> From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I don't think it is so cut and dried.
Like everything else of moderate or greater complexity, the proper
answer is always: "It depends..." :-)
> Considering that you pay extra for a diesel engine just like you pay
> a hybrid premium it is hard to see savings there.
Ah, but with a hybrid, you're paying for complexity, whereas with a
diesel, you're paying for strength. Complexity tends toward increased
maintenance, strength tends toward reduced maintenance.
> Diesel fuel here is
> more expensive than premium gasoline and oil company spokesmen say it
> is going to stay that way because diesel takes more of that precious
> oil to produce.
Hmmm... I'm not sure I follow. Diesel is a lower fraction, and
requires less processing to produce. They have to go through
"cracking" to increase the yield of gasoline, at the expense of
diesel production.
It sounds like an excuse to me, not a reason. In fact, I'm pretty
sure I read somewhere that the reason diesel is so expensive now is
that refineries have re-tooled for more cracking (which requires more
energy), leaving less base stock for diesel. In straight fractional
distillation, diesel should always be more plentiful and cheaper.
From strictly an efficiency point of view, it would be best if all
our transportation would use diesel -- eliminate cracking entirely,
and save the aromatic top fractions for solvents, instead of burning
them up in low-compression, low-efficiency engines. But of course,
this is an issue of moderate or greater complexity... see my first
paragraph above...
> Then you have to deal with cost of upkeep...
Actually, I think diesel scores here. Except for a few lemons (the
Chevy 350 comes to mind), lifetime cost of ownership is lower for
diesels if you take care of them and drive them a long time.
If you "churn" vehicles, and like to drive new ones, then sure,
you're not going to get much benefit of long life, but I'm glad
SOMEONE churns diesels -- I can't afford new ones!
> My brother has had three large pickup trucks with diesel engines...
> the percentage increase in
> mileage from 8 MPG to 12 MPG is huge you wonder whether it is enough
> to overcome the extra cost of vehicle.
Too bad he picked the wrong diesel. :-)
My 2wd Cummins (no one who owns one calls them a "Dodge" :-)
routinely got 22-24 mpg. I needed a 4x4 (as in, "driving through
hayfields", rather than commuting and looking tough on the highway)
and it *only* gets about 20 mpg.
Coming back home from southern Oregon with a 3,500 pound trailer
load, it went down to 18 mpg.
> There are also twice
> as frequent oil changes...
Not according to the owner's manual, but regardless: I willingly
change oil more often (and use synthetic) when I have a vehicle that
should have no problem cresting a half a million miles than I do with
gassers that may be shot before 200,000.
> ... the faint stink of diesel...
What, you don't like french-fries? My diesels don't stink. But the
downside is that I always seem to be hungry while driving...
Anyway, I hear where you're coming from, Windsor. A lot of it's
situational. Everyone's going to have their own needs to fill, and
their own biases. Please don't take my strong opinions as any sort of
attack on yours.
:::: Never fear failure! If inevitable, embrace it! ::::
:::: Jan Steinman http://www.EcoReality.org ::::
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|