Dec-03-2019 05:36 AM
Dec-07-2019 10:17 AM
JRscooby wrote:ShinerBock wrote:
Yeah, all those people who live in the city were NOx is a health issue, it is all about me because they don't want to move away from their favorite Starbucks.
Learn how and where NOx forms.
I maybe should learn something. OTOH, Maybe you should learn about how society forms. Maybe you could get the idea between your ears that without cities we would not need any emission controls, because we would have no trucks, or computers to talk about trucks with.
Dec-07-2019 02:32 AM
ShinerBock wrote:
Yeah, all those people who live in the city were NOx is a health issue, it is all about me because they don't want to move away from their favorite Starbucks.
Learn how and where NOx forms.
Dec-06-2019 01:11 PM
JRscooby wrote:ShinerBock wrote:
Well it is because of those people that I have to pay more for fuel due to lower efficiency, pay more for my truck due to the emissions equipment, decreased reliability, and pay more for repairs/maintenance in the long run due to NOx emissions that only effect the health of people in highly populated areas. Why should I have to pay for their wants?
Me me me it's all about me. You do not have to pay. You choose to drive a new diesel truck. If you can afford to drive the new diesel you could choose a new gas, or a old diesel. IMHO, the only choice you should have is to modify the engine to no longer meet emission standards.
Dec-06-2019 03:02 AM
Grit dog wrote:
And in Scoobys example, either this is a singular personal experience that he is assuming to be the norm, or it's made up by throwing the poor me card.
A more accurate example might be the old toyota burning oil being pulled over with "probable cause" (the pollution or that conveniently busted tail light or any other host of minor infractions) and then citing the driver for expired registration (maybe because it couldn't pass emissions), no insurance and a bench warrant for the other unpaid violations.
That's not a feel bad for the poor scenario, that's a lack of responsibility or give a ____ by the driver of the car.
And none of this has a dang thing to do with the original discussion....big surprise.
ShinerBock wrote:
Well it is because of those people that I have to pay more for fuel due to lower efficiency, pay more for my truck due to the emissions equipment, decreased reliability, and pay more for repairs/maintenance in the long run due to NOx emissions that only effect the health of people in highly populated areas. Why should I have to pay for their wants?
Dec-05-2019 09:53 AM
JRscooby wrote:ShinerBock wrote:
Actually it is not pure ignorance when speaking in terms of PM and NOx.
What I referred to as "pure ignorance" was your implication more people should move into rural area, and instead of driving 50 miles a week to get back and forth to work now drive 50 miles one way, and think that the increase in driving will not increase emissions.
Dec-05-2019 09:43 AM
time2roll wrote:JRscooby wrote:Two wrongs do not make a right and low income does not get a pass. Yes I agree this example is unfortunate.
Most of the time it happens is in the suburbs. A guy in a new, shinny, lifted pickup can leave the light, blowing enough black smoke that pedestrians can disappear. But the maid on her way to clean the house of the rectum that just choked the kids walking to school can get a ticket because 20 year old Toyota is smoking as she slows for the light.
The Toyota needs to be fixed or replaced and a 'fix-it' citation is in order.
The truck with a modified and deliberate intention of smoke should be impounded on the spot, heavy fine assessed, and require OEM repair before returning to the owner.
Dec-05-2019 07:47 AM
time2roll wrote:
Two wrongs do not make a right and low income does not get a pass. Yes I agree this example is unfortunate.
The Toyota needs to be fixed or replaced and a 'fix-it' citation is in order.
The truck with a modified and deliberate intention of smoke should be impounded on the spot, heavy fine assessed, and require OEM repair before returning to the owner.
ShinerBock wrote:
Actually it is not pure ignorance when speaking in terms of PM and NOx.
Groover wrote:
"Trust me, the EPA is not perfect, but some seem to take what they say as the word of God without question or even knowing what the regulation is."
I wholeheartedly agree with this. In fact, they probably did more harm than good with the regulations in the 1970's that made many cars more than double their fuel requirements and thus CO2 emissions.
Dec-05-2019 06:25 AM
Groover wrote:
"CO and CO2 on the other hand(which gassers mainly emit) do stay in the air regardless of where you are at."
Shiner, you generally put a lot of thought and intelligence in your posts. Surely you are not claiming that the carbon in diesel fuel is somehow converted into NOx instead of CO and CO2. And, since diesel has a higher percentage of carbon in it that gasoline a pound of diesel will make more carbon byproducts than a pound of gasoline.
Production of NOx is an endothermic process which means that it absorbs energy and increases demand for carbon based fuel. Once it is discharged it starts breaking down and creates nitric acid which slowly dissolves most everything.
"Trust me, the EPA is not perfect, but some seem to take what they say as the word of God without question or even knowing what the regulation is."
I wholeheartedly agree with this. In fact, they probably did more harm than good with the regulations in the 1970's that made many cars more than double their fuel requirements and thus CO2 emissions.
Dec-05-2019 05:29 AM
Dec-04-2019 08:26 AM
JRscooby wrote:
First you have not addressed the point without regulation the research into making the engines run cleaner.
JRscooby wrote:
Most of the time it happens is in the suburbs. A guy in a new, shinny, lifted pickup can leave the light, blowing enough black smoke that pedestrians can disappear. But the maid on her way to clean the house of the rectum that just choked the kids walking to school can get a ticket because 20 year old Toyota is smoking as she slows for the light.
JRscooby wrote:
This is a problem. But I think a good part of the problem is unlike most of the developed world, somebody running for office in the government can say he will listen to god and money, not scientist. (Most people I know, if they mention the voices in their head we beg them to get back on meds. But I guess if they could get on the news they could get elected)
JRscooby wrote:
Let me see. A long time ago it was discovered for society to develop past substance farming cities are needed to concentrate market and labor. I think most who live in city do so because that is where the jobs are. It is pure ignorance to think any vehicle will pollute less driving 100 miles a day instead of 10.
But most important, who in sam hill is forcing you or anybody else to pay the cost? When I lived on the farm, we used 2 pickups. When I got old enough to need one, I bought one that was 10 years old. As soon as we knew it would work we could pull the 14 year old one out of service long enough to rebuild the engine. Emission standards have been on heavy duty diesel pickups for what 13 years? If you don't want to pay the cost, drive the old truck, or buy a gasser.
Dec-04-2019 08:02 AM
JRscooby wrote:Two wrongs do not make a right and low income does not get a pass. Yes I agree this example is unfortunate.
Most of the time it happens is in the suburbs. A guy in a new, shinny, lifted pickup can leave the light, blowing enough black smoke that pedestrians can disappear. But the maid on her way to clean the house of the rectum that just choked the kids walking to school can get a ticket because 20 year old Toyota is smoking as she slows for the light.
Dec-04-2019 07:33 AM
ShinerBock wrote:JRscooby wrote:NRALIFR wrote:
It can’t happen fast enough as far as I’m concerned.
This kind of thinking and innovation is what’s going to solve our climate/environmental problems, not the “Ban it (everything you’re currently doing) and cram it (my half-baked plan du jour down your throat) nonsense coming from politicians mouths.
:):)
Strange. Most of what I hear from politicians in power is "IT AIN'T HAPPENING!"
What I don't understand is person 1 can be driving the car he can afford, maintaining it as well as he can, gets a ticket because of a little smoke. At the same time, person 2, that can afford to drive what he wants, spends more than person 1 makes in 2 years for a truck, then gets on the 'net and brags about modifying the truck so it no longer meets the emission standards.
Never seen this happen on the road and there have been plenty of times where I was behind a gas job that was spewing all sorts of smoke.
The other portion of this is who is making the regulation and depending on how you trust them. Many people do not even know what the regulation is yet they will blindly follow whatever the EPA states even though our regulations allow for more CO2 and CO than many other standards like the EU. The EU has a much higher NOx limit than the US which allows their diesels to run more efficiently and have much lower CO2 and CO limits which gas engines emit more of.
There is also the factor that many of these emissions like NOx and PM are only harmful in heavily populated areas where it does not have a chance to dissipate, but since it is a one size fits all system, those of us in rural areas have to abide by the same emissions regulation (with less fuel economy and a more costly emissions system) all because someone wants to live in a city. Why should I have to pay the price because others do not want to move away from their favorite metro area coffee shop.
Dec-04-2019 05:56 AM
JRscooby wrote:NRALIFR wrote:
It can’t happen fast enough as far as I’m concerned.
This kind of thinking and innovation is what’s going to solve our climate/environmental problems, not the “Ban it (everything you’re currently doing) and cram it (my half-baked plan du jour down your throat) nonsense coming from politicians mouths.
:):)
Strange. Most of what I hear from politicians in power is "IT AIN'T HAPPENING!"
What I don't understand is person 1 can be driving the car he can afford, maintaining it as well as he can, gets a ticket because of a little smoke. At the same time, person 2, that can afford to drive what he wants, spends more than person 1 makes in 2 years for a truck, then gets on the 'net and brags about modifying the truck so it no longer meets the emission standards.
Dec-04-2019 04:37 AM