French Makers Charged with Emissions Fraud

Status
Not open for further replies.
The effect of diesel fumes upon users has long been studied. Of course they are toxic at high levels but most people worked out long ago not to use engines in confined spaces. Used in the open air in the countryside there is no measurable health risk from old fashioned diesels with zero emission controls. Mouldy hay, dust, tobacco smoke, bushfire smoke, insecticides all figure in the attached study from the National Centre for Farmer Health but the good old diesel doesn't get a mention. I was pleased to be able to buy a new Deutz tractor that avoided Euro emission standards by sourcing the motors from SAME in India. Nothing like the smell of diesel fumes. Of course people living in confined urban streets hate trucks but that comes with the location. Spend a couple of days on a fireline and you get used to working in conditions of high diesel fume concentrations. With no ill effect.
The safety of diesel fumes was discussed by New Scientist in the early 1970's with no alarming conclusions although a Soviet study in 1976 raised the concern a component could be carcinogenic in mice at high concentrations.
Poor timid little ageist children should beware of their own breath. Toxic in confined situations.
 
Last edited:
Russell Hall said:
The effect of diesel fumes upon users has long been studied. Of course they are toxic at high levels but most people worked out long ago not to use engines in confined spaces. Used in the open air in the countryside there is no measurable health risk from old fashioned diesels with zero emission controls. Mouldy hay, dust, tobacco smoke, bushfire smoke, insecticides all figure in the attached study from the National Centre for Farmer Health but the good old diesel doesn't get a mention. I was pleased to be able to buy a new Deutz tractor that avoided Euro emission standards by sourcing the motors from SAME in India. Nothing like the smell of diesel fumes. Of course people living in confined urban streets hate trucks but that comes with the location. Spend a couple of days on a fireline and you get used to working in conditions of high diesel fume concentrations. With no ill effect.
The safety of diesel fumes was discussed by New Scientist in the early 1970's with no alarming conclusions although a Soviet study in 1976 raised the concern a component could be carcinogenic in mice at high concentrations.
Poor timid little ageist children should beware of their own breath. Toxic in confined situations.
Click to expand...

Russell, it's all good. There is nothing in diesel exhaust material that could kill you. Except the following:

https://www.toxalert.com/appNotes/docs/Composition of Diesel Exhaust Emissions.pdf

Your antiquated and anti-social views on everything to do with the health of our atmosphere do nothing to endear you to a well educated younger cohort of Australians. The days of "She'll be right mate" are long gone, as are the days of easily controllable bush-fires. You'll get to spend a lot more time breathing diesel exhaust fumes from your fire truck as time goes on, no-one needs to point out to you why. Antediluvian thinking still lives on in certain circles, as evidenced by the enthusiasm for coal and gas mining in the north of our country. Incidentally, how would you react if the Victorian government changed it's mind on fracking and allowed it to be carried out in your neighbourhood? You'd be delighted, I'm sure!
 
Oh dear. Do be careful out there. An academic has found the sky is falling. Not found in real health outcomes but let's run around pushing our woke agenda. Much experience in fire fighting? Or know Victorian fire history? Do some research before you repeat utter nonsense. The diesel is the basis of our transport system and will remain so for the forseeable future. Crowded urban environments always suffer from traffic congestion and the consequences of it. Remember when the complaints were on the quantity and smell of horse manure on the streets of Melbourne? Congestion is the inevitable consequence of concentrating the population, ports and service industries in one location made worse by poor planning and infrastructure decisions. Don't blame the diesel (or the horse) for resulting smells. An earlier generation was always complaining about steam locomotives ruining the washing. But there's nothing to stop you not using the products of our evil system, back in the 1970's a number of folk decided to be totally self sufficient growing their food and their weed. Go for it. Ditch the car. Or at least convert it to run on something you produce yourself. Do they still print Earth Garden?
Have had gas explorers here before, we get on ok. They fly over sometimes with ground sensing radars, now upgraded to a business jet.
This euro case will be well defended by the manufacturers. What is more interesting is the politics behind the prosecution and the response within France.
 
There are numerous historical reports (all strenuously denied) of Renault using software to "improve" their diesel emissions results. These still exist via Google searches. Something along the lines of only activating various emissions techniques within a set temperature range that happened to coincide with the testing regime temperature range or something similar.

I also recall a NOx trap that was thought to not actually do anything at less than 50km/h or within the normal operating environment of the cars they were fitted to.

I'm surprised about the Stellantis involvement though, especially Peugeot and Citroën as I didn't think any defeat devices or software cheats had been implicated in their systems.
 
Russell Hall said:
Oh dear. Do be careful out there. An academic has found the sky is falling. Not found in real health outcomes but let's run around pushing our woke agenda. Much experience in fire fighting? Or know Victorian fire history? Do some research before you repeat utter nonsense. The diesel is the basis of our transport system and will remain so for the forseeable future. Crowded urban environments always suffer from traffic congestion and the consequences of it. Remember when the complaints were on the quantity and smell of horse manure on the streets of Melbourne? Congestion is the inevitable consequence of concentrating the population, ports and service industries in one location made worse by poor planning and infrastructure decisions. Don't blame the diesel (or the horse) for resulting smells. An earlier generation was always complaining about steam locomotives ruining the washing. But there's nothing to stop you not using the products of our evil system, back in the 1970's a number of folk decided to be totally self sufficient growing their food and their weed. Go for it. Ditch the car. Or at least convert it to run on something you produce yourself. Do they still print Earth Garden?
Have had gas explorers here before, we get on ok. They fly over sometimes with ground sensing radars, now upgraded to a business jet.
This euro case will be well defended by the manufacturers. What is more interesting is the politics behind the prosecution and the response within France.
Click to expand...

I regularly spend time with a mate who was the captain of a local brigade for nearly thirty years in the north east hill (forest) country. He gave up after the organisation was taken over by a bunch of city bureaucrats who would not listen to the advice of people who lived and fought fires in the area for generations. Your constant use of the term woke, as discussed before, is you virtue signalling your similarly un-woke compatriots and simply illustrates that you have an agenda which involves pushing back at science. Fighting fires is one thing you might be good at but you suck at trying to lower their incidence and ferocity by denying that our climate is in anyway influenced by mankind's activities.
 
SLC206 said:
There are numerous historical reports (all strenuously denied) of Renault using software to "improve" their diesel emissions results. These still exist via Google searches. Something along the lines of only activating various emissions techniques within a set temperature range that happened to coincide with the testing regime temperature range or something similar.

I also recall a NOx trap that was thought to not actually do anything at less than 50km/h or within the normal operating environment of the cars they were fitted to.

I'm surprised about the Stellantis involvement though, especially Peugeot and Citroën as I didn't think any defeat devices or software cheats had been implicated in their systems.
Click to expand...

If you read Seasink's post #34 you would realise that it is now impossible to run any type of I/C engine using software which modifies the combustion, injection, timing etc. Unfortunately, that is now how all engines are controlled, including petrol engines, so I can see the writing on the wall for I/C engines in clear print in that one legislative clause.
 
If diesel was that bad they would never ever ever use them in mining situations

Ok in coal they run through a water trap but there is still fumes

In hard rock which is still a confined space
 
Kim I worked for the CFA in Community Safety. I spent a lot of time interviewing people who experienced fire. Back to 1939 up to 2007. Each community had their own experience and told their own tale. Some had a positive experience, others where there was loss of life were still traumatised. Every big fire with a front coming towards you is the worst anyone has ever seen. Our strategy was to minimize loss of life. Outcome was not what was intended. Twenty years ago I remember fires of twenty thousand acres that ran for days that got a small paragraph in the Age and no TV news coverage. Now every rubbish dump or patch of scrub is covered. Are fires getting worse? It's agreed that 1939 was the worst in recorded memory for the east of the state. The fire of 1851 was the biggest and may have been the fiercest but we don't have data. There are often large fires that devastate districts like Streatham in 1977 or Apsley in 1956 that burn out large areas and aren't stopped until weather conditions change. Then there are mega fires where extreme conditions coincide to bring a very difficult fire environment. Black Saturday in 2009 and Ash Wednesday in 1983. The latter was the worst fire situation we had since 1939, from the Adelaide Hills, the South East of South Australia, the Otways, the Western District and the fringes of Melbourne. A jet stream touched down and provided extreme and constant winds. Yet the death toll was a third of the 2009 fire that grew into a firestorm near Melbourne. There is a reason for the high death toll in 2009 and it's not what you might think. Anyway fires are nasty things, are more difficult control not because of weather but because of resource re-allocation and changed tactics. There is a reason why every fire gets away and there are often factors the public doesn't see. So the fire fighting environment changes. I don't fear the future because of climate change but I know an event like 1956 will come again. And I will rely on my faithful diesels that run in extreme heat sucking in smoke and ash and with a 12 hour blow of the filters never fail.
 
pugrambo said:
If diesel was that bad they would never ever ever use them in mining situations

Ok in coal they run through a water trap but there is still fumes

In hard rock which is still a confined space
Click to expand...

They used 10 year old kids in mining along with pit ponies back in the day. Don't you just long for those days again? The argument is about the amount and type of pollution that diesel engines generate and what it does to the atmosphere, not how close you can stand to an exhaust pipe although how long you think a canary would last with a diesel exhaust pumped into it's cage is the real question.
 
Russell Hall said:
Virtue signaling is again a catch all for the tiresome types who are letting us know how virtuous they are by using a few catch phrases. The sort of person who travels to an environmental conference in a private jet but rides a bicycle from the five star hotel to show their virtue.
Click to expand...
Like this:
 
Bu
Kim Luck said:
They used 10 year old kids in mining along with pit ponies back in the day. Don't you just long for those days again? The argument is about the amount and type of pollution that diesel engines generate and what it does to the atmosphere, not how close you can stand to an exhaust pipe although how long you think a canary would last with a diesel exhaust pumped into it's cage is the real question.
Click to expand...
But Kim spend too long in a closed chamber and your own breath will poison you. Aren't you afraid of the damage you're doing to the atmosphere by breathing?
 
I'm a bit worried Homo Sapiens is getting a free ride here. Wandering the earth emitting the dreaded carbon dioxide. Not like plants that absorb CO2 and emit oxygen. Pretty obvious what has to happen. For the good of the atmosphere and the planet. Not Soylent Green but Soylent Brown, volunteer to be made into compost. A totally plant based planet. After you.
Safework Australia, where would we be without them? Exactly where we are, useless lot without much respect on the workfloor but great commentary.
 
When inhaling, humans take in approximately 21 percent oxygen, 0.04 percent carbon dioxide and 79 percent nitrogen. On exhalation, humans give off approximately 16 percent oxygen, 4 percent carbon dioxide and 79 percent nitrogen. That's it apart from infinitesimally small amounts of various trace elements.

Compare that result with the exhaust gases from a diesel engine: which is one of the major contaminant mixtures of public health concern, consists of hundreds of toxic species in either gas or particle phase, mainly carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides, sulfur compounds, aldehydes, benzene, and low molecular weight PAHs and nitro-PAH in gas phase, and diesel PM (DPM), which by itself is a complex mixture containing a center core of elemental carbon (EC), small amounts of sulfate, nitrate, metals, and other trace elements, and adsorbed organic compounds including PAHs, nitro-PAHs, and oxygenated PAHs. DPM is highly respirable, with mean diameter of ∼0.1 μm. It also consists of a significant portion of particles in ultrafine particle size range (< 0.1 μm). The chemical compositions of DE vary greatly, depending on the fuel formulation, engine types, and operating conditions.

It is well-known that exposure to DE at occupational settings can cause various adverse health effects (Table 2) including lung cancer. Recently exposure to DE has gained attention because DE is a significant contributor to ambient PM, which has been linked to increased mortality and morbidity worldwide. In particular, a stronger correlation was found between traffic-related PM and observed health outcomes. Given the complex chemical mixtures of DE, exposure to DE is an area of concern for multiple end points and deserves further research.

Biofuel emissions are important to note because there has been an increasing trend in use of biofuel as an alternative fuel worldwide. Two common types of biofuels in the market are biodiesel and bioethanol. The former is manufactured from vegetable oils or animal fats, and the latter is produced by the fermentation of plants (e.g., sugar cane or corn). These fuels are considered ‘clean’ fuels because they generate low emissions of many criteria pollutants, that is, CO, SO2, and PM, as well as total hydrocarbons (THCs). However, whether exposure to biofuel emission is safe for people is unknown because only limited data are available for the chemical and physical characteristics of biofuel emissions and the health effects associated with exposure to biofuel emission. Several studies have shown higher emissions of aldehydes and NO2, higher soluble organic fraction in PM, and smaller particles in biodiesel emissions than fossil fuel emissions. Whether the change in chemical proportion and particle size may lead to different or higher health risks needs to be investigated. Therefore, characterization of biofuel emissions as well as study of its toxicities are important for understanding potential health risks for the public. (Credit to Z. Fan, L. Lin, in Encyclopedia of Environmental Health, 2011)
 
It's the mouse test. Give enough concentration of anything to a mouse and you can get it to develop cancer. Bacon, toast, coffee, meat whatever you have in your sights. In life these problems don't arise. On the other hand there are really nasty chemicals that people kept quiet about like PFAS. Self motivated interest groups promote one fuel over another.
The politics of this attack on diesel are interesting and may be part of a wider campaign. But rest assured it is an absolutely safe power source.
Renault has state ownership and therefore not given to political games and Peugeot always stood apart from politics. But they will have their own opinions at what is going on.
 
Last edited:
Why they call this the Lucky country, so much Good Luck, Gosh I wonder when that will be taxed or banned, meanwhile I am quite open to buying a long range diesel for its economic operation and of course a short range cheap EV -cheap in the sense of the initial price, the projected life of its batteries and proven overall economy.

I Note that all those charging bays at the new local Woolworths seem to be empty 99% of the time. Probably hope to charge mine at home though (if I get one) I don't want the Government to subsidise the price though, just buying on genuine need and merit.

I wonder what happened with Carlos what's his name and Nissan in Japan. Did he fail to C0-operate with development of the Japanese preferred hydrogen fueled vehicle movement there.

Ken
 
The buses follow fixed routes and stop frequently at a charging place. The same goes for the non-inductive wireless trams in Newcastle - they are charged from overhead at each stop, and get what is needed to get them a short distance. It really isn't suitable for vehicles that don't stop regularly. (It doesn't really replace the trains that were removed either)
 
Last edited:
The largest operational urban tram network in the world is located in Melbourne, Australia. 250km of double track, 493 trams, 24 routes, and 1,763 tram stops, 5,000+ services daily, 200+ million trips completed annually. All electric.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top