Saturday, September 11, 2010

Clean Diesel Consequences – My Experience- Sounds Great But It Sucks

REDRANT:
I saw a cable TV show that had a cutaway of the "soot burner" for "clean" diesel engines. It had a spark plug and did inject diesel fuel directly to create a super-hot flame to burn the soot. I wondered about the fuel this would use.

You mentioned Europe where 50% of new cars are diesel. Vehicle fuel costs at least twice as much in Europe and diesel tends to be at least a dollar a gallon cheaper. Compared to the US Europe has a great passenger rail system but a poor rail freight system. This is due to passenger rail priority, shorter distances and more rugged terrain than the US. The lesser diesel tax in Europe reflects the truck dependence. Diesel cars "piggyback" this.

In the last decade or so diesel has cost more than gasoline in the US. For starters almost all motor fuel is paid for with plastic nowadays with credit or debit cards and except in Oregon is self-serve. This greatly reduces the "volume discount" diesel used to have. The article I will link below mentions the 15 PPM sulfur for US diesel. This is hard to do and there is strong international demand for low sulfur diesel. Finally, the more sophisticated the refinery "cracking" the less diesel/fuel oil is left. A couple of years back I read of asphalt tar going way up in price because refineries were "cracking" more. The old "teakettle" refineries couldn't deal with the low sulfur mandates.

This article makes sense but it should say ALL LIGHT TRUCKS WITH DIESELS. Obviously, you can still buy gasoline light trucks. Natural gas might be good for URBAN commercial trucks, especially if they are stored outdoors.-----Greg Lang


Clean Diesel Consequences – My Experience- Sounds Great But It Sucks

There’s an editorial/commentary in the Strib about Clean Diesel. Its yet another example of people wanting something “green” to happen and avoiding all reality around their mandates. As in, the consequences.
In today’s politically charged climate in Washington, it’s rare to find a program that has near-universal support among Democrats and Republicans. It’s also unusual for a policy to bring together environmentalists, industry and government officials for a common cause, much less one that actually provides a $13-to-$1 positive return on investment to taxpayers and the federal government.
Some background on “Clean Diesel”: I own a clean diesel. My 2007 GMC Sierra has a clean diesel engine in it. Congress dictated that all new light trucks must have a clean diesel engine starting in 2007. Larger semi trucks and equipment were phased in over the next years.
I have to burn special diesel with just 15PPM of sulfur in it. The old stuff was 500PPM. Now I like the fact that my truck doesn’t leave a soot cloud, don’t get me wrong. But the choice forced upon me by Congress has cost me money, convenience, and makes me do things differently.
The upfront cost of the equipment on my truck added at least $1000 to the purchase price I was told. General Motors was required to redesign the entire concept of the diesel in order to make it meet the standards.Plus my truck looks like I drove over a light pole with the giant exhaust system that it is required to have.
The large silver pipe that sticks out the back of the truck has been a problem for me during the fall and winter. You see, when you are trying to back out of parking spaces in the winter when there are the giant piles of solid icy snow, and you accidentally bump into the snow with the exhaust pipe that protrudes out past the bumper (not curved to the side be hind the wheel like other trucks due to the hot exhaust temps) it ends up bending the pipe and exhaust system.
This is just one of the drawbacks of people in ivory office buildings in Washington pretending to have good ideas. The results or consequences of what looks or feels good on paper isn’t realized for the real world applications.
You see, in order to meet the emmissions requirements, my exhaust system has a filter in it. This filter requires cleaning, in order to do that, my truck will dump raw fuel into the over sized pipes and ignite it to flash burn the nasty soots and particles. Hence the need for the giant tube and cooling tip that sticks out like a sore thumb.
I am lucky enough to do a lot of highway driving. If I was someone who spent most of my time in stop and go traffic or city driving, I would not get up to speed in order to safely have the truck’s exhaust system clean itself. It will only clean itself when moving at highway speeds.
I’d get a warning light telling me to get it out on the open roads and drive it for 30 minutes. If you are unable to do so, the truck would go into “limp” mode and you’d have to take it to a dealer, they’d have to cut into the exhaust system, pull out the filter, and put it into a fancy expensive machine that would clean the filter. Then they’d` have reinstall it and repair my exhaust system. And since it is a federal emissions requirement, they have to do it free of charge, or out of their pocket.
So there is a chance that people with clean diesel trucks like mine could end up stranded and needed a tow truck due to the “green” policies and mandates. But that’s not the total problem. There’s other applications that this clean diesel technology is impractical, unusable, or dangerous.
There’s a serious danger of fire if you have leaves or other flammable things under the vehicle. A pile of leaves or dry long grass in a field could start on fire due to the extra hot exhaust pipes under my truck. And I can tell you the first few times the truck “cleans itself” you wonder what the heck kind of roadkill you somehow ran over to create that stench of death you smell. The phrase, “I think your truck just sh!t itself” makes us giggle, but also provides a little frustration when you think about how it all came to be by environutters and bureaucrats in Washington.
I’ve talked to a local fuel delivery company about my truck. They are a fuel tanker and delivery company. They go and pick up fuel in 8000 gallon trailer from the fuel depots (those big giant white circles like you see West of 35W as you drive on 35W in Roseville) The restrictions to even drive a vehicle onto the premises are onerous, for good reason. And, I’m told, a truck like mine, with an overly hot running exhausts system is not allowed onto the grounds.
The system in my truck is similar to that on newer semi tractors pulling those fuel tanker trailers, meaning new big trucks that meet the federal emissions are not able to be used to deliver fuel due to the danger of causing a fire or explosion. He said he bought a new truck before the mandate kicked in so he didn’t have to worry about how the details get worked out.
That’s just some of the pains caused by do gooder bureaucrats and politicians appeasing the green lobby. There’s also the true cost of operating a vehicle with clean diesel. My MPG blows or better put, my truck sucks fuel. I chose a diesel because I do a lot of driving and towing. A diesel gives you, or should, better mileage and has a much lower drop when towing or hauling heavy loads.
As I said, it should. In pre-clean diesel trucks like mine, people easily get 22 MPG and see very small drops when hauling. In my truck, I get 14-15 MPG around town. On a tank of fuel with mixed city and highway driving, I average around 16-18 MPG. On road trips keeping my speed at 65MPH and below is the only time I see anything close to or over 20 MPGs. When I toss a trailer behind her, I’m see MPG drop to 9 to 12. Considering I spent thousands and thousands of extra dollars on a diesel to avoid such wild MPG performance typical in a gas engine, I’m kinda POed.
Why? Because lower MPGs due to the clean diesel requires me to burn more fuel. Its the entire non-sense part of green laws that makes me insane. Its impossible to have an engine that can perform well that is both clean bruning and gets good mileage. You can easily do one of the other, but not both.
Enter the ridiculous CAFE requirements. Vehicles have to meet high requirements for low emissions, but now also have to meet over the top CAFE levels. Now my truck was a Gen 1 version, so I have great power still. Something that people behind me when I try to merge onto a highway pulling my boat or a bobcat appreciate. I can get up and get moving, the purpose of a diesel for towing.
Newer versions will very likely be forced to scale back power in order to meet the CAFE MPG standards.
So let’s sum this up.
I have a clean truck that came factory equipped with the crap the people in the Strib story are praising. Praising spending untold billions to retro fit onto older trucks and machines. So I have some experience with the real world consequences of their goals and agenda.
The equipment is very expensive up front. Its high maintenance and can lead to down time which, for construction companies, costs them twice. Once for the repairs, once for lost productivity.
The longterm costs of running a clean diesel machine, in my own experience, is much higher due to lower MPG performance. I’m paying more at the pump and visiting them more frequently due to the green mandates. That means I’m using more fuel in order to be green to other people’s standards.
So when people talk about reducing our need for foreign fuel, or domestic for that matter, I get a little upset. These green policies are making us more addicted to oil. I’m using more oil and burning more of it because of a law that Congress passed.
The same law these morons are praising for wasting millions to retrofit old machines and trucks so they can feel good the at the next cocktail party with the other tree huggers.
I call these people Lunacrats. They push lunacy as public policy.

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Discovery Channel bomber "'Awakened' by Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth'...".


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38957020/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

Lee said at the time that he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.”
While his main domain, savetheplanetprotest.com, is now a single page presenting his complaints, archives show that in the past he has used it to promote a contest to give away money and property in Hawaii “for the best TV show idea to save the planet.”

Friday, August 27, 2010

After A Few Years, Smart Proves It Isn’t. Few Fortwo Drivers Would Buy Again.




With fuel economy on everyone’s mind in 2008, the pint-sized Smart Fortwo brought its eccentric styling and European flair to the United States looking to tackle a new market. The Fortwo was designed for crowded urban driving and its ability to squeeze into parking spaces and maneuver through dense traffic was unchallenged. Sure, it may have seemed out of place on American roads, but the Fortwo had qualities that many drivers found valuable. Gray-market importers had managed to sell enough Smarts earlier in the decade that it forced DaimlerChrysler’s hand to officially import the vehicle into the U.S., and it looked as though Smart had a promising life ahead of it in America.

Just two years later, however, Smart’s outlook is gloomy. According to some staggering data compiled by CNW Research, drivers of the Fortwo are dissatisfied with their cars. In fact, CNW says that a mere 8.1 percent of New York City owners -- essentially the Smart’s target market -- claim that they would purchase a Fortwo again.

To put that statistic in perspective, the next lowest vehicle charted by CNW is the Chrysler Sebring -- at 37 percent. And the current-generation Sebring is arguably the biggest automotive disaster since the PontiacAztek. Given that brand loyalty is one of the most important and cost-effective ways to generate sales, the future of Smart in the U.S. looks uncertain at best (more a link)

.


Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Ontario’s Power Trip: Power without the people.

Key quote: "OSEA’s political clout scored another victory last Friday when the Ontario government reversed itself on a plan — announced July 2 — to cut the massive subsidy price paid for small-scale solar electricity to 58¢ for each kilowatt hour from 80¢. The cut, to be imposed on 16,000 solar project applicants, would have saved $1-billion. But now, under lobbying from OSEA, Ontario Energy Minister Brad Duguid has reversed himself. The new price would be 64¢ but the old price of 80¢ would be paid on all projects for which applications had been received as of Aug. 13.

Read more: http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/08/17/ontarios-power-trip-power-without-the-people/#ixzz0wx3KVu2D

Redrant: My Minneapolis, MN Xcel energy retail residential electric cost is around ten cents per kilowatt hour. (Old) nuke costs around two cents per KWH to produce, coal is around four cents per KWH. Peaker natural gas might be eight to ten cents per KWH and "big wind" might be ten to fifteen cents per KWH without subsidies. Compare that eighty cents to sixty-four cents paid for wholesale solar!

At Nellis Air Force Base, in the Nevada desert, (which has more sun) one-hundred million dollars was spent on a solar panel system. They claim that it will save one million dollars per year on electric costs. That 1% and solar panel have at best a 25 year working life and need cleaning and maintenance. http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/Gores_Dream.jpg Greg Lang

Friday, August 6, 2010

Mississippi River pours as much dispersant into the Gulf of Mexico as BP

I ran across this fascinating story of the chemicals used in dispersants flowing into the gulf of Mexico before the spill.

"Mississippi River pours as much dispersant into the Gulf of Mexico as BP". http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/08/mississippi_river_pours_as_muc.html

I remember in the 1970's there was a big push to get phosphates out of detergents. Like an area of water with a lot of natural oil seeps nature probably adapts organisms to handle these dispersant type chemicals. This may be why the oil "disappeared" so soon after the BP well was capped. Also, interesting is how no one considered this factor until now.

Sunday, August 1, 2010

The "saver switch" is not as bad as it sound.

The "saver switch" is not as bad as it sound. In residential uses it hooks up only to the central AC where the compressors can be turned off for up to fifteen minutes at a time. It is debatable how much electricity this saves since the AC compressor will make up for lost time once it starts again. People told me that it gets a bit muggy inside when the saver switch is working.

3M uses a lot but the big users here are the iron range taconite processing (lower grade iron ore processed to high iron content pellets) and a very large scrap steel "mini-mill" on the Mississippi near St. Paul. All can be shut down during heat waves making the Minnesota grid quite robust but it can be stretched only so far. Taconite for new domestic steel is way down and the scrap mini mill demand is way down. They make rebar and basic structural steel, I beams and such but the domestic demand for these is way down. Increasingly, local scrap steel is shredded, cubed and sent via barge to the Gulf of Mexico and then other countries. Mini-mills make money by converting scrap steel into rebars and common structural steel. Good products but they are new construction related. Mini-mills use electric arc furnaces which use a lot of electricity.

The point of this is that as the region grows, even in a downturn electricity demand will increase and we are now eating up the slack capacity. In the Twin Cities we have some of what I would can "we played hard to get and weren't being got economic (construction) activity. Primo construction locations held back by final "sprouting" but this is only the primo stuff. Figure electricity has a 500 mile "leash" before you get excessive line losses.

BTW: The so-called "server farms" are not big electrical users but electrical demand is highest during peak electrical demand. I used to work in the high end mainframe field and the "big irons" were water cooled! Server stacks were air cooled and didn't get that got. Basically a "server stack" can be up to fifty high end laptop "guts" sharing a single display and mouse. There are banks of what are basically desktop big hard drives and "jukeboxes" full of double sided "blu-ray" type data disks with more mundane "paperwork".

The point is that the established data centers are using less energy. If you build a modern data center from scratch that will suck up a lot of juice but that is a minor cost. Minnesota has not had the blackouts/brownouts they have had on the West Coast.

BTW: Google use the 3M model to develop Google. I have been leading a so far lame effort to have Google establish a facility on the Twin Cities 3M corporate campus.

Cross posted at my http://fourfiftygas.com (why retype?

Minnesota air pollution? It's not as bad as you think

http://www.twincities.com/ci_15644449?nclick_check=1

You might believe air pollution is on the rise. You would be wrong. 40 years after the Clean Air Act, the U.S. and Minnesota have drastically cut emissions. So why doesn't anyone know about it?

Inhale. Exhale.

That lungful of clean air was brought to you by the reformed polluters of Minnesota.

They have slashed pollution by more than 50 percent since 1970. Smokestack industries have cut emissions by almost two-thirds. The biggest polluters — drivers — have cut pollution by 77 percent.

Put another way, air pollution per capita in America has dropped almost two-thirds.