OK TOYOTA, Now give us our diesel hybrid.

While I agree with you that CARB likely has slowed down fuel economy in their drive to regulate, a visit to London should dissuade you that stronger environmental regulations are a bad thing. They just often don't really regulate well, and that includes too strong regulations on some things, and lax on others, and all in all overly complicated.

A hybrid does not need diesel for strong torque, it simply needs more electrical power. Even the low torque atkinson engine in a camry hybrid seems to propel it well. For heavier duty applications turbo di gasoline engines provide high power with lower pollution than diesel engines requiring less expensive pollution controls.

 

Nah. A bogus argument for many factual reasons.

1. It pushed Diesel technology to make clean engines. Global warming/greenhouse gases and air pollution are huge problems and CA is right in taking the lead on it.

2. What held up Diesel advance was US oil companies not going with low sulfur Diesel and fighting it so long.

3. Diesels got a good start in US and it was falling oil prices of the Reagan/Saudi deal that hurt Diesel cars in the US. US gas prices should have been kept high via taxes but oil companies, auto companies and Saudi's got the Nixon/Carter energy efficiency, reduce oil use in US national interest regulations rolled back and killed what was left with low oil prices.

4. European air regs are strict also but Diesel has thrived in Europe with clean air regs and high fuel taxes.

 

Subjective,
You are welcome to your opinions, but not your facts.

CA never prohibited diesels. They did require that diesels meet the same pollution emission minimum requirements of passenger cars, just like petrol. That was simply not possible until low-sulfur diesel was mandated (how dare they!); but the desulfated fuel is not cost competitive to petrol without subsidy.

A relatively small group of people will want to buy a diesel for its "performance," but most of the potential market look at them as higher MPG alternatives to save money. The higher fuel costs wipe that argument off the table. The crappy reliability of those imported to the US just adds a couple extra nails to the coffin.

So you see, squat to do with Pelosi or whatever liberal conspiracy you care to manufacture.

 

2013 Volvo V60 Diesel-Hybrid Priced
But, how much does it weigh?
Passing U.S EPA emissions when running on the diesel engine?
Urea, particulate filter?
And Tesla Model S anyone?

 

Don't see weight as an issue as long as it gets the mileage, which it does since it's passed the fuel use and safety tests all cars must pass before going into production and on sale.

On US emissions, likely OK there as European emissions are similar and most car mfg's assume they will be getting more stringent.

As alternative to Tesla. AWD drive wagon? Absolutely. At 117 mpg with pure EV for most of my driving, it's the perfect car for the 21st century.

 

117mpg sucks. The Volt can do 230mpg*.


*based on abandoned test standards which Volvo likely also used

 

For a period of time, no diesel passenger car met the LEV pollution standard. Neither did petrol cars without mufflers.

Are you going to whine about that, too ?

 

Chemical Characteristics and Oxidative Potential of Particulate Matter Emissions from Gasoline, Diesel, and Biodiesel Cars - Environmental Science & Technology (ACS Publications)
In-Use Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicle Particulate Matter Emissions on Three Driving Cycles - Environmental Science & Technology (ACS Publications)
Size and Composition Distribution of Fine Particulate Matter Emitted from Motor Vehicles - Environmental Science & Technology (ACS Publications)
Signature size distributions for diesel and gasoline engine exhaust particulate matter
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
ScienceDirect.com - Atmospheric Environment - Physicochemical and redox characteristics of particulate matter (PM) emitted from gasoline and diesel passenger cars
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Mutagenicity and in Vivo Toxicity of Combined Particulate and Semivolatile Organic Fractions of Gasoline and Diesel Engine Emissions
Exhaust Particulate Emissions from a Direct Injection Spark Ignition Engine
Exhaust Particulate Emissions from Two Port Fuel Injected Spark Ignition Engines
Vehicle Technologies Program: 2004 Diesel Engine Emissions Reduction (DEER) Conference Presentations

Full articles might be behind a paywall. I might have access at work.
The bottom subset are ones I gleaned from the article. Being from 2004, the work mostly focused on diesels without filters.

You said, "The exhuast filters make even smaller particuls penetrating blood stream". I am countering that gasoline cars also emit these smaller particles. I did misspeak in my earlier post by over generalizing. Gas cars may not be as dirty as diesel. From the abstracts, they appear to be cleaner, but DPF equipped diesels are close in level to them. I know it's different in Europe and other parts of the world, but in the US gasoline is the vast majority of vehicle fuel type. Diesel opponents here bring up the harm of particulates. This lead to our improved emission standards, a good thing. But they've overlooked the fact that the larger gasser fleet could be an issue. The human failing of 'I can't see it so there isn't a problem'.

The WHO's recent conclusion on diesel and cancer link is based on research of miners. The clean up emissions they have called for has already happened, or will, in the US and Europe. The clean up of off road emissions needs to happen, even for gasoline. Even without the clean up, the risk to the public was less than to miners trapped in an enclosed space.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/13/health/diesel-fumes-cause-lung-cancer-who-says.html

 

Carbon tax(s) is absolutely necessary. The reason you see clean Diesels capable of meeting US standards is due to European carbon taxes (gasoline and Diesel taxes) which made Diesels a viable option due to inherent fuel efficiency of Diesel engines combined with European air quality requirements.

Carbon taxes and air quality regulation created today's clean Diesels.

 

I'll guess back -- fair play right ?

You sound like a climate change denialist, who is still crying over Sarah Palin's unfair defeat at the hands of the "librel" media.

 

Wager on the table: you will be one of the first crying for gubmint handouts and "help" when you are flooded.
Tea baggers are all the same.

 

BTW. The premise of this thread is off. Just because Audi wins Le Mans (which they have done many other times because they have been the only large factory backed team for many years) does not necessarily mean that the tech should be pushed for normal usage. Le Mans makes rules that encourage Diesels (Audi and Peugeot) and now hybrids (Audi and Toyota). The Toyotas were fairly new designs and had some unfortunate incidents - We will see them at it again next year.

As someone visiting large European cities fairly often, I appreciate all actions to get diesels out of these highly congested areas. Leave the diesels for the highways where the hybrid systems are of little use.

 

Just a small observation: the Japanese seem very pro-hybrid - the Europeans pro-diesel and hybrid-skeptic.

Generalization with some truth.

 

Don't know that race car technology was being pushed as simply giving Prius a Diesel engine and upping mileage by 25% to 62 mpg.

 

I hope not, since it would not happen. 8% improvement sounds about right to me.