[Richard Stevenson]

Nottingham city council will soon be charging diesel vans to enter our city centre all though we have work place parking levy and  a new tram system. Apparently we have one of the highest levels of pollution in the country.   £20 per day has been mentioned.  It's a disgrace !

[Richard iSparkle]

Nottingham city council will soon be charging diesel vans to enter our city centre all though we have work place parking levy and  a new tram system. Apparently we have one of the highest levels of pollution in the country.   £20 per day has been mentioned.  It's a disgrace !

whys that a disgrace?

pollution causes ill health and diesel causes cancer. if we can reduce the levels that's good for everyone.

also, if there's less traffic it'll be faster for you to get about and earn that £20 back

[Spruce]

Amasing how two guys can see the same thing totally differently.

I doubt the City of Nottingham is doing this for the health of their residents. More like a revenue stream if you ask me.

-

[SeanK]

Nottingham city council will soon be charging diesel vans to enter our city centre all though we have work place parking levy and  a new tram system. Apparently we have one of the highest levels of pollution in the country.   £20 per day has been mentioned.  It's a disgrace !

whys that a disgrace?

pollution causes ill health and diesel causes cancer. if we can reduce the levels that's good for everyone.

also, if there's less traffic it'll be faster for you to get about and earn that £20 back

There wont be any less traffic and there wont be any less pollution, just less money in the pockets of diesel vehicle owners
that's why its a disgrace.
Have the London congestion charges or the taxes on flights made a difference ? here's an idea ban all diesel vehicles sold
after a certain date in the future say 2018  from our cities full stop.

[robert mitchell]

Amasing how two guys can see the same thing totally differently.

I doubt the City of Nottingham is doing this for the health of their residents. More like a revenue stream if you ask me.

-

Exactly !

[sunshine windows]

Back tut ol' 'orse n cart then

[Spruce]

Back tut ol' 'orse n cart then

...and polution from the back end in a different form. 

[Positivity]

People were encouraged to switch to diesel, we were informed that it was cleaner.
Now they are introducing pollution taxes and talking about increasing road tax for Diesel vehicles and maybe a scrap trade in scheme.
Just can't win!

[Marc Stock]

People were encouraged to switch to diesel, we were informed that it was cleaner.
Now they are introducing pollution taxes and talking about increasing road tax for Diesel vehicles and maybe a scrap trade in scheme.
Just can't win!

Once again, a Labour policy. I never agreed that Diesel was cleaner and always argued the point whenever it come up to dicussion. Diesel is less refined than petrol, has many more long carbon chains to oxidise in combustion than petrol which is why it's a dirty fuel.

Diesel is cheaper to manufacture, and more profitable for the petrochemical industry to sell, even when you could get the stuff for 45p a litre the manufacturing process for diesel is less than half that of petrol, combined with the push to sell more Diesel cars prices went up at the pump to £1.40 or more a litre vastly incressing  the wealth of the oil companies due to the still low cost of manufacturing of diesel.

Only people who fell for the Diesel push of the 2000's are people who do not understand how engines work, or how fuel is made. The argument is that Diesel is more economical than petrol, this is only the case due to the high compression ratio needed to combust the fuel. If you can find a way to combust petrol at the same sort of pressures you would get simular if not the same fuel efficiency as Diesel.  Oh hang on that's where GDI comes in (Gasoline Direct Injection) GDI engines now match or even exceed diesel in terms of miles per gallon.

Diesel does have one advantage, it has more specific energy per litre than petrol, which is why trucks and vans use it as it translates to more torque so heavy loads are more efficient to transport.

But average Joe doesn't know all this.,

[EandM]

People were encouraged to switch to diesel, we were informed that it was cleaner.
Now they are introducing pollution taxes and talking about increasing road tax for Diesel vehicles and maybe a scrap trade in scheme.
Just can't win!

Once again, a Labour policy. I never agreed that Diesel was cleaner and always argued the point whenever it come up to dicussion. Diesel is less refined than petrol, has many more long carbon chains to oxidise in combustion than petrol which is why it's a dirty fuel.

Diesel is cheaper to manufacture, and more profitable for the petrochemical industry to sell, even when you could get the stuff for 45p a litre the manufacturing process for diesel is less than half that of petrol, combined with the push to sell more Diesel cars prices went up at the pump to £1.40 or more a litre vastly incressing  the wealth of the oil companies due to the still low cost of manufacturing of diesel.

Only people who fell for the Diesel push of the 2000's are people who do not understand how engines work, or how fuel is made. The argument is that Diesel is more economical than petrol, this is only the case due to the high compression ratio needed to combust the fuel. If you can find a way to combust petrol at the same sort of pressures you would get simular if not the same fuel efficiency as Diesel.  Oh hang on that's where GDI comes in (Gasoline Direct Injection) GDI engines now match or even exceed diesel in terms of miles per gallon.

Diesel does have one advantage, it has more specific energy per litre than petrol, which is why trucks and vans use it as it translates to more torque so heavy loads are more efficient to transport.

But average Joe doesn't know all this.,

I've never read anything definitive on the safety of GDI emissions. Around the turn of the century PSA created the particulate filter for the diesel engine which is now an industry standard. The particulates in question where PM10 which did pose health concerns as they represented a difficulty for our lungs to successfully filter. The concern with GDI were that direct injection petrol  engines also produced PM10 but in greater quantities due to, as has been said, less specific energy per litre.

We then have the issue of Benzene present in both fuels. It is a known  carcinogen and  has no safe exposure limit.
In Petrol it makes up  0.62% per litre and in Diesel it's 0,02% - factor in an urban setting where air quality is paramount and a petrol powered vehicle is going to burn considerably more fuel than an equivalent diesel.

We could just ban all vehicles from city centres unless they are electric - but where do we get the electricity from in a 100% environmentally friendly way ? We can shift the problem but not overcome it.

[Marc Stock]

People were encouraged to switch to diesel, we were informed that it was cleaner.
Now they are introducing pollution taxes and talking about increasing road tax for Diesel vehicles and maybe a scrap trade in scheme.
Just can't win!

Once again, a Labour policy. I never agreed that Diesel was cleaner and always argued the point whenever it come up to dicussion. Diesel is less refined than petrol, has many more long carbon chains to oxidise in combustion than petrol which is why it's a dirty fuel.

Diesel is cheaper to manufacture, and more profitable for the petrochemical industry to sell, even when you could get the stuff for 45p a litre the manufacturing process for diesel is less than half that of petrol, combined with the push to sell more Diesel cars prices went up at the pump to £1.40 or more a litre vastly incressing  the wealth of the oil companies due to the still low cost of manufacturing of diesel.

Only people who fell for the Diesel push of the 2000's are people who do not understand how engines work, or how fuel is made. The argument is that Diesel is more economical than petrol, this is only the case due to the high compression ratio needed to combust the fuel. If you can find a way to combust petrol at the same sort of pressures you would get simular if not the same fuel efficiency as Diesel.  Oh hang on that's where GDI comes in (Gasoline Direct Injection) GDI engines now match or even exceed diesel in terms of miles per gallon.

Diesel does have one advantage, it has more specific energy per litre than petrol, which is why trucks and vans use it as it translates to more torque so heavy loads are more efficient to transport.

But average Joe doesn't know all this.,

I've never read anything definitive on the safety of GDI emissions. Around the turn of the century PSA created the particulate filter for the diesel engine which is now an industry standard. The particulates in question where PM10 which did pose health concerns as they represented a difficulty for our lungs to successfully filter. The concern with GDI were that direct injection petrol  engines also produced PM10 but in greater quantities due to, as has been said, less specific energy per litre.

We then have the issue of Benzene present in both fuels. It is a known  carcinogen and  has no safe exposure limit.
In Petrol it makes up  0.62% per litre and in Diesel it's 0,02% - factor in an urban setting where air quality is paramount and a petrol powered vehicle is going to burn considerably more fuel than an equivalent diesel.

We could just ban all vehicles from city centres unless they are electric - but where do we get the electricity from in a 100% environmentally friendly way ? We can shift the problem but not overcome it.

Exactly, this is the problem. I feel the only real way we are going to break away from fossil fuels is if the fuel companies can no longer make the profits they have enjoyed.

Personally I think fuel cell technology is the answer. Batteries are not as environmentally friendly as they are made out to be as the manufacturing process is often damaging to environment.

It's a big issue, no doubt

[Spruce]

So Marc, what engine is in your van?

It does make me concerned that the soot expelled from the exhaust of my van is damaging to someone's health. I do try to drive carefully to prevent clouds of smoke from the exhaust of my diesel engined vehicles. I'm definitely against the 'rolling coal' protests of some American anti-environmentalists.

But what is the alternative solution now?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by fuel cell technology as this has been bantered about in many variants over the years. Of course the oil companies would love this type of technology introduced AFTER fossil fuels run out. The only technology that will replace petrol and diesel will be that which is reliant on a complicated process of delivery so would remain in the control of multi-national companies backed by Governments for taxation purposes.

I can't believe that no one has divised an easy way to split water into hydrogen and oxygen at a basic level. If they have then its been squashed by the world of big business to prevent us running our combustion engines from the tap at home. Simple under bonnet concepts have been diy assembled for a while now producing Brown's gas.

http://www.fuelcellsystems.co.uk/technology/

They tell us that to electrically split water in hydrogen and oxygen takes more energy than the resultant energy making it uneconomical.

Unfortunately any fuel cell technology will also end up in the hands of big business.
 

[Spruce]

People were encouraged to switch to diesel, we were informed that it was cleaner.
Now they are introducing pollution taxes and talking about increasing road tax for Diesel vehicles and maybe a scrap trade in scheme.
Just can't win!

Once again, a Labour policy. I never agreed that Diesel was cleaner and always argued the point whenever it come up to dicussion. Diesel is less refined than petrol, has many more long carbon chains to oxidise in combustion than petrol which is why it's a dirty fuel.

Diesel is cheaper to manufacture, and more profitable for the petrochemical industry to sell, even when you could get the stuff for 45p a litre the manufacturing process for diesel is less than half that of petrol, combined with the push to sell more Diesel cars prices went up at the pump to £1.40 or more a litre vastly incressing  the wealth of the oil companies due to the still low cost of manufacturing of diesel.

Only people who fell for the Diesel push of the 2000's are people who do not understand how engines work, or how fuel is made. The argument is that Diesel is more economical than petrol, this is only the case due to the high compression ratio needed to combust the fuel. If you can find a way to combust petrol at the same sort of pressures you would get simular if not the same fuel efficiency as Diesel.  Oh hang on that's where GDI comes in (Gasoline Direct Injection) GDI engines now match or even exceed diesel in terms of miles per gallon.

Diesel does have one advantage, it has more specific energy per litre than petrol, which is why trucks and vans use it as it translates to more torque so heavy loads are more efficient to transport.

But average Joe doesn't know all this.,

I've never read anything definitive on the safety of GDI emissions. Around the turn of the century PSA created the particulate filter for the diesel engine which is now an industry standard. The particulates in question where PM10 which did pose health concerns as they represented a difficulty for our lungs to successfully filter. The concern with GDI were that direct injection petrol  engines also produced PM10 but in greater quantities due to, as has been said, less specific energy per litre.

We then have the issue of Benzene present in both fuels. It is a known  carcinogen and  has no safe exposure limit.
In Petrol it makes up  0.62% per litre and in Diesel it's 0,02% - factor in an urban setting where air quality is paramount and a petrol powered vehicle is going to burn considerably more fuel than an equivalent diesel.

We could just ban all vehicles from city centres unless they are electric - but where do we get the electricity from in a 100% environmentally friendly way ? We can shift the problem but not overcome it.

This is very interesting.

I've seen diesel exhausts of new vehicles with dpf filters with no soot on the inside at all. My 04 hdi van's exhaust  on the other hand is really sooty.

Have dfp filters solved the soot emissions issues?

Then what about more co2 if everyone went back to petrol?

What about the no issues with diesels.

Maybe the horse and cart is the way to go.

[EandM]

People were encouraged to switch to diesel, we were informed that it was cleaner.
Now they are introducing pollution taxes and talking about increasing road tax for Diesel vehicles and maybe a scrap trade in scheme.
Just can't win!

Once again, a Labour policy. I never agreed that Diesel was cleaner and always argued the point whenever it come up to dicussion. Diesel is less refined than petrol, has many more long carbon chains to oxidise in combustion than petrol which is why it's a dirty fuel.

Diesel is cheaper to manufacture, and more profitable for the petrochemical industry to sell, even when you could get the stuff for 45p a litre the manufacturing process for diesel is less than half that of petrol, combined with the push to sell more Diesel cars prices went up at the pump to £1.40 or more a litre vastly incressing  the wealth of the oil companies due to the still low cost of manufacturing of diesel.

Only people who fell for the Diesel push of the 2000's are people who do not understand how engines work, or how fuel is made. The argument is that Diesel is more economical than petrol, this is only the case due to the high compression ratio needed to combust the fuel. If you can find a way to combust petrol at the same sort of pressures you would get simular if not the same fuel efficiency as Diesel.  Oh hang on that's where GDI comes in (Gasoline Direct Injection) GDI engines now match or even exceed diesel in terms of miles per gallon.

Diesel does have one advantage, it has more specific energy per litre than petrol, which is why trucks and vans use it as it translates to more torque so heavy loads are more efficient to transport.

But average Joe doesn't know all this.,

I've never read anything definitive on the safety of GDI emissions. Around the turn of the century PSA created the particulate filter for the diesel engine which is now an industry standard. The particulates in question where PM10 which did pose health concerns as they represented a difficulty for our lungs to successfully filter. The concern with GDI were that direct injection petrol  engines also produced PM10 but in greater quantities due to, as has been said, less specific energy per litre.

We then have the issue of Benzene present in both fuels. It is a known  carcinogen and  has no safe exposure limit.
In Petrol it makes up  0.62% per litre and in Diesel it's 0,02% - factor in an urban setting where air quality is paramount and a petrol powered vehicle is going to burn considerably more fuel than an equivalent diesel.

We could just ban all vehicles from city centres unless they are electric - but where do we get the electricity from in a 100% environmentally friendly way ? We can shift the problem but not overcome it.

Exactly, this is the problem. I feel the only real way we are going to break away from fossil fuels is if the fuel companies can no longer make the profits they have enjoyed.

Personally I think fuel cell technology is the answer. Batteries are not as environmentally friendly as they are made out to be as the manufacturing process is often damaging to environment.

It's a big issue, no doubt

Fuel Cell technology is quite brilliant. James May drove a Honda in California that ran on Hydrogen straight from the pump.  The car could be filled in a few minutes and then had an electrical range of around 300 miles with water as the only waste product.
As has been already mentioned the problem stems from getting hold of the hydrogen and making available to pump. It still requires more energy to separate it from whatever it's attached to, usually water, than you get back so usage is always running at a loss relative to creation.

The only workable solution is cold fusion to generate the electricity - if anyone ever gets it to work.
CERN has apparently had success in Nuclear Fusion but even that, at the moment, still yields less power out than you have to put in.

[Marc Stock]

Unfortunately yes my van is Diesel. But as has been mentioned their isn't much alternative.

This is an interesting link on what nissan are doing with fuel cells.

http://www.autonews.com/article/20160614/OEM05/160619961/nissan-develops-new-ethanol-fuel-cells-to-jump-infrastructure-hurdle?X-IgnoreUserAgent=1

Nissan develops new ethanol fuel cells to jump infrastructure hurdle

[Perfect Windows]

There wont be any less traffic and there wont be any less pollution, just less money in the pockets of diesel vehicle owners
that's why its a disgrace.
Have the London congestion charges or the taxes on flights made a difference ? here's an idea ban all diesel vehicles sold
after a certain date in the future say 2018  from our cities full stop.

If there's no less traffic after the introduction of a £20 daily charge then you would have to rewrite the most basic parts of economic theory, namely that demand drops when price increases.  For there to be no change,  not a single person would have to get a bus/train/walk/cycle/share a ride to work rather than pay £20 to take their car.

I worked in London when the congestion charge came in and it was spooky how quiet the traffic was.  Everyone noticed it.

From Wikipedia "After ten years since the scheme introduction in February 2013, TfL reports a 10% reduction in traffic levels from baseline conditions.[8] TfL assessed that the scheme has had a significant impact in shifting people away from using cars, contributing to an overall reduction of 11% in vehicle kilometres in London between 2000 and 2012.[4]"

Vin

[EandM]

Unfortunately yes my van is Diesel. But as has been mentioned their isn't much alternative.

This is an interesting link on what nissan are doing with fuel cells.

http://www.autonews.com/article/20160614/OEM05/160619961/nissan-develops-new-ethanol-fuel-cells-to-jump-infrastructure-hurdle?X-IgnoreUserAgent=1

Nissan develops new ethanol fuel cells to jump infrastructure hurdle

Let's hope it doesn't break in half after a few years like their pickup trucks !

[slap bash]

I would love someone to explain hold a charge will change pollution level . 5 minutes of breeze the pollution has moved on to the next town.  And if only charging more solves the problem I would like to know. So we all sell our diesel and buy petrol van and there will be a petrol van tax.

[AuRavelling79]

I reckon clockwork or rubber band power is the way to go if you belong to a gym.

You hook up all the gym bunnies to a running treadmill or spinning bike which "winds up" their car's clockwork motor. Easy.

[Positivity]

I reckon clockwork or rubber band power is the way to go if you belong to a gym.

You hook up all the gym bunnies to a running treadmill or spinning bike which "winds up" their car's clockwork motor. Easy.

Get all the prisoners running on treadmill generators all day instead of watching SKY!