Do narrowboat engines pollute less than car engines?

[Jim Batty]

I read on a travel site that narrowboats emit 1/6 of pollution and use 1/3 of the fuel of a car, but I can't really find any straight forward evidence to back this up. Is this true?

 

Partly related to this might be (?): engines put out more pollution when under load ... and there seems to be a lot of time when a narrowboat engine is just idling, such as when working a lock.

[MoominPapa]

I read on a travel site that narrowboats emit 1/6 of pollution and use 1/3 of the fuel of a car, but I can't really find any straight forward evidence to back this up. Is this true?

 

Partly related to this might be (?): engines put out more pollution when under load ... and there seems to be a lot of time when a narrowboat engine is just idling, such as when working a lock.

Are the ratios per hour, or per distance travelled? They certainly use fuel slower than a car, but I reckon it costs more diesel to talke our boat somewhere than to drive the same journey.

 

MP.

[steven wilkinson]

I would have thought that you couldnt easily compare the two! They operate at different ranges and loads! There are old engines and new engines! Low hours engines and high hours engines!

Polution per mile? hour? mile/hour? litre?

 

I can say I have been behind some seriously dirty and smelly cars as well as boats!

[Grace and Favour]

I read on a travel site that narrowboats emit 1/6 of pollution and use 1/3 of the fuel of a car,

 

This is bunkum of the highest order.

 

Complete and utter codswallop

 

Worthy of Wikipedia

[John V]

I'm no engine expert but I believe a cold engine produces more emissions than one operating at the correct temperature, could it be that on average boat engines run cooler?

[Paul C]

A narrowboat engine is less sophisticated than a car engine, won't have a cat, or a particulate filter, and 99% likely to be diesel - I'd say that a narrowboat engine is MORE polluting than a car engine, on average.

 

However, there are many times less narrowboats than cars, and they probably get used less (less hours/year or whatever). Also one must bear in mind narrowboats don't get congested in cities, etc in the same way as car traffic does.

 

So overall, cars pollute more than narrowboats.

 

It would be tricky to put actual figures on it though.

[Jim Batty]

Are the ratios per hour, or per distance travelled? They certainly use fuel slower than a car, but I reckon it costs more diesel to talke our boat somewhere than to drive the same journey.

 

MP.

It's just a generic comment about the green-ness of narrowboating.

 

Given that boating is more about (pleasurable!) time aboard than covering distance, I suppose I would be more interested in a comparison in how much pollution (say CO2 emission) a boat and a car engine puts out.

[steven wilkinson]

my own opinion - cars are cleaner than boats!

[by'eck]

I think only horse boating is green - well maybe a shitty green

 

Having said that I've heard cows pollute the atmosphere with methane. Can't imagine horses are so different.

 

Now if you could carry the horse on board and run your engine from its pollutants???

Edited December 15, 2012 by by'eck

[ditchcrawler]

I read on a travel site that narrowboats emit 1/6 of pollution and use 1/3 of the fuel of a car, but I can't really find any straight forward evidence to back this up. Is this true?

 

Partly related to this might be (?): engines put out more pollution when under load ... and there seems to be a lot of time when a narrowboat engine is just idling, such as when working a lock.

My car does about 10 miles to 1 lt of diesel, my boat does about 3 miles to 1 lt

My car uses 5 lts of diesel per hour my boat uses about 1.25 lt per hour

I dont know how much emission per lt of diesel I get from the boat but I would expect it to be much higher than the car

[Taslim]

This is bunkum of the highest order.

 

Complete and utter codswallop

 

Worthy of Wikipedia

 

Couldn't have put it better.

 

Have a green thing.

 

taslim.

[Albion]

I read on a travel site that narrowboats emit 1/6 of pollution and use 1/3 of the fuel of a car, but I can't really find any straight forward evidence to back this up. Is this true?

 

Partly related to this might be (?): engines put out more pollution when under load ... and there seems to be a lot of time when a narrowboat engine is just idling, such as when working a lock.

 

If you are comparing the very latest car diesel engines that comply with Euro 5 emissions regulation and the type of marinised industrial engine commonly used in narrowboats then, as others have said, that is complete nonsense.

 

Euro 5 engines will be running extremely high injection pressures for better fuel atomisation, They have piezo-electric injectors that can give up to about 5 (IIRC) injections per firing event (reducing diesel knock, improving combustion and allowing retarded injection for the purging of catalysed diesel particulate filters <DPF>). They have sophisticated after treatment of the exhaust (Catalysed DPFs).

Plant and industrial engines used in nbs tend to have simple, relatively low pressure injection equipment, no exhaust after-treatment and pressure operated injectors. They do not have to comply with such severe exhaust emission legislation and, although this is getting tougher, it still lags vehicle standards.

Roger

Edited December 15, 2012 by Albion

[Jim Batty]

My car does about 10 miles to 1 lt of diesel, my boat does about 3 miles to 1 lt

My car uses 5 lts of diesel per hour my boat uses about 1.25 lt per hour

I dont know how much emission per lt of diesel I get from the boat but I would expect it to be much higher than the car

 

This is interesting. Here's what I've been able to find so far: at the Low Impact Life Onboard site they say:

 

1 litre of diesel emits equivalent of 2.68 kg CO2

1 litre of petrol emits equivalent of 2.31 kg CO2

 

So diesels emit a bit more pollution than petrol engines.

 

If we're talking running time, then your car diesel engine would seem to emit 4 times more pollution than your boat diesel engine.

 

I can see that if we are looking at covering distance, then the boat needs to burn just over 3 times the amount of diesel as your car does (to cover the same distance). But because the boat is 4x less polluting it overall puts out a bit less CO2 than the car over the same distance.

 

(I haven't done the full maths, but it seems that a petrol engined car, emitting a little less CO2 than a diesel engined car (according to LILO's numbers above) would emit about the same as the boat over the same distance.)

 

 

For me, I think it makes more sense talking about running time with narrowboats, as I rarely am trying to 'cover distance' to get from A to B. (We CC and don't have a car, but use bicycles!).

 

If you are comparing the very latest car diesel engines that comply with Euro 5 emissions regulation and the type of marinised industrial engine commonly used in narrowboats then, as others have said, that is complete nonsense.

 

Euro 5 engines will be running extremely high injection pressures for better fuel atomisation, They have piezo-electric injectors that can give up to about 5 (IIRC) injections per firing event (reducing diesel knock, improving combustion and allowing retarded injection for the purging of catalysed diesel particulate filters <DPF>). They have sophisticated after treatment of the exhaust (Catalysed DPFs).

Plant and industrial engines used in nbs tend to have simple, relatively low pressure injection equipment, no exhaust after-treatment and pressure operated injectors. They do not have to comply with such severe exhaust emission legislation and, although this is getting tougher, it still lags vehicle standards.

Roger

Yes, I can see there are a lot of factors involved - engine type, age, how well looked after, how its driven, etc. I wonder what percentage drop in pollutant emissions the Euro 5 regulations you mention effect. 0.2%, 2%, 20%?

[carlt]

This is interesting. Here's what I've been able to find so far: at the Low Impact Life Onboard site they say:

 

1 litre of diesel emits equivalent of 2.68 kg CO2

1 litre of petrol emits equivalent of 2.31 kg CO2

 

So diesels emit a bit more pollution than petrol engines.

This obsession with CO2 distorts the pollution debate enormously.

 

Canal boats spew out tons of particulate pollution, not being subject to the same stringent regulations that cars have to comply with.

 

The CO2 that both cars and boats emit is insignificant, compared to other greenhouse gas sources.

 

Local environmental damage is far more significant yet, these days, totally ignored because of the global warming fad.

[alan_fincher]

I read on a travel site that narrowboats emit 1/6 of pollution and use 1/3 of the fuel of a car, but I can't really find any straight forward evidence to back this up. Is this true?

I think they are probably having a laugh!

 

Huge amounts are done to control emissions on cars, including, of course things like catalytic converters and checks at MOT time.

 

AFAIK, there is little effort made to control diesels typically used in canal boats down to any level, (even the more "modern" ones), and certainly no statutory checks of compliance. Until recently the "red" diesel we were using had (IIRC) up to about 20 times the sulphur content that road diesel had to comply to - OK they have finally changed that!

 

If I'm brutally honest, I have little doubt that my boat diesels, (one from 1960s, and one from 1970s), are far from environmentally friendly.

 

The other thing is that when boating I can be running them anything up to ten hours a day - for me to drive more than 2 or 3 hours in any day would be most unusual.

 

So diesels emit a bit more pollution than petrol engines.

I have very little doubt that at least one of my boat diesels emits far more pollution than my diesel powered car.

 

Probably whatever way you measure it!

[Jim Batty]

... Huge amounts are done to control emissions on cars, including, of course things like catalytic converters and checks at MOT time.

 

AFAIK, there is little effort made to control diesels typically used in canal boats down to any level, (even the more "modern" ones), and certainly no statutory checks of compliance.

 

... If I'm brutally honest, I have little doubt that my boat diesels, (one from 1960s, and one from 1970s), are far from environmentally friendly.

 

... I have very little doubt that at least one of my boat diesels emits far more pollution than my diesel powered car.

 

 

Yes, I never thought running an engine is particularly 'green'. I think there are many other aspects of being on a boat that are green. For example, you become much more aware of using resources such as water, electricity, coal/wood, etc. You recycle a lot more stuff. You consume a lot less stuff (if you live on board).

 

What I'm finding difficult is quantifying how 'un-green' boat engines are. CarlT points out that CO2 isn't the only measurement in the mix, which it isn't. I guess I'm now trying to get a grip on some key measurements in order to make comparisons.

[carlt]

What I'm finding difficult is quantifying how 'un-green' boat engines are. CarlT points out that CO2 isn't the only measurement in the mix, which it isn't. I guess I'm now trying to get a grip on some key measurements in order to make comparisons.

It is such a vast complicated subject though.

 

Is Alan's smoke belching vintage engine more polluting than a modern car even though that car may have been replaced 10 times by its owner, having another engine manufactured each time, with all the pollution that produces while sickles sickly old lump coughs, burps and farts its way along the canal being maintained and revitalised with little environmental cost?

[mango]

As an asthmatic who is affected by exhaust fumes, engine emissions concern me every time I'm in the bottom of a lock or following other boats through a tunnel. Low sulphur diesel has made a big difference, largely eliminating sulphur dioxide from the exhaust, and I have long known that sulphur dioxide affects me. Particulates and nitrogen oxides are the other main problems for asthmatics.

 

Hire boats tend to be fairly clean but I would love to be able to hire a boat with a diesel particulate filter. Of course I would be stuck in a lock beside a boat with a worn out SR2.

 

As others have said, pollution has many forms but the pollution that leaves me gasping for breath is what I tend to think of most.

[carlt]

 

Hire boats tend to be fairly clean but I would love to be able to hire a boat with a diesel particulate filter. Of course I would be stuck in a lock beside a boat with a worn out SR2.

I never share a lock with my, let alone someone else's boat.

[Paul C]

The problem is, how do you assess pollution? If you incluse the whole life cycle, then you'd need to include the energy used, and the pollution caused by this, in its manufacture, and disposal (whole life cycle). Then, where do you draw the line? Do you consider the pollution caused by the truck which delivered the car? Or is that included in ITS whole-life cycle of pollution? etc

 

Cars tend to have caused large amounts of pollution during their manufacture, especially hybrids with the chemicals required in their batteries.

 

Its so wooly and nobody has agreed on the definitions, or where to draw the lines, that you can massage any answer to mean anything you like, if you so wished. So the original claim is just as valid as any others, in a way!

[Jim Batty]

... Its so wooly and nobody has agreed on the definitions, or where to draw the lines, that you can massage any answer to mean anything you like, if you so wished. So the original claim is just as valid as any others, in a way!

 

Brilliant!

 

Hmmm, yes, the same reasons why we still hear, 'Climate change? What climate change?'

[bag 'o' bones]

This is bunkum of the highest order.

 

Complete and utter codswallop

 

Worthy of Wikipedia

 

Bit unfair on Wikipedia!

Theres a lot of good stuff amongst the rubbish.

[Albion]

This is interesting. Here's what I've been able to find so far: at the Low Impact Life Onboard site they say:

 

1 litre of diesel emits equivalent of 2.68 kg CO2

1 litre of petrol emits equivalent of 2.31 kg CO2

 

So diesels emit a bit more pollution than petrol engines.

 

If we're talking running time, then your car diesel engine would seem to emit 4 times more pollution than your boat diesel engine.

 

I can see that if we are looking at covering distance, then the boat needs to burn just over 3 times the amount of diesel as your car does (to cover the same distance). But because the boat is 4x less polluting it overall puts out a bit less CO2 than the car over the same distance.

 

(I haven't done the full maths, but it seems that a petrol engined car, emitting a little less CO2 than a diesel engined car (according to LILO's numbers above) would emit about the same as the boat over the same distance.)

 

 

For me, I think it makes more sense talking about running time with narrowboats, as I rarely am trying to 'cover distance' to get from A to B. (We CC and don't have a car, but use bicycles!).

 

 

Yes, I can see there are a lot of factors involved - engine type, age, how well looked after, how its driven, etc. I wonder what percentage drop in pollutant emissions the Euro 5 regulations you mention effect. 0.2%, 2%, 20%?

 

CO2 is a measure of the efficiency of the engine. The more CO2 the more efficient the engine, hence diesels emit more CO2 than petrol. CO2 isn't a major pollutant. Petrol catalytic converters change CO (Carbon Monoxide) to CO2 (Carbon Dioxide) to reduce pollution (among other changes). You might find that surprising but efficient pollution reduction equipment actually increases CO2 output. You can see, if you check the figures that Euro 5 is a major reduction of pollutants compared to Euro 4 and eventually we will have Euro 6 in 2015.

 

See, copied from another site:

Euro 5 standard

 

Emissions from diesel vehicles:

 

carbon monoxide: 500 mg/km;

particulates: 5 mg/km (80 % reduction of emissions in comparison to the Euro 4 standard);

nitrogen oxides (NOx): 180 mg/km (20 % reduction of emissions in comparison to the Euro 4 standard);

combined emissions of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides: 230 mg/km.

 

Emissions from petrol vehicles or those running on natural gas or LPG:

 

carbon monoxide: 1 000 mg/km;

non-methane hydrocarbons: 68 mg/km;

total hydrocarbons: 100 mg/km;

nitrogen oxides (NOx): 60 mg/km (25 % reduction of emissions in comparison to the Euro 4 standard);

particulates (solely for lean burn direct-injection petrol vehicles): 5 mg/km (introduction of a limit that did not exist for the Euro 4 standard).

 

 

 

This obsession with CO2 distorts the pollution debate enormously.

 

Canal boats spew out tons of particulate pollution, not being subject to the same stringent regulations that cars have to comply with.

 

The CO2 that both cars and boats emit is insignificant, compared to other greenhouse gas sources.

 

Local environmental damage is far more significant yet, these days, totally ignored because of the global warming fad.

Exactly, compared to the sheer numbers of vehicles on the road worldwide our narrow boats are a minuscule drop in the ocean.

 

 

As an asthmatic who is affected by exhaust fumes, engine emissions concern me every time I'm in the bottom of a lock or following other boats through a tunnel. Low sulphur diesel has made a big difference, largely eliminating sulphur dioxide from the exhaust, and I have long known that sulphur dioxide affects me. Particulates and nitrogen oxides are the other main problems for asthmatics.

 

Hire boats tend to be fairly clean but I would love to be able to hire a boat with a diesel particulate filter. Of course I would be stuck in a lock beside a boat with a worn out SR2.

 

As others have said, pollution has many forms but the pollution that leaves me gasping for breath is what I tend to think of most.

The problem is that catalysed DPFs have to burn off the carbon particles every so often (every few thousand miles in the case of cars). This is done by increasing the heat in the DPF dramatically and creating an after-burn in the exhaust system by late injection of fuel. If you happened to be there when it occurred you might not like it. However, in vehicles, it can only happen when the temperature has achieved full temperature and the engine revs are sufficiently high so that is unlikely to happen in a lock for your narrow boat example. Despite this apparently polluting burn-off of the particulates the average overall emissions are reduced.

Another problem that you would not like in a narrow boat (if it is ever possible to do it) is that the exhaust system will get so hot that it could be dangerous. They don't advise parking in a field of long grass if you have a catalytic converted car or catalysed DPF in case the temperature causes the grass to ignite.

Roger

[Giggetty]

But the average narrowboat weighs about 16 x a car and is actually a sort of caravan. You have to build this into any sort of comparision.

[RLWP]

I need a car to work, it produces emissions

 

I do not 'need' a boat, it's emissions are unnecessary

 

A boat pollutes more than a car

 

Richard