Bristol is set to become the UK's first city to ban diesel cars from entering parts of the city centre

[munch]

So we give up then? Just not bother trying?

No but there are many other things that would help just as much, but without always hitting the motorists. Houses could be made a lot more thermally efficient. It would be relatively easy to make solar panels compulsory on all new builds, both commercial and domestic.

 

[broc]

The Government has progressively reduced the economic benefits of domestic solar panels........ it could take as long as 60+ years to recover the cost of a new installation & the panels only have a 25 year life expectancy.

 

[cardiff_gareth]

My car is a 2 litre petrol Mazda 5 and eats fuel! I'd love a diesel for the fuel economy and cleaner fumes but I live and work so close to each other I'd be getting DPF replacements on a regular basis and thus can't make the change. My tax on my car is £325 a year. Unfortunatly I either go diesel or stay with a large petrol engine. Yes I know some people carriers are now small petrol units with big turbos so more enviornmentally friendly and cheaper to run but they cost more than I can afford.

I don't see the point in banning diesel cars from city centers as like others have stated, since 2007 diesel cars have needed DPF's to pass emissions and MOT's. I don't have the statistics so no need to reply with the 'where's the proof' but I would have thought that most cars on the road now would be post 2007 so therefore have a DPF and cleaner emissions. If they ban diesel vehicles then I think this will have an impact on the shoppers and the shops themselves as if I can't get my car into Bristol to park up and shop then I'll just hit up Amazon or go to another city where I can park. With the high street in decline due to online shopping why would you put something in place to alienate a large proportion of your customers?!

Seems you pay your car tax (which can be obscene) and then you pay tax on fuel also but now they're dictating where you can now take your car you're getting taxed on to use!

 

[LeeRatters]

There is a hell of a lot of difference between mechanical and electronic fuel injection. With mechanical fuel injection you are tied into one timing of injection throughout the rev range. With electronic fuel injection the timing of the injection can vary throughout the rev range to ensure a cleaner and more controlled burn and a more exact amount of fuel used.

What about twin Weber 48 carburetors!?!?

I still think it mainly boils down to crap road layouts and the like that causes bad traffic congestion, etc etc Look at how many times they change these things and the majority of people just can't understand why and think it's crazy ideas!

 

[nilagin]

What about twin Weber 48 carburetors!?!?

I still think it mainly boils down to crap road layouts and the like that causes bad traffic congestion, etc etc Look at how many times they change these things and the majority of people just can't understand why and think it's crazy ideas!

What doesn't help is bus stop lay byes being filled in (supposedly to stop people parking their cars in them so the buses now stop in the traffic flow causing congestion and on top of that some bus stops are far too close to each other they could certainly do with thinning out a bit. We have a local road with two bus stops about 50 metres apart. Pointless.

 

[LeeRatters]

What doesn't help is bus stop lay byes being filled in (supposedly to stop people parking their cars in them so the buses now stop in the traffic flow causing congestion and on top of that some bus stops are far too close to each other they could certainly do with thinning out a bit. We have a local road with two bus stops about 50 metres apart. Pointless.

Exactly that. So many roads in my area where that bus stop thing happens! We have some where one starts just as the other ends - sometimes nothing can get through at all if the timing is right (wrong?) and at the maximum it's only one way.

 

[broc]

The A1 Western Bypass around Gateshead and Newcastle is a prime example of bad road layout; it is a major trunk road with several local interchanges too close together & adjacent to one of the UK's largest out of town shopping centres. It results in a mix of through traffic & local traffic frantically swapping lanes to join/leave in a short space, all of which slows vehicles down causing congestion & increased air pollution.

 

[munch]

The Government has progressively reduced the economic benefits of domestic solar panels........ it could take as long as 60+ years to recover the cost of a new installation & the panels only have a 25 year life expectancy.

I wasn't thinking about it in economic benefit for the individual, more for the cutting down of carbon emissions.

 

[wyx087]

the [solar] panels only have a 25 year life expectancy.

Whilst they are said to have life expectancy of 25 years by mass media, just like car batteries, they will last way beyond that period.

Solar panels are usually warrantied to have 80% of its specified production rate for 20 years. Beyond that, even if they only produce 50% of what they originally specified, they will still produce electricity and function as renewable source.
Same with EV batteries with 8 years warranty, where the car doesn't stop function beyond the warranty.

Does your car with its 3 years warranty (for example) only have life expectancy of 5 years?

Currently, electric cars are a joke .....

Electric motor are a LOT more suitable to off-roading and towing.
The only joke is the lack of choice in EV's due resisting the change by car manufacturers in previous few years.


Near the middle of this video, the guy in charge of programming traction control (who also worked on ICE traction control) talks about advantages with electric motors:

View: https://youtu.be/J-falgJE1xg

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

How about jet engine NOx emissions when you fly off to your holiday home? Of course, they don't count - neither do the emissions from the taxi that gets you to/from the airport(s). Or the busses that do the same.

Walk through many jet streams while doing your shopping?

 

[nilagin]

Walk through many jet streams while doing your shopping?

You don't have to it's being pumped out into the air. You don't need to be on the high street for Nox. What about barbeques etc? It is being deposited on the food then eaten.

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

You don't have to it's being pumped out into the air. You don't need to be on the high street for Nox. What about barbeques etc? It is being deposited on the food then eaten.

Because banning diesel cars from city centres is to do with reducing the nox concentration in city centres..

So anything else, while valid in terms of an overall pollution point of view, is unrelated to the point of cars and city centres.

 

[cambsno]

Because banning diesel cars from city centres is to do with reducing the nox concentration in city centres..

So anything else, while valid in terms of an overall pollution point of view, is unrelated to the point of cars and city centres.

So people will take longer journeys to go round the area, thus causing more pollution.

Its one of the most badly thought out schemes imaginable. A knee jerk reaction and the sort of thing that councils seem to love to do. What it needs is joined up thinking - IF diesels are so bad then firstly stop selling new ones! If we banned new sales, then the manufacturers would need to act and do more and better EV. You then look at phasing out the cars - expensive but possible.

 

[nilagin]

Because banning diesel cars from city centres is to do with reducing the nox concentration in city centres..

So anything else, while valid in terms of an overall pollution point of view, is unrelated to the point of cars and city centres.

Planes still fly over cities. Perhaps Bristol will be insisting that planes also have to change their flight paths.
And as I have already pointed out modern diesels produce lower nox emissions than older petrol vehicles.
Diesel generators on building sites and refrigerator units on lorries aren't even regulated. They will be producing far more nox than post 2007 diesel cars.
But the building site generators won't matter, they are just cramming in more housing and businesses to line the local councils pockets.

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

So people will take longer journeys to go round the area, thus causing more pollution.

Its one of the most badly thought out schemes imaginable. A knee jerk reaction and the sort of thing that councils seem to love to do. What it needs is joined up thinking - IF diesels are so bad then firstly stop selling new ones! If we banned new sales, then the manufacturers would need to act and do more and better EV. You then look at phasing out the cars - expensive but possible.

It works quite well in Paris. Although the system is slightly different. You get an Air Quality rating for your car, 1-5. When pollution levels are bad in the city centre, they restrict which cars can go into the city, or greater paris. All older diesels are already banned. When we went over earlier this year, we just had to apply for the sticker for our window, cost about £4.

People won't take longer journeys to get into the city, as they're just simply not allowed to take those cars into the city. So they have to get a bus or something instead (or don't go in).

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

Planes still fly over cities. Perhaps Bristol will be insisting that planes also have to change their flight paths.
And as I have already pointed out modern diesels produce lower nox emissions than older petrol vehicles.
Diesel generators on building sites and refrigerator units on lorries aren't even regulated. They will be producing far more nox than post 2007 diesel cars.
But the building site generators won't matter, they are just cramming in more housing and businesses to line the local councils pockets.

Do they fly down the high street?

 

[Mr Bump]

Because banning diesel cars from city centres is to do with reducing the nox concentration in city centres..

So anything else, while valid in terms of an overall pollution point of view, is unrelated to the point of cars and city centres.

correct matey, but dirty diesel owners want the problem to be caused by someone else not them.

 

[nilagin]

Do they fly down the high street?

They only have to fly over it. The particulates falls into the air you are breathing on the high street.
Diesel vehicles for the last 20yrs or so, have direct their exhaust onto the ground . It isn't pumped UP into the atmosphere.

 

[nilagin]

correct matey, but dirty diesel owners want the problem to be caused by someone else not them.

It is caused by other People, you in your older dirty petrol when you could just as easily have bought a newer car especially an EV. But no, you will continue with your misinformed little rants, whilst polluting the atmosphere with your older car and jetting off to your house in Greece.

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

They only have to fly over it. The particulates falls into the air you are breathing on the high street.
Diesel vehicles for the last 20yrs or so, have direct their exhaust onto the ground . It isn't pumped UP into the atmosphere.

Ok, so you believe that the NOX emissions from a plane, fall straight down into the highstreet but the exhaust from a diesel has no effect on the local atmosphere because the exhaust is pointed down?

How is it then, that when Paris enforces it's restriction on vehicles, the air quality significantly improves, but they don't stop any flights?

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

I do wonder who would volunteer to approach this chap on their own and tell him to scrap his nice red Landrover...

 

[LeeRatters]

It works quite well in Paris. Although the system is slightly different. You get an Air Quality rating for your car, 1-5. When pollution levels are bad in the city centre, they restrict which cars can go into the city, or greater paris. All older diesels are already banned. When we went over earlier this year, we just had to apply for the sticker for our window, cost about £4.

People won't take longer journeys to get into the city, as they're just simply not allowed to take those cars into the city. So they have to get a bus or something instead (or don't go in).

In this instance, a main issue is the ban covers a main North/South route through Bristol which is about 2 miles away from the centre. That is going to push people to travel further or pay to use the Suspension Bridge (that cost already jumped from 20p to £1 I think)

It is caused by other People, you in your older dirty petrol when you could just as easily have bought a newer car especially an EV. But no, you will continue with your misinformed little rants, whilst polluting the atmosphere with your older car and jetting off to your house in Greece.

It's not that easy to buy a newer car especially an electric. Unless you are paying of course.....? And you are finding a way for people to charge them?

 

[nilagin]

Ok, so you believe that the NOX emissions from a plane, fall straight down into the highstreet but the exhaust from a diesel has no effect on the local atmosphere because the exhaust is pointed down?

How is it then, that when Paris enforces it's restriction on vehicles, the air quality significantly improves, but they don't stop any flights?

Less traffic, less congestion.

 

[nilagin]

It's not that easy to buy a newer car especially an electric. Unless you are paying of course.....? And you are finding a way for people to charge them?

He can afford it. He doesn't even have to sell his house in Greece to do it.

 

[wyx087]

And as I have already pointed out modern diesels produce lower nox emissions than older petrol vehicles.

What about all the diesel cars on the road today? If a car has life expectancy of 15 years, surely there will still be quite a few 2004 diesels without DPF on the road.

How many high NOx diesels cars are there in total, on the road?
How many high NOx petrol cars are there in total, on the road?

Saying modern diesels are cleaner than older petrols is only focuses on one metric: NOx production. Whilst factually true, it is not the truth in the real world.
It's worse than Bristol council's ill informed banning of diesels.

In this instance, a main issue is the ban covers a main North/South route through Bristol which is about 2 miles away from the centre. That is going to push people to travel further or pay to use the Suspension Bridge (that cost already jumped from 20p to £1 I think)

This is what gets me. There is a route possible to not drive through city centre. Going by other side of the river, going pass a big Asda A370). That seems to be designated as inside the city centre CAZ.

London, at least, designate the ring roads as outside the zones. Allowing traffic to flow around the CAZ.

 

[Garry Edwards]

But what the government (and some members here) don't seem to get is that only diesel powered 4 x 4 cars are capable of doing the jobs needed by farmers. Currently, electric cars are a joke and petrol engined cars - when available in real 4x4 versions - simply cost far too much to run.

Electric motor are a LOT more suitable to off-roading and towing.
The only joke is the lack of choice in EV's due resisting the change by car manufacturers in previous few years.


Near the middle of this video, the guy in charge of programming traction control (who also worked on ICE traction control) talks about advantages with electric motors:

View: https://youtu.be/J-falgJE1xg

That's an interesting video, thanks for that. I have nothing against electric cars - and think that my son's Tesla is fantastic - but farmers need very different capabilities, and their needs have been ignored so far.

For example, in the video they guy is making the point that they've made it incredibly light. In the real world usage of farm utility vehicles, having excellent torque and traction is pretty useless without having a lot of weight, simply because my own car frequently has to tow 2.5 tons on road and often double that on our own land, which means that the car needs to weigh at least as much as the laden trailer. This is just one of our trailers, and fairly typical.

Farm utility vehicles are just that - they get used for everything from taking the kids to school and doing the weekly shopping trip to the nearest town (chelsea tractor territory) to heavy towing, driving across fields during the summer months and pulling out other vehicles that have got stuck. This requires both weight and a very solid chassis, because cows aren't house trained and driving over their s*** dissolves metal very rapidly. Large, heavy cars would, I suspect, run the batteries out pretty quickly, and there are no fast charging points in the country.

Sometimes, especially during harvest, a car can be running around, guzzling fuel at very low gearing, for many hours at a time. Not a problem with a diesel because there's always a Jerry can of fuel in the back but it's obvious that electric cars wouldn't cope.

I fully accept that electric cars have very good torque, but the reality is that our cars don't go in deep mud. Doing so would damage the land and the car would very quickly get stuck anyway. We can only drive cars in fields during the summer months. At this time of year the only vehicles that can cope are quad bikes, tractors and telehandlers.

Another big factor, if good electric utility vehicles actually existed, would be cost - cars wear quickly because of chassis corrosion, we have to do a lot of shunting around, which inevitably results in a lot of minor body damage, then there's driving down narrow country lanes where the paintwork always gets scratched.

So, electric utility vehicles are no doubt the future, but the future seems to be as far away as ever.

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

Less traffic, less congestion.

But you just said the cars don't contribute to the local air quality because of the direction their exhausts point, and that planes have a far bigger impact....

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

but the future seems to be as far away as ever.

It always is and when it does arrive it's quite different to what you expected.

 

[nilagin]

Saying modern diesels are cleaner than older petrols is only focuses on one metric: NOx production. Whilst factually true, it is not the truth in the real world.
It's worse than Bristol council's ill informed banning of diesels.

Yet again you fail to make sense.
The Bristol diesel ban is all about Nox.
The London ULEZ is more selective. It also alienates the more pollutant petrol cars but allows the clean diesels.

 

[nilagin]

But you just said the cars don't contribute to the local air quality because of the direction their exhausts point, and that planes have a far bigger impact....

No I didn't.

 

[wyx087]

Yet again you fail to make sense.
The Bristol diesel ban is all about Nox.
The London ULEZ is more selective. It also alienates the more pollutant petrol cars but allows the clean diesels.

No, yet again, you have failed to read and understand.

When talking about NOx across all petrol cars in the country, vs all diesel cars in the country. You will most certainly to find diesels produce a lot more NOx.
But you have singled out modern diesel and were comparing against old petrols, trying to prove a point (that diesels don't produce loads of NOx) by selectively choose your sample.

This strategy is akin to how tobaco industry attempted to convince people that smoking is not bad for your health.

 

[FujiLove]

I've been pondering whether to buy a used diesel instead of a petrol car precisely because their CO2 emissions are so low (+ they're very economical). 90% of our use would be on quiet rural roads, so not sure the NOx emissions are such a big problem in those circumstances. Bit torn about what to do now.

Any thoughts? Is this putting anyone else off?

We'd be looking to keep the car for many years (6+ at least) and don't want to end up with a lemon that we can't drive into UK cities!

 

[cambsno]

No, yet again, you have failed to read and understand.

When talking about NOx across all petrol cars in the country, vs all diesel cars in the country. You will most certainly to find diesels produce a lot more NOx.
But you have singled out modern diesel and were comparing against old petrols, trying to prove a point (that diesels don't produce loads of NOx) by selectively choose your sample.

This strategy is akin to how tobaco industry attempted to convince people that smoking is not bad for your health.

So why do we allow diesel cars to be made and sold? Surley the first thing is to stop adding to the problem? Then work from there. What happens in 10 years when standards have changed and todays new vehicle should be banned?

 

[wyx087]

So why do we allow diesel cars to be made and sold? Surley the first thing is to stop adding to the problem? Then work from there. What happens in 10 years when standards have changed and todays new vehicle should be banned?

Exactly.
But this is already happening. A diesel car as young as 5 years old is subject to fees into ULEZ in London, because standards have changed.

 

[Raymond Lin]

So why do we allow diesel cars to be made and sold? Surley the first thing is to stop adding to the problem? Then work from there. What happens in 10 years when standards have changed and todays new vehicle should be banned?

They already plan to ban production of all petrol AND Diesel cars by 2040.

They can't stop it bluntly, for obvious reasons.

 

[cambsno]

They already plan to ban production of all petrol AND Diesel cars by 2040.

They can't stop it bluntly, for obvious reasons.

No, but they could ban diesel cars from say 2025 - IF they are so bad for us!

 

[Raymond Lin]

No, but they could ban diesel cars from say 2025 - IF they are so bad for us!

Are you arguing the timetable? They can't do it by 2025 the same reason why they can't stop it bluntly.

You do realise a happy medium needs to be set between cutting off something bluntly or a soft stop? And that 2040 is one they all decided it is the optimal timeline.

Sounds like you are arguing for arguing sake.

 

[LeeRatters]

This is what gets me. There is a route possible to not drive through city centre. Going by other side of the river, going pass a big Asda A370). That seems to be designated as inside the city centre CAZ.

London, at least, designate the ring roads as outside the zones. Allowing traffic to flow around the CAZ.

Coronation Road is within the diesel ban area. Just. And you can't go through Cumberland Basin or Temple Meads to get to Coronation Road anyway (from the north)

 

[nilagin]

No, yet again, you have failed to read and understand.

When talking about NOx across all petrol cars in the country, vs all diesel cars in the country. You will most certainly to find diesels produce a lot more NOx.
But you have singled out modern diesel and were comparing against old petrols, trying to prove a point (that diesels don't produce loads of NOx) by selectively choose your sample.

This strategy is akin to how tobaco industry attempted to convince people that smoking is not bad for your health.

No you, @Mr Bump Bristol are the ones that have the lack of understanding.
Bristol want a blanket ban on all diesel cars in their city centre. But like you and Mr Bump wish to ignore the fact that there will still be petrol cars emitting higher nox allowed to use the city centre roads whilst owners of cleaner diesels can't.
Nothing to do with me being selective and nothing to do with your comparison to the tobacco industry.

 

[nilagin]

They already plan to ban production of all petrol AND Diesel cars by 2040.

They can't stop it bluntly, for obvious reasons.

Petrol and diesel hybrids, which must be capable of 50km under electric power will still be allowed. I would expect by 2040, hybrids will have a greater electric range anyway.