Smelly 2CVs!

[LostKiwi]

Whereas emissions supposedly cause human health problems in cities - of which the studies tend to suggest that most people will die earlier but something like 2 days earlier for breathing it in a life time.

That doesn't take into account those who suffer severe breathing issues when in a polluted atmosphere.
For example in 1989 I found it very difficult to breathe without coughing when in the centre of Sheffield, Manchester or London.
Now that we have cleaner air I can go to those places with far less discomfort or breathing difficulty.
Whilst mpg is important for global warming so is what we chuck out the exhaust. I'd rather cars chucked out less harmful emissions but more of them than the other way round.

 

[js190d]

They might be inefficient emissions wise but they were so small, simple and light they were capable of an easy 70mpg on a run. It's like my W124 diesel which may well produce a bit of mist when cold or accelerating high but it still gets a genuine 50mpg if you avoid towns, so although the smoke is showing the power train isn't efficent, because it has no catalysts, turbos and airbags it actually more than compensates.

I think this emissions angle is a little bit of a red herring. I, like 98% of scientists, believe in climate change and it being a potentially huge problem for the worlsd as we know it so actually mpg and not buying new stuff is important. Whereas emissions supposedly cause human health problems in cities - of which the studies tend to suggest that most people will die earlier but something like 2 days earlier for breathing it in a life time. The hugely cleaner air already being breathed in cities from catalysts etc also hasn't made much impact too which you would think would have happened if these emissions from 80s cars were so dangerous?...but it seems governments *suddenly* disagree with me after pushing low CO2 cars for ages...

Also your old W124 diesel can run on non fossil fuels which are carbon neutral because burning a renewable resource like vegetable oil does not make a nett addition to global carbon dioxide concentrations. Vegetable oil is produced by growing a crop, which absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. After harvesting the crop, we can consume it, burn it or simply let it rot.

 

[LostKiwi]

Also your old W124 diesel can run on non fossil fuels which are carbon neutral because burning a renewable resource like vegetable oil does not make a nett addition to global carbon dioxide concentrations. Vegetable oil is produced by growing a crop, which absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. After harvesting the crop, we can consume it, burn it or simply let it rot.

By the same token oil is also carbon neutral as it was formed from plant mass that once grew on the surface......

 

[js190d]

By the same token oil is also carbon neutral as it was formed from plant mass that once grew on the surface......

A fossil fuel is not a renewable resource

 

[LostKiwi]

A fossil fuel is not a renewable resource

Yes it is. It was formed from plant material by a natural process. Plants still grow and given the chance would lay down fresh deposits of oil over a suitable time frame.
The issue is we are using it faster than its being formed.

 

[js190d]

Yes it is. It was formed from plant material by a natural process. Plants still grow and given the chance would lay down fresh deposits of oil over a suitable time frame.
The issue is we are using it faster than its being formed.

You are of course correct but sadly the timescale is a couple of hundred thousand years for some fossil based oil whereas my theoretical field of rape seed oil would provide me a tank full of crisp and dry every august.

 

[ajlsl600]

if they were forced to produce stuff we could actually interview and repair that would sure help the environment ,but we know why that aint happening..i am sick of going of to try repair something just to find out that likely half the R&D money was spent on measures specifically designed to make it difficult/impossible to repair !!!

 

[Blobcat]

if they were forced to produce stuff we could actually interview and repair that would sure help the environment ,but we know why that aint happening..i am sick of going of to try repair something just to find out that likely half the R&D money was spent on measures specifically designed to make it difficult/impossible to repair !!!

That washing machine I had in my SLK last week was being thrown out because it was doing random things. I know it was only 4 years old as I bought it... following a quick strip down and clean I took the circuit board and switches apart. Cleaned it all and working perfectly again. So much better for the environment keeping and repairing what we have than constantly buying new.

That unfortunately is pretty much diametrically opposed to the rampant consumerism that business is based on.

 

[ajlsl600]

xactly. i have 2 simple turn dial washers and another loom dial, pump, circuit board, door and seals from another as bits. never paid over 170 for a washing machine, unless one incl lovelly but she has multiple attributes so still a bargain.political ?

 

[js190d]

Engineered obsolescence is now the norm. Such a pity with regards to cars seeing as manufacturers seem to have stopped their products rusting away like they used to.

 

[LostKiwi]

You are of course correct but sadly the timescale is a couple of hundred thousand years for some fossil based oil whereas my theoretical field of rape seed oil would provide me a tank full of crisp and dry every august.

But we (as either a country or planet) don't have the land available for the production of sufficient fuel from crops, nor the water.

What's needed is a major shift in society. We need to become more focused on local employment, local sourcing and shun the global markets and consumerism that business and society is so in love with.
It ain't going to happen. At least it won't until something forces it on us.
The other problem is population. That's one problem that will be extremely difficult to resolve without the help of one or more of the horsemen of the apocalypse.

 

[ajlsl600]

That washing machine I had in my SLK last week was being thrown out because it was doing random things. I know it was only 4 years old as I bought it... following a quick strip down and clean I took the circuit board and switches apart. Cleaned it all and working perfectly again. So much better for the environment keeping and repairing what we have than constantly buying new.

That unfortunately is pretty much diametrically opposed to the rampant consumerism that business is based on.

not to metion better for the back pocket as well ,nothin i like better than a good wriggle. even when it takes a while to achieve...

 

[keefysher]

A fossil fuel is not a renewable resource

By the same token oil is also carbon neutral as it was formed from plant mass that once grew on the surface......

Yes it is. It was formed from plant material by a natural process. Plants still

You are of course correct but sadly the timescale is a couple of hundred thousand years for some fossil based oil whereas my theoretical field of rape seed oil would provide me a tank full of crisp and dry every august.

grow and given the chance would lay down fresh deposits of oil over a suitable time frame.
The issue is we are using it faster than its being formed.

Ive been saying for decades 'put it back from whence it came'. CCS is viable. Waste that decomposes can be put back into the ground and the gas extracted, ffs it was done in mining for over a century. Rare earth metals for nuclear etc go back in after being depleted. Lots of big holes from ore bodies to fill, infrastructure to get it out can be used to put it back. Make the put it back part of the full life cycle cost, that won't go down with the greed merchants that want max take out yesterday, but there are more important things than money.

Also 'renewable energy', an oxymoron. Back in the day it was regenerative. Put systems in India, Jamaica, Venezuela that used a diseasel 4 pot into 1st motion shaft, turn 3 reduction box, dump material on, downhill up to 14 miles, generation up to 4.8MW. None of this digital control sh1te, liquid rheostat where it wasn't going to stop working due to a dry joint on a cheap chinese tat PCB or wonky chip that couldn't be replaced for weeks to get to the middle of nowhere. OK its not flashy, kool, or digital but it works, for decades with little or no issues. Why re-invent the wheel?

 

[js190d]

But we (as either a country or planet) don't have the land available for the production of sufficient fuel from crops, nor the water.

What's needed is a major shift in society. We need to become more focused on local employment, local sourcing and shun the global markets and consumerism that business and society is so in love with.
It ain't going to happen. At least it won't until something forces it on us.
The other problem is population. That's one problem that will be extremely difficult to resolve without the help of one or more of the horsemen of the apocalypse.

Again you are correct Lostkiwi, if everyone started using biofuels there would be a problem of supply & demand. Just like if everyone did what we are now told is the right thing to do and switch to an electric car. There would be power cuts and electricty would become a scarce and much more expensive resource.
Change is at this very moment is being forced on us i would argue.
The whole global warming (oh no sorry its called climate change now is'nt it) thing, extinction rebellion & greta thunberg discourse (but completely one sided) is unavoidable if you listen/watch or read the mainsteam media. But it's not really a discourse at all. I wonder why?
As for the population "issue", if it is potentially such a problem in the future then surely all the nice fluffy animals or even insects (they produce co2 as well) would be the first to go. But you don't hear that from the 'protestors' do you.

 

[ajlsl600]

Ive been saying for decades 'put it back from whence it came'. CCS is viable. Waste that decomposes can be put back into the ground and the gas extracted, ffs it was done in mining for over a century. Rare earth metals for nuclear etc go back in after being depleted. Lots of big holes from ore bodies to fill, infrastructure to get it out can be used to put it back. Make the put it back part of the full life cycle cost, that won't go down with the greed merchants that want max take out yesterday, but there are more important things than money.

Also 'renewable energy', an oxymoron. Back in the day it was regenerative. Put systems in India, Jamaica, Venezuela that used a diseasel 4 pot into 1st motion shaft, turn 3 reduction box, dump material on, downhill up to 14 miles, generation up to 4.8MW. None of this digital control sh1te, liquid rheostat where it wasn't going to stop working due to a dry joint on a cheap chinese tat PCB or wonky chip that couldn't be replaced for weeks to get to the middle of nowhere. OK its not flashy, kool, or digital but it works, for decades with little or no issues. Why re-invent the wheel?

xactly, completely agree grand for operator not so grand for the keep us constant consumers

 

[d215yq]

Also your old W124 diesel can run on non fossil fuels which are carbon neutral because burning a renewable resource like vegetable oil does not make a nett addition to global carbon dioxide concentrations. Vegetable oil is produced by growing a crop, which absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. After harvesting the crop, we can consume it, burn it or simply let it rot.

Yes, on my trip to UK and France I was running about 60% veg oil as it's a lot cheaper. In Spain diesel is 1.15€ so it's not much of a saving so I don't tend to. I'm also recycling 10L of engine oil that is 10yrs old (but unused) so can't be used as motor oil any more. Only putting a litre or two of that to a tankful though, but both on the extra oil and veg oil the car seems to run a lot better than pure diesel. I'll probably put the used engine oil in at a very low concentration the next time I change it. As far as I'm concerned it all helps.

I'm not sure veg oil is fully environmentally friendly though, if they fell forest for a field of sunflowers/rape seed then as rape seed/sunflowers will have a much smaller biomass than what was there there's a one off release nof CO2 in the air. That said I suppose if the field produces lots of crop every year that would eventually pay it off...it would be interesting to hear the payback time.