EU is trying to ban Diesel and petrol cars

[weasley]

Originally Posted By: Bjornviken
EU is trying to ban diesel and petrol cars in the near future .Do you guys think oil corporations will let it happen?


Where is this stated? There have been several announcements across Europe from cities and countries about various bans on vehicle drivetrains, and some OEMs stating their future positions too. But read carefully, because they almost all use carefully-worded language which really means that they are 'banning' or ceasing production of "conventional engines". In most cases, what they mean is that hybrids are still on the table, with their ICEs intact. The media don't help by misinterpreting the announcement and restating them as "no engines". There will be gasoline and diesel engines for along time to come.

 

[Motor_Boater]

Originally Posted By: PandaBear
...It would be easier if they can just remove the tax incentive on diesel but that'll anger the industrial and commercial users. So just banning passenger cars diesel is easier...
That wouldn't be fair to those who've bought their Diesel-powered vehicles in good faith, not knowing how disastrous they are to the environment. The tax incentive was legislated in for the very reason tax incentives seduce buyers of natural gas- and electric-powered vehicles. To pull the rug from under Diesel-powered vehicle owners would sow mistrust among them, when they have to decide on whether to purchase vehicles powered by newer technologies or not

 

[chrisri]

Originally Posted By: weasley
Originally Posted By: Bjornviken
EU is trying to ban diesel and petrol cars in the near future .Do you guys think oil corporations will let it happen?


Where is this stated? There have been several announcements across Europe from cities and countries about various bans on vehicle drivetrains, and some OEMs stating their future positions too. But read carefully, because they almost all use carefully-worded language which really means that they are 'banning' or ceasing production of "conventional engines". In most cases, what they mean is that hybrids are still on the table, with their ICEs intact. The media don't help by misinterpreting the announcement and restating them as "no engines". There will be gasoline and diesel engines for along time to come.

Indeed. People have trouble reading with understanding these days, and media isn't helping.

 

[silverbar]

If they were smart they would ban all diesels over 3 years old that could not pass new diesel emissions regulations. Natural gas fueled jet engines to create electricity to charge electric car batteries sounds better than those stinky Prius oddball 4 stroke engines to charge up.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: silverbar
If they were smart they would ban all diesels over 3 years old that could not pass new diesel emissions regulations. Natural gas fueled jet engines to create electricity to charge electric car batteries sounds better than those stinky Prius oddball 4 stroke engines to charge up.


Ya reckon?

Who did you used to be before your last ban?

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: silverbar
If they were smart they would ban all diesels over 3 years old that could not pass new diesel emissions regulations. Natural gas fueled jet engines to create electricity to charge electric car batteries sounds better than those stinky Prius oddball 4 stroke engines to charge up.


Ex post facto laws are illegal in the US- The government removing legal use of property legally acquired is a slippery slope.

your natural gas powered jet engine scenario doenst work out as clean as it sounds because you need a lot more fuel to produce the same work.

(roughly) Natural gas is 20% less efficient than propane, which is 20% less efficient than gasoline, which is 20% less efficient than diesel.


UD

 

[silverbar]

And just who are you pretending to be Shannow? Are you Lord savior to all EU truckers or something? I do believe you missed a dose.

 

[silverbar]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: silverbar
If they were smart they would ban all diesels over 3 years old that could not pass new diesel emissions regulations. Natural gas fueled jet engines to create electricity to charge electric car batteries sounds better than those stinky Prius oddball 4 stroke engines to charge up.


Ex post facto laws are illegal in the US- The government removing legal use of property legally acquired is a slippery slope.

your natural gas powered jet engine scenario doenst work out as clean as it sounds because you need a lot more fuel to produce the same work.

(roughly) Natural gas is 20% less efficient than propane, which is 20% less efficient than gasoline, which is 20% less efficient than diesel. And Prius's do

not use a normal 4-stroke, they are oddball and stinky when they get enough miles, yet they are not ever smog checked.





UD




Well actually Uncledave if you look at my post I said EU which stands for European Union. I said nothing about laws OR regulations in the USA.

Apparently most are unawares that much electricity in the USA in generated by running jet engines on natural gas (methane). IE, that is how much electricity is made that can then be used to charge peoples battery cars or electrify your home. ICYDNK, jet engines are all designed to run on natural gas (methane not propane) and using jet fuel AKA kerosene spray is just mimicking methane. Ideally a jet engine is run on methane. FTTDK, natural gas is far cleaner burning than oil or (of course) coal to make electricity. But sorry dave you got your facts on propane and methane screwed up. Propane is 30% inferior to natural gas (methane). Propane is trash compared to natural gas. Comparing methane to gasoline is pointless the way you are trying to compare it.

 

[DBMaster]

Originally Posted By: silverbar
Propane is 30% inferior to natural gas (methane). Propane is trash compared to natural gas.


Can you explain why this is true if propane has 2.5 times the energy density of natural gas? (2,572 BTU per cubic foot v. 1,011)

 

[silverbar]

Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Originally Posted By: silverbar
Propane is 30% inferior to natural gas (methane). Propane is trash compared to natural gas.


Can you explain why this is true if propane has 2.5 times the energy density of natural gas? (2,572 BTU per cubic foot v. 1,011)


That would be because you are getting your info from a propane website, and/or the cubic foot of propane is more compressed than the cubic foot of methane. A simple lie, but one the propane sellers have been getting away with for ages. I especially like how they sell propane at gas stations always priced a bit below the price for a "gallon" of gasoline. Like you are supposed to get the idea in your head that propane is "cheaper" than gasoline.

 

[DBMaster]

Originally Posted By: silverbar
Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Originally Posted By: silverbar
Propane is 30% inferior to natural gas (methane). Propane is trash compared to natural gas.


Can you explain why this is true if propane has 2.5 times the energy density of natural gas? (2,572 BTU per cubic foot v. 1,011)


That would be because you are getting your info from a propane website, and/or the cubic foot of propane is more compressed than the cubic foot of methane. A simple li


I didn't get it from a propane web site, but I do believe you are correct. Thank you for this. It will actually come in handy.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: silverbar
Like you are supposed to get the idea in your head that propane is "cheaper" than gasoline.

Do note that LPG has significantly better logistics than natural gas. Natural gas vehicles tend to be confined to being a "city vehicle" for a reason, given lower range and much poorer infrastructure. LPG isn't what it used to be for availability, as in back in the late 1980s, but it can still be filled almost everywhere, and there are keylock/cardlock facilities in existence. Natural gas - not so much.

With respect to trying to compare costs to gasoline, one simply can compare cost per mile. At one time, LPG was very popular among fleets here for good reason. That's not the case so much, now.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: silverbar
That would be because you are getting your info from a propane website, and/or the cubic foot of propane is more compressed than the cubic foot of methane. A simple lie, but one the propane sellers have been getting away with for ages. I especially like how they sell propane at gas stations always priced a bit below the price for a "gallon" of gasoline. Like you are supposed to get the idea in your head that propane is "cheaper" than gasoline.

But unlike methane, retail propane is stored and sold as a liquid - that is where the energy density is important. In a motor vehicle is is always beneficial to have a liquid fuel over a compressed gas. A cubic foot of propane gas is largely equal to a cubic foot of methane gas in terms of energy density but you get the huge advantage that propane can be much more easily liquified than methane.

They don't sell propane gas as motor fuel, so how else would you label it per unit volume?

 

[Garak]

For the record, automotive LPG pumps here dispense by the litre. BBQ tanks are weighed when filled at the same place, not least because the fuel tax isn't there when it's a BBQ fuel.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: Garak
For the record, automotive LPG pumps here dispense by the litre. BBQ tanks are weighed when filled at the same place, not least because the fuel tax isn't there when it's a BBQ fuel.

Correct, but a litre of liquid not a litre of gas. The volume of gas is much higher which would directly compare to methane.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: silverbar
Apparently most are unawares that much electricity in the USA in generated by running jet engines on natural gas (methane). IE, that is how much electricity is made that can then be used to charge peoples battery cars or electrify your home. ICYDNK, jet engines are all designed to run on natural gas (methane not propane) and using jet fuel AKA kerosene spray is just mimicking methane.


Jet engines, running on jet fuel is mimicking methane ?

Not sure on that logic.

But to use Natural Gas (a highly utilitarian quality fuel) to generate electricity in stationary "jet" engines at 30% efficiency is a ridiculous waste of resurces.

As a peaker, they have their place, but baseboard is insane....it's Not efficient, and it's Not green.

To say that it's a good thing to expand that to electricity for cars is similarly silly.

The Gas Turbines that are used for CCGT aren't typical Jet Engines, and rely on a steam boiler and turbine to improve their efficiency in the 50%+ range (claim 60 but that's ISO conditions, which aren't met when installed and run)...

Jet engine based Gts are not a sensible solution for transport.

 

[PeterPolyol]

Originally Posted By: Trav
is just typical nothing will replace the horse and cart stuff from more than 100 years ago.
Funny thing about all the buggy whip comments is I find it really hard to believe anyone a century ago would have preferred horse and buggy carts to the automobile

Is it really the same thing to denounce one type of automobile over another, when the older version is much more convenient and cost-effective?

Originally Posted By: silverbar
or the cubic foot of propane is more compressed than the cubic foot of methane.

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: Garak
For the record, automotive LPG pumps here dispense by the litre. BBQ tanks are weighed when filled at the same place, not least because the fuel tax isn't there when it's a BBQ fuel.

Correct, but a litre of liquid not a litre of gas. The volume of gas is much higher which would directly compare to methane.

This. Can't compare volumes of fuel in different states without being misleading about each fuel's properties.

In the same state, propane is more energy dense than natural gas. Propane molecule is C3H8 while methane molecule is CH4. Propane has 8 hydrogen atoms per molecule avilable to react, while methane has only 4.

That's only regarding energy density, but methane is the cleanest combusting 'fossil fuel' around with it's ratio of 4 hydrogens to one carbon molecule. Methane also has a higher AKI than propane (120 vs 105 respectively), allowing engine design to compensate for energy density by enabling higher compression ratios.

Garak called it WRT logistics, propane compresses easily into liquid, natural gas requires very high pressures. LPG liquid phase injection (even direct injection!) is exciting to me as a high performance motor fuel, even though old-school gaseous propane systems have been more popular. Liquified natural gas on a motor vehicle is much riskier and would require specialized tanks and infrastructure, but it would be nice. One of the later advances for natural gas vehicles is ANG Adsorbed Natural Gas, where the tank is filled with an adsorbent material that increases the tank capacity-to-pressure ratio over simple CNG tanks.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Correct, but a litre of liquid not a litre of gas. The volume of gas is much higher which would directly compare to methane.

Exactly, and LPG is pumped as a liquid, of course. Natural gas vehicles are limited mostly to city buses here, and there's only one commercial place you can refuel a natural gas vehicle here, and despite driving by that location about a bazillion times, I've never seen a vehicle being fuelled there.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: PeterPolyol
Garak called it WRT logistics, propane compresses easily into liquid, natural gas requires very high pressures.

Yeah at room temperature it is supercritical so you really can't make it a liquid via pressure alone.

 

[PeterPolyol]

Good call, I overlooked methane's low -82.3C critical temp