Somebody was telling me the Euro diesels don't need as much pollution controls (ie -dpf, regen) due to the fuel being much cleaner than the fuel here in Canada. So... Is this true? If so, should we be making an election issue of this so as to improve the fuel economy of our vehicles? Hell... I know my old beast got much better mileage than the new trucks, but nowhere near the power of the new trucks...

Say it increases fuel costs by 3% but reduced pollution control increases mileage by 5%, we'd be ahead, wouldn't we? IF this is true...

 

The fuel quality is better in Europe, no question. BOSCH has been bitten by that a few times already by applying their overseas technology to engines here (Duramax injectors, Early HPCR injectors). For that though their fuel costs are about 3x what we pay per litre.

I don't know of many companies that would pull cash out of their profits to retrofit entire refineries to meet those standards here. The major oil companies pay huge taxes and get some say in what our fuel quality will be. The EPA is not just a government group either, so the push for fuel economy on all vehicles is only driven by the consumer, not by government. Well at least not until election time in the US.

 

While it's true that fuel in Europe is more expensive. Most of the retail price is taxes not cost of product. In fact the USA sends most of the diesel it produces to Europe, which of course means we pay more for it here since other wise there would be a glut of diesel here.

Funny thing, diesel is way cheaper to produce then gas yet sells for close to fifty cents a gallon more here in AZ.

 

He's right, it cost less to make than gasoline and such. It was called waste in the past and sold for next to nothing. Then they found out they can change pressure and temperature and produce jet and heating oil. So they play their games all year for max profit. But with the higher demands for diesel in the states, they jumped the price up to what the market would bear.

Somewhere about 1/3 of the diesel made is shipped out of the states for a higher profit in other countries.

One other factor plays in the game for present and future profits. I believe in the late 80's early 90's, oil companies stopped wanting to expand and build additional refineries. The EPA made it almost impossible to meet new standards for construction. So they started to retro-fit / de-bottle neck the older units. In the early 2000's, the government stated to them that they will have the EPA work with them to quicken the process and two refineries that companies wanted to build could be built. The oil companies politely said no, they were fine. Seems if one facility burps, they can jump the prices (stop us from using fuel) and make plenty of short term profit. (Look at when the hurricane hit Orleans). And they don't have to put out cash for equipment, pay more employees, meet higher standards on the newer equipment and such, just by keeping the present facilities running and only expanding whenever they have to.

 

So the new upgrader/refinery CNRL is building here in Alberta to make diesel will be to the higher emissions standards?

I know Canada already has lower sulpher fuel. What would be required of the refineries to make the DPF/regen redundent? Or at least allow the euro tech to come here?

 

In Europe their Emmision Standards are different then here. They measure different particles then we do.

 

If we end up paying for diesel what they pay i will be on a bloody horse.. I've seen 4.50 a liter over there.. for a 120 liter tank.. 540 bucks.. Now where will we find that cause we all know our wages wont go up to match that cost. and that whole trickle down effect wont cover all of that cost.. I'll stick with this chitty fuel thanks..

 

Ah yes, but most of the difference (I believe) is fuel taxes, not what the fuel actually costs - over 80% in Britain according to this link.

http://www.petrolprices.com/fuel-tax.html

Significantly lower in Canada...

http://blog.gasbuddy.com/Can_Tax_Info.aspx

and lower yet in the USA.

 

In Germany some people filled there tanks 2/3 with diesel at the station and drove over to the grocery store and topped the tank of with cooking oil that was 1/2 price of diesel. But on a cool morning they chanced that there injector pump went.
Many jurisdictions in particular california try to discourage car buyers from choosing a diesel by taxing diesel to an extend that it makes it uneconomically to operate.
As I was in California 2005 with my diesel smart car at the time I was told that diesel car's like a Mercedes D320 couldn't be sold there only trucks, if you wanted a diesel you had to import a used one from another state.
As for quality in europe verses north america the diesel smart was rated as a 3 litre car, here in Canada with different injector programming it was 3.5 litre.

 

Correct me if I am wrong. But did'nt VW not produce a new model of TDI for a couple of years ( 2006-2007 maybe) because of the poor fuel quality here in North America?

 

I worked in Italy, just about everything over there is diesel power. Sure darn expensive fuel. Like you said $4 to 5 a litre. Tons of taxes on fuel. Helps to keep the government wallet full of cash for spending on stupid stuff. You guys see that the liberals are considering about bring back the NEP (very quitely)
http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...319/story.html

Thank goodness that they have no chance of winning the election this year. Big cash grab, but one day we all will have $4-5 litre for fuel.