3 ms·
Sure, there's the argument that we're squeezing the balloon rather than reducing waste; the waste products can be tweaked to produce more or less of one or the
by SwellJoe 10y ago
Sure, there's the argument that we're squeezing the balloon rather than reducing waste; the waste products can be tweaked to produce more or less of one or the other. My point is that as long as diesel continues to be propped up as a "clean" technology, based on fabricated data, we won't see migration to actually cleaner technology. Of course it's cheaper to make vehicles that are either poisonous or cause climate change (both, actually, no matter how you squeeze the balloon).
Diesel, it turns out, isn't all that "clean". I hate that it's so...I drive a modern turbo diesel vehicle, and have been very disappointed to learn about the tradeoffs and negatives of that technology (though I drive a big Ford diesel, which doesn't make some of the compromises that VW was making in its small engines, and does comply with EPA regulations without trickery, to the best of my knowledge).
Burning fossil fuels contributes to climate change and produce dangerous emissions that are toxic for living things. As long as we continue to allow auto makers and the fossil fuel industry to externalize those costs, alternatives won't be competitive and won't be able to replace those fossil fuel burning vehicles.