PithyOpiner
Champion Author
Stockton
Posts:16,220
Points:1,599,495
Joined:Jun 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2013 1:50:33 PM
I use Diesel instead of water to irrigate my lawn and so far it is better for the environment than gasoline. Which tends to burn my grass and plants. And, it tastes better, too.
|
yodudebc
Champion Author
Vancouver
Posts:5,616
Points:546,750
Joined:Aug 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2013 10:06:11 AM
So far it seems to be harmful emissions vs particulate matter.
|
prorodeo2012
All-Star Author
Bakersfield
Posts:528
Points:181,595
Joined:Sep 2012
|
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2013 5:24:15 AM
Diesal is best.
|
MertieMan
Champion Author
Lexington
Posts:14,803
Points:2,898,535
Joined:May 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2013 5:21:08 AM
Neither with all of the pollution junk on vehicles currently.
|
Bluebird333
All-Star Author
Wisconsin
Posts:634
Points:52,300
Joined:Feb 2012
|
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2013 7:12:32 PM
Diesel, and its not even close. Diesels are used in caves and mines because they don't produce anywhere near the amount of carbon monoxide as gassers do (if any). Diesel engines pressurise fuel and directly shoot it into the engine when the engine reaches the power stroke so it only sucks air in the intake (fuel is burnt way more efficiently and co2 levels are quite a bit lower). Diesels can run extremely lean and the newest ones have emissions equipment that are far superior than whats on gassers. Diesels use less fuel to go the same distance and are great for bio fuels.
|
yodudebc
Champion Author
Vancouver
Posts:5,616
Points:546,750
Joined:Aug 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2013 10:15:25 AM
Hi GasBuddy. Yeah, maybe "Do the math. Show your work." sounded a bit teacherish. But I got what I was hoping for -- thoughtful responses. I didn't provide my opinion because I honestly don't think I have completely thought it through and I was looking for other perspectives on the topic.
|
tdioiler
All-Star Author
Detroit
Posts:895
Points:422,375
Joined:Jul 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2013 11:09:46 PM
The article Wepsman posted is from 2007; the year ultra-low sulphur went into affect. And the comment about total carbon load between fuels does not take any effort to identify the particulate drop that diesel provides, and captured by filters, when petrol has much less capture.
And the article was written by someone with much more written on home appliances and child-proofing a home. A stay-at-home PR person? Yeah.
|
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:25,991
Points:3,036,990
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2013 6:22:05 PM
Neither are "better for the environment".
Isn't what you mean, which is less harmful? Or which is worse?
Why don't you provide your opinion, or are you asking the question as someone that doesn't know the differences between the two?
As PithyOpiner alluded to, what do you mean by "Do the math"?
And, what do you mean by "Show your work"?
Are you asking that Gas Buddy members provide and post independent research for you viewing, or analysis, or review?
|
PithyOpiner
Champion Author
Stockton
Posts:16,220
Points:1,599,495
Joined:Jun 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2013 6:05:40 PM
Gasoline
2 + 2 = 4
|
WEPSMAN
Champion Author
South Dakota
Posts:10,523
Points:2,026,425
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2013 9:04:35 AM
Here is an article that has one opinion:
http://ezinearticles.com/?Diesel-vs-Regular-Gasoline---Which-is-Better-for-the-Environment?&id=946207
It says diesel has more emissions, but makes up for it with better economy so it is better for the environment. Also this does not into account for the newer "clean" diesel engines.
|