Talk:Diesel exhaust

Remedies?

• It would be nice to see a section in here about (if there are any) remedies to diesel exhaust, such as filters or catalytic converters... 16:10, 20 November 2006 User:68.175.108.132

I have added a section. Biscuittin (talk) 10:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Composition

• some average percent compositions of these substances would be beneficial 06:18, 1 November 2009 User:98.243.187.158

Global warming potential of DPM

I am interested to know about the global warming potential of DPM. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.170.183.60 (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

Diesel particulates in Europe

Until the past few years, with the advent of better diesel engines and filters, Western Europe has been blanketed in a high concentration of diesel particulates. The entire continent literally reeked of diesel fumes. Yet lifespans were longer than in North America. Is there any epidemiological evidence for the harmful effects of moderate levels of diesel particulates? 10:58, 3 August 2007 User:72.49.143.224

Environmentalist POV?

I think it's beyond dispute that DPM is generally bad for your health, but it seems to me that instead of an encyclopedic article, this page (which was split from the article on automobile exhaust not too long ago) is all about telling you how horrid DPM is. Barely two sentences is dedicated to describing WHAT it is, non-sensationalist studies about the health impact of DPM is not discussed, negative side effects of efforts to combat DPM (higher fuel prices, more complex equipment and maintenance, even higher fuel consumption in many cases) are given nary a mention.

I will admit to some bias in the other direction, and for that reason I don't think I'm the best choice to revise the article. However, I'll tag it for POV review, and hopefully more experienced Wikipedians will come along and help contribute to a more balanced POV and some more scientific facts. Stian Oksavik 18:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I have to say that it seems pretty neutral to me. After all DPM is a known carcinogen so describing how horrid it is seems appropriate. Compare this article to articles on other airborne carcinogens such as Hexavalent chromium. I agree however, that a more structured and analytic approach to the toxicology would be useful, especially with more references to the scientific literature. I might try to get to this in the next couple of weeks. Grhabyt (talk) 01:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

This article is in no way neutral, you CAN NOT selectively comment about negative effects unless the title is along the lines of "negative effects of diesel particulate matter", —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.38.101.11 (talk) 01:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

U.S. hatchet job?

This article has serious POV problem. All references are either from a U.S. government source, Department of Labor, or are from US based sources which have the word American as part of the name of the source. How can anyone give full credit to sources from one nation when the use of diesel engines are world wide?

The list of external sources are also either from U.S. government sources or are case studies published in U.S. media. In addition, none of the assertations are footnoted to specific references or external sources. --TGC55 (talk) 20:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

A few references

• Health Effects of Diesel Exhaust A fact sheet by Cal/EPA's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the American Lung Association
• Diesel Exhaust: A Critical Analysis of Emissions, Exposure, and Health Effects Summary of a Health Effects Institute (HEI) Special Report HEI Diesel Working Group
• Diesel Exhaust and Air Pollution American Lung Association

  15:46, 25 February 2009 User:Fred Bauder

diesel/gasoline final results about particulate matter

test

you run your gasoline car with you in it in your closed garage for one hour

i run my diesel car with me in it in my closed garage for one hour

then we will discuss the final results about particulate matter

Wdl1961 (talk) 15:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

The lethal component of gasoline exhaust is carbon monoxide, not particulate matter. The alleged harm of particulate matter is that it can cause cancer and lung damage, but neither of those will kill you in an hour.

Then again, modern gasoline engines are so clean that the only thing you're likely to get from either experiment is a headache, or possibly dehydration and heat stroke (running any internal combustion engine in an enclosed garage for an hour will make said garage pretty hot.) Stian (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

This article

• I made this article by assembling matter which was spread (with much duplication) across the pages Exhaust gas and Diesel particulate matter and Diesel fuel and Diesel exhaust air contaminants: see Wikipedia:Content forking. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Occupational exposure

A section on occupational exposure is vital due to the serious risks involved in constant heavy exposure. I'm sure it and other sections on health issues can be edited to reduce duplication and conflation of occupational risks compared to those of the general public. User:Fred Bauder Talk 15:52, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced material

No one doubts that diesel fumes may have adverse health effects, however, so far the study upon which the carcinogenic claims rest is one involving miners in tightly enclosed areas next to diesel powered machines. That's very different than most exposures people suffer. As well, this whole article is rife with unsourced claims. It's not enough to say – the Germans tell us its bad – you need to have a quotation and a page number. There are a large number of improperly sourced claims in this article, so you can see why several readers think it violates NPV guidelines (I do too).Theonemacduff (talk) 02:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Biodiesel is a very broad term - it is a group of fuels containing non-fossil oils (treated for transesetification achievement). However the hydrocarbons vary with different sources and treatments. Therefore not only nitrogen oxides vary in the exhaust but also many hydrocarbons, it depents on the hydrocarbon composition of the biofuel. In the article there is a statement: "All diesel engine exhaust emissions can be significantly reduced by using biodiesel fuel. Oxides of nitrogen do increase from a vehicle using biodiesel..." which is missing citation. As far as I know biodiesel fumes MAY have either increased or reduced hyrocarbon content, depending not only on the combustion process (as stated "injection timing") but also on the biodiesel source (respectively HC composition).81.161.249.222 (talk) 11:36, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Agreed with previous commenter. I am substantially concerned with the "All diesel engine exhaust emissions can be significantly reduced by using biodiesel fuel. Oxides of nitrogen do increase from a vehicle using biodiesel..." line, it is either oversimplified or downright incorrect. The primary factor influencing POH formation in combustion of aliphatic hydrocarbon fuels is temperature. Diesels burn at lower temperatures than otto cycle engines, therefore more POHs get formed. The difference between biodiesel and diesel is that the first one is an ester, the second is an alkane. A few steps into the reaction, the ester will be cracked near the carbonyl, eventually leading to an alkene and a formyl radical, which then react just like intermediates in normal diesel fuel do.

Biodiesel vs. Diesel also doesn't have anything to do with NOx. Due to the lower temperatures, NOx formation from diesel engines is fairly low to begin with, with prompt NO being the only feasible pathway. The prompt NO pathway is controlled by CH radical concentration, which is present regardless of if the starting molecule was an ester or alkane.

The material currently posted is both unsourced and incorrect.75.58.177.245 (talk) 21:35, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree and whether I did or didn't, the material is unsourced. So I removed it. You could have too.MartinezMD (talk) 21:46, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Tagged for NPOV

I have placed an NPOV maintenance notification on the article, because it's a mess. It seems like a tug-of-war betweeen "DIESEL IS CLEAN" proponents and "DIESEL IS TEH EVIL" proponents has taken place here. I have attempted to clean up the lede, which still contains facts not in the rest of the prose and go unreferenced, which generally come down to "Modern Diesels are like totally clean nowadays!", whenever nowadays might be. I've tried to tone those down. Sources are not always what they should be, especially when making or implying health claims. The entire section chemical components has notes that seem to want to stress, or at least imply, how dangerous diesel exhaust is to the point I'm a little surprised it doesn't contain an entry "water vapor, causes burns, and can lead to drowning when inhaled". I'll do some edits over the next few weeks, but I probably won't be able to fix it all in a period shorter than that. Feel free to help clean up the article. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. --BDD (talk) 16:56, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Diesel exhaust → Internal combustion engine exhaust gases – Please put your reason for moving here. KVDP (talk) 15:44, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I propose to move this article to "Internal combustion engine exhaust gases". This way, the scope of the article can be broadened and a comparison of the carcinogenic compounds between exhaust gases of:

• Diesel engine running on straight vegetable oil
• Diesel engine running on petroDiesel
• Diesel engine running on bioDiesel
• gasoline engine running on gasoline
• gasoline engine running on ethanol
• gasoline engine running on biobutanol
• gasoline engine running on biogas
• gasoline engine running on natural gas

can be made. I even think there's more danger in the oxides than the fine dust from Diesel engines which lately is been getting an overly large amount of media attention. So, let's write an article and find out. KVDP (talk) 15:43, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Instead you should create a new article at your suggested title as an overview article for the various types of ICE exhaust. This article is fairly large, and I don't see why diluting it to a more generic form would be better. I do see that there'd be a fair amount of overlap, but there's also a fair amount of specificity in this article as well. -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 05:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose - mainly because I can't see the majority of people searching for "Internal combustion engine exhaust gases" over the more symplistic and common "Diesel exhast" - so they'll hit a redirect. Why not create your article and then we can see better where there is overlap and where there isn't? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:15, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose, for both sets of reasons cited above. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 09:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose "IC" engine implies petrol/gasoline too. The emissions issues are distinctly different for the two groups of engines and should be covered separately. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Diesel Exhaust Exposure in Miners Linked to Lung Cancer

http://dceg.cancer.gov/news-events/linkage-newsletter/2012-07/research-publications/diesel-exhaust

New review article includes notes on cardiovascular effects of diesel: Expert position paper on air pollution and cardiovascular disease

Newby et al.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehu458 First published online: 9 December 2014

Advanced Access: http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/12/08/eurheartj.ehu458

Eur Heart J. 2014 Dec 9. pii: ehu458. [Epub ahead of print]

PMID 25492627 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.190.133.143 (talk) 23:33, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Mothers exposed to fine particle pollution during the third trimester faced doubled risks that that the child would suffer from autism

Raanan Raz, Andrea L. Roberts, Kristen Lyall, Jaime E. Hart, Allan C. Just, Francine Laden and Marc G. Weisskopf

"Autism Spectrum Disorder and Particulate Matter Air Pollution before, during, and after Pregnancy: A Nested Case–Control Analysis within the Nurses’ Health Study II Cohort"

Environ Health Perspect; DOI:10.1289/ehp.1408133

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1408133/

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/advpub/2014/12/ehp.1408133.acco.pdf

PMID 25522338

Autism risk linked to particulate air pollution

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/18/idUSL1N0U01ZX20141218

NEW YORK Thu Dec 18, 2014 12:01am EST

Reuters

There was no association between autism and fine particulate pollution before or early in pregnancy, or after the child was born. But high levels of exposure during the third trimester doubled the risk of autism.