I think most of the problems are caused by particulates, which are due
to incomplete combustion (perhaps higher in a diesel than in a gasser).
The particulates have nasty stuff in them, and if you breathe a lot of
that then you might have some problems. The "fumes," which I would
think are the combustion gases, are NOx SOx and CO2 and such, which are
less bad from a breathing standpoint, though they contribute to
atmospheric issues. The story I sent earlier about the Texas "cleaner"
diesel fuel attempts to address some of this. I'm not sure about CA but
stationary sources and off-road equipment seem to be major culprits in
the overall emissions, and these have strong lobbies that mitigate
attempts at regulation. And trucking industry too. I guess this story
represents a shot at those sources. Automobiles are easiest to get since
drivers don't have a strong lobby for them, and have been dealt with to
some extent already.
But remember that CARB has never let facts (or perhaps reasonable
interpretation of them) deter it from its mission.
Back in the 70s a buddy of mine worked for some group out there that was
analyzing these kinds of things. They figured out that buying every
driver in Socal a new Honda Civic (which I think were just coming out at
the time) would be cheaper and have better effects than all the stuff
CARB was spewing, due to lower emissions and higher gas mileage and less
clogging on the freeways. But that would not be PC.
It is an interesting issue all around.
--R
Marshall Booth wrote:
andrew strasfogel wrote:
Calif. study links diesel fumes to deaths and high healthcare costs
Diesel-burning
cargo carriers such as ships, trains and trucks contribute to hundreds of
deaths and billions of dollars in healthcare costs annually in California,
according to a study released last week by state officials.
The California Air Resources Board said diesel fumes will result in about
750 deaths this year and cost $70 billion in healthcare costs over the next
15 years.
This "study" (I prefer the term fantasy) requires that you accept the
assumptions that CARB makes. They are NOT based on science, but
completely on conjecture.
Marshall
