Le Rant: on Paris, diesel pollution, and political hypocrisy

"Clemsie McKenzie" (thestirringcolumn) 07/05/2016 at 12:00 • Filed to: None

3

40

Last Friday, Paris closed its doors on all cars built before 1997, in a bid to reduce pollution in the city. But this new law will be inefficient at best, and a real hassle for thousands of people. It is also a good summary of the total hypocrisy shown by France regarding emissions and an all-powerful diesel industry.

One thing that might surprise many of you from the US is that in France nearly 80% of all cars sold are diesel powered .

Why is that?

Well, after the 1973 oil crisis, French manufacturers invested heavily on diesel technology. But diesels engines are costly, and so widespread success wasn’t that prevalent in France, early on.

The manufacturers weren’t going to back down from those R&D costs, though. And so they lobbied the French government into lowering the (massive) oil taxes for diesel fuel, rendering it cheaper to buy than normal gas. Normally, the only advantage of diesel engines (besides torque) is the better mileage. In France, because of that intense lobbying, owning a diesel car provides a double advantage: lower consumption AND cheaper fuel.

And so here we are, with 80% of French cars being sold with a diesel engine.

I already hear the US Jalops dreaming of diesel Citroen wagons creaming their pants at the idea. But I’m here to tell you that diesel can suck, too .

Diesel engines are for the most part loud, smelly, unrefined, heavy, smokey, and have no top-end power. More importantly (and this is finally relevant to my rant here), they do not only release CO2, but also NOx and fine particulate.

Now, we all know the effects of CO2 on global warming, and it’s true that most diesels pollute less than gas engines on that regard.

But NOx and fine particulate adds to the global warming problem a more direct and visible problem, being linked to acid rains and around !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

This fact was brought up by different health organizations a couple of years ago, and the French government said “Yeah, sure, we see it now. Diesel sucks. We’re gonna do something about it! Maybe tomorrow though, today I’m bit busy. Let’s reschedule! But we’ll do it, sure!”

There were talks of diesel gas being finally set back to a normally taxed price. Now, this would have been a decent first step, even funding further the government. But it never happened. French manufacturers and transportation companies probably saw to that. As a matter of fact, nothing happened on that front. You would have thought that after the Dieselgate, something would finally have been done to bring diesel sales down. But no.

Now, the recently elected mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, has pledged to reduce pollution in the city. Which is a grand idea, and I’m all for it. Let’s take a look at a breakdown of which kind of cars produce which kind of air pollution in Paris, courtesy of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! :

The right columns are the most important here. “particuliers” = privately owned; “essence” = gas; “utilitaires”= company operated vehicules (aka trucks of various sizes, from vans to semis). As you can see, private diesel cars produce 43% of NOx emissions in Paris, private gas cars 4%. Also note that NOx emissions have almost halved between 2000 and 2012.

The second chart is for particulate matters (PM) emissions. “Essence” (gas) cars aren’t on the chart, because they don’t really produce any.

Now, is it only me or taxing more heavily diesel cars and trucks (or just on par with normal gas, really), and forking out incentive to switch from (old) diesel cars to gas, hybrid or even electric cars sounds like a very effective plan to reduce emissions?

Well, I guess it’s only me. Paris has decided to ban all cars from 1997 or before, effective last week. In a couple of years, I won’t be able to drive in the city with my 2000 Renault Clio, which has a 1.4L, 4-cylinders gas engine that gets better mileage than my parents’ Toyota Prius.

As a result, a maximum amount of people will be pissed, and experts are forecasting lowering of emissions by 10% tops in 2020. And still, nothing has been done to fix the diesel problem, which actually directly kills people.

All in all, it just shows how France regards its transportation policies, especially regarding cars. They’ll just do whatever makes the industry happy, and costs the smallest amount of money, even if it doesn’t fix anything. The same thing works for speed limits and driving laws enforcement, but this rant is already pretty long, so maybe I’ll save that for later.

My main frustration with this is that it would have been so easy to clean up Paris’ air, and that for a while it actually seemed that the city understood what it had to do. But no, let’s just blindingly ban cars, what could possibly go wrong with that?

Vive la fucking France.

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:05

3

On the bright side, the French will be too busy striking to enforce it.

Clemsie McKenzie > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie 07/05/2016 at 12:08

0

You say that, but pre-1997 cars are outlawed in Paris since last week, and I didn’t see much noise been made about it around here. I guess people are too busy drinking beer in front of the football.

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:13

0

I think the Paridian cops have their hands a bit full right now with their lulzworthy Occupy-lite cryfest.

Slant6 > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:15

0

What if you’re like visiting from elsewhere? Can they really tell you to stop driving?

When I had first heard about this I thought it was fine, since Paris is a big city with I’m assuming usable public transportation. And also that not many cars there are pre 1997 (most cities I’ve been in have newer cars as the majority, but I’ve only been to US cities and Montreal).

But hearing from you has changed my opinion.

Ash78, voting early and often > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:24

1

Thank you for this. French economic policy has really helped encourage the manufacturer and adoption of diesels across Europe as a whole, but obviously the numbers are among the highest in France. What's interesting to me is that this (completely legal) policy has done so much damage to human life, and it's NOT as politically tinged as the CO2 issue and the whole global warming debate (humans vs nature; will it make a difference? will it halt economic progress?). Particulates and NOx are objectively bad all the time, no real argument. And to think about how much trouble VW is in for their cheating almost makes me sick when you look at numbers like this. Completely legal, non-cheating numbers.

450X_FTW > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:24

0

They should ban ships coming into port since they pollute far more than diesel cars on the road do.

CalzoneGolem > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:24

0

Diesel engines are for the most part loud, smelly, unrefined, heavy, smokey, and have no top-end power.

This is how I’ve always felt about diesel engines.

Amoore100 > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:25

1

I was gonna make a fuss about it but I figured it makes some sense and it doesn’t affect me so I’d just be the guy yelling at a cloud. Thanks for this article, it saved me plenty of effort and ranting myself ;)

Still, wouldn't the progressive Euro emission standards (Euro 3, Euro 4, Euro 5, Euro 6) help the smog issue with the age restriction?

450X_FTW > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:25

2

Here we see the typical french people, they all have breathing problems that are directly related to diesel exhaust fumes from commuter cars, and not possibly any other source.....

Clemsie McKenzie > 450X_FTW 07/05/2016 at 12:27

1

Actually, it’s illegal to smoke in bars in France!

CalzoneGolem > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:28

0

I’m confused how they think this is going to be enforceable. Can the cops really tell the difference from a 1996 Peugeot 306 and a 1997?

Doubtful.

Cé hé sin > 450X_FTW 07/05/2016 at 12:29

0

It’s quite a while since you could see a sight like that in Paris, or anywhere else in France!

No smoking in bars and restaurants.

450X_FTW > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:29

1

Sacrebleu!!

Clemsie McKenzie > Ash78, voting early and often 07/05/2016 at 12:29

0

Exactly! This is government-backed pollution. Diesel and the particles it emits have been classified as “potentially cancerous” since 1989, and it’s been proved a couple of years ago that they definitely are cancerous. How can a government still push for more people to drive diesels after that?

450X_FTW > Cé hé sin 07/05/2016 at 12:30

0

I literally googled “france smoking” just for this picture too. I know nothing of France.

Clemsie McKenzie > Slant6 07/05/2016 at 12:32

0

From what I know, pre-1997 cars are banned from Paris, in all circumstances. Now I guess they’ll simply give you a fine, but I suspect it’ll be enough for you to not do it.

But yeah, the public transportation system is pretty good, especially compared to what exists in the US. Strikes are no legends, though!

Ash78, voting early and often > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:36

0

And it’s hard to argue with spending a day in Paris or London and seeing how much black soot clogs your nose by the end of the day. I hate to think about how much my nose hairs weren't able to clean! To be fair, I was a huge diesel fanatic for a while, but within the context of the US, where they are (and always would be) a small minority. It's good to have some diversification in our energy sources, but when diesels become the majority form of propulsion, it's clearly a problem.

Clemsie McKenzie > Amoore100 07/05/2016 at 12:38

1

Thanks!

Sure, it would help. As I said, experts are forecasting a reduction in 10% of emission. It’s nothing to be sneezed at, for sure. But there are much more effective way to go about this, however it would affect the status-quo with Renault and Peugeot-Citroen.

Cé hé sin > CalzoneGolem 07/05/2016 at 12:40

1

Not me. I’ve driven quite a number and haven’t found them to be any of the above.

Clemsie McKenzie > Ash78, voting early and often 07/05/2016 at 12:41

0

Yeah, a bit of diesel is fine. It makes sense if you travel a lot and hates hybrids (for some reason), or for trucks. Now, for city cars and such? No reason at all, except for those tax incentives.

Clemsie McKenzie > CalzoneGolem 07/05/2016 at 12:42

1

Yeah but say they stop you for something else and check your papers, well you gonne have another fine to worry about.

Cé hé sin > Slant6 07/05/2016 at 12:42

0

As far as I can make out it applies to all vehicles, wherever they’re from. You have to buy a sticker to be able to drive in the city centre on weekdays so no sticker and you’re liable to a fine, although how they enforce that is another matter.

CalzoneGolem > Cé hé sin 07/05/2016 at 12:43

0

I’ve been around the big American diesels mostly but the newer VAG diesels motors seem ok. Still this is how I think of Diesel.

duurtlang > CalzoneGolem 07/05/2016 at 12:46

0

As the owner of a Peugeot 306 convertible first registered January 1997 I think I have a tiny bit of authority here. In early 1997 there was a facelift for the 306. Mine was one of the very last from before the facelift.

Your point does still stand though. Banning cars based on year is beyond silly. It would be better to look at emission norm (Euro3, for example) and fuel type.

My actual 306 at 19.5 years old:

1997 facelift (press shot):

duurtlang > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 12:49

0

Classics aren’t banned though, from what I’ve heard.

CalzoneGolem > duurtlang 07/05/2016 at 12:49

0

You just need to swap the front fascia and hon hon hon!

Clemsie McKenzie > duurtlang 07/05/2016 at 12:50

0

Yep, cars 30+ years old cars are still allowed.

Cé hé sin > CalzoneGolem 07/05/2016 at 12:53

1

They don’t have to. You need to buy a windscreen sticker to be able to drive in the city centre and you’re not getting one unless you have a sufficiently new vehicle. No sticker and you’re liable to a fine.

CalzoneGolem > Cé hé sin 07/05/2016 at 12:54

0

That makes sense. Do you have to pass an emissions test to get the sticker?

Slant6 > Cé hé sin 07/05/2016 at 13:00

0

Is there any exception to antique or vintage vehicles? Or does Europe not do that like the US does, where they’re exempt from just about everything (displaying valid plates, tolls, inspections, red light cameras, etc).

Cé hé sin > CalzoneGolem 07/05/2016 at 13:00

1

I don’t know, as I understand it the sticker is based just on age, however the vehicle will need to pass a safety/emissions check in any case and driving without a valid test cert is already illegal.

duurtlang > Clemsie McKenzie 07/05/2016 at 13:01

1

So cars aged 19.5-30 years old are banned. It’s rather weird legislation, and I honestly question it’ll have even close to that 10% improvement.

20+ year old cars are typically not all that prevalent, and the ones that are left don’t tend to be driven all that much. Someone who does 25k km a year typically doesn’t do so in a 20 year old car. Deduct the 20+ year old gasoline powered cars (with catalysts) which are still relatively clean, and you’re left with just a handful of diesels and non-catalyst gas powered cars contributing to the problem.

My guess: no measurable effect whatsoever related to banning <1997 cars. The only improvement will be related to the natural replacement of cars, as seen in your 2000 -> 2012 comparison.

Cé hé sin > Slant6 07/05/2016 at 13:01

0

Vehicles more than thirty years old are expected to be exempted in some circumstances.

Clemsie McKenzie > duurtlang 07/05/2016 at 13:09

0

Yeah I do think that 10% is rather optimistic as well.

duurtlang > Cé hé sin 07/05/2016 at 13:11

0

Well, they really are louder, heavier and they do have less top end power. Well maintained they’re not smelly or smokey, and unrefinement depends on the engine.

Having said that, I actually prefer the gas engine in my 1988 205 GTi over the diesel in my 2013 Ford Focus company car. They have the exact same amount of hp and displacement. The turbo diesel does have almost twice the torque (and a lot of extra weight it needs to drag along).

Cé hé sin > duurtlang 07/05/2016 at 14:17

0

Many people prefer diesels - they find petrol engines gutless in comparison. In some places they have considerably higher resale value too - here people buying anything new and bigger than a Focus or Golf - and often a Golf sized model too - wouldn’t consider a petrol car because they’d be stuck with it.

Cé hé sin > 450X_FTW 07/05/2016 at 14:25

0

True, and there are emissions regs for ships - but you can’t enforce them on the high seas. What happens then is that some ships, especially I suppose the big two stroke ones, use two kinds of fuel. When in an emissions regulated area they use diesel, elsewhere they switch to bunker oil which is a thick, tarry, dirty substance which you have to heat to be able to inject.

Yes, large marine diesels are two strokes. They’re extraordinarily efficient, surprisingly.

duurtlang > Cé hé sin 07/05/2016 at 14:58

0

Here diesels tend to depreciate faster. They’re more expensive when new, but this difference changes quickly. They’re taxed (ownership tax) significantly higher and don’t really make much financial sense to those doing <25k km a year. Especially cars like the Focus and Megane wagon/diesel, which sold in huge numbers a few years ago, have depreciated quickly.

Looking at the Ford Focus first registered in 2013 on a popular used car website I find:

gasoline: 81, diesel: 120

manual: 192, auto: 11

wagon: 135, hatch: 68, sedan: 1

gasoline: median price €12k, median kms: 63k

diesel: median price €12k, median kms: 116k

I have to note that due to a tax loophole(ish) the diesel Focus above sold quite a lot more than expected.

Now I’ll do the same thing for the 2010 Ford Focus:

gasoline: 65, diesel: 33

manual: 97, auto: 1

wagon: 63, hatch: 31, convertible: 3, sedan: 1

gasoline: median price €9.5k, median kms: 103k

diesel: median price €7k, median kms: 185k

As you can see: diesels start out more expensive when new, cost about the same after 3 years (but with more kms) and are clearly cheaper after 6 (but with more kms)

I will have to add that cars with high kms (or damage) are frequently exported to the east of the continent.

edit : yearly ownership tax (fuel type and vehicle weight based):

Focus wagon diesel (both 2010 and 2013): €1380

Focus wagon gasoline (both 2010 and 2013): €612

gogmorgo - rowing gears in a Grand Cherokee > Clemsie McKenzie 07/06/2016 at 02:59

0

My impression of the “romantic” city of lights from when I was there back in 2008 is that it’s a filthy city. Everything was grimy and a bit sooty, and there was a persistent fug of nasea-inducing diesel exhaust everywhere. Banning old cars isn’t going to solve that... most people aren’t out there driving 20-year-old cars. Don’t you love it when politicians impose innefective solutions without minimal scientific base?

Clemsie McKenzie > gogmorgo - rowing gears in a Grand Cherokee 07/06/2016 at 04:12

0

Love it so much.