Diesel cars pollution is much worse <18C

[grober]

A recent survey of Euro 5 cars has shown that they generate much more toxic emissions below 18C principally by defeating much of the engine pollution controls.. This is perfectly legal under current legislation. It's unfortunate that defeating the emission controls also may have the effect of helping fuel consumption figures which doesn't help. Hardly a surprise after the VW dieselgate! Diesels more polluting below 18C, research suggests - BBC News

This is the company that produced the report altho its not clear who funded it?
Emissions Analytics

They appear to offer more accurate real world mpg figures.
Emissions Analytics Provides Consumers With Real-World MPG Data | Emissions Analytics | Emissions Data Products

 

[ioweddie]

Thank God for Global Warming, we should be OK soon as its getting warmer every day LOL

 

[markjay]

Europe's taste for Diesel is the result of governments' obsession with lowering CO2 emissions, combined with the public's (mis?)concept of frugality.

Diesel has its place, always did, but when over 50% of Europe's private vehicles are now Diesel powered, we clearly got something wrong.

 

[grober]

Europe's taste for Diesel is the result of governments' obsession with lowering CO2 emissions, combined with the public's (mis?)concept of frugality.

Diesel has its place, always did, but when over 50% of Europe's private vehicles are now Diesel powered, we clearly got something wrong.

Agreed. Its particularly a European phenomenon since the worlds other car manufacturing countries - the USA and Japan chose the petrol hybrid model instead.
As I said before - blame General De Gaulle- it actually goes that far back historically to a time when global warming was but a gleam in the environmental lobyist's eye.

 

[Alex225]

There is definitely a misunderstanding of diesels.

So many people opted for them when there isn't a need. We went to the local MB dealership on Sunday to look at motors for my other half. All of the C and E class models we looked at were diesel! I'm not convinced it's going anywhere soon.

My other half is looking to get shot of her diesel Focus because she doesn't need a diesel yet looking at most modern Mercs models are not that prominent.

I can always recall going to places like Spain on holiday and all the cars out there seeming to be diesel.

 

[Palfrem]

Global Warming - May kill us/them in an indeterminate time in the far off future, possibly
Poor air quality / PM10s - Killing people now

Well done the politicians!

 

[grober]

Mercedes make petrol engined versions of all their models it's just that MB UK chose not to import/sell them. I suspect because there's less profit in it for them.

 

[grober]

Global Warming - May kill us/them in an indeterminate time in the far off future

If you had happened to occupy certain parts of the planet currently subject to rising sea levels entreme weather events/ flooding or drought/ crop failure in the more arid regions they might disagree on that one. Fortunately in the temperate zone of the planet we have been buffered from most of these extreme climate events.

 

[Charles Morgan]

Global Warming - May kill us/them in an indeterminate time in the far off future, possibly
Poor air quality / PM10s - Killing people now

Well done the politicians!

I suspect that like all well-intentioned policies the counter-productive nature only becomes clear after a while.

Much as I love diesel engines, in places like London which are awful pollution traps at the best of times (river valley with hills surrounding trapping dirty air) having extra particle emissions in the cold (when temperature inversion makes the problem far worse) is not acceptable. Hybrid or Electric only.

 

[geraldrobins]

Mercedes make petrol engined versions of all their models it's just that MB UK chose not to import/sell them. I suspect because there's less profit in it for them.

Petrol engines are available for most models in the UK as well, although maybe not as much choice. Its all down to demand IMHO.

 

[artyman]

I daresay the emissions from planes with folk jetting all round the planet far outweigh diesels in the damage to the environment.

 

[Tiim533]

Sigh...

On any given year, too much salt in your diet is bad for you, then the next it's good. Then butter is bad for you, and then it's good. Diesel good one year, bad the next.

However, to put this all into perspective, Methane gas emitted by cows and other livestock does have a significant impact on the amount of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, which are the main culprits behind climate change and global warming. While farts aren’t the only way cows are expelling methane, it is, at least, accurate to say that cow farts play a part in our planet’s climate growing hotter.

That's according to Do Cow Farts Really Significantly Contribute to Global Warming? anyway.

 

[grober]

I daresay the emissions from planes with folk jetting all round the planet far outweigh diesels in the damage to the environment.

Ah yes but how did they get to/from the airport?

 

[grober]

Sigh...

On any given year, too much salt in your diet is bad for you, then the next it's good. Then butter is bad for you, and then it's good. Diesel good one year, bad the next.

However, to put this all into perspective, Methane gas emitted by cows and other livestock does have a significant impact on the amount of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, which are the main culprits behind climate change and global warming. While farts aren’t the only way cows are expelling methane, it is, at least, accurate to say that cow farts play a part in our planet’s climate growing hotter.

That's according to Do Cow Farts Really Significantly Contribute to Global Warming? anyway.

This is undoubtedly fact and exacerbated by increased factory farming dairy and meat production. On a global scale its presumably related to population growth but at individual western country level the irony is that the increased consumption of meat and dairy animal products is directly related to increased obesity and health problems. That's where the concept of overconsumption and sustainability raises its head. Taking it back to diesel cars it might be summed up by the question- how many fully occupied 4/5 seater cars do you see on the roads?

 

[st13phil]

A recent survey of Euro 5 cars has shown that they generate much more toxic emissions below 18C principally by defeating much of the engine pollution controls.

I'm old enough to remember that this is an almost parallel re-run of the Catalytic Converter fiasco in the late 1980's.

The EU seized upon cat converters as the "solution" to nasty emissions from petrol engines. Unfortunately, the research they based their decision upon was carried out - for the most part - by CARB, the California Air Research Board. That research showed that cat converters significantly reduced the target emissions, so the EU enacted regulations that effectively closed the door on lean burn and other rather promising emissions reduction technologies and made the fitment of cat converters the only game in town.

The trouble was that no-one had given a moments thought to the fact that European car use patterns are totally different to those in California, with most being short commute journeys during which the engine and emission control components don't actually spend very long (if at all) at the ideal operating temperature, and that unlike California, ambient temperatures in most EU countries are for much of the year well below 15c which exacerbates the emissions problems.

The net effect of this was that cat-equipped petrol cars in typical European use actually caused more pollution that non-cat vehicles

 

[grober]

I'm old enough to remember that this is an almost parallel re-run of the Catalytic Converter fiasco in the late 1980's.

The EU seized upon cat converters as the "solution" to nasty emissions from petrol engines. Unfortunately, the research they based their decision upon was carried out - for the most part - by CARB, the California Air Research Board. That research showed that cat converters significantly reduced the target emissions, so the EU enacted regulations that effectively closed the door on lean burn and other rather promising emissions reduction technologies and made the fitment of cat converters the only game in town.

The trouble was that no-one had given a moments thought to the fact that European car use patterns are totally different to those in California, with most being short commute journeys during which the engine and emission control components don't actually spend very long (if at all) at the ideal operating temperature, and that unlike California, ambient temperatures in most EU countries are for much of the year well below 15c which exacerbates the emissions problems.

The net effect of this was that cat-equipped petrol cars in typical European use actually caused more pollution that non-cat vehicles

This is probably quite correct. There is however another side to the story. What is clear in emission regulation legislation ,however faulty in its implementation, is its INTENT - to reduce toxic emissions from car exhausts to certain acceptable levels for health or environmental reasons. To think that the other players in this game - the car manufacturers- would be disingenuous to this would be naive. But despite this their modus operandi with the huge technical and manufacturing facilities available to them seems to have been to try to circumvent any regulations rather than implement them?

 

[whitenemesis]

 

[stevehg]

This is probably quite correct. There is however another side to the story. What is clear in emission regulation legislation ,however faulty in its implementation, is its INTENT - to reduce toxic emissions from car exhausts to certain acceptable levels for health or environmental reasons. To think that the other players in this game - the car manufacturers- would be disingenuous to this would be naive. But despite this their modus operandi with the huge technical and manufacturing facilities available to them seems to have been to try to circumvent any regulations rather than implement them?

Yawn. The car companies are run and employee people that have children, grand children etc. and are not run by some evil empire. Now not all of these people, like in any sample of society, have the best moral judgement, but in the whole the majority are honest people who work with integrity.

Like all companies, car manufacturers have to make a profit to exist. Meeting emissions legislation ads complexity, costs, and above a certain threshold is not a desirable item that consumers will pay a premium for. So naturally they are resistive to legislative change. Given that, the motor industry has made some of the largest strides in emissions reduction of any industry.

We are near to the point where range and cost of electric vehicles are good enough for them to go mainstream, and in the within ten years it's likely that over 50% of cars in sold Europe will be electric.

So given this, moaning about new diesels that are already required to meet euro 6, will have further tighter legislation imposed is a waste of time in the long run.

 

[John]

I do wonder if the proliferation of diesels over the last 15 odd years has led to an improvement in the evolution of diesel technology in general which can benefit other diesel-engine vehicles such as lorries.

Or would these have evolved to the level they are now anyway...

 

[kid-jensen]

All I know is that thanks to VAG, renault and the like, my Outrageius £495 a year "road Tax" will almost certainly be going up soon...

Well done the EU!