The war on NOx and diesel...
Discussion
The Turbonator said:
swerni said:
The Turbonator said:
Here's an idea.
Why not scrap the current VED scheme and tax cars solely on engine capacity size?
Make petrol and diesel the same price at the pumps.
Scrap manufacturers quoting combined MPG figures and instead quote only the urban and extra urban figures.
This way, the public can make an informed decision on whether choosing a diesel or petrol engine.
If they do low miles in the city, then they would be able to see that a petrol would be better. If they have a high annual mileage, with mostly motorway driving, they should be able to see that a diesel would be better.
This way the amount of diesels in city centres would decrease, thus lowering NOX levels in the city centres but we'd still have plenty of diesels on the motorway, keeping the CO2 levels down.
That's a bloody stupid ideaWhy not scrap the current VED scheme and tax cars solely on engine capacity size?
Make petrol and diesel the same price at the pumps.
Scrap manufacturers quoting combined MPG figures and instead quote only the urban and extra urban figures.
This way, the public can make an informed decision on whether choosing a diesel or petrol engine.
If they do low miles in the city, then they would be able to see that a petrol would be better. If they have a high annual mileage, with mostly motorway driving, they should be able to see that a diesel would be better.
This way the amount of diesels in city centres would decrease, thus lowering NOX levels in the city centres but we'd still have plenty of diesels on the motorway, keeping the CO2 levels down.
Edited by The Turbonator on Tuesday 27th January 10:04
You could come up with a system where CO2, NoX gasses and particulate matter are all taken into account, when calculating a cars VED level. But as another poster said, why do all that when you could just scrap VED and add it onto fuel?
The only problem being that it brings an end to taxing parked cars for polluting.
JonnyVTEC said:
GroundEffect said:
SCR and AdBlue will be more common with Euro 6.2 rather than Euro 6.1 (which is now in effect).
Its effective from Sept 15 isn't it?6.2 is basically US Tier3 so expect higher dosing rates.
Because many companies took the previous governments `diesels are better' ruling, hook line and sinker, they did not, (and many still do not) give their drivers any choice in terms of what cars they could have as a company car.
For some the only choice is whether they stay in the company car scheme, or opt out and buy one of their own. But even this is a problem, because the company wont let them buy whatever they want, even if the employee is buying it themselves, in case the car impacts on the `image' a company is trying to create, when an employee turns up at a meeting/ site / venue. In many cases they are only allowed a diesel. Consequently diesel company cars make up quite large proportion of the vehicles on UK road, Whether people like it or not.
I don't think I would be happy spending my `own' dosh, on a car type that I did not really want.
For some the only choice is whether they stay in the company car scheme, or opt out and buy one of their own. But even this is a problem, because the company wont let them buy whatever they want, even if the employee is buying it themselves, in case the car impacts on the `image' a company is trying to create, when an employee turns up at a meeting/ site / venue. In many cases they are only allowed a diesel. Consequently diesel company cars make up quite large proportion of the vehicles on UK road, Whether people like it or not.
I don't think I would be happy spending my `own' dosh, on a car type that I did not really want.
DonkeyApple said:
Or you could tax based on a cars efficiency? Kind of like putting a tax on the amount of fuel it uses?
The only problem being that it brings an end to taxing parked cars for polluting.
It also puts lots of non jobs out of work in Wales, which I suspect is the real reason it doesn't happen.The only problem being that it brings an end to taxing parked cars for polluting.
The vast majority of what the DVLA do (new owners, reg transfers, etc) could be replaced by a self service website, you only need a small office to deal with engine, colour changes, etc.
Claudia Skies said:
DonkeyApple said:
A well silenced, small, modern petrol unit with a modern auto box like the zf8 would be a huge improvement.
Agreed. "The answer" is small, light, petrol cars. Not these daft, heavy, inefficient hybrids.DonkeyApple said:
Or you could tax based on a cars efficiency? Kind of like putting a tax on the amount of fuel it uses?
The only problem being that it brings an end to taxing parked cars for polluting.
Then they will instigate a SORN tax...The only problem being that it brings an end to taxing parked cars for polluting.
I sort of agree with a CC tax rather than Co2, sure there will be exceptions, but those that have Rotaries will be paying more anyway as they struggle to to 20mpg - so will pay in fuel duty. Plus if they did bring in a SORN tax as well they would all get hit
braddo said:
Claudia Skies said:
DonkeyApple said:
A well silenced, small, modern petrol unit with a modern auto box like the zf8 would be a huge improvement.
Agreed. "The answer" is small, light, petrol cars. Not these daft, heavy, inefficient hybrids.Of course it does, every time that stop start traffic stops it goes back into the battery. The point that it doesnt ever fill the battery back up is because its using that 'tech' to move the car with reduced load on the engine each time.
Its not like the 'tech' of a diesel of similar mass is needed in the same conditions either.
Its not like the 'tech' of a diesel of similar mass is needed in the same conditions either.
JonnyVTEC said:
Of course it does, every time that stop start traffic stops it goes back into the battery. The point that it doesnt ever fill the battery back up is because its using that 'tech' to move the car with reduced load on the engine each time.
Its not like the 'tech' of a diesel of similar mass is needed in the same conditions either.
The argument from the owners is that it isn't moving for long enough periods to generate enough charge to make an improvement over basic stop/start tech or a lighter car etc. they bought them just to swerve the CC. Its not like the 'tech' of a diesel of similar mass is needed in the same conditions either.
DonkeyApple said:
I've had several conversations with owners who live in central London and they've commented that because all the driving is stop/start the engine is always running as the batteries don't get a good run to charge up. I was under the impression that as a car for commuting in and out of London they work well as the run in charges it fully and then it can do all the stop start as mostly an EV but if it's a pure central London vehicle like a taxi pretty much is then it doesn't give any of the real benefits for lugging all the extra tech about.
The engine should kick in and out in heavy traffic, it should not be running all the time the plug in Prius will do up to 15 miles or so on a 90 min charge before becoming a conventional hybrid so thats why they can achieve their best mpg's around town up liner33 said:
DonkeyApple said:
I've had several conversations with owners who live in central London and they've commented that because all the driving is stop/start the engine is always running as the batteries don't get a good run to charge up. I was under the impression that as a car for commuting in and out of London they work well as the run in charges it fully and then it can do all the stop start as mostly an EV but if it's a pure central London vehicle like a taxi pretty much is then it doesn't give any of the real benefits for lugging all the extra tech about.
The engine should kick in and out in heavy traffic, it should not be running all the time the plug in Prius will do up to 15 miles or so on a 90 min charge before becoming a conventional hybrid so thats why they can achieve their best mpg's around town up DonkeyApple said:
I understand the theory. All I am saying is that the few people I know in central London who have bought one have all commented that their fuel bill is no lower as the engine is running most of the time and that the savings were from swerving the CC.
As I said the engine shouldn't be running all the time. When I commuted from Uxbridge to central London in my diesel I went through 10 gallons per week for about 100 miles driving liner33 said:
DonkeyApple said:
I understand the theory. All I am saying is that the few people I know in central London who have bought one have all commented that their fuel bill is no lower as the engine is running most of the time and that the savings were from swerving the CC.
As I said the engine shouldn't be running all the time. When I commuted from Uxbridge to central London in my diesel I went through 10 gallons per week for about 100 miles driving DonkeyApple said:
Uxbridge is not central London.
If they are doing such short journeys in start-stop traffic wouldn't they be better walking / cycling / tubing / busing. It's quite obvious that if there isn't a way to charge the battery through moving that a hybrid isn't a great saving. They bought them to swerve the CC which is aimed at people coming in and out of London, not those lazy people who want to drive 2-3 miles a day in start-stop traffic.DonkeyApple said:
Uxbridge is not central London.
No but I commuted TO Central London and from central London spending a lot of time IN central London , I was making the point that no car is very economical in heavy city traffic , but a car like the Prius by its very nature will be more ecomomical than most others. Of course if you live IN Central London and work in Central London why someone would want a car for commuting anyway defeats me
Max_Torque said:
There is also the fact that as a population we are living longer than ever before. Our "ageing" is going to cause us all significant issues in future as the old are not dying!
It's a trade off between convenience and risk, no absolutes. Lets face it, you can exceed some arbitrary NOx concentration limit (40ppm) and hence break a European law, but you are still quite free to smoke 20 fags a day! Of course when asked "are you worried about air pollution" the average VoxPop will say "oh, yes, very worried" and then jump into their car and drive off. In a world where more and more people are obese, and daily exercise is becoming the exception, NOx pollution is very low on the list of things to worry about!
The ONLY reason the politicians are suddenly getting their knickers in a twist is because some highly localised parts of the UK occasionally (in heavy traffic) fail to meet the EU "standards" and are in breech of EU legislation and hence we could be fined for non-compliance. And that is because some other faceless suit in Brussels has arbitrarily decided that 40ppm is the number below which we are all at risk. It's a bit like speeding, where 70mph = ok, 70.00000000001mph = Illegal, and yet the difference is RISK on either side of the arbitrary limit is immeasurable!
Good point, I remember a particular flight made back in the 1970`s on a ginIt's a trade off between convenience and risk, no absolutes. Lets face it, you can exceed some arbitrary NOx concentration limit (40ppm) and hence break a European law, but you are still quite free to smoke 20 fags a day! Of course when asked "are you worried about air pollution" the average VoxPop will say "oh, yes, very worried" and then jump into their car and drive off. In a world where more and more people are obese, and daily exercise is becoming the exception, NOx pollution is very low on the list of things to worry about!
The ONLY reason the politicians are suddenly getting their knickers in a twist is because some highly localised parts of the UK occasionally (in heavy traffic) fail to meet the EU "standards" and are in breech of EU legislation and hence we could be fined for non-compliance. And that is because some other faceless suit in Brussels has arbitrarily decided that 40ppm is the number below which we are all at risk. It's a bit like speeding, where 70mph = ok, 70.00000000001mph = Illegal, and yet the difference is RISK on either side of the arbitrary limit is immeasurable!
clear spring day, at about 2400 ft, and 35 miles North of London. Visibility was to all intents, limitless in every direction, except that is, when looking South towards London, which was covered by a dirty brown dome of pollution, and this was long before diesel cars in any great number were available. It was not cars that were the problem, but the place itself.
I worked there for ten years, and clearly remember the dirt that accumulated on my clothes, and in my nose every single day, and I worked in an office on the 3rd floor of an architectural practice in Grays Inn at the time.
The bottom line is if you must work in a dirty place, you are going to pick up certain amounts of dirt, depending on the place.
TheAllSeeingPie said:
DonkeyApple said:
Uxbridge is not central London.
If they are doing such short journeys in start-stop traffic wouldn't they be better walking / cycling / tubing / busing. It's quite obvious that if there isn't a way to charge the battery through moving that a hybrid isn't a great saving. They bought them to swerve the CC which is aimed at people coming in and out of London, not those lazy people who want to drive 2-3 miles a day in start-stop traffic.It is about whether the Prious tech would be better in a Black Cab than just a modern, small petrol unit.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff