AdBlue shortage threatens EU supply chains(economist.com)
economist.com
AdBlue shortage threatens EU supply chains
https://www.economist.com/business/2022/11/10/a-series-of-shortages-threatens-eu-supply-chains
38 comments
Eastern europeans won't even notice AdBlue shortage and continue trucking like nothing happened. (It's super popular past time activity to disable that thing even on brand new trucks, even dealers are in on it ( citation needed, however ))
As an eastern european myself, I wish it was as heavily enforced as it is in western europe - anyone found to have modified their truck to bypass emission reducing devices should have the truck siezed and ordered to pay fines so heavy the thought of doing it again wouldn't even cross their minds.
And yes, I'm aware that even dealerships offer removing DPFs/GPFs as an option when buying a new car, because somehow people from my country think they live on a different planet with inexhaustable supply of fresh air, and somehow can't connect in their brains the relation between filthy, sooty air that we breathe and automotive exhausts. No no, it's all an evil plot by the west to make us pay for costly filter replacements, so it's better to cut it out right at the start when the car is brand new<mind explodes>.
And yes, I'm aware that even dealerships offer removing DPFs/GPFs as an option when buying a new car, because somehow people from my country think they live on a different planet with inexhaustable supply of fresh air, and somehow can't connect in their brains the relation between filthy, sooty air that we breathe and automotive exhausts. No no, it's all an evil plot by the west to make us pay for costly filter replacements, so it's better to cut it out right at the start when the car is brand new<mind explodes>.
You seem angry at people who choose to do whatever they please.
I mean, I'm sure you'd be angry at people who choose to do whatever they please too, the only question is where is that line for you?
Would you draw it at truckers who drive on bald tyres? Ones who ignore the work time regulations? Ones who drive drunk? Ones who don't turn their lights on at night?
All of the above are "people who choose to do whatever they please" - if you aren't angry with at least the ones I listed, I'm curious what kind of lawless society you live in.
Would you draw it at truckers who drive on bald tyres? Ones who ignore the work time regulations? Ones who drive drunk? Ones who don't turn their lights on at night?
All of the above are "people who choose to do whatever they please" - if you aren't angry with at least the ones I listed, I'm curious what kind of lawless society you live in.
I wonder why.
How to downvote?
Downvoting is karma-gated to prevent abuse. Keep contributing to the community until you have 501 or greater karma and downvote will become available.
There is a list here https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented
There is a list here https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented
I understand why you are angry, but keep in mind that western europe is no saint either. Dieselgate something something.
On one hand you have people assuming that the trucks won't run because they can't comply with every letter of the law, as if they were in perfect compliance before. And on the other hand you have the people who are closer to the ground and know that the trucks will run, just less legally (several options for doing so have already been mentioned in the comments).
The discontinuity between the regulators and the kind of people who write for the economist vs the people more closely dealing with the reality on the ground is far more interesting (in a train wreck sort of way) to me than any given shortage in a "required for compliance" material.
The discontinuity between the regulators and the kind of people who write for the economist vs the people more closely dealing with the reality on the ground is far more interesting (in a train wreck sort of way) to me than any given shortage in a "required for compliance" material.
>AdBlue, a mix of urea and deionised water...
And urea?.. well given the amount of 'truckers' lemonade' found in lay-bys, they shouldn't have any trouble sourcing that either.
My concern is that urine contains salts and may not be an appropriate replacement for deionized water.
No, piss does not work as a DEF substitute. Not even close.
Urine is only 2% urea. DEF is 32%.
There's no way those lorries can verify the adblue tank is full of adblue and not just water. So it's not really going to stop trucks from operating is it.
Maybe tank itselft not but exhaust composition via NOx lambda probe? Yes, it can stop a truck.
Maybe they could take the Volkswagen approach..
Why this AdBlue thing is called so fancy if this is kind of common (not rare, easy to get) substance?
AdBlue is just the common commercial name/trademark:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid
for what should be called AUS32 (aqueous urea solution 32%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid
for what should be called AUS32 (aqueous urea solution 32%).
dare to ask, why is a Trademark used as standard name for someting
and
who owns and makes money of this trademark, is it again the same "them" (big bankers & black rock etc.)
Looks like the Adblue trademark is registered to the “ Verband der Automobilindustrie e.V. (VDA)” which is a German non profit automobile industry association.
Velcro
it's just some regulation, not a law of physics
turn off the logic that disables the engine if the additive isn't available
a sensible legislature should be able to waive it during a time of crisis
ah, the EU... so that's impossible, so it's going to be like requiring empty flights to maintain runway landing slots during covid
turn off the logic that disables the engine if the additive isn't available
a sensible legislature should be able to waive it during a time of crisis
ah, the EU... so that's impossible, so it's going to be like requiring empty flights to maintain runway landing slots during covid
Yeah, let's just apply a short sighted patch, buy some extra tech debt and continue fucking up the planet as usual.
options:
- continent wide supply chain shut down
- lorries polluting slightly more for a short, defined period of time
Is it short sighted? Or is it adaptable and doing the right thing given the situation?
Technical debt isn’t absolutely evil and sometimes the interest rate is good enough to take on debt.
Like preventing people from going hungry in exchange for extra pollution for a season.
Technical debt isn’t absolutely evil and sometimes the interest rate is good enough to take on debt.
Like preventing people from going hungry in exchange for extra pollution for a season.
Another example of why this sort of top down regulation is bad.
This top down regulation is why we're not giving ourselves brain damage from breathing in fumes from leaded petrol.