Diesel pollutes; shocker!

[w00hoo_kent]

I was more hoping for a reduction in my VED; but that could be offset by an increase in yours!
Re your claim that you pay more for fuel; well that probably isn't the norm as diesel cars get more mpg, so for an equivalent mileage petrol cars use more fuel and therefore pay more.
Overall though, it is supposedly the case that diesels are more expensive to run, unless you are doing high mileages.

Not so much the case any more, a frugal petrol engine car will happily match a less economically minded diesel one. Most diesel's are a bit more bullet proof than the equivalent petrol, although again that's changing a bit with modern diesel design. It's a very murky situation.

 

[Piemaster]

Its shipping thats the real issue.

Old article. IMO annex VI covers air pollution from ships. If you can wade through it, I do it for a living and they seem to make it as complicated as possible to implement. Newer engines are a lot better plus the residual fuel oils being referred to are only allowed to be burned outside special areas - basically in the middle of oceans. Within them (such as North Sea and around Europe) its all ultra low sulphur fuels. There is quite often local national laws layered on top of it as well.
Plus shipping is still a lot more efficient for transport than anything else. As with those big Maersk ships 15,200 containers would be 15,200 trucks being driven from the far east to europe. Thats a lot of road miles.

 

[mustang1]

The most pollution is see comes from buses (yes I know Boris is tackling the issue but it's a painfully slow process). Much pollution also comes from HGVs. I see a bunch of TNT/FedEx etc trucks making deliveries running on electric or hybrid power. I wish other lorries and HGVs could convert to such kind D's of power. I would leave tractors alone because there are hardly any around but those polluting taxis need a move to hybrid power.

We can't JUST tackle the private motorist without tackling the other vehicles too.

Oh as an aside, what qualifications do politicians have that they can make a case for promoting diesel, then demoting diesel and so on? Weren't they promoting diesel only to comply with EU regs of lower carbon emissions? Shouldn't we talk about carbon credits too where a polluting nation can buy credits from a less polluting nation, thereby continuing its economic expansion while limiting the expansion of third world nations? Oh darn I went off topic again.

 

[mustang1]

We already pay more at the pumps- is that not enough of a penalisation for having a diesel?
Hadn't noticed the VED was any less/ more for diesel/ petrol vehicles- they're all banded in together aren't they? (happy to be proved wrong)

Clearly not, because you're still filling!

 

[mustang1]

Like new bikes and stuf? It makes me laugh reading on here about "n+1" and so on (not necessarily you @User) when there is nothing wrong with the 'n' and then imagining that they are being environmentally friendly

+1
The environmentalist bike rider who has umpteen bikes. (Stuff deleted)

Not so much the case any more, a frugal petrol engine car will happily match a less economically minded diesel one. Most diesel's are a bit more bullet proof than the equivalent petrol, although again that's changing a bit with modern diesel design. It's a very murky situation.

While I'm not a fan of diesel cars, I thought a very economical petrol car still isn't as economical as a very economical diesel car.

 

[w00hoo_kent]

While I'm not a fan of diesel cars, I thought a very economical petrol car still isn't as economical as a very economical diesel car.

The problem is that often a not so economical diesel car is chosen - because it is a diesel where a very economical petrol car would be a better choice. As I say, it's all a bit murky. I can ask my mate who works for Ford in the diesel engines testing division for chapter and verse if you want... It's just very rare that anyone ends up comparing apples with apples.

 

[w00hoo_kent]

but those polluting taxis need a move to hybrid power.

Have you seen the proposals for the updated LEZ (or LEZ Max, or SuperLEZ, or whatever they are calling it) in London? Basically the LEZ will remain with the congestion zone becoming a second upgraded LEZ banning a huge raft of vehicles and requiring London taxis to adhere to even more stringent rules. It's a month or two since I read the thing but I think it was something like all taxis hybrid and no more than 5 years old. Of course, full implementation is at least 5 years off and I'm not sure what will happen once Boris is off trying to become PM.

 

[User482]

Interesting that all diesel cars are being grouped together. The newer cars are far less polluting but the major problem in my neck of the woods comes from lorries and vans.

You'd think so, but that's not really true. Despite ever increasingly stringent Euro standards for vehicle emissions, we are not seeing the expected improvements in real world conditions. In fact, some of the devices used to reduce particulates are believed to be responsible for an increase in NO2 emissions.

I work with air quality experts and they tell me the dominant source of pollution in city centres is traffic, in particular diesel cars.

 

[helston90]

Clearly not, because you're still filling!

No choice sadly- need my car, just resent paying more and getting less.

 

[marknotgeorge]

So it seems the tide is turning against diesel cars.
I could never understand why VED was so much less for diesels when you can clearly see the muck coming out their exhausts. So there might be less co2 than petrol cars, but that would appear to be outweighed by carcinogenic particles.
Perhaps now they will increase VED for diesels, while cutting it for sensible sized petrol engines - such as my 1600cc Toyota, Mr Chancellor?

While agreeing with most of your message, I'd like to point out that the VED for a post-2001 car within a specified CO2 band is the same. It's just that diesel versions of a particular model of car generally have lower CO2 emissions. My car, a 2004 Ford Fusion 1.4 diesel is in VED band C (£30 a year). A 1.4 petrol is in band G (£180 a year).

 

[ufkacbln]

You'd do a hell of lot better just giving up meat.

Horses - dual purpose

Use them as transport and then use them as food when you get to the destination - true mixed mode

 

[marknotgeorge]

Horses - dual purpose

Use them as transport and then use them as food when you get to the destination - true mixed mode

Fertilizer for the two veg as well...

 

[Piemaster]

Diesel being a pollutant may well have some positives in banning cars from cities- more pedestrians and bikes!

 

[GrumpyGregry]

The most pollution is see comes from buses (yes I know Boris is tackling the issue but it's a painfully slow process). Much pollution also comes from HGVs. I see a bunch of TNT/FedEx etc trucks making deliveries running on electric or hybrid power. I wish other lorries and HGVs could convert to such kind D's of power. I would leave tractors alone because there are hardly any around but those polluting taxis need a move to hybrid power.

We can't JUST tackle the private motorist without tackling the other vehicles too.

Why not? A double-decker bus transports what? 80 people on the same space that three single-occupancy cars occupy. A double-decker is way more fuel efficient than 80 single-occupancy private cars, and thus less polluting.

 

[ufkacbln]

Diesel being a pollutant may well have some positives in banning cars from cities- more pedestrians and bikes!

Again cosmetics

The real polluters are the commercial vehicles and public transport that are allowed to remain

Even when compared on "passenger miles" buses are worse polluters than cars