malumbu

Nope they sell cars that will sell. Nice balanced post Cardelia. Nitrous oxide is not toxic in fact I understand that celbs take if for fun. For many giving birth its essential. It's a nasty greenhouse gas though. I'm going to start a thread on consultation on the air quality plan, to bet a greater interet on this pretty important issue.

How fast were you driving? If you were speeding it may have been me. Life is too short. Move on. That will no doubt fick you off! The thread on irrational rage seems much more fun.

My point was it isn't simply a case of those dirty disel cars, and there are many reasons why we are in this position. I wasn't talking about totally redesigning engines, rather the control systems that help determine power, fuel efficiency and pollution. I expect that as more and more testing results come out, and the new standards are introduced, we will find out that some diesel cars are much cleaner than others. Now whether that is luck, the design of the engine and pollution reducing technology, or the way the engine is managed I don't know. For heavy vehicles there had to be some more fundamental redesign to meet emissions standards, there again there tendes to be far more space in a truck or bus to fit a chemistry set. Go back 25 years and many cars were much lighter and flimsier. Road safety standards changed making them heavier, and weitght has a big influence on fuel economy. Going back further as a young driver there were plenty of cars (virtually all petrol with decent fuel economy). And nobody wanted a diesel because they were agricultural in performance. (Yep the turbo also had a big effect). A quick Google shows that, for example, an estate car can exceed 1.5 tonnes and go up to a Range Rover and over two tonnes. OK we don't all drive Range Rovers but with the popularity of SUVs, and the 'I'll be more safer than you' weights are going up. The 1990 Citroen AX sports was like sh... off a shovel, weighing less than 800 kg so you'd come off pretty bad against a modern car. Crash impact systems leading up to autonomous cars could lead to considerable light-weighting but that is some way off. I'm still not convinced there are government files warning that there would be mass adoption of diesel cars and that we'd all die. The state of knowledge until recent years was that fine particles were dangerous, and that these would be significantly reduced as technology was fitted. Which has happened - less and less is from diesel, and much you can't do a lot about blowing over from the continent. And as many have pointed out construction. Nitrogen dioxide moved from an irritant to something more sinister in recent years. It was not hushed up, or a coup by the Grauniad/Greenpeace. Read the expert Committee papers eg www.gov.uk/government/publications/nitrogen-dioxide-health-effects-of-exposure There has also been a number of select committee reports and it is a bit rich of Ed Davey to blame the Tories when his party were also in government. Anyway simply trying to put a bit of balance/context into the argument. I'm a tree hugger but I simply don't buy into much of the popular views. And if you are going to get stuff delived, for the time being it will very likely to be a 'dirty diesel' Here's something to help you save fuel - buses use it, but will it catch on for car drivers? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/magazine-39792384/could-this-box-make-you-a-better-driver

And I genuinely worked with a Mike Cox (not Hunt)

Worked with a Nicola who married a Mr Nicholls. And a Lynn who became Lynn Flynn. A Ms Cunze (German name) who probably couldn't wait to change her name. And a friend who's maried name became Bowel, and they changed it to Bowl. A bit like Keeping up Appearances, the sitcome where the name was pronounced Bouquet not Bucket. Which leads me onto Penge pronounced in a Frech style (the fun we had with Sarf London names in the 80s and 90s.

Met a Zebedee a few years ago. I cracked up and was tempted to ask about the Magic Roundabout. It's a generation thing and the youngster hadn't a clue where I was coming from. As with many things it is what you associate a name with from your yonger days. Harry was Harry worth the comic, and was a very old fashioned name. Now one of the most popular no doubt due to a certain character in a popular book. My dad was 'Guy' we hated it, he hated it yet in the 50s there was a famous hunky actor (Guy Maddison) that popularised it. Now Guy is a really cool game. The odd ones were names interchanged between the genders - I know a Lee (girl) Tracy (boy) and Dale (girl). There was also a boy named Sue and a girl called Johnny. Sometimes it works (eg Bertie) and Robyn's in the US are girls, rather than the usual boy Robin. You don't hear of many Leslies or Lesleys nowadays.

I meant to say a little more. In the good old days (!) you were generally OK sitting with the home fans, but less so standing on the terrace. Now with all seaters the rough end, and the posh seats (OK there are now some very posh seats now) difference has generally gone. Although when I first sat in the shed I asked if this was wise - it's OK mate all the nutters are now in the Matthew Harding stand. Saying that there were clearly some old school in the shed. In times gone by you'd sit in the 'posh seats' being able to be a little less discrete, and if you lost (which was the safer option) you'd get banter that went into ribbing. Always a fun time at Fulham in recent years where there is no proper segregation in the away end and they even advertise some seats as being neutral. No bother although there was a chant at one time "Can you hear the neutrals sing". I was in thd old stand when Liverpool got a very late winnner a few years ago and there was a bit of an altercation. "Mate we have no problem with you being here, but don't stand up and cheer when you score". It was all very polite. As you'd expect at Craven Cottage.

That last post was a response to Stringvest. To Uncle Len. My dear man. Blair was a disicple of Thatcher. We lost the engineering and manufacturing bsse mcuh earlier. She shagged the NW, the NE, the Midlands and South Wales then. He may of finished it off, but certainly didn't start it. And until Lehman Brother etc (and I am sure that others better placed to say the warning signs were there) things had in deed Only Got Better. Well ignoring the illegal war and selling off even more public assets. But if we are beter at doing things than making things then so be it. If my kids don't know what a lathe is, does it matter?

Go back a 100 years and see how the masses were treated in the factories and mills my friend. That is not rhetoric that is fact. I've been a trade union member for 30 years, and went on strike for one day as a protest against changes to the pension scheme. Please refrain from talking about us and them, and a myopic view of the 1970s. That's not pretending its all good. But having arms severed on the factory floor, or no support to widows and dependents after a work fatality is thank God a thing of the past. And also have a look at agriculture over a similar time period, to a time when there was no subsidies and protection for farmers, and we produced much less of our food, and almost starved to death in world wars. Come back when you have an informed view and we can have a proper debate. For example when our rail engineering was the most advanced in the world, under the state, in the 1970s, electricity generation, telecomms and no doubt more. All sold off for a quick buck and votes for the Tories who promted greed and selfishness.

I find much of the debate here very informative, including the dangers to the economy of Corybyn's agenda. Yet haven't we already scored a massive home goal against our economy by voting to leave Europe?

I've sat in the shed a few times as an away supporter. Had a nice chat with the Chels fans, who essentially said no problems mate, but just don't celebrate if you score - "We've been in the same position as you". Had a similar experience at Old Trafford where a bloke warned me at half time that the stewards would throw me out if they realised I wasn't a home supporter, and the prawn sandwich eating brigade wouldn't punch me but inform the stewards. I spent the second half having some good banter with this guy, particularly as he was from Bolton so I could rib him about about being a glory hunter. Intersting to see what happended last night. Pay a grand to sit wit the home supporters, than get punched for the privilage of it. Not wishing to start a war, just hearing your views and experiences.

There's this great information source called the internet which tells you about everything. Here's some information about petrol cars with low carbon emissions http://www.nextgreencar.com/emissions/low-emission-cars/petrol/ Perhaps this interwebnet thingy will catch on. This may be of interest too http://www.nextgreencar.com/emissions/low-emission-cars/petrol/ At 500 odd quid this must be some real muscle car. Bet is sounds good.

No no no no no no no no Artificial grass is fine for all weather football pitches. And lining butcher's display shelves. It's the thin end of the wedge. It's dumbing down of society. It supports no ecosystems. You may as well just pave your garden (and paradise). And put up stone cladding; there is no compromise here. I am out seeding and watering in April and October (preferably using water from the butt, if there was any damn rain). And still the moss comes back. I'll continue to do this until the day I die. Wars have been fought for less. Turn again Dick Whittington

You could also argue UKIP do/did this - have some nice policies that many in the street would like. In the knowledge that they will never be in power to deliver. So folks - two choices back to the 50s with the Tories - where collective memory is very rosy, but it wasn't all great. Or to the 70s with Labour where we had the opposite - most think times were bad but there were a lot of good things too. Or for me a Hermit's cave

The One Show was fingers down the throat time. I suppose on the positive it was less fingers down the throat than Maggie and Dennis. I was on LBC once on a consumer programme in an official capacity. I have a face for radio. I wanted to start my bit off by saying that I was surprised they still existed. I'd lived in London for well over ten years at that point amd wasn't aware of it. I thought that LBC was something that my older relatives had listened to in the 70s and had ceased broadcasting after inappropriate comments following the death of a pope John Paul I in 1978 after only a month in office. I understand that is is more relevant now.

Ordinary working families need strong and stable leadership and ordinary working families need to be protected from those dreadful energy giants. I would expect ordinary working people to have the sense and knowledge to shop around and switch suppliers. Obviously they haven't got the time as ordinary working familes must spend all their time on working and family matters. These ordinary working families are already being targeted by the price comparison web sites. Now as for the old, vulnerable etc. There is probably a case for intervention. But ordinary working families with strong and stable leaders? I'm getting peed off with the whole thing. And Jezza following the line that we have a clear mandate to leave Europe. Forgetting the lies, the lack of a coherent stay campaign, and his flipin lack of inspiration and clear message. Well he got what he wanted and should vote for strong and stable leadership.

I worked in fair trading in the early 00s and had it beaten into me that comptetitive markets were the best way of delivering services, stimulating the economy and that intervention was BAAADDD. And that private enterprise was better than state provision. Of course Tony Blair was a disciple of Margaret Thatcher. And May a disciple of Milliband. Bless. I'm sure I could pick holes in the Labour manifesto but this one is really rich. Perhaps we should never have privitised energy markets in the first place. Hands up East Dulwich who pocketed a lot of cash out of this. Not me!

I walked to school. Our kids walked to school. I am the people's poet. I am right. On the downside the money saved on the bus fare went on sweets. I am suffering now. Interesting observation. When I started primary school there were 140 kids coming on two double decker buses, one from the North and one from the south. By the time I'd left this was down to two single deckers. By the time I left secondary school this was down to a mini bus. And now probably a taxi for the odd kid who can't get a lift. There's lots of stuff on risk adverse parents, but that should be for another thread. My friends moved to Scotland ten years ago and were shocked as the primary school kids all walked together without any parents.

OK time for some myth busting. Government did not say "go out and buy diesel" they incentivised low carbon cars to help save the planet. People (including me) bought diesels because they were fuel efficient, low-end torque, less stressed, reliable etc. There are other relatively low carbon cars - the Fiat 500 (petrol) is an ace city car. Yet even with that model Fiat had to extend it (in size) and bring in diesel variants. We didn't buy diesels 20 years ago as they were awful. Noisy, slow, agricultural, take for ever to start. The French used them in country areas - not us Brits of course. The Sierra had one diesel variant, and that was with a 3L Peugeot engine (compare that to the Mondeo). Then came along the common rail injection system and wow, you'd have to put a label on telling that it was a diesel or you may fill it with petrol. Energy output is much higher on a diesel, but combustion is less complete. The fuel/oxgen ratio is differnt to that of petrol so you can't use three way catalysts. The Americans probably due the the great LA smogs of the 70 realised the need to clean up petrol engines which led to the end of carbureters and the introduction of the aforementioned three way cats. (And helped kill off the Brit small sports car industry, but it was pretty rubbish at that time). The increased particulate matter emissions from diesels have been know for years, which is why all modern diesel cars have filters on them, with the trapped material being periodically burned off. Very successful, apart from the occasional one where it has either failed or been illegally used. You could have a go at government, police or local authorities for not doing more about smoky exhausts. Or the rrsses who don't care. Go back 25 years and you will have seen much more crap in the air. There is no set amount that diesel cars are more polluting that petrol. All depends on the technology and the engine mapping - balance of performance, fuel use and NOx. It's wrong that vehicles are often optimised for the first two, but that is what sells cars. If as consumers we'd asked for low pollution at the expense of performance then the world would be different. But then we'd all be like me who uses a push bike as the main form of transport. VW make some excellent vehicles, have a massive R&D programme so it beggars belief that they cheated. The VW group are the only ones to date who have been shown do do so, and I doubt if it is a log jame. There are no specified emission control systems. Some new vehicles use catalyst, others NOx traps, others exhaust gas recirculation. Or combinations. Depending on how these are plumbed in can help emission reductions. Some manufacturers say they can do it simply by engine mapping. It will all come out in the wash in times to come. Modern direct injection petrol engines may be the next environmental nightmare out there. To date the emissions control regime for diesels hasn't delivered for cars and vans - but has been given a massive kick up its arse so will do. Yet for trucks and buses the new standards have delivered what they say on the tin, so with money and the space to bring in a chemistry kit it can be made to work. (see the Dutch NGO testing organisation TNO https://www.tno.nl/en/collaboration/expertise/technical-sciences/tno-research-on-powertrains/) The health impacts of most air pollutants have been known for some time. We have got rid of sulphur and lead emissions. The impacts of NO2 are now much better understood. This is not a conspiracy theory as the Grauniad makes out. So who's to blame. Government for not putting out better advice? And being afraid of the motor and petrol heads lobby? Local authorities for some pretty wishy washy air quality strategies and communications. Low Emisison Zone was a start but why on earth not have progression in the standards rather than fix them six years ago. The auto industry for doing the least they have to do in terms of meeting standards, not promoting environmentally friendly vehicles (or greenwash using 'eco' inappropriately, and promoting fast and sexy vehicles? Noting that the auto industry has been seen as a great British economic success in recent times and emplys tens of thousands - being out of a job is not good for your health. The beaureau and Eurocrats for getting the standards wrong? The health research community for not getting advice out swifter. Or us for our obsession with speed and power, driving two tonne vehicles with one person in it badly and at times unecessarily. Not that simple eh? And what are you going to do about it! I'm using my diesel car less and less (yes I have one, it is reliable and economic), to the extent that when it falls apart or gets banned I'll consider alternative forms of propulsion and/or ownership and continue to use my pushbike as number one transport. It wont stop the family on the street from owning five cars, and everytime one of their kids hits 17 another one will come on the street. Anyway apart from my jibe at the neighbours no selective use of numbers here. And if I wanted to have a proper moan I'd say why are we also afraid of the black cab lobby. Oh here is some data (the company who unearthed the VW scandal, so I expect pretty reliable) showing that slowly it is betting better http://emissionsanalytics.com/real-driving-emissions-how-real-is-it/

I go to Modern Computers on the OKR http://www.moderncomputers.com/ Google reviews are mixed. They built this PC that I am typing on, maintain it, repaired my Macbook (dunno why, as they are obselete a week after you buy them - and that is a swipe at Apple) and repaired a touch screen laptop (not like the wonkers at PC World)

And similarly to other vehicles (there will be sensible exemptions or discretion) - although I don't believe the cops always have to leave their engines running and when I challenge them on this they are particularly stupid. Not all cops are stupid by the way. A lot are. Anyway people are dying so let's do something about it. Looking forward to the draft air quality plan.

Never been the greatest fan, but the coverage today on the radio cames up with some wonderful dry quips from him, either I am mellowing or I underestimated him.

Gawd David Davis as an objectionable twot, neo colonialist, with England and the English language ruling the world.

Turning my engine off when parked was ingrained as I was a student when I had my first car and did everything to save money. Obviously for many this is not the first thing that they do judging from what I see daily. Over half of new cars have stop start technology that switches the engine off when stationary after a certain time, it takes a few days to get used to then you can just enjoy saving money and saving the environment. Yet many turn the technology off fueled by the popular press and some of the motoring websites that report that it ruins batteries and wears the starter motor out. It doesn't. It's a no brainer. It's a shame that we need national and local government to intervene. But at the end of the day many of us are selfish in our driving habits and it is probably easier to admit to being bad in bed than being a bad driver. Right off my soapbox now. And no this is not all a Brussels' conspiracy

Good. It's not just tradespeople. Good It's not just people who can't speak English Good. PA can the lady who had the wobbly at me on Peckham Rye when I gently asked her to turn her engine off whilst she sat their texting now acknowledge that I am right.