Home

Clean and Fuel Efficient Diesel? NyTimes

Sun, 05/27/2001 - 06:37 — charlie.collins

The NYTimes has a story about the new technology of diesel vehicles and the widening US Europe gap over usage. This I did not know, diesel can be done right, diesel can be done low emission! I always thought of diesel as efficient but high in emissions (sulphur, co2, etc.) Not so if you regulate the way the fuel is made and use more advanced diesel engines.

Europe regulates diesel strictly, its clean, its efficient, its fantastic. The US, big surprise, does not. The commercial vehicles and cars that burn diesel in the US burn a concoction that does pollute at high levels thanks directly to the oil lobby who has successfully fought all attempts to clean it up.

At any rate, despite the stupidity that prevails in the US (it CAN be done right, we just DONT do it right) diesel is an alternative in other parts of the world. In fact, before I bought my new Honda Insight (gas-elec hybrid) I looked at the VW Jetta TDI. The TDI is sold here in the states and gets 48MPG, but running on US diesel it does pollute. In Europe the new Audi A2 gets 78MPG (yes, you read that right frickin 78, fuel economy can be done right also.)

In Europe diesel amounts for a significant 32 percent of all vehicles sold, in the US 1 percent (but justifiably so based on the fuel differences.)

Its great news for the planet that diesel has improved, but if you are in the US, go hybrid or fuel cell. We dont HAVE to be dependent on oil companies (foreign and domestic), we can make our own choices. Check out more on the diesel phenomenon in Europe via the linked NYTimes story (free reg required.)

Thanks to /. for the lead.
  It Gets 78 Miles a Gallon, but U.S. Snubs Diesel

Comments

Sun, 05/27/2001 - 11:35 — Andy (not verified)

Re: Clean and Fuel Efficient Diesel? NyTimes

Hey man, great post. My uncle has a wealth of obscure knowledge, and he was telling me how there was some engineer back in the 50's who developed a car that burned ethanol and got 70-something miles to the gallon and double the horsepower of most cars on the market...great car in other words. Chrystler approached him and offered the guy a couple million for the rights to the design, which he accepted thinking the car would go into full production. Chrystler buried the design and no car was ever made. The domestic automobile industry (not to mention the govt.) is so clearly in bed with the oil industry that someone should sell porno tapes of the two (three).

I won't even get started on California's solar power initiative where they wanted to power every street lamp and every traffic light with solar energy. The technology was available and rock solid, but PG&E crushed the plan because it would take a huge cut into their profit.

The plain immorality that exists in our energy policy disgusts me.

Mon, 05/28/2001 - 16:55 — atrox (not verified)

Re: Clean and Fuel Efficient Diesel? NyTimes

agreed, i dont even go off on that the enrgy policy rant either because all of my friends are tired of hearing me. i guess that means i need to start doing something more substantial and quit bitching, hmmm.

many technologies have been bought and killed. i used to work for many years in the tire business and a similar thing happened. a gentelman had a plan and prototype of a non pneumatic tire that lasted hundreds of thousands of miles and did not go flat. got bought out, i beleive if was Goodrich and killed. the tire business is also very close to the petroleum industry.

personally all this energy crisis crap pisses me off, there is no crisis, there just isnt profit for oil companies if we wean ourselves off of petroleum. solar, hydro, wind, etc all are real and viable alternatives. along with making more efficient use of pertroleum crap, we can do better, we just dont.

americas new chief jackass has quite the plan too, hmmm, lets drill some more. i ask you, what in the hell does that get us, the oil will run out, we cant always keep drilling, lets move on into reality.

sorry, the ranting slipped out again, its just that the US is the biggest waste on the planet and the egregiously irresponsible actions of the government and oil companies, and us for putting up with it get the best of me, its crazyiness.

Thu, 05/31/2001 - 06:30 — Al (not verified)

Re: Clean and Fuel Efficient Diesel? NyTimes

The author writes the, "despite the stupidity that prevails the US (it CAN be done right" (sic)...

I would propose that it is not stupidity that holds this country back, it is ignorance and illiteracy: stupidity would describe the act of ignoring an intelligent presentation of arguments like like those in this story. Ignorance would describe not acting on the facts because they were presented too poorly to merit a credible evaluation. Illiteracy would describe the inability to adequately express this improtant evidence.

The author advocates an intelligent course of action in "a concoction" of misspellings, incorrect punctuation, and pseudo-sentences. Perhaps one reason that the "oil lobby who has successfully fought" has had so much success is that the oil lobby pays literate people to compose their arguments and credible speakers to preent them.

Lofty intentions or not, very few of us will ever have our voice heard (to say nothing of listened to) until we first learn to speak.

Tue, 02/07/2006 - 10:47 — atrox (not verified)

RE: Clean and Fuel Efficient Diesel? NyTimes

I did not see this response in May 2001 as it came a few days after the article.

I will respond though even if very late.

"despite the stupidity that prevails in the US (it CAN be done right" - does not contain any misspellings or grammatical errors, etc.

The commenter who is being quite pedantic (but himself wrong while doing it) however wrote 'The author writes the, "despite the stupidity that prevails the US (it CAN be done right" (sic)...'

And "The author write the" is ITSELF grammatically incorrect. Jackass.

Also I assert that it is indeed stupidity and not ignorance that holds the US back in terms of energy policy. We do know better. We do know the facts and arguments on each side and we do not act in the best course. Stupid. (Ignorance plays a part but our policy makers on such matters are certainly not "ignorant" about them, hopefully.)

"stupidity would describe the act of ignoring an intelligent presentation of arguments like like those in this story." (sic)

"like like"?

'"a concoction" of misspellings, incorrect punctuation, and pseudo-sentences'

Concoction is spelled correctly and it is an actual word. Try a dictionary.

'Perhaps one reason that the "oil lobby who has successfully fought" has had so much success is that the oil lobby pays literate people to compose their arguments and credible speakers to preent them.'

preent them?

I am not usually quick to jump on misspellings and punctuation errors in comments to articles. I do spell things wrong in articles from time to time (it is usually more of an issue with my typing skills than my actual spelling skills) and I more rarely get grammar or punctuation wrong (I dont use apostrophes for contractions by design, they are extraneous characters). I need to do a better job of spell checking and so on, true.

However, in this case I am responding to someone calling out my mistakes (incorrectly in every noted instance) and yet making a littany of his own mistakes (of the very type he is criticizing) in his response. That is stupid AND ignorant.

As I reread the article I do not note many mistakes. A few sentences are poorly constructed in my present opinion, but not grammatically incorrect. I see one instance where I used the word "amount" and meant "account".

What is quite sad in all of this (despite "Al" being such a jackass) is that it has nothing to do with the substance of the article or the debate itself, the important stuff. The entire "lofty intentions or not" . . . "until we first learn to speak" (nice Al) is false. Whether get we (sic) a pronoun in the wrong place or not the point of the article was still clear.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.