C D Patterson Posted July 1, 2006 Share Posted July 1, 2006 Is Ford going to have any cars with diesel engines in the near future? Does it all hinge on the new low sulfer diesel fuel and its availability? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 (edited) Is Ford going to have any cars with diesel engines in the near future? Does it all hinge on the new low sulfer diesel fuel and its availability? Low sulphur addresses two problems with Diesel engines: particulate matter (usually abbreviated PM), or soot, and sulphuric oxides (stinky, and a key cause of smog). However, low sulphur fuel does not address NOx pollution. NO is as poisonous as carbon monoxide (CO), each replaces oxygen in the bloodstream. Both NO and NO2 also cause smog. NO and NO2 are caused by two things: high combustion temperatures and too much oxygen in the combustion chamber. The EPA recently patented a system that uses EGR (exhaust gas recirculation) to maintain a very low percentage of oxygen in the combustion chamber (patent documents suggest that ideal combustion occurs with 13-14% oxygen in the chamber--far less than the 21% concentration in the atmosphere). Anyway, the EPA patented a system that reduces NOx production to well within the most stringent environmental standards. Ford licensed this techology from the EPA and are developing production PCMs, a turbocharger, and EGR valves that will implement this method of controlling NOx emissions. The best diesels that Ford builds in Europe are far from capable of meeting the very strict NOx standards in the US, and especially California, for passenger cars. Moreover the techology developed by the EPA requires substantial modifications to these diesels (basically, all new PCMs, exhaust systems, and a turbocharger with variable geometry). However, this system is by far the most promising one yet developed, and if it pans out, Ford will likely be one of the first to market with affordable diesels across their full lineup. It's my belief that progress on this has allowed Ford to concentrate on these ultra clean diesels, instead of a proposed hybrid V6, for their targets for fuel economy and CO2 reduction in larger vehicles. Edited July 3, 2006 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 WOW grat info Richard... any estimate of possible ETA of these engines? Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 WOW grat info Richard... any estimate of possible ETA of these engines? Igor Best kept secret in Detroit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 (edited) Since it has been estimated that the Fischer-Tropsch Process can produce diesel at $1/gallon, I suspect this will be the key to our future energy independence. "The governor estimated the cost of producing a barrel of oil through the Fischer-Tropsch method at $32, and said that with its 120 billion tons of coal -- a little less than a third of the U.S total -- Montana could supply the entire United States with its aviation, gas and diesel fuel for 40 years without creating environmental damage." Link (If there's anyone with decent knowledge of the topic: I have seen some, but few, references to producing gasoline as well as diesel and jet fuel from the processes. Does anyone know the details?) Edited July 4, 2006 by Noah Harbinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Since it has been estimated that the Fischer-Tropsch Process can produce diesel at $1/gallon, I suspect this will be the key to our future energy independence. "The governor estimated the cost of producing a barrel of oil through the Fischer-Tropsch method at $32, and said that with its 120 billion tons of coal -- a little less than a third of the U.S total -- Montana could supply the entire United States with its aviation, gas and diesel fuel for 40 years without creating environmental damage." Link (If there's anyone with decent knowledge of the topic: I have seen some, but few, references to producing gasoline as well as diesel and jet fuel from the processes. Does anyone know the details?) The Fischer-Tropsch-Process has been around for about 80 years. It is not a econimcally viable method to produce fuel. You use a lot of enegry to get a barrel of crude out from it. And you have high carbon emmsions in the process. Their is alternative processes such as theAlberta Taciuk Process that is far more efficiant and works on low grade hydrocarbon bearing material such as oil shale. Some thing FTP can not do. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 The Fischer-Tropsch-Process has been around for about 80 years. It is not a econimcally viable method to produce fuel. You use a lot of enegry to get a barrel of crude out from it. And you have high carbon emmsions in the process. You're living in the past, man! Contemporize! It is commonly stated that the Fischer-Tropsch process becomes economical when oil is over $30/barrel. . . which you may note has not been true except in isolated economies (Germany during WWII, South Africa during Apartheid) until quite recently... but is eminently true right now. Modern improvements to the process sequester pretty much all the byproducts; pollution isn't nearly the factor it once was. Their is alternative processes such as theAlberta Taciuk Process that is far more efficiant and works on low grade hydrocarbon bearing material such as oil shale. Some thing FTP can not do. Doesn't mention anything about taking Coal as an input. Two of the world's most fuel-thirsty economies, the US and China, have utterly huge deposits of coal, so I think Fischer-Tropsch has a greater chance of seeing the light of day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misteredog Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 You're living in the past, man! Contemporize! It is commonly stated that the Fischer-Tropsch process becomes economical when oil is over $30/barrel. . . which you may note has not been true except in isolated economies (Germany during WWII, South Africa during Apartheid) until quite recently... but is eminently true right now. Modern improvements to the process sequester pretty much all the byproducts; pollution isn't nearly the factor it once was. Doesn't mention anything about taking Coal as an input. Two of the world's most fuel-thirsty economies, the US and China, have utterly huge deposits of coal, so I think Fischer-Tropsch has a greater chance of seeing the light of day. There's also real potential for diofuels in the diesel arena e.g. the CHOREN Industries SunFuel process SunFuel Shell oil is also involved in gas to liquid conversion for diesel fuels. And of course there's always waste cooking oil recovery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 And of course there's always waste cooking oil recovery. There's a place about 50 miles from here. Called Nicks. I think they actually have this process reversed. The food is cooked in diesel oil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.