As I Had Thought

[groar]

Originally Posted by Big Dave

The EPA does not control the regs of Europe and Japan, but their agencies are dominated by like-minded people.

Regardless of who, the what is the same: Diesel cars are dead in the US and maybe in other nations as their regs bite in.

In France, gasoline is currently being less sold than previously because the CO2 taxes, depending on the number of g/km. I compared different models of different constructors with 110hp and Gasoline by consuming 50% more are generating 33% more CO2 than diesel. For Gasoline you have to pay CO2 taxes when you buy them while diesel is tax neutral.

A few months ago the French government talked about modulating CO2 taxes for bigger families who need bigger cars and for the gasoline cars to be saved

Denis.

[Concrete]

Diesel cars are dead in the US and maybe in other nations as their regs bite in.

Big Dave,
I understand your frustration
but you may not want company at the diesel pump
in the US diesel goes to those who want it the most - truckers and heavy equipment

supply and demand is not that far out of wack - not defending EPA or tax policies here
it is just that right now diesels are an investment that make most sense on a torque beast
be thankful - if every econbox used diesel you'd have longer lines & even higher costs

BTW
There is another issue lower sulfur created
remember the squawking about not enough US refinery capacity?
guess what - the low sulfur rules killed some/many of the smaller refineries

had a friend leave his job at a refinery because he thought his smallish plant could not handle the 1/2 billion conversion cost and would have to close.
yes Billion with a "B" for one mediocre refinery
you think we are paying more at the pump - you bet
and we will until all the debt for the conversion is paid down

glad to breath free - but there are many costs
althought it might give a boost to bio-diesel

[Big Dave]

Was the air quality in 1998 (a year someone else brought up but certainly pre-ULSD and pre-Tier II) that bad?

I don't seem to remember it being that bad back then and I haven't seen any improvement since Tier II/ULSD.

[roflwaffle]

Originally Posted by Big Dave

Was the air quality in 1998 (a year someone else brought up but certainly pre-ULSD and pre-Tier II) that bad?

I don't seem to remember it being that bad back then and I haven't seen any improvement since Tier II/ULSD.

It isn't for most places, just for some. For instance, roughly 1 out of every 2,000 people living near the port of LA will get lung cancer due to diesel emissions.

“What we are saying is that on top of that, 100 [in the study area] are going to have cancer for no other reason than the diesel pollution from the ports,” Martin said. He said lung cancer is the primary risk from diesel fumes. Lung cancer is usually fatal.

The 53,000 people who live nearest the two seaports face a risk exceeding 500 in a million from port pollution alone, according to the study.

[...]

Earlier research had found that diesel fumes accounted for 71% of the cancer risk associated with air pollution in the Los Angeles region.

Ideally, we could let people over in the mid-west have their AQ regs and people in CA have theirs for diesels, and we do for the most part, but as it turns out it's cheaper to just fit everything w/ emissions equipment rather than keep entire trucking fleets within certain geographical boundaries.

[RH77]

Originally Posted by Big Dave

Was the air quality in 1998 (a year someone else brought up but certainly pre-ULSD and pre-Tier II) that bad?

I don't seem to remember it being that bad back then and I haven't seen any improvement since Tier II/ULSD.

Honestly! Where do you get your information? In 1998 did you travel to: LA, SFO, Phoenix, Denver, St. Louis, Atlanta, or any major city in the Northeast?

RH77

[whitevette]

It may be as simple as this...the government is broke. Too many irons in too many fires. Disasters, wars, etc., etc.
Taxes on fuels are a big source of easy money...lots of it! Just pass a new tax law... and sit back. They'll pay. As they'll pass along the price increase. The old "trickle down" theory at work.
Then there is the cost of clean air. Nothing is free! We're all playing a deadly game with China & India.
Too simple? Hmmm....

[SuperTrooper]

Originally Posted by whitevette

It may be as simple as this...the government is broke. Too many irons in too many fires. Disasters, wars, etc., etc.
Taxes on fuels are a big source of easy money...lots of it! Just pass a new tax law... and sit back. They'll pay. As they'll pass along the price increase. The old "trickle down" theory at work.
Then there is the cost of clean air. Nothing is free! We're all playing a deadly game with China & India.
Too simple? Hmmm....

If you'd care to look at the FACTS, the federal taxes on gas and diesel haven't changed since 1997.

[Big Dave]

Re: Post #45

I've been to all of them, both recently and back in the 70s. The air is much, much cleaner than in the 70s. Is it pristine? Of course not. Can it get better? Of course. At what price? Staggering.

Actually the cheapest and most effective means of achieving cleaner air is to massively embrace nuclear power.

But as for a quantitaive measrement, I use the EPA's own five-year report to Congress. Name the pollutant. All of them are less than 40% of baseline. Particulate levels aredown to natural background levels.

roflwaffle posted:
"...roughly 1 out of every 2,000 people living near the port of LA will get lung cancer due to diesel emissions."

Dave says:
Really? How do you know that? Are you sure it wasn't decades of cigarettes or are cigarettes off the hook these days? Railroad ready track crews - which are exposed to high amounts of diesel smoke (30-70 engines (3000+HP)running nearby all day long) every minute of their working careers get lung cancer at exactly the same rate as the general populace. Even if you could prove this, it would have made more economic sense to pay the people enough to move away from the port. BTW, I've never heard such claims made about the ports of Corpus Christi, New Orleans, or Newport News.

[Big Dave]

The triple whammy (Tier II/ULSD/CA ban) has made a mockery of our efforts to get better MPG by robbing us of a powerful tool for better MPG. The triple whammy has made diesels too expensive, too inefficient, and forces their fuel prices so high as to not be worth the bother.

We all know diesels get much better MPG. We could duct tape our grilles and make belly pans until Hades freezes over and it would not be as effective as substituting a (non-TierII compliant) diesel to the vehicle. One need look no further than the old saY 2000 VW Jetta. The gas version got 27 MPG (EPA) and the diesel was over 40.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Big Dave

We all know diesels get much better MPG.

And we likewise know (or should if we've been paying attention :-)) that other ways of converting oil to miles driven will give still better mpg, and will produce less emissions per mile. So why the insistence on making the relatively small step to diesel?