Diesel - is it the future?

[hellokeith]

Getting near another automobile purchase, and I'm evaluating various options.

Some say that legislation by the Bush administration over the last few years has effectively killed any good foreign diesel import cars while protecting gas-guzzling Detroit trucks (yay American jobs and crappy quality, boo natural resources and world stability).

Others champion the Bush EPA mandate of Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel, which reduces the previous Low Sulfur Diesel 500 ppm to ULSD 15 ppm, and goes into effect for all new diesel engines in 2006-2007 time frame. They say this will encourage the adoption of European diesel technology in the US and invigorate the consumer diesel car market.

While I was initially excited about hybrid technology, the newness has worn off and reality has arrived. Gas-hybrid is not the magic bullet I had hoped, based on local environmental and economic factors:

* long commutes to work through mixed highway and street conditions, with variable high speed sections and bumper-to-bumper traffic
* very hot summer, unbearable without an air conditioner
* cold winter, unbearable without a heater
* higher cost compared to conventional 30+mpg gas vehicles

So here's the rub. Will diesel be the killer fuel technology, providing both the horsepower we know and love, while increasing fuel efficiency and reducing emissions? Or is it just another oil trap, designed to perpetuate 100 more years of OPEC dominance?

 

[CrackRabbit]

The thing about diesels is that they can be run on more than just petroleum based fuels and still get good mileage.
Making biofuels will help reduce the need for oil, but not eliminate it. Only a true next gen fuel will do that.

 

[K1052]

Biodiesel using efficent crops is attractive to displace at least some of our petrodiesel usage. Algae is looking very promising for this in the future since can produce far more oil per acre used and can utilize low value land that gets lots of sunlight (Southwest US).

As more diesel passenger cars make it to market in the US biodiesel will become increasingly attractive.

 

[Lemon law]

A gasoline engine is only about 20% energy efficent---a deisel engine is about 33% energy efficent.

But therein lies the rub---prior to the basic invention of the gas motor---what we call gasoline was simply a waste product that occured in the refining of crude oil---too volatile to be used in lighting like kerosine
and basically something worthless. And deisel fuel can be used for home heating and a large number of other applications.

 

[Strk]

You're not going to see me doing this very frequently, but here we go -- a Bush defense (Clinton too, to be fair).

The new diesel requirements did exactly the opposite of what you said. They will encourage companies to import diesels. Until recently, the only way you were going to get a new diesel was either as a commercial/heavy duty truck or a VW. And as a daily driver, they both suck. Without the new diesel, vehicles cannot be made efficient enough to pass CA emissions standards, which effectively cuts off some of the single largest purchasers of vehicles.

However, the new diesel will allow particulate traps, catalytic converters and numerous other pieces of emissions equipment. In the end, we won't be adopting European diesel technology -- ours will be a lot cleaner.

It won't stop our oil issue, but when you still use a combustion engine, what do you expect? Even with the spikes in demand, oil is the most feasible and, in some cases with the production of bio-fuels, the most environmentally conscious. The latter part may sound like a joke, but do a little research on corn and ethanol production (corn specifically, as not all methods are bad).

 

[steppinthrax]

We need to stop thinking about the interanal combustion engine of any type all together for many reasons:

1. It still depends on some sort of fuel source which means it makes money for big oil etc. They love the whole idea that we will always go to them for gas. It wouldn't change it any different if we have to go to them for Hydrogen, Ethonol or diesel.

2. Still production of greenhouse gases. No matter how effecient you try to make it.

3. Mechanics make money. The most commonly serviced car parts (which make mechanics money): Oil change, spark plugs, plug wires, clutch, transmission flushes and various fluid replacements and flushes etc.....

The investment needs to be made in totally plug in hybrids. It is possible and has been done several years in the past but was snuffed out. A plug in hybrid crosses all three reasons mentioned above. The reason why we will never see such a car is because companies and this currenty government status we are in won't allow such an event.

 

[newmachineoverlord]

Running diesel cars on more than 5% biodiesel voids your warranty, so diesel is not a solution. The way of the future is flex-fuel e85 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles optimized for ethanol. The first ethanol optimized engines won't come out till 2010 at the earliest, and plug in hybrids won't come out until 2009. No one has yet announced combining the two concepts, but once those characteristics are combined we will have a winner. Ethanol is the only fuel currently available that can be made from entirely renewable energy, and it requires very little for auto makers to make future cars compatible. Right now people don't like it because current flex-fuel engines are merely designed to tolerate ethanol, not to take advantage of its potential. Consequently current designs don't get very good mileage with it yet. It is also one of the few fuels that can efficiently allow consumers a choice between fuels once they've already purchased their vehicle.

E-85 optimized engines aren't out yet, but once they are they can get 30% better mileage than gasoline. That's right, despite the lower energy per volume of ethanol, it's higher octane rating can allow a greater mpg than gasoline, resulting in dramatically better energy efficiency.
http://techfreep.com/mit-ups-mpg-30-percent-with-ethanol-injected-engine.htm

Plug in hybrid electric vehicles are the most crucial step towards oil independence.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/10/031015031752.htm

Some experiments are showing that diesel is no better than gasoline for commute cars. http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22750-1794324,00.html

There is already plenty of electricity to supply plug in electric vehicles. http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1977261&enterthread=y

As for the myth of ethanol using more energy to make than it contains, that has been thoroughly debunked. Ethanol contains 1.34-1.67x more energy than is expended. Furthermore the energy used can come from low quality sources not suitable for use in transportation. http://www.agriculture.com/ag/story.jht...News_050328crETHANOL.xml&catref=ag1001

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
We need to stop thinking about the interanal combustion engine of any type all together for many reasons:

1. It still depends on some sort of fuel source which means it makes money for big oil etc. They love the whole idea that we will always go to them for gas. It wouldn't change it any different if we have to go to them for Hydrogen, Ethonol or diesel.

2. Still production of greenhouse gases. No matter how effecient you try to make it.

3. Mechanics make money. The most commonly serviced car parts (which make mechanics money): Oil change, spark plugs, plug wires, clutch, transmission flushes and various fluid replacements and flushes etc.....

The investment needs to be made in totally plug in hybrids. It is possible and has been done several years in the past but was snuffed out. A plug in hybrid crosses all three reasons mentioned above. The reason why we will never see such a car is because companies and this currenty government status we are in won't allow such an event.

I can't wait until you start whining about "big electricity".

Cars also will still require repair and service unless you plan on changing the laws of physics while you are at it.

 

[WHAMPOM]

A hundred mile round-trip electric car? OH SH1T! We had some, but the manufacturer had them crushed.

 

[hellokeith]

A roommate of mine 10 years ago had the first all-electric plug-in car at the university (using a VW Beetle). It was great.. during the 2-3 months of the year you could comfortably be in it. It was a no-go during summer and winter.

Pure electric and conventional electric-gas hybrids only work truly well for moderate climates and in-city driving, neither of which apply to this sprawling metroplex where I live.

I have not researched corn ethanol, so I only know hearsay, which states its production uses way too much water.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: newmachineoverlord
Running diesel cars on more than 5% biodiesel voids your warranty, so diesel is not a solution.

That is incorrect despite what some of the auto manufacturers might imply. Problems creep up in older diesels that have been running petrodiesel for a while when anything over B20 is introduced to the fuel systems (breaks deposits loose casuing problems).

New cars/trucks cand use blends at or near B100.

 

[theeedude]

I hope diesel is not the future. I hate the smell of diesel exhaust. Irritates my lungs.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
We need to stop thinking about the interanal combustion engine of any type all together for many reasons:

1. It still depends on some sort of fuel source which means it makes money for big oil etc. They love the whole idea that we will always go to them for gas. It wouldn't change it any different if we have to go to them for Hydrogen, Ethonol or diesel.

2. Still production of greenhouse gases. No matter how effecient you try to make it.

3. Mechanics make money. The most commonly serviced car parts (which make mechanics money): Oil change, spark plugs, plug wires, clutch, transmission flushes and various fluid replacements and flushes etc.....

The investment needs to be made in totally plug in hybrids. It is possible and has been done several years in the past but was snuffed out. A plug in hybrid crosses all three reasons mentioned above. The reason why we will never see such a car is because companies and this currenty government status we are in won't allow such an event.

I can't wait until you start whining about "big electricity".

Cars also will still require repair and service unless you plan on changing the laws of physics while you are at it.

The electricity that power plants generate produces greenhouse gases as well. However this would be significantly less then the amount that all the cars generate right now put together. Mainly because it can be controlled. Also since the burning is done all in one place the government can put restrictions (and has done) on scrubbers and the cleanliness of the exhaust.

How many times do you hear of the computer is someone?s car going bad? It is not an item meant to be replaced on any basis except when it goes bad (very rare case). It has no maintenance schedule as well. These plug in hybrids will mainly be computer electronics/motors and batteries. Most of which we know from the past are very reliable. In which case it is feasible for the car to only consume electricity/tires etc. during it?s entire lifespan. There would be no oil/fluids to change. They would require a less compressive schedule. There has been talk of batteries going bad in these cars but government studies have tested the battery and charging systems in regular hybrids and stopped doing this when the mileage was extremely high 200K to 300K. Most Americans will change their cars before 100K.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
A roommate of mine 10 years ago had the first all-electric plug-in car at the university (using a VW Beetle). It was great.. during the 2-3 months of the year you could comfortably be in it. It was a no-go during summer and winter.

Pure electric and conventional electric-gas hybrids only work truly well for moderate climates and in-city driving, neither of which apply to this sprawling metroplex where I live.

I have not researched corn ethanol, so I only know hearsay, which states its production uses way too much water.

Yeah but this was a car he made himself. The EV1s were great an all around car that were mainly marketed in CA where it's always hot. Those simple enviromental factors can be overcome simply by some basic eng methods. The sad thing is that GM and other big car companies know that quite a few of us (drivers) dont go beyond a certain mileage per day. Though my life I've never worked anywhere where I had to have more then 40 miles round trip. Right now I do probably 30 miles round trip. If an electric car was released and this range limitation was indicated I imagine people would still purchase the car. Once the concept catches on more/less others will purchase. Companies will be able to improve and improve the charging and battery systems to a point where they have comprable mileage of an internal combustion engine on one charge.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
We need to stop thinking about the interanal combustion engine of any type all together for many reasons:

1. It still depends on some sort of fuel source which means it makes money for big oil etc. They love the whole idea that we will always go to them for gas. It wouldn't change it any different if we have to go to them for Hydrogen, Ethonol or diesel.

2. Still production of greenhouse gases. No matter how effecient you try to make it.

3. Mechanics make money. The most commonly serviced car parts (which make mechanics money): Oil change, spark plugs, plug wires, clutch, transmission flushes and various fluid replacements and flushes etc.....

The investment needs to be made in totally plug in hybrids. It is possible and has been done several years in the past but was snuffed out. A plug in hybrid crosses all three reasons mentioned above. The reason why we will never see such a car is because companies and this currenty government status we are in won't allow such an event.

I can't wait until you start whining about "big electricity".

Cars also will still require repair and service unless you plan on changing the laws of physics while you are at it.

The electricity that power plants generate produces greenhouse gases as well. However this would be significantly less then the amount that all the cars generate right now put together. Mainly because it can be controlled. Also since the burning is done all in one place the government can put restrictions (and has done) on scrubbers and the cleanliness of the exhaust.

How many times do you hear of the computer is someone?s car going bad? It is not an item meant to be replaced on any basis except when it goes bad (very rare case). It has no maintenance schedule as well. These plug in hybrids will mainly be computer electronics/motors and batteries. Most of which we know from the past are very reliable. In which case it is feasible for the car to only consume electricity/tires etc. during it?s entire lifespan. There would be no oil/fluids to change. They would require a less compressive schedule. There has been talk of batteries going bad in these cars but government studies have tested the battery and charging systems in regular hybrids and stopped doing this when the mileage was extremely high 200K to 300K. Most Americans will change their cars before 100K.

You were railing against large oil companies, disregarding the fact that large utility companies will be providing said power. Hydrogen would also be produced by major utilities if it was ever utilized on a widespread scale since reforming it from oil (current method) would be counterproductive.

moving parts=friction=service and repair
battery life/endurance is dependent on several things: temperature, usage, number of charge and discharge cycles, etc..

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: newmachineoverlord
Running diesel cars on more than 5% biodiesel voids your warranty, so diesel is not a solution. The way of the future is flex-fuel e85 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles optimized for ethanol. The first ethanol optimized engines won't come out till 2010 at the earliest, and plug in hybrids won't come out until 2009. No one has yet announced combining the two concepts, but once those characteristics are combined we will have a winner. Ethanol is the only fuel currently available that can be made from entirely renewable energy, and it requires very little for auto makers to make future cars compatible. Right now people don't like it because current flex-fuel engines are merely designed to tolerate ethanol, not to take advantage of its potential. Consequently current designs don't get very good mileage with it yet. It is also one of the few fuels that can efficiently allow consumers a choice between fuels once they've already purchased their vehicle.

E-85 optimized engines aren't out yet, but once they are they can get 30% better mileage than gasoline. That's right, despite the lower energy per volume of ethanol, it's higher octane rating can allow a greater mpg than gasoline, resulting in dramatically better energy efficiency.
http://techfreep.com/mit-ups-mpg-30-percent-with-ethanol-injected-engine.htm

Plug in hybrid electric vehicles are the most crucial step towards oil independence.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/10/031015031752.htm

Some experiments are showing that diesel is no better than gasoline for commute cars. http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22750-1794324,00.html

There is already plenty of electricity to supply plug in electric vehicles. http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1977261&enterthread=y

As for the myth of ethanol using more energy to make than it contains, that has been thoroughly debunked. Ethanol contains 1.34-1.67x more energy than is expended. Furthermore the energy used can come from low quality sources not suitable for use in transportation. http://www.agriculture.com/ag/story.jht...News_050328crETHANOL.xml&catref=ag1001

Ethanol is ABSOLUTELY the WRONG way to go. The ethanol lobby (Iowa not Coors) is totally FOS about the near- and long-term prospects for ethanol.

1) Building a parallel ethanol infrastructure is stupid and stupid expensive.
2) Optimized E85 engines?? The current prototype would situate gasoline and ethanol in separate tanks, mixing ethanol with the gasoline at regular intervals throughout the combustion cycle.Yep, that's a winning idea.:roll:
3) Honda diesel . . . kicking German and domestic arse
4) Plug-in hybrids only make sense in the context of electricity grid that's not dependent on dirty coal or imported natural gas. Regardless, it' idiotic to tie a looser idea like ethanol to the use of plu-in hybrids.
5) The Citroen diesel vs petrol battle is just plain stupid. It was a 1 rep pseudo-experiment where the diesel averaged 82.7mpg and the gasoline version did something like 84.2mpg over 2.5 hrs and a average speed of 49mph on a loop. The idiot writing the story didn't even have enough sense to know the lower hp diesel (55 vs 68) likely had twice the torque of the gas sipper. It's all irrelevant though since the market for 1000kg cars with motorcyle engines isn't very big in the US.

In sum, ethanol is a boondoggle for the US taxpayer and welfare for corn farmers/ethanol producers.

Ethanol producers run back to trough to beg for government subsidies and coercion to force US taxpayers/consumers to keep corn/ethanol pirates fat and happy

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
We need to stop thinking about the interanal combustion engine of any type all together for many reasons:

1. It still depends on some sort of fuel source which means it makes money for big oil etc. They love the whole idea that we will always go to them for gas. It wouldn't change it any different if we have to go to them for Hydrogen, Ethonol or diesel.

2. Still production of greenhouse gases. No matter how effecient you try to make it.

3. Mechanics make money. The most commonly serviced car parts (which make mechanics money): Oil change, spark plugs, plug wires, clutch, transmission flushes and various fluid replacements and flushes etc.....

The investment needs to be made in totally plug in hybrids. It is possible and has been done several years in the past but was snuffed out. A plug in hybrid crosses all three reasons mentioned above. The reason why we will never see such a car is because companies and this currenty government status we are in won't allow such an event.

I can't wait until you start whining about "big electricity".

Cars also will still require repair and service unless you plan on changing the laws of physics while you are at it.

The electricity that power plants generate produces greenhouse gases as well. However this would be significantly less then the amount that all the cars generate right now put together. Mainly because it can be controlled. Also since the burning is done all in one place the government can put restrictions (and has done) on scrubbers and the cleanliness of the exhaust.

How many times do you hear of the computer is someone?s car going bad? It is not an item meant to be replaced on any basis except when it goes bad (very rare case). It has no maintenance schedule as well. These plug in hybrids will mainly be computer electronics/motors and batteries. Most of which we know from the past are very reliable. In which case it is feasible for the car to only consume electricity/tires etc. during it?s entire lifespan. There would be no oil/fluids to change. They would require a less compressive schedule. There has been talk of batteries going bad in these cars but government studies have tested the battery and charging systems in regular hybrids and stopped doing this when the mileage was extremely high 200K to 300K. Most Americans will change their cars before 100K.

You were railing against large oil companies, disregarding the fact that large utility companies will be providing said power. Hydrogen would also be produced by major utilities if it was ever utilized on a widespread scale since reforming it from oil (current method) would be counterproductive.

moving parts=friction=service and repair
battery life/endurance is dependent on several things: temperature, usage, number of charge and discharge cycles, etc..

Less moving parts = less friction = less service and repair. Exactly with electric vehicles. You can't dispute this. Most plug in hybrids have a direct drive motor. Or a motor that is directly connected to the wheel.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

So here's the rub. Will diesel be the killer fuel technology, providing both the horsepower we know and love, while increasing fuel efficiency and reducing emissions? Or is it just another oil trap, designed to perpetuate 100 more years of OPEC dominance?

Biodiesel is potentially a killer fuel technology b/c it can produce energy independence (Brazil), studly engines (twin-turbo Audi R8/Q7), double-triple current US fleet averages (BMW, Honda, VW, MB, even Ford diesels in Europe), and reasonable compromises (BMW 335d, 325d, and their vicious twin-turbo oil burner . . . 286hp and enough torque to embarass a full-size pickup.

Importantly:
1) diesel/biodiesel can use the existing distribution network
2) potential crops need a fraction of the resources required for typical corn/ethanol
3) consumers (not government) could drive the demand side as they CHOOSE to weigh the pro/con of diesel/biodiesel vs gasoline, gas-electic, E85, etc.
4) Current subsidies for E85 production could be switched to an open R&D program. Give assistance based on highest merit instead of largest lobby.

Fortunately, we have Europe and Brazil leading the way on biodiesel so a lot of the heavy lifting is already ongoing. Unfortunately, ethanol is dead weight with a death grip on the US Congress. Domestic automakers won't be totally out in the cold. They produce diesel cars abroad and are arguably the champs of diesel trucks (non-commercial). But per norm, they will be playing catchup in most segments from subcompact to luxo cruisers.

I would delay buying a diesel until at least 2009. I would be surpised if most major automakers are not offering multiple commuter diesels in the US market by then.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
We need to stop thinking about the interanal combustion engine of any type all together for many reasons:

1. It still depends on some sort of fuel source which means it makes money for big oil etc. They love the whole idea that we will always go to them for gas. It wouldn't change it any different if we have to go to them for Hydrogen, Ethonol or diesel.

2. Still production of greenhouse gases. No matter how effecient you try to make it.

3. Mechanics make money. The most commonly serviced car parts (which make mechanics money): Oil change, spark plugs, plug wires, clutch, transmission flushes and various fluid replacements and flushes etc.....

The investment needs to be made in totally plug in hybrids. It is possible and has been done several years in the past but was snuffed out. A plug in hybrid crosses all three reasons mentioned above. The reason why we will never see such a car is because companies and this currenty government status we are in won't allow such an event.

I can't wait until you start whining about "big electricity".

Cars also will still require repair and service unless you plan on changing the laws of physics while you are at it.

The electricity that power plants generate produces greenhouse gases as well. However this would be significantly less then the amount that all the cars generate right now put together. Mainly because it can be controlled. Also since the burning is done all in one place the government can put restrictions (and has done) on scrubbers and the cleanliness of the exhaust.

How many times do you hear of the computer is someone?s car going bad? It is not an item meant to be replaced on any basis except when it goes bad (very rare case). It has no maintenance schedule as well. These plug in hybrids will mainly be computer electronics/motors and batteries. Most of which we know from the past are very reliable. In which case it is feasible for the car to only consume electricity/tires etc. during it?s entire lifespan. There would be no oil/fluids to change. They would require a less compressive schedule. There has been talk of batteries going bad in these cars but government studies have tested the battery and charging systems in regular hybrids and stopped doing this when the mileage was extremely high 200K to 300K. Most Americans will change their cars before 100K.

You were railing against large oil companies, disregarding the fact that large utility companies will be providing said power. Hydrogen would also be produced by major utilities if it was ever utilized on a widespread scale since reforming it from oil (current method) would be counterproductive.

moving parts=friction=service and repair
battery life/endurance is dependent on several things: temperature, usage, number of charge and discharge cycles, etc..

Less moving parts = less friction = less service and repair. Exactly with electric vehicles. You can't dispute this. Most plug in hybrids have a direct drive motor. Or a motor that is directly connected to the wheel.

And I'm sure integrating far more electrical components will be problem free....

Manufacturers have enough problems with the elecrical systems in existing ICE cars. Switching over to hybrids/electrics won't put mechanics out of business just change more of what they work on.

 

[Thump553]

Around here, diesel is consistently 50-60 cents more per gallon, year in, year out. I have several friends and relatives who went the diesel route and now regret it (except for the one that has gone biodiesel, and its more of a hobby for him than anything else).

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
We need to stop thinking about the interanal combustion engine of any type all together for many reasons:

1. It still depends on some sort of fuel source which means it makes money for big oil etc. They love the whole idea that we will always go to them for gas. It wouldn't change it any different if we have to go to them for Hydrogen, Ethonol or diesel.

2. Still production of greenhouse gases. No matter how effecient you try to make it.

3. Mechanics make money. The most commonly serviced car parts (which make mechanics money): Oil change, spark plugs, plug wires, clutch, transmission flushes and various fluid replacements and flushes etc.....

The investment needs to be made in totally plug in hybrids. It is possible and has been done several years in the past but was snuffed out. A plug in hybrid crosses all three reasons mentioned above. The reason why we will never see such a car is because companies and this currenty government status we are in won't allow such an event.

I can't wait until you start whining about "big electricity".

Cars also will still require repair and service unless you plan on changing the laws of physics while you are at it.

The electricity that power plants generate produces greenhouse gases as well. However this would be significantly less then the amount that all the cars generate right now put together. Mainly because it can be controlled. Also since the burning is done all in one place the government can put restrictions (and has done) on scrubbers and the cleanliness of the exhaust.

How many times do you hear of the computer is someone?s car going bad? It is not an item meant to be replaced on any basis except when it goes bad (very rare case). It has no maintenance schedule as well. These plug in hybrids will mainly be computer electronics/motors and batteries. Most of which we know from the past are very reliable. In which case it is feasible for the car to only consume electricity/tires etc. during it?s entire lifespan. There would be no oil/fluids to change. They would require a less compressive schedule. There has been talk of batteries going bad in these cars but government studies have tested the battery and charging systems in regular hybrids and stopped doing this when the mileage was extremely high 200K to 300K. Most Americans will change their cars before 100K.

You were railing against large oil companies, disregarding the fact that large utility companies will be providing said power. Hydrogen would also be produced by major utilities if it was ever utilized on a widespread scale since reforming it from oil (current method) would be counterproductive.

moving parts=friction=service and repair
battery life/endurance is dependent on several things: temperature, usage, number of charge and discharge cycles, etc..

Less moving parts = less friction = less service and repair. Exactly with electric vehicles. You can't dispute this. Most plug in hybrids have a direct drive motor. Or a motor that is directly connected to the wheel.

And I'm sure integrating far more electrical components will be problem free....

Manufacturers have enough problems with the elecrical systems in existing ICE cars. Switching over to hybrids/electrics won't put mechanics out of business just change more of what they work on.

Not exaclty.

As a matter of fact there will be far less mechanics. To work on cars mechanics will more/less need an in depth electrical background. Mechanics as you already may know didn't make straight A's in high school. I'm sure automobile manufactures will come out with certification programs. Cars will be more/less a computer type of thing. According to Consumer reports Desktop PCs is one of the most home repaired item. I think these plug in hybrids will be on top. Also I don't think you seem to understand or really haven't worked on a car. I've done transmission work, overhauled engines etc.... Most of what a auto shop does is fluid/flush changes, plugs, wires, filters etc.. Those are the "Money Makers" in the business. In an electric vehicle you minus allmost all of those things.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
We need to stop thinking about the interanal combustion engine of any type all together for many reasons:

1. It still depends on some sort of fuel source which means it makes money for big oil etc. They love the whole idea that we will always go to them for gas. It wouldn't change it any different if we have to go to them for Hydrogen, Ethonol or diesel.

2. Still production of greenhouse gases. No matter how effecient you try to make it.

3. Mechanics make money. The most commonly serviced car parts (which make mechanics money): Oil change, spark plugs, plug wires, clutch, transmission flushes and various fluid replacements and flushes etc.....

The investment needs to be made in totally plug in hybrids. It is possible and has been done several years in the past but was snuffed out. A plug in hybrid crosses all three reasons mentioned above. The reason why we will never see such a car is because companies and this currenty government status we are in won't allow such an event.

I can't wait until you start whining about "big electricity".

Cars also will still require repair and service unless you plan on changing the laws of physics while you are at it.

The electricity that power plants generate produces greenhouse gases as well. However this would be significantly less then the amount that all the cars generate right now put together. Mainly because it can be controlled. Also since the burning is done all in one place the government can put restrictions (and has done) on scrubbers and the cleanliness of the exhaust.

How many times do you hear of the computer is someone?s car going bad? It is not an item meant to be replaced on any basis except when it goes bad (very rare case). It has no maintenance schedule as well. These plug in hybrids will mainly be computer electronics/motors and batteries. Most of which we know from the past are very reliable. In which case it is feasible for the car to only consume electricity/tires etc. during it?s entire lifespan. There would be no oil/fluids to change. They would require a less compressive schedule. There has been talk of batteries going bad in these cars but government studies have tested the battery and charging systems in regular hybrids and stopped doing this when the mileage was extremely high 200K to 300K. Most Americans will change their cars before 100K.

You were railing against large oil companies, disregarding the fact that large utility companies will be providing said power. Hydrogen would also be produced by major utilities if it was ever utilized on a widespread scale since reforming it from oil (current method) would be counterproductive.

moving parts=friction=service and repair
battery life/endurance is dependent on several things: temperature, usage, number of charge and discharge cycles, etc..

Less moving parts = less friction = less service and repair. Exactly with electric vehicles. You can't dispute this. Most plug in hybrids have a direct drive motor. Or a motor that is directly connected to the wheel.

And I'm sure integrating far more electrical components will be problem free....

Manufacturers have enough problems with the elecrical systems in existing ICE cars. Switching over to hybrids/electrics won't put mechanics out of business just change more of what they work on.

Not exaclty.

As a matter of fact there will be far less mechanics. To work on cars mechanics will more/less need an in depth electrical background. Mechanics as you already may know didn't make straight A's in high school. I'm sure automobile manufactures will come out with certification programs. Cars will be more/less a computer type of thing. According to Consumer reports Desktop PCs is one of the most home repaired item. I think these plug in hybrids will be on top. Also I don't think you seem to understand or really haven't worked on a car. I've done transmission work, overhauled engines etc.... Most of what a auto shop does is fluid/flush changes, plugs, wires, filters etc.. Those are the "Money Makers" in the business. In an electric vehicle you minus allmost all of those things.

I've worked on cars. Again you are merely changing what will need to be worked on and at what intervals. As cars have gotten more and more electronics installed mechanics have had to learn how to fix those systems just as often (or more depending on the car) as fixing something mechanical. The kid next door will most likely not be fixing my electric car by hooking it up to his laptop. There will still be wear and tear on moving parts, especially given the kind of driving these cars will be subjected to (stop and go commmuting almost exclusively). Motors, batteries, electronics, etc will inevitably fail and have to be replaced.

 

[Nyati13]

Originally posted by: Thump553
Around here, diesel is consistently 50-60 cents more per gallon, year in, year out. I have several friends and relatives who went the diesel route and now regret it (except for the one that has gone biodiesel, and its more of a hobby for him than anything else).

The price of diesel in the US is odd, because diesel is cheaper to make than gasoline, and in most of the world it is priced less per liter at the pumps.

I think in the veeeeeeerry long run hydrogen will be the best solution. In the medium term (next 50 to 100 years) biodiesel and biodiesel/electric hybrids will be the best solution.

 

[Nyati13]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I would delay buying a diesel until at least 2009. I would be surpised if most major automakers are not offering multiple commuter diesels in the US market by then.

I think '08 or '09 is when Subaru will have their diesel in the US market. Flat-4 turbo-diesel. (rumoured to be a 2.2Liter )

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Nyati13

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I would delay buying a diesel until at least 2009. I would be surpised if most major automakers are not offering multiple commuter diesels in the US market by then.

I think '08 or '09 is when Subaru will have their diesel in the US market. Flat-4 turbo-diesel. (rumoured to be a 2.2Liter )

I used to have a slightly modified WRX . . . 400+hp and torque. I sold it b/c I couldn't get it to pass emissions . . . go figure.

IIRC, the diesel price premium is a relatively new occurence . . . say the past 5 years? The price of all fuels went through the roof but the diesel didn't come down as much??