Clubjazz - Honda Jazz & HR-V Forums
Other Hondas & General Topics => Off Topic (Non-Honda) => Topic started by: Jocko on January 05, 2018, 11:41:50 AM
-
The news is full of the announcement that new car sales have fallen, for the first time in 6 years. What stands out is that sales of new diesels have dropped by almost a fifth. Is this the beginning of the end of diesel cars (diesel commercial vehicles will go on for ever)? What effect this has on secondhand diesel car prices is anyone's guess. Will prices drop in the secondhand market, or will the reduction in numbers of newer vehicles coming on the market keep secondhand prices buoyant? Only time will tell.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42571828 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42571828)
-
There was a number of reasons why I got rid of my diesel HRV, but the potential for the resale value of diesels going over a cliff was one of them.
As for the drop off in sales, right now I think it is very difficult for motorists to know which way to go, regarding engine types. We all know EVs are coming, and we all know right now they aren't that practical. We now all know that Diesels are the Devil's work. So if you are unsure, you will mostly likely wait until a clearer path emerges.
I plumped for a hybrid as my car (still have my 2005 Jazz on the drive too), and it is a brilliant car, but it is not as efficient as a diesel.
-
I have never owned a diesel. I have driven quite a few and loved the driving experience. When I worked for Arnold Clark one of our small FIAT vans was a turbo diesel, and it was a sweet drive.
My brother has a 2014 BMW 320 X-Drive Estate. It is an automatic, and BMW state 57.6 - 62.8 mpg from it. He regularly sees 70 mpg on a long run, and that is without using Economy mode.
Will I ever buy a diesel? Don't think so, but I have bought a couple of my brother's cast offs, so you never know. I would certainly consider his Beemer if the price is right.
-
There was a number of reasons why I got rid of my diesel HRV, but the potential for the resale value of diesels going over a cliff was one of them.
As for the drop off in sales, right now I think it is very difficult for motorists to know which way to go, regarding engine types. We all know EVs are coming, and we all know right now they aren't that practical. We now all know that Diesels are the Devil's work. So if you are unsure, you will mostly likely wait until a clearer path emerges.
I plumped for a hybrid as my car (still have my 2005 Jazz on the drive too), and it is a brilliant car, but it is not as efficient as a diesel.
Good post. There's a lot of uncertainty about and this encourages people to stick rather than twist. Wages are also lagging behind inflation. One minor point (or maybe it's not minor!) is road tax and the changes that came in in April last year. A friend of mine who tends to buy new but keep for a long time, changed his 08 Plate 1.6 Focus for a Fiesta back in September. Instead of buying new and being liable to the £140 per annum road tax under the new system, he's opted for a late 2016 model which, being the 1.0 litre Eco Boost was exempt from road tax and will continue to be so. Keeping cars for 8 years or so that saves him over £1,000!
-
This is a pretty good article from 'Which'
https://www.which.co.uk/reviews/new-and-used-cars/article/petrol-vs-diesel-cars-in-which-is-better
At the end it basically says although general servicing costs for Petrol and Diesel are comparable (?) diesel cars are in general less reliable than petrol and if something goes wrong it is normally a lot more expensive to fix a diesel. And people who don't regularly use motorways or do other high speed journeys should avoid Diesels with DPF, which will block up and burn out if only used for short journeys and costs £££££'s to fix.
My boss had a brand new Mazda CX-5 diesel in 2014 and his commute involved 30 mile each way mainly motorway, after about 8 months something happened to the Turbo and a bit or a blade(s) fell off and got into engine, it took them 10 weeks to get car back on road and if it had happened outside guarantee period it would have cost him the proverbial 'arm and leg' . For most people driving less than 10K a year a Diesel does not make sense just for fuel saving, if you need it to tow something then that is a different matter.
-
I don't trust Which's statement, that according to their annual review diesels are less reliable than petrol engined cars. Perhaps that is true in their test, but not because of the fact they are diesel. I think it is a case of twisting statistics to prove a point. If you test two cars, a diesel and a petrol, and the wipers fail on the diesel, then the petrol is more reliable. Get my point?
Diesels, vans, trucks, tractors and such, run for ever. Even with no maintenance they will virtually run for ever! Just not at their best or efficiently. It is the nature of the oil burner.
And a turbo failing and dropping parts into the engine, that could happen as easily with a petrol engine. It may cost more to replace a diesel engine with a new one, but diesel engine rebuilds tend to be cheaper than for a petrol engine.
-
I don't trust Which's statement, that according to their annual review diesels are less reliable than petrol engined cars. Perhaps that is true in their test, but not because of the fact they are diesel. I think it is a case of twisting statistics to prove a point. If you test two cars, a diesel and a petrol, and the wipers fail on the diesel, then the petrol is more reliable. Get my point?
Diesels, vans, trucks, tractors and such, run for ever. Even with no maintenance they will virtually run for ever! Just not at their best or efficiently. It is the nature of the oil burner.
And a turbo failing and dropping parts into the engine, that could happen as easily with a petrol engine. It may cost more to replace a diesel engine with a new one, but diesel engine rebuilds tend to be cheaper than for a petrol engine.
Modern diesels are just so complicated to get emissions even reasonable, that is where unreliability comes in. Modern diesels are nothing like diesels of a decade or two ago which were fairly simple bits of kit and would run for ever on anything you cared to feed them with be it chip fat or bio diesel (ha ha). Japanese fell out with european car legislators in around 2005 when japs said that emissions wise, diesel is a dead end technology... could not have put it better myself.
One failure that repeats on diesels is the dual mass flywheel tend to fail regularly, these are needed to protect gearbox from diesel low down power pulses, they are cheaper than a new gearbox but still expensive.
-
As culzean says, modern diesels are complex beasts, and there is a lot to go wrong... and as said previously, it can get very expensive very quickly.
A failed common rail injector pump can easily end up costing £3-4k to repair when you add up the cost of the pump, injector rebuilds, new pipework and the labour cleaning the metal particles out of the tank and the rest of the fuel system. Repeat failures of turbos, and subsequently crank bearings, caused by poor oil circulation are also far more common these days, particularly in certain PSA diesels - and these engines are fitted to many non-PSA vehicles too.
-
Many people have become cautious about diesels now that the truth about the emissions has emerged and there are plans to have tighter rules on emissions in some urban areas. However, in itself that doesn't explain the overall sales drop. It's more likely, as noted above, that the tax changes moved some 2017 purchases into 2016 plus, with several years of good sales there's a diminished supply of customers for new vehicles. When will the people who have bought cars on 3 year PCPs need to change? There might also be a minority of people who are holding out for a new scrappage scheme.
-
I think the PCP market must be getting pretty saturated now.
-
On the diesel thing I remember back in the 1980s the office where I was working had 2 diesel escorts as pool cars. They were very reliable but were very agricultural beasts compared to those of today - no turbos, no DPFs and very understrained engines (incredibly slow as well). In fact they both got to 100,000 miles if I recall and were the most reliable cars in the pool.
Today's diesel is a different beast as Culzean points out and all the evidence I've seen indicates that they are now less reliable than their petrol equivalents. Part of that may be because people are buying them for the wrong reasons. They do better if they are used for distance work or at least kept constantly running like a Taxi although round here you can't move for Prius taxis. It's why you can't get hold of them that easily second hand. Our local Toyota dealer almost never has a used Prius but loads of Auris or Yaris hybrids.
But government got this wrong by encouraging diesels to meet CO2 targets - the NOX problem was always known about from what I gather. I'm surprised nobody has sued the government on air quality grounds!
-
I have always liked diesels. Bullet proof and indestructable, simple technology and very reliable. I prefer the low down torque and the mid range poke of a turbo but the problem with modern diesels is they are no longer allowed to be diesels. I think one of the reasons they were pushed so much is largely down to Europe where they have always been popular with the low cost of diesel fuel. It used to be much cheaper here until the tinkering politicos realised they could jack up the tax on DERV knowing that the average diesel would get much higher MPG thereby offsetting the impact of the price increase on diesel owners. It's a pity about the emissions issues because the concept of compression ignition makes a lot of sense. On a general level, it is interesting that the 'technology tactics' of the Germans and the Japanese seem to be quite different. The Germans seem much more focussed on stretching new ideas and technology (which partly explains some of the reliability problems) whereas the Japanese seem more intent on perfecting existing technology with tweeks here and there without compromising reliability. Since it seems a matter of time before EV's make the grade, it just doesn't make sense to sink huge amounts of cash into further developing the combustion engine which has largely exceeded its sell by date so the Japanese approach of 'treading water' makes more sense. That said, I have a feeling the rattle box will be around a bit longer than we might reasonably expect.
-
My car before the Jazz was a diesel, got it 15 years, 400,000km+ (250,000 miles) and really never had any additional things than an annual service and normal wear in those 15 years. But road tax almost 3 times the Jazz, not allowed in some cities and plain old were reasons to change. But the car never failed us, it was one of the reliable old diesels, i think. ;)
I think the drop in diesel sales is also a reaction to the VW scandal!
-
If only the driver of a diesel could see what the following drivers see. I often have to drop back because of thick cloud of grey or black smoke belching out of vehicle in front away from lights, junctions and up hills. These are not old fashioned diesels, they are fairly new registration high end models. The trouble is as well some drivers see diesels as 'more powerful' than petrol (due to lower down torque but alas limited rev range), which explains the number of Diesel F1 cars and diesel dragsters (yes I know Audi win the Le mans 24hr race in diesels but that is down to fewer fuel stops required and they don't measure emissions on racetracks).
Diesel was considered 'waste product' of petrol refining until some bright spark decided it could be used in a vehicle.
My view of things is that Germans were put on this planet to complicate things and Japanese and Americans to simplify stuff. This is down to having to use PLC's in industry - where Siemens kit was horribly complicated and expensive where Allen_Bradley (USA) and Omron (Japan) were much simpler (but no less powerful) and cheaper. Even in WW2 Jerries were making fewer and fewer larger and larger more complicated tanks that the crews could not maintain in good working order (they probably lost more tanks to breakdowns than to allied action) where the allies and especially Russia just stuck a big gun on a simple to make but rugged chassis and blew the hell out of the Germans by sheer numbers. The T-34 chassis and suspension (also used on successful British tanks) was an adaption of an older American design by a guy called Christie that the Yanks never used, what a pity.
When Jerries captured a T34 and took it to Germany the German tank companies laughed at it and said, we could not make that it does not meet our quality and technical design standards (Russians did not see the point of wasting labour highly polishing a machine that had a battle life of maybe 20 minutes, they just built them by the 1000's with lowest labour input).
-
I think Culzean may have hit the nail on the head here. Certainly the Japanese seem quite conservative and the approach seems to be to perfect existing technologies with small incremental improvements. Toyota have been making hybrids for over 20 years now and they have got it sussed. The preponderance of Priuses going into the taxi business is testimony to that.
Speculating now I wonder if Honda are pursuing a similar approach with regards to EVs. They have done concept cars but it looks like they will be waiting until the next decade to go all out on electric. I bet they won't be short range ones either.
-
I have not driven a diesel since circa 1972. This is purely personal.
I worked for Mothers Pride, the fleet for the 'salesmen' at that time were Austin/Morris LD with a special body. The engine was a BMC 2.2 litre diesel. My van was automatic, I know not why as my patch started in Launceston and ended in Wadebridge with the 30 miles drive back at a max speed of just over 40mph. One morning, about 2 miles from the depot, I smelt a very strong smell of diesel. Lifted off the engine cover, yes those were the days of luxury, a piece of bent tin between you and that beautifully quiet engine. There was a lovely spurt of diesel out of the pipe to the injector pump. So rather than wait hours for the mechanics to finish their tea, I drove back to the depot. That night,after visiting, I was so ill, our GP thought I had suffered a stroke. It scared him, me my Wife and Pa in law who had to lift me out of our car into his home I was completely paralysed.. ( My wife drove about 4 miles to Pa in Law being nearest no licence and little driving experience) .Since then I have avoided diesel like the plague and it saddens me to see people filling their diesel cars without either using the gloves provided or washing their hands afterwards. Yes I was stupid to do what I did BUT who would have thought diesel fumes could do that? Wonder fuel? it has lot to answer for. However, it means our haulage costs are considerably cheaper than petrol engined lorries etc. The boffins should be concentrating on alternative power for heavy transport before pandering to the motorist.
-
Good analogy re tanks in WW2. I believe the T34 was generally considered to be the best all round tank mainly on practical grounds. Not surprisingly, they pinched the best ideas and used them. It is fascinating how collective thinking operates on different levels throughout the world depending on circumstances. The Japanese Zero was a wonder machine at the start of the Pacific War but was outmoded in later years simply because they did not evolve and it ended up being more or less a turkey shoot for the Americans. Back on diesels, it is interesting that Rudolf Diesel, the German inventor who developed the concept early 1900's was unable to persuade the Fatherland to adopt his ideas (PS - on his terms) in favour of the petrol engine. How ironic considering recent events concerning 'Dieselgate'. He was forced to look elsewhere and went AWOL on board a ferry crossing to the UK in 1913. Foul play, possibly, but what started in contraversy looks like ending the same way.
-
Good analogy re tanks in WW2. I believe the T34 was generally considered to be the best all round tank mainly on practical grounds. Not surprisingly, they pinched the best ideas and used them. It is fascinating how collective thinking operates on different levels throughout the world depending on circumstances. The Japanese Zero was a wonder machine at the start of the Pacific War but was outmoded in later years simply because they did not evolve and it ended up being more or less a turkey shoot for the Americans.
The Japanese introduced the nakajima KI-84 towards end of ww2, it featured GDI direct injection in its 18 cylinder 2000hp radial engine and was a match for any fighter of the war - its performance was limited a bit because Japan did not have access to 100 octane fuel, after the war americans evaluated the plane and it did 425mph running on high octane gasoline. If Japan had them earlier in sufficient numbers it would have made a huge difference. The planes rate of climb, high altitude performance and long range meant it could easily and quickly reach high altitude American bombers and it was heavily armed with 20mm cannons.
-
My experience with Japanese stuff is that it just works.
My view of things is that Germans were put on this planet to complicate things and Japanese and Americans to simplify stuff. This is down to having to use PLC's in industry - where Siemens kit was horribly complicated and expensive where Allen_Bradley (USA) and Omron (Japan) were much simpler (but no less powerful) and cheaper.
I agree that the Siemens PLC kit was hideously complicated, but they were actually far more powerful than the average PLC - it was just that 99% of users would never need the advanced functions that the Siemens offered. It didn't help that the programming software was unable to represent some of these advanced functions in the PLC programmer's universal language of ladder. Just crazy.
The biggest issue I had with the Siemens was that the programming was so different to other stuff... whereas most users could easily move from one PLC platform to another after a bit of familiarisation, the Siemens stuff often left you head scratching. A nightmare for maintenance engineers.
-
My experience with Japanese stuff is that it just works.
My view of things is that Germans were put on this planet to complicate things and Japanese and Americans to simplify stuff. This is down to having to use PLC's in industry - where Siemens kit was horribly complicated and expensive where Allen_Bradley (USA) and Omron (Japan) were much simpler (but no less powerful) and cheaper.
I agree that the Siemens PLC kit was hideously complicated, but they were actually far more powerful than the average PLC - it was just that 99% of users would never need the advanced functions that the Siemens offered. It didn't help that the programming software was unable to represent some of these advanced functions in the PLC programmer's universal language of ladder. Just crazy.
The biggest issue I had with the Siemens was that the programming was so different to other stuff... whereas most users could easily move from one PLC platform to another after a bit of familiarisation, the Siemens stuff often left you head scratching. A nightmare for maintenance engineers.
Yeah, I was in maintenance and nobody really liked Siemens, but it was company standard... (nobody asked the blokes who used it every day though, as usual, guess the Siemens rep was handing out brown envelopes LOL). Siemens did have way more capabilties than most people needed, but that was their standard package, Germans seem to prefer function blocks and statement list to ladder.
Allen Bradley was more modular then Siemens - you could install the rack and I/O cards and just fit (and pay less money) the processor module with features you needed at that time, very well designed because if you needed a more powerful processor module later you could just replace the module and everything else stayed the same and you could plug A/D cards and other high end modules into same rack (bit like 19" racking but on a smaller scale).
-
I used to use Modicon and Mitsubishi PLCs. Modicon, because it was the system on the equipment our parent company supplied, and Mitsubishi, as it was readily available from RS Components. I loved writing logic for machines we modified. Before PLCs we worked with relay logic, with all the limits that imposed. Nothing beats using a set of contacts in 50 different circuits!
-
I used to use Modicon and Mitsubishi PLCs.
Lovely Gould Modicon 484, so easy to use, and built like a tank. We used to have a P180 programmer connected permanently to the PLCs for an enormous conveyor system, and used it on a daily basis for fault finding. We had dozens of 484s running the whole plant... still have some old data cartridges for the P190 somewhere with the programs on.
They were all eventually replaced by Siemens and Omron.
Relay logic is going back a bit, we were ripping that out and replacing it with PLCs when I started. Mind you, we still had some kit with octal base valves in...
-
It was a 484 I started out on. Relay logic was 60's and early 70's gear. First foray into PLC's was 82-83 ish.
-
I used to use Modicon and Mitsubishi PLCs.
Lovely Gould Modicon 484, so easy to use, and built like a tank. We used to have a P180 programmer connected permanently to the PLCs for an enormous conveyor system, and used it on a daily basis for fault finding. We had dozens of 484s running the whole plant... still have some old data cartridges for the P190 somewhere with the programs on.
They were all eventually replaced by Siemens and Omron.
Relay logic is going back a bit, we were ripping that out and replacing it with PLCs when I started. Mind you, we still had some kit with octal base valves in...
Anyone who has ever carried a Gould programming console from satellite carpark and through a car plant would have to say they are too blooming heavy (and needed wheels), and small screen was pants with nested rungs. Not as bad as hand held programmers for mitsubishi, Omron etc where you could hardly see two contacts on screen, like looking at map of world through a keyhole. Anyone remember bright yellow GEC Gem80 PLC and Honeywell IPC, there were so many PLC's around in early 1980's and most have disappeared. As an engineer working for a company making production equipment for car plants, every customer used a different PLC, had to learn a new one for ever job...
People today with laptops don't know they are born .............
-
Gould programming console. Everyone thought you played the accordion!
-
Gould programming console. Everyone thought you played the accordion!
Well it has happened again - a truly meandering thread, from new car sales to diesels to tanks to aircraft to PLC's to accordions - is this a record :-X
-
It must be there or there abouts. Acordions? touch of genius in terms of meandering threads.
-
Gould programming console. Everyone thought you played the accordion!
Well it has happened again - a truly meandering thread, from new car sales to diesels to tanks to aircraft to PLC's to accordions - is this a record :-X
But records are there to be broken, are they not. (That was a rhetorical question so I skipped the question mark).
-
Gould programming console. Everyone thought you played the accordion!
Well, it made me laugh, meandering or not! ;D
As for humping the Modicon programmer about, you should have tried the one for the Texas 5TI - it was even bigger and heavier... I mean the suitcase full of lead VPU200, not the jumbo sized calculator lookalike which you would try your best to get away with.
Isn't it funny what you can remember from years ago, all this stuff has been ripped out and scrapped. Ask me what I was doing 5 minutes ago and I'm beaten. Has some connection with the meandering I think...
-
Isn't it funny what you can remember from years ago, all this stuff has been ripped out and scrapped. Ask me what I was doing 5 minutes ago and I'm beaten. Has some connection with the meandering I think...
bit more meandering.......
Apparently scientists see the human mind as being like the hard disc on your computer, the fuller it gets with information the harder it is to recall what you need - it is not that older people get slower it is just that there is far more information to sift through to get to what you want. Millennial generation do not have the problem apparently because all they need is on Google or Facebook, all they have to remember is how to work the internet browser....
The only ways I have found to defrag my mental HDD is a good nights sleep or to do 20 minutes of TM (Transcendental meditation now called 'mindfullness' apparently).
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2012/05/14/is-the-purpose-of-sleep-to-let-our-brains-defragment-like-a-hard-drive/#.WlJEB65l-Uk
Scientists are also discovering that your brain needs a lot of cholesterol to function properly, and most modern diets cut out animal fats and statins (widely prescribed) stop your liver making cholesterol, soon they may find that alzeimhers is cause by modern low fat diet......... watch this space.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-optimalist/201310/your-healthy-diet-could-be-quietly-killing-your-brain
I just finished a book titled 'Cold' by Ranulph Feinnes about his many polar and mountain expeditions and apparently they exist almost exclusively for many months on 'Ghee' (clarified butterfat) as it is the highest energy content lowest weight food. The cholesterol of expedition members actually went down during expeditions to remarkably low levels (<3) - seems the problem may be lack of exercise rather than fat in the diet (which is preferable to sugar anyway).
-
I just finished a book titled 'Cold' by Ranulph Feinnes about his many polar and mountain expeditions and apparently they exist almost exclusively for many months on 'Ghee' (clarified butterfat) as it is the highest energy content lowest weight food. The cholesterol of expedition members actually went down during expeditions to remarkably low levels (<3) - seems the problem may be lack of exercise rather than fat in the diet (which is preferable to sugar anyway).
No question about it in my mind. You only have to look at photos of generations gone by and there were many more skinny folk around then. Life was far more labour intensive and they didn't consume the quantitities of junk available today. The human body was designed to wear out and not rust out.
PS - I think the reference to 'rust' qualifies as a toehold on topicality.
-
Honda trailing Kia, Hyundai, Volvo, Seat and Skoda, but ahead of Mazda, Citroen and Fiat. Note that Suzuki is far closer to Honda than most expected. VW overtakes Vauxhall as the No.2 brand - it's sales drop is equivalent to Honda's total UK sales.
I see Peugeot and Renault are being trounced by the Koreans.
http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-news/industry-news/uk-2017-car-sales-analysis-winners-and-losers/
-
Honda trailing Kia, Hyundai, Volvo, Seat and Skoda, but ahead of Mazda, Citroen and Fiat. Note that Suzuki is far closer to Honda than most expected. VW overtakes Vauxhall as the No.2 brand - it's sales drop is equivalent to Honda's total UK sales.
I see Peugeot and Renault are being trounced by the Koreans.
http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-news/industry-news/uk-2017-car-sales-analysis-winners-and-losers/
Suzuki make great motorbike engines and have brought out some attractive car models at a great price in last few years, they have a tie up with maruti ?? In India where some models (definitely the Swift) are made.
Just looked at global car sales 2017 and Honda on fourth place behind VW, Toyota and Ford (sales of car or ' light vehicles' as they call them) and just ahead of Nissan.
-
Is this report on the BBC news another nail in the coffin of diesel cars.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42615559 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42615559)
Appears "consumer confusion" is as much a factor as anything else.
-
Is this report on the BBC news another nail in the coffin of diesel cars.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42615559 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42615559)
Appears "consumer confusion" is as much a factor as anything else.
quote from BBC article....
Diesel vehicles produce the overwhelming majority of nitrogen oxide gases coming from roadside sources, leading to them being targeted by clean air campaigners.
But the cars are also generally more fuel-efficient than petrol cars and therefore produce less carbon dioxide.
That helps car companies to meet targets for reducing CO2, introduced to combat climate change
In other words, governments will sacrifice their local population to the well known health effects of the various oxides of nitrogen pumped out by Diesels to meet ' Co2 targets' - just shows how barmy and short sighted governments can be - and how 'targets' can skew peoples thinking, whether they are for NHS or 'climate change'....
-
Is this report on the BBC news another nail in the coffin of diesel cars.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42615559 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42615559)
Appears "consumer confusion" is as much a factor as anything else.
quote from BBC article....
Diesel vehicles produce the overwhelming majority of nitrogen oxide gases coming from roadside sources, leading to them being targeted by clean air campaigners.
But the cars are also generally more fuel-efficient than petrol cars and therefore produce less carbon dioxide.
That helps car companies to meet targets for reducing CO2, introduced to combat climate change
In other words, governments will sacrifice their local population to the well known health effects of the various oxides of nitrogen pumped out by Diesels to meet ' Co2 targets' - just shows how barmy and short sighted governments can be - and how 'targets' can skew peoples thinking, whether they are for NHS or 'climate change'....
We could add electric cars into the same thinking. Desperate attempts to meet CO2 targets which will make little real difference with an exploding world population. More people = more pollution.
-
governments will sacrifice their local population to the well known health effects of the various oxides of nitrogen pumped out by Diesels to meet ' Co2 targets' - just shows how barmy and short sighted governments can be
I guess that view might depend whereabouts you happen to live.
-
Well, in China increasing new car sales from 10 million to 25 million between 2008 and 2017 probably hasn't helped.
Going back another 10 years to 1998 new car sales in China were about 2 million. New car sales in China in 2020 are forecast to be 30 million.
The UK/ EU governments take us all for mugs with their CO2 "targets" (and make themselves look foolish).
-
China is the biggest market for EVs or New Energy Vehicles (NEVs) as they refer to them. This is driven by the fact they restrict sales of ICE vehicles for use in large cities. So don't be so quick to blame China when the West has been polluting the Earth with CO2 emissions for the past 100+ years.
http://www.ev-volumes.com/country/china/ (http://www.ev-volumes.com/country/china/)
-
I am certainly not blaming China or anyone else. New car sales in China are only about ten times those of UK, pretty insignificant in CO2 production terms if you are a volcano.
The example is to demonstrate the humbug surrounding the subject, how stupid UK/ EU governments are and how they distort things. Coal is another one. The idea of encouraging every Joe/ Jaq to buy diesel cars was barmy. Like EV's it is just another motor industry scam to try to get within unrealistic CO2 targets. Like stop/start - Honest John, last weekend, recommended that if the battery was getting flat you should drive more miles. Where is the energy saving/ environment benefit in that? Plus of course the new Range Rover EV which does over 100 mpg for 30 miles until it gets to do 17 mpg on its backup diesel (sorry, its a more environmentally friendly petrol) engine (It costs over £100,000 too).
And I thought, for a long while, we had given up on nuclear power as it was too environmentally unfriendly.
Someone is having a joke!
-
China is the biggest market for EVs or New Energy Vehicles (NEVs) as they refer to them. This is driven by the fact they restrict sales of ICE vehicles for use in large cities. So don't be so quick to blame China when the West has been polluting the Earth with CO2 emissions for the past 100+ years.
http://www.ev-volumes.com/country/china/ (http://www.ev-volumes.com/country/china/)
You can blame China, they continued to burn vast amounts of brown coal in open fires long after everyone else had stopped, for many years they were also commissioning a coal fired power station every week long after they started decommissioning them in the west. Only recently has China started to go a bit green, and that is only because millions are dying due to pollution of every sort and air quality that is a bad as could ever get, car exhaust fumes were probably cleaner than the air that went in.
-
I was talking about cars, not coal, but we burnt coal for 200+ years.
-
Plus of course the new Range Rover EV which does over 100 mpg for 30 miles until it gets to do 17 mpg on its backup diesel (sorry, its a more environmentally friendly petrol) engine (It costs over £100,000 too).
The Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, BMW i8 etc. etc. are all guilty of the same misrepresentation on the subject of mpg. Claiming mpg that are unbelievable for a SUV / Sports car of about 140mpg, the Mitsubishi carries a 500kg battery around that will take it all of 20 miles if you are lucky and drive like a nun - after that it is just a dead weight and you are lucky to get 30mpg. Same with i8 claiming a 360bhp car that can go 0-60 in less than 5 seconds can get 140mpg - you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know there is some trickery and weasel words going on there. The fact that they are allowed to claim it shows the weakness of the regulations, mpg tests should be done over a few hundred miles at normal road and highway speeds without allowing for a recharge every 20 miles..
Problem is some people are uncritical enough in their thinking to take the makers claims at face value and you only have to convince a few % of the population who have more £'s in the bank than brain cells in their head to sell enough to make a nice profit thank you very much... The sad thing is the makers are allowed to make these claims in the first place - the wild west and snake oil springs to mind.
-
I was talking about cars, not coal, but we burnt coal for 200+ years.
Coal burning produces a lot more CO2 and other nasty substances than burning petrol. The fact is China ignored what the rest of the world was doing and decided to build around 1200 coal fired stations even after 2015. Electric cars are p!ssing in the wind if your electricity to charge them is from coal fired stations.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/02/the-truth-about-china-2400-new-coal-plants-will-thwart-any-paris-cop21-pledges/
All that China will commit to, says the Adams report, is to continue to improve the energy efficiency of its economy as it grows – a goal it has long pursued, independent of global warming concerns. In doing so, China aims to increase its GDP along with its fossil fuel use, and by 2030 or so will depend on fossil fuels for 80% of its energy use, down from today’s 90%. When it reaches 80% 15 years hence, its energy makeup will largely resemble America’s today.
-
I was talking about cars, not coal, but we burnt coal for 200+ years.
200 years ago UK population was 10 million. Now it is approaching 70 million. We burn coal.
In 1800 China's population was 300 million . Now it is approaching 1,400 million. They burn coal too.
You do the maths.
-
I was talking about cars, not coal, but we burnt coal for 200+ years.
200 years ago UK population was 10 million. Now it is approaching 70 million. We burn coal.
In 1800 China's population was 300 million . Now it is approaching 1,400 million. They burn coal too.
You do the maths.
Did the math :o
UK uses about 33million tons per year (9 locally mined and 24 imported), China uses 3,5Billion tonnes per year.
-
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/02/the-truth-about-china-2400-new-coal-plants-will-thwart-any-paris-cop21-pledges/
All that China will commit to, says the Adams report, is to continue to improve the energy efficiency of its economy as it grows – a goal it has long pursued, independent of global warming concerns. In doing so, China aims to increase its GDP along with its fossil fuel use, and by 2030 or so will depend on fossil fuels for 80% of its energy use, down from today’s 90%. When it reaches 80% 15 years hence, its energy makeup will largely resemble America’s today.
I'm not entirely sure WUWT is an entirely reliable site to quote, it's one of the climate change denying website circle that all quote each other to prove their points.
I thought that coal use in China had been declining for the last three years? Much of the planned increase in coal fired generation, often quoted on these sites, has long been shelved.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/world/asia/china-coal-power-plants-pollution.html?_r=0
-
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/02/the-truth-about-china-2400-new-coal-plants-will-thwart-any-paris-cop21-pledges/
All that China will commit to, says the Adams report, is to continue to improve the energy efficiency of its economy as it grows – a goal it has long pursued, independent of global warming concerns. In doing so, China aims to increase its GDP along with its fossil fuel use, and by 2030 or so will depend on fossil fuels for 80% of its energy use, down from today’s 90%. When it reaches 80% 15 years hence, its energy makeup will largely resemble America’s today.
I'm not entirely sure WUWT is an entirely reliable site to quote, it's one of the climate change denying website circle that all quote each other to prove their points.
I thought that coal use in China had been declining for the last three years? Much of the planned increase in coal fired generation, often quoted on these sites, has long been shelved.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/world/asia/china-coal-power-plants-pollution.html?_r=0
So China overestimated the amount of electricity it needed and because of downturn in economy has cancelled a massive 8% of its planned coal fired stations, but still have many times the coal fired capacity of USA.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/world/asia/china-burns-much-more-coal-than-reported-complicating-climate-talks.html
-
So China overestimated the amount of electricity it needed and because of downturn in economy has cancelled a massive 8% of its planned coal fired stations, but still have many times the coal fired capacity of USA.
To be fair, there's a few more people in China. China are not the world's biggest coal burners by capita.
-
We are drifting a little off the point here.
CO2 emissions targets on new cars (or even switching away from petrol engines in new cars) will have no actual effect on the state of the planet. Governments nudging consumers to nasty diesel or electric engines is/ was foolhardy - as is governments bullying car manufacturers to achieve false NOx/ CO2 emissions targets.
Increases in world population have infinitely more consequence.
-
Increases in world population have infinitely more consequence.
Indeed, and those people wanting a western standard of living, with cars and heating, rather than pushbikes and a few extra blankets.
-
Heard it reported, this morning, that every year mankind produces more weight in plastic than the weight of all mankind. It is not just coal that produces CO2.
-
I think I'm right in thinking that cars are responsible, in a developed country, for about 10 to 12% of CO2 so by far from being the biggest culprit (other transport brings that figure up to 20% or more). The beef and dairy industries probably dwarf that (don't have the figures though).
The Aussie Petrol Head John Cadogan is interesting on this. He fully accepts man made climate change and that it will eventually lead to ecological collapse. He think climate change deniers are morons who simply cannot accept science. He is, however, a huge critic of EVs, especially in Australia where they will, effectively, burn coal. The general point is well made though - cars are not the biggest culprits.
-
When you think about it though, Australia is ideal for solar. With storage, battery or otherwise, they could easily generate enough for their needs. Australia provides 15% of their energy from renewables but less than 3% is currently from solar. The outback is ideal for large soar arrays which would be relatively unobtrusive, except to satellites! 12.5 Sq miles of PV will supply 2GW of energy. The outback is thousands of Sq miles.
-
Cadogan made that point. Much of the outback is just scrubland and desert. They could generate and export electricity.