What I find puzzling is why the media is reporting this as new science. The Sunday Times in particular have been drip feeding this story out over the last few months, its clearly being stage-managed and is politically (tax?) driven. I remember hearing about carginogenic particulates in exhaust fumes in the 1980s. Also the UK road tax level on diesels is governed by the nitrogen oxide emission, and millions of motorists have purchased diesels as a "green" choice (remember how we all had to save the planet from greenhouse gases a while ago?), producing less carbon monoxide and dioxide than petrol and low NOx. The media are doing a disservice to the public by not investigating the real issue here- the constant moving of the "green" goalposts to rake in yet more money.
You can just see the news 10 years hence- we've all dashed to petrol vehicles and science has discovered that its causing climate change so lets put up taxes and move to cleaner diesels...
Yes I remember it as well, problems are that it will not matter what you use,they will want to tax it, they are never going to clean the air, too many other harmfull materials around natural as well as man made
|
|
The simple basic fact is that too many people are burning too much fuel too fast. There will always be nasty by-products to combustion, but you can vary the proportions a bit.
Good job there are fewer keen gardeners these days - just think of all those nasty bonfires ....
|
|
Not helped by all the "eco-friendly" do-gooders with wood-burning stoves - now seen as a major health issue in parts of the USA.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes I remember it as well, problems are that it will not matter what you use,they will want to tax it, they are never going to clean the air, too many other harmfull materials around natural as well as man made
One of the biggest "greenhouse gasses" is methane. Largely emiited by COWS.
Let's ban eating steak and drinking milk. Problem solved...
Edited by madf on 11/12/2014 at 09:27
|
Yes I remember it as well, problems are that it will not matter what you use,they will want to tax it, they are never going to clean the air, too many other harmfull materials around natural as well as man made
One of the biggest "greenhouse gasses" is methane. Largely emiited by COWS.
Let's ban eating steak and drinking milk. Problem solved...
That just shifts the methane production further up or down the food chain. ;)
|
|
|
One of the biggest "greenhouse gasses" is methane. Largely emiited by COWS.
Let's ban eating steak and drinking milk. Problem solved...
Or fit them with inflatable balloons, both ends, to collect the methane and burn it in our cars instead of oil - it won't reduce greenhouse gases but it would make the oil last longer.
|
One of the biggest "greenhouse gasses" is methane. Largely emiited by COWS.
Let's ban eating steak and drinking milk. Problem solved...
Or fit them with inflatable balloons, both ends, to collect the methane and burn it in our cars instead of oil - it won't reduce greenhouse gases but it would make the oil last longer.
A euro MP suggested getting rid of cows untill he learnt more methane was produced by insects and all other animals than was made by cows ;)
IMO Diesels are here for many years to come,as for clean air, there isnt any, unless you go to a factory making microchips where they have spent millions on filtering systems,
once particulates have been reduced I suspect something else will replace it as a health scare giving the public something else to take their mind off the governments antics
|
One of the biggest "greenhouse gasses" is methane. Largely emiited by COWS.
Let's ban eating steak and drinking milk. Problem solved...
With China rapidly growing richer, other countries following, and all demanding more meat, not a chance.
Edited by corax on 11/12/2014 at 13:00
|
One of the biggest "greenhouse gasses" is methane. Largely emiited by COWS.
Let's ban eating steak and drinking milk. Problem solved...
With China rapidly growing richer, other countries following, and all demanding more meat, not a chance.
We won`t go short of methane either ;0
|
We won`t go short of methane either ;0
Someone needs to come up with a method of tapping this rich resource somewhere along the line - sewage pipes for example.
It's a dirty job but someones got to do it.
The irony is, after all the health problems endemic in the west, the east will now be moving away from a healthy diet where it costs less to produce the ingredients, to a worse diet that is far more expensive to produce in terms of resources and land.
I wouldn't mind if people actually used what they have bought, but the waste that you see is despicable.
|
We won`t go short of methane either ;0
Someone needs to come up with a method of tapping this rich resource somewhere along the line - sewage pipes for example.
It's a dirty job but someones got to do it.
The irony is, after all the health problems endemic in the west, the east will now be moving away from a healthy diet where it costs less to produce the ingredients, to a worse diet that is far more expensive to produce in terms of resources and land.
I wouldn't mind if people actually used what they have bought, but the waste that you see is despicable.
It's been done - but not cost-effectively - some land-fill sites were capped and the methane taken off to power old jet engines driving generators feeding the national grid
|
|
A letter in the Telegraph said that diesel cars wouldn't need to be scrapped, you'd just have to "change the head and add ignition" then it would run on petrol.
Surely not that simple - I doubt if a diesel block has anywhere to add a distributor, the gear ratios would be wrong and maybe the pistons & rings. The whole engine management system would also need changing so I can't see it being cost-effective even if technically possible.
|
A letter in the Telegraph said that diesel cars wouldn't need to be scrapped, you'd just have to "change the head and add ignition" then it would run on petrol.
Surely not that simple - I doubt if a diesel block has anywhere to add a distributor, the gear ratios would be wrong and maybe the pistons & rings. The whole engine management system would also need changing so I can't see it being cost-effective even if technically possible.
Why do you need a distributer?, as long as it has a crank position sensor, pistons and rings could stay.
I see no reason why it cant be done
I also see no reason to do it either, Diesel I think will be as clean as petrol eventually besides what are they going to do with all that waste oil
Edited by bolt on 11/12/2014 at 18:11
|
A letter in the Telegraph said that diesel cars wouldn't need to be scrapped, you'd just have to "change the head and add ignition" then it would run on petrol.
Obviously written by soemone who knows nothing about cars.
Cannot think of any diesel and petrol motors that share a common block thus simply swapping a head is not an option.
Even if there are some (there could be) the pistons in the diesel would be much higher compression thus would need changing.
Then you would need to add the necessary sensors to provide the petrol ECU with the information it needs.
Then you would need to change the loom to provide wiring to those sensors.
Then you would need to fit the petrol ECU and other bits that provide a spark.
Then what about fuel supply. The diesel pump would be no good thus the whole lot would need changing.
And what about the exhaust and emission system, very different.
And after all that you would need to go the the DVLA and get the vehicle checked and reclassified.
Cheaper to scrap it.
|
Cannot think of any diesel and petrol motors that share a common block thus simply swapping a head is not an option.
Fast forward - the JLR Ingenium and new Volvo engine use the same modules for diesel and petrol - there have been others in Europe as well as some GM diesels in the US, not successful but done anyway.
But I agree, it's a totally impractical idea.
|
A letter in the Telegraph said that diesel cars wouldn't need to be scrapped, you'd just have to "change the head and add ignition" then it would run on petrol.
Surely not that simple - I doubt if a diesel block has anywhere to add a distributor, the gear ratios would be wrong and maybe the pistons & rings. The whole engine management system would also need changing so I can't see it being cost-effective even if technically possible.
Would a head change be enouh to stop petrol igniting under compression?
|
A letter in the Telegraph said that diesel cars wouldn't need to be scrapped, you'd just have to "change the head and add ignition" then it would run on petrol.
Surely not that simple - I doubt if a diesel block has anywhere to add a distributor, the gear ratios would be wrong and maybe the pistons & rings. The whole engine management system would also need changing so I can't see it being cost-effective even if technically possible.
Would a head change be enouh to stop petrol igniting under compression?
I read somewhere Mercedes are working on a combined petrol/diesel, that could be interesting
|
I read somewhere Mercedes are working on a combined petrol/diesel, that could be interesting
Translated from marketing-speak: Someone misfuelled their SLK.
;D
|
I read somewhere Mercedes are working on a combined petrol/diesel, that could be interesting
Not a new idea - various companies including Rolls-Royce developed multi-fuel engines mainly for military applications so they could run on whatever fuel was available.
|
I read somewhere Mercedes are working on a combined petrol/diesel, that could be interesting
Not a new idea - various companies including Rolls-Royce developed multi-fuel engines mainly for military applications so they could run on whatever fuel was available.
Even ran on high alcohol wine!
|
I read somewhere Mercedes are working on a combined petrol/diesel, that could be interesting
Not a new idea - various companies including Rolls-Royce developed multi-fuel engines mainly for military applications so they could run on whatever fuel was available.
Cummins have produced versions of their diesel engines which run on CNG (compressed natural gas for years.
|
|
CNG is available for conversions of diesels in Europe but generally only suitable for goods vehicles as the tank has to be heavy for safety standards.
|
|
<< Would a head change be enouh to stop petrol igniting under compression? >>
In my simple-minded way I assumed the prupose of changing the head was to reduce compression from about 24:1 to 9:1 - or some numbers like that?
But the changes to the 'peripherals' can't be that simple - gear ratios as has been said.
|
But the changes to the 'peripherals' can't be that simple - gear ratios as has been said.
Add a 2-speed auxiliary gear-set with one ratio for operating in 'petrol' mode, the other for 'diesel' mode, then use the main gearbox in the normal way. While it's fun to discuss this, I don't think there's any real future for such a dual-fuel petrol / diesel engine for civilian road vehicle use!
|
But the changes to the 'peripherals' can't be that simple - gear ratios as has been said.
Add a 2-speed auxiliary gear-set with one ratio for operating in 'petrol' mode, the other for 'diesel' mode, then use the main gearbox in the normal way. While it's fun to discuss this, I don't think there's any real future for such a dual-fuel petrol / diesel engine for civilian road vehicle use!
I don`t think so either, I still think diesels have a way to go before they die off,becoming more efficient,
though Boris has ideas in London of removing cars altogether from inner cities so that counts out petrols as well, leaving bikes and buses- taxis at so called 0 emissions
wait and see on that one
|
|
|
|
|
