Porsche/VW Group U.S. Diesel Strategy Interview

I find this stunning. Are people in Europe and the U.S. really that gullible?
(1) Yes, diesels offer more MPGs, BUT: you are using a fuel that (a) takes MORE oil to make (b) contains MORE carbon per gallon and (c) costs MORE (unless you artificially make it cheaper with tax treatment, as Europe does).
So, to recap: 30% better miles PER GALLON, but said gallon has 15-20% MORE oil, carbon and cost. So, really only a 10-15% improvement PER MILE in these categories, which hybrids beat easily, compared to their gas-only counterparts. A trip to fueleconomy.gov will make this clear. I'm always amused when people say "those Euro diesels get better mpg than hybrids"....when in fact they are like half the size of my Prius! In fact, I think there has never been a car made in history that combines room, mpg, and price the way a Prius does (and probably never will be).
So, if you care about reducing foreign oil: hybrid better than diesel
if you care about reducing your carbon output: hybrid better than diesel
if you care about saving money: hybrid better than diesel (in U.S.)
if you care about performance.....don't tell me hybrids can't. See Lexus GS and Infinity M.
And, hybrids put us on the pathway to electric, while diesel is a dead-end unless we get biodiesel.....which still has tailpipe emissions.
Diesel is a joke and yet carmakers still make money by making them and clueless luxury car buyers still fork over tons of $$$

 

Coming clean about diesels! First Shift: Coming clean about diesels

 

Scorpion, comparing cars is always a sure fire way to cause rancor, but I decided to compare the VW Golf diesel to the Honda Civic HF and the Toyota Corolla. Below are combined city/highway EPA numbers:

Golf: 34
HF: 33
Toyota: 29

Needless to say, if people accept these vehicles for comparison the diesel is not improving on petrol cars anywhere near 30%. On the other hand, diesel fuel is about 20% more expensive in my state and as you say, has about 15% more carbon pollution per gallon than petrol.

Tax carbon, and even Americans will get a clue.

 

Diesel is dirty and it is not the future. VW is backing the wrong horse. The Scandinavians think cng is the future and the Japanese and Americans thing EV is. VW is all alone. VW saying diesel is the future is akin to th horse and buggy company saving the buggy is the future when the Model T rolled off the assembly line.

 

Hey Wolfgang I have some swamp land in Florida are you interested? I hear you are a fools paradise.

 

JMD, diesel is no more or less the future than petrol. Both source from oil.

 

And I think that is almost unforgivable and will end in tears. What short memories they have. Was it not similar financial punishments (to Germany) that set the ball rolling to WWII?

 

The future folks, diesel exhaust fluid, some SUV's are carrying 32 liter tank!

And the flatbed photo from some journalist!
2012 VW Passat TDI - AdBlue Empty / No Engine Start - YouTube

 

What is the true story about the horrors of $8000. fuel pump failures that we hear about in VW forums.

 

As it is now, diesel has the better prospects when it comes to renewables. Ford and GM diesels can go up to 40% biodiesel. The manufacturers are only covering 10% ethanol for their gas engines. There are better choices for gasoline, but policy is pushing ethanol.

The diesel Passat and Jetta both have the same drive train. They both have similar fuel economy ratings. How can the larger and heavier car do as well as the smaller? It has SCR exhaust treatment that uses urea treatment. The NOx trap method used on the Jetta carries a fuel economy plenty. With SCR it might have rivaled the Prius on the EPA.

Kudos to Ram if they can manage non SCR treatment without the fuel economy hit.

As to getting stranded by the lack of DEF fluid. The vehicle gives plenty of warning that it is time to add fluid. Ignoring the alerts is just as responsible as ignoring a low fuel warning. Even if a person did ignore them, the car won't stop when you run out. It will enter a low power mode, so they can't ignore that something is up, and allow them to get more fluid.

Couldn't watch the videos here, but the VW photo op with tow truck was probably on par with the recent Tesla one.

 

I guess I'm one of those gullible Americans then since I own a clean diesel vehicle.

Didn't we already have a discussion about this on another blog?

If you had said Prius specifically, or even Toyota hybrids in general, I may agree with you, but since you widened the category to all hybrids, there is at least one example in the U.S. where the diesel version not only gets better mileage than the hybrid version (even city), it also has lower CO2 emissions and uses less petroleum (MB S-class - Compare Side-by-Side).

Also, as I mentioned to you on the other blog, the official EPA fuel mileage tends to underestimate the "real-world" mileage of diesels by a wide enough margin relative to the gasoline versions that the "extra oil" and "extra carbon" in diesel fuel is essentially overcome.

And with regard to fuel prices, Europe may be artificially making diesel fuel cheaper than gasoline in a few countries by taxing it less, but the U.S. is making it artificially more expensive by taxing it more than gasoline (federal tax on diesel is 6 cents more than the tax on gasoline).

 

Respectfully, I will grant you ALL of what you say. TODAY's diesels can (barely) overcome the cost, carbon and oil penalty of diesel and match hybrids in per-mile emissions. Then what? Do you recall me asking the following: Imagine if EU goes for all diesel, while U.S. goes for all hybrids in the near future. Then, imagine Iran and Israel going to war, and fuel rising to $7-8/gallon. Who is better off? The U.S. can quickly migrate hybrids to plug-in hybrids (manufacturers simply have to add extra battery capacity and a plug.......e.g.,Ford Cmax and Fusion hybrids assembled at same plant as Energi versions).......and then these plug-in hybrids will spur demand for charging infrastructure which paves the way for zero tailpipe emissions EVs.
What will EU do? Unless there is large-scale bio-diesel production from non-food sources, the only thing they can do is add hybrid drivetrains to all those diesels coming off the assembly line. So, while we are upgrading to plug-in hybrids and EV's, they will be getting their first (non-plug) hybrids.
And keep in mind that even if a cheap, non-food biodiesel source is found, it still creates localized tailpipe emissions that create smog and cause asthma (if used on a large enough scale).....something EV's and Plug-ins (city driving) won't do when charged overnight using residual (nuke, wind) grid energy. Clearly, we should not be debating what's good today, but what puts on a path to a secure future.

 

Agreed Diesel is a Political risk. EV is domestic production much better.

 

I do recall that you said that, and I responded by mentioning that algae biodiesel is currently available commercially at a few stations in California (as B20 - Propel Offers Algae-Based Biodiesel), and at least one study forecasts that BTL diesel will be competitive with petroleum diesel even without government subsidies given large enough scale (James L. Manganaro and Adeniyi Lawal, "Economics of Thermochemical Conversion of Crop Residue to Liquid Transportation Fuel." Energy Fuels, 2012, 26 (4), pp 2442–2453, Economics of Thermochemical Conversion of Crop Residue to Liquid Transportation Fuel - Energy & Fuels (ACS Publications) ).

It should also be noted that BTL (Fischer–Tropsch) used in diesel engines results in dramatically reduced exhaust emissions over regular petroleum-based ULSD (Noboru Uchida, Ichiro Sakata, Kouji Kitano, Nobuhiro Okabe, and Yoriko Sakamoto, “Simultaneous Improvement in both Exhaust Emissions and Fuel Consumption by means of Fischer-Tropsch Diesel Fuels.” International Journal of Engine Research (2012)).

I certainly have no problem with hybrids, EV, FCV or any other technology. However, in my opinion, more than just EV will be necessary especially if the range issue can't be fully resolved. I'm really an "all-of-the-above" proponent, including diesel, at least in the near- to mid-term.

 

Sounds like we agree then......that the perfect car would be a plug-in hybrid with a WVO/B100-capable diesel engine used as range extender

 

You need to talk to the epa and doe then. EPA makes commercial sales of filtered WVO for direct fuel illegal. The epa regulations are getting ice's that at best can handle B20 with the emissions control.

Now EPA could easily change regulations to allow higher start up emissions in PHEVs, and provide regulations to legalize engines running WVO. CARB has pushed EPA away from regulations that would allow for B100 in new cars.

The other alternative fuel to oil, methanol, which can be made renewably or from cheap natural gas is also discouraged by the EPA. An M85 phev can be extremely efficient, and fuel switching between E10 and M85 could be done easily which changing natural gas and oil prices. This would require that CARB change evaporative emissions regulations, and the DOE give proper credit in café for M85, as well as congress adopt the open fuel standard so that car makers make the necessary modifications to allow these fuels to work - estimated cost per car $100.

diesels, hybrids, biofuels, methanol, plug-ins we can use all of them to reduce oil dependence.

 

Totally agreed. I don't have the data, but something tells me this thinking in CARB/EPA comes from looking ONLY at start-up emissions (as well as others in the drive cycle) without properly accounting for how these emissions are amortized PER MILE. Clearly, its OK for a B100 range extender to have higher emissions than a B100 engine in a regular car, since the range extender is rarely used, and the emissions per mile would be low since most miles are driven electric.

 

The trucks with Duramax diesels and DEF warn you at least ten times that you're running low on fluid.

 

It's getting better now. The repair dropped to around $5000.