> James Newtons Massmind wrote:
>> Over all the future of diesel cars looks good to me.
>>
>> Rebuttals?

Good technology but still not good enough long term.

Std diesels make particles of a size which make them amongst the most 
carcinogenic substance known to man. Doesn't seem to be well known. 
Hard to filter and filters that work tend to be somewhat power 
robbing. Not insurmountable.

Still a hydrocarbon IC engine. Less refined fuels than petrol and 
easier from a bio base but still energy intensive to produce. Still 
caught up in the peak oil catastrophe and /or "in real terms 
everything takes more energy to produce than it makes". Fusion escapes 
that web, but a fusion powered car seems unlikely this millennium. 
(BTTF notwithstanding).

Hydrogen, alas, is liable to have more long term potential once the 
storage and distribution issues succumb to volume market.
Nasty stuff. Terrible mass density. Terrible volume density. Nasty 
storage issues. Dangerous flames (invisible). Superb energy per mass.

Stirling will save you, but only after you put 100 billion odd into 
R&D.
If you really really really must you could make an essentially 
identical Stirling run on petrol, diesel, LPG, alcohol, Hydrogen, 
Methanol, bio whatever, wood, coal, tar, rice husks, paper, garbage, 
solar, nuclear thermal, ... .  ie most thermal sources. External 
combustion so NOX emissions can be vvvv good.










-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist