More from the brain trust at the white house (Page 2/2)
82-T/A [At Work] MAR 08, 08:43 AM

quote
Originally posted by steve308:
This should be good news for consumer confidence and prices.



I am really starting to enjoy your subtle humor... hahah.
rinselberg MAR 08, 09:16 AM
Did I mention that if these proposed new EPA standards are approved, it will be the first ratcheting up since 2001—more than 20 years ago—of tailpipe emissions standards for buses, delivery vans, tractor-trailers and other big trucks? The new standards would not kick in until newly manufactured vehicles from Model Year 2027 start hitting the roads. They wouldn't be imposed on any vehicles that were already in use.

From the aforementioned Coral Davenport's report in the New York Times.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 03-08-2022).]

82-T/A [At Work] MAR 08, 09:34 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

Did I mention that if these proposed new EPA standards are approved, it will be the first ratcheting up since 2001—more than 20 years ago—of tailpipe emissions standards for buses, delivery vans, tractor-trailers and other big trucks?

(That's from the aforementioned Coral Davenport's report in the New York Times.)





Rinse, have you been to any cities where they are using natural gas? I know natural gas has anywhere from 10-15% less efficiency than petroleum, but it seems like a much better solution. The United States has tons... tons of natural gas that's readily available. Personally, for most situations, I think natural gas is a much better solution. I don't know if your article references the use of natural gas... but it seems to work well for a lot of cities.

I've been led to believe that natural gas has significantly less emissions (nearly zero) than gasoline combustion does... but I'm too lazy to look it up.
rinselberg MAR 08, 09:45 AM
Buses running on natural gas--very common here in Silicon Valley.

I don't see anything in what I've read about this that strikes me as working against natural gas fuel, in any way. But the most obvious impact would be on diesel-engined tractor-trailer trucks and other large diesel-engined road vehicles. The manufacturers will have to produce diesel-engined vehicles that comply with the standards, or move away from diesel engines.
olejoedad MAR 08, 11:54 AM
Forcing the move from diesel to LNG is probably the whole point of the new regs.
sourmash MAR 08, 03:09 PM
One of my employers had LNG capable pickups. The mileage was markedly less using LNG than with gasoline.
The power was similar enough to gasoline.

Most people avoided using the LNG, but at times the company mandated it's usage.
Fats MAR 10, 11:27 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Rinse, have you been to any cities where they are using natural gas? I know natural gas has anywhere from 10-15% less efficiency than petroleum, but it seems like a much better solution. The United States has tons... tons of natural gas that's readily available. Personally, for most situations, I think natural gas is a much better solution. I don't know if your article references the use of natural gas... but it seems to work well for a lot of cities.

I've been led to believe that natural gas has significantly less emissions (nearly zero) than gasoline combustion does... but I'm too lazy to look it up.



Oddly, all the places that sell natural gas stopped using it on their vehicles years ago. Notice that they all use diesel to move the stuff around except for a few instances where the place is likely getting a subsidy from the Government to run the stuff. The CNG stuff worked, but had worse mileage, and the engines were getting destroyed earlier. Diesel at least oils things a bit as it's used.
82-T/A [At Work] MAR 11, 08:20 AM

quote
Originally posted by Fats:

Oddly, all the places that sell natural gas stopped using it on their vehicles years ago. Notice that they all use diesel to move the stuff around except for a few instances where the place is likely getting a subsidy from the Government to run the stuff. The CNG stuff worked, but had worse mileage, and the engines were getting destroyed earlier. Diesel at least oils things a bit as it's used.




I've never owned a CNG vehicle... but I've heard that it can get anywhere on average from 15%, to even 30% less efficiency.

I would suppose though that if the emissions were SIGNIFICANTLY less... less in totality despite the increased amount of gas needed for the reduced efficiency, and it was cheaper, then it would make sense.


This shows gas at all-time lows...




.


I have to assume that it's simple economics...

1 - There are not enough CNG stations around, so it doesn't make it feasible.
2 - Because there are fewer CNG vehicles and general demand, a CNG bus (or CNG vehicle) will likely cost more
3 - The operating costs will probably be more expensive... it's much more dangerous to have compressed natural gas than a tank of gasoline
4 - Historically, the price of gasoline has been really, really cheap over the past 5+ years.


We saw a LOT of CNG vehicles back in 2004-2008 time period. I remember you could buy a variety of different Fords with CNG and CNG/gas hybrids. The Crown Victoria, the Ford Ranger, and even the Ford Taurus.