So, who’s surprised?

Author
Discussion

Matthen

Original Poster:

1,297 posts

152 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18415532

Apparently Diesel fumes cause cancer.

Who would have thought that?!

benzito

1,060 posts

160 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
Just more evidence to rid the world of horrible diesels!

Contigo

3,115 posts

210 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
Its been known for ages that diesel exhaust particulates can cause cancer. The government is so focused on co2 output that they fail to look at the crap that is actually polluting us all. wkers

PHmember

2,487 posts

172 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
Doesn't everything cause cancer these days?

Matthen

Original Poster:

1,297 posts

152 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
PHmember said:
Doesn't everything cause cancer these days?
You see, that's what I thought...

GroundEffect

13,851 posts

157 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
PHmember said:
Doesn't everything cause cancer these days?
Most things DO cause cancer, to some degree. Cancer is a .

Matthen

Original Poster:

1,297 posts

152 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
GroundEffect said:
Most things DO cause cancer, to some degree. Cancer is a .
True frown

JSquaredJim

238 posts

213 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
When they banned leaded fuel due to lead poisoning. In the doses we were exposed to in the atmosphere the worst that would happen is a headache and slight wooziness. They replaced that with Unleaded containing many things to replace the lead, all of which were massivley carcinogenic.
Don't be surprised by any of this, those in charge are brain dead twonks and will be forever more.
It's all about being seen to be doing the right thing, as opposed to actually doing it.

Strawman

6,463 posts

208 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
That was the reason always given for California's very strict emissions standards for particulates from diesel cars, and the reason few were sold in America, only recently have car manufacturers managed to build low enough emission engines with particulate filters e.t.c. So it is really only confirming older findings, not something new.

maniac0796

1,292 posts

167 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
Been known for years, look up 3-Nitrobenzanthrone, essentially the most carcinogenic chemical known

GoodDoc

559 posts

177 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
Strawman said:
That was the reason always given for California's very strict emissions standards for particulates from diesel cars, and the reason few were sold in America, only recently have car manufacturers managed to build low enough emission engines with particulate filters e.t.c. So it is really only confirming older findings, not something new.
That's a somewhat disingenuous statement. Diesel sold in the US was refined to a very different standard to that sold in Europe and contained much higher proportions of unpleasant chemicals (sulphur in particular). In fact the quality of the fuel was so bad that some states effectively legislated against diesel fuelled passenger cars.

The reason so few diesel cars were sold in the US was that the more advanced and cleaner diesel engines sold in Europe simply couldn't run on the lower quality US fuel, and until you improved the fuel quality you couldn't use the cleaner engines.

The only findings that California's emission controls confirmed was that commercially available diesel in Europe was cleaner than that in the US.

Strawman

6,463 posts

208 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
GoodDoc said:
That's a somewhat disingenuous statement.
No it is quite genuine, read the actual legislation it is all about particulate matter in the air, which originate primarily from Diesel engines and forest fires. This was enacted in 1998, so 14 years ago now, nothing to do with the sulphur quantity in American Diesel fuel.

GoodDoc

559 posts

177 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
Strawman said:
No it is quite genuine, read the actual legislation it is all about particulate matter in the air, which originate primarily from Diesel engines and forest fires. This was enacted in 1998, so 14 years ago now, nothing to do with the sulphur quantity in American Diesel fuel.
But as you pointed out, the legislation applied to cars and not trucks. It seems rather shortsighted to identify diesel engines as a primary source of particulate matter in the air and only apply the emissions limits to 'light-duty' vehicles'.

Much as the cause of the US civil war was not simply 'slavery', the reason for diesel's small share of the US passenger car market is not simply 'emissions'.

Fox-

13,244 posts

247 months

Tuesday 12th June 2012
quotequote all
Amazes me that the obsession was on C02 almost without even considering anything else. CO2 seemed to be all that anyone cared about..