Henorm wrote:Ok I have everything I am not objective, I am an agent of the big oil and automobile lobby so the only objective is to pollute a maximum by winning a pile of money ..
It's funny, that's exactly what all those who do not support controversial arguments do: they make a mockery of the situation instead of thinking about the arguments against them!
You'll just notice that I selected some of your arguments that are not objective, I do not make a generality ...
Henorm wrote:1 / When you want to ride green you must comply with the latest anti-pollution standards in force and in addition limit emissions of CO2. From this point of view I do not see the interest of driving with HV and pass just Euro 2. If you really want to be green buy a Euro 4 car and simply put diesel in it ...
I do not agree with that!
We can very well "ride green" (what does that mean?
) by making a car last for a while, new enough to have some technical refinements preventing it from polluting too much and consuming too much, and old enough to be able to drive with a locally produced agro-fuel (less than 100 km from my home) and in which very little gray energy is injected (cultivation, harvesting, pressing-filtration and short-distance transport).
I understand very well that for someone whose job is, indirectly, to sell as many cars as possible, this type of speech is relatively disturbing ...
Henorm wrote:3 / Rolling Vegetable Oil has no interest if this oil was produced by exhausting water, deforesting amazonia or using a max of fertilizer
I never said the opposite, but there is way to do, locally, quite another thing ...
Moreover, should we remind you of all the "inconveniences" associated with the exploitation of oil?
Henorm wrote:It's been 100 years that we know how to run a motor with vegetable oil, why we do not do it? There is a simplistic answer that is it is the fault of oil tankers and builders.
You've just forgotten the economic factor, the most important of all ... Petroleum derivatives were cheaper until a very short time ago.
Henorm wrote:There is another one because today it is not the right answer to the environmental problems but this one nobody wants to hear it. If you're happy with yourself because you're getting Euro 2 with your HV engine, it's better for you and your conscience.
Not the right answer if you consider the views of builders who must meet current and future standards. But it's
a good answer to use older vehicles by significantly reducing their environmental footprint. And that no manufacturer has ever recognized!
Henorm wrote:Today a green engine is defined by its emissions of NOx and CO2 (particles and HC, apart from the start are post-treat quite easily).
Yes and so ? Someone said the opposite of that here? Who ?
Henorm wrote:Biomass To Liquid means that we use "plants" (lawn mowing, algae, forest waste) or animal fats (lard) to make kerosene or diesel fuel using the Fischer Tropsch process. It is different from the first generation daughter who directly uses oil "from a plant."
Yes, I know all that, nothing new.
