suggestions please - bad ideas for reducing car pollution?

[ChemicalChaos]

Morning all,

I'm doing a little research for a presentation, which for various reasons is going to be on ideas that aimed to reduce car pollution but which turned out to be very bad in hindsight.
Current ideas listed are:
leaded fuel - better efficiency through higher octane, but obviously poisonous
city diesels - 'nuff said
fuel cells - hydrogen production, greenhouse gas potential of water vapour,
hybrids - production and disposal energy intensiveness
carbon composites/fiddly electronic management - as above
biofuels (1st gen) - carbon neutral but cause food crises

this being PH, does anyone please have any other interesting suggestions to touch on?

thanks!

[Willy Nilly]

buy smaller, more economical cars and use them less

[99dndd]

Scrap your current car and use up far more resources in building a new one that produces less pollution "under test conditions."

[ChemicalChaos]

thanks chaps,

I was more on about "scientific advancements" than behavioral changes however

[Mike335i]

I read an article about how catalytic converters were pursued instead of lean burn engines in the late 80s.

This led to increased co2 levels being produced, where as lean burn technology could have been pursued much earlier and cars could, theoretically, be much more efficient.

I can't remember the article and I am fairly sure there will be some holes in the notion, but it got me thinking.

[Monty Python]

Increased car safety - the addition of all the latest safety gadgetry has increases the weight of cars, thus making them less economical.
Use of carbon fibre and other "exotic" materials - increased production cost/resources
Speed bumps/traffic calming measure/potholes - anything that makes cars slow down/accelerate increases fuel consumption

[ambuletz]

downsize your 1000cc modern superbike for a 500cc two stroke.

[Mr2Mike]

Mike335i said:

I read an article about how catalytic converters were pursued instead of lean burn engines in the late 80s.

This led to increased co2 levels being produced, where as lean burn technology could have been pursued much earlier and cars could, theoretically, be much more efficient.

I've read similar articles and they tend to conveniently ignore the fact that lean burn engines of the era would have been pumping out lots of NOx instead of CO, not to mention the fact that it would have required every single manufacturer to develop new engines rather than adapt current engines by adding catalytic converters. It's only with the advent of direct petrol injection and extensive research that engines like Mazda's Skyactiv are now possible.

[Whitean3]

Monty Python said:

Speed bumps/traffic calming measure/potholes - anything that makes cars slow down/accelerate increases fuel consumption

Yup, the speed humps/traffic calming measures were my first thought. Not a scientific advancement, but leads to higher fuel consumption, greater air and noise pollution etc.

You might also argue that hybrids/electric cars pollute the earth far more than people think if you consider the nickel mining, transportation of batteries across the globe etc.- but you need to be careful about the facts/myths (from both sides!)

Also consider the 'throw away' culture instead of build to last and maintain/repair; far greener than making something new from scratch. The challenge is peoples' needs to keep up with the Joneses and have the latest gadget. The scrappage scheme is a good example of this too

[Shakermaker]

Monty Python said:

Speed bumps/traffic calming measure/potholes - anything that makes cars slow down/accelerate increases fuel consumption

But these have never been used to reduce pollution, surely these are exactly as you say - traffic calming measures, to reduce speed in an effort to make the road safer, not "greener"?

[Flibble]

ChemicalChaos said:

Morning all,
leaded fuel - better efficiency through higher octane, but obviously poisonous

Leaded fuel was never about pollution, and they knew it was bad from the start. It was a cost cutting exercise because it's cheaper than similar octane unleaded.

[300bhp/ton]

ChemicalChaos said:

Morning all,

I'm doing a little research for a presentation, which for various reasons is going to be on ideas that aimed to reduce car pollution but which turned out to be very bad in hindsight.
Current ideas listed are:
leaded fuel - better efficiency through higher octane, but obviously poisonous
city diesels - 'nuff said
fuel cells - hydrogen production, greenhouse gas potential of water vapour,
hybrids - production and disposal energy intensiveness
carbon composites/fiddly electronic management - as above
biofuels (1st gen) - carbon neutral but cause food crises

this being PH, does anyone please have any other interesting suggestions to touch on?

thanks!

Well there are 2 obvious answers, both decisive in their aims. But likely unpopular.

Ban all cars everywhere.
Remove the human race.

Brutal strategies, but would likely solve the pollution problems. If indeed they are actually problems.

[ChemicalChaos]

Thanks for all the suggestions everyone. In the end I managed to go way over the word count with just the few existing ideas, but I have worked the essence of some of your suggestions into my points in the main text.

You might be interested to see the final product, so here it is!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-Jm53X0jdzlbFU...


The actual brief was to write 3000 words on a topic of any choice, that answered a question to do with the uses of green/renewable/environmental chemistry. I appreciate that to a car enthusiast, some of the points you'll see argued are very tenuous - but having committed myself to the title without having done much research, i had to work what what I had!