WHO says diesel exhaust does cause cancer
- Thread starter Stephen_G
- Start date
- Status
Not since I worked in the service stations and they brought in the rule that under 12s could not fill cars, as their faces were too close to the benzene fumes, and self serve was designed to spread the exposure over the populace rather than the driveway service attendants who were pumping gas 8 hours a day.
JHZR2
Staff member
Doesn't really tell us anything we know, and this sounds like non-pm filtered applications like off-road.
Lots of folks think they are above emissions protection. Diesel PFs some see as a liability for reliability, maybe so, but one would imagine that the benefits (pollution, reliability of it clogging) can still be outweighed by fuel savings and power train longevity.
For this to be highly beneficial, they should have provided insight into the particle size distribution of spots from the target industries versus late model clean diesel soots versus gasoline soots.
Lots of folks think they are above emissions protection. Diesel PFs some see as a liability for reliability, maybe so, but one would imagine that the benefits (pollution, reliability of it clogging) can still be outweighed by fuel savings and power train longevity.
For this to be highly beneficial, they should have provided insight into the particle size distribution of spots from the target industries versus late model clean diesel soots versus gasoline soots.
Quote:
and is anyone really suprised?
Nothing the BBC publishes would surprise me.
and is anyone really suprised?
Nothing the BBC publishes would surprise me.
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
I do remember when I drove a big rig that the old guys would die as soon as they got to retirement age. We always said it was diesel and the dust from the loading docks. Luckily I don't have to do that anymore.
If they were drivers, it was more likely from poor diet and lack of exercise.
I do remember when I drove a big rig that the old guys would die as soon as they got to retirement age. We always said it was diesel and the dust from the loading docks. Luckily I don't have to do that anymore.
If they were drivers, it was more likely from poor diet and lack of exercise.
Originally Posted By: spasm3
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
I do remember when I drove a big rig that the old guys would die as soon as they got to retirement age. We always said it was diesel and the dust from the loading docks. Luckily I don't have to do that anymore.
If they were drivers, it was more likely from poor diet and lack of exercise.
These were local drivers at home every night that loaded and unloaded trucks all day. I am sure some were out of shape but they did do physical labor. Instead of 600 miles a day like OTR drivers they were 150 miles a day in the city.
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
I do remember when I drove a big rig that the old guys would die as soon as they got to retirement age. We always said it was diesel and the dust from the loading docks. Luckily I don't have to do that anymore.
If they were drivers, it was more likely from poor diet and lack of exercise.
These were local drivers at home every night that loaded and unloaded trucks all day. I am sure some were out of shape but they did do physical labor. Instead of 600 miles a day like OTR drivers they were 150 miles a day in the city.
I thought this was already common knowledge. Around here it's a law that school buses cannot idle while sitting in front of the school because of the exhaust fumes. It's been a law for the last 10 years.
No surprise here.
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
I do remember when I drove a big rig that the old guys would die as soon as they got to retirement age. We always said it was diesel and the dust from the loading docks. Luckily I don't have to do that anymore.
I'm sure that diesel particulates aren't a good thing to breathe. My problem with diesel particulate filters is that they take away so many of the reasons to buy a diesel in the first place. They kill the economy since you have to waste fuel to run the regeneration cycle, for example. And I've now seen some trucks dump out a lot more smoke when a regen cycle kicks in than a non-DPF truck does at its worst. Once the technology matures, I'm sure they'll be less of a nuisance.
I do remember when I drove a big rig that the old guys would die as soon as they got to retirement age. We always said it was diesel and the dust from the loading docks. Luckily I don't have to do that anymore.
I'm sure that diesel particulates aren't a good thing to breathe. My problem with diesel particulate filters is that they take away so many of the reasons to buy a diesel in the first place. They kill the economy since you have to waste fuel to run the regeneration cycle, for example. And I've now seen some trucks dump out a lot more smoke when a regen cycle kicks in than a non-DPF truck does at its worst. Once the technology matures, I'm sure they'll be less of a nuisance.
Yup, my diesels are definitely putting out more particulates than the 18 diesel trains running through my neighborhood daily, and the numerous coal-fired power plants spewing 24/7/365 all up & down the Ohio Valley. Good thing we have the EPA around to crack down-at least on the little guy who can't afford the lawyers and lobbyists to defend themselves! Not surprised it causes cancer, though.
No surprises here. But what does not cause cancer?
Living is the #1 cause of cancer - wanna know the cure?
I wonder, does using biodiesel, or a bioblend reduce the risk?
Also, for modern diesels i think that the 2010s is the 1970s for them, like when catalytic converters were first brought online for cars, there was a loss of power and mpg due to having to run so clean, but within 10 years the tech caught up, we went from carb to fuel injection for example, used computers to allow higher compression ratios on lower octane fuel, etc.
Time will bring the performance back to what it was, as will the mpg.
Also, for modern diesels i think that the 2010s is the 1970s for them, like when catalytic converters were first brought online for cars, there was a loss of power and mpg due to having to run so clean, but within 10 years the tech caught up, we went from carb to fuel injection for example, used computers to allow higher compression ratios on lower octane fuel, etc.
Time will bring the performance back to what it was, as will the mpg.
MolaKule
Staff member
Quote:
Dr Kurt Straif, also from IARC, said: "For most of the carcinogens when there is high exposure the risk is higher, when there is lower exposure the risk is lower."
There have been considerable efforts to clean up diesel exhausts. Lower sulphur fuel and engines which burn the fuel more efficiently are now in use.
The UK Department of Health said: "We will carefully consider this report. Air pollutants are a significant public health concern, we are looking at this issue as part of our plans to improve public health."
But director of cancer information Dr Lesley Walker said the overall number of lung cancers caused by diesel fumes was "likely to be a fraction of those caused by smoking tobacco".
And what is this study based on? Humans, lab rats?
What concentrations?
For me, this is one of those WHOville type statements that is too general and sweeping.
Dr Kurt Straif, also from IARC, said: "For most of the carcinogens when there is high exposure the risk is higher, when there is lower exposure the risk is lower."
There have been considerable efforts to clean up diesel exhausts. Lower sulphur fuel and engines which burn the fuel more efficiently are now in use.
The UK Department of Health said: "We will carefully consider this report. Air pollutants are a significant public health concern, we are looking at this issue as part of our plans to improve public health."
But director of cancer information Dr Lesley Walker said the overall number of lung cancers caused by diesel fumes was "likely to be a fraction of those caused by smoking tobacco".
And what is this study based on? Humans, lab rats?
What concentrations?
For me, this is one of those WHOville type statements that is too general and sweeping.
Last edited:
Where I live one still sees a fair number of the now-defunct Crown school buses (a brand name -- photo link below) that were mass-produced in the 1960s and 1970s. The problem with them is durability. As in TOO MUCH durability. I used to be a school bus driver in college, and those old Crowns are like giant cockroaches – they’re indestructible and just refuse to die. That's the good news. That bad news is that their old, inefficient, smoking (as opposed to "smokeless") diesel engines go along for the ride with the rest of the bus, belching out smoke decade after decade. I always thought that was an interesting twist in the overall "diesel emissions" topic -- how to kill off a diesel engine in a mass-produced vehicle that just won't die.
http://www.rapidtransit-press.com/southwind17-05-01-09aan.jpg
Other than that, I see this as similar to smoking on planes. If a state-of-the-art diesel engine is relatively “smokeless” and engineered to be low-polluting, that’s fine and good. For any diesel other than that, one no longer has any “right” to spew out diesel exhaust and soot like it was still 1970. Like smoking on planes, that time has passed – our lungs trump the black cloud routinely seen spewing out a Crown bus.
http://www.rapidtransit-press.com/southwind17-05-01-09aan.jpg
Other than that, I see this as similar to smoking on planes. If a state-of-the-art diesel engine is relatively “smokeless” and engineered to be low-polluting, that’s fine and good. For any diesel other than that, one no longer has any “right” to spew out diesel exhaust and soot like it was still 1970. Like smoking on planes, that time has passed – our lungs trump the black cloud routinely seen spewing out a Crown bus.
the solution to these old engines is a diesel cat converter retrofit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalytic_converter#For_diesel_engines
http://ect.jmcatalysts.com/site.asp?siteid=836&pageid=906&furtherid=908
even the old engines can be made relatively clean
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalytic_converter#For_diesel_engines
http://ect.jmcatalysts.com/site.asp?siteid=836&pageid=906&furtherid=908
even the old engines can be made relatively clean
sort of. To install the particulate filter, engine must run ad new according to three makers we looked at. Otherwise it would plug too quickly and require more regen cycles.. So, added to the cost of an expensive item is engine rebuild. Due to how new fuel systems operate, injectors also fail at a higher rate and sooner. New injectors for a Dodge/Cummins are going for $880 each for the HEUI's where I can do all 6 of mine for close to that cost.
regards,
Mike
regards,
Mike
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
Dr Kurt Straif, also from IARC, said: "For most of the carcinogens when there is high exposure the risk is higher, when there is lower exposure the risk is lower."
There have been considerable efforts to clean up diesel exhausts. Lower sulphur fuel and engines which burn the fuel more efficiently are now in use.
The UK Department of Health said: "We will carefully consider this report. Air pollutants are a significant public health concern, we are looking at this issue as part of our plans to improve public health."
But director of cancer information Dr Lesley Walker said the overall number of lung cancers caused by diesel fumes was "likely to be a fraction of those caused by smoking tobacco".
And what is this study based on? Humans, lab rats?
What concentrations?
For me, this is one of those WHOville type statements that is too general and sweeping.
This was on the internet, They couldn't say it if it wasn't true.,,
Quote:
Dr Kurt Straif, also from IARC, said: "For most of the carcinogens when there is high exposure the risk is higher, when there is lower exposure the risk is lower."
There have been considerable efforts to clean up diesel exhausts. Lower sulphur fuel and engines which burn the fuel more efficiently are now in use.
The UK Department of Health said: "We will carefully consider this report. Air pollutants are a significant public health concern, we are looking at this issue as part of our plans to improve public health."
But director of cancer information Dr Lesley Walker said the overall number of lung cancers caused by diesel fumes was "likely to be a fraction of those caused by smoking tobacco".
And what is this study based on? Humans, lab rats?
What concentrations?
For me, this is one of those WHOville type statements that is too general and sweeping.
This was on the internet, They couldn't say it if it wasn't true.,,
- Status
Similar threads
