Enjoy them whilst you can
Discussion
berlintaxi said:
Won't ever happen, but if it does, I'm emigrating. Scary to think I'll only be 45
Monty Python said:
Are they planning to cover the country with wind turbines?
No need, because don't you know they are 100% efficient?! That seems to be the presumption they are making when calculating how many they need to build.I'm liking the bit about dimming streetlights to save energy too. A little knowledge being a dangerous thing - dimmer must mean less energy goes the logic of the simpletons.
Would be better to invest in LED streetlights.
Edited by r11co on Friday 14th March 07:36
Short sighted, vote grabbing and pointless.
It would make little difference as they'll never get enough votes to actually start implementing any of this stuff. However, the point is that this kind of thing is going to happen as each party tries to 'out-green' each other.
I notice he mentions it would be only vehicles used for non-freight purposes that would be affected. Surely it makes more sense to concentrate on exactly those vehicles that burn the most fuel, while giving off the most pollution? In other words, HGV's, PSV's etc. Is it not the case that a small gain in fuel efficiency would bring greater benefits because of the huge distances they cover? Maybe that's happening anyway, but it seems strange to mention non-freight specifically?
Anyway, I'm sure we'll still be able to use gas guzzlers, there just might be an extra 'city tax' to pay if we should venture into a built up area. Ker-ching!
It would make little difference as they'll never get enough votes to actually start implementing any of this stuff. However, the point is that this kind of thing is going to happen as each party tries to 'out-green' each other.
I notice he mentions it would be only vehicles used for non-freight purposes that would be affected. Surely it makes more sense to concentrate on exactly those vehicles that burn the most fuel, while giving off the most pollution? In other words, HGV's, PSV's etc. Is it not the case that a small gain in fuel efficiency would bring greater benefits because of the huge distances they cover? Maybe that's happening anyway, but it seems strange to mention non-freight specifically?
Anyway, I'm sure we'll still be able to use gas guzzlers, there just might be an extra 'city tax' to pay if we should venture into a built up area. Ker-ching!
Typical politicians, attention seeking with an absolutely stupid idea.
Who do they think will vote for that ?
You have just removed the ability to get to work for pretty much most of the population.
Who do they employ as advisors before coming out with things like that - as I would sack them
Who do they think will vote for that ?
You have just removed the ability to get to work for pretty much most of the population.
Who do they employ as advisors before coming out with things like that - as I would sack them
r11co said:
Monty Python said:
Are they planning to cover the country with wind turbines?
No need, because don't you know they are 100% efficient?! That seems to be the presumption they are making when calculating how many they need to build.I'm liking the bit about dimming streetlights to save energy too. A little knowledge being a dangerous thing - dimmer must mean less energy goes the logic of the simpletons.
Would be better to invest in LED streetlights.
Edited by r11co on Friday 14th March 07:36
Also our energy problems are around peak demands. EV's will mosty charge at night, which will smooth peaks, and is well being within our current capacities. An average driver will need around 9kWh per day, so about the same as running a hob for an hour.
bqf said:
I'll be 67 by then, and so the level of concern is minimal.
Seriously though, I reckon 90% of passenger cars sold by then will be powered by something other than petrol/diesel. I think the whole EV idea is a red herring - hydrogen is the fuel of the future.
If you are going to use a load of electricity to generate hydrogen you may as well do the job properly and produce synthetic methanol by combining it with atmospheric CO2. It's carbon neutral and can be used just like petrol, so no leaky hydrogen tanks or cryogenic refueling, and no new vehicle fleet or new infrastructure required. Seriously though, I reckon 90% of passenger cars sold by then will be powered by something other than petrol/diesel. I think the whole EV idea is a red herring - hydrogen is the fuel of the future.
Simple, green and, for nearly everyone, no observable change. Except that all this climate change stuff will have to be blamed on something else.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff