柴油廢氣致癌！！ (第11頁)

a.ming
個人積分：25分
文章編號：36535895

25分

101樓

2012-06-14 16:23

lin740619 wrote:
新式的柴油引擎應該還好吧!
反而，應該對柴油貨車好好的體檢一下，為了更有馬力，排出的廢氣，根本沒有經過過濾器。...(恕刪)

你說的是之前的柴油貨車..之前沒有法規.所以沒有車廠會去裝CDPF!

至於這幾年來新的3.5噸的柴油貨車幾乎都有裝設這各裝置了!

至於另依個致癌物.硫化物....台塑有出超低含硫量的柴油!

不過focus dtci 很多人為了不讓他堵塞有時引擎電腦無法自清乾淨的話`還要拆下來洗.怕麻煩會拔掉cdpf....拜託為了各位大家的健康~不要把他拔掉嘿!!!

naferla

naferla
個人積分：31分
文章編號：36536080

31分

樓主

2012-06-14 16:30

只想大家討論一下！文中我已強調預期柴油小客會被大作文章，我各人認為現今柴油小客車符合環保規範，我的focus tdci是今年五月買的，當初就是考慮過這些問題才投入柴油車懷抱！我堅信TDCI製造污染問題不會比普通汽油車嚴重！
請大家看清楚，不要隨便“砲”人！

咪山寶

咪山寶
個人積分：0分
文章編號：36536110

0分

103樓

2012-06-14 16:32

naferla wrote:
今天(2012年6月...(恕刪)

這不是很久前的新聞嗎??很早就有相關研究了~...,不過好像開柴油車的人都不曉得哩

在日本柴油車是不能進到特定區域的..
歐美的環境可能較合適吧~在台灣有些地狹人稠的地方真的要進一步討論看看,柴油車的適用性...

ctho_kk

ctho_kk
個人積分：1分
文章編號：36536957

1分

104樓

2012-06-14 17:07

任何加入化學成分的東西或多或少都對人體不好!
東西的故事

Hotfish

Hotfish
個人積分：81分
文章編號：36537335

81分

105樓

2012-06-14 17:23

naferla wrote:
文中我已強調預期柴油小客會被大作文章...(恕刪)

昨天新聞一出來就想到這裡又有一場論戰了...
所以小弟在另一篇寫過，車主都要好好保養自己的車，
無論汽油引擎柴油引擎，只要維持正常運作，都能有效減低汙染。
原料採集、產品製程、使用、報廢回收的流程，
當今有什麼交通工具真正做到零汙染呢？

大家都使用著大地的天然資源，心存感恩總是比較好的謝謝指教

Imagination is more important than knowledge. -----Albert Einstein

市集達人

市集達人
個人積分：20分
文章編號：36537547

20分

106樓

2012-06-14 17:30

silwell2536 wrote:
柴油廢氣致癌，請問我們要吸多少才會發病，又有多少人因吸過多廢氣而發病死亡？人生在世，你該如何回去，早有定數，何必太計較，少發脾氣，少計較，才會活的比較久

吸多少才會發病不是劃分致癌危害等級的目的.

吸進同樣的量,何者致癌的可能性較高才是

對於癌症,奉勸各位不要有"生死早有定數"這種放任的想法.

國際癌症研究署劃定的致癌危害等級共分四個類別，
第一類是確定對人類致癌，例如石棉、芥子氣、香煙和酒精。
第二類是很可能或可能對人類致癌，
第三類是缺乏足夠證據來判斷是否對人類致癌，
第四類則是很可能不對人類致癌。...(恕刪)

市集達人

市集達人
個人積分：20分
文章編號：36537643

20分

107樓

2012-06-14 17:34

persist555 wrote:
柴油轎車(全新車)排出的廢氣,不知道比汽油車乾淨多少了
溫室氣體也比汽油車大幅減少 ...(恕刪)

如果是全新柴油轎車 vs 全新汽油轎車呢?

又或者

如果是十年柴油轎車 vs 十年汽油轎車呢?

maken

maken
個人積分：435分
文章編號：36538886

435分

108樓

2012-06-14 18:36

來看看全文吧：

Lyon, France, June 12, 2012 ‐‐ After a week-long meeting of international experts, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which is part of the World Health Organization (WHO), today classified diesel engine exhaust as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1), based on sufficient evidence that exposure is associated with an increased risk for lung cancer.

Background

In 1988, IARC classified diesel exhaust as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A). An Advisory Group which reviews and recommends future priorities for the IARC Monographs Program had recommended diesel exhaust as a high priority for re-evaluation since 1998.

There has been mounting concern about the cancer-causing potential of diesel exhaust, particularly based on findings in epidemiological studies of workers exposed in various settings. This was re-emphasized by the publication in March 2012 of the results of a large US National Cancer Institute/National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health study of occupational exposure to such emissions in underground miners, which showed an increased risk of death from lung cancer in exposed workers (1).

Evaluation

The scientific evidence was reviewed thoroughly by the Working Group and overall it was concluded that there was sufficient evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of diesel exhaust. The Working Group found that diesel exhaust is a cause of lung cancer (sufficient evidence) and also noted a positive association (limited evidence) with an increased risk of bladder cancer (Group 1).

The Working Group concluded that gasoline exhaust was possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), a finding unchanged from the previous evaluation in 1989.

Public health

Large populations are exposed to diesel exhaust in everyday life, whether through their occupation or through the ambient air. People are exposed not only to motor vehicle exhausts but also to exhausts from other diesel engines, including from other modes of transport (e.g. diesel trains and ships) and from power generators.

Given the Working Group’s rigorous, independent assessment of the science, governments and other decision-makers have a valuable evidence-base on which to consider environmental standards for diesel exhaust emissions and to continue to work with the engine and fuel manufacturers towards those goals.

Increasing environmental concerns over the past two decades have resulted in regulatory action in North America, Europe and elsewhere with successively tighter emission standards for both diesel and gasoline engines. There is a strong interplay between standards and technology – standards drive technology and new technology enables more stringent standards. For diesel engines, this required changes in the fuel such as marked decreases in sulfur content, changes in engine design to burn diesel fuel more efficiently and reductions in emissions through exhaust control technology.

However, while the amount of particulates and chemicals are reduced with these changes, it is not yet clear how the quantitative and qualitative changes may translate into altered health effects; research into this question is needed. In addition, existing fuels and vehicles without these modifications will take many
years to be replaced, particularly in less developed countries, where regulatory measures are currently also less stringent. It is notable that many parts of the developing world lack regulatory standards, and data on the occurrence and impact of diesel exhaust are limited.

Conclusions

Dr Christopher Portier, Chairman of the IARC working Group, stated that “The scientific evidence was compelling and the Working Group’s conclusion was unanimous: diesel engine exhaust causes lung cancer in humans.” Dr Portier continued: “Given the additional health impacts from diesel particulates,
exposure to this mixture of chemicals should be reduced worldwide.“(2)

Dr Kurt Straif, Head of the IARC Monographs Program, indicated that “The main studies that led to this conclusion were in highly exposed workers. However, we have learned from other carcinogens, such as radon, that initial studies showing a risk in heavily exposed occupational groups were followed by positive findings for the general population. Therefore actions to reduce exposures should encompass workers and the general population.”

Dr Christopher Wild, Director, IARC, said that “while IARC’s remit is to establish the evidence-base for regulatory decisions at national and international level, today’s conclusion sends a strong signal that public health action is warranted. This emphasis is needed globally, including among the more vulnerable populations in developing countries where new technology and protective measures may otherwise take many years to be adopted.”

以上是正文部分，其它附錄之類的我就不貼了。有興趣的請自行爬文。

lkk77

lkk77
個人積分：3379分
文章編號：36539149

3379分

109樓

2012-06-14 18:53

咪山寶 wrote:
這不是很久前的新聞嗎...(恕刪)

這是今天2012年6月14日的電視新聞報導

knift

knift
個人積分：7693分
文章編號：36540012

7693分

110樓

2012-06-14 19:48

maken wrote:
The main studies that led to this conclusion were in highly exposed workers...(恕刪)

導致這一結論的主要研究在高度暴露的工人。
它的研究倒底是曝露在「新式柴油轎車廢氣下」的工人，還是曝露在「老舊柴油重型機具」的工人？
這二款在排放管制上我相信是天差地別的。