Latour Ch. 3

Drawing on my previous example (which will be a trend, I fear) there are some interesting arguments pushing the debate over clean diesel. Auto manufacturers are launching extreme campaigns to convince the American public that there is virtue in diesel technology. For example, Audi's TDI (http://www.truthinengineering.com/tdi/) campaign is seeking to demystify the misconceptions people harbor. Here we see the money pressed into service to get the black box of diesel pushed back upstream (at least in the US perception) and the conception of sustainable clean diesel downstream. Attacking the arguments directly with research and testing is costly but in the long run it might pay off for both the struggling auto industry and the environment. BMW has, at great cost, set up a similar campaign including using diesel pres vehicles that highlight how far diesel has come since the stinky cars of the 70s. Will the efforts of these brands be rewarded and will the cost of pushing their arguments downstream and into the minds of the worlds most fickle consumers pay off, or will misguided environmentalists win out in their call for zero emissions tech? A valid argument is that diesel is a band aid which is an idea that could be called midstream, it is a concept that would require a lot more money than perhaps any group is willing to throw at it to move it in their favor. It's intriguing that a concept could be neutral in a discussion such as this and depending on who rolls the ball will determine how the argument descents and the strength of its persuasion. Audi put an intense amount of money towards convince the vocal minority of auto enthusiasts by running a TDI car in Le Mans for three years. The money and research that has to go into the program exemplifies the trust that is put in by audi and potentially by the end consumer; for who this is ultimately done for. Who determines the true validity of these efforts.