PM Prayut targets diesel cars, factories

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

13 hours ago, fruitman said:

So it's okay to burn the fields?

 

Strangely missing from any mention whatsoever.....

[mok199]

Urban areas and resorts must be treated with a different approach than say motorways ,railways and suburban landscapes...The days of driving into a city center or a beach resort must come with a price ,every entrance monitored,and every vehicle must be accounted for . ...Park and rides ,or pay the price $$$$

[yellowboat]

"Methanol is an additional source of fuel and water adds power via the steam effect. You are replacing expensive diesel with inexpensive water or water-methanol. To realize maximum fuel economy, water/methanol injection should take place at all engine load states and not just at high engine load states."    

If diesels are to be targeted there should be an aim, but I know I know....

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 hour ago, yellowboat said:

"Methanol is an additional source of fuel and water adds power via the steam effect. You are replacing expensive diesel with inexpensive water or water-methanol. To realize maximum fuel economy, water/methanol injection should take place at all engine load states and not just at high engine load states."    

If diesels are to be targeted there should be an aim, but I know I know....

 

This gets really geeky, and I'm not a scientist,  but was reading science on the topic lately...

 

And basically, among different types of pollutants, there are some like PM2.5 that are VERY bad for your health thru inhaling, and there are others / different ones that are worse for global warming because they remain in the atmosphere longer.

 

From what I was reading lately, some of the alternate fuel approaches, while they don't create the same kinds of particulates or as much as diesel does, create pollutants have have a greater and longer lasting impact on global warming conditions in the atmosphere.

 

Not that the Thais would ever come to understand and deal with these kinds of details. But in more educated realms, there's a recognition that not all alternate fuels are necessarily a panacea, depending on which environmental/health problem you're trying to address.

 

Then, there's also the issues of the added diesel machinery and fertilizer emissions that it takes to grow the crops needed to produce ethanol fuels as a widespread replacement for traditional fuels. With any fuel source, it's not ONLY the tailpipe emissions that have to be considered.

 

Just saying, from a serious science perspective, it's a complicated issue and you have to be careful which supposed solutions you reach for.

 

 

[Guest]

If the PM is talking about banning diesel vehicles because of PM (particulate matter ) which is the stuff in the air then he would have to ban gasoline vehicles first as they produce more PM than diesel vehicles ( So, while diesel fuel contains slightly more carbon (2.68kg CO₂/litre) than petrol (2.31kg CO₂/litre), overall CO₂ emissions of a diesel car tend to be lower. In use, on average, this equates to around 200g CO₂/km for petrol and 120g CO₂/km for diesel. ) but the reason governments have the diesel banning on the table is the Nitrogen dioxides and the nitric oxides which is harmful when it is released into the air. but as far as the smog is concerned the diesel is not as bad as gasoline. but some of the diesel engines that are so worn that they belch out clouds of black fumes need to be removed from the roads.

[canopy]

10 hours ago, mok199 said:

The days of driving into a city center or a beach resort must come with a price ,every entrance monitored,and every vehicle must be accounted for . ...Park and rides ,or pay the price $$$$

So in other words the rich ride in as usual, force the poor to take the bus. It's not fair.

 

[mok199]

1 hour ago, canopy said:

So in other words the rich ride in as usual, force the poor to take the bus. It's not fair.

 

Are you after ''fairness or clean air""....

[canopy]

18 minutes ago, mok199 said:

Are you after ''fairness or clean air""....

 

Clean air can be achieved without discriminating. So that was just a bad idea. Ever think about what Hamburg is doing?

 

[mok199]

1 hour ago, canopy said:

 

Clean air can be achieved without discriminating. So that was just a bad idea. Ever think about what Hamburg is doing?

 

Discrimination ???? , anyone and everyone who cares about clean air . knows , driving into an urban city center conjested with traffic and black with pollution should be restricted ideally banned ....rich people and poor people ride public transport in progressive and proactive countrys and cities ..Some thais think ''if it starts ,its ok to drive anywhere '' and that must end.

Edited February 7, 2019 by mok199

[canopy]

21 hours ago, mok199 said:

anyone and everyone who cares about clean air

Unfortunately not. Do you really think the millions of people regularly burning plastic in their yard give a hoot about clean air? They don't. I live in the countryside. It's a burning culture. Thai's love burning their trash, their fields, the forests, their food leftovers, their recyclable plastic bottles, just everything for no particular reason. I've asked some people why they burn and get a blank face as they realize they have no explanation, they just do it. I haven't met anyone who cares about the air quality in the least bit. I agree with you elsewhere in the world there are many that do actually care and not only that they are doing great things about it. I even provided a clickable link about the city of hamburg going car free. Thailand is the wrong place to be if you care about clean air. It's sad, but the truth must be seen. Two points I want to make is (1) clean air should never be shouldered on the backs of the poor meanwhile the rich get a free pass (2) it appears agricultural burning is the main culprit so focusing on vehicle / factory pollution, while useful and admirable, will mean Thailand will continue to be blanketed with terrible air as the most rampant and unnecessary pollution is being completely ignored.