Car Emmisisons (was Thunderf00t thread)

[nctnico]

Not every MOT failure means the end of a car. A broken lightbulb means a failed MOT and I doubt anyone is going to purchase a new car because of a broken lightbulb. It is cost versus benefit. If (big if) bans on ICE vehicles go on as planned (there is a 1% chance of that actually happening looking at the ongoing political landslides in the US and Europe), it means it will be much more economically viable to keep older cars going. And this is really a step backwards instead of going forward. At this point the market mechanisms should be allowed to work their magic.

[tszaboo]

Congratulations, you won, your country is more like a 3rd world country than we hoped for.

Have you seen the state of the UK's economy? Its not just like a 3rd world country.

Let me ask you this: How come everyone here from the UK is somehow sounds proud of that you still use coal for heating?

This is not "semantics" or "finding excuses".
Its you lapping up facts from a CEO whose bests interests are that of his company and his wealth, coming here to show off your knowledge, being told a lot of the information is not accurate or misrepresented, and refusing to acknowledge or research further.

Its not nearly as bad as thunderfoot, but it shows the same lack of processing.

I didn't misrepresent anything. I told you what Musk said, why he took up arms and decided to support Trump. I honestly don't care if his reasons are true or not. Even if they had reasons not to invite him, it's still an insult. One that (in part) cost them this election.

[Bud]

Can we get back to Thunderfoot 

[coppice]

The MOT failure rate is effectively a de facto fleet turnover rate.  It may not be an explicit vehicle age limit, but it effectively forces old, potentially higher polluting cars from the road.

In the UK there is no relation between MOTs and fleet turnover. I guess only 1 in 10 MOT failures result in the vehicle's end of life. Lots of 3 year old well cared for cars fail their first MOT for a windscreen wiper that smears a bit, or a lamp nobody noticed has failed. If it has been driven hard for 3 years a variety of minor issues might fail it, and get fixed. One of our cars needed new rear brake discs last year, because the car is driven gently, and normal use had allowed the discs to rust to the point of a test failure. It stayed in the garage for an extra day, the discs were replaced, and an MOT certificate was issued. This is what happens with most MOT failures. Cars have to pass an emissions test as part of their MOT checks, so a seriously polluting one won't pass.

[tggzzz]

Congratulations, you won, your country is more like a 3rd world country than we hoped for.

Have you seen the state of the UK's economy? Its not just like a 3rd world country.

Let me ask you this: How come everyone here from the UK is somehow sounds proud of that you still use coal for heating?

You are hallucinating.

I have my suspicions as to why, but such speculations are boring and pointless.

[coppice]

Let me ask you this: How come everyone here from the UK is somehow sounds proud of that you still use coal for heating?

WTF are you talking about? Who said we are proud? Who said any significant number of people in the UK still heat their homes with coal? The low cost of natural gas from the North Sea pretty much killed off coal for home use in the 1970s, Mostly because its such a PITA to deal with. There was an incorrect claim of a blanket ban on coal in UK. We simply pointed out that is not true. I doubt anyone would bother with the effort of creating a ban, as we just don't use it anyway.

[thm_w]

I didn't misrepresent anything. I told you what Musk said, why he took up arms and decided to support Trump.

Never said you yourself misrepresented anything.

I honestly don't care if his reasons are true or not.

Ah, at least you'll admit it I guess.

Can we get back to Thunderfoot 

Rather not, just leads to reading posts going back to 2022 or earlier on twitter, showing he's been obsessed for a while.
As Dave says its a very one dimensional view.

[tszaboo]

And there are plenty of people who do still use coal for heating.

Let me ask you this: How come everyone here from the UK is somehow sounds proud of that you still use coal for heating?

WTF are you talking about? Who said we are proud? Who said any significant number of people in the UK still heat their homes with coal? The low cost of natural gas from the North Sea pretty much killed off coal for home use in the 1970s, Mostly because its such a PITA to deal with. There was an incorrect claim of a blanket ban on coal in UK. We simply pointed out that is not true. I doubt anyone would bother with the effort of creating a ban, as we just don't use it anyway.

So which one is it?

You are hallucinating.

I have my suspicions as to why, but such speculations are boring and pointless.

Am I? After I got a TED talk about the history and different types of coal?

[tszaboo]

being told a lot of the information is not accurate or misrepresented, and refusing to acknowledge or research further.

Never said you yourself misrepresented anything.

Are you for real?

[nctnico]

Can we get back to Thunderfoot 

Nope, that ship (carrying the lost marbles and credibility) has sailed 

[Andy Chee]

The MOT failure rate is effectively a de facto fleet turnover rate.  It may not be an explicit vehicle age limit, but it effectively forces old, potentially higher polluting cars from the road.

In the UK there is no relation between MOTs and fleet turnover.

Cars have to pass an emissions test as part of their MOT checks, so a seriously polluting one won't pass.

It is this latter point that is relevant. What is the MOT failure rate due to failing emissions  testing?

And when I say fail, I mean the emissions problem is not worth fixing and the vehicle written off and scrapped.

[nctnico]

The MOT failure rate is effectively a de facto fleet turnover rate.  It may not be an explicit vehicle age limit, but it effectively forces old, potentially higher polluting cars from the road.

In the UK there is no relation between MOTs and fleet turnover.

Cars have to pass an emissions test as part of their MOT checks, so a seriously polluting one won't pass.

It is this latter point that is relevant. What is the MOT failure rate due to failing emissions  testing?

And when I say fail, I mean the emissions problem is not worth fixing and the vehicle written off and scrapped.

On a petrol car failing emissions is either an O2 (lambda) sensor (cost between 50 and 100 euro) or the catalythic converter (costing between 400 and 1100 euro). These are not amounts which buy you another car. So far I have not had a catalythic converter failure even with very high mileage.

BTW, on recent cars with EOBD, emissions testing is done by reading the car's computer in case the engine warning light is on. So if the engine warning light is off, it automatically means a pass for emissions.

[coppice]

The MOT failure rate is effectively a de facto fleet turnover rate.  It may not be an explicit vehicle age limit, but it effectively forces old, potentially higher polluting cars from the road.

In the UK there is no relation between MOTs and fleet turnover.

Cars have to pass an emissions test as part of their MOT checks, so a seriously polluting one won't pass.

It is this latter point that is relevant. What is the MOT failure rate due to failing emissions  testing?

And when I say fail, I mean the emissions problem is not worth fixing and the vehicle written off and scrapped.

I don't know, but I assume it must be low. If the emissions were OK last year and not this year, that should be due to something fixable. Of course, the testing is against the standard the car was built against, and not the current standard. However, nobody has so far talked about judging old machines by new standards.

[tggzzz]

You are hallucinating.

I have my suspicions as to why, but such speculations are boring and pointless.

Am I? After I got a TED talk about the history and different types of coal?

Another strange characterisation. Are you OK?

[wraper]

On a petrol car failing emissions is either an O2 (lambda) sensor (cost between 50 and 100 euro) or the catalythic converter (costing between 400 and 1100 euro). These are not amounts which buy you another car. So far I have not had a catalythic converter failure even with very high mileage.

Really, all that simple? How about worn out engine that needs a very expensive engine block repair or replacement?

BTW, on recent cars with EOBD, emissions testing is done by reading the car's computer in case the engine warning light is on. So if the engine warning light is off, it automatically means a pass for emissions.

Sounds like nonsense, and good luck asking for that here. Only real emission testing.

[Siwastaja]

It is this latter point that is relevant. What is the MOT failure rate due to failing emissions  testing?

Failure rate for old cars in emission tests (just like any other reason) is significant and after simple fixes many still pass.

Like,
* Leaking exhaust, no actual problem with emissions, air that mixes in increases O2 and fails measurement
* O2 sensor failing, new sensor takes a few minutes to swap and costs like $50 or even less for a cheap aftermarket part which lasts for another year or two
* Carburetor mix ratio knob misadjusted, takes a few minutes to correct

No one scraps a car just because it failed, failing is completely normal even for new cars. Of course if the car is really in bad condition and the owner has been thinking about scrapping it anyway then failed inspection can be the final straw. Of course as an exception to this rule, ugly surprises can arise like engine block needing expensive/specialized work (boring, etc.)

[tszaboo]

You are hallucinating.

I have my suspicions as to why, but such speculations are boring and pointless.

Am I? After I got a TED talk about the history and different types of coal?

Another strange characterisation. Are you OK?

You used 4 gaslighting sentences in a row. After doing exactly what I said you were doing. Would you kindly find someone else to abuse online?

Precisely.

TV in the 60s regularly had adverts for various types of smokeless coal. (And Esso Blue paraffin for heaters).

Firstly read again. Traditional house coal is banned. That's the low quality stuff that used to be used to make town gas, by boiling the volatiles off to create coke.

Secondly anthracite is coal, pure and simple. It is the type that was exported from South Wales all over the world. That's why the world price of coal was set in this building https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_Exchange

You should double check that, because it didn't. Welcome to the mid 20s.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/selling-coal-for-domestic-use-in-england

Another case people denying something like 1 page after it happened.

[tszaboo]

so I watched the last three Thunderf00t videos.
I must say I never liked his style.
It boiled down to showing throwaway comments, memes, videos from movies and badly edited photos. Several times going about how electing Trump is the same as Brexit. He was using the same clips over and over again.
I mean sure   if you want to play it that way. He's reasoning is that reality sometimes resembles fiction, if I make 4 second long clips out of it, and therefore I'm right.

[magic]

You used 4 gaslighting sentences in a row. After doing exactly what I said you were doing. Would you kindly find someone else to abuse online?

It's not gaslightling if you really aren't well

None of what you quoted is being proud of using coal.

[tszaboo]

You used 4 gaslighting sentences in a row. After doing exactly what I said you were doing. Would you kindly find someone else to abuse online?

It's not gaslightling if you really aren't well

None of what you quoted is being proud of using coal.

Let them first make up their mind if it's plenty of people or not.

[tggzzz]

You used 4 gaslighting sentences in a row. After doing exactly what I said you were doing. Would you kindly find someone else to abuse online?

It's not gaslightling if you really aren't well

None of what you quoted is being proud of using coal.

Just so.

I appreciate it is unlikely that tszaboo's first language is English, but it appears he doesn't understand the meaning of "abuse" and "gaslighting".

His reply (below) your message is also a little strange, in that I don't see how it relates either to what you wrote or to the other parts of this thread...

You used 4 gaslighting sentences in a row. After doing exactly what I said you were doing. Would you kindly find someone else to abuse online?

It's not gaslightling if you really aren't well

None of what you quoted is being proud of using coal.

Let them first make up their mind if it's plenty of people or not.

[tszaboo]

Just so.

I appreciate it is unlikely that tszaboo's first language is English, but it appears he doesn't understand the meaning of "abuse" and "gaslighting".

Oh here we go again, attacking me instead of addressing what I said. But that's OK.
Or maybe you just have the memory of a goldfish.

And there are plenty of people who do still use coal for heating.

Let me ask you this: How come everyone here from the UK is somehow sounds proud of that you still use coal for heating?

WTF are you talking about? Who said we are proud? Who said any significant number of people in the UK still heat their homes with coal? The low cost of natural gas from the North Sea pretty much killed off coal for home use in the 1970s, Mostly because its such a PITA to deal with. There was an incorrect claim of a blanket ban on coal in UK. We simply pointed out that is not true. I doubt anyone would bother with the effort of creating a ban, as we just don't use it anyway.

So which one is it?

tggzzz, are you feeling OK? Do you need help? We are really concerned about your recent lapses in memory, and your lack of understanding of the English language. I beg you, for your own sake please look for professional help.

[Siwastaja]

it appears he doesn't understand the meaning of "abuse" and "gaslighting".

He is just full of negative emotions, hate and such, himself, to the point of stalking others in random threads just to write abusive off-topic comments himself. Good old projection: he thinks others think about him the same way as he thinks of others. A sad case. I mean, if he managed his negativity and allowed comments into his internal echo chamber, he would have many very interesting and good opinions and points. But victimizing himself all the time while developing feelings of hate against anyone who dares to question or correct his comments... Yeah, a sad case.

[tggzzz]

it appears he doesn't understand the meaning of "abuse" and "gaslighting".

He is just full of negative emotions, hate and such, himself, to the point of stalking others in random threads just to write abusive off-topic comments himself. Good old projection: he thinks others think about him the same way as he thinks of others. A sad case. I mean, if he managed his negativity and allowed comments into his internal echo chamber, he would have many very interesting and good opinions and points. But victimizing himself all the time while developing feelings of hate against anyone who dares to question or correct his comments... Yeah, a sad case.

I don't remember him being like that, hence my feeling there might have been a change.

Alternative explanation: I'm wrong because I don't pay too much attention to the person making comments, only to the comments themselves. (Exceptions for treez and the like, of course!)

[tom66]

On a petrol car failing emissions is either an O2 (lambda) sensor (cost between 50 and 100 euro) or the catalythic converter (costing between 400 and 1100 euro). These are not amounts which buy you another car. So far I have not had a catalythic converter failure even with very high mileage.

BTW, on recent cars with EOBD, emissions testing is done by reading the car's computer in case the engine warning light is on. So if the engine warning light is off, it automatically means a pass for emissions.

Not in the UK MoT. They still use an exhaust probe and rev the engine.