For vehicles - climate change or air pollution - which matters more?

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by JakeJ, May 26, 2017.

?

For vehicles - climate change or air pollution - which matters more?

  1. Climate change. Less fuel burned for better mpg - but not as clean exhaust

    1 vote(s)
    100.0%
  2. Air pollution - bad mpgs and lots of co2 - but clean exhaust

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Climate change versus air pollution – which matters more?

    Few people really understood the issue of Volkswagon diesels programmed to cheat tailpipe pollution tests. By doing so, Volkswagon became the largest auto manufacturer in the world. So what was it about?

    I have a Ford twin turbo diesel 4x4. In factory stock form it gets about 15 mpg highway at best, will show engine error lights and requires a great deal of maintenance plus a relatively short engine life for a diesel. This is 100% entirely due to all the complex pollution control systems. Without those, fuel mileage increases to around 25 mph and horsepower nearly doubles at the same time, plus 90% of maintenance costs eliminated and the motor becomes good for at least half a million miles. The better mileage means, of course, less fuel burned per mile and less carbon emissions.

    The trick of VW was their computer could detect a tailpipe test and turn on all the environmental controls. Otherwise, for driving, they were all bypassed. With VWs getting significantly better fuel economy, running smoother and more powerful, people wanted VWs.

    So which is the greater need? Clean exhaust that pours out LOTS of co2 per mile? Or a dirty exhaust but pumping out far less co2? The federal government dictates that vehicles get the worst mileage burning the most fuel making the most co2, but the exhaust is much cleaner as a result. Simply, the government dictates vehicles put out vastly more co2 than they otherwise would.

    Some areas really NEED clean exhaust – major cities and particularly those boxed in by mountains such as areas of the West Coast. Others do not as air tends to clean itself. Thus, Florida has no tailpipe tests because it is a narrow flat strip of land between two huge bodies of water so wind blows the air out to sea.

    It would seem since GPS is such a cheap technology, vehicles computers could be set by the factory to run the vehicle clean – but bad gas mileage and lots of co2 – in urban areas - but then turn all that off for maximum fuel efficiency and minimal co2 emissions when on the open road.

    Do you agree with the government’s priority for air quality at the expensive of trillions of pounds of carbon emissions and bad fuel economy? Or should minimizing climate change/co2 emissions and best fuel economy be the priority?
     
    Last edited: May 26, 2017
  2. waltky

    waltky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    30,071
    Likes Received:
    1,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    India’s Air Pollution 18 Times the Healthy Limit...
    [​IMG]
    India’s Air Pollution 18 Times the Healthy Limit
    October 20, 2017 — Air pollution in New Delhi hit 18 times the healthy limit Friday under a thick, toxic haze after a night of fireworks to celebrate the Hindu festival of Diwali, despite a court-ordered ban on their sales.
     
  3. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    For vehicles - climate change or air pollution - which matters more?

    The two are almost the same thing.
     
  4. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,634
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why not just use electric vehicles in more crowded urban areas.
    Not only are driving distances less and electric charging stations more accessible but it will also have the benefit of cutting down smog (and noise pollution).
    Electric vehicles are also more efficient in situations where there is a lot of frequent stopping, like in heavy traffic. That's why the postal service was one of the first to adopt electric vehicles, as early as the 1980s, since the delivery car has to restart the engine after each stop at a mail box.

    I think this is another example of closed-minded people in urban areas trying to apply a solution that's good for them onto everyone else living a different way of life.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2017

Share This Page