Is it possible to save the planet by sticking to the speed ?
Discussion
Utter ballcocks.
We drive cars that last - although cars can be recycled what is the cost of this to the planet in the machinery electrical usage and personnel time (who have to eat to live which means food production etc etc). Where do you stop.
Not many people work close to their homes anymore so need transport - I live in Redditch and work in Derby, Mrs FFG works in Hagley (and soon moving to Halesowen) so again needs transport.
I tried public transport but it's taxi, train, train, taxi and talkes around 3+ hours one way so not practical. This assumes no issues with trains, which there often are.
If they were serious they would put sensors in cars to optimise acceleration, gear changes, top speed etc.
All these politicians live in big houses so their carbon footprint is enormous. They also live in/near London so can benefit from public transport but probably own a few Jags/4x4's also.
Rant over.
FFG
We drive cars that last - although cars can be recycled what is the cost of this to the planet in the machinery electrical usage and personnel time (who have to eat to live which means food production etc etc). Where do you stop.
Not many people work close to their homes anymore so need transport - I live in Redditch and work in Derby, Mrs FFG works in Hagley (and soon moving to Halesowen) so again needs transport.
I tried public transport but it's taxi, train, train, taxi and talkes around 3+ hours one way so not practical. This assumes no issues with trains, which there often are.
If they were serious they would put sensors in cars to optimise acceleration, gear changes, top speed etc.
All these politicians live in big houses so their carbon footprint is enormous. They also live in/near London so can benefit from public transport but probably own a few Jags/4x4's also.
Rant over.
FFG
v8_steve said:
The f
ing BBC can shut the up , this morning they had this preaching segment about if you drive at 80 instead of 70 your emissions are 30% higher ,, then in a later segment that tt Chris is thrashing around Brands in a car then back to the studio for the CEO of Tescos to be grilled on Tescos carbon footprint arghhhhhhhhhh 
If the amount you consume in petrol relates directly to Global warming then YES - driving in a less agressive manner, with lower speed and smoother acceleration would help.
However FOR ME, so would building the Northern Relief Road From the M57 to the Formby Bypass, and building the second river crossing over the Mersey at Widnes. I spend 40 - 50 minutes going nowhere fast every day and I reckon this would save MORE fuel than if I drove at a steady 56 mph.
However FOR ME, so would building the Northern Relief Road From the M57 to the Formby Bypass, and building the second river crossing over the Mersey at Widnes. I spend 40 - 50 minutes going nowhere fast every day and I reckon this would save MORE fuel than if I drove at a steady 56 mph.
Marki said:
v8_steve said:
The fing BBC can shut the up , this morning they had this preaching segment about if you drive at 80 instead of 70 your emissions are 30% higher ,, then in a later segment that tt Chris is thrashing around Brands in a car then back to the studio for the CEO of Tescos to be grilled on Tescos carbon footprint arghhhhhhhhhh And what about the pollution caused by sitting in congestion - no mention of that. Free flowing traffic is much less polluting.
I have a horrible feeling that the next thing will be the introduction of the graduated penalties for speeding - last plan was 6 points for > 10mph over. That would certainly end 80 or more on the motorway!
Its not as if getting somewhere on time is important to the economy of anything...
The motorways were all built for 100+ anyway
I have a horrible feeling that the next thing will be the introduction of the graduated penalties for speeding - last plan was 6 points for > 10mph over. That would certainly end 80 or more on the motorway!
Its not as if getting somewhere on time is important to the economy of anything...
The motorways were all built for 100+ anyway
The argument is fundimentally flawed - you can't maintain a steady 70 on a moderately loaded M-way because the traffic is all trying to do the self same thing so it gets in the way... But you CAN maintain a steady 85 or so.
When you live in the real world, and use trials based on real journeys, speeding saves fuel.
When you live in the real world, and use trials based on real journeys, speeding saves fuel.
Don said:
Marki said:
v8_steve said:
The fing BBC can shut the up , this morning they had this preaching segment about if you drive at 80 instead of 70 your emissions are 30% higher ,, then in a later segment that tt Chris is thrashing around Brands in a car then back to the studio for the CEO of Tescos to be grilled on Tescos carbon footprint arghhhhhhhhhh v8_steve said:
What a load of biased crap. Amazing how the results of a 'survey', 'experiment' call it whatever you want come out with the results they wanted. I'm imagine you could do tests and prove that travelling at 100mph produces less CO2 or something (probably not true but you know what I'm getting at)Anyway this "Global Warming is caused soley by Man Made CO2" is rubbish, this planet has a far more complex system ecosystem to be affected by one rather insignificant contribution to a gas that comprises less than 1% of the whole atmosphere (Graph)
Interesting non hysterical view of the genuine reason we are observing Climate Change
Edited by V8 GRF on Wednesday 12th September 11:34
Also look at the fun facts on http://mysite.verizon.net/mhieb/WVFossils/ice_ages...
Humans only produce about 3% of All CO2 produced and of that less than 1% will be from cars.
We all may as well phone up the Thames barrier to warn them every time we flush the toilet.
Humans only produce about 3% of All CO2 produced and of that less than 1% will be from cars.
We all may as well phone up the Thames barrier to warn them every time we flush the toilet.
The Real Inconvenient Truth
everyone should read this - even though it's a bit geeky in places:
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/index.html here's an extract:
"So, greenhouse is all about carbon dioxide, right?
Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.
In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, “Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models,” Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).
The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other "minor greenhouse gases." As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2."
everyone should read this - even though it's a bit geeky in places:
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/index.html here's an extract:
"So, greenhouse is all about carbon dioxide, right?
Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.
In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, “Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models,” Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).
The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other "minor greenhouse gases." As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2."
Ironic isn't itIn theory yes but as we(The human Race) are so insignificant in this planet's multi million year history it won't matter what we do. We cannot control the sea, earthquakes, volcanos or the weather so why do scientists believe that we've altered the planet in the last 100 or so years.
Sheer arrogance....
Sheer arrogance....
Its all a load of bullshit greenhouse gasses carbon footprints and all the rest of it,the government only want to screw the working man by taxing him into the ground and driving him to self distruction.
The fat tressel legged ball aching bastards,anyway I'm thinking of building an ark in the back garden just in case.
The fat tressel legged ball aching bastards,anyway I'm thinking of building an ark in the back garden just in case.
Edited by SEN 18 on Wednesday 12th September 21:48
V8 GRF said:
In theory yes but as we(The human Race) are so insignificant in this planet's multi million year history it won't matter what we do. We cannot control the sea, earthquakes, volcanos or the weather so why do scientists believe that we've altered the planet in the last 100 or so years.
Sheer arrogance....
It's also worth unserstanding that the greenhouse effect attributable to CO2 is known to be logarithmic against volume - in other words it tails off the more is produced to the point where there is an absolute maximum quantity of CO2 that can exist in our atmosphere: a doubling of the amount of CO2 does not double its greenhouse properties, rather it increases it by 25% or so - despite the Governments figures claiming both the opposite AND using figures that assume it's already twice as prevalent as it actually is today.Sheer arrogance....
Heard from one of my kids teachers today that the Government is going to make AL Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" mandatory watching in our school curriculum, as though it's fact rather than a hyped up movie contrived to reinstate a politician's flagging career - makes my blood boil!
Jappo said:
V8 GRF said:
In theory yes but as we(The human Race) are so insignificant in this planet's multi million year history it won't matter what we do. We cannot control the sea, earthquakes, volcanos or the weather so why do scientists believe that we've altered the planet in the last 100 or so years.
Sheer arrogance....
It's also worth unserstanding that the greenhouse effect attributable to CO2 is known to be logarithmic against volume - in other words it tails off the more is produced to the point where there is an absolute maximum quantity of CO2 that can exist in our atmosphere: a doubling of the amount of CO2 does not double its greenhouse properties, rather it increases it by 25% or so - despite the Governments figures claiming both the opposite AND using figures that assume it's already twice as prevalent as it actually is today.Sheer arrogance....
Heard from one of my kids teachers today that the Government is going to make AL Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" mandatory watching in our school curriculum, as though it's fact rather than a hyped up movie contrived to reinstate a politician's flagging career - makes my blood boil!
It would be interesting to know where these taxes actually go, are they used on so called 'Green' projects or like car tax are they syphoned off to prop up the economy?
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff