news: Diesel engines 'pose health risk'

[Shude]

I see we're back to bashing diesels in the news because of the soot they allegedly produce...

Diesel engines 'pose health risk'

Diesel engines pose a serious health threat, pumping out high levels of tiny particles that cause breathing problems, health experts have warned.
The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy (CSP) looked at levels of PM10 picked up at various points around the UK.

London's Marylebone Road and Camden were worst, with Port Talbot in south Wales and Bury in Lancashire also in the top five pollution hotspots.

World Health Organisation experts say there is no safe limit for PM10.

The pollutant consists of tiny solid or liquid particles of soot, dust, smoke, fumes and aerosols.

The effects on those with lung diseases such as asthma, bronchitis and emphysema could be far more serious, respiratory physiotherapists warned.

The CSP said its analysis showed there were high levels across the UK, with an average of 23.3 micrograms per cubic metre of air (micrograms/m3).

The highest level was found on Marylebone Road, with 43 micrograms/m3, followed by Camden with 32 micrograms/m3.

'Worst air quality'

But the survey showed that many other parts of the UK had high levels of PM10, with five of the top 10 hotspots outside London.

The CSP's Grahame Pope said: "The government should accept the WHO position that there is no safe exposure limit.

"Local authorities should follow the Japanese example by banning these vehicles from built up areas."

London mayor Ken Livingstone said: "London has long-suffered the worst air quality in the country, with air pollution estimated to cause 1,600 premature deaths every year.

"By the end of this mayoral term we will declare the whole of Greater London a Low Emission Zone, banning the most polluting lorries, coaches and buses from the capital."

TOP 10 HOTSPOTS
London Marylebone Road 43 micrograms/m3
Camden Kerbside 35
Port Talbot 31
Bury Roadside 30
Bradford Centre 27
Glasgow Kerbside 27
London A3 Roadside 27
London Hillingdon 27
Stockton-on-Tees Yarm 27
London Bloomsbury and London Harlington 26
The CSP said the pollutant could cause coughing, wheezing and shortness of breath.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4302211.stm

 

[GrahamC230K]

Great. Ban them, bring back 4 star.

 

[Brian WH]

Great. Ban them, bring back 4 star.

I don't think it will solve this problem mate.

banning the most polluting lorries, coaches and buses from the capital."

The modern Diesel Car is nowhere near as bad!!

 

[peterchurch]

Guys,
I can remember being about 6 years old and my mum taking me upto London for the day. We were crossing Regents Street behind a taxi as he pliped his accelerator to get ready to move. My trousers got covered in soot and crap from the exhaust I was not a happy chappy You only have to look at the smoke that you get out of the back of a cold diesel to see that they are not very nice engines for the environment. I have never understood what the hell Mr Brown was thinking when he opened up the loophole to premote diesels as company cars over petrol

Regards,

Peter

 

[peterchurch]

Hang on!!! The penny has just dropped

Has that F***wit Livingstone sat behind one of those bloody bendy buses to see howmuch crap they chuck out ! Oh no, sorry he wouldn't notice, as he would be sat in the back of an equally bad taxi running up huge cab bills at Londons Expense !!!! GRRRRR

 

[Dieselman]

Why do people have to revert to old information when debating noxious engine outputs.

For some years PM10s have been out of the limelight as they are too large to pass throught the lung wall so don't cause respiratory issues, PM2.5s are the new particulates of interest.
Many new diesels are fitted with particulate traps so produce nearly zero particulates of any size.

Referring to a probably knackered taxi from 40 years ago isn't much of an argument either. Black smoke is caused by either worn injectors or high sulpher fuel. The level of sulpher has been reduced to a minute percentage of the levels even twenty years ago.

The Chancellor didn't introduce any tax advantage for diesel engined vehicles, in fact there is a three percent penalty.
The tax advantage comes because vehicles with lower toxic emissions enjoy a lower tax levy, diesels just happen to fit this bill.

Both petrol and diesel engines emit pollutants, typically Co, NoX, Co2, particulates.
Diesels only emit greater quantities of NoX.
Petrol engines emit greater quantities of Co, Co2, particulates. Yes really.

Diesels emit a lesser quantity of particulates but due to their mass being greater they account for a greater mass.

Add to this the efficiency of a petrol catalysed engine is about 25%, a modern diesel about 45-50%.

So which one really pollutes less?

 

[Dieter]

Hi,

As more motorists use diesel the amount of fuel tax taken by the Government is decreasing (as diesel gives more mpg etc.). So (is) this is another 'scare' tactic to increase tax on diesel.

If this Government were really interested in 'green' issues then how is it that the UK is the only Country in Europe which DOESN'T have (general) access to Bio-diesel ?

To make Biodiesel economical to produce the Government needs to reduce associated tax etc.. No chance!

You'd think the Government were 'running' the Country for themselves rather than representing us?

Cheers,

 

[stwat]

(quote)You'd think the Government were 'running' the Country for themselves rather than representing us?(quote)

Nail hit squarely on the head.

Stu

 

[PJH]

banning the most polluting lorries, coaches and buses from the capital."

The modern Diesel Car is nowhere near as bad!!

Ban buses...so much for promoting public transport.

 

[Robbo]

How come in California which has the most stringent emission laws anywhere in the world does not allow the sale of Diesels (even CDIs) due to their particulate emissions, whereas petrol engines are fine?

There seems to be some contradictions with some of the views posted here.

 

[MainMan]

There is a phenomenon called "global dimming" which relates to the observation that the amount of light reaching the earth has been decreasing over the years - 15% less now than 10 years ago. The reason for this has been tracked down to soot particles in clouds - no prizes for guessing where the soot comes from. These particles make the clouds behave, to an extent, like a mirror and reflect back sunlight into space. Without this effect global warming would already have had a disastrous effect on the planet. So while we all develop lung cancer and die because of the diesel pollution maybe we should reflect on the fact that without it the damage to our environment would be even worse. It may in fact be an example of Gaia theory where the earth is protecting itself against those who try to destroy it by killing them.

 

[Alfie]

Referring to a probably knackered taxi from 40 years ago isn't much of an argument either. Black smoke is caused by either worn injectors or high sulpher fuel. The level of sulpher has been reduced to a minute percentage of the levels even twenty years ago.

Disagree here. Have you seen how many of those 40 year old buses and taxi's are still in use? A trip to London will show that most buses are older than most of the people on this forum. Now, with their 9 litre diesel engines and huge weight, just how much crap are they putting out still to this day!

It is unfair to compare a diesel car of today with a bus of yeasterday as some have rightly pointed out the car of today will pollute far far less than a car or a bus of yester-century!

Still, its refreshing to see a group other than the 4x4 drivers being bashed. Next week it will be some other group no doubt.

 

[peterchurch]

Referring to a probably knackered taxi from 40 years ago isn't much of an argument either. Black smoke is caused by either worn injectors or high sulpher fuel. The level of sulpher has been reduced to a minute percentage of the levels even twenty years ago.

Sob Im only 32 and that knacked sodding taxi is probably still running today

I said that Gordon introduced a tax loophole on the basis that when the laws came in to place. Everyone in my office said "Sod it! I might as well have that 3.0 BMW diesel as it works out cheaper than the 2.0 petrol version..."

I like most petrol heads am in utter ignorance of the diesel engine. So can I ask the following questions?

1) If you have a heavy left foot, does a diesel still return the same benifits, compared to the heavy footed petrol head?

2) Do the efficiency figures for diesels engines reduce as they get older?

3) Is diesel any more green to produce than petrol (chip fat and bio fuels aside)

cheers

 

[Mambo]

1) If you have a heavy left foot, does a diesel still return the same benifits, compared to the heavy footed petrol head?

You mean right foot surely?

 

[peterchurch]

You mean right foot surely?

Doh !!!!

 

[RichieRuss2000]

There is a phenomenon called "global dimming" which relates to the observation that the amount of light reaching the earth has been decreasing over the years - 15% less now than 10 years ago. The reason for this has been tracked down to soot particles in clouds - no prizes for guessing where the soot comes from. These particles make the clouds behave, to an extent, like a mirror and reflect back sunlight into space. Without this effect global warming would already have had a disastrous effect on the planet. So while we all develop lung cancer and die because of the diesel pollution maybe we should reflect on the fact that without it the damage to our environment would be even worse. It may in fact be an example of Gaia theory where the earth is protecting itself against those who try to destroy it by killing them.

Interesting point... though if you have time you should go and read the new Michael Crichton book 'State of Fear' for an alternitive view of Global warming. Which incidently is all based on scientific fact that doesn't get as much press as the usual stuff... If only this one was made into a movie!

 

[PJH]

You mean right foot surely?

Perhaps Peter likes holding his car on the brakes when launching it away from the lights! Or would that be TWO heavy feet ?

 

[peterchurch]

Doesn't look like any Diesel fans want to answer my questions then ?

 

[andy_k]

when we had the Peugeot diesel it's consumption varied just like that of a petrol car - the more you hammered it the more fuel it used. The difference was though it would drop to 40mpg from 50mpg so it hardly mattered.

Andy

 

[peterchurch]

when we had the Peugeot diesel it's consumption varied just like that of a petrol car - the more you hammered it the more fuel it used. The difference was though it would drop to 40mpg from 50mpg so it hardly mattered.

Andy

fair point