By on May 17, 2017

traffic (Michael Gil/Flickr)

Earlier today, we mentioned Volvo was preparing to dump its diesel-burning engines because the EU is aggressively pursuing anti-diesel legislation. While it’s easy to accuse Europe of being fraught with fringe environmentalists, the truth is that the continent spent decades avoiding restrictions on diesel-burning passenger vehicles, sold loads of them, and has suddenly found itself with its green pants around its ankles.

In addition to hazy skies, air pollution isn’t exactly great for your health. A recent study published in Nature found diesel engines produced 5 million more tons of nitrogen oxide than previously estimated for 2015. The research focused on vehicles in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Korea and the United States and uncovered that we’ve grossly overestimated the amount of good being done by our global regulatory efforts. Companies are practically guaranteed to be falsifying testing results while others are openly incapable of reaching government-enforced guidelines.

Who cares? It’s not like anyone is dying, right? Well, not exactly.

Keen to adhere some urgency to the findings, the researches estimated the added 5 million tons of NOx contributed to about 38,000 more premature deaths in 2015 than previous estimates.

Thanks to a lower population density and overall higher quality of air, only about 1,100 of those deaths were from North America. Meanwhile, China, India and the European Union took the brunt of the representative corpses. The EU found itself with a disproportionately large number of NOx related health issues compared to some more populous regions. The same is true when you break it down into countries. The European Environment Agency surmises the United Kingdom actually sees a few thousand more diesel emission-related deaths than Germany each year, despite possessing a significantly smaller population. Italy, which is even smaller than the UK, has almost twice the death-rate of Deutschland.

Hans Bruyninckx, the EEA’s executive director, stated in 2016: “Emission reductions have led to improvements in air quality in Europe, but not enough to avoid unacceptable damage to human health and the environment.”

The authors of the Nature study used real-world analysis to determine “nearly one-third of on-road heavy-duty diesel vehicle emissions and over half of on-road light-duty diesel vehicle emissions are in excess of certification limits.”

The researchers insist adopting and enforcing next-generation standards, specifically something more aggressive than Euro 6, could virtually eliminate diesel-related NOx emissions in these at-risk regions. While it’s difficult to quantify pollution specific fatalities — even though that’s what a good portion of the study is devoted to — its findings estimate 174,000 premature deaths could be prevented in 2040 by applying stringent standards to heavier-duty vehicles and shifting passenger cars away from diesel entirely.

Some might assume if automakers can’t best the current emissions standards without cutting corners today, there’s no way they’ll be able meet the more rigorous guidelines of tomorrow. However, the authors cited recent tests that proved “real-world NOx emissions in line with certification limits are technically achievable.”

Ray Minjares, from the U.S. International Council on Clean Transportation, was consulted as part of the research team.

“Manufacturers know how to make their cars clean and they are actively choosing not to,” he stated. “The question for the public is: are we comfortable with that situation? Why are manufacturers who sell vehicles in Europe choosing to provide Europe with dirtier versions of the cars they sell in the U.S.?”

[Image: Michael Gil/Flickr (CC BY 2.0)]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

95 Comments on “Study Suggests Diesel Cars Killed 38,000 Extra People Without Even Hitting Them...”


  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    2017 is turning out to be a banner year for fiction.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Sounds like you’re doubting the veracity of this study?

      I’m no tree hugger, but it’s not a stretch to statistically link a variable such as NOx to lifespan, particularly for at-risk people. This sort of math is done with other risk factors, such as smoking, diet, age (young drivers, for instance), vehicle safety devices, and so on.

      The trick is to separate correlation from causality, which is what statisticians do for a living. So if lung-related deaths are occurring in NYC at a much higher rate than in Fiji, it’s probably not due to eating hamburgers.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        I personally don’t doubt the hazard. But a journalist can’t use numbers like that and then say the “supposed” data says those numbers are (what they are), and that the same supposed next generation standards will correlate to ‘x’ number fewer deaths by the year ‘x’. The “journalist” is writing to people that accept anything as fact, show me data, show me the method you used to gather the data and how you calculated your results.

        Instead of trying to get the masses to protest and demand stricter regulations, show me how euro 6 was better than euro 5; and how euro 5 decreased the number of deaths from euro 4. Give the readers data that points to this.

        I don’t need to read articles written by activists pretending to be journalists.

        • 0 avatar
          WheelMcCoy

          “The “journalist” is writing to people that accept anything as fact, show me data, show me the method you used to gather the data and how you calculated your results.”

          The “journalist” included a link to Nature, which would show you the data and methodology. It will cost you $32 though to get the entire text of the study.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Lets say that the Nature article uses flawless data methods, why do I want to read someone else’s interpretation of the Nature data? Unless they include data (rather than taking snippets of random facts) their article isn’t going to prove useful when the sourced article will contain the facts without the fluff.

            Unless – that is, they are building on the data from their source. So where do we think they are adding onto the article? Every numerical piece of data presented seems to be from Nature. The point I’m trying to make is that the article reeks of activism. The data is used sparingly to justify their writing.

            We all know Europe royally screwed up by allowing the Diesel fascination to expand unabated, but there are better ways of presenting this issue.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “We all know Europe royally screwed up by allowing the Diesel fascination to expand unabated”

            I agree, and now the Europeans are getting their AHA! moment.

            Gasoline is still the best all-around fuel.

          • 0 avatar
            golden2husky

            ….Gasoline is still the best all-around fuel…

            Actually, yes when talking about motor fuel for vehicles. Making diesels clean and refined is not really worth the effort. Not really sure it is a win in reducing national consumption either. All of those mileage gains in the car are offset at the well since there is almost twice the yield of gasoline per barrel of crude compared to diesel. Perhaps the diesel is a natural byproduct of refining (don’t know) and we get it anyway but better to leave it for big rigs, stationary generators, and heating oil.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Gasoline takes more stages of refinement than diesel, but the high 22.5-to-1 compression ratio for diesel ignition is what adds to diesel’s woes.

            I’m a HUGE fan of diesel, as long as it is used in Big Rigs, like 18-wheeler tractors, earth movers, etc.

            Never cared much for tiny diesels.

            Smallest diesel I ever owned in a vehicle was a 1996 Cummins RAM, bought used in Grand Junction, CO.

            And that Cummins still works today, pumping water from a well for a potato farm in Idaho, long after the RAM has been sent to the crusher and recycled.

        • 0 avatar
          redapple

          And the snarky tone.

    • 0 avatar
      VW4motion

      Yes, fiction for people that thrive in alt news. Unfortunately science is not alt news, so those that don’t believe in science are essentially proving that natural selection does exist for those that are uneducated.

    • 0 avatar
      addm

      Nature has taken time to study, compile data and did some statistics.
      You easily dismissing it as being fabricated don’t do justice to their effort.
      If you want to refute their study, you have to put in your effot

  • avatar
    Hummer

    I don’t want to downplay the harm of NOX on human health, because it is a big threat. But the entire last paragraph is an idiot trap, designed to create outrage among those who are unable to rationally work through a problem.

    Again issues clearly exist but shock articles make people numb to these and other problems. While “38,000 more people than ‘previously’ estimated” may have died, they may also have died from ‘x’.

    Again I don’t want to downplay (just to be clear to those same people described above) the effects of NOX – and I truly believe these particulates have major irreparable effects on animals including humans… but if it’s 38,000 more than previously estimated what does that bring the total to? 38,001? 138,000? Put some science behind this article don’t try to shock people with random incomplete evidence to your point. And how many people have the cause of death on their death certificate say NOX emissions?

    • 0 avatar
      DarronS

      Hummer, you just spent three paragraphs downplaying the harm NOX emissions cause. Your last question is a red herring. NOX emissions cause all manner of respiratory issues, and those will be listed as the cause of death.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        Explain how I’m downplaying NOX emissions by questioning the (lack of) data being used. The article is so poorly written it should cause someone to lose either their job or credibility. The article is a compilation of random summations or statements without the underlying facts presented. What is it 38,000 more than?

        Please, I beg you, explain how I’m downplaying the subject of this article on a legitimate problem by pointing out overwhelming flaws.

        And no although NOX clearly effects people, those same people that died from respiratory issues may have died from smoking, second hand smoke, silicosis, pre-existing conditions, or a myriad of other possible issues. It would be (nearly) impossible to say someone died from NOX emissions, but I welcome anyone to prove me wrong.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    “However, the authors cited recent tests that proved “real-world NOx emissions in line with certification limits are technically achievable.””

    Agreed – for a price. And that price probably makes diesel an unviable product in the consumer market.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    The cancerous health effects of diesel exhaust have been widely known for decades. It’s criminal Europe plowed ahead despite this with zero regard to its citizens. And for what??

    The EU health care costs ‘fallout’ linked directly to diesels must be astronomical. Or why take action *now*???

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Quiet you.

      It is totally the automaker’s fault. No need to bring up the long-running regulatory structures that heavily favor sub 2.0L diesels.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        Imagine how much healthier the air would be in Europe if we replaced every diesel with an American spec LS3.

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          Passenger car diesels are already on Death Watch in North America.

          Eventually an OEM is going to say “screw it” and actually design a clean sheet high-displacement V8 or V10 to be an equal-footing diesel alternative (as opposed to the current strategy of rigging sports sedan engines for truck duty as an entry-level choice).

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            ajla, it doesn’t have to be a high displacement V8. Just a V8!

            My fondest memories of V8s include the Chevy 283, the Ford 289, the Ford 302, T-Bird 312, the GM 327 and the MOPAR 340. The GM348, and 350 were the staple engines back then, along with the Ford 352.

            These were all based on the small-block design.

            Imagine what those displacement can do with today’s engine tech.

            I’d go into debt for an all-aluminum Big-Block Tundra V8 with 32-valves and DOHC, displacing 454 cubic inches or better.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Cylinder deactivation is a very real technology that is advancing to the point of being a no-brainer. I badly want to see someone do a 8+L V8 with cylinder deactivation.

            Want a diesel destroyer?

            Do a twin turbo 8.2L V8 that works in pair with the cylinder deactivation, cut out one turbo when half of the cylinders are deactivated and direct all forced induction from the remaining turbo to the 4(or6?) cylinders working.
            Having a fully functioning twin turbo 8.2L with a useful amount of torque from a turbocharged 4.1L four cylinder or turbocharged 6.15L six cylinder would be amazing.

            1,000 lb-ft torque at 1,000 RPM?

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            LOL! I see an opportunity for GM to bring back the 8-6-4 Caddy V8, with 32-valves and DOHC, done in all-aluminum.

            Northstar anyone?

            Yeah, baby!

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          @hummer
          Then you would have to worry about particulates

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Studies are showing that turbo DI engines produce more fine particulate than diesels. That would mean DPF/urea systems on those engines.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Calm down, direct injection wouldn’t require urea, SCR. Just an updated catalytic converter.

            I’d be easier to delete the “direct injection” part from gas engines (for normal “fuel injection”) instead, if that were the case. Direct injection is not that great a benefit, to have to deal with diesel type emissions.

            Except you can’t delete the “diesel” part from diesels.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            They went to DI in order to get better metering, which gives better mpg over the long haul.

            I don’t think they would really want to take a step back from DI and go back to TBI or PI.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      “The cancerous health effects of diesel exhaust have been widely known for decades. ”

      So true!

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Europe has a full-blown disaster on its hands, and it didn’t have to be that way. As flawed as CAFE/CARB seem to be some times, thank god we’re not them (Europe)!

        Clearly there’s just *something* about American gas V8s… OK not all of them, but there’s just never been anything better, all things considered. And they’re just as relevant today, emissions/economy/reliability friendly too!

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          The American V8 is the answer to every problem,

          Need something reliable and easy to fix if issues do arise?
          American V8
          Want an engine that will increase the likelihood of your vehicle holding its value?
          American V8
          Want an engine that emits less NOx than the current crop of direct injection gas 4cylinders?
          American V8
          Want an engine that tolerates abuse and neglect and keeps going?
          American V8
          Want to go fast on the weekends but get good MPG on the weekdays?
          American V8
          Feeling down and depressed due to a bad day?
          American V8
          Candy from the street corner done gave you the clap?
          American V8

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          DenverMike, Europe became that way because the political parties in power steered Europe in that direction.

          But I can tell you that not all Europeans agree with that direction. No one in my family in Germany or Portugal owns a diesel.

          They own gasoline ICE vehicles. Hopefully more Europeans will buy gasoline vehicles when it is time to replace their diesels.

          And with the US exporting so much gasoline to Europe, that is a good thing.

          It can be argued that today’s GM 5.3L V8 and Fiatsler 5.7L Hemi are the most advanced small-block domestic V8s, but the Rolex of all V8s remains the Toyota Tundra all-aluminum, 32-valve, DOHC, 5.7L V8!

          If Toyota only made a Big Block using that same state-of-the-art tech. You know, like a 454 (7.39L).

          Yeah, I’d buy one.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @highdesertcat
            They will take up petrol engines when North Anericans abandon Pickups

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @HDC – I’d like to see a revival of the “Big Blocks” too, but I’m hoarding a couple dually F-350 crew cab 4X4 Lariats with fuel injected 460 Big Blocks in the meantime.

            They all came with factory “restrictor plates” that are easy to remove. They’re probably there to promote 7.3 diesel sales (at the time), or extend the life of the overdrive auto trans.

            But the current “Coyote V8” is no slouch. Toyota just needs something worthwhile to put their DOHC V8 in, lol.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            DenverMike, Yeah, I remember the restrictor plates.

            But in order to get better breathing for the Big Blocks, the restrictor plate has to be removed and four-into-one headers adapted.

            That unleashes the max potential of the Big Blocks, even from idle.

            Originally, that’s how the Big Block was designed but then the DOT mandates and CARB /EPA fuel economy standards forced the OEMs to choke down the big brutes (except for HD trucks.)

            I own two of those magnificent Toyota 5.7L V8s and I am truly amazed at how great they are in comparison to everything else I have owned over the 70 + years I’ve been alive.

            Best examples of production small block V8s (350 cubes and under) I know of, with 380+ gentle horsies on tap.

            Works very well, for me.

    • 0 avatar
      TDIGuy

      Since diesel particulate (not NOx) is the same carcinogen level as red meat, I’ll just drive my TDI over to the Outback Steakhouse and be done with it.

      • 0 avatar
        -Nate

        Cute snarky comment but it completely misses the fact that Diesel particulates don’t give you cancer, they kill you by ruining your lungs and causing heart attacks etc.
        .
        Read up on it in the AMA Medical Journals .
        .
        No, I’m not a tree hugger dipshit and I don’t drive a Diesel Automobile because it’s cool or enviro-bullshit anything, I just like it .
        .
        -Nate (,looking fondly out the window at my old junker Diesel)

    • 0 avatar
      redmondjp

      It’s not the NOx that is bad for you – it’s the particulate matter (PM).

      And PM levels are now rising on GASOLINE engines thanks to direct injection.

      So this whole argument is moot. The question should be, how many people will die from direct-injection gasoline-powered vehicles?

  • avatar
    ajla

    More humans sacrificed to the scourge of direct-injected, low-displacement turbo engines.

  • avatar
    zip89123

    What a crock. Fake news. Did the study also condemn car pool lanes, toll bridges, V8’s, oil companies, Republicans, 2 cycle motors, airplanes, candles, too many people on the planet, & cow manure? Didn’t think so.

    • 0 avatar
      markf

      “What a crock. Fake news. Did the study also condemn car pool lanes, toll bridges, V8’s, oil companies, Republicans, 2 cycle motors, airplanes, candles, too many people on the planet, & cow manure? Didn’t think so.”

      Cause “Republicans” kill people, do you even read the nonsense you type?

      • 0 avatar
        zip89123

        Absolutely I read what I wrote. The only nonsense was your reply.

        • 0 avatar
          markf

          So how many people have Republicans killed? I hope at least as many as pansy diesels……

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Probably not as many as the Clintons ;P

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Kay Adams: Do you know how naive you sound, Michael? Presidents and senators don’t have men killed!
            Michael Corleone: Oh. Who’s being naive, Kay?

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @markf – looks like liberals are living inside your head.

            I would say rent free, but like socialism, we all pay the price for your subsidized housing.

            Welfare does protect the infirm.

          • 0 avatar
            markf

            “@markf – looks like liberals are living inside your head.

            I would say rent free, but like socialism, we all pay the price for your subsidized housing.

            Welfare does protect the infirm”

            When I did I mention the word Liberals? You are obsessed with Trump.

            The ridiculous statement was made above implying Republicans are implicit in the deaths of many, many people. I asked how many and as usual you and the intellectual giant who made the original post will not answer my simple question.

            You just sink into personal attacks on my perceived economic status

  • avatar
    indi500fan

    I visited London for the first time last summer.
    Based on things I’d read, I expected a Beijing-esque cloud of diesel pollution over the landscape.
    Saw nothing like that at all, and believe me they have jammed up traffic everywhere and all the time.

  • avatar
    Tele Vision

    A small Diesel, somewhere in the vehicles’ body, powering a spinal battery that motivates all four wheels via hub motors, is the best solution to Worldwide normal transportation: Instant torque. Excellent fuel economy. Wide platform viability ( sports cars to sedans to CUV/SUVs to 4X4 trucks ). Wide styling parameters, too.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      You lose a lot of energy converting mechanical energy into electrical, which then goes to motors that convert that electrical energy back to mechanical.

      Theoretically it’s great, but outside of a fixed speed vehicle lots of development is needed.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        That’s true. If its the case, ditch the batteries and go directly to the motors. Also true, trains rarely have to stop at intersections, except for other trains.

  • avatar
    -Nate

    I call B.S. in North America at any rate .
    .
    Every day I see Diesel powered big rigs with dead black 6″ streams of dense Diesel soot blowing out their exhausts and no one gets a ticket anymore .
    .
    I have three Diesel powered Automobiles and only one ever emits any visible smoke .
    .
    All three are 1980’s vintage Mercedes and so use at best 1940’s technology yet don’t emit particles visibly, those particles are the killer according to cancer Doctors ’cause once they settle in your lungs, that’s it ~ they cannot ever be removed and cause heart attacks and many other ailments leading to early deaths .
    .
    So, stop those heavy polluters and see if the rest of the Diesel fleet isn’t less damaging .
    .
    Always easier to go after the general public that the ones who actually cause most of the problems .
    .
    -Nate

  • avatar
    amca

    Diesel trucks are filthy dirty and little regulated. I bet they’re responsible for the lion’s share of diesel pollution. Cars, on the other hand, are highly regulated and quite clean.

    But that can’t stop the pile-on of ignorance that’s begun rolling.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Caterpillar and International would like a word with you.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        In 1998 all of the truck companies got caught cheating on diesel emissions. VW wasn’t the first to develop “defeat devices” to pass testing.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          The trucks were tuned specifically pass the emissions test, but didn’t run any different when not being tested.

          You can call that “gaming the system”. Truck makers were fined a billion (collectively), the emissions test was improved/updated, and we moved on.

          You can call what VW did “cheating the system” with a device (code) that did actually have cars running differently (much dirtier) except when they detected they were being tested.

          Basically VW ran a “Bully Dog” type of (off road) tuner when the cars detected they were clear of any emissions testing.

      • 0 avatar
        redmondjp

        Hummer – Caterpillar doesn’t even make on-road diesel engines any longer, try again!

        • 0 avatar
          TR4

          No? Take a look at these:

          http://www.cat.com/en_US/products/new/equipment/on-highway-trucks.html

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          “Hummer – Caterpillar doesn’t even make on-road diesel engines any longer, try again!”

          That’s my point.

          And actually they do, just not for the US market.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            they do here as well, they just no longer sell engines to other truck manufacturers. they started their own line of trucks.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            I don’t keep up with the heavy trucking industry so help me here. A quick look up seems that Cat teamed up with Navistar in 2011, but stopped making all trucks in March 2016. So those trucks had cat engines or Navistar? Information is hard to find it seems.

            I see articles from 2015 stating they were going to stop outsourcing to Navistar and build their own, but then I see articles from 2016 stating they were going to stop making on-road trucks.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            http://www.cat.com/en_US/products/new/equipment/on-highway-trucks.html

            edit: I guess they *did* decide to kill the line, apparently due to slow sales.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            http://www.equipmentworld.com/caterpillar-discontinues-on-highway-vocational-truck-line-exits-business-immediately/

            That says Cat ceased production of those trucks, they were going to transition but chose to exit. Additionally it says Navistar supplied all of Cats engines.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            No CAT does not make on-highway engines for the US market. The CT13 found in their trucks is the Navistar N13 painted yellow instead of blue.

  • avatar
    Cactuar

    All I see is this gorgeous E39 5 series…

  • avatar
    Bearadise

    Driving a diesel these days is like being a Trump supporter. You thought you were doing the right thing but now, not so sure.

  • avatar
    jfbramfeld

    This study is perfectly feasible. I myself did a study in which I determined that if you add the number of deaths reported in every study of dangerous products you come up with the actual live voting population of the city of Chicago times the speed of light squared.

    That may sound like a lot of dead people, but studies don’t lie.

  • avatar
    Zipster

    Bearadise:

    Trump supporters will not have post decisional dissonance. Their brains lack that capability.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      That’s funny coming from a person that cant see the forest from the trees. If he starts alternating from his original position there’s going to be a lot of people upset. As is he’s got the establishment back in the corner like a rabid dog, and everyday is a proud day to be an American.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        if he’s an “agent of change,” it’s only in a manner similar to Heath Ledger’s portrayal of the Joker.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          You say that, but the market says otherwise.

        • 0 avatar
          WheelMcCoy

          … or agent orange.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Poor things, all you have left is name calling. Like a bully on the playground that got a black eye from someone half your size.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            LOL! I get a great big ROTFLMAO belly-laugh from the leftie-libbies just losing their mind over Trump getting elected. Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo……

            What they lose track of is that this guy is the new King of the Hill.

            And he is an unconventional president. He’s going to do things his way.

            Biggest news coming up will be that Trump will discontinue the daily news briefing to the Press.

            That ought to be good for a howling roar as both the Press and ‘crats go into self-immolation mode.

            Love it!

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            HDC, I think you might want to step back a moment and ask yourself a question: is sticking it to the dumb old libbies worth watching this guy f**k the country up?

            Seems to me that’s an awful high price to pay for “winning” a political argument.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            FreedMike, I’m not winning anything.

            I didn’t even vote for the guy. Didn’t think he could ever win.

            We all were told by the alt-left Media that there was no path to 270.

            I watched in amazement on ZDF TV in Germany where we were at the time when Trump made his world-wide acceptance speech. It was a HUGE, earthshaking event, bigger than any before it in History. Seriously!

            My wife was crying. Our German relatives sat around with their mouths agape. Me too. Could not believe it!

            Allah has a sense of humor! Trump got elected!

            But now that Trump is The Man With The Plan, I like what he has done, is currently doing, and is planning on doing for America in the future.

            If he keeps this up and runs in 2020, I will vote for him.

            I can see where the ‘crats are just devastated. But fair play, the GOP obstructed the last guy in office, now the ‘crats get to give obstructionism their best shot.

            I’m an Independent. I vote for the best candidate, regardless of political party.

          • 0 avatar
            WheelMcCoy

            I thought I was pretty clever. And judging from the response, I was!

            Kidding aside, the swamp @Hummer mentions below is not being drained. Trump filled the position for Secretary of the Treasury with a Goldman Sachs guy, Steven Mnuchin. Mnuchin’s claim to fame at GS was lucrative foreclosures of homes belonging to Trump supporters. Irony anyone?

            I get why Trump was elected. I, too, felt politicians were too beholden to establishment donor money. It really was time to shake them up, but as far as I can see, Trump is not your man.

            He recently invited Russians into the oval office, with a photographer and equipment that may not have been sufficiently vetted. We don’t know the value of the information leaked, but the trust the U.S. had with its allies is gone. Pence, in contrast, would not allow this to happen.

            There’s more, but I’ll leave it that Trump is unfit to lead. Watch his actions carefully. Put country above politics. I’m serious.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Trump indeed has the establishment back in the corner…and they’re all huddling together there to figure out how to get him back on his freakin’ meds before he rings a bell that can’t be unrung.

        I can deal with a conservative president. In fact, I cast my first presidential vote as an adult on one, in 1984. And you know what? Reagan would have b**ch-slapped the fool who showed up to a military graduation ceremony yesterday and made it into a pity party for himself.

        Trump’s a loser, Hummer. Whatever one thinks of his politics, he’s clearly not suited for the presidency. And unless he straightens out his act, and does it quickly, it’s only a matter of time before “the establishment” – i.e., the folks who have a mentality beyond that of a fifth-grader – take him down. It can’t happen a minute too soon. If that means Mike Pence takes charge, then so be it. We’ll survive that.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          So do you think that Pence will be any different or better?

          Not hardly bud. Pence knows what got Trump and him elected.

          If Pence should take over for some reason, he will abide by what the voters sent them to DC for.

          Change!

          (What would be truly disastrous for the ‘crats if Pence should take over at some point, is that Pence will select Paul Ryan as VP.)

          Nightmare City!

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Like I said…I don’t like having a president I don’t agree with politically, but I can deal with it. I can’t deal with a president who simply isn’t suited for the job. Trump isn’t. He’s a buffoon. Four months in, and all this is going wrong? I don’t want to see how it looks ten months in.

            I have no idea whether that’s a disaster for the Democrats or not. If it is, then it is. If Pence f*cks up, then he’ll pay the price in 2018. That’s how it works.

            And if you want change, then here’s a good way to start: start thinking of politics as what’s right for everyone and stop thinking of it as a way to stick it to people you don’t agree with politically. That’s what got us in this stupid mess to begin with.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            An admirable approach to a thorny political dissonance, FreedMike.

            If things were only that simple.

            Long history of political opponents sticking it to people they don’t agree with politically.

            I cannot remember during my lifetime a worse loss for the ‘crats at all political levels. Remember, I started as a ‘crat from a two-union household in life.

            Seems to me, the voters looked at the past eight years and said, enough is enough!

            The people who voted for Trump won’t leave him unless Trump does something that hurts their pocket book.

            And right now, all those people who voted for Trump recognize that Trump has to fight the GOP, the ‘crats, the alt-left Fake News Media, and the Deep State Intel Leakers, all trying their best to oust this guy.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          You can name call all you want, the fact is the man is tearing down the elitist system we have in place. The man wasn’t elected by the same elites that elected Bush and Obama, he was elected by the people that wanted to stop the government take over of our rights. He’s acting the exact way he should.
          You’ve lost your mind if you think a man that ran on a platform of dismantling the D.C. Swamp was going to be liked by the same people he’s getting rid of. The people are tired of the same establishment types that pretend they know what’s best for the people of this country when they have no real world work experience.

          At the end of the day I voted for him, the mans barely into his first term and I couldn’t be any prouder to call Trump the president of America.

          How can you call Trump unsuited for the job? Not a single candidate that ran was better suited for the position, not in 2016, not in 2012, 2008, 04, 00.

          I don’t expect you to suddenly realize how lucky we are but your going to drive yourself crazy if you spend the next 8 years pretending your outraged without being able to point to why.

  • avatar
    Sigivald

    “The research focused on vehicles in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Korea and the United States and uncovered that we’ve grossly overestimated the amount of good being done by our global regulatory efforts. ”

    So, 38k deaths out of … well over 3 billion people?

    *That’s not even goddamn rounding error*..

    (Seriously, that’s a rate of just over 1 in 100,000.

    It’s something to possibly address slowly, over time, with fleet replacment – assuming people fix this whole “GDI engines emit nasty particulates too” problem I kept hearing about here.

    The fleet replacement cost alone makes it a ludicrous way to try to “save lives” by just replacing all the diesels – you’d save far more by spending a tenth the money on effective charities, easily.)

  • avatar
    markf

    Trump

    #Triggered

  • avatar
    brn

    I stopped reading at “Study Suggests”.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Astigmatism: So, in your view, Biden nixing a single in-process pipeline is more responsible for raising oil prices...
  • el scotto: @TimK Depends on the engine. Turbos have changed from the 80’s when you had to let them run for a...
  • el scotto: Since 2016? The sharks, I mean class-action lawsuit lawyers are in a frenzy. Most manufacturers just say...
  • el scotto: @redapple, Sir, some alternative thoughts. My grandpa had a John Deere Gator. He used it 2-3 days a week...
  • jpolicke: Time to bring back NASCAR style hood pins.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber