Diesels in the News

ruking1

Yes I did read his posts in the context of his past posts. And clearly in THAT context, the assertion ..."But not liking the Prius because Hollywood likes it and ONLY because Hollywood likes it is juvenile."... is not true.

gagrice

Some 17 percent of German auto buyers were interested in cars with less than 70 horsepower six years ago. But in 2006, only 9 percent want the smaller engines. Over the same period of time, sales of cars with between 136 and 190 horsepower doubled to 27 percent, Dudenhöffer said.

"Automobiles are very valuable to Germans, they have a feeling of freedom in the car," he said. " A person's esteem is very closely connected to what they drive."

"By emphasizing diesels over the last few years, manufactures have done a lot to help consumers," he said. "They are helping get around the conflicting objectives of more performance without more consumption."

Car buyers are turning to diesel engines because they can get similar performance with less fuel. The market share of diesel engines has climbed to nearly 45 percent since 2000 in Germany, according to Dudenhöffer's report.

Big is better

ruking1

In someways, the posted article speaking of Germans' in particular, might be reading "TOMORROWS" news as projected to Americans in general. Indeed it may be 10-15 years in the furture for us, in the USA.

I really can't, off the top of my head think of many cars in the USA that advertise, let alone can cruise at autobahn speeds, that have 90 hp for a sub 3,000# vehicle that get 42/49 mpg!!!??? This is against the back drop of 25% of the USA vehicle fleet being so called "small, compact, economy " cars, and ever increasing price per gal of fuel.

I would guess sub 100 hp in the American mindset would have and have had such pejorative connotations, as to affect/effect buying decisions negatively.

qbrozen

I would guess sub 100 hp in the American mindset would have and have had such pejorative connotations, as to affect/effect buying decisions negatively.

I'm not sure it matters as much as you think it does. To folks like us, maybe. But I would have to say, in my personal experience, AT MOST, 10% of folks I know can even tell me how much HP their vehicle has.

ruking1

While you might attribute more of a "SOTP" seat of the pants view of this issue all the way to TOTALLY CLUELESS(no hidden or revealed puns intended) statistics indicated sub 100 hp cars are clearly in the minority. So using your logic, some folks might not buy a sub 100 hp car dismissing it as not enough "umpf" or whatever euphemisms they might employ. The other side of that is they are clueless to the point of NOT demanding it.

Another illustration might be, i.e., I HATE silver cars ! Yet if I (or more importantly a MAJORITY OF FOLKS) buy silver cars, the folks making the paint decisions would be remiss if they got rid of silver cars, don't you think?

qbrozen

Ah, but a diesel can have less than 100 hp and still have plenty of kick in a light car. (again, probably not enough kick for us enthusiasts, but enough to rival and probably outaccelerate the small 4-cylinder gas engines out there now)

ruking1

I think I understand your point, and if that is your point; I would agree!!! However for me, I did not come to this 90 hp 2003 VW Jetta TDI seeking that point out. However over 82,000 miles, I am very very pleased. Essentially a lot of the advantages remain hidden from view. There have been some unintended consequences and benefits, but I think that ADDS to the plus column.

ruking1

But I probably would be remiss in balancing the other side of the topic by NOT asking what would be the affect/effect if the Hybrids had sub 100 hp!? Me thinks a lot of that would convert to the - MINUS column.

moparbad

Clean Diesel

My savings fund for a Honda diesel is growing larger, should be ready to purchase by the time Honda introduces diesel engines for 2008/2009 models.

dhanley

"Sadly it is not just our kids that they corrupt. It is the whole fiber of our country. They see nothing wrong with driving their Prius to the airport for the media to see."

Shrug--I'm not sure what your point is. Perhaps your interest in diesel is to impress the neighbors. I don't know how you are so sure that their interest in the environment is any more or less genuine than yours is.

larsb

good idea to hold out for a Honda diesel, because apparently the MB "clean diesel" is just not clean enough YET.

Inside Line - BlueTec Too LOWTECH for USA

dhanley

"And that is the key behind all liberal touchy feely regulations: not what is truly effective, but what is easy to do, whether it accomplishes much or not. Let's all sing kumbaya."

Shrug--i might as well say that conservatives want us all to breathe right out of tailpipes, as long as we're setting up strawmen. Look at the air pollution in houston, for example.

Let's say we focus on diesel news and not attacking states/parties?

dhanley

"I am pointing out to the suckers that fell for the Hollywood hybrid rhetoric, just how phony they are. Your reasoning that they are rich people is hilarious. Does that give them the right to pollute?"

The interesting part is that you seem to be very upset at "hollywood." You don't seem to be upset at CEO's who probably fly in private jets a lot more often.

ruking1

Just goes to show there is something for everybody on this thread topic!!

british_rover

Possible V12 diesel in Audi RS8

british_rover

Doh double post.

alp8

it's funny - you are spending more time defending gagrice's position than gagrice, himself

he and I went around on this and seem to have settled it

am not sure why you keep kicking the dead horse

the fact is, some people can't listen to ANY message if they don't like the messenger. Gagrice has stated his contempt of Hollywood many times. That's fine. I just don't think the messenger is all that relevant. I listen to the message, evaluate facts, and make up my own mind. Whether the messenger has an agenda is irrelevant to whether the message has relevance. Of course, I am comfortable analyzing the facts, listening to alternative views, etc. I don't need to debase a message by debasing the messenger.

Well, sometimes I do. I'm not perfect.

once_for_all

yep, I am holding out for a Honda diesel, or Subaru. The vehicle needs to be a Ridgeline/or Baja.

A Ford diesel in the new IRS SporTrac could also interest me.

John

ruking1

..."am not sure why you keep kicking the dead horse "...


Perhaps it was a friendly reminder to a "live" rider to GET OFF the dead horse.

ruking1

To me this is an indicator that at least the environmental regulation side of the government is still in denial of the "problem" of importation of foreign oil. This is unless of course they really know the truth, and that is: there is really no "foreign oil" problem.

I actually read this in passing and it was WELL hidden away. It was hidden in full view and EXPRESSED as numbers. But since most folks can't or won't do the math or even see its real significance it remains hidden in plain sight. But the gist of it is: of all "fuel" consumed yearly in the USA, fully half of that fuel was diesel/diesel/ variants. It has literally been this way for generations!!!! As you have heard me say more than once these generators ARE UNMITIGATED. This generates almost NO outcry !!!!???? So for example, regulators and environmentalists advocate TAKING mass transportation and aircraft, which is for the most part unmitigated!!??? They also advocate living in cities which oxymoronically use expotentially more energy than say a small town or rural area!!

gagrice

You don't seem to be upset at CEO's who probably fly in private jets a lot more often.

If they acted like they were doing something for the environment by flying around in their high pollution jets I would have included them. It is the hypocrisy of some of the more visible celebrity environmentalists that I am decrying. I am against any person or entity that put forth rhetoric of "DO as I say, Not as I DO". Don't drive around in a Suburban and ask me to drive a Yugo. That ain't gonna get it.

There are many celebrities that are open advocates of a cleaner environment. One in particular lives close to what he preaches, Willie Nelson. I realize not everyone can afford a self sustaining compound on Maui.

alp8

and how much fuel do you think Willie burns when he goes on tour? Probably more than every member of Edmunds COMBINED in a year.

Why do you keep ignoring my point? If Hoolywood types said "There is gravity," would you be running around telling people not to believe in gravity because Tom Hanks says we should believe in gravity?

----

I do agree with you, generally, about all the unregulated emissions. But you are ignoring the fact that CARB simply can not regulate everything. They do not have the legal authority. And it doesn't sound likely that you would vote for a President, etc. that would give them that authority.

Some of your comments make you sound like someone who doesn't want clean air, but I know that isn't the case. But your rhetoric and approach can make people think that.

alp8

So for example, regulators and environmentalists advocate TAKING mass transportation and aircraft, which is for the most part unmitigated!!???

What environmentalists recommend taking aircraft?

They also advocate living in cities which oxymoronically use expotentially more energy than say a small town or rural area!!

Actually, last time I checked, urban environments were far more efficient than suburban or rural environments. That doesn't mean that everyone should live in a city, or that someone living rurally has to be living less efficiently than if he was living in a city.

dhanley

"If they acted like they were doing something for the environment by flying around in their high pollution jets I would have included them."

Hum. I do know that Larry David flys coast-to-coast in a private jet and his wife is an environmental activist. I don't know that your attitude towards "hollywood" has any more justification than this. I mean, who specifically do you think is being a hypocrite here? Would it be better if they drove suburbans?

Here's a list of celebrity hybrid drivers:

http://www.hybridcars.com/celebrities.html

Also, there are a lot of CEO's claiming their comanies are green/enviro-friendly while they are lobbying congress for the right to pollute more.

gagrice

Hum. I do know that Larry David flys coast-to-coast in a private jet and his wife is an environmental activist.

Probably as good of an example as any. What is wrong with flying First Class in a 737 with 140 other people. It brings the pollution per person way down. I could do the math, I doubt it would mean anything. I know you see where I am going with this.

Does Larry David and his Prius/private jet lifestyle pollute more or less than the average citizen driving a VW diesel or Hummer to work every day? I will applaud the actor/actress that uses a hybrid as their every day transportation. I think that hybrids may have a positive environmental impact. Only time will tell if the added pollution in manufacturing is outweighed by the lower emissions throughout the life of the vehicle.

there are a lot of CEO's claiming their companies are green/enviro-friendly while they are lobbying congress for the right to pollute more.

A perfect example of CEO manipulation of Congress is the current ethanol debacle. Tax dollars being used to pollute the Mississippi Delta.

gagrice

Some of your comments make you sound like someone who doesn't want clean air

I want to see a balance between clean air and practicality. I lived in Los Angeles in the 1950s & 60s. I remember not being able to breath in that polluted air. It was gasoline causing that not diesel. There is still problems in areas of the LA basin. Not caused by diesel cars. It is mostly unregulated or lightly regulated, ships, trains, semi trucks, tractors, factories and heavy equipment.

I believe the modern diesel cars like the VW TDI and MB CDI are a good balance. They use less fossil fuel and are relatively clean burning. As I have pointed out many times. The VW TDI or E320 CDI are as clean burning as a 3-4 year old Toyota Camry. There are hundreds of thousands of these cars on the road today. They are just as polluting as a modern diesel car and they use more fuel and cause more Green House Gas.

Conservation, by driving less, would go a lot further to help the environment than trying to make every car SULEV.

PS
I put 3992 miles the first year on my GMC Hybrid PU truck. I am trying to do my part. How about you?

alp8

see? That's much better!! (less vitriol and more of who you really are)

I'm also doing my part. My wife drives 6 miles/day to and from the train for her 15 mile commute. My commute is 17 miles, which I drive, alone, in a 22 mpg car. Not great. But at least I bought a house that is only 17 miles from work. I could have saved a couple hundred thousand dollars and commuted 100 miles/day. Should I get "credit" for that choice? I think so. (I drive approximately 12k miles/year.)

I also have solar panels on my roof, but that is really only an offset for my hot tub (electric).

Probably the best thing I could do for energy use is take my two kids out of soccer. :-) We do try to carpool that as much as possible, though that is mostly for convenience for the parents and not for fuel conservation.

The lifestyle choice of living "close" to work (a relative term, I admit) is probalby the most important thing any of us normal folks do vis a vis energy conservation. I don't have the luxury of cutting back my private jet use. ;-)

I agree that many folks are hypocrites. They talk the talk, but they don't walk the walk. Using a private jet is a good example. They are putting their convenience above the need for energy conservation (and decreasing pollution).

But at least Larry David is trying to "sell" me anything connected with his wife's enviro message. She/he isn't making an y money when I buy a Prius after listening to her talk. That's different than a Ford exec, for example, flying all over in a private jet, but trying to convince me that Ford is a Green Company. Still, that doesn't mean I shouldn't buy/drive a hybrid.

dhanley

"What is wrong with flying First Class in a 737 with 140 other people. It brings the pollution per person way down."

I agree with you 100%. I just don't see the reason to discredit every actor because of what, so far, one is doing. We could just as well conclude that willie nelson's biodiesel use is a farce because some singer somewhere is a hypocrite.

"A perfect example of CEO manipulation of Congress is the current ethanol debacle. Tax dollars being used to pollute the Mississippi Delta."

Well, that may or may not be a good example. There are tremendous tax subsidies both direct and indirect for petrol as well. All other things being equal, i'd prefer for subsidies to be going to farmers rather than chevron/bp/shell. Keeps more americans working.

alp8

I want to see a balance between clean air and practicality.

I hear you. Balance doesn't work real well in our system, unfortunately. If something is unregulated, and there is an externality involved, that externality will be taken advantage of. No one is gonna keep their product/activity from causing air pollution unless they HAVE TO. That's just how life is.

If your property drains into your fish pond, you are unlikely to pollute your property and kill your fish. If it drains into a water resource that is large and seemingly unconnected to your life, people will not control their discharges. If you add the profit motive in, there is no way anyone is gonna control their discharges. It just doesn't happen. Heck, if you did control your discharges, your shareholders would get rid of you. (Of course, the situation is different if there is some bottom line benefit to you controlling your discharges.)

larsb

If the "world's cleanest diesel" car cannot make it into the 5 clean air states, what is REALLY the state of modern diesel cars?

http://www.autospectator.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5694

I have been giving diesel the "benefit of my doubt" because all the stories about how clean diesel is supposed to be soon.

So NOW when is "soon"? 2008? 2009?

Please un-confuse me fellas.

ruking1

I think the politics of these issues are not ready to embrace diesel as a minority solution to the "importation" of foreign oil issue. Of course, continued scenarios like the HUGE Gulf of Mexico oil discovery by Chevron, Devon, et al. is truly NOT bullish for the issue of "shortage, FOREIGN and HIGHER prices".

So it also takes the onus from the politicos and gives them some one to BLAME, hey the REGULATORS dont think it is ready for prime time (not US).

In fact, this lets me know that diesel is ONE right solution. Also this is a HUGE signal that the SNAFU scenario is the order of at least the next generation. (30 years) I mean think about it, oil is a commodity, but it is about one of the very few commodities that has pricing power!!?? So now that "WE" have ownership of a supply that is potentially BIGGER than the WHOLE mideast supply.... I think folks on this thread can figure the ramifications of this!!?? But truly for those that so called care for air quality...Here is the real tragedy

..."Calling California a "clean air state" is hilarious. The air is cleaner in Europe where over 50% of the passenger vehicle market is diesel."...

The other signal that is being sent is CARB states do not need or really want 35 mpg vehicles? Not only is the writing on the wall, the whole procedural book is being published.

moparbad

larsbPlease un-confuse me fellas.

You need to ask CARB. They have the answer.
Calling California a "clean air state" is hilarious. The air is cleaner in Europe where over 50% of the passenger vehicle market is diesel.

Mercedes Diesels in October

CARB states do not need 35 mpg vehicles, let them drive Hummers and Excursions! :shades:

ruking1

But on the other hand when unleaded regular is back around 2 per gal or less (from 2.78 per gal today corner store) I am not going to gripe too much when #2 diesel is at the same price. My cost per mile driven will still be cheaper than app 99% of passenger vehicles.

mike91326

I have a friend who works for the South Coast AQMD who told me that the reason the MB diesel failed the CARB test was because of the AdBlue system, not the tail pipe emissions. He indicated that the emissions meet California's regulations for 2008 but CARB does not like the idea that owners have to keep adding AdBlue to keep the car clean. They were willing to accept a 25000 mile interval between tank refills but found that you may only get 7500 miles if you always drive the car hard. If thats true MB has their work cut out for them.

ruking1

This is really the key point. The car DOES pass the forward emissions tests concerns!!! The problem is the regulators fear those MB owners will NOT add the urea compound, to save money!!??

bhill2

It is also worth noting that one of the reasons that diesels have problems meeting the emissions standards is that those standards were set around gas engines; tighter where gas engines can meet lower standards, looser where they cannot. I mean, you can't legislate engines off the road, so you have to be certain the the standards are attainable. I am sure (although I admittedly have no hard evidence) that equally meaningful standards could be set that were attainable by diesel engines but very difficult to attain by gas engines.

ruking1

I would agree with your point, which is one reason why I believed then and now and history has shown, the so called lack of diesel regulation in the 1970's to be a huge mistake. If it had progressed so called along side, I do conjecture the 37% advantage that diesel has/would have almost economically mandated a higher diesel population; as say, in Europe where it is FULLY 50% of the passenger vehicle fleet population AND GROWING. This is in marked contrast to the USA's less than 3%. Further, the differences in emissions would now be a none issue. So to me, giving diesel the same ramp up time as unleaded regular gasoline had is a total no brainer. The problem to me is the 37% advantage gores somebody's OX.

Also despite trumpet calls to raise the price per gal of unleaded regular, the recent realities testing procedures highlights the real PAIN. Given that painful exercise, NO politician especially in a pivotal election time and year, wants his/her name velcro'ed to advocating higher fuel prices, higher taxation on fuel, etc. aka political suicide. Let someone else fall on THAT sword. Everyone now wants to take CREDIT for FALLING fuel prices.

moparbad

I agree. It is important that diesel emissions are regulated intelligently. Europe has taken an intelligent, balanced aproach and CARB has foolishly attacked the cleanest class of diesel vehicles with their regulations while being lax with the regulations for the highest emissions diesel vehicles.

alp8

..."Calling California a "clean air state" is hilarious. The air is cleaner in Europe where over 50% of the passenger vehicle market is diesel."...

yikes, what is "hilarious" is how poor your logic is.

I thought you were one of the guys who understands air pollution

I guess not

California gets more sunshine than Europe (thus more ozone).

California experiences more inversions than Europe, thus less flushing of polluted air out of populated air basins

and that's just a start

The analysis present in your statement is sophomoric, at best

Why do you have to restort to hyperbole to obfuscate the real issues? What the heck is your AGENDA, because it obviously isn't to INFORM or encourage thoughtful discussion. For some reason, you choose to mislead people into agreeing with your position.

ruking1

Might I bring to your attention you are quoting a quote of someone elses that I quoted. So I noticed you totally ignored or by passed the my point about the 35 mpg. So how you turn that into a dissertation of the difference of USA and European weather patterns; compare and contrast for the last 100 years is a bit beyond the scope of the response. You don't get it even when things are crystal clear. So I think going with the flow of the postings,quotes of others, etc, with a bit of suspension of disbelief is a necessary thing.

So for another example, what does sunshine in CA or even Europe have to do with the grams per mile measurement of pollution? Grams per mile is the same in Europe as it is in the USA!! (given the same car, fuel and conditions) So unless you want to wonk us all out with an endless explanation of the weather and weather dynamics, topography etc, I think it would be better to stick to the topic at hand.

The other is you do know for example that Europe does send us their GAS guzzlers rather than the models that get MUCH better fuel efficiency? You might want to explain why that is a good thing.? (with the full blessings of the regulators) NOT.

My agenda is pretty simple, if the importation of foreign oil is a problem, why dial out 35 mpg? Is 30 -37% more, better or worse?

alp8

Air pollution is only an issue if the air stays IN the air basin being regulated. Take two air basins with identical amounts of pollution at hour zero. If the wind blows hard in Air Basin 1 and doesn't blow hard in Air basin 2, Air Basin 1 will have an air pollution problem that Air Basin 2 does not have. And you know that. It's not only about what comes out of the tailpipe.

Maybe you need to clarify what you were writing. I tried to read "up" in the thread, but I did not find any text that further explains your comments. I am not trying to be obtuse.

Are you only talking about emissions from tailpipes, or are you talking about how polluted the air is in an air basin? Those are two very different issues. Again, you know that.

Why does Europe send us their gas guzzlers? UMMMMM, because we buy them? That's just a guess.

moparbad

and that's just a start
You forgot to include the FACT that California is the world's 12th-largest emitter of greenhouse gases.

Or how about CARB's mandate that 2% of all vehicles be exhaust free by 1998. Makes for an interesting movie, however, it is an example of how misguided CARB is, even if it is well intentioned.

CARB should have, and still could, align it's diesel emissions regulations with those current Euro 4 and the upcoming Euro 5 regulations.

..."Calling California a "clean air state" is hilarious. The air is cleaner in Europe where over 50% of the passenger vehicle market is diesel."... To agree with the statement shows disdain for CARB, not lack of logic.

alp8

To agree with the statement shows disdain for CARB, not lack of logic.

of course it shows lack of logic - or do you think that all air pollution comes from passenger vehicles???

houdini1

Wrong, it shows perfect logic. You are the one who is trying to be misleading and you are the one that is being less than truthful. You are becoming more transparent and many of your misleading statements are beginning to catch up with you.

alp8

What ARE you talking about?

transparent? Misleading? What the heck are you talking about?

If you have trouble understanding my posts on this issue, then point to what you don't understand. I pointed out exactly why the comments about air quality and diesel in Europe are misleading. I also pointed out that maybe I was misunderstanding his point.

larsb

Diesel nationwide is 34 cents a gallon higher than gasoline...

When is it coming down?

http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/

qbrozen

I'm not wondering when it will come down ... because its already quite a bit cheaper than gas in my area ... I'm wondering (and always have wondered) why the heck there is such a large disparity across the nation.

For instance, does Cali charge alot on diesel to discourage its use? Is it a supply problem in some parts of the country? Etc.

moparbad

Diesel nationwide is 34 cents a gallon higher than gasoline...

When is it coming down?

About 5 minutes ago. :P

Diesel $2.68
Unleaded Regular $2.61
Location Flying J I80/I94 just outside of Chicago as I just filled my truck up with unleaded there.

larsb

OK let me rephrase my question to avoid sarcasm:

When is the USA diesel "average price" going to come down like gasoline has?

moparbad

Significant reductions in "average price" may not occur until January-February.
Fall and Winter is the traditional high for diesel pricing due to decreases in diesel fuel and increases in heating oil. Add to that the mandated change in sulfur content that is taking place this Fall and the expected result is higher than typical diesel prices and a longer duration of higher diesel prices.

Diesel Shortages in Western States