France curbs Paris car drivers to combat dangerous smog

PM pollution is probably combination of many sources and factors.
- weather - warm, sunny and dry
- home heating (old wood furnace) - it's still winter
- road transport
- industry

So what can you do? The simplest short term solution is to transfer as many people as possible from cars to public transport.

I red somewhere that Hybrids were allowed no mater the licence plate, good to hear.

 

including the diesel Peugeot hybrids?

 

Agree, and the warm, sunny, dry weather is actually the main factor. It's usually accompanied by a subsidence inversion which would effectively preclude vertical dispersion over that particular region.

 

I read it in local media, that EV, hybrids and any car with 3 or more occupants are allowed.

 

If the Paris public transport is as easy to use as DC, then I'd be happy to leave my car home, but if it sucks like Baltimore and L.A., then I'd find a new job outside the city. (In other words Patis' behavior is driving away employees.)

Also in response to post #1;

Euro-Diesel standards have only been clean since circa 2010, so there's still a lot of cars that are the equivalent of transitional LEV rating. That's why there's a lot of NOx coming from the old fleet.

rUS diesel standards are now better than EU standards with cars like the Jetta getter rated as clean as its gasoline equivalent.)

 

Repeat for those who say "clean diesel" is an oxymoron : Greenercars.org rates a diesel Jetta *just as clean* as the gasoline Jetta : 48 out of 100 points. (For comparison the Prius is 57 and the Tesla is only 38.... that's right:less clean than a diesel.). The reason diesel is rated so high is because it now had NOx, CO neutralization. PLUS soot filters which no gasoline car has (and should).

 

ACEEE has been around for ~25 years. Criticizing that group makes as little sense as criticizing Greenpeace or the California Air Resource Board. They are all pro-environment. (I label them as ultra-liberal.)

No, gasoline Jettas do not have soot/particulate matter filters. Only diesel Jettas carry them, because the soot/PM output is regulated, and a diesel Jetta would exceed the limit without the filters. (With the filters, it emits only 10% as much soot as a gasoline direct injection engine. Very clean.)

And yes of course greenercars factors soot into the lifecycle (manufacturing-to-junkyard) analysis of greenercars ratings. It is part of the ULEV and SULEV and PZEV rating system which they use to calculate a car's pollution output.

 

I looked up the Jetta on fueleconomy.gov

Both petrol and diesel versions of the Jetta account for a combined upstream + tailpipe GHG of ~ 300 grams/mile;
The Prius is ~ 225 grams/mile.
If you think it will help your case feel free to look up other tailpipe pollutants.

So if your website ranks the Jetta as 'greener' than a Prius then it is corrupt, incompetent, or both.

Oh and by the way, *LEV ratings are ONLY tailpipe emissions.

 

Duplicate post..... forum error.

 

I noticed someone said "Clean gasoline cars are also an oxymoron." Not really..... there are several gasoline cars that are rated PZEV emissions (equal to a Prius or Civic hybrid), and on greenercars.org are almost as clean as the Leaf EV (and more clean than the Tesla EV at 38/100).

Greenercars is a life cycle analysis from birth-to-recycling of the whole cars pollution impact. They publish a book almost 500 pages long filled with empirical data and scientific analysis.

Edmunds is a joke..... like getting green/environmental data from Jeremy Clarkson (the guy who falsely-claimed his Tesla ran out of charge).

 

Here we go again, "10%" in quantity, quality...etcetera... discussion...

 

Is the inside of your Prius' tailpipe spotless? Is that before or after scrubbing it out? All engine, gas and diesel, emit particulates. Even CNG ones emit some. An unfiltered diesel emitted a lot. A filtered one still emits some during a drive. It is less than most gasoline engines, but the chemical differences mean the gas particles aren't visible coming out of the tailpipe. That doesn't make them less harmful than diesel particles.

Direct Injection gas engines do emit more particulates than a filtered diesel. Enough that they will be requiring a filter in the future. Assuming lobbyists don't get the implementation date pushed back. Port injection cars also emit, but at levels considered safe. We don't know how many models emit more or less than a filtered diesel because testing isn't mandatory.

Diesel cars(passenger vehicles) sold in the US are as clean as gasoline ones because they have to adhere to the same standards. (Before the counter points of 'dirtiest gasoline' start, look up what the Toyota's non-hybrid cars, the majority that they sell, are rated in a Federal emission state.) European emission standards are behind the US for diesel. Euro 6 will be a big a catch up. While there are compliant models available now, Euro 6 isn't official yet.

So European cities will have a problem with air pollution from older diesels. (Don't forget France barred gasoline cars in Paris too.) There is probably a fair number of Euro 3 compliant cars still being driven around daily. Until those cars come off the road, that is how it will be. In the US, a large chunk of emissions from cars is due to the old gas ones driving around. Just because there is 10 year old cars, and even ones with carburetors, still driving around, doesn't make the new ones on dealer lots just as dirty.

Do not forget that it has taken decades to get cars as clean as Prius. All that time and money spent on cleaning up the gasoline exhaust has helped in cleaning up diesel exhaust. It will still take time to improve the performance and cost of diesel emission systems. Then, barring an effort to speed the process up, it will take time before the old dirty diesels are retired.

 

Here are some graphics which may clarify the particle emissions from the various gasoline and diesel engine technologies...

This is a graphic of PFI and GDI particle emissions...



Source: Walter Piock, Guy Hoffmann, Axel Berndorfer, Patrick Salemi and Bernd Fusshoeller; "Strategies Towards Meeting Future Particulate Matter Emission Requirements in Homogeneous Gasoline Direct Injection Engines." SAE International, 2011-01-1212


Here is a graphic of filtered (DPF) and unfiltered European-spec diesel cars...



AU = Artemis Urban
AEU = Artemis Extra-Urban
AH = Artemis Highway

Source: Karlsson, "Measurement of Emissions from Four Diesel Fuelled Passenger Cars Meeting Euro 4 Emission Standards." AVL MTC Motortestcenter AB, Sweden, October 2005

Notice that the filtered diesels (Peugeot and Citroen) are well below the Euro 5b/Euro 6 regulated limit of 6X10^11 particles/km.

 

OK, this study is a smoking gun implicating diesels in the Parisian PM2.5 problem:
http://www.londonair.org.uk/london/asp/LAQNSeminar/pdf/June2012/Sophie_Moukhtar_PM2.5_pollution_The_situation_in_the_Greater_Paris_Area.pdf

A pretty picture from the study for the lazy amongst us



Trollbait, I'm curious: Have you become a diesel supporter/apologist only since Euro6 ?

 

Why not? Euro 6 diesel is virtually the same as the Prius emissions. And contrary to posts by others, Euro 6 diesel cars can be purchased now. Euro 6 applies to new models sold/released in 2014. Some models met Euro 6 previously, but were rated Euro 5; Mercedes, Jaguar, BMW etc.

 

I support sustainable fuel production, and in that regard diesel seems to have an advantage. I also believe that plug ins will be the solution for most person vehicle needs. Until they have the numbers to make an impact, hybrids can do a great job of reducing emissions and foreign petroleum dependency.

But hybrids simply aren't going to work for everyone. Whether because of actual needs or irrational reasons some will not buy a hybrid. Better to give them options without limiting it by fuel type. I know diesel fanboi's felt threatened by hybrids and some were trollish here. Getting defensive and villianizing new diesels with outdated info isn't going to help progress though.

That study is nearly two years old. No one is denying that Paris and Europe has a problem with pollution from their diesel fleet. The fact that most of the particulates come from diesels should be surprising. Diesels are common there. Gasolines are common here, and, guess what, similar studies done in the US have found the majority of particulate emissions come from gasoline engines.

One of diesel's, at least past, advantages over gasoline engines was longer service life. Unless steps are taken to get the older, pre-emission control models off the road, they are going to be around longer. Meaning regulation changes will take longer to have an impact.

In regards to the current smog problem in Paris, the particle emissions of diesels likely have little roll in it. Soot from Coal burning had a role in past smog problems, but modern smog is a reaction of pollutants to form ozone and particles. The main culprits are NOx and VOCs. The main supplier of NOx will likely be the diesels, though European gasoline cars could be emitting more than American ones. Gasoline will contribute more VOCs than diesel by being more volatile, but there are plenty of non-transportation sources for them.

Now, America isn't Europe. Diesel cars were never popular here. Even when the diesel prices were lower. So there are fewer old diesels spewing pollutants to impact overall overall air quality. The greater number of older gasoline cars have a bigger effect. Because of ULSD and current regulations, diesels sold now will just as bad as most of the gasoline cars sold. The emission control technology for diesel is still young, and it is likely we will see improvements going forward.

Even though diesel cars are going to get cleaner in the US, there impact to overall air quality will still be small. Diesel passenger vehicle sales only get around 1%, or a third of hybrids annual sales. Even with expanding options for consumers, higher purchase and fuel prices will keep their numbers low.

 

Just the opposite -- I can understand people choosing Euro6 diesels. The earlier support is less than debatable.