Santiasco Air Quality a la Bei Jing..

[frozen-north]

grams per mile is super weird in my head, as it is a mix of metric and imperial measurements, but does apparently exsist. Grams per km make more sense.
.....
Grams per Km tells you how much pollutant is created for every Km travelled. Its the same as measuring it in Miles per gallon, or Km per litre, when comparing between different vehicles effects on the environment. As we presume all readings are taken using near identical fuel.
.....
Grams per litre would tell you how environmentally friendly a fuel type was, but not the car. As different cars use different amounts of fuel. One that burns more will obviously create more exhaust, and as such more pollution.
......

It still does not make sense to me.

Let's quote what marti had posted:

Do you understand the concept of a unit of "work" ?

I thought not.

This measurement system assesses the "costs" of a unit of "work" - where an amount of pollution is a cost of a unit of productivity.

What unit of productivity?

First, when quoting the pollution generated by a factory nobody measures it in grams per widget produced.

Second, ...Joules are units of work. Where are the units of work in this 'grams per mile' result shown in the tables?

Third. If the engine isn't moving, then what? Obviously there is an assumption made somewhere about how many kilometres the engine has moved. Where did the mileage used for the calculations came from? Is there a reliance on information given by manufacturers about a particular vehicle's mileage per unit of fuel?

- I didn't see any mention of the type of fuel being used, only about 'cars', light-duty trucks', 'heavy-duty trucks'.
- marti did not reply to the question about his earlier claim about large SUVs producing less pollution than Dosedmonkey's small car.

A new report reveals that carmakers routinely manipulate official UN-backed miles/gallons tests...
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... ency-tests

U.S. Fines Automakers Hyundai and Kia for Misstating Mileage
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/04/us/po ... leage.html

The SI unit of work is the joule. ..... The dimensionally equivalent newton-metre .....
Non-SI units of work include the erg, the foot-pound, the foot-poundal, the kilowatt hour, the litre-atmosphere, and the horsepower-hour.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_%28physics%29

[Dosedmonkey]

Oh I wasn't directly trying to fight/contradict Marti. Just stating some facts on how things are actually done, including reading more about it myself, as I am no car pollution expert. Although I deal a lot with emissions in my industry. When you change spare parts on much larger machines then car engines you have to note all the information of where they come from down, and make sure they're approved, as this effects your NOx out puts.

There is a lot of independent miles per gallon tests in the UK, I know this. You can buy a lot of independent magazines every month with lists of new or second hand cars and their pros and cons, and the independent MPG is normally in there.

There is different MPG readings given for urban and normal driving. But if the engine is idle, and the car is not moving, I think this is what you mean, then the idle consumption is very roughly realitive to how many litres the engine is, so a 1.1 litre city car will spill a lot less exhaust when the car is not moving, then a 6 litre Pick up truck. Because the larger litre engines always have more energy loss, due to larger or more cylinders, and more mass of moving parts in engine causing more resistances.

http://www.consumerenergycenter.org/tra ... osses.html

The losses of aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance, intertia are pertically larger on larger vehicles, but really all of the things noted on the above link are larger on larger engine, larger SUV/pick up trucks.

As stated before, some modern engines turn off in idle, and on again as you proceed to move. This also occurs in fully electric cars, electric cars also have a lot less resistance, as they have a lot less components. They are also a lot less likely to break down, because they are a lot less complicated. Not only did the oil industry block electric cars for a long time, but car manufacturers were scared as they make a fortune from spare parts.

If you have not seen the Documentary, Who Killed the Electric Car, I highly recommend it, really well made and interesting documentary, as well as being related to this topic, but in the smog of Califonia instead.

http://www.whokilledtheelectriccar.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489037/

[marti]

Let's see how that emissions-belching Peugeot 206 compares in standard EU emissions testing for [CORRECTION carbon dioxide] , against some vehicles with larger engines and 4x4/AWD.

[Dosedmonkey]

Carbon monoxide is only one of the pollutants from exhaust for a start.

And it is such a home made image that proves nothing. Wheres the reference.

What a internet troll.

Types of pollutants.
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/wh ... Zm8pBtViko

Most green and least green cars of 2014... oh look the worst is a SUV.

http://www.infoplease.com/world/transpo ... -cars.html

Car CO2 emissions, catagorised by type quite nicely,
http://www.carpages.co.uk/co2/

UPDATE:
Just found the emissions Marti is refering to, and they are CO2 emission, CARBON DIOXIDE. Not carbon monoxide like he said.... good one.

The Peugeot g/km he used refers to the 1.6 110bhp, fastest edition. They go as low as 113g/km

Smallest engine Jeep CVherokee I can find is 3.0 litre, not 2.2, and has emissions of 218g/km... so I suggest your statistics is bollocks.

Nissan Qashqai is not a 4x4, but a high rise hatch back, so essentially same as a 206. 130g/km
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/nissan/qashqai/

So what about the Chevrolet Silverado which you see on the roads often in Chile, which was my original points, a wopping 330g/km!

An interesting website for comparing some cars.
http://www.nextgreencar.com/new-car-search/

My conclusion is still the same, you shouldn't prosecute people because they have a old car, it should be on the emission readings themselves!

[marti]

they are CO2 emission, CARBON DIOXIDE.

Smallest engine Jeep CVherokee I can find is 3.0 litre, not 2.2, and has emissions of 218g/km... so I suggest your statistics is bollocks.

Yes, carbon dioxide, on which the UK bases part of the vehicle taxation. Correction made to earlier post. And you will find many 4x4/AWD vehicles with larger displacement than the 206 Peugeot with lower CO2 emissions per km (data was based on 1.4 L Peugeot 206 models, and comparison models, all in the UK vehicle tax records ).

peug 14 206.JPG (34.71 KiB) Viewed 4041 times

[Dosedmonkey]

As stated before, Nissan Qashqai isn't a real 4x4, they only do one version in 4x4, the rest our only two wheel drive, because the 4x4 version has such a small engine, so by the time the traction is split to four wheels, it hardly makes a off roader. Just a fashion statement for those who don't understand cars, and efficiencies. Ironically.

[marti]

As stated before, Nissan Qashqai isn't a real 4x4, they only do one version in 4x4, the rest our only two wheel drive, because the 4x4 version has such a small engine, so by the time the traction is split to four wheels, it hardly makes a off roader. Just a fashion statement for those who don't understand cars, and efficiencies. Ironically.

hyun.JPG (31.09 KiB) Viewed 4029 times

peug 14 206.JPG (34.71 KiB) Viewed 4029 times

[frozen-north]

Dosedmonkey had mentioned this earlier. All the vehicles marti has quoted as being less polluting than the Peugeot have diesel engines.

It seems that if we look at a Peugeot with a diesel engine we find a different result:

Carbon dioxide emissions 110 g/km

http://www.otodata.com/cars/Peugeot/206 ... 38790.html

One of those marti mentioned is the Hyundai ix35:

the automatic version of the Hyundai is less efficient than the manual, increasing fuel consumption from 51 to 41mpg and increasing CO2 emissions from 145g/km to 179g/km

http://www.carbuyer.co.uk/reviews/hyund ... ehicle/mpg
http://www.hyundai.co.uk/new-cars/ix35

And, as Dosedmonkey pointed, it is not just CO2:

...between 1998 and 2011, ... NOx emissions from petrol cars have reduced by some 90% over this period, whereas emissions from diesel cars have actually risen by 250%. This dramatic difference is a result of a rapid growth in the number of diesel cars in the parc, and relatively higher NOx emissions of diesel vehicles compared to petrol vehicles.

...diesel cars have also historically tended to emit significantly more particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) than petrol cars both of which are linked to poor air quality and health issues.

http://www.racfoundation.org/motoring-faqs/environment

[MikieO]

After our day of rain, has the driving restriction been lifted? I'm hoping to meet a friend at the airport on Friday
and don't want a multa driving in from the coast...

[Donnybrook]

There is no restriction for tomorrow, Tuesday, but it is anyone's guess if there will be on Friday. If you are going from the coast to the airport and back to the coast you don't have to worry about the restriction anyway.

[Dosedmonkey]

On the autopista from any direction outside of santiago north or south going to the airport you don't need to really worry too, to be honest. They don't exactly do emission checks on vespucio, theres not even a hard shoulder/break down lane.

This is the website for emission restrictions and also construction works and such. It is updated after 2100 hours each evening, for the next days restrictions, not to conflict with the end of the current days.

http://www.uoct.cl/

Only just noticed the live cameras on there... really should check them before using the autopista, so i know where the jams are. Scrap that, saw how terribly mediocre positioned they are.

[MikieO]

I usually take the 78 and vespucio but what with the timing, (mid am traffic) will go the 68. Thanks for the responses.