[tonyw]

With so much  talk about the harmful emissions from diesel engines, what are engine manufacturers doing about it? Surely they are not going to roll over and accept that their engines days are numbered?

[Ruperts Trooper]

Like all major groups, Hyundai/Kia is moving into Hydrogen Cell (iX35/Tucson) and hybrid, plug-in hybrid and pure EV (Ioniq) - in addition diesel/petrol engines are still being developed and improved.

Only time will tell which technology will dominate and make all the others obsolete.

When the new WLTP-RDE test procedure is rolled out, then we may start to know just how clean, or not, Euro 6 diesels with Adblue really are - even there there's new technology on it's way, ASDS, which is claimed to be much more effective than Adblue at reducing/eliminating NOx.

[tonyw]

What's going to happen with trucks? Will they have a reduced load capacity to compensate for having to tow a trailer containing tons of batteries? Are electric trucks feasible?

[Ruperts Trooper]

What's going to happen with trucks? Will they have a reduced load capacity to compensate for having to tow a trailer containing tons of batteries? Are electric trucks feasible?

Send answers to the Green Party - big vehicles use more fossil fuel and emit more emissions than small vehicles - those should be the ones tackled first, but it's too difficult politically.

[Jon]

First there was Diesel engines

Then low sulphur diesel fuel, to reduce sulphur.

Then particulate filters were added to reduce particulates. These steadily improved as standards went up from EU3 to today.

Then came EGR, exhaust gas recirculation, putting exhaust back into the combustion to reduce the combustion temperature. Lower combustion temps mean lower NOx.

Now for EU6 lab tests we have LNT, lean NOx traps, that chemically trap NOx from leaving the exhaust. It is chemically converted in trap 'regeneration' to harmless gasses and water.
The alternative to LNT is SCR. SCR uses adblue to chemically react with NOx in the exhaust converting it to harmless chemicals such as nitrogen gas.
LNT alone is better than SCR alone in the lab, and there's no ongoing cost. That's why current Hyundai EU6 diesel cars all have LNT but do not require adblue.

Other manufacturers have gone down the SCR alone route.
Commercial vehicles with their lower rpm and lower combustion temperatures (as they are not trying to replicate to feel of a petrol car with high revs) achieve pretty good NOx emissions with SCR in the real world. Cars generally don't.

In the real world an LNT combined with SCR bring emissions right down under almost all driving conditions and that's on its way very soon. Both are needed for the RDE without fudge factors being applied.

Currently being tested and developed alongside electric, plug in, fuel cell and conventional hybrid is the 48v mild hybrid which can be added at fairly low cost.
The downside of EV is that it only moves the emissions from the point of use of the car to the point of generation of the electricity, and that isn't always as clean or sustainable as it could be.

My last journey used 160 tonnes of fuel.

[Ruperts Trooper]

First there was Diesel engines

Then low sulphur diesel fuel, to reduce sulphur.

Then particulate filters were added to reduce particulates. These steadily improved as standards went up from EU3 to today.

Then came EGR, exhaust gas recirculation, putting exhaust back into the combustion to reduce the combustion temperature. Lower combustion temps mean lower NOx.

Now for EU6 lab tests we have LNT, lean NOx traps, that chemically trap NOx from leaving the exhaust. It is chemically converted in trap 'regeneration' to harmless gasses and water.
The alternative to LNT is SCR. SCR uses adblue to chemically react with NOx in the exhaust converting it to harmless chemicals such as nitrogen gas.
LNT alone is better than SCR alone in the lab, and there's no ongoing cost. That's why current Hyundai EU6 diesel cars all have LNT but do not require adblue.

Other manufacturers have gone down the SCR alone route.
Commercial vehicles with their lower rpm and lower combustion temperatures (as they are not trying to replicate to feel of a petrol car with high revs) achieve pretty good NOx emissions with SCR in the real world. Cars generally don't.

In the real world an LNT combined with SCR bring emissions right down under almost all driving conditions and that's on its way very soon. Both are needed for the RDE without fudge factors being applied.

Currently being tested and developed alongside electric, plug in, fuel cell and conventional hybrid is the 48v mild hybrid which can be added at fairly low cost.
The downside of EV is that it only moves the emissions from the point of use of the car to the point of generation of the electricity, and that isn't always as clean or sustainable as it could be.

My last journey used 160 tonnes of fuel.

EGR was used from 2000 when NOx limits were introduced in Euro 3 - before USLD.

Adblue/SCR is more effective at reducing NOx than LNT - but LNT is cheaper to fit which is why Adblue only fitted to more expensive models - it was VW's reluctance to incur the cost of Adblue on their 4-cylinder models that led to "dieselgate" - the lack of Adblue is why many Euro 6 diesels have real world NOx many times the limit.

[tonyw]

As TMIAP has said to cope with the massively increased demand we will need increased generation capacity which if fossil are to be prohibited will mean nuclear and that won't please the tree huggers. I'm thinking about starting a company making very long extension leads so that I can charge my car from a flat on the 21st floor to where I have had to park round the corner. A potential  trip hazard I hear you say, so I may also start a new accident claims company to deal with the expected increase in claims.
As you may have gathered I think that once again there is a lack of joined up thinking from the policy makers.

[Jon]

Looks like the proposed ban won't include hybrids.
So we will still have petrol and diesel but combined with electric hybrid assistance.

I'm a fan of range extenders. When the drive is from electric motors and batteries the range extender power unit only has one task. An engine that has a fixed rpm to drive a generator can be made very clean and efficient.  

Rather than have the regulation define what engineering technology is or isn't allowed, best to set the rules on environmental impact and let the engineers work out how to comply with whichever technology or power supply.

I'd love a Tesla but I can't afford one and it wouldn't work too well yet for my drives to the Alps or down to Spain. More rapid charging infrastructure will be needed.

For RT, yes SCR outperforms LNT in real driving. The opposite is true in the current lab based tests. Initial/ongoing cost and any reluctance of drivers to have to fill their adblue tanks are factors.

And for Tonyw, I think you need to rig up some kind of wireless induction charging so you can charge the car from the apartment, perhaps using an old sky satellite dish, loads of cables and some massive magnets! Make sure you park in the right spot!

[Ruperts Trooper]

Adblue/SCR is a PITA, especially when a platform has little spare space to fit the tank - where the filler is next to the fuel filler it's easy enough but if it's in the boot (under the spare wheel in the case of my Touareg) then it's only topped-up when the system "threatens" to prevent the engine starting.

My ongoing Adblue cost is about £25 per 10,000 miles.

[Spike1987]

This is only my opinion but I think by the time the ban comes in (2040) the wireless charging will take over, possibly under the road surface allowing the electric car to be charged whilst driving it, which should give the car a very good range and the battery's shouldn't need topping up that often. As for ad blue it's been used in trucks since 2006 the car world is only just catching up

[Ruperts Trooper]

Wireless charging is a big ask - it'll need to charge at a rate of 30-60 kw to balance the energy being used - that'll play havoc with other electronics, including those with pacemakers!

[Piskoty]

Why as a species are we all trying to skirt around the fact that we can't cope without fossil fuels?
What is the rate of new Coal fired power stations opening up in China, anyone know? Every one of which is blowing everything we try to achieve away.