MPs say car ownership not compatible with decarbonisation
Discussion
and your starter for 10:
- I live in a rural area and the idea of charging stations for EVs is laughable here. I'll still be a joke in 20 years time too.
- public transport is almost non-existent
- without personal transport people will starve or get ill or both as there are few local shops or services
- so the geniuses in Westminster commit us to some ludicrous target while being told we don't have anywhere near the infrastructure
- now the slow learners have caught up and realise that, they want to ban cars to make their policy work (and have us all on public transport or rent shared EVs - neither of which anyone will provide outside of cities as it's massively uneconomic)
- chances of any government pursuing that strategy getting my vote on a scale of 1 ... 10 are .....
frozen-in-wiltshire said:
and your starter for 10:
- I live in a rural area and the idea of charging stations for EVs is laughable here. I'll still be a joke in 20 years time too.
I live in a (very) rural area too. - I live in a rural area and the idea of charging stations for EVs is laughable here. I'll still be a joke in 20 years time too.
We have plenty of Tesla drivers around, though, and as it happens the nearest Tesla supercharger (at the village hall, in the next village) is closer than the nearest shop or petrol filling station for me.
It's actually much easier to install EV charging stations than it is to build a petrol station, because their requirements in terms of Planning Permission are negligible.
And I assume that you have electricity, even in deepest, darkest Wiltshire?
The range/infrastructure argument is a complete red herring, if we have the political will to make it happen.
Car ownership is not the problem, I can only drive one at a time. Car usage is what they mean, so let's have some credible alternatives.
Jacking up the cost of motoring is not the answer either, as one article reported (along the lines if making fuel duty rise by at least the same margin as rail fares).
People need to be able to live closer to where they work and have well serviced local communities, you know, like 30 years ago.
Jacking up the cost of motoring is not the answer either, as one article reported (along the lines if making fuel duty rise by at least the same margin as rail fares).
People need to be able to live closer to where they work and have well serviced local communities, you know, like 30 years ago.
2gins said:
People need to be able to live closer to where they work and have well serviced local communities, you know, like 30 years ago.
Do people drive more because they can't live near where they work, or do they live further from work (or look for jobs further from home) because it has been so cheap and easy to drive?I'm all in favour of reducing car usage where there's a viable alternative, and that means investing in trains/busses/trams/cyclepaths.
RizzoTheRat said:
2gins said:
People need to be able to live closer to where they work and have well serviced local communities, you know, like 30 years ago.
Do people drive more because they can't live near where they work, or do they live further from work (or look for jobs further from home) because it has been so cheap and easy to drive?I'm all in favour of reducing car usage where there's a viable alternative, and that means investing in trains/busses/trams/cyclepaths.
I would love to live closer to work but the closer I get the dearer it is and I can't afford to live there. I could take public transport (train and a 15-min walk each end so not difficult) but it takes longer and would cost significantly more. Also on the days it's pissing with rain or snowing I can't think of anything I'd rather do less than trudge along getting cold and soaked.
I would still need a car so I would then be paying for the privilege of it being parked up at home most days - the only reduced cost would be the fuel I use commuting, however the saving is less than the cost of the train. I also don't always go straight home from work so would need the car those days either way.
Public transport simply doesn't stack up for me - it would have to be much cheaper, reliable and convenient to make it worth getting out of the car for.
frozen-in-wiltshire said:
and when there's 500 households in a village trying to use one charger for 40 minutes at a time, how's that going to go for you?
l
Only as likely to happen as 500 households in a village all trying to use 4 petrol pumps at the same time. Does your village have a filling station or do you have to share with 500 households in another village too?l
Can none of those households have charging points at home?
When you propose points like that quoted it's clear that your main cause for complaint is a fear of change.
I haven't seen any proposals to ban car ownership, unless you can enlighten me?
Car usage, particularly in urban areas, needs to change. As much to alleviate congestion as for a reduction in toxic emissions that arises from it.
Sharing vehicles ( ie public transport ) is the answer. Infrastructure needs to be provided but it has to be done in a cost effective ( for the providers ) manner so it will grow slowly to match the growth in demand.
How do create a growth in demand? Make it less attractive for people to drive their cars.
Those who want ( or need ) to use their cars badly enough will still be able to do so almost everywhere.
Wooda80 said:
Can none of those households have charging points at home?
Isn't that the answer? I have seen quite a few installed on the front of houses around here. I guess it is probably quite expensive, but the savings from not filling up at the pump each week must offset it pretty quickly?The fact that this has been announced at the same time as a review of HS2 has been announced just shows the amount of joined up thinking going on in parliament.
To announce that private car ownership/use needs to decrease at the same time as the flagship out of London infrastructure project is put at risk is laughable. No HS2 won't solve the need for private car ownership but the joined up thinking in government simply isn't there.
To announce that private car ownership/use needs to decrease at the same time as the flagship out of London infrastructure project is put at risk is laughable. No HS2 won't solve the need for private car ownership but the joined up thinking in government simply isn't there.
Wooda80 said:
Only as likely to happen as 500 households in a village all trying to use 4 petrol pumps at the same time. Does your village have a filling station or do you have to share with 500 households in another village too?
Can none of those households have charging points at home?
When you propose points like that quoted it's clear that your main cause for complaint is a fear of change.
I haven't seen any proposals to ban car ownership, unless you can enlighten me?
Car usage, particularly in urban areas, needs to change. As much to alleviate congestion as for a reduction in toxic emissions that arises from it.
Sharing vehicles ( ie public transport ) is the answer. Infrastructure needs to be provided but it has to be done in a cost effective ( for the providers ) manner so it will grow slowly to match the growth in demand.
How do create a growth in demand? Make it less attractive for people to drive their cars.
Those who want ( or need ) to use their cars badly enough will still be able to do so almost everywhere.
Feel free to stop breathing anytime if you’re worried about the emissions. Also this does sound like a proposal or possible intention to ban cars. It won’t happen though...keep dreaming Can none of those households have charging points at home?
When you propose points like that quoted it's clear that your main cause for complaint is a fear of change.
I haven't seen any proposals to ban car ownership, unless you can enlighten me?
Car usage, particularly in urban areas, needs to change. As much to alleviate congestion as for a reduction in toxic emissions that arises from it.
Sharing vehicles ( ie public transport ) is the answer. Infrastructure needs to be provided but it has to be done in a cost effective ( for the providers ) manner so it will grow slowly to match the growth in demand.
How do create a growth in demand? Make it less attractive for people to drive their cars.
Those who want ( or need ) to use their cars badly enough will still be able to do so almost everywhere.
Car ownership is vital for me.... I live in a rural spot with no public transport at all. None. No shops nearby either - nearest is 7 miles away.
I may buy an EV in the future, but I don't consider them at all 'green' - full of interesting materials shipped from all over the world go into their manufacture and, of course, the electricity used to charge them is not exactly green either. I'm not sure they are more recyclable than a petrol car either.
We are right to be wary of government proclamations - diesel was thought to be the best alternative up until quite recently. Introducing heavy taxation on people's vital transport is not the way to go - unless the aim is to make cars the province of the wealthy.
I may buy an EV in the future, but I don't consider them at all 'green' - full of interesting materials shipped from all over the world go into their manufacture and, of course, the electricity used to charge them is not exactly green either. I'm not sure they are more recyclable than a petrol car either.
We are right to be wary of government proclamations - diesel was thought to be the best alternative up until quite recently. Introducing heavy taxation on people's vital transport is not the way to go - unless the aim is to make cars the province of the wealthy.
55palfers said:
When China, India, USA, Russia, etc. have "decarbonised" do pop back and collect my car keys.
Until then, bugger off.
Spot on, we're insignificant in this regard and any token act from our MPs will be overtaken in weeks by other developing nations.Until then, bugger off.
In any case, how come electric car ownership is incompatible with decarbonisation? Electric cars will save us all
We all know that the wind blows to order like MPs so we can charge up using the energy from the beating of climate pixie wings.
I run a fleet of eight diesel vans.
Once new staff have had four weeks training they are given a van and permitted to take it home if they need to go straight to a site in the morning. Presumably:
a. I'll have to pay to put a charging point in at new starters' houses before that four week training period is up? To add context people either stay in this job forever or leave in the first year.
b. Pay for a new charging point each time they move house.
c. Or make all staff come in every morning even if it makes no sense to do so.
Ours is a family firm. Rumour has it the next likely leader (current owner's son) is hot on eco stuff. So I may find out soon!
Once new staff have had four weeks training they are given a van and permitted to take it home if they need to go straight to a site in the morning. Presumably:
a. I'll have to pay to put a charging point in at new starters' houses before that four week training period is up? To add context people either stay in this job forever or leave in the first year.
b. Pay for a new charging point each time they move house.
c. Or make all staff come in every morning even if it makes no sense to do so.
Ours is a family firm. Rumour has it the next likely leader (current owner's son) is hot on eco stuff. So I may find out soon!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff