I don't understand what this has to do with World of Warcraft.
An article in todays Guardian (Diesel cars emit up to four times more toxic pollution than a bus, ) reveals that real world research in Norway and London has foundOriginally Posted by Guardian
You won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.
I don't understand what this has to do with World of Warcraft.
Actually it's "Women on Wheels"! Who else would drive a supermini diesel car?
WoW predates WoW by a least three decade years
You won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.
crazy uh.
Makes a mockery of the talk in that other thread that the limits are set too low and that car makers are passing the test so therefore all okay...
If a truck can meet emission levels in real world driving then why are the limits set too low?
I see bad juju for whizzbox diesos in Europe
'95 130 dual cab fender (gone to a better universe)
'10 130 dual cab fender (getting to know it's neurons)
Regards, Will
Stornoway Grey '09 D3 TDV6 SE, 2015 TERRITORY Engine at 348k
LLAMS, FYRLYTS, OL D4 Bar
Safari Snorkel, D4 hitch, ARB CKMA12
I suspect that the test conditions do not even come close to the real world, and that trucks and buses do better than small cars because the engines operate close o maximum power most of the time, whereas a car engine rarely operates at more than about 10% of maximum power.
John
John
JDNSW
1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol
Given the new revelations, I wonder if the EU will amend (up) it's supposed emissions reductions and admit it's programmes have been less than successful? (or at least much less successful)
You won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.
John,
my reading brings the conclusion that trucks meet the 80mg/km limit solely due to urea injection.
small cars blow through this, especially in stop start when they are as you are saying are running low engine loading.
BUT if a truck can meet 80mg/km surely the car makers with 1/10 the volume of fuel being burnt can too!
I guess though there would be customer resistance to refuelling your exhaust tank!
And the extra 10L of urea would blow out a whack of the small cars load carrying capacity!
interesting times
s
'95 130 dual cab fender (gone to a better universe)
'10 130 dual cab fender (getting to know it's neurons)
It certainly shows that manufacturers have been avoiding the rules on emissions once their vehicles are out in the real world. I guess there will have to be random testing of vehicles in real-world driving before they are approved for sale.
A bus owner explained it like this...
Imagine a picnic rug. Big enough for a small family to sprawl on, along with basket, plates and invading ants...
Call that the amount of diesel emissions/pollution from dirty, pre-1990 diesels.
Test a mid 1990's diesel engine ( German or Nordic bus f'rinstance...)
- Lay a large towel on the rug, that's a similar ratio of pollutants.
Today, relatively speaking, a Euro 6 diesel engine's rubbish would occupy the same area as a box of matches...
On your picnic rug.
I think there has been some improvement over the last 50 years.
Add to the mix, improved engine management systems, intelligent transmissions (for dumb drivers) and weight-saving materials.
Its the price we pay for 'not' walking everywhere...![]()
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks