So, are Renault next?
- Thread starter Yugguy
- Start date
HDi fun
TC ModFather
I think the VW thing got all out of proportion (and I don't like VW remotely) so what's to stop the law agencies and media ripping through all corporate makers one at a time. Scandal sells . . . . .
Renault is a good candidate, it's large, state owned (I think), has plenty of liquid assets
Renault is a good candidate, it's large, state owned (I think), has plenty of liquid assets
I'd be surprised if Japanese car makers were involved in this sort of thing. Work ethics and business principles run deep out there.
HDi fun
TC ModFather
It's a load of nonsense. The testing process is reliable and repeatable. If nothing else this gives us car buyers some mechanism by which to compare competing models. The process and requirements are also widely published, thus they are available to the motor industry. I have the same views of official fuel consumption figures. Driving style and journey type will vary widely, that is unavoidable.
NOx is an unavoidable by-product of burning fossil fuels in atmospheric air. NOx is more likely to be exhausted when engines are running hot and are under load. Under low load (or none, idling) there is insufficient heat for this become an issue. However, cold running creates problems with unburnt Hydrocarbons (fuel) and Carbon-monoxide (CO). These have been addressed by the industry-wide adoption of 3 way regulated catalytic converters, CO especially.
So when someone bleats about Oxford Street (London, UK) being laced with NOx, they are talking bollocks. In Oxford Street traffic speeds are approximate to zero mph. Stationary. Engine temperatures are low. NOx is not readily formed. The cat converters are still controlling CO emissions, and strangely these work pretty well all the time. Better still IF THE ARE AT FULL OPERATING TEMPERATURE.
If we consider stop-start technology then an engine which is not running is emitting nothing at all !!!
This is a media popular thing at the moment and the stupid (especially) British public is buying into it. Governments are dependent upon fossil fuels for revenue by way of taxation. The car industry and the revenue it generates is essential.
We worry about saving the planet. No need, because mankind will wreck itself long before it destroys the planet. That is not possible. Take a hypothetical quasi-religious stance: God (see below*) gave us 200-300 years worth of fossil fuels to keep us going whilst we unravel the nuclear process. Once that 200-300 years worth is gone then planet damage stops. Finish.
*God - I wish to make it quite clear that I make no reference to any God in particular. I am not in any way racist. Nor judgemental. I happen to live in a multi-racial country and I love it. Things could be better - getting rid of racism and bigotry would be nice. Getting rid of greed would also be nice. Getting rid of hatred and discrimination would be very very nice.
Rant over
NOx is an unavoidable by-product of burning fossil fuels in atmospheric air. NOx is more likely to be exhausted when engines are running hot and are under load. Under low load (or none, idling) there is insufficient heat for this become an issue. However, cold running creates problems with unburnt Hydrocarbons (fuel) and Carbon-monoxide (CO). These have been addressed by the industry-wide adoption of 3 way regulated catalytic converters, CO especially.
So when someone bleats about Oxford Street (London, UK) being laced with NOx, they are talking bollocks. In Oxford Street traffic speeds are approximate to zero mph. Stationary. Engine temperatures are low. NOx is not readily formed. The cat converters are still controlling CO emissions, and strangely these work pretty well all the time. Better still IF THE ARE AT FULL OPERATING TEMPERATURE.
If we consider stop-start technology then an engine which is not running is emitting nothing at all !!!
This is a media popular thing at the moment and the stupid (especially) British public is buying into it. Governments are dependent upon fossil fuels for revenue by way of taxation. The car industry and the revenue it generates is essential.
We worry about saving the planet. No need, because mankind will wreck itself long before it destroys the planet. That is not possible. Take a hypothetical quasi-religious stance: God (see below*) gave us 200-300 years worth of fossil fuels to keep us going whilst we unravel the nuclear process. Once that 200-300 years worth is gone then planet damage stops. Finish.
*God - I wish to make it quite clear that I make no reference to any God in particular. I am not in any way racist. Nor judgemental. I happen to live in a multi-racial country and I love it. Things could be better - getting rid of racism and bigotry would be nice. Getting rid of greed would also be nice. Getting rid of hatred and discrimination would be very very nice.
Rant over
That's the problem OG - people worship him on their terms in their way and not his! If people did what he wanted we wouldn't have greed, war, anger, hate, discrimination, selfishness or any of these other issues.You have stopped taking the tablets again, haven't you?
On the God issue. If there is one, then all religions worship him/her in their own way, so I don't understand why they can't see that and stop fighting each other.
HDi fun
TC ModFather
You have stopped taking the tablets again, haven't you?
On the God issue. If there is one, then all religions worship him/her in their own way, so I don't understand why they can't see that and stop fighting each other.
I agree completely.
Yugguy
Torque King
The problem with all religions is simple - people. People make religion hard work, and they use it to justify oppressing their fellow man.
For instance, Christianity's basic message is simple - be good to your fellow man, and if you do, you'll be happier. It is also VERY clear in the Bible, in Jesus's words and elsewhere, that if you want to have a relationship with God you can, and you dont need anyone else's permission, or approval, and NOONE can cut you off from this except yourself.
Unfortunately this is not what the major organised Christian religions preach - excommunication for instance - the idea that the Church can bar you from heaven - TOTALLY unbiblical.
Romans 8:38-39
38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
That's pretty bloody clear to me.
And as for the institutional abuse of children, especially justified by religion, this angers me more than I can say. The perpetrators should be exposed and dealt with no matter who they are and to do it in the name of God, well if He does exist I dont think He will be happy with them:
Matthew 18:6
6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
These are the issues I have with organised religion.
That said, I do not believe that if we got rid of them we'd all suddenly be living in some humanist utopia. Human nature is human nature, and people would simply find other ways and excuses to oppress others.
There is a lot said about Islamic extremists and yes, some of what they do is justified by twisting scriptures out of context, but a lot I think is simply to do with them being young men, they want to feel special, they want adrenalin and they want to get laid.
Just my tuppence worth, I would not want to fall out with anyone here over it.
For instance, Christianity's basic message is simple - be good to your fellow man, and if you do, you'll be happier. It is also VERY clear in the Bible, in Jesus's words and elsewhere, that if you want to have a relationship with God you can, and you dont need anyone else's permission, or approval, and NOONE can cut you off from this except yourself.
Unfortunately this is not what the major organised Christian religions preach - excommunication for instance - the idea that the Church can bar you from heaven - TOTALLY unbiblical.
Romans 8:38-39
38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
That's pretty bloody clear to me.
And as for the institutional abuse of children, especially justified by religion, this angers me more than I can say. The perpetrators should be exposed and dealt with no matter who they are and to do it in the name of God, well if He does exist I dont think He will be happy with them:
Matthew 18:6
6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
These are the issues I have with organised religion.
That said, I do not believe that if we got rid of them we'd all suddenly be living in some humanist utopia. Human nature is human nature, and people would simply find other ways and excuses to oppress others.
There is a lot said about Islamic extremists and yes, some of what they do is justified by twisting scriptures out of context, but a lot I think is simply to do with them being young men, they want to feel special, they want adrenalin and they want to get laid.
Just my tuppence worth, I would not want to fall out with anyone here over it.
HDi fun
TC ModFather
You won't fall out with me over anything here! I am not remotely religious!! I re-read my previous post and it does - wrongly - imply that I might be 
Similar threads
Similar threads
-
-
F
-
-
-
-
