RE: TDI the new PPI

[hairyben]

Devil2575 said:

culpz said:

I really don't think this will be the case. No-one will care when all this is over, despite the outcome.

VW's reputation has not been tarnished. Most people probably couldn't care less. I'm pretty sure most forgot about the scandal until this potential compensation claim came about. They have and will continue to sell plenty of cars.

Plus, how do you/can you prove that is the specific reason for the drop in re-sale value?

Well it fking should be.

You might not care less, but plenty of people do care that they have been lied too.

The thing is, is the population at large really that annoyed? It doesnt seem so. If anything I wonder if people, people used to the "environment" being a tool used to clobber them left and right by the powers that be, feel VAG have been cheating on the government rather than them its customers and are having a chuckle on some level.

[Cold]

Renault to be the third company on the chopping block.

[culpz]

Devil2575 said:

If you know that you are doing something that is having a health impact on yourself and others then perhaps you need to question the sense in doing so, however I suspect that the activities you partake in do not take place in a built up area where lots of people live and work. The issue of NOx/Particulates is all about the local effects. Also, only a few people do what you do, millions of people drive diesel cars in town centres.

I do find your comments about the environment some-what questionable, considering you drive an old diesel Focus. That thing must be dumping pollution into the atmosphere like no-one's business.

[hairyben]

Cold said:

Renault to be the third company on the chopping block.

Would that bring mercedes and toyota to the party, how much are they sharing small diesel engines?

[Devil2575]

culpz said:

Devil2575 said:

If you know that you are doing something that is having a health impact on yourself and others then perhaps you need to question the sense in doing so, however I suspect that the activities you partake in do not take place in a built up area where lots of people live and work. The issue of NOx/Particulates is all about the local effects. Also, only a few people do what you do, millions of people drive diesel cars in town centres.

I do find your comments about the environment some-what questionable, considering you drive an old diesel Focus. That thing must be dumping pollution into the atmosphere like no-one's business.

I probably does, but then it only does a low milage, it's only insured for 5k/year and typically does less than 4. I cycle to work 4 out of 5 days. However when I change it I won't be buying another old diesel. I did higher mileage when I bought it but that changed once I decided to buy a bike.

Sadly my current finances don't run to changing my car just yet.

Edited by Devil2575 on Friday 13th January 17:36

[Devil2575]

hairyben said:

The thing is, is the population at large really that annoyed? It doesnt seem so. If anything I wonder if people, people used to the "environment" being a tool used to clobber them left and right by the powers that be, feel VAG have been cheating on the government rather than them its customers and are having a chuckle on some level.

Maybe they do, maybe that's what they're told is happening, that it's just a tool to clobber them? Maybe because they can't see the polution they don't realise the long term health effects?

I suspect people used to think the same about taxing smoking.

Maybe if people understood what the latest research on the health effects of NOx and particulate polution shows they might realise that there is a very good reason why goverments have introduced legislation. But then why should anyone listen to scientists, they're just experts after all and we can all know as much if not more than them by doing 30 minutes "reseach" on the internet...

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=...

[heebeegeetee]

Devil2575 said:

How is it proposterous?

Do you care about your own health? What you eat, how much exercise you take etc? It should be the same with the environment.

Not caring about the impact of your behaviour on the environment that you live in is stupid. Caring about it is pretty easy, especially as it's in your own interests to do so.

I could say that I have a big tyre fire in my garden every weekend, what difference does diesel make. I don't have to have a tyre fire

If you know that you are doing something that is having a health impact on yourself and others then perhaps you need to question the sense in doing so, however I suspect that the activities you partake in do not take place in a built up area where lots of people live and work. The issue of NOx/Particulates is all about the local effects. Also, only a few people do what you do, millions of people drive diesel cars in town centres.

Millions of people drive for pleasure; millions of people enjoy fast cars; millions of people enjoy driving fast; millions of people enjoy classic cars; the vast majority of people do not renew their cars each year to ensure emissions are at their lowest; millions of people do not mot their cars in the first three years to check their emissions; millions of people shop on Sundays, a practice almost nobody else is able or seemingly wants to do in Europe in the same manner; millions of people commute further than they could or should, to suit themselves; millions of people fly, millions of people fly just to have a warmer holiday; millions of people fly just for a weekend, having possibly driven to and from the airport in a diesel car.

Where on earth do you end it?

"If you know that you are doing something that is having a health impact on yourself and others then perhaps you need to question the sense in doing so". - I could apply that to possibly every aspect of my life and so could tens of millions of people in the uk and billions of people globally.

[mrnoisy78]

Like anyone truly cares about the emissions part - the only bit the yanks were interested in was cash from the beginning, as always.
Most fickle nation ever, always wanting to point the finger if it means they get a financial reward off the back of doing nothing; just saddens me how I see more and more of this sort of selfish behaviour bleeding into the UK every year.

[heebeegeetee]

Devil2575 said:

Maybe they do, maybe that's what they're told is happening, that it's just a tool to clobber them? Maybe because they can't see the polution they don't realise the long term health effects?

I suspect people used to think the same about taxing smoking.

Maybe if people understood what the latest research on the health effects of NOx and particulate polution shows they might realise that there is a very good reason why goverments have introduced legislation. But then why should anyone listen to scientists, they're just experts after all and we can all know as much if not more than them by doing 30 minutes "reseach" on the internet...

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=...

Well look, I'll take you up on this debate (to a degree).

That document you linked refers almost immediately to reduced life expectancy. Where is this reduced life expectancy? Life expectancy in developed (and thus polluted, presumably) countries have only ever gone one way, and scientists are now talking in terms that we are reaching the maximum life spans that humans will achieve.

In the UK today, the 65 yr olds expected to live longest live in central London:

"Life expectancy at age 65 was highest for men in Harrow, where they could expect to live for a further 20.9 years compared with only 14.9 years for men in Glasgow City.
For women at age 65, life expectancy was highest in Camden (23.8 years) and lowest in Glasgow City (18.3 years)."
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...

I can't find the link now, but I have read elsewhere that wealthy people in Chelsea can expect to live into their 90's, and there aren't many other places in the world that can be expected to live much longer than that.

In my lifetime (I'm 58) I have seen very clearly that people are living much longer and they are so much more healthy than they were when I was young. I have friends in their late 60s and a good mate who is 70. That particular chap has lived and worked in or near to the Black Country here in the West Mids his whole life, his childhood spent there, and he is incredibly fit and active and of course looks nothing like 70 yr olds did when I was young. Anybody looking at old family pics can see there's been an enormous change in recent times.

Britain could do a lot better - I think Sunday trading must mean Britain will always be the dirtiest country in Europe, that and allowing trucks to run 24/7, unique in the whole of Europe afaiaa. Our cycling levels are a tiny fraction of that of Europe of course.

I read this last week: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/family/raise-worl...
and it caused me to think that the British lifestyle really is rubbish, and therefore far dirtier and more polluting than it need be.

But we use the same cars as Europe, so they aren't the issue other than us historically proving next to no alternative to the motor car - that is by far the bigger scandal imo.

[Devil2575]

Heebeegeetee said:

"If you know that you are doing something that is having a health impact on yourself and others then perhaps you need to question the sense in doing so". - I could apply that to possibly every aspect of my life and so could tens of millions of people in the uk and billions of people globally.

People need to start applying it to themselves if we want to stand a chance of not completely screwing up the planet.

[loose cannon]

They deserve there punishment for lying, but ultimately humans as a race will die out due to famine lack of water overpopulation which In the next 20 years will hit crisis point, and the wars over resources will come to a large head
Ending mans rain on this planet it's the only way it can and will pan out, there are just to many people in the world
And that number gets more ridiculous every day every month every year

[DonkeyApple]

heebeegeetee said:

Well look, I'll take you up on this debate (to a degree).

That document you linked refers almost immediately to reduced life expectancy. Where is this reduced life expectancy? Life expectancy in developed (and thus polluted, presumably) countries have only ever gone one way, and scientists are now talking in terms that we are reaching the maximum life spans that humans will achieve.

In the UK today, the 65 yr olds expected to live longest live in central London:

"Life expectancy at age 65 was highest for men in Harrow, where they could expect to live for a further 20.9 years compared with only 14.9 years for men in Glasgow City.
For women at age 65, life expectancy was highest in Camden (23.8 years) and lowest in Glasgow City (18.3 years)."
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...

I can't find the link now, but I have read elsewhere that wealthy people in Chelsea can expect to live into their 90's, and there aren't many other places in the world that can be expected to live much longer than that.

In my lifetime (I'm 58) I have seen very clearly that people are living much longer and they are so much more healthy than they were when I was young. I have friends in their late 60s and a good mate who is 70. That particular chap has lived and worked in or near to the Black Country here in the West Mids his whole life, his childhood spent there, and he is incredibly fit and active and of course looks nothing like 70 yr olds did when I was young. Anybody looking at old family pics can see there's been an enormous change in recent times.

Britain could do a lot better - I think Sunday trading must mean Britain will always be the dirtiest country in Europe, that and allowing trucks to run 24/7, unique in the whole of Europe afaiaa. Our cycling levels are a tiny fraction of that of Europe of course.

I read this last week: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/family/raise-worl...
and it caused me to think that the British lifestyle really is rubbish, and therefore far dirtier and more polluting than it need be.

But we use the same cars as Europe, so they aren't the issue other than us historically proving next to no alternative to the motor car - that is by far the bigger scandal imo.

The rampant consumerism that had utterly engulfed the whole of the UK is quite an interesting aspect you raise.

In the South East a very significant number of vehicles, at the weekend, are just queuing and crawling to get to temples of consumption. A reversion to Sunday trading hours would probably have the greatest positive impact on urban noise and air pollution than almost anything else that could be done.

Can't happen though asbit would drop the yields on commercial property rents which would trigger a rather unpleasant rebasing of asset values within most pension funds. Plus, banning the Sunday worship would probably result in riots among the true believers.

[hairyben]

Devil2575 said:

hairyben said:

The thing is, is the population at large really that annoyed? It doesnt seem so. If anything I wonder if people, people used to the "environment" being a tool used to clobber them left and right by the powers that be, feel VAG have been cheating on the government rather than them its customers and are having a chuckle on some level.

Maybe they do, maybe that's what they're told is happening, that it's just a tool to clobber them? Maybe because they can't see the polution they don't realise the long term health effects?

I suspect people used to think the same about taxing smoking.

Maybe if people understood what the latest research on the health effects of NOx and particulate polution shows they might realise that there is a very good reason why goverments have introduced legislation. But then why should anyone listen to scientists, they're just experts after all and we can all know as much if not more than them by doing 30 minutes "reseach" on the internet...

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=...

The validity of the science is not relevent to my point, in fact it endorses it, given the people were clobbered into diesel cars because environment and are now being clobbered back out of them and into what they were driving before because environment... the environment is weaponised as a quasi religion we dare not object to by people with motives and agendas that blatently contradict themselves. Whether a particular aspect or factoid happens to be true or not is besides the point

[Alucidnation]

Cold said:

Renault to be the third company on the chopping block.

And Fiat/Chrysler.


https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/car-companies-pr...

[scherzkeks]

mrnoisy78 said:

Like anyone truly cares about the emissions part - the only bit the yanks were interested in was cash from the beginning, as always.
Most fickle nation ever, always wanting to point the finger if it means they get a financial reward off the back of doing nothing; just saddens me how I see more and more of this sort of selfish behaviour bleeding into the UK every year.

Of course. All we are good at is hustling.

[George111]

mrnoisy78 said:

Like anyone truly cares about the emissions part

We should all care about emissions. Not the daft CO2 emissions but general pollution. Where a car has an emissions control system to reduce, in this case, NOx emissions, which are known to be bad for humans, it's sensible to ensure it's working as it ought to be.

What VW did was to specifically prevent this system working. Agreed, all diesels emit more than they ought to or more than they were believed to, that's not the point - the point is that a perfectly good system of reducing emissions of a particular pollutant, inefficient as it may have been, was turned off completely. That's not acceptable surely to anybody ?

Trouble is that the constant drive for less CO2 means greater thermal efficiency which means higher pressures and temperatures which means more NOx so the politicians have created the perfect storm themselves. But we don't need the likes of VW to deliberately make it worse !

[SuperHangOn]

It's hardly breaking news that diesel exhaust isn't great for air quality. How many decades have we known this? We should be really questioning why European governments actively promoted the widespread use of diesel cars through their tax system then suddenly decide they should be taxed off the road. Instead VW et al are getting hit hard for a naughty but ultimately irrelevant misdemeanour.

Maybe the owners of petrol cars should be reimbursed for their inflated RFL's and fuel since 2001!

[heebeegeetee]

SuperHangOn said:

It's hardly breaking news that diesel exhaust isn't great for air quality. How many decades have we known this? We should be really questioning why European governments actively promoted the widespread use of diesel cars through their tax system then suddenly decide they should be taxed off the road. Instead VW et al are getting hit hard for a naughty but ultimately irrelevant misdemeanour.

Maybe the owners of petrol cars should be reimbursed for their inflated RFL's and fuel since 2001!

Europe isn't taxing diesels off the road, diesel fuel is still significantly cheaper than petrol all over the continent.

Some large cities are banning older cars, both petrol and diesels, but so far only a handful of cities or less. Maybe someone can help here, but I believe Paris and Athens have been banning certain cars for quite some time, but not based on fuel.

[epom]

I wonder will there me as much a fuss made when the claims re Renault come to fruition ??

[loskie]

wouldn't it be amusing if the government then counter sued the consumers who are claimimg? After all the taxman is the real loser in this. The drivers have lost nothing.