New cars ‘are worse for the environment’
When it comes to pollution we have to pick our poison
Consumer Editor and Transport Correspondent
NEW cars do more harm to the planet than older models, shocking tests have revealed.
A Which? probe found new petrol, diesel and hybrid motors produce 7% more carbon dioxide than equivalent models made three years ago.
It is a dramatic reversal after 17 years of declining CO2 emissions.
According to the consumer watchdog’s tests, family sized petrol-hybrids, seen as the greener option for many, were the worst with a 31.7% increase.
Small petrol cars saw an average rise of 11.2%, while the increase in medium-sized petrol SUVS was 20.4%.
As well as lab tests, the cars were driven on motorways with the air con on and 200kg of gear in the boot.
Which? stopped short of naming and shaming all the cars in its test. But it said the Chevrolet Camaro 6.2 litre V8 and Honda CR-V 1.5 litre turbo petrol were among the worst.
While CO2 rocketed it also found levels of nitrogen oxide (NOX), which causes deadly lung damage plunged.
Diesel cars saw an 85% decline, with drops ranging from 61-26% in health because from these very same petrol-hybrids, small petrol cars and cars, we are seeing a rise in CO2.” medium-sized SUVS. Bulkier vehicles and, ironically,
Which? researcher Adrian Porter emissions reducing technology, could said: “We have seen a dramatic be to blame, he added. decrease in NOX and that’s brilliant. Which? admitted its methods were “However, it does seem to have “tougher” than those used by the
planet’s20%industry. come at the expense of the And
IT’S no surprise that CO2 emissions have risen while NOX emissions have fallen. This is something that we’ve known about for decades.
In the early 1990s when three-way catalytic converters were introduced to cut pollutants like NOX, CO2 outputs rose.
That’s because more fuel had to be burnt to enable the catalytic converter to work and fuel consumption is directly related to CO2 emissions: burn more fuel and the engine produces more CO2.
It’s the same story today because for modern emission-reduction systems to work well extra fuel has to be burnt.
The question is, do we want to save lives in cities by reducing toxic gases like NOX or do we concentrate on cutting
Mike Hawes, from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders insisted: “Only the official, Europewide test can be relied upon to accurately compare vehicles.” Honda said its cars passed the official tests.
Rise in carbon dioxide emissions in medium sized petrol SUVS
The Honda CR-V
CO2, which isn’t poisonous to humans but is damaging the planet?
Using percentages in reports is rather misleading because while an 85% reduction in toxic emissions sounds extremely impressive, it doesn’t tell you how bad the car was in first place.
In other words a smaller improvement in a car that was already very clean may actually better for the environment.
Where the report is bang on is the effect of weight. The heavier the car the more fuel it will use.
Manufacturers have made big efforts to reduce bulk with new processes and the clever use of materials, while still fitting equipment that we’ve got used to.
Unfortunately, while making strides in reducing weight they’ve also been making cars taller and wider and that increases drag and thereby fuel consumption.