Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
According to the reports these diesels were polluting 40x times the limits. This is significantly higher.
And? Without context the number is sensationalism and worthless.
0.1 ppm vs 4 ppm?
1 vs 40ppm?
100 vs 400 ppm?
Keep in mind that the CO2 is like 135000 PPM and CO is like 14000 ppm in a working engine.
Actually, I found the calculation:
NOx (g/kWh)=0.006636 x NOx ppm.
A Euro V diesel is rated at 2g/kWh, which means it "spews" 300ppm.
While the CO2 content is like 135000ppm.
BOTH will increase as the MPGs are dropped and total tonnage is increased due to higher fuel use.
I don't agree that each of those pollutants are equivalent. NOx is much worse in my mind than CO2.
They could have had both good mpg and good emissions if they hadn't cheated for financial gain by "designing" a system without DEF.
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
According to the reports these diesels were polluting 40x times the limits. This is significantly higher.
And? Without context the number is sensationalism and worthless.
0.1 ppm vs 4 ppm?
1 vs 40ppm?
100 vs 400 ppm?
Keep in mind that the CO2 is like 135000 PPM and CO is like 14000 ppm in a working engine.
Actually, I found the calculation:
NOx (g/kWh)=0.006636 x NOx ppm.
A Euro V diesel is rated at 2g/kWh, which means it "spews" 300ppm.
While the CO2 content is like 135000ppm.
BOTH will increase as the MPGs are dropped and total tonnage is increased due to higher fuel use.
I don't agree that each of those pollutants are equivalent. NOx is much worse in my mind than CO2.
They could have had both good mpg and good emissions if they hadn't cheated for financial gain by "designing" a system without DEF.