|
Post by LandieMark on Nov 5, 2019 23:13:09 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-bristol-50292596The first major city to blanket ban diesels. They are going to charge for buses, taxis and delivery vans. I can see Newcastle following suit if its a success. I definitely need to keep a petrol vehicle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2019 1:09:19 GMT
Considering most public transport being diesel and them wanting more uptake for public transport, who is going to come up with the subsidy for that? Public transport costs are already a joke with overcrowding etc during the crush, how is this joined up thinking on transport?
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 6, 2019 9:32:14 GMT
Good to see that for once it isn't just targeting private cars, however I walk past a very busy taxi rank in the centre of Dundee most lunchtimes and those plonkers often sit, even in warm weather, with their engine running so are they going to be pursued for doing that?
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Nov 6, 2019 10:34:48 GMT
About time a class action was taken against the government. People were persuaded into Diesels and now its costing them as councils change there mind about what the public should be driving. I'm sure they want electric cars but probably have done nothing with regards to infrastructure.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Nov 6, 2019 10:43:04 GMT
Why do uninformed local authorities have the power to massively impact people's lives?
Modern Euro6 diesels are very clean in NOx, produce less CO2 and consume less scarce resources than petrol cars. Land Rover dealers in Bristol may as well shut their doors and what do you do if you have just spent £80K on a new Range Rover? Move somewhere else?
I know there isn't universal love for diesels on here but the blanket ban is just so stupid, so uninformed and so damaging. This diesel hate game is going to decimate the motor industry, motor dealers and all the ancillary trades and suppliers whilst delivering a very limited, if any, benefit.
It would be much better, less intrusive and sensible if central Government introduced a scrappage scheme for diesels which weren't Euro6 or better.
|
|
|
Post by Blarno on Nov 6, 2019 11:02:09 GMT
Putting a plaster on cancer, that's what this is.
How are they going to enforce the ban? Shoot all diesel drivers on sight? Will it be ANPR enforced with fines? Will there be toll booths with emissions savvy tech bods? Or some geezer who can sniff out diesel fumes?
I'm a total diesel convert, until such a time exists that a petrol car can match the usable performance to economy ratio of a turbodiesel.
Another scrappage scheme is pointless. The last one was a total shambles - you only have to do a quick search online to find photos and videos of airfield and yards rammed to bursting point with perfectly usable older cars that were hastily chucked in part ex on the promise of saving the environment. Some of us don't have the funds to buy a new car. Some of us don't want a new car (Me included - the rise of DPFs and now GPFs is enough to put me right off anything new)
The irony being that all these lovely new cars offered on scrappage schemes have consumed a shit tonne of CO2 to produce in the first place, they'll never achieve any of the claims for economy or efficiency and, in the case of DPF and GPF equipped vehicles, will end up either being scrapped or repaired at great expense (Both fiscally and in CO2) when the emissions control systems fail because they require a very specific set of parameters to be achieved to allow them to operate correctly.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Nov 6, 2019 11:19:50 GMT
About time a class action was taken against the government. People were persuaded into Diesels I call a degree of bullshit on this line of argument.
Everyone I know who bought a diesel did so because they expected to get better mpg and therefore they imagined it would be a cheaper vehicle to own. No other reason unless it for that small subset of the population who regularly tows and needs a torquier engine.
I have never ever heard a single one utter a single word about how it was for environmental reasons.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Nov 6, 2019 11:20:38 GMT
But in general I think this is a silly move. No call for a total ban for all the reasons already stated.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Nov 6, 2019 11:34:04 GMT
Putting a plaster on cancer, that's what this is. How are they going to enforce the ban? Shoot all diesel drivers on sight? Will it be ANPR enforced with fines? Will there be toll booths with emissions savvy tech bods? Or some geezer who can sniff out diesel fumes? It'll be enforced like the London Congestion Charge, with ANPR and fines.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Nov 6, 2019 11:38:36 GMT
About time a class action was taken against the government. People were persuaded into Diesels I call a degree of bullshit on this line of argument.
Everyone I know who bought a diesel did so because they expected to get better mpg and therefore they imagined it would be a cheaper vehicle to own. No other reason unless it for that small subset of the population who regularly tows and needs a torquier engine.
I have never ever heard a single one utter a single word about how it was for environmental reasons.
I remember everyone being happier with petrol and then the EU/Government told us that diesel was better for the environment as it produced less CO2. They upped the tax on petrol cars for company car drivers and made diesel the go to choice through taxation incentives. Companies were OK with it as the additional cost of these environmentally friendly vehicles was offset by better mpg for high mileage drivers. Turns out we were sold a pup.
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Nov 6, 2019 12:01:35 GMT
About time a class action was taken against the government. People were persuaded into Diesels I call a degree of bullshit on this line of argument.
Everyone I know who bought a diesel did so because they expected to get better mpg and therefore they imagined it would be a cheaper vehicle to own. No other reason unless it for that small subset of the population who regularly tows and needs a torquier engine.
I have never ever heard a single one utter a single word about how it was for environmental reasons.
So you don't know anyone with a company car or anyone who buys a certain car because you get cheaper RFL? People bought diesel because of cheaper costs but that was because those costs were manipulated by government policy towards diesel. Yes you got better MPG but you had done for years and the diesel uptake was poor.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Nov 6, 2019 12:15:21 GMT
If it's a company car, it's not going to be the driver's problem. And I never heard anyone mention the cost of RFL - it was always about the MPG.
But what I was really getting at was all the sudden outcry by sections of the public bleating that they bought their Golf TDis because they thought it was helping them save the planet and it turns out it wasn't. That smacks of total BS to me. They just smell money.
Sure the government is playing silly buggers, but I just refuse to indulge what I see as another manifestation of today's pernicious victim culture.
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Nov 6, 2019 12:35:24 GMT
The co car user has now been moved out of diesel and is in hybrid. The point was that the number of diesels is now numerous and in the hands of the private motorist.
Money is quite important and is usually the top driver on most peoples agenda, nobodies arguing that but most people also need to budget where £50 of road tax makes a big difference to what they eat that week.
I reading what you've put as I can afford it so sod everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 6, 2019 13:04:28 GMT
I call a degree of bullshit on this line of argument.
Everyone I know who bought a diesel did so because they expected to get better mpg and therefore they imagined it would be a cheaper vehicle to own. No other reason unless it for that small subset of the population who regularly tows and needs a torquier engine.
I have never ever heard a single one utter a single word about how it was for environmental reasons.
I remember everyone being happier with petrol and then the EU/Government told us that diesel was better for the environment as it produced less CO2. They upped the tax on petrol cars for company car drivers and made diesel the go to choice through taxation incentives. Companies were OK with it as the additional cost of these environmentally friendly vehicles was offset by better mpg for high mileage drivers. Turns out we were sold a pup. Same as the massive reduction in tax for those using a hybrid where the rush to BMW 530es, for example, is completely bogus as a) most users don't bother plugging them in and b) if you're on the road a lot what benefit do you actually get from batteries with a fairly tiny range. At some point the tax system will realise its mistake and we'll go through the same process with all these short-range hybrids.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Nov 6, 2019 13:08:52 GMT
What about trains? Those Cross Country voyager trains all seem to go through there and they're some of the dirtiest on the network.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Nov 6, 2019 13:30:24 GMT
Here's where I have a problem with it; we all know that cars today emit less than 1% of the pollutants they did 30 odd years ago. If you take Newcastle they are saying that pollution levels are now so bad on the Tyne Bridge that something has to be done as it's causing the deaths of hundreds of people each year. However, the Tyne Bridge is no busier today than it was 30 years ago so the traffic crossing it is only emitting 1% of what it was 30 years ago. So, logically, there must have been tens of thousands of deaths then? People would not have been able to breathe. Add in the fact that the local coal fired power stations have closed down, I smell bullshit.
The other grand idea Newcastle City Council have is to make the Coast Road - the dual carriageway that runs from the City to the coast, only free to post 2006 petrol and Euro 6 diesels. All other cars would pay £12.50. So they are proposing to take polluting cars off the road where they travel most efficiently and onto the surrounding streets, full of family houses and children, where they'll add to pollution right outside peoples' houses where kids are playing and walking to school. You really couldn't make it up.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 6, 2019 13:34:30 GMT
The other grand idea Newcastle City Council have is to make the Coast Road - the dual carriageway that runs from the City to the coast, only free to post 2006 petrol and Euro 6 diesels. All other cars would pay £12.50. So they are proposing to take polluting cars off the road where they travel most efficiently and onto the surrounding streets, full of family houses and children, where they'll add to pollution right outside peoples' houses where kids are playing and walking to school. You really couldn't make it up. But you know that in their tiny minds the fact that some categories of cars are banned means that they will simply disappear and magically be replaced by brand new vehicles that have zero emissions and no huge emission cost of production/delivery.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Nov 6, 2019 13:43:05 GMT
The other grand idea Newcastle City Council have is to make the Coast Road - the dual carriageway that runs from the City to the coast, only free to post 2006 petrol and Euro 6 diesels. All other cars would pay £12.50. So they are proposing to take polluting cars off the road where they travel most efficiently and onto the surrounding streets, full of family houses and children, where they'll add to pollution right outside peoples' houses where kids are playing and walking to school. You really couldn't make it up. But you know that in their tiny minds the fact that some categories of cars are banned means that they will simply disappear and magically be replaced by brand new vehicles that have zero emissions and no huge emission cost of production/delivery. Ah yes, like when the Greens say building more roads with result in more cars, as if the moment the tape is cut on the new dual carriageway the number vehicles magically jumps to new highs.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 6, 2019 14:35:26 GMT
The reason I'm currently running around in an Audi A6 is that one of my colleagues suddenly realised how much tax he was paying to have it and once he realised we weren't going to chop it in for a 530e he took the cash option and bought himself something.
His decision had absolutely nothing to do with pollution and everything to do with money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2019 14:50:25 GMT
That is certainly traditional politics, find a problem and tax it into extinction. Find the next, rinse and repeat. Nothing like addressing a problem by not addressing a problem at solving problems. Just who does advise government in these issues anyway?
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Nov 6, 2019 15:50:53 GMT
The co car user has now been moved out of diesel and is in hybrid. The point was that the number of diesels is now numerous and in the hands of the private motorist. Money is quite important and is usually the top driver on most peoples agenda, nobodies arguing that but most people also need to budget where £50 of road tax makes a big difference to what they eat that week. I reading what you've put as I can afford it so sod everyone else. Read it how you choose. I completely agree that people bought diesels because they thought it would save them money, whether through mpg, RFL or servicing or whatever. But, at the time the govt starting pushing diesel and it became the popular choice, petrol residuals took a hit. Did owners of petrol cars get to sue the government for the change in policy? No.
My point is different: when the VAG dieselgate scandal first hit, newspapers like the Guardian were full of self-righteous pieces about how it was outrageous that UK drivers had been conned into buying what they thought was the "green option" when it wasn't. And that's where I think the horseshit lies - I don't think the vast majority gave the green aspect the slightest thought when buying their car, let alone those worrying about how to feed their family each week. It was purely the expectation of lower running costs.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Nov 6, 2019 17:41:08 GMT
My point is different: when the VAG dieselgate scandal first hit, newspapers like the Guardian were full of self-righteous pieces about how it was outrageous that UK drivers had been conned into buying what they thought was the "green option" when it wasn't. And that's where I think the horseshit lies - I don't think the vast majority gave the green aspect the slightest thought when buying their car, let alone those worrying about how to feed their family each week. It was purely the expectation of lower running costs.
I agree with that but I also think the Government have a lot of responsibility for demonising all diesels when only the older ones need reining in. It was a totally irresponsible act not backed up by facts and enormously damaging to many people and businesses. If anyone else made such false claims and statements they would be prosecuted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2019 22:01:47 GMT
What are Bristol planning to do with the trains then? There are at least two train stations and the trains that use them ain't electric ones. There's also ruddy great river runs through the middle of it. They gonna ban boats, too?
Twats!
|
|
|
Post by Sav on Nov 6, 2019 22:43:37 GMT
There is a fab article in Autocar this week about the potential extinction of city cars. Unfortunately, socialism is rife across Europe. Those who keep mandating these crazy CO2 targets haven’t got a clue about the very legislation they are passing. We keep hearing how France is one of the biggest supporters of the EU, perhaps not the people to run their biggest businesses. Fundamentally, the freedom that the motor vehicle provides has always been a problem with large swathes of politicians.
We’re told that Greta Thunberg must be listened to, and it’s been alarming how politicians are bowing down to her and seriously thinking of rushing through climate targets on the basis of her holy advice. All she is, is another socialist living in cloud cuckoo land. Greta says this, Greta says that, its like a cult.
This diesel ban is just laughable. A ban utterly devoid of facts or any reasonable rationale. Local authorities need their powers curbed. People often say they want more localism. I don't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2019 22:54:33 GMT
The threat is very real but the methods chosen to address it are in cloud cuckoo land, we need real joined up thinking to get through it and demonising one part of our activities of living misses the point, education rather than ranting on all sides will possibly do the trick. I still hope we can get there but many of those pointing politicians are merely people with an interest in their own agenda and financial backers they are controlled by too. Including extinction rebellion, sham and fake groups are everywhere and we thought spin was a thing of the past.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 7, 2019 9:31:52 GMT
Local authorities need their powers curbed. They have to get it ratified by Central Government so it's merely a proposal from them, not a policy that's been put into action.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Nov 7, 2019 9:36:05 GMT
I don't know Bristol that well but surely this is only about sectioning off a small part of the city centre anyway?
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 7, 2019 9:42:02 GMT
I don't know Bristol that well but surely this is only about sectioning off a small part of the city centre anyway? There's a map in the story linked above. It is just the centre but there's a larger clean air zone with some restrictions but it doesn't appear to cover the whole city. The outright ban is only from 7 a.m. until 3.30 p.m. Initially, anyway. As is usual with these things once it's in place it'll grow.
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Nov 7, 2019 12:23:52 GMT
About time a class action was taken against the government. People were persuaded into Diesels I call a degree of bullshit on this line of argument.
Everyone I know who bought a diesel did so because they expected to get better mpg and therefore they imagined it would be a cheaper vehicle to own. No other reason unless it for that small subset of the population who regularly tows and needs a torquier engine.
I have never ever heard a single one utter a single word about how it was for environmental reasons.
Quite true, which is why I have to have a little sneer at those people suing VAG. None of them bought diesel for solely environmental reasons, I'll bet. I got mine because it gives a level of performance, economy and cheap road tax that is unbeatable. OK, excellent MPG figures are an environmental assistance in that using less fossil fuel cannot be a bad thing, but that was a sideline benefit. I see buses, HGVs and taxis are yet again not the focus of attention. It would be interesting to see just how much (or how little) difference this kind of scheme will make. When I visited that there London village back in August, the place was choked up with old buses, taxis and trucks. Despite asupposed LEZ and emissions charging. "They should be encouraging the use of buses rather than increasing the cost." Yes. Provided they are clean, not the ancient things I tend to see still running around, chucking out clouds of soot.
|
|
|
Post by Boxer6 on Nov 7, 2019 12:49:15 GMT
I call a degree of bullshit on this line of argument.
Everyone I know who bought a diesel did so because they expected to get better mpg and therefore they imagined it would be a cheaper vehicle to own. No other reason unless it for that small subset of the population who regularly tows and needs a torquier engine.
I have never ever heard a single one utter a single word about how it was for environmental reasons.
Quite true, which is why I have to have a little sneer at those people suing VAG. None of them bought diesel for solely environmental reasons, I'll bet. I got mine because it gives a level of performance, economy and cheap road tax that is unbeatable. OK, excellent MPG figures are an environmental assistance in that using less fossil fuel cannot be a bad thing, but that was a sideline benefit. I see buses, HGVs and taxis are yet again not the focus of attention. It would be interesting to see just how much (or how little) difference this kind of scheme will make. When I visited that there London village back in August, the place was choked up with old buses, taxis and trucks. Despite asupposed LEZ and emissions charging. "They should be encouraging the use of buses rather than increasing the cost." Yes. Provided they are clean, not the ancient things I tend to see still running around, chucking out clouds of soot.A friend of mine is engineering maestro for a bus company (depot) and tells me tales of how they look after their fleet. For example, the oldest bus they currently have in service on regular routes is 9, and all of them meet Euro6 guidelines either from the factory or retro-fitted.
The exhaust system on a Euro6 Volvo decker is upwards of £11,000!!!
|
|