# diesel pollution



## mustang1 (23 Oct 2014)

Seems like whenever I read anything about diesel pollution, much is made of cars polluting the roads. In my experience the cars are pretty clean: clean(er) engine, stop/start mode, etc.

The real pollutants I see are
Buses
White vans
HGV

And with buses going towards hybrid tech, I've only noticed one bus that exhibited this feature. I noticed because when it accelerated, it made no noise until it reached about 15mph which in though was wonderful. The bad news is I've seen hybrid buses which never seem to be in electric mode.

Seems like all the anti a pollution measures are proposed against cars which IMO do not need them. It sthe other vehicles that are polluting but whoever controls these things doesn't have the bite to tackle the real polluters.


----------



## young Ed (23 Oct 2014)

does my dads blue van with a 2.5l engine not pollute then?
i will still be driving an incredibly polluting landy at 17  and won't be thinking about electric, hydrogen (the way forward IMO), or LPG any time soon
Cheers Ed


----------



## Drago (23 Oct 2014)

My knackered old pick up truck emits only chanel number 5 from the tailpipe.


----------



## the_mikey (23 Oct 2014)

I hate driving behind tired old Ford Transit pickups, they seem to spew out thick black stuff without exception.


----------



## Brandane (23 Oct 2014)

mustang1 said:


> Seems like all the anti a pollution measures are proposed against cars which IMO do not need them. It sthe other vehicles that are polluting but whoever controls these things doesn't have the bite to tackle the real polluters.


 A lorry weighing 40 tonnes will do about 7mpg.. A diesel car weighing 1 tonne will do about 50mpg.. Who are the real polluters then?


----------



## classic33 (23 Oct 2014)

young Ed said:


> does my dads blue van with a 2.5l engine not pollute then?
> i will still be driving an incredibly polluting landy at 17  and won't be thinking about electric, hydrogen (the way forward IMO), or LPG any time soon
> Cheers Ed


Hydrogen isn't exactly new as a fuel for cars. Got a taxi in the 80's in Dublin, powered by Hydrogen.
Also you can actually refill the gas tank/bottle of your car at many petrol stations.


----------



## young Ed (24 Oct 2014)

classic33 said:


> Hydrogen isn't exactly new as a fuel for cars. Got a taxi in the 80's in Dublin, powered by Hydrogen.
> Also you can actually refill the gas tank/bottle of your car at many petrol stations.


never said it's new but not very mainstream yet
never seen hydrogen taps at petrol stations yet but maybe i'm just not looking hard enough
if i were to build a hydrogen car i would build a water splitter thingy at home so i could just refill at home 
Cheers Ed


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

Hydrogens a chimaera at the present state of affairs. It simply moves emissions from the tailpipe to a coal burning power station. 

I run my old heap on veg, which cuts particulate emissions by about 75%. So low that at the last test Mr MOT had to keep resetting the machine because the particulate smoke levels were so low they weren't triggering it. Who would've thought being tight would have other benefits?


----------



## BrianEvesham (24 Oct 2014)

mustang1 said:


> The real pollutants I see are
> Buses
> White vans
> HGV
> ...





Brandane said:


> A lorry weighing 40 tonnes will do about 7mpg.. A diesel car weighing 1 tonne will do about 50mpg.. Who are the real polluters then?


Or to put it another way, one 40 tonne truck with a payload of say 26 tonnes can do the same work as 26 small Vans.
One double deck bus carrying 70 passengers replaces 70 cars!
So who IS polluting more per tonne/person being transported ?


----------



## albion (24 Oct 2014)

London is becoming like Beijing and is bad for your health mainly because of diesel.
The diesel particulate filter will not 'regenerate' in the city so instead noxiously offloads it all into London. (who hasn't had to backtrack or cover their mouth for an accelerating diesel car?)

With up to 50% of many cars now diesel it is becoming catastrophic for Londoners. Its almost enough to say sod it, I'll have a fag.


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

If a particulate filter doesn't regenerate it simply blocks. The cough of soot is usually due to either big miles wear and tear, poor maintenance, or inappropriate use of a diesel car...such as regular use in a low speed urban environment, where what little matter that does get past the filter settles in the exhaust and gets blown into your lungs when they do eventually floor it.


----------



## young Ed (24 Oct 2014)

BrianEvesham said:


> Or to put it another way, one 40 tonne truck with a payload of say 26 tonnes can do the same work as 26 small Vans.
> One double deck bus carrying 70 passengers replaces 70 cars!
> So who IS polluting more per tonne/person being transported ?


in actual fact most almost all vans will have a 1.5 or more ton payload
and our car, like most can take 5 people (and often does) but many now days will take 7 or 8
Cheers Ed


----------



## BrianEvesham (24 Oct 2014)

young Ed said:


> in actual fact most almost all vans will have a 1.5 or more ton payload
> and our car, like most can take 5 people (and often does) but many now days will take 7 or 8
> Cheers Ed


I was taking a simplified look at it @young Ed to make the point that they are both doing more work than there smaller counterparts for the Amount of pollution produced.


----------



## albion (24 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> ...or inappropriate use of a diesel car...such as regular use in a low speed urban environment, where what little matter that does get past the filter settles in the exhaust and gets blown into your lungs when they do eventually floor it.


Yes, likely exactly why London gets a big load of the lung destroyer big time. Remove diesel and I bet London meets air quality standards easy.

The saddest thing is that the proposal is to wait 6 years.before doing anything about it.
On a bad day it is compared to smoking 60 cigarettes.


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

Of course, pollution can be linked economy - burn more crap and your exhaust will expel more rubbish. So this is an interesting angle...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/11146868/Smallest-cars-worse-for-fuel-economy.html


----------



## Profpointy (24 Oct 2014)

Brandane said:


> A lorry weighing 40 tonnes will do about 7mpg.. A diesel car weighing 1 tonne will do about 50mpg.. Who are the real polluters then?



The lorry will be carrying maybe 30t of stuff, whilst the car will be carrying typically one 80kg bloke. So what's the pollution per tonne transported?

edit - brian above beat me to it


----------



## albion (24 Oct 2014)

over 50% of all cars registered in Britain are now diesel, up from 23% in 2002. One reason is that cities and government have offered tax incentives for diesels.
A 2011 test by government to measure emissions from vehicles in everyday use concluded that, while petrol emissions had improved by 96%, "emissions of NOx [nitrogen oxide] from diesel cars and light goods vehicles have not decreased for the past 15-20 years.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/mar/19/uk-air-pollution-health-crisis

The lobbyists are always in control.


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

What about the other pollution related figure for lorries? The energy expended and pollution created in their manufacturer and disposal? Their average lifespan? The damage they do to the roads that requires energy intensive and environmentally tragic repairs? What about young Eds smoke old Land Rover, which might last 40 or 50 years? The relatively low emissions Prius, which by the time it has been manufactured in Japan and shipped to a showroom floor in London has already accounted for more emissions than a home grown SUV from manufacture, through 100,000 miles of motoring, and disposal? The problem is far to complex and subtle to hold up an isolated example of one vehicles MPG and make narrow comparisons.


----------



## BrianEvesham (24 Oct 2014)

No, but it's a start.


----------



## GrasB (24 Oct 2014)

From my observation larger capacity N/A petrol engines do best around town unless you have the lightest of right foots. The problem with small petrol engines is that most are now using quite high pressure turbos which drink fuel at relatively low throttle inputs. Superchargers are better as they don't need nearly as much fuel to calm down knock bit then they get hit more by the standard test cycles. Manufactures play about with the throttle mappings to give non-liner responses but simply drivers go for the same acceleration rather than the same throttle input as a % of the throttle motion. Performance cars can't have as radical a throttle ramp as a lower powered car because you end up with a throttle switch rather than something variable, this in turn pulls the emissions levels closer to reality. 

This is why I can get 29-31mpg from a supercharged 7l V8 around town, about the same as a 2.0 turbo engine & not much worse than a 1.2l TSI Polo.


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

BrianEvesham said:


> No, but it's a start.


it's a distraction. Unless you include every factor into the comparison it like comparing the sun to the moon, or curing a patient's cancer while ignoring their Ebola.


----------



## albion (24 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> ... The problem is far to complex and subtle...


No.

it is not. Politicans take account of lobbyists when making decisions. And whenever I hear of 2020 etc the intent is often 'nothing is going to change on my watch'.

So why not tax London diesel an extra £10 a day next year? Ken Livingstone would do it I imagine.


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

I was speaking more of the technical and scientific problem.

The human problem is indeed very simple.


----------



## BrianEvesham (24 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> it's a distraction. Unless you include every factor into the comparison it like comparing the sun to the moon, or curing a patient's cancer while ignoring their Ebola.


I disagree but I'm not going to argue with you. Just giving my opinion


----------



## DWiggy (24 Oct 2014)

Diesels are fine as long as they are serviced regularly it would seem a lot dont get serviced as often as they should,from experience nearly all diesels car/vans new/old that put their foot down when going up a hill leave a trail of black soot that lingers....


----------



## young Ed (24 Oct 2014)

DWiggy said:


> Diesels are fine as long as they are serviced regularly it would seem a lot dont get serviced as often as they should,from experience nearly all diesels car/vans new/old that put their foot down when going up a hill leave a trail of black soot that lingers....


not seen a mercedes sprinter of the new type (only made in diesel) smoke black
they use special technology to ensure as clean and complete a burn as possible and have a dpf and everything else like that
one thing they don't like and can cause black smoke and the DPF to pack up is running at a normal idle, fopr this reason if i were to ever have a diesel with a DPF i would either adjust the idle in the proper way or fit a little bracket and a adjuster/stop screw just above the accelerator so that it idled at a higher than normal RPM as this is better for the DPF, gives a better burn, and reduces black smoke
Cheers Ed


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

Don't Mercs now use a urea based DPF system, can regen whenever required and not just at high engine temps?


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

And they wonder why so may people are sticking to diesel?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...ric-car-infrastructure-falling-into-ruin.html


----------



## GrasB (24 Oct 2014)

[QUOTE 3344879, member: 45"]Our 1.2tsi does 40+ around town.[/QUOTE]
But that'll be heavily driver dependent. I was comparing the same driver (my wife) in the same conditions. She was getting mid-30s out of the 1.2 TSI polo we hired/leased. Also I noticed that the trip computer was reading about 4mpg high on that car, about the same over-estimation the lease cars we had.


----------



## GrasB (24 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> Don't Mercs now use a urea based DPF system, can regen whenever required and not just at high engine temps?


Along with almost every EU6 diesel getting type approval.


----------



## Smurfy (24 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> Hydrogens a chimaera at the present state of affairs. It simply moves emissions from the tailpipe to a coal burning power station.
> 
> I run my old heap on veg, which cuts particulate emissions by about 75%. So low that at the last test Mr MOT had to keep resetting the machine because the particulate smoke levels were so low they weren't triggering it. Who would've thought being tight would have other benefits?


May I ask what type of veg oil? And didn't veg oil prices rocket to the same price as diesel as soon as the supermarkets and wholesalers realised that people were filling their fuel tanks rather than their deep fat fryers?


----------



## GrasB (24 Oct 2014)

Well I didn't drive the polo in town... ever! 

It's also probably worth noting that the CanAM is probably the car which defines her default acceleration levels. So a slight whiff of the throttle in that might have been 50% WOT in the in the Polo.


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

The bulk are still EOYLS based systems.


----------



## the_mikey (24 Oct 2014)

Brandane said:


> A lorry weighing 40 tonnes will do about 7mpg.. A diesel car weighing 1 tonne will do about 50mpg.. Who are the real polluters then?



Without getting too philosophical it depends what is causing the lorry to weigh 40 tonnes.

Also is 40 diesel cars at 50 mpg each is collectively 1.25mpg?


----------



## young Ed (24 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> Don't Mercs now use a urea based DPF system, can regen whenever required and not just at high engine temps?


not sure, my dads mercedes sprinter van regens when and as it wants and the revs go up a bit and the engine temp shoots right up and then drops back down along with the revs when regen is complete
Cheers Ed


----------



## hennbell (24 Oct 2014)

Here in Canada we have lots of diesel trucks and people like to modify them to put out hugh plumes of black smoke. Google "rolling coal" and you will see what I mean.


----------



## the_mikey (24 Oct 2014)

hennbell said:


> Here in Canada we have lots of diesel trucks and people like to modify them to put out hugh plumes of black smoke. Google "rolling coal" and you will see what I mean.



I did Google it, I don't swear often but that made me swear. Seriously, there's not much hope for the future if that's the sort of thing people are aspiring to, "sh!t for brains" comes to mind..


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

Good grief! Why on earth do that?


----------



## classic33 (24 Oct 2014)

the_mikey said:


> I did Google it, I don't swear often but that made me swear. Seriously, there's not much hope for the future if that's the sort of thing people are aspiring to, "sh!t for brains" comes to mind..


Say what you really mean!


----------



## hennbell (24 Oct 2014)

the_mikey said:


> I did Google it, I don't swear often but that made me swear. Seriously, there's not much hope for the future if that's the sort of thing people are aspiring to, "sh!t for brains" comes to mind..


 
The trucks are very often $80,000+ Heavy Duty pick ups driven by local oil rig workers or "Rig Pigs". It is done to show off just how much money they make, and how little money means to them.


----------



## Drago (24 Oct 2014)

Bloody pick up truck drivers.

Oh, wait....


----------



## Brandane (24 Oct 2014)

albion said:


> With up to 50% of many cars now diesel it is becoming catastrophic for Londoners. Its almost enough to say sod it, I'll have a fag.


It's almost enough to say sod it, I'll stay away from London .


----------



## albion (25 Oct 2014)

Strangely I semi recall that I was cycling around central London when all cars were banned.
Not for pollution but some big event that eludes me.

I wonder, how many of the population there would object to odd/even days just for weekends ?


----------



## albion (25 Oct 2014)

Are more drivers the answer?
The government just cut the rice of the driving license.

I guess with an election around every corner there is little room for austerity.


----------



## Smurfy (25 Oct 2014)

Good grief! This plumbs new levels of anti-social behaviour!

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbAhfThNoco


----------



## byegad (25 Oct 2014)

Brandane said:


> It's almost enough to say sod it, I'll stay away from London .



FTFY


----------



## Racing roadkill (25 Oct 2014)

I hate diesel with a passion. The stuff from the pumps acts like tear gas, the burnt stuff from the exhaust isn't much better. I got cut up by a bloody diesel car on a ride last week. The knobber was sat in front of me, going no faster than I wanted to, and choking me to death in the process. The devil's fuel.


----------



## Drago (25 Oct 2014)

Get a whiff of my diesel and you'll be left feeling hungry.


----------



## classic33 (26 Oct 2014)

In tractor pulling competitions, isn't it(diesel) injected into the exhausts. Thus providing flames as well?


----------



## Drago (26 Oct 2014)

I drive a pickup, does that make me a numbskull?

I'm not intro cars, buy my transport solely for practical attributes. The large front cabin suit me well - I can't drive a focus if the drivers door is closed - and the rear bed is ideal for bicycles or my wife's wheelchair.

I've converted it to run on veg, so the emissions are far cleaner than any diesel with over 3/4 less particulates, and its closer to carbon-neutral than any commercially available car by a huge margin. It also means I can fuel it for 65p/L, so at low 30s to the gallon it costs less than a Nissan Micra to run.

So who's a numbskull?


----------



## Dave the Smeghead (26 Oct 2014)

I cannot believe this "rolling coal" thing. I am almost too flabbergasted for words. They even think its fun to put their own heads in it - hopefully significantly shortening their lives in the process.
Lets hope the "craze" never comes here; mind you with price of our fuel I can't see many being able to afford it!


----------



## screenman (26 Oct 2014)

Drago, I have this picture of you shoving carrots into the filler cap.


----------



## albion (26 Oct 2014)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...estimate-pollution-pumped-out-by-diesels.html

It pretty much says that in London each diesel car is 3 times over the maximum actually allowed.
"emit around three times more NOx pollution in congested traffic than is permitted in current European emissions tests"


----------



## ClichéGuevara (26 Oct 2014)

Quite a few years ago, the company I worked for gave me an old diesel with a side exhaust to drive. It was a proper heap and I hadn't gone far when I turned round to take it to the garage because it was ridiculously noisy and smoky. 
On the way back, I got caught at a level crossing, and as is my habit, switched off the engine. It was only as the barriers lifted and I fired up and checked mirrors etc before moving, I noticed the Miami Vice type in the open topped car next to me.
His white car had a big black ring on the side, and he was covered in black bits, as was the inside of his car.

Now kids, it's wrong, it's neither big nor clever and it was an accident...but I must confess, I was too busy laughing to apologise. I'm sure that makes me a bad person.


----------



## GrasB (26 Oct 2014)

[QUOTE 3347475, member: 9609"]Black smoke is poor incomplete burning usually because the mix is too high (lack of oxygen) but weirdly does not seem to affect performance. (providing there is not too little oxygen (obviously)) When pumps were adjustable things, we used to try and get them to run a little back at full power, least you knew it was getting enough fuel.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, on my Alfa I was running over 140bhp/l with the slightest puff of black smoke when the throttle was cracked (nearly) wide open when starting from off-boost. This was a known over-fuleing issue that's impossible to fix (intake manifold airflow mass trailed pre-turbo airflow mass as the air stacked up between the primary & secondary turbos momentarily)



albion said:


> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...estimate-pollution-pumped-out-by-diesels.html
> 
> It pretty much says that in London each diesel car is 3 times over the maximum actually allowed.
> "emit around three times more NOx pollution in congested traffic than is permitted in current European emissions tests"


Standard EU tests are broken & don't represent real world driving shocker!.. oh sorry we've know this for god knows how many years


----------



## Recycle (26 Oct 2014)

mustang1 said:


> Seems like whenever I read anything about diesel pollution, much is made of cars polluting the roads. In my experience the cars are pretty clean: clean(er) engine, stop/start mode, etc.


 A well maintained diesel engine on average has a more efficient combustion stroke than its petrol equivalent, but the diesel has a lot of nasty additives which after combustion are released into the air as carcinogenic particles < 10 microns. This is dangerous because particulate matter < 10 microns is not commonly produced by nature so we haven't evolved effective ways of filtering it from our lungs. These carcinogens are inhaled deep into the lungs, and particles < 2 microns pass through the lungs into the blood.


----------



## Nortones2 (26 Oct 2014)

Recycle said:


> A well maintained diesel engine on average has a more efficient combustion stroke than its petrol equivalent, but the diesel has a lot of nasty additives which after combustion are released into the air as carcinogenic particles < 10 microns. This is dangerous because particulate matter < 10 microns is not commonly produced by nature so we haven't evolved effective ways of filtering it from our lungs. These carcinogens are inhaled deep into the lungs, and particles < 2 microns pass through the lungs into the blood.


The same applies to petrol cars. The sub-2 micron particulates are as prevalent in petrol if not more so. Euro 6 will require particulate filters for petrol too. Diesel is picked on because of the obvious cloud from older engines. Petrol is not s o blatant, and the technology to measure superfine particulates has been slow to develop.


----------



## Drago (27 Oct 2014)

screenman said:


> Drago, I have this picture of you shoving carrots into the filler cap.


being a cyclist I don't drive many miles. Once a month I go to Costco and buy 40-60 litres of veg. The Missus feels hugely embarrassed as I stand in Costco car park pouring it into the tank giving a cheery and cheeky wave for the astonished onlookers.


----------



## hennbell (27 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> I drive a pickup, does that make me a numbskull?
> 
> I'm not intro cars, buy my transport solely for practical attributes. The large front cabin suit me well - I can't drive a focus if the drivers door is closed - and the rear bed is ideal for bicycles or my wife's wheelchair.
> 
> ...


 
The numbskull would be the people who take beutifully tuned, clean running trucks and pay money to have them belch black smoke. The truck is not the issue the person driving it is.


----------



## Smurfy (27 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> being a cyclist I don't drive many miles. Once a month I go to Costco and buy 40-60 litres of veg. The Missus feels hugely embarrassed as I stand in Costco car park pouring it into the tank giving a cheery and cheeky wave for the astonished onlookers.


Gotta be careful of sludge if you do that!
http://www.vegetableoildiesel.co.uk/mybbforum/showthread.php?tid=32111


----------



## Drago (27 Oct 2014)

Yeah, don't worry, very frequent oil changes. Been running various vehicles this way since 2002 with no problems. Sadly, the time will one day come when there are no suitable IDI diesels left for me to use.


----------



## Smurfy (27 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> Yeah, don't worry, very frequent oil changes. Been running various vehicles this way since 2002 with no problems. Sadly, the time will one day come when there are no suitable IDI diesels left for me to use.


Very frequent? Is that 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000? I'm tempted, but too worried about sludge. to try it yet.


----------



## mustang1 (27 Oct 2014)

A guy I know who has a diesel car and removed the DPF told me the dpf is not required in suburban areas (where he loves), its only required in stop/go traffic. I think he was trying to justify chipping his car and removing the DPF. I thought that was an MOT requirement these days.

Interesting to hear a DPF will be required on petrol cars with Euro 6 standards, I had no idea. One reason I didn't buy diesel is coz of the dpf. I need to re-analyze.


----------



## Drago (28 Oct 2014)

YellowTim said:


> Very frequent? Is that 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000? I'm tempted, but too worried about sludge. to try it yet.


3000 miles. The standard interval on my old warhorse is only 4500 miles anyway, so it's by no means onerous.

DPF has to be present for the MOT but there's no viable means of testing them so its a visual inspection only, so a lot of people hollow them out. Same with cats on diesels.


----------



## Smurfy (28 Oct 2014)

Drago said:


> 3000 miles. The standard interval on my old warhorse is only 4500 miles anyway, so it's by no means onerous.
> 
> DPF has to be present for the MOT but there's no viable means of testing them so its a visual inspection only, so a lot of people hollow them out. Same with cats on diesels.


Mine's old, I think it only has a catalyst, and no DPF. I've certainly heard of people ramming the whole lot out with a metal bar to improve efficiency.


----------



## stowie (29 Oct 2014)

Diesel cars are rubbish town cars. Notwithstanding the debate on particulates etc. they are mechanically rather fragile given all the gubbins that they now have to manage emissions. I have a Vauxhall where the swirl flaps - a half baked invention to try to manage emissions / power at various revs - had decided to come adrift (they get gunged up by that other amazing invention, the EGR) and cause merriment in the engine block. Luckily it was under warranty and a new manifold, turbo and engine rebuild sorted it. But if you think this is only applicable to things like Vauxhalls, BMW have had a very similar problem in the past, with BMW seemingly taking little responsibility when the bits went through the engine. All this is because they are adding in delicate parts at lowest cost and then people are driving their cars such short distances that they get gunged up.

All of this is hotly debated online, with little thought given to the fact that it might be better to simply not drive ridiculously short distances in crowded cities in the first place.


----------



## mgarl10024 (30 Oct 2014)

mustang1 said:


> Buses



I've often wondered about this. I started off smug that I got the bus to work with my green credentials intact, but over time started to wonder when I noticed how most of the buses - were old; were heavy (11 tonnes for a double decker); would belch out smoke when pulling away; would stop/start frequently; would idle when waiting at stops; etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_transport#Buses suggests that they are still better but not by as much as you'd think (at least in the US).


----------



## Feastie (1 Nov 2014)

What about Taxis?

If Boris made some kind of decree that all taxis had to be electric (and compensated the cab men for this), I think it would make London SO much nicer air-wise. They have some kind of different fuel that really stinks and there's something in it that sets off my asthma like nothing else.


----------



## albion (1 Nov 2014)

Electric, Boris and TFL will have wiped out the vast majority of traditional London taxis within a year or two.
Could it be that their OTT support of unregulated Uber happens to be another war on unions ?

They wont be electric, they will all become clapped out bangers in the fashionably new, capitalist race to the bottom.


----------



## albion (9 Jan 2016)

So, they solved the Oxford Street problem by breaking the meter apparatus!
Putney now gets to be 'the biggest public health catastrophe since the Black Death'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...on-Putney-reached-maximum-levels-morning.html
But luckily we can ignore all this because Wandsworth is to be declared a low emission zone some time in the long distant future.

Big oil has an interesting diesel/petrol battle between CO2 flooding the world and NOX destroying peoples respiratory systems.


----------



## ufkacbln (9 Jan 2016)

A couple of years ago during one of the "fuel strikes" it was shown that some drivers could increase their mpg by 20 - 25% with the simple expedient of improving their driving, which in turn would decrease the pollution they cause

There is also the question of how many car journeys are actually necessary

All of this is pollution, and suggesting that we can take action on diesel, yet let the petrol users sit back smugly and imagine thay are somehow not part of the big problem is really rather counter-productive

Forget diesel and concentrate on the whole problem of inappropriate driving and inappropriate use of vehicles


----------



## ClichéGuevara (10 Jan 2016)

Drago said:


> I drive a pickup, does that make me a numbskull?
> 
> I'm not intro cars, buy my transport solely for practical attributes. The large front cabin suit me well - I can't drive a focus if the drivers door is closed - and the rear bed is ideal for bicycles or my wife's wheelchair.
> 
> ...



Does that include the input from veg oil production?


----------



## Drago (10 Jan 2016)

If one went full circle and powered the machinery with veg oil too, then yes.

Alas, I've gone petrol now with both cars but Cuno is right. I use it as little as possible, and drive it as economically as possible, so even in my current 4x4 I'm probably chucking out less crap annually over 2500 miles or so than the average mileage electric car user is responsible for.


----------



## MoultonDan (13 Jan 2016)

Biggest problem with diesels is the ice like slick it leaves on the road from seemingly over filled trucks and vans!


----------

