Yet my diesel Astra kicks out less emissions than my old petrol Vectra did.
154 g/km v 192 g/km.
I can also remember diesels from a few years ago leaving a sooty mark half way up the rear bumper and even on the boot or hatch where the exhaust would belch out all kinds of nasties.
You don't tend to see that any more. Even the chrome tail pipe on the end of my exhaust doesn't get sooted up.
|
>> Yet my diesel Astra kicks out less emissions than my old petrol Vectra did.
>>
>> 154 g/km v 192 g/km.
That's the problem! Everyone thinking that because the CO2 levels are low, that the car isn't polluting. Its the other pollutants in diesel emissions which cause the issue
|
The Telegraph report doesn't make clear the distinction between CO2 emissions, which are a global problem, and NOx and particulates, which cause problems local to where they are emitted.
The rest of the article is pure speculation. All the recent updates in standards have been applied by requiring new vehicles to conform and by excluding older ones (Euro 3 diesels, for example) from certain sensitive areas. I'd be amazed if this one went any other way.
|
A press summary of the judgement is here:
www.supremecourt.uk/decided-cases/docs/UKSC_2012_0179_PressSummary.pdf
It contains a link to the full version.
The Telegraph's library picture of the Supreme Court Justices is a few years out of date. It shows the former President Lord Phillips (a noted Bromptoneer) and misses out altogether Lord Carnwath who wrote the lead decision in this case. The second judge from left looks like the late Lord Rodger of Earlsferry who dies in 2011. I suspect it dates from the court's move to Middlesex Guildhall.
|
Of course, the ironing is that the highest levels of pollution measured tend to be near bus stations and taxi ranks.
Actually enforcing emissions requirements on buses + taxis (most minicabs around my way are 6-8 years old and smoky), and banning waiting with the engine running would go a long way towards helping. Making Euro 6 diesels VAT exempt for taxi-drivers might help too.
"Banning" or penalising diesel drivers will accomplish absolutely sod all.
|
Quite right, Fursty. Ironing can be cruel.
};---)
|
>> Its the other pollutants in diesel emissions which cause the issue
So my DPF isn't stopping them either?
|
>> >> Its the other pollutants in diesel emissions which cause the issue
>>
>> So my DPF isn't stopping them either?
>>
No to isn't. Your DPF does what it says on the tin. It removes diesel particulates by means of a filter.
The pollutant which is causing concern in Nitrogen Dioxide a clear colourless gas. Diesel engines are a major source of this pollutant which has an adverse effect of lung function.
|
The low emmision bandwaggon started long ago.
www.tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/low-emission-zone
|
Diesel cars won't be banned. There are far too many of them already, the populace won't stand for it. Anyway what about buses, lorries and trains which are numerous and essential?
Noted yet again yesterday when the garage man came to collect me to get the jalopy that 3 series BMW diesels are rapid and refined. I'd love one if I could afford it.
I noticed too that the allegedly harsh suspension is nothing of the sort (our drive is good for spotting that sort of thing). Garage man said the reputation stems from use of runflat tyres.
|
Probably cheaper than the next few bills on the old passion wagon, AC:
www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201504142609041/
|
>> Probably cheaper than the next few bills on the old passion wagon, AC
That one is, but it's a bit long in the tooth. I quite fancy the M power one for about £4,000... I think the garage man's example is an M as well, with about 130,000 on it.
|
Even after several years of service, the inside of tailpipes on DPF diesel cars have no deposits and the metals is clean and shiny.
I remember petrol cars with light black soot or tan coloured crusts inside the tailpipes so the modern diesels are MUCH cleaner than petrols were 10+ years ago.
Around here there are 2009 buses where the bodywork is blackened around the exhaust outlet and the floor is thick with soot where they power away from lights and bus stops.
Surely it is these dirty buses and black cabs that need to be phased out?
What about increasing the biodiesel content to B20 as this will drastically reduce these particulates due in part to the oxygenation of the fuel.
Last edited by: Shiny Tailpipes on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 14:22
|
I remember petrol cars with light black soot or tan coloured crusts inside the tailpipes so the modern diesels are MUCH cleaner than petrols were 10+ years ago.
Tan petrol exhaust pipe insides were actually the tetra-ethyl-lead (the lead in leaded petrol) after it has been burnt. If you study a photo of an aeroplane exhaust pipe during World War 2 you'll quite often see a whitish crust as aviation fuel then had exceedingly high levels of lead. Current avgas has much less lead (but still a lot by car standards) and old warplanes get a wash these from time to time so you'll not see the deposits these days.
Last edited by: Slidingpillar on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 16:16
|
>> Noted yet again yesterday when the garage man came to collect me to get the jalopy that 3 series BMW diesels are rapid and refined. I'd love one if I could afford it.
Sorry to bang on, but the garage man's example has auto transmission. Sweet as a nut and immaculate at 130,000... perhaps if looked after the model is good for astronomical mileages.
|
>>Diesel cars won't be banned.
Of course not. But what an excellent "justification" for raising various taxes which impact them.
|
>> >>Diesel cars won't be banned.
>>
>> Of course not. But what an excellent "justification" for raising various taxes which impact them.
>>
Spot on. See my "Emissions bandwagon" post above.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 15:48
|
>> >>Diesel cars won't be banned.
>>
>> Of course not. But what an excellent "justification" for raising various taxes which impact them.
And great justification for makers to produce cars that circumvent taxes and in turn benefit consumers.
|
>> And great justification for makers to produce cars that circumvent taxes and in turn benefit
>> consumers.
>>
The government and its agencies will be inventive in maintaining their income. Anyone remember window taxes ? :-)
www.historyhouse.co.uk/articles/window_tax.html
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 16:11
|
Missed the edit.
An example is the DVLA getting less VED as cars become more C02 efficient. Answer, sell owner info to parking companies turning a blind eye to data protection law.
|
>> An example is the DVLA getting less VED as cars become more C02 efficient. Answer,
>> sell owner info to parking companies turning a blind eye to data protection law.
Is there no end to these conspiracy theories?
Firstly the provision of information does little more than cover it's cost; a fleabite in the context of lost revenue from low CO2 concessions. Secondly, can you explain exactly how data protection law is ignored?
The Information Commissioner is satisfied with the arrangement:
ico.org.uk/for-the-public/dvla/
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 16:34
|
>> The Information Commissioner is satisfied with the arrangement:
>>
And who appoints and pays the Commissioner ?
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 16:40
|
>>
>> And who appoints and pays the Commissioner ?
>>
The Lizard Illuminati of course. Everyone knows that.
|
>And who appoints and pays the Commissioner ?
The ICO is an independent body paid for by all companies who process data.
The Queen appoints the commissioner with advice from the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Justice.
|
"The Queen appoints the commissioner with advice from the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Justice."
Nah, it's the lizards.
|
>> The Queen appoints the commissioner with advice from the Prime Minister and the Secretary of
>> State for Justice.
Thanks, I was about to point that out too. The efect is to make the IC extremely difficult to dismiss. Neither of the two recent incumbents, Christopher Graham and Richard Thomas gave any impression of being government's poodles. Neither were the previous holders of the office but they pre dated FOI legislation so had a different role.
|
>> The Queen appoints the commissioner with advice from the Prime Minister and the Secretary of
>> State for Justice.
>>
Giving you lot a prod with a stick is almost as fast as googling. :-)
|
>>Giving you lot a prod with a stick is almost as fast as googling. :-)
Its mostly because finding something you don't know is not a challenging or time consuming enterprise.
|
>> Its mostly because finding something you don't know is not a challenging or time consuming
>> enterprise.
Hmm. How about "how many American President's wives both wore pink at the State of the Union address and had a French grandparent?"
I'm sure Google could tell me but it wouldn't be very quick.
Or have I intruded on an exchange of veiled minor hostilities and missed the point?
|
|
Ok, maybe I should have said "finding something you don't know but would like to know......"
|
|
P.s. "veiled hostilities "? Where did you get that from?
|
Ok, brain surgery then. After all, it's not exactly rocket science.
Veiled, clearly such that they aren't even there. Don't mind me, la la la, I'm gone.
|
And lets remember what taxation is.
>>The government and its agencies will be inventive in maintaining their income.
What do you mean "their income"? Its our income. Collected for us by various parts of our Government. It is then spent on things considered neccessary by our Government.
Its easy to reduce tax, just spend less. So lets suppose we remove your worry about selling ownership information to parking companies. What do you reckon that brings a year? £1m? Lets go with that.
There's about 30m tax payers in the UK, so each one will save 3p each. Well, that'll help.
Lets reduce something which brings a lot of revenue; VAT.
That brings in about £100bn I think. As I recall, the NHS has a budget of about £100bn as well. There you are then, we can reduce VAT as much as anyone wants, but we will have to cut back on the NHS to pay for. Which will also mean funding an awful lot of redundancy payments and unemployment benefits.
Tax is used to pay for the benefits we say we want. It is not all salted away in a Government Swiss Bank account for retired politicians.
Any tax reduction requires an equal tax increase elsewhere, or a reduction in expenditure.
Its all just moving sun chairs around on the deck of the Titanic as successive governments change taxation up on some and down on others depending on whether they want to please Mail readers or Sun readers, neither of which are capable of understanding the true issues and complexity.
|
>> And lets remember what taxation is.
>>
>> >>The government and its agencies will be inventive in maintaining their income.
>>
>> What do you mean "their income"? Its our income. Collected for us by various parts
>>
>> Any tax reduction requires an equal tax increase elsewhere, or a reduction in expenditure.
>>
>> Its all just moving sun chairs around on the deck of the Titanic as successive
>> governments change taxation up on some and down on others depending on whether they want
>> to please Mail readers or Sun readers, neither of which are capable of understanding the
>> true issues and complexity.
>>
I don't give a stuff that you think that I am too thick to realise what budgeting is. I must be doing something wrong to be a debt free home owner with a newish car on my drive.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 16:53
|
>>I don't give a stuff that you think that I am too thick to realise what budgeting is
Then why comment on it? I presume it is important to you for me to know that you don't care? How sad.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 16:54
|
|
It is as much about the poor management of the publics expectations as anything.
|
"An example is the DVLA getting less VED as cars become more C02 efficient."
The Irish solution was to split the CO2 A, B, C... bands into narrower A1, A2, B1, B2, B3... bands - and put a new, steeply increasing, scale of rates on them.
The end effect was that your post-2008 "clean green" DPF'd diesel family wagon ended up costing as much to tax as the typical pre-2008 Irish family 1.6 petrol car.
You now had to be under 120g Co2/km to qualify for low tax bands - which brought another glut of VRT income when the gullible (sorry, environmentally conscious) changed those DPF'd diesels for greenline/bluetech/hybrid wotsit versions ... mostly of the same cars!
|
As usual, cars and motorists are the easy target. And is it just UK Cash Cow PLC being targeted or do French and German diesels not produce gas?
I wonder if the EU is taking action against Germany since they shut down their nuclear fuelled power stations after the Fukishima incident and have ramped up the use of their coal burning stations. One of the dirtiest in Europe is in Poland which chucks out 37m tonnes of CO2 each year along with poisonous metals such as mercury.
|
As usual, cars and motorists are the easy target.
That's a fatuous argument. There are 29m cars in the UK (plus 6m other vehicles) and, as NoFM points out, 30m taxpayers. Not a 1:1 mapping, of course, but to a first approximation a taxpayer is a car owner/user. And car use is an area of our lives where we tend to have more choices than, say, income or heating. So before you bleat about paying tax to own or use your car, be careful what you wish for; the alternative taxes (and there will be alternative taxes) may be harder to avoid.
|
Although they are inevitable, like death, taxes are loathsome to any reasonable person.
No one in their right mind would pay them willingly. Money down the drain of official greed and incompetence.
Please don't tell me how necessary they are. Heard it all before.
Excuse me. Just off to hear Ed Miliband. Doubtless taxes will be mentioned. But I won't listen to that bit.
|
Diesel cars could be banned ? - VxFan
