What To Do With The Gas?

[Ty]

Interesting, but we're talking different decades.
I talk the '60s and '70s while you talk the 80s and on.
I talk smog pumps since they mostly dealt with stick shift, carbureted vehicles.
extract from Wikipedia ..."Carbureted engines' exhaust raw fuel content tends to spike when the driver suddenly releases the throttle"...
Probably impacted EFI and the trend toward automatics.
I also talk catalytic converters.
They require an overly rich mixture so that they have something to catalyze.
And then catalytic converters were mandated by law.
Even is they were becoming an obsolete technology.

I was making a point that it isn't the emissions equipment that killed mileage. That isn't the case and it was coincidental....
And I thought extra gas is the primary killer of catalytic converters.

Oh right... so did the pros.

Excess Fuel Overheating The Catalytic Converter
An engine that is performing at peak efficiency will burn all the fuel in the combustion chamber during the combustion process. An engine that is not performing properly, that is not burning all the fuel, will allow unburned or excess fuel to enter the exhaust system. When this excess or unburned fuel contacts the hot core of the converter it will ignite. This constant infusion of unburned fuel will cause temperatures to continuously rise above the designed operating temperature until the core of the catalytic converter will actually melt. Possible causes for the excess fuel entering the exhaust system are an incorrect fuel mixture, incorrect timing, corroded spark plugs, worn and cracked ignition wires, improper fuel pressure, a faulty oxygen sensor, sticking float, faulty fuel injector or a malfunctioning check valve.


The above was so obvious and I found the same information in a bunch of different places. I thought it was common knowledge. I was apparently wrong. Here's the actual source of the above.
http://bobsmuffler.com/convfail.html

 

[WilliamH]

I was making a point that it isn't the emissions equipment that killed mileage. That isn't the case and it was coincidental....
And I thought extra gas is the primary killer of catalytic converters.

Oh right... so did the pros.

Excess Fuel Overheating The Catalytic Converter
An engine that is performing at peak efficiency will burn all the fuel in the combustion chamber during the combustion process. An engine that is not performing properly, that is not burning all the fuel, will allow unburned or excess fuel to enter the exhaust system. When this excess or unburned fuel contacts the hot core of the converter it will ignite. This constant infusion of unburned fuel will cause temperatures to continuously rise above the designed operating temperature until the core of the catalytic converter will actually melt. Possible causes for the excess fuel entering the exhaust system are an incorrect fuel mixture, incorrect timing, corroded spark plugs, worn and cracked ignition wires, improper fuel pressure, a faulty oxygen sensor, sticking float, faulty fuel injector or a malfunctioning check valve.

Once again. A quote with no source cited.
You have to have carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons to be reduced.
From Wikipedia
...."These "two-way" converters combined oxygen with carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbons (HC) to produce carbon dioxide (CO2) and water (H2O). In 1981, two-way catalytic converters were rendered obsolete by "three-way" converters that also reduce oxides of nitrogen (NOx);however, two-way converters are still used for lean-burn engines."....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalytic_converter

 

[Ty]

Once again. A quote with no source cited.
You have to have carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons to be reduced.
From Wikipedia
...."These "two-way" converters combined oxygen with carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbons (HC) to produce carbon dioxide (CO2) and water (H2O). In 1981, two-way catalytic converters were rendered obsolete by "three-way" converters that also reduce oxides of nitrogen (NOx);however, two-way converters are still used for lean-burn engines."....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalytic_converter

I added the source (one if them). I thought everybody knew it is horrible to put extra gas in catalytic converters.

 

[WilliamH]

I added the source (one if them). I thought everybody knew it is horrible to put extra gas in catalytic converters.

Having an engine that far out of tune is bad whether you have a catalytic converter or not.
But..... If you have a catalytic converter you have to run a rich mixture to provide the unburned hydrocarbons that are necessary for a catalytic converter to work. Unburned hydrocarbons are the byproduct of incomplete combustion.
Seems like a properly tuned engine achieving optimized combustion should get better mileage than a de-tuned engine producing hydrocarbons for your converter to catalyze.

 

[AriLea]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q...ved=0ahUKEwiNzM-hgMTPAhWC5yYKHX7FDrYQgQMIGjAA

Someday the oil will be gone and electricity too expensive. What then?
Read the award winning novel Windup Girl to see the author's futuristic projection: wind up power!
https://www.amazon.com/Windup-Girl-...F8&qid=1475605665&sr=8-1&keywords=windup+girl

They just found 40years of light crude in Alaska. As the ice sheet recedes I think there will be more found. In a way that's unfortunate. That reduces the economic motivation to quit burning. We may need to find a way to capture ocean-stored methane as it gets released, but I suppose we'd just burn that too. Still that's better than releasing the raw form.

We're at 400 ppm now. After the reefs all get bleached, I'm not that sure what will happen in the Oceans. If you can get water to them the land plants will love going higher ppm than that. Some algae types as well. For the rest of us fauna, not so much.

There must be some kind of brine-water farming that would be benefitted. Do that on some of those sinking islands in the Oceans?

This chart makes me wonder if wide spread memory issues, a lack of impulse control and general thoughtlessness are related.

Effects of CO2 Levels
350-1,000ppm Concentrations typical of occupied indoor spaces with good air exchange
1,000-2,000ppm Complaints of drowsiness and poor air.
2,000-5,000 ppm Headaches, sleepiness and stagnant, stale, stuffy air. Poor concentration, loss of attention, increased heart rate and slight nausea may also be present.

How often do you get sick and how often do you feel tired all day? Those are areas not officially studied (oops, yes they are, see below) related to CO2, but probably are affected. CO is studied however, fortunately plants convert that to co2 quite readily as part of their process.

Keep in mind these charts are about averages. The environment you live in is chalk-full of high concentration 'hot spots'.

another reference..

The number to watch for is 45 mm Hg of CO2 in the air, or 6% or 60,000 PPM – that is the concentration of CO2 that needs to be reached for the humankind to become extinct. If my math is serving me right, if we divide 60,000 PPM with 400 PPM we get the ‘kill factor’ for CO2: 150.
In other words, the concentration of CO2 needs to increase 150-fold for the CO2 to become toxic.

link to article
U.S. scientists have found that high levels of carbon dioxide in offices and classrooms could be affecting our concentration and decision-making abilities.

The research was conducted by scientists at the State University of New York and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory at the University of California. They found that carbon dioxide concentrations in office buildings normally don’t exceed 1,000 ppm, except in meeting rooms, when groups of people gather for extended periods of time. (Which may partly explain why it’s so hard to stay awake in meetings.)

At carbon dioxide levels of 1,000 ppm – a fairly typical level for an office – volunteers showed a dramatic decline in performance in six out of nine tests. It became significantly worse when the level rose to 2,500ppm.

‘Previous studies have looked at 10,000 ppm and 20,000 ppm; that's the level at which scientists thought effects started,’ added Dr Fisk's colleague and co-author Mark Mendell. 'That's why these findings are so startling.'

Sleep and Carbon Dioxide Poisoning

Carbon dioxide intoxication or carbon dioxide poisoning, known, respectively, as hypercapnia or hypercarbia, occurs when a person has too much of the gas in the body. This usually happens when someone is exposed to elevated levels of carbon dioxide for a long period of time. So, how is sleep a contributing factor to hypercapnia or hypercarbia?

Well, risk factors for this poisoning include unconsciousness and the effect of oxygen given to a person suffering from sleep apnea. Rebreathing exhaled air also puts one at risk for carbon dioxide poisoning or intoxication. This can happen when someone sleeps in a sealed tent or with a blanket over his head.

Many people have no symptoms of hypercapnia, but if they do, they're likely to feel drowsy or find it hard to think straight

OK, my mild doom and gloom moment is over. . more research

 

[Jeff Miller]

I'm not sure which thread this is best for but it seemed like this would be a good one to revive.

Google now gave me a link to an article that quotes the chevy bolt owners manual as saying that the battery could lose up to 40% of its charge capacity by the end of its 5 year warranty period. The article in autoblog goes on to state that this is common.

I just found this interesting as many of the EV discussions seem to focus on the cost of battery replacement as well as range anxiety, and given the articles I cite below, it appears to me that those two things are very real concerns.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/12/07/chevy-bolt-ev-battery-lose-40-percent-capacity/
http://www.leftlanenews.com/chevy-w...-degrade-by-40-percent-over-8years-93502.html
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/2...ch-as-40-over-the-warranty-period-113534.html

 

[johnsnownw]

I'm not sure which thread this is best for but it seemed like this would be a good one to revive.

Google now gave me a link to an article that quotes the chevy bolt owners manual as saying that the battery could lose up to 40% of its charge capacity by the end of its 5 year warranty period. The article in autoblog goes on to state that this is common.

I just found this interesting as many of the EV discussions seem to focus on the cost of battery replacement as well as range anxiety, and given the articles I cite below, it appears to me that those two things are very real concerns.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/12/07/chevy-bolt-ev-battery-lose-40-percent-capacity/
http://www.leftlanenews.com/chevy-w...-degrade-by-40-percent-over-8years-93502.html
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/2...ch-as-40-over-the-warranty-period-113534.html

Battery degradation isn't a concern with Li-Ion technologies. Engineers are well aware of how to control the conditions which lead to degradation. The issue occurs when you ignore them. For instance, the Bolt doesn't have a large enough buffer, which can lead to pre-mature aging of the cells.

Tesla owner data, and lab data, indicate that Tesla packs will have a 40% loss (on average) only after ~900k miles. Which is why they have an 8 year unlimited mile warranty on most of their packs.

 

[Sethodine]

I'm not sure which thread this is best for but it seemed like this would be a good one to revive.

Google now gave me a link to an article that quotes the chevy bolt owners manual as saying that the battery could lose up to 40% of its charge capacity by the end of its 5 year warranty period. The article in autoblog goes on to state that this is common.

I just found this interesting as many of the EV discussions seem to focus on the cost of battery replacement as well as range anxiety, and given the articles I cite below, it appears to me that those two things are very real concerns.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/12/07/chevy-bolt-ev-battery-lose-40-percent-capacity/
http://www.leftlanenews.com/chevy-w...-degrade-by-40-percent-over-8years-93502.html
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/2...ch-as-40-over-the-warranty-period-113534.html

That's a little steeper drop-off than the Leaf's warrenteed battery degredation, but it's really not too bad. If the battery still has 60% capacity at 5 years, then that's still an estimated 142 miles of range (or double what my 4-year-old Leaf is getting). And EV batteries do not degrade linearly, the degredation is always worst in the first 3 years before leveling out into a more linear decline.

A rough estimate puts the 238-mile range Bolt at around 180 miles for a 3-year old one (the minimum age I could afford to buy one). If our driving isn't substantially different than how we drive the Leaf, then it could last us 20 years or more before the range becomes an issue.

EV range is the biggest percieved issue for a lot of people, but most people drive less than 50 miles a day. For everything the EV cannot do, there is Elio

 

[Rickb]

That's a little steeper drop-off than the Leaf's warrenteed battery degredation, but it's really not too bad. If the battery still has 60% capacity at 5 years, then that's still an estimated 142 miles of range (or double what my 4-year-old Leaf is getting). And EV batteries do not degrade linearly, the degredation is always worst in the first 3 years before leveling out into a more linear decline.

A rough estimate puts the 238-mile range Bolt at around 180 miles for a 3-year old one (the minimum age I could afford to buy one). If our driving isn't substantially different than how we drive the Leaf, then it could last us 20 years or more before the range becomes an issue.

EV range is the biggest percieved issue for a lot of people, but most people drive less than 50 miles a day. For everything the EV cannot do, there is Elio

Yes on the range extender Elio for a family of 2.

 

[Jeff Miller]

OK, I admit that I choose to stay blissfully ignorant of many of the intricacies of EVs simply because I like gas powered vehicles. Add to that the many conversations about battery replacement costs and range anxiety and I found that the articles I posted above seemed to support what I've been hearing as well as continue to enforce the notion in my brain that I'm all gas all the way.

Additionally, given the information from the autoblog article I'm having trouble understanding johnsownw response:

Battery degradation isn't a concern with Li-Ion technologies. Engineers are well aware of how to control the conditions which lead to degradation. The issue occurs when you ignore them. For instance, the Bolt doesn't have a large enough buffer, which can lead to pre-mature aging of the cells.

Tesla owner data, and lab data, indicate that Tesla packs will have a 40% loss (on average) only after ~900k miles. Which is why they have an 8 year unlimited mile warranty on most of their packs.

The article talks clearly about how early leaf and tesla vehicles had significant issues with degradation including lawsuits. Did Nissan and Tesla not use Li-Ion technologies and have since changed to Li-Ion such that this is no longer a problem?

Sethodine says:

That's a little steeper drop-off than the Leaf's warrenteed battery degredation, but it's really not too bad. If the battery still has 60% capacity at 5 years, then that's still an estimated 142 miles of range (or double what my 4-year-old Leaf is getting). And EV batteries do not degrade linearly, the degredation is always worst in the first 3 years before leveling out into a more linear decline.

A rough estimate puts the 238-mile range Bolt at around 180 miles for a 3-year old one (the minimum age I could afford to buy one). If our driving isn't substantially different than how we drive the Leaf, then it could last us 20 years or more before the range becomes an issue.

EV range is the biggest percieved issue for a lot of people, but most people drive less than 50 miles a day. For everything the EV cannot do, there is Elio

I have read your many posts and understand that range is not an issue for you. However, what I hear about the bolt and the model 3 is that they are going to be sellers because of their range. If in 5 years they can only go 60% of their touted range that seems to be a significant problem for the folks that are buying them specifically because it addresses their range anxiety or range needs.