US vs Euro emissions

[bikersupermoto]

Originally Posted by minisweeper

Someone tell me I'm not the only one who thinks that keeping diesels out of the US due to 'emissions standards' is massively ironic...?

ok...u brits hav odd ways of thinkin about things....300million people in us now....dunno how many hav cars...some hav lots some dont hav one...so say average 300million cars...if each one was as dirty as the euro diesels hav been....from when euro people started drivin diesel autos (15years?) ago ... (not talkn about britain coz britain cottoned onto diesel autos late compared to mainland europe) ...... the us air quality *** b a lot worse than it is today. california has smog test for autos...can u imagine the air quality there had we had dirty diesels for past 15 years?

with so many cars in the us, its more important than ever that we dont go diesel until they sort out the black smoke that u all make in europe!. we are waiting till they get diesel working right before allowing diesel cars on our roads! an thats a good thing for us all!.

[Pottsy]

Black smoke? 1979 diesel Golf, maybe.

The US has (until last year) been using 500ppm diesel. That's a lot of sulphur (sulfur) to make all those nasty particulates. Over here in backward old Europe, we use 10ppm (typically 5ppm) diesel, and are introducing all sorts of fancy particulate catching devices. The use of diesel cars in the UK is saving CO2 emissions measured in megatons.

What do they tell you over there? We just hear of the crazy stories of the rather nifty electric vehicles that were mysteriously withdrawn from the market by the oil companies. Is it the oil companies that are driving the thoughts that smooth powerful cars that do 50mpg are a bad thing?

[bikersupermoto]

Originally Posted by Pottsy

Black smoke? 1979 diesel Golf, maybe.

The US has (until last year) been using 500ppm diesel. That's a lot of sulphur (sulfur) to make all those nasty particulates. Over here in backward old Europe, we use 10ppm (typically 5ppm) diesel, and are introducing all sorts of fancy particulate catching devices. The use of diesel cars in the UK is saving CO2 emissions measured in megatons.

What do they tell you over there? We just hear of the crazy stories of the rather nifty electric vehicles that were mysteriously withdrawn from the market by the oil companies. Is it the oil companies that are driving the thoughts that smooth powerful cars that do 50mpg are a bad thing?

sorry pottsy, but here in the us, the comsumer is king and the oil companies know that, thats why we can organise ourselves here to not buy gas on certain days at certain stations an it screws up all their delivery schedules...i know your lovely british government is involved in your gas tax....hence the brits pay us$10 a gallon for gas or you go buy a diesel car and pay even more!...an happy with the noise and smoke it makes coz its got a bit go at low revs and never stop goin on about how wonderful it all is!!!.. (and seem happy to pay it...they dont complain...its not the british thing to do!...go hav a nice cup of tea and whine instead!)...an we pay at the moment here in michigan, $3.50 and that expensive because its winter here!...so go figure!...

i hav a volvo v70r here in the us, an econo wagon for the us compared to most cars here an its gas of course!...its quieter, smoother and faster than the civic i drive in the uk and it doesnt make a cloud of black smoke when you floor it....(please dont try tellin me the civic doesnt make smoke...it makes clouds of the ******* stuff when u floor it....same as all the other euro diesels!...come to glasgow next time im there an follow me around an il show u if u dont believe me if u dont choke on the smoke 1st!)....sure it only does 23mg average and it makes its power higher up the revs but its v nice to drive.

as for your thoughts on oil companies removing vehicles, i think someones telling you nice bedtime stories....honda hav just started to sell the fuel cell vehicle here in the u.s from next year, ford hav been seeling the escape hybrid for over a year, toyoat dont just have the prius here but the camry has hybrid drive as an available option so does honda s accord....so as i say potsy, nice bedtime stories!.

[Jack The Lad.]

And what will you do when the oil and gas starts running out and there is not the electricity to charge the electric vehicles, -start another war.
Tis about time the Yanks got real and started joining the real world club.
As with the last two world wars, come in when its all over I suppose.

[bikersupermoto]

we have the technology and along with the dutch and germans are harvesting solar and wind power (california and nevada hav massive solar projects running and more in the pipeline) while you continue to whine about gas prices and take years to debate whether a wind generator is an eyesore on your "lovely" english countryside!...

and with all your old buildings (i hav use of an apartment in a "conservation" area where they still have single glazing and no cavity wall insulation)...and not allowed to change it because if british conservation rules!...

and you burn coal in your victorian fireplaces!....more smoke...
and you light your street signs?!?!...and most of your highways....havent they gotten around to reflective paint in quaint old britain yet....

i could go on...so yeah, britain is doing so well in conserving oil and gas and really thinking about it running out....almost as much as we are jack!

[Pottsy]

Coal? Road signs?? BS873-1 is, er law.

CO2 output per capita.

Normally the accusation is that European governments are barking mad when it comes to trying to reduce carbon emissions, not the other way round.

CO2-by-country-2002.jpg

[bikersupermoto]

yeah, that graph is great for simple people, make them anti us....theres a bit more to it potsy as u prob well know.....can you post a graph that takes into account co output, the total population, the climate of the country, the size of the country.

eg, russia, us and china.
large populations, extreme climates and long distances between places people need to get to/from.
we need a/c in south us and heat in north.
we got long distances to transport goods 7 people....all takes energy.

britain 55-60 million an no extreme heat/cold like in us/russia/china.

britain small island-short distances to travel for goods & people movements.

unless you want us all to stay in our homes, not travel to work & see family and be too cold or hot depending where in the us/russia/china we live?

make a graph with that info for us please.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by bikersupermoto

yeah, that graph is great for simple people, make them anti us....

[..]

.

1. I assume you mean anti-US

2. Graphs not required: you seem to be doing a great job by yourself.

Anthony.

[Pottsy]

co2percap.gif

We could do this discussion forever, but outside of the US it's generally accepted that the US is a huge contributor to the worlds pollutants. But we also appreciate that this is a function of your political policies over many years and not something that the people have done.

It's the same here - for decades we have suffered high fuel taxes. There has been nothing clever going on here, our politicians have just used fuel as mechanism for extracting money out of us, and we don't like it. The result though has been a huge effort by car manufacturers to use technology over the last 40 years to make cars more efficient. Not to save the world, but to save money. It's just a happy modern by-product that this work may be saving the planet.

Ultimately though, it will probably be the ever rising oil price that may encourage US consumers to veer away from the large capacity low tech V8 for something a little more high tech. Things may also change slightly when your key politicians do not derive huge personal incomes from oil revenues, but that may take some time. We may also progress when we are presented with politicians that are not self-interested, but that also is a bit of a pipe-dream.

PS This was the bedtime story - an interesting US documentary.

[Munro]

Originally Posted by Pottsy

Ultimately though, it will probably be the ever rising oil price that may encourage US consumers to veer away from the large capacity low tech V8 for something a little more high tech.

There is actualy a lot to be said for lower technology long lasting vehicles as they can be better for the environment than high tech shorter lasting ones. The attached report makes for interesting reading.

[Maldax]

Bikersupermoto, nice to see you doing your bit for the stereotypical US thinking of US v the rest of the world

and to be honest with you it does not look like you are too worried about what gets pumped into our atmosphere

YouTube - my gilera h@k running rough & smoking

[Jack The Lad.]

I think that part of your first post on the subject, pretty well sums up your attitude bikersupermoto.--- " I am not worried about gas mileage".

[FWH]

Originally Posted by bikersupermoto

and you burn coal in your victorian fireplaces!....more smoke...

..and you don´t because your country wasn´t invented back then?

A key question is - how many of those big trucks and SUVs are really needed in the US? Sure some parts of the country have terrible roads, but that is usually not why people buy them..

[Foggy69]

Originally Posted by Munro

There is actualy a lot to be said for lower technology long lasting vehicles as they can be better for the environment than high tech shorter lasting ones. The attached report makes for interesting reading.

Some of this makes sense, but I think the overall results have more to do with 'lies, damn lies and statistics'.

It places the Civic at 47, just above a Range Rover Sport and just below a BMW X5. None of them has particularly agricultural engineering. None of them is particularly over engineered to last for very many years. All are loaded with technology. The two 4x4 have high co2 emissions and low mpg. So using the arguments put forward in this report, where is the logic that says driving a X5 is better for the environment than a Civic

And the Toyota Land Cruiser at 71!!! Surely this car is the embodiment of all that this report says. It is constructed in an established way. It uses technology that Noah would probably recognise. And will still be going strong in 40 years.

[Anthony]

I think the report is based on carefully constructed piece of misinformation, which is this: the total energy used in the 'dust-to-dust' scenario is based on converting all the different (unspecified) types of energy sources into petrol-dollars with the implicit assumption of equality of polluting capability. No account is made of the 'greeness' of the energy sources in either the creation or the destruction of a vehicle. For all we know, the steel plant(s) used to produce the steel, might be run on wind power for example.

What we do know is the (calculated) total use of carbon fuels burned in the vehicle during it's lifetime on the road. And it is obvious that high consumption per mile combined with long life (with increasing inefficiences due to age) will create more pollutants.

As always, we need to be careful what we are talking about: is it energy consumption or pollutants?

Anthony.

[CivPilot]

Working in the petrochem industry also opens ones eyes to the real causes of man made pollution, and to just how much of the harmfull C02 in the Atmosphere is "man made".

You would be shocked to see just how small (and I mean tiny percentage of total pollution) an impact the car has on the environment, and anyone who claims different is simply missinformed and brainwashed by our government.

Go and look up the figures, they will shock you. (and it might make you want to kill some cows )

[Koen]

Methane is indeed 26 times worse for the environment than CO2. And ecause of global warming, more and more methane, coming from mostly "natural resources" is released in the atmosphere.

As for the "greenest car": Toyota can probably tell you why the Prius is the greenest car, and Honda can also tell you why the Civic Hybrid is, and Lexus will tell you why they are better. But when Jeep comes tell me they have the greenest car, that must be a joke.
I think this dust-to-dust measuring is questionable. I know from my professional life that this cost-calculation is a typical american thing, and that maths apparently isn't their strongest point.

Anyway, I admire the effort being doen here to prove the american that there are other countries too in this big world, and that sometimes it can be nice to listen to other people, instead of shouting, and bulling them around. Keep up the good work!

K.

[Jack The Lad.]

I shall now start on a rant about Vietnam.

[Foggy69]

Originally Posted by Jack The Lad.

I shall now start on a rant about Vietnam.

They have probably already forgotten this little mishap in their history.

Best tell them how they won the war in Iraq and made the world a safer place
And just to make sure I am not just accused of US bashing, I better say how we helped

[Seirrah]

Originally Posted by bikersupermoto

with so many cars in the us, its more important than ever that we dont go diesel until they sort out the black smoke that u all make in europe!. we are waiting till they get diesel working right before allowing diesel cars on our roads! an thats a good thing for us all!.

Yeah maybe just reduce the number of cars on your roads.