diesel ban looms

[ayjay]

You wait till enough people have electric cars then see a handy tax on them being implemented under some excuse ,your never going to win

 

There's already something in the pipeline.

 

I saw a scheme touted recently where they were considering charging companies for the parking spaces they had.

 

Doesn't matter what it runs on, you still have to park it somewhere.

[chesters1]

Technically having company parking is a perk so tax liable

I presume even if you pay its a perk you have it to yourself unlike joe public who have to hunt it down

[Steve Walker]

The very successful attempt to push people into diesels was to reduce CO2 emissions, but unfortunately it has come at the expense of local air quality. There are a few issues - they have been allowed to be dirtier on test than petrol engines for some pollutants (simply because of what was feasible with current tech), the test conditions are not representative of how they are actually driven, and at least one manufacturer has been gaming the system. So their actual in-use emissions performance, even when brand new, hasn't kept up with their on-paper performance. Add in to that our in-use emissions testing (MOT) being nowhere near sensitive enough to pick up deterioration in performance over time and people buggering up the emissions by chipping them or removing the diesel particulate filters when they expensively break and you've got a problem.

[Mat Hillman]

 

Wonder where the blue stuff goes ? Into the fuel line somewhere i would presume? so why not a version like redex where you can put it directly in the tank? Or if its that easy why isnt it in diesel by law?

 

 

It's injected into the exhaust system.

 

My new Taxi has it got about 5k miles before the Ad Blue light came on, took less than 10l to fill the additive tank back up. I'm quite impressed as I'm paying £20 a year road tax for a big diesel car and getting almost 50 to the gallon out of it mainly town driving!

 

Mat

[chesters1]

 

It's injected into the exhaust system.

 

My new Taxi has it got about 5k miles before the Ad Blue light came on, took less than 10l to fill the additive tank back up. I'm quite impressed as I'm paying £20 a year road tax for a big diesel car and getting almost 50 to the gallon out of it mainly town driving!

 

Mat

I wonder rather than getting rid of it its masking it somehow ?

My old volvo 240 had a carb and a 2.3 litre engine so not clean in anyway but every MOT it beat the emission standards for even a injected car ,how did it do it? It had a system that injected air into the exhaust (pulse air system) which in essence 'diluted' the exhaust .it didnt reduce the emissions ofcourse but mislead the sensor on the exhaust gas analyser it was cleaner than it was

[Phone]

Chesters1,

 

Whilst I consider you his equal sometimes you're the quintessential cynic. If i recall the meaning of E = mc^ correctly, it effectively demonstrates that mass is a highly condensed form of energy (among other things that Einstein's famous equation demonstrates). He said, "Matter (mass) can be created and destroyed. It is energy which cannot be created nor destroyed.

 

"Getting rid of it" is why there is increased efficiency.

 

Phone

[chesters1]

Is it? as most uk cars are far larger than ones even from the 70's perhaps 'efficiency' is trying to get round the problem of this increase not overcome it LOL

The problem doesnt lie with cars but the number of cars ,perhaps to make a huge 'efficiency' fewer should be on the roads rather than make those on it more efficient (and perhaps shorten their lives forcing people to buy new cars) the car makers will show you how 'efficient ' their cars are forgetting every few years your scrappkng the damn things doint untold pollution getting rid of them .

My old volvo (before it got bent) was probably not efficient but like my 1957 fridge just how many modern cars will be made and scrapped in the years its on earth? If i buy second hand parts thsts far more efficient than buying new ones hence car makes now make it far harder to get or use second hand parts so their cars get replaced and them get a nice shiny one sold ,hows getting rid of something thats only broken more efficiant than fixing it .isnt 'efficiency ' in car terms supposed to be good for the planet? Or good for business?

Edited December 12, 2016 by chesters1

[Steve Walker]

AdBlue is basically a solution of urea. No, you can't just refill it with pee!

 

It is broken down in the exhaust gases to ammonia and carbon dioxide. The ammonia reacts with the oxides of nitrogen to give nitrogen and water.

[chesters1]

AdBlue is basically a solution of urea. No, you can't just refill it with pee!

 

It is broken down in the exhaust gases to ammonia and carbon dioxide. The ammonia reacts with the oxides of nitrogen to give nitrogen and water.

Where does the CO2 go ?

Could it be your just substituting one pollutant for another? And what gets rid of the carbon particulates ? Is the carbon bye products added to the co2 from the blue to give more carbon?

The exhaust filter obviously gets rids of soot but stopping a gas is impossible

Perhaps every car towing a water container in a trailer and putting the exhaust gasses through it may get around it by producing soot soup and carbonic acid but whats the impact on extra emmisions towing a trailer full of carbon soup and carbonic acid everywhere ? LOL in the end the soup will end up in the environment along with the acid ,you are not going to overcome the eventual

 

Its like low energu light bulbs ,they may use less energy in use but probably use more disposing of them than they saved ,your just substituting one saving for you for a loss somewhere else ,far more efficient is sitting in the dark

Energy can only be changed not destroyed ,you will save on one hand lose on the other the planet is doomed your choice is to do it quickly and enjoy yourself or slowly and boringly in the dark

I dont have fun driving a car but i fart a lot either isnt good for you me or the planet

Edited December 12, 2016 by chesters1

[Steve Walker]

Out of the tailpipe!

 

But there's not a great deal of it compared to what's coming from burning the fuel.

 

It's a 32.5% urea solution. It's a little denser than water, so Mat's 10 litres would ~ 3.5kg of urea.

 

Urea is CH4N20, meaning that 12 + 4*1 + 2*14 + 16 = 60 units by mass of urea contains 12 units of carbon which would give you 12 +2*16 = 44 units of CO2.

 

3.5kg * 44/60 = ~2.6kg of CO2

 

Or about the same as a litre of diesel.

 

So the additional CO2 from using Adblue is, in Mat's case, about the same as using an extra litre of diesel over 5000 miles.