New cars & emissions musings, moved from NMS/B7

storx

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Location
Earth!!
TDI
2009 Jetta CR140, 2010 Corvette Z06
With current mods I am getting 38.8city/55hwy on B100
 

tdiatlast

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
TDI
2009 Sportwagen (boughtback); 2014 Passat TDI SEL (boughtback)
Totally wrong forum...Storx car is NOT street legal (heavily modified or removed exhaust emissions system)
He should be saying "and polluting at a rate significantly higher than legally allowed"...
 

rotarykid

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 27, 2003
Location
Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
TDI
1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
Totally wrong forum...Storx car is NOT street legal (heavily modified or removed exhaust emissions system)
He should be saying "and polluting at a rate significantly higher than legally allowed"...
Even with his mods he is polluting less than the majority of the large displacement gas powered loophole SUVs and pickup trucks from the last 15 years.

I don't care what anyone says a 6-10 mpg gas suv or pickup will always pollute more than a high tech extremely efficient 50-60 mpg TDI-CR diesel car even if all of the emissions are removed. And it isn't just at the tail pipe that counts, but all of the pollution that is that is produced by refining the gasoline they are wasting for no real reason compared to what is used by the fuel efficient diesel car.

There is a reason diesel autos essentially had no emissions on them until 1992 while gasoline engines have required all sorts of emissions controls going back to 1971. Because compared to all gassers any diesel is pretty clean even without any emissions after-treatment. Without any after-treatment diesels have low C0, low C02, and large PMs that essentially fall to ground in short order once produced.......Don't get me wrong, I like that they have figured out how to make the exhaust coming out of a diesel cleaner than the air going in. But come on is that really necessary???? I don't think so........

But WT! do I know......
 

TomB

Veteran Member
Joined
May 1, 2003
Location
Cle Elum, Washington/Las Vegas, Nevada
TDI
2015 Audi TDI Prestige Sport
Even with his mods he is polluting less than the majority of the large displacement gas powered loophole SUVs and pickup trucks from the last 15 years.

I don't care what anyone says a 6-10 mpg gas suv or pickup will always pollute more than a high tech extremely efficient 50-60 mpg TDI-CR diesel car even if all of the emissions are removed. And it isn't just at the tail pipe that counts, but all of the pollution that is that is produced by refining the gasoline they are wasting for no real reason compared to what is used by the fuel efficient diesel car.

There is a reason diesel autos essentially had no emissions on them until 1992 while gasoline engines have required all sorts of emissions controls going back to 1971. Because compared to all gassers any diesel is pretty clean even without any emissions after-treatment. Without any after-treatment diesels have low C0, low C02, and large PMs that essentially fall to ground in short order once produced.......Don't get me wrong, I like that they have figured out how to make the exhaust coming out of a diesel cleaner than the air going in. But come on is that really necessary???? I don't think so........

But WT! do I know......
Really? Do you believe all of this?

Diesel Particulate Matter is one of the most invasive particles in the human lung. It is so small that it gets deep into the nodules and causing issues similar to black lung.

The reason is because diesels were such a SMALL percentage of the total cars. They focused on gasoline and the BIG wins first.
 

rotarykid

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 27, 2003
Location
Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
TDI
1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
Really? Do you believe all of this?
Diesel Particulate Matter is one of the most invasive particles in the human lung. It is so small that it gets deep into the nodules and causing issues similar to black lung.
The reason is because diesels were such a SMALL percentage of the total cars. They focused on gasoline and the BIG wins first.
We that drive diesels are still only in the 0.5-2 % range today across the US. and properly tuned diesel, opacity tested puts out a mi-nute amount of PM compared to what gasoline engines do today. If we still had the standard that was in effect pre-1992 how much pollution would the few of us across the US really be polluting??

If you are really worried about PMs in US air you should demand PM traps be installed on all gasoline engine...........

I asked this until I am blue in the face, where is the clean air gotten from over regulating vehicles that almost no-one drives?????????
Please tell me with a straight face that less pollution is produced by a vehicle that uses 10+ times the amount of fuel to go the same distance. And don't forget the warmup time that gas engines are allowed to pollute at far higher levels than test results give...

Gasoline takes more energy to refine each gal of gas (produces more pollution) compared to 1 gal of D2 being produced. That same 1 gal of D2 can be used to go say 60 miles used by properly tuned to cut PMs diesel which could easily be done with the current on sale today 2.0L TDI-CR. Again I have spent close to ~25 years in the Denver metro area that has had opacity testing going back to 1987 so I have seen first hand how PMs can be cut down by adjustment of IQ & ID.

Low C0 & C02, fueling cutdown to lower levels PMs by opacity testings in a 50-60 mpgUS in a current Jetta or Passat size car, all of this without all of the required trap and regeneration crap.

Please tell me how dirty this would really be compared to any of the 6-12 mpgUS real world v8 gas guzzlers still running around from the last 20 years of the loophole abuse???

That is for every 100 miles traveled the gasser uses 16.7-10 gals real world most of the time compared to the to diesel using 2-1.6 gals.....

16.7 gals burned compared say 2 for every 100 miles traveled, how dirty this would be?? Can anyone say that the diesel engine set up as I suggest sipping fuel is dirtier when all is considered???

And I left out the fact the ~300-500 ppm sulfur fuel has 20-30 % more energy than the current ULSD. This fact makes any diesel get lower overall mpgs by as much as 30 % lower produces more pollution in a fuel sipping diesel.

I have had this exact discussion with a friend that works for the gov in emissions in the federal government, a person that does emission testing. He agrees that no real gain in clean air has been seen in older diesels like claimed in older diesels.

I just don't buy that this car where it's after treatment equipment has been removed is polluting more than what I have compared it to.........I think I am not the only one.
 

FormerOwner

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2006
Location
Alabama
TDI
2013 Passat TDI SE 6spd; Former Owner 02 MkIV wagon
Dude.... we've been trying to educate the public about the benefits of diesels for over 100 years... it still hasn't sunk in yet to our level of satisfaction... take a deep breath and get the color back in your face.

Drive more... worry less. Let the dummies be dummies, because that means more diesel enjoyment for you and all the rest of us.
 

VeeDubTDI

Wanderluster, Traveler, TDIClub Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 2, 2000
Location
Springfield, VA
TDI
‘18 Tesla Model 3D+, ‘14 Cadillac ELR, ‘13 Fiat 500e
This thread is getting cleaned up later...
 

VeeDubTDI

Wanderluster, Traveler, TDIClub Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 2, 2000
Location
Springfield, VA
TDI
‘18 Tesla Model 3D+, ‘14 Cadillac ELR, ‘13 Fiat 500e
Moved various posts from the NMS forum into a new thread here, since it all seems to be emissions-related. Carry on!
 

rotarykid

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 27, 2003
Location
Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
TDI
1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
After discussing this with VeeDub and getting an ok to discuss this, I would like to put this forward;.....


In the grand scheme of things a de-emissioned with all of the after treatment "crap" removed TDI-CR properly tuned to cut PMs is far cleaner than any other vehicle with diesel power ever sold. And they are very clean compared to what I brought up earlier in this thread...........

That is compared to my last my 91 Jetta D which is still running around with it's new owner. Compared to my current 85 Jetta TD with a 94 Canadian 1.9 EcoDiesel drivetran, my current 97 Passat TDI it would be cleaner. And a de-emissioned TDI-CR is cleaner than all of the ALH & the few PD TDIs I have had.

You can run any of these in a closed off room for some time and all you might get is a headache. But try that with any gasoline vehicle and you will be dead in short order, so which do you think in more of a pollution danger????????????? ......

Any common rail diesel engine is even cleaner without any of that after treatment crap. A tuned properly de-emissioned TDI-CR is very clean in whole scheme of things.

So it may not be "legal" but WT! saying that the world will end from someone doing so is just a ridiculousness comment that should be responded to and squashed accordingly..........
 
Last edited:

VeeDubTDI

Wanderluster, Traveler, TDIClub Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 2, 2000
Location
Springfield, VA
TDI
‘18 Tesla Model 3D+, ‘14 Cadillac ELR, ‘13 Fiat 500e
I wouldn't go so far as to imply that conversation was an endorsement of your post.
 

bhutchins

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Location
SW Portland OR
TDI
Jetta TDiCup, 02Q built Sept 2010
The government controls logging. And here in the NW they are required to clear the underbrush and replant the tree's, yet 90% of air pollution (SOOTY) is from forest fires, and their worried about my vehicle emissions?
 

wxman

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 26, 1999
Location
East TN, USA
TDI
Other Diesel
Well-to-Wheels emissions of a 2007 SUV which was was legal for sale in California (Cadillac Escalade) and a 2006 TDI which was not legal for sale in California (Jetta TDI) were discussed in a thread a few years ago (http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?p=3091063#post3091063). Except for slightly higher NOx, the emissions of the conventional diesel ("unfiltered"/no NOx after-treatment) were less across-the-board than the Escalade, much less in some cases, e.g., NMHC/VOC.
 

wxman

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 26, 1999
Location
East TN, USA
TDI
Other Diesel
...Diesel Particulate Matter is one of the most invasive particles in the human lung. It is so small that it gets deep into the nodules and causing issues similar to black lung....
I don't disagree, but this statement implies that DPM is the only PM that's small enough to cause the health damages you mention. Actually, many studies have shown that under many common driving conditions (rapid acceleration, high speed/loads), particle number (PN) emissions from gasoline (SI) engines approach or even exceed the PN emissions of conventional (unfiltered) diesel engines. Here's a graphic taken from a CARB - *CARB* - publication (Appendix P, Lev III PM Technical Support Document, “Development Of Particulate Matter Mass Standards For Future Light-Duty Vehicles.” http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/leviiighg2012/levappp.pdf (page P65))...





Note that during "acceleration", the PN of the "SI Fleet" actually exceeds the PN of the "Diesel Fleet" in the ~20 nm - ~100 nm size range.

Even in the case of "Cruise", the smallest particles (nanoparticles) in the "SI Fleet" are about the same as the nanoparticles in the "Diesel Fleet".
 

rotarykid

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 27, 2003
Location
Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
TDI
1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
[FONT=&quot]I actually at least partially agree with the emissions correlated to fuel consumption argument.

I give EPA and CARB all due credit for almost completely eliminating "tailpipe" emissions in the latest round of emission regs (Tier 2/LEV II). However, "tailpipe" emissions are not the whole story as far as total emissions are concerned ("tailpipe" emissions are becoming a less and less significant portion of the total overall emissions associated with vehicles).

A increasingly significant source of associated emissions now are in the "well-to-pump" (WTP) phase of the total emissions cycle. The WTP emissions are directly correlated to fuel consumption. Gasoline generally has higher emissions on an equivalent volume basis (e.g., per gallon) per ANLs' GREET model (v1.8 - which EPA approvingly cites in their "full-cycle" CO2 emissions calculations on fueleconomy.gov)...

Gasoline

Total VOC – 3.14 grams/gallon
Total CO – 1.6 grams/gallon
Total NOx – 5.05 grams/gallon
Total PM10 – 1.25 grams/gallon
Total PM2.5 – 0.5 grams/gallon
Total SOx – 2.45 grams/gallon


Diesel

Total VOC – 0.98 grams/gallon
Total CO – 1.6 grams/gallon
Total NOx – 5.02 grams/gallon
Total PM10 – 1.08 grams/gallon
Total PM2.5 – 0.42 grams/gallon
Total SOx – 2.35 grams/gallon


Of course, these are just model results, but as can be seen, a gasoline vehicle that gets relatively low fuel mileage will cause emissions in the WTP cycle that will swamp the "tailpipe" emissions required by Tier 2 or LEV II. So forcing diesel exhaust emissions of NOx to vanishingly small levels is somewhat silly if their much higher mileage figures result in lower NOx emissions in the WTP phase than even PZEV gasoline vehicles that achieve significantly lower fuel mileage.

Of course, there's also the "weekend effect" of decreasing NOx emissions relatively more than VOC emissions, but that's another story that's been discussed previously.
[/FONT]
From the string you linked to in your above post, If I read this correctly:

Am I correct to believe that by multiplying the figures you give above for producing gasoline by how many gals it takes to go the same distance as a fuel efficient diesel can go on one gal of D2 you can get an idea of how much production pollution is actually put out to compare the two???
 

rotarykid

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 27, 2003
Location
Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
TDI
1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
2006 Jetta TDI

(Grams/Mile)

Emission..................WTP.............PTW................WTW Total

HC/VOC...................0.029...........0.0194.............0.0484
CO...........................0.053...........0.04................0.093
NOx.........................0.169............0.31................0.479
PM2.5......................0.031...........0.046...............0.077
HC+NOx (US06)........0.198..........0.748................0.946
HC+NOx (SC03)........0.198..........0.748................0.946
CO (US06).................0.053..........0.05.................0.103
CO (SC03).................0.053..........0.05.................0.103
SOx..........................0.086...........0.02................0.106


2007 Cadillac Escalade

(Grams/Mile)

Emission..................WTP.............PTW................WTW Total

HC/VOC...................0.209...........0.067..............0.276
CO...........................0.126...........1.8.................1.93
NOx.........................0.393...........0.02...............0.413
PM2.5......................0.086............0...................0.086
HC+NOx (US06)........0.602..........0.069................0.671
HC+NOx (SC03)........0.602..........0.129................0.731
CO (US06).................0.126..........2.5.................2.63
CO (SC03).................0.126..........2.2.................2.33
SOx..........................0.21............0.006..............0.216


I did make some assumptions in the data...

The certified exhaust PM in PTW is actually total PM (TPM); I assumed it was all PM2.5. I also assumed the PTW PM emissions from the Escalade are zero, although that's almost certainly not the case (all we know from the cert sheet is that it's less than 0.01 g/mi).

Since WTP emission are a function of fuel mileage/consumption, I assumed the mileage was the same in each emission cycle (i.e., FTP75, US06, SC03). This is likely not the case, but I have no data for fuel consumption in the respective test cycles.

I used GREET's default values for PTW (exhaust) for SOx since that value is not given in the certified emissions data.




GREET is *supposed* to account for ALL emissions in the entire WTW cycle, emissions from diesel engines used to pump crude oil out of the ground, emissions from electricity used to refine the crude to gasoline/diesel fuel, emissions from diesel trucks used to transport the fuel to fuel stations, evaporative emissions during storage of the fuel, etc.

I included evaporative emissions from the Escalade based on the CARB certification data. That would include evaporative losses during refuleing (ORVR) plus evap emissions while the vehicle is "sitting", i.e., 3-day/2-day diurnal, and converting those emissions into a grams/mile equivalent.
Ok, from this I think if I am reading it correctly, from the figures you give:

The 06 TDI is WTW as much as (.......)WTW than the CARB certified 07 Egolade


_____(.....) times {cleaner or dirtier}

VOCs 5.7 times cleaner
CO 20.8 times cleaner
NOx 0.8 higher for the diesel
PM2 1.1 times cleaner
HC+NOx(US06) ~0.7 higher for the diesel
CO 25.8 & 22.6 respectively- times cleaner
SOx 2 times cleaner

Are there any figures out there that can be used for comparison for the current 2.0 TDI-CR without all the after treatment equipment, a similer emissions set up to what the 06 PD engine had??
 

wxman

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 26, 1999
Location
East TN, USA
TDI
Other Diesel
Sorry for the delay in responding, but it looks like you have it figured out anyway.

If you're interested, EPA has also published upstream (WTP) emission factors for conventional gasoline, RFG, and ULSD in a recent support document (“Draft Joint Technical Support Document: Proposed Rulemaking for 2017-2025 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards.” http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/documents/420d11901.pdf (Table 4-12, page 4-42 [366 of 479]). Here's a reproduction of that table...





The emission factors are given in grams/million BTU of product. According to DOE, the lower heating value of #2 diesel fuel is 128,450 BTU/gallon and conventional gasoline is 116,090 BTU/gallon (http://www.afdc.energy.gov/pdfs/fueltable.pdf). RFG isn't given, but I think it's about 114,000 BTU/gallon. If I understand the table correctly, column 4 ("Petroleum Refining") is the sum of column 2 ("Refining Energy Use Upstream Emissions") and column 3 ("Petroleum Refining On-Site").

As far as engine-out emissions from a 2.0 CR TDI, I haven't seen any actual engine-out measurements, but DPF is typically about 95% effective in reducing particle mass, and NOx absorption catalysts are about 85% efficient, so the engine-out emissions of the CR engine should be roughly similar to the tailpipe emissions of the 2006 PD engine.
 

RNDDUDE

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2011
Location
Valencia Ca.
TDI
2011 Jetta Sportwagen TDI
Diesel cars are a miniscule factor compared to OTR diesel 18 wheelers, which if observation is an indicator, don't do any particulate filtering at all, and there are MILLIONS of them on the road, blowing soot out all the time. Where are all the people dropping dead from THAT?
 

GoFaster

Moderator at Large
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Location
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
^ Current (2007 onwards) OTR diesels do have particulate filters. Very few tractor trailers around here emit any visible smoke. It's nothing like the old days.
 
Top