Why has Diesel become more expensive than petrol?

murphaph

Any takers?

Diesel is cheaper to produce so is it a tax thing or what?

antoinolachtnai

It's a result of global demand. There is only a certain amount of diesel production capacity, and if it's all used up, well, then the price will go up.

I've heard that what usually brings this about is if military users wade in there and start buying everything they can get. They would be most likely to do this if they were planning major ground operations.

Diesel is the fuel of choice for ground-based operations for most armies. NATO has even commissioned a diesel motorbike.

BrianD

Well those AMerican tanks (Abrams M1) use gas turbines apparently. Not so great on range and fuel economy!


Even with the activity in Iraq, one would have thought that production would have adjusted. Is it possible that diesel is produced and bought from a non-dollar source?

Victor

BrianD wrote:

Well those AMerican tanks (Abrams M1) use gas turbines apparently. Not so great on range and fuel economy!

M1s don't so much have a range (distance), as an endurance (time), idle is 85% of full power.

Capt'n Midnight

This all sounds quite strange. Most petrol is made by cracking things like diesel. And military diesel engines aren't too fussy about what goes into them, gas turbines are even less fussy, I'd be supprised if the M1 couldn't easily run off everything from natural gas to sump oil.

Most fuel used by military is in logistics so it's what the trucks and ships and planes use. Oddly enough jet engines should run on diesel /kerosene / parafin (I'm not sure of the exact bp's of these) but you get slightly better mpg using more volatile fuel. On one occassion a safety officer invited airlines to a little duel , he'd stand ankle deep dropping matches into standard jet fuel if they did the same to the stuff they'd put additives into. Yes folks, jets should not fireball when they crash, not much mention of that since 9/11..

Of course this means that the yanks can use this as an excuse not to buy diesel SUV's

Link to fuel types - http://home.comcast.net/~agmann/stove/Petrol.htm

Victor

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Yes folks, jets should not fireball when they crash, not much mention of that since 9/11..

Part empty tanks are much more at risk than full tanks as the fuel has the oppurtunity to vapourise. Fuel is much more dangerous as a oxengenised vapour (see househould gas explosions).

MrPudding

Victor wrote:

Part empty tanks are much more at risk than full tanks as the fuel has the oppurtunity to vapourise. Fuel is much more dangerous as a oxengenised vapour (see househould gas explosions).

Most military planes replace used fuel with an inert gas for this very reason.

The M1 can run on just about anything. Gas turbines are good like that. I think the military are trying to standardize on diesel. Having one fuel type makes logistics much easier. Diesel is the natural option due to it less explosive nature it is much safer to store on the battlefield in large quantities.

MrP

Capt'n Midnight

The petrol engined Shermans were called "tommy cookers" by the germans for that reason. The availabilty of diesel was a major reason for them using jets even though they only got 10 hours out of the engines.

Victor - in the case of most boeings they now have to have the feul pumps covered cos they are prone to over heating - I take it you saw the thing on TWA 800 where they showed that the explosion limits changed with pressure , higher altitude , lower pressure more volatiles and also the effect on the baffles to change what was a quiet burn into a explosive mixture..

Overall it sounds like bio-diesel is becoming more attractive.

Victor

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Victor - ... - I take it you saw the thing on TWA 800 where they showed that the explosion limits changed with pressure , higher altitude , lower pressure more volatiles and also the effect on the baffles to change what was a quiet burn into a explosive mixture..

No it was in Air Forces Monthly they had a piece about putting aircraft into long term storage, that they would fill the tanks on arrival and only much later, at their convenience would they empty them and "dry" them.

Capt'n Midnight

Victor wrote:

, that they would fill the tanks on arrival and only much later, at their convenience would they empty them and "dry" them.

bet they didn't do that with the SR-71's

MrPudding

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

bet they didn't do that with the SR-71's

I've seen a few pictures of these with unholy amounts of fuel leaking out after it shrinks back to it normal size after cooling. I think it uses / used different fuel again which is very very hard to ignite.

MrP