If you read: the average car has DROPPED by 12% so it's not the cars, it's the fact that more of them are sold and in use.

What, so your suggestion is because something's hard to achieve best to not bother at all?

Diesels create less CO2 (better fuel econ despite more C in the fuel) than petrol engined cars so I don't see you argument.

It's hard so let's not bother? Well that attitude sure didn't get you to the Moon now did it?

Incent farmers to switch to biofuel feedstocks as long as there is excess food production. On hillside properties, pay them to grow trees, reducing flood risks.

Eliminate export subsidies for all intra-EU freight. We still have way too much livestock, dairy products etc. being shuttled back and forth (e.g. across the Alps) just to collect these.

Sharply reduce wait states in rail freight without jeopardising safety by introducing redundant satellite navigation, robust communications networks and adaptive traffic control on key routes. Break national monopolies on the ownership and operation of locomotives and self-propelled rolling stock.

Insist that airlines quote only total ticket prices incl. all taxes, fuel surcharges etc. Incent airlines to partner with ground transportation providers on routes shorter than ~250km/150mi. This includes integrated baggage handling, perhaps also door-to-door service.

Consider setting a per-vehicle cap on CO2 emissions (e.g. 210 g CO2/km by MY 2012) so carmakers have to redefine their concept of a luxury vehicle for the European market. Top-of-the-line models tend to define brand identity and influence consumer aspirations.

At least they're chewing, which is more than I can say for our pathetic Canadian Government.

OK, Europe, you went for Diesel fuels in a big way. Knowledgeable people are aware that the well-to-wheel efficiency of Diesel is higher than that of gasoline, and the CO2 emissions are lower.

Over here in the United States, people don't care as much about CO2 emissions as the Europeans do -- or any kind of pollution, for that matter. But hybrid gasoline-electric vehicles are selling well in America, to those who do care. HEV's, like Diesels, increase the well-to-wheel efficiency.

Is it finally time for the hybrid Diesel car?

With at least 10 kilometers of PHEV capability, pretty please?

I'm with Raf, set a per-vehicle cap on CO2 emissions (e.g. 200g CO2/km by MY 2010) - there is NO luxury in 2050 if we can't control the pace of CO2 emissions.

How constant stop/restart of diesel hybrid affects it PM emission? Anybody?

Raphael:

"a passenger car diesel PHEV would weigh about 1000lbs more than a gasoline car with similar performance. It would also be exorbitantly expensive."

Does that 1000lbs include the reduced size of the diesel engine? Is that a full or mild hybrid? What kind/size of battery are we talking about here? What is your definition of exorbitant? Most full hybrids are only a few K more than a regular ICE car.

I think EU will be the first to switch to electric cars.

It just makes sense:

* gas costs 5 or 6 bucks a gallon ( 2 times what it costs in the US)

* Most people don't need to drive long distances all that often.

* By my calculation, owning a pure EV could save 10,000 or more over the lifetime of the vehicle.

* With V2G technology, Europe could deploy more wind, solar, & wave without effecting their grid.

Matt

If the goal really is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions particularly CO2, the only strategy is to apply a cap with emissions trading to all sectors not just large emitters.
What would this look like? Companies that sell fossil fuels to consumers and small businesses would be issued GHG credits for their customer's emissions. The total amount of credits available will diminish in future years to reach GHG emissions targets. Energy retailers would need sufficient credits to cover their fuel sales through a combination of emissions trading, and conservation efforts. These costs would be passed on to their customers.

Thanks, Rafael. By the way, your 1000 lb estimation is way too big. Difference between gasoline and diesel engine is close to 100lb, and in case with modern aluminum alloy engine block even less.

Speaking from the point of view of Global Warming. Increase in number of vehicles actually operating in Europ will level-off pretty soon. It is happening in US, where virtually all people who want to drive a car can afford it. Population of European countries does not increase somehow appreciable, and in many countries it is just shrinking. Longer driving distances seen in US year after year is not a big issue in Europe, because of much less expansion of suburban sprawl. Correct me if I am wrong.

Now diesel cars. Emission of CO2 from transportation is about of 20% of all anthropogenic fossil-fuel derived combustion. Cars represent most of the consumption, probably around 60%. Diesel car emits about 10-15% less CO2 then gasoline one, and currently diesel cars represent about 50% of new purchases in Europe. Multiplying the numbers, we get that “diesel proliferation” yields very small dent in reduction of CO2 emissions. Yet it is way more polluting whatever concerns to smog-forming NOx and extremely harmful PM. Yes, I know, modern diesel is way less polluting that old one. But the picture will change dramatically when these engines will age and their emission control will deteriorate – without visible effect on power output and driveability.

Diesel engines are already marvelously efficient, and there is no hope that their efficiency will improve somehow dramatically. All in all, promoting diesel cars as “GHG solution” or even "step in right direction" is delusional at best.

Meanwhile, gasoline hybrids – just first generation of this new technology, already achieving less CO2 emissions then diesels, and are “super ultra low emission” vehicles. Progress in hybrids is just started, and adoption of lean GDI NOx adsorber-equipped hybrids could yield no less then 20% reduction of CO2 emissions further. Plus increased reliance on electric-only mode, and ultimately PHEV vehicles, promising just decimate their fuel consumption. Clearly the winning technology, if you ask my opinion.

BTW, just today premier of BC, Canada (about 5 million people province) announced that in near future all vehicles purchased for government fleet should be hybrids.

The reason for extreme commuting is some idiots have for a long time messed with the building of new homes and as a result homes have gotten far far too expensive and in many places too rare. Thus people have to stay put and commute to whereever thier new jobs are within a wider and wider range.

Also because local asshats have loaded in massive fee hikes moving incures a massive hit on people. Where we used to live every new home gets hit with a 75000 fee.. but every resell of a house also gets a massive fee as well. Add to this that people change jobs more often then 30 years ago and what do you bloody well expect to happen? Poeple find a home they can afford and then they commute as far as needed to reach work.

Bloody idjits in gov need to be shot!

The mainnails in the corrif of kyoto and the world envitonmental calm are..


1 Most of the politicos national state and local all over the world are liars. Cooking the books shuffling the numbers and wasting money left right and everywhere else.

2 To many places industrializing woith far far too many people involved in it. To be blunt no matter what europe and maerica do india alone is 200x as important. One small nation industrializing now is worth more to the future then the entire east coast of america. And a ton of countries are doing just that.

3 world war 3. With the way things are going ww3 is garanteed now. Amd when it happens does anyone expect environmental care? And even if somehow there is no world war the world will be at war anyway. And I dont know if you have noticed but our toys are alot better at destroying the environment then they were 60 years ago.