Diesel GC will only meet 2007 EPA regs unless...

RFCRD · **Posted:** Sun Jun 18, 2006 11:21 am

GreggD wrote:

While you can't use 100% biodiesel in a gasoline engine, you can mix it with the gas at a maximum of 15%. The gas will burn more efficiently & the emissions will be lower. I know, because I've done it sucessfully.

Hey, what made you try this stunt? Did it smoke or run funny? Do you know of anyone doing serious research on this?

On the crude oil supply questions, ever notice how imported crude oil market prices seem to float around near the cost of recovering new oil domestically? You are 100% correct, it's worthless to pump the stuff if you can't refine it. One thing not discussed is the balance of diesel vs. gasoline refined. Refineries need to keep this in balance. In Europe where diesels are more common, they tend to end up with a surplus of gasoline which supposidly is a by-product of diesel fuel refining. I don't believe diesel engines in cars will catch on in the US because if it did, diesel fuel prices would skyrocket from demand and create an imbalance in fuel supplies. If that happens we would need all those 11 mpg gas sucking SUV's to burn off the surplus gasoline.

GreggD · **Posted:** Sun Jun 18, 2006 12:28 pm

RFCRD wrote:

GreggD wrote:

While you can't use 100% biodiesel in a gasoline engine, you can mix it with the gas at a maximum of 15%. The gas will burn more efficiently & the emissions will be lower. I know, because I've done it sucessfully.

Hey, what made you try this stunt? Did it smoke or run funny? Do you know of anyone doing serious research on this?

On the crude oil supply questions, ever notice how imported crude oil market prices seem to float around near the cost of recovering new oil domestically? You are 100% correct, it's worthless to pump the stuff if you can't refine it. One thing not discussed is the balance of diesel vs. gasoline refined. Refineries need to keep this in balance. In Europe where diesels are more common, they tend to end up with a surplus of gasoline which supposidly is a by-product of diesel fuel refining. I don't believe diesel engines in cars will catch on in the US because if it did, diesel fuel prices would skyrocket from demand and create an imbalance in fuel supplies. If that happens we would need all those 11 mpg gas sucking SUV's to burn off the surplus gasoline.

I actually got the idea from a Paul Harvey commentary one morning about 2 years ago. I'm also a member of a biofuels forum. I posed the question & got a response from a fellow member who had added 15% biodiesel to the gas in his car. It ran quite well. The vehicle I used was a 1998 Pontiac Grand Am GT 3.1 L.

One reason that diesels won't catch on is those environmentalist wackos that say "Diesel is dirty", but offer very little if anything in the way of a solution. Back in the 1980's, GM offered several of their cars with a diesel engine. Diesel fuel prices did go up, just the way UNLEADED gasoline did back in 1975 when the use of leaded gas in new cars/trucks was banned. In 1974, I seem to recall unleaded gas selling for .35 per gal. at a station in my old home town. One year later is had jumped to about .50 per gal.

GreggD · **Posted:** Sun Jun 18, 2006 2:11 pm

DarbyWalters wrote:

In the end we have to blame ourselves...we are basically to busy, lazy, confused to do anything about the situation ( In general ). Most people, including myself, are trying to make things better for ourselves. Point: I , until lately, have not really worried or even researched BioFuels...Why...It was not on the top of my list until I got my CRD. Funny thing is I have a statewide moving company that uses Isuzu Diesel Turbo trucks. Why didn't I think about Biodiesel before...because the customer was basically funding my fuel purchase thru the price of a move. As long as I and my company were making money...I was content. On the other end of the scale, Oil Companies are doing the same. They are just moving along as always because change requires a thought process and adjustment. Althought "environmentalist" are sometimes looked at as "Wackos", they are for the most part people who have decided to make a change that requires adjustments. Just like the rest of us, they cover the spectrum of personalities and degrees of commitment.

Even tho some of us would never admit groups like GreenPeace, PETA, ect. are doing good, sometimes it takes a more radical viewpoint to draw attention to a common sense solution. Yeah, they sometimes got over the top but they do eventually bring attention to some issues we might ignore.

Yes, they do go over the top....to the extreme. I remember a couple of years ago that the ELF burned down houses & destroyed an SUV dealership out in California. These enviromental wackos did the very thing the say their against, polluting the environment. An animal rights group stopped logging by saying that a species of owl could only be found in that area. Later, the very species was found living in a Wal-Mart sign in southern Califoria. It turns out they transplanted the owl to that area & falsified the documents. These folks will do anything, including lie, destroy private property, or whatever it takes to justify their end.

oldnavy · **Posted:** Sun Jun 18, 2006 9:21 pm

ELF has now went on record that it is ok to kill for their beliefs.

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Sun Jun 18, 2006 9:39 pm

oldnavy wrote:

ELF has now went on record that it is ok to kill for their beliefs.

Thought I was fairly up to speed on dangerous nutjob groups, but I guess not. Who the hell is ELF?

GreggD · **Posted:** Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:09 pm

oldnavy wrote:

ELF has now went on record that it is ok to kill for their beliefs.

It seems they can dish it out, but can they take it.

GreggD · **Posted:** Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:10 pm

Goglio704 wrote:

oldnavy wrote:

ELF has now went on record that it is ok to kill for their beliefs.

Thought I was fairly up to speed on dangerous nutjob groups, but I guess not. Who the hell is ELF?

ELF stands for Earth Liberation Front. ALF stands for Animal Liberation Front.

Both groups are very dangerous in my opinion.

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:17 pm

GreggD wrote:

Goglio704 wrote:

oldnavy wrote:

ELF has now went on record that it is ok to kill for their beliefs.

Thought I was fairly up to speed on dangerous nutjob groups, but I guess not. Who the hell is ELF?

ELF stands for Earth Liberation Front. ALF stands for Animal Liberation Front.

Both groups are very dangerous in my opinion.

So I guess if you encounter them while four wheelin' in a diesel Jeep, with leather seats, and a dog in the back it is a shoot first kinda deal? :lol:

retmil46 · **Posted:** Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:47 pm

Between the far left, far right, politicians, oil industry, auto industry, EPA, Sierra Club, lobbyists, etc, we're caught at the bottom of the hill, and you know what they say about what comes out of the back end of a bull rolling downhill.

More fuel we use, more money the government rakes in thru taxes. The tighter the supply and the higher the prices, the more money the oil industry rakes in. Raise CAFE and emissions standards, requiring more complicated equipment on a vehicle, and the auto industry can justify jacking up the prices on their vehicles. And then you have the EPA and the environmental groups pushing their own narrow agendas, everything else be damned. And John Q. Public is caught in the crossfire, not knowing which way to turn or who to believe from all the BS being slung.

What I've come to believe is that all of the groups involved, on both sides, DO NOT want a simple easy solution to the mess, even if one were available. There's too much money, influence, and power to be gained from continuing to play The Game and keeping the status quo.

Hero · **Joined:** Sun Apr 16, 2006 5:32 pm **Posts:** 122

GreggD wrote:

RFCRD wrote:

GreggD wrote:

While you can't use 100% biodiesel in a gasoline engine, you can mix it with the gas at a maximum of 15%. The gas will burn more efficiently & the emissions will be lower. I know, because I've done it sucessfully.

Hey, what made you try this stunt? Did it smoke or run funny? Do you know of anyone doing serious research on this?

On the crude oil supply questions, ever notice how imported crude oil market prices seem to float around near the cost of recovering new oil domestically? You are 100% correct, it's worthless to pump the stuff if you can't refine it. One thing not discussed is the balance of diesel vs. gasoline refined. Refineries need to keep this in balance. In Europe where diesels are more common, they tend to end up with a surplus of gasoline which supposidly is a by-product of diesel fuel refining. I don't believe diesel engines in cars will catch on in the US because if it did, diesel fuel prices would skyrocket from demand and create an imbalance in fuel supplies. If that happens we would need all those 11 mpg gas sucking SUV's to burn off the surplus gasoline.

I actually got the idea from a Paul Harvey commentary one morning about 2 years ago. I'm also a member of a biofuels forum. I posed the question & got a response from a fellow member who had added 15% biodiesel to the gas in his car. It ran quite well. The vehicle I used was a 1998 Pontiac Grand Am GT 3.1 L.

One reason that diesels won't catch on is those environmentalist wackos that say "Diesel is dirty", but offer very little if anything in the way of a solution. Back in the 1980's, GM offered several of their cars with a diesel engine. Diesel fuel prices did go up, just the way UNLEADED gasoline did back in 1975 when the use of leaded gas in new cars/trucks was banned. In 1974, I seem to recall unleaded gas selling for .35 per gal. at a station in my old home town. One year later is had jumped to about .50 per gal.

I was really thinking that you meant to say to use ethanol with a 15% gasoline blend (E-85 of course) but see your point now

Did anyone know that you can run an E-95 blend (95% ethanol/5% gasoline) in a diesel engine? There was a trucking company based out of Decatur, Illinois that did this a few years ago and had few problems (other than a few busted up spark plugs).

GreggD · **Posted:** Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:34 am

Goglio704 wrote:

GreggD wrote:

Goglio704 wrote:

oldnavy wrote:

ELF has now went on record that it is ok to kill for their beliefs.

Thought I was fairly up to speed on dangerous nutjob groups, but I guess not. Who the hell is ELF?

ELF stands for Earth Liberation Front. ALF stands for Animal Liberation Front.

Both groups are very dangerous in my opinion.

So I guess if you encounter them while four wheelin' in a diesel Jeep, with leather seats, and a dog in the back it is a shoot first kinda deal? :lol:

To quote Bugs Bunny:"Ahhhh, could be."

GreggD · **Posted:** Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:46 am

retmil46 wrote:

Between the far left, far right, politicians, oil industry, auto industry, EPA, Sierra Club, lobbyists, etc, we're caught at the bottom of the hill, and you know what they say about what comes out of the back end of a bull rolling downhill.

More fuel we use, more money the government rakes in thru taxes. The tighter the supply and the higher the prices, the more money the oil industry rakes in. Raise CAFE and emissions standards, requiring more complicated equipment on a vehicle, and the auto industry can justify jacking up the prices on their vehicles. And then you have the EPA and the environmental groups pushing their own narrow agendas, everything else be damned. And John Q. Public is caught in the crossfire, not knowing which way to turn or who to believe from all the BS being slung.

What I've come to believe is that all of the groups involved, on both sides, DO NOT want a simple easy solution to the mess, even if one were available. There's too much money, influence, and power to be gained from continuing to play The Game and keeping the status quo.

Here! Here! I have to agree with you on that. There are some on the right that are RINO's, Republicans In Name Only. Several from the Northeast, & a Maverick from Arizona. May be others I'm not aware of too. We do have options now, but as you said, nobody wants to implement them. Sorry, I'm not trying to politicize this forum, but I am passionate about what I believe in.

jinstall · **Posted:** Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:07 am

Why does the US CRD not have a PF on it? It is required here in Germany since 2005 on ALL diesels.

RFCRD · **Posted:** Thu Jun 22, 2006 7:13 am

jinstall wrote:

Why does the US CRD not have a PF on it? It is required here in Germany since 2005 on ALL diesels.

Most likely because it's another piece of hardware to purchase and maintain. On yours, where did they put the PF and what maintenance does it require?

oldnavy · **Posted:** Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:10 am

So what is "PF"?

Guest · **Posted:** Thu Jun 22, 2006 11:08 am

oldnavy wrote:

So what is "PF"?

I'm guessing a Particulate Filter.

BiodieselJeep.com · **Posted:** Thu Jun 22, 2006 11:10 am

Quote:

I was really thinking that you meant to say to use ethanol with a 15% gasoline blend (E-85 of course) but see your point now

Did anyone know that you can run an E-95 blend (95% ethanol/5% gasoline) in a diesel engine? There was a trucking company based out of Decatur, Illinois that did this a few years ago and had few problems (other than a few busted up spark plugs).

OK, now I know you are f'n with us ... spark plugs...in a diesel. Seems like I'm the only one who caught your joke.

However, I HAVE used Biodiesel and Gasoline in a mix for a 2 cycle engine (a weed wacker). I did a rough guess at the different lube-properties of 2 cycle oil vs Biodiesel (1 to 5), did the math up and figured about 10% biodiesel. Ran fine but that doesn't mean the engine isn't getting slowly getting crapped up. Its an old, cheap thing and I don't care. And I'm half-crazy (ok more than half).....

grywlfbg · **Posted:** Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:49 pm

I figure I might as well throw my $0.02 in here regarding the oil refinery thing from a couple pages ago. Here in Cali, the oil companies did shutter refineries in order to drive up prices (this was proven during the Enron trial in phone conversations and e-mails). Cali is different because CARB requires a specific blend of gas that's only refined here so if we run short we can't borrow from other states.

They (oil companies) also do fun things like schedule routine refinery maintenance at the beginning of the summer driving season to cause artificial shortages.

It is true that it's nearly impossible to build a new refinery in California due to environmental regs but the point is that the oil companies only want to build them now that they can get make much higher profits due to shortages that they themselves caused. They could have just kept the ones they already had open.

If our worthless government (both sides of the aisle are to blame) wants to truly lower gas prices, they need to mandate one single requirement for fuel nationwide. That way refineries with excess capacity in one state can ship fuel to another. Prices would isntantly drop. Also, they should relax the dates on when stations have to shift from summer to fall to winter blends of fuel. If their forecasts are wrong then prices rise or fall dramatically right before the date.

Oil companies are evil and the government is evil (or stupid). Let's leave it at that

GreggD · **Posted:** Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:25 pm

Hey Chris,

I mentioned about having one nationwide blend of fuel on Page 2. Just make the adjustment for higher altitudes in states like Colorado.

If California has the most stingent emissions standards, then that's the fuel the rest of us should use too.

You're right about the refineries picking the worst times of the year for maintenence.

Diesel GC will only meet 2007 EPA regs unless...

Who is online