Print 93 comment(s) - last by Hoser McMoose.. on Jul 13 at 2:47 PM

Honda Odyssey

Honda Pilot

Honda Ridgeline
Honda to introduce a new 3.5 liter V6 diesel by 2010

While many domestic and foreign automakers are looking to hybrid technology to improve fuel efficiency across their auto lines, Honda is looking towards the tried and true: diesel engines.

It was reported last month that the next generation Honda Accord would forgo its slow-selling and poor-performing Accord Hybrid with a diesel variant. The oil-burning Honda Accord will feature a 2.2 liter i-CTDi Tier 2 Bin 5 diesel engine along with an ammonia-filled catalytic converter to reduce NOx emissions.

Honda is also poised to make a new 3.5 liter V6 diesel engine available for its larger vehicles including the Odyssey minivan, Pilot mid-sized SUV and the Ridgeline mid-sized pickup truck. The new Tier 2 Bin 5 diesel will first be available in 2010 according to the Japanese Nikkei newspaper.

The engine is said to be 30 percent more fuel efficient than Honda's current 3.5 liter V6 gasoline engine (rated at 17/24, 15/20 and 15/20 respectively in the Odyssey, Pilot and Ridgeline based on 2008 EPA estimates). The new motor is also said to produce 20 percent less carbon dioxide as the 3.5 liter V6 gasoline engine.

Honda's new diesels likely won't come under as much scrutiny for failure to achieve EPA estimates as has been the case with hybrids. Honda knows this first-hand as it recently became the target of a class-action lawsuit regarding poor fuel economy on the Civic Hybrid.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Typo + comment
By SandmanWN on 7/13/2007 11:36:28 AM , Rating: 2
Your entire argument about corn is that we will somehow not be able to use corn for our daily needs. This can be solved with simple legislation stating that food and other items that currently depend on corn production gets first dibs on the corn supply. All the excess with then be funneled into the fuel system. Your entire argument goes out the window at that point.

And don't be naive. It took a very long time to get the energy yields of gasoline to the efficiency levels they are today. If you don't think efficiency can be brought up to higher levels over time with ethanol then you are just plain fooling yourself.

And what difference does it make if we start with corn, one of the easiest and most readily ways to get ethanol, and transition to something else later? Big friggin' whoop. Boo Hoo our price of corn goes up a little. It's a drop in the bucket compared to oil prices.

Which is why I advocate thermal depolymerization over ethanol production. It takes a variety of abundantly available waste resources and with very little processing, produces a refinable light crude. It's still crappy for the environment, but it fits nicely into our existing infrastructure, and won't cause a global catastrophe in two years.

Yeah thats great man. Trade one problem for an even worse one. Great technology you decided to back there. And how the hell is ethanol going to cause some major catastrophe. You surpassed sipping the kool aid and went straight to sucking down the whole bottle.

RE: Typo + comment
By dluther on 7/13/2007 1:04:28 PM , Rating: 2
It appears to me that you have a finely developed "all or nothing" mentality regarding alternative energy sources. Why is that? I fully support alternative energy sources, especially ones that are clean and renewable. Honestly, I really like the concept of ethanol, it's just that our current source is, well, no need to rehash that conversation.

This can be solved with simple legislation

Okay. "Simple legislation" is an oxymoron -- there's no such thing as simple legislation, especially when you are neglecting the concept that these markets aren't regulated, merely subsidized It's called a free market economy, and a legislation that says someone can call "dibs" sounds logical, it just never will happen. It's obvious to me that you don't have a grasp of how futures, spot markets, independent sources, and farmer coalitions work to determine crop prices. You need to do some research on this. The farmer gets to sell his corn to the highest bidder. If the ethanol manufacturer wants to pay more than the feedlots, guess who's going to get the corn?

Big friggin' whoop. Boo Hoo our price of corn goes up a little. It's a drop in the bucket compared to oil prices.

Oil and gasoline prices are already at historic highs, with no relief in sight, which already has a deleterious price effect of almost everything else because transportation and manufacturing costs are tied to these costs. That you don't care about raising the prices of other items independently tells me that you are either stupid, heartless, or are simply unaffected by the changes that are happening.

Trade one problem for an even worse one.

How can augmenting our crude supplies with a cheaper supplement even remotely to be considered 'worse'? If crude oil is priced at $72/bbl, and TDP crude can be priced at $56/bbl, where is the problem? How in anyone's mind can a process that takes almost every organic waste we produce, and turn it into crude oil be considered bad?

Ultimately, I envy you -- I really do. You seem to live in a dream world where everything is possible, unaffected by the vagaries of political and economic downturns, and the effects those cause. If I were in that position, I'd stay there for as long as I could. Unfortunately for the rest of us, we have to live and work in the real world.

RE: Typo + comment
By Hoser McMoose on 7/13/2007 2:47:03 PM , Rating: 2
This can be solved with simple legislation stating that food and other items that currently depend on corn production gets first dibs on the corn supply.

Ouch, there's a plan that's absolutely doomed to failure before it even gets out of the gate! If you truly believe that this sort of thing can be legislated then you are being VERY naive!

Every time governments have tried to force such things they have failed miserable.
It took a very long time to get the energy yields of gasoline to the efficiency levels they are today.

We've been making ethanol for about a thousand years. We've only been making gasoline for about a hundred years. There really isn't much new technology that is going to significantly improve the energy yield we're going to get for producing ethanol from corn because it's an extremely well understood process.

Genetic engineering of the corn crops themselves is the only area that we're likely to have good payback on this, though we'd still be better off genetically engineering OTHER crops then corn.

It's a drop in the bucket compared to oil prices.

That's only because ethanol currently amounts to about 1% of the world's fossil fuel energy use (not counting the rather direct use of it as a 'fuel' when we drink the stuff!). If it were to make up a larger percentage of the fuel use in the world then the price would go up SIGNIFICANTLY and would become much more volatile.

Besides, corn is so thoroughly integrated into our food system that any small increases get passed along to the consumer in nearly every food-based product we buy.

"I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For [Paramount] to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks!" -- Movie Director Michael Bay

Most Popular ArticlesAMD, Zen Processor might power the upcoming Apple MacBook Pro
September 30, 2016, 5:00 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Are you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Apple’s Siri Speaker is a Game Changer
September 26, 2016, 5:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki