Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by djberg96 (2603) on 2003.02.13 13:58 (#16994) Journal
    I forwarded this story to a good friend of mine, who happens to be a mechanical engineer, and specializes in diesel engines (in the U.S.). Here was some information he provided:
    1) People generally drive fewer miles per year than in the US due to high fuel costs and good public transportation. 12,000 to 15,000 miles per year is pretty common in the US, but somewhat unusual for a European. At that rate, mechanical problems due to biodiesel could take years before they are seen.

    2) Most of the diesels in Europe using the biodiesel are indirect-injection (IDI), not the direct-injection (DI) used in current cars. The DI engines (generally 99MY and later) meet much higher emissions standards, but are much less tolerant of fuels for which the system was not designed for. Even if you purchased non-wasteoil biodiesel, the lubrication properties could be very different than normal diesel. Considering that DI fuel injection pressure is 1800 bar (26,000 pounds/square inch), all of the moving parts (injector needles, fuel pump pistons, etc.) have very minimal running tolerances and behave very poorly with wear.

    Another thing to keep in mind is that although they may smell better, their NOx and PM emissions could be quite worse than they are with normal fuel. Most of the harmful substances in emissions don't have an odor.

    So far, I have done a lot of testing with Ethanol and biodiesel, and their main benefit is to the states that grow corn.