Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 00:08:15 -0400
Reply-To: Wade Shen <swade@UMIACS.UMD.EDU>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Wade Shen <swade@UMIACS.UMD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Turbo Diesel Power and Economy - global efficiency Q?
In-Reply-To: <KDEFIMDKMLDACJCKCOGIIEDECHAA.jp0815@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Right. Generally diesels with their higher fuel efficiencies produce
less CO2 and other greenhouse equivalents. Unfortunately, their smog
emissions are pretty bad and in urban environments this leads to
low-level ozone build up and poor air quality.
The EPA ratings are somewhat arbitrary because they are based on certain
assumptions about driving patterns (45% city/55% highway), but they are
a good basis for comparison, because they apply the same standard for
all cars over many years.
In Europe and in Canada, the GHG emmissions are weighted with more
import than in the US, but then again, we use more coal-fired power
plants than either of those areas, so we'd better make up for our carbon
emmissions in other ways.
wade
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM] On Behalf
Of Joachim Preiss
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 10:53 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Turbo Diesel Power and Economy - global efficiency Q?
EPA ratings may be arbitrary. TDI engines are among the worst in EPA's
statistics, even worse than any 10mpg guzzler, although their low fuel
consumption and greenhouse gas emissions are matched only by ultralight
cars and hybrids. In Europe reducing greenhouse gas emissions is
considered very important, besides the fact that expensive fuel calls
for better gasmileage. TDI engines however emit particles which can
cause smog. Technology is available today to filter those diesel
particles which are also considered carcinogenic from the exhaust, but
car manufacturers (VW!) refuse to install them in their cars.
Greenhouse gas emissions hurt globally, particles locally.
In your 2 ton Westy you can probably achieve 20-25mpg with a clean
burning modern I4 gasoline engine, or 35mpg with a TDI. Your choice.
Joachim
'85 Westfalia 1.9WBX 18mpg
'00 golf 1.9 TDI 45mpg over 45k miles
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com]On
|> Behalf Of Wade Shen
|> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 22:29
|> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
|> Subject: Re: Turbo Diesel Power and Economy - global eficiency Q?
|>
|>
|> Check out www.fueleconomy.gov This site has information about EPA
|> fuel efficiencies and relative polution as gauged by the EPA.
|>
|> Just taking a quick look, the Jetta 1.9 TDI vs Jetta 1.8 T, The TDI
|> emmits 3.4 tons less greenhouse gas (in co2 equiv.) per year, for the
|> same body and transmission. However, the smog forming emissions are
|> much worse for the TDI (and generally for diesels).
|>
|> wade
|>
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM] On
|> Behalf Of Damon Campbell
|> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 9:38 PM
|> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
|> Subject: Re: Turbo Diesel Power and Economy - global eficiency Q?
|>
|>
|> I am trying to debate the merits between several different engine
|> conversions (although i don't really know why... my 1.9 is running
|> like a champ). My main criteria is not a moderate HP increase
|> (although an extra 15 or so would be great), but rather the reduction
|> of pollution to the world. So this question transcends (a bit)
|> frank's lengthy analysis, although inspired by it.
|>
|> What combinations of fuel and engine produce the least amount of
|> pollutants? In this question, i am including the impacts of actually
|> producing/transporting/etc. the fuel, as well. (i remember someone
|> mentioning this a while back, but can't find it in the archives).
|> How does natural gas, or possibly even fuel cells weigh in to the
|> global-efficiency calc compared to your standard gas and diesel? It
|> sounds like a simple TDi is a viable option for these criteria, but i
|> want to see even *more* numbers! :-)
|>
|> Thanks,
|> -Damon
|>
|> Frank Grunthaner <FrankGRUN@AOL.COM> wrote:
|> And frankly, the highly efficient TDi is probably the most effective
|> engine for the Vanagon. Turbo diesels are impressive, and the TDi
|> technology even more so.
|>
|> Sorry for the soapbox,
|>
|> Frank Grunthaner
|>
|> '84 Westy
|>
|>
|> ---------------------------------
|> Do you Yahoo!?
|> Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos, & more faith.yahoo.com
