He forgets the part where because of emissions requirements the C15 can't be driven in that scourge the people the author defends call "low emissions zones".

▲

pasc1878 a day ago | parent | next [-]

Good so the car won't be killing people due to high noxious emissions.

	▲	ErroneousBosh a day ago \| parent [-]
		Stick a petrol version of the engine in (Peugeot XU instead of XUD) and convert it to run on propane. There you go, now the exhaust is just water and carbon dioxide, and you don't die from breathing it in. No CO, no HC, and not really any more NOx that was in the air it sucked in. This is why forklifts run on gas, instead of petrol or diesel. We could have had incredibly clean air in our cities 25 years ago, if the government hadn't decided that pushing "scrappage schemes" to get people to buy "cleaner greener diesels" was cheaper.

▲

piva00 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If you want to live in polluted areas there are plenty of places available on Earth for that, I believe most people would rather not. Low emissions zones are mostly in very densely populated areas where the impact of pollution is higher, not sure why you consider that a scourge.

Could you expand on why?

▲

eloisant a day ago | parent | next [-]

People who don't live in France may not know why low emission zones are so stupid: it's not about how much pollution your car emits, but how old it is.

So you're not allowed to bring a 20 years old car even if it's small, light and as a result doesn't pollute that much (because of its low fuel consumption). However you're allowed to bring in your brand new SUV even if its emissions are much higher. In fact it doesn't matter how much your SUV pollutes, it's recent so it's "fine".

Do you know you usually drive 20+ cars? Poor people. Do you know who loves restrictions on old cars? Car manufacturers.

▲

jen20 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Could you expand on why?

Perhaps I'm a plumber going to work on a house in a LEZ? Perhaps I need to deliver something? Perhaps deliver to the airport (!) inside the LEZ.

There are all kinds of reasons why someone might need to take a van into an LEZ, if you think for more than about quarter a second.

This is primarily a reason why you shouldn't drive a vehicle from the 1970s, as the article suggests, and why LEZs need practicality not to drive service inflation inside the area.

	▲	AlotOfReading a day ago \| parent [-]
		Every emission zone regulation I'm familiar with distinguishes between private and commercial vehicles for exactly this reason. The French zones for example divide vehicles into categories. Private vehicles are set a base category/range, and commercial restrictions are usually the next category looser.

▲

blell a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm just poking a gigantic hole on the hypocrisy of the author. I am not interested in that discussion.

	▲	piva00 a day ago \| parent [-]
		> I am not interested in that discussion. Rather uncurious of you then, not sure why make a comment if you aren't willing to explore it further. Shouting into the void?

▲

ceejayoz a day ago | parent | prev [-]

https://eupolicy.social/@jmaris/115860595509967609

▲

nicolaslem a day ago | parent | next [-]

CO2 is a bit of an outlier in the groups of pollutants emitted by a car. Modern cars will emit way less of the other pollutants that are directly unhealthy for humans to breathe (NOx, CO, particulate matter, etc.).

I know the thread is mostly for fun, but only considering CO2 is a bit misleading when accessing how environmentally (un)friendly a car is.

▲

blell a day ago | parent | prev [-]

That does not matter. It only complies with Euro 3 emissions requirements.

▲

omnicognate a day ago | parent | next [-]

Which will get you into London's Low Emission Zone (LEZ). Not the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ), though.

Besides, I think the point is really that we should be making and buying vehicles more like this (in the positive aspects) rather than that we should all drive 40 year old Citroens.

▲

blell a day ago | parent [-]

If the EU cared about this so much they wouldn't have allowed all car makers to buy one another until all cars cost €25k for the base model. Maybe, maybe that's the issue that prevents people from updating their cars which emit a lot of stuff they don't like.

▲

omnicognate a day ago | parent [-]

You seem to have an axe to grind about something completely unrelated to the article here. Since you brought it up, though, if you're going to be one of the thousands of people driving up the road outside my house every day then, as a member of a family with multiple generations of life-threatening asthma, the fact that you're required to do it in a car with strictly regulated emissions is an unalloyed positive as far as I'm concerned.

	▲	hermanzegerman a day ago \| parent [-]
		20 day old account and constantly hates against the EU. Probably a bot. Not worth engaging

▲

woodpanel a day ago | parent | prev [-]

This thing will be so old that the owner just needs to apply for a "historical" car license and then those eco-zones are irrelevant.

But yeah, the author's wrong on so many things. Starting with putting his stuff on mastodon in the first place. Or not withstanding that the same people he cheers on, are outlawing diesel engines.

Tbh though, a lot of the latter was fueled from US-industrial anti-diesel propaganda.