The rise of diesel in Europe: The impact on health and pollution

theguardian.com

11 points·happyscrappy··3 comments

"Hands up — there’s absolutely no question that the decision we took was the wrong decision. But at that time we didn’t have the evidence that subsequently we did have."

Now there's a quote to live and die by. Big programs (incentives, taxes, peer pressure, political points) seldom wait for actual and system-wide data and defensible evidence before making decisions with wide effect, because to somebody somewhere it's always more advantageous to have the sky falling. Small changes with quantitative and qualitative feedback loops are the only sane way forward, but sound bites and negative news have far more impact and immediate (electable) results.

The article seems to be mostly about decision making instead of buttressing the claim that diesel cost lives vis-a-vis petrol. It kinda just waves the allegation around without showing any work.

For all I know, diesel is significantly more efficient (maybe like 2x). I can expect to see 50-60 MPG when I rent cars in Europe vs 25-30 MPG when I rent similar sized cars in the US. So that's hard evidence I see every time I drive.

There is a study linked in the article and European cities have much worse air quality than the US, which is why Paris wants to ban diesels outright. Hybrids would have been a better way to go. Poor air quality is a nightmare.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com