UK may ban diesel cars from cities in the future
- Thread starter TDI2000Zim
- Start date
TDI smile
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- TDI
- 2002 TDI (ALH) with 513,000 km. First Owner and very happy... No Problems, never left us stranded on the Highway. Average useage is about between under 4 ltr. and 5 ltr. Normal longdistance travel: 4.1/100
That will be a big fight! Trucks and Busses are on Diesel. Busses are some on Electric Power and etc! Lets see how that will end?
wxman
Veteran Member
From the linked BBC article...
Utter nonsense!
TDIMeister
Phd of TDIClub Enthusiast, Moderator at Large
Care to expound, wxman?
wxman
Veteran Member
NOx is produced from ALL combustion processes, anthropogenic or otherwise. Any time temperatures exceed about 1200 degrees C, NOx is formed. So industrial boilers and electric generation plants (coal or natural gas) also produce NOx.
It's also astonishing that there seems to be such a willingness, almost an eagerness, to give gasoline/petrol vehicles a complete pass on emissions in general, and NOx emissions in particular in this case. NOx emissions from petrol vehicles may be easier to control than diesels, but that doesn't mean that they're not a source.
A citation in that BBC article would nave been nice, since we don't know if the European Environmental agencies actually believe this, or if this is just a opinion expressed by the reporter who wrote the article.
It's also astonishing that there seems to be such a willingness, almost an eagerness, to give gasoline/petrol vehicles a complete pass on emissions in general, and NOx emissions in particular in this case. NOx emissions from petrol vehicles may be easier to control than diesels, but that doesn't mean that they're not a source.
A citation in that BBC article would nave been nice, since we don't know if the European Environmental agencies actually believe this, or if this is just a opinion expressed by the reporter who wrote the article.
wxman
Veteran Member
Here are a few specific data points which at least cast doubt on "the pollutant [NO2] comes almost entirely from diesel vehicles" premise.
EPA "spot checks" a certain percentage (15%?) of the personal passenger vehicles offered for sale in the U.S. each year for both claimed fuel economy and certified emissions. In 2014, EPA tested both the diesel and gas versions of the VW Passat and the BMW 3 Series. Here are the results of those NOx emission tests conducted by EPA...
2014 Passat
TDI - 0.022 g/mile (FTP); 0.004 g/mile (US06)
1.8T - 0.006 g/mile (FTP); 0.035 g/mile (US06)
2014 BMW 328d xDrive vs. 320i xDrive
328d - 0.012 g/mile (FTP)
320i - 0.011 g/mile (FTP)
[Note - the FTP is the official test duty cycle for testing emissions; US06 is a supplemental test duty cycle for testing emissions in "aggressive driving" scenarios.]
Also, EPA projected (in a "Regulatory Impact Analysis") that NOx emissions from "highway diesel" would account for 2.5% of all anthropogenic NOx emissions in 2030 (presumably after most if not all of the "non-clean diesels" are retired), while "highway non-diesel" would account for 12.2%, almost a factor of 5 more than highway diesel. If EPA is assuming the same ratio of gasoline:diesel fuel as is currently consumed (~3:1), then diesel vehicles would have a lower specific NOx emission rate per unit volume of fuel consumed than highway non-diesel vehicles.
Granted, NO2 is only a component of NOx (NOx = NO + NO2), and these examples are for U.S.-spec diesel vehicles, not European, but I would still need much more data before I would be convinced of the BBC article assumption.
EPA "spot checks" a certain percentage (15%?) of the personal passenger vehicles offered for sale in the U.S. each year for both claimed fuel economy and certified emissions. In 2014, EPA tested both the diesel and gas versions of the VW Passat and the BMW 3 Series. Here are the results of those NOx emission tests conducted by EPA...
2014 Passat
TDI - 0.022 g/mile (FTP); 0.004 g/mile (US06)
1.8T - 0.006 g/mile (FTP); 0.035 g/mile (US06)
2014 BMW 328d xDrive vs. 320i xDrive
328d - 0.012 g/mile (FTP)
320i - 0.011 g/mile (FTP)
[Note - the FTP is the official test duty cycle for testing emissions; US06 is a supplemental test duty cycle for testing emissions in "aggressive driving" scenarios.]
Also, EPA projected (in a "Regulatory Impact Analysis") that NOx emissions from "highway diesel" would account for 2.5% of all anthropogenic NOx emissions in 2030 (presumably after most if not all of the "non-clean diesels" are retired), while "highway non-diesel" would account for 12.2%, almost a factor of 5 more than highway diesel. If EPA is assuming the same ratio of gasoline:diesel fuel as is currently consumed (~3:1), then diesel vehicles would have a lower specific NOx emission rate per unit volume of fuel consumed than highway non-diesel vehicles.
Granted, NO2 is only a component of NOx (NOx = NO + NO2), and these examples are for U.S.-spec diesel vehicles, not European, but I would still need much more data before I would be convinced of the BBC article assumption.
wxman
Veteran Member
I also don't understanding why UK is having such a difficult time meeting attainment with the NO2 ambient air quality standards there. The U.S. was able to meet the NO2 NAAQS in 1998, i.e., when Tier 1 was still in effect, never mind before crackdown on heavy-duty NOx emissions. Los Angeles, California, was the last NO2 non-attainment area in the U.S., and was reclassified "attainment" in September, 1998.
I find it difficult to believe that dispersion characteristics in major UK cities, i.e., London, are any worse than LA (although I've never actually looked at dispersion in any European cities.) There seems to be something missing in this NO2 non-attainment dilemma in UK.
I find it difficult to believe that dispersion characteristics in major UK cities, i.e., London, are any worse than LA (although I've never actually looked at dispersion in any European cities.) There seems to be something missing in this NO2 non-attainment dilemma in UK.
meerschm
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2009
- Location
- Fairfax county VA
- TDI
- 2009 Jetta wagon DSG 08/08 205k buyback 1/8/18; replaced with 2017 Golf Wagon 4mo 1.8l CXBB
http://www.transportenvironment.org...-emissions-‘likely-decades’-due-failing-tests
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...estimate-pollution-pumped-out-by-diesels.html
seems like the answer is moving to SCR (using Urea DEF system) and improving the tests so that the tests are more similar to the real use of these vehicles.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...estimate-pollution-pumped-out-by-diesels.html
seems like the answer is moving to SCR (using Urea DEF system) and improving the tests so that the tests are more similar to the real use of these vehicles.
wxman
Veteran Member
Thank you for the links.
So "real world" NOx emissions from diesels are three to six times the current (Euro 5?) regulatory limit for NOx depending on which article you believe? I don't see anywhere in either article where petrol vehicles were "real world" tested. Do we know for sure that petrol cars have NOx emissions that are not three to six times more than the regulatory limit for petrol?
And again, the U.S. was able to achieve attainment with the NO2 NAAQS while Tier 1 was still in force. The NOx emission limit for gasoline cars was 0.6 g/mile, and almost 1 gram per mile when US06 and SC03 were added into a composited regulatory limit. That's over 12 times the current T2B5 regulatory limit (0.07 grams/mile.)
[On edit - the composited regulatory limit under Tier 1 that I mentioned was for NMOG+NOx, so that really isn't a valid point. However, the 0.6 g/mile for gasoline NOx limit is still about 8.5 times more than the T2B5 regulatory limit for NOx (0.07 g/mile).]
I recall from an air quality conference I attended in 2006 that no areas in the U.S. are even within a factor of 2 from the regulatory NO2 NAAQS limit (0.053 ppm). There's still something missing IMHO.
So "real world" NOx emissions from diesels are three to six times the current (Euro 5?) regulatory limit for NOx depending on which article you believe? I don't see anywhere in either article where petrol vehicles were "real world" tested. Do we know for sure that petrol cars have NOx emissions that are not three to six times more than the regulatory limit for petrol?
And again, the U.S. was able to achieve attainment with the NO2 NAAQS while Tier 1 was still in force. The NOx emission limit for gasoline cars was 0.6 g/mile, and almost 1 gram per mile when US06 and SC03 were added into a composited regulatory limit. That's over 12 times the current T2B5 regulatory limit (0.07 grams/mile.)
[On edit - the composited regulatory limit under Tier 1 that I mentioned was for NMOG+NOx, so that really isn't a valid point. However, the 0.6 g/mile for gasoline NOx limit is still about 8.5 times more than the T2B5 regulatory limit for NOx (0.07 g/mile).]
I recall from an air quality conference I attended in 2006 that no areas in the U.S. are even within a factor of 2 from the regulatory NO2 NAAQS limit (0.053 ppm). There's still something missing IMHO.
Last edited:
wxman
Veteran Member
wxman
Veteran Member
From the Telegraph article that Mike linked...
Source: Johnson-Matthey web site
The three-way catalysts used by petrol vehicles are very effective in reducing NOx emissions, but if those TWCs are not operating at designed efficiencies, NOx emissions potentailly could be much higher than diesels.
Any automotive engineer care to comment?
That appears to be fundamentally untrue...
Source: Johnson-Matthey web site
The three-way catalysts used by petrol vehicles are very effective in reducing NOx emissions, but if those TWCs are not operating at designed efficiencies, NOx emissions potentailly could be much higher than diesels.
Any automotive engineer care to comment?
GoFaster
Moderator at Large
Usually, if anything, a gasoline engine will be running rich of stoichiometric in conditions outside of what the test procedure includes, e.g. near wide open throttle and higher revs. In that situation, I would expect CO and possibly HC to considerably exceed what happens during the test procedure(s), but I wouldn't think NOx would increase. Sure, the engine is running hotter, but it's running rich, and the catalyst ought to be up to temperature, so it should reduce the NOx. Or not?
Both of my gasoline-fueled late model four-wheeled contraptions stay in closed loop right up to full load at lower revs. Only one of my motorcycles is new enough to have closed-loop fuel injection, and it goes rich when the throttle is nearly open regardless of revs. The newest vehicle has a Chrysler Pentastar V6, and the inside of the exhaust pipe is as clean as a whistle after 6000 km; not much rich operation happening there.
"Lean cruise" is a thing of the past.
Both of my gasoline-fueled late model four-wheeled contraptions stay in closed loop right up to full load at lower revs. Only one of my motorcycles is new enough to have closed-loop fuel injection, and it goes rich when the throttle is nearly open regardless of revs. The newest vehicle has a Chrysler Pentastar V6, and the inside of the exhaust pipe is as clean as a whistle after 6000 km; not much rich operation happening there.
"Lean cruise" is a thing of the past.
meerschm
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2009
- Location
- Fairfax county VA
- TDI
- 2009 Jetta wagon DSG 08/08 205k buyback 1/8/18; replaced with 2017 Golf Wagon 4mo 1.8l CXBB
I am not an Automotive engineer, but your source seems to me to say that with a cat, the diesel spews 42/4 as much NOX as the gasser. (over ten times as much)
even so, this is fresh cats, no statment in the chart of drive cycle, useage, and other factors that the previous articles discussed, which indicate that cars in use exceed the expected amounts.
even so, this is fresh cats, no statment in the chart of drive cycle, useage, and other factors that the previous articles discussed, which indicate that cars in use exceed the expected amounts.
wxman
Veteran Member
I should have been more clear - petrol engine-out (no cat) NOx is about twice as high as diesel engine-out NOx.
My point is that gasoline engines actually produce more NOx emissions; the only reason that they're lower at the tailpipe is because of the TWC (assuming it's working effectively.)
Here's source which suggests that petrol produces over three times as much NOx engine-out...
http://www.air-quality.org.uk/26.php (Table)
Last edited:
wxman
Veteran Member
The default NOx emissions in GREET are higher for diesel...
However, default upstream NOx emissions are higher for gasoline than ULSD (0.222 g/mile (gasoline); 0.143 g/mile (ULSD)).
These emission rates are for the U.S., not Europe, but I still think there are many more sources of ambient NOx than just diesels.
However, default upstream NOx emissions are higher for gasoline than ULSD (0.222 g/mile (gasoline); 0.143 g/mile (ULSD)).
These emission rates are for the U.S., not Europe, but I still think there are many more sources of ambient NOx than just diesels.
meerschm
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2009
- Location
- Fairfax county VA
- TDI
- 2009 Jetta wagon DSG 08/08 205k buyback 1/8/18; replaced with 2017 Golf Wagon 4mo 1.8l CXBB
I still am trying to figure out why what they will do to clean up the air in London (or Beijing for that matter) is scary to someone in New Jersey.
https://greet.es.anl.gov/ thanks for the GREET info.
I suspect that the London issue is, in part, influenced by weather patterns. (based on nothing except a vague recollection of coal-induced disasters in the distant past)
https://greet.es.anl.gov/ thanks for the GREET info.
I suspect that the London issue is, in part, influenced by weather patterns. (based on nothing except a vague recollection of coal-induced disasters in the distant past)
wxman
Veteran Member
Thanks to a commenter on CleanMPG, I have a reference to specifically support my rebuttal of "The pollutant comes almost entirely from diesel vehicles" assertion in the subject linked article.
So even if ALL road transport NOx comes from diesel sources, that still leaves over 67% of NOx from non-diesel sources. And these is just anthropogenic sources; there are still large natural sources of NOx.
If you look at the graphic on that page, it appears that NOx emissions from passenger cars in general have actually dropped as the diesel mix has increased. Same can be said of heavy-duty vehicles (virtually all diesel as I understand it.)
http://naei.defra.gov.uk/overview/pollutants?pollutant_id=6
So even if ALL road transport NOx comes from diesel sources, that still leaves over 67% of NOx from non-diesel sources. And these is just anthropogenic sources; there are still large natural sources of NOx.
If you look at the graphic on that page, it appears that NOx emissions from passenger cars in general have actually dropped as the diesel mix has increased. Same can be said of heavy-duty vehicles (virtually all diesel as I understand it.)
Steve Addy
Top Post Dawg
If you repeat a lie often enough it becomes truth and takes on a life of its own. Diesel will always be a target regardless of how clean it becomes. Those same people though fail to recognize that their electric plug in cars push the emissions issue back through the system to the power generation facilities, still primarily coal in the US.
If I were the UK I'd be a lot more concerned about Icelandic volcanoes than about diesel emissions, the threat of the former is a lot more immediate than the latter.
I would look at the source of the reporting and / or the reporter to see where the impetus might be coming from for this complaint.
It sounds to me like banning diesel cars will only deal with a very small portion of the NOx emissions present. If they exempt large diesel buses and trucks I would have a big problem with being singled out as a driver. Especially if the numbers show that car NOx is actually a very small part of the problem.
In the US this was always my complaint before they included HD diesel in the emissions requirements. The cars were a very small part of the problem yet the big contributors were exempted from compliance. I guess that's not so anymore, but the two tier compliance system always left me feeling like it wasn't a level playing field.
Steve
If I were the UK I'd be a lot more concerned about Icelandic volcanoes than about diesel emissions, the threat of the former is a lot more immediate than the latter.
I would look at the source of the reporting and / or the reporter to see where the impetus might be coming from for this complaint.
It sounds to me like banning diesel cars will only deal with a very small portion of the NOx emissions present. If they exempt large diesel buses and trucks I would have a big problem with being singled out as a driver. Especially if the numbers show that car NOx is actually a very small part of the problem.
In the US this was always my complaint before they included HD diesel in the emissions requirements. The cars were a very small part of the problem yet the big contributors were exempted from compliance. I guess that's not so anymore, but the two tier compliance system always left me feeling like it wasn't a level playing field.
Steve
LarBear
Veteran Member
If the Yellowstone super volcano blows anytime soon worrying about air pollution from any other source will be like worrying about the mosquito on your arm whilst a bear is gnawing on your leg. Maybe we should come up with catalytic converters for forest/range fires and volcanos?
wxman
Veteran Member
More on the "pollutant [NO2] comes almost entirely from diesel vehicles" canard.
Based on the UK's official National Emission Inventory (2012 - latest data available)...
Total anthropogenic NOx emissions (2012) - 1061 kilotonnes
Total NOx emissions from passenger cars (2012) - 158 kilotonnes
Percent NOx emissions from passenger cars - 158/1061 = 14.9%
Using the same ratio of NOx emissions from diesel:gasoline cars in GREET (~2:1) - 9.8% of NOx emissions from diesel cars; 5.1% NOx emissions from petrol cars.
Interestingly, NOx emissions from the passenger car sector decreased significantly from 853 kilotonnes in 1990 to 158 kilotonnes in 2012, a time period during which there was significant diesel penetration in UK passenger cars.
Reducing the number of diesel cars in the UK doesn't seem to correlate well with reducing ambient NO2 levels under those assumptions.
Based on the UK's official National Emission Inventory (2012 - latest data available)...
Total anthropogenic NOx emissions (2012) - 1061 kilotonnes
Total NOx emissions from passenger cars (2012) - 158 kilotonnes
Percent NOx emissions from passenger cars - 158/1061 = 14.9%
Using the same ratio of NOx emissions from diesel:gasoline cars in GREET (~2:1) - 9.8% of NOx emissions from diesel cars; 5.1% NOx emissions from petrol cars.
Interestingly, NOx emissions from the passenger car sector decreased significantly from 853 kilotonnes in 1990 to 158 kilotonnes in 2012, a time period during which there was significant diesel penetration in UK passenger cars.
Reducing the number of diesel cars in the UK doesn't seem to correlate well with reducing ambient NO2 levels under those assumptions.
vwmk4
Veteran Member
Looking to VW to build more E-GOLFS and soon. For London and the remainder of the cities. My driving since retirement would be ideal for an E-Golf. I understand that the range will be better in 2016. I have solar power at home and grid power comes from a nuke plant nearby. So no nasty coal fired plant co2 and other nasty things.