


Finally an article that does not make the horses

pb2488 wrote:Regarding the shift to the auto industry, are there really "dozens of other examples" that prove that the industry is interested?
pb2488 wrote:If at all, a patent filed and unused serves as any scientific proof?
pb2488 wrote:Because since 10-15 years we hear about the system, the manufacturer, there is not much concrete. Outside, they never stop working and investing in improving the performance of their engines.
Cdlt
The aquazole (water-diesel emulsion) lowered the emissions of certain pollutants but this to the detriment of power and consumption:Christophe wrote:Aquazol and gecam are concrete industrial examples ... there are probably some patents ...
Today, we know how to perform better and cheaper in terms of depollution.Because of the presence of water, the Aquazole is less energetic than diesel and causes a drop in engine power and an overconsumption of the order of 8 12%. http://www.ademe.fr/paca/Pdf/fiche5-solutions-depollution.pdf
Scientific truth that disturbs ???Christophe wrote:Then we can always spend our time trying to destroy a scientific truth that bothers ...![]()
I do not understand the comparison made between the EGR and the water doping to explain the non-democratization of the latter?Christophe wrote:Currently if the manufacturers are satisfied by controlling the EGR valve to obtain a "poor man" water injection ... then no "external" water injection is necessary for them. It costs them less and they are happy with the desired results.
pb2488 wrote:The aquazole (water-diesel emulsion) lowered the emissions of certain pollutants but this to the detriment of power and consumption:Christophe wrote:Aquazol and gecam are concrete industrial examples ... there are probably some patents ...Today, we know how to perform better and cheaper in terms of depollution.Due to the presence of water, the Aquazole is less energetic than diesel and causes a drop in engine power and a overconsumption in the order of 8 to 12%. http://www.ademe.fr/paca/Pdf/fiche5-solutions-depollution.pdf
FUEL TESTING
Aquazole ® ON BUS FLEET
. 2 Reduction of pollutant emissions compared to commercial diesel emissions
The environmental benefit is significant for heavy-duty engines, especially the older MAN SC10 engines, which are used on city buses.
It is found, by measurements carried out on standardized cycles (European cycle R49-13 modes, AUTONAT cycle, AQA-RATP cycle, RVI cycle, etc ...), for a fuel EEG compared with the diesel entering in the formulation of the EEG:
- a reduction of NOx emissions from 15 to 30%;
- a reduction of fumes and soot from 30 to 80%;
- a reduction of particulate emissions from 10 to 80%.
These results will be refined and optimized based on the composition of the EEG, notammant of the water content of the sulfur content of diesel fuels, depending also on future types and new engine emissions control technologies. Then the results should be confirmed by durability tests of performance obtained.
1. 3 Reducing energy consumption
Compared to the "diesel" base, there is a slight tendency to reduce energy consumption by approximately 2%, which can be explained by a more complete combustion of the hydrocarbons in the presence of water and thus leading to a slight improvement in efficiency.
The study I quote is quite clear:Christophe wrote:+ 1 Flytox and here is the source: http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.f ... e_aqua.htm so a .gouv.fr (just in case the pb would treat us as a fababulator ...)
1. 3 Reducing energy consumption
Related to the "diesel" base, there is a slight tendency to reduce the energy consumption of about 2%, explained by a more complete combustion of hydrocarbons in the presence of water and thus leading to a slight performance improvement.
Go back to "Water injection in heat engines: information and explanations"
Users browsing this forum : Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 43 guests