Ford States Better Diesel ULSD Fuel is the Only Way for Diesel Engine Progress

S

SkyPup

Guest
DETROIT (AP)--Diesel fuel may be the right remedy to help cure global warming and raise vehicle fuel economy, a top Ford Motor Co.
(F) executive said Monday.

"Diesel can answer the needs of society," Chief Operating Officer Nick Scheele said during a panel discussion on the subject at the Society
of Automotive Engineers World Congress.

He admitted today's diesel fuel, although much cleaner than earlier versions that spewed black smoke and gave off a strong odor, does have
the drawbacks of high sulfur content and particulate emission, but that shouldn't deter its use.

"Yes, it's got problems, but it's advantages vastly outweigh its problems," Scheele said.

He noted that diesel offers greater fuel economy and faster acceleration than gasoline.

Scheele is so eager to sell the public on diesel, he said Ford will circulate some diesel-powered Ford Focuses to the media and government
agencies in hopes eliciting positive word of mouth.

He said strict air quality regulations in California were standing in the way of greater production of diesel-powered vehicles because if they
can't be sold in such a large automotive market, the vehicles would not be profitable enough.

A senior scientist from the California-based Natural Resources Defense Council said the state should not be made a scapegoat. Diesel is not
the panacea Scheele speaks of, said Dr. Gina Solomon.

"California regulated diesel for good reasons," she said.

"Diesel is toxic to lung functions, and there are dozens of human studies where diesel is linked to cancer, and recent research linked diesel to
asthma," Solomon said.

She did agree that modern diesel fuels have improved, but she remains unconvinced the fuel is not harmful to the environment.

The federal government is also behind wider use of diesel, said Jeffrey Holmstead, the Environmental Protection Agency's assistant
administrator for air and radiation, who also was on the panel.

"We certainly are pro-diesel, and it's important for the public to understand this is a clean technology," Holmstead said.

The petroleum industry is working toward producing a low-sulfur-content diesel fuel and expects to have it between 2003 and 2004,
according to panel member Duane Gilliam, executive vice president for corporate affairs at Marathon Ashland Petroleum LLC.

"If a market develops early, then we would do our best to meet that market," Gilliam said.
 
S

SkyPup

Guest
In the U.S., VW isn't expecting widespread availability of ULSD prior to 2006, and the company is disappointed that EPA is only proposing to cap sulfur at 15 ppm rather than a more catalyst-friendly 5 ppm.

"If anything, the body of information indicates that EPA's proposed 15 ppm cap is the absolute highest limit that should be considered," VW told EPA in its official comments on the diesel proposed rule. "VW disagrees with the agency that reducing the level of sulfur in diesel fuel to 15 ppm will enable the technologies to reach the Tier 2 standards."

VW also said it's discouraged by EPA's lack of consideration for mandatory increases in cetane, along with cuts in aromatics, density and distillation, as called for in the auto industry's World-Wide Fuel Charter.

Clever combustion management combined with 10 ppm ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD), a particle filter and a NOx trap could "keep diesel passenger cars alive in the U.S." when the toughest final EPA "Tier 2" standards take effect later this decade.

That's the prediction from Volkswagen R&D regulatory manager
Klaus-Peter Schindler, who spoke at the recent Diesel Engine Emissions Reduction conference sponsored by U.S. Department of Energy here.

Besides 10 ppm sulfur limits, Schindler also called for cutting fuel
polyaromatics to 2% and boosting cetane to 55 (minimum), quite hike from typical 42-45 cetane levels in the U.S. These measures would help cut emissions and aid combustion/performance.

VW favors a continuous PM filter regeneration scheme (CRT) rather than periodic, because continuous yields lower backpressure, thus better fuel economy, he said.
 

Mad Milo

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2002
Location
Akron, Ohio USA
TDI
2002 Jetta Wagon
Another great newspost, 'pup!

One thing that makes me wonder, though:

Of all states *****in' and whinin' about emissions, why isn't California and the FRONTLINE of biodiesel? They try to be "advanced" in all other aspects, but not this?

 

chopchop

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 24, 2000
Location
Here (Calgary) & There (Blighty)
Originally posted by SkyPup: ........ high sulfur content.....
Only in frigging North America ....! Oh, and N Island, New Zealand, I almost forgot!

..... A senior scientist from the California-based Natural Resources Defense Council said the state should not be made a scapegoat. Diesel is not the panacea Scheele speaks of, said Dr. Gina Solomon, "California regulated diesel for good reasons," she said.
"Diesel is toxic to lung functions, and there are dozens of human studies where diesel is linked to cancer, and recent research linked diesel to asthma," Solomon said.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">...... Dr Gina Solomon should get out more, outside her cocooned and seriously misinformed miniworld in California. Clueless cow!

- Richard

[ March 05, 2002, 07:40: Message edited by: chopchop ]
 

Pressurized

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2001
Location
De-Riot NW Burbs
TDI
Golf, 2000, Silver
She's just used to gasoline fumes and her sensory functions don't recognize it anymore. Diesel smells bad to a newbie.

Interestingly, Ford doesn't even make their own diesels and in comparision to VW they're a bunch of rookies. Guess they sense the impending doom of higher CAFE and negative publicity of selling big overweight global warming SUV's.
 

chopchop

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 24, 2000
Location
Here (Calgary) & There (Blighty)
Originally posted by Pressurized:
[QB].... Interestingly, Ford doesn't even make their own diesels .....QB]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe not here, I don't know, but they most certainly DO in Europe. In fact, they have invested and are investing megabucks in their diesel engine manufacturing facility in Dagenham/UK.

Ford also has major joint engine projects running with PSA (Peugeot/Citröen) for small diesels.
 

kailei

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2001
Location
Chicago, IL USA
Why was no one talking about B100?
Do the oil companies have that much control?
Diesel engines running B100 is the solution!
Sustained economics for American farmers, no holes in Alaska wilderness, no sulfer, reduced particulate emissions!
There are no challenges to Biodiesel that a little tax incentive won't cure
 

Dorado

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2001
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
TDI
New Beetle TDI, 2002, Cool White
Why was no one talking about B100?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Politicians thinking things through by themselves for the good of the country are hard to find. To most, special interest groups are all the same, so they do not really look at the merits of any position on any issue. Very low voter turnout doesn't help either: they represent a very low % of the population and whichever corporations and special interest groups give them the most money or keep in touch with them the most. Since most people vote based on party affiliation, there is little incentive for candidates to have a personal view on any issue. Unfortunately, few dare to do so.

That said, there is no reason to be upset (or too upset!!!). Just do as much as you can from whatever position you are to influence things for the better. TDI's are a good start, and B20 or B100 even better! Email people, and move info around, who knows how far your thoughts can go?
 
Top