Boris goes to war on Diesel
Discussion
kingofdbrits said:
I'm assuming this is a result of the WHO press release on Diesel fumes? Where they've catergorised them as a Cat 1 carcinogen...
Possibly, and if so they ought to be specific and identify 3-NBA and 1,8-DNP as the two most carcingenic chemicals known to science - and they are found in the exhaust emissions of large-engined diesel powered vehicles particularly when the engine is under load, i.e. large diesel engined vehicles which stop-start. This means older diesel buses more than HGVs, and diesel trains. The million quid hydrogen powered 'Boris Buses' don't do this, but they're not cheap.Small diesel engines in cars are not implicated in the same way. The chances of this specificity are slim, it would clearly identify public transport as a problem and petrol engined vehicles including cars as a solution.
shakotan said:
Article said:
The problem is that CO2 isn't the only nasty stuff to spew from the rear of runabouts. Diesel engines, despite recent improvements in filtering technology, emit higher level of nitrous oxide (NOx) and particulates...
No, NITROGEN Oxide, you f
king dumb hack.turbobloke said:
As to Boris and London, any city than bans or restricts cars and relies on buses and diesel taxis will be catapulting itself to a position at or near the top of the urban air pollution league tables, just ask Oxford.
Agree with all the rest of your comments but the above makes no sense at all. How do you work that out?qube_TA said:
shakotan said:
Article said:
The problem is that CO2 isn't the only nasty stuff to spew from the rear of runabouts. Diesel engines, despite recent improvements in filtering technology, emit higher level of nitrous oxide (NOx) and particulates...
No, NITROGEN Oxide, you fking dumb hack.Thanks.
oyster said:
turbobloke said:
As to Boris and London, any city than bans or restricts cars and relies on buses and diesel taxis will be catapulting itself to a position at or near the top of the urban air pollution league tables, just ask Oxford.
Agree with all the rest of your comments but the above makes no sense at all. How do you work that out?
A few years after the Oxford Transport Strategy was implemented, banning cars and encouraging buses to proliferate, this league table appeared in The Guardian.
Top 10 polluted places
1 Oxford
2 Bath
3 Glasgow
4 London, Marylebone Road
5 London, King's Road
6 Exeter
7 London, Hammersmith Broadway
8 Bristol
9 Sheffield
10 London, Brent
A few years ago there was a bus-strike in Leeds, the air quality was considerably better, was a bit curious as it wasn't until it was better that it became so obvious that normally it's fairly horrid.
A lot of them are diesel-hybrid models now, not sure how much better they'll be but having them auto-cut the engine when they're stationary should help.
A lot of them are diesel-hybrid models now, not sure how much better they'll be but having them auto-cut the engine when they're stationary should help.
davepoth said:
Mr GrimNasty said:
Petrol cars are no better, just slightly different types of ****t. Even tyre dust is nasty.
It's the NOx and particulates that are the problem for diesel, and they aren't addressed by the current regulations or tax regime which concentrates on CO2 emissions.I never thought they were that bad or worthy of a the hype surrounding them - until a few days ago when I was gassed by a s
tload of almost pure NOx. It turns into Nitric acid on contact with the moisture in your eyes and throat, and it was one of the least pleasant experiences I've ever had. Anything to reduce the buildup of this stuff in cities gets my vote
audidoody said:
There are any number of cyclists in London who have definitely died "prematurely".
Were the premature deaths you refer to due to air quality alone or at least partly due to a decision to pass (or attempt to pass) a larger vehicle on the left in a narrow gap where visibility may not have been good? If the latter there are various causal factors at play as well as the one indicated above, but not air quality in a deterministic way.Edited by turbobloke on Wednesday 30th July 16:42
qube_TA said:
shakotan said:
Article said:
The problem is that CO2 isn't the only nasty stuff to spew from the rear of runabouts. Diesel engines, despite recent improvements in filtering technology, emit higher level of nitrous oxide (NOx) and particulates...
No, NITROGEN Oxide, you fking dumb hack.turbobloke said:
That's exactly what happened to Oxford as a matter of record, it banned cars from the city centre, busising the city, which then headed straight to the top spot in pollution league tables. Would that help to make any sense of it?! The reasons aren't difficult to work out
A few years after the Oxford Transport Strategy was implemented, banning cars and encouraging buses to proliferate, this league table appeared in The Guardian.
Top 10 polluted places
1 Oxford
2 Bath
3 Glasgow
4 London, Marylebone Road
5 London, King's Road
6 Exeter
7 London, Hammersmith Broadway
8 Bristol
9 Sheffield
10 London, Brent
Out of interest, TB, where was Oxford in the list before the OTS was brought in?A few years after the Oxford Transport Strategy was implemented, banning cars and encouraging buses to proliferate, this league table appeared in The Guardian.
Top 10 polluted places
1 Oxford
2 Bath
3 Glasgow
4 London, Marylebone Road
5 London, King's Road
6 Exeter
7 London, Hammersmith Broadway
8 Bristol
9 Sheffield
10 London, Brent
ChemicalChaos said:
NOx particles are the real problem.
I never thought they were that bad or worthy of a the hype surrounding them - until a few days ago when I was gassed by a stload of almost pure NOx. It turns into Nitric acid on contact with the moisture in your eyes and throat, and it was one of the least pleasant experiences I've ever had.
Anything to reduce the buildup of this stuff in cities gets my vote
What were you doing to be gassed by "almost pure NOx"? I never thought they were that bad or worthy of a the hype surrounding them - until a few days ago when I was gassed by a s
tload of almost pure NOx. It turns into Nitric acid on contact with the moisture in your eyes and throat, and it was one of the least pleasant experiences I've ever had. Anything to reduce the buildup of this stuff in cities gets my vote
NOx exists as molecules, not particles
.NOx is a varying mixture of NO and NO2 [with the former being readily oxidised to the latter in the atmosphere, which is then implicated in "acid deposition" some distance downwind of the source - it does NOT happen instantaneously because it needs energy from the Sun over a period of time], for the purposes of exhaust emissions.
Highway Star said:
Out of interest, TB, where was Oxford in the list before the OTS was brought in?
It wasn't top, that honour apparently belonged to Manchester before Oxford hit the heights when it did. I'll have a look through files and see what I can find.More recently, i.e. around 2012, Glasgow and Leicester have overtaken Oxford iirc.
XJSJohn said:
They seriously got teh air polution down here in Bangkok a few year ago by converting all the diesels to CNG, cheap to do and the various companies didnt have to spend a fortune converting their fleet.
yes still polutes but much less smog / choke from visable large particles.
Depends how they do that because the potential is there for huge NOx and HC emissons ... Basically methane slip. And for those who bang on about co2, methane is even worse. Does sort out the PM though!yes still polutes but much less smog / choke from visable large particles.
Portable emissions tests are also now revealing that things like NOx emission basically haven't dropped for 15+ years!
Edited by Otispunkmeyer on Wednesday 30th July 23:14
ChemicalChaos said:
davepoth said:
Mr GrimNasty said:
Petrol cars are no better, just slightly different types of ****t. Even tyre dust is nasty.
It's the NOx and particulates that are the problem for diesel, and they aren't addressed by the current regulations or tax regime which concentrates on CO2 emissions.I never thought they were that bad or worthy of a the hype surrounding them - until a few days ago when I was gassed by a s
tload of almost pure NOx. It turns into Nitric acid on contact with the moisture in your eyes and throat, and it was one of the least pleasant experiences I've ever had. Anything to reduce the buildup of this stuff in cities gets my vote
You can't target one, without addressing the other problems. It's just stupid.
aw51 121565 said:
What were you doing to be gassed by "almost pure NOx"?
NOx exists as molecules, not particles .
NOx is a varying mixture of NO and NO2 [with the former being readily oxidised to the latter in the atmosphere, which is then implicated in "acid deposition" some distance downwind of the source - it does NOT happen instantaneously because it needs energy from the Sun over a period of time], for the purposes of exhaust emissions.
Standing next to a nitromethane burning car in a confined space. The gas certainly seemed to acidify on contact with everyone's eyes and throats!NOx exists as molecules, not particles
.NOx is a varying mixture of NO and NO2 [with the former being readily oxidised to the latter in the atmosphere, which is then implicated in "acid deposition" some distance downwind of the source - it does NOT happen instantaneously because it needs energy from the Sun over a period of time], for the purposes of exhaust emissions.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff