|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
 Posted - 04/06/2008 : 14:04:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Dr. Mabuse.....
Sorry to be absent for several days, other threads and personal business interfered.| I had no idea that "petrodiesel fuel" was only rated 10-15 octane. This was news to me. I suppose you could provide a link to your source? |
Of course Here |
Thanks.
| Which may not be a bad thing, since higher compression translates to higher engine efficiency. |
Neither a bad thing nor a good thing, just a different thing. |
Not quite. "since higher compression translates to higher engine efficiency" translates into a car that has a better fuel mileage. Which is a good thing.
| The converted prototype is not designed for a lifetime of use with the higher compression ratios necessary for ethanol use. A production engine will certainly be of a sturdier overall construction and will cost more to produce |
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I seriously doubt the engine will be 10% more expensive than the standard diesel, simply because the assembly will be the same. It will of course use a tad more building material than the standard diesel. We will also have to consider the expected total mileage of both versions of the engine. I guess only the SAAB engine designers knows for sure. In my opinion, with some but limited knowledge of industrial design, differences will be minor. I did work at Volvo's Engine plant for 5 years, specifically the production of their 12litre diesel engine.
| The lack of complaints from today's diesel car owners and lack of media-coverage suggests that it's not much of a problem anymore. Probably thanks to advances in engine technology. |
Typical fleet owner complaint regarding Diesel engine starting | Most starting problems with diesels have to do with the glow plugs not getting hot enough or fuel pressure issues. During cold weather the glow plugs need to heat a lot longer than in mild weather. Most of my equipment is diesel and I tell my operators to run the glow plugs 20 to 30 seconds before attempting to start the first time in cold weather as opposed to 10 seconds when its warm, but they never seem to learn and are always cranking the engine over and over wondering why it wont start. I dont know if its all that cranking thats doing it but ive gone through several sets of glow plugs this last winter, in one case the relay that is supposed to shut them off after a few minutes of running was not doing its job and they glowed till they could not glow any more. What it boils down to is give plenty of time for the plugs to warm up, remember they need to be hot enough to ignite the fuel ( there is no other way to ignite the fuel ) and a cold engine takes longer to heat up, and once it is running give it time to warm up the rest of the engine ( long enough for the temp guage to start to rise ) before driving. Your glow plugs can be ohm tested to see if they are still good and it is entirely possible that one or more has gone bad. |
Source |
Your source lacks information on what car (model and year) it was other than a Ford.
My father used to have a car with the same cold weather starting problems. However, that was a 1972 Peugeot diesel closing on the end of its life.
| As if this would be a problem. There are several viable options for ignition improver. |
Of course there are and have been for years. It merely points up the fact that ethanol requires more additive than petrodiesel due to higher compression. |
You're not making sense. ethanol does not require more additive due to higher compression. It's the higher compression that makes ethanol more combustable and makes the ethanol not require as much additive as it should have needed with a lower compression. The article on the SAAB ethanol-converted-diesel didn't mentioned what kind of additive was used. Knowledgeable members of the Swedish Ethanol discussion forum suggest that ether would work just fine for E96.
| Gasoline Otto-cycle engines of higher compression require similar additives (tetraethyl lead until outlawed) |
Why bring that up? What has leaded gas with higher octane than unleaded have anything to do with ethanol-vs-diesel?
Ethanol has a higher octane without additives to increase octane. In fact, the gasoline part of E85 lowers the octane rate. An Otto-engine optimised for E85 or even E96 (without ignition enhancers) is more energy efficient than the standard Unleaded-95.
| There is no free lunch, if you are going to increase the compression of an internal combustion engine, various technological concessions must be made to achieve the desired efficiency. Frequently, additional cost is incurred! |
Costs that gets highly diluted in mass production. We're not talking about after-market conversion kits here, but a viable solution for mass production. In the Swedish article you quoted, the Scania chief-of-development said that production-wise, only minor adjustments are needed.
| Cost differences have always existed between comparative fuels, since the dawn of gas-pumps. So what? |
The what is that if the fuel costs more, people don't buy as much. Look what is happening to SUV and big-engine car sales in the US as gas prices rise. My wife is the comptroller at the world's second-largest automobile dealership, and she reports that the decline in sales of big SUV's and other gas-guzzlers is alarming (to the dealership owner)! |
And this is a negative thing...why?
Less gas-guzzling cars will improve the collective mileage of the nation's car pool. That's a good thing. Makes for less fossil carbon pollution. Besides, if you can get twice the mileage from the E95 ethanol fuel compared to unleaded-95, what does it matter that E95 costs 10-20% more? Wouldn't you go for E95?
| Can you explain to me why energy conservation is paramount in the choice of ethanol? |
No, I can't for the life of me. It takes more energy produced by petrofuels to produce a gallon of ethanol than that gallon of ethanol produces to run the vehicle that burns it. So the vehicle might just as well run on petrofuel! |
You'll need to help me out here. To me it sounds like you are saying that it takes 1,5 gallons of fossil fuel to produce 1 gallon ethanol, while it takes 1 gallon of fissile fuel to produce 1 gallon of gas.
Maybe I'm not reading it right.
It takes more energy to produce one gallon of ethanol than it takes to pump up and process oil into Unleaded 95. Yes we know that. So what? Even with a higher energy consumed by processing the ethanol, we're not adding fossil carbon into the atmosphere by using ethanol! Which is the point of switching to ethanol in the first place!
| More total energy is consumed by the ethanol car. That is not energy conservation! |
Like I said, energy conservation is not paramount when there are other ecological considerations more important.
| the electric car is probably the way to go, at least in Sweden where 90% of the electricity is either nuclear or hydro-power. But for me, that is not an option (though I'd love to have a Tesla). |
Not a Tesla, a Chevy Volt, in 2009! |
No, I said a Telsa. And I can't afford to get one as soon as 2009 anyway.
What's so special with a Volt anyway?
The Tesla is pure plug-in and the World's electrical distribution system is not yet ready for millions of pure plug-ins. |
Chevrolet couldn't build millions of Volts in a year anyway. There's ample time to expand the electrical distribution system.
But even that is not the point I want to make. With minor adjustments in the SAAB diesel engine design, SAAB could be producing ethanol-diesels by the end of 2009. The ethanol distribution system is already in place.
You could get the car and immediately start reducing your carbon footprint. And at the same time not suffer from the increased fuel consumption that is inherent in the gasoline-to-ethanol converted Otto-engine. A full tank in that ethanol-diesel SAAB would get you 1000 miles across the country without refilling. How long can you drive your Volt before having to recharge it?
When you start charging your Chevy Volt, where does your increased electricity come from?
When the winter nights in Sweden gets really cold (or when I start charging my electric car) additional electricity has to be produced. Hydro- and Nuclear power becomes insufficient, that's when the coal and oil powered plants goes on-line, and Sweden starts buying coal powered electricity from the European continent. As long as we don't have a non-fossil fuel powered electric surplus to redirect to car-chargers, switching from gasoline to electric car will not make a difference, the energy will still be generated by fossil fuel. One way or another.
Here's some Swedish help for your arguments:Tanka etanol i dieselbilar!
Alrik Söderlind - 2007-11-16 09:13
Sverige satsar stenhårt på E85-bilar, för miljöns skull.
Tyvärr verkar det vara helt fel väg.
Det förstår jag efter att ha samtalat med Scanias utvecklingschef Hasse Johansson, på den stora miljömässan Michelin Bibendum i Shanghai.
Scania har kört sina dieselbussar på etanol i över 20 år, och man är nu inne på sin tredje generation dieselmotorer som går på E95.
Det fantastiska är att man får ut i stort sett samma verkningsgrad med etanol i tanken som med diesel! 43 procent - mot 44 procent för dieselmotorer på dieselbränsle.
Hasse Johansson, utvecklingschef på Scania.
Alla vet att en E85-bil drar mellan 30-40 procent mer bränsle än en vanlig bensinbil.
Och alla vet att en dieselbil drar cirka 30 procent mindre än en bensinbil.
Alltså borde vi konvertera dieselbilar för etanol, och inte bensinbilar.
Hasse Johansson säger lite skämtsamt att han brukar säga till Saabs chef Jan-Åke Jonsson: "När ska ni börja bygga riktiga etanolmotorer!"
Nästa år kommer Scania att sälja mindre lastbilar som går på E95, och dessutom kommer man testa hybridbussar i större skala i Stockholm. Kombinationen hybrid och E95 låter som en riktigt klimatvänlig lösning.
Det bränsle som Scania kör på består till 95 procent av etanol och fem procent av en tändförbättrare. Enligt Hasse Johansson är konverteringen av en dieselmotor för etanoldrift lite mer komplicerad än konverteringen av bensinmotorer där det mesta bara handlar om att materialen ska tåla etanolen.
"För en dieselmotor måste också spridarmunstyckena anpassas till etanolbränslet, men det är inga stora problem" säger Hasse Johansson.
På frågan om varför vi använder etanol till törstiga bensinmotorer i stället för energieffektivare dieselmotorer svarar Hasse: "Saab kunde för mycket om bensinmotorer och för lite om dieselmotorer."
Min slutsats är att Sverige styrt in på E85-spåret eftersom Saab lyckades övertala Göran Persson om att E85 är den rätta vägen. Tänk om Göran Persson också hade frågat Scania, och om de svenska lastbilstillverkarna Scania och Volvo hade haft ett intimt teknikutbyte med de svenska biltillverkarna… Då skulle vi redan idag kunna köra riktigt energieffektiva bilar på biobränsle, och alltså ha en etanolförbrukning på runt 0,6 l/mil jämfört med 1,3 l/mil som dagens törstiga Saab-E85-bilar drar.
Vi skulle alltså kunna komma dubbelt så långt per liter etanol, om vi tankade den i dieselbilar.
Men tåget har inte gått. Varför inte erbjuda valfri etanolblandning på besinmackarna?
Kör du en E85-bil får du E85. Många bensinbilar går för övrigt att köra på E15, men någon sådan säljs ju inte.
Kör du dieselbil konverterad för etanol får du en E95 med tändförbättrare.
Så vem blir först med en E95-dieselbil?! En sådan vill jag ha. |
What the hell did that guy say?
|
Just about the same thing I've said already: (Paraphrased)
The Swedish company Scania has manufactured diesel enginges made for ethanol fuel for 20 years, so we have a good track record of the technology working. Engine efficiency is the same as ordinary diesel with these engines. (Mabuse notes: SAAB and Scania used to be the same company, however, a split was made to separate the car manufacturing from trucks, busses, and other heavy machinery diesels).
Combining ethanol-diesel and electric hybrid technology is interesting, and trials will begin shortly with busses in Stockholm.
To the question "Why use ethanol in gas-guzzling Otto-engines when it's more efficient in diesel engines?" Hasse Johansson chief-of-development for Scania answered: "SAAB engineers were too proficient with Otto-engines, and not enough with diesel."
This is an opportunity: we can now have cars running on bio-fuel with twice the mileage.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2008 : 14:48:13 [Permalink]
|
When you start charging your Chevy Volt, where does your increased electricity come from?
|
The Volt recharges itself. This is the electric car with a gas (and maybe ethanol) generator on board to recharge the batteries.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2008 : 15:38:22 [Permalink]
|
So, it's a hybrid...
Both the design and the performance of the Toyota Prius sucks. Surely Chevy Volt will do better.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2008 : 22:37:08 [Permalink]
|
No, its not a hybrid. The gas motor never powers the car. The propulsion is 100% from the electrical motor.
http://gm-volt.com/about/
It just carries its own generator to recharge the batteries.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2008 : 00:18:55 [Permalink]
|
Mabuse....
Dude is exactly correct. The Volt plugs in, but it also totes a small on-board gasoline (could be ethanol) engine driving a generator that recharges the batteries automatically as you go. The gasoline engine is not connected to the wheels of the car. It only spins the generator that charges the batteries automatically on an as-needed basis as you drive!
If you fully charge the Volt before starting out, you get something in the neighborhood of 150 miles to a gallon of gas! Of course you also pay the going rate for the electricity you bought to fully charge the battery (lithium-ion, as of now) pack. The electricity, as of now, is far cheaper than yhe gasoline on a per mile basis! Go to www.chevyvolt.com and get details!
As it stands now, they are anticipating an initial first year production run of about 100,000, with orders for 40,000 (my money is on one of them!) already in! GM is aiming for a sticker under $30K!
There will be competition, first from Toyota, then Honda, finally from other US makers and some European. Ford and Chrysler seem to be way behind the pack. BMW has a working prototype of a four wheel drive sedan with individual electric traction motors on each wheel - see this month's Popular Science magazine!
Future production will depend on acceptance and the ability of the nation's electric production and distribution grid to sustain ever-growing numbers of Chevy, Toyota, Honda, Kia, and probably many more marques of all electric plug-in, plug-in + self generation via ICB on-board engine, and hybrid cars that also plug in - even including a few Teslas, one of which I am greedily awaiting sometime this year! |
| Edited by - bngbuck on 04/07/2008 00:23:45 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2008 : 10:34:21 [Permalink]
|
Of course, the plug-in cars are not automatically "green". The electricity used to charge them is probably from coal!
The US needs to get its head out of its ass and start building new nuclear power plants. There are functioning nuclear plants in Europe that can't melt down when the coolant is intentionally turned off. Time for us to get on board with nuclear power.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2008 : 13:44:59 [Permalink]
|
Dude.....
| The US needs to get its head out of its ass and start building new nuclear power plants. There are functioning nuclear plants in Europe that can't melt down when the coolant is intentionally turned off. Time for us to get on board with nuclear power. |
AMEN!! - 100%
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2008 : 19:34:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
When you start charging your Chevy Volt, where does your increased electricity come from?
|
The Volt recharges itself. This is the electric car with a gas (and maybe ethanol) generator on board to recharge the batteries.
|
Ballard Power Systems of Canada and some other hybrid car makers have been improving something they call regenerative braking. The rotors act as generators so that some of the amps are put back in the battery making the hybrid's gasoline engine have to run less under normal stop-and-go driving common to big cities. And improve the gas milage for urban drives. (sucks rocks for long haul driving)
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2008 : 00:02:44 [Permalink]
|
Valiant Dancer.....
Regenerative braking in electric automobiles dates back to 1967 and the Amitron (and Electron) electric cars. Toyota has featured regenerative braking in their best-selling Prius since 1997. The Tesla has a regenerative braking system.
It is almost a certainty to be a feature of any production pure {plug-in electric}, {hybrid}, {hybrid plug-in}, or {plug-in, ICE-onboard-charging} electric in the future!
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2008 : 00:25:56 [Permalink]
|
Dr. Mabuse.....
Please read the wiki article on the Toyota Prius. It may change your dismissive opinion of that vehicle. It is really a remarkable piece of engineering and is the very first real production high volume part-electric vehicle. It has paved the way for the progressively higher electric technology to follow!
Toyota has completed prototypes on a pure plug-in with alternative charging, but they are a very secretive company and are waiting to gauge the initial (one or two year) acceptance of the Chevy Volt before launching their plug-in!
Watanabe has said privately that he has concerns about the ability of the American electrical distribution system to respond effectively to a rapid proliferation of plug-in cars. This comes second-hand from the horse's mouth, a conversation that Gloria's (my wife) boss had with the Toyota head man recently.
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2008 : 08:08:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
No, its not a hybrid. The gas motor never powers the car. The propulsion is 100% from the electrical motor.
|
Aparently, according to wikipedia:
Diesel-electric powerplants have also been used in submarines and surface ships and some land vehicles. In some high-efficiency applications, electrical energy may be stored in rechargeable batteries, in which case these vehicles can be considered as a class of hybrid electric vehicle.
|
Emphasis mine.
I've always thought of vehicles as hybrid if there is an energy conversion with an intermediate stage. Chemical-to-mechanical-to-electric-to-mechanical. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2008 : 09:41:20 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Dr. Mabuse.....
Please read the wiki article on the Toyota Prius. It may change your dismissive opinion of that vehicle.
|
It's still a butt-ugly car. Maybe if I took one for a test-drive I might change my mind... |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2008 : 11:18:42 [Permalink]
|
Well, its a hybrid... but if we are going to define hybrid that loosely we can call any vehicle that isn't a straight gas powered vehicle a hybrid. Kinda loses its usefulness as a descriptor.
Vehicles that have two propulsion systems, each independently capable of moving the vehicle, is what most people will think of when you say "hybrid car".
The Volt has only one engine, and it is an electric motor. It carries a gas generator to recharge the batteries. So calling it a hybrid car seems inacurate.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2008 : 11:19:59 [Permalink]
|
The energy conversion rate isnt the problem, it's the wear and residue build-up I would be worried about if using a fuel not originally intended for the vehicle.
Also a Gallon of oil will produce the following
51.4% Gasoline, 15.3% fuel oil, 12.3% jet fuel, 5.4% still gas, 5% marketable coke(a reusable residue), 3.3% residual fuel oil, 2.8% liquid refinery gas, 1.7% asphalt oil, 2.4% other lubricants etc.
The refinery process will increase the volume to about 1.17 Gallons from the additives, plus more if ethanol is added.
-data from California Energy Commission
Essentially one barrel of oil makes about 20 gallons of regular gas.
Also as has been stated, electricity is cheap because it mostly comes from coal, and ethanol uses more petrolium, mostly in the farm/fertillizer process.
http://healthandenergy.com/ethanol.htm
Ethanol is a stupid idea and we dove in head first. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2008 : 13:42:13 [Permalink]
|
BPS....
| Ethanol is a stupid idea and we dove in head first. |
You are 100% correct. Ethanol is a political pander to giant corporate agriculture interests, largely corn in the US, pure and simple. Taken to mass production sufficient to lessen our dependence on petrofuels, ethanol would be a greater climate and ecological disaster than additional oil drilling leading to lower prices (hah!) greater gasoline usage and more emissions (which should be prevented by federal fiat!)
People are stupid! They believe the first propaganda they read! You have to read all the propaganda, both pro and con, and then try to make a reasoned decision as to who lies the least!.
I am rapidly arriving at that position and in another few weeks I will feel prepared to take on any ethanol-lover on several different levels of persuasion.
It isn't that there is no information on this subject. Google can keep one busy for several long days, and the books available are myriad. From what I have read so far, there can be little doubt that ethanol is indeed a very bad idea as to how to lessen the carbon problem or solve the energy problem!!
The only long term true solution lies in alternative energy production from wind, solar, nuclear (must solve the spent fuel - high plutonium - problem) and possibly hydrogen (which has it's own set of problems)
However, it is obvious that continued dependence on petrofuels is untenable, that energy conversion must be consolidated - (wind farms, solar farms, nuclear plants) - instead of continuously more diversified - (more gas tanks every day!), - and that electricity will ultimately emerge as the only viable energy for vehicles of all types, indeed transportation of all types - land, underland, sea, undersea, and air. Space travel is likely to be dependent on combustion fuels for some time, however, and as long as the primary rocket propellant remains oxygenated hydrogen, we're not in too much doo-doo-there! |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Diesel engine converted to Ethanol
