Dirty Diesels and the NZ PR campaign Page 1 / 3

serf407, Dec 5, 10:59am
Is there a concerted pr campaign via NZ media against fossil fuel utilising vehicles?

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/432141/nz-risks-being-dumping-ground-for-dirty-diesels-carmaker-warns There are still systems being developed to improve diesel combustion (probably not a good exmaple - dynacert -canada)
https://youtu.be/pKW6_4DvbR8 (4 minutes)
The question to ask imo. Will NZ become a dumping ground for early generation faux EV vehicles, that has obsolete, unobtainable replacement batteries and parts?

Will this be the time to purchase a towing company to 'rescue' evs that have been outranged by their owners etc?

Like the media have terms like gas guzzling dirty diesels etc. Should there be terms like environment exploiting, electricity wasting, lithium powered complex techo-garbage BEVs etc?
Lithium mining summary 12 mins https://youtu.be/pGKK1s-HDDI

intrade, Dec 5, 11:07am
The issue is transport is 8% global pollution. if no fuel would be used for transport tomorrow we would still have 92% of the global pollution .
So why target the 8% well because the people who work can be milked this way. the biggest polluters dont pay no taxes to start with.
So basically we need world war 3 to end this B$

gazzat22, Dec 5, 11:59am
Intrade i totally agree . the biggest "pushers" for EV,s and or PHEV,s are those like the CEO of Toyota who manufacture them. Successive Governments have run away at any suggestion of Emission Testing by machines being compulsory for all vehicles at WOF/COF testing.From memory it was trialled a few years ago but the machines were deemed "Not Cost Effective" which is politician and business talk for too costly for the return aka Theres no or not enough profit in it.

tweake, Dec 5, 12:39pm
ah yes the old tax the poor so the rich can drive ev's.

as far as us being a "dumping ground" we already are and i say bring it on. dumping "dirty" vehicles here, which are still cleaner than what most kiwis drive, is a good thing as they will be very cheap. that will mean even poor people will be able to get later model safety features and fuel economy.
and it will still be "green" as they would be replacing a lot of 30 year old vehicles that are high polluters.

if they tax high polluting vehicles then people will simply hang onto their old high polluting vehicles and it makes the situation worse, except for the rich who can get cheaper new vehicles.

serf407, Dec 5, 12:58pm
Atlis battery alleged demonstration, showing a 9 minute cell recharge from empty. November 2020
Has this been independently verified?
I hope these guys don't go the same way as Faraday Future.

bill-robinson, Dec 5, 1:10pm
all the BS about EV.s but no one mentions ET.s, elecy trucks.probably because the battery weight will exceed the load capacity. just imagine all the truck stops between wellington and jaffaville. the number of trucks will double. let the brain cells bump together and remember rail.

tweake, Dec 5, 1:24pm
not to mention our biggest selling new vehicles are utes which will not be replaced by cars anytime soon.

tygertung, Dec 5, 1:27pm
If you are going in between Wellington and Auckland, just bung the freight on a train. There would be a train, surely!

itsafamilything, Dec 5, 1:38pm
Think that if you want to but due to the ever increasing complexity and throwaway, disposable nature of the modern vehicle, suggesting modern garbage as being suitable for the financially challenged is a pipe dream! They are and will increasingly become endless money pits! Just watch it play out and see.

itsafamilything, Dec 5, 1:40pm
I have always understood that slow charge is best for the battery and longevity. Does that still stand?

tweake, Dec 5, 2:13pm
the answer to that is in what you said, throwaway.
dirt cheap cars that are cheaper to throw away than repair and they are cheap because there is so many dumped here from other countries. people buy them and sell off their old cars cheap.
no different to when jap imports started to flood in.

the problem of old highly technical expensive to fix cars is already here, its not a new problem. many older vehicles have either gone up in price or worth more as parts so they get stripped.

tweake, Dec 5, 2:24pm
that test looks bogus.
their cell is big, lots more mass and is cooled (pump). the comparison cells are small and no cooling. you can easily crank up the charge rate up if you have proper cooling and temp monitoring. even battery drills do that.

tweake, Dec 5, 2:27pm
yes, but with better cooling and monitoring you can push them harder.
my older drill is handy man range with no temp monitoring. takes over an hour to charge. my new drill is the pro range which uses an onboard battery chip and it charges in half the time.

bigfatmat1, Dec 6, 12:49pm
fast charging is fine as long as there is good thermal management. Its the heat that damages batteries vehicles like leafs have 4 temp sensors for 96 cells and no cooling

s_nz, Dec 6, 4:29pm
Regarding new tech from diesel combustion, many (most?) automakers are pulling their money out of diesel R&D. Some i.e. Mercedes have canceled it completly, so will continue running current generation tech until they move away from the fuel. Others like toyota had said (way back in 2017) that they are not launching a new model with a diesel power-train in Europe. First of the block without a diesel offering by them was the C-HR.

I don't think people here realize how quickly the tide has turned on diesel in Europe. There was a massive move to diesel as the engines are more efficient, and hence make less CO2, and are better for avoiding climate change. Sadly in the real world it turned out that the emissions from such cars were really bad for local air quality.

s_nz, Dec 6, 4:46pm
Following on from the above.

These days in the likes of the UK, diesel vehicles are getting banned from many town centers. You here stories of people with a 2016 1.5L diesel car in the household that can no longer take that car into the town center. These vehicles are going to depreciate steeply, and people won't be buying any brand new diesels cars in that area.

Regarding NZ being a dumping ground for Faux EV's, what do you consider a faux EV? - Non plug in hybrids? - Plug in hybrids? The formour are extremly common, and especially the toyota models (excl 1st gen prius and eairly estima) are highly reliable. They are so popular in taxi duty that an active aftermarket exists to look after them (in addition to the dealership network). In terms of plug in hybrids, (and pure EV's for that matter), these didn't really become a thing until 2011, so they are hardly obsolete.

It is a valid criticism that japan is dumping their old tired PHEV's and EV's on us, and we would be better off with new ones, but the counterpoint is that it means we have a healthy used marketplace for cheap PHEV and EV motoring.

You are welcome to purchase a towing company to rescue flat battery EV's, but be aware that most owners are well aware of their cars range, and are likely to plan charge stops etc (or take another vehicle) if they are traveling in excess of their EV's remaining range.

With regards to the derogatory EV terms, Most you list are false.

The EECA commisiones a Life cycle analysis on EV's and found them environmentally better than competing vehicles:


As such I consider EV's a great use of our 80% renewable energy. Not sure where you get the idea EV's are complex from, they are much similar than a comparable modern combustion engines car. Not that it matters given both are sufficiently reliable.

s_nz, Dec 6, 5:07pm
Should be noted that the biggest bang for buck to clean our vehicle fleet from an air quality point of view would be having exhaust gas analyzers (Tailpipe sniffers) at WOF time.

A very small portion of vehicles are grossly emitting, and by requiring they be fixed or removed from the fleet, we could have substantial air quality gains at relitively little cost.

I think it was going to add under $4 to the cost of a WOF, but the politicians decided not to go ahead with it.

lythande1, Dec 6, 5:47pm
By the govt.

Bugger Lithium and the whole battery nonsense. I could list the reasons against but it's like trying to talk to the religious.

bitsnpieces2020, Dec 6, 5:49pm
EV production is pathetic. Tesla have just made their 1 millionth car this year. This is after starting in 2008.

By comparison 110 years ago Henry Ford built 15 million model T's in 20 years.

tweake, Dec 6, 6:01pm
the catch here is what do you define "grossly emitting" as?
that can easily become a moving goal post.
nz still has a lot of older vehicles which are well worn which probably would fail. that would make a big impact to poorer people.
probably make very little difference to the rich who are already driving late model low mileage vehicles.
once again the poor pay the price for rich mans ideals.

gph1961, Dec 6, 7:58pm
then let them eat cake

s_nz, Dec 6, 9:10pm
Any test would have to be done in a repeatable way, and the thresholds would need to be clearly defined to avoid the shifting bar you speak of. Typically the bar would be pegged relative to the original emissions standards at time of first registration, such that a 1990 car would be allowed to emit more than a 2010 car.

NZ is somewhat luck that being a long windy, country, that air quality is a lesser issue than other places in the world.

I used the term because it was the term used by NIWA when they did research in the area in 2003. I couldn't find more recent research, I think the issue has improved a lot since then, but hasn't gone away.

From that research I quote:

"The gross emitters contribute far more than their share of pollution. They should be targeted. If you fixed up that 10 per cent of the worse emitters, half the city's worst pollution would be fixed."


You are correct that there would be a regressive impact of having people fix excessively polluting cars. Likely this is why the various politicians failed to act on the 2003 research.

While i agree that the policy would be regressive, I think a decent chunk of grossly emitting vehicles aren't the cheap vehicles typically driven by the poor. I think they fall into a few categories:

- Cars that are broken and the owner dosn't know, or care to fix it. There was a fairly modem BMW 7 series that smoked badly in my area that I think falls into this catogory.
- Cars that have been modified in a way that increases their emissions.
- Commercial vehicles, especially van's and light trucks. I remember seeing one with the brand of a well known electronic retailer on the back of it laying down a thick cloud of smoke. Not really any regressive impact here.
- Old but valuable diesel 4x4's such as Patrols & Land-cruiser's. I respect that these vehicles are desirable and collectible, but they are worth $10k+, and I don't think the money to maintain the vehicle to run cleanly would bring hardship to somebody that owns a $10k vehicle. (and if it did, they could sell it and get a corolla / swift / tidda at a third the price).
- This only really leave's eairly 90's sedans that are blowing blue smoke. Time for major maintenance or replacement with a cheap ex-japan car.

Only the last bracket is going to have a big impact on the poor. Potentially we could exempt vehicles outside of the big cities (where air quality is less of an issue) as to avoid impact on those some of the most improvised.

There are also other ways to support those in poverty with transport that I feel would be more effective than continuing to allow the use of excessively polluting vehicles.

apollo11, Dec 6, 9:34pm
You will be able to validate your comparison in another eight years, until then it's worthless.

s_nz, Dec 6, 9:59pm
This PR campaign is driven by the auto industry, not the government. It is the auto industry encouraging the government to add a feebate scheme.

Successive government here has been relatively weak on vehicle emissions, and on EV promotion. Other than a fairly small amount of money in the contestable fund for low emission vehicle related projects, the previous government didn't really pass any pro EV policy. The soon to expire RUC exemption dates back to when national was in power.

No idea what you have against lithem, but I think the independent and peer reviewed life cycle assessment that was commissioned by the EECA is a reasonable basis for my opinion.


s_nz, Dec 6, 10:09pm
Will be interesting to see how the comparison pan's out in goes in coming years. I don't think it is important that a new automaker beats fords first 20 years, but I think it is a possibility.

Tesla's most recent quarters production was 145,000, but I don't think their china plant was close to full production than. Germany plant should open some time next year, and production issues with the model Y should get resolved. Production lines for the Semi, Cybertruck & new roaster should all ramp up in the next four or so years.

Share this thread

Buy me a coffee :)Buy me a coffee :)