Talk Morgan Forums Community Vehicle Talk (non-Morgan) Large Diesel Engines

11.2 km/litre and CO2 203 g/km

About 1,000 litres of fuel with all the associated costs, plus 2,300 kg of CO2

I have no problem with that!

I can't really work it out but a type of carbon particle, carbon black, is used predominantly in the manufacture of tyres. I would not mind betting that this, from tyre wear, is a significant addition to airborne fine carbon particles in the cities.

I didn't read it, but in the latest IET online news is an article re: using some vegetable materials in tyre manufacture. Whether it is to reduce the carbon content I have no idea.
I'll see if I can find the article.

What sort of battery can release electricity at grid levels then?
Could you point me towards any info, sounds really interesting.
Nick

A recent research in Germany has found that only ca. 7% of small particulates are caused by Diesel engines, most of it older ones which are Euro 4 or less). More is produced by tyre wear and brake abrasion. But most of the dangerous small particulates are already on the tarmac and get whirled up again by driving.

(In southern European countries streets in cities are cleaned often by water spraying vehicles every morning or evening. The research says that this treatment would reduce the amount of particulates dramatically in our cities as well.)

The survey also states that most of PM-10 and PM-2,5 you breathe are close to or in a subway station, again caused by brake abrasion of the train brakes.

I´m not the biggest fan of Diesel engines but what the study means is, that the Diesel engines are not so dominantly influencing the measurements.

The politicians do NOT like the outcome of this serious study, nevertheless they have found a scapegoat which gives reason to milk the car drivers/ tax payers or to forbid driving certain kind of cars.
What is even more frightening, the politicians could have some more scapegoats in reserve. For example they could introduce a tyre tax for all vehicles, orientated towards the tyre width.

Er.....last time I checked, natural gas was a hydrocarbon.

Although it's true that you can't get local power up on the the transmission network past the GSPs, that's hardly an issue as all the demand (apart from a very few huge consumers like Network Rail, Corus, etc) happens on the distribution networks, and with only 14 DNOs there's loads of scope of active balancing.

The detailed stuff I have is all protectively marked Commercially Confidential, so I'm unable to share it, but you could Google "Virtual Power Plant" or "National Grid Demand Response Aggregators" for publicly-available information.

You may also be interested to read up on the next Capacity Market Auction which is aiming to introduce aggregated demand response into the system, currently it's about 90% generation / 10%DR, the aim is to move it towards 50/50. This is where the aggregators are mainly looking to drive out value, turning loads and loads of otherwise insignificant consumers into tradeable assets.

Absolutely true, but since gas generation is much cleaner than burning petrol or diesel in cars, I assumed you were talking about coal. There is absolutely no pollution disbenefit with CCGT plant, it's only the old open cycle stuff that's grubbier than internal combustion engines in cars, and they are being phased out as quick as poss.

On the smaller engine front, Just moved from a 1.6 diesel Volvo V40 to a 1.4 petrol (don't mention the emissions - I mentioned it once in the showroom, but I think I got away with it) Audi A3 and it is fantastic.

Diesel was sluggish at low speeds while the smaller petrol is much more nimble, and as fast as you need on A roads and motorways.

Engine is so quiet, can't tell when its on at lower revs.

The game has moved on. Don't think I will be moving back to diesel, at least on smaller cars.