Motorists who drive fuel-hungry BMWs, people carriers and Range Rovers face a five-fold increase in road tax under radical plans to combat Britain's spiralling greenhouse gas emissions.
The proposals are being studied by transport and environment ministers after it emerged that car buyers are ignoring warnings about the dangers of climate change by increasingly choosing luxury cars, larger MPVs and 4x4s with large, powerful engines.
The Government's influential energy conservation agency, the Energy Saving Trust (EST), has told ministers the only way to force motorists to buy "green" cars is to introduce a new top rate of road tax as high as £900 a year.
The new tax - more than five times the current rate of £165 a year for petrol engines - would have a major impact, by catching many popular larger family cars such as the Vauxhall Sharan or Ford Galaxy people carriers. Link
PeakOil is You
THE Hummer/SUV Thread (merged)
by Raxozanne » Sun 29 May 2005, 08:32:56
Yes, however the article also states that:
The proposal will be resisted by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, the main industry body.
It will be interesting to see if this gets through or will big business win again?
The proposal will be resisted by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, the main industry body.
It will be interesting to see if this gets through or will big business win again?
Hello, my name is Rax. I live in the Amazon jungle with a bunch of women. We are super eco feminists and our favourite passtimes are dangling men by their ankles and discussing peak oil. - apparently
- Raxozanne
- Tar Sands
- Posts: 945
- Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: UK
by Wildwell » Sun 29 May 2005, 10:30:09
The motoring and road haulage industry will try to block everything, at some stage though the facts will simply be not able to be skewed of refuted.
I think sooner or later Blair will have to act on the aviation industry, road freight and motoring lobby in a more draconian manner if they are incapable of self regulation - If not for climate change for peak oil.
I think sooner or later Blair will have to act on the aviation industry, road freight and motoring lobby in a more draconian manner if they are incapable of self regulation - If not for climate change for peak oil.
-
Wildwell - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1962
- Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: UK
Re: SUV RIP
by ForeignObserver » Sun 29 May 2005, 13:49:18
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Wildwell', 'M')otorists who drive fuel-hungry BMWs, people carriers and Range Rovers face a five-fold increase in road tax under radical plans to combat Britain's spiralling greenhouse gas emissions.
The proposals are being studied by transport and environment ministers after it emerged that car buyers are ignoring warnings about the dangers of climate change by increasingly choosing luxury cars, larger MPVs and 4x4s with large, powerful engines.
The proposals are being studied by transport and environment ministers after it emerged that car buyers are ignoring warnings about the dangers of climate change by increasingly choosing luxury cars, larger MPVs and 4x4s with large, powerful engines.
I'm not sure how much impact this will have at the top end. Vehicles at this level are seen as status symbols - making them more expensive just adds to that. Many of them are company cars where the impact will be minimal.
Also we are faced with the attitude of one driver quoted as saying that because of the low mpg he was already paying more taxes than others. Misses the point really. The only real solution is an outright ban which will not happen. Failing that legislation to restrict engine size and CO2 emissions.
- ForeignObserver
- Wood
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Thu 14 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
by DrColossus » Sun 29 May 2005, 15:03:40
I just saw this story on the on channel 4 news and predictably the driving lobbyist bloke was denying that we have any problems at all and even claimed that global warming was a myth.
The enviromentalist bloke said that he thought the only way people would stop buying SUV's and other gas guzzlers was when oil reached $100 a barrel, perhaps he knows about peak oil, although it wasnt mentioned once, however it is only a matter of time.
The enviromentalist bloke said that he thought the only way people would stop buying SUV's and other gas guzzlers was when oil reached $100 a barrel, perhaps he knows about peak oil, although it wasnt mentioned once, however it is only a matter of time.
"Now there is one outstandingly important fact regarding Spaceship Earth, and that is that no instruction book came with it."
- R. Buckminster Fuller
- R. Buckminster Fuller
-
DrColossus - Wood
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: Exeter, UK
by eastbay » Sun 29 May 2005, 15:42:52
Let me do some quick math here. 900 Pounds/year more. 75 more a month. For a guy earning 5 to 10,000 pounds /month which is typical of the pukes driving this trash the extra 75/month will be, as we say in the USA, 'chump change'.
I think it's mostly symbolic and will have little effect.
EastBay
I think it's mostly symbolic and will have little effect.
EastBay
-
eastbay - Expert
- Posts: 7186
- Joined: Sat 18 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
- Location: One Mile From the Columbia River
Re: SUV RIP
by hull3551 » Sun 29 May 2005, 21:03:55
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ForeignObserver', '.')..vehicles at this level are seen as status symbols - making them more expensive just adds to that.
I agree (from what I see in the US, at least). Also, people are in a mindset that SUV's are a necessity anymore because:
- they have a family
- they have a boat
- they might buy a boat
- for work
- for play
- for the soccer (football) team
- they're safer (I always chuckle at this one...idiots)
- for their bad back (or a myriad of other health reasons)
- to haul crap for their home, hobbies, job, etc.)
- or any of the other thousand resons.
Furthermore, the fact that they are more expensive (as was said) makes them an even more compelling purchase for the image-minded consumer.
This will continue until the ability to extract home-equity ends.
-
hull3551 - Peat
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Sun 13 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Bellingham, Wash
by mrniceguy » Mon 30 May 2005, 05:36:06
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he Government's influential energy conservation agency, the Energy Saving Trust (EST), has told ministers the only way to force motorists to buy "green" cars is to introduce a new top rate of road tax as high as £900 a year.
It's a good idea, if you want to drive round in a ridiculously large vehicle, polluting the atmosphere you should be made to pay for it. However putting up the tax on fuel would encourage (force) less car use and raise more revenue (which should be spent on better public transport). At the same time there should be a policy of educating drivers in ways of driving more efficiently e.g. many people just don't realise that accelerating hard away from traffic lights uses more fuel than gently pulling away.
-
mrniceguy - Peat
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Tue 23 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
- Location: Nottingham UK
by jimmydean » Mon 30 May 2005, 14:14:41
I find it amazing still that I see GM SUV commercials on TV. They are hoping those high margin vehicle sales will continue despite the oil price rise.
Maybe they are right since most people just think things can't get any worse and whatever we are experiencing at the pumps is just a short-term thing.
Maybe they are right since most people just think things can't get any worse and whatever we are experiencing at the pumps is just a short-term thing.
-
jimmydean - Lignite
- Posts: 223
- Joined: Thu 05 May 2005, 03:00:00
by dinopello » Mon 30 May 2005, 16:04:45
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mrniceguy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he Government's influential energy conservation agency, the Energy Saving Trust (EST), has told ministers the only way to force motorists to buy "green" cars is to introduce a new top rate of road tax as high as £900 a year.
It's a good idea, if you want to drive round in a ridiculously large vehicle, polluting the atmosphere you should be made to pay for it. However putting up the tax on fuel would encourage (force) less car use and raise more revenue (which should be spent on better public transport). At the same time there should be a policy of educating drivers in ways of driving more efficiently e.g. many people just don't realise that accelerating hard away from traffic lights uses more fuel than gently pulling away.
Another thing, IMO that should probably be paid for commensurate with use and impact on environment is vehicle storage. Probably, the biggest impediment to creation of urban environments that are compact, human scale and walkable is the requirement to provide large amount of vehicle storage (parking). Surface parking is a waste of space and spreads the urban fabric and underground parking is extremely expensive to build. As vehicles have grown in size, many municipalities have increased the required size of standard spaces exasperating the problem, yet regardless of whether you park a mini-Cooper or a Ford Expedition, you usually pay the same amount (or nothing at all). Vehicle storage seems to be the only type of storage that you don’t pay for based on how much space you use up.
-
dinopello - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 6088
- Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: The Urban Village
