4 ms·
I agree, this article is disappointingly light on details. CO2 is specifically regulated in Europe, separately from fuel consumption, so this could pertain to t
by csours 11y ago
I agree, this article is disappointingly light on details. CO2 is specifically regulated in Europe, separately from fuel consumption, so this could pertain to that.
Fuel consumption would be a very accurate proxy for CO2 production, unlike NOx, which strongly affected by vehicle processing, so it is really unclear what the cheat could possibly be.
- yuhong 11y agoIn this case, I think the numbers was simply wrong.
- vlehto 11y ago>CO2 is specifically regulated in Europe, separately from fuel consumption It's a joke. They should have increased fuel taxes. But that was too unpopular, so we have mess of regulations. As a result you either want to have new car with very small engine, or very old car with big engine. No matter how much emissions you actually make.
- yxhuvud 11y agoHuh? We actually tend to have quite high fuel taxes here in Europe. (or well, at least here in Sweden)
- vlehto 11y agoYes. That's the reason why it was unpopular to rise it further. But it would still have been the only logical action. It would have fought congestion, as idle running would have been more expensive. It would have encouraged to buy less consuming car and drive less. On the other hand taxing car ownership might make unemployment worse. If you have to sell your future means of commuting because of the taxes, you are in deeper shit.