not sure I would trust an article that states
"Due to heated fuel being returned to the tank, keep fuel tanks as full as possible (to minimise algae growth)"
Currently reading:
Technical EGR delete
not sure I would trust an article that states
"Due to heated fuel being returned to the tank, keep fuel tanks as full as possible (to minimise algae growth)"
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
With regards to "pm10s", that's why some clever person designed the DPF...
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2009
- Messages
- 19,492
- Points
- 3,294
Exactly my point. The EGR does not stop enough particulates so they had to add the DPF. Begs the question why is EGR needed when you have a DPF.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2009
- Messages
- 19,492
- Points
- 3,294
Its not "complete nonsense.noses. It's a simplification which of course you well know. Regardless of the technical details urea injection systems reduce NOx.
Ammonia would make a good vehicle fuel unfortunately the hydrogen it contains is extracted by reforming natural gas which is extremely energy intensive. Low cost intrinsically safe nuclear could do the job. That will never happen because nobody wants low cost nukes (1) they would quickly replace coal oil and gas and (2) they don't suit the green agenda who need a constant public jeopardy to support their politics.
Urea injection sytems DO NOT REDUCE NOx emissions.
Selective Catalyst Reduction (SCR) systems reduce NOx emissions. Vehicle SCRs require additional nitrogen to operate. One common source of nitrogen used in vehicle SCR systems is urea (Adblue). EGR systems also reduce NOx emissions.
I've never suggesed ammonia as a vehicle fuel.
The Panda Nut
Nutty about Pandas Infected by Panda virus and OPD
I am another from the think you should leave it alone camp, but, I was chatting to the well informed man at our local breakerts yard a while ago, and he rightly pointed out that there has been little improvement in fuel use and mpg for vast numbers of years and a properly driven car without all this EU clobber bolyted to it does similar mile to the gallon.
Physics dictates that if you burn a gallon of oil it will produce emissions and fumes. I am afraid you cannot get rid of these emissions, they are irrefutable results of getting oil and burning it. Whichever way you cut it they are there. Yes ypu can filter the particulates and you can cat treat some of the output to reduce it but I am very very very far from convinced that my super-dooper EU class 6 emissions rated car is better than my 1985 1.7 diesel as it uses twice the amount of fuel and more than a bit of this excessive consumption is caused by the electronic rubbish that is fitted to the new engine. AND to what end is itr fitted???? All this CRAP is supposed to reduce emissions, but does it? If it does, then why did ALL the corporate criminals in the car industry build get arounds, and what exactly was this crap actually doing for emissions. My take is that it was doing exactly nothing as it certainly wasn't reducing emissions how it was intended, and , if this is the case what exactly is the result of removing it?
Its pretty clear that we don't know because the criminals who went around the system have perverted emissions data and made it totally unreliable and impossible to judge what if any effect it had other than costing a ******* fortune to maintain it in working order.
Whats needed here is a debate about big stupidly over powered engines being allowed. A 4 litre car is nearly 5 times the size of the Panda twin air and its going to be unnecessarily dirty and environmentally damaging. We need to tackle this first and stop allowing these things to be sold.
Unfortunately most of the drivers of these mostly German overkillmobiles are driver by the brain dead who use most or all of the power most of the time. Again its this that needs to be targetted now. I am NOT saying everyone who drives powerful machines is bad, far from it, but in terms of the environment don't try telling me that these cars are not the bulk of the problem you CANNOT get away from the simple basic physical facts!.
I suspect that cars with poorly functioning EGR and DPFs are probably worse than those without.
I would suggest however until the facts are known that we lean on our MP's to reduce cars with "Ludicrous modes" of performance whether petrol or electric as such excessive use of power comes with excessive use of resources. Over time this will have the biggest effect on emissions reduction.
In the mean time I would urge those thinking of making uninformed amateur adjustments to their cars to think again and get the bloddy thing serviced properly instead!
Physics dictates that if you burn a gallon of oil it will produce emissions and fumes. I am afraid you cannot get rid of these emissions, they are irrefutable results of getting oil and burning it. Whichever way you cut it they are there. Yes ypu can filter the particulates and you can cat treat some of the output to reduce it but I am very very very far from convinced that my super-dooper EU class 6 emissions rated car is better than my 1985 1.7 diesel as it uses twice the amount of fuel and more than a bit of this excessive consumption is caused by the electronic rubbish that is fitted to the new engine. AND to what end is itr fitted???? All this CRAP is supposed to reduce emissions, but does it? If it does, then why did ALL the corporate criminals in the car industry build get arounds, and what exactly was this crap actually doing for emissions. My take is that it was doing exactly nothing as it certainly wasn't reducing emissions how it was intended, and , if this is the case what exactly is the result of removing it?
Its pretty clear that we don't know because the criminals who went around the system have perverted emissions data and made it totally unreliable and impossible to judge what if any effect it had other than costing a ******* fortune to maintain it in working order.
Whats needed here is a debate about big stupidly over powered engines being allowed. A 4 litre car is nearly 5 times the size of the Panda twin air and its going to be unnecessarily dirty and environmentally damaging. We need to tackle this first and stop allowing these things to be sold.
Unfortunately most of the drivers of these mostly German overkillmobiles are driver by the brain dead who use most or all of the power most of the time. Again its this that needs to be targetted now. I am NOT saying everyone who drives powerful machines is bad, far from it, but in terms of the environment don't try telling me that these cars are not the bulk of the problem you CANNOT get away from the simple basic physical facts!.
I suspect that cars with poorly functioning EGR and DPFs are probably worse than those without.
I would suggest however until the facts are known that we lean on our MP's to reduce cars with "Ludicrous modes" of performance whether petrol or electric as such excessive use of power comes with excessive use of resources. Over time this will have the biggest effect on emissions reduction.
In the mean time I would urge those thinking of making uninformed amateur adjustments to their cars to think again and get the bloddy thing serviced properly instead!
Although use of fuel (MPG you say on your end of the channel) has some relation to emissions (burning CH make CO, CO2, H2O), but that is not the only thing emitted. (and probably not the most deadly). NOX and particles are probably more deadly.
I think combustion engines are at the end of their development meaning there's not a lot that can be improved. But compare the 1 litre in 10 Km we found normal in the seventees to what modern engines (with lots more power) consume now.
gr J
I think combustion engines are at the end of their development meaning there's not a lot that can be improved. But compare the 1 litre in 10 Km we found normal in the seventees to what modern engines (with lots more power) consume now.
gr J
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
The understanding I have is that on more modern diesels, the main function of the EGR is to reduce NOx, whereas the DPF is solely to reduce soot.
