An future end to DPF Diesels?

[BrokenTrack]

The Diesel Engine could be converted to a 6 stroke, and that would do the same thing as DEF, BUT give the engine an extra power stroke for free. (Well almost free)

 

[RalphVa]

Let's hope it works in actual application. Should be some news of some outfit using this technology soon.

Loved the VW TDI's performance and non diesel-like sounds and all but hated the stink from the burn off, almost worse than pre DPF, untreated diesel vehicles.

Ralph

 

[Gale Hawkins]

Thread Bump

and new tech for Gas engines that uses "jet" injection Somewhat like but different than the old Honda CVCC (Compound Vortex Combustion Chamber) design. 20 % fuel economy and 95% reduction in NOx

From MAHLE the auto parts/tech company

Want +20% MPG? Bam, Here You Go - Autoline Exclusives - YouTube

Sounds like your thought is on target.

Gradual switch from diesel to gas and electricity - FutureFarming

 

[RalphVa]

Mazda is coming out with a sparkplug-less gas engine with even higher CR than their current 14/1 that is supposed to give even better fuel mileage. Right now on the current Skyactiv (new one will be Skyactiv X), they are about 20% above diesel consumption of a TURBO diesel without turbo.

Ralph

 

[LOWTECH]

Why not forget the fossil fuels and their additives and go electric? Solectrac.com

 

[pmsmechanic]

Why not forget the fossil fuels and their additives and go electric? Solectrac.com

There are several reasons off hand that I can think of. I'm not saying these are insurmountable but we aren't going to get there with present day technology. If you put 100 barrels of oil in a long pipeline you end up with 85 at the end. The other 15 are used up to move the oil down the pipeline. If you generate 100 megawatts of electricity you end up with about 33 to sell to the customer. Again on a long transmission link. The other 66 megawatts get burned up in what's called line loss.

Further more if everyone on a city block buys an electric car the whole infrastructure for supplying electricity to that city block is going to need upgrading. Presently there can be only approximately 4 Tesla's per city block. This is all information that I've been told. Your research might come up with different facts. I haven't double checked it.

Very few people talk about how much range you lose in cold weather. Cold battery's don't have the same capacity as warm ones. In the city this isn't so serious but for rural people you basically end up needing a second car for longer distances.

Another issue that is seldom mentioned is the amount of carbon produced to generate electricity. If the generation is coal there is no carbon advantage to an electric vehicle. I essentially consider wind and solar to be expensive experiments. You would have to cover the surface of the earth to generate enough electricity to meet current demands, plus in this day and age you still need conventional generation for when solar and wind are idle. Solar and wind are idle far more often than we are led to believe.

It would do far more for reducing carbon to require automotive manufacturers to build at least 1-2 million miles of reliability into vehicles with the ability to upgrade to more efficient engines as technology advances. If you think of the energy used to produce a vehicle vs the energy used to propel it through out it's lifetime this makes sense.

Lastly if governments were really serious about reducing carbon, planting trees makes tons more sense than carbon taxes.

 

[jaydee325]

The February issue of Diesel Progress Magazine (a trade publication) had an article titled Proposing Cleaner Truck Engines. This article outlined the next step the EPA is considering to further lower diesel truck emissions. I've provided a link to the EPA website location where the EPA is requesting public comment on these proposed new rules.

The magazine is accessible via subscription only which is why I can't provide a direct link to the article. Subscriptions are free, however you have to fill out a survey. Here is a link to the magazine for those who may want to subscribe. I've been reading this magazine for several years now and recommend it for anyone wanting to keep up on new developments in the trade.

 

[LOWTECH]

There are several reasons off hand that I can think of. I'm not saying these are insurmountable but we aren't going to get there with present day technology. If you put 100 barrels of oil in a long pipeline you end up with 85 at the end. The other 15 are used up to move the oil down the pipeline. If you generate 100 megawatts of electricity you end up with about 33 to sell to the customer. Again on a long transmission link. The other 66 megawatts get burned up in what's called line loss.

Further more if everyone on a city block buys an electric car the whole infrastructure for supplying electricity to that city block is going to need upgrading. Presently there can be only approximately 4 Tesla's per city block. This is all information that I've been told. Your research might come up with different facts. I haven't double checked it.

Very few people talk about how much range you lose in cold weather. Cold battery's don't have the same capacity as warm ones. In the city this isn't so serious but for rural people you basically end up needing a second car for longer distances.

Another issue that is seldom mentioned is the amount of carbon produced to generate electricity. If the generation is coal there is no carbon advantage to an electric vehicle. I essentially consider wind and solar to be expensive experiments. You would have to cover the surface of the earth to generate enough electricity to meet current demands, plus in this day and age you still need conventional generation for when solar and wind are idle. Solar and wind are idle far more often than we are led to believe.

It would do far more for reducing carbon to require automotive manufacturers to build at least 1-2 million miles of reliability into vehicles with the ability to upgrade to more efficient engines as technology advances. If you think of the energy used to produce a vehicle vs the energy used to propel it through out it's lifetime this makes sense.

Lastly if governments were really serious about reducing carbon, planting trees makes tons more sense than carbon taxes.

I did not know this! Thanks - I do 100% agree with the tree idea and maybe more importantly keeping our agricultural land covered with crops during the full growing season. Currently we are only harvesting about 40% of the available photosynthesis and we could easily bring that number up to between 80 and 100% with a change in cropping practices. It will take some government incentives to make the change but once we have the infrastructure in place the payback will be significant - not just in terms of carbon sequestered but in terms of economic benefits to our local communities.

 

[EddieWalker]

As long as the Government is providing incentives to solar and wind companies to produce a product that is inefficient, then they will continue to do so. Eventually, both will replace fossil fuel, but not until the technology improves dramatically. Currently, we are just wasting money and making a few people very rich while creating garbage that will cost more money to remove once tax dollars stop supplementing their existence.

 

[LOWTECH]

What are your thoughts on home based solar and wind as charging sources for electric vehicles?

 

[EddieWalker]

24 volt and 12 volt, DC systems work great. You get what you pay for with them, but costs are dropping every year. Even home systems are getting better, the big drawback are the batteries and how often they have to be replaced, but that's the same with electric cars. Making the batteries is very destructive to the environment, and disposing of them is even worse. How long they last, what they cost and how much electricity you have available to use at your home are still an issue.

 

[fried1765]

There are several reasons off hand that I can think of. I'm not saying these are insurmountable but we aren't going to get there with present day technology. If you put 100 barrels of oil in a long pipeline you end up with 85 at the end. The other 15 are used up to move the oil down the pipeline. If you generate 100 megawatts of electricity you end up with about 33 to sell to the customer. Again on a long transmission link. The other 66 megawatts get burned up in what's called line loss.

Further more if everyone on a city block buys an electric car the whole infrastructure for supplying electricity to that city block is going to need upgrading. Presently there can be only approximately 4 Tesla's per city block. This is all information that I've been told. Your research might come up with different facts. I haven't double checked it.

Very few people talk about how much range you lose in cold weather. Cold battery's don't have the same capacity as warm ones. In the city this isn't so serious but for rural people you basically end up needing a second car for longer distances.

Another issue that is seldom mentioned is the amount of carbon produced to generate electricity. If the generation is coal there is no carbon advantage to an electric vehicle. I essentially consider wind and solar to be expensive experiments. You would have to cover the surface of the earth to generate enough electricity to meet current demands, plus in this day and age you still need conventional generation for when solar and wind are idle. Solar and wind are idle far more often than we are led to believe.

It would do far more for reducing carbon to require automotive manufacturers to build at least 1-2 million miles of reliability into vehicles with the ability to upgrade to more efficient engines as technology advances. If you think of the energy used to produce a vehicle vs the energy used to propel it through out it's lifetime this makes sense.

Lastly if governments were really serious about reducing carbon, planting trees makes tons more sense than carbon taxes.

VERY well said!
Unfortunately, the "green new deal" types don't comprehend those facts.

 

[Gale Hawkins]

What are your thoughts on home based solar and wind as charging sources for electric vehicles?

Sounds kind of HIGHTECH to me.

Of course that sounds good to have solar charging high tech storage batteries while you are out planting the crop and you come home for the day and pull in your tractor so it is fully charged and ready to go the next morn.

As others have covered the green technology is getting there and perhaps is 40% of the way there today.

Those of us that get our tractor fuel in 5 gallon jugs will never live long enough to pay for the set up and the EV's (cars, trucks and tractors) out of profits. It would be nice if those with the interest and cash to do so would do so to help finance the green evolution.

This real real bad cold going around may slow the green evolution but I reading of people this morning some are making the case since the virus is helping clear out the smog that it is a sign we should go EV full bore ASAP.

Right now we all understand we are at a greater risk of a near term death than in our life time so food and toilet paper are our main focus. At the rate gas prices are dropping they will be paying us to fill up by Christmas 2020.

 

[FatTire]

......
Another issue that is seldom mentioned is the amount of carbon produced to generate electricity. If the generation is coal there is no carbon advantage to an electric vehicle. I essentially consider wind and solar to be expensive experiments. You would have to cover the surface of the earth to generate enough electricity to meet current demands, plus in this day and age you still need conventional generation for when solar and wind are idle. Solar and wind are idle far more often than we are led to believe.

.......

Let me say first that I am not ready to give up my diesel pickup or any of my diesel powered equipment. BUT, that remark about having to cover the earth to generate enough renewable energy isn't even close to being true. If I remember correctly there were several days in 2019 when electricity production in the USA from renewable sources exceeded fossil fuels. Obviously there is a long way to go, and powering the nation's transportation fleet with clean power is going to be a huge step up, but like it or not we are already taking significant steps toward a much different future.

 

[FatTire]

What are your thoughts on home based solar and wind as charging sources for electric vehicles?

I live off-grid and have gone 7 years since I last ran a generator for my house*, but there is no way I could charge an EV off my current system unless I were willing (and able) to break the charging up over 5 to 7 days. If I wanted to charge an EV I would have to install a PV array significantly larger than my current 2.1 KW set up. With PV panel prices continuing to drop, I imagine someday this is will be feasible for me.

* My shop runs off its own PV system, and typically I run a generator 10 to 20 hours a winter. Usually because something won't fit in the shop over night and I have to run a block heater, or used too much power that day (welding being the big one).

 

[BrokenTrack]

Another thing people do not think about with electric vehicles is the charge time.

I talked with someone whose daughter and husband went to Florida, and it took them 8 hours longer with an electric vehicle than gasoline because of the wait times to recharge the batteries.

I would have never thought of that issue.

 

[John_Mc]

Let me say first that I am not ready to give up my diesel pickup or any of my diesel powered equipment. BUT, that remark about having to cover the earth to generate enough renewable energy isn't even close to being true. If I remember correctly there were several days in 2019 when electricity production in the USA from renewable sources exceeded fossil fuels. Obviously there is a long way to go, and powering the nation's transportation fleet with clean power is going to be a huge step up, but like it or not we are already taking significant steps toward a much different future.

Yeah, that post was long on opinions, short on facts. I didn't bother to bite.

 

[John_Mc]

Another thing people do not think about with electric vehicles is the charge time.

I talked with someone whose daughter and husband went to Florida, and it took them 8 hours longer with an electric vehicle than gasoline because of the wait times to recharge the batteries.

I would have never thought of that issue.

We own a 2019 Chevy Bolt. 237 mile range when we don't have to run heat or AC. There are people who do cross-country trips in them, but we're not inclined to do that. We have gas vehicles for that. We use the Bolt for a commuter/grocery-getter vehicle. We may try the 250+ mile trip to my wife's family one of these days, but really that's not what we bought it for. Not a chance we'd try to make a Vermont-to-Florida run. When using it for local trips, it's been perfect. Pretty much zero maintenance, and we never stop at a gas station. Drive it to work and back, run whatever errands we need, and plug it in overnight. Even in the winter, when we need to run the heater, range has not been a concern. It doesn;t fit 100% of our needs, but that kind of use is the vast majority of all driving in the USA.

 

[1010]

DPF/DEF is a joke and expensive joke. And we are paying out the nose for it. We are stupid for allowing it.
The same clowns calling for these restrictions are the same clowns calling for less GOV.. Pathetic.

 

[FatTire]

1010, can you clarify that comment? Isn't it usually the.people who truly want smaller government who also are aggrieved by pollution control standards, at least in their current form?

I love how clean my F350 runs, but I do wish the systems that provide that were less complicated and more reliable. I guess we'll be switching to EV by about the time really good emissions control for diesel becomes a reality, and quite possibly the manufacturers that are slow to embrace that will fall by the wayside.