I found this article about an attempt by Italian environmentalists to ban the Fiat 500:
www.planetsave.com/ViewStory.asp?ID=5435
Apparently its lack of catalytic converter causes 'unacceptable levels of pollution'.
What these people don't seem to realise is that a car causes more pollution before it's ever driven than in it's entire lifetime of use:
www.greenspeed.us/electric_bicycle_manufacture.htm
Shouldn't environmentalists be encouraging us to keep old cars in good condition and on the road, and more importantly shouldn't they make sure that they are familiar with all the facts before preaching to others?
|
Shouldn't environmentalists be encouraging us to keep old cars in good condition and on the road, and more importantly shouldn't they make sure that they are familiar with all the facts before preaching to others?
Actually, it's an attempt by FIAT500 owners to be exempted from pollution controls.
Sure, you're right about the pollution created in manufacture. But I'm not sure that's a persuasive reason to leave highly polluting vehicles in highly-populated urban areas.
|
Sort of similar point but then again, nothing like it!
I got berated by a "friend" at Uni who's into all that tree hugging and the Earth and all that business. (Reminds me of what NW would look like ;-))
Anyway, she said I was irresponsible because I drove a big, and I quote, "polluting car". Now it's hardly a V8 Cadillac - it's only a 1.8 saloon but she was asking me why I needed such a big car when a smaller one would do.
Needless to say, I laughed, thought of a good answer but decided against saying it and walked off.
She doesn't own a car incidentally.
--
Adam
|
she was asking me why I needed such a big car when a smaller one would do
'cos you're a boy, and boys feel inadequate in small cars? ;-)
[ducks and runs away]
|
Yeah - you'd better run!
My first car was a Mark 4 Fiesta and it was a cracking car although I'm guessing that the massive 1.25 litres pushed out from that monster would have been too big as well.
I shall go down to Network Q to have a look at some Novas with GSi badges on the back and "MAX POWER" sunstrips. Then I'll be set methinks.
--
Adam
|
I shall go down to Network Q to have a look at some Novas with GSi badges on the back and "MAX POWER" sunstrips.
For goodness sake, don't forget the blue flashing lights!
And if you ask nicely, Mark might lend you his burberry baseball cap ;-)
|
I thought all Nova's came with blue lights as standard.
I'm laughing now because I have this image of a black Landcruiser with all round tints. Lowered suspension. Driver's window half down with Mark wearing his cap backwards. One hand on the wheel and MC Hammer's "Can't Touch This" blaring out!
Sorry Mark - it had to be said!
--
Adam
|
I have this image....
Count yourself lucky it's only a image.
|
|
Apart from the colour of the Landcruiser that is scarily accurate.
|
|
I *am* the real slim shady.
|
|
Shouldn't environmentalists be encouraging us to keep old cars in good condition and on the road, and more importantly shouldn't they make sure that they are familiar with all the facts before preaching to others?
>>
you are assuming that they are capable of rational thought and debate.
just ask them one question: suppose that, at a stroke, the uk reduces its use of oil from current levels to not 80%, not 50%, but zero, yes zilch, no oil use at all.
what effect will this have on the world in 10 years time, or even 50 years time? you guessed it - zilch, none.
why? - because the increase in consumption by other countries such as china, india, etc. just by their population growth will be massive, even if you assume that their per capita use will stay constant. remember also the usa, which is forecast to increase its population by a significant amount.
search of this forum for population + oil reserves should bring up previously posted data.
|
Wasn't Jay Kay from Jamiroquai set upon by the environmental lobby, as he owns somethink like 17 or 18 gas guzzlers?
His answer was that he was doing the environment some good, as he could only drive one car at a time, and was therefore stopping 16 other peole driving gas guzzlers !!
|
|
|
because the increase in consumption by other countries [snip] will be massive
The folks in those countries say that they'll not consider limiting consumption when we bring our usage down to their levels, and share our fuel-saving technologies.
It's a question of who's going to jump first ... which is why all the major environmental campaigns work both to reduce cinsumption in the west and to discourage developing nations from going down the lots-of-oil path.
There's a very rational debate going on there, if you want to hear it
|
It's a question of who's going to jump first ...
>>
as always, it is the uk. and as always we in the uk jumped even before anyone asked.
a very rational debate going on ..
>>
of course.
so how much do you think the world oil consumtion will be for whole of the year 2005 as a % increase/decrease of that in 2004?
and how about year 2010, 2020, 2030 ?
as the song goes - the answer is blowing in the wind, my friend.
|
so how much do you think the world oil consumtion will be for whole of the year 2005 as a % increase/decrease of that in 2004?
>>and how about year 2010, 2020, 2030 ?
>>
p.s. you can assume that the uk has started the ball running as from 1st january 2005 by reducing its oil consumption to zero.
|
|
Going back to cats, I always understood that the view the motor industry holds on them is that they are expensive, usless pieces of junk that don't work, and are only fitted because weak kneed governments didn't have the stomach for a fight with the tree huggers.
|
I think that the imposition of catalytic converters has indirectly acheived a lot - the adoption of electronic injection instead of carburettors, and the abolition of points, centrifugal and vacuum advance - Good things!
However, I think that the mandatory catalytic converters have also restricted the development of petrol engine technology. Consider how much technical improvement has occured with diesels relative to the near static state of spark ignition engine development.
number_cruncher
|
The big mistake was to specify the method rather than the objective.
And what use the graduated RFL according to emissions is I fail to see, so what if you get £5 off if your CO2 is a shade lower, that's a gallon of petrol a year, more or less. Since C0 output equates directly to petrol input and most of the price of petrol is tax, the systems already in place.
|
|
|
|
|
