What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?

xwesx · March 2015

I have to admit that the urea requirement gives me pause as well given my northern climate, but it has not precluded me from closely considering them. It will probably be a while yet before I take any plunge. I'm thinking that a diesel CUV/SUV will replace our Forester when the time comes (a while, I hope) and I want something in the same or similar size to it. At 5.5 years old and 80,000 miles, it's a youngin' still and very much a staple of my stable (don't say that too fast - LOL).

I'm sure there are ways to mitigate the freeze point issue of the urea additive.

ruking1 · March 2015

Less than 15 k miles per year is really not a lot and is a "high" average for the US driver.

stever · March 2015

@xwesx, how's your air quality been up there this winter? LA has improved so much there's gotta be hope for Fairbanks....

xwesx · March 2015

ruking1 said:
Less than 15 k miles per year is really not a lot and is a "high" average for the US driver.

Yeah, we've definitely used that car less (on average) than any DD in the past. It benefits greatly from us having two "daily drivers" now rather than only one (compared to our 1996 Outback, on which we put 140,000 over 6.5 years). I put over 15K a year on mine (Fiesta) as well. But, with the kids home-schooled and the wife not working outside the home, "her car" sees no use at least half the days of the week (outside of trips). Were it not for the couple of long trips we took with it, we likely don't break 10,000 miles a year on it.

xwesx · March 2015

stever said:
@xwesx, how's your air quality been up there this winter? LA has improved so much there's gotta be hope for Fairbanks....

Crappy.... really, really poor. Our weather has been astoundingly warm this winter, but the air quality is probably worse than many winters. From what I hear, we're pretty high up on the EPA's "shyt lyst." Heheh.

Those temperature inversions are just not a friend to our air quality.

gagrice · March 2015

I'm sure there are ways to mitigate the freeze point issue of the urea additive.

Looking for complaints, most came early in the transition to Urea injection. From the various blogs VW at least took care of customers with frozen Urea issues. Mostly the heater being defective. For those that park out at 15-30 below, I would get advice from your dealer.
Also a side note:

SCR used with AdBlue®, improves fuel economy which more than compensates for the cost of AdBlue®.

stever · March 2015

LA, via a tweet from @actualsize‌:

NM today:

gagrice · March 2015

It pays to own a diesel vehicle in CA.

ruking1 · March 2015

So for me, as good as gassers have improved and in some cases they have improved very much, for all the attributes that are important to me, there are not enough real incentives (to the outliers that have made that switch) to switch FROM diesels TO gassers.

Two starting points, using the MB GLK 250 BT / 350, as an example are 70% better gasser mpg and 10% better than diesel torque figures to 406 # ft (35% better in diesel now 273 vs 369 # ft) : LIKE model. Needless to say, those are VERY tall orders, almost delusionary. This is NOT a knock to MB @ all. Indeed MB has priced the GLK 250 BT well opposite the GLK 350. @ MINUS $-500.

OR, If you wanted to DOWNSIZE diesels (like the European 2015 VW Passat line) DIESELS in that direction also has the edge.

Just heard on a cable tv financial news network that MB announced a Charleston, SC MB VAN plant for $ 500 M. Diesels, I am sure will be a good % of the Sprinter power plants. Metris will also be added.

http://www.thestate.com/2015/03/06/4028405/mercedes-benz-van-division-announces.html

My .02 SWAG are these panel vans are probably more cost effective, efficient and effective against the tradesman's ubiquitous PU trucks and paneled vans.

Totally off topic I just saw a 09 TDI for sale that indicate I have lost 2.9% per year to OWN it (depreciation) So in six years MINUS -17.4 %

stever · March 2015

And vice versa.

And I'd even pay the premium if I could otherwise afford to live in California.

xwesx · March 2015

Metris will also be added.

Interesting news! Looks like the initial introduction, scheduled for Fall of this year, is for a 4-cyl gas engine only. I am interested to see if they add a diesel option.

ruking1 · March 2015

MB Metris

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2016-mercedes-benz-metris-arrives-at-dealerships-in-october-priced-at-29945.html

gagrice · March 2015

Seems like a perfect fit for the 2.1L Bluetec. How is the Metris different from the Viano?

Mercedes-Benz has announced plans to further expand the V-Class lineup with the introduction of the V 250 BlueTEC 4MATIC at the Paris Motor Show.

This will be the first V-Class with 4MATIC all-wheel drive, and will feature a 2.1-liter four-cylinder engine that develops 190 PS (140 kW) and 440 Nm (324 lb-ft) of torque in the the V 250 BlueTEC.

Detailed performance specifications have not been released but Mercedes confirmed the model will consume 6.7 L/100km (35.1 mpg US / 42.1 mpg UK) and have CO2 emissions of 177 g/km.

The V 250 BlueTEC 4MATIC will go on sale in December and German pricing starts at €53,109.70 (including a 19% VAT).

http://www.emercedesbenz.com/autos/mercedes-benz/viano/mercedes-v-250-bluetec-4matic-announced/attachment/emercedesbenz-14c834_12/#gallery

xwesx · March 2015

The Viano is the consumer-class (e.g., luxo) van, while the Metris is it's commercial stable-mate.

nyccarguy · March 2015

Slow diesel news Saturday

@ruking1, I got the mileage figures you asked me for my company's 2006 Mitusubishi FUSO FE180.

2/13/2015 - 59,587 miles
3/6/2015 - 59,755 miles

168 miles driven
24.973 gallons of ULSD @ $3.539/gallon

6.73 mpg

gagrice · March 2015

xwesx said:
The Viano is the consumer-class (e.g., luxo) van, while the Metris is it's commercial stable-mate.

I could be convinced on the need for more room in a Luxo Viano. With AWD and the BlueTec 4cylinder, it should be a winner. Hope it makes it here.

gagrice · March 2015

nyccarguy said:
Slow diesel news Saturday

@ruking1, I got the mileage figures you asked me for my company's 2006 Mitusubishi FUSO FE180.

2/13/2015 - 59,587 miles
3/6/2015 - 59,755 miles

168 miles driven
24.973 gallons of ULSD @ $3.539/gallon

6.73 mpg

I hope they were hauling a HUGE load. I had no idea they were such diesel guzzlers. Though 18,000 lbs is a lot of freight.

ruking1 · March 2015

nyccarguy said:
Slow diesel news Saturday

@ruking1, I got the mileage figures you asked me for my company's 2006 Mitusubishi FUSO FE180.

2/13/2015 - 59,587 miles
3/6/2015 - 59,755 miles

168 miles driven
24.973 gallons of ULSD @ $3.539/gallon

6.73 mpg

Thanks for the heads up. I am sure they are very HEAVYy duty city miles! Though you probably would not know, it would be interesting to know what the gasser engine would do.

nyccarguy · March 2015

That is 100% "city" stop & go driving.

avalon02wh · March 2015

ruking1 said:

avalon02wh said:

stever said:
And if he wrecked the Altima, what would be the best replacement?
I would buy a Lamborghini Veneno.
Yes ! And ... here are the sounds of hot air.

Never say never.

avalon02wh · March 2015

gagrice said:

TAPS may be on its final days. I think a new Trans Canada pipeline is likely. Which would tie into Keystone XL when it is completed. And it will be completed. Canadian greed will assure the exploitation of the second largest known oil reserves in the tar sands. If I was king those against oil production would not be allowed to own any vehicle that depended on fossil fuel. They should be the first forced to live in caves. That would include any form of transportation that fossil fuel was used in its manufacture.

Any predictions on when TAPS will stop flowing?

avalon02wh · March 2015

gagrice said:

They even work well in 18 mph avg speed commute slug. This is a commute norm, so I don't know why you said this. ..."I'll bet you didn't know that people drove that slow."... You would have lost monies.

The times for the normal commute we have used the 09 VW Jetta TDI in , (27 miles) can range from 45 min (rare) to mostly 1.5 to 2 hours. (I am sure you can calculate average speeds) for a DSG.

http://www.treehugger.com/cars/average-commute-times-usa-interactive-map.html I suspect I am at the low end of the scale when it comes to both average mph and total commute time. My total commute time is 7 minutes walking out the door to walking in the door. And yes, there was a little bit of sarcasm in the statement. Still waiting for Edmunds to give us a Bob Newhart emoticon...

gagrice · March 2015

Any predictions on when TAPS will stop flowing?

They keep moving further West and East across the Arctic. There is likely more oil to be transported than has already gone down the line. More than 16 billion barrels have passed through the pipeline. The estimate for ANWR alone is more than that.

As the trans-Alaska oil pipeline ages, its life expectancy is actually increasing.

When oil first flowed through the 800-mile conduit in 1977, it was expected to transport crude and other petroleum products from Alaska’s North Slope to the ice-free port of Valdez for 35 years or until 2011.

But in 2003, the pipeline got a new lease on life, literally. The federal government renewed its right of way for 30 years, extending the line’s apparent life expectancy to 2034.

I am sure we will all be pushing up daisies long before oil stops flowing through the Alaska Pipeline.

In 2008, FERC adopted an end-of-life date of 2034 for the pipeline. But in a 2010 property tax dispute, an Alaska state court found the pipeline could continue operating economically until 2067

avalon02wh · March 2015

gagrice said:

kurtamaxxxguy said:
Would only consider buying Diesel when manufacturers can make their engines run cleanly without adding Urea (added hassle, expense, etc.).
If the Urea fill every 10-15k miles is an issue, owning diesel is NOT for you. With the current price of DEF under $5 per gallon, the cost per mile on my Touareg TDI is 2 tenths of a cent per mile. Chump change when you figure gas in my Sequoia was about 21 cents per mile over 6 years. I would keep this vehicle even if diesel was twice the price of gasoline. Right now diesel is about 20 cents per gallon less than RUG. I love not filling for 600+ miles. I love the torque climbing hills that the gas V8s just don't have. I was not in favor of Urea, until I realized it makes the air cleaner and it is less hassle than changing oil. which is every 10k miles.

I would agree that the urea fill can be inexpensive. However, some dealers will charge insane prices for the fill. Anything to soak the customer. The problem is with the dealer not the diesel system. Some people will see the story and decide not to buy a diesel.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1042727_adding-urea-to-clean-diesel-cars-can-i-just-pee-in-the-tank
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2013/10/how-much-does-refilling-the-volkswagen-passat-tdis-urea-cost.html

I am not sure that adding urea every 10,000 miles would be a deal breaker, other things like the price of the car & price of RUG vs. diesel would play a bigger role.. I would add the urea myself after the free maintenance is up as several of you already do.

Local Rug prices are up about 35 cents while diesel is only up about 5 cents a gallon from a month ago. The gap is down to about 20 cents. Very curious to see where prices go when the new refinery kicks in. I am also very interested in seeing what happens when Cushing tops out. Maybe they will just put it on the ground like they do with grain when the silo is full! (sarcasm)!!

stever · March 2015

Haven't checked but I assume the "emergency" underground salt dome (?) oil storage "tanks" down toward Louisiana somewhere are slam full.

Seems like the only thing that will cause TAPS to wind down, absent a natural (or other) disaster, would be a cheap oil glut that kills the economics. Shale's not going to do it, so that pretty much leaves a big switch from oil to something else.

gagrice · March 2015

stever said:
Haven't checked but I assume the "emergency" underground salt dome (?) oil storage "tanks" down toward Louisiana somewhere are slam full.

Seems like the only thing that will cause TAPS to wind down, absent a natural (or other) disaster, would be a cheap oil glut that kills the economics. Shale's not going to do it, so that pretty much leaves a big switch from oil to something else.

With the only non (sorta) fossil fuel option is EV, I think it will be many decades before people give up on oil based transportation. Unless you charge your EV with solar, it will likely have some fossil fuel created energy stored in the battery. I found it interesting the country people point to for alternatives is kicking up the coal generation to replace Nuclear. Not the cleaner hard coal, the dirtiest brown lignite coal. Got to keep those factories running, when the sun don't shine.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2014/02/140211-germany-plans-to-raze-towns-for-brown-coal/

Not to mention we do not have the resources anymore to make batteries or electric motors. So that means more stuff from Asia. China controls 95% of the Rare Earth elements needed for almost every form of alternative energy.

stever · March 2015

Sort of related is this morning's story in the Washington Post. Some tidbits:

"The [utility] industry and its fossil-fuel supporters are waging a determined campaign to stop a home-solar insurgency that is rattling the boardrooms of the country’s government-regulated electric monopolies.

Rooftop solar’s new popularity is creating a serious cost imbalance. While homeowners with solar panels usually see dramatic reductions in their electric bills, they still rely on the grid for electricity at night and on cloudy days. The utility collects less revenue, even though the infrastructure costs ... remain the same.

The residential solar industry currently employs about 174,000 people nationwide, or twice as many as the number of coal miners.

Researchers from Cambridge University concluded that photovoltaics will soon be able to out-compete fossil fuels, even if oil prices drop to as low as $10 a barrel." (that one looks huge to me).

Time to short the utility stocks.

“One can imagine a day when battery-storage technology or micro turbines could allow customers to be electric grid independent,” said a 2013 Edison study. “To put this into perspective, who would have believed 10 years ago that traditional wire line telephone customers could economically ‘cut the cord’?”

And this is where the Koch brothers ran into a wall:

“Conservatives support solar — they support it even more than progressives do,” said Bryan Miller, co-chairman of Sunrun, a California solar provider. “It’s about competition in its most basic form. The idea that you should be forced to buy power from a state-sponsored monopoly and not have an option is about the least conservative thing you can imagine.”

Utilities wage campaign against rooftop solar

avalon02wh · March 2015

gagrice said:
Any predictions on when TAPS will stop flowing?

They keep moving further West and East across the Arctic. There is likely more oil to be transported than has already gone down the line. More than 16 billion barrels have passed through the pipeline. The estimate for ANWR alone is more than that.

As the trans-Alaska oil pipeline ages, its life expectancy is actually increasing.

When oil first flowed through the 800-mile conduit in 1977, it was expected to transport crude and other petroleum products from Alaska’s North Slope to the ice-free port of Valdez for 35 years or until 2011.

But in 2003, the pipeline got a new lease on life, literally. The federal government renewed its right of way for 30 years, extending the line’s apparent life expectancy to 2034.

I am sure we will all be pushing up daisies long before oil stops flowing through the Alaska Pipeline.

In 2008, FERC adopted an end-of-life date of 2034 for the pipeline. But in a 2010 property tax dispute, an Alaska state court found the pipeline could continue operating economically until 2067

As you said, the "estimate" is in the billions. NPRA was also estimated to contain billions of barrels. Until you start drilling you never really know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Petroleum_Reserve–Alaska

I see that they are still trying to deal with the low flows.

http://www.alyeska-pipe.com/TAPS/PipelineOperations/Throughput
Throughput, total per year in millions
2002 365 bbl.
2003 363 bbl.
2004 342 bbl.
2005 325 bbl.
2006 277 bbl.
2007 270 bbl.
2008 257 bbl.
2009 245 bbl.
2010 226 bbl.
2011 213 bbl.
2012 201 bbl.
2013 195 bbl.
2014 187 bbl.

http://www.alyeska-pipe.com/TAPS/PipelineOperations/LowFlow
http://www.alyeska-pipe.com/TAPS/PipelineOperations/LowFlowOperations

ruking1 · March 2015

stever said:
Sort of related is this morning's story in the Washington Post. Some tidbits:

"The [utility] industry and its fossil-fuel supporters are waging a determined campaign to stop a home-solar insurgency that is rattling the boardrooms of the country’s government-regulated electric monopolies.

Rooftop solar’s new popularity is creating a serious cost imbalance. While homeowners with solar panels usually see dramatic reductions in their electric bills, they still rely on the grid for electricity at night and on cloudy days. The utility collects less revenue, even though the infrastructure costs ... remain the same.

The residential solar industry currently employs about 174,000 people nationwide, or twice as many as the number of coal miners.

Researchers from Cambridge University concluded that photovoltaics will soon be able to out-compete fossil fuels, even if oil prices drop to as low as $10 a barrel." (that one looks huge to me).

Time to short the utility stocks.

“One can imagine a day when battery-storage technology or micro turbines could allow customers to be electric grid independent,” said a 2013 Edison study. “To put this into perspective, who would have believed 10 years ago that traditional wire line telephone customers could economically ‘cut the cord’?”

And this is where the Koch brothers ran into a wall:

“Conservatives support solar — they support it even more than progressives do,” said Bryan Miller, co-chairman of Sunrun, a California solar provider. “It’s about competition in its most basic form. The idea that you should be forced to buy power from a state-sponsored monopoly and not have an option is about the least conservative thing you can imagine.”

Utilities wage campaign against rooftop solar

One REAL text case would be the path Detroit Michigan will go ! I do not think it will be an all or nothing, even as that is the most likely. It might be one reason why Koch Brothers industries have bought in the Detroit area !! ?? (coal related operations) But who knows ?

Hats off to the largely leadership, unions for the awesome governance !! ( sorry to leave out the host of supporting players) IF the same elements either defacto or are called upon again, it's the same old same ole, all over again !?

It is vey apparent the electric infrastructure needs BILLIONS of $$'s of MASSIVE work in order for BASIC things to happen, let alone rebirth. Which utility is going to want to pony up, IF the goal is getting off the grid, they will be asked to fund? ?? It is also apparent that "HOME" solar systems are expensive ($30,000) and optimistically have 30 year live spans. In the early stages of "solar" most companies have gone bankrupt. One can buy houses in Detroit for $ 30,000, I have read ! Large tracts of land can be had just putting it back on active tax rolls.

It is the height of hypocrisy for the PVF to be 95% PLUS+ RUG/PUG !!! This plan was probably hatched in Detroit, so there is a certain amount of IRONY here !

Everybody knows diesel gets better mpg (30% minimum), has less ppm SULFUR (30 ppm to 90 ppm vs 15 ppm 5 to 10 ppm nominally delivered @ the pumps) . Biodiesel has ZERO ppm SULFUR and a whole host of necessary on going processes can be tapped to make B 100 FROM. YET after @ least 50 years, there is STILL no political will for B100 specifications engines !!

ruking1 · March 2015

For the "oil glut" we are supposed to be having, prices have not moved down !! ?? In fact, prices have gone UP !!!

ULSD $3.25 (yippie to have even hit $2.99,=+ 8.7%)

RUG $ 3.31
MG $ 3.41
PUG $ 3.51

gagrice · March 2015

I see that they are still trying to deal with the low flows.

187 million barrels a year is a respectable 512,000 barrels per day. I think Pt Thomson is due on line shortly. No sense pumping anymore than needed to keep the flow going at $50 per barrel. Bet it goes back up as the price goes up.

stever · March 2015

It's an oil glut, not a refinery glut.

My other solar quote was around $21,000 before the incentives (~$7k in credits). That includes ~$2,000 for a panel upgrade to 200 amp (I'm maxed out right now). And yeah, I'd get to take a credit for the portion spent to upgrade the panel. Ditto the carport idea if we went back to that.

The utilities are really going to shoot themselves in the foot by fighting solar and net metering. I'm tempted to dump another $10k in the system and get batteries and just go off the grid. Then who's going to help pay for it? And the utilites that went whole hog nuclear will really be underwater. No way they'll be able to afford the billions in waste management fees. So we'll all be on the hook for the WIPP and Diablo Canyon messes.

Forgot to check diesel prices today; all I noticed was that the cheap gas at one of the Walmarts was up to $2.23.

gagrice · March 2015

The utilities are really going to shoot themselves in the foot by fighting solar and net metering. I'm tempted to dump another $10k in the system and get batteries and just go off the grid. Then who's going to help pay for it?

I would seriously think about that also. We in So CA are faced with $4 billion to demobilize San Onofre Nuke plant. We are already paying the highest rates in the Nation. Then if the idea of $50 per month to use Net Metering gets popular. You can get a total solar system for off the grid with 3KW for $13k.

http://www.altestore.com/store/Packaged-Systems/Off-Grid-Residential-Systems/Off-Grid-Residential-package-3-306kW-Kyocera-Modules/p11616/

ruking1 · March 2015

I think you will know municipalities are serious, when they pass the requirement for ALL new construction to be energy self sufficient, aka have the capability to be OFF grid and have the option to draw OFF the grid or sell TO the grid. Most to all cities are NOT capable of doing that. This is not to mention the loss of revenue to the utility co's, municipalities, state and federal governments.

Cupertino, CA ( people have probably not a clue which tech firm

is located there) not very long ago charged $21,000 for the PERMITTING ONLY for a solar installation, residence. The local utility charge another arm/leg to hook up the solar installation to the system also.

The truth is there is no electrical energy shortage either. I think it is plain to see they are trying to make it financially daunting for the smaller business oil AND solar companies to do business crashing and crushing oil/solar industry jobs !!!! Great jobs recovery !

stever · March 2015

Last I heard was that in a lot of states, you can't build new and get a certificate of occupancy if you weren't connected to the grid.

Diablo, San Onofre - can't keep up with the problem children.

ruking1 · March 2015

Now you have confirmed what one REAL obstruction IS !

gagrice · March 2015

stever said:
Last I heard was that in a lot of states, you can't build new and get a certificate of occupancy if you weren't connected to the grid.

Diablo, San Onofre - can't keep up with the problem children.

That is a problem, lady Florida is fighting just that. Lot of places on the Big Island with no power or water. The power grid is part of Big Brother wanting control of your every move. With the smart meters in San Diego they can shut you off in a heart beat. They will give you a slight discount if you allow them control of your AC unit. When we had rolling blackouts before large numbers put up solar, they would cut off your AC on the hottest days of the year. I think the systems where you pay nothing down and a guaranteed monthly fee are the safest. Then when the utility stiffs the solar owner, it will be the company that owns the equipment.

ruking1 · March 2015

Also, not far behind a "closed" utility account (any to all) is an unfit for "human habitation" RED tag. It's a downhill slope the rest of the way. Any one can do the multiplication, (DETROIT for example) and it's a no brainer to see why Detroit looks like what Detroit looks like. Out of 144 sq miles, app 50 sq. MILES= (640 acres per sq miles, 32,000 acres) of parcels are "fallow". Oh and fully HALF the population has since left Detroit.

Slow diesel news day (one indy where I buy)

ULSD @ $3.19

RUG $ 3.35
MG $3.45
PUG $3.55

Back @ the commute grind, 41 mpg diesel (consistency is almost boring here) vs 26 mpg (VW like model RUG/PUG gassers, projected, fuelly.com) @ 1,250 miles month/= .0778 cents/.1327 CPMD : F ( cost/ cents per mile driven fuel) or 70.5 % more.

A gasser (like model) in our case would spend $824 MORE per year. New tires and alignment do not seem to have the "newness" mpg penalty. Over a years time (15,000 miles commute) $824 SAVINGS will buy 258 gals of ULSD, and that would be 10,590 miles , commute MORE. Yearly tire is projected @ minus- $80.

ruking1 · March 2015

Interesting article about RUG/PUG, aka 10% ethanol. (corollary: ADVANTAGE, diesel, specifically plus +3/4% minimum, 108% MORE for ethanol to get equivalent RUG/PUG energy )

End the Ethanol Rip-Off
By ROBERT BRYCEMARCH 10, 2015

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/opinion/end-the-ethanol-rip-off.html?_r=0

So,... IF it is THAT bad @ 10% ethanol, what do you think @ 100 % ethanol ?????? !!!!!

Correction from ..."Yearly tire is projected @ minus- $80."
TO :
Tire consumption rate $'s is projected @ minus- $80. yearly.

henryn · March 2015

For once, I am in full agreement with you. Adding ethanol to gasoline was never a good idea, and as time goes by, that fact continues to become more self evident.

And while we're at it, what about DST (Daylight Savings Time)? Another idea that was never really worthwhile, and it's well past time to end it.

xwesx · March 2015

henryn said:
And while we're at it, what about DST (Daylight Savings Time)? Another idea that was never really worthwhile, and it's well past time to end it.

I disagree with that. DST is an excellent idea! The part that doesn't make any sense is the "fall back" portion where we go to standard time during the winter months. If we would just set on Saving Time and leave it there year-round, nobody would ever even remember we switched to it, yet would reap the benefits of more evening light for much of the year if, like many of us, they schedule their days "on the clock."

So, as far as ideas go, it really doesn't matter how much merit one has.... if you inconvenience people long enough with it, they're gonna reject it eventually!

gagrice · March 2015

Well Duh, we have said this all along. Not to mention the fact that Ethanol had to be transported by trucks instead of pipelines. I would imagine the overall negative environmental impact was rather large.

Fueleconomy.gov, a site run by the federal government, advises that vehicles running on the most common form of ethanol-blended fuel, E10 (which contains 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent gasoline), will typically get “3 percent to 4 percent fewer miles per gallon” than they would if they were running on pure gasoline. That mileage penalty — in essence, a tax — must be paid at the pump through the purchase of additional fuel.

One of my many reasons for switching to a diesel vehicle. If I ever buy another vehicle it will be diesel also. I have had it with the government and their experiments with our gasoline fuel. MTBE polluted our water in California. Ethanol destroyed a large area of the Gulf of Mexico. The EPA is their own worst enemy. With the help of the jerks at CARB.

slorenzen · March 2015

gagrice said:
Well Duh, we have said this all along. Not to mention the fact that Ethanol had to be transported by trucks instead of pipelines. I would imagine the overall negative environmental impact was rather large.

Fueleconomy.gov, a site run by the federal government, advises that vehicles running on the most common form of ethanol-blended fuel, E10 (which contains 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent gasoline), will typically get “3 percent to 4 percent fewer miles per gallon” than they would if they were running on pure gasoline. That mileage penalty — in essence, a tax — must be paid at the pump through the purchase of additional fuel.

One of my many reasons for switching to a diesel vehicle. If I ever buy another vehicle it will be diesel also. I have had it with the government and their experiments with our gasoline fuel. MTBE polluted our water in California. Ethanol destroyed a large area of the Gulf of Mexico. The EPA is their own worst enemy. With the help of the jerks at CARB.

Disagree on the 3% to 4% mileage penalty.

I see a solid 10% difference between ethanol-laced RUG vs the "clear gas".

ruking1 · March 2015

slorenzen said:

gagrice said:
Well Duh, we have said this all along. Not to mention the fact that Ethanol had to be transported by trucks instead of pipelines. I would imagine the overall negative environmental impact was rather large.

Fueleconomy.gov, a site run by the federal government, advises that vehicles running on the most common form of ethanol-blended fuel, E10 (which contains 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent gasoline), will typically get “3 percent to 4 percent fewer miles per gallon” than they would if they were running on pure gasoline. That mileage penalty — in essence, a tax — must be paid at the pump through the purchase of additional fuel.

One of my many reasons for switching to a diesel vehicle. If I ever buy another vehicle it will be diesel also. I have had it with the government and their experiments with our gasoline fuel. MTBE polluted our water in California. Ethanol destroyed a large area of the Gulf of Mexico. The EPA is their own worst enemy. With the help of the jerks at CARB.
Disagree on the 3% to 4% mileage penalty.

I see a solid 10% difference between ethanol-laced RUG vs the "clear gas".

I do not see it as disagreement, so much as reinforcing what has been said about diesel. Again to a lesser extend, BUT with GREATER IMPACTs, RUG/PUG is ALSO being impacted: burn MORE, COST more, while professing to burn LESS and "cost less"

.

Again, this is NO knock against MB. BUT using (like model ) GLK 350 (PUG @ 20 mpg) vs GLK 250 BT (ULSD @ 34.5 mpg), the diesel posts 73% BETTER mpg (costs WAY less also).

gagrice · March 2015

Disagree on the 3% to 4% mileage penalty.
I see a solid 10% difference between ethanol-laced RUG vs the "clear gas".

You are right, it is more like 3-4 MPG less with most E10. Just more lies from the EPA.

henryn · March 2015

xwesx said:

henryn said:
And while we're at it, what about DST (Daylight Savings Time)? Another idea that was never really worthwhile, and it's well past time to end it.
I disagree with that. DST is an excellent idea! The part that doesn't make any sense is the "fall back" portion where we go to standard time during the winter months. If we would just set on Saving Time and leave it there year-round, nobody would ever even remember we switched to it, yet would reap the benefits of more evening light for much of the year if, like many of us, they schedule their days "on the clock."

Yes, but "more evening light" would come at the expense of a very late sunrise. Would you really like to see the sun not come up until 8:30 a.m. ? I know I wouldn't.

Standard time zones were only implemented in 1883. Up until then, everyone set their clocks / watches to high noon when the sun was directly overhead, very simple system. But the trains were running into each other, so standard time zones were implemented just to help avoid train collisions.

xwesx · March 2015

Sun doesn't come up in mid-winter until 1000 or later anyway, so what's the difference?

Basically, in the winter, there isn't enough daylight to matter one way or the other. So, why create the inconvenience of a shifting clock when there is a clear benefit of the DST during the better part of the year.

As of this week, I'm already more productive in the evenings. I go home, change clothes, and then outside to "get some work done." Just last week I was holing up as soon as I parked the car.

skyisthelimit · March 2015

Price, fuel economy and performance. I have friends who bought their diesel trucks mainly because of lower fuel expenses.

stever · March 2015

We switched to DST along with most of the country last week. Yesterday we went to Tucson - AZ doesn't switch because of the evening heat in the summer. Bit of a pain since they are otherwise on the same time zone as NM. Would much rather keep DST going all year too.

While we're messing with time zones, why not just compress them to two zones in the Lower 48? Eastern and Western.

Narrowest differential seen on I-10 going over and back was twenty cents - $2.49 RUG, $2.69 diesel.

ruking1 · March 2015

stever said:
We switched to DST along with most of the country last week. Yesterday we went to Tucson - AZ doesn't switch because of the evening heat in the summer. Bit of a pain since they are otherwise on the same time zone as NM. Would much rather keep DST going all year too.

While we're messing with time zones, why not just compress them to two zones in the Lower 48? Eastern and Western.

Narrowest differential seen on I-10 going over and back was twenty cents - $2.49 RUG, $2.69 diesel.

So if I fueled a MB GLK 350 in your neck of the woods, I project PUG would be @ $2.69/20 mpg =.1345 cents?

With the GLK 250 BT diesel @ $2.69/34.5 mpg= .078 CPMD : F !! ??

What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles