Quote:
Originally Posted by slowmover
Anti-diesel ”reasearch” is pretty well bunk. Politically skewed. Like the faked dangers of second-hand cigarette smoke.
|
I believe second-hand cigarette smoke is dangerous, plus it's worse than Diesel fumes. But anyway, nobody would be able to convince me that all this anti-Diesel bias is not politically-inclined. Well, many countries could enhance their energy independence retaining old-school Diesels on the road and putting them to run either on pure vegetable oils or biodiesel which could be even made out of residual fats from animal carcasses. I got to learn about Diesel engines due to the influence of Argentinians, Uruguayans and Paraguayans in the '90s, but nowadays it's not so easy to spot so many Diesel cars with Argentinian or Uruguayan plates in the coastal city where I usually go on the summer due to politics on those countries that rendered the Diesel engine too expensive due to left-leaning politicians who embraced the anti-Diesel bandwagon in order to send more money to Venezuela...
Quote:
|
The energetic content of diesel makes it indisposable. Non-replaceable. Emissions controls have changed the rest.
|
Emissions controls and the fuel standards might shift, but I'm also sure the Diesel engine will stay for longer than the sell-outs from the European Parliament are trying to take them out of the road.
Quote:
|
The number of vehicles to service urban sprawl is the problem.
|
I'd also consider the size of certain vehicles as a part of the problem. Sometimes I think Japan was right on classifying vehicles for their size in order to charge lower taxes to smaller ones.