Die Diesel

[gavroche]

All the large shipping container ships run on diesel, then diesel trucks/trains are used to move the goods to depots. That's a lot of diesel being used to transport goods around the world and so causing pollution.

Interestingly, Mr Diesel designed his original engine to run on vegetable oil. (Peanuts)

Exactly and they pollute far more than our little cars but nothing is said about them is it? Once again, money talks and money comes first.

 

[NorthernDave]

As with cigarette smoking, people need leadership from politicians to do the right thing, even if this make them unpopular with those it is educating. As others have said, the dangers of diesel have been know for at least the last 4 years, yet absolutely nothing has been done about it. Hopefully after the election and perhaps with the confidence of a large majority Mrs May may do the right thing.


https://www.theguardian.com/environ...s-more-toxic-than-trucks-and-buses-data-shows

It's interesting that you cite cigarettes as an example - for despite all the harm they do, they government are quite happy to let you carry on smoking as long as you pay the tax. Same with alcohol. What is the cost to society of those two?

The reason that "nothing" is done is because there isn't an alternative. Petrol cars aren't massively better, buses and trucks all (pretty much) run on diesel to get goods to shops and for all the hype about electric cars they're still a decade or more from being a solution because there simply isn't the infrastructure there to support them. A few weeks ago, I was loaned an electric courtesy car while mine was in the garage for a service. It was excellent around town, had a range of 100 miles and I was very nearly converted. But the reality hit: there are nowhere near enough charging points - there are only two that I know of in the town I work in and they're both in a supermarket car park with a maximum parking time of two hours. I park on the street at home (terrace house), so I'd have to run an extension lead through the letter box and up the street on a night and hope that A) it reaches the car and B) no-one trips over the lead or unplugs it before it's charged.
And public transport is slow, unreliable, often overcrowded, inflexible and hideously expensive - I know because I've tried and using the bus / train more than doubles not only the time for our commute, but the cost too. We're in the ridiculous position that it's often cheaper locally to take a taxi than a bus, especially if there are two or more of you.

I'll admit, I've got a diesel car and I've got no intention of giving it up until someone can offer me an affordable and workable alternative. It's Euro V with a properly working DPF, it's got stop/start so around town if it's not moving it's not emitting, it's zero rated for VED, it's correctly maintained and, perhaps more importantly, it is used for commuting (most of which is on motorway or fast A roads so the engine is quickly up to temperature) and not much else. Most weekends it doesn't turn a wheel. The local shop is under 10 minutes walk away, a large 24 hour supermarket not much further so why use the car? That is how the problem needs to be tackled in the short term, a groundswell away from using the car for journeys of under a couple of miles.

Don't forget, it's only five years since diesel was pushing £1.50/litre and that didn't stop people buying diesel cars.

 

[snorri]

Exactly and they pollute far more than our little cars but nothing is said about them is it? Once again, money talks and money comes first.

A great deal has been said about pollution from ships, and vast sums spent to reduce that pollution. I can't imagine which shipping industry journals you have been reading which have failed to cover this topic.

 

[Dan B]

"I had financial incentives to buy a diesel, therefore it is fair and moral that I should receive further financial incentives to stop using it". Something about this argument just doesn't seem right to me

 

[nickr]

" Petrol cars aren't massively better, buses and trucks all (pretty much) run on diesel to get goods to shops and for all the hype about electric cars they're still a decade or more from being a solution because there simply isn't the infrastructure there to support them."

Unfortunately are they are
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/27/diesel-engine-fumes-worse-petrol
Diesel fumes are significantly more damaging to health than those from petrol engines, according to research which shows that related air pollution contributes to lung disease, heart attacks, asthma and other respiratory problems.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2158574/Diesel-engine-exhaust-fumes-major-cancer-risk.html
Diesel engine exhaust fumes cause cancer and belong in the same potentially deadly category as asbestos, arsenic and mustard gas, according to the World Health Organisation.

http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk...definitely-cause-cancer-should-we-be-worried/
Today the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) – part of the World Health Organisation – announced that it had reclassified diesel exhaust as a ‘definite carcinogen’ – putting it in its highest category (Category 1).[/QUOTE]

 

[Drago]

Exactly and they pollute far more than our little cars but nothing is said about them is it? Once again, money talks and money comes first.

A lot is said about them, should you choose to take notice. And air transport. Even tanks and other military vehicles have to meet emissions standards.

Several overlapping considerations with shipping...

1. If consumers didn't expect so much cheap junk to spend their money on there wouldn't be so many ships. Think about that next time you order your phone upgrade, even though there's nothing wrong whatsoever with the old one.

2. Fuel per kilogram mile they compare favourably with road transport.

3. Unlike private road transport, there isn't yet a fully viable alternative that is actually cleaner.

4. Large container ships, ULCC's etc, tend to stick to sea routes and its rare they're spotted sat in stationary in rush hour traffic with a lone occupant on board. In addition, because they're not commonly seen on the high street their particulate emissions don't pose anything like the kind of immediate health risk of road transport pollutants.

 

[davidphilips]

I'm close to buying a diesel people carrier at the moment. I'm not 100% it's a good idea now though. Won't be doing mass miles but still be cheaper than a petrol one.

Just be careful buying a diesel as you can run into fun with a diesel if you are not using it for long journeys dpf can play up.

 

[Drago]

Depending on the vehicle, the cost break-even point for diesel is around 15,000 miles per annum.

I don't have a downer on diesels per se. I do have a downer on people who use them regularly for journeys under 7 miles (ie, most people if we're honest) which is where they're at their least economical and most polluting. They need to be properly hot for the anti pollution systems to work and for the combustion-ignition process to work efficiently.

 

[Smokin Joe]

It's interesting that you cite cigarettes as an example - for despite all the harm they do, they government are quite happy to let you carry on smoking as long as you pay the tax.

Because my cigarettes carry a risk only to me, not to anyone else. It is not for the government to manage my personal risks, I can do that for myself.

 

[Drago]

For the motoring that most private citizens do, most of the time, the electric car is already more than viable. How many of us drive more than, say, 120 miles daily?

But people come out with all sorts of tosh to justify stick with ICE. "Every 28 years I take the entire family to visit Aunt Agnes in Thurso", which in their mind justifies driving round in a ton and a half of metal with three, four, for or six seats empty for the other 99% of the time.

People are dying because of the laziness of society, and the willingness of politicians to do anything that might get them kicked off the gravy train. People you know, I know, human beings, losing their lives because others are, by and large, simply greedy consumers and lazy commuters.

 

[Crackle]

The trouble is, diesels exist. Without some kind of scrappage scheme, the problem will just get passed on.

 

[Will Spin]

Because my cigarettes carry a risk only to me, not to anyone else. It is not for the government to manage my personal risks, I can do that for myself.

I don't think so, that's why smoking has been banned in all public spaces, the same philosophy should apply to deisel emissions.

 

[tyred]

Exactly and they pollute far more than our little cars but nothing is said about them is it? Once again, money talks and money comes first.

If you expect to bananas, oranges, tea, coffee and God only knows how many other imported items sitting on the shelves the next time you visit Tesco's you may find difficulty in reducing shipping.

 

[ufkacbln]

For some of us of a certain age we have been through this before.

Many years ago we had lead in the petrol to improve its performance. Then there was research performed and lead became the scapegoat.

Leaded petrol was phased out, unleaded cars had to be taken off the road and the scandal of leads in petrol was the main topic.
Catalytic converters became compulsory and all the ills of the world were resolved

What was kept quiet in this new wonderful world was that the products replacing lead had intact increased pollution because they were photochemically active, and that the emissions of other problematic pollutants such as Benzene had also increased

But the real success story was that the motor lobby had managed to pull off a clever trick.

By making lead the scapegoat they managed to present themselves as having tackled the evil monster, and made car use green again

We should learn from history and not be fooled by the same Charlatan's trick a second time

 

[NorthernDave]

For the motoring that most private citizens do, most of the time, the electric car is already more than viable. How many of us drive more than, say, 120 miles daily?

Quite so, but for the reasons I've given up thread electric cars currently don't work for an awful lot of people.
The infrastructure to charge large numbers of vehicles simply isn't there and it would require huge expense and take many years to put the infrastructure in place.

Just because a shopping centre or supermarket put a couple of charging points in a car park that can hold a thousand cars, it is not enough to address the problem.

In the short term we need to stop people choosing the car as the default option. We've done it, only using the car for necessary journeys - it doesn't require huge effort and it can be done with minimal impact on the day to day stuff.
Our local shop is less than ten minutes walk away - yet most of our neighbours choose to drive there. I can see them getting into their cars on a Sunday morning, as I'm setting off to walk there.
By the time they've driven round there (walking you can cut through on a more direct route), I'm often just behind them in the queue.