Bob Lutz of GM talks about Future of Diesel in US - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

pjc · #16 09-20-2007, 12:19 PM

For those interested in the numerical standards:

Euro 4, effective 2005:
NOx = 250 mg/km (.40 gm/mi) diesel; 70 mg/km (.11 gm/mi) petrol
PM = 25 mg/km (.04 gm/mi) diesel (no standard for petrol)

Euro 5, effective Sep 2009 for new models, Jan 2011 for all passenger vehicles, including SUVs (which comprise a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of the European market):
NOx = 180 mg/km (.29 gm/mi) diesel; 70 mg/km (.11 gm/mi) petrol
PM = 5 mg/km (.008 gm/mi) for diesels and petrol

Euro 6, effective 2014:
NOx = 80 mg/km (.13 gm/mi) diesel; 70 mg/km (.11 gm/mi) petrol
PM = 5 mg/km (.008 gm/mi) for diesels and petrol

US EPA Tier 2, effective model year 2007:
NOx (gm/mi) = .02 (Bin 2); .03 (Bin 3); .04 (Bin 4); .07 (Bin 5); .10 (Bin 6); .15 (Bin 7); .20 (Bin 8).
PM (gm/mi) = .01 (Bins 2-6); .02 (Bins 7-8)

Note that for NOx, a manufacturer's US fleet average must meet the average of the bins, .07 gm/mi, which happens to be the same as the Bin 5 standard. The manufacturer, not EPA, chooses which bin to certify a particular model/engine combination to, but if it selects a bin higher than Bin 5, it must offset sales of such vehicles by sales of vehicles in bins lower than Bin 5. This is in contrast to the European approach, in which all passenger vehicles must meet the same standards, but which is not "fuel neutral."

So, when Bob Lutz says a diesel "must" meet Bin 5 standards, that's not exactly true. GM could certify a particular model+engine to a higher bin, but would have to make up for it with satisfactory emissions from other (petrol) vehicles.

C Sean Watts · #17 09-20-2007, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pjc

For those interested in the numerical standards:

Euro 4, effective 2005:
NOx = 250 mg/km (.40 gm/mi) diesel; 70 mg/km (.11 gm/mi) petrol
PM = 25 mg/km (.04 gm/mi) diesel (no standard for petrol)

Euro 5, effective Sep 2009 for new models, Jan 2011 for all passenger vehicles, including SUVs (which comprise a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of the European market):
NOx = 180 mg/km (.29 gm/mi) diesel; 70 mg/km (.11 gm/mi) petrol
PM = 5 mg/km (.008 gm/mi) for diesels and petrol

Euro 6, effective 2014:
NOx = 80 mg/km (.13 gm/mi) diesel; 70 mg/km (.11 gm/mi) petrol
PM = 5 mg/km (.008 gm/mi) for diesels and petrol

US EPA Tier 2, effective model year 2007:
NOx (gm/mi) = .02 (Bin 2); .03 (Bin 3); .04 (Bin 4); .07 (Bin 5); .10 (Bin 6); .15 (Bin 7); .20 (Bin 8).
PM (gm/mi) = .01 (Bins 2-6); .02 (Bins 7-8)

Note that for NOx, a manufacturer's US fleet average must meet the average of the bins, .07 gm/mi, which happens to be the same as the Bin 5 standard. The manufacturer, not EPA, chooses which bin to certify a particular model/engine combination to, but if it selects a bin higher than Bin 5, it must offset sales of such vehicles by sales of vehicles in bins lower than Bin 5. This is in contrast to the European approach, in which all passenger vehicles must meet the same standards, but which is not "fuel neutral."

So, when Bob Lutz says a diesel "must" meet Bin 5 standards, that's not exactly true. GM could certify a particular model+engine to a higher bin, but would have to make up for it with satisfactory emissions from other (petrol) vehicles.

CAFE = corporate average fuel economy. The maker's entire fleet for that year. The two playing fields (US and EU) not being quite the same. He made his point about as clear as Alan Greenspan's economics speeches.

patbob · #18 09-20-2007, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C Sean Watts

--Now, not getting personal but if the shoe fits - hey, you know the rest.

Start paying attention people. Lutz is right, stratified charge gasoline engines WILL replace the small diesel - notice I said small? Direct gasoline injection and/or induced ignition gasoline engines will surpass diesel efficiency with far fewer particle emissions.
Read up on Euro five standards vs US standards THEN tell me why the Bluetec was developed for the US/Canadian markets.

I suppose we can start a federal government buggy whip industry bail out but do we really need to?

While what you say about those technologies is true, they are not available today. Passenger car diesels that meet bin 2 standards are. Ok, fine, maybe GM can't put on in a passenger car and meet their target price point, but that didn't seem to be the crux of Lutz's argument. His argument was all about how difficult the technology would be to do, not how hard it is to do at the price point and profit margin GM must achieve.

As for the buggy whip industry.. their bailout will be cheaper than the GM bailout will be when they don't bring the right products to market for a couple of years running.

Bio300TDTdriver · #19 09-21-2007, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForcedInduction

Dangit! Why isn't a 100mpg series-hybrid diesel for sale yet?!?

If a VW Lupo with a traditional diesel and gearbox can get 70mpg, a hybrid should have little trouble getting 100+.

Well it's not for sale yet and it's not a hybrid, but it gets 100 mpg.

http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/honda/t-shot-across-the-bow-signaling-the-diesel-invasion-of-america-is-about-to-begin-6245.html

lietuviai · #20 09-21-2007, 12:13 AM

I want one!

Bio300TDTdriver · #21 09-21-2007, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lietuviai

I want one!

Me too. We just bought the hybrid, but when Honda sells the civic diesel here (2009 is what they say now) we will be trading the hybrid in.

C Sean Watts · #22 09-21-2007, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patbob

While what you say about those technologies is true, they are not available today. Passenger car diesels that meet bin 2 standards are. Ok, fine, maybe GM can't put on in a passenger car and meet their target price point, but that didn't seem to be the crux of Lutz's argument. His argument was all about how difficult the technology would be to do, not how hard it is to do at the price point and profit margin GM must achieve.

As for the buggy whip industry.. their bailout will be cheaper than the GM bailout will be when they don't bring the right products to market for a couple of years running.

that. When knees jerk the main point tends to get lost. NOW, I'm not saying those who poo poo what he had to say are doofuses, however, with tongue firmly in cheek, I will circuitously insinuate said demographic are slightly left of the bell peak. err - uuhh

Any direction a maker decides to go, hybrid, electric, hydrogen, small diesel, etc, etc. will be a calculated, capitol investment. Most of the time that means no guarantees, no bailouts. CEOs know it, but they must be careful when they say that. Managers tend to want to 'make the design pay off,' while engineers tend to want to, 'make the design work.' Recall that a stock broker will tell you the two motivators of Wall Street are FEAR and GREED.

Between the lines? He can't come out and state, "We - the big three- have poured billions into electric hybrid and pure electric. We did this in a long view of the future of transportation because we decided to skip a generation (IE: small, clean diesel) and be ready for the day zero tailpipe emissions becomes law..." Too many people (sheeple?) will hear, "We poured billions into.." OH MY GOD -- SELL THE STOCK!!!

As for bailouts, some are investments - Chrysler paid back and paid off. J.P. Morgan getting into the defense weapons business in the 1930s came with nothing but a big sucking sound.

Anyone who's ridden in a Lupo did it not feel like it would beat you on a long highway trip? I've been in one around town, THEN in an A class CDI about 100 miles on the Autobahn. The A was much more civilized - costs more, but a very nice ride for a tiny car.