Slashdot Mirror
In Response to Pollution Spike, Paris Temporarily Halves Traffic By Decree
As reported by News.com.au, the city of Paris has implemented a harsh (but temporary) measure for drivers, in response to a surge in pollution: banning cars with even-numbered registration plates from the streets. According to the article,
City mayor Anne Hidalgo had asked authorities to prevent one in every two cars from taking to the capital’s streets and make all public transport temporarily free in a bid to drive down pollution. Only vehicles with numberplates ending in an odd number will be allowed to drive, though exceptions exist for vehicles like taxis, electric cars and ambulances. ... Public transportation is to be free until at least Monday in Paris and its surrounding towns in an effort to force pollution down by coaxing drivers to give up their cars for a few days. Similar emergency measures were last implemented almost exactly a year ago — on March 17 — during a particularly bad spike in the pollution levels.
Why not? You allow only half the vehicles on the street today and the other half tomorrow. You have halfed your traffic and brought your pollution levels down. It is quite simple to enforce by number plates. Petrol today and diesel tomorrow on the other hand is difficult to enforce, makes no sense.
Having been through carless days in the 70's, it is trivial to make evens and odds on alternate days, with maybe Fridays as all allowed. Alienating one group (evens) makes it personal.
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
There was recently a good talk about smog in China. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Yes, but you're missing the crucial point that "No Diesel" is very hard to enforce -- typically diesel commuter cars have only a small badge (if that) to distinguish them from the petrol versions, and the badge is different in appearance and placement between manufacturers and models. By contrast, banning cars based on license plate is very easy to enforce, as they are standard across vehicles and police are already accustomed to inspecting them by habit.
In short, a non-optimal rule that can be enforced is much better than an optimal rule that can't.
Usually I'm against nanny-stating, but in this case there is a clear and immediate problem, and there is a quick way to mitigate it. What I hope will happen is that this will (1) put more focus on pollution in France, and (2) teach the people there alternate ways to go about their day that won't pump gobs of pollution into the air.
We've been doing this for years, both with cap&trade and with better emissions standards. Countries need to start doing a lot more and not just passing the buck so politicians can get reelected again. At some point we as a whole need to make some changes that are going to make people comfortable with the norm pretty unhappy. They can deal with it and adjust, but the norm isn't going to work.
"Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
The diesel problem isn't a combustion one: diesel is more efficient than petrrol. In case you wonder what "more efficient", that is that the combustion rate is higher than that of petrol.
The problem lies with particle emissions / N compounds emissions. That's where diesel pollutes much more than petrol.
In this case, talking about Paris, the pollution will be dominated by cars. There aren't many industrial sources in the city.
Why not? You allow only half the vehicles on the street today and the other half tomorrow. You have halfed your traffic and brought your pollution levels down. It is quite simple to enforce by number plates. Petrol today and diesel tomorrow on the other hand is difficult to enforce, makes no sense.
I agree, but there's nothing in the article to suggest that it'll be half the vehicles today and the other half tomorrow. Instead it says "Only vehicles with numberplates ending in an odd number will be allowed to drive... for a few days" You'd think it'd be odd numbered plates on odd numbered days and even plates on even days, but that's not what it says.
But come to think of it, that'd be a little weird: you'd be able to drive your car into the city on one day, but wouldn't be able to drive it out the next. You wouldn't be able to go anywhere overnight, you'd have to wait a day for the return trip. They're using check points to stop cars from entering the city, but presumably they won't stop anyone leaving.
If you're already in the city, just plead ignorance; who watches the news anyway? :)
Utter nonsense. I drive a French car which is a 2Litre diesel and it's cleaner than either its 1.6 or 2Litre petrol engined models.
http://www.nextgreencar.com/view-car/49545/citroen-c4-grand-picasso-2.0-bluehdi-exclusive+-150-eat6-auto-diesel-automatic-6-speed
http://www.nextgreencar.com/view-car/53981/citroen-c4-grand-picasso-1.6i-thp-exclusive-165hp-s&s-eat6-auto-petrol-automatic-6-speed
Sadly, I agree, and it's also the reason that no real change will ever happen until we are literally on the brink of extinction and we're forced to choose between killing off the entire race or reverting to an age without fossil fuels (or moving on to an age where we no longer need fossil fuels by using alternate fuels). Politicians in the US shoot for being career politicians, so they won't ever rock the boat. We'll never get the change that's needed until the last possible second.
"Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
Yes, and that reason is that during the cleanup after WWII, the French didn't bath much due to a soap shortage. Having occupying Nazis goose stepping everywhere will do that and it takes a while to recover.
I don't imagine you'd smell all that pleasant if the last time you were able to find a bar of soap was 6 months ago.
Public transport uptake would likely increase dramatically, at least here in Australia, if it were free. It probably wouldn't change train usage, but for buses and trams there would likely be a marked uptake. I suppose it might be a hard sell due to the cost, though the benefits of fewer cars on the road might sell that pretty well.
At a guess, I'd say there are two main reasons people don't use public transport: it's inconvenient to schedule your transport around someone else's timetable and path, and it's inconvenient to have to carry the correct quantity of cash / make sure a bus card has enough money on it; for the poorer demographic the cost part is probably a greater component. Having more people using public transport would probably result in increased availability / paths for public transport, mitigating the first problem a bit.
Just seems a bit weird; if you want cars off the road, reduce the benefits of using one (using a bus would eliminate wear & tear, fuel, and parking costs). As a bonus your population's health might improve very slightly as people are walking to and from the bus stops.
Except it's not a question of green. CO2 emissions here aren't what's causing the problem, it's particulate matter and Nitrous Oxides.
From your own link your diesel produces double the NOx emissions.
Not wanting cancer trumps the minor differences in CO2 emissions between the models, and diesel is definitely no longer considered greener or healthier the way it used to be.
The problem lies with particle emissions / N compounds emissions. That's where diesel pollutes much more than petrol.
false
You don't know what you're talking about, do you?
Right back at you, kid.
It's not surprising that you don't know what you're talking about, because TPTB don't want you to know that gasoline is just as polluting as diesel. But it's sad that you're repeating this uninformed canard.
Nitric oxides are important, they are what causes acid rain, but they are nothing compared to particulates and CO2 — especially since we've reduced them so very much. And gasoline is actually worse than diesel in this regard because all of the soot is PM2.5. Modern diesels produce more PM2.5 than old ones like my 1982 300SD, though. While my 300SD has no emissions equipment (the EGR actually failed) it gets 30 MPG freeway which is right up there with the more efficient full size sedans of today, and the soot it produces is larger in size.
However, you're forgetting to account for mileage. Yes, the diesel produces more NOx per gallon. It also burns less gallons. The diesel doesn't produce twice as much NOx per mile traveled. In 1982, a full-size sedan typically got 20 mpg or less on the freeway, maybe 22 or so if it was spectacularly good. So I'm consuming significantly less fuel and producing notably less CO2 than I would if I were driving a gasser.
Of course, you could say we should all be driving new cars. In which case, I'll happily let you buy me one. I'll take a TDI, thanks.
Slow Down Cowboy!
Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow the ignorant idiots who you don't want to hear from anyway a fair chance at posting a comment.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You're forgetting the lead compounds that petrol contains to reduce knocking.
We are playing at "pretend it's the 1980s", right?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The diesel sold in Europe is much better fuel than the one we dump into trucks and trains. Lower sulfur, for one thing, although we are catching up. Most environmentally friendly motor fuel is diesel (no, it is not the remote-polluting electrics; look at the output of, for example, the Four Corners power complex). Modern biodiesel burns clean and has a very low carbon footprint. Soot traps take care of the particulates.
Additionally, diesel fuel has much more energy available by volume or mass, is less flammable, and hygrophobic (doesn't pull water from the air into the fuel tank) than the lighter hydrocarbons (gasoline, methane, ethanol), or hydrogen (unless fused, of course)
I wish I could have purchased the turbo-diesel version of my Jaguar XJ, rather than having to settle for an XJ-R.
Diesel engines are much more polluting than petrol since the combustion is incomplete.
I already know about the difference between the official trope about diesel pollution and the improvement reached nowadays, but that wasn't the point.
They did this in San Jose, Costa Rica (and maybe they still do, I don't know). Cars were each restricted one weekday. Plates ending in 1 or 2 on Monday, 3 or 4 on Tuesday, etc. It wasn't 24 hours, it was from ~6am to 8pm.
It was somewhat successful, though not surprisingly considerably less than a 20% reduction. Taxis were not restricted, and of course wealthier families tended to have more than one car.
>> Diesel engines are much more polluting than petrol
Not in France. Most diesel engines here have FAP filters.
aaaaaaa
There is a lot of political pressure in Paris to push out diesel motors, which are often the main source of summer pollution peaks. This
one actually has another origin: (French source) http://www.airparif.asso.fr/ac... .
There is actually a cloud over much of north Europe, not just Paris. The origin is firstly agricultural.
Its mostly ammonium nitrate from spring fertilizer spreading. The second source is wood burning out in the country. Diesel
is the third source in this outbreak.
The real political problem is the impossibility of doing anything against big-agro, not diesel. (Similar problems in France
also occur with water pollution -- impossible to regulate)
The 'system' is almost certainly the Mark I eyeball. I think you underestimate the configuration difficulties.
What?
You cannot masturbate while driving a diesel car in France?
I'm shocked.
I agree, but there's nothing in the article to suggest that it'll be half the vehicles today and the other half tomorrow. Instead it says "Only vehicles with numberplates ending in an odd number will be allowed to drive... for a few days" You'd think it'd be odd numbered plates on odd numbered days and even plates on even days, but that's not what it says.
"It" being an Australian news source that is being a bit vague. What actually happens in Paris is that it goes by whether the day of the month is odd or even. Monday is 23rd, so only odd digit cars are allowed on the road. If it extends to the 24th, then only even numbered cars will be allowed.
And the ban certainly does apply within the city. Pleading ignorance will still get you a fine.
Remember how crystal-clear the skies were when all airplanes were grounded after 9/11?
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
This was tried in Athens. What actually happens is that 2 car families who have the option no longer take the smaller, less polluting car half the time, and lots of 1 car families buy a really cheap clapped out, much more polluting car to use on alternate days.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
While it's true that a diesel without emissions control emits more highly dangerous particulates, this is not 1970. In an advanced economy any properly maintained, recent model diesel vehicle is going to be as clean as its gasoline counterpart.
It's worth considering banning the most polluting vehicles rather than arbitrarily banning half of all vehicles, but you can't do it this way. One way to do it would be to ban older vehicles, or vehicles of a certain weight carrying fewer than two or three passengers. But the even/odd license plate thing will work to reduce pollution and is simple to implement in a short term emergency -- although a massive inconvenience to people who can't carpool for some reason.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
You'd be wrong then. Soap is not needed to avoid smelling like a French man. Just regular bathing.
Other than getting oil and other sticky substances off my hands I can't recall the last time I used soap. My work colleagues might hesitate to tell me if I did smell but my dance partners wouldn't - they'd not only tell me, they'd refuse to dance with me.
Luckily I shower daily (or more) and stay clean and avoid smelling of dirt, stale sweat and garlic.
Soap? Totally fucking irrelevant.
Nonsense? There should be a law against driving Picasso.
For god sake, did you even looked at the pictures in the links?!?
About 80% of France's electrical energy comes from nuclear power plants, with fossil at under 10%. So while power plants do technically emit as a whole, the problem is largely mitigated. Now, there's nuclear waste.
Anything you do can get you slashdotted, including nothing.
Except in France, where only about 8% of their electricity comes from fossil fuels.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Bogota, Colombia has legislated no drive days all year round. Pico placa publishes the last digits in the paper.
Anyone of wealth just has multiple vehicles.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Considering the PM2.5 issue, I'm starting to wonder if "modern" diesels might actually be worse than older ones.
The new ones have less of everything but PM2.5, so it's kind of a difficult argument. Best-case, IMO, is a modern (common-rail) diesel but without the emissions trap crap... run on biodiesel.
I'm thinking hard again about a propane conversion, but only if I can run it on methane as well. Then the hard part will be getting enough biomass, and getting it into one of those big bags people are using for water tanks now.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
They say diesel gives almost 1.5 times the fuel efficiency of petrol. So even if it is more polluting by the gallon, if you need less of it you have less pollution, no?
they'll probably just buy two shitty cars to drive every day anyways.
Which is EXACTLY what happened in Mexico City when they tried this sort of thing. It wound up making the problem worse.
Bureaucrats need to learn that you cannot force people to change their habits. They will work around any restrictions and then resent you for it. You have to change the environment that makes gas-burning cars attractive--improve public transit, subsidize electric (or raise petrol taxes, either way), mixed-zoning so people don't have to go as far for daily needs, etc.