Fiat Chrysler to stop making diesel cars by 2022

Posted: February 26, 2018 by oldbrew in Emissions, government, pollution, Travel

Some Fiat-Chrysler models

Negative publicity and tighter air quality rules look to be strangling the production of diesel-engined private cars, whereas hefty subsidies are on offer for electric vehicles.

Collapse in demand and rising costs lie behind decision, says The Week.

The car-maker Fiat Chrysler has announced it will stop producing diesel passenger vehicles by 2022, as costs spiral and demand falters.

The Italian-American firm – which owns the Jeep, Ram, Dodge, Chrysler, Maserati, Alfa Romeo and Fiat marques – made its announcement days after Volkswagen-Porsche said it will drop diesel, and months after Toyota said it will not create a new diesel model.

Diesel was once the most popular fuel in Europe, says the Financial Times, but its popularity has declined drastically because of rising public and political opposition, which includes plans by several European cities to ban it completely.

Sales of diesel fell by 8% last year in Europe, says the newspaper – and its share of the fuel market on the continent is now 43.8%.

The other factor behind Fiat Chrysler’s decision is the rising cost of meeting increasingly tight emissions quotas – it is estimated that developing diesel engines to meet new rules will add 20% to the cost of production.

Source: Fiat Chrysler to stop making diesel cars by 2022 | The Week
– – –
Motor1: Diesel decline leading to higher CO2 figures

  1. oldbrew says:

    Remember the days of governments and car makers promoting diesel power as a benefit to humanity?

  2. Bitter&twisted says:

    This is what happens when Governments interfere in the free market.
    Distortion, inefficiency and job losses.
    Virtue-signaling idiots.

  3. Curious George says:

    Let me remind you that a jungle is a free market.

  4. ivan says:

    Actually B&t, this is what happens when governments listen to ‘advisers’ that have vested interests as their be all and end all.

    It could also be groupthink virtue signalling on a grand scale through ignorance which is the norm for all politicians.

  5. Bitter@twisted says:

    Ivan, I think the simplest explanation is a scientifically ignorant, virtue-signaling Government being taken for a ride by “green” scamsters.
    And it’s our money that’s been wasted.

  6. michael hart says:

    B&t, that’s correct.

    Diesel used to be the ugly sister of regular petrol, for good reasons. You won’t see an F1 team using diesel in their cars if they are given a free choice.

    But diesel engines do offer some efficiencies which also make use of this fuel which is further down the ladder of useful petroleum-refining products. So when somebody told the global-warmers that it might be a way of reducing CO2 emissions per car/mile driven, there were car manufacturers willing to argue the same point in front of politicians.

    And there we have it: Hypocritical arrogant arts-educated environmentalists and ambitious politicians who are totally ignorant of the science and engineering issues involved, coupled with short-sighted industrial groups who thought their mendacity wouldn’t ever come back to haunt them (how does it feel now, VW-Audi and French manufacturers?). There undoubtedly were sensible people who told politicians it was a wrong move, but they were ignored.

  7. E.M.Smith says:

    As a Diesel owner for about 40+ years now, this is so sad.

    THE most efficient prime mover out there, being sidelined for crap reasons.

    There’s a reason the USA has Diesel Electric trains, Diesel long haul trucks, Diesel shipping. It just works, darned near forever (my last sedan died at about 450,000 miles… my present one will be running after I’m gone), and with THE best gas mileage you can get. I get 28 to 32 MPG in a full sized nearly 2 ton sedan (Mercedes). The lighter smaller gas wagon we have (same maker) gets 17 to 22 MPG. The Diesel version of it gets in the 30 MPG range.

    Want to burn a LOT more fuel? Ban Diesels. How does it “save the planet” to pump 1.5 to 2 x as much oil for the same distance?

    Then there’s the issue of refining.

    At present, the USA ships extra Diesel to the EU and the EU ships their extra gasoline to the USA. (Because the EU pushed Diesel with higher fuel costs and promotion, while in the USA GM Killed the domestic Diesel car market by making junk). During refining, you get a natural distribution of gasoline vs Diesel. To shift that takes significantly more energy and equipment for cat crackers / reformers. IF Diesel demand falls of in the EU, somebody is going to need a lot more catalytic crackers installed and gasoline will cost more cracked from the Diesel cut.

    The “smog laws” long ago left behind any practical impact. Now it is just a tool to penalize car driving. (The present exhaust is so far past clean as to be stupid-clean wasting about 1/3 of the energy in the fuel just to be “more clean than clean”. Look at the same weight vehicles from the 1960s and 1970s MPG and compare to now. The difference is the cost for smog gear and designs. The Honda Civic of the early ’70s got 52 MPG, the VW Diesel Rabbit about the same… )

    The Stupid, it burns…

    @Curious G:

    Yes, and the Jungle gave us Lions, Tigers, Gorillas, etc. While the farm gives us turkeys too dumb to survive and that can’t breed without help, sheep that fall over if you shout at them, and cows that waddle around and wait for someone to eat them.

    Farming is good for producing slow dumb things to eat, not so good for producing competitive smart agile things. I’ll take the jungle economy, thanks. The “managed” economies will end up on the lunch plate…

  8. oldbrew says:

    Once diesel has been tamed, it will almost certainly be petrol’s turn to get similar treatment. Some countries have already pencilled in the execution date.

    Then the coast will be clear for EVs, in theory at least.

  9. J Martin says:

    This may distort the market for fuel quickly enough to cause shortages of petrol, which may slow the switch to petrol. With governments begining to reduce subsidies for electric cars, they will also have to start to find ways to tax them to make up for lost fuel tax revenue, so sales of electric cars will slow, they may find that they have no choice but to issue a reprieve of at least a stay of execution for diesel.

    My next car in a year and half will be diesel.

  10. Bitter@twisted says:

    I get 55mpg average out of my diesel.
    Best was 67mpg over a 100 or so miles, done at 60mph thanks to “intelligent” variable speed limits.
    There was no variability.

  11. BLACK PEARL says:

    With modern diesels being so efficient A switch to petrol will probably bring in more taxes….. wonder if that’s part of the thinking also

  12. oldbrew says:

    More petrol use means more CO2 compared to diesel – which probably means getting fined by the EU for missing targets.

  13. PeterMG says:

    I’m with EM Smith. There are still many amongst us who really do believe all the bull about diesels. As someone who work for a large diesel engine manufacturer, I can guarantee we could get 10% better fuel economy out of every EPA 10 or Euro6 diesel just by chucking the particulate filter. It does very little other than cut power output and use fuel. And if we accepted a slightly higher NOx that 10% would go to 15% and suddenly engine manufacturers would be able to innovate again. This 15% could be gained with almost zero investment, a huge return for everyone and burning less fuel is the best way of caring for the environment.

  14. p.g.sharrow says:

    A friend of mine ran an experiment with a catalyst vapor adding system on used diesel engines.
    Very impressive results on cleaning up the combustion and efficient fuel use. Greatly reduced the “knock” detonation and smoothed engine vibration. I’m sure the EPA outlawed it’s use due to their collusion with Cummings Engines to mandate their patented nitrogenous injection system…pg

  15. PeterMG says:

    p.g.sharrow That would be the same Cummins that along with CAT and Detroit Diesel got caught doing exactly what VW was doing, only in the late 90’s or early noughties. Changing the engine injection timing when the engine was working so that it burnt less fuel and then building in some code that could recognise an emissions test, or a noise test.(something the every engine manufacturer does) Or the same Cummins that went down the dead end of cooled EGR with particulate trap that every operator hates with a passion. Or the Same Cummins that hedged its bets and always invest more than any other engine manufacturer and had a parallel SCR (selective Catalytic Reduction) program going in Europe (Darlington UK) and due to their larger R&D budget were able to patent a system that was better than anyone else’s at reducing Nox so you can run hotter and cleaner and more efficiently. So successful that the latest Zero emission stage 4 final industrial High HP engines don’t need particulate traps.

    Whilst I’m less supportive of industrial leaders who don’t do their homework and accept fake science at face value, their is nothing fake about most of the products that come out of either the US or UK factories of Cummins. Like every company they also produce copies in China, that despite all the protests that may emanate from Columbus Indiana do not last and perform as advertised. But I do understand you are surely going to destroy your company if you don’t cooperated with a heavily pollicised EPA. Now that regulators can’t measure any further reductions in NOX, HC or Particulates, and CO2 importance is set to reduce, manufacturers will get back to making their product different again and look to find areas that set them apart. I would start by engineering the cooled ERG’s out and simplifying the VG turbo’s and moving back to simple waste gates. That will improve reliability 500%

  16. p.g.sharrow says:

    @PeterMG; I have operated nearly every kind of engine in every kind of application over the last 50 years and would have to admit that Cummins builds one of the best running, efficient diesel engines.
    As to the Company, we worked with them on an application in the time frame you point to, to provide engine generation for electric power generation for the island of Hawaii. We helped them win the contract by their promises to use our fume scrubber technology to gain EPA license for operation. After the temporary operation permit was granted they stalled the scrubber installation in favor of their SCR system so long that they had to re-engine the plant! because the first engines were worn out. They paid us nothing. The plant paid them nothing for the first engines, but the new engines did include the modern mandated SCR equipment at the old contract price. But, CAT was frozen out of the bragging rights for providing generation for Hawaii !

    Modern IC engine designs are so effective that a reboot of regulation is needed as most add-ons that are mandated, are contra-effective for reduced pollution to the energy created. These add-ons have also become the main fail point, with a life that is 1/4 that of the underlying engine. These things greatly add to the cost of operation as well as reducing the wealth being created…pg

  17. Chrysler and Jeep are crap cars. It might be good for all if Chrysler and owners Fiat go broke.The Toyota Hilux diesel is the biggest selling vehicle in Australia. Every long distant truck is diesel.

  18. oldbrew says:

    Toyota stops selling diesel cars in Europe

    Japanese auto manufacturer Toyota has said it will soon stop selling diesel vehicles in Europe, reacting to diesel’s fall from grace on the Continent. The announcement was made at the Geneva Motor Show.

  19. oldbrew says:

    Fiat Chrysler denied bid to dismiss diesel emission cheating claims
    March 16, 2018

    A federal judge in San Francisco ruled Thursday that owners of 150,000 Dodge Ram and Jeep Grand Cherokee models across eight U.S. states can proceed toward trial over allegations that software in their vehicles was designed to hide emissions up to 20 times the legal limit.