1931 Slant Window 4 Door Murray Sedan on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output

How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.

Trump tells Detroit 3 CEOs he wants more US jobs, calls environmentalists 'out of control'

As expected, President Donald J. Trump met with top executives from FCA, Ford, and General Motors this morning as part of a larger push to generate jobs in America. "I want new plants to be built here for cars sold here!", Trump said in a tweet ahead of the meeting. Not everything said in the meeting was made public, but the President later tweeted that he had a "Great meeting with automobile industry leaders." FCA CEO Sergio Marchionne, Ford chief Mark Fields, and GM's Mary Barra all echoed the positive vibes after the meeting. In a statement, Barra called the discussion "very constructive and wide-ranging," adding that it focused on "policies that support a strong and competitive economy and auto industry," and "that supports the environment and safety." That's noteworthy, because Trump is reported to have said "I am to a large extent an environmentalist. I believe in it, but it's out of control." Fields, speaking to reporters after the meeting, said, "We're excited about working together with the president and his administration on tax policies, on regulation and on trade to really create a renaissance in American manufacturing." The Ford CEO was specifically talking about Trump's withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. "We've repeatedly said that the mother of all trade barriers is currency manipulation, and TPP failed in meaningfully dealing with that, and we appreciate the president's courage to walk away from a bad trade deal," he said. Marchionne focused on American manufacturing in his statement after the meeting. "I appreciate the President's focus on making the US a great place to do business. We look forward to working with President Trump and members of Congress to strengthen American manufacturing." Perhaps equally as interesting as what was said and who was invited are what wasn't said and who wasn't invited. Trump has been very vocal about his distaste for US automakers' plants in Mexico, but no mention was made of the North American Free Trade Agreement by Trump or any of the Detroit CEOs after the meeting. We also have to wonder if Trump plans to meet with representatives from German, Japanese, and Korean automakers that have made massive investments into American plants and produce a large number of cars in this country. Related Video: News Source: Reuters, General Motors, Fiat Chrysler Automotive, Donald J.

Aluminum lightweighting does, in fact, save fuel

When the best-selling US truck sheds the equivalent weight of three football fullbacks by shifting to aluminum, folks start paying attention. Oak Ridge National Laboratory took a closer look at whether the reduced fuel consumption from a lighter aluminum body makes up for the fact that producing aluminum is far more energy intensive than steel. And the results of the study are pretty encouraging. In a nutshell, the energy needed to produce a vehicle's raw materials accounts for about 10 percent of a typical vehicle's carbon footprint during its total lifecycle, and that number is up from six percent because of advancements in fuel economy (fuel use is down to about 68 percent of total emissions from about 75 percent). Still, even with that higher material-extraction share, the fuel-efficiency gains from aluminum compared to steel will offset the additional vehicle-extraction energy in just 12,000 miles of driving, according to the study. That means that, from an environmental standpoint, aluminum vehicles are playing with the house's money after just one year on the road. Aluminum-sheet construction got topical real quickly earlier this year when Ford said the 2015 F-150 pickup truck would go to a 93-percent aluminum body construction. In addition to aluminum being less corrosive than steel, that change caused the F-150 to shed 700 pounds from its curb weight. And it looks like the Explorer and Expedition SUVs may go on an aluminum diet next. Take a look at SAE International's synopsis of the Oak Ridge Lab's study below. Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of Aluminum-Intensive Vehicle Design Advanced lightweight materials are increasingly being incorporated into new vehicle designs by automakers to enhance performance and assist in complying with increasing requirements of corporate average fuel economy standards. To assess the primary energy and carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) implications of vehicle designs utilizing these materials, this study examines the potential life cycle impacts of two lightweight material alternative vehicle designs, i.e., steel and aluminum of a typical passenger vehicle operated today in North America. LCA for three common alternative lightweight vehicle designs are evaluated: current production ("Baseline"), an advanced high strength steel and aluminum design ("LWSV"), and an aluminum-intensive design (AIV).