When I did mine, the maid reasons we’re economy and environment. Plus and extra 70 litres travel. I had been worth it but I did mine a few years ago.
Printable View
When I did mine, the maid reasons we’re economy and environment. Plus and extra 70 litres travel. I had been worth it but I did mine a few years ago.
There are no enviromental benefits to be had from LPG in this application. [smilebigeye] (Making the tanks and components, Shipping them on Vessels etc negates most of the benefits in a single vehicle)Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonP
For the extra range (sub 300km gain) and the eating up a signifcant amount of the load capacity (GVM) with the frame and tank you'll gain very little.
Then add the fact that LPG is becoming harder to find now as many service stations are actively removing their LPG infrastructure.
You will be better off either going with Jerry Cans for those longer trips or an extended fuel tank (which still eats some of your load capacity)
I disagree. Assuming a 90kg tank
The embodied CO2 from energy used in the steel would be around 200kg
The fabrication might double that
And the shipping would have less than 4grams of CO2
That equals less than 100L of Petrol to offset the CO2 of the LPG tank
Add all the electronic components, the copper in the wiring, the land transport, the carbon overheads of the retailer and the installer, and you are still going to be environmentally friendly within the first 200L of petrol saved
Lpg makes 33% less CO2 than petrol for the same energy output
So after leas than 8 refills you are doing better than not converting
Plus you reduce emissions locally as well
This also assumed there was no green energy in any stage of the system. Unlikely these days
We are talking about a 2.6 tonne 4x4 probably over 3 tonnes when loaded aren't we?Quote:
I disagree. Assuming a 90kg tank
The embodied CO2 from energy used in the steel would be around 200kg
The fabrication might double that
And the shipping would have less than 4grams of CO2
Regards PhilipA
I think the suggestion was that the environmental footprint of the lpg system was higher than the environmental benefit of the system (as is the case with electric cars)
I assumed 90kg for the lpg tank to do a quick calc as the other components are minor and was bundled into an assumption at the end
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipA
The footprint is larger on the whole now as the volumes aren’t there.
The entire LPG supply chain has now shrunk - so the trucking of the gas, the offset by volume etc aren’t there as much anymore.
And a 30% lower emission per litre is offset by nearly double the lpg consumption.
Using “emissions” as a justification for a conversion are really not the key factor. FI vehicles still cold start on Petrol, this is when their emissions are greater etc.
To quantify it all takes a lot of work.
If you want LPG then go for it, the added systems on the vehicle will just be another complexity and additional weight that comes off your available payload. Anything that hangs lower than an Aux Fuel tank will reduce capability offroad so keep that in mind when choosing tank size under the floor.
Having had some very high powered LPG vehicles it was viable, but no longer is. Even here in a rural city - we now only have one source - so a fill requires a 20min detour just to get LPG. And at $1.00+ a litre it’s on or with petrol for consumption cost per km.
Your call...
And I was jokingly suggesting that if you cared about emissions you would not be driving a D3 but perhaps a Jimny with a trailer on the odd occasion.Quote:
I think the suggestion was that the environmental footprint of the lpg system was higher than the environmental benefit of the system (as is the case with electric cars)
Regards PhilipA
I disagree with your double the consumption figure based on my experience with 13 years of driving my dual fuel P38A. Yes, consumption was higher (about 15%) - not so high that it wasn't worth it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombie
My P38A originally had a venturi LPG system (no ECU) but that was later changed to an ECU-controlled injected system.
Same for our vans,consumption increase is actually less than10%,over fuel,and that’s over many vehicles and many years.Quote:
Originally Posted by p38arover
The earlier LPG systems definitely were not as efficient as the latest injection systems.
[bigsmile]89.9 is good price for western nsw.Quote:
Originally Posted by bikeman
i dont think you going to get that big tank under there.
70-75 is probably the best you will get