Study: Government Favors EVs over Diesels

...don't get me started!
Except the public does not understand that are hybrids are not favored in America. Hybrids are same boat as diesel: you pay more for vehicle and pay more sales and property taxes and receive no subsidy.

What is favored are non-petroleum fuels (ethanol, electricity, biodiesel etc).

You tell me how you feel about that, and I will tell you what political party you probably belong to.

 

If you mean do I like encouraging technologies that get us away from imported oil, then yes, I do. Why should an oil based technology that is 100 years old need help from the government? Diesels need to get better mileage since the fuel is substantially more expensive than gasoline.

 

The current plugin incentive does favor big battery. It doesn't matter if you package it with a dirty gas engine. You still get $7,500 incentive. Crazy.

Regular hybrids and diesel don't get any incentive.

I agree that government incentive need to be tech neutral and the qualifying amount should depend on measurable results, not the size of you know what.

 

Because the EUSSR is run by Germany and France; two countries that have had cheap diesel (compared to petrol) for years and have a car industry biased to the fuel.

Thankfully I think the word is slowly getting out over here that diesel fumes are dangerous. It also appears that Government are falling out of favour with EV's though because diesel and petrol is so highly taxed and electricity isn't. Can't go missing all that tax revenue can we?

 

They do get better mileage in the whole. On average diesel vehicles' EPA ratings are 18% below what is reported by owners, and that was an EPA finding. The only help diesels need is a more accurate sticker number for their fuel economy, or even just an easily spotted footnote that the EPA testing tends to underrate them. We should also switch the 55/45 city/highway split for combined to 43/57. That is the average result from a self reported survey, and what the EPA uses for their MOVES program.

Is there any bin 5/LEV or worse plug ins out there? The emission tests and ratings only represent the CS or hybrid mode of a PHV. Unless they are never plugged in, which can be so, won't represent their emission profile in the wild. With the majority of owners getting the PHV that best fits their driving pattern, a substatial part of these cars miles will be in EV mode with lower car emissions.

Hybrids and diesels don't need that much of an incentive. Hybrid market share hovered around 4% for several years until the release of the new Ford and Toyota, plus a couple others, hybrid models. Diesels have been around 1%, but the only offerings were limited to VW for the majority. They just need to expand offerings for consumers to have a better chance of finding one that meets their needs.

 

I continue to fundamentally disagree with you on this point, GC. DI petrol engines (GDI) are what should be the regulators' radar screen at this time, if anything.

Here is a excerpt from an article in a German Magazine (Spiegel)...

(Translated by Google Translate)

http://www.spiegel.de/auto/aktuell/deutsche-umwelthilfe-gefaehrliche-benziner-mit-direkteinspritzung-a-930663.html


Also, a study was conducted in the U.S. by the Health Effects Institute of the health effects of nearly continuous exposure to concentrated diesel exhaust from a 2007-compliant diesel engine on laboratory animals, and only a few mild effects were note after up to 12 months exposure (http://pubs.healtheffects.org/getfile.php?u=708) and preliminarily for the lifetime of the animals (http://www4.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/resources/merit-review/sites/default/files/ace044_greenbaum_2013_o.pdf - slide #19).

The concentration of NO2 in the "high-level" chamber was 4.2 ppm, which is higher than the industrial exposure limit for humans (TLV = 3 ppm TWA - ICSC 0930 - NITROGEN DIOXIDE
) and MUCH higher than the U.S. NAAQS (ambient) exposure limit (0.053 ppm (53 ppb) annual mean - National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) | Air and Radiation | US EPA).

 

...and for CAFE purposes the fossil fuel used (to make elec) is basically credited as near-zero.
So the only thing that counts as "bad" for MPG CAFE is gasoline and diesel consumed in the vehicle.
Thus auto makers have an incentive to market EV which gives them better fleet average CAFE MPG.
In other words, MPGe is not actual fossil fuel equivalents. Further in other words, CAFE MPG is a measurement that speaks to the "need" to avoid gasoline use.

 

DEF or "diesel exhaust fluid" is another consideration and expense when considering a diesel vehicle.

Diesel exhaust fluid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

It is very low cost for lower emissions while retaining higher fuel economy.
Wayne Gerdes of Cleanmpg.com recently did a 1100 mile trip with the new Grand Cherokee diesel. By the little gauge for the DEF tank, the trip used 10% of an 8 gallon tank. DEF is around $3 or less at a truck stop. Jeep claims a 750 mile range per tank. At $4/gal, it would be $108 to fill the 24gal tank. Let's say a full gallon of DEF is used. It will add less than a half cent to the per mile cost. Maybe a cent per mile if you buy the box jugs of DEF from Walmart. The diesel cost per mile is 14.4 cents.

 

The article speaks about comparing GDI engine in real life operation to laboratory tests, not to Diesel engine which is much more dangerous and dirty.
World Health Organization announced Diesel engine as certain carcinogenic for me that is enough.

 

I am not particularly a diesel fan, but you need to distinguish between clean diesel vehicles in which the exhaust is cleaned up remarkably well vs. inhaling raw emissions from old diesel engines, the latter has been shown to cause cancer (for example in coal mining years ago diesel motors were used in the mines for the equipment).

 

Then why has the EU proposed to give GDI an ORDER-OF-MAGNITUDE leeway in particle number emissions that diesel engines are currently required to meet (6X10^11 particles/km current standard for diesels under Euro 5b, 6X10^12 particles/km proposed for GDI for Euro 6 until 2017)? GDI can't even meet the current diesel standard in the laboratory tests. If GDI is "significantly higher" in real life operations than the testing procedures would indicate, that really means GDI is bad!

The WHO also classified ALL particulate matter as "carcinogenic to humans" (IARC Group 1), not just diesel PM.

 

Diesel is inherently dirty and need complicated after-treatment to make it cleaner (but not clean).
New diesel engines are becoming old in time (fact of life), who will guarantee us that the complicated and expensive after-treatments will be maintained properly (and replaced when needed) by the owner?

 

You probably mean 6 x 10^-11 and 6 x 10^-12 don't you?

 

No - 6X10^11 particles/km is the current standard for diesels under Euro 5b - Emission Standards: Europe: Cars and Light Trucks.

 

Can't disagree that diesels require complicated (and expensive!) after-treatment, but there are some conditions (e.g., US06 test duty cycle) under which gassers approach, if not exceed, the PN from UNFILTERED diesels...




Source: "Environmental and Health Impact From Modern Cars." Ecotraffic Report

Diesel with DPF is clearly much lower (several orders of magnitude) than either under US06 operating conditions.

 

As mentioned, the big study about diesel exhaust and cancer involved miners. It involved diesel equipment with no emission controls. Under the same conditions gasoline engines would be detrimental to the workers health also. The higher carbon monoxide emissions might just out right kill them without adequate ventilation. Gasoline would also have a higher explosive risk.

The same people that are guaranteeing the aging, non inexpensive, gasoline systems are properly maintained.

 

Reason #4,325 of why ALL government incentives, rebates, kickbacks, exclusions, exemptions, carve-outs, subsidies, grants, and bribes should be eliminated.
Period.

Imagine a world where the government just taxed people, corporations, etc for the money that they needed to operate, without the federal jobs program for attorneys, lobbyists, and accountants???

You'd still have the feral joys of scratching each other's eyes out over how progressive (or regressive) the tax RATE would be, and you could stick with all of the anti-big-oil stuff too....but imagine being able to do your taxes on the back of a postcard?

Then?
The EV crowd, the Diesel gang, and the Hybrid bunch could just let their chosen technology stand on their own true merits.

 

.
Double-tap.