Is diesel less polluting than gasoline ??

Warming and Climate Change: causes, consequences, analysis ... Debate on CO2 and other greenhouse gas.
User avatar
momotopo
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 40
Registration: 21/11/06, 19:33
Location: North part
x 1

Is diesel less polluting than gasoline ??




by momotopo » 21/11/06, 21:55

Here, I pose the situation:

- On one side my petrol car, a Kia Magentis V6 2.5l automatic transmission given to the ade for 238 g CO2 / km, of course classified orange F in the fridge classification, in short very bad and not green for a round. It is a car that likes calm, very quiet and extremely comfortable. In short, not a racing car and in which the respect of the speed limits is very easy, the speed regulator helping. This car is given for 10,7 l in mixed course in manufacturer data. Personally, considering the sunken aspect of my driving, since 2 years and 23000 kms, I'm stable at 8,5-9,5 l / 100 depending on whether I'm doing more or less city.

- on the other hand, a colleague who has just bought an Opel Astra 1,7 L ctdi from 100 cv given to the ade for 138 g CO2 / km and this one classified light green C (in short a green car) or almost. This car is given to 5,1 l / 100 by the manufacturer in mixed driving. This is the theory but in practice, the reality is very different. My colleague tends to have a heavy foot and on an extra-urban course, he realized 630 kms with 44 liters of diesel, which makes us 6,98 l / 100.

You will tell me that it is much less than my consumption. You may be right or you may be wrong.

Let's take the starting consumptions

10,7 l gasoline = 7,918 kg fuel (density 0,74)
5,1 l gasol = 4,33 kg fuel (density 0,85)

10,7 / 5,1 = 2,10 (more than double)
7,918 / 4,33 = 1,82 (it goes down)

let's go to CO2

238 g gasoline / 7,918 = 30,05g / kg petrol fuel
138 g gasoline / 4,33 = 31,87g / kg gasoline


Well, I thought that diesel produced less CO2. It must believe that no!

The "sad" reality:

9 l / 100 gasoline * 0,74 = 6,66 kg gasoline
6,98l / 100 gas oil * 0,85 = 5,93 kg gas oil

in CO2, it gives us:

6,66kg gasoline * 30,05 = 200,133 g
5,93kg gasolines * 31,87 = 188,989 g

difference in fuel weight:

6,66 / 5,93 = 1,12

and in co2:

200,133 / 188,989 = 1,05

In short, it basically means that the figures given at the start do not mean much and that the way of driving can shake them up considerably.

But I risk going for a polluter and he will not.

Poor France and its diesel lobby.

Come on, I'll stop complaining and I'll go and enjoy my rolling palace.
0 x
User avatar
sam17
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 253
Registration: 14/02/06, 13:57
Location: la rochelle
x 1




by sam17 » 21/11/06, 22:47

Not to mention the differences in toxicity between the two types of emissions:

https://www.econologie.com/file/environn ... icules.pdf

I think there was a topic on it recently, but I can not get my hands on it ...
0 x
--
Patience is a tree whose root is bitter, and whose fruits are very sweet.
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 6




by Cuicui » 21/11/06, 23:24

Certainly, but the diesel engines, we can rotate them partially with crude vegetable oil, and we can effectively depollute them with a doping with water.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79121
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Is diesel less polluting than gasoline ??




by Christophe » 22/11/06, 09:40

Welcome momotopo, here are some remarks:

momotopo wrote:10,7 / 5,1 = 2,10 (more than double)
7,918 / 4,33 = 1,82 (it goes down)


What is the point of this report?
Compare conso volumic and mass?
2,10 / 1,82 = 0,85 / 0,74 ...


238 g gasoline / 7,918 = 30,05g / kg petrol fuel
138 g gasoline / 4,33 = 31,87g / kg gasoline


Uh, I would rather have written:
238g CO2 * 100 / 7,918 = 3005g CO2 / kg petrol is 2,2 kg / L
138g CO2 * 100 / 4,33 = 3187g CO2 / kg diesel or 2,7 kg / L

Well, I thought that diesel produced less CO2. It must believe that no!


No, diesel is a heavier molecule that contains more carbon atoms, so it is logical that it releases more CO2 ... You will find on this page the combustion calculations:
https://www.econologie.com/equation-de-c ... s-638.html


The "sad" reality (...)


In short, it basically means that the figures given at the start do not mean much and that the way of driving can shake them up considerably.


I understand nothing about your calculations ... it seems to me that you divide the CO100 emissions by 2?
200,133 g = 200 g or 20 g ??

But I risk going for a polluter and he will not.

Poor France and its diesel lobby.


Well sorry but the end of your reasoning is completely biased, here are the REAL calculations:

CO2 emissions:

Gasoline = 2,2 kg / L
Diesel = 2,7 kg / L

You will therefore reject 10,7 * 2,2 = 23,54
And your colleague 5,1 * 2,7 = 13,77

Conclusion: your colleague releases 41% less CO2 per 100km traveled based on manufacturers' consumption ... This comes from the fact that the effective average efficiency of a diesel engine is better than that of a petrol engine. If the 2 yields were identical we would find the ratio 2,7 / 2,2 ... It's chemical ... or rather mathematical ...

BUT TO BE MORE ACCURATE IN TERMS OF Diesel pollution:

1) it would have been necessary to compare 2 vehicles of the same "class" (mass, power ...)
2) CO2 refining costs must be taken into account: they are higher for diesel than petrol ...
3) CO2 is not the only pollutant ...
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79121
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 22/11/06, 09:43

sam17 wrote:I think there was a topic on it recently, but I can not get my hands on it ...


Wouldn't that be it?

https://www.econologie.com/forums/diesel-et- ... t2536.html

Found here : roll:
0 x
User avatar
sam17
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 253
Registration: 14/02/06, 13:57
Location: la rochelle
x 1




by sam17 » 22/11/06, 09:49

Thank you Christophe.

I was satisfied to seek first diesel then diesel pollution, but faced with the irrelevance of my results I threw in the towel: /

I had just browsed the subject with a distracted eye so I was not marked by its keywords.
0 x
--

Patience is a tree whose root is bitter, and whose fruits are very sweet.
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2

Re: Is diesel less polluting than gasoline ??




by Woodcutter » 22/11/06, 10:42

momotopo wrote:[..] You will tell me that it is much less than my consumption. You may be right or you may be wrong.
No. There is no question to have on it ... It consumes less than you.

And taking again the figures given by Christophe:
You will therefore reject 9 * 2,2 = 19,8 kg CO2 / 100 km (I took the average value of your consumption) or 198 g / km
And your colleague 7 * 2,7 = 18,9 g CO2 / 100 km or 189 g / km

So anyway, your colleague produces less CO2 than you ... even if the difference is not that of the standard conditions!

Coming to the second point, I find it quite odd to compare two vehicles that are so different with two opposite driving styles too.
If you reverse the flywheels, your colleague would end up with a consumption of 12 to 15 l / 100 and you would turn around 5 l / 100 ...

momotopo wrote:In short, it basically means that the figures given at the start do not mean much and that the way of driving can shake them up considerably.
Of course !
The "starting" numbers are measured under standard conditions to establish a reliable basis for comparison, which cannot be done if you are compared to your colleague because of your differences in behavior ...
So the departure differences (238 g for you and 138 g for him, i.e. a ratio of 1,7 to 1) will be respected with identical driver and traffic conditions ...

momotopo wrote:But I risk going for a polluter and he will not.

Poor France and its diesel lobby.
If we only take into account CO2 emissions it's reality, you pollute more than him.
The "dieselisation" of car fleets is one of the rare ways, in a consumer society like ours, to lower average levels of CO2 emissions, diesel lobby or not ... : roll:

Clarification regarding this:
Christophe wrote:
momotopo wrote:Well, I thought that diesel produced less CO2. It must believe that no!

No, diesel is a heavier molecule that contains more carbon atoms, so it is logical that it releases more CO2 ...
A very simple way to remember, for gasoline we talk about octane number, so molecule in C8. For diesel we speak of cetane number, therefore molecule in C16.
With a carbonaceous hydrocarbon chain of alkane type, the longer the chain, the more the C / H ratio increases and the more CO2 is produced on combustion per unit mass.
This is also what explains the interest of methane (which is found in large proportion in NGV) to reduce CO2 emissions.
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 22/11/06, 10:50

Christophe wrote:
sam17 wrote:I think there was a topic on it recently, but I can not get my hands on it ...


Wouldn't that be it?

https://www.econologie.com/forums/diesel-et- ... t2536.html


I have already said what I thought about it several times but this "article" by Louchet seems really questionable to me ...

Even a primary anti-diesel should be questioned before taking over all the assertions of this gentleman ...
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
peace_angelh
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 8
Registration: 22/08/07, 10:52

Diesel: the truth is not broadcast in France




by peace_angelh » 22/08/07, 10:56

http://antivoitures.free.fr/2005/12/die ... mpait.html

For the Fracais and the builder only CO² is taken into account while it is the least toxic pollutant for the man!

Diesel: and if you wrong us?
by Jean Louchet, INRIA (National Institute for Research in Automation and Computer Science)

The "official truth" about Diesel

Here are the statements we commonly hear:

* diesel consumes less
* diesel fuel is cheaper
* the efficiency of a diesel engine is higher than that of a gasoline engine
* The longevity of a diesel engine is greater than that of a gasoline engine
Now that all engines are equipped with catalytic converters and particulate filter diesels, toxic fumes are eliminated and only the CO2 remains.
* diesel pollutes less than gasoline
* diesel is better for the ozone layer
* diesel is better against the greenhouse effect.

Almost all of these claims are false, and none is completely correct. Unfortunately, as you will see, the serious sources of information on these topics are for the most part in English and have never been translated into French - which may be a good fit for some.

It is possible - and even probable - that I made some mistakes in the following: in fact I am neither chemist nor physicist of the atmosphere nor engineer engine, even if the English cooking, the lapping of valves and the profile Cams are quite familiar to me. Thank you for pointing this out, as well as the references (serious scientific articles) that could complement or give different points of view.

From the following analysis comes a conclusion: whether we are users of diesel engines or not, we are victims of propaganda dangerous for our health and for the planet.

Objective elements

benzopyrenes

In 1984, the company Calspan (Buffalo, Michigan) had shown that the concentration of Benzopyrenes in the outputs of passenger diesel engines was approximately 100 times higher than in heavy duty diesel (and in negligible concentration in petrol engines). These Benzopyrenes are the main atmospheric agents responsible for cancers. Results never published in the scientific literature because emanating (we speak of fumes!) From work ordered internally by car manufacturers (VW in particular) and that I learned directly in 1984 because I knew by my job the engineers of Calspan who made the measurements.

It means in practice that a single diesel car pollutes (carcinogenetically speaking) as much as about thirty semi-trailers! Twenty years of silence later, furnished only by my small and vain gestures (it seems that I am sensitive) and, in reverse, some great propaganda PSA pointing the CO2 as the main pollutant (if true, forbid Perrier and Quézac!)

Reinforcement of allergenicity of pollens by diesel emissions

To add a layer (if we can say), here are some sites on this subject, provided by a German friend who told me that European standards in particles were exceeded in some German cities (we imagine in France so!), and that people were beginning to take legal action against the government on this issue.

Epidemiology

The magazine "Que Choisir" recently took the commercial risk of spreading a bit of the truth. I will summarize the article: diesel vehicle emissions caused, in French cities alone and in the year 2002, between 6450 and 9500 additional cases of death from cancer of the respiratory tract compared to what would have occurred if these same vehicles had run on gasoline. This brief article is actually a summary of the AFSSE report (see http://www.afsse.fr/documents/Rapport_1.pdf) carried out in 2004 at the request of the French government. The AFSSE report is much more detailed and interesting: it shows that diesel causes even more deaths from cardiopulmonary diseases than from cancer of the respiratory tract alone. The total number of deaths due to fine particles in the atmosphere (therefore mainly diesel) is estimated at 31700 deaths in 2000 in France (AFSSE report, page 60): compared to the 30000 due to tobacco or the approximately 7000 due to accidents of the road. And it should not be forgotten that, if passive smoking exists (and fortunately has dropped since the Evin law), the vast majority of these 30000 concerns smokers themselves and it is up to everyone to take responsibility; on the other hand dieselism is more often passive than active (it seems to me!). This means that diesel kills many more people in spite of themselves than tobacco and road accidents put together!

We put deterrent labels on the cigarette packs, well. What are we waiting for to put on diesel pumps at petrol stations?

If nothing is changed, the prospects on the 2020 horizon are dire.

It is now established that Benzopyrene microparticles (precisely those that no filter can stop, of size less than about 10 microns) cross the pulmonary barrier and enter the bloodstream. We do not know all the organs where they can attach, but it is already established that the brain is one of the targets since we find these same diesel particles in the brains of laboratory mammals exposed to diesel fumes. These particles are believed to promote the development of brain tumors.

I also saw an article on ovarian cancer due to diesel: women exposed to diesel emissions have a probability of developing ovarian cancer multiplied by 3,5 (International Journal of Cancer, Vol 111, Issue 2, August 2004 )

Nitrogen oxides NOx

The "pollution peaks" of large European cities are due to the exceeding of the maximum permitted concentrations of NOx. The current remedy used in France is to restrict movement or even do nothing at all. So who is producing NOx?

In a gasoline engine, the production of NOx is inherently low. On an engine built without special precautions, the product of the NOx and CO concentrations is approximately constant. A "richer" setting gives less NOx and more CO, a "lean" setting (lots of air and little gasoline) the reverse. The very questionable "pollution control" of the compulsory technical control fixes a maximum for the CO rate, but no minimum, which amounts to encouraging the production of NOx which varies in the opposite proportion. Catalyzed gasoline engines (triple effect catalysts, compulsory since 1991 I believe) have electronic richness control which keeps NOx production at a very low level. This electronic regulation is not possible on diesel engines whose NOx production always remains high despite the catalysts (double-acting only). In short, diesels remain the main source of NOx.
...

Concrete political measures have already been taken in some countries, notably in Japan, where all circulation of diesel vehicles (even utility vehicles) is prohibited in the Tokyo metropolitan area. This ban is becoming more widespread, and I have been told that there is currently a major operation to convert existing vehicles with diesel engines to gasoline engines. I do not know if this operation is financially assisted by the State.

Norway (country with a low population density but where public opinion is aware of health problems and climate change) sounded the alarm this year (2005) because the sale of diesel reaches 30% of the total of new cars: the ministry of transport estimates that the threshold of health safety is exceeded and the government prepares highly dissuasive measures.

In Denmark, the proportion of diesel remained low, following good information to consumers, and the presence of a special "diesel" tax of 8000 crowns (1100 Euros) per year and per vehicle.

In the United States, where the proportion of diesel-tourism is negligible, the federal government is preparing measures to limit pollution from heavy goods vehicles (which is however relatively lower on these large engines, see above). It is in the United States that the studies on the health effects of diesel are the most numerous and thorough, although it is probably the least affected among the developed countries.

In France, a country with a fairly high population density, 70% of new passenger car registrations are diesel, and no measure has been taken. Spain and Belgium are in similar situations.
...
http://antivoitures.free.fr/2005/12/die ... mpait.html

I find it amazing that the French are badly informed ... (again the pressure of lobbies but it is not even in their interest I do not understand ... :??:)
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79121
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 22/08/07, 13:09

This text has already been discussed here: https://www.econologie.com/forums/diesel-et- ... t2536.html
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Climate Change: CO2, warming, greenhouse effect ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 116 guests