Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Diesel Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 12-09-2018, 01:47 PM
bigsky's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NW MT
Posts: 43
Ban diesel motors, up here in agriculture country, and there will be many "environmentalists" starving in their big city's

Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-09-2018, 01:53 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The slums of Beverly Hills
Posts: 8,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigsky View Post
Ban diesel motors, up here in agriculture country, and there will be many "environmentalists" starving in their big city's
Or agriculture jobs get replaced by automation faster than you can say unemployment benefits.

LOL
__________________
CENSORED due to not family friendly words
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-09-2018, 02:35 PM
Father Of Giants's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Newport News, Virginia
Posts: 1,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjts1 View Post
The sooner the better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by martureo View Post
Diesel emits more NOx than petrol when combusted.
My question is WHY?

Lets break this down with FACTS .Only 28% of the total output of emissions is caused by transportation.
Only 3% of passenger vehicles sold are diesels. Add to that, nitrous oxide only makes 5% of ALL the TOTAL SUM of all emissions. Of that TOTAL SUM of all nitrous oxide, the vast majority of it is SOIL MANAGEMENT, transportation only accounts for a mere 5% of it. Stationary engines another 5%.
Click on nitrous oxide to see the facts.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases


The EPA themselves even stated that Nitrous oxide make up a relatively small percentage of transportation emissions.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/us-greenhouse-gas-inventory-report-1990-2014

If my math is right, transportation only accounts for .05% ( to 1% if you want to include stationary engines) of the TOTAL Nitrous Oxide output.

Why ban something that's BARELY contributing to the total sum of emissions? What impact will that make? Let me help you out, next to none. Diesels are merely a scapegoat for a political agenda.

Liberals/leftist want to ban something with no good reason why, even when logic/facts topples said reason/issue.

Laughable, Diesels are destroying the United States, but cold hard facts refute such BASELESS claims
__________________
1998 Ford Escort ZX2 5 speed - 279,000 miles My Daily

1992 Mercedes 300D 2.5 202,000 - Pure junk
2000 Mercedes E320 Black - 136,000 miles - Needs repair

Don't forget to grease the screw and threads on the spring compressor.

Last edited by Father Of Giants; 12-09-2018 at 03:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:17 PM
Squiggle Dog's Avatar
https://fintail.org
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surprise, AZ, USA
Posts: 3,777
Or, instead of banning diesels we could use clean-burning, renewable biodiesel.
__________________
Stop paying for animal enslavement, cruelty, and slaughter. Save your health and the planet. Go vegan! I did 18 years ago. https://challenge22.com/

DON'T MESS WITH MY MERCEDES!


1967 W110 Universal Wagon, Euro, Turbo Diesel, Tail Fins, 4 Speed Manual Column Shift, A/C
1980 W116 300SD Turbo Diesel, DB479 Walnut Brown, Sunroof, Highly Optioned, 350,000+ Miles
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:22 PM
tbomachines's Avatar
ಠ_ಠ
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 7,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Father Of Giants View Post
My question is WHY?

Lets break this down with FACTS .Only 28% of the total output of emissions is caused by transportation.
Only 3% of passenger vehicles sold are diesels. Add to that, nitrous oxide only makes 5% of ALL the TOTAL SUM of all emissions. Of that TOTAL SUM of all nitrous oxide, the vast majority of it is SOIL MANAGEMENT, transportation only accounts for a mere 5% of it. Stationary engines another 5%.
Click on nitrous oxide to see the facts.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases


The EPA themselves even stated that Nitrous oxide make up a relatively small percentage of transportation emissions.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/us-greenhouse-gas-inventory-report-1990-2014

If my math is right, transportation only accounts for .05% ( to 1% if you want to include stationary engines) of the TOTAL Nitrous Oxide output.

Why ban something that's BARELY contributing to the total sum of emissions? What impact will that make? Let me help you out, next to none. Diesels are merely a scapegoat for a political agenda.


It's the same logic as banning rifles when they make up .05% of total homides.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4.xls

I know rifles are off topic but they fall in the same exact situation. Liberals/leftist wanting to ban something with no good reason why, even when logic/facts topples said reason/issue.:

Laughable, Diesels (and rifles) are destroying the United States, but cold hard facts refute such BASELESS claims
yes, let's equate diesel and rifles. Great job.
__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:27 PM
Father Of Giants's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Newport News, Virginia
Posts: 1,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbomachines View Post
yes, let's equate diesel and rifles. Great job.
I see your comprehension is lacking so I fixed the post.

Besides that my post is irrefutable none the less. Care to dispute THE EPA's claims?

Waiting for someone to give good reason to ban Diesel engines in regards to emissions, oh wait, there are none...
__________________
1998 Ford Escort ZX2 5 speed - 279,000 miles My Daily

1992 Mercedes 300D 2.5 202,000 - Pure junk
2000 Mercedes E320 Black - 136,000 miles - Needs repair

Don't forget to grease the screw and threads on the spring compressor.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:32 PM
pawoSD's Avatar
Dieselsüchtiger
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 15,438
Ocean transport (shipping, cruise ships, etc) are to blame for a massive amount of the global "fuel oil/diesel" emissions. These monstrous size ships and their engines emit more unchecked pollution than MILLIONS of cars. They often burn heavy dirty fuel full of sulfur and have no pollution controls on them whatsoever. Meanwhile a car with a 2 liter diesel that consumes less fuel in a year than one of those ships does in 15 minutes has to lug around tons of emissions equipment....

And thats not even taking into account the gross junk/pollution those ships pump into the ocean along the way either....or invasive species that attach to them and get moved around the world....
__________________
-diesel is not just a fuel, its a way of life-
'15 GLK250 Bluetec 118k - mine - (OC-123,800)
'17 Metris(VITO!) - 37k - wifes (OC-41k)
'09 Sprinter 3500 Winnebago View - 62k (OC - 67k)
'13 ML350 Bluetec - 95k - dad's (OC-98k)
'01 SL500 - 103k(km) - dad's (OC-110,000km)
'16 E400 4matic Sedan - 148k - Brothers (OC-155k)
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:43 PM
tbomachines's Avatar
ಠ_ಠ
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 7,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Father Of Giants View Post
I see your comprehension is lacking so I fixed the post.

Besides that my post is irrefutable none the less. Care to dispute THE EPA's claims?

Waiting for someone to give good reason to ban Diesel engines in regards to emissions, oh wait, there are none...
No. Why would I dispute the EPA claims? I will dispute the logic of equating rifles and diesel autos though, which is (as I think you realized and also disclaimed) completely irrelevant.
__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:44 PM
tbomachines's Avatar
ಠ_ಠ
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 7,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by pawoSD View Post
Ocean transport (shipping, cruise ships, etc) are to blame for a massive amount of the global "fuel oil/diesel" emissions. These monstrous size ships and their engines emit more unchecked pollution than MILLIONS of cars. They often burn heavy dirty fuel full of sulfur and have no pollution controls on them whatsoever. Meanwhile a car with a 2 liter diesel that consumes less fuel in a year than one of those ships does in 15 minutes has to lug around tons of emissions equipment....

And thats not even taking into account the gross junk/pollution those ships pump into the ocean along the way either....or invasive species that attach to them and get moved around the world....
Yep those things switch to bunker fuel soon as they are out of jurisdiction.
__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-09-2018, 05:18 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 1,623
Photochemical smog is a local problem. Unburned hydrocarbons and NOx react in sunlight to produce ozone, which is (at a minimum) a lung irritant. Looking at national percentages (which may or may not be accurate) misses the point that on a city-level scale, NOx is an important contributor to urban smog. The reduction of unburned fuel emissions and emissions of NOx through controls on both stationary and mobile sources has dramatically improved air quality in Los Angeles (my home town) and probably many cities across the U.S. I support further efforts to reduce emissions to help improve people's quality of life.

Now, just to be clear, I do not support banning any specific fuels. I support emission standards, and manufacturers are welcome to meet them however they like. If you can meet the required standards to maintain and improve people's health, it doesn't matter to me what fuel is being consumed.

On a different note, black carbon particle emissions are another major pollutant from diesels. So focusing on NOx is missing a large part of the problem associated with compression ignition combustion.
__________________
1968 220D, w115, /8, OM615, Automatic transmission.
My 1987 300TD wagon was sold and my 2003 W210 E320 wagon was totaled (sheds tear).
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-09-2018, 05:32 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Father Of Giants View Post
My question is WHY?

Lets break this down with FACTS .Only 28% of the total output of emissions is caused by transportation.
Only 3% of passenger vehicles sold are diesels. Add to that, nitrous oxide only makes 5% of ALL the TOTAL SUM of all emissions. Of that TOTAL SUM of all nitrous oxide, the vast majority of it is SOIL MANAGEMENT, transportation only accounts for a mere 5% of it. Stationary engines another 5%.
Click on nitrous oxide to see the facts.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases


The EPA themselves even stated that Nitrous oxide make up a relatively small percentage of transportation emissions.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/us-greenhouse-gas-inventory-report-1990-2014

If my math is right, transportation only accounts for .05% ( to 1% if you want to include stationary engines) of the TOTAL Nitrous Oxide output.

Why ban something that's BARELY contributing to the total sum of emissions? What impact will that make? Let me help you out, next to none. Diesels are merely a scapegoat for a political agenda.

Liberals/leftist want to ban something with no good reason why, even when logic/facts topples said reason/issue.

Laughable, Diesels are destroying the United States, but cold hard facts refute such BASELESS claims

Life follows art. Just watched Jean Sheppard's Christmas Story for the umpteenth time. This response reminds me of Ralphie's fantasy when he turns his theme into the teacher. It was beautiful until he gets his actual grade.


Check your math, review your premises, read your own links, and try not to shoot your eye out.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-09-2018, 05:39 PM
Father Of Giants's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Newport News, Virginia
Posts: 1,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mxfrank View Post
Life follows art. Just watched Jean Sheppard's Christmas Story for the umpteenth time. This response reminds me of Ralphie's fantasy when he turns his theme into the teacher. It was beautiful until he gets his actual grade.


Check your math, review your premises, read your own links, and try not to shoot your eye out.
Until someone proves otherwise I won't budge an inch.
__________________
1998 Ford Escort ZX2 5 speed - 279,000 miles My Daily

1992 Mercedes 300D 2.5 202,000 - Pure junk
2000 Mercedes E320 Black - 136,000 miles - Needs repair

Don't forget to grease the screw and threads on the spring compressor.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-09-2018, 07:22 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Greater Metropolitan Beaverdam VA
Posts: 2,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbomachines View Post
Yep those things switch to bunker fuel soon as they are out of jurisdiction.
I don't think they can switch to bunker. For one, most commercial ships are Diesel or gas turbine. The days of steam engines are mostly gone. The U.S. Navy combatants are now all gas turbine.

If one wants to place blame for emissions, look to air transport. I once saw a paper on the tonnage of emissions that a four-engine airliner spits out on a single cross-continent flight. The number was somewhere between 50 and 65 TONS and that did not count the particulates.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-09-2018, 08:19 PM
pawoSD's Avatar
Dieselsüchtiger
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 15,438
Yep, air transport is a big one too. A single long duration flight in a larger aircraft can easily burn over 30,000 gallons of fuel...again with no emissions controls other than how clean the engine is capable of running. Thats enough fuel to drive my GLK nearly a million miles.....and thats just ONE flight.
__________________
-diesel is not just a fuel, its a way of life-
'15 GLK250 Bluetec 118k - mine - (OC-123,800)
'17 Metris(VITO!) - 37k - wifes (OC-41k)
'09 Sprinter 3500 Winnebago View - 62k (OC - 67k)
'13 ML350 Bluetec - 95k - dad's (OC-98k)
'01 SL500 - 103k(km) - dad's (OC-110,000km)
'16 E400 4matic Sedan - 148k - Brothers (OC-155k)
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-09-2018, 09:52 PM
Mad Scientist
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,600
I don't see diesels being banned here in the USA.

There will come a time when none are built, as other technologies catch market share and the driving public moves on. There will come a time when no combustion powered cars at all are built - it'll be EVs only, and eventually autonomous vehicles only.

When's the last time a steam powered car was built? What percentage of the population commutes to work by horse and buggy? The country has moved on.

I wonder what the next step after EV's will be.

__________________
617 swapped Toyota Pickup, 22-24 MPG, 50k miles on swap
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page