They are finding out that the cost to produce a motor that meets strict American emissions standards means the car will simply not be competitive. The diesel fanboys will no doubt be disappointed The EU emissions standards for diesels lags behind the American standards. For almsot a decade that was not the case, but then our legislators realized the loophole they created As far as claimed fuel economy, what does the Prius deliver in EU drive cycles? One can visit the Great Britain Toyota site to find out The New Toyota Prius - The Original Hybrid Car by Toyota | Toyota UK According to the specs for the UK version the Prius is rated at EU combined of 3.9 litres per 100km or 72.43 miles per Imperial gallon All the extra technology to address the worst of diesel emissions - which incidentaly do nothing to address dioxin emissions from diesel engines - exceeds the "premium" required to mass produce a hybrid gasoline vehicle At least Honda appears to think so
jayman, upon what do you base your assertion that the new technology has done nothing to address dioxin emissions? According to a report released in 2009 ("PHASE 1 OF THE ADVANCED COLLABORATIVE EMISSIONS STUDY." COORDINATING RESEARCH COUNCIL, June 2009)... The new technology not only has not done anything to address dioxin emissions, it's essentially eliminated them, at least according to that report.
a couple points to consider: - VW sells TDI jetta which meets T2/Bin5, and it isn't that much premium - while Prius is no doubt more efficient (at least cheaper per mile), diesels may be more efficient and cheaper in larger vehicles (SUV, minivans, trucks). For example Highlander hybrid carries 10,000$ over non-hybrid, and the cost of hybrid in Prius ~3,000$
I did a search for the most up to date data http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehicle...11/adv_combustion/ace044_greenbaum_2011_o.pdf http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehicle...10/health_impacts/ace044_greenbaum_2010_o.pdf http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehicle...0/thursday/presentations/deer10_greenbaum.pdf The test regime did not specifically address 2,3,7,8 TCDD or "dioxin" but rather incidentally compared to models before DPF. In the case of 2,3,7,8 TCDD was it compared to 2004 levels, or to much earlier levels? Fuels were reformulated, along with engine oils, to be compatible with DPF/SCR in modern diesel engines. As a hint, chlorine in diesel fuel and in the engine oil - historically there used to be much higher trace amounts - allow very potent release of 2,3,7,8 TCDD Now that 2,3,7,8 TCDD is vastly reduced in modern diesel engines with UNTAMPERED emissions controls, contrast the 2,3,7,8 TCDD emissions to a modern gasoline engine, such as used in the Prius Also contrast why Honda still considers it too expensive to certify their diesel engine to meet "our" standards, which are still stricter than the EU standards
@ jayman, The actual ACES Phase 1 report to which I referred previously is available at http://www.crcao.org/reports/recentstudies2009/ACES Phase 1/ACES Phase1 Final Report 15JUN2009.pdf . Dioxins/Furans are specifically addressed on page 77 of the report. TEQ is a value assigned to other polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs) relative to the most toxic PCDD - 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD). Tables 40-42 list the individual PCDDs, the associated TEQ, and the levels measured for three of the 2007 engines. It appears that no 2,3,7,8 TCDD was measure for any of the engines. Do you have any data that specifically addresses dioxin/furan emissions from modern gasoline engines? I'd be interested to see any research on the subject. By the way, I'm not taking issue with the expense of the emission control equipment on diesels being a factor on their acceptance in the U.S., especially on smaller cars.
Thank you for finally providing the source link The test was independant, and performed on heavy duty diesel engines, not light duty diesel engines. The primary dioxin component in fuel combustion is 2,3,7,8 TCDD though there are other species as part of combustion You will not that different engines had different dioxin emissions. An important issue raised was the chemical composition of the motor oil, as blowby and normal oil scaping will introduce lube oil into the cylinder and for combustion. Oils with higher chlorine content will increase 2,3,7,8 TCDD emissions Tightly controlled regulations on fuels - which had to be reformulated to be compatible with DPF and SCR - have helped a lot with dioxin/furan emissions. Next will be engine designs to minimize blowby, then lube oils that not only prevent DPF fouling but also dioxin/furan emissions due to chlorine content I would like to see a similar study done on light duty engines, including those used in 3/4 ton and 1 ton pickups - with emissions controls in place and with them tampered with. As you may be aware, some pickup owners tamper with the emissions systems so they can produce clouds of black smoke on command Dioxins/furans were produced by older gasoline motors that ran leaded gasoline. A very potent source of dioxin/furan emissions were stationary and small air cooled engines, as they had to run richer to prevent overheating Leaded fuels contribute greatly to gasoline furan/dioxin emissions. As almost every motor back then had flat tappet camshafts, to prevent cam lobe wear a zinc oil additive, in combination with phosphorous, was used: ZDDP Zinc Dialkyl Dithio Phosphate For sliding friction as one might expect on a cam lobe with a flat valve lifter, the ZDDP was very good at minimizing wear, spalling, and friction. It is all but eliminated in modern oils due to the fact it tends to coat O2 sensors and TWC converters and not allow them to meet either Federal or especially California emissions warranty requirements High chlorine fuels, leaded fuels, high chlorine motor oils (Byproduct of refining) all contribute to gasoline engine dioxin/furan emissions. Modern fuels, engines, and oils have essentially eliminated those emissions You may be interested in these articles http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/deer_2005/session2/2005_deer_mcdonald.pdf http://www.energyjustice.net/files/lfg/LFG-caponi.pdf Cummins has recently claimed that dioxin/furan emissions in their newest HD engine designs is quite tightly controlled Measurement of Dioxin and Furan Emissions during Transient and Multi-Mode Engine Operation This is a Canadian study done on a spark-ignited HD engine running on landfill gas http://www.bape.gouv.qc.ca/sections/mandats/LES-lachenaie/documents/DA29.pdf
It's more like 5k when they are similarly equipped, V6, AWD, tech package, etc. Of course, you can get a base model I4, 2WD for 10k less or more. Why can't they make a hybrid with a clean diesel motor? No way to reap the benefits of both or some technological hurdle?
base gas 2dr golf: 17995 base tdi 2dr golf: 23225 -------------------------------- $5230 difference. almost 1/3rd the price of the car. That's a huge premium.
Now nearly a decade ago, Ford had a concept diesel hybrid SUV and car that were AT-PZEV for the time. Cost was the hurdle to production. The robust diesel engine plus emissions plus hybrid components would have added around $9000. The cost is likely lower now, but diesel fuel generally runs a little more than premium gas also. I'd like to see diesels succeed, since they currently seem to have an advantage on the biofuel front.
The cost ends up being much higher once modern emissions controls are tacked on. Historically, diesel engines were valued for their robustness and simplicity. With common rail electronic injection, and the emissions, modern diesel engines are no longer simple. They haven't been for a long time I would like to see diesel engines suceed in the market, but with hybrid technology rapidly maturing into mainstream product lines, it will be difficult for a manufacturer to introduce something like a hybrid diesel vehicle The regulatory environment in the EU is much different than here, and up until the late 1990's was day and night different. It was still possible to buy a gasoline fueled car with no emissions, leaded gasoline was still available, and due to tax incentives diesel vehicles with no emissions controls were popular The EU was forced to adapt emissions controls for the same reason that China and India will have to: urban health issues Of course, the EU still produces a surprising amount of Cl2 using mercury cell electrolysis, the Castner Kellner Process. One can imagine what that does to waterways
I've heard the base TDI VWs are the equivalent of their midrange gassers in terms of features. If so, grabbing the starting list prices isn't apples to apples.
Whelp, as far as I can tell, the TDI has these items standard over the gasser: Trims & Specs < VW Golf - 2011 Volkswagen Golf Hatchback < Models < Volkswagen of America -fog lights -chime if you leave the lights on -17" alloys -floor mats -touch screen for the audio -rear heat duct -ski pass through -sports suspension They charge $1300 for the alloys for the gasser. The other stuff? $?
The Canadian price list and trim levels are a bit easier to decipher. TDI is $2300-$2400CAD more than 2.5.
You're right but I wouldn't say late 1990's. Emission control (catalytic converters) were introduced in the UK & Europe back in the very late 1980's on high end cars and became mandatory on all vehicles by mid 1992. Since then there has been an improvement every three years or so on reducing emissions further. I will grant you these are not as strict as the Californian regulations unfortunately. Leaded petrol was available until the late 1990's for older cars but was discontinued around the year 2000. It can still be purchased in limited quantities and at massive cost (think $15 a US gallon!) by those running classic cars. You are right about diesel emissions - during the 1990's diesel cars had very little (if any) emission control, though particle filters and Eurea injection systems started to appear around 2000 onwards. Europe is still really dragging its feet regarding NOx emissions from diesel cars and a cynic would think this is because of lobbying from diesel car producers in France and Germany. It also turns out that diesel cars are producing much more NOx in 'real world' driving than under the emission testing proceedures and this is causing a real stink in London at the moment - literally! BBC News - London Olympics 2012: Air quality row may hit games
Lack of emissions controls probably wouldn't matter in a sparsely populated rural area, which here we have in abundance. In a high density urban environment, the poor air quality has a very significant effect on health
