albion
Guru
Yes, it made sense though quite obviously not for long. Things will quickly change....It makes economic sense to do so so while I make fun of diesel cars, I totally get it.
Next year ?
Yes, it made sense though quite obviously not for long. Things will quickly change....It makes economic sense to do so so while I make fun of diesel cars, I totally get it.
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.
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.
My esteemed employersI work for Clarksons, who do you work for ?
VW are in serious trouble. It's interesting that they were caught in the US - Californian pollution limits are very strict and it would seem that the testing is better than what we have in the EU. We know that very few cars meet the latest Euro 6 standard: it's time manufacturers were named and shamed.
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...-in-breach-of-eu-pollution-rules-report-finds