Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air pollution

MartinC
Posts: 1909
Joined: 10 May 2007, 6:31pm
Location: Bredon

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby MartinC » 16 Mar 2016, 8:40am

Mark R wrote:Yes very good, I don't fancy my chances of convincing you of anything. i'll leave you to your denial :wink:


Hmmm. If I don't agree with you I'm in denial? What is it you've decided I'm denying? As I see it I'm only denying that diesel engine emissions are the only or most important pollution problem that we face and that it can be resolved by banning them. And you're right, the arguments you present aren't convincing.

MartinC
Posts: 1909
Joined: 10 May 2007, 6:31pm
Location: Bredon

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby MartinC » 16 Mar 2016, 8:55am

Mark R wrote:The supposed climate change advantages of diesel are now being questioned. e.g.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/18/eu-urged-to-axe-support-for-diesel/...........................


This is a classic piece of the confirmation bias that pervades the argument. The article is saying that the contribution to climate change from diesels is understated because it doesn't account for the carbon locked up in the soot particles produced (by presumably older low tech diesels) but ignores the fact that this carbon isn't deposited into the atmosphere as greenhouse gases. It's a bit like saying that growing trees is contributing to climate change because they lock up lots of carbon. It's rubbish.

Mark R
Posts: 630
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 7:41pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby Mark R » 16 Mar 2016, 10:37am

MartinC wrote:
Mark R wrote:The supposed climate change advantages of diesel are now being questioned. e.g.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/18/eu-urged-to-axe-support-for-diesel/...........................


This is a classic piece of the confirmation bias that pervades the argument. The article is saying that the contribution to climate change from diesels is understated because it doesn't account for the carbon locked up in the soot particles produced (by presumably older low tech diesels) but ignores the fact that this carbon isn't deposited into the atmosphere as greenhouse gases. It's a bit like saying that growing trees is contributing to climate change because they lock up lots of carbon. It's rubbish.


You are awfully quick to dismiss these articles as rubbish whilst it is obvious you have little understanding of the issues.

What is the relationship between black carbon from diesels and global warming?

Why not do a bit of reading and improve your understanding of the issues?

Mark R
Posts: 630
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 7:41pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby Mark R » 16 Mar 2016, 10:50am

reohn2 wrote:I've just bought a diesel car,Ford C max 2.0l TDCi, to replace a 1.8l petrol Ford C max because I need the extra power to tow our caravan.
The diesel is returning 50mpg compared to 37mpg for the petrol,I'm using a fifth less fuel,running costs aside,which is the greater polluter?


Unfortunately the diesel is far more polluting at the local level, becuase the toxic elements of the exhaust emissions are orders of magnitude higher.

The following article sums it up pretty well...

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/18/eu-urged-to-axe-support-for-diesel/

Mark R
Posts: 630
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 7:41pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby Mark R » 16 Mar 2016, 11:00am

pwa wrote:
I certainly agree about just driving less. On the subject of LPG, I once worked for a company that had two cars converted to LPG and they broke down regularly from that day on. Skodas with VW petrol engines. LPG isn't so easy to find, either.



I doubt if they are on average any less reliable, although the lack of availabilty in your area would certainly be a dealbreaker.

On the subject of reliability; how many owners of modern diesels have had so much trouble with the particle filter they ended up paying to have it removed? Answer: No one really knows, but probably an awful lot. Yet another element of this public health timebomb....

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby beardy » 16 Mar 2016, 11:03am

That article doesnt actually present a case or create an argument. It just bullet points a collection of rather random and unconnected facts to create an image.

Eg. Japanese (petrol?) cars have 18% lower CO2 emissions, pretty meaningless without context, do the Japs all drive round in small saloon cars rather than the SUV's that are common here?

I do agree with the idea of cutting all subsidies for the use of diesel and petrol.

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby reohn2 » 16 Mar 2016, 11:15am

Mark R wrote:
reohn2 wrote:I've just bought a diesel car,Ford C max 2.0l TDCi, to replace a 1.8l petrol Ford C max because I need the extra power to tow our caravan.
The diesel is returning 50mpg compared to 37mpg for the petrol,I'm using a fifth less fuel,running costs aside,which is the greater polluter?


Unfortunately the diesel is far more polluting at the local level, becuase the toxic elements of the exhaust emissions are orders of magnitude higher.

The following article sums it up pretty well...

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/18/eu-urged-to-axe-support-for-diesel/


I can't see anything in the article that convinces me of that.
I'm not saying the diesel is cleaner,just the article doesn't prove it to me.
-----------------------------------------------------------

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby beardy » 16 Mar 2016, 11:19am

The only pertinent fact that I could find was this
But the briefing says testing in France shows the devices do not work properly on 75% of cars.

Mark R
Posts: 630
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 7:41pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby Mark R » 16 Mar 2016, 11:23am

That article doesnt actually present a case or create an argument. It just bullet points a collection of rather random and unconnected facts to create an image.


Well it's not meant to be a scientific jounal article. I does however point many of the flaws in the rationale for promoting diesels in the first place, e.g petrol vs diesel is niether here nor there from a global warming perspectively but diesel pollutes heinously at the local level.

Eg. Japanese (petrol?) cars have 18% lower CO2 emissions, pretty meaningless without context, do the Japs all drive round in small saloon cars rather than the SUV's that are common here?


I imagine the Japs do drive smaller vehicles, samll crowded country an all that, a bit like us really. They used to have lots of diesels too but they rather sensibly turfed them out. Remember all those Jap import 4x4's and people carriers coming over here in the 1990s?

I do agree with the idea of cutting all subsidies for the use of diesel and petrol.


Amen to that. Let's end this ridiculous situation where people can tax a 10 year old, eyewateringly filthy diesel for just 30 quid.

Mark R
Posts: 630
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 7:41pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby Mark R » 16 Mar 2016, 11:26am

reohn2 wrote:
I can't see anything in the article that convinces me of that.
I'm not saying the diesel is cleaner,just the article doesn't prove it to me.


Hopefully it has made you question the climate change rationale for favoring diesels?

Mark R
Posts: 630
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 7:41pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby Mark R » 16 Mar 2016, 11:39am

beardy wrote:The only pertinent fact that I could find was this
But the briefing says testing in France shows the devices do not work properly on 75% of cars.



Yep, and here in the UK an unkown number of modern diesels driving round with the particle filter removed. Yet according to the manufacturers the particulate problem was fixed years ago...

pwa
Posts: 13900
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby pwa » 16 Mar 2016, 11:47am

Mark R wrote:
beardy wrote:The only pertinent fact that I could find was this
But the briefing says testing in France shows the devices do not work properly on 75% of cars.



Yep, and here in the UK an unkown number of modern diesels driving round with the particle filter removed. Yet according to the manufacturers the particulate problem was fixed years ago...


I've no idea how many modern diesels actually cut out particulates quite as they are meant to. But it is my impression, as a road user, that black smoke (particulates) from the back of diesel cars is much less common than it used to be.

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby reohn2 » 16 Mar 2016, 11:54am

Mark R wrote:
reohn2 wrote:
I can't see anything in the article that convinces me of that.
I'm not saying the diesel is cleaner,just the article doesn't prove it to me.


Hopefully it has made you question the climate change rationale for favoring diesels?


Surprisingly I don't favour diesels,it's the first one I've had other than a Transit for work.
I bought the diesel because of it's power output,the car itself satisfies all our needs the 1.8 petrol wasn't powerful enough for our new caravan,and there wasn't any petrol version available that was.
We could open up the debate regarding towing,etc,etc,,etc.
But we needed a vehicle to do a job,I looked around and the 2.0l diesel Cmax was the only one that was capable in the price range plus my fuel costs are 20% less and VED is £50pa less.
Where does the fault lie in my available choice?
-----------------------------------------------------------

Mark R
Posts: 630
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 7:41pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby Mark R » 16 Mar 2016, 12:15pm

reohn2 wrote:
Surprisingly I don't favour diesels,it's the first one I've had other than a Transit for work.
I bought the diesel because of it's power output,the car itself satisfies all our needs the 1.8 petrol wasn't powerful enough for our new caravan,and there wasn't any petrol version available that was.
We could open up the debate regarding towing,etc,etc,,etc.
But we needed a vehicle to do a job,I looked around and the 2.0l diesel Cmax was the only one that was capable in the price range plus my fuel costs are 20% less and VED is £50pa less.
Where does the fault lie in my available choice?


The government for promoting diesel vehicles I suppose. They could easily get rid of the financial incentives then presumably manufactures would start offering more alternatives.

Mark R
Posts: 630
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 7:41pm

Re: Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air polluti

Postby Mark R » 16 Mar 2016, 12:28pm

pwa wrote:
I've no idea how many modern diesels actually cut out particulates quite as they are meant to. But it is my impression, as a road user, that black smoke (particulates) from the back of diesel cars is much less common than it used to be.


There is no doubt that is true but PM10 and smaller, the stuff that public health profs are really worried about, cannot be seen with the naked eye.