Comments on: Diesel – a greener fuel option?

By: Mazda

Mazda — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 23:28:19 +0000

So long as the diesel car has a particulate filter, it is a cleaner option. If it does not, then it is a dangerous fuel.

By: John Ely

John Ely — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 04:08:02 +0000

I don’t see any comments in the NRMA website or blogs regarding the proposed eliminating of standard unleaded petrol leaving just E10 ethanol blend 91 RON fuel available in New South Wales as from 1st July this year.
This is a huge rip off. Very few people realise that ethanol blended petrol gives poorer fuel economy than standard unleaded. This means that motorists will have to visit the pumps more frequently and so petrol sales go up. An increase in sales of 95 RON petrol will also result.
Oil company profits and fuel excise duties collected will therefore increase.
This whole thing really takes the cake and makes you wonder if a cosy relationship exists between our politicians and the oil companies to have come up with this underhanded move!

By: Jayson Anders

Jayson Anders — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 05:57:05 +0000

There are many people developing open source algae reactors and processing info on the web. Check out algaegeek.com as a great example. http://algaegeek.com

By: Peter W

Peter W — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 06:30:15 +0000

As diesel is now cleaner than the other fuels why is it still such a hefty price at the bowsers? When the GST was going through its twoing and froing, Meg Lees from the then Democrats stated to Howard she would only back the GST if he taxed the hell out of the dirty Diesel fuel. He did, Diesel is now cleaner and the castards have left the hefty tax on the product! So the GST was brought into being on the Diesel saga.

By: Vivian

Vivian — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 10:34:41 +0000

Now I am really confused.
I have been consulting the Federal Government Green Vehicle Guide.
Diesels do not rate well at all. In fact if you look at diesels the best is rated 4 stars (out of 5) and is the 93rd car on the list. Many of the modern European diesels do not rate more than 3 and 1/2 stars.
This is important as the organisation I work for places restrictions on vehicles that have less than a 4 star rating.
If diesels have a lower sulphur output, consume less per kilometer, have a lower CO2 output and, in many cases, have a particulate filter, why does the Government rate them so badly against petrol vehicles.
Could somebody please explain.
Thank you

By: LiZ

LiZ — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 02:53:58 +0000

I’ve been reading about diesel/lpg. Suppose to be cleaner, better economy and more power.
What is better, petrol/lpg or diesel/lpg?

By: Bradley

Bradley — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:21:57 +0000

Diesel in Australia was even dirtier than the article suggests. In 1996, allowable sulphur was 5000ppm (not 500ppm) with an average of 1500ppm! See p120 http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/airquality/publications/urban-air/pubs/chapter2.pdf
Modern diesel engines were just not brought to Australia for fear of engine, catalytic converter and filter damage. And those premium brands didn’t want a dirty image.

Old diesel engines can run cleaner on biodiesel or even straight vegetable oil. In fact, biodiesel cleans out the gunk in the tank from years of diesel, which clogs lines and filters for the first few tanks until it starts to get better (like a reformed smoker, which is kinda what it is.) And the emissions and particulates are much lower.

Manufacturers of newer diesels claim that biodiesel cannot be used in cars for Australia. In Europe, those cars have thermostatically-controlled heaters to prevent the fuel turning to gum at low temperatures. So if you live in the high country, stay away from B100 in Winter.

Consider: you get better economy, the fuel can be derived locally from waste or agriculture, particulates can be filtered out, the engines tend to last a lot longer than petrol engines. Add up those points and the fuel is quite probably greener than petrol.

By: Les

Les — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 05:38:37 +0000

I don’t own a diesel car myself but where I work there is a very large fleet of forklifts all running on diesel. The fleet is gradually being changed from an American made forklift to Japanese made. I have noticed that the new Japanese forklifts are much cleaner running, with no soot or smell and are very fuel efficient. The Japanese forklift I operate has a six cylinder diesel engine (the equivalent of a Landcruiser engine) and works around the clock. It easily runs 26 to 28 hours on a 80 litre tank of fuel compared to the older American 4 cylinder forklifts only getting about 14 hours out of a 100 litre tank of fuel and belching large amounts of smoke when under load. This definitely proves the worth of the new diesel technology to me. My next car will be a diesel.

By: elle

elle — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:42:45 +0000

To me diesel is and always will be a ‘dirty’ fuel. I am one of the many who have a reaction to diesel fumes.

By: Barry

Barry — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 06:28:17 +0000

Sad to see people are rubbishing LPG as an alternate fuel, I have been using in now in my 4WD, for over 15 years in 2 vehicles, it has saved me a small fortune. Yes it contains a sulphur based chemical, which is only there to give it an odour to know when there may be a leak. It is 50ppm and it is for this reason that the reduction in LPG sulphur level below 50 parts per million (ppm) is not feasible without developing new odorant chemical. I mean I have been behind a diesel and to be honest if I cannot get past it safely I will drop back about 500m so I can at least leave my fresh air vent open. All fuels have funny smells. I agree with Mars from Sydney that the Federal Gov does not really care about emissions and such, its up to the individual and all savings start at home. I think it’s a tax thing.