Hi,

Well I have something, although it might not be very catchy -- questions nobody seems to care about.

Over the life of a truck, how much extra fuel will be consumed by regeneration, in relation to the alleged savings in pollution output?

With regard to the 2011 machines, what is the extra cost to the consumer for not just the urea, but the additional hardware on the engine, and how does that compare with any asserted savings in pollution output for that engine?

How much farther can this go before owning a diesel is no longer cost-effective for anyone (unlike Mark) who does not tow constantly?

When the market to guys like me -- who could conceivably get away with towing with a gasser -- dries up, what will manufacturers do when light truck diesel sales dwindle?

When will this stupidity stop? The government has screwed up both the automotive market and that of the food industry with its ethanol subsidies (which AlGore recently acknowledged was a mistake to advocate) -- lowering fuel economy, increasing corn prices, etc. They advocate and subsidize (with our tax dollars) electric vehicles that can't go very far, go even less distance when you have to use a heater in the winter or air conditioner in the summer, and rely on electricity supplied by a grid that can't expand efficiently due to other Federal regulations. This continual Federal pressure to squeeze the last few percentages of pollution out of the cleanest vehicle fleet in the world is ridiculous.
(Tirade off.)

FWIW.