[vinya_jag]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

See, arguments like this feel

"I want to ban something, lemme find a reason.. Yeah Pollution"

"After some data analysis... Oh boy pollution did not work, how about something else!!"

If you want to get rid of heat, please petition your office to switch off air conditioning. Also shut down the data centers too. Those glass buildings are heat islands.

Infact, if we ban all modes of employment, people will stop driving to work. Problem solved!!

Agree with you largely,
They are indeed finding reasons to ban vehicles. Now this, in a few months, there will be another.
It is a tough balance act. They need to keep the investments coming in. Automobile industry is a big employer in India. Also, they got to please the bigger investors. So, the smaller ones will take a hit.

The world now needs countries like us and China to reduce pollution. And they feel, that can arrest the sea level rise, fill the ozone over australia, spare the arctic ice. And the number 1 culprit is the Car.
India is forced to act.

Europe already is heading to a alternate fuel only cars by 2025 (Norway I believe). These countries show that they have acted. They might not be in many other ways. But its like a status report, and showing progress.

USA is going Tesla/ And other Electric car way. But who could question them if they are delaying the process?

Now India, we are under more pressure from all these countries to act.
We have to show progress. This is just one baby step. We will see multiple bans. Next, petrol vehicles will be banned. And slowly we will see a change in the way we travel/ commute. Its not long before we will all be using the bicycle-Train/Bus-walk way of commute. (My guess, another 20 years )

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by vinya_jag

Agree with you largely,
They are indeed finding reasons to ban vehicles. Now this, in a few months, there will be another.
It is a tough balance act. They need to keep the investments coming in. Automobile industry is a big employer in India. Also, they got to please the bigger investors. So, the smaller ones will take a hit.

The world now needs countries like us and China to reduce pollution. And they feel, that can arrest the sea level rise, fill the ozone over australia, spare the arctic ice. And the number 1 culprit is the Car.
India is forced to act.

Sure, who is against action. The government can make road tax proportional to CO2(eg UK) and ban all vehicles from plying which do not meet emission standards. Where did you get the idea that "act" means not looking at data

Europe already is heading to a alternate fuel only cars by 2025 (Norway I believe). These countries show that they have acted. They might not be in many other ways. But its like a status report, and showing progress.

Yes, but they have acted on data. Euro 6 says control your Emissions. It does not say you need to put in a 100cc engine.

USA is going Tesla/ And other Electric car way. But who could question them if they are delaying the process?

Who is delaying what?

Now India, we are under more pressure from all these countries to act.
We have to show progress. This is just one baby step.

Lets say a house is burning. You can put petrol in the fire. That is also a step. But is it a right step? Things like pollution, climate change are not like vodoo. There is science and logic involved. So you have to use science or logic in decisions. As for baby steps, India and china have so many babies doing steps, Did we solve all the problems with baby steps?

We will see multiple bans. Next, petrol vehicles will be banned. And slowly we will see a change in the way we travel/ commute. Its not long before we will all be using the bicycle-Train/Bus-walk way of commute. (My guess, another 20 years )

By all means, but do not single out. If diesels cause pollution, and PM levels of even Euro 4 diesels are not acceptable, govt can ban all diesel vehicles and diesel generators from operating in the country. Why single out 2000cc+?

That said, in your posts there are a lot of words, yet there is no data. This thread is a data driven thread. You can write long essays, but its just noise. Its not information. You can start commenting when you have some data and information. Its not compulsory to have the last word, you see!

[sgiitk]

We seem to be following the Third Law of Thermodynamics - Entropy (disorder) always increases. So we have more and more activity from our courts leading to less and less useful output.

[lurker]

Enthusiasts here can tell me something:

There are tons of vehicles, which are not visible around metros, but due maximum duty in terms of mileage daily. These are Trucks, Pickups like Mahindra pickups, 407s, Nissan's, Force Travellers, JCB's, Fork Lifts, Cranes, Dumpster Trucks, Eicher Nissan type small load movers, large multi ton tractor trailers, Tractors, Harvesters, Combines, all of which are backbone of agricultural activity and transportation in India. Small towns are full of Ashok Leyland and Tata buses that give last mile connectivity but these buses plying are more than 20 years old on avg.

think about it, the senselessness of such ad hoc and off the cuff directives.

Do people think that such kind of vehicles do not pollute, and do people think that owners can afford to keep such vehicles for 10 years only. I mean most owners would have taken loans for these investments and they do not even pay off within 10-15 years.

Consequences most likely will be, most of our agriculture and farm industry and rural transportation and small towns and non-metro connectivity will be thrown to to the wind with these kind of small minded activism.

[kiku007]

Originally Posted by vinya_jag

Now India, we are under more pressure from all these countries to act.
We have to show progress. This is just one baby step.

Perhaps we can start by not posting irrelevant posts, logging off from TBHP and shutting down computers/phones.

You have no idea how much energy is consumed and heat generated by all of our combined time online.

[ajindal]

Great article and a thorough analysis. Everyone always thought diesels were polluting and here the story is completely different. I've never had details as presented above. Isn't there some way where this data can be presented to the powers making those decisions? I'm sure all the learned people sitting in the SC and NGT would take note of it if they are really serious about taking care of vehicular pollution.

Based on some of the observations above, won't it be revolutionary if the manufacturers were given incentives to
a) Reduce vehicular pollution on the whole across their fleet
b) Improve safety even on lower priced cars. (Not related to this topic but still) . I'm sure people would choose better options automatically.
Alternatively, the govt mandate such tests on models currently available and fine manufacturers for violation on either of the 2 above. I'm sure manufacturers who are actively working on such things would like to standardize these across markets.

[vinya_jag]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

By all means, but do not single out. If diesels cause pollution, and PM levels of even Euro 4 diesels are not acceptable, govt can ban all diesel vehicles and diesel generators from operating in the country. Why single out 2000cc+?

That said, in your posts there are a lot of words, yet there is no data.

Again agree with you fully. If it were me, I would have banned or taxed all private diesel/ petrol vehicles from entering the most congested parts of my City.
2000cc + is not the way to go too. I completely agree with the facts.

But a populist government would exactly do what they have done now. Don't you agree? 'Tax the rich, Hurt the rich'. This according to me is the smallest, yet significant of the segments that they could have banned.

I feel, they just are playing with our sentiments by saying that they want to ban big cars, because they pollute the most.

And @Kiku, I work for a video on desktop kind of solution that can drown your laptop battery in less than an hour, and can burn your table with the heat. You now made me retrospect on my job. Hey, I still say that my car heats up way more (No stats I have) than my previous petrol one, and I am running with my AC ON all the time too, completely not caring about the efficiency, cause it was built to do so. And I am completely loving my new car. Blame me

[kiku007]

@ Vinya_jag

The opening post of this thread is a gold mine of data and analysis explaining the Thread Title. Now somewhere in the line, you come and tell Diesel engines above 2000CC should be banned because they produce more heat just because you felt it without any substantiating data. Just undermines the effort someone put to start this thread IMHO.

There are two other threads where we discuss the same topic but mostly without such detailed analysis (For or against).

[lurker]

all vehicles that bring in supplies like veggies, pulses, supplies, chicken, fish , dairy are all vehicles more than 10 years old. If all these vehicles are replaced or outlawed then either prices will shoot up and stay there for a long time OR goods will become scarce and unavailable. So now be prepared to say bye-bye to all these products. From now on I will eat NGT judgement copies by mixing it in my chutnies, it will be key ingredient to my dal tasks, pulao, keema etc.

[msk016]

I think there is no doubt about the fact that vehicular pollution in general needs to be controlled. The basis adopted by NGT here is absolutely without any technical standing, as is well explained by TSK.
The NOx emissions of a Diesel engine are based almost entirely on the compression & max pressures of the engine. The problem is, higher these pressures, higher the fuel efficiency. We in the marine industry we have strict limits built in to the operating systems to prevent us from going beyond permissible limits.
I find it hard to believe that the people in the government and in the auto industry don't know what to do, to minimise all aspects of vehicular pollution.
We have to look beyond the obvious, to understand why nothing has been done in all these years and why this sudden knee jerk reaction, which can have catastrophic economic implications. I start to wonder who filed the original petition with the NGT, who are they aligned with, who is funding these NGOs, what is their end game. I also wonder the what the real motives of the NGT chairman, who are they aligned with? Environmental activists have known to cause more damage to our economy than any good to the environment. These are some interesting questions that come to my mind.

[cs_rajesh]

Originally Posted by mallumowgli

Forget NGT, our entire executive and politicians are known only for knee jerk reactions

But that is all due to our upbringing. We are not taught to analyse, derive, plan and then act. Always we jump to act and cut short the rest.

Is it perhaps the illusion that one who quickly derives the conclusion and brings action, is the one recognized to lead. Unfortunately applying the same steps for every kind problem does not help.

Also this kind of knee jerk reactions suits public that has short term memory. Because the consequences of such reactions are not cross-checked against the original need / requirement. Public anyways remembers, someone did something .. that's all that matters.

[VRPAI]

Originally Posted by vinya_jag

I feel Banning 2L + Diesels make sense. (For one reason)
Pollution aside, I feel, the heat generated from a diesel car is much higher than a petrol engine. Bigger the engine capacity, more the heat.

This surely is gonna hurt.
We switched from our Petrol Figo to a Diesel Polo, and it takes so much longer for the diesel Polo to cool down once in the garage. We can sense the heat a couple of hours even after the vehicle has stopped running.
(The govt)

It solely depends upon the car. It isn't like Diesel's are hotter. For example drive a Polo 1.6 the same way as you did your car, and check on the heat. Honestly speaking i guess the operating temperature of both are the same. It's more to do with how the car engine is designed I guess.

If one is looking at reducing the carbon footprint,there are many ways one can do so. The government or the courts can promote that. Banning them is never a solution.
And if Diesel cars are made out to be such big villains as made out by the NGT, why haven't other countries banned them yet?!.

This sudden Ban came as a shock for me who owns just a single diesel car. Now imagine what kind of signal it sends across to the big companies who have invested billions in our country anticipating the revenue earned from selling these diesel cars. Ohkay, now forget these "foreign" companies and think about their Indian vendors, who have invested loads of money into this. Who pays for their losses, who gives the people emplyment?,who compensates for the loss in the economy?!.
There would be atleast a lil sence if they have 1) some data to support these decisions ,2)if they are done in a phased manner and 3)if there are stricter PUC rules

Till then I would not have even 1% agreement to this new theory of banning diesel cars after Ten years or this ban on Diesel's >2000cc

[dean5545]

https://youtu.be/3347hAuO52w

While on one side we are taking statistics into consideration the media is just getting everything wrong I feel.
The reporter is asking why didn't TKM have petrol cars on sale if they knew diesel cars were harmful and how much cess are they willing to pay!
They are still in a wrong notion that these 2L+ engines pollute more.

There is no point of making such a statistical study if it doesn't reach the eyes and ears of our lawmakers and the masses.
Honestly how many of them will know that the 2L ban is baseless. They will think that the NGT is doing something good which the Government should have done long back.
This entire ban movement is due to non synchronous working of the Government and the Judiciary of India.

[rajivrt]

Anyone thought about telling the civic agencies that if they just clear up their act, rationalize the traffic signals, free up the carriageway, minimize intersections by putting in Michigan turns/bulbs/u turns, asking the police not to set up roadblocks for their vested interest, ensuring commercial vehicles not wait on the middle of the roads stopping traffic behind, ensuring RTO actually tests new drivers before issuing license so they drive better by not holding traffic on all lanes- all measures which will automatically speed up traffic, ensure smooth passages and less stopping time, in effect increasing the capacity of the road, and burning less fuel overall? Wouldn't that be better than banning big sized diesels which logic the opening thread so beautifully and comprehensively tears apart.

[RavenAvi]

Now, a government affidavit filed with the Supreme Court has clearly shown that not only diesel vehicles with 2000cc engine and above emit Particulate Matter (PM) within the permissible limit of 0.06 gm/km, but it is almost at same level that of vehicles with smaller engine capacities, i.e., between 1300-1400cc.

This clearly establishes that the size of the engine has no relation with pollution. It is the quality of engine which matters.

A Land Rover Discovery Sport which has a 2993cc engine, for instance emits PM at 0.019 gm/km, well within the prescribed limit of 0.06. Compare this to the Renault Lodgy, which has an engine capacity of 1461cc but emits PM at 0.018 gm/km.

Financial Express