Our cars - All Comments

re: Carbon dioxide and the law of averages

404notfound — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:51:32 GMT

I never said global warming is a myth, I said the idea that cars are warming the earth is a myth. First of all, you have to do exactly that - decide whether the world is warming or not. Compared to when? If you take the last 30 years www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures you'll see that we're pretty much back to where we started from anyway. Bet you won't hear that on the BBC! This is an indisputable fact based on the IPCC's very own measurements of temperature. So what if we compare the last 2,000 years? www.drroyspencer.com/.../2000-years-of-global-temperatures Oh dear, again, back to where we were 1,200 years ago - or rather not as warm as then even. But what if you ignore the fact that the last peak in temperature was eleven years ago (yes, really) and say that the past 11 years is just a cooling blip? Ok then, so let's go with that. Let's say that we've been warming, and forget a time frame to compare it to (don't know why you'd want to do that, but let's go with it). The amount of warming caused by CO2 (if you accept that it does) is 37.25% (according to the IPCC). Cars are responsible for 6.75% of global CO2 emissions, so the amount of warming that could possibly be attributed to cars is 2.5%. However, since those figures are heavily biased with no time frame, no allowance for the urban heat island effect, no negative feedback from CO2 in the atmosphere and subject to a wide error margin, then it can be said with an excellent degree of probability that cars contribute nothing to warming.

It must be remembered that you first of all have to choose a time frame in which you will measure the Earth's temperature. That's difficult enough. Then you have to say that any warming within that time frame IS being caused by man-made emissions of gases. Again, fraught with diificulty as we don't understand climate science - as it is THE most chaotic science. Then you have to believe that these gases will cause warming - not cooling (with negative feedbacks). Then you have to ignore possible natural factors (like the Sun). When you've done all that and still believe that we are warming the planet, then you come down to cars themselves as a contributor - which is 2.5%. As that figure is so small and subject to a large error margin THEN you can say that cars have no effect on warming. And that statement carries more probability than the statement that they do. You won't hear the Greens tell you this because they don't want people to know it. You won't hear the government tell you this because they want to tax you on it. You won't hear anyone on the BBC tell you this because their journalists are grossly ignorant. You won't hear scientists tell you this because thousands of them are getting massive grants to say the opposite, and their jobs depend on it. Some scientists WILL admit this but they are soon berated by those ignorant of what they're saying.

ALL the figures and stats are available on the internet for free - you just have to look.

re: Carbon dioxide and the law of averages

The Fop — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:06:36 GMT

Global warming is a myth? And there are figures to PROVE it? I'd be interested to see them, as many would disagree. Where is this available?

re: Carbon dioxide and the law of averages

Uncle Mellow — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 22:37:54 GMT

I so agree about modern art.

re: Carbon dioxide and the law of averages

sexybeast54 — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:33:15 GMT

I'll try that line at the post office next time I need to taxt my car

re: Carbon dioxide and the law of averages

404notfound — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:14:34 GMT

I don't care what the CO2 figure is. Cars add nothing to global warming anyway. It's a myth that will one day be admitted. And yes, I do have the figures to prove it. There's never been so much carp, as the idea that cars are warming the world - apart from modern art, that is.

re: Carbon dioxide and the law of averages

beachland2 — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:42:34 GMT

or the turn on the millennium even.

re: Carbon dioxide and the law of averages

Uncle Mellow — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:28:26 GMT

Er - generally for older vehicles there are no published figures. They only really started this at the turn of the century, and the 20th century is king in my house.

re: Carbon dioxide and the law of averages

TegTypeR — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:05:50 GMT

I have three cars in my own personal fleet. Just done the sums and that works out at an average of 240g/km. Ooof!

As a magazine you are in the privileged position of having a new fleet. I wonder what other readers who run older vehicles averages are?

re: Peugeot 309: the story so far

Pugracer — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:52:22 GMT

Sounds like you are having fun. I am trying to race a 309GTI in the BARC-SE Tin-Top series at Brands Hatch and have realised that as it is not a common race car, there are a limited number of suppliers and tuners. Any thoughts on where I can get GRP panels eg for bonnet, boot and rear doors (mine is obviously the 4 door GTI). Having said that it is a great track day car and over the months I intend to improve it. Next thing is probably to fin perspex windows if available. Anyhow would like to keep in touch with any 309GTI developers or competitors.

All the best

re: Mini JCW – what a hoot!

akendal9 — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 06:07:21 GMT

You mention misting windows in the rain, but not the noisy and ineffective wipers. I don't get the misting, but after 3 months of ownership the wipers had to go. I have now fitted a pair of Bosch Aero's - problem solved. Don't bother with online stores, just £18 for a pair of 18"ers from German & Swedish.

re: The missing Jag diesel

W124 — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 21:50:47 GMT

I hate it when that happens.

re: The missing Jag diesel

W124 — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 21:50:08 GMT

That's useful to know. I wonder if Jaguar could get the supply of engines they would need given that Landrover do also. Perhaps there is a bit of tension between the two companies for reasons like this. The PSA unit sounds ideal and, if reworked as you say, might also be ideal for the XJ which is pretty light - that would be a bold, clever move in Europe. I think the key to this is the understanding that this problem needs to be looked at in terms of sales. The logic, in engineering terms, is irrelevant.

I was wondering also about the X-Type. Could Jaguar just re-skin and re-engineer it as they did the S-Type to make the XF? The last generation Mondeo chassis is surely a better place to start than an old US saloon.

re: The missing Jag diesel

W124 — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 21:49:07 GMT

re: The missing Jag diesel

Chips — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:34:22 GMT

The 2.2 diesel in the X-type is the Ford Puma unit and it's ancient and barely clinging on to EU4. Ford don't use the Puma in any of their current cars anymore - just the vans.

The 2.2 in the Freelander is the PSA DW12 unit and is close to state of the art for a 4 cylinder diesel. It's the engine that's just gone in the new 2.2 Mondeo and it's used in various PSA applications as well. In a saloon car (i.e, not a Freelander), it's reasonably clean, punchy and refined. The new stop/start version of the Freelander produces 174g/km and does 42.2mpg. With similar technology and the updated DW12 that is on the way - Jaguar could easily achieve 180 + bhp, 45 mpg and low carbons (maybe not 520d low, but close).

re: The missing Jag diesel

Roofer — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 22:33:36 GMT

If the new 3.0d does as it says on the tin, i may swap my 335d for one.

BMW aftercare has finally done for me.