Mud-club
Chat & Social => The Bar - General Chat => Topic started by: landraver on February 27, 2006, 10:02:12
-
Just booted up AOL and was faced with this in their homepage news section:
"Drivers of gas-guzzling 4x4 cars have been accused of "crass irresponsibility" by a government minister with a responsibility for cutting Britain's carbon emissions.
Energy minister Malcolm Wicks indicated that the Government was considering punitive measures to persuade motorists to opt for less environmentally-damaging vehicles.
And he suggested that the authorities would like to see a situation where manufacturers were regarded as "irresponsible" for even producing cars which emitted high levels of greenhouse gases.
A record 187,000 4x4s were sold in the UK last year, up from 80,000 a decade ago.
But many of the so-called "Chelsea tractors" are used in the cities where there is no call for their off-road capacities.
Mr Wicks told The Times: "There is crass irresponsibility in some of the larger monstrosities people drive around suburbia and in London.
"We have to move against this kind of thing."
According to The Times, the Government is considering an increase to £200 in the price of a tax disc for high-emission cars which produce more than 250g of carbon dioxide per kilometre - compared with 104g for Mr Wicks' own Toyota Prius.
The minister also suggested that there should be incentives for manufacturers to switch to "greener" technology, like the Prius's hybrid system which combines a petrol-driven engine with an electric motor.
He said he was "disappointed" that British and European manufacturers had not followed the lead of the Japanese.
"Given the very demanding CO2 cuts we must make, we are going to need more than just a series of marginal changes. We are going to need a step-change," he said.
"We will have to ask, 'Is it environmentally responsible to be producing cars which are a serious part of the problem?'
"There will come a time when it will be irresponsible for those to be on sale."
Transport minister Stephen Ladyman told the paper that moves were being considered to encourage the use of less polluting fuels.
Suppliers are already being asked to produce five per cent of transport fuel from renewable sources like crops by 2010, and Dr Ladyman said the target would have to be increased after that date.
"Somewhere down the supply chain, it will have to be more expensive to supply fuels which are high in CO2," he said.
"The thrust of any policy post-2010 has to be to make people make greener choices."
Britain has a target of cutting CO2 emissions by 60 per cent by 2050."
hmmm!
Once again a bit of political bandwagon jumping going on I fear :cry:
Jeff
-
The best bit is that its comparing figures with car made today, so our 10-12 year old Discos are totally out of the equation anyway. :lol:
-
<sigh>
More tax? What do they think VAT is? What do they think fuel *tax* is?
By owning my climate killer I am fattening the coffers of the treasury so they can plant more trees (not!).
They have more problems than that too....
They can't define a climate killer 4x4 ... as a small percentage are V8 etc - not the majority! If someone can afford £80,000 for a chelsea tractor...do you really think a tax increase of a few hundred quid a year will bother him/her? However - at the other end of the scale, the owner of the new Panda 4x4 will be a tad horrified!?!
Then of course we have the problem of "unfair victimisation" :-)
My new engine is a variant of the XKR engine - so therefore, if it's bad in my Range Rover .... surely it's bad in the XKR? Ban that too.
My current Range Rover has a 7 series BMW engine under the bonnet....ban my Range Rover ... but leave the 7 series on the road? Er....still not making sense here....
On Friday we were driving around in a Bentley Continental GT - it's got a HUGE engine, and the computer was showing us single figure MPG results....hardly green?!?! Ban it!!! LOL
Anyway ... as I say .... it's not fair to pick out 4x4 drivers when we are not the only people with big engines. We're just an easier target :(
-
Then of course we have the problem of "unfair victimisation" :-)
My new engine is a variant of the XKR engine - so therefore, if it's bad in my Range Rover .... surely it's bad in the XKR? Ban that too.
My current Range Rover has a 7 series BMW engine under the bonnet....ban my Range Rover ... but leave the 7 series on the road? Er....still not making sense here....
I'm the last one to say owt against 4x4s, but we've got to be a bit carefull with our choice of argument on these subjects otherwise the Treehuggers will be straight in. :-k
Thier argument here will be that the BMW emits 100gm/km less CO2 than the Ranger Rover with the same engine. The Jag has emits 90g/km less CO2 than the equivelent engined RRS. Just 'cos it's the same motor doesn't mean it's the same in every respect.
Bentleys? Does anyone need a car that big? I don't have inch think shagpile carpet in my home, why would I want it in my car? :P
Just a tuppence to add to the pot!
cheers
8)
Eeyore
-
Yes- reading between the lines he's taking a (badly aimed) pop at 4x4's but it will encompass all vehicles that have more power than a moped.
So they're trying to pass it off as a move against urban 4x4's (which anyone knows would be un-enforceable) to generate more revenue from all motorists. W*nkers.
-
Why I hate 'New Labour'
They persecute minorities to appeal to the majority
Holocaust sound familiure???
OK so you may think that last comment a little un fair, but they have done this before.
cough "fox hunting" cough
A great way of gaining support from the left, wasting time and money, and have no effect on animal welfair all in one bill.
They only use the term 4x4 or SUV to appeal to the general public.
-
http://channels.aolsvc.co.uk/motor/article.adp?id=20060227030909990001 just been on there to read some of it. There is a vote and when i just voted it was 51% say yes we should pay more tax while 49% say no.
-
Just in case Any one miss understands my previous comment, I am refering to the scape goating not the murder side of the holocaust.
-
why do they class 4x4s as gas guzzling, and does it mean any vehicle that is 4 wheel drive :evil:
-
Just in case Any one miss understands my previous comment, I am refering to the scape goating not the murder side of the holocaust.
Yes I know what you mean, & I completely agree!! As you said the foxhunting "issue" is a perfect example. Destroying peoples livelyhoods for the sake of appeasing people who don't understand and don't care!
Jeff
-
why do they class 4x4s as gas guzzling, and does it mean any vehicle that is 4 wheel drive :evil:
Yes, my 1.6 Vitara uses so much more than my race tuned 2.5Litre turboed german luxury car. I'll bet it uses double the fuel that the same manufactures 6.9Lt W12 engined flagship car does!
-
Haven't I read somewhere that the goverment are proposing to buy, (with OUR money) 25 jags for it's ministers? :? :evil:
-
Just booted up AOL and was faced with this in their homepage news section:
Once again a bit of political bandwagon jumping going on I fear :cry:
Jeff
I saw that as well
Haven't I read somewhere that the goverment are proposing to buy, (with OUR money) 25 jags for it's ministers?
Aren't they also being given the option of a Toyota Prius as well?
Of course, they'll all go for the Jag and cite the 'Security Risk' factor for needing a fast & powerful car :roll:
-
Cut them some slack... I'd walk to avoid a Pirus.
-
sounds ideal coming from a labour party whose leader at the first chance plonks his butt on a plane to fly every few days.i am getting so fed up with this nanny state attitude of "minority dictatorship" on us 4x4 owners.
-
Prius?
Would somebody care to explain the exestance of this car. The fancy electrics reduce the cars performance for a small increase in efficiency. If I want efficiency I would go for a golf TDI which has plenty of performance and will do over 60mpg at 90mph.
Oh yes I forgot Its a like armarni hand bag, it is not intended for practical use, but as a fasion accesory.
-
:evil:
so will taxes be raised across the board for any 4x4?
What about something like the high end performance cars that have 4 wheel drive?
What about emergency service vechicles that are 4 wheel drive?
what about the royal families 4x4's?
What about the goverments 4x4's?(e.g. special protection units etc)
what about normal cars with 4 wheel drive - e.g. fiat panda? siera's etc?
what about farmers and tradesmen who need a four wheel drive for the business?
and whats the justification to rasise this tax?
where will the money be spent
bet its not on maintaining greenlanes,motorways and other roads.
Basicly theve lost on things like NERC so want to hit back somewhere that wil hurt and as always with the morons in whitehall
about to email my local mp (labour by coincidence) suprise suprise he has no email contact info
=D>
-
If politicians keep talking out of the place where the sun dont shine how can we hope to keep the environment right, they seem to be the biggest pollution I can see
-
Don't worry because the way this government tackles crime somebody will have stolen your wheels anyway which equels 0 emissions.
-
All we need is for theives to steal all the MPs cars/vehicles and force them to use public transport. If they were forced to use it then they would dedicte a lot more time and effort to this instead. Just imagen they might even get a reliable and cost effective train service going.
-
Personally as i now find myself living in a 'semi' rural area i fully intend on going to my local MP's surgery to see what his stance on 4x4's are and why regardless of 'for or against'
If more people did this maybe we could get a better gauge of how the land 'lies'.
Also besides anything else the amount of wheels being turned by (indirectly) an engine what gripe can they have especially when there are other motors on the road that produce a greater threat to global warming.
How about we restrict exhaust emissions from ALL vehicles including buses, trucks and trains then and only then can we get back to the anti 4x4 arguement which is so pointless in this day and age.
I figure if we are heading for massive climate change i will be needing all my damn 4x4's.
My ramblings are just that :?
-
Just imagen they might even get a reliable and cost effective train service going.
ok now we really are talking in the realms of fantasy
:lol:
-
No, in the ideal fantasy land anybody with political ambition would automatically be bared from being invoved in running the country.
Just think
No spin
No PR stunts
No half truths
No making sure your realected
No saying "at least we are not as bad as the oposition".
If that doesn't sound like bliss to you then go back to wesminster.
Oh just had anouther thought, what if there were no layers either?
-
All we need is for theives to steal all the MPs cars/vehicles and force them to use public transport
That sound a bit like 'Social Engineering', restrain peoples freedom of movement by eliminating personal transport (or make it unappealingly priced)
If it continues we'll have a pre-Industrial Revolution society, where you only travel to the nearest town as you can't go any further within a reasonable time-scale
I knew I shouldn't have watched 1984 the other night :lol: :roll:
Come to think of it, isn't George Orwells real name (Eric Arthur) Blair (or is that just a co-incidence?) :lol: :lol:
-
hmmm!
Once again a bit of political bandwagon jumping going on I fear :cry:
Jeff
What else do you expect from sheep, put a red rosette on a t**d and people will vote for it.
Common sense and the labour party are mutually exclusive.
-
Suppliers are already being asked to produce five per cent of transport fuel from renewable sources like crops by 2010, and Dr Ladyman said the target would have to be increased after that date.
[rant]
Hmm, so why are the exchequer making the use of vegetable-oil fuels more expensive to use than fossil fuels at present?? Have a look at the price of commercially produced bio-diesel too; constantly a few pence a litre more than fossil!!!
And why only 5%, unless it's to keep the petroleum companies sweet; all diesel could be bio; where's the problem in that?? Apart from the obvious one of upsetting the oil magantes, of course!!!
Also these people are STILL totally ignoring the fact that the majority of the pollution any vehicle including electric/hybrids produce in their lifetimes, is in their production!!!! - the government cannot simply go on exhaust emissions, as this is a tiny fraction of the total; Land Rovers are, in fact one of the greenest vehicles around, given the enormous amount of them still on the road; how many 50+ year old Toyotas will there be on the roads in 2056? Very few I suspect!!
[/rant]
-
Did you know that...
In one year ONE cow can emit <proportionately> the same amount of METHANE into the atmosphere as TWO Discovery 3 diesel doing 12,000 miles p/a can emit carbon dioxide.
Both Greenhouses Gases. BAN THE COW, i say.
-
No, in the ideal fantasy land anybody with political ambition would automatically be bared from being invoved in running the country.
Just think
No spin
No PR stunts
No half truths
No making sure your realected
No saying "at least we are not as bad as the oposition".
If that doesn't sound like bliss to you then go back to wesminster.
Oh just had anouther thought, what if there were no layers either?
Isn't one of the European countries like that - all the cabinet posts are done on a selection basis similar to jury duty and you get called up and told "You are the prime minister for the next six months"...?
-
Did you know that...
In one year ONE cow can emit <proportionately> the same amount of METHANE into the atmosphere as TWO Discovery 3 diesel doing 12,000 miles p/a can emit carbon dioxide.
Both Greenhouses Gases. BAN THE COW, i say.
and people say mcdonalds are distroying the enviroment. They should be hailed for there sterling work in reducing the worlds bovine population
:lol:
-
I'm all for higher Taxis ............................ :shock:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4616995657&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1
-
First, let me say I agree with Thrasher
More tax? What do they think VAT is? What do they think fuel *tax* is?
So, a car (whatever type, 2wd or 4) uses more petrol - the owner AUTOMATICALLY pays more tax.
So having proved that the treehuggers can't add up (or maybe its multiplication that is there problem?)
Why shouldn't the treehuggers concentrate on cars that, "can't" be practical, like my ex-boss's top of the line sports cars?
Gas guzzlers? yep thats them
Practical? Nope, only seat two people and can't carry more than an overnight bag in the luggage compartment
Driving Style encouraged? welll the're barely ticking over at 50 mph, speed was what they were built for, and that was all.
Whats more, its the stupid 17 - ?9 year olds males that lust after them that cause one heck of a lot of the accidents on the road today...
But picket a Porsche dealership? naw, Greenpeace would rather try to drive more jobs out of the UK than actually do their sums.
Of course this is my opinion, but I am sure I am not alone.
Incidentally, has anyone else noticed the rise of 'people carriers' occupied by just one lonely male in the rush hour traffic, most of which are longer, and wider than my 110!
Oh and before the treehuggers come to lynch me, my 110 runs on LPG....