A GREENER WORLD
May 6th, 2007 by Fred
The Western world has in the last several months woken up to the fact of climate change. Virtually every man and woman on the street has taken up the ‘green cause’, although frequently in denial as to just what personal sacrifices are called for if we are really going to reduce global warming. Experts are resigned to the fact that the best we can do is to stabilise emissions. At this point, I would like to mention that the treatment of French vines and wine is strictly controlled, which means that on the whole they are most natural in the world. But more about that later. What I want to offer here are some comments on ‘sustainable motoring’.
In Beaujolais, our transport is an ageing Land Rover. We would prefer communal transport, but in a rural area, complicated by running our wine business, this is just not realistic. In London, 4×4’s are generally known as ‘Chelsea tractors’. They are increasingly targeted by the green element, especially when used on school runs. Our Land Rover is in its 22nd year. The 2007 design is little changed. On the whole it is mechanically simple and I am normally able to effect repairs without sophisticated equipment. The result is that it has been kept going all this time. Many are those who like to acquire a new vehicle every couple of years, especially if it exhibits some new gimmick or image. This is great for a capitalistic economy, but think of the energy requirement, and so the CO2 footprint, of building a new vehicle with all that steel, plastic, glass and rubber plus the machining and fabrication. I have to admit that I have not yet calculated a kilowatt-hour figure, maybe someone out there has, but as an engineer I know that it will be large. We cannot shut down the bulk of the car industry at a stroke; the social implications are unacceptable. And I am not suggesting Land Rovers for all, that is clearly ridiculous. I am using our situation only as a means to transmit the concept of ‘sustainable motoring’. We need purpose-designed sustainable vehicles.
Additionally, our Land Rover happens to be diesel powered. Basic thermodynamics says that this is the green option. This is simply because the diesel operates at a higher compression ratio than is possible with the petrol (gasoline) engine and consequently the diesel engine thermal efficiency is greater. Not so long ago Tony Blair, as an example, argued in favour of the petrol engine because the diesel is polluting. The cynic would say that he did this so that he would be justified in introducing another stealth tax, diesel fuel in the UK is now more expensive than petrol even though it is cheaper and more energy efficient to produce. It is true that the unfettered traditional diesel produces oxides of nitrogen and particulates in quantities no longer acceptable, but modern clean-up technology has eliminated this problem. And the diesel is to be preferred for the new ‘hybrid technology,’ where, in its purist form, the powerplant is constrained to run at the speed (rprm) at which it exhibits its best fuel consumption.
You said “Basic thermodynamics says that this is the green option. This is simply because the diesel operates at a higher compression ratio than is possible with the petrol (gasoline) engine and consequently the diesel engine thermal efficiency is greater.”
I totally agree that energy efficiency is always a good thing, but only when comparing the same systems - like a newer model diesel engine or a newer model lightbulb.
When comparing two different systems - like diesel and petrol - the complete lifecycle needs to be considered. This is the extraction, refinement, transportation and disposal (emissions) of diesel, petrol and the newer ‘bio-fuels’.
For example, the newer ‘bio-fuels’ use ethanol which is often made from growing corn. But growing that corn requires fossil-fuel based fertilizers, lots of tractors, distribution, etc. Many people don’t know what the actual costs are of different systems and so that makes it hard to know the repurcussions of switching en masse.