Diesel/lpg

[el-d]

As the price of diesel spirals ever upwards the question of the viability of an lpg conversion again becomes a live issue. I'd be interested to read opinions and information on this, especially from those who've looked into the matter deeply or indeed had a conversion carried out on their motorhome.

 

I have a 1997 Pilote Galaxy A-class on the Peugeot chassis with the usual 2.5 litre turbo-diesel engine.

[enodreven]

Hi,

 

Its worth checking the LPG to Diesel conversion companies as from what I can understand the conversion of a diesel engine to LPG only uses a small amount of LPG as the engine runs on a mixture or both, and if my understanding is correct the fuel savings may be questionable unless your mileage is high

 

I could be completely wrong so its worth looking at the converters web sites to double check

 

 

[rupert123]

el-d - 2008-06-23 7:43 PM

 

As the price of diesel spirals ever upwards the question of the viability of an lpg conversion again becomes a live issue. I'd be interested to read opinions and information on this, especially from those who've looked into the matter deeply or indeed had a conversion carried out on their motorhome.

 

I have a 1997 Pilote Galaxy A-class on the Peugeot chassis with the usual 2.5 litre turbo-diesel engine.

 

Certainly not worth while on a diesel. I have had two petrol engines converted to LPG, both Range Rover V8 and on both fuel consumtion dropped about 20% but was still worthwhile if you do a fair amount of mileage. On a diesel you only use a proportion of LPG to diesel, as has already been pointed out but savings are pretty much nil, even convertors I have spoken to are not keen.

[bob b]

I think that if I was in the market for a motorhome now, I would go for a petrol version and have it converted to LPG.

 

LPG doesn't seem to be rocketing up in price like the other fuels.

 

You would think that the convertors would be considering marketing

such a motorhome. It wasn't that long ago that few people wanted a petrol fueled motorhome and the diesel versions carried a premium.

 

All change shortly methinks !

 

 

[Den]

Yes your right they tend to run 30% lpg giving greater HP ... But should you use the extra power, your back to the square one.. Also the cost of the conversion. You wotld need to cover a white van man miles. I did look into this and i did in those days cover in excess of 60000 miles per year. Even with this mileage and keeping the van 3 years. Figures did not had up. SO grin and bear it, its not good and even the substitute fuels have gone up in price. And remember not all vehicles can safely run on these. According to manufactures(Do'nt think i've spelt that correct)!!! Anyway i try Formula 1 tecnology................ Slipstream..... Saves a little and not totaly legal ,,, following to close, and who wants to look at the backend of a truck.. mile after mile..

[Ranger]

Hi el-d, have you thought of bio-diesel? You can find out from your base vehicle manufactorer what mix you need to run on. most diesels will not run successfully on straight biodiesel, needs to be a % mix with real diesel. Very old diesel engines will run on straight biodiesel, even cooking oil, but not modern ones. A lot of people around here were running on vegy cooking oil for quite a while, then Mr Plodd found out and put his foot down, ( Tax dodging ) Even had sniffer dogs to point out vehicles running on cooking oil & chip fat. In the Botanical Gardens of Wales the little internal diesel train runs on treated chip fat. Try asking Google where your nearest bio-diesel pump is. Ask your garage what they think of bio-diesel, some mechanics say it is not worth the bother except for very high milage as even a mixture can gunge up your injectors on a modern engine but gives you something to think about and look into.

[Clive]

Just filled up our Sprinter based Scout. 2.9 litre 312.

 

Works out at 25.5 MPG towing a two motorcycle trailer or a bigger 2 axle trailer with 2 motorcycles and two commercial gazebo,s and all the sides inside. Seems about the same as it was 10 years ago when it was just about run in!!

 

Thanks to Bill Gates and EXCEL

 

 

[Clive]

Somehow the pump cost of LPG seems to have gone up in ratio to diesel, so whatever justification you used previously should still apply to running costs.

[olley]

Hi I find that generally LPG is around half the price of petrol, and you lose about 25% of your MPG with it.

 

From what I have read you need to do very high mileages to make a Diesel/LPG conversion make sense. Even on a petrol like mine payback is in the region of 25,000 miles.

 

Olley

[Brian Kirby]

All these fuels, except biodiesel, are derived from crude oil.  It is largely the price of crude that is driving present price hikes, coupled with the falling value of sterling (oil is traded in dollars [including North Sea oil], so any fall in sterling against the dollar increases the price of oil to UK consumers).  The price of crude is rising because China and India especially, and to some extent Africa (along with the all rest of us) are using more and more of the stuff, plus some sources of supply, such as Iraq, are presently unreliable, while others, such as Russia, are being manipulated for political ends.  Those who are reliable suppliers know they have limited reserves, so are reluctant to increase supply rates because they want to preserve their reserves and thus their future income.  Switching fuels under these circumstances seems to me a little like moving the deckchairs around on the Titanic.  However much we might wish it weren't true, I think they will all rise much faster than inflation, albeit there may be some periods when prices fall temporarily, for example during periods of economic recession, and some fuels will rise quicker, at times, than others.  However, it seems the writing is on the wall, and I think we just have to put up with it.  All fuels are set to become much more expensive and, although LPG is cheaper than the others today, as users switch to it its price will rise to cancel out the advantage.  How fast?  That will depend on the speed of switching, but I wouldn't spend money on converting to LPG that could just as well be spent on diesel/petrol.  Don't forget it is only the cost per mile of the fuel actually consumed that gives the payback, not the price of the fuel itself.  Biodiesel?  Maybe, but from my understanding, if there is widespread switching into growing biodiesel feedstocks, there will be food shortages, leading to a lot more people around the world starving.  Depressing, isn't it?

[net-traveller]

I'm back.

 

Some interesting facts from my hols.

 

Diesel is dropping in price so it seems strange to me that it's still high here.

 

Details - Belgium 29 May 1.469 euro per litre.

Belgium today 1.427 euro per litre.

 

Bio-diesel - at less 10 cents a litre cheaper than ordinary in Germany but you won't find it at the big name stations.

 

Dover roadworks are causing chaos and HMs finest (Customs etc) are having a field day so a hell of a trip home.

 

I think the bread rolls must be thawed by now so I'm off for my tea.

 

 

 

;-)

[el-d]

Well I certainly seem to have started something! Thanks for all the replies to my original post. I must say it's pretty much as I thought it would be. The fact is that, with a market economy, as soon as something gains popularity there are plenty who are ready to take advantage and push the price up. I'm not talking about the retailers who probably maintain a pretty modest margin but those who control the supply chain. After all, that's partly what the oil situation is about. Those who've got it can hold everyone else to ransome because they know we'll just go on paying up - we have little real alternative. Add to that the fact that supply is running down and you have a no-win situation for the end user - and in the long run for us all, of course. As you say, a depressing picture.

 

What appears to be lacking is a serious political will to make any meaningful investment in real, viable alternatives. Road users have been contributing millions for many years into the pot and the oil situation is not surprise news by any means. Our economy relies so much on road transport that the effects of pressure on operators caused by rising costs appear in just about every sector of business. Unless significant advances in fuel technology appear very soon then we shall be complaining about more than not being able to run our cars and motorhomes.

[enodreven]

Have a look at this its got to be the way forward if they can get the price down

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/business/worldbusiness/17fuelcell.html

[kmoorman]

braunston - 2008-06-26 10:04 AM

 

Have a look at this its got to be the way forward if they can get the price down

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/business/worldbusiness/17fuelcell.html

 

Would be nice - but when will they become affordable for normal people. If the governments of the world are serious about breaking the reliance upon fossil fuels, maybe they need to assist in getting these out to people, even if it is done at a loss to the manufacturer / government.

 

I wonder why (for Southern California and other sunny climes especially) they don't produce a fuel cell / electric (solar) hybrid - that would surely get better economy than a fuel cell alone?

 

Kieron.

[Mickt]

Just got back from a trip to Croatia. Deisel price i paid during the last month are

FRANCE 1.41 EURO Per LTR

BELGIAN 1.36

LUXEMBOURG 1.28

GERMANY 1.44

AUSTRIA 1.38

SLOVINIA 1. 29

CROATIA 1.55

 

Note the LUXEMBOURG price went up 12 cents in 3 weeks and the CROTIA price is converted to euro

 

Anybody going to Croatia it is hany to have some money changed to Kuna as tolls have to be paid in cash and they will not accept anything else.

Also some ACSI sites will only accept payment in Kuna and they do not accept credit cards

[el-d]

I agree Kieron. If governments were really serious about the fuel problem and the matter of climate change they would divert significant resources to making the technology available at a price the ordinary guy can afford. I could think of several places they could move the money from (naming no Iraq wars of course - whoops, who said that?) After all, what's the point of someone coming up with a bright idea if no-one can take it up because of the cost. It just becomes a status symbol for the rich. Of course the government would have to see a clear way of taxing it so that we don't actually gain any advantage from the green technology, that would never do would it.

 

Could move to Japan I suppose.

[CliveH]

 

LPG tandem systems are more about making a diesel engine efficient and less polluting rather than a fuel "alternative". As said above the LPG is added to the diesel not replacing it.

 

And as I understand it - you need to look at a water injection kit as well to make it really work.

 

Basically diesel burns incompletely - hence all the smoke and your engine oil going black within a day of oil change. Compare to a petrol engine running on LPG and the engine oil is still clear and clean after thousands of miles.

 

But even tho' LPG helps by allowing more diesel to be burnt, the combustion cycle still runs out of oxygen and so a water injection provides this.

 

We will probably see engines with such systems in the future but to get the best out of them they need to be designed "in" rather than added "on".

 

The Australian Truckers use both LPG and water injection on their huge "road trains" so a lot of good info is available from Oz.

 

As for the price of LPG - it is Government policy to tax LPG at 50% of petrol due to how clean it burns - No particulates to speak of and less CO2 than diesel, - so for town use LPG has distinct advantages. It also has the advantage of being a bi-product of oil production – if we did not use it – it would be “flared off” at the oil wells or rigs. You do not see the rigs flaring off the LPG like you used to. Thank goodness we can now use it – and it does give me a bit of a buzz to know that I am running my vehicle on a waste product of what most other people are forced to use.

 

And I agree with the post above from bob b in that an LPG powered petrol engine is beginning to have some real advantages cost wise over a diesel. In particular - the new LEZ within the M25 means that older diesel vehicles will be charged £200 A DAY!!! eveytime they move!!!

 

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/5725.aspx

 

Now I will not go into the fairness of this (just DON'T start me on that PLEASE!!!!) - but when you consider that in contrast a petrol engined vehicle converted to LPG would not be subject to the LEZ fines and would even be eligible for cheaper road tax!!!! – there must be a glut of older diesel vehicles nobody wants within and around the LEZ.

 

As a committed Land Rover nut (Discovery 3.9 LPG'd V8 - tows our TA Wyoming like a dream) - I am aware that most tuggers in the LEZ are getting rid of perfectly good diesel vehicles and swapping to petrol/LPG vehicles. Strange because a lot of LR’s with petrol V8’s used to be converted to diesel (easy to do – built like a meccano set) – but now the reverse looks to be a good prospect if you live in the LEZ.

 

I would assume that diesel MH's within the LEZ are undergoing the same?

 

Any thoughts - observations from anyone on this?

 

[el-d]

Lots of good common sense stuff there Clive.

 

One observation I'd make about LEZs and other clean-up measures is that it's a pity the first "solution" offered is always a punitive one, not an enabling one. If it's undesirable: tax it. If you want to prevent it: impose a whacking great charge. As I said in my previous post, I'm sure we all agree with the principle that we have to clean up our act. We can't go on relying on oil-based fuels for various reasons and most people would embrace new technology if it were within their means to do so. Let's for goodness sake see some positive incentive to take up viable alternatives instead of just being clobbered for hanging on to what we've got.

 

You can't turn the clock back; we are a society that has grown used to moving about the country (and the world) and that is not going to change in a hurry. Unless you live in a city or town of any size, public transport is a total non-starter. From my village I can get to the nearest town once in the day and come back when the bus says I can, unless I want to walk a mile or so to the next village where the choice is marginally better. To go further afield just becomes impossible since nothing connects with anything else and you'd end up making an over-night out of even the simplest journey! When I need to fly abroad I have no realistic alternative but to get my car out and drive to the airport. Any other way I would end up adding two days, a hotel and a taxi to my trip!

 

But I fear I digress, except inasmuch as it's all part of the same general picture: a realistic and positive approach to the transport needs of the 21st century.

 

[Wilbury]

Brian Kirby - 2008-06-25 7:06 PM

 

All these fuels, except biodiesel, are derived from crude oil.  It is largely the price of crude that is driving present price hikes, coupled with the falling value of sterling (oil is traded in dollars [including North Sea oil], so any fall in sterling against the dollar increases the price of oil to UK consumers).  The price of crude is rising because China and India especially, and to some extent Africa (along with the all rest of us) are using more and more of the stuff, plus some sources of supply, such as Iraq, are presently unreliable, while others, such as Russia, are being manipulated for political ends.  Those who are reliable suppliers know they have limited reserves, so are reluctant to increase supply rates because they want to preserve their reserves and thus their future income.  Switching fuels under these circumstances seems to me a little like moving the deckchairs around on the Titanic.  However much we might wish it weren't true, I think they will all rise much faster than inflation, albeit there may be some periods when prices fall temporarily, for example during periods of economic recession, and some fuels will rise quicker, at times, than others.  However, it seems the writing is on the wall, and I think we just have to put up with it.  All fuels are set to become much more expensive and, although LPG is cheaper than the others today, as users switch to it its price will rise to cancel out the advantage.  How fast?  That will depend on the speed of switching, but I wouldn't spend money on converting to LPG that could just as well be spent on diesel/petrol.  Don't forget it is only the cost per mile of the fuel actually consumed that gives the payback, not the price of the fuel itself.  Biodiesel?  Maybe, but from my understanding, if there is widespread switching into growing biodiesel feedstocks, there will be food shortages, leading to a lot more people around the world starving.  Depressing, isn't it?

 

Hi Brian,

A very concise sumation.

Yes, it is depressing.

What will become known as the "Golden Age" is over.

What kind of world are our desendents going to live in?

Wilbury

[el-d]

Hi Wilbury,

 

I guess it's not surprising that this thread is becoming somewhat philosophical and that's fine. It's also contained some good practical points so far and if it continues much longer will no doubt gather some more!

 

Golden age? Some would think it so and in many ways it is, I'm sure. Others might see it as an age of decline into exploitative and prodigal squandering of earth's resources. During the (relatively) short period since the industrial revolution the reliance of "developed" nations on fossil fuels has grown at a runaway pace and now we understand that such resources are finite, exhaustable and maybe nearing the end of their commercially viable lifetime.

 

The point is, where to now? Is it time to throw up our hands in horror and go and buy a horse and cart or is there a new challenge and a new age of discovery just around the corner? Let's hope that it's the latter and that there will be a climate of optimism and enabling with the backing of those who we elect (in our flawed way!) to represent us.

[Brian Kirby]

"The point is, where to now? Is it time to throw up our hands in horror and go and buy a horse and cart or is there a new challenge and a new age of discovery just around the corner? Let's hope that it's the latter and that there will be a climate of optimism and enabling with the backing of those who we elect (in our flawed way!) to represent us."

Resuming my role as resident pessimist, whether or not there is a climate of optimism (is that the same as saying "crisis, what crisis?"), I think if our revered leaders, of whatever political persuasion, had simple answers, they would adopt them.  Politicians, on the whole, dislike unpopularity.  It is notable that the government is presently pretty unpopular, as a consequence of a number of factors (some their own stoopid fault, some not), including the credit crunch etc, and rising fuel prices.  It is also notable that on both these fronts the government says in practice it can do little, and all the opposition has to offer are assurances that, with hindsight, they would have handled the credit crunch better, but remain studiously silent on fuel prices.  Lower fuel tax?  Well, fine, but where are the corresponding spending savings to be made, or should some other tax - but which - just be increased?  In truth, I think we are all just complaining that the world as it is, is not the world as we wish it.  However, 'twas surely ever thus?

[el-d]

How right you are Brian. It's a bit like the old countryman giving directions to a stranger saying, "If oi were ee oi 'ouldn't start from yer". We could probably do better planning the future if we didn't have to start with the present and of course we would all do it better, wouldn't we.

 

I think my "climate of optimism" is more to do with looking positively forward than denying the reality of the present situation which is undeniably precarious. I would just be more encouraged if I saw convincing evidence of meaningful investment in new, preferably renewable, energy use. Measures for eking out the remaining fossil fuels, important though they are, are only a part of the picture.

[Clive]

The hydrogen fuel cell is only attractive from a carbon footprint viewpoint if its generated in a "green" way. Hydrogen is generated by splitting water into its component parts by passing electricity through it. If this electricity is generated by wind power then thats fine, but if its derived from fossil fuel then its dafter and less efficient than a modern diesel engine.

 

Linde Gas (who also own BOC and Linde Mh own Still) already have a fleet of airport tractors running on hydrogen using fuel cell technology, the hydrogen fuel cell being the simplest. Also some Fork lift trucks etc.

 

However, how you obtain the raw fuel is always the crunch question to ask.

The bottom line is that the requirement for POWER is increasing and those who control it have throttled the supply and hiked the price.

Solar power anyone?

C.

 

[Syd]

When thinking about power one thing comes to mind for me is the fact that you cannot derive lots of power from putting just a little power in, use of power for whatever purpose is notoriously ineficent, you always have to put in more power than you can get out, even to produce an alternative power source.

 

There is no free lunch

[Ranger]

Quite right Syd, "Work done by a machine can not exceed work done on a machine" School days memories!