This is ai_vin's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following ai_vin's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
ai_vin
Recent Activity
I was just going to say that myself SJC. Also in the news today, the keystone xl and dakota access pipelines, the ones he claimed would be using American steel, won't be because his rule only applies to new pipeline plans and these two are old pipeline plans.
ICEVs will be around for another 40+ years and USA need a safe source of fossil fuel to be free of imports from unfriendly nations. Ah, but what about exports TO unfriendly nations? ;) As long as Trump is President America will be the "unfriendly"est nation of all.
@GdB No, it's not a "tail wind" - it's a "cross wind." The shape of the truck acts like a wing or sail that produces "lift" as well as drag and side forces. Cross wind when added to forward speed gives you an apparent wind at different yaw angles. The right yaw angle can produce more forward lift than rearward drag while any side forces are handled by the tires on the road. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forces_on_sails
the new SuperTruck I vehicle achieved 13 mpg This duplicates the efforts, and results, of other "supertruck" projects I've seen over the years.
From the looks of the pictures it seems the CF parts take up more space than the steel parts. That's not always an option when designing a car. It's even less of an option if you're thinking of simply replacing the part in a current car.
That wouldn't work because there is NO effort to keep ethanol out of gasoline here. Quite the opposite: "Since December 2010 federal regulations have required that gasoline in Canada contain 5% renewable fuel content overall" and every pump I've filled up at these last 6 years has had the label "May contain up to 10% ethanol" on it. The problem then is two fold: What fuel grade ethanol we can produce gets spread out to all the gasoline supply leaving little left for higher ratios. And because Canadian driver see themselves as doing something "ECO" collectively there less call for individuals to go that extra step and those that want to have already found their extra step in propane/CNG or BEV/hybrid cars, so there's little market demand for E85. That one station I mentioned? It doesn't cater to environmentalists. It's located in the rich end of town where young punks with too much allowance drive souped-up streetracers.
Another idea: Bi-fuel - E85 and propane or CNG. All have 100+ octane numbers and could be run in the same high compression engine. In Canada propane/autogas and CNG is more available than E85, there's only one E85 station that I'm sure of vs ~40 CNG stations listed on a website I found vs almost 450 autogas stations. Using E85 would be best for the environment but falling back on propane would be cheaper and still better than gasoline or diesel.
This might be a way to get around the lack of E85 pumps; http://eco-fueling.com/fuel-technology/
@Trees Good to know, just wish E85 was more available in Canada. I know of one station that sells it in West Vancouver and I think there's a station somewhere in Ontario. ---- Going to need a very big aux tank when I drive cross-country pulling my trailer.
@ SJC I too was once a supporter of using bio DME for trucks but I since gone off the idea. When used as a diesel fuel, DME provides reduced PM and NOx emissions, but increased CO and HC. However preliminary studies in the 1990s concluded that it should be possible to achieve ULEV emissions using a properly designed DME-based fuel injection system with an HSDI engine and an oxidation catalytic converter. Other factors are more problematic. It has a lower energy density AND specific energy than diesel so we'd be burning more of it. Plus: The physical properties of DME (density, viscosity, lubricity, etc.) are so different from the diesel fuel that the entire fuel system must be redesigned. While it seems clear that DME, like perhaps some other alternative fuels, would be able to produce much larger emissions reductions than it is possible with diesel fuel, the emission benefit comes at a price of a specific level of complexity of the fuel storage and injection system, including the need to carry a pressurized fuel tank onboard the vehicle. Furthermore, it is not clear that the apparently inherent emission advantage of DME can offset the fuel’s lack of established supply and fueling infrastructure. From today’s perspective, the DME fuel is more likely to be used in certain niche applications, rather than provide a wide-scale alternative to liquid diesel fuels. Lately I've been looking into renewable diesel. So far it looks good.
The cellulosic ethanol allows greenhouse gas emission savings of up to 95% 95% of 20% is still 19%. This is a big improvement but with climate change upon us we need to go a lot farther.
@ Dr. Strange Love The distillation unit in a refinery (even a bio-refinery) always produces a range of chemicals. [It can be tuned somewhat to get a peak of production in that range but you'll always get some of the other stuff.] If they don't find a use for all the produced chemicals they are just throwing money away. That's all they are doing here, finding more uses for the chemicals they get out of the GTL Fischer-Tropsch process.
I find it interesting that they use the term "splash blended." Splash blending is inherently less accurate than other methods so you can never be sure of ratio in your tank. And some fuel pairs, like biodiesel/petro-diesel don't mix very well so stirring is needed.
Now is not the time to rest on our laurels. The previous GHG requirements were far too low for what is needed and what could have been done. The proof of that is how easily they have been met.
First it was VW, then it was Dodge and it's new 3.0 litre Ecodiesel, and now they are going after Renault? When will it stop?
43% lower GHG for ethanol vs gasoline. Guess what? For biodiesel it is 75%
There are lots of ways to clean up diesel emissions. Can you even get a new diesel today that will run without the DEF system working?
People should purchase vehicles fit for purpose....to suggest that there are replacement Hybrid vehicles available to fill the role of an F-150, is more than a little disingenuous IMO. Right you are. I would love to be able to afford a Tesla but at $100,000 it's out of my price range. For most things I make do with a sub-compact but there are times when I just need something that can tow. Nothing does that better than a diesel and I can at least run it on biodiesel to reduce the harm.
It will be interesting to see how this F-150 with a 3 liter diesel compares to the Ram 1500 with its 3 liter diesel.
@Harvey/gor The lead in times between development and commercialization are much longer than either of you think. Don't expect to see the finished product for 8-10 years. And if you don't see it at all it's not necessarily an indicator that there is something wrong with it. It could just as easily be that during those 8-10 years they found something with even more potential that they are developing.
CMU study suggests difficulties in reaching targeted low price Difficulties folks, it said "difficulties" not 'impossibilities.' What's the old adage? "It takes 20% of the effort to reach 80% of the way and 80% of the effort to get the last 20%" Where's the surprise here?
I wonder if they could make this with 4 wheels not 6. From my understanding a 6 wheeler requires a special licence to operate. A 4 wheeler could be used as an RV hauler and this would make my family vacations a lot more green. http://rvhaulers.ca/
Vehicles equipped with artificial intelligence is one thing, but emotions? What happens when your car gets mad at you? Or depressed and suicidal? Or develops a crush on the BMW you park next to? And yes I am having a lark at this, so don't take it serious.
I would just need a home compressor to use it in my car. . . and a car or truck that ran on CNG of course.