[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
SG-W:/ Re: [energyresources] Hydrogen from gasoline!!!
- Subject: SG-W:/ Re: [energyresources] Hydrogen from gasoline!!!
- From: Steve Bean <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 19:22:52 -0500
- Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-To: email@example.com
- Delivered-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> I wish to ask a question about car fuel consumption. Here in
This seems like an odd place to ask it, but I'll answer what I can.
>states, the NOx limitations are severe enough that it is difficult to
>Diesel engines that will comply with them. In my opinion, higher
>engines will improve gas mileage but may increase NOx per gallon. I
Hybrids and fuel cells will increase gas mileage without such increases,
and CNG vehicles are even better at this point, emitting very low levels
of all pollutants.
>like to see a relaxation of these standards, at least for four
>cars like the Civic, Escort, Neon, or Cavalier that get over 50 mpg at
>mph on a flat highway. These cars presently probably get about 35 mpg
>those conditions. This would accelerate the production of more
>vehicles and would increase new engine experimentation. In my opinion
Hybrids and fuel cells are the "engines" of choice at this point, and
they seem to be good choices if we're going to continue building cars
>rest of the world is going in this direction anyhow and the US should
The US should build trains like the rest of the world and drive less
like them, too.
>Does anyone have an idea as to how the ratio of CO2 to NOx changes with
>respect to their Greenhouse effects as the compression is increased?
I don't, but I don't think it matters since we can reduce both at the
>was an article in a Science magazine somewhere that said that third
>charcoal making was the principal Greenhouse factor. If so, this would
>car NOx less important. Furthermore, NOx is a fertiliser and may
>carbon growth enough to compensate for its Greenhouse effect. I believe
I hadn't heard about charcoal production being such a big problem, but
it's not really in the same category as fossil fuel consumption.
We emit so much that every bit is important, even more so if developing
countries are contributing in their own way.
I think carbon growth would only increase in areas where nitrogen is a
limiting factor, which I don't believe is the case in most areas. I'd
check into that before basing any decisions on that possibility.
>the car companies would jump on this and something good could happen.
>question is also important to engine driven cogeneration. If anyone
>add to or figure out how to support this idea, I would appreciate it.
>is a very important question. The environmentalists must start to
>that fuel consumption is more important than pollution.
Yes, I agree, but pollution is important, too, and we can tackle both at
the same time with existing technologies.
smartgrowth-washtenaw: Internet List and Forum for issues relating to
sprawl, smart growth, and preservation of the quality of life in Washtenaw
Postings to: email@example.com For info, send
email to firstname.lastname@example.org with a one-line message body of "info