www.tdiclub.com

Economy - Longevity - Performance
The #1 Source of TDI Information on the Web!
Forums Articles Links Meets
Orders TDI Club Cards TDIFest 2016 Gone, but not forgotten VAG-Com List Unit Conversions TDIClub Chat Thank You

Order your TDIClub merchandise and help support TDIClub


Go Back   TDIClub Forums > VW TDI Discussion Areas > TDI News/Tech

TDI News/Tech This Forum is for the posting of TDI news related items.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 26th, 2020, 17:12   #61
Daemon64
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Salem, Massachusetts
Fuel Economy: Fuelly Average 29.6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nwdiver View Post
The thing most people miss/ignore about the energy use of EVs for charging... and I cannot emphasize this enough;

EVs DO NOT USE GRID MIX

Take SPP for example. Last year my ISO SPP was ~25% wind. Yet if you were to look at the mix at the time I was charging my EV it was closer to 50%. Further... you can use curtailment so that even though the mix was ~50% at the time the dirty fuel was likely a thermal plant at its lowest idle and wind was actually being reduced. Charging off-peak dramatically decreases the emissions of EVs and very soon smart charging will decrease this even more. An aggregator can use 100k EVs as a virtual power plant. Too much wind? Increase charge rate 50MW. Wind output just went down or demand picked up? Instead of increasing the output of a peaker plant by 75MW decrease the charge rate 75MW. Software will always be cheaper than a physical generator or grid storage.

Further... having dispatchable demand (EVs) increases the amount of wind and solar the grid can economically support. So it becomes a synergistic relationship. More EVs => More wind/solar => Cleaner cheaper EVs => More wind/solar => More EVs => More Renewables; Curtailment... not storage will be the first challenge to cleaning up the grid. EVs can be a BIG part of the solution to curtailment.

??? How are EVs not ready? The difference in trip time is now practically non-existent. Towing might still be an issue but for passenger cars EVs are more convenient than ICE most of the time for most people. The investments should be in improving EVs and the infrastructure that supports them not wasting $$$ on obsolete ICE tech.
Wait. How do you figure that EVs do not use energy mix? The power comes from whoever purchases the power at their local utility. If that's your house for example: that's your energy company. If you're using chargepoint for example that's whoever the chargepoint provider is ( whether its a hotel, the town, the local gym ) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charging_station#:~:text= Generally speaking they're coming from the grid, like anyone else. Maybe Tesla has some special setup where they only get it from renewables, but that's not any of the major level 2, or level 3 providers. So yes, it comes from grid mix. You can't look at our grid and say "oh all only comes from wind or solar". I get that in your specific instance you may have charged more on renewables, than someone else who didn't. I also get that the e-golf we use theoretically gets all of its power from 100% renewable( since our city is supposed to be 100% renewable sources only ).

I also get that if battery based solutions were put into place that, yes there could be more peak availability for solar & wind since the energy will be captured at their peak, stored and used back. But that's just not how it works right now, or in the near future. The state i live in generates 67% of their electricity from natural gas for example. But I only gave you the averages across the country. I get its better in some areas than others. But assuming your efficient in getting your power, others may not be and thats law of averages especially if we're considering 100% adoption. I also get that a ton of different situations and scenarios effect the outcome of an individual EVs efficiency.

I never stated that EVs are bad. I said they have shortcomings at the moment that many smart people are trying to overcome. My point was that in the meantime we could have some solutions today on the short that stop gap us.

As far as EVs not being ready. Tesla as a car manufacturer not withstanding the cybertruck and maybe the rivian. Seem to be on the right track. Infact i think many Tesla's are not bad on range. Except in colder climates where all EVs suffer at the moment. Once density is increased that will be a lot less of an issue. For commuter cars, hell 200 - 250 mile trips, Tesla's are great. Some of the other companies are up there to... the general charging networks are getting better... But keep in mind a few things here:

1.$ 35,000 is a lot for some people for a vehicle and for every new vehicle sold per year in the US 2 people buy a car for 20k or under used. Electrics in general happen to be on the more expensive side, especially Tesla. They're working on that I know but lets be real for a while the model 3 was really 50k.

2. 36.6% of all amercians rent. Which means finding an electric charger is often less convenient than getting a gas vehicle. Not to say you can't do it. We live in an apartment and we use a lvl 2 charger for the e-golf. But we also have 1 diesel, and 1 gas powered vehicle for longer trips, and well some fun. Many people who buy electrics still keep a gas powered vehicle for the same reason. Which shows they're not ready yet.

3. Battery density is not great currently. I've seen some excellent papers, research, up and coming stuff in semi solid, solid, sodium batteries... messing with the anode, etc...etc.. Stuff looks promising. If you can tell someone their electric will have the range of my Q5 - 600+ miles, and that they can charge that to 80% in sub 5 minutes.... the adoption rate will skyrocket. We need a 2x density increase, with weights being equal, more solid materials so that the speed to charge is basically nothing.

4. Given all above the last target is the target you will never hit. The car enthusiast, the classic car person, the big diesel pickup trucks that roll coal, the person he can only afford the sub 10,000 car. ( I get that you found a 6k leaf, but until those become the norm with bigger density and easy charging, forget it ). The trucking industry, planes, trains, ships. Which is why i mention carbon capture synthetic fuels... it solves those two without leaving it on the table.

5. "The investments should be in improving EVs and the infrastructure that supports them not wasting $$$ on obsolete ICE tech." -- Haha love the fight. EVs have their own groups researching, and there are others on gas / diesel powered vehicles. Market economics come into play here where the market dictates what is needed and right now since Climate Change is an Existential crisis... I would like them to do all of it, right now, not just evs, not just synthetic fuels, not just nucleur, everything, solve anywhere there is pollution. A multi-faceted problem, requires a multi-faceted solution.
Daemon64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2020, 17:19   #62
nwdiver
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Eunice
Fuel Economy: 320wh/mi; ~90mpge
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daemon64 View Post
Wait. How do you figure that EVs do not use energy mix?
I don't know how I could have been more clear....

Quote:
Originally Posted by nwdiver View Post
Yet if you were to look at the mix at the time I was charging my EV it was closer to 50%. Further... you can use curtailment so that even though the mix was ~50% at the time the dirty fuel was likely a thermal plant at its lowest idle and wind was actually being reduced.
The average annual wind generation is 25%. But the wind generation when my car is charging averages ~50%. If you aggregate charging to match wind and solar you can get >90%.

1) You need to look at the 5/10 year cost of ownership. Fuel and maintenance is significantly less expensive. I agree if you want cheap buy used which is why I think it's silly to keep manufacturing ICE.

2) Renters still park their car somewhere. We probably need more incentives for street side parking. Power requirements for charging an EV are WAAAY lower than most people realize. The UK is using surplus capacity from upgrading street lights to LED to provide curbside charging.

3) Battery density already exceeds bladder capacity. The benefit of a 500 mile range diminishes greatly when you refuel in your driveway.

4) Synthetic fuels will be great for aviation but we need to reserve what little we can make for aviation and it's physically impossible for it to ever be more cost effective than simply charging a battery.

5) We have finite resources. The OEMs are already tapped out trying to transition to EVs. Every $ they're spending on ICE is really a dollar they can't afford to not spend on R&D for electrification. At some point you have to do a little fiscal triage... invest in what works and stop wasting $$$ on what doesn't.

Last edited by nwdiver; February 26th, 2020 at 17:28.
nwdiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2020, 18:11   #63
atc98002
Veteran Member
 
atc98002's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daemon64 View Post
...
Now environmental -
So my Q5 produces 357 g/mi of CO2 based on the average and the egolf --- Nationwide the CO2/kWh ( https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11 ) is .99lbs or 449.056grams, at the very best the egolf is producing 102.06 g/mi, and at the worst its producing 136.8 g/mi. Not bad. Now lets compare that to say a european golf tdi ( 225 g/mi ) ... Now lets just mention regular hybrids for a second not PHEV - 154 g/mi to 190 g/mi depending on vehicle. None of this includes the amount to create them just the emissions ongoing. What I'm saying is that electrics are not the only answer here.... Take the 2020 SQ5 TDI w/ the mild hybrid g/mi of co2 - 285 ( this is based on manufacturer averages ofcourse and i always beat those )... but if i didn't go sports and just got another Q5 TDI like offered in europe that is currently 231 g/mi. They just don't offer them here, which is why I have to pollute more. The cleanest non-hybrid SUV is lexus UX @ 225g/mi US, and hybrid Q5 is around 165 g/mi ... but those are misleading because they assume none for the electricity since its a PHEV... which is not true. ( I need a vehicle that can tow btw ).
For towing, you are correct that an EV just isn't there yet. And probably still a ways away. But that CO2 amount is highly dependent on location. For my use case, using the same web site you gave here for data, Washington state produced 116,756,729 Megawatt Hours of electricity in 2018. However, 88,785,166 MWh was from hydro, wind and solar. So, a hair over 76% of our electricity had no direct CO2 emissions. I suspect that the CO2 per KWh here is far lower than the number you list. I had trouble finding the most recent data, but I did find a chart for 2012. It shows the WA grid produced about 40 grams of CO2/KWh (tough to see an accurate value on the chart because it's so small). I feel pretty confident that there's no vehicle with a combustion engine that can equal, let alone beat, that number.

Using the energy calculator on fueleconomy.gov, it lists the 2019 e-Golf as 90 g/mi, while my Niro PHEV is 140 g/mi. And that calculator appears to take your local electricity generation into the mix. Appears to me the EV still beats a really good PHEV quite handily.
__________________
2019 Kia Niro PHEV EX Premium
2005 Ram 1500
2013 VW GTI: daughter
2010 Routan gone, replaced with 2018 Pacifica Hybrid: other daughter has 3 kids
atc98002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2020, 18:19   #64
turbobrick240
Veteran Member
 
turbobrick240's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: maine
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daemon64 View Post
So Carbon engineering the company i linked does direct air capture CO2, uses some chemical reactions to literally pull the CO2 from the atmosphere, and stores it. They use renewable energy sources of electricity, and take the captured CO2 from the air, and hydrogen from water, and then make gas / diesel. They have press releases, and etc... if you search them out.
I'm not sure why you're comment on micro nukes. If you look into nupower you would realize that they are some ridiculous amount safer, can be shutdown via a release, produce greater power density, are much more efficient on the fueling and etc... Plus my advocation is to replace only our aging nucleur facilities with 40 year newer, much safer technology... Can you elaborate on why you dislike micro-nukes?
Carbon capture is a great idea. It makes sense to utilize the least energy intensive means to capture the carbon. The obvious choice(to me at least) seems to be biological capture by plants and algae.

https://www-usnews-com.cdn.ampprojec...20%25251%2524s

https://cleantechnica-com.cdn.amppro...rom-the-air%2F

https://www-wired-com.cdn.ampproject...-atmosphere%2F

As nwdiver mentioned, nuclear is too expensive. And the vulnerabilities that would be created by having thousands of small nuclear reactors scattered everywhere is not a pleasant thought.

https://wiseinternational.org/nuclea...guySjsSk8YojbA

We only need look as far as California to see how quickly EV's can become mainstream. The model 3 outsold both the Honda Accord and Toyota Corolla there in 2019.

Last edited by turbobrick240; March 4th, 2020 at 12:14.
turbobrick240 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2020, 12:00   #65
Rob Mayercik
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: NJ, U.S.A.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nwdiver View Post
I can't speak for @Turbobrick240 but I dislike nuclear because is ridiculously, OMG expensive. New Nuclear is ~4x more per kWh and ~15x more per kW compared to solar and wind. Nuclear has evolved into a fancy & expensive welfare program.
Maybe it wouldn't be so bloody expensive if the the industry didn't have to wage a never-ending holy war against people who hear the word "nuclear" and immediately start acting like Chicken Little with a severe case of hair-on-fire.

I mean, how the heck are we ever going to get our clean fusion power reactors like in Star Trek if the extremist environmentalists keep stifling our ability to replace our existing nuclear power plants (decades-old, expensive first-generation designs) with newer designs that are safer and less expensive?

I want my Mr. Fusion, dammit!
__________________
2002 Jetta GLS TDI Automatic
Baltic Green/Beige Leather
400K miles as of Dec 2019!
Rob Mayercik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2020, 13:05   #66
nwdiver
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Eunice
Fuel Economy: 320wh/mi; ~90mpge
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Mayercik View Post
Maybe it wouldn't be so bloody expensive if the the industry didn't have to wage a never-ending holy war against people who hear the word "nuclear" and immediately start acting like Chicken Little with a severe case of hair-on-fire.
I mean, how the heck are we ever going to get our clean fusion power reactors like in Star Trek if the extremist environmentalists keep stifling our ability to replace our existing nuclear power plants (decades-old, expensive first-generation designs) with newer designs that are safer and less expensive?
I want my Mr. Fusion, dammit!
You're not going to find a more business friendly area than the area around where Vogtle is being built. It's not 'environmentalists'... it's the nuclear industry.

Any thermal generator is inherently inefficient which doesn't help the cost. A nuclear plant has to dissipate 2 units of heat for every unit of electricity produced.
nwdiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2020, 14:33   #67
tikal
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Southeast Texas
Fuel Economy: 37 MPG (~ 45% city)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daemon64 View Post
Speaking from someone who has a 2015 Q5 TDI, and a 2019 VW E-Golf. I would gladly keep my diesel all day long. The golf is just plain boring. There is no excitment in an EV. 0-60 in 2.4s doesn't excite me from a model s either. We have a 2011 HIGHLY modified WRX w/ built alot and it does sub 3s 0-60, and strong qm pulls, is a standard and blast to drive. Where the e-golf shines is heavy traffic, but the Q5 does more than adequate there. That's from an excitement perspective.

Ok. Lets look at it from an efficiency Standard my Q5 Averages 29mpg in fuelly. And the e-golf which is rated at 119 mpgE combined - Except we get around 3.3 miles / kWh - 4.4 / kWh - So 111.21 MPGe - 148 MPGe . E-Golf does better in this department and electrics in general, ofcourse things like hybrids get you pretty close depending.

Now environmental -
So my Q5 produces 357 g/mi of CO2 based on the average and the egolf --- Nationwide the CO2/kWh ( https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11 ) is .99lbs or 449.056grams, at the very best the egolf is producing 102.06 g/mi, and at the worst its producing 136.8 g/mi. Not bad. Now lets compare that to say a european golf tdi ( 225 g/mi ) ... Now lets just mention regular hybrids for a second not PHEV - 154 g/mi to 190 g/mi depending on vehicle. None of this includes the amount to create them just the emissions ongoing. What I'm saying is that electrics are not the only answer here.... Take the 2020 SQ5 TDI w/ the mild hybrid g/mi of co2 - 285 ( this is based on manufacturer averages ofcourse and i always beat those )... but if i didn't go sports and just got another Q5 TDI like offered in europe that is currently 231 g/mi. They just don't offer them here, which is why I have to pollute more. The cleanest non-hybrid SUV is lexus UX @ 225g/mi US, and hybrid Q5 is around 165 g/mi ... but those are misleading because they assume none for the electricity since its a PHEV... which is not true. ( I need a vehicle that can tow btw ).

Alternatively we could be immediately more environmental if we switched globally to carbon capture synthetic fuels, because that would make all current vehicles effectively carbon neutral if not negative. This would also be applied to place that cannot use electrics effective currently like trucking, trains, plains, cargo ships, etc.... Like Carbon Engineering https://carbonengineering.com/ --- Pair this with ducted fuel injection and you have a good recipe to make this stuff neutral while electrics, can really grow, and the grid can be cleaning as well.

The second is - More microscale high deployment nucleur like nupower --- https://www.nuscalepower.com/ --- Just replacing our current reactors with these would be infinitely safer, and produce a scale of about 5x the power. Which would make our grid 100% nucleur and some renewables, and remove all fossil fuels.... just saying... This would make the case for electrics

Adoption - Currently global EV sales are around 2% annually. Last year 17 million vehicles were sold in the US, and the are around 279 million registered vehicles in the US. Assuming a 100% ev adoption rate per year, it would take us around 17 years to full cycle through all of our vehicles. But lets assume the EV segment is going to burst at the seems and the ev market sales literally go 2500% over current and over the next 10 years it spikes to 50%, thats means 34 years to transition. This is why I'd like to see synthetic fuels come online, and become mandatory, because then atleast we can significantly slow the damage done, in all areas, and all sectors.

There is a lot of rambline here So boiling it down:

1. I don't think electrics are ready, since basically people don't want them yet, and they aren't are convenient yet.

2. We need synthetic carbon capture fuels today

3. A nupower switch would be awesome since it would clean up eletricity generation which electric cars use, but so does everything else in this country.

4. Ducted fuel injection needs to be a thing

5. Please bring us modern TDI's with mhev, so we can switch to greener alternatives especially for those of us that tow some weight, as electrics and density are not their to handle this at all yet.

6. They need to keep researching on how to make any ICE engines more efficient because they're not going anywhere. So improve this while electric adoption is happening.
Another take regarding the Environment from the Argonne National Labs GREET model. YES it will change gradually in favor of electrical vehicles (now diesel is tied or better than EVs according to the GREET chart below from wxman). In the mean time, if you have a safe running light duty diesel vehicle, why not keep it until your budget/needs allows to move into EVs? People might also buy used light diesel vehicles as a bridge technology towards getting EVs in the future due to finances, range, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wxman View Post
Actually, I do have an update based on the latest release of the GREET model (GREET_2019):


tikal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2020, 16:52   #68
jerryfreak
Veteran Member
Default

interesting....

can they hit 50 mpg average without diesel? or do they use some electric 'mileage equivalent' quackery to meet their goals


https://www.motor1.com/news/361821/m...al-california/
jerryfreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 1st, 2020, 05:50   #69
kjclow
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Fuel Economy: 55 max / 44 avg on beetle ~37 on JSW
Default

It does say fleet average, so they're using electric vehicles to boost the numbers.
__________________
2010 silver/black JSW TDI with DSG, 2017 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel

Last edited by kjclow; April 1st, 2020 at 05:59.
kjclow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 1st, 2020, 06:25   #70
Lightflyer1
Veteran Member
 
Lightflyer1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Round Rock, Texas
Default

There was an article the other day that mentioned the US car makers will only produce a small number of electric cars in favor of trucks and SUV's. More than likely they will only produce enough to help meet their mpg requirements. Instead of an all out push to go electric.
__________________
How to post pics:http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread...t=post+picture
Lightflyer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 1st, 2020, 12:28   #71
Daemon64
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Salem, Massachusetts
Fuel Economy: Fuelly Average 29.6
Default

Yeah, they are putting out more electrics. But likely hybrids as well. Note that the Audi Q5 now has a hybrid option, that supposedly averages 3mpg better. But mostly what they are looking for is a CO2 emissions average: The orig obama requirements were "54.5 miles per gallon is based on a projected fleet average of 163g/mi of tailpipe CO2 emissions." The 2020 Q5 Hybrid is 165g/mi --- https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Powe...Q5&srchtyp=ymm

With PHEV, it would be easy to make this happens. 2020 Q5 is 364 g/mi, 2020 Q5 PHEV is 165g/mi ... The 2020 VW JEtta w/ the 1.4T is 261 g/mi --- make it a PHEV and it will be stupidly better in terms of fuel, and CO2... and it already does 30city / 40 highway... Also that 1.4T is a beast for a small motor ( my fiend has one ) 147HP / 184TQ --- Gas car that has a hp/tq similar ( not perfect ofcourse ) to a diesel.

One step further -
The European 2020 SQ5 TDI is 284.8 - 276 g/mi ( Current US Spec Gas version is 444 g/mi )
The European 2020 Q5 45 TDI ( Same engine / spec as my Q5 TDI and it pollutes far less ) is 265.5 - 259.1 g/mi
The European 2020 Q5 40 TDI ( Think 2.0L Golf TDI Engine 0-62 in 7.6 ) is 231.7 - 217.26 g/mi

For reference my 2015 Q5 TDI us spec is 384 g/mi.

Point being is the modern Audi / VW engines can meet the CO2 standards with ease if they put the right stuff in and I for one would like them to send the new SQ5 TDI MHEV here, so i can pollute significantly less while doing the same work, and getting better mpg.
Daemon64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23rd, 2020, 13:48   #72
D_Bill
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SE Pa
Fuel Economy: 13 jsw - coming soon / for old_v1 around town 40-42 hiway 52-54
Default old conversation

Some years back - about a decade or so I ended up in a conversation here on TDIClub with a scientist from DOE - him being the smart guy and me pushing common sense to the max.

We agreed that he was right for city folks - electric worked for metropolitan areas

but

We agreed I was right for suburban/rural folks - diesel ( esp , at the time, something akin to algae based biodiesel ) worked for our town and country and family visits .

Most city folks didn't drive for more than 200-300 miles per day . So he's right in cities ( well also because there are charging stations ). But my neighbors and I have families all over the place 300 - 3000 miles away so 500 - 750+ miles per day were " routine " family events. Ditto for moving/towing tools, equipment, boats and such .

My 2001 Jetta TDI is long gone ( sold at 300K to a friends son who still uses it ). Thus past Jan I got a chance to buy a cleaned up 2013 JSW TDI :-) I usually don't put much stock in the computer mpg numbers but I suppose they are close enough for govt work. Just before the CV 19 shut down I made one of those 550 mile in a day trips at old man ( not hypermiling just keeping it around 60 ish on I 80 here in PA 's northern tier ( mild hills ) . Computer says 55 mpg which is darn close to the calculated between fillups mpg I got in the '01 ( just under 60mpg - my best ever - on a slow, no stopping, return trip of 900+ miles from FL some 10 +- years ago ) .

Bottom line - imagine what we could get from tdi's if allowed to continue innovation .

Bonus points for what I think is carbon neutral - alcohol . Less energy per gallon but -

plants + water/co2 in and alcohol out

cars + alcohol/o2 in and water co2 out

btw - I think alcohol will never happen - no way for govt nor big industry to make money since we'd make our own alcohol and drink the leftovers :-)
D_Bill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23rd, 2020, 15:14   #73
turbobrick240
Veteran Member
 
turbobrick240's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: maine
Default

Alcohol works for Brazil. How carbon neutral it is I'm not sure. Probably depends on how much rainforest is being slash & burned for the sugarcane plantations.
turbobrick240 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23rd, 2020, 16:50   #74
nayr
Veteran Member
 
nayr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Denver, CO
TDI(s): 2014 Audi Q7
Default

Ive got a 2020 Q5e right now, had it a couple weeks and will have it a couple more weeks while they fix the rear main on my diesel..

I think i'mna buy one of these in a few years when I can get a CPO for half.. its a fun car, way more fun than the 2.0FSI Q5 loaner I had a few months ago.. supposedly quicker than the SQ5 and I believe it.

Drove across metro the other day w/full battery in hybrid mode and got back home 2h later and had 75mpg on the gas engine.. We went on a 4h drive through the mountains this last weekend in hybrid mode and got 35mpg by the time we got home. My wife can run a full day of errands and shopping and never even touch the gas engine, and she could also make it to her office and back w/out ever using ICE either.
__________________
2014 Audi Q7 Prestige - Air Susp, ACC, Malone Stg2 w/RawTek DP/MidPipe, 245/65/17 BFG KO2, FrontRunner w/Full Size Spare, D710 HAM, Cayenne TCM, Webasto OEM Retrofit
1975 Westfallia 4MT - ALH Conversion in progress.
nayr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2020, 07:40   #75
kjclow
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Fuel Economy: 55 max / 44 avg on beetle ~37 on JSW
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D_Bill View Post
Bonus points for what I think is carbon neutral - alcohol . Less energy per gallon but -

plants + water/co2 in and alcohol out

cars + alcohol/o2 in and water co2 out

btw - I think alcohol will never happen - no way for govt nor big industry to make money since we'd make our own alcohol and drink the leftovers :-)
Alcohol production for vehicle use and personal consumption has been legal in Iowa for at least 40 years. You just have to claim the number of gallons produced and used as fuel replacement so that you pay road use taxes, assuming that it was for on-road vehicles.

There are three big issues associated with alcohol production:
1. The energy requried to produce the alcohol is greater than the energy returned from the alcohol.
2. At least in the US, alcohol production is from grain crops, such as corn. Although this particular corn does not end up directly on our tables, it is used in all of our animal food that has a direct impact on the price on the meat that does hit our tables.
3. In order to get plants that are easier to process, vast areas of land are being driven into crop production that nature never intended to be used for that.
__________________
2010 silver/black JSW TDI with DSG, 2017 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel
kjclow is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AARodriguez and TDIs are making a comeback tour! AARodriguez Corp. Vendor & GroupBuy items for sale 4 October 11th, 2017 13:56
The Internal Combustion Comeback TDIMeister TDI News/Tech 28 September 26th, 2013 19:09
Diesel, Cleaner, Is Set to Make a Comeback TDIMeister TDI News/Tech 11 November 23rd, 2010 05:32
Peugeot and Citroen to make comeback in the US? Willy den CGI Non VW Group Diesels 9 April 23rd, 2004 05:42
Can the 105 year-old make a comeback? RED Non VW Group Diesels 0 June 17th, 2003 16:07


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:48.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright - TDIClub Online LTD - 2017
Contact Us | Privacy Statement | Forum Rules | Disclaimer
TDIClub Online Ltd (TDIClub.com) is not affiliated with the VWoA or VWAG and is supported by contributions from viewers like you.
1996 - 2020, All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.22221 seconds with 11 queries
[Output: 154.71 Kb. compressed to 133.17 Kb. by saving 21.54 Kb. (13.92%)]