[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by phamilyman

Its just a case of 'its not me, its the govt/truckers/..' others.

There are more than enough tbhpians who drive 60-70km a day. Together, individual users are a large part.

And emissions are important for us to consider. be it from call center cabs, boleros, indicas or even from bikes.

and seriously, tsk, could you/anyone numerically (not anecdotally) prove that its all only the trucks? per passenger-km, i believe its call center cab sumo/indicas more anyday. and the individual users themselves - but most of us would presumably keep our cars in top condition to minimize pollution.

but then agian, SPM is not visible, so its not just a matter of black smoke, if I recall my envt courses right.

No its not only the trucks, but when you have a large number of vehicles plying without confirming to E-II or E-III norms, you will have pollution.
Even if you ban all petrol and diesel cars, and allow CNG vehicles, even then you will have dangerous pollution levels if those vehicles do not confirm to the pollution norms. Any fuel, be it petrol, diesel or gas can be burnt inefficiently.
Rather than banning a technology, introduce stringent anti pollution norms, and any vehicles not confirming to the norms should not be allowed to ply on roads.

[vasudeva]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Rather than banning a technology, introduce stringent anti pollution norms, and any vehicles not confirming to the norms should not be allowed to ply on roads.

In a democracy, that seems the only sensible solution. Tighten up emission standards, introduce Euro IV nationwide (instead of only 11 cities) and earlier than planned date of 1-4-10, give incentives/disincentives rather than banning something. Unfortunately, given the anarchy that is India, and the almost non-existent law enforcement in India, the Government must achieve its objectives at the manufacturer level only. Knowing Indian law enforcement, rules may not be enforced at all at road level (think Delhi traffic police). It is a tragedy that more rules in India means more corruption.

Originally Posted by directinjection

Contrary to popular belief, diesel isn't subsidised in India. It's just that petrol is grossly overpriced causing people to wrongly conclude that diesel is subsidised. IIRC, it was in the 2001 budget that subsidy was removed from diesel.

Of course, technically subsidy means selling below cost of production. Both diesel and petrol cost around Rs. 21-24/ltr. at factory gate. The rest is taxes. Thus, both petrol and diesel are not subsidised if factory gate price is considered, but subsidised if taxes are considered. Yes, taxes should be considered, since all countries tax these products are high levels to discourage consumption, and promote higher FE.

[directinjection]

Originally Posted by vasudeva

Modern direct-injection diesel engines have a specific fuel consumption that is around 25% lower than comparable modern petrol engines.

Diesel engines have always been more fuel efficient than petrol ones, even when they employed conventional indirect injection. Also, the difference in fuel efficiency is about 1/3rd rather than 1/4.

So the equation is: Average Diesel = 33% more FE than average petrol, keeping all other factors constant.

Two good examples to study are:

1. Indica diesel versus petrol
2. non-Isuzu 1489CC Ambassador petrol versus 1489CC diesel

They constitute good examples because both these cars employed the same engine block for their petrol and diesel models in order to keep cost down and the only differences between the petrol and diesel versions were the ones necessitated by the difference in fuel. Both the diesels were conventional, indirectly injected ones and were at least 33% more fuel efficient than their respective petrol versions.

[srishiva]

The government should be agnostic to fuel/technology. Just introduce good, enforceable laws. The industry will use its brain to meet them.

[vasudeva]

The fuel economy benefit of the direct injection diesel over an ‘equal performance’ petrol/gasoline engine is closely dependent on the engine model and axle ratios employed for the gasoline versus the diesel car. However, overall, advanced DI diesel appear to provide 25 to 28% fuel consumption reduction (equivalent to 33 to 39% fuel economy increase) on the test cycle when compared to an equivalent modern four-valve gasoline engine providing approximately equal performance. The benefit is higher
at lower speeds and lower at high speeds (over 100 kmph).

Sorry to be OT, but recent IEA analysis indicates that the effect of vehicle speed on fuel economy is larger for diesel vehicles in comparison to its effect on gasoline vehicles. Even the test values indicate that the diesel engine’s fuel economy benefit over a gasoline engine on the same vehicle is smaller on the high-speed test than on the low-speed city cycle. At 150 km/hr, the DI diesel’s fuel consumption advantage is typically only 15 to 18%, as opposed to 25 to 28% on the city cycle. (This corresponds to a fuel economy advantage of 18 to 22% at high speeds compared to 33 to 39% at low speeds.)

Diesel also scores because as with gasoline vehicles, operation in denser traffic under stop-and-go conditions will reduce vehicle fuel economy, while operation in light traffic at moderate highway speeds will increase fuel economy. However, diesel fuel economy is less sensitive to the mix of traffic conditions than gasoline vehicle fuel economy. This is because in stop and go conditions, idle fuel consumption has a large effect on fuel economy. Diesel vehicles consume very little fuel at idle, and idle fuel consumption reduction relative to a gasoline vehicles is on the order of 40-45%. As you would know, short trips and starts in cold weather result in higher fuel consumption. However, diesel engines require much less enrichment during cold start, and the typical level of excess fuel consumption at a 0-5 degree cold start is only about 35 to 40% of the excess fuel used in a gasoline engine.

As compared with gasoline engines, the effect of improved engine oils can be larger for diesel engines since they have higher internal engine friction than gasoline engines. At the same time, improved oils have their most significant benefits during cold start, where the diesel fuel consumption penalty is not as large as that for a gasoline engine.

Diesel's primary disadvantage is higher NOX emissions (5 to 10 times those of modern gasoline engines) and higher particulate emissions (although effective particle traps are now available on some cars). Although diesel cars are cheaper to run and contribute less CO2, they require more materials manufacturing of which may result in CO2 emissions. Diesel engines have much higher internal mechanical friction because of the need to seal the cylinder against high pressures. The high compression ratio and combustion process lead to higher engine weight relative to a similar displacement gasoline engine.

[phamilyman]

Originally Posted by vasudeva

Of course, technically subsidy means selling below cost of production. Both diesel and petrol cost around Rs. 21-24/ltr. at factory gate. The rest is taxes. Thus, both petrol and diesel are not subsidised if factory gate price is considered, but subsidised if taxes are considered. Yes, taxes should be considered, since all countries tax these products are high levels to discourage consumption, and promote higher FE.

Incorrect.

What is happening is this:
a. The government levies fat taxes on petrol. Taking price to say 60rs/ltr
b. Then govt says sorry, you aren't allowed to sell at 60, sell at 43.52 instead.
c. Its above the cost yes, but below tax paid price. So to recover its own taxes, government sells oil bonds, which ultimately come outta the tax payer

Populism is not demand management.

[v&v]

how can they ban or i have heard that they will make diesel to cng. I dont think this is a practical approach. They should first provide mass transport system in place and they should device some entry tax system to heart of city like it happens in london. Just these ban-van wont work.

[im_srini]

Reminds me of the whole Coke, Pepsi, saga... A dubious report gets published, & everybody jumps on the bandwagon demanding bans - left, right, & center !

The number of personal diesel vehicles may have risen manifold, but since when do they get driven with the same intensity as commercial vehicles ? Commercial vehicles have larger engines, poorer maintenance, & probably spend 10 hours a day on the road !

If the powers that be ensured fuel quality, better roads, & adequate traffic management, the cars wouldn't be stuck idling on the roads in the first place !

[HotChillyPepper]

Originally Posted by im_srini

Reminds me of the whole Coke, Pepsi, saga... A dubious report gets published, & everybody jumps on the bandwagon demanding bans - left, right, & center !

The number of personal diesel vehicles may have risen manifold, but since when do they get driven with the same intensity as commercial vehicles ? Commercial vehicles have larger engines, poorer maintenance, & probably spend 10 hours a day on the road !

If the powers that be ensured fuel quality, better roads, & adequate traffic management, the cars wouldn't be stuck idling on the roads in the first place !

\Very true. But if they want to do anything with heavy vehicles then Govt has to replace the full fleet of transport buses with Volvos or similiar. Even the Desiel train engines too needs to be replaced with electric alternatives

[amit27]

Guys before banning diesel govt. also needs to have a look at quality of Diesel sold in the country . I beleive Europe has Ultra Low sulphur diesel while we diesel mixed with Krosene or whatever is cheaper . Adulteration is a major cause of fuel emmision

[ashutoshb]

Even if the authorities implement the existing rules in place, that would be more than sufficient. Every day I see ill maintained trucks, Indica cabs and auto rickshaws leaving people behind them gasping for air, right here in Delhi.

[phamilyman]

Has anyone here got their cars post a few thousand km checked for RSPM content? Its NOT the black visible smoke. SPM is invisible micron sized stuff!!

[hell_raiser]

Well i agree with most of the reasons given for pollution but everybody seems to have missed one. The idiotic way everyone drives.
For a city like delhi even if one driver is in the fast lane or parked illegally , blocking it there will be traffic behind it for a kilometer. Uselessly burning up fuel when they could have have reached their destination by now.
If we all followed traffic rules we might end up saving a lot of petrol by avoiding jams cased by the ME FIRST attitude as seen regularly and also driving in the left most lane possible.

Also how many times do we c people riding solo to work ... maybe they have really have work but there are many execs who like to ride solo...

then there is the totally incompetent government which is narrowing down the road from 3 lanes to two, so that buses which form max 5%(2% according to TOI) of the traffic can have one lane to themselves..
They say all the research is done but that is contradicted by all the major newspapers... Also they should come to pune and look at the traffic jams caused by the BRT lane. Theres a half a kilometer long jam on intersections where previously it used to be barely 50mts. While the bus lanes remain totally empty.
Then with horrendous ethics of working they have , the traffic jams just increase due to the obstructions.. Just recently a business man lost his life due to an unilluminated divider right in the middle of the road. Then the buck passing started. At least they should learn from the Metro construction and cause the minimum possible inconvenience to the average commuter and maintain safety for all those involved.

[vibzez]

All the suggestions are really good, but where do you see this heading? What ultimately do you think all this will come to?

[amit]

I wonder when we will stop believing that banning is going to solve problems. This whole exercise shows that the government has no idea how to tackle the issue of pollution and is merely thrashing it's hands about.

1. Government wants to ban diesel engined vehicles.

2. They don't want to give any tax sop's to electric cars. Why wasn't Reva given any tax sops?

3. They want everyone to switch to CNG but wouldn't provide the infrastructure.

4. They don't want to give tax sops to manufacturers to develop hybrid's and electric vehicles.

5. They don't want to provide proper road infrastructure so that cars drive at a more environmentally friendly 60kmph as opposed to our current 20kmph.

6. They don't want to develop better public transport facilities so people automatically give up their cars and take the metro because it's easier and faster (forget the cost advantage)

7. They don't want to develop alternative sources of energy like the free and abundant solar energy that India is blessed with.

May I know how they will ensure that Indian metro's in 2020 will be more liveable and less polluting then Indian metro's 2007?