Have you heard if GM has any plans to modify their Duramax engines to allow for better Biodiesel compatibility? (Ie. are they going to inject the fuel for the DPF somewhere other than in the cylinder?)
I know it was a cost-cutting move on their part to use the same injectors, but man, talk about a snafu for Biodiesel...
Maybe since they're going through tough times you can knock the bright engineer that decided to pull that stunt over the head & tell him if they wanna get all the Biodiesel market to inject outside of the cylinder....
it seems someone is working on the Cummins dpf delete here
1983 Mercedes Benz 300SD
290,000 miles. 50K on alt fuels.
What is the difference between Cummins farm engines and Cummins road engines that makes the farm engines BD compatible?
No DPF on the farm engines.
YVORMV - Your veg. oil results may vary, see www.burnveg.com/forum
95 Dodge Cummins 4x4
Zero fossil house- 100% solar power and heat.
Graydon, I doubt it. It would cost too much. I don't know how the HO Duramax (the 4.5L one) will handle BD either. The tough times are delaying introduction of that engine for a year.
Blessings. Joe 1999 Chevy Suburban w/new optimizer 6500 TD and 1995 Chevy Cube van 6.5L. WWW.RillaBioFuels.com
Man, this one sure has dealt Biodiesel a mighty blow....
Here's hoping that with a little oversight from the government (maybe in this case a good thing), the congress can somehow enforce something that will require Biodiesel to be able to be used in newer engines. Hopefully in high blends too.
Talk about a major setback though for the B100 market...
I can't help but wonder, if the government has all these plans and incentives in place to use and make BIO. Wouldn't somebody wake up and smell the coffee and realise that the BIO movement and the auto manufacturers are going in oposite directions? We seem to be the only ones who see this!
Graydon et al,
I've spoken with the NBB about this. Before the holiday, I managed to convene a call that included NBB CEO Joe Jobe, Technical director Steve Howell, Regulatory director Shelby Neal, plus Jason Burroughs from Diesel Green Fuel, Rachel Burton from Piedmont Biofuels, Emily Landsburg from Philadelphia Fry-o-diesel, and Eric Bowen from Tellurian here in California.
We are working on coordinating efforts (toward both activism and education) between the grassroots and the NBB. I will admit: it appears that the NBB has solidified itself as a proponent of B20 or lower, based on their strategy so far, but perhaps that can change.
While the passenger and small truck manufacturers have gone with the in-cylinder post-injection systems that are such a problem, it appears that the heavy duty diesel engines will generally be more along the lines of exhaust-stream post-injection, which is fully biodiesel-compatible. Also, the retrofit kits for big trucks and busses (see: CARB) will probably exclusively be the exhaust-stream type, if they are "active" at all (some systems are "passive" and don't even require a post-injection fuel squirt).
Still, the passenger cars and light trucks, our bread and butter, will be slipping away from the B100 community unless the DPF-delete thing really gains strength and infrastructure.
Bottom line: massive education campaign needed, to guide our existing and future market in the right direction, on all types of diesel vehicles. By the way for folks in California: CARB’s campaign will NOT go smoothly or quickly.
While we can't reset the clock on the evil OEMs that have gone with in-cylinder post-injection, not-to-mention possibly way-too-frequent regenerations (VW and Chrysler leading the ignorance brigade, followed by Ford, GM, MB), we should be able to weather this thing, and I do believe that the technology will get better, and more biodiesel-compatible, over the next couple years.
Stay tuned: this will be an issue at the SBS and NBB Conferences.
Yokayo Biofuels Facebook page
fueling / R \ evolution since 2001
Be realistic, B100 isn't sustainable. There's only enough feedstock to produce B20 at best for a national market. The situation isn't helped by the traitorous biodiesel producers who scoop the tax funded subsidies then sell their biodiesel to foreign countries.
If we're going to "be realistic", there is no fuel that can sustain the **existing** markets. A shrinking of the market demand, thanks to dramatically increased fuel efficiecy, will undoubtedly be necessary, as will a broad number of different technologies and fuels, of which B20 and B100 both play a role.
While it may be difficult to provide B100 to a wide market, having people continue to grow the B100 movement results in necessary R&D for better feedstocks and quality control (B100 users are the ones who REALLY need quality biodiesel), and also offers the lowest footprint possible for the folks who can afford to pay the premium ($ if commercial, time if a hobby).
Personally, I believe that there is no room for black-and-white, one-or-the-other absolutism in the fight against climate change.
Yokayo Biofuels Facebook page
fueling / R \ evolution since 2001
It appears that the newer engines that are capable of burning B100 are only found in off-road equipment. It would make sense for the feds to designate B100 as the only fuel that qualifies to be un-taxed off-road fuel during the summer months. If they don't have emission controls they could at least be required to burn a cleaner fuel. We would probably burn just as much biodiesel nationally and the EPA and auto makers could do whatever they wanted to make on-road ULSD fueled equipment burn cleaner.
The simple fact remains that 5 vehicles burning B20 emit less total pollution than burning the same quantity of fuel in one vehicle using B100 plus 4 vehicles burning petro diesel. The real problem is urban pollution. Requiring a minimum of B5 in all diesel fuel sold results in the most reduction of pollution. Climate change is inevitable, pollution is caused almost entirely by humans and that's the real problem.
I have often wished there was some way to estimate the amount of dino us small brewers offset, I mean the amount we collectively make including SVO guys, I do around 3000 gallons a year and fuel four vehicles and four tractors and several generators.
I know of a LOT of guys locally who brew in one form or other that really have zero connection to "mainstream" bio, they rarely or never visit any web sites.
Take all these people into account and add it up and it has to be a LOT of gallons.
And then you take the big guys like Kumar and all the other big time producers and that is a very significant number of gallons.
What is this based on? And this would be ignoring the D80 portion?
I would think 5 trucks burning 80% petro-diesel would produce more emissions than 1 truck on 0% petro-diesel...which that statement would imply is false.
Assuming that the biodiesel they produce is used domestically and not exported to some foreign country overseas.
John, Aren't you trying to say "The reduction in pollution gained by putting 5 vehicles on B20 is greater than the reduction in pollution gained by putting one vehicle on B100"
Yes, 5 vehicles burning B20 emit less total pollution than burning the same quantity of fuel in one vehicle using B100 plus 4 vehicles burning petro diesel. Apologies if that wasn't clear, I edited the earlier statement to avoid any misunderstanding. The research shows that adding 20% VO based fuel to petro diesel cuts emissions by 40%. Those who burn B100 in road vehicles are a small elite group; an insignificant market in terms of vehicle manufacturers. In terms of reducing the real problem of urban pollution, adding some BD to all diesel fuel does the most good. ALL BD produced in America should be used to reduce pollution in American cities, especially since US taxpayers are subsidizing it. Those American BD producers who sell their product overseas are greedy traitors.
Nobody ever said that Cummins road engines were incompatible with bio.
Engines with dpf seem to be incompatible with bio, whovever makes it.
But since you asked, Cummins makes two different sets of engines.
Engines models that start with I are automotive engines and engine models that start with Q are offroad engines. For example, an ISX would be found in an over the road truck and a QSX would be found in a Steiger tractor.
The difference would be that one has water cooled EGR and DPF and different fuel stratagies/perameters than the other.
You instruct others to use google, I suggest you use google, you could have found the answer yourself without wasting vital bandwith.
1992 F350 w/Cummins
2004 F250 w/Edge Platinum
both on B100
A mix of VO based fuel with diesel burns cleaner than straight diesel.
As stated above, the relevant research is posted in the fuel blending section of this forum.
I think he already straighten that out:
5 vehicles burning 80% Petro-diesel are better than 4 vehicles burning 100% petro-diesel and one burning B100.
Same 5 trucks: same 35gal of biodiesel.
7 gallons in each truck and then top off with diesel makes for less total emissions than putting all 35gal in just one truck and nothing but diesel in the other 4.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 33|