Diesel emissions

[LPGC]

Many forum users will have anticipated a thread on this subject.. Looks like I'm the first to mention it.

In the news - VW admits to installing software in diesel vehicle ECUs that recognises emissions test situations and goes into super clean emissions mode... The rest of the time, the ECU runs in it's usual mode and kicks out 10 times the vehicle's rated emissions!

Sussed by American vehicles testers of some sorts - but not before some of us on this forum and no doubt not before by a great many other people too. We have all driven behind diesels kicking out clouds of smoke, tasted it and coughed. We have all heard of the damage diesel particulates can cause.

Many users of this forum including Gilbert and myself have been saying this for years... Diesel engine manufacturers produce diesel engines which may pass emissions tests, yet kick out way more emissions in the real world..

Petrol emissions are much cleaner than diesel emissions, LPG emissions are much cleaner than petrol emissions. Diesel engines generally produce a little less CO2 than petrol engines, so that's a little positive step regards global warming - and it seems lowering CO2 output is the first priority of governments. BUT diesel engines produce particulates which may cause breathing problems and cancer in the immediate vacinity, i.e. your city and your street. Not many people would be as concerned about global warming as they would about their kid getting asthma or cancer... Governments got it wrong.

With an unusual display of thinking outside the box, Sheffield council recently hit the nail on the head with their 'drive petrol' roadside signs.. Well done Sheffield but wish they'd gone one further and explained why LPG was far better than even petrol.

I believe VW's admittance is the tip of the iceberg (and this is equally applicable to many Audi models), hopefully there will be a fresh look at all diesel vehicle manufacturers, because it doesn't take Einstein to realise that the stinky fumes coming out the back of them are not good for your health. All diesels produce carcinogenic particulates!

Simon

[Gilbertd]

Over the years there's been a number of changes to fuel and emissions as a result of half arsed knee jerk reactions. Think about it. Research showed that a higher than normal level of lead was found in the bodies of children with lower than average brain development. So, ignoring the fact that at that time lead was still used in paint and children have a habit of chewing on pretty coloured things, it was mandated that the amount of lead in petrol had to be reduced. As the lead was there for a reason, to act as a lubricant and protection for valve seats, fuel manufacturers had to put something in to try to do the job that the lead used to do. These chemicals, when broken down by the combustion process caused all sorts of toxic nasties to come out of the tailpipe so manufacturers were forced to fit catalytic converters that turn all these nasty chemicals into nice safe, clean CO2 and water vapour. Great, everything is wonderful until along comes the news that despite the body of all mammals exhaling CO2 as part of the breathing process, CO2 then gets the blame for global warming so is no longer nice and safe and innocent as had been thought. So we've got to reduce it and the easiest way for a car manufacturer (before the days of cheat software), is to stick a diesel engine in instead. It's emits much less CO2, but it makes up for it by chucking out Nitrous oxides and soot instead. Neither of which are particularly good for you if you breathe them (unlike CO2 which is pretty harmless unless in extreme quantities).

From what I have seen so far, the US emissions limits don't test for CO2, but for the Nitrous oxides and it is the amount of these that have been fiddled, by a considerable margin. EU tests don't check the NOx levels but concentrate on CO2 instead. However, when road tax, sorry, Vehicle Excise Duty, is on a sliding scale depending on the CO2 level, it makes a good marketing point if you can advertise your cars as having cheaper VED than those of a competitors so if you can fiddle the NOx figures you may as well fiddle the CO2 ones too. For good measure, why not fiddle the fuel consumption figures too? Has anyone ever managed to get anywhere near the fuel consumption the manufacturers quoted on a new car? The old 1993 EU test methods were obviously much closer to the real world (or the cheat software didn't exist) as the handbook for my P38 quotes a combined figure of 18.1 mpg and, if I drive sensibly, can achieve that. No matter how you drive you'll never be able to achieve the 60+ mpg quoted for a lot of newer cars.

The emissions checks, particularly for diesels, are a farce anyway as they are geared towards urban driving. Particulates are low because of the DPF which stores them until you give it some welly. Then you inject a little urea, increase the combustion temperature and the DPF chucks it's content out all over the countryside instead. Anyone who spends any amount of time on the motorways will have seen a car driving along at a steady speed suddenly belch a cloud of black smoke out of the tailpipe for no apparent reason. That's the DPF emptying itself, or regenerating as the manufacturers call it as it doesn't sound as bad.

Many years ago I bought a brand new motorcycle for less than a third of the usual price as it was part of a cancelled export order that one enterprising dealer had bought directly from the manufacturers for next to nothing. All we need to do now is find a third world country that doesn't care about poisoning the population and make VW an offer for the cancelled export order of US spec diesels........

C'mon VW, Lancia admitted they got it wrong with the Beta and bought them all back, time for you to do the same.

[Joanne3]

Over the years there's been a number of changes to fuel and emissions as a result of half arsed knee jerk reactions. Think about it. Research showed that a higher than normal level of lead was found in the bodies of children with lower than average brain development. So, ignoring the fact that at that time lead was still used in paint and children have a habit of chewing on pretty coloured things, it was mandated that the amount of lead in petrol had to be reduced. ...

I used to think that the removal of lead from petrol was completely pointless posturing by politicians and their pressure groups until I read a paper in a statistical review last year.

This paper was looking at (so far) unexplained co-relations, and some researchers measured violent crimes against the introduction of lead free petrol. In every country they looked at, 20 years or so after introduction, violent crimes have dropped.

So ... I now support lead free petrol and I never thought I would say that!

There is a handy summary on the BBC website http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27067615

Joanne

[Gilbertd]

This paper was looking at (so far) unexplained co-relations, and some researchers measured violent crimes against the introduction of lead free petrol. In every country they looked at, 20 years or so after introduction, violent crimes have dropped.

I suppose it's possible but what else has changed over 20 years? I maintain that lager makes people violent. For the last 15-20 years I've worked behind the bar at the Peterborough Beer Festival (second in size only to the CAMRA organised Great British Beer Festival) and we have NEVER had any instances of violence. Not a bad record considering the attendance is around 40,000 people in the space of 5 days. People come in, drink too much, get drunk, fall over and go to sleep. Contrast that with the scenes outside most nightclubs in most city centres on a Friday or Saturday night where you can almost guarantee a punch up. I've always maintained that just as too many E numbers makes young kids into obnoxious brats, the chemicals in factory produced lager makes people violent whereas the lack of chemicals in real beer just make you fall asleep.......

[Bailes1992]

I like diesels. I do 20k-30k per year and the low down grunt and good range makes life much easier.
I generally don't care what comes out of the back end of my car, it really isn't a concern for me. However as odd as it sounds I do like how clean my Euro6 diesel appears to be.

A CAR WITH A WORKING DPF SHOULD NOT SMOKE AT ALL!
The particulate matter gets caught up in the particulate filter until the car decides to regen. It's at this point the soot is incinerated and not 'blown out'. A car doing a successful and complete regeneration should not smoke at all, even during regen.
Certainly my 2015 Ford Focus 1.5TDCi does not smoke what so ever, there is never any soot on the exhaust either. The same goes for my Fathers 2012 BMW 320d.

Now I'm not dismissing the issues with diesels, I know they exist and I know a lot more could be done to help them. However until companies stop doing all these lab tests and focus on real world driving in order to come up with ways to lower out NOx then we don't have a hope in hell of getting to the bottom of it. Everything seems hunky dory, some kicks up a little fuss and there's a knee jerk reaction to try and fix the issue. Nothing is logical. And that's why I believe there will be a Euro 7 and a Euro 8, I don't think drivers are ready to give up their diesels just yet.

I had a Fiesta 1.0T when my Focus went in for work under warranty. If I had driven a 1.0T before I ordered mine I would have probably opted for one, they are a fantastic little engine and make a lovely little rumble as they go about their business.
BUT after I drove it I got home and worked it out. I paid an extra £700 for my diesel. It would have paid for itself in less than 12 months.
My car does 65mpg. The 1.0T in the Fiesta(lighter car) was doing 40. I could have had it fitted with one of those Prins direct liquid LPG injection things but I'd have to wait 3 years for it to come out of warranty.

My Father is looking to replace his current 320d. He's decided he likes the Mazda6. His options are a 2.2 Diesel engine that puts out 175bhp and 410nm or a 2.0 Petrol with 162bhp and 210nm of torque.
Looking at it from my perspective, the diesel will be a much stronger engine to drive, cheaper to run and significantly faster.
There is no incentive right now to go petrol.

Lets go back to my Focus. It has an 'issue' which it's been back 13 times to try and resolve.
When you go yo accelerate sometimes the engine hesitates and bogs down before it starts to pull, it feels a bit like a blocked fuel filter.
Also sometimes when you're driving down the motorway the engine will randomly make a loud thump, a jerk and feel like it's cut out for a split second before carrying on like nothing has happened.
Both faults are down to programming of the EGR valve. I have been advised by Ford that this is a characteristic and not a fault and that unless 50 people complain about it nothing will be done. I have been told the current number of people complaining is still in single figures.
So what does that mean for the future of my car? The hesitation is downright annoying, almost dangerous and the cutting out issue will be destroying the DMF and engine mounts. It means if it's not fixed by the time it's out of warrenty the EGR will be getting removed. Without the EGR the DPF cannot regenerate so that will have to be removed also along with my posh 'active grills' which supposedly make the car cut through the air easier. What other option do I have?

I will however while the DPF and EGR are being removed have the engine fully remapped to give me a little more power, torque and economy. I'll be fitting a bigger intercooler, an induction kit mounted right in the front grill and fitting a full stainless exhaust. I hope to get 160bhp/350nm out of the car.
I do like how clean my car is now though, I like the fact it doesn't smoke or smell. I will probably then get a 100cell SportCAT fitted to try and stop the exhaust smelling, disguise it as a DPF to help me through the MOT.
To reduce particulate matter I will be looking into LPG enrichment. The LPG giving me a hotter burn which will reduce PM to nothing as it will result in a much more thorough burn of the diesel. How I will go about it I don't know yet. I'm unsure weather to just add a constant 15% LPG which will give me savings during normal driving but inject the normal amount of diesel plus 15% LPG at WOT. Or an LPG substitution system which incorporates knock sensors and others gadgets which can reduce the amount of diesel injected and substitute it by upto 50%.

Then there's the issue of NOx. I'm looking into retrofitted AdBlue systems. They are available but at designed for older diesel lorries and busses. How easy they would be to fit to a small petrol hatchback? I don't know.

[Gilbertd]

The particulate matter gets caught up in the particulate filter until the car decides to regen. It's at this point the soot is incinerated and not 'blown out'. A car doing a successful and complete regeneration should not smoke at all, even during regen.
Certainly my 2015 Ford Focus 1.5TDCi does not smoke what so ever, there is never any soot on the exhaust either. The same goes for my Fathers 2012 BMW 320d.

Maybe the current ones are better, but spend any amount of time on a motorway and you will definitely see a car doing a constant speed suddenly throw a big cloud of black smoke out of the tailpipe for no apparent reason. The ones I've noticed doing it most seem to be the TDCi Mondeo. Earlier generation I know but is it that or is it just that yours is that much newer and working as it should at the moment and will start to do it as it gets older?

[Bailes1992]

MK3 Mondeos never had a DPF.
The smoke you see is just build up inside the exhaust manifolds, turbo vanes, CATs etc.

I've seen a few newer cars do it and have assumed they have removed the DPF.

And even if the DPF isn't working as it should no significant particulate matter should get past it. It simply gets blocked up and the car fails to run.

[Gilbertd]

Was there a particular date when a DPF became mandatory (like there was with cats on petrol engines) or was it an option that a manufacturer fitted to meet whatever standard was current at the time? We used to have a number of Peugeot 406 HDi on our fleet at work and I had an 03 plated one. An earlier 51 plate one had to be moved to a different office so my colleague drove that while I followed in mine to give him a lift back. Despite him normally driving like a granny, I couldn't stay with him coming off roundabouts, the 51 plater was so much quicker. When I enquired as to why there should be this much difference, I was told that it was because my 03 car had a DPF but the earlier one didn't.

[TNT]

The Euro 6 standards is crazy, it basically turning the car into an air filter, the exhaust it probably cleaner than the air being sucked in. I can't see any diesel getting close to euro 6 without a adblue tank.

Our government has this crazy idea and obsession with CO2, forgetting the other stuff which cause our air quality problems. In reality and many people around here have said it before, NOx, pm's and CO are far more important in the grand scheme of things. This incident might actually turn the lime light towards NOx pm's and CO , and maybe the EPA might give our government the kick up the butt it needs. Hopefully this shines a light back on LPG too, until such a time batteries get half decent, the national grid gets the upgrades and extra power stations to handle everyone charging their cars, maybe an lpg hybrid in the mean time?

[Sir Henry]

To my mind LPG becoming more prevalent is a two edged sword. As there is more uptake, there will be more filling stations selling it. On the other hand if it takes away too much revenue from the guv'mint you can kiss goodbye to the lower duty on it.

[Bailes1992]

I'm a big 406 enthusiast. I've owned 3 and moderate on the 406oc forum.
The only 406 that was fitted with a DPF was the 2.2HDi (136). The 2.0HDi was never fitted with a DPF but was availible in two flavours. 110bhp and 90bhp. What I suspect is your colleague had a 110 and you had a 90.

[Gilbertd]

That would make sense even though the cover on the engine on both said HDi 110. The only difference was mine was an 03 plate and the other one a 51 plate.

[Bailes1992]

They both had the same engine covers. Only difference was the 110 has an intercooler.

[Morat]

I don't drive diesels. I like an engine that revs and doesn't sound like a... well... a diesel.
I like straight 6 and V8 petrol engines. It's a narrow choice these days, but LPG makes it possible.

I also like LPG as a fuel. I don't need to go into why on this forum!

Diesel should be taxed higher than petrol because it pollutes more. The problem is that all the Sheeple have bought diesels because they were told to, and if you try and turn a herd too quickly it breaks up and gets hard to control. Diesel will be gradually moved from it's "Favoured Fuel" status, but it will be a gentle change to allow current owners to move on without losing too much money and doing anything reckless like voting down the government. Or grumbling a bit.

The dangers of particulates from diesels have been known for decades, there was work done in the 60s by the Medical Research Council which showed the particulates from taxis and lorries were significant but no one wanted to listen.