On 30 May 2012 23:07:12 GMT, Larry wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote in
:
On Tue, 29 May 2012 22:38:21 -0500, Leon
lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:
On 5/29/2012 7:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 29 May 2012 13:48:20 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
wrote:
"Just Wondering" wrote:
There is no other realistic alternate energy source for
private motor vehicles.
-------------------------------
Truck and bus fleets work quite well and at lower cost
using natural gas as opposed to #2 diesel.
That's some low hanging fruit to get started.
Lew
Waterloo regional transit had a fleet of natural gas
busses, and the maintenance costs totally killed the
project - they went back to deisel, and now have quite a
few hybrid deisels. The extra engine maintenance on the
CNG busses outstripped any possible fuel savings.
I am seriously curious as to why maintenance costs were
higher. Do you know?
Since CNG engines outlast gasoline engines, I'm willing to
bet that it was the switch from diesel to CNG IC engines
which caused the maintenance shift.
Show me something that would indicate that the general CNG
engine will last longer. My experience, albeit 20 years ago,
is completely opposite of that. I've taken apart converted
engines that were nothing but scrap metal. Rebuilders refused
to take them as a core when purchasing a short/long block.
CNG has no lubricating properties that most internal
combustion engines depend on, even the small amount that
gasoline delivers.
My info was circa 1984. The body shop's Chevy wrecker was a CNG
conversion. The paperwork which came with it stated that the
conversions lasted longer because they didn't have liquid gasoline
washing the oil off the cylinders every other stroke on the carbureted
models. I wasn't interested enough to research it. (That was before
the Internet.)
Got cites to current info on the difference? I know that the newer
injected engines don't suffer from the stated malady.
--
When a quiet man is moved to passion, it seems the very earth will shake.
-- Stephanie Barron
(Something for the Powers That Be to remember, eh?)