Fuelly Forums

Fuelly Forums (https://www.fuelly.com/forums/)
-   General Discussion (Off-Topic) (https://www.fuelly.com/forums/f22/)
-   -   GHG or NOx (https://www.fuelly.com/forums/f22/ghg-or-nox-5012.html)

zpiloto 06-15-2007 07:49 AM

GHG or NOx
 
This is kinda of a spinoff of another thread. What should we put or efforts into. Seems like all the trend is to reduce GHG affect but in the process it seems we are increasing NOx, VOC, and PM10 particles. So what would our efforts be better spent on? Again I know it's not a simple answer. Just wanted to get a debate going?

rh77 06-15-2007 08:25 AM

Good Question
 
Definitely PM10 as one of the first -- because of the major contributors and the ability to make a quick fix. Diesels generate the most -- so with the new regs for the 07MY+, the particulates are reduced, or retrofits of existing units can trap the particles: effects breathing disorders. (short term)

GHG: Definitely for the long term...gotta start now, followed closely by NOx, which is hazardous immediately.

Newer catalysts reduce NOx, but still can be raised by driving technique (although it reduces GHG). It depends on the ratio.

I consier PM10 to be separate.

EDIT: VOCs -- definitely need to respect the vaporative capture system on many station pumps (or fill at night / not mow on "Ozone Alert" days). Cities with Smog should make this a equal priority with PM10 for immediate benefit.

RH77

Bill in Houston 06-15-2007 11:43 AM

I'm thinking that PM10 is the one where our knowledge is the most sketchy, and I suspect that we pretty strongly underestimate it's importance.

Mike T 06-15-2007 11:55 AM

When was the last time you saw a gasoline pump nozzle that actually sealed with the tank orifice, so all the VOC-laden air that has to be displaced from the fuel tank does NOT vent to the atmosphere, and went into the vapour recovery canister instead? I've NEVER seen one.

rh77 06-15-2007 02:13 PM

Needed to Research more...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike T (Post 58380)
When was the last time you saw a gasoline pump nozzle that actually sealed with the tank orifice, so all the VOC-laden air that has to be displaced from the fuel tank does NOT vent to the atmosphere, and went into the vapour recovery canister instead? I've NEVER seen one.

I know I needed some more info to specify additional insights -- The U.S. EPA is a good source of info...some links below:

Regarding VOCs and your concern Mike: the closest thing is the spring-loaded system on pumps in California with the "elephant trunk" seal.

I found a manufacturer link here (see page 3)...

I can still see vapor shadows in strong sunlight with any system, but vapor recovery is supposed to help. EVRU Data.

ORVR (on-board refueling vapor recovery) seems to be effective. ORVR Fact Sheet. Basically the system on a vehicle.

Bill- Regarding fine particulates (PM10), I know from several documented studies that show a higher incidence of Asthma (including a rising number of childhood cases), non-smoker Emphysema, COPD, and other breathing problems are caused by this "soot". (EPA Fact Sheet) It's a major reason why low-sulfur Diesel is the only road-legal fuel in the U.S. as of this year, modified emissions are required on all new Diesel engines, or retrofits are requested or subsidized for school busses. More at the EPA regarding the retrofit plan.

NOx, to me, was the most elusive in common information. EPA Fact Sheet. Basically it's pretty nasty: causes acid rain, contributes to GHGs, can contain particulates, deteriorates water, smog, etc.

RH77

SVOboy 06-15-2007 02:38 PM

I say NOx first. However, there is very little that makes the elimination of NOx and GHGs mutually exclusive.

I think that the efforts to reduce them should be kept seperate...that way each group can keep pushing their own agenda. *shrug*

zpiloto 06-15-2007 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SVOboy (Post 58420)
I say NOx first. However, there is very little that makes the elimination of NOx and GHGs mutually exclusive.

I think that the efforts to reduce them should be kept seperate...that way each group can keep pushing their own agenda. *shrug*


Which begs the question. How hard and expensive would it be to reduce NOx? Also GHG's are just a function of MPG or is there more to it?

SVOboy 06-15-2007 02:51 PM

Just a function of MPG.

It's not that expensive to reduce, I don't think. Probably the best method is to try to get rid of old cars...

zpiloto 06-15-2007 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SVOboy (Post 58429)
Just a function of MPG.

It's not that expensive to reduce, I don't think. Probably the best method is to try to get rid of old cars...

Can't git rid of the old ones, then we lose our heritage.:) So I guess in the pursuit of higer FE we need to do it in a NOx friendly way. SO what would those ideas be? Would a preheated cat help with reducing NOx from a higher compression engine?

SVOboy 06-15-2007 03:05 PM

There are such things as cat wraps you can buy that keep some heat for as much as 24 hours...I don't EOC anymore...I also haven't leaned the car out at all. This is just for general emissions, but yeah.

I'm looking to move up to a prius or hchI or even civic when I graduate. I won't log too many miles until then anyway (and I hope an EV will go in the works).

For the average person though, I think vehicle switching is the only really efficient thing...


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:20 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.