"Diesel VED could rise by £800"
Discussion
Here is a genuine question.
If governments/car makers hadn't been fixated on diesel engines and poured their development into petrol engines could they be as frugal and twice as clean? There has been huge development in the diesel engine, maybe it is time for a shift to further development of petrol? Electric cars are not the answer either! The electric has to be produced somehow and the amount of damage to the environment manufacturing them is probably more than burning diesel (apart from the fact its in some third world country so its ok because we cant see it.)
Having said that its the governments fault we are all driving diesels so why do we have to be taxed to poverty for their mistakes!
If governments/car makers hadn't been fixated on diesel engines and poured their development into petrol engines could they be as frugal and twice as clean? There has been huge development in the diesel engine, maybe it is time for a shift to further development of petrol? Electric cars are not the answer either! The electric has to be produced somehow and the amount of damage to the environment manufacturing them is probably more than burning diesel (apart from the fact its in some third world country so its ok because we cant see it.)
Having said that its the governments fault we are all driving diesels so why do we have to be taxed to poverty for their mistakes!
If the world's government put half as much money into finding a properly renewable energy source as against finding new ways to use oil, I bet there would be a solution within the decade. Unfortunately, oil is worth the most, so we can't possibly expect them not to exploit it. Wouldn't want everyone to stop using it now would we?
Seriously though, diesel fumes have got really bad, and it'd be nice to not have a £290 tax bill for my petrol. Pisses me off when people in diesel's tell me I'm polluting the world with my petrol that only does 35MPG.
Seriously though, diesel fumes have got really bad, and it'd be nice to not have a £290 tax bill for my petrol. Pisses me off when people in diesel's tell me I'm polluting the world with my petrol that only does 35MPG.
300bhp/ton said:
There must be another angle on this emissions thing too.
ie there must be 'x' number of pollutants produced for every gallon of fuel burned.
How does diesel and petrol differ in this respect? Eg what quantity of pollutents for gallon burned.
Then factor in diesels do a lot more miles for each gallon burned. So what is the real amount of pollution per mile being produced by each fuel source?
Missing the point in how taxation works. ie there must be 'x' number of pollutants produced for every gallon of fuel burned.
How does diesel and petrol differ in this respect? Eg what quantity of pollutents for gallon burned.
Then factor in diesels do a lot more miles for each gallon burned. So what is the real amount of pollution per mile being produced by each fuel source?
The original 'discount' to incentivise a significant shift from petrol to diesel has run its course, it is now time to tax those people and claw back all the discounts and raise an additional premium.
The joy of this ruse is that the average consumer will look at their uplifted VED rate of a few hundred quid a year and to avoid this tax will go and buy a new, lower tax car this paying a massive lump of VAT effectively paying a decade or two's VED liability in advance.
When that phase of the cycle is complete it will just begin again using a different 'issue' as the trigger.
DonkeyApple said:
Missing the point in how taxation works.
The original 'discount' to incentivise a significant shift from petrol to diesel has run its course, it is now time to tax those people and claw back all the discounts and raise an additional premium.
The joy of this ruse is that the average consumer will look at their uplifted VED rate of a few hundred quid a year and to avoid this tax will go and buy a new, lower tax car this paying a massive lump of VAT effectively paying a decade or two's VED liability in advance.
When that phase of the cycle is complete it will just begin again using a different 'issue' as the trigger.
Bingo.... we have a winner The original 'discount' to incentivise a significant shift from petrol to diesel has run its course, it is now time to tax those people and claw back all the discounts and raise an additional premium.
The joy of this ruse is that the average consumer will look at their uplifted VED rate of a few hundred quid a year and to avoid this tax will go and buy a new, lower tax car this paying a massive lump of VAT effectively paying a decade or two's VED liability in advance.
When that phase of the cycle is complete it will just begin again using a different 'issue' as the trigger.
Crossflow Kid said:
Indeed, but it's still a grubby coal-fired power station, isn't it?
Yes, possibly. Normally around 6% of the UK's power is from coal so it's quite likely to be from cleaner sources. This site is quite interesting - it shows where the grid's power is coming from. If the taxes were really about environmental impact then a detailed life cycle analysis of each type of car would be required to compare what is "better" for the local, national and global environments at each point in the life cycle (including where the energy driving the car has come from). As it is, governments will tax in a way that will raise the most income while being approximately aligned with public opinion and emissions targets.
DonkeyApple said:
Missing the point in how taxation works.
The original 'discount' to incentivise a significant shift from petrol to diesel has run its course, it is now time to tax those people and claw back all the discounts and raise an additional premium.
The joy of this ruse is that the average consumer will look at their uplifted VED rate of a few hundred quid a year and to avoid this tax will go and buy a new, lower tax car this paying a massive lump of VAT effectively paying a decade or two's VED liability in advance.
When that phase of the cycle is complete it will just begin again using a different 'issue' as the trigger.
Are you suggesting that the poisoning of the British public with diesel fume was deliberate?The original 'discount' to incentivise a significant shift from petrol to diesel has run its course, it is now time to tax those people and claw back all the discounts and raise an additional premium.
The joy of this ruse is that the average consumer will look at their uplifted VED rate of a few hundred quid a year and to avoid this tax will go and buy a new, lower tax car this paying a massive lump of VAT effectively paying a decade or two's VED liability in advance.
When that phase of the cycle is complete it will just begin again using a different 'issue' as the trigger.
DonkeyApple said:
Missing the point in how taxation works.
The original 'discount' to incentivise a significant shift from petrol to diesel has run its course, it is now time to tax those people and claw back all the discounts and raise an additional premium.
The joy of this ruse is that the average consumer will look at their uplifted VED rate of a few hundred quid a year and to avoid this tax will go and buy a new, lower tax car this paying a massive lump of VAT effectively paying a decade or two's VED liability in advance.
When that phase of the cycle is complete it will just begin again using a different 'issue' as the trigger.
What 'uplift'? To the general man in the street there is no change at all to the car he has currently, bar the normal £5 a year increase or whatever.The original 'discount' to incentivise a significant shift from petrol to diesel has run its course, it is now time to tax those people and claw back all the discounts and raise an additional premium.
The joy of this ruse is that the average consumer will look at their uplifted VED rate of a few hundred quid a year and to avoid this tax will go and buy a new, lower tax car this paying a massive lump of VAT effectively paying a decade or two's VED liability in advance.
When that phase of the cycle is complete it will just begin again using a different 'issue' as the trigger.
The people who will be affected by this are those buying new cars from next year onwards, there is no 'uplift' and therefore no reason to rush out and buy a new car, if anything quite the opposite.
I have conversations with people every week who's main motivation for buying a car is nil/£20 RFL. That's gone, cars that fall into the higher tax bands on the current system will normally be of a higher price £40k+ and will pay a penalty for that of a supplement of +£310 for the first 5 years.
IMO there's nothing in the new changes incentivising anyone to rush out and buy a car for registration on the 1st April 2017!
ETA: unless you mean they are going to change cars now before the new bandings come in?
Edited by Butter Face on Thursday 5th May 08:55
300bhp/ton said:
There must be another angle on this emissions thing too.
ie there must be 'x' number of pollutants produced for every gallon of fuel burned.
How does diesel and petrol differ in this respect? Eg what quantity of pollutents for gallon burned.
Then factor in diesels do a lot more miles for each gallon burned. So what is the real amount of pollution per mile being produced by each fuel source?
Take all the emissions filters of and it's petrol that's cleaner.ie there must be 'x' number of pollutants produced for every gallon of fuel burned.
How does diesel and petrol differ in this respect? Eg what quantity of pollutents for gallon burned.
Then factor in diesels do a lot more miles for each gallon burned. So what is the real amount of pollution per mile being produced by each fuel source?
Then factor in that a 1.3 litre petrol turbo does the same job as a 2.0 litre turbo diesel at the same mpg and you have your answer.
skyrover said:
DonkeyApple said:
Missing the point in how taxation works.
The original 'discount' to incentivise a significant shift from petrol to diesel has run its course, it is now time to tax those people and claw back all the discounts and raise an additional premium.
The joy of this ruse is that the average consumer will look at their uplifted VED rate of a few hundred quid a year and to avoid this tax will go and buy a new, lower tax car this paying a massive lump of VAT effectively paying a decade or two's VED liability in advance.
When that phase of the cycle is complete it will just begin again using a different 'issue' as the trigger.
Are you suggesting that the poisoning of the British public with diesel fume was deliberate?The original 'discount' to incentivise a significant shift from petrol to diesel has run its course, it is now time to tax those people and claw back all the discounts and raise an additional premium.
The joy of this ruse is that the average consumer will look at their uplifted VED rate of a few hundred quid a year and to avoid this tax will go and buy a new, lower tax car this paying a massive lump of VAT effectively paying a decade or two's VED liability in advance.
When that phase of the cycle is complete it will just begin again using a different 'issue' as the trigger.
skyrover said:
Are you suggesting that the poisoning of the British public with diesel fume was deliberate?
That's actually an interesting question, in reality. Scientific papers from the mid 70s on all point out that the monoxides and particulates from exhaust fumes were the most toxic to humans. Obviously the 90s and the turn of the century have focused political attention on greenhouse gases and impact on global warming. We are now focussing more on the relevant issue of direct health as most humans live in cities and the air quality can be signficantly improved and so the health costs fall etc.
But these are just structures under which to run a taxation regime. And taxation works best by steering a large group into one zone through incentives and then clawing back those incentives plus a healthy premium by removing/changing the incentives once sufficient people are in and the migration has slowed.
I'm not sure it is more visible than in the taxation around motorists.
If we look at the very recent war on NOx then what we know is that everyone was fully aware of these dangers and the health implications for over 40 years. We are only now paying heed because the migration of taxpayers to diesel has pretty much run its course and we are into diminishing returns and at the same time taxation needs to be raised in this area do introducing a reversal to migrate people back from diesel is logical.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Thursday 5th May 09:46
vtecyo said:
In March, a think tank called Policy Exchange said the VED rate for new diesel cars should increase by up to £800 to reflect the high levels of air pollution they cause.
Hmm.. another Think Tank.. Basically, the government's way of scapegoating their s
tty ideas by saying it was thunk up by a third party.. They don't even have the balls to admit to their bullst policies! Butter Face said:
What 'uplift'? To the general man in the street there is no change at all to the car he has currently, bar the normal £5 a year increase or whatever.
The people who will be affected by this are those buying new cars from next year onwards, there is no 'uplift' and therefore no reason to rush out and buy a new car, if anything quite the opposite.
I have conversations with people every week who's main motivation for buying a car is nil/£20 RFL. That's gone, cars that fall into the higher tax bands on the current system will normally be of a higher price £40k+ and will pay a penalty for that of a supplement of +£310 for the first 5 years.
IMO there's nothing in the new changes incentivising anyone to rush out and buy a car for registration on the 1st April 2017!
ETA: unless you mean they are going to change cars now before the new bandings come in?
I had certainly forgotten that VED was fixed for the existing vehicle and had assumed they would be raising existing rates also? So does VED never change for old cars?The people who will be affected by this are those buying new cars from next year onwards, there is no 'uplift' and therefore no reason to rush out and buy a new car, if anything quite the opposite.
I have conversations with people every week who's main motivation for buying a car is nil/£20 RFL. That's gone, cars that fall into the higher tax bands on the current system will normally be of a higher price £40k+ and will pay a penalty for that of a supplement of +£310 for the first 5 years.
IMO there's nothing in the new changes incentivising anyone to rush out and buy a car for registration on the 1st April 2017!
ETA: unless you mean they are going to change cars now before the new bandings come in?
Edited by Butter Face on Thursday 5th May 08:55
I think that there is a sound effect of 'pre buying' by consumers ahead of price increases. Much like the recent stamp duty change brought in a lump of advance tax receipts to the coffers.
EnglishTony said:
Take all the emissions filters of and it's petrol that's cleaner.
Then factor in that a 1.3 litre petrol turbo does the same job as a 2.0 litre turbo diesel at the same mpg and you have your answer.
But then you have a highly stressed petrol engine vs a less stressed, generally more reliable diesel engine.Then factor in that a 1.3 litre petrol turbo does the same job as a 2.0 litre turbo diesel at the same mpg and you have your answer.
Look how many 1.0 Ecoboost Fiestas have got issues for example...
Poopipe said:
It's still free to tax if it's electric.
Everything else is 140quid a year to tax.
Those of us driving round in 2litre turbo petrol cars are going to pay less than this year.
Everyone who bought a diesel cos it was 30quid a year to tax is going to bh about having to pay more than this year.
Slight mix up of facts there. It only applies to cars registered after the 1st April 2017, cars before that remain as they are now (+/- inflation).Everything else is 140quid a year to tax.
Those of us driving round in 2litre turbo petrol cars are going to pay less than this year.
Everyone who bought a diesel cos it was 30quid a year to tax is going to b
h about having to pay more than this year. EnglishTony said:
Take all the emissions filters of and it's petrol that's cleaner.
But is it? I'm not saying it isn't. However, most emissions testing is done at idle and rated on a percentage of the total gases emitted, rather than actual quantities. And none of this takes into account how far the vehicle could travel for the given fuel.EnglishTony said:
Then factor in that a 1.3 litre petrol turbo does the same job as a 2.0 litre turbo diesel at the same mpg and you have your answer.
The petrol will never have the same torque, even if it makes good PEAK hp. And I simply don't believe they offer 'real world' the same mpg.xjay1337 said:
But then you have a highly stressed petrol engine vs a less stressed, generally more reliable diesel engine.
Look how many 1.0 Ecoboost Fiestas have got issues for example...
With all the emissions controlling rubbish strapped to modern Diesel engines (which clearly still doesn't work in the real world) I'm not sure there is a case for saying they are more reliable. Look how many 1.0 Ecoboost Fiestas have got issues for example...
I think there's just as much emission control on petrols!
Petrols often have EGRs and other such devices... DPFs are not that problematic.
I've had 1x Mk5 TDI 105bhp (running 221bhp at 150k), 1x Mk5 GTI (stage 2 revo at 90k) and my Scirocco TDI (running 250bhp at 162k)... guess which cars have been completely reliable and guess which caused me no end of issues....
Petrols often have EGRs and other such devices... DPFs are not that problematic.
I've had 1x Mk5 TDI 105bhp (running 221bhp at 150k), 1x Mk5 GTI (stage 2 revo at 90k) and my Scirocco TDI (running 250bhp at 162k)... guess which cars have been completely reliable and guess which caused me no end of issues....
300bhp/ton said:
But is it? I'm not saying it isn't. However, most emissions testing is done at idle and rated on a percentage of the total gases emitted, rather than actual quantities. And none of this takes into account how far the vehicle could travel for the given fuel.
.
As the graphs above show... the diesel is emitting approx 0.6 g/km NOx (real world) and the petrol is emitting approx 0.01 g/km NOx .
So despite the diesel travelling further per gallon, it's not travelling 6000% further
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff