4 ms·
On the other hand, when strapped for cash, many citizens will stop doing it. You can make it illegal to drive with that tank empty, but that still won't make ma
by rlpb 10y ago
On the other hand, when strapped for cash, many citizens will stop doing it. You can make it illegal to drive with that tank empty, but that still won't make many citizens do it. The environment is better off this way.
- derefr 10y agoPerhaps they could mandate another additive to diesel that gives it a very apparent coloured plume in its exhaust; and then another additive to AdBlue that oxidizes/reduces that additive. Then you just tell police to pull over anyone with black fumes coming from their cars.
- bluead 10y agoThere's no need for any of this. DEF diesel engines already go into limp mode not long after the fluid runs dry (after ignoring many warnings). There are sensors such that just replacing with any arbitrary diesel-compatible fluid won't fool it (thought that would be stupid to do). And most states have annual inspections that include emissions, you would not pass with a dry Adblue tank. No need for dramatic exhaust; the cops can run your plates and see your inspection is expired.
- Dylan16807 10y agoHaha inspections, you're funny.
- hydrogen18 10y agoThat one is simple, just make the vehicle not run when certain conditions aren't met. Most diesel trucks already do this from the factory, if you don't follow the regen. cycle the truck just turns off.
- rlpb 10y agoThat wouldn't sell well. Manufacturers would end up doing more to make sure it doesn't run out. This is my point - read back up the thread.
- bluead 10y agoWhat do you mean it wouldn't sell well? DEF diesels in the US do go into limp mode (5 mph limit) if you ignore the empty DEF alerts. Well, they don't sell well in the US, but they didn't sell well prior to DEF, so I don't think you can pin the blame on that.
- hydrogen18 10y agoSeems to sell just fine in the current market, I haven't seen a huge move away from Diesels as a result of its introduction.
- throwaway1X2 10y agoWell, running the engine (or not to) with empty AdBlue tank has nothing to do with topping it up yourself. - You can let the tank go empty and not turn up to the workshop for the fill up, how does disallowing to top it up yourself prevent that? - Many current cars with AdBlue will flash increasingly annoying warnings at you, and although many people drive with check engine lights lit, running out of urea will display you a counter of remaining kilometers and the car will simply refuse to start when empty. Again, nothing to do with whether you push the car to the dealership on foot or fill the tank yourself from the bottle (and actually, there are very foolproof anti-spill bottles, which let the liquid go only when tightly screwed onto the DEF tank).
- rlpb 10y ago> Well, running the engine (or not to) with empty AdBlue tank has nothing to do with topping it up yourself. Yes it does, since it affects the design of the vehicle. Remember that the context of this thread includes: "So the tank needs to be large enough to cover a full maintenance interval...or creative solution to limit consumption."
- scythe 10y agoHow much does urea actually cost? If your car smells like a coal plant, it's kind of a turn-off to potential passengers.
- hx87 10y agoAdvanced Auto Parts sells 2.5 gallons, which would last you 10k miles at least, for $12.
- gozur88 10y agoUnless you don't go to the shop to get it filled up. If it's really a question of forcing people to refill the tank you could have the engine refuse to start if the tank is empty.