Ok Gnits. You’ve shared you’re opinion. But, according to your profile, why do you choose to drive that 2008 TDI anyway?
Because at the point in time when I bough it I had no clue about diesel technology, at all? Not that MY car would actually emit more pollutants and carcinogens than necessary - because, you know, it still has it's DPF, EGR, etc. in place and working, which in turn do their job, and filter out most of the bad stuff. And I actually just fixed some minor problem with these recently, which caused no practical problems for me, but because I was just bothered by the fact that in some cases it emitted a little more stuff, than it should have under optimal conditions.
I go out of my way to do everything to keep my car's emission at the minimum possible. A person who deletes his car's DPF does the exact opposite of that, and puts his extra effort into making it even higher than it would be anyway (regardless of this likely not being his primary goal). So, don't even try to somehow draw a parallel between us, because we're actually at the opposite, very far ends of the same scale.
Why don’t you trade it for a newer and more efficient, cleaner running diesel?
Would that lower the emission of this particular car, or that of humanity as a whole? Obviously it wouldn't, not even a single microgram. Because this very car would still be driven by someone else, and would keep emitting the same amount of stuff. Or possibly even more, if that person would delete the DPF, or would not take as good care of the car as I do.
Or should I scrap it, and buy a new one instead of it? What do you think how much pollution manufacturing all the components, building, transporting that car to me, etc. does create? Do you really think the net emission saving between the emissions created by my "old" car and a new, possibly more efficient one would be more, than how much extra emission building and delivering that new car to me would generate? Because it wouldn't be not even close.
So, then why would I do that - even if I'd have the funds for that? Or what did you mean to say or imply there?
This is supposed to be about sharing information not condemnation, judgement and shame.
This thread wasn't about judgement until someone tried to defend an illegal act by trying to poke fun of those who pointed out the act to be illegal. So, is your problem being judgemental? Because then you're definitely complaining at the wrong point of time and to the wrong person. Even now I'm not arguing based on moral grounds, but based on hard facts and logic. Or is your actual problem more that there have been valid and pretty much irrefutable points brought up against DPF delete, both on legal, health, and also on environmental grounds?
Most of my questions are obviously rhetoric.