Fuel comparison charts

On 6/27/2013 9:31 AM, Home Guy wrote:
> RBM wrote:
>
>>> And, funnily enough, diesel appears to be about 13% more
>>> expensive at the pump!!?? Conspiratorial coincidence?? lol
> Around here (Ontario, Canada) diesel is usually less expensive than
> regular gasoline.
>
> As of this minute, prices a
>
> Diesel: $1.10 CAD/Liter ($3.97 USD per-US Gallon) (0.80 Euros/liter)
> Gasoline: $1.19 CAD/Liter ($4.50 USD / Gallon) (0.87 Euros/liter)
>
> This is 87-octane gas with probably 10% ethanol.
>
> Premium gasoline (91 or 92 octane) cost is:
>
> $1.32 CAD/liter ($4.77 USD/gallon) (0.96 Euros/liter)
>
>> As far as diesel vehicles go, I think at this point they have
>> effectively removed every reason a person would buy one.
> Diesel cars should be BANNED.
>
> Or, they should force people who drive diesel cars to have to smell the
> exhaust coming from their tail pipes. Feed back some of that exhaust
> through a small pipe into the passenger compartment.
In the U.S. at least, diesels have been pretty clean to extremely clean
since around 2006, maybe things are different on your planet.

richard > wrote in
:

> On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 01:16:03 -0400, Existential Angst wrote:
>
>> Perty inneresting.
>> http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fue...ison_chart.pdf
>>
>> Apropos of some recent diesel discussions, diesel fuel all by itself
>> should give 13% more mpgs, just from the higher btu's per gallon
>> alone. And, funnily enough, diesel appears to be about 13% more
>> expensive at the pump!!?? Conspiratorial coincidence?? lol
>>
>> It also becomes clear how gasahol shoves it in the motorist a little
>> deeper, as well -- radically lower btu's per gallon.
>>
>> Unbeknownst to most people, regular gas has more btu's/gal than high
>> test -- by dint of the higher stability of the tertiary carbocation
>> intermediate, in the combustion process.... no foolin.
>> Texaco was successfully sued over this li'l factoid, in their false
>> advertising of their premium fuels. Someone at Texaco didn't pay
>> attention in Organic Chem I.
>>
>> #6 fuel oil has markedly higher energy per gal:
>> http://www.hrt.msu.edu/energy/pdf/he...0common%20fuel
>> s.pdf
>>
>> The thing about #6 fuel oil is that it may need little to no
>> fractionating at all, radically lowering its delivered cost. Yeah,
>> the sulfur.... But mebbe by adding another mere 500 lbs to each
>> vehicle, they could **** us for a de-sulfuization unit in each
>> car.....
>>
>> Some other useful charts:
>> http://www.chestnuthillchimney.com/C...,%20Wood,%20Pe
>> llet,%20Gas%20and%20Electricity%20Costs.htm
>> http://www.energykinetics.com/saving...parisons.shtml
>>
>> Fwiw.
>
> Just to set you straight on the prices, diesel had always been 10
> cents cheaper than regular gas.
> When fuel prices surged up to around the $2.50 mark for the first
> time, people put up a big fuss over it. The prices dropped back down a
> little. Then went right back, up and over $3.00 a gallon.
> But the future markets brokers didn't want to lose their cash cow so
> they made diesel more expensive.
> Why? Because truckers get a tax break on the fuel.

in the US this is incorrect. the trucking industry never got any tax
breaks on diesel. off road doesn`t pay the road tax, but trucking is deff
not off road.

> Unfortunately, that action ultimately practically killed off the
> nation's MUST have trucking industry to the point where only those
> that can afford the fuel, are still in business.

most are now charging a fuel surcharge based on the price of fuel.
what hurt the trucking industry is the economy slow down that killed
the load demand, and the "dramatic" increase in DOT regulations and
officers writting ticket for every little **** ant thing to raise
revenue. Gee thanks for more "its not a tax" taxes, because it sure as
heck is not about the safety. KB


>
> The next step, which probably won't happen for another decade or two,
> is to go to distilled alcohol fuel. Tests have shown that used cooking
> oil will run just fine in diesel engines with no conversions.

On 6/27/2013 8:16 AM, Existential Angst wrote:
>
> Hydrogen would appear to be the, uh, Bomb, since every kitchen with a solar
> cell on the window sill can produce it. Altho usefully packaging it would
> be a bit, uh, volatile.
>
> Just fuel for thought.
>

If Hydrogen could be easily and cheaply produced and stored at home from
rain water, you would get a tax bill every time it rained.

On 6/27/2013 12:28 PM, harryagain wrote:
> "richard" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 01:16:03 -0400, Existential Angst wrote:
>>
>>> Perty inneresting.
>>> http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fue...ison_chart.pdf
>>>
>>> Apropos of some recent diesel discussions, diesel fuel all by itself
>>> should
>>> give 13% more mpgs, just from the higher btu's per gallon alone.
>>> And, funnily enough, diesel appears to be about 13% more expensive at the
>>> pump!!?? Conspiratorial coincidence?? lol
>>>
>>> It also becomes clear how gasahol shoves it in the motorist a little
>>> deeper,
>>> as well -- radically lower btu's per gallon.
>>>
>>> Unbeknownst to most people, regular gas has more btu's/gal than high
>>> test --
>>> by dint of the higher stability of the tertiary carbocation intermediate,
>>> in
>>> the combustion process.... no foolin.
>>> Texaco was successfully sued over this li'l factoid, in their false
>>> advertising of their premium fuels. Someone at Texaco didn't pay
>>> attention
>>> in Organic Chem I.
>>>
>>> #6 fuel oil has markedly higher energy per gal:
>>> http://www.hrt.msu.edu/energy/pdf/he...on%20fuels.pdf
>>>
>>> The thing about #6 fuel oil is that it may need little to no
>>> fractionating
>>> at all, radically lowering its delivered cost. Yeah, the sulfur....
>>> But mebbe by adding another mere 500 lbs to each vehicle, they could ****
>>> us
>>> for a de-sulfuization unit in each car.....
>>>
>>> Some other useful charts:
>>> http://www.chestnuthillchimney.com/C...ty%20Costs.htm
>>> http://www.energykinetics.com/saving...parisons.shtml
>>>
>>> Fwiw.
>>
>> Just to set you straight on the prices, diesel had always been 10 cents
>> cheaper than regular gas.
>> When fuel prices surged up to around the $2.50 mark for the first time,
>> people put up a big fuss over it. The prices dropped back down a little.
>> Then went right back, up and over $3.00 a gallon.
>> But the future markets brokers didn't want to lose their cash cow so they
>> made diesel more expensive.
>> Why? Because truckers get a tax break on the fuel.
>> Unfortunately, that action ultimately practically killed off the nation's
>> MUST have trucking industry to the point where only those that can afford
>> the fuel, are still in business.
>>
>> The next step, which probably won't happen for another decade or two, is
>> to
>> go to distilled alcohol fuel. Tests have shown that used cooking oil will
>> run just fine in diesel engines with no conversions.
>
> Diesel engines are over 50% of cars in the UK.
> Some diesel engines will run on used cooking oil but not all.
> The new technology ones won't.
>
> The latest diesel engine cars over here have ceramic exhaust gas filters as
> well as catalysers.
> They rely on a high speed run to burn the carbon out of the filters every
> now and then.
> If you don't do this, the filter gets f***d and a new one costs a fortune.
>
> And fuel is getting on for $11/gallon. Our gallons are a bit bigger than
> yours.
>
>

I understand diesel price parity in EC is basically mandated by the
government and the consumers are hosed by the government in extremely
high fuel taxes. That's why the more efficient diesel engines are in
such high usage. Normal market forces and lower taxes in the US give
much less advantage. Diesel engines cost more and fuel costs more here.

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 07:39:11 -0400, RBM > wrote:



>All the new "clean diesels" have a 100,000 mile warranty on the
>emissions systems, so at least these huge expenses don't come out of
>pocket, but I sure don't want to own this thing one minute after the
>warranty is up.

A guy at work has one. It has not cost him a penny for the emissions
related repairs, but they keep his trucks for days at a time trying to
figure out the problems. He finally traded it for a gas model.

On 6/27/2013 5:38 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 07:39:11 -0400, RBM > wrote:
>
>
>
>> All the new "clean diesels" have a 100,000 mile warranty on the
>> emissions systems, so at least these huge expenses don't come out of
>> pocket, but I sure don't want to own this thing one minute after the
>> warranty is up.
> A guy at work has one. It has not cost him a penny for the emissions
> related repairs, but they keep his trucks for days at a time trying to
> figure out the problems. He finally traded it for a gas model.
The third problem I had with mine, was a faulty "diesel emission fluid"
pump. The dealership mechanics were clueless and needed help from techs
at Mercedes, which took five days. I'm afraid that they are just too
complicated and no longer reliable.

"RBM" > wrote in message
...
> pump. The dealership mechanics were clueless and needed help from techs at
> Mercedes, which took five days. I'm afraid that they are just too
> complicated and no longer reliable.

Same old deal. Every time something new comes out it is too complicated for
the dealer mechanics to repair. I bought a new car in 1972. Same basic car
as a 1969. The 69 ran fine for about 30,000 and someone ran a stop sign on
me. I then bought a 72 and it had all the smog stuff on it. The never
could fix the electronic system so it would start. That thing left me
sitting about 5 times and I had to have it towed to the dealer. Ran the
battery down several other times, but as it was a manual transmission, I was
sble to push it off. Finally traded it with about 15000 miles on it.

The stuff usually works great unless there is a problem, then you beter
trade it off as it probably will not be fixed or if it is, it may take a
month.

In article >, RBM > wrote:
>The third problem I had with mine, was a faulty "diesel emission fluid"
>pump. The dealership mechanics were clueless and needed help from techs
>at Mercedes, which took five days. I'm afraid that they are just too
>complicated and no longer reliable.

Wait... wait... you bought a Mercedes and you are surprised that it is too
complicated and "no longer" reliable?

I think Mercedes invented the whole philosophy of "never use one part when
you can use ten," or maybe that was Bosch....

This is not a new thing.... Mercedes has been doing this for nearly a
hundred years now.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Sounds like a by product of government regulation.

"..... and I'm here to help."
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
..
"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message ...

A guy at work has one. It has not cost him a penny
for the emissions related repairs, but they keep his
trucks for days at a time trying to figure out the
problems. He finally traded it for a gas model.

On 6/27/2013 9:27 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article >, RBM > wrote:
>> The third problem I had with mine, was a faulty "diesel emission fluid"
>> pump. The dealership mechanics were clueless and needed help from techs
>> at Mercedes, which took five days. I'm afraid that they are just too
>> complicated and no longer reliable.
> Wait... wait... you bought a Mercedes and you are surprised that it is too
> complicated and "no longer" reliable?
>
> I think Mercedes invented the whole philosophy of "never use one part when
> you can use ten," or maybe that was Bosch....
>
> This is not a new thing.... Mercedes has been doing this for nearly a
> hundred years now.
> --scott
>
>
I think this stuff is just the only successful technology currently
available that meets the EPA standards for diesels. It doesn't matter
who the manufacturer is, all diesel trucks in the U.S. made after 2010
have the same stuff strapped on to them.