In article ,
Bob Hobden wrote:
"IMM" wrote in message
Vehicles "are" a very large polluters, especially when they are
concentrated
in cities, where masses of people live. Great progress is being made on
pollution from homes, in insulation standards, boiler efficiency , etc,
yet
there appears no immediate solution to the filthy car.

Sorry!? I think you have that the wrong way round.
The laws on vehicle pollution continue to get tougher and tougher and the
manufacturers have had to comply to continue to sell vehicles. There has
been massive strides in reducing pollution from cars, per mile travelled.
Catalytic Converters, Electronic Engine Control, lean burn engines, two
stage ignition, direct petrol injection, particle traps etc with more to
come. We are significantly reducing overall pollution figures despite a
massive increase in vehicles, now all we need to do is get rid of all those
old polluting buses.

I suggest that you take the effort to find out the facts behind the
government and motor lobby propaganda. That is completely untrue.
Here are a few of the major reasons, but I shall not follow up much.
If you want to know the science behind what I am saying, I will answer
if I can, but I will not play Blair and Howard.

1) An increasing number of cars are fitted with power steering
and brakes, and (worse) air conditioning. In addition to increasing
the fuel consumption, it means that engines need to be left running
when the car is stopped in traffic. Not all are as bad as Citroen,
but it is now rare for engines to be switched off in traffic jams.

2) Catalytic converters virtually eliminate carbon monoxide, but
increase the amount of nitrogen oxides. Worse, they work only after
the engine has warmed up (about 5 miles) and the average trip in the
UK is about 3 miles. Also, they don't work at all well when the engine
is idling (see (1). The reason that they "reduce pollution" is the
the government is very careful to measure only what they do reduce.

I will give you that an INCIDENTAL effect has been the removal of lead
and sulphur but, as someone with breathing problems, I can witness that
pollution for a given amount of traffic is getting worse.

3) The various regulations have the effect of increasing the weight
of vehicles, discouraging more economical two-wheeled transport (both
motorcycles and bicycles, ridden on the road). I believe that it would
now be cheaper for me to get a HGV licence than a motorcycle one, and I
am a very "low risk" person. And cycling is now finished, as a form of
medium-distance commuting (3-10 miles), and that is DIRECTLY due to the
changes in regulations and attitudes of the "powers that be."

Other people have pointed out the errors in your "pollution-free" car
theory. All it does is move the pollution from the suburbs to the
power station, though I agree that doing so COULD be used to reduce
pollution. I know of no plans that any government has, and definitely
not the UK, to do so.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.