And they continue to deny any responsibility

[John Jones Jr]

The bottom line here is, if you were driving a diesel you wouldn't be saying boo about diesel pollution. As it just happens you have a petrol (ironically a 350) so sadly that seems to give you a licence to harp on about diesels and not just in this thread either. Give it a rest.

P.s I'm presuming you're a reasonably intelligent man, if so why not post a thread on something more interesting and less divisive. Win, win for all.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

14 minutes after I wrote that I've decided not to respond to the "why don't you" posts, along comes a "why don't you" post. What a fool I am, I thought that people here could read. And what a bigger fool I am for just responding. Doh!

 

[stwat]

So, do you only want replies that agree with you and stroke your ego?

What is the point in starting threads like this if all you are going to do is try and put down anyone who responds with anything other than totally agreeing with your views

 

[dejongj]

I think the OP is spot on to highlight the news article. It is pathetic that in 2017 we, yes WE, have caused to exceed these levels.

To many people drive diesels where even if this wasn't a concern it seriously doesn't make logical sense to drive one. Sure I can appreciate that people like the torque and lazy driving of modern diesels, but plenty of really good petrol and hybrid and electric vehicles are available as well.

Yes I used to live in central London, and when starting my family I did move out to the country side, and no I don't have a diesel either. Sure all combustion engines pollute but the effect on health from the particles is particularly of concern, hence international guidelines by rather clever people were drawn up.

 

[Dryce]

To be fair to the OP, modern HGVs are pretty clean, they're at Euro 6 and have to have both a DPF and Adblue, I'd bet money on the truck my brother drives kicks out less NoX than my '05 RR Sport.

HGVs consume huge amounts of fuel compared with a car - and accumulate a lot more miles.

You can't win that bet except on a technicality unless your brother drives 24/7 with a maximum load in the car while towing a maximum load.

 

[Dryce]

Continually reading posts that say "It's not my fault, it's the government/manufacturers/experts fault" doesn't allay any of my fears.

If there hadn't been the mad and unecesary rush to diesel then you'd find the same sorts of articles about petrol vehicles.

Simple advice if you care so much about these things. Don't own a car, walk or cycle to work, don't fly on holiday.

As has been *repeatedly* pointed out the authors of these article will happily blame private motor vehicles while quoting peak figures for streets that on which private vehicles are baned. That's outrageous and maybe gives an insight to how we end up with the mad rush to diesel in the first place. Academics often have an agenda annd politicians seem naive at times.

 

[GordonTarling]

Diesel pollution is in the public eye and I'm sure things will change in the future, for whatever reason.

We should be more concerned about Chemtrails, which appear to be a closely guarded secret that allows 'agencies' to spray possibly toxic chemicals into our upper atmosphere without having to acknowledge that it even happens. No-one will admit to what is being done, yet it's very real.

 

[E55BOF]

What do you expect us to do? Do you want to see mass self-flagellation sessions of Mercedes diesel owners

SM for all, I say, not just diesel car owners...

Oh, all right, I'll get my coat.

 

[CabrioDave]

Having looked through some of the extreme replies here, I went back to the original posting.

As far as I can see, the statement made boils down to:

Now that we know more of the emissions problems of diesels (problems which were hidden by the emphasis on CO2 figures in the tax system), isn't there a clear case for moving, at the next purchase, to other types of engine?

 

[c63chris]

First world problems. These articles always make good scare mongering. There's over 60 million people in the country so taking the OPs concern about his children then statistically even if the "linked cases" are direct then 15,000 out 64 million I would say you're safe. If you are that worried the answer is not the internal combustion engine. We all know that. It's getting closer and you see more and more vehicles on the road. Yes the power has to be generated but the UK went three days in a row on renewables last year. Portugal went three weeks. Easy to be negative. Personally I think the future looks exciting.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[dejongj]

HGVs consume huge amounts of fuel compared with a car - and accumulate a lot more miles.

You can't win that bet except on a technicality unless your brother drives 24/7 with a maximum load in the car while towing a maximum load.

Ofcourse you can as you the standard comparison is in nox mg/km.

 

[TheFoX]

The general population doesn't really understand the effects of Nox, CO2 or any other contaminants. When any of us buy a car, do we really understand the consequence of our actions? I doubt it.

Knowing that one car produces more CO2 than another is easy knowledge, but knowing the impact of that emission is really the preserve of the scientists who deal with those facts.

Of course, we have the media which relish on stories that can scare people, and who are known the blow facts out of proportion just to sell their media.

So, why do some buy petrol and some buy diesel?

Would you pull a big caravan in a petrol?

Would you want a petrol four wheel drive?

Would you opt for a diesel if you just used your car as a town hopper?

Would you buy a small car if you had a large family?

Would you buy a people carrier if it was just for your own personal use?

What colour car would you buy?

Sometimes our choices are limited. If we like a model and colour, the fact that they only have it in diesel or petrol means that we buy what is available at the time. Or it might be we choose a car not quite to our liking because we need a diesel because of our mileage, or a petrol because of a lack of our mileage.

Unless you are buying brand new, our choice as second hand buyers is limited to what is available at the time. Even brand new can have limitations, as certain models may only be offered with a limited number of powertrains.

We don't get to choose what we want to buy. We buy what is available at the time, and we have to buy according to what the experts tell us is best.

 

[dejongj]

If there hadn't been the mad and unecesary rush to diesel then you'd find the same sorts of articles about petrol vehicles.
...

Same sort as in pollution in general yes most likely. However this is very specifically regarding nox emissions, and very much so related to diesel vehicles as such. The immediate impact on health is measurably larger as well. So yes same sort of conversation if you plonk all pollution in one great big heap and ignore the actual effects.

But ultimately, surely it is a good thing to strive to improve. I honestly don't see what the issue is that so many have with this. As your next car get a cleaner car, try and look objectively at it whether you need a diesel, if you must then Mercedes do some nice bluetec models as well with its separate ad blue tank.And also review whether a car journey is truly required, or try and think ahead and combine several journeys to make it more efficient.

These are all very simple things we can do ourselves starting today to make slight improvements to our environment. No need for direction or stimulation from any government, we can take those responsibilities upon ourselves very easily without and pressure or wholesale lifestyle changes.

 

[Dryce]

Ofcourse you can as you the standard comparison is in nox mg/km.

The truck will almost certainly fail that. Why? It's going to be heavier.

The technicality would be on NOx grammes for a given amount of work. Load the truck up and it consumes a huge amount of fuel but is arguably doing more work.

It's a pity that the NOx for a given amount of work isn't applied to buses. During the day if they are running lightly loaded they carry a disproportionate penalty in terms of fixed weight that probably makes them pretty bad offenders. But green activists and city councils don't really want to know about that.

It's no surprise the Hope Street in Glasgow has pollution problems. It's uphill. A single deck bus is carrying perhaps 13tonnes of weight in addition to passengers - a double deck bus maybe 18 tonnes.

 

[dejongj]

The truck will almost certainly fail that. Why? It's going to be heavier.

The technicality would be on NOx grammes for a given amount of work. Load the truck up and it consumes a huge amount of fuel but is arguably doing more work.

It's a pity that the NOx for a given amount of work isn't applied to buses. During the day if they are running lightly loaded they carry a disproportionate penalty in terms of fixed weight that probably makes them pretty bad offenders. But green activists and city councils don't really want to know about that.

It's no surprise the Hope Street in Glasgow has pollution problems. It's uphill. A single deck bus is carrying perhaps 13tonnes of weight in addition to passengers - a double deck bus maybe 18 tonnes.

Sorry it just doesn't work like that at all, there is no need to make this more complicated by introducing given amount of work whatever that may mean. It is a simple measurement.

Take a look at this Norwegian report as an example with real scientific backing;
https://www.toi.no/environment-and-...ssions-in-real-traffic-article33388-1314.html

 

[Deleted member 65149]

HGVs consume huge amounts of fuel compared with a car - and accumulate a lot more miles. You can't win that bet except on a technicality unless your brother drives 24/7 with a maximum load in the car while towing a maximum load.

"Cars accounted for 79% of all vehicle miles travelled in 2014".

. Lots of interesting data in there.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

The truck will almost certainly fail that. Why? It's going to be heavier. The technicality would be on NOx grammes for a given amount of work. Load the truck up and it consumes a huge amount of fuel but is arguably doing more work. It's a pity that the NOx for a given amount of work isn't applied to buses. During the day if they are running lightly loaded they carry a disproportionate penalty in terms of fixed weight that probably makes them pretty bad offenders. But green activists and city councils don't really want to know about that. It's no surprise the Hope Street in Glasgow has pollution problems. It's uphill. A single deck bus is carrying perhaps 13tonnes of weight in addition to passengers - a double deck bus maybe 18 tonnes.

The emission regulations applied to HGVs and busses are far stricter than those applied to cars. Fitting cars with the same emission controls as on trucks is currently disproportionately too expensive in both cash and performance. Car manufacturers have lobbied for and achieved a significant delay in having the latest regulations applied to diesel cars. Positive but very slow advances. In the meantime petrol engines are also rapidly improving.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

To many people drive diesels where even if this wasn't a concern it seriously doesn't make logical sense to drive one.

True, some people drive Diesel engines cars when petrol, electric, hybrid, or public transport (but probably not hydrogen!) make more sense.

I don't drive diesels but the cars I drive aren't logical, because there are faster cars, more fuel efficient cars, cars which produce less emissions (I could go on) available.

My brother and sister in law drive two new cars, one of which my BiL only uses to commute. A bus takes precisely the same route, taking a car at all isn't logical.

I drive a car which can carry 5 people, their luggage, and tow a 3.5t trailer with an engine up to the job, and I use it to commute in, with just a driver and a laptop, which is not logical.

I drive a car with 21 inch wheels and low profile tyres, which are heavy, expensive to replace, and create the need for compromises on steering and suspension design, which is not logical.

I don't think I'm alone.

 

[davidjpowell]

I was half way through responding to some of the comments here by explaining my personal decisions, when the site momentarily dropped out and I lost everything. I return to a member calling me a troll. He thinks he's a "mean boy". His words, not mine. Of course such a reaction is to be expected, but is water off a duck's back to me.

On the flip side, there have been several intelligent posts on the subject. Most I agree with.

Anyway, I've now decided it's best not to respond to the "why don't you" / "you should have" negativity because it achieves nothing and merely appears to add fuel to a fire. It's a fire I would prefer to do without. Sit back and get vilified or provide substance and get berated. The former is easier.

I'll continue to read the posts in the hope that someone manages some adult arguments against my now well known concerns. I genuinely want to be provided with proof that I don't need to worry. I want to see evidence that all the reports I far too regularly read and hear about pollution, in particular from diesel cars, are nonsense and that none of any our children will ever suffer as a consequence. Continually reading posts that say "It's not my fault, it's the government/manufacturers/experts fault" doesn't allay any of my fears.

I won't say your a troll. I will say that you are preaching, in my view wholly unnecessarily.

Your entitled to your view. You've given it to us more than once, but now seem intent on ramming it down our throats.

Your entitled to your personal decisions. You are not entitled to criticise or complain about others personal decisions - those are their own choices to make.

 

[dejongj]

True, some people drive Diesel engines cars when petrol, electric, hybrid, or public transport (but probably not hydrogen!) make more sense.

I don't drive diesels but the cars I drive aren't logical, because there are faster cars, more fuel efficient cars, cars which produce less emissions (I could go on) available.

My brother and sister in law drive two new cars, one of which my BiL only uses to commute. A bus takes precisely the same route, taking a car at all isn't logical.

I drive a car which can carry 5 people, their luggage, and tow a 3.5t trailer with an engine up to the job, and I use it to commute in, with just a driver and a laptop, which is not logical.

I drive a car with 21 inch wheels and low profile tyres, which are heavy, expensive to replace, and create the need for compromises on steering and suspension design, which is not logical.

I don't think I'm alone.

No you are not alone in illogical decisions, the car I drive currently (or I should say my wife uses for the 300 miles per week school run) is not logical either

The difference to me is that those other illogical choices don't impact anyone else, to me that is a pretty big differentiator.