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




Go Back   TDIClub Forums > VW TDI Discussion Areas > TDI (Diesel) Emissions

TDI (Diesel) Emissions This is a discussion about emissions from TDI's. Pro's cons of Diesels (including biodiesel) effects on the environment and how they compare to Gasoline and other fuel sources for Internal combustion engines.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 21st, 2012, 11:09   #1
storx
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Earth!!
Default New cars & emissions musings, moved from NMS/B7

With current mods I am getting 38.8city/55hwy on B100
__________________
Da Diesel Build
storx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21st, 2012, 12:13   #2
VeeDubTDI
Good Ol' Boy
TDIClub Enthusiast
 
VeeDubTDI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Springfield, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by storx View Post
With current mods I am getting 38.8city/55hwy on B100
Wrong forum, I think.
__________________
TDIClub Chat: irc.freenode.net ##tdiclub
EV Chat: irc.freenode.net ##ev
VeeDubTDI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21st, 2012, 12:25   #3
tdiatlast
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Default

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"...
__________________
2014 Passat TDI, 2009 JSW TDI DSG (buyback)
2015 Nissan LeafS ($.02/mile fuel cost)
2014 Toyota Avalon Hybrid Limited (39.5mpg C/H)
2013 Ford CMax Hybrid (39.2mpg C/H)
2014 Cadillac ELR, purchased 3/18
tdiatlast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21st, 2012, 17:37   #4
rotarykid
Veteran Member
 
rotarykid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
Fuel Economy: 64 .1city @ 30-60 mph/ 52-53 @ 70-85 mph hyway ( 52 to just under 60 normal around town)on LSD
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdiatlast View Post
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......
__________________
More diesels than I can list
rotarykid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24th, 2012, 20:00   #5
TomB
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cle Elum, Washington/Las Vegas, Nevada
Fuel Economy: 34 mpg on first tank
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rotarykid View Post
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.
__________________
2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee 3.0L MB Diesel
2012 Passat TDI SEL Premium Opera Red/Titan Black
2015 Audi A3 TDI Prestige S-line Lotus Gray Metallic/Black Leather
TomB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2012, 20:09   #6
rotarykid
Veteran Member
 
rotarykid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
Fuel Economy: 64 .1city @ 30-60 mph/ 52-53 @ 70-85 mph hyway ( 52 to just under 60 normal around town)on LSD
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomB View Post
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.
__________________
More diesels than I can list
rotarykid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2012, 20:28   #7
FormerOwner
Veteran Member
 
FormerOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Alabama
Fuel Economy: 35 city / 48+ hwy
Default

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.
__________________
FormerOwner:
2002 VW TDI Wagon Candy White
1982 Audi 4000S diesel 1.6L
Current Owner: 2010 F-150 XLT SCREW 4x4; 2013 VW Passat TDI SE 6M; 2005 Toyota Camry LE
FormerOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26th, 2012, 09:58   #8
VeeDubTDI
Good Ol' Boy
TDIClub Enthusiast
 
VeeDubTDI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Springfield, VA
Default

This thread is getting cleaned up later...
__________________
TDIClub Chat: irc.freenode.net ##tdiclub
EV Chat: irc.freenode.net ##ev
VeeDubTDI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26th, 2012, 12:45   #9
VeeDubTDI
Good Ol' Boy
TDIClub Enthusiast
 
VeeDubTDI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Springfield, VA
Default

Moved various posts from the NMS forum into a new thread here, since it all seems to be emissions-related. Carry on!
__________________
TDIClub Chat: irc.freenode.net ##tdiclub
EV Chat: irc.freenode.net ##ev
VeeDubTDI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26th, 2012, 20:11   #10
rotarykid
Veteran Member
 
rotarykid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
Fuel Economy: 64 .1city @ 30-60 mph/ 52-53 @ 70-85 mph hyway ( 52 to just under 60 normal around town)on LSD
Arrow

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..........
__________________
More diesels than I can list

Last edited by rotarykid; August 26th, 2012 at 20:36.
rotarykid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26th, 2012, 20:24   #11
VeeDubTDI
Good Ol' Boy
TDIClub Enthusiast
 
VeeDubTDI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Springfield, VA
Default

I wouldn't go so far as to imply that conversation was an endorsement of your post.
__________________
TDIClub Chat: irc.freenode.net ##tdiclub
EV Chat: irc.freenode.net ##ev
VeeDubTDI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26th, 2012, 20:36   #12
bhutchins
Veteran Member
 
bhutchins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SW Portland OR
Fuel Economy: best 47
Default

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?
__________________
Sold : 234 WHP / 404 WTQ (550 N-M)
bhutchins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 27th, 2012, 08:31   #13
wxman
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: East TN, USA
TDI(s): Other Diesel
Default

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...63#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 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 27th, 2012, 09:03   #14
wxman
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: East TN, USA
TDI(s): Other Diesel
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomB View Post
...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/le...12/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".
wxman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 27th, 2012, 18:44   #15
rotarykid
Veteran Member
 
rotarykid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
Fuel Economy: 64 .1city @ 30-60 mph/ 52-53 @ 70-85 mph hyway ( 52 to just under 60 normal around town)on LSD
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by wxman View Post
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.
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???
__________________
More diesels than I can list
rotarykid 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
NMS/B7 - Passat '12+ FAQ & Maintenance HOW-TO VeeDubTDI VW Passat Family (NMS and B7) TDIs (2012+) 75 June 25th, 2017 20:49
Timing moved & noisy IP Ironforger VW MKIV-A4 TDIs (VE and PD) 3 May 14th, 2007 12:31
ULSD emissions any cleaner in pre '07 cars? ForestHill Fuels & Lubricants 20 November 29th, 2006 19:16
BioD emissions and electric cars MrErlo Alternative Diesel Fuels (Biodiesel, WVO, SVO, BTL, GTL etc) 44 July 8th, 2006 21:56
Pls comment: oil analysis [moved to Fuel & Lube] hotneutron VW MKIV-A4 TDIs (VE and PD) 0 August 16th, 2004 20:38


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:24.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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 - 2017, All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.20506 seconds with 11 queries
[Output: 139.27 Kb. compressed to 117.38 Kb. by saving 21.89 Kb. (15.71%)]