Where Are The German Hybrids?

Comments

November 9, 2006 at 1:05 pm

(1) Daniel Head says:

Let’s not confuse “fuel efficiency” with “good for the environment”. The response from German car manufacturers that their answer to fuel efficiency is diesel power has nothing to do with being good for the environment. Fuel efficient diesels are much worse for the environment that regular petrol-driven cars. Comparing diesels (fuel efficient) with hybrids (fuel efficient and better for the environment) is a useless and misleading exercise. The fact is that German car manufacturers, so applauded for their engineering excellence, are completely failing when it comes to the morals of protecting the planet.

November 9, 2006 at 1:16 pm

(2) Dave Anderson says:

This is true. See Ask Umbra for more info. Here’s a quote:

In California, diesel exhaust is listed as a known carcinogen, is the most significant source of airborne toxins, and accounts for 70 percent of the cancer risk from air pollution.

and

Diesel engines are more culpable than gasoline on almost all counts. This is in part because diesel is dirtier. Also, gasoline-powered engines have been targeted for cleanup in the past several decades, with regulatory standards such as unleaded gas and the catalytic converter resulting in somewhat cleaner emissions. Diesel is just beginning that process, but currently, the allowable emissions from diesel exhaust are rather horrifying.

November 9, 2006 at 1:29 pm

(3) Diane Palmquist says:

The German car manufacturers will be left behind (as will the Big 3) if they continue to offer old technologies to the market.

Diesel was a good answer in the 80’s but consumers have moved past this. I am not looking to drive my grandfather’s Mercedes.

November 9, 2006 at 5:34 pm

(4) cars says:

I think a couple of important points about diesels are being missed.

First, the regulations to clean up diesel are in place; as of last month, low-sulfer diesel fuel is now mandated in the US. (I just saw an Exxon-Mobil TV ad crowing about how they were now refining low-sulfer diesel fuel. Of course they are — it’s the law! How dumb do the oil companies think we are???)

Second, diesel engines can do something gasoline engines can’t: Run on renewable fuels with no modifications. Any diesel built in the last 50 years or so (meaning one that doesn’t use natural rubber in its fuel system) can run biodiesel, a 100% renewable fuel that can be made from new or recycled vegetable-based oils. (Diesels can also run on straight vegetable oil, I believe, provided they are started and shut down on bio- or petroleum-diesel.)

So virtually any diesel car owner can run biodiesel in his/her car, but gasoline engines do not offer that option. Even running an ethanol-gasoline blend requires special modification, and fuel economy goes out the window.

So far, no refining standard has been set for biodiesel, and as a result the automakers selling diesels in the US (VW and Mercedes) do not endorse a mix of biodiesel greater than 5% (BD5). But the use of biofuels is definitely on their radar.

And don’t forget the fact that diesels are much more fuel efficient than gasoline engines, whether they run petro- or biodiesel. In my experience, diesels are as fuel efficient, if not more fuel efficient, than gasoline-electric hybrids in real-world driving.

And also don’t forget that diesel and hybrid technology are not mutually exclusive. Diesel-electric hybrids would offer the benefits of higher economy, lower emissions, *and* the possibility to free us from our reliance on petroleum-based fuels — something gas-electric hybrids just can’t do.

Now, a plug-in diesel-electric hybrid — that would be the *ultimate*!!

November 10, 2006 at 11:14 am

(5) Dave Anderson says:

So I gather what you’re saying here is that, in an imaginary future world that you concocted in your head, diesel engines aren’t so bad, huh?

Because a diesel *can* use biodiesel is virtually meaningless in the real world. We *could* drastically reduce our dependency on foreign oil through aggressive conservation efforts; we *could* save more fuel by properly inflating our tires than we would through ethanol production; we *could* leverage photovoltaics and geothermal heat to green-up our communities. There are all kinds of things we *could* do better in this arena, but hypotheticals don’t keep our air breathable or polar ice caps from melting.

In response to the question “why aren’t you developing hybrid cars?”, the CEO of VW reportedly replied, “we’re in the business of selling cars,” implying he believes people don’t want them. So his morality vis-a-vis environmental stewardship is quite clear.

Until the McDonald’s next to the gas station is pumping spent vegetable oil into the tanks from which the diesel pumps draw fuel, buying a diesel-powered car is ecologically irresponsible, given the selection of superior options, notwithstanding your imaginary ones.

April 17, 2007 at 11:19 am

(6) Jascha Doke says:

The claim that German car manufactuers will be left behind if they continue to offer old technologies to the market is obsolete when recognizing the facts. Actually, Germany’s car industry has consistently patented more life-saving, fuel-conserving, electronic and mechanical marvels in respect to the auto industry than any other country

Furthermore, Diesel was not just a good answer in the 80’s, and consumers did not move past this. In France and Germany its a rarity that one comes across a 2004+ car that has a gasoline engine in most large cities. This is true also for the majority of Europe.

In conclusion, Diesel is the answer, and a very clever one. Biodiesel-electric hybrids could one day change the entire foreign policies of nations. I am currently writing a 20 page thesis on the superiority of German automobiles in respect to innovation, safety, performance and fuel efficiency. Fact is, the Germans are not behind but ahead of the norm.

June 18, 2007 at 1:26 pm

(7) Levi says:

So many ignorant people, that means you Dave Anderson.

The Opel Eco Speedster is proof that diesel powered cars can be far more efficient than hybrids. 113mpg in combined cycle testing including high speed runs at its top speed of 155mph. Show me a hybrid that can do that! http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/02/the-opel-eco-speedster.php

I noticed that upi failed to mention just how detrimental the production of hybrid vehicles is to the environment! The time it would take to recoup that economic damage in fuel economy is far longer than the expected service life of the vehicle. That is entirely retarded in its own right. Or wait, did you think the batteries made themselves?

http://www.reason.org/commentaries/dalmia_20060719.shtml
http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/
http://thewatt.com/article-1070-nested-1-0.html

February 2, 2008 at 10:17 pm

(8) Bailey Andersdon says:

If the low fat/less meat fad continues, beef will be needed less, less dmeand, less supply. Cows eat up more acres of crops than humans, and those acres could go towards vegetable oil fuels.

June 6, 2008 at 1:28 am

(9) josh m says:

well dave andersons original comments are 2-3 years old as far as model years are concerned. i am pretty sure at this point he in wrong. the new ultra low sulfur diesel and the new standards for clean diesel exhaust have resulted in diesels that are cleaner than gas counterparts

June 18, 2009 at 10:14 pm

(10) Marcus says:

Some of these coments are from ages ago as far as diesel technology is concerned. If you want to give up vehicle performance for fuel efficiency, there are plenty of options, including golf carts. If you want both performance and efficiency, then your only option are the German clean diesel cars.