VW No Longer Approves Biodiesel for New Models

[BeetleGo]

No no no Steve,

If biodiesel can cause any damage at all, under any circumstances, in any percentage concentration, then this is how things are and by stunningly logical, rigorous, scientific deduction is HOW IT WILL ALWAYS BE and denotes that ALL biodiesel is bad, that NO ONE should EVER use it under any circumstances, or extend ANY effort whatsoever toward addressing known issues and reSOLVING them. That, you see, would involve foresight. That would be tampering with how things ARE (if that). Why bother? It's much more important to insist that there is no possibility that biodiesel has gargantuan potential. Can't you for ONCE just see things in black and white?! Sheesh. You dreamers in here. Just go home and give up already.

<Trust me, there isn't an emoticon on earth that could capture my profound level of sarcasm right now. Oops! Then such an emoticon can never ever exist!>

Isn't this the same doomed-to-repetition thread as the other one that's been generating a lot of pages this week?

BeetleGo, in the other direction (almost always for a reason)~ /images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Steve York UK said:
One thing that seems to have escaped everyones attention. In Europe, fuel quality is guaranteed at the pump by a sticker saying the the fuel meets the relevant EU (BS/DIN equivalent) standard. This means that if your engine fails you are covered by the warranty. I understand that the legal position in NA is different, hence VWofNA's different stance to biodiesel to VAG in Europe.

Also note that this is a particularly German problem. Note the statement that "if the fuel had been sold according to the law for petrol and petro-diesel the garages would have been shut down".

This implies some legal concession/blind eye exists in Germany for biodiesel.

This certainly doesn't apply in the UK where such infraction WOULD involve prosecution for failure to meet BS(DIN) standards. No problems were reported with PD engines here running on biodiesel. Also, ALL French diesel contains 5% biodiesel and there were no reported problems there, either.


[/ QUOTE ]

 

[SkyPup]

Heh Heh, the 5,000 blown TDI PD engines had nothing to do with Dav's daydream..... /images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

 

[AutoDiesel]

[ QUOTE ]
Davin said:
[ QUOTE ]

The "biodiesel sensor" is something the biodiesel manufactures are pushing, not Volkswagen.
And the sensor has to do with adjusting injection to lower NOx emissions.


[/ QUOTE ]

It seems to me that these are two different sensors. Reread the article that I posted. The "hoping man" is Harthmuth Hoffmann... He specifically mentions rubber seal problems that VW had, and then he says that this will change when a sensor is added which will allow unrestricted use of biodiesel.

I think it's pretty clear that he means that this sensor will fix the problem causing the financial losses, and not any problem with pollution controls.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the concern is meeting the Euro IV emission standards.

Wissenshaft Wirtshaft Politik
COMMENT: A sensor for the bio Diesel
"At present there is no manual change-over between bio and normal Diesel; some vehicles can refuel bio Diesels, but the exhaust standard of the stage IV is guaranteed only with normal Diesel, because the engine setting for it is optimized."
No release for bio Diesels more
"Beyond that it is not guaranteed "that those is reached very strict Euro-4-Abgasnorm with bio Diesel", so the AUDI speaker. The turbo-Diesel versions of the new A3 as well as VOLKSWAGEN the Touran are however already classified under this emission class. A possible solution for this problem could be a bio Diesel sensor, which the RME producers develop at present according to UF OI speaker Dieter Bockey together with Volkswagens: The construction unit recognizes, as high the RME portion in the fuel system is and adapts if necessary electronic injection. Thus with high RME portion a too high output of nitrogen oxides (NOx) one avoid."

So far VW isn't willing to put the sensor on their cars. There has been some hints that the consumer might be able to. But then someone like the TUV would have to approve it.

Even if the biodiesel is of the highest quality they are concerned that because biod it will raise the NOx output to much. Yes, even in Europe they are concerned about NOx output. Some previous posts belittle NOx. But even in Europe they are concerned about it.

 

[AutoDiesel]

posted by BeetleGo
[ QUOTE ]
If biodiesel can cause any damage at all, under any circumstances, in any percentage concentration, then this is how things are and by stunningly logical, rigorous, scientific deduction is HOW IT WILL ALWAYS BE and denotes that ALL biodiesel is bad, that NO ONE should EVER use it under any circumstances, or extend ANY effort whatsoever toward addressing known issues and reSOLVING them.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's called - MONEY!

If the manufacturer which pushed biodiesel in their own country the most in the end calls it quits because it has cost them 20 million Euros or more, wouldn't you think just maybe they had a few qualified people look into it?
Theres plenty of "logical, rigorous, scientific deduction" as you say. VW doesn't believe they can stay in limits for the new EURO-4 (2005) regs using biodiesel. Either that or it is just become too much of a bother. You decide.
And yes, it all comes down to MONEY. Their MONEY.

A few thousand TDier's in the U.S. don't compare at all to the experiences of the tens of thousands of TDier's in Europe. And if the manufacturers don't want to deal with it anymore that is their right. They are the ones that will be held liable for the upcoming Euro-4 (2004) regs.


And don't think for a minute that I'm telling anyone not to use it. Hell, I'm thinking of using B20 again (but no higher mix) just because it makes the engine run so much quieter. Displacing petroleum diesel is great to.
Hopefully I won't get hard starting and sluggish power like I had before with B40 to B80 mixes. Maybe I'll just live with it. And maybe I won't. It's great to have choices.
Informed choices.

 

[Ricdude]

[ QUOTE ]
AutoDiesel said:
If the manufacturer which pushed biodiesel in their own country the most in the end calls it quits because it has cost them 20 million Euros or more, wouldn't you think just maybe they had a few qualified people look into it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and it seems like a simple engineering solution (sensor+onboard programming change) is capable of resolving the issue. That sounds to me like even the new TDI PDs are capable of running on biodiesel, with the proper precautions.

[ QUOTE ]
Theres plenty of "logical, rigorous, scientific deduction" as you say. VW doesn't believe they can stay in limits for the new EURO-4 (2005) regs using biodiesel.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is an emissions issue for the new VWs meeting german emissions standards, also solvable via adequate engineering precautions (appropriate catalysts or biodiesel additives).

[ QUOTE ]
A few thousand TDier's in the U.S. don't compare at all to the experiences of the tens of thousands of TDier's in Europe. And if the manufacturers don't want to deal with it anymore that is their right. They are the ones that will be held liable for the upcoming Euro-4 (2004) regs.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I understand it, the tens of thousands of TDIer's in Europe are working just fine on biodiesel (granted, RME, not SME, but that's another issue entirely). The newer model PD TDI engines can operate fine on biodiesel with the appropriate engineering precautions. This means that if biodiesel as a fuel option is important for us as vehicle operators, we need to make sure that VW knows that this is an important issue for future purchases. If VW knows we want it, the odds are greater that we'll get it in the future.

[ QUOTE ]
It's great to have choices. Informed choices.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed. All the information about newer model engines and the troubles they've seen in Germany with them is certainly useful for people who may be interested in buying PD TDIs (when they finally get here) and running them on biodiesel. However, you still haven't shown any evidence to contradict the hypothesis that "Sufficiently high-quality biodiesel, used with the appropriate precautions, will not damage the TDI engine, or its supporting components." Currently, it seems that the only biodiesel-compatible passenger vehicles sold in this country today are VW TDIs.

 

[gredi]

Since VW is working on a non petroleum sourced fuel (Sunfuel), is it safe to assume that they want to find out what it takes for their products to work with alternate fuels and be dependable for their customers? If there is a demand from the people that buy their products, would it not be prudent for VW to meet that demand?

 

[Steve York UK]

It is interesting to note that BMW approve the use of bidiesel in their cars ONLY if the user has a biodiesel conversion kit fitted. They haven't had any reported problems and neither has any other manufacturer (PSA being the largest). Maybe they know something VW doesn't (or didn't now VW are talking about modifying the engine for biodiesel).

 

[gredi]

Do you know what that "kit" consists of?

 

[Steve York UK]

No. Ithink it consists of replacement fuel lines made of a different type of plastic though. Here is a link to p apge which mentions it and the fuel qualities required by each manufacturer.

http://www.biodieselfillingstations.co.uk/approvals.htm

 

[Davin]

[ QUOTE ]
AutoDiesel said:
If the manufacturer which pushed biodiesel in their own country the most in the end calls it quits because it has cost them 20 million Euros or more, wouldn't you think just maybe they had a few qualified people look into it?
Theres plenty of "logical, rigorous, scientific deduction" as you say. VW doesn't believe they can stay in limits for the new EURO-4 (2005) regs using biodiesel. Either that or it is just become too much of a bother. You decide.
And yes, it all comes down to MONEY. Their MONEY.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hold on a sec... So what caused VW to stop supporting biodiesel? The 20 million euro loss or the failure to meet emissions spec? Or are these somehow related?

 

[SkyPup]

No Dav, you can stop day dreaming now. VWAG & AUDI simply listen to BOSCH, the FIE experts who produce ALL of their diesel injection components....

 

[AutoDiesel]

[ QUOTE ]
Hold on a sec... So what caused VW to stop supporting biodiesel? The 20 million euro loss or the failure to meet emissions spec? Or are these somehow related?

[/ QUOTE ]

Both.
There have been many angry (remember my earlier post that had the title Auger Mit Biodiesel from Autobild.de?) VW owners that thought they could use biodiesel with no problems.
Well, after going out and filling up with B100 that was supposed to meet the current DIN specs and then having many problems arise, VW was hit with thousands of warranty claims. Initially they wanted to blame it on poor fuel, like everyone pro-without-question person here at Freds.com want's to believe. After initially denying many warranty claims, they had a very large publicity issue - not taking care of their customers when VW itself was OKing the use of biodiesel. They finally gave in and warranted the pumps. VW had to eat the cost, over 20 million Euros by most publications accounts, because Bosch never approved biodiesel use in the first place. VW wasn't too happy.
This happened to Volvo also. They approved a couple of models, had problems, had lawsuits, had to pay themselves. Result - Volvo quit approving the use of biodiesel starting with their 2002 models.
Then the issue of Euro-4 emissions comes up.
1) How is VW going to make sure that there vehicles stay in compliance without adding to the the already considerable costs they have incured coming up with all of the new emission systems for their diesels?
Considering that question, why should VW have to foot the bill for repairs even if it isn't their fault? They shouldn't. But if they give the approval to use biodiesel they are left liable. At least in Germany. And this has and would extend to not only the basic mechanical item affected and would also extend to the liability that they would open themselves to if they start getting a large number of vehicles not meeting Euro-4 regs because of a fuel issue. They could probably get tough and go after the biodiesel producers. But then it would present even a worse public relations nightmare for biodiesel.


Everyone likes to say "even bad petroleum diesel will cause problems". Yes, that is the case. But up until the last few years VW has not had any problems with fuel issues on the scale they have had with biodiesel. Since allowing biodiesel their warranty claims have increasing perportionally with the use of biodiesel.

So how to control it?
Don't approve its' use in your product anymore.

 

[bowlerman]

all i want to know that will b-100 still be ok to use in new tdi's?

 

[Dante]

Bowlerman, nohing has changed. Based on what AutoDiesel said above, VW covered the claims for PR reasons, not legal ones. To the extent they covered them for legal reasons, they were reasons that may be valid in Germany but not in the USA.

I don't know about yours, but my warranty specifically excludes for "intentional or unintentional misfueling." IMO if you have a problem caused by fuel that is (and should be) between you and your fuel vendor. VW should not have to pay for problems caused by something they don't control (fuel).

Do your own research on biodiesel. (I researched it for a year before I ran it in my car.) Make your own decision and take responsibility for it.

 

[ikendu]

Have been and still runnin' B100!

I guess I'll be writing to VW to explain that the only reason that I bought my VW and consistently recommend it to my friends and to all who attend my renewable fuels lectures IS its ability to run biodiesel. As far I can see...they're just gonna have to figure out a way that B100 will work OK in their new designs. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[oriley]

Dante Driver said
[ QUOTE ]
Do your own research on biodiesel. (I researched it for a year before I ran it in my car.) Make your own decision and take responsibility for it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you, somebody finally says something respectful. I completly agree with this statement. If a person doesn't like BD, that's fine, a person is entitled to there own opinion, but don't cut people down for there decisions.
I am one that likes BD, sees the potential/benefits in it, but I have not used it yet. I plan on it in the near future, and will take full responsiblty in my decisions.
Once again Dante Driver, thank you for saying/typing that very friendly/proffesionally. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[AutoDiesel]

[ QUOTE ]
I am one that likes BD, sees the potential/benefits in it, but I have not used it yet. I plan on it in the near future, and will take full responsiblty in my decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]


Denver Close to Violating Ozone Standard
With the peak of the ozone season still to come, Denver is just two bad air days away from violating federal air standards for the summertime pollutant.
Federal and state air quality officials are pessimistic about avoiding the dubious achievement.
It was only last summer that the Environmental Protection Agency and state officials celebrated Denver's removal from the ozone non-attainment list, capping a 10-year battle to erase the final stigma of the brown cloud era.
------------------------------------------------------------

TECHNICAL STATEMENT ON THE USE OF BIODIESEL FUEL IN COMPRESSION IGNITION ENGINES

* Neat biodiesel and biodiesel blends reduce particulate, HC and CO emissions and increase NOx emissions compared with petroleum-based diesel fuel used in an unmodified diesel engine. Neither B100 nor biodiesel blends should be used as a means to improve air quality in ozone non-attainment areas.
------------------------------------------------------------

Guess you'll have to take "full responsibility" for doing your part to push the Denver area back into a non-attainment classification by the EPA.
NOx you know! Fine in the country, bad in big cities.

 

[bean boy]

Actually the Nox is only a problem in the presence of all the unburnt hydrocarbons that the petroleum fueled vehicles and oil burning facilities are kicking out. If more urban folks used biodiesel, they wouldn't be creating the ozone problem that drifts downwind and pollutes my air as well.

Isn't it time you take full responsibility...or even just a little? /images/graemlins/eek.gif

 

[AutoDiesel]

[ QUOTE ]
bean boy said:
Actually the Nox is only a problem in the presence of all the unburnt hydrocarbons that the petroleum fueled vehicles and oil burning facilities are kicking out. If more urban folks used biodiesel, they wouldn't be creating the ozone problem that drifts downwind and pollutes my air as well.

Isn't it time you take full responsibility...or even just a little? /images/graemlins/eek.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

You must be thinking of all of those cars from the sixties and early seventies, eh? Every heard of that thing called a three way oxygen sensor catalytic converter?
That is something diesels can only dream about until the fuel gets cleaned up.

You are a little behind the times concerning modern emission equipement for gassers. Remember, gassers have had emission equipement since the 60's. Light-duty diesels have only recently started to be controlled.

Biodiesel is great. But unless you get the manufacturer of the vehicle on board and get the individual vehicle certified in this country with the EPA for emissions it will remain just a "alternative" fuel used by a few fanatical TDiers.

By the way, modern gassers are cleaner for HC than diesels with real world certifications. I'm not trying to bust your bubble but facts are facts. I will use an example of the 2001 Toyota Prius rated at SULEV. Not fair you say? Well starting in 2004 there will more SULEV's on the road than ever before and many vehicles will be rated at ULEV. Still very good.
From the actual test results for a Toyota Prius from the NREL/EPA.......
Emissions (g/mi)
--HC----CO----NOx--CO2
0.009-0.116-0.003-158

Now finding test results for TDi's is much harder but per previous posts these figures were posted from this site....
Environmental and Health Impact From Modern Cars
One note. This test used the absolute best quality commercial diesel fuel in the world...Swedish EC1 with less than 10ppm of sulfur. Something that we won't even get in 2006. The Prius was tested on ULSgas, something that is available in virtually every major metropolitan area in the U.S. right now and will be the norm as of Jan/2004. I would suspect the real figures for TDi's in the U.S. to be much worse because of the crappy diesel available here. But I'll use these figures because it would be what would be best expected from current TDi technology.

a Golf TDI emits.......
car________CO________HC_______NOx______CO2_______PM
Golf TDI__0.135____0.0267____0.627_____243______0.483

Toyota/HC = 0.009 g/mi

Golf TDi/HC = 0.0267 g/mi

If you are so concerned about HC, then why aren't you pushing current, modern emission controlled gassers as they emit much less HC than diesels do unlike what you like to read or what you believe?

And when it comes to NOx....

Toyota = 0.003 g/mi
TDi = 0.627 g/mi

Lot of people would argue that CO/Carbon Monoxide would be the real killer....well....

Toyota = 0.116 g/mi
TDi = 0.135 g/mi

Sure the Toyota Prius is the extreme end of the spectrum for emissions. But it is the direction that many manufactures are going with cars to make sure their fleet averages remain within spec. TDi's will be stuck in Federal Bin 9 for many years to come. Oh, that is the second worst Tier 2 bin developed for diesels since we won't have ULSD until Sept/06.

And if more states adopt CA emission regs like many states in the east U.S. have and there is hint many more states may do in the future things will tighten up even more.

Biodiesel is great for what it can do.
But what is needed is a national standard that is enforced at every pump. At best, in a "utopian" world, you might see B2 at every pump 10 years from now. Great, wonderfull. But nowwhere near what will be needed to clean up emissions by 2007 for diesel.

 

[AutoDiesel]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't it time you take full responsibility...or even just a little?

[/ QUOTE ]

And what does that mean, anyway?
I've used biodiesel and am going to start using mixes up to B20 for my own reasons in our Golf TDi.
If I wanted to take responsibility for emissions I would be dumping the Golf and buying a good used Prius. Better yet, I would drive less than the average person out there. And you know what? I do. Now that I don't work right now, I am down to less that 50 miles a week.
If you really want to take full responsibility.
Don't drive.

 

[bean boy]

[ QUOTE ]

Guess you'll have to take "full responsibility" for doing your part to push the Denver area back into a non-attainment classification by the EPA.
NOx you know! Fine in the country, bad in big cities.


[/ QUOTE ]

Glad to hear you are taking some responsibility. Your quote from this earlier post sounded like you were dissing others for thinking about using biodiesel. Was I mistaken?

[ QUOTE ]
You must be thinking of all of those cars from the sixties and early seventies, eh? Every heard of that thing called a three way oxygen sensor catalytic converter?
That is something diesels can only dream about until the fuel gets cleaned up.

[/ QUOTE ]

You wouldn't be dissing others intentionally would you?

[ QUOTE ]
If I wanted to take responsibility for emissions I would be dumping the Golf and buying a good used Prius. Better yet, I would drive less than the average person out there. And you know what? I do. Now that I don't work right now, I am down to less that 50 miles a week.
If you really want to take full responsibility.
Don't drive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although most of us can't stop working just so we drive less, we have to live in the real word of paying bills, commuting to work, buying food, etc.

Most people can't afford to stop working or buy new cars unless they have to. Those who already have diesels can make the switch to Biodiesel if it is more available and they have good reason to use it. You and Skypup seem to be focused on trying to talk people out of using it. I can't help but wonder why.

By the way, I'm talking about diesels on biodiesel vs gassers with hydrocarbons. In addition to the inversion created by the mountains, the air problem in Denver is probably more likely caused by the 90% of vehicles that are gassers. But lets use your comparison of the Prius to a tdi on biodiesel. I found this posting on Biodieselnow

[ QUOTE ]
Nate, don't forget the hydrocarbons issue. From page 53 at http://www.vv.se/publ_blank/bokhylla/miljo/2002_62/2002_62.pdf(these are emissions per km, so we'll need to convert. The blue column is their measurements, the white is what VW specs. To be conservative, I'll go with the higher numbers - the VW specs).a Golf TDI emits 0.081 g CO per km, 0.016 g of HC/km, 0.376 g of NOx per km, and 0.029 g of particulates, and 146 g/CO2 per km. To convert to per mile, divide by 0.6, and that gives, for a petro diesel powered Golf TDI, in g per mile:car________CO________HC_______NOx______CO2_______PMGolf TDI__0.135____0.0267____0.627_____243______0.483(diesel)now, using the biodiesel reductions from http://www.cityofseattle.net/cleancities/Biodiesel%202.htmSo, the CO will be reduced by 50%, HCs by 93%, NOx will increase by 13%, and PM will decrease by 30%. So running on biodiesel, we now have:car________CO________HC_______NOx______CO2_______PMGolf TDI__0.065____0.0019____0.709______53.46____0.338(biodiesel)Now, compare that to a Prius or Insight from http://www.geocities.com/hevo101/impact.htm
car________CO________HC_______NOx______CO2_______PM
Prius_____1.0______0.010______0.02______166____?Insight___2.1______0.055______0.07______129____?bioTDI____0.065____0.0019____0.709______53.46____0.338I can't find particulate data on the hybrids, so can't compare directly. But, as can be seen, the CO and HC are far far far lower. The CO2 data is considerably in favor of the biodiesel powered TDI (and as mentioned, if the alcohol were derived from biomass, it would drop to 0). The biodiesel powered TDI emits considerably more NOx - but, NOx is not nearly as much of a concern as CO, HC, and CO2. Or at least it shouldn't be. US EPA standards consider NOx very important, but Euro standards don't. NOx is only a smog problem when combined with high levels of HCs. As can be seen, bioTDIs emit far far less HCs than gasoline cars. And of course, US emissions standards ignore CO2 altogether (can anyone say "oil lobbyists"?). In my book, the biodiesel powered TDI wins out easily. Also, consider that NOx emissions can be drastically reduced with improved catalytic converters - the only reason we can't use them is because of high sulfur levels of US petro diesel. If running on biodiesel or low sulfur petro diesel, modern catalysts can reduce NOx a lot.

Simba, diesel hybrids (running on biodiesel) are likely the best transportation choice for now (or perhaps even 50 years from now). Audi makes somewhat of a diesel hybrid in Europe, the A2. It's a four door sedan that gets around 80 mpg, if I remember correctly.

sjdthree, I just noticed that I forgot to give any further info on the catalysts. See http://transtech.anl.gov/v1n6/aftertreatment.html
That includes some tests done on one of these cats. Note that NOx was reduced up to 98%, and PM up to 99% (so that would bring the biodiesel powered TDI's NOx and PM down to 0.014 and 0.0034 respectively, both lower than the Prius (oh, thanks Autodiesel for the Prius' PM spec)). But, as mentioned earlier, those catalysts get killed by sulfur. So, until only ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) and biodiesel are available in the US (i.e. no more high sulfur diesel), no company will sell cars equipped with those cats here.


[/ QUOTE ]

It looks like this argument has raged on in other forums already. No, I'm not talking about 60's cars and I'm not talking about 04 cars. It looks like tdi's using biodiesel beat out the prius and the insight

car________CO________HC_______NOx______CO2_______PM
Prius_____1.0______0.010______0.02______166____?Insight___2.1______0.055______0.07______129____?bioTDI____0.065____0.0019_____0.709______53.46____0.338I

[ QUOTE ]
If you are so concerned about HC, then why aren't you pushing current, modern emission controlled gassers as they emit much less HC than diesels do unlike what you like to read or what you believe?

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems you are the one who doesn't like what you read or what many others believe. Or am I mistaken that the above nubers clearly show that the TDI on Biodiesel emits less than the gassers on all but the NOx levels? And when the 06 Ultra Low Sulfer Diesel goes on line, the catalitic converters can be used to take care of the NOx. The TDI on Biodiesel will beat out all the hybrids. Why would I want to push the gassers then?

I agree that something needs to be done so that more vehicles must use biodiesel, not diesel or gas. I believe in Biodiesel because it reduces our wasteful use of easy energy sources like fossel fuels, helps reduce harmful effects on the environment, and helps American farms.

The use of Biodiesel as a replacement for oil heating systems would also go a long way to cleaning up the air beyond the problem created by transportation users alone.

This problem is bigger than whats going on in Denver, but every gallon of biodiesel used it a good thing. I'm glad to hear you are using it. I'd like to see all of us focus our time and energy on helping to bring about a change for the better instead of these constant pissing contests and nit picking.

Lets work to make cars more compatable with biodiesel and make biodiesel more available. It won't happen overnight, but biodiesel is here now. The infrastructure for it is here now. What else is here now that works as well and is not a fossel fuel?

 

[AutoDiesel]

[ QUOTE ]
You wouldn't be dissing others intentionally would you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Diss, Diss, Diss. Whoever came up with that stupid saying anyway? /images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

Don't take suggesting what you might do buy adding more NOx to the mix of HC as a "diss".
If more people drive more diesels that are fueled by biodiesel they will add more NOx contributing to ozone smog.
Not only will they add more NOx they will also add more HC than the current gasser technology. The only reason gassers contrubute more is because there are more of them. And replacing them with a current diesel would not be as good as replacing a old gasser with a up-to-date ULEV/SULEV vehicle. Now hopefully that will change with clean diesel in 2006 and beyond. But right now it will not.

[ QUOTE ]
I found this posting on Biodieselnow.....Or am I mistaken that the above nubers clearly show that the TDI on Biodiesel emits less than the gassers on all but the NOx levels?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you are mistaken! So is the poster for that thread.

There's is one very large fatal flaw with the pure speculation of the calculations in that post and the figures are not base on real world emissions of LD diesels in the U.S. which comprise of only TDi's right now. The reason why? The Swedish study used Swedish EC1 diesel , the cleanest petroleum diesel (less than 10ppm sulfur) available in the world commercially! Now go find out what the real emissions are for U.S. TDi's running on our crappy 300ppm to 500ppm sulfur diesel! You or NHMike would find that the comparison wouldn't be as good as you believe.

Emission Calculation
"The difference between EC1 fuel and EC3 is that the sulphur level is much lower, NOx-emissions fall by 10 % and PM-emissions fall by more than 20 % when EC1 is used."

EC3 diesel is the current EU standard of 350ppm sulfur diesel, still cleaner than our 500ppm diesel.

Everything posted in that thread is based apon pure speculation and a few lab results for experimental emissons equipement. Those experiments will lead to better emission equipement on diesels in the future but it will not happen until the diesel supply in this country gets cleaned up. And a couple of engine manufacturers don't even believe the 15ppm sulfur standard in 2006 will be good enough. They want the equivalent to the Swedish EC-1 at 10ppm or less.

Until you find auto manufactures actually certifying their engines on biodiesel with EPA testing, any comparison is just speculation.

[ QUOTE ]
Lets work to make cars more compatable with biodiesel and make biodiesel more available. It won't happen overnight, but biodiesel is here now. The infrastructure for it is here now.

[/ QUOTE ]

How are you going to make cars more compatible with biodiesel when the only manufacturer in the world that has allowed biodiesel (for RME only) at B100 has just stopped endorsing biodiesel altogether for its' newest Euro-4 emission certified cars and other vehicles?

[ QUOTE ]
What else is here now that works as well and is not a fossel fuel?

[/ QUOTE ]

Volkswagen has already answered that question.

Sunfuel
Cleanliness
SunFuel® is a high-grade fuel consisting of hydrocarbons which contain no sulphur or aromatic compounds.
This fuel has great potential for significantly reducing pollutant emissions produced by engines - in particular nitrogen oxides (NOx ) and particles.
Designer fuel
SunFuel® is produced synthetically and is therefore designated a designer fuel. The fuel properties can be chemically modified and adapted to meet the requirements of optimised combustion. Biomass is the raw material from which SunFuel® is extracted is biomass.
Biomass
As it is so diverse in nature, biomass is available all year round. It uses resistant plant varieties that are in ample supply and can be cultivated in an eco-friendly manner.
Raw materials
The raw materials include specially cultivated plants which grow particularly quickly without intensive care, such as: miscanthus (type of grass), poplar, willow, triticale (wheat-rye hybrid) etc. Also various forms of biogenic waste for example: forest and industrial wood, biological waste, even animal waste products can be raw materials.
Production process
Synthetic gas is obtained from biomass by means of a gasification process. This synthetic gas is converted into hydrocarbons in a Fischer-Tropsch reactor and specifically processed to create the designer fuel SunFuel®.
------------------------------------------------------------


If you want to see what the latest is for emission "projections", at least for HD vehicles as that is what the figures are based on, check this out.........

Emissions Reductions

The future is ULSD with particulate filters and oxidation catylyst's combined and with this combination emissions are better than B100 for NOx, CO, PM, and equal for toxics. HC is only different by 3%.

Being critical of something or someone is much different than "dissing" someone. You choose what you are going to do and go from there. I am going to use up to B20 because it displaces petroleum diesel and support our farmers and for nothing else. My NOx will go up and that is something to consider if you live in a large metropolitan area as I do. But there are always trade-offs and I will just have to live with it. What you or others do is your choice but just don't get caught up in the propaganda machine that says biodiesel will cure the ills of the world.

 

[bean boy]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't take suggesting what you might do buy adding more NOx to the mix of HC as a "diss".

[/ QUOTE ]

In reading alot of your posts I notice you have a tendancy to be condescending and abnoxious in your response to anyone who you don't agree with.

[ QUOTE ]
Guess you'll have to take "full responsibility" for doing your part to push the Denver area back into a non-attainment classification by the EPA.


[/ QUOTE ]

There is a difference between being critical and "dissing" others. You loose credibility by using this approach and twisting things around. I guess the ability to be annonimous on the net makes it a little easier to be this way. Its easy for all of us to slip into this style. The hard part is to remain respectfull of others and their opinions.

[ QUOTE ]
You or NHMike would find that the comparison wouldn't be as good as you believe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have read alot of what NHMike, you, and others have posted. I give more credibility to his arguments and responses than yours, in part because of the tone of your responses vs the well thought out, articulate, and logical responses of NHMike.

[ QUOTE ]
If more people drive more diesels that are fueled by biodiesel they will add more NOx contributing to ozone smog.
Not only will they add more NOx they will also add more HC than the current gasser technology

[/ QUOTE ]

What research do you have, whether speculative or base on real world emissions, that backs up your arguement that 100% biodiesel from a tdi emits more hc than a gasser?

You keep coming back to the swedish diesel study, but how do you make the leap to biodiesel results from that?

It has been interesting to see different side of this issue and come to my own opinion. I hope others reading these exchanges will take note about how some posters tend to twist things around. They can certainly explore these same discussions at length on Biodieselnow.com and decide for themselves.

[ QUOTE ]
How are you going to make cars more compatible with biodiesel when the only manufacturer in the world that has allowed biodiesel (for RME only) at B100 has just stopped endorsing biodiesel altogether for its' newest Euro-4 emission certified cars and other vehicles?

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What else is here now that works as well and is not a fossel fuel?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Volkswagen has already answered that question.

Sunfuel

[/ QUOTE ]

So lets gets this straight, VW says that they don't recommend biodiesel for their new cars. oh and by the way, they have this new fuel made from biofuels, and thats ok to use.

I certainly hope they have developed a biofuel that meets everyones approval. We have been hearing about this since 2001 but where do we buy Sunfuel today?

My point is that if we put pressure on the manufacturers to develop vehicles to run on existing biofuels, it can be done. In fact they do run on existing biofuels. Do they last as long as they would on petro diesel? Some say yes, some say no.

[ QUOTE ]
What you or others do is your choice but just don't get caught up in the propaganda machine that says biodiesel will cure the ills of the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll stick with biodiesel until something better comes along. Who said it will cure the ills of the world? I am convinced that when you weigh all of the positives of biodiesel vs the negatives, it is a better choice for now.

 

[oriley]

Hallelujah!
Very well put, I agree with the abnoxious tone of writing. And also agree w/ the comment of how NHmike responds to ones posts. He gives professional responses, instead of all the "hee hee"'s and smiley faces, that sound condescending. I have been gone for the past couple of days for the holiday weekend, and have been wondering what was going on here! Will read more tomorrow! I'm sure that there will be some new post, it seems that there have been ones right after somebody says anything positive on BD!!

 

[SkyPup]

BD-100 is not approved by any FIE manufacturer in the land, but BD-5 is!

http://www.dieselforum.com/factsheet/biodiesel.pdf

The reasons are all quite simple:

 

[AutoDiesel]

[ QUOTE ]
You keep coming back to the swedish diesel study, but how do you make the leap to biodiesel results from that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Those biodiesel results were the calculations of NHMike.
Not mine. If you can't trust him, who can you trust!

It proves my point. You are not going to find any certification results for U.S. TDi's because they don't want you to know them. Why is it you can find many vehicles at the NREL/EPA site, but not TDi's?
Because they don't want the real facts out there.
It is well known that they are barely meeting Federal Tier II Bin 9 emission limits for 2004 and beyond. That from VW itself.

Emission Standards

Compare that with what the average ULEV/SULEV vehicle will be doing as of Jan/2004 Bin 4 or better.

 

[Lightman]

how about the fact that all of the ulev etc cars are ugly, slow, and generally and gay as sh!t? /images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

Also I believe most of the problems in SP's list are either 'potential' problems, or those due to poorly made bio.

 

[gredi]

Small Car Emissions
It's interesting to note that the EPA thinks that my V-8 SUV has fewer pounds of smog forming emissions than the TDI's do.

 

[Geordi]

Not really that big a surprise tho, since the EPA still believes that diesel = filth.

Now if they tested the cars with biodiesel, then maybe they might notice the cleaner cars are the diesels.

Nah, why should logic mean anything?

 

[gredi]

I have not found anywhere that says what the breakdown of "smog forming pollutants" are for the TDI's. One would think that somebody, somewhere had to test these things to be able to say they exhaust X amount of Y pollutants in Z miles. Maybe a search on google Unclesam will turn up some results. I've dealt with the FAA and know the government can hide stuff real well if they don't want it found easily.