RE: Sulphur Free by 2009
Wednesday 26th February 2003
Sulphur Free by 2009
EU implements new laws requiring reductions in sulphur
Discussion
typical EU no brains b#ll###s, more fuel price rises and for what? motorists pay enough for clean fuel, when aircraft and ships which use tonnes and tonnes of the stuff a day pay no tax on their fuel.(eg a medium size ship will use 100 tonnes a day of heavy fuel oil)
the logic of taking out the sulphur is flawed, it will only take one good erruption by Mount Etna to put back into the atmospher all the sulphur dioxides which we have paid to take out.
the logic of taking out the sulphur is flawed, it will only take one good erruption by Mount Etna to put back into the atmospher all the sulphur dioxides which we have paid to take out.
Germany already use sulpher free fuel. The extra cost was cancelled out by a tax reduction on petrol. Sulpher free fuel allows Direct Injection Petrol engines to yield more power, more torque, better economy and lower emmisions. But so far Blair has refused to give the 3p decrease in petrol tax on sulpher free fuel to allow it to take off in Britain.
Despite the fact that 80p out of every £1 spent on petrol is tax, he won't let us off with 3p for even cleaner petrol.
Despite the fact that 80p out of every £1 spent on petrol is tax, he won't let us off with 3p for even cleaner petrol.
I thought it was now accepted that the acid rain in the Scandanavian forests is caused by the lignite burning power stations in the eastern European countries - so why keep reducing sulphur in our fuel in the name of 'The Environment'? Surely not just to keep the enormous world-wide horde of environmentalists in their government paid jobs?
campbell said: [q]A spokesbloke for the oil refining industry said it would cost $11 billion to implement.[/q]
Dont they make that in a day, why dont the shut up, out out and get the fcukn job done and at the same time drop the price of fuel too.
Wngeing barstuards
Hmmmm. You don't work in the petrol industry do you...
My former company (I won't name names, but they're a biggy) made losses last year. Lots of losses. Sure, you make a fortune digging the stuff up and selling it to aviation industry and marine apps, or even the chemical business. But just try and sell it to the motorist.
We were making 1.5p/litre on a good day, and as low as minus 5p per litre for the rest of the time. I can't explain the economics of it (i.e. why they go on) as I'm just an engineer, but you hear the figures, feel the redundancies and realise what
the government is. Especially, as pointed out here ealier, when the super-polluters of industry and travel don't pay a penny. Gets my goat big time!
What I find quite funny is that in California (the birth place of the catalytic convertor) they're starting to wonder why the problems they're having with smog etc haven't been solved by the stringent emissions regulations impossed on cars...
They're starting to realise a lot of the VOC's (volatile organic compounds) that they thought cars were the main cause of are actually coming from other sources... One of which just happens to be the frying of meat... and for this reason McDonalds restaurants and the like are now being fitted with catalytic convertors
They're starting to realise a lot of the VOC's (volatile organic compounds) that they thought cars were the main cause of are actually coming from other sources... One of which just happens to be the frying of meat... and for this reason McDonalds restaurants and the like are now being fitted with catalytic convertors
Speed Matters | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff