I'd be careful not to read too much into a study involving just 20 subjects, the statistical significance is not very high. Also, 300 micrograns per cubic meter is a rather high level of particulate pollution. Cairo, Beijing and Delhi - all of which are renowned for very poor air quality - averaged 150-200 micrograms per cubic meter in 2004.

However, the research is yet another data point suggesting that it's time for European cities to enforce the EU directive on PM10 immissions. They are supposed to take action if the daily average exceeds 50 micrograms per cubic meter on more than 35 days in a calendar year. This will be tightened to just 7 days in 2010. The problem is that cities can actually do little or nothing to mitigate ambient PM pollution, other than restrict traffic in some way. That carries economic costs and does not endear politicians to voters. Unsurprisingly, mayors all over Europe have been honoring the directive in the breach since it became law in January of 2005.

Fortunately, the situation will vastly improve of its own accord over the next decade as the diesel vehicle fleet churns and wall-flow DPFs become standard equipment. Some cities in Germany (e.g. Stuttgart) are looking to accelerate the process by banning high polluters (old diesels and old gasoline cars without catalytic converters) from entering the city center on days with low air quality, starting in 2008.

In addition to compliance with the EU directive, the city - home to two major auto manufacturers and several tier 1 supply chain corporations - may be hoping to boost new vehicle sales in Germany, which have been lackluster of late.

We should ban walking around, too, because people sometimes get hit by cars and bicycles and stray golf balls and stuff and then they die.

Just another sign that operating ICE must be removed from large populations of humans(other animals too). More heart disease studies(like lung disease studies) will show how insidious ICE is around people. Studies of other internal organs will probably also show the detrimental effects to health of ICE.

Let's get electric energy densities up & charge times down, so we can replace ICE with EVs. May ICE die, that people will live. Long live EVs.

Gave up the smoke a long time ago, my friend.

Well if you do not think a total ban is in order, how about diesel school buses. Using them with the knowledge we have now is akin to finger painting with lead based paint.

And a little on public bans. Managing other peoples risk is bad, like saying folks cannot smoke in their own homes, or they must wear their seat belt in their own car. But a ban something that harms others, such as legacy diesels in urban areas at least should be considered. Is the thread significant, and based on the increase in breathing disorders it sure seems to be, we should error on the side of prudence.

@ Van -

before you go off banning everything in sight, perhaps you should learn more about how DPFs work. Comparing them to cigarette filters is quite inappropriate.

The ambient PM10 concentration the researchers used reflects something of a worst-case scenario for individuals living in Europe today. Factory-installed wall-flow DPFs do work (>98% effective) but they've only been on the market for ~2 years. It will take at least a decade before >90% of old diesels have been consigned to the great junkyard in the sky / Africa.

Diesel particles are actually no bigger than "PM1", Motorist! Soot's finest is a continuing and continuous problem of people breathing in the streets, not one of PM10-episodes' on/off-drama and funny coloured window stickers. A problem of particle n u m b e r - concentrations and therefore n o t remotely passé in Europe's (Japan's exported) current vehicle production as Rafael once more tries to insinuate. Maybe some time "Euro-6" will actually address the problem - years from now, of course.
Clean Peugeots were available earlier than Rafael wrote. By years, of course...

But the whole amalgamation of the extensive PM10 (EU-triggered) topic and the problem of diesel particulate matter is one big unfortunate communications disaster - one of the reasons european new diesels still aren't remotely as (well) filtered as America's diesel propagandists may believe. Suffering quite an esoteric misinforming marketing here in germany for many years now. Whatever may arrive in California or else from the Krauts, does not reflect our situation, but (the value of) your own legislation over there!

@ Mo -

engine out diesel particles have a size distribution. Most are in fact larger than 10 microns, but there is a significant portion of the particle count that is smaller. Anything less than ~7 microns can pass through the lung lining and into the bloodstream, accumulating mostly in the liver and spinal fluid. This is significant because prior to the availability of DPFs, car makers relied exclusively on ever-higher injection pressures to reduce PM10 mass, which is what vehicle certification is still based on. That has skewed the engine-out size distribution toward smaller, more dangerous particles. Note that EPA and CARB also limit PM10, simply because the traditional gravimetric measurement technique is not sensitive enough for smaller particles.

However, wall-flow - as opposed to open retrofit - DPFs do catch a high proportion of even these smallest of particles and burn them off during purge phases. The size distribution is not skewed any further in favor of smaller particles through the use of wall-flow DPFs.

As for Peugeot, they did start shipping their FAP in selected models as long ago as 2000, but it required a Cer-based ash-forming additive. Most of their competitors managed to meet Euro 4 without an expensive filter and followed suit only in 2005/2006 in response to unexpected customer demand, especially in Germany.

litesong,

You have been grossly mislead by the BEV advocates. With a large percentage of grid electricity coming from conventional coal-fired power plants, BEV will not offer significant emission advantage over that of ICE.

Electric cars are not 3-4x more efficient than ICE from well-to-wheel analysis. It's more like 25% more efficient than the best of gasoline-ICE today, or on par with a LDV diesel, less than a HDV diesel, and not any more efficient than an HEV, or less than a full HEV.

Diesel's PM problem can be remedied by DPF, and even better still, by conversion of diesel engine to run on NG (natural gas), which costs much less per BTU value than diesel fuel today. "Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water."

Meanwhile, taking one aspirin a day will send diesel's blood-clotting problem away! Even an 80mg baby aspirin will help, if you have a sensitive stomach. If you are not convinced, talk to you doctor.
Furthermore, many cars nowaday have built-in on-board HEPA airfiltration system that will minimize the diesel's PM problem.

Perhaps a ~$100 retrofit HEPA air filter on existing cars will do the trick for those with asthma or cardiovascular risks. This is just my idea. I'm not awared of any such existing retrofit kit.

Certainly, the diesel's PM problem is in need of a little bit of PR info like those ideas of mine! Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water!

Roger...Why do I want to suck diesel fumes & take aspirins, when EVs will let me breath good air & eliminate aspirins. If you think aspirins relieve all effects ICE fumes do to the body, tooth fairies will leave dollar bills under your pillow too. Why would you dare minimize the hazards of ICE. Should babies suck diesel fumes & take baby aspirin too? Thousands of kids living & schooling near freeways ain't gettin' fixed with aspirins. Switch to EVs & lots of doctors will have fewer patients. Electric motors ARE 3 times more efficient than ICE. Electricity is delivered to charging sites(home or stations) NOT USING clogged freeways & will lessen traffic by lessening the transportation of fuels to gas stations. Electricity is delivered more efficiently than fuel. A pox on your 25%.

My northwest electric power is produced kilowatt to HP with only 4% of the pollution of ICE. With our development of further renewable electric sources that pollution is going down even more. All other grid systems can have our 4% to aim at with concerted efforts to develope renewable electric sources.

Im so clean and perfect. Kiss my feet.

thanks, NBK, for an eloquent reply to litesong.

Natural gas can be used to power most diesel engines, and this will substantially reduced PM emission, also 20% less CO2 than diesel fuel. Natural gas' methane can come from a variety of feedstocks, including waste biomass pyrolysis or gasification.

Sorry people. Someone used my User Name to post on this thread.

NBK-Boston...Never have I said to ban diesels, but you've used the term multiple times already. I said lets get electric energy densities up & charge times down, & ICE will die naturally(economically). Wind turbines ARE sweeping the world. Generating power at only 3MPH, each tower supplies 750 homes. They are miraculously coming down in price & will supply many scores of thousands of Megawatts of power if not a lot more. Solar cells have busted past 40% efficiency with great versatility of placement. Electric wave & tidal generating systems are rapidly developing. Get on the band wagon & get renewables on your grid. The electric motor is so elegant, we will marvel about ancient times when we were trapped in cloudy pollutions due to ICE.

Gas indeed is often transported more than 1 mile on freeways. One gallon of gas produces 19 pounds of carbon dioxide. A total of 28 pounds of carbon dioxide is produced if you include the fuel transportation to gas stations.

George...Why do you falter at the death of ICE, when you never have cried for the millions dead due to ICE pollution.