Sign In Join 



Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?

7022 messages,  Last post on Dec 09, 2009 at 9:08 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Automotive News


Messages Page 3 of 703
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
703
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#21 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [gagrice] OH REALLY? by larsb
Nov 07, 2006 (6:29 am)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Nov 06, 2006 5:40 pm)

Even a 'clean' diesel-powered 4x4 will produce cancer-causing soot and global warming CO2. Also, diesel exhaust fumes are a major contributing factor to acid rain.
 
And:
 
Global Warming
Diesel exhaust not only threatens public health,it contributes substantially to global warming through emissions of carbon and other heat-trapping gases.
Transportation is the source of roughly one-third of all heat-trapping gases released in the United States. This is more than most countries release from all sources combined.

 
And:
 
Diesel Soot adds to Global Warming
 
It's dirty, smelly, causes respiratory and cardiovascular disease and shortens life, true, but now there's another reason to hate diesel exhaust: Its soot exacerbates global warming. Reducing soot emissions will slow global warming faster than will reducing carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases, says a Stanford pollution expert.
 
"If you want to control global warming, the first thing to go after is soot," says Mark Z. Jacobson, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering. "But you should not neglect carbon dioxide. Controlling fossil-fuel soot will not only slow global warming but also will improve human health."

 
So please don't try to give us the "diesel eliminates global warming" line. Not flying with this edumacated fellow.
#22 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [gagrice] OH REALLY? [larsb] by gagrice
Nov 07, 2006 (2:30 pm)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Nov 07, 2006 6:29 am)

Can you find any older anti-diesel smut to sell here? If you had studied the situation you would know that sulfur is the primary ingredient in the soot from diesel engines. So a study based on high sulfur diesel is of little value to an educated population. Get us some recent studies of modern diesel engines using ULSD and it will give your argument a bit more credence.
 
The best selling car in America puts out about 1.5 tons more GHG per year than a VW TDI diesel car. That is based on high sulfur diesel. Think how much better the score with ULSD.
#23 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [rorr] by sls002
Nov 07, 2006 (3:59 pm)
Reply

Replying to: rorr (Nov 06, 2006 11:41 am)

If you want to talk about the relative change in temperature, you need to look at the absolute temperature, which in kelvin is celsius plus 273. However, if carbon dioxide is doubled, the expected change in temperature is about 2 to 5 degrees K.
#24 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [rorr] by Mr_Shiftright HOST
Nov 07, 2006 (5:30 pm)
Reply

Replying to: rorr (Nov 06, 2006 11:41 am)

well I did use "correlation", not causation...which I think is the proper conclusion to make from statistics alone.
 
HOWEVER---the polar ice is definitely absolutely, no argument, no contest......MELTING.
 
Interestingly this is causing a big BEEF between USA and Canada, on Canada's right to supervise the Northwest Passage (previously nearly unpassable, but soon to be a major highway for anybody....or NOT anybody, if Canada gets its way).
 
Unfortunately for Canada, they haven't much in the way of equipment to enforce their claim.
 
WEIRD FACTOID: one future cause of global warming? Flat screen TVS, which use 3X normal electricity, which means more coal burning, etc......
 
The point of all rambling post? That the problem of global warming will have to be addressed on a VERY broad front, not just cars....
 
#25 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [gagrice] OH REALLY? [larsb] by avalon02wh
Nov 11, 2006 (5:44 am)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Nov 07, 2006 6:29 am)

That was an interesting article. Soot can come from a variety of sources, however.
 
"In earlier work, Bond estimated that burning firewood -- the principal fuel for cook stoves in the developing world -- produces 800,000 metric tons of soot worldwide each year. In comparison, diesel cars and trucks generate about 890,000 metric tons of soot annually. These two sources each account for about 10 percent of the soot emitted into the world's atmosphere each year, she said."
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-10/acs-sfw102406.php
 
I agree with gagrice in that ULSD will have a beneficial impact in reducing global warming gases and soot.
 
"The massive forest fire in Indonesia (1997/1998) released approx. 2.57 gigatonnes of Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere (source: Nature magazine, November 2002). During 1997-1998, the total amount of Carbon Dioxide released to the atmosphere was 6 gigatonnes."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_fire
 
This article suggests that forest fires might be one of the biggest GW contributors. Forest fires also produce a lot of soot.
 
Again, it appears from the current evidence that autos are not a major source of global warming. Still, that does not mean we cannot work on reducing their contribution to the problem. If we are heading toward a tipping point, even a small reduction might help us avoid going over the edge.
#26 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [Mr_Shiftright] by avalon02wh
Nov 11, 2006 (6:12 am)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Nov 07, 2006 5:30 pm)

Your weird factoid at first had me a bit puzzled. I was under the impression that the new TVs were more energy efficient. A quick Google search turned up an article at
 
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-6400401-2.html?tag=nav
 
* Microdisplay rear projector: 0.11 to 0.15 watt per square inch
* LCD: 0.16 to 0.41 watt per square inch
* CRT: 0.25 to 0.40 watt per square inch
* Plasma: 0.30 to 0.39 watt per square inch
 
The 40 inch LCD was 214 watts. The 42 inch plasma TVs scored a toasty warm 357 & 360 watts. On the other hand, a 50 inch plasma TV was 229 to 236 depending on if the power save was on. The 20 inch LCD only used 18 watts.
 
So I guess in the TV world, like the auto world, bigger is generally bad for global warming.
 
More on topic, I find the trend in high HP cars a bit disappointing from a GW perspective. Do people really need a 262 HP Camry? How about the new Mercedes-Benz S65 AMG which has 604 hp and 738 lb ft of torque?
 
HP = Heat & CO2 = Global Warming
#27 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [avalon02wh] by pisulino
Nov 13, 2006 (4:09 pm)
Reply

Replying to: avalon02wh (Nov 11, 2006 6:12 am)

Interesting discussion.
My twist will be to know the actual effect air traffic is causing.
The air traffic has increased exponentially in the last 25 years.
I'm ignorant of what really causes this so called " global warming". But for sure would love to understand the effect of the emissions created by airplanes and in addition to that, if the effect is worst when emitting directly up at 35,000 feet.
Just a thought. Also, what are the emmissions of one plane (commercial medium size) compared to cars. Is it 1 to 50, 1 to 1000?
#28 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [pisulino] by gagrice
Nov 13, 2006 (4:33 pm)
Reply

Replying to: pisulino (Nov 13, 2006 4:09 pm)

compared to cars. Is it 1 to 50, 1 to 1000?
 
I researched NoX from jets and cars. The latest cleanest Gulfstream emits 500 times as much NoX as a VW diesel car. When you consider how many 1000s of miles a Gulfstream will get flown in a year compared to a car it is a very significant. And the Gulfstream is clean compared to many military and commercial aircraft. The key is people flying in a Gulfstream have a lot more stroke than the average person driving in a car.
#29 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [gagrice] by Mr_Shiftright HOST
Nov 14, 2006 (10:01 am)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Nov 13, 2006 4:33 pm)

Are you factoring in the # of people on the planes, that is, "people-miles per NoX particle?
 
For instance, I'm sure a city bus emits more NoX than a VW diesel, but it's carrying a lot of people per mile, so it works out to be better.
#30 of 7022
Re: global temperature changes [Mr_Shiftright] by gagrice
Nov 14, 2006 (12:23 pm)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Nov 14, 2006 10:01 am)

I picked the Gulfstream as an upscale very efficient jet. I doubt they carry more than 5-7 people on most jaunts cross country. Diesel buses are a whole different situation. How many have any smog equipment? I would seriously doubt they are as clean per passenger mile as a new VW TDI. I think city buses in general are better than school buses. With school budgets always getting messed with, I can imagine that school bus upgrades are a very low priority in most districts.

Messages Page 3 of 703
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
703
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement