[AT] Ram 3.0 liter Dieselgate

Sat Jan 14 08:47:17 PST 2017

Agreed Charlie.  The Chinese rules on coal plants are brand-new, couple
years old.  Guessing a couple things (a) compliance with the rules might be
sketchy (b) even with excellent compliance I would think it will take quite
a while for the atmosphere to clear up.

SO

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:51 AM, charlie hill <charliehill at embarqmail.com>
wrote:

> "The Chinese actually have emissions standards on their coal plants.  Now,
> I can't say I know anything about their rates of compliance, but it's not a
> free-for-all as has been implied."
>
> A friend of mine is one of the top stunt pilots in the world.
> (http://hubietolson.com/)
> He recently flew two airshows in China.  I was talking with him in a local
> café recently
> about the China shows.  Another guy asked him about air restrictions in
> China.  He
> said the air space is highly restricted but that it did not matter in his
> case.  He said they
> fly strictly visual flight rules and that if he got as much as a mile away
> from either of
> the two airports he couldn't see how to get back.  Not from fog or dark,
> from air pollution.
> The two airports were in cities a hundred or more miles apart so it wasn't
> just a localized
> situation.
>
> Charlie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Offiler
> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 9:11 AM
> To: Antique tractor email discussion group
> Subject: Re: [AT] Ram 3.0 liter Dieselgate
>
> Some factors to consider Cecil:
>
> - volcanoes emit huge quantites of ash/soot/particulate, CO2, SO2, H2O...
> but they don't emit serious quantites of NOx.  And the diesel discussion is
> really all about NOx.  Of the five emissions that are controlled:  Diesels
> are lower in (#1) CO2 due to thermal efficiency, lower in (#2) CO and (#3)
> HC due to lean-burn, but higher in (#4) NOx and (#5) particulates.  Then,
> consider that particulates are pretty well covered by the DPF (diesel
> particulate filter) and it literally boils down to NOx.
>
> - The Chinese actually have emissions standards on their coal plants.  Now,
> I can't say I know anything about their rates of compliance, but it's not a
> free-for-all as has been implied.
>
> - The immediate effects of NOx are localized, not global.  The case in
> point is the smog in Los Angeles.  If you think back, the earliest
> emissions standards were tighter in CA than the rest of the nation.
> Remember cars with "California Emissions" vs. "49-State Emissions"?
> Because the problems can be fairly local, they actually started out by
> trying to keep the solution fairly local too.
>
> SO
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Cecil Bearden <crbearden at copper.net>
> wrote:
>
> > I suppose that I have been sheltered from the smog and bad air quality
> > living my entire life in Oklahoma.   Here, the air is changed at least
> > every 15  minutes!!  The wind here is a minimum 8 mph and that low is
> > only experienced 3 or 4 days a month.   Wile I realize that man does
> > have some effect on the air as Grant discussed about California,  all
> > that work is lost when a Volcano blows its lid somewhere in the World.
> > Or as mentioned, another country puts up Power plants with no regard to
> > emissions. Perhaps we need to station reverse wind generators on our
> > coasts that will blow the pollution away from out nation.
> >
> > My view is getting very jaded as I get older.  I have worked since I was
> > 8 years old to get ahead.  Now as I each the age when I should be able
> > to enjoy the fruits of that labor, I have to be constantly vigilant to
> > prevent politicians, thieves, foreign governments, and the poor excuses
> > for roadways in this state from taking it all away.   As Will Rogers
> > once said,  "We sure are not getting all the government we are paying
> > for" !!
> >
> > I mention the roadways because Oklahoma has some of the worst in the
> > nation, and our County roadways are like Asphalt trails after a low
> > level air raid.  As a matter of fact, last week, my neighbor found a 50
> > lb anvil at the side of the road near an especially rough section!!!!
> >
> > On a better note, I rebuilt the injection pump on the 60KW Onan
> > Generator with the Allis Chalmers engine (same as in a 190XT tractor).
> > It would run about 3 minutes and die after I installed it,  The shut off
> > solenoid decided to fail when I put it back together.   $85 and a 1 hour
> > trip to the pump shop fixed that...
> >
> > The Roosa Master and CAV pumps have a vinyl ring between the governor
> > and the drive plate inside the pump.  Time and fuel additives cause the
> > ring to deteriorate.   If you have ever heard a John deere rev up and
> > down while setting idle, that  is usually the problem if the pump is 20
> > years old.  There is a solid governor drive plate now available.  It is
> > $50 extra and most shops don't replace it as the new vinyl ring is
> > included in the $50 gasket kit. While it took me over a day to get the
> > pump rebuilt, the pump shop would have charged $500 plus another $185
> > for the parts I installed.   The pump has to be taken apart to replace
> > that vinyl ring, but if the engine was running OK before, The
> > calibration stand work is not really necessary.  If any of you guys want
> > to try to rebuild your own pumps I can give you places to call for
> > parts, and links to rebuild literature.
> >
> > Cecil in OKla
> >
> > On 1/13/2017 3:59 AM, Stephen Offiler wrote:
> > > Don, I am widely in agreement with essentially everything your son
> > > wrote,
> > > with just one tiny nitpick. The urea injection systems have nothing to
> > > do
> > > with particulates, they're for controlling NOx only.  I'd bet he knows
> > this
> > > and just slipped on the wording.  Particulates are handled by a
> > completely
> > > separate device in the exhaust system called the Diesel Particulate
> > Filter,
> > > a physical filter, not a chemistry experiment.
> > >
> > > The beauty of the diesel engine is that it can run at very high
> cylinder
> > > temperatures and pressures with very lean fuel mixtures.  This creates
> > > higher thermal efficiency, simply put, more heat from the burning fuel
> > > moves the vehicle down the road and less goes out the radiator and
> > > exhaust.  However high temperature and pressure forces nitrogen to hook
> > up
> > > with oxygen, creating NOx compounds (mostly NO2, NO3, and N2O).  Can't
> > have
> > > it both ways, says the laws of physics.  Either reduce NOx by reducing
> > > cylinder temperature and pressure in various ways (his choice "b")
> > > including lower compression, lower turbo boost, greater EGR, etc...
> thus
> > > creating a diesel that performs more like a gas engine; or reduce NOx
> > using
> > > a chemistry lab behind the engine to break apart the NOx back into
> > harmless
> > > N2 and O2 molecules (his choice "a")
> > >
> > > On a separate note, thanks also to Grant Brians for lending some
> > real-world
> > > perspective on the reasons our government chose to control auto
> > > emissions
> > > and the success they achieved.
> > >
> > > SO
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:44 PM, Don <don.bowen at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 1/12/2017 5:45 PM, David Bruce wrote:
> > >>> The other issue is the regs being reasonable but if they had to cheat
> > to
> > >>> meet the regs there is an issue. Not an insider but seems to me if
> one
> > >>> was doing it others were.
> > >> The following is from my son on the earlier VW scandal.  He is an
> > >> account executive for Jaguar Land Rover and has written several books
> > >> on
> > >> automobile performance modifications.
> > >>
> > >> "I meant to send this to you - I sent the below response to people at
> > >> my
> > >> agency who were asking about the scandal:
> > >>
> > >> This goes back to the simple fact that there are only two possible
> ways
> > >> for a Diesel engine to meet CA/EPA Nox and particulate emissions: a)
> > >> Urea injection or b) Destroy performance and engine life. Choose a and
> > >> the designers have to find a way to make the car not run when the tank
> > >> runs dry, and risk annoying consumers who are used to low maintenance
> > >> engines. Choose b and no one will buy your Diesel car.
> > >>
> > >> Here’s the list of manufacturers that chose to use Urea injection:
> > >> Jaguar Land Rover, BMW, Mercedes, Ford, Chevy, Allison, Chrysler
> > >> (Cummins), Volvo trucks, Audi, VW (Passat)
> > >>
> > >> Here’s the manufacturers that chose to go without Urea: IH/Navistar
> > >> (almost destroyed their company when the engines failed early and had
> > >> to
> > >> be recalled), Mazda (caused them to delay/cancel launch of the Mazda6
> > >> in
> > >> the U.S.), VW (except Passat)
> > >>
> > >> VW thought they could get the best of both worlds by fooling the
> > >> regulators into thinking the cars are cleaner than they really are.
> ALL
> > >> manufacturers game the EPA testing to some extent but this case is
> > >> extremely egregious because of the difference in how the cars run. And
> > >> of course because they got caught.
> > >>
> > >> Happy to chat more if anyone wants more back story – this is one of
> the
> > >> reasons Diesel engines are not popular in the U.S."
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Don Bowen       --AD0NB--
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> AT mailing list
> > >> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> > >>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > AT mailing list
> > > http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > AT mailing list
> > http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> >
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>