kotuku4:
Umm you can buy the land cruiser 70 and 200 series with 4.5 litre v8 diesel. Toyota.co.nz
The Landcruiser 200 V8 has been discontinued by TNZ and its status is "sold out" My understanding is it is being replaced with a V6 Hybrid
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
kotuku4:
Umm you can buy the land cruiser 70 and 200 series with 4.5 litre v8 diesel. Toyota.co.nz
The Landcruiser 200 V8 has been discontinued by TNZ and its status is "sold out" My understanding is it is being replaced with a V6 Hybrid
kotuku4:
Scott3:
NZ has had emission's standards for some time, so you can't import a Land-cruiser 4.2 diesel to NZ anymore, but they are still sold in kenya etc:
https://www.toyotakenya.ke/en/range/toyota-kenya/land-cruiser-70-series
(although we do have an exemption for 20+ year old stuff that badly needs to be closed.
Umm you can buy the land cruiser 70 and 200 series with 4.5 litre v8 diesel. Toyota.co.nz
Completely different engine.
4.2 is an inline 6 with the engine code 1HD FTE. 4.5 is a v8 with the engine code 1VD-FTV
Both have advantages and disadvantages. 1HD FTE has a reputation of being extremely reliable, and tolerant of poor fuel. 1VD-FTV meets modern emission's standards, makes more power & torque.
The 1HD FTE remains in prodution but cannot be sold in NZ due to it's emissions profile.
MikeB4:
The Landcruiser 200 V8 has been discontinued by TNZ and its status is "sold out" My understanding is it is being replaced with a V6 Hybrid
Thanks. There will be some extremely disappointed people who were looking to pick up one of the v8 200 series cruisers before the 300 series arrives. Plus there is going to be quite a few months where Toyota NZ is without it's flagship SUV.
Toyota Landcruiser 300 series. The v8 is getting retired, and it is widely expected that a 6 cylinder turbo diesel will replace it in the line up, along with a 3.5L 6 cylinder petrol and 3.5L 6 cylinder hybrid. A 4 cylinder diesel is expected for some markets, and there are rumors of a v8 petrol flaghsip. It is unclear what Toyota NZ will offer here.
Scott3:
GV27:
Also, I'd buy a V12 in a heartbeat, but I'd also be quite happy to limit the usage of it under a cap (5,000km a year etc). Most insurers will make you nominate a limit for a classic anyway so I don't see the issue.
Classics are already exempt in the current proposal
V12 engines in modern cars are limited to very expensive and very exotic stuff. I don't think a $500k ferrari or Rolls Royce should be treated any differently to a Cheaper car with less cylinders and comparable consumption (say Y62 Nissan patrol).
Should note that policies that encourage owning more vehicles (such as a km cap) arn't ideal from an emissions reduction perspective. A lot of emissions embed in the manufacture of a car.
After my experience with my BMW Mini Cooper, any modern car I buy will have fewer cylinders, not more - ideally none.
Ironically enough now my daily drive 2000 Corolla is old enough to be imported under the 20 year rule.
While it's not directly related to Climate Change, the YouTube channel Kurzgesagt has done a video on Nuclear energy deaths, with a comparison to the deaths from the health impacts of fossil fuels. This link takes you to the part of the video that explains the deaths from fossil fuels and compares it to deaths caused by Nuclear and Renewables. It highlights that the Clean Car Standard serves to be a two for one helping both climate change and our health.
Better late than never I suppose...
can anyone tell me how much a year of a cow's life compares to co2 per km travelled of a car? (want to know if cow or car is worse)
Involuntary autocorrect in operation on mobile device. Apologies in advance.
Batman:
... (want to know if cow or car is worse)
Cow is definitely worse. I've got a 30km commute to work, about 25 minutes by car (depending on traffic), 5 hours by cow. π
I've joined a carpenters course. Haven't made anything yet....we've only just begun.
Batman:
can anyone tell me how much a year of a cow's life compares to co2 per km travelled of a car? (want to know if cow or car is worse)
Can't find a cow to car calculator!
Here is some rough data
Cows, pigs and other farm livestock in Europe are producing more greenhouse gases every year than all of the bloc’s cars and vans put together, when the impact of their feed is taken into account, according to a new analysis by Greenpeace. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/sep/22/eu-farm-animals-produce-more-emissions-than-cars-and-vans-combined-greenpeace
The EU has a substantial livestock population: there were 143 million pigs, 77 million bovine animals, 62 million sheep* and 12 million goats* in December 2019 (297 million)
There are some 312.7 million motor vehicles in circulation on the EU's roads
One livestock = one car? Doesn't seem right
Farming especially Dairy has a big impact on green house gases and waterways and certainly needs to change urgently but this does not diminish the need to address our travel including cars, trucks and aircraft.
floydbloke:
Batman:
... (want to know if cow or car is worse)
Cow is definitely worse. I've got a 30km commute to work, about 25 minutes by car (depending on traffic), 5 hours by cow. π
I just got a couple of funny looks at work for laughing randomly... this comment was so immature, I thank you π
I'm not a complete idiot, I still have some parts missing.
Batman:
can anyone tell me how much a year of a cow's life compares to co2 per km travelled of a car? (want to know if cow or car is worse)
Cows emit about 5,000g CO2 and 160g CH4 per day
A 4-stroke 2L car breathes about 1L/rev * (say) 3,000RPM = 3,000 L/min, of which I think pretty much all the 16% O2 turns to CO2 = 480L/min of CO2 produced at 1.87kg/m^3 = 0.89kg/min = 890g/min
So if the car is driven more than 5.6 hours/day, it emits more CO2 than the cow. But the cow also emits methane, which is 84 times as bad as CO2, so the cow's 160g CH4/day is equivalent to 13,440g CO2; add that to the 5,000g CO2 and you have 18,440g CO2-equivalent per day. In which case the car could be driven 20.7 hours per day.
So, for most cars, a cow is worse for the environment (unless you take into account the emissions in manufacturing the car maybe).
[edit]: The 2L @ 3,000RPM is about what my car does at about 100kph. Lower speeds will mean lower RPMs and less CO2 per hour, but more CO2/km. Larger displacement car engines will emit more, unless (as is likely) they're running at lower RPM. Whilst cars don't emit CH4, they do emit nitrous oxides which are bad for people and destroy ozone.
[edit 2]: The cows in the link were dairy cows. I think that beef cattle will emit substantially less CO2, since they don't have the load of producing a whole lot of milk every day.
Don't even think about a whole lot of cows being transported by a truck.
Heres an interesting breakdown and modeling of GHG emissions from farms IN NZ, We should keep in mind that NZ dairy and beef are amoung the most efficient and "greenest" in the world so global modeling doesn't always fit
https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/28329/direct
Some great mathematical modelling being done. Has anyone factored in that the ‘fuel’ cattle use is biomass and as such is renewable?
“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |