Diesel sales down 21.7%

[Jeff DaymanParticipant @jeffdayman43397]

Climate change and vehicle pollution are political playthings as well as a major tax revenue source.

In the western world we pay all sorts of vehicle and fuel taxes reportedly to reduce climate change and fix vehicle pollution. In the meantime, hundreds of millions of people in Asia and the far east continue to use two stroke powered light vehicles and motorcycles and no end in sight. We're all on the same globe, so why are the rules so completely different for vehicle pollution in different regions?

Because our politicians can.

Don't get me wrong, in my opinion everyone in the world should always try to create the least possible pollution and use the most efficient vehicles available, appropriate to their level of income. It's only sensible to try to minimise pollution. Individuals can do their best with that by using common sense and without spurious facts from politicians and pseudo scientists about climate change and political hand wringing/hysteria about pollution.

To keep on track with forum theme: I've reduced stack emissions on my IC models by lean burn tuning, and have reduced my coal usage by half by changing to gas firing on several models.

I feel better already, and am shopping for a green T shirt online. Can't find one that says "nuke the whales" anymore though….

[Antony PowellParticipant @antonypowell28169]

I'm sure your motor is services as it is required its the idiots that don't service their vehicles that are the problem.

As for large ships they all have to be converted to run on Diesel as crude is to be banned or so i read somewhere

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Antony Powell on 06/10/2017 17:01:54:

…

As for large ships they all have to be converted to run on Diesel as crude is to be banned or so i read somewhere

Ships are pretty much diesel already, but they burn cheap bunker oil rather than the stuff we get at the pump. Read all about the Wärtsilä-Sulzer RTA96-C engine; seriously grown-up – it weighs 2300 tons!

Dave

[Mark RandParticipant @markrand96270]

A curious side effect of the vast reduction of sulfur (Correct IUPAC spelling, unfortunately) pollution from Diesel engines and coal fired power stations is that arable farmers now have to use sulfur containing fertilizers to add it back to the soil.

[Mike PooleParticipant @mikepoole82104]

Spent a few days in Devon earlier this week and had to smile when I saw a filling station that sold red diesel.

Mike

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

Clive,

Re Passat & hill climbing.

This was a while ago, perhaps 12 months so maybe I misunderstood him. I had 4 passengers in the petrol Avensis, and due to the way the slope works, I change up at two points where the slope slackens off. The first is from 3rd to 4th, and the second which is at 40mph was from 4th to 6th, missing out 5th. The rpm was about 1800rpm, I think, and it just slowly accelerated up the remaining slope. My friend with the Passat expressed surprise that it did it, from which I got the impression that maybe his wouldn't.

Having said that, I had noticed that he seldom seemed to use 6th. I don't know why, unless it's a hangover from an earlier car where he said outright that 6th was effectively an overdrive for motorway cruising. I'm one of those drivers who like to get up the box asap and when I found that my car was happy doing what it does, running at 40 in 6th, then I do it.

I don't think the Avensis is particularly low geared – 60mph in 6th appears to be around 2200rpm; rated power is at 4500 rpm hence equivalent to 124mph (not that I've ever been anywhere that speed). But it does give the impression of being a big(ish) lazy engine.

Peter G. Shaw

[samuel heywoodParticipant @samuelheywood23031]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 06/10/2017 09:12:26:

Posted by Antony Powell on 06/10/2017 08:43:23:

…

car drivers have always been the easy target yet airlines are allowed to pollute far more in a day than all cars do in a year (roughly)

It's not just the volume that matters, it's where it happens. A problem with cars compared with aircraft is that cars pollute at ground level inside towns and cities. And geography often makes car pollution much worse because many settlements are in poorly ventilated valleys. It's the unhappy concentration of pollution and people together that makes cars a target.

What's really annoying is that the pollution produced by your and my car really is trivial. It's the other 30,000,000 on British roads that need sorting out. My solution is simple: other people must not be allowed to drive.

Dave

Interesting thought that somehow pollution at 36,000ft is less of an issue than ground level?

What goes up…usually ….eventually comes down…somewhere.

Anyone remember Cheynobyl & the eventual,result of radioactive Welsh sheep?

When last i checked,Airlines don't pay tax on fuel~ maybe it's time for them to start making an environmental contribution too?

[vintagengineerParticipant @vintagengineer]

There is nothing wrong with diesel engines per say, it's all down to how little the car makers want to spend on making the engine!

[Mike PooleParticipant @mikepoole82104]

It seems to me that as most diesels seem to be turbocharged these days if the turbo is not spinning fast enough then power is lacking, once the turbo gets going then the power comes in and keeps coming, perhaps we will get some F1 technology and spin up the turbo with an electric motor to get thing started.

Mike

[Brian BParticipant @brianb]

May I remind everyone that Hyundai are developing a Hydrogen fuelled engine which should beat everything else,

they are pollution free and there is no shortage of hydrogen.

Brian Bristoll.

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

Posted by Brian B on 08/10/2017 15:38:03:

 

May I remind everyone that Hyundai are developing a Hydrogen fuelled engine which should beat everything else,

they are pollution free and there is no shortage of hydrogen.

Brian Bristoll.

There might be no shortage of hydrogen locked up as water, but as a free gas it doesn't occur in nature, you have to make it. Most of it is made by reacting steam and methane. This requires energy input, both to heat the methane and make the steam. What's left over is carbon dioxide, and when you burn the hydrogen, either in an IC engine or a fuel cell, you finish up with water. This means you start off with water and methane, and finish up with water and carbon dioxide. To my mind you might as well just burn the methane in an IC engine. I suppose that a fuel cell won't produce NOX, but is it as yet proven technology cheap enough for motor cars? In short, battery and hydrogen fuelled cars are not pollution free (unless they only use renewable energy to make the hydrogen/electricity), they just pump out the pollution somewhere else. Politicians seem too ill educated to work this out.
In case you think I'm being too negative, I've read that Germany uses excess wind power to generate hydrogen which they pump into the gas main. Considering that using gas for space heating is very efficient, that seems like not a bad idea to me.

Edited By duncan webster on 08/10/2017 16:02:32

[Ian HewsonParticipant @ianhewson99641]

I worry more about the population explosion that fuels everything else, how long can we keep up expanding?

Edited By Ian Hewson on 08/10/2017 17:21:49

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

Posted by Ian Hewson on 08/10/2017 17:21:10:

I worry more about the population explosion that fuels everything else, how long can we keep up expanding?

Edited By Ian Hewson on 08/10/2017 17:21:49

Agreed but, short of a nuclear war or a plague, how can we control it?

Russell

[HowiParticipant @howi]

Posted by Russell Eberhardt on 09/10/2017 08:04:40:

Posted by Ian Hewson on 08/10/2017 17:21:10:

I worry more about the population explosion that fuels everything else, how long can we keep up expanding?

Edited By Ian Hewson on 08/10/2017 17:21:49

Agreed but, short of a nuclear war or a plague, how can we control it?

Russell

Nuclear war! Plague! Come on Mr Trump, this is your point in history, the world needs saving from itself.

[Speedy Builder5Participant @speedybuilder5]

The QEII produced more pollution, consumed more fuel per passenger than Concorde.
BobH

[Antony PowellParticipant @antonypowell28169]

What is it Donald trump says Diesels don't kill its Diesel drivers that kill or was it something about guns – It's all a blur

Lets just Nuke North Korea and be done with it !! (whoops Donald again, it's gone all blurred)

Climate change we don't have that in America – worst tornado's on record this year already

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Speedy Builder5 on 09/10/2017 17:13:22:

The QEII produced more pollution, consumed more fuel per passenger than Concorde.
BobH

Depends who you believe. This chap reckons the QE2 did about 45 miles per gallon per passenger at cruising speed. If I got the sums right (and that's a big if), Concorde did about 8 miles per gallon per passenger.

Any other offers? I'm no expert.

Dave

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

With regard to turbocharged diesel engines in cars and trucks, (and many other machines) foe many years, the fuel injection pumps, and now the ECU programs) have boost controls which are adjusted to hold fuel delivery just below the point where smoke is emitted. A smoking diesel is either old or desperately in need of attention.

(Unless you are tractor pulling, where it seems that as long as the driver can see where he's going, it is acceptable!)

For the rest of us, much of the hysteria is generated by the press, for maximum effect, (and minimum understanding of what really happens inside an engine), supported by sections of the political field who look to gain something from it for themselves.

Who else would expect an industry to reduce emissions by a factor of ten within a timescale less than it takes to develop an engine? And to the industry's credit it was achieved!

Although that only encourages politicians to use their ignorance to make even more stupid demands.

Howard

[WearyParticipant @weary]

Just a thought……

Those of you interested in statistics may want to consider that September 2016 was a record-breaking month for car sales in the UK. I would politely suggest that it is not in fact a good comparison month.

You may care to scroll down to the bar-chart on this page which gives a good visual representation of total vehicle sales, of all power-types, this century and the overall trend in that period. Over the longer time-period it appears that all is not as it would seem from the screaming headline reports comparing only the two years 2016 & 2017. Total vehicle sales in 2017 were above those of ten years ago, even though they were exceeded by the years 2015 & 2016.

Those of you actually interested in the raw data can access sales numbers by type of vehicle. petrol, diesel, other, over the longer period by searching.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics eh?

Regards, & happy comparing,

Phil

Edited By Weary on 09/10/2017 20:12:35

[WearyParticipant @weary]

Apologies to the statistically minded, and others too – of course!

Annual new car registration bar-chart here.

Shows the cyclical nature of market and trend since turn of century nicely.

(Had too many statistics pages open earlier so confused my links, and too late to edit posting)

Phil

[FarmboyParticipant @farmboy]

Interesting article here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/how_toxic_is_your_car_exhaust

Worth scrolling to the end of a rather long page to see the conclusion.

[Author]

Posts