Ca guys.....deep trouble

[bluesmoker]

Originally Posted by Matthew_S

I think what bothers a lot of people is the arbitrary and ham-handed way the government regulates these things. It doesn't make a lot of sense to clean up emissions a little bit at the cost of substantial increases in fuel consumption. This is especially true if you believe that carbon dioxide from fossil fuels is a major problem.

Also, many of these regulations come from a federal government that, in most cases, does not have the authority to issue them. Air quality is a local issue and should be dealt with on the local level.

I don't really think it's appropriate to dismantle the emission controls on a car in most cases. There are times when the side effects of emission control equipment produces unacceptable issues that could have been avoided if there was a little common sense used in the regulatory process. I also understand that civil disobedience is a great American pastime and that is generally a good thing if you value liberty.

There are lots of ways to reduce pollution and there is certainly plenty of evidence that the current regulatory system leaves a lot to be desired in many ways.

a great post, i agree entirely

[MrMopar]

Originally Posted by bluesmoker

it can happen and has happened:

I just love debating you poorly educated, self righteous polluters

just keep feeding me with unsupported opinions so i can continue to embarass you

Great Smog of 1952

Yeah, that was a one-time event caused by specific weather patterns, domestic use of low-quality coal due to post-war economic necessities, and other factors.

[bluesmoker]

Originally Posted by MrMopar

Yeah, that was a one-time event caused by specific weather patterns, domestic use of low-quality coal due to post-war economic necessities, and other factors.

yes and diesel engines without emission controls, which is what you guys create when you "delete" the epa mandated factory smog equipment

one of the outcomes of this disaster was the mandatory installation of emission control equipment on internal combustion engines, including diesels

In addition there was pollution and smoke from vehicle exhausts – particularly from diesel-fuelled buses which had replaced the recently scrapped electric tram system

[supton]

Oh come on. It's not everyone is completely removing any and all emissions controls, and are now trailing black smoke at anything above idle. Even you agreed that there are times when it is ok.

[MrMopar]

Originally Posted by bluesmoker

yes and diesel engines without emission controls, which is what you guys create when you "delete" the epa mandated factory smog equipment

one of the outcomes of this disaster was the mandatory installation of emission control equipment on internal combustion engines, including diesels

In addition there was pollution and smoke from vehicle exhausts – particularly from diesel-fuelled buses which had replaced the recently scrapped electric tram system

You're making it out to sound like it was solely diesel engines causing the smog, when 99.99% of the problem was coal being burned for heat and electricity. There are at least 3 coal fired power plants (Battersea being the most notable) that have been closed in the 70s and 80s to be replaced with nuclear power in the UK.

[RabbitGTI]

Originally Posted by MrMopar

You're making it out to sound like it was solely diesel engines causing the smog, when 99.99% of the problem was coal being burned for heat and electricity. There are at least 3 coal fired power plants (Battersea being the most notable) that have been closed in the 70s and 80s to be replaced with nuclear power in the UK.

No, that event was caused by 100s of thousands of Mini and MG diesel owners disabling the EGR valves and cats on their cars. Many of those cars were chipped too, but that does'nt increase pollution LOL

[donDavide]

http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/04/q3/0927-trees.htm

Let's cut them down Bluesmoker

[Sets_Chaos]

And we all know, without EGRs and catalytic converters, the 1999.5 Jetta on ULSD and/or Bio is just as gross a polluter as a 1952 diesel bus.

[wxman]

I don't want this to be interpreted as an endorsement of removal of any emission controls, but there are compelling reasons to believe that diesel emissions are not, and never have been, significantly responsible for air quality issues, particularly "smog".

Theoretically both NOx (NO + NO2) and non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC/VOC) are required to make ozone (the primary constituent of “smog”). CO works also and has the same ozone production pathway as NMHC. Lot of NOx, little VOC --> ozone destruction and nitrate deposition. Lot of VOC, little NOx --> peroxide and organic aerosol formation (e.g., the "smoke" in the Great Smoky Mountains). Lot of NOx, lot of VOC --> lots of ozone, lots of organic aerosol (PM), lots of PANs (peroxyacyl nitrates, the stuff that makes your eyes water). Whether adding NOx makes ("NOx limited regime") or destroys ("VOC limited regime") ozone depends on the amount of VOC you have. Essentially all urban and suburban regions in the US are VOC limited.

This has been confirmed by numerous studies of the “weekend ozone effect” in which ambient ozone levels remain the same on weekends and in some cases even increase in metropolitan areas, in spite of LOWER ozone precursor emissions. It has been shown that ambient levels of NOx are reduced relatively more on weekends than ambient levels of NMHC/VOC or CO, mainly because of the huge reduction in diesel truck traffic (up to 80% in some cases). See http://www.altfuels.us/pdf/lawson%5B1%5D.pdf for a good discussion of this phenomenon.

It should be noted that this “weekend effect” (i.e., decreasing ambient NOx levels relatively more than ambient VOC/CO levels results in higher ambient ozone levels) has been supported on theoretical, modeling, and empirical bases in these studies.

It also should be noted the EPA itself has acknowledged the “weekend effect” but has continued to promulgate emission rules (including Tier 2) that require greater reductions in NOx emissions than NMHC/CO emissions anyway. In my opinion, Euro 5/6 emission regs would have been just as effective from an air quality perspective as Tier 2, if not more so, since they (Euro 5/6) actually have lower limits on PM, NMHC and CO, although higher limits on NOx. It still would have required a reduction in NOx emissions from Tier 1, just not as dramatic.