Another Scandal for German Clean-auto Zones
by Christine Lepisto, Berlin on 01.19.08
Berliners have barely started showing the new emissions badge required for driving into the city center, and the air is getting thick. Thick with accusations. The popular gearhead weekly, AutoBild, has thrown down the gauntlet: "The Soot is Gone" screams the headline over the question: "Can the environment zones be abolished?"
Could AutoBild have a point?
High levels of soot in the air are blamed for the death of 350,000 Europeans each year. Among the countries violating the EU health standards, in 2006 Germany measured 99 locations which exceeded the limits more than 35 days a year. Action was taken: polluting cars were banned from entering the problem zones.
Then scandal struck: filter fraud. Auto owners doing their best to bring their cars up to spec were sold defective filters. Quick intervention by authorities cleaned up that mess, minimizing the aggravation as much as possible for the victims.
Now, as the first police controls are still issuing only warnings, the next scandal breaks. AutoBild reports that in 2007, the soot was already gone. The metering stations tracking air quality reported only good news. Experts attribute the reduction in alarms to the weather: if the weather is to blame, why are the authorities pinning the burden on car drivers? And if the soot is gone, do we still need a pollution control law?
Well, look a little deeper. The weather in 2007 was breezier, and wetter. Is dilution the solution to pollution? It is true that if the concentration of pollutants is reduced by washing out the dust or blowing it away, the health can also be expected to improve. But will the weather cooperate again in 2008?
Furthermore, 24 measuring stations did exceed the health limits for more than 35 days per year: the double whammy that triggers European requirements to be implemented to improve the air quality. Granted, that is a 76% reduction over 2007, but it is still 24 locations with air quality believed to be harmful, maybe even deadly.
We say stick with the program Germany. The emissions badges will require more polluting autos to be phased out over a number of years. And maybe drivers will decide to take a bike instead, helping to meet the goals to increase bicycles in the inner cities.
Via ::AutoBild
Almost every Volkswagon diesel I have seen is spewing black smoke -even the newer ones. The backs of these cars are usually covered in black particulate soot. I have no idea where people got the idea that diesels were better for the environment.
The big point is that if you kick these cars *out* of the core, you'll drive suburban development.
I disagree ... look at London. People are investing in smaller cars, to get exempt.
People around Berlin will start to choose cars that will let them drive in the center.
Berlin has a brilliant subway system. No one really needs a car there. So banning cars that pollute (just because there was less soot in 2007 doesn't mean we need it at all) is a good thing.
If you ban or tax old cars, you will encourage people to buy new cars, which require a lot of energy to produce, thus negating any local reduction in pollution. Best to just tax all cars indiscriminately.
Doug, what the heck are you talking about???
Modern diesels, 1999+, are generally as clean as their gasoline counterparts. Up until recently, they did have slightly higher particulate and NOX, but we're talking about micro particles, not black (or white) smoke. Gas engines also emit particulate, just much, much smaller. Those have now been linked to heart disease, so you still like gasoline better than diesel?
But please review the new Tier 2, BIN 5 regulations for diesel light duty vehicles. All new ones must comply. Guess what? It makes them just as clean, in all respects, as their gasoline counterparts.
So stop already with that US-centric DIESEL IS BAD thing. Out of tune, poorly maintained vehicles of any fuel type are bad.
Willy,
I totally agree. I drive a 2000 VW Jetta TDI manual transmission. According to TerraPass, it emits 7,545 lbs or carbon dioxide every 15,000 miles driven. The equivalent gas version would emit 10,662 lbs. That's almost 30% less carbon emissions for the diesel. Sure, that particular model may be a little more sooty and have slightly higher NOx emissions PER GALLON, but it burns less fuel per mile than a gas model. And with the new 2008 "clean diesels" with common rail technology and particulate traps, not to mention 55 mpg highway fuel economy for the new Jetta, diesels are poised to be the cleaner option even over hybrids.
I also agree that the fallacy of the the US-centric view that "diesels are dirty" is completely skewed. Sure, US diesels are! That's because US the automakers never took the time to refine the technology. Thankfully diesels have been developing quite nicely in Europe over the past few decades and now the time has come for this superior, more thermodynamically efficient internal-combustion technology to go mainstream.
Luc
@Willie Bio:
I don`t know where you live but here in Hungary (and in most other parts of the EU), you are not required to use a particulate filter with your diesel car let alone making it T2B5.
As a result most of the diesel cars are sold without these technologies and you DO SEE black smoke from most of the them. And the smoke goes right into your lungs causing cancer and coronary diseases.
Europe needs very strict emission control for diesel emissions, at least as strict ones as T2B5. I hail Berlin and London for setting these strict standards and hope that all of the cities in Europe follow suit.
Thank goodness the US got its act together and made the diesel cars in the US less polluting. I'm on the waiting list here in Indiana to get a VW diesel.
I live in Germany and have a dielsel VW Golf. With petrol costs also being so high, having a diesel allows me to drive about 800 km per tank. That is about 500 miles! So I only have to fill the tank about once a month.