Diesel Gas Mileage

[swamprat]

I'm not sure if I made this a topic from a while ago, but I have some first hand information that new enviornmental requirements for diesel eingines are going to negatively affect the fuel efficiency of the modern diesel engine. The company I work for just got a new coach equipped with engines meeting the 2007 EPA requirements for diesels. The results are not pretty. The driver told me that he experienced a 15 percent increase in fuel consumption from 5.9 mpg on the old engines to 5.1 mpg for the new engines. If anyone was expecting diesel engines to be the panacea for fuel economy in 2008, you will be surprised. Look elsewhere. You can thank the overzealous EPA reguulators, along with the 102nd congress, who passed the Clean Air Act of 1990, and of course President Bush 41, and of course, their cheerleaders in the enviromnental movement.

I don't get the logic of burning more fossil fuel to reduce pollutants. Its a crock. Next time you see an environmentalist, slap them around.

[Eric]

I would have to look into this to give you a "fer sure" answer, but I'm betting that the decrease in economy comes mostly from particulate traps/exhaust after-treatement stuff.

Bear in mind, also, that emissions from diesels are different than emissions from gas engines - so different standards (and controls) apply...

The ultimate problem is too damn many people. Even very slight/fractional emissions output on a per car (or per person) basis adds up to trouble when it is multiplied by 300 million.... or 1 billion.

[swamprat]

Diesel trucks are subject to slightly different emissions standards than are diesel cars. Diesel cars are required to perform exactly as gasoline engines when it comes to NOX and even particulates. That is like trying to get a fish to run in the Kentucky Derby. These environmentalists are cracked.

The problem may be too many people, but they aren't going away. We have cut down the aggregate amount of "pollutants" being emitted into the atmosphere by wide percentages already, despite a tripling of miles driven since 1970. Output per car was at 10 percent of 1970 levels back in 1980. When rules started for diesels back in 1998, the tail pipe emissions dropped by a similar percentage.It will take more than a doubling, possibliy trpling of the population before "pollution" levels rise to 1970 levels. I'm not too worried about it.

When it comes to pollution in the developing world, that could be trouble, although, most developed countries have lower overall "pollution" levels than do developing nations.

I am more worried about the cost of motoring for future generations than I am about anything else. We should be working on "alternative" sources before the oil runs dry. I am concerned that the money spent of incremental reductions in tail pipe emissions ... that 8 percent of 1 percent of.... is going to make cars more prohibitievly expensive for a large segment of the population. They already are.

[Eric]

"I am more worried about the cost of motoring for future generations than I am about anything else. We should be working on "alternative" sources before the oil runs dry. I am concerned that the money spent of incremental reductions in tail pipe emissions ... that 8 percent of 1 percent of.... is going to make cars more prohibitievly expensive for a large segment of the population. They already are."

Hell, I'm just as concerned about having the room to drive!

In many areas of the country, driving is just another chore; it sucks. You sit in traffic; your opportunities to actually enjoy the car (and driving) are few and far between.

The number one problem is population density; too damn many people. Once you get to a certain critical mass, everything turns to shit. Just look at the DC area; or Atlanta. Or LA. Or Noo Joisey. Uglified landscapes. Overcrowding. Pollution and blight. Diminished quality of life. Ridiculous cost of living.

To me, hell on earth is a seething crowd of people.

[mrblanche]

I am more worried about the cost of motoring for future generations than I am about anything else. We should be working on "alternative" sources before the oil runs dry. I am concerned that the money spent of incremental reductions in tail pipe emissions ... that 8 percent of 1 percent of.... is going to make cars more prohibitievly expensive for a large segment of the population. They already are.

There is no shortage of oil, although there may be a shortage of easily reachable oil.

I'm with Eric on the ULSD mileage figures, by the way. While most researchers are saying it has slightly less energy than LSD, it's not usually a significant amount. But the particulate traps, etc., do use energy. Another problem is that unless you ran the coach in question on LSD (bad idea!!!), then on ULSD, or vice versa, you really can't get a mileage comparison; there are too many variables.

However, the big companies obviously aren't enamored of the idea of the new engines; there was a massive pre-buy of 2006 trucks.