Vanagon EuroVan
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (October 2002, week 3)Back to main VANAGON pageJoin or leave VANAGON (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Wed, 16 Oct 2002 21:17:00 -0700
Reply-To:     David Marshall <vanagon@VOLKSWAGEN.ORG>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         David Marshall <vanagon@VOLKSWAGEN.ORG>
Subject:      Re: Turbo Diesel Power and Economy - global efficiency Q?
Comments: To: Joachim Preiss <jp0815@EARTHLINK.NET>
In-Reply-To:  <KDEFIMDKMLDACJCKCOGIIEDECHAA.jp0815@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

I have been doing some reading on this very subject for quite a while as the Diesel bug has bitten me very hard this year. I have a 1.6TD Golf and a 1.9TD Syncro 16 Multivan - both have given me a lot of trouble free and inexpensive operation.

I live in a town where they cut down trees to make a living and every third vehicle on the road is a heavy truck of some sort that has a BIG turbo Diesel motor that belches out the black smoke when they are under load. Local air pollution in Quesnel is quite high and since I have moved here in 1992 my breathing health is not as good as it used to be.

Seeing how Canada has signed the Kyoto Accord (and the USA didn't) we are supposed to reduce our green house gas emissions by x% by such and such a date (still learning about this stuff). I'm doing my part by switching to Diesel powered vehicles and getting set up for Bio-Diesel production (more on that later). Based on the EPAs findings the TD / TDI is a great solution to reducing our GHGs by producing almost 50% as compared to an equivalent gasoline engine. As you pointed out the particulate (soot) levels of a Diesel motor (not JUST the TDI as most other gas engined car manufactures want you to think) is almost 6 times of that of an equivalent gasoline motor (1.9 Turbo Diesel vs 2.0 Gasoline) - These figures are true *IF* you use petroleum based Diesel fuel. If you use Bio-Diesel (canola or soya based) the levels of soot drop considerably and the particles that are released are not not toxic and will biodegrade in about 30 days. Why are we still subsidising our western farmers to grow wheat that mostly gets shipped to another country where it usually goes to waste? Why not put that same money into developing canola production and bio-Diesel production instead? This way we keep our population employed, mobile and healthy. At the same time we keeping our environment cleaner and healthier too. We also lessen our dependency on oil from the Middle East and keep our money locally to benefit everyone.

Just a thought!

1985 Golf 1.6TD soon to be intercooled 1986 Syncro 16 Multivan 1.9TD 1988 Syncro Double Cab 2.0 Gasoline - soon to be TDI

David Marshall

Fast Forward Automotive Inc. 4356 Quesnel Hixon Road Quesnel BC Canada V2J 6Z3

http://www.fastforward.ca mailto:sales@fastforward.ca Phone: (250) 992 7775 FAX: (250) 992 1160

- Vanagon Accessories and Engine Conversions - Vanagon, Transporter and Iltis Sales and Importation - European Lighting for most Volkswagen models

-----Original Message----- From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com]On Behalf Of Joachim Preiss Sent: October 16, 2002 7:53 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


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main VANAGON page

Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!


Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com


The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.

Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.