Bosch gives diesel a new life - Page 2
  • Register
  • Help
Page 2 of 6 First 123456 Last
Results 26 to 50 of 134
Like Tree32Likes

Thread: Bosch gives diesel a new life

  1. #26
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    10,448

    Default The regulators's dream and nightmare... bicycle..

    Quote Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
    Also ignores the particulates... And from what I can tell only gets them past the next standards cycle.


    Sent from my iPhone using aussiefrogs
    I guess your hidden message is "We have vays and more regulations in the pipeline"

    Advertisement


    Now what happened to governments eliminating regulations, or does that offend with the possibility of creating out of work regulators?



    Ken

  2. #27
    1000+ Posts robmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne / Caulfield
    Posts
    17,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kenfuego View Post
    I guess your hidden message is "We have vays and more regulations in the pipeline"

    Now what happened to governments eliminating regulations, or does that offend with the possibility of creating out of work regulators?



    Ken
    Probably not Hakkon per se, but most definitely those pesky European Regulators, which Australia tends to support and follow.

    Euro 7 will hit around 2020. But of course it won't be the end of existing diesel vehicles, the older ones will progressively go off the road by natural attrition.
    Mutual Respect is Contagious


  3. #28
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    724

    Default

    Lower CO2 emissions and highly efficient particulate filtration, combined with much less NOx emitted as a result of this claimed breakthrough, makes continued banning moves somewhat more contentious.
    If Bosch can deliver its game on again.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    1972Ren likes this.

  4. #29
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    16,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by robmac View Post
    Probably not Hakkon per se, but most definitely those pesky European Regulators, which Australia tends to support and follow.

    Euro 7 will hit around 2020. But of course it won't be the end of existing diesel vehicles, the older ones will progressively go off the road by natural attrition.
    And due to the long lasting nature of diesel engines, at approximately one third of the retirement rate of petrol engines of earlier generations.....
    Kenfuego likes this.
    It's another lovely day! Again!

  5. #30
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,484

    Default Bosch gives diesel a new life

    Quote Originally Posted by Kenfuego View Post
    I guess your hidden message is "We have vays and more regulations in the pipeline"

    Now what happened to governments eliminating regulations, or does that offend with the possibility of creating out of work regulators?



    Ken
    Of course - thatís how it works.... Ever improved air quality and health outcomes is what regulators are there for. The ďmarketĒ has failed to account for the health of its consumers because its an externality that not costed - thatís called a market failure.

    Do you really want to live in the world where there were no emissions restrictions placed on transport or industry...? London smog? LA smog...? Arsenic and raw sewage dumped in rivers? Leaded petrol? The list is endless...

    What about other regulations? Seatbelts. Airbags. Crash safety. How do you feel about the amazingly complex and rigorous regulation of safety in airlines?

    Where do you think the line should be drawn? Where ever it is, just remember itís a subjective judgement all your own and not representative of the rest of us.

    There is still a demonstrable problem with emissions, hence there will continue to be a progressive tightening of standards.

    For the ultimate objective for air quality and health outcomes, Iíd suggest ICE is incompatible entirely with it regardless of how many minor iterative improvements they can make.


    Sent from my iPhone using aussiefrogs
    Last edited by Haakon; 29th April 2018 at 09:01 AM.
    JoBo likes this.
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  6. #31
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,484
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  7. #32
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    10,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
    Of course - that’s how it works.... Ever improved air quality and health outcomes is what regulators are there for. The “market” has failed to account for the health of its consumers because its an externality that not costed - that’s called a market failure.

    Do you really want to live in the world where there were no emissions restrictions placed on transport or industry...? London smog? LA smog...? Arsenic and raw sewage dumped in rivers? Leaded petrol? The list is endless...

    What about other regulations? Seatbelts. Airbags. Crash safety. How do you feel about the amazingly complex and rigorous regulation of safety in airlines?

    Where do you think the line should be drawn? Where ever it is, just remember it’s a subjective judgement all your own and not representative of the rest of us.

    There is still a demonstrable problem with emissions, hence there will continue to be a progressive tightening of standards.

    For the ultimate objective for air quality and health outcomes, I’d suggest ICE is incompatible entirely with it regardless of how many minor iterative improvements they can make.


    Sent from my iPhone using aussiefrogs
    Nice rant, but these days it seems that the real endeavour is to first find an emotional or health study (however dubious, or lacking in data and cross checking) and use that with the aid of a media industry that craves for any controversial or divisive issue to sell failing newsprint to the masses, and what better than create a scare campaign.

    That of course suits the regulators and the taxers who can then appear to be fixing an issue superficially while not looking into underlying other issues that might well have a higher health or environmental impact, but are either sacred cows, that can't be touched (protected by powerful investors that are well connected to governments, trade, industry or ones that are putting up research studies to buy and bias science) you know the ones like Soros who fund the Getup emotional pressure groups but stand to make heaps of money in manipulating things to their favour!

    The Diesel demonization would not survive a searching investigation, as one would have to wonder why 40 year old worn out UK busses were allowed to spew out the worst and still do, in a country that suffers from weather inversions, fog, smog, quite naturally dating back to industrial pre emission control days, and all the things that follow in regards to health and then use those in a hocus pocus righteous righteous manner to justify attacking modern versions, when the medical profession itself is so divided on the results of some of those "world" health studies funded by a UN which is quite corrupt and blatant in its world control bid for power by trough feeders.

    You like EV technology and I do too for the urban dwellers who will spend up big to commute, but there is a big struggle to conceal the downsides of that technology and sell it as some environmental saviour. It may get there, but at what cost and can it compete in mass transport of people goods and services, even the infrastructure is horrendously expensive but there is something elitist about the whole thing and smells of corruption in its promotion as one follows the money.

    But there will be plenty of political tools to aid the process using exactly the emotional constructs you use. personally I like the idea of sunset clauses in use of regulatory power and of scrapping more old regulations than newer ones created, that way we might get a better handle on the balance between serving financial manipulators and big schemes and looking after small investors and ordinary working people.

    If EV's can't be easily acquired by average working people and have durability over and above the needs of manufacturers profits (longevity of the product to conserve materials used and inevitable pollution to someone somewhere in the world) then that also needs to be addressed and it probably will be by the taxing people who love creating new taxes!!) This will become critical when technology replaces man in the manufacturing, so humans IF employed will have to choose between a regulatory minion or a taxing multi minion or begging for sustenance.

    Some will get rich and some will lose out as scares and guilt are used to promote schemes and that won't be stopped by bigger and better quango's.

    Good Luck!

    Ken

  8. #33
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    724

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kenfuego View Post
    Nice rant, but these days it seems that the real endeavour is to first find an emotional or health study (however dubious, or lacking in data and cross checking) and use that with the aid of a media industry that craves for any controversial or divisive issue to sell failing newsprint to the masses, and what better than create a scare campaign.

    That of course suits the regulators and the taxers who can then appear to be fixing an issue superficially while not looking into underlying other issues that might well have a higher health or environmental impact, but are either sacred cows, that can't be touched (protected by powerful investors that are well connected to governments, trade, industry or ones that are putting up research studies to buy and bias science) you know the ones like Soros who fund the Getup emotional pressure groups but stand to make heaps of money in manipulating things to their favour!

    The Diesel demonization would not survive a searching investigation, as one would have to wonder why 40 year old worn out UK busses were allowed to spew out the worst and still do, in a country that suffers from weather inversions, fog, smog, quite naturally dating back to industrial pre emission control days, and all the things that follow in regards to health and then use those in a hocus pocus righteous righteous manner to justify attacking modern versions, when the medical profession itself is so divided on the results of some of those "world" health studies funded by a UN which is quite corrupt and blatant in its world control bid for power by trough feeders.

    You like EV technology and I do too for the urban dwellers who will spend up big to commute, but there is a big struggle to conceal the downsides of that technology and sell it as some environmental saviour. It may get there, but at what cost and can it compete in mass transport of people goods and services, even the infrastructure is horrendously expensive but there is something elitist about the whole thing and smells of corruption in its promotion as one follows the money.

    But there will be plenty of political tools to aid the process using exactly the emotional constructs you use. personally I like the idea of sunset clauses in use of regulatory power and of scrapping more old regulations than newer ones created, that way we might get a better handle on the balance between serving financial manipulators and big schemes and looking after small investors and ordinary working people.

    If EV's can't be easily acquired by average working people and have durability over and above the needs of manufacturers profits (longevity of the product to conserve materials used and inevitable pollution to someone somewhere in the world) then that also needs to be addressed and it probably will be by the taxing people who love creating new taxes!!) This will become critical when technology replaces man in the manufacturing, so humans IF employed will have to choose between a regulatory minion or a taxing multi minion or begging for sustenance.

    Some will get rich and some will lose out as scares and guilt are used to promote schemes and that won't be stopped by bigger and better quango's.

    Good Luck!

    Ken
    Rupert says ďYOUR HIREDĒ Ken


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

  9. #34
    1000+ Posts robmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne / Caulfield
    Posts
    17,330

    Default

    You're hired perhaps ?.
    Armidillo likes this.
    Mutual Respect is Contagious


  10. #35
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    10,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nagaman View Post
    Rupert says “YOUR HIRED” Ken


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    As a defender of science and the scientific method, that attempt to take a cheap shot smear is pretty low, I would rather someone have the balls to stand up and introduce some standards in both our Education systems and government to force government departments and yes the EPA to give full accountability under these standards based on the scientific method. Twoud be nice if the ABC agitated for a similar direction here. Might improve our education, our reporting and yes the basic science that seems to have been replaced by mere scary authority claims.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/04/...-long-overdue/

    No that is a real revolution the direction needs to be backed up by law as that would end the bad science and scary speculation that has replaced scientific objectivity credibility, and emphasis on replication and falsification.

    I know some will wet their pants over not being able to just claim stuff or make up scary scenarios to do the bidding of profiteers and manipulators. I'd like to see that direction strengthened by laws in Australia. Whether "Rupert" approves or not I could not care less!


    “The ability to test, authenticate and reproduce scientific findings is vital for the integrity of the rule making process. Americans deserve to assess the legitimacy of the science underpinning EPA decisions that may impact their lives.”
    Ken

  11. #36
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    724

    Default

    Quoting science that only aligns with a belief is what ended up giving us Trump and Brexit unfortunately Ken.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    robmac and Haakon like this.

  12. #37
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    724

    Default

    I note the quote that is the basis for Trumpís EPA secretary which is the insidious work of the troll industry and with zero academic merit -
    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin..._b_244903.html


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

  13. #38
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    10,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nagaman View Post
    Quoting science that only aligns with a belief is what ended up giving us Trump and Brexit unfortunately Ken.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    I respect your belief, But good science produced using the scientific method is free of politics and I respect the scientific method.

    PS Huffington post is NOT free of politics (Huff and puff)

    The rest is opinions.. IMHO!

  14. #39
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    724

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kenfuego View Post
    I respect your belief, But good science produced using the scientific method is free of politics and I respect the scientific method.

    The rest is opinions.. IMHO!
    Thatís Scott Pruittís position Ken ......unfortunately the very person who has done his most to politicise and thus undermine science in favour of the Koch Bros, Mercer et al.....all who just happen to have much to gain.
    Terry McCrann has no scientific qualifications either but as Herald Sun business editor rants regularly on wind power etc.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

  15. #40
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    10,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nagaman View Post
    Thatís Scott Pruittís position Ken ......unfortunately the very person who has done his most to politicise and thus undermine science in favour of the Koch Bros, Mercer et al.....all who just happen to have much to gain.
    Terry McCrann has no scientific qualifications either but as Herald Sun business editor rants regularly on wind power etc.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    I could have guessed you would be a wind power believer when the wind don't blow it produces no power and when it blows too hard the same deal, but the concept puts money into the hands of the investors and promoters so it must be good ....for them. AEMO burst the myth bubble with facts of course and electricity IS much more expensive now so the observable facts seem to confirm that wind and solar don't work exactly when people need that now expensive electricity. Now with observable facts no one needs scientific qualification, to make an intelligent comment. Just an open mind capable of looking and making up ones mind as you see it.

    I see you have made up your mind. I see you don't mention Soros, or Dear old Al Gore who profit behind the scenes. Even Bernie Sanders profited and he claims to be a socialist, sometimes things get a different perspective when the potential money trails are followed.

    Not that a multi billionaire is automatically bad..

  16. #41
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,484

    Default

    The lack of scientific understanding in the broader community is something Ken and I can heartily agree on... Its ****ing depressing how much sadly ignorant/misinformed/naive stuff gets thrown around by those who write/read anything Murdoch or the bizarre tin foil hat stuff on Wattsup and their ilk...
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  17. #42
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    10,448

    Icon14 My old mate, don't be .......ing depressed you will see it turn out o.k.

    Quote Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
    The lack of scientific understanding in the broader community is something Ken and I can heartily agree on... Its ****ing depressing how much sadly ignorant/misinformed/naive stuff gets thrown around by those who write/read anything Murdoch or the bizarre tin foil hat stuff on Wattsup and their ilk...
    We are an agreeable couple Haakon I would add the science deniers on Real Climate and their ilk too. They ended up just as empty vessels parroting "we have the true myth and by hell you better not question our authority or else" In the end science and the scientific method will trump the bad stuff! won't stop the extremists on either side though..Too much money and I am certain the evil oil companies aren't throwing any my way

    Good luck in your endeavours. all will turn out right, just watch the weather closely.

    Ken

  18. #43
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,484

    Default

    Weather isnít the issue, itís the climate you have to watch


    Sent from my iPhone using aussiefrogs
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  19. #44
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    724

    Default

    Those who have actual evidence are always invited to publish it .
    Then you have to accept that it will be subjected to analysis.
    Choosing the scientific evidence selectively in order to promote an opinion has nothing to do with actual science.
    Opinion wonít get a pass beyond the internet bloggershphere.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    robmac likes this.

  20. #45
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nagaman View Post
    Those who have actual evidence are always invited to publish it .
    Then you have to accept that it will be subjected to analysis.
    Choosing the scientific evidence selectively in order to promote an opinion has nothing to do with actual science.
    Opinion wonít get a pass beyond the internet bloggershphere.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    Fake news!

    Sorry what? Hmm, where are my pills....


    Sent from my iPhone using aussiefrogs
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  21. #46
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    16,637

    Default

    Ahh! Remember the days when people might advise you before starting their rant: "In my humble opinion....."

    "Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff."
    - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
    It's another lovely day! Again!

  22. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    34

    Default

    Hi,
    back on the topic, this story gives a bit more detail on what Bosch are talking about.

    Miracle or mirage? Bosch?s diesel ?breakthrough? | Business| Economy and finance news from a German perspective | DW | 27.04.2018

    It's a bit sad that some people are so politically opposed to diesel, that they don't want to believe diesels can be made low emission, but they should really just keep their negativity in their pocket. If Bosch's technology works, then it will pass the tests.

    Andy
    Kenfuego likes this.

  23. #48
    1000+ Posts REN TIN TIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Brisbane/Australia
    Posts
    1,804

    Default

    Hang on, If I remember correctly, when crude oil is refined into the various petrol byproducts there is always a percentage of diesel fuel produced. Not sure of the percentage but it's significant and the ratio of diesel to gasoline is relatively fixed. So regardless of whether we like it or not when we produce gasoline we also produce diesel. If we kill-off the diesel completely there will be vast amounts of unwanted diesel fuel sitting around. Not sure if you can turn unwanted diesel fuel into anything else useful but probably not.

    Okay, we're not going to kill-off diesel engines in trucks, locomotives, ships, and other heavy commercial vehicles anytime soon even if diesel passenger cars are banned. Most of the actual and/or proposed diesel restrictions apply to built-up urban areas so there diesels will be around for a long time yet.
    "I cannot help but notice that there is no problem between us that cannot be solved by your departure."

  24. #49
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,484

    Default

    Itís all still just an iterative minor improvement that delays the inevitable at best... And itís only nox, not particulates.

    This doesnít ďsaveĒ diesel... It might at best let the car makers make another few years of profit.



    Sent from my iPhone using aussiefrogs
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  25. #50
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    7,394

    Default

    have you looked at what emerges from a petrol engine tailpipe? Diesels aren't as exclusively bad as you seem to think.
    Kim Luck likes this.

Page 2 of 6 First 123456 Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •