TTAC/Drive - The Truth About Diesels

Discussion in 'OT Driven' started by TriShield, Jul 4, 2007.

  1. TriShield

    TriShield Super Moderator® Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    132,732
    Likes Received:
    1,596
    Location:
    PRESIDENTIAL TOWER, GREAT AGAIN, NY
    The Truth About Diesels

    [​IMG]

    By Paul Niedermeyer
    July 2, 2007

    No wonder the Germans are so gung-ho on sending their diesels across the pond. Europe’s two-decade long diesel-keg party has been crashed by a new generation of super-efficient, clean and cheaper gasoline engines. A royal diesel-overproduction hang-over is inevitable. The Germans’ morning-after solution: send the stinky leftovers to enthusiastic Yanks waiting with open arms, who’ve conveniently forgotten their killer hangover from the last US diesel orgy.

    In 1892, an experimental ammonia engine literally blew up in engineer Rudolph Diesel's face. Laid-up in a hospital bed, he pored over Nicolaus Otto’s pioneering work on the internal combustion engine. Diesel identified its weakness.

    Diesel tumbled to the fact that the Otto engine’s efficiency was intrinsically compromised by the fact that it mixed fuel with air prior to compression. Too much compression resulted in uncontrolled pre-detonation. Diesel’s solution: inject fuel separately from the air to allow super-high compression and eliminating the need for a throttle (reducing pumping losses). Diesel's engine was roughly 30% more efficient than Otto's.

    In 1989, VW/Audi ushered in the modern direct-injection (TDI) diesel. The group's oil burning powerplant set a high-water mark in the diesel’s long development. With Europe’s high fuel costs, the more expensive (yet efficient) diesel engine could now pay for itself quite easily. The calculation triggered Europe's diesel-boom, resulting in a 50 percent market share vs. gasoline-engined propulsion.

    But Europeans have been paying a price (other than at the pumps): particulate emissions (Particulate Matter, or “PM”) and NOx pollution. Many European cities have serious particulate and diesel odor problems. Several European cities impose restrictions on diesels during PM alerts.

    The new generation of “clean(er)” diesels that meet the US Tier2 bin5 standards cut PM emissions substantially, but not completely. Already, there are warnings that PM from “clean” diesels still poses a significant health risk.

    The diesels coming our way carry several other penalties, especially versus the gasoline hybrid.
    The complicated and expensive NOx catalysts and urea injection schemes (“BlueTec”) cut efficiency by five percent. Meanwhile, the next Prius is projected to be 15 to 20 percent more efficient. And Toyota is bringing down hybrid production costs.

    The diesel vs. hybrid mileage/cost gap widens… further. And the “clean” diesel’s just-barely compliant emissions still can’t touch the gas-hybrid’s practically breathable exhaust.

    Then there's the elephant in the room: global warming. Clearly, the political winds are blowing against CO2. Diesel fuel has higher carbon content, resulting in 17 percent more CO2 per gallon of fuel burned than gasoline. With the diesel’s efficiency superiority down to 25 percent, a “clean” diesel emits only 13 percent less CO2 than yesterday’s gas engine. And that small gap is… wait… gone.

    While the diesel’s efficiency peaked in 1989, and lost 5 percent to PM cleansing, gas engine development is on a roll.
    Engineers are systematically tackling all the inherent deficiencies that Diesel identified in his hospital bed. (No wonder Rudolf was considered paranoid; maybe he suspected that eventually the Otto engine would catch up.)

    A farrago of new gas-engine technologies has converged, which Europeans have been quick to embrace. VW’s 1.4-liter 170hp TSI gas engine is a perfect example of the trend. The TSI starts off with the help of a supercharger (no turbo-lag), and then switches to turbocharging (no parasitic losses). With diesel-like torque and direct injection, it’s the best of both worlds.

    A CO2 output comparison with two other similar-output VW engines is telling. Their 170 horse 1.4-liter TSI produces 174g/kms of CO2. Their 150hp 2.5-liter five cylinder engine (US Rabbit only) emits 240g/km. And their 170hp 2.0-liter TDI diesel (not US compliant) produces 160g/km.

    American Rabbit drivers are paying a whopping 38 percent efficiency penalty compared to the Euro-Golf TSI, as well as giving up gobs of torque and twenty horsepower. If VW’s 170hp TDI were “cleansed” to T2b5 standards, its CO2 output would be no better then the gasoline TSI.

    And that’s just the jumping-off point.
    Start-stop technology, full valve control, and stratified direct-injection offer anywhere from 10 to 25 percent further improvement potential. Combine these goodies with mild-hybrid assist/regeneration, and the diesel party’s kaput. No wonder the Germans are all hard at work on mild-hybrid technology. It’s their best shot to keep up with Toyota’s CO2 meister, the Prius (102g/km).

    A study by the consulting firm AT Kearny confirms the diesel's demise. It predicts that only 25 percent of Europeans will find diesels an attractive economic proposition by 2020.

    Have Rudolf Diesel’s paranoid nightmares come true? Not totally. Diesels are a welcome mix to the party for larger vehicles that spend a lot of time on the open road. Count on GM’s new 4.5-liter “baby” Duramax diesel to be more popular with the light-truck crowd than the gas hybrid option. But when it comes to smaller vehicles, the numbers just don’t add up.

    Although Rudolf Diesel’s engine WAS intrinsically more efficient, it turns out that Otto’s engine is a lot more clever at learning new tricks.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=4039

    The truth about diesel

    [​IMG]

    This week's cover story, 'The truth about diesel', is the result of more than 12 months of research.

    We've suspected for some time diesel isn't the saviour of the world's environmental problems that it has been made out to be. And, indeed, this is the view of the many experts we've interviewed who've become frustrated by the recent hype about diesel.


    Sales of diesel cars have increased by a staggering 139 per cent in the first four months of 2007 compared with the same period last year. Indeed, Australians have already bought more diesel cars in the past four months than they did in all of 2005.

    We have questioned the financial benefit of diesel cars for some time. If you calculate the $3000-plus price premium compared with a petrol car and then figure out the savings in fuel economy, it will take about nine years to reap the cost benefits based on the average distance travelled by Australian motorists.

    Now there is good reason to be worried about the health implications of diesel. To be blunt, diesel emissions can give you cancer. Research Drive has unearthed shows diesel is responsible for more deaths each year than the road toll - and yet governments appear to be giving the diesel problem far less attention. Perhaps that's because there's no revenue in it.

    Apparently the NSW State Government is reluctant to introduce emissions checks on cars at registration renewal time because it is concerned about the impact it would have on low-wage earners. Yet the same government happily imposes the most expensive traffic fines and stiffest penalties in Australia.

    The Federal Government, too, is far from blameless on this issue. The quality of diesel fuel in Australia lags well behind more stringent regulations in Europe and other countries. If a car maker's new model doesn't meet the latest emissions requirements, it isn't allowed to be sold in Australia. When petrol companies stretch a deadline, there appears to be no punishment.

    Diesel has a place, especially in heavy transport, and technology is slowly making it cleaner. But even when more restrictions are in place in 2009, diesel will still not be as clean as unleaded petrol. Cigarette packets carry warning labels. Where are the warnings on diesel vehicles?

    Joshua Dowling
    Posted on June 1, 2007 08:30 AM

    http://blogs.drive.com.au/2007/06/the_truth_about_diesel.html

    The truth about diesel - Diesel produces fewer greenhouse gases than unleaded petrol but it is more dangerous to our health. RICHARD BLACKBURN reports on an automotive dilemma.

    [​IMG]

    Richard Blackburn, The Sydney Morning Herald, 01/06/07

    Demand for diesel-powered cars is soaring. Australians bought more diesel cars in the first four months of this year than they did in the whole of 2005.

    Sales this year are up 135 per cent on the same period last year and the latest figures show that almost 20 per cent of new vehicles sold this year are powered by diesel. In 2000, the figure was just 10 per cent.

    However, the explosive growth is a double-edged sword.

    The good news is that diesel-powered engines are more efficient than their petrol cousins and therefore emit less CO2 - the major contributor to global warming.

    The bad news is that emissions from diesel engines are harmful to your health. That includes the latest generation of so-called "clean" diesels.

    The Federal Government's Green Vehicle Guide, which ranks vehicles on their greenhouse gas and air pollution performance, doesn't have a single diesel vehicle in its top 50 list of low polluters.

    Just one makes the top 150 and there are only five in the top 200 vehicles.

    Jon Real, a spokesman for the Federal Department of Transport, which maintains the guide, says diesel cars are marked down because they have a "much more significant health effect".

    He says diesels produce about the same amount of hydrocarbons as petrol but significantly more nitrogen oxides (NOx) - a precursor to smog - and particulate matter.

    Air quality experts estimate that diesel engines produce particles at about 20 times the rate of petrol engines and it is those emissions that are bad for your health.

    Particulate matter has been linked with thousands of deaths worldwide. Side effects range from cancer to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. NOx have also been linked to serious health problems, including asthma, respiratory disease, infections and reduced lung function in children.

    A recent NSW parliamentary inquiry into air quality found that motor vehicles produce 71 per cent of NOx emissions in Sydney and just under 20 per cent of particle pollution.


    Real says particulate matter emissions carry a hefty weighting in the department's assessment of pollution effects from different vehicles. It's easy to see why.

    The most recent figures from the Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics - for 2000 - put the annual death toll from vehicle exhaust pollution at between 900 and 2000 people - higher than the national road toll. It is also estimated to contribute to between 700 and 2050 asthma attacks in Australia each year.

    Diesel fumes are accepted as the major contributor to these figures. "Diesel exhaust has been linked in numerous scientific studies to cancer, the exacerbation of asthma and other respiratory diseases," the bureau's report says.

    The Chairman of the Lane Cove Tunnel Action Group and immunologist, associate professor Ray Kearney, says vehicle exhaust has been reported to stunt lung development in children. Kearney says Australian authorities have been slow to legislate against harmful pollutants produced by motor vehicles.

    http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=40556&vf=12&pg=1
     
  2. autobahn

    autobahn New Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,208
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Something about this article smacks of misuse of statistics.

    Sounds like someone's a hybrid fanboy.
     
  3. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    You know, I never understood how a diesel engine could get away without a throttle valve until now. Sad, but true.

    I still don't believe the bit about diesel being more polluting, though. People bitch about CO2 levels, but CO2 is very easily reprocessed into oxygen by forests and phytoplankton -- the real problems are the artificial greenhouse gases we used to produce (and are still produced in less-scrupulous parts of the world). Freon is a good example; it has 4000x the greenhouse potential of CO2, and while CO2 itself is on the rise, its biggest effect is that it serves as an indicator for the rate of production of the really dangerous gases, for which there are no existing processors to break them down. Particulates aren't so great, but PM emissions from diesel engines are just burned wax -- the same stuff in paraffin candle smoke -- and there are catalysts out there that can deal with that; they would be much more affordable if people would pony up to pay for them, just like how hybrids are coming down in cost.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2007
  4. TriShield

    TriShield Super Moderator® Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    132,732
    Likes Received:
    1,596
    Location:
    PRESIDENTIAL TOWER, GREAT AGAIN, NY
    The post is actually three articles. Links to each are on it.
     
  5. jjski78

    jjski78 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2007
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Right Here, aka You're Mom's House
    Good articles, but they do reek of Hybrid fanboyisms. I love how they go out on a limb and try to come up with a time-table of how long it would take you to recoup the extra money spent for a diesel based on mileage. What they don't tell you is the fact that it would take just as long, if not longer, to recoup the extra coin spent for a hybrid model. Never mind the fact that, at least near me, diesel is about 25-30 cents cheaper per gallon than regular unleaded. Or the fact that you can run bio-diesel and lower your emissions, or run veggie oil and lower your emissions in a diesel engine.

    I'm not gonna say the diesel is cleaner than a Prius or other hybrid, but those vehicles NEED oil to run. The big problem is we're, supposedly, running out of oil (I don't buy into this, but that's what people think). A diesel engine gives you alternative fuel sources to pick from, thus negating your dependence on oil.

    And as for the whole "diesel exhaust accounts for xxx number of deaths per year" give me a fucking break! Everything nowadays causes cancer or some other disease. Some people just have the right (or wrong) DNA that pre-disposes them to cancer. What a load of horse shit.

    All in all, well written articles, but they are written, quite obviously, by a pro-hybrid group of whistle-blowers.
     
  6. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm in bed with the hybrid fanboys, myself. What astounds me is that the dumbasses who wrote these articles seem to think that your choice of engine somehow affects your ability to slap an electric motor and regenerative brakes onto it. SURPRISE! It doesn't. :squint:

    You want a good compromise? MAKE A PLUG-IN DIESEL HYBRID ALREADY.
     
  7. jjski78

    jjski78 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2007
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Right Here, aka You're Mom's House

    That would get like 200MPG!! The oil industry would crush it!
     
  8. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    um, plug in is lame. HORRIBLE range. And then you just have to pay all the costs on your monthly power bill. And that's way more money than gas for the same distance.
     
  9. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, whatever. Clearly you don't know what a plugin hybrid is used for.

    I have a 20-mile round trip commute to work every day. If I had a plugin diesel hybrid, I could run to work on the batteries and run home on the engine. So I would effectively use 40 miles worth of diesel every week (i.e. roughly one or two gallons) -- not counting further savings from regenerative braking. I'm totally down with that.
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2007
  10. Virality

    Virality New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,469
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    LA
    Imagine the development costs for that....and then the price they'll charge us for it.

    I'd be down if BMW did it. Toyota on the other hand :ugh:
     
  11. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    clearly YOU don't understand. plug-in hybrids just don't work. You spend more on the electric bill than you would on gas.
     
  12. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Depends on where you live. I get my power from a nuclear plant.

    You also neglect to consider that a plug-in hybrid doesn't use any power at all when stopped, which makes probably zero difference to your daily commute and definitely a big difference to my daily commute.
     
  13. Ronin

    Ronin Guest

    gasoline 4 life yo
     
  14. thedguy

    thedguy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pissing in the gene pool
    Cliffs: Expensive, heavy, complicated hybrids > *
     
  15. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    They're not gonna get better until we make a bunch. It was the same with gas engines, wasn't it? Hell, it wasn't until the past 30 years or so that they achieved anything resembling efficiency. We've been making them since the early 1800's.
     
  16. thedguy

    thedguy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pissing in the gene pool
    The problem I have with the idea of a hybrid is it's 2 engines/motors. It's got the down sides of an electric car with none of the benefits.

    At least until we goto a series hybrid. Using electric motors to drive the wheels and a small diesel generator and the ability to be plugged in, seems like the best option since everyone seems to think they need a 300+ mile range electric car when most car trips are what...less than 20 miles at a time?

    No matter what solutions people come up with, there will be people bitching. I can see environmentalists going nuts against pure electric cars. They'd bitch that the mining of the nickel for the batteries or copper for the motor windings are destorying the environment (see the nickel mine in sudbury ontario, or copper mine in utah).

    Someone could invent the perpetual motion machine and environmentalists would shoot the damn thing down and rednecks would refuse to buy it because "I like my v8."
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2007
  17. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    By "series hybrid", do you mean essentially a gas engine with an electric transmission that can also run off batteries? Don't you think having a generator connected to the engine AND a motor connected to the wheels is going to be a waste of mass, instead of connecting both the motor and the engine to the wheels directly?
     
  18. thedguy

    thedguy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pissing in the gene pool
    An example of a series hybrid is the Chevy Volt concept.

    There is no ICE driving the wheels, only electric motor(s). The vehicle has enough batteries for roughly 40 miles of driving on pure electric (and it's a plug-in). The ICE is just a generator for those cases where you need to go further than the 40 miles without plugging in.

    This allows the motors to soak up all the starts and stops and variations in speeds and use regenerative braking and all that, while the ICE can do what it does best, and sit and run at it's extremely narrow efficient RPM range.

    They currently do this in diesel locomotives, it seriously cuts down on weight and complication, and increased fuel efficiency quite a bit (or so howstuffworks.com tells me)
     
  19. Jeebus

    Jeebus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2000
    Messages:
    55,365
    Likes Received:
    85
    Location:
    KNOCK KNOCK! LOL!
    What about all the pollution from making and disposing off all those hybrid car batteries.....
     
  20. TRAUMAhead

    TRAUMAhead Rum Is for Drinking, Not for Burning.

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Messages:
    946
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Cali
    Just give me a diesel powered Wrangler in the States. :hs:
     
  21. MrBonus

    MrBonus Et Tu, Brute?

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2001
    Messages:
    188,617
    Likes Received:
    186
    Every piece of the batteries are recycled and modern hybrids have batteries with life cycles that are expected to last the lifespan of the car anyway.
     
  22. nindia

    nindia OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Messages:
    37,008
    Likes Received:
    136
    Location:
    earf
    this article looks like it was written by a saudi oil barons secretary
     
  23. PanzerAce

    PanzerAce Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2006
    Messages:
    14,502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    N37°18'37" W120°29'50"
    The other thing I love about these articles is that they go on and on about how the R&D of gas engines is making them so efficient...while ignoring the fact that diesels get a fraction of that R&D, many of them run on 1930s technology, and are STILL more efficient that gas engines.
     
  24. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Every now and then someone bumps a thread that's several years old, and I start reading the posts, only to discover the guy I totally agree with is me from several years ago. It feels kinda dirty, like traveling back in time and banging your own grandmother, then finding out who she is afterwards.
     
  25. kit99bar

    kit99bar USPA Class 2, weak, old man!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,168
    Likes Received:
    12
    i love that :rofl:

     

Share This Page