Impunity of a killer: Diesel diesel

[Remundo]

Your message is not very clear! What do you mean ?

[chatelot16]

at high temperature the water vapor destroys the carbon of the scale well ... but if the temperature is too low nothing happens

water vapor is not a miracle solution to avoid any particle: it can even be worse if too much steam reduces the temperature too much

everyone knows the problem of wood which makes abominably too many particles if it is wet

solutions with water in diesel to improve combustion we have been experimented when a simple small improvement was sufficient: with the current objective it is no longer useful it is necessary to do much better

[Mathew]

What bothers me about all of this is that the numbers put forward vary enormously. We talked about ten thousand deaths due to diesel in the very first message of this post, today we can read 60.000 ... There is like inflation
How do doctors find out? They ask questionnaires to patients in the final stages?
(Sorry to seem cynical on this subject, but my popa having died of leukemia, I allow myself)
And how do we point the finger ONLY ONE culprit when there is a list of suspects as big as the arm: active or passive cigarette, indoor pollutants, dust, factory rejects, and so on ...
These elements form a whole, and it suffices to remove one for the final effect to be greatly diminished. An example: total the interior emissions due to paints, PVC coating, various plastics ... Multiply by the number of hours spent inside a home, and compare with the inhalation of diesel particles. You often put your nose under the exhaust pipe, do you?

In short, I am not saying that diesel has nothing to do with it and that it has no effect, but it is the ideal culprit, too ideal. Skillful transition for the second part of my idea (oualavach, I'm in shape tonight)

In the ten strategies of manipulation of peoples, there is a paragraph that says in summary: create a problem, then bring the solution.
For 40 years, we let the diesel develop, then one day we decide it's bad. In the meantime, consumers have been encouraged to buy diesel and oil companies and manufacturers have devoured huge amounts of money for this technology.
Never forget that it is money that rules the world, and that the system has to work. Especially in France, one of the rare countries to have both an oil company and car manufacturers.
Now we are told that we have to buy gasoline, and in 30 years, we will be told: "We must go electric, gasoline is as bad as diesel. And it is expensive"
And we will magically get out of very good and very expensive electric vehicles, which are being developed right now by the manufacturers.

My conclusion: yes, the politicians (who are in charge of the financiers) don't care about us. Public health is another example, and their technological ignorance is frightening.

[chatelot16]

I will not contradict you! I am convinced that the current bashing diesel is exaggerated

there are medical problems related to fine particles ... diesel makes more particles than gasoline ... but it is not as sure that diesel is as guilty as that

but my goal is to show that banning diesel is not the solution: there are solutions to reduce the pollution of everything that smokes: diesel petrol and heating

the catalytic converter and current particle filter requires that the pot be hot: therefore push to waste energy ... these system are ineffective when it is cold ... alas a big part of the time of use in city, the where there is the greatest need

conversely my water system works from the cold start ... it is rather at full power on the highway that it might heat ... no matter if the efficiency decreases, since it is not on the edge of the highway that the problem arises

the catalytic converter is not a good solution against N02: completely ineffective in diesel: pushes to make a mixture too rich in gasoline, with lambda probe and complicated regulation

with the efficiency of limestone against NO2, you can adjust the frankly lean engine to have the best performance, and do not do either unburnt or CO without catalytic converter

the goal is also to make a simple and inexpensive trick, adaptable in old vehicles, to be able to refuse new models too expensive

[Janic]

the figures given are "rough" estimates by comparison between two eras: before diesel in the cities and now. The same goes for diseases linked to active or passive tobacco by comparing (for example) lung cancer in women between periods of low consumption and current consumption (the curve is soaring!). But it goes without saying that there are cumulative factors.

[chatelot16]

that's the doubt

there is a correlation between these health problems and the increase in diesel ... but a correlation is not proof

confusing corelation and cause I say that it is the leaves of the trees that make the wind move ... the proof when the leaves of the trees do not move there is no wind

there is a bunch of other pollution that has increased as the number of diesel has increased

[gildas]

Your message is not very clear! What do you mean ?

Yours suggests that particles are diluted in water ...

Besides, those who make Gillier Pantone notice much less polluted gases, no doubt that water plays a role in fixing particles.

... while they are not created because carbon combines with the oxygen in the water.

1) H2 creation reaction with carbon soot from unburnt with water: C + H20O + heat = CO + H2

Consequence: very good improvement in combustion, on the one hand because we reduce the soot in the cycle, on the other hand thanks to the H2 created which burns extremely well!

Developed in detail here: https://www.econologie.com/forums/dopage-mot ... t4883.html

https://www.econologie.com/forums/post202958.html#202958

[sen-no-sen]

that's the doubt

there is a correlation between these health problems and the increase in diesel ... but a correlation is not proof
confusing corelation and cause I say that it is the leaves of the trees that make the wind move ... the proof when the leaves of the trees do not move there is no wind

You are not making us fallacious there?

there is a bunch of other pollution that has increased as the number of diesel has increased

Ah yes and which one?

[Janic]

chatelot hello

there is a correlation between these health problems and the increase in diesel ... but a correlation is not proof

That's right! It's called a high probability, but what is evidence in general? asbestos has long been considered a correlation but not proof until ... AIDS as well, etc ...

there is a bunch of other pollution that has increased as the number of diesel has increased

This is still correct! The analysis of tissues with today's sophisticated devices makes it possible to quantify the pollutants absorbed. It goes without saying that in a heavy smoker, the presence of numerous pollutants will make the analysis more delicate, but in a child with "new" lungs the analysis is more characteristic.

[chatelot16]

for asbestos the danger had been known for a long time: when there are asbestos fibers in the lungs there is no possible cause

for diesel there is possible confusion with multiple other source of particles: heating, industry, tire and road wear, and even gasoline engine which I am not convinced that they do not make particles at all

attention I do not deny the danger of the diese, I just ask for more precise information

and in the order of importance of reduction of engine pollution I put forward the reduction of NO2 whose danger is obvious

and the water and limestone purification system is effective especially for NO2, and I hope it will be also for particles