Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:Or just make the diesels hybrids (Score 1) 92

Kinda the sweet spot for hybrid-electric drives, no?

It is, but not with diesels, because they don't start-stop as gracefully as gassers, and probably never will — at least, not until gasoline engines eliminate their startup advantage by becoming just as high-compression as diesels. And in fact, the trend we are seeing in gasoline engines is to move towards higher-compression direct-injected designs, or to moderate-compression DI engines with turbochargers. In the bargain they are becoming just as expensive as diesel engines, because now just like the diesels they need a high-pressure fuel pump and a heavier cylinder wall to deal with the increased cylinder pressures, as well as the use of more exotic alloys to increase rigidity and durability while keeping package sizes down. So what we're seeing is that diesel and gasoline engines are effectively converging on the same point.

At some point we might even get engines which are capable of running on either cycle, or some other thing somewhere in between. Koenigsegg has a practical solenoid-actuated valve design (as well as a fully custom in-house designed PCM) that in practical terms can actually permit changing from one combustion cycle to another while the engine is running, for example switching from four-stroke to two-stroke at high RPM. Maybe one day we'll have single engines that can run on spark or compression ignition.

Or, you know, maybe we'll give up on this infernal combustion crap, and go electric. Batteries are getting better faster than ICEs.

Comment Re:The real answer... (Score 1) 92

It would be even nicer if we could just run them on farts and rainbows. After all, that's about as likely to work as suggesting water should be used as a fuel source.

You actually CAN use water as a partial fuel in your diesels... in a way. When the engine is very hot you can inject water mist into the intake. This not only cools the combustion chamber, but as a natural result of the same process it makes power as the water becomes steam and its volume increases. Large-displacement diesels can allegedly make as much as 100HP additional when wide-open and under heavy load, but 50HP is a better estimate for a typical diesel V8. Water injection systems are fairly common on the heavier end of the light truck spectrum. You can use them with gasoline engines as well, but water injection works best with high cylinder temperatures.

Unfortunately it really only works when the engine is under a lot of load, so if we wanted to make this a typical part of substantial improvements in stock vehicles, we'd have to design them to run closer to the limits all the time, which tends to reduce longevity. That's why we got all these gigantic, low-revving diesels in the states to begin with. My 1982 Mercedes 300SD (OM617.951) "redlines" at 4700! It gets literally as much horsepower output from 3 liters as Americans got out of 6.9! And the torque is not so much lower as you might expect.

Comment Re:Or just make the diesels hybrids (Score 1) 92

You're either a troll or you have never experienced the pollution from diesel vehicles in a city centre

You're either a troll or you haven't been around both gasoline and diesel vehicles being started. I have a 1982 300SD, a real good old mechanical diesel with no emissions controls worth mentioning, and I would a million times rather huff its startup smoke than a gasoline vehicle's. You can feel the difference. I have asthma, and the gasoline vehicles make me cough and choke right away (even if I didn't know they were running and just inhale a good whiff) while the diesel merely smells bad. Once either one heats up, you can no longer perceive the difference. While you have to be careful not to outrun the turbo with your foot in my 1992 F250 diesel (well, you did before the block died the death of cavitation) the Mercedes has boost pressure compensation and fuels itself correctly, so it doesn't stink to drive behind my car, either. And since it has no trap, the soot isn't re-burned to turn it into the PM2.5 that modern diesel vehicles produce.

Comment Re:Not actually available now (Score 1) 205

It was 5$USD at Adafruit, there was 43 units left after I received the notification email. After seeing the nearly 11$USD shipping cost to Canada, I removed it from my cart.

Yes, this is part of my point. Nobody can get these for $5. Everyone has to pay more in shipping than what the item costs. I can buy an Arduino Nano from fucking China and get it for $3.50 shipped. So my question was, when can I actually walk into a store and get one for five bucks? Apparently that was trolling.

Comment Re:Err, petrol is currently cheaper that diesel (Score 2) 92

Diesels also release invisible soot - PM 2.5, far more so than petrol engines.

Hey, here's an idea, why don't you try reading the link I posted which points out that this isn't actually true because the soot that gassers produce is so fine we could not even measure it until recently? That will help you waste less time making erroneous statements.

Comment Re: Doesn't sound very credible to me (Score 1) 92

No, it's to with the fact that diesel engines emit a much higher level of particulates which is having a negative impact on health in very high density urban areas like Paris and London.

No, no they do not, and if you cannot keep up with the news (which we discussed here on slashdot!) then you should not make declarative statements. Gasoline engines produce more PM2.5 than diesels, and that's the stuff that cilia can't sweep out of your lungs and thus what's really harmful.

Comment Re:Err, petrol is currently cheaper that diesel (Score 3, Informative) 92

Gassers put out just as much soot as diesels, but it's the more dangerous kind of soot that you can't see. The fuel is also more volatile and all gassers spit unburned fuel until they enter closed-loop mode. They do that a lot faster these days, but it's still true. Diesels always run lean, they don't have that problem. They have the problem that since they run lean, they produce more NOx. You're upset because you can see the soot, but breathing gasoline does more damage to your lungs.

Comment Re:Not quite right (Score 1) 92

"Diesel produce larger particles which are easier to filter."

Wrong. As well as large soot particles it produces particles 2.5 um in size which are almost impossible to filter and need to be burned away.

Gasoline vehicles produce twice as much soot as was previously believed, so guess who's wrong? Virtually all the soot from gassers is not just PM2.5 but actually so small it was until recently impossible to measure in the field, and in fact gasoline engines are worse contributors to PM2.5 than diesels. Meanwhile, what do you think happens to those large soot particles which get filtered? There's no filter element that you change when it gets clogged up with soot. Instead, the soot is burned in the trap... and turns into PM2.5

Comment Re: Imbicycles (Score 1) 92

Why the fuck are you traveling with your desktop and printer on the train?

Because you want them to use public transportation, and they just bought a new PC and printer.

As for shopping, go to the store around the corner.

The last time I lived in a city, I had a good paying job compared to the median, so I was easily able to live in a part of town where I could literally walk to anything I wanted in ten minutes or less — restaurants, movie theater, various shopping outlets, and work. The first time I lived in a city, I was barely making it. The only things in my neighborhood were two bars, a library (that was nice anyway) and a liquor store. There was no store around the corner for large items. And even if there was, how would I get them home if they were larger than I could carry?

Basically because diesel cars suck you are complaining about bikes?

Actually, they're complaining about bicyclists, not bicycles. Bicycles aren't inherently harmful technology. Bicyclists who don't follow traffic laws, however, are inherently harmful to fuel mileage.

If you replaced all those diesels in the city with bikes there would be even less pollution.

Yes, but you would still have to come up with a method for people to move large packages around if you eliminated all the cars.

Comment Re:Or just make the diesels hybrids (Score 1) 92

Amen! Gasoline cars are fucking horrible to be around, their HCs are far more volatile and they ALL release a BUNCH of unburned HCs when cold. Diesel fuel is less volatile, and they run lean all the time, that's part of their design. That's why they make NOx, but it's also why they produce less emissions overall per mile traveled. Gasoline vehicles emit just as much soot as diesels, it just happens to be the finer and more dangerous kind. If diesel fuel is bad to be around, then gasoline is worse. If they're banning diesels from cities, they should ban gassers first.

I would argue that the ideal transportation system for cities would be elevated (monorail? monorail!) PRT. It frees up the streets for pedestrians and bicycles, and it does literally all the positive things that cars do (including enabling individuals to travel without having to wait for lots of other people to want to go the same way) without causing any of the problems that cars cause. Take out all of the cars, replace them with PRT, call it a day.

Comment Re:Windows 7 (Score 1) 344

A few whiners isn't the world. Many people were fine with Vista.

And your experience is irrelevant to the broader experience that was experienced by the majority of users, and you are willfully ignorant.

Your hatred is blinding you to the fact that not everyone had the same experience you did, if you even had that experience and aren't just lying about it all.

Your cowardice is leading you to troll from behind anonymity because you know that you're a lying sack of shit.

The trouble with a lot of self-made men is that they worship their creator.