It's always interesting when this is brought up, because private flights emissions are literally nothing compared to the transport industry emissions. They might as well be zero. Introduction of AdBlue has been one of the greatest improvements in diesel emissions that we have done - calling it "peddling by brussels" is uninformed at best and actively malicious at worst.
This has nothing to do with CO2 emissions and everything to do with particle pollution.
Our leaders do not live inside urban centers, and do not suffer from particle pollution. Or at least way less than the average citizen, and i'm not even talking about the people living near the Paris ring road, who aren't exactly the richest.
I understand if you're from the countryside (i am too) that you dislike adBlue, but think that it probably add years of living to the poorest urbanites.
But the argument that you shouldn't be using AdBlue in your diesel because rich people fly private jets is frankly, crazy. Both things should be addressed, but one of those things is far more important to tackle right now for the health of everyone.
There's no way those lorries can verify the adblue tank is full of adblue and not just water. So it's not really going to stop trucks from operating is it.
Oh, they can. There is a "quality sensor" in the DEF tank, and the ECU is required to "derate" the engine if that sensor isn't happy. Which in practice means go into limp mode.
On one hand you have people assuming that the trucks won't run because they can't comply with every letter of the law, as if they were in perfect compliance before. And on the other hand you have the people who are closer to the ground and know that the trucks will run, just less legally (several options for doing so have already been mentioned in the comments).
The discontinuity between the regulators and the kind of people who write for the economist vs the people more closely dealing with the reality on the ground is far more interesting (in a train wreck sort of way) to me than any given shortage in a "required for compliance" material.
Eastern europeans won't even notice AdBlue shortage and continue trucking like nothing happened. (It's super popular past time activity to disable that thing even on brand new trucks, even dealers are in on it ( citation needed, however ))
As an eastern european myself, I wish it was as heavily enforced as it is in western europe - anyone found to have modified their truck to bypass emission reducing devices should have the truck siezed and ordered to pay fines so heavy the thought of doing it again wouldn't even cross their minds.
And yes, I'm aware that even dealerships offer removing DPFs/GPFs as an option when buying a new car, because somehow people from my country think they live on a different planet with inexhaustable supply of fresh air, and somehow can't connect in their brains the relation between filthy, sooty air that we breathe and automotive exhausts. No no, it's all an evil plot by the west to make us pay for costly filter replacements, so it's better to cut it out right at the start when the car is brand new<mind explodes>.
I mean, I'm sure you'd be angry at people who choose to do whatever they please too, the only question is where is that line for you?
Would you draw it at truckers who drive on bald tyres? Ones who ignore the work time regulations? Ones who drive drunk? Ones who don't turn their lights on at night?
All of the above are "people who choose to do whatever they please" - if you aren't angry with at least the ones I listed, I'm curious what kind of lawless society you live in.
dare to ask, why is a Trademark used as standard name for someting
and
who owns and makes money of this trademark, is it again the same "them" (big bankers & black rock etc.)
Looks like the Adblue trademark is registered to the “ Verband der Automobilindustrie e.V. (VDA)” which is a German non profit automobile industry association.
38 comments
[ 0.98 ms ] story [ 85.4 ms ] threadAnd urea?.. well given the amount of 'truckers' lemonade' found in lay-bys, they shouldn't have any trouble sourcing that either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid
for what should be called AUS32 (aqueous urea solution 32%).
Our leaders do not live inside urban centers, and do not suffer from particle pollution. Or at least way less than the average citizen, and i'm not even talking about the people living near the Paris ring road, who aren't exactly the richest.
I understand if you're from the countryside (i am too) that you dislike adBlue, but think that it probably add years of living to the poorest urbanites.
But the argument that you shouldn't be using AdBlue in your diesel because rich people fly private jets is frankly, crazy. Both things should be addressed, but one of those things is far more important to tackle right now for the health of everyone.
The discontinuity between the regulators and the kind of people who write for the economist vs the people more closely dealing with the reality on the ground is far more interesting (in a train wreck sort of way) to me than any given shortage in a "required for compliance" material.
turn off the logic that disables the engine if the additive isn't available
a sensible legislature should be able to waive it during a time of crisis
ah, the EU... so that's impossible, so it's going to be like requiring empty flights to maintain runway landing slots during covid
Technical debt isn’t absolutely evil and sometimes the interest rate is good enough to take on debt.
Like preventing people from going hungry in exchange for extra pollution for a season.
And yes, I'm aware that even dealerships offer removing DPFs/GPFs as an option when buying a new car, because somehow people from my country think they live on a different planet with inexhaustable supply of fresh air, and somehow can't connect in their brains the relation between filthy, sooty air that we breathe and automotive exhausts. No no, it's all an evil plot by the west to make us pay for costly filter replacements, so it's better to cut it out right at the start when the car is brand new<mind explodes>.
Would you draw it at truckers who drive on bald tyres? Ones who ignore the work time regulations? Ones who drive drunk? Ones who don't turn their lights on at night?
All of the above are "people who choose to do whatever they please" - if you aren't angry with at least the ones I listed, I'm curious what kind of lawless society you live in.
There is a list here https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented