if regulations were removed, people would suddenly not care about having a safe car?

 

 

I strongly disagree with that. In the 1950s and early 1960s, before safety-standards were mandated, there was relatively little concern for vehicle-safety, despite vehicle-injury and death statistics that, in comparison to today, would look like a slaughterhouse. Ford offered seat belts, padded dashes, and flexible, collapsing steering columns in the mid-1950s as an option...very few takers. The ill-fated Tucker Torpedo of 1948 went even further than that...no dice. Even after the first wave of regulations were implemented, in 1971, Lincoln and the Chrysler Imperial offered, as an option, a primitive version of what would be today's ABS...again, very few takers. GM tried a few years later, in the mid-70s, with air-bags......well, you get the picture.

Of course, that doesn't mean that manufacturers, at the time, were not also guilty of some serious (and inexcusable) neglect, either, usually due to cost-cutting, such as with the Ford Pinto's frame-rail/gas-tank location and the general underpinnings/suspension of early versions of the Chevy Corvair.

One must also remember that much of the advance in vehicle-safety was not only in the vehicles themselves, but in safer roads. Flush guard-rails, the re-engineering of steep mountain grades and sharp curves, the advent of the Interstate highway system, safety-medians to lessen head-on collisions, cloverleaf interchanges, traffic-flow/control devices, more vigorous enforcement of DUI/DW laws, and many other advances also greatly helped.

......now, back to diesels.

 

 

Or they can stop taxing gasoline so much so there does not need to be so many diesels or electrics.

 

I'm at the point that the level of VW cheating deserves the "death penalty". No more VW sales in the US ever! Germany created this monster and will keep the company in business if only for the political issues. The rest of the world should not keep them in business. We may never know how many American lives were lost due to the foul emissions from the cheater VW diesels.

 

I added that specificially for ya!

Question for you tho - as a diesel owner, how do you feel about driving behind vehicles like this...

 

I don't often drive in Mexico, so haven't experienced the first one. And the second appears to be a gasser with a blown head gasket or stuck injector, not a diesel at all. But yeah, not a fan.

 

Okay, my understanding is that new diesels have gotten a LOT cleaner over the past decade or so.

So are these cities and courts proposing banning the sale and use of even these clean diesels? If so, why?

Are car companies saying they won't be producing even the newer clean diesels? Why?

It's my impression that my RX450h is very comparable to a diesel-powered RX350 (if one were produced) in terms of mileage and pollution. And I assume that a diesel engine is somewhat more expensive than a comparable gasoline engine, so perhaps the cost of a hybrid RX450h would be comparable to an RX 350 diesel. If so, then by going hybrid we get substantial increased complexity but no more diesel odor. Is that the trade-off?

 

NO, newer clean diesels still don't come close to Hybrid tech as far as pollution/emissions....mileage yes.

 

That's one of the best suggestions of all.

 

Yes, diesels in the USA are much cleaner since 1990; they must now meet the same emissions standards as gasoline-powered cars. Diesels were cleaned up to reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions (which contributes to ground-level ozone) and particulate matter (PM) emissions (the black soot).

But diesels in Europe (specifically, the European Union) were not subject to the same, stringent NOx and PM emissions. The EU was more concerned about CO2 emissions (which is dependent upon fuel efficiency) than dirty pollution, and since diesel cars are much more fuel efficient than gasoline cars, diesel was favoured.

The newest Euro 6 diesel emissions standards are much better but still do not quite match American diesel emission standards. The automakers have found it much easier to meet Euro standards than American standards. VW's small diesels could meet Euro standards without the diesel exhaust fluid but we find out now -- after the Dieselgate scandal -- that they really should have used the exhaust fluid in North America.

As a result, there are a lot of dirty Euro 1 to Euro 5 diesel cars on the streets in the EU. European cities are now trying to ban the use of diesels -- especially the older, dirtier models -- from their streets.

Hybrid gasoline-electric vehicles are very clean, pollution-wise, cleaner than straight gasoline vehicles (which are cleaner than diesel vehicles). Fuel efficiency of hybrid vehicles tend to be better in stop-and-go city driving than diesel vehicles (because hybrids may switch off the engine when not needed) but may not be as fuel efficient as diesel vehicles in highway driving.

 

Gas tax is only .38 in Houston area....no biggie.

 

Houston is also the refining center of the nation's oil industry, so the transportation costs of getting the fuel to local stations is also quite low.

 

That may be one possible method to reduce diesel car use but you can't beat the effect and immediate impact of a ban on driving diesel cars. A diesel car ban is so immediately effective that some European cities already ban diesels during high pollution days -- if air pollution is terrifically high, ban diesels driving into the city for the next day or 2 or 3 and pollution levels go down.

I am thinking that a driving ban imposed by cities can be brought into effect much more quickly than changing fuel pump taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel. Municipal politics is usually much more quickly enacted than state or federal politics (I am assuming that fuel pump prices are imposed at the federal or state level).