Biofuels and gasoline engine

[Woodcutter]

For the "full" HCCI you can wait

How long ? (and at which manufacturer? )

What is likely to kill the diesel is Post treatment NOx + FAP because there it is 2000 €, celon the engine displacement is Euro 5 or Euro 6. I do not know if I can go into the details of typical solutions "AdBlue" but this stuff is a nightmare and it's not just a tank that you pee in every now and then. So yes it kills the diesel of mister everyone and only Mercedès which targets the American market (there the anti-pollution standards are much more strict) with the big diesel engine can afford it.

The FAP anyway will be quasi-compulsory already with Euro 5, so the "gap" will perhaps not be as important as that with the transition to Euro6.
In addition, gasoline engines are also becoming more complex at high speed, so the gap, there again, may decrease by increasing the cost of "alternatives", because it is necessary to compare to something, I conceived...

What hurts diesel are the NOx and as you just told us, you do not pass Euro 3 pure HV (0,57g / km instead of 0,5g / km) and it is worse in Euro 4 (0,25 g / km).

It seems to me that the Bora was supposed to spend Euro 3, and in fact being very strict, it also magnified oil ... (0.51 instead of 0.50). I think we can reasonably say that the HV is just NOx limit for Euro3 ...

So I rest my question: it has 20 years Euro3?

It would hurt your mouth to say that the HV does not cause a return of 20 years, whether in NOx and even less in particles (given that at 0.029 g / km, we are "almost"at the level of Euro4)?

I have read a lot of documents (and even books !!) on combustion in vegetable oil and if the solution was simple a long time ago that the builders would have adopted it (and they would not have been "beep" with a DPF

Nobody said it was simple, but the speeches, heard many times (from people close to manufacturers: effect of chance?) Which say: "the HV it pollutes more than the diesel ... "are seriously starting to piss me off.

This is not a generality and it is valid for recent vehicles! In France there are 30 million vehicles rolling, of which less than 5 milions have been sold since the application of Euro 4 !!!
There are therefore many vehicles for which the HV can be interesting to use a carbon energy with a short cycle, even if this solution does not emanate "from a big builder"...

[Woodcutter]

When I see this:


I tell myself that there is still a lot of charlatanism in the sale of "flex-fuel kits" ...

[Henorm]

For Flex Fuel> Yes there is charlatanism in the sale of flex fuel kit because the image you show only illustrates the engine, there is still the whole fuel circuit to modify up to the tank (see rather a diagram on the IFP website).

I do not want to get into the details of the HV discussion because I do not think I have the right to do it (and JAPREN is watching me!) But again if it's just a vehicle It works at the HV we would get out of it, but the market will require a flexible HV - Diesel vehicle and that is impossible mission.

Euro 3 is the year 2000 we agree, we must not take my "20 years" at face value. On the other hand, we must not forget the maintenance of the vehicle and its daily operation and here I think we will review the oil changes every 7000 km or the good old preheating indicator ...
In Sweden vehicles running on Biodiesel are not even considered as clean vehicles (because of NOx emissions) so I do not even talk to you about the vegetable oil that, as you just admitted, allows only one Euro 2 homologation .... And do not neglect the cost of post-treatment NOx is it the enemy of diesel.

In any case it makes no sense to want to push the design of vehicles running on vegetable oils since apart from tractors first-generation biofuels are only one step towards synthetic fuels that alone can meet the demand without encroaching on food crops.

[zac]

In any case it makes no sense to want to push the design of vehicles running on vegetable oils since apart from tractors first-generation biofuels are only one step towards synthetic fuels that alone can meet the demand without encroaching on food crops.

Hello

I agree with you on a lot of points.

But I suspect you react in engine technician, a little formatted.

NO the replacement of food crops for fuel (it's suicide).

YES to the oil recovery to lighten the load on oil (in a small way I agree but 1 + 1 it is 2 and multiplied it little count).

yes to the use of fallows, in a reasonable way, to make fuel with short cycle (still some%).

YES cleaning undergrowth and recovery of household waste; instead of sending millions of tons of gas, a pure waste in the admosphere, we are used to propel vehicles.

YES to oilseed aguaculture that is feasible everywhere and can potentially clean up the air and certain watercourses, in order to produce fuels with a very short carbon cycle.

Our pretty piston engine stuffed with electronics are gems of technology; unfortunately they are outdated. Let's look simpler or different.

better a traction motor capable of running with a gasogen fueled with rotting wood (and advertising from the letterbox), which will have a zero CO² balance than a super engine "euro5" which will spit fossilized carbon .

@+

[Nikolian]

An optimized E85 engine must work better than a FlexFuel Kit.
but does not prevent that we are forced to find that these kits work.

Well, that's not why I write.
I have been at E40 since January, so almost 6 months that I roll at ~ 50% E85, I just changed my belt distrib, the opportunity to tell my garage to check hoses, candles and usual items.
Verdict: no particular wear.

[Woodcutter]

[...] I do not want to get into the details of the HV discussion because I do not think I have the right

Pout... A little too easy as pirouette ...

[...] but again if it was to make only a vehicle that runs the HV we would get out of it, but the market will require a flexible vehicle HV - Diesel and it is mission impossible.

Uh? Someone said that? It seems to me that at the base we're just talking about running vehicles that are already a few years old at the HV, right?

[...] Euro 3 is the year 2000 we agree, we must not take my "20 years" at face value.

Glad to read it! Be a little more precise, however, even when you want to "make effects" ...

[...] so I do not even talk to you about the vegetable oil which as you've just admitted it only allows Euro 2 approval ...

Euro2 did not ask for NOx alone, but HC + NOx at 0.90 g / km ... In this case, we are much lower than that. I see you like to masturbate flies ...

[...] On the other hand we must not forget the maintenance of the vehicle and its daily operation and I think we will review the drain every 7000 km or the good old glow indicator ...

No, no difference, emptying at 10 000 km. Oil fired engine heater and HV switching for the most sophisticated fixtures.

[...] And we must not neglect the cost of post-treatment NOx is the enemy of diesel.

How many ?

[...] Anyway it does not make any sense to want to push the design of vehicles running with vegetable oils since apart from the tractors the first generation biofuels are only one step towards the fuels of synthesis which them only the energy demand can be met without encroaching on food crops.

Re-uh? I do not believe that pushing the design of vehicles to HV is what is required ...
Moreover, and unless the crops with very high productivity type Miscanthus actually work for second-generation biofuels, HVs are still bio-fuels that have the best ratio of energy inputs / recoverable energy per hectare!

[Henorm]

I find you very aggressive Mr. Bucheron.

When you :

[...] so I do not even talk to you about the vegetable oil which as you've just admitted it only allows Euro 2 approval ...

Euro2 did not ask for NOx alone, but HC + NOx at 0.90 g / km ... In this case, we are much lower than that. I see you like to masturbate flies ...

I do not see what you reproach me, I am just saying that your vehicle passes Euro 2 but certainly not "largely" since the NOx emissions alone cover more than half of the standard.

When a manufacturer places a new vehicle on the market:

1 / It must pass the standards in force therefore minimum Euro 4
2 / It must not propose a technical regression under penalty of being rejected by the market -> Oil change every 20.000 - 30.000 km today, no delays at start-up and I will come back to one of your remarks on autonomy of less 500 km (and yes people want to go on vacation with their car and maybe only this one).

These two points are today untenable in HV so no possibility for a manufacturer to put an HV vehicle on the market especially since it will not find any equipment manufacturers to manufacture and certify the parts for it. So there is nothing to expect from "big manufacturers" but you do what you want in your garage.

I also come back on the HCCI, I spoke about the use of this mode of combustion on all the points of operation not only on partial cartographies as it is the case today.

The second generation fuels or synthetic fuels are xTL (x = G, T or B) from biomass, gas or coal. It is not about making biofuels with other plants. When we talk about energy we have to think beyond our borders, and we quickly realize that the term Vegetable Oil has no meaning if we stop there. This is not the best energy compromise, there are as many oils as there are plants and you can even taste the difference between olive oil, corn oil, sunflower oil, ... imagine engine management. Finally, if it is really a question of having an "ecological" behavior, simple energy yield is not the right criterion and we should also look at the consumption of water, fertilizers, ....

The post-treatment of NOx using, for example, SCR catalysis consists at least of a urea reservoir, a urea heater, a urea quality sensor, a NOx sensor. NH3, a calculator, a urea injector, a catalyst, .... plus vehicle architecture modifications including the tank layout and all the related effects to manage. I let you do the addition knowing that some components mentioned above do not exist yet ...

I'm not a mechanic, I work at a manufacturer but not on the engines, I'm just curious and I try to be objective.

[Woodcutter]

You should be careful about your quotes, it's incomprehensible! (I modified...)

I find you very aggressive Mr. Bucheron.
When you :

[...] so I do not even talk to you about the vegetable oil which as you've just admitted it only allows Euro 2 approval ...

Euro2 did not ask for NOx alone, but HC + NOx at 0.90 g / km ... In this case, we are much lower than that. I see you like to masturbate flies ...

I do not see what you reproach me, I am just saying that your vehicle passes Euro 2 but certainly not "largely" since the NOx emissions alone cover more than half of the standard.

What do I blame you for? Do not master your subject !!!
HC emissions represent a very low proportion of HC + NOx ... In this case, we have NOx = 0.57 g and HC = 0.04 g at the HV or 0.61 gr / km so yes, we are not all exactly at Euro3 (0.56 g / km) but, as for NOx alone, it is not very far. We are "almost" at Euro3, and not Euro2 ... To what extent we can not moreover attribute that to the wear and tear of the vehicle

What do I blame you for? You arrive here and start by trying to discredit, with technical arguments that prove to be false, a solution that can be quite interesting for vehicles that, if they do not leave concessions, are not no antiquities for all that!

[...] These two points are today untenable in HV therefore no possibility for a manufacturer to put an HV vehicle on the market all the more so as it will not find any equipment manufacturers to manufacture and certify the parts for it. So there is nothing to expect from "big manufacturers" but you do what you want in your garage.

Again, who talked about putting an HV vehicle on the market new ?

[...] I also come back on the HCCI, I spoke about the use of this mode of combustion on all operating points not only on partial mappings as is the case today.

And so ? It is not on phases "partial"What is the most acute problem with NOx today?

[...] Second generation fuels or synthetic fuels are xTL (x = G, T or B) from biomass, gas or coal. It's not about making biofuels with other plants.

Uh ...
"Biomass" means that it comes, among other things, from plants ...

[...] Post-treatment of NOx using SCR catalysis for example consists of at least one urea tank, a urea heater, a urea quality sensor, a NOx / NH3 sensor, a calculator, a urea injector, a catalyst, .... plus the vehicle architecture modifications and especially the tank layout and all the related effects to manage . I let you do the addition knowing that some components mentioned above do not exist yet ...

Too nice to let me add ... It's not me who spoke 2000 €, or the death of Diesel, and I do not work for Renault ...

[...] I try to'to be objective.

[...] The use of alcohol (and vegetable oil) causes accelerated aging, so yes the bike / car starts and will even run at least 10 000 km but after ...

Similarly (it is especially true with vegetable oil) they do not pass the anti-pollution controls. With pure oil we return 20 years back in terms of polluting emissions (particles and NOx).

Sorry, but these words that are a few weeks old do not are not goals.

[Henorm]

Ok I have everything I am not objective, I am an agent of the big oil and automobile lobby so the only objective is to pollute a maximum by winning a pile of money.

I'm trying to convey a few messages but I do not have to be clear:

1 / When you want to ride green you must comply with the latest anti-pollution standards in force and in addition limit emissions of CO2. From this point of view I do not see the interest of driving with HV and pass just Euro 2. If you really want to be green buy a Euro 4 car and simply put diesel in it ...

2 / Vegetable Oil doesn't mean anything, a Copra oil contains 45% unsaturated C12, a soybean oil contains 90% saturated C18: they are both vegetable oils and they have nothing to do with combustion -> Need to have a standard

3 / Rolling with vegetable oil has no interest if this oil was produced by depleting water, deforesting the Amazon or by using a maximum of fertilizers -> Standardization of production and product

It's been 100 years that we know how to run a motor with vegetable oil, why we do not do it? There is a simplistic answer that is it is the fault of oil tankers and builders. There is another one because today it is not the right answer to the environmental problems but this one nobody wants to hear it. If you're happy with yourself because you're getting Euro 2 with your HV engine, it's better for you and your conscience.

Today, a green engine is defined by its NOx and CO2 emissions (particles and HC, except at start-up, are post-treated quite easily). HVs do not meet these specifications from the point of view of "green" governments such as Sweden.

Biomass To Liquid means that we use "plants" (lawn mowing, algae, forest waste) or animal fats (lard) to make kerosene or diesel fuel using the Fischer Tropsch process. It is different from the first generation daughter who directly uses oil "from a plant."

I do not know where I was talking about the death of diesel (and I'm too lazy to search) but I wanted to illustrate the paradox that consists on the one hand to make the reduction of CO2 emissions a priority (without however the make it mandatory) and on the other impose standards on local emissions (NOx, HC, CO, Particles) that prevent manufacturers from deploying strategies to reduce CO2 at source (stratified direct fuel injection, loss of attractiveness of diesel because of NOx + FAP post-treatment). At some point it will be necessary to make a choice ...

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

End of debate as far as I am concerned. I put a foot in this forum following what I read about the Flex Fuel kits I see that the dialogue is difficult and that there are the nice users of ethanol / HV on one side and the bad builders on the other. As if we could not work in the automotive field and at the same time be concerned about the environment. So I leave you, after all you do what you want with your cars.

[zac]

End of debate as far as I am concerned. I put a foot in this forum following what I read about the Flex Fuel kits I see that the dialogue is difficult and that there are the nice users of ethanol / HV on one side and the bad builders on the other. As if we could not work in the automotive field and at the same time be concerned about the environment. So I leave you, after all you do what you want with your cars.

he did not even answer me and he runs away

@+