I think Ford could consider bringing the Fiesta and it's diesel to the US if it had more models to offer the diesel (i.e. Focus, Mondeo, Ranger, Escape, etc.) Mercedes and VW are offering several models and plan to expanding to other models. I haven't read of the cleaner diesels being marketed anywhere except in the US.

 

My bet is that it has nothing to do with $$ or marketing, it's about emissions. There are dirty diesels out there and this is one of them I'll bet. The non Blue-tec MB's all score a 1 out of ten for smog where 0 is the worst. The new VW are supposed to be much better, but gov't numbers aren't up yet. US is ahead of the curve on this, in part because the old diesel fuel in NA had a higher sulfur and burned dirtier. EU is bringing higher emissions requirements out for diesels in the next little while iirc.

 

The emissions ratings I quoted are from the UK EPA-like site. The diesels can beat hybrids for greenhouse gases. But the smog emissions are 10-20 times worse. On the UK site the smog numbers for the Fiesta EconoTec and a Mercedes E320 CDI are about the same. I have yet to see an actual emissions rating of the Bluetec, only that it can reduce NOx emissions by up to 80%.

The Bluetec also slightly increases CO2. However, several UK sites claim this is one reason you won't see Bluetec in the UK anytime soon.

 

Dirty, filthy diesel vehicles:

1. Commercial and public vehicles
2. All diesel cars up to and including the 2006 model year in North America
3. All diesel trucks and SUVs, except those that have emissions treatment to reduce NOx

Before you denounce this as unfair because the latest and greatest diesels are considered clean, let me remind you that the majority of diesels on the road today didn't just arrive off of a ship in the last month or two. As people were becoming anxious with gas prices and hybrids were gaining popularity over the last several years, Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz started to really push their dirty, filthy diesels as the solution to energy efficiency and a fair number of consumers bought into it.

Personally, it's quite common for me to be driving behind a modern TDI and have to switch on re-circulate on my air system because of the unpleasant odour. It's the owner's fault if they're not keeping the engines tuned, but you don't expect such things so soon.

 

No doubt the diesels you specified had high smog emissions prior to the latest US versions. But, they can produce less greenhouse gases than a comparable hybrids and are very energy efficient. On the other hand it could be said:
Annual worldwide hybrid production struggles to break 500,000. Where as 7,900,000 new "dirty, filthy" diesels were registered in Europe for 2007. With US annual sales sliding to 12.5 million and China's sales increasing to 10 million (europe is ~15 million). Hybrids are a cleaner solution but a long way from filling current demand.

 

Understood, but there are dirty, filthy, old high-emitting gassers on the road too, as far as that goes. As a matter of fact, these high-emitting gassers have been implicated as the main cause of poor air quality (i.e., "smog") in urban locations, NOT diesels, high-emitting or otherwise. See http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehicles...eer_fujita.pdf slide #16.

The point is that this Ford diesel car could be (would have to be) cleaned up compared to the European version and sold in N.A. Development cost are essentially a non-issue since it's already being sold in Europe and diesel exhaust aftertreatment is now commercially available. I personally think this is another example of short-sightedness by the U.S. car manufacturers.

By the way, CARB emissions certification data for the 2009 Jetta TDI are available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onroad/..._u2_diesel.pdf if anyone is interested.

 

Not to stray too far from the topic of this thread, but I feel compelled to make a comment about the “smog forming” adjective that’s frequently used to describe NOx.

In fact, NOx is a rather strange substance in that it can either create or DESTROY ozone (the primary component of “smog”), depending on the ambient conditions encountered. Using “smog-forming” to characterize NOx is at least somewhat misleading.

Under ambient conditions that are found in urban/suburban environments (“VOC limited”), reducing NOx will have little impact on ambient ozone levels, and in some cases, can actually make them WORSE (see, e.g., http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehicles...t08_lawson.pdf slide #7, bullet #2, in addition to the first link I gave in my previous post).

In a nutshell, NOx creates ozone, but HC and CO allow it to accumulate in the atmosphere. It is clear from these NREL studies that reducing HC and CO emissions is much more important to air quality that equivalent reductions in NOx.