Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749




by sen-no-sen » 22/11/12, 16:54

chatelot16 wrote:for diesel there is possible confusion with multiple other source of particles: heating, industry, tire and road wear, and even gasoline engine which I am not convinced that they do not make particles at all


Petrol vehicles produce particles, but in smaller quantities.
As for petrol vehicles with direct injection, they produce as much as diesels.
The difference between the production of particles is therefore not very significant between the latest generation Diesel / petrol engines, on the other hand the harmfulness of particles from diesel are considered to be certain carcinogenic, whereas for petrol it is considered to be possible carcinogenic .
It is therefore urgent to get rid of "fossil propulsion".

As for the other reasons you mention (heating, industry), it remains responsible for pollution and must be considered as an aggravating factor, but not as the main factor (except in special cases).
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 22/11/12, 18:57

sen-no-sen wrote:Petrol vehicles produce particles, but in smaller quantities.
As for petrol vehicles with direct injection, they produce as much as diesels.


this is yet another problem! by analyzing the old statistics or petrol was synonymous with carburetor there was not this problem

but with direct injection petrol it changes everything ... another progress to be wary of

It is therefore urgent to get rid of "fossil propulsion".

it is simply important to find applicable solutions ... in my case, there is no 3,5t electric truck available ... and even if there were it would be too expensive

plastic piping full of water and limestone is quite within my means: as a test it could simply be placed inside in a corner for all travel or I do not need to all the volume, and be dismantled on the days when I do a full load

once well developed it will be possible to integrate it definitively under the chassis
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel




by izentrop » 07/01/18, 11:03

A petrol injection and FAP engine emits 8 times more particles and finer than its diesel counterpart https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filtre_%C ... de_moteurs

And the diesel engine has 6% more efficiency than its counterpart
The overall efficiency of the diesel engine (not the fuel as seen just before) is better with 42% for diesel and 36% for petrol (according to ifpenergiesnouvelles.fr). The efficiency represents the transformation of the initial energy (in the form of fuel in the case of an engine) towards the resulting mechanical force. We are therefore at 42% maximum with a diesel, so the heat and turbulence of the exhaust gases represent the remaining 58% (of the energy lost therefore ... Damage). http://www.fiches-auto.fr/articles-auto ... ssence.php
Then we are surprised that the French continue to prefer diesel : Mrgreen:
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188

Re: Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel




by Remundo » 07/01/18, 17:23

it is quite a cinema now for the "particles". If they want to reduce them, let them inject indirectly. The engines will perhaps be a little less nervous, but it drives very well and it is even more reliable because we do not have a very high pressure circuit.
0 x
Image
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel




by Ahmed » 07/01/18, 17:45

So, in your opinion, there is no need for Revolution to remove particles? : Wink:
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264

Re: Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel




by chatelot16 » 07/01/18, 19:08

no there is no need for a revolution ... it's been known for a long time ... it was visible on certain documentation of deutz engine, great specialist in diesel ... direct injection engine for the best performance ... ricardo comet indirect injection engine for cases where the main aim is to avoid too serious pollution from poorly ventilated buildings

ricardo comet diesel engines a little old just before HDI are not that bad

to classify the polution of the diesel engine by considering that the most recent are the best is an absurdity!
1 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel




by Ahmed » 07/01/18, 19:36

It was a joke on my part, but thank you for your response.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264

Re: Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel




by chatelot16 » 07/01/18, 19:55

the ricardo comet indirect combustion diesel engine with combustion chamber is not a radical solution to suppress fine particles, but it is a solution known for a long time to reduce them ... and I am not convinced that the current HDI method + particle filter is the right solution

the big problem is the measurement of pollution by fine particles ... it comes out in gaseous form from the engine so no hot filter on the exhaust pipe can stop them ... it condenses later on cooling

therefore direct injection diesel is irreparably bad for particles ... diesel with combustion chamber has an advantage at the source

the next question, and that's the main question, is or should you put a particle filter ???

if we put the filter on the hot exhaust pipe it does not filter anything since the hot particles are only steam which passes perfectly through the filter

solution dilute the exhaust gas to cool it! suck 10 times more cold air than exhaust gas ... and the particles will condense and will be captured by the filter ... and even if the filter does not capture everything produced by the engine in question it filters the ambient air and collects particles from other engines which have had time to condense ... this idea of ​​filtering 10 times more flow than the engine exhaust can do that one vehicle will capture the pollution of others!
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188

Re: Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel




by Remundo » 07/01/18, 21:44

there will always be particles,

direct injections increased the fine particles, before the particles were a little larger.

but what is needed is not to emit particles in the city: hybridization of vehicles with 10 to 60 km of range.

On national or intercity highways, particles do not bother many people.
0 x
Image
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264

Re: Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel




by chatelot16 » 08/01/18, 00:48

the particle problem is really vicious because we don't know how to measure exactly what it takes

car manufacturers put particle filters on the exhaust pipe too hot, it filters everything it can and once out of the exhaust it cools and the most dangerous particles condense

So the current particle filters are an absurd solution just good to meet absurd standards!

the good solution is to dilute the exhaust gas to cool it and cause condensation of all the particles, then to filter with any simple filter like paper filter ... when you dilute to cool there is no more need a complicated filter like the ceramics in the current fap ... simple paper is enough since the dilution has cooled

it is therefore enough for each engine of a paper filter 10 times larger for the exhaust than for the intake ... largely more economical than the current fap which are not only too expensive but ineffective because of their absurd cleaning process energy consumer and pollution producer
1 x

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 272 guests