Slashdot Mirror
France Wants To Get Rid of Diesel Fuel
mrspoonsi sends this Reuters report:
France wants to gradually phase out the use of diesel fuel for private passenger transport and will put in place a system to identify the most polluting vehicles, Prime Minister Manuel Valls said on Friday. Next year, the government will launch a car identification system that will rank vehicles by the amount of pollution they emit, Valls said in a speech. This will make it possible for local authorities to limit city access for the dirtiest cars. "In France, we have long favoured the diesel engine. This was a mistake, and we will progressively undo that, intelligently and pragmatically," Valls said. About 80 percent of French motorists drive diesel-powered cars. Valls said taxation would have to orient citizens towards more ecological choices, notably the 2015 state budget measures to reduce the tax advantage of diesel fuel versus gas.
is diesel such a bad fuel? I thought low sulfur diesel in modern vehicles was pretty OK with great gas mileage?
From what I know with my north-american perspective, the reason diesel is so popular in Europe (excluding some countries) is that it's not as heavily taxed as gasoline, as a concession to the commercial transport industry. Combined with greater per-liter fuel economy, it becomes advantageous to use it instead of gasoline, ignoring pollution downsides. The 80% figure is surprising, I thought it hovered around 40-50%.
How does France imagine to accomplish this phaseout? To transform 80% of its automobile fleet would present huge costs both to government and to the individual drivers. Will there be subsidies for electrics? Lower taxation of gasoline fuel and gasoline-powered cars?
Maybe it's a very roundabout plot to tax heating. Diesel works in place of heating oil, right?
Ignoring for the moment that there is probably not enough bio-diesel by several magnitudes to meet the need, I wonder if bio-diesel would also be phased out.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
This sounds like Renault and Citroen have SERIOUS problems and want to sell new cars.
Everybody talking about CO2 reductions and they want to kill Diesel ? WTF ? Diesel has by its very principle (high temperature differential in the cycle) an excellent efficiency. That translates into low CO2 emissions.
The soot can (and already is) combatted by filters, catalyzers and things like Daimler's Urea injection (AdBlue). This is no longer a real problem, except if you make one out of it.
So who exactly decided that diesel engines were bad? Last year the government offered incentives to purchase diesel engine vehicles and this year they are increasing the tax on diesel fuel and now offering incentives only for electric cars. And by electric cars we mean the ones charged with electricity created by those really, really bad nuclear power plants that they want to phase out in favor of coal fired plants or something. Idiots.
While diesel looks like a dirtier fuel from the exhaust, isn't it cleaner ?
IE bigger chunks that fall out of the air quicker and fewer greenhouse gases.
The green techs need a push, but we need the oil companies not to game the politics !
electrics need better battery tech, cheaper fuel cells, hydrogen production & delivery networks.
solar,wind, geothermal, nuclear,etc are for producing at fixed locations.
conservation is the quickest short term gain.
ride a bike and use it wisely.
wisdom without greed !
So Diesel cars in France are basically unsellable and anyone who has one can look forward to fuel costs rising ahead of petrol for the rest of the time they have it. All that's going to happen is that Diesel cars that would have gone to or stayed in France will flood the rest of the EU.
The reason 80% of percent of French motorists drive diesel-powered cars is because they are the most economical option.
Not just French but in most of Europe you'll find the diesel car is the popular option as it's the most economical choice.
The introduction of the "AdBlue" legislation on goods vehicles, and now private vehicles, has reduced the pollution deficit in comparison to petrol to a point which is even better. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid
Take a typical French family car and compare same sized engines of petrol and diesel (this car has AdBlue).
http://www.nextgreencar.com/view-car/49548/citroen-c4-grand-picasso-1.6i-vti-vtr+-120hp-petrol-manual-5-speed
http://www.nextgreencar.com/view-car/49561/citroen-c4-grand-picasso-1.6-e-hdi-vtr+-115hp-diesel-manual-6-speed
Which one pollutes the most? Why the hell would you want to start "phasing out" the cleaner car?
Why not just offer everyone driving a fossil fuel car the same incentive to move to electric?
Why pick on diesel when it's now cleaner?
I'm all for electric and the end of burning fuel to drive around but you have to ask the question of WHERE that electricity is coming from to charge up your car?
Is the problem just being shifted?
At least when you burn the fuel yourself you have the choice of which fuel you burn and how well you burn it.
When you are consuming electrons off a grid you've given up a lot of your freedom of choice.
How is this even true? I used this website to compare the Jetta which comes in a diesel and gas version and the diesel had less carbon emissions. (comparing the 2011 2.0 TSI gas to 2013 2.0 TDI diesel the gas had 1.4 times more CO2 emissions)
https://www.car-emissions.com/cars/model/volkswagen/jetta/page:1/sort:Year/direction:desc
I hate articles like this that provide no hard data for me to judge by myself what the facts are. This push to phase out the "bad" technology is a clearly bogus effort to improve society.
Every talks of CO2, the problem with diesels is the NOx. No amount of trying to fudge the exhaust system will help with that, having worked in a workshop for a few years I've seen the first hand effects of the emission control systems and they are unreliable. In the UK you need to drive > 12,000 miles a year for a diesel to even start to make economic sense but people get so hung up on fuel costs they don't look at the TCO of a vehicle and go for the one with the lowest fuel costs.
They build at least two new nuclear power stations and have a very capable nuclear industry. Leccy is so cheap they use it for heating !
They recently also did some shit with the air conditioning systems against Daimler, which enabled them to embargo a certain type of Daimler car completely in France. And "becuase of the war etc" the German government is super-tame with those fuckers.
Pretty stupid idea.
My Ford Focus with diesel uses 4,5l per 100km. My wife's Opel Astra uses 8l of gasoline per 10km
Is burning almost twice more of gasoline is better for the environment? I doubt it.
So what? contractors will have to drive priuses?
Diesel ist the more expensive, superior technology. It only had IN THE PAST a problem with the emission of small, cancerogenous particles. That has been fixed at enormous R&D cost (AdBlue, filters, high-end injection systems, you name it).
The French are rodents at times, that's all.
Plain and simple France is a bankrupt county. Someone is bribing it's gov't to let USA take foothold in decision making, while aggressively pushing USA way of doing things benefiting USA companies exports. Recently, remember?, they convinced Baltic countries to "be free of soviet aggression" by buying more expensive gas from USA.
Is is the NoX or the cost ? Please focus on one aspect for your mudslinging.
Proper Diesel engines from VW are almost indestructible if properly maintained and they have excellent torque in the low rpms. And you can get 6l for 100kms with real driving on a real german autobahn (VW Polo 59kW), Which is GREAT.
We have a VW Polo Diesel, 59KW (which is almost the smallest VW car type) and it does NOT AT ALL smell of Diesel. You must experience some very old U.S. model or something. Or a tractor ?
I only smell the Diesel when I dont wear the throw-away gloves when filling up. At my fingers. Certainly not in the whole car.
That's just not correct for the United States.
If the Federal Government deems that the "smog" is too high, special hoses/fittings are put on the gas pumps. This costs money and the price is passed on by the gas stations to the customers. They will also force Local Governments into to newer, less polluting vehicles and those new vehicles are paid using tax dollars. Taxes end up rising. The Federal Government does the same to State Governments.
The USA Federal Governments does not inspect cars after the initial point; it now inspects communities.
I have lived in communities that required vehicles to be inspected for their emissions. If you car failed, the car had to be "repaired" before the owner could get a current car tag. The car repair hit "a lot of people that cannot afford to retrofit or replace vehicles" hard. Car inspection is on the decline because it creates an intense dislike among those voters whose cars are inspected on a yearly basis.
And want their General Motors Car back.
Boy, get yourself a VW.
California has enacted proper measures to protect their inhabitants from cancerogeneous exhaust ? Your buddy bitches because of this ?
Well, tough shit, governments protect their citizen's health. DEAL WITH IT.
actually, there's no tax advantage at all, if you count by type of fuel: the days of low price for diesel/high price for petrol have left Europe long ago. aaaannd, good luck with the truck industry: Diesel has a kind of economy of scale whereby you can easily build large diesel engines, but it's actually quite difficult to build economical, big petrol engines.
Luckily, the central case is much more benign: since such a measure cannot be adopted by a single EU state, this slimy politician will gain brownie points by looking enviromental [ akin to a wookie "fly casual"], all the while knowing that it cannot and will never be adopted, with all the practical hassle involved. move along, nothing to see here.
"If a boss demands loyalty, give him integrity. But if he demands integrity, give him loyalty." (John Boyd, 1927-1997)
Circa 2006 I used to travel to Roune. Lovely city, amazing architecture, almost all of it completely black. I mean black hole black. So bad that they were power washing them with bleach other something else to try to restore them. Did a great job, for about a year. I soon came to the conclusion that the US actually did make the right choice. Now I understand the low sulfur should be a game changer. Either Valls isn't convinved, or he's targeting other things that may not be using the low sulfur. But I think it's a move that is 50 years too late.
Hardly the only drawback. They stink. The engines are very noisy and they *still* don't behave worth a damn in cold climates or even northern continental winters. Untreated #2 diesel gels at 17.5 f. which is *way* too high, so it has to be chemically prepared for cold climate, and even then, it pretty much sucks. Diesels get too cold and fail to start here (northmidwestern state) all the time. People are constantly leaving diesels running so they won't gel up. Honestly, they're a blight on the road and a shitty technology all around.
You want a "better engine technology", the answer is the electric motor. Torque curves like cliffs, outstanding efficiency, huge amounts of available power to the ground in a very small footprint, able to recover energy via braking, almost trivially capable of completely independent AWD designs... EV tech has more potential for the future than gas or diesel could ever hope for.
It's the bloody low energy density of batteries that have made this such an uphill climb. But that's (slowly) changing. I hope my next vehicle will be electric. But if not, at least I can guarantee you it won't be a diesel.
Germany had a "FlugDiesel" in her long-range recon seaplanes, because the excellent fuel efficiency apparently enabled very long patrol ranges. That was in WW2.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blohm_%26_Voss_BV_138
There are highly efficient airplanes with Diesel engines to the present day.
So much to the "weight argument".
Rudolf Diesel spent his entire life on these machines and it was not in vain !
1) Diesel enjoys great tax breaks all over Europe. If you gas up with diesel, the government receives a smaller share than with Gasoline. Diesel cars are a LOT cheaper to own and operate in Europe. From my experience with the EU, this may be mandated and thus may not be able to be fixed by individual states.
2) Gasoline cars are harder to repair at home and break down more often and sooner. Fixing a diesel, especially the older ones, is easier but that is a lot less profitable to either business or government.
3) Many people in Europe skip the Diesel taxes all together by (illegally) driving on "red" home fuel diesel or avoid the markup by having their own tanks of 'white' diesel at home. Truckers sometimes have a switch installed that allows them to temporarily switch from 'red' to a reserve of 'white' for check points.
4) You can make a diesel car (especially the old 70/80's VW, Mercedes, Jeep and other 'tanks') run on several kinds of oil including old filtered frying oil, skipping taxes and duties all together.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Jumo_205
is because france is one of the most smoggy places in Europe and adding particle burners just isn't doing the trick, it's not a conspiracy people...
it's just that diesel is truly filthy particle wise...
France has a history of choosing loosing sides. It is no surprise here.
Durka durka!
Douchebag astroturfer.
Durka Durka.
Mr. Rogers: "Can you say "Big Brother"?
Kids: "Big Brother."
Mr. Rogers: "I thought you could."
The Big-Brother-like quote: "This will make it possible for local authorities to limit city access for the dirtiest cars."
That probably should read "block" rather than "limit." It's not like these officious little French regulators intend to let you bring half your car into the city but not the other half.
I've often thought that we need to change how our laws, rules and regulation are applied in the U.S. Require that they first be tested in DC and every county for 50 miles radius around for one year before they can be applied to the rest of us. And require a second vote by Congress for that extension to the rest of the country.
In short, give them an advanced taste of their own medicine.
Mr Burson-Marsteller, YOU ARE A FUCKING LIAR.
I am using a 2006 VW Diesel here in Germany and we NEVER have any issues with cold winter weather. All your claims were correct circa 1985 or so.
Why doesnt GM invest money into developing a proper engine ? All the money they wasted in propagandists like YOU could go into the R&D to make a proper Diesel engine. Or license one from elsewhere,
One tank filling plus a 5 liter reserve will take me from Karlsruhe to Paris and back. No refuelling in France required. THAT is the effiency of DIESEL.
Bork bork bork!
Diesel soot is by now a Minimal Problem. Can we outlaw cigs before outlawing the most efficient Internal Combustion Engine we have ?
...do that. If you have proper state-mandated inspections every two years, this is not the case. You cannot spot Diesels in Germany from exhaust and you will also be hard-pressed to do it by sound. Except if you are a car maniac or motor developer.
Oil companies hate the Diesel, as it does not help to drive up their depressed prices. Simply TOO EFFICIENT. THAT is probably the key thing behind this mad story.
Its what we call a "Konjunturprogramm" here. They want to help their dying car industry with public subsidies. Somehow they twist the Diesel into this. Maybe they also want to help the TOTAL company.
It would be better to finally get a handle on very shitty french manufacturing quality...but whatever floats your boat, madame.
Check out the Ram 1500 Ecodiesel. 400ft/lbs of torque and gets almost 30mpg highway. Interior and suspension are nicer than the Ford too. Also GM is introducing a Colorado diesel in 2015 that might be worth a look.
and never knew it by sound or odor.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Most impressive electric I've seen. 90 mile range. A stock 2015 Golf in every other respect. $700 four-hour Bosch home charger.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
" push consumer behavior in the favored direction"
Ignoring the irony that diesel was once such a favored direction...
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
But the standard is only to the level it was when the car was manufactured. The standard is not raised beyond that.
Owning a car costs money even when it's paid-off. I know, I used to drive nothing but beaters as I was poor, and I did have to contend with cars that failed emissions. Thing of it is, fixing the car once a year cost about the same as a single car payment would have, so it was not too much of a burden to handle.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Retail gas stations in Toronto have been converting and updating their pumps to diesel fuel. Regular fuel is on the way out and to be replaced by electric, in the next 16 years. Bio-diesel will be the fuel of choice for trucks and suvs.
mk 6 TDI manual here. 37 mpg combined no matter how hard spanked, 40 if driven nice. The car is fast...it will roll along at any speed up to about 105 that you choose, all day, no matter the hills, but it isn't fast getting there. Kind of like getting a train up to speed. The true test is that at 90 mph, it is as quiet as my e46.
I own a 2014 USA Jeep Diesel with an Italian sourced diesel. It uses the standard Diesel exhaust fluid (Urea) system and it it very clean.
I can get my face one foot away from the exhaust with it running and there is no odor. I see no black exhaust either.
The pollution control systems work.
There is nothing in the article about France trying to kill diesel. The purpose of those measures are to get rid of OLD DIESEL CARS that are well known source of pollution (for the particules).
Meanwhile, in the US, the government quietly criminalized the conversion of fryer oil into fuel for diesel cars unless the 24.4c gallon federal diesel tax is paid by the person who uses it. There will be a line and worksheet in the 2014 1040 packet for reporting this tax.
OPEC's decisions on crude pricing are now obvious.
Target: FRANCE
Action: KILL FRANCE.
France wil become the "Poland "of the "New Reich." It is DESTINY.
Sig Heil
Valls said taxation would have to orient citizens towards more expensive choices
There! I've thoroughly grammar-corrected the line from the original Surrender Monkey.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
People piss on the french in these postings, but laughably the quoted article most probably mis-translates a french news articles. The French government is phasing out the favoured tax position of diesel. It states NO WHERE that they are banning diesel cars.
However people love posting idiotic opinions based on a dubious translation because it fits their fixed world view that the french are stupid.
What a waste of time. The French are reducing the favoured position of tax on diesel, they are putting in a system to identify cars pollution levels. The minister is question was stating as well that 2015 would be the year that climate was the most important issue. That's it.
the use of any kind of petroleum fuel for transportation. They can start with a tax break for pluggable hybrids.
I read the blurb, and I've read blurbs like this before (coming out of France). At one time I didn't understand them, then I had it explained to me. First, follow the money. Second, follow the politics (which always chases after money). In this case, the politics are international, and the beating to be administered is to be (likely) in Germany. Rumour has it, Rudolf Diesel was German. This is the first round in some kind of negotiation between car manufacturers or diesel suppliers and the French Government. I'm not familiar with the minutiae enough to give specifics, but it sure smells like politics at work.
diesel=bad, yet oil-fired and nuclear electric powered insanely expensive rail infrastructure=good.
I can't think of an analogy, but I'm pretty sure there must be one.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
my old Ford got that, and that was a 75 P plate station wagon, 1298cc Kent Crossflow block (same engine used in the Pinto for the US market). Only topped at 86mph, but it got me where I needed to go.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
So, what have they found that emits less than diesel?
Modern diesels (= last 20 years) with particle filters doesn't emit much.
HIgh compression gasoline motors is starting to generate the same particles. It seems like you will get those particles if you have an efficient motor.
Any pure fuel will emit less, since it's easier to optimize the engine for it.
But can France produce enough ethanol (and the needed E100 cars) for that?
Or are they hoping for electrical cars?
4mpg?
Did you mean 8 litres / 100 km?
I think the big problem is usage in cities. :) )
Even the best diesel makes more (and worse) particulate than gasoline.
In this respect, CO2 emission (global) and particulate (local) emissions don't match the optimal solution, regarding car fuel coice.
People driving a lot in the highway will just have to stop more far from the center, or to get some other solution (hybrid, falling back to some efficient gasoline engine).
(Note: I own a car, sometimes I use it, but I don't NEED it. It's awesome not to need a car
European diesel is always cheaper than benzin/gasoline, and that is the hind rationale for most motorists - price of fuel.
So you want to prop up EDF and nicely kill off Peugeot and Renault ?
Yeah, "Europe" is indeed doomed. A bunch of retards with a super-education and no work. And I am saying this because of the incredible stupidity of my fellow Germans.
So you are one of these Covert Maoists who hate Everything Which Nicely Works. That must certainly include one of the most ingenious German inventions - the Diesel engine. You hate Germany, you hate working stuff.
At least that is consistent.
So "regular fuel" is Benzine in your terminology ?
Also, where is the electric gar going 1000 kms with a fuel load of 40 liters ? You will be hard pressed to make 100kms with a much more expensive car.
Frankly France exhibits far more intelligence than the people in the US give them credit for. Our system in the US acts like cancer and tries to perpetuate all of our current qualities and wrongs. It sort of self heals regardless of what changes are needed. Here we see all kinds of organized and quite likely criminal opposition to Tesla cars being introduced despite the fact that they are the most superior vehicle one can buy. I wonder to what degree French companies and politicians will resist phasing out diesel engines. This type of resistance to change is exactly why the US has not been on solar, wind and water power for decades. It is not that it is not good or too expensive. It is all about propaganda and lies and big business wanting to keep a tight grip on energy supplies. Really folks, just dwell upon this stuff for a bit. If the US has an energy supply issue why do we allow any exports of coal, oil or natural gas at all? If you are short of groceries in your home do you rush to sell what little food you have?
It is one of the worst electrics going. The range is less than leaf and slower than leaf. And if u think that is best EV going, u have obviously not seen a Tesla.
Gasoline engines have lousy part-load efficiency. Hence it is great to pair them them with an electric motor so they can run full-load whenever they are running.
Diesel engines do not really have that problem. Hybrid diesels only have the benefit of regenerative braking, and that is not enough for a reasonable payback on investment.
FWIW, I have a hybrid diesel and for commuting, I'm using about 2.2l + 25kwh per 100km. Given the price difference between diesel and electricity, I'm reasonably happy.
> They *still* don't behave worth a damn in cold climates or even northern continental winters
Reality chimes in: ALL soviet russian tanks have been diesel-powered since circa 1939, starting with the infamous T-34. Have you heard of the famous russian General Winter, who wins all wars? And diesel worked for him, there. Starting is possible three ways: a pack of beefy batteries, compresssed air bottles and a geared flywheel with handcrank for utmost emergencies.
BTW, the engine is a V-12 cyl. diesel, originally designed by BMW for zeppelins, hence the alu block casting. As airships went out of fashion, the design was sold to Hispano-Suiza (a french car, engine and firearms company, despite the misleading name). There, the design was sold on to the soviets for pennies by the crypto-communist french "left popular front" government on the verge of WW2. The russkies promptly put it in tanks, to increase the range and torque and reduce the fire hazard versus Otto-cycle engines, which the Reich and anglo-american tanks used.
Diesels are the workhorse that build civilization...
The online order went first through a Google search, and then Amazon logistics system, which each have huge farms of servers supported by hundreds of large diesels ready to provide emergency power in case the grid ever fails. After all, 1 hr of server outage could be millions of dollars lost in sales revenue.
The diesel powered step-truck brought the goods from the UPS logistics center to the buyers doorstep. The logistics center sorted the packages which were offloaded from a diesel powered class 8 tractor trailer. In turn, this truckload came from the inter-modal rail yard or nearby warehouse, which brings in goods by rail to a central distribution hub. The trains are a mix of large high speed diesel (shunting) and large medium speed diesel (line-haul). The warehouse was built, the rail was laid, and the roads were graded and paved by a plethora of diesel powered heavy equipment from bulldozers, excavators, wheel loaders, motor graders, tracked loaders, to cranes, telehandlers, scissor-lifts, and specialty paving equipment and track laying equipment.
The goods arrived from a natural gas and coal powered factory. The factory also had diesel / nat gas industrial engines to power certain machinery or just for back up power. The coal for the power plant was mined by very large diesel mining trucks, shovels, wheel loaders, and bulldozers and was shipped by diesel powered locomotives (the coal mine has a continuous line of trains running through getting loaded). The natural gas for the power plant was pumped by diesel powered frac engines and line pump engines that run both diesel and field gas.
Much of the intermediate processed materials used by the factory were brought from China/Japan/EU/So America by oceanic shipping running very large slow speed 2-stroke diesel, which achieve an amazing 50% thermal efficiency. All those other heavy equipment use high speed diesels, but still achieve very high thermal efficiencies of 40 to 45%. The intermediate processed materials were made from plastic/iron/misc metals harvested from the earth by the same kind of diesel powered mining and well service equipment mentioned for the power plants above. [The recent increase in US shale oil is shipped mostly by diesel powered locomotives.] The intermediate processed materials were shipped to the factory from the international port via diesel powered train and truck.
Lunch for all the workers in the entire economic stream was planted, irrigated, and harvested by diesel powered tractors, industrial pumps, and combines. Or if they ate fish, was harvested by fishing trawlers powered by large high speed diesels. (The beef and chicken eats the field corn and oats or whatever by those same crop farms.)
Unfortunately, some of the men were injured during all this work. So they were sent to a hospital constructed by all the same diesel powered heavy equipment, and has the same large high speed diesel generators for backup power. The building was constructed using materials mined and quarried by heavy diesel powered equipment.
After a hard day's work, they drive home on roads built by diesel powered construction equipment. And enter their houses and apartments built using diesel powered small and medium sized construction equipment.
(Plagiarized from user drewtam on reddit)
Considering how clean new cars have become, I have difficulty worrying about what's left to clean up. We've probably taken 95% of the emissions out of modern cars vs. say, the 1960s, yet we have monumental arguments over how much of the remaining amount we are going to take out. What is the marginal benefit of taking an additional 1-2% out vs. the marginal cost when you've already taken out 95%?
I'm in California where gas is finally getting down to the $3.06/gal range for regular unleaded. Diesel though is still hovering around almost $.60 more per gal.
What burns me is that it isn't just the $.24/gal tax that's the difference but that you can find two Diesel providing stations that have wildly different prices, they could be different by $.20-.30...
I'd better stay as an anonymous coward as I'm probably best described as French (and owning a diesel-run car).
The big issue here is not fine particles or the evils of diesel against the goods of gasoline.
It is that the beleaguered government of Manuel Valls, and President Hollande, need to give guarantees to the Ecologist party to make sure they will not desert their causes in parliament. This story of cutting down on diesel is "une vieille affaire". Every time one government, left or right, wants to get the Ecologists a little bit closer to their side, they make this kind of announcement. And then it goes into memory lapse.
Europe Ecologie Michèle Rivasi, who sits in the European Parliament, was heard raving lascivious praise of François Hollande and Valls's government after this announcement. It will boil down to nothing once the realities of antagonizing all the voters who use a diesel engine to drive down to the voting booth sink in the more "intelligent and pragmatic" decision-makers.
It will be interesting to see what will be the counter-offensive of diesel-engine makes such as Peugeot. They will have a slick communication drive with billboards and TV / Radio ads to re-legitimate diesel in the mind of consumers - and voters.
Sure, I had a Chevy Sprint that got as good a mileage as my Jetta. It also was built like a beer can, had no airbags, the AC slowed it on the highways, and it wouldn't come near to passing today's emissions. Apples to Oranges - today's cars weigh tons more than previous generations, have real safety features, and if the same drivetrains were dropped into cars of yesteryear would get mileage ratings that would drop jaws.
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
I just got my worst fill up ever - 31MPG. Traffic here is awful with a 12mile commute often taking near an hour. I think they've switched us to winter fuel too. Generally I'm 38 with bumper to bumper traffic and have never been on a highway trip long enough to drain the tank. I regularly get over 50miles on a fill! I'm driving it less with the delta between gas and diesel being as high as it is but I have little doubt that will be changing.
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
But I can't help it.
Diesel is the better fuel, it results in a lower consumption, less dangerous. Buy a barrel and try to set fire to it, you'd be surprised! Try the same with petrol (oh, please don't!).
Consumption is lower, I mentioned it. In the refining process, it comes out as the 'lower quality', though.
Buy a modern diesel engine, and it neither stinks nor does it make more noise.
The whole thing is a sick publicity stunt by the former girl-friend of the French president.
I could agree on one single item where diesel is worse than petrol: that's the particles in the exhaust fumes. However, these are not dangerous at all to nature. It only so happens that they are seen at the origin of one or another cancer. But that's a problem mostly to us, the oxygen-breathing species. How can we dare to use significantly more oil, and waste mother nature's resources; produce more CO2; generate more heat, etc. for just one egotistic reason: prevent a number of lung cancers. A number that fades into oblivion compared to the numbers produced by the Marlboro Man and his followers, the pollution produced by capitalist enterprises around the world, including the 'communist' PRC.
...is that it is used by a lot of very old cars and trucks. Unlike modern vehicles, they stink and smoke a lot. Even those with (now mandatory) particle filters end up polluting because the owners will not bother maintaining their filters. The police never stop vehicles on the road to check that they conform to emission standards.
Because we French love to enact laws that are never applied. So don't hold your breath on this one...
I live in Brisbane Australia and I bought a new Golf diesel 2011 model, goes like hell, great economy and lower pollution rating etc than any of the petrol locals could produce at the time. Better value for money, better car, easier on the environment... everyone a winner. Given a choice I will never buy a petrol engine again, the diesels are just that much better. At the time I took a bit of interest in the pollution and efficiency side of things and read around and stumbled upon a couple of links about the big polluters..... http://earthjustice.org/featur... http://www.theguardian.com/env... There is plenty more info out there, you just have to want to be informed. Happy reading guys and gals, I hope Santa is good to you all this year.
I prefer Classic Slashdot.
What about products from $ff and $regi ?
My Smart ForTwo 450 gets 61MPG (that's US Miles Per Gallon), while running on B20. With almost 70,000 miles so-far, its NEVER belched visible smoke, and the exhaust smells like fryer oil. As an aside, my little car's CO2 output is actually lower per-mile than even an all-electric Tesla...so that's good enough for me.
only available as an automatic
Because of perceived/actual lack of market.
Hence the fact we'll be shopping from the factory, and ordering what the customer wants #FTW.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear