Can I Clean My 2001 Air Cooler 7.3 Diesel

Clean diesel may worsen pollution past increasing emission of nanoparticles.

Discussion in 'Emissions' started by Walter, Dec 6, 2008.

Masaru Sagai: 'Make clean' diesel cars may worsen air pollution
http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200812020050.htmlSince I have asthma, this actually concerns me. Does everyone have further information or opinions on this?
Nosotros need to start looking at the emissions of smaller particulates than PM10. PM2.5 and PM0.1 are both probably worth looking at, and until that happens, DPF'due south are just trading the emissions of a regulated particulate size for emissions of an unregulated particulate size. Gasoline engines don't make much around 10 micrometers, simply can exist as bad equally diesels in the PM2.v and PM0.one range.
If true, this is bad news!
Dan'south son in Houston has been treated for asthma. Turns out Houston is the asthma capital of the Us. This may exist an extra reason to resent diesel-clanging doolies with cowboys that are all hat - no cattle....plenty of them in Houston and D/FW.
A whole lotta diesels around here too. Almost fifty% of them don't fifty-fifty have hitch recievers. 75% of the ones that do have obviously never been used.
That and all the Houston-area refineries needed to support the guzzlers, both here and beyond the country. Houston-refined fuel goes a lot of places...
Well that sucks!
I did a quick google and PM0.1 and smaller are referred to equally "ultrafine" particles and the smallest of them are called "nanoparticles". It seems that effects of these smaller particle sizes hasn't been researched as much and so naturally regulation will lag behind...
Non sure what country the author of the linked article is from (Japan?), just it doesn't appear it's applicable to the U.S./Canada, at to the lowest degree not the latest clean diesel versions.
All diesel vehicles (cars, HD trucks, SUVs, pickups) manufactured since January 2007 have come OEM-equipped with diesel particulate filters (DPF). DPF has been shown to be extremely effective across the entire particle size distribution.

Several studies take actually shown that DPF reduces particle numbers beneath ambient (due east.g., Färnlund et al., "Emissions of Ultrafine Particles from Different Types of Light Duty Vehicles." Swedish National Route Assistants; Environmental and Wellness Touch From Modern Cars, Ecotraffic (Sweden); John Storey et al., ORNL, "Comparison of Straight Exposure of Human Lung Cells to Modern Engine Exhaust Particles." Proceedings of the 9th Almanac DEER Conference). One even shows PM number emissions beneath that of filtered dilution air (http://www.dieselnet.com/papers/0209czerwinski/).

Even CARB has acknowledge that cars equipped with DPF have lower PM emissions than typical modern gasoline cars (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CYH/is_5_7/ai_99232199).

I would also have issue with the supposition that gas vehicles don't produce much ultrafine PM. At least one study shows gas vehicles under some common driving conditions (high speed/load, cold ambient temperatures) produce utrafine PM that tin approach or even exceed uncontrolled diesel engines (http://www.osti.gov/span/servlets/purl/829821-SQYKH6/native/829821.pdf).
wxman, I'chiliad very happy to hear all of this. Subaru may exist releasing a diesel, so if they do I won't feel bad about driving information technology.
I think 10 microns or less is the size of particle that can make information technology downwardly the smallest airways all the style to the alveoli. This is roughly the size of a red jail cell.
I had no idea that nosotros-in the USA- don't filter out these small particles. If we practice- how do we do it? I mechanical filter that fine would take to add a lot of back pressure wouldn't it? Maybe the filters accuse theses particles and pull them via the charge to a charged plate.I think industrial stack scrubbers work like this.
Charlie
Yes, the author is from Japan.
Thanks for the interesting links; I'll read them afterwards Xmas.
Welcome to cleanmpg, wxman!!!
--Walter
Walter - give thanks you for the welcome.
I neglected to mention in my initial post that EPA recently acknowledged that they have been underestimating PM mass emissions from gasoline vehicles by about threescore% ("Analysis of Particulate Matter Emissions from Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles in Kansas City." April 2008). This is primarily PM2.5, but since the normal size distribution of gasoline vehicle PM is typically skewed to the left (i.e., smaller) than the typical normal size distribution of diesel fuel PM, information technology is probable that ultrafine PM from gasoline vehicles also has been/is being underestimated.
Hello All,
Accept you all seen the Nova episode on Global Diming? Information technology seems PM can prevent rainfall.

Does it seem currious that the rise of deisels in Europe coincides with the Ethiopian drought? I think at that place is a connectedness there. And at present equally Europe is mandating DPF's, even on existing existing Diesel cars, the Ethiopian drought has diminished.

The transcontinental climate impacts due to Diesel fuel PM appear to be quick acting and severe.
Which is why nosotros should all strive to use as little carbon in our fuels, and little fuel as possible.
Diesel fuel exhaust is a significant source of fine particle pollution, as well as a combination of more than than twoscore substances that are listed as chancy pollutants. Because of their microscopic size, these fine particles can get trapped in the pocket-sized airways of the lungs when they are inhaled.
Sources of diesel emissions include diesel-powered trucks, buses and cars (on-road sources); diesel-powered marine vessels, construction equipment, trains and aircraft back up equipment (non-road sources).

Particulate matter from diesel exhaust overwhelmingly presents the highest health risk in the Puget Sound area, making up an estimated 78 percent of the potential cancer adventure from exposure to outdoor air toxics.1 Diesel particulate matter is also linked with health effects including heart problems, aggravated asthma, chronic bronchitis and premature death.
Again, DPF virtually eliminates PM from diesel engines. Even then, DPM represents only one of a myriad of sources of ambient PM2.five.
Gasoline exhaust contains those hazardous components likewise, simply generally in greater amounts per unit volume of fuel burned.
Are you aware of any study that exonerates PM2.5 from gasoline exhaust, or any other source for that matter? Public health agencies have decided to arbitrarily assign all cancer risks to DPM and none to other ambient PM, thus the apparent "overwhelming" cancer rsik from DPM. At that place are no reasons to believe other PM2.5 isn't just as harmful equally DPM, especially from combustion sources.
Two newbies in boxing, with one advertising wood pellets, there must be at least 1 agenda here. :countenance:
I'1000 skeptical that nosotros know with any accurateness that 78% of Puget sounds outdoor air cancer chance is because of diesel fuel.
Ill have some other step... we utilize hydrodesulfurization equally a means of producing the 15ppm fuel necessary to let pollution controls to operate and live. Guess where that hydrogen comes from??? Some from catalytic cracking of fuel, the rest of the make-upwards (which tin exist a lot depending upon how nasty the crude is) is made by steam reformation of methane... trading marsh gas, which could exist used to heat our homes, showers, and produce fertilizer, to non-selectively fissure fuel.
Almost of it is wasted opening aromatic rings and double/triple bonds, not removing sulfur.

And then were doing double waste duty...

So we enable diesels with pollution controls, which not but sap ability and fuel economy, but make diesels more expensive to produce, operate and maintain.

In the long run, considering the environmental effects of producing, recycling and reclaiming metals for batteries (especially since much of this is done in Mainland china where there are limited pollution controls), a "dingy diesel" getting 60 MPG could be cleaner than a hybrid, full circumvolve. hydrogen could be used for superior causes, or fifty-fifty for a hydrogen infrastructure to help rovide cleaner air in cities and congested areas.

Instead we get this supposedly beneficial applied science, which just costs more and is probable to cause consumers to swap cars more often (lets face it, nigh wont want to accept to deal with a $3000 emissions system or a $3000 hybrid battery), driving manufacturing-based pollution up farther and introducing more issues...

We have potentially equally much of this matter coming from ga$$ers, and nosotros take away the benefits of diesels to some extent - longevity and operational economy. Some of the longevity is due to stouter designs which heighten the cost - but and so we raise the cost more than with expensive pollution controls.

With mandatory inspections and proper tuning, plain old diesels tin can run awfully make clean... and college fuel economy means lower overall tonnage, which is a win for all involved.
The diesel upgrade for a VW is about $2200 and $1000 for a Mercedes. That includes the more expensive diesel engine, turbocharger, 20000+ PSI piezo fuel injectors, plus all emissions controls. So unless Mercedes and VW are underpricing the diesel package for some reason, there is no way the emissions system alone is $3000.
Well tuned diesels may not emit visible smoke, but their emissions from are however nowhere nearly as clean as what comes out of the new make clean diesels. My 2001 was allowed to emit 18x as much NOx and 10x as much PM as a 2009 TDI. If somebody told me I could encounter 2009 emissions standards but it meant giving up 10% of power and 3mpg, I would gladly do it.
I only purchased an 2009 VW Sportswagan TDI. My first tank-full I pushed the car to see what it could do(36.8mpg). I'll take that, with the new automobile average at around 24.5mpg. One affair, the car makes a diesal sound but when it starts after about 4 minutes in the common cold information technology sounds similar a gas car. I love it.
Joe the new guy
Congrats on the purchase, Joe! The SportWagon is a very nice auto and with the TDI, nothing that size can match its fuel economic system. I know it can do a lot amend than 36.8mpg though. I've seen some reports on TDIclub of people with 50+ mpg tanks and you can beat that easily by applying and understanding the techniques described in Beating the EPA - The Why's and How to Hypermile. Accept a read through it, don't be afraid to ask questions if something doesn't make sense, and bask your new automobile!