"uofime-2" (uofime-2)
10/13/2015 at 11:19 • Filed to: None
0
6|
"uofime-2" (uofime-2)
10/13/2015 at 11:19 • Filed to: None | 0
| 6 |
The ACEA is pushing to maintain the status quo, even if it means doing more harm than good.
From J !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA) is quoted saying that:
“it is important to proceed in a way which allows manufacturers to plan and implement the necessary changes, without jeopardizing the role of diesel as one of the key pillars for fulfilling future CO2 targets.”
They are suggesting that controlling CO2 is more important than controlling NOx. This suggests that they are so focused on the EU regulations that they have completely forgot what the point of them is, to protect the people.
Which emission actually represents an immediate health risk, CO2 or NOx?
This crisis presents a real opportunity for regulators to stop chasing CO2 and focus on cleaning up the more dangerous emissions that represent a more real thread to the public good.
Tightening the regulations and having the manufactures meet them will take a lot of work and cost money for the manufacturers and that is of course what the ACEA is speaking out against.
The worst thing is that in a few months after all the “dieselgate” brouhaha dies down all this will be swept under the rug and it will be business as usual, at least until we get to the next crisis.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
davedave1111
> uofime-2
10/13/2015 at 11:41 |
|
I don’t read the bit you quoted the same way. They said that both are important - and they meant ‘because we have money invested in them’.
The EU has some rather odd rules about CO2, but to quite a large extent it’s still unregulated.
http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies…
Here in London, we haven’t waited for the EU to sort the regs out.
https://www.london.gov.uk/media/mayor-pr…
|
uofime-2
> davedave1111
10/13/2015 at 11:51 |
|
I understand that they want to reduce CO2 and that they have targets for that, I just think it is ridiculous that they seem to prioritize it over NOx.
The seem to be saying that if they fix their NOx they won’t be able to sell diesels to meet CO2 targets which while possibly true but meeting CO2 while spewing NOx is going to do more harm than the good the CO2 targets intended
|
davedave1111
> uofime-2
10/13/2015 at 11:56 |
|
I don’t think they really did say that. To me it reads that they don’t want to compromise on either.
Looking at the general background, I think there’s an increasing expectation that diesels are going to be clamped down on by regulators in the near future - and there was before the VW story broke. The car manufacturers have a lot of money invested in diesels, but really only because of how the regs and tax incentives have been structured. If the regs change, it could render that investment rather pointless.
|
uofime-2
> davedave1111
10/13/2015 at 12:05 |
|
I can completely understand why the companies wouldn’t want the regulations to shift, but a lot of evidence says the regulations should change and the companies can adapt or close.
|
uofime-2
> davedave1111
10/13/2015 at 12:09 |
|
Also to be clear, I’m talking about regulations to take effect in 5 years not next year, I’m very aware the the automotive development cycle is long (3-5 years).
kanadanmajava1
> uofime-2
10/13/2015 at 12:21 |
|
I think that they mean that the amount of diesel vehicles have to be kept at certain level as they produce less CO2 emissions than engines using Otto cycle engines. So the estimates for CO2 emissions would be way off if the number of new diesel cars would be going down.
Nearly every environmental olicies in Europe are now related to the CO2 emissions (and NOx emissions have no role in this). So the estimated number of diesel vehicle is quite essential for the plans made by European Union.
The harms caused by NOx emissions and CO2 are quite different. You can die from CO2 emissions too but only in closed place. The long term effects caused by the CO2 emissions could kill at some point later on though. The NOx emissions are somewhat poisonous (NO2 is but NO is harmful only after it has turned into NO2 emissions) but even they don’t kill you immediately. But in dense cities they are causing health issues.
I bicycle a lot and I know that you shouldn’t ride behind city bus or any other modern diesel car. Once you realize what the NOx emissions smell like they really start to irritate.
My work is related to the measurement of exhaust emissions and I’m calculating various exhaust emissions test results nearly daily. The mess caused by VW has now brought a lot of attention to NOx emissions so now it isn’t anymore just a weird combination of letters.