Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Great Britain: Drive one of these? You're crass and irresponsible, says minister on warpath
The Times (U.K.) ^ | February 27, 2006 | Darren Webster

Posted on 02/27/2006 5:47:39 PM PST by Stoat

Drive one of these? You're crass and irresponsible, says minister on warpath


 
The minister has accused urban drivers of using 4x4s unnecessarily (Dwayne Senior/Sunday)
DRIVERS of gas-guzzling cars are to be penalised under measures being developed to tackle climate change.

Ministers are particularly keen to target the growing number of people who drive large 4X4s around cities and venture off tarmac only when parking on grass verges.

In an interview with The Times, Malcolm Wicks, the Energy Minister, said: “There is crass irresponsibility in some of the larger monstrosities people drive around suburbia and in London. We have to move against this kind of thing.”

 

 
Owners of cars with high emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, face higher taxes. Those who choose hybrid cars and vehicles powered by alternative fuels will benefit from incentives designed to accelerate the shift to “low carbon cars”.

Road transport accounts for a fifth of Britain’s CO2 emissions and is one of the few sectors in which emissions have grown in the past decade.

A record 187,000 4X4s were sold last year, up from 80,000 a decade ago. Small cars accounted for the smallest proportion of new cars since 1999.

The Government is committed to cutting CO2 emissions by 60 per cent by 2050 and believes that tough measures will be needed to persuade drivers to choose greener vehicles.

Transport fuel is a key topic in the Government’s Energy Review, which is considering long-term energy needs. Policy proposals will follow in the summer. The review is being led by Mr Wicks, who said that he was determined to clamp down on manufacturers and owners.

He said that British and European manufacturers had been too slow to develop hybrid cars, which have both a petrol or diesel engine and an electric motor, and use energy normally lost in braking to recharge their batteries.

“I’m disappointed how slow some motor manufacturers have been to follow the lead of the Japanese. Why do I use a Toyota Prius hybrid? Other things being equal, I would like to have bought a car from a British or European manufacturer.”

Mr Wicks said that the small measures the Government had adopted so far, such as offering £1,000 grants to people buying a Prius, were no longer enough.

“Given the very demanding CO2 cuts we must make, we are going to need more than just a series of marginal changes. We are going to need a step change. We will have to ask ‘is it environmentally responsible to be producing cars which are a serious part of the problem?’ There will come a time when it will be irresponsible for those to be on sale.”

Mr Wicks and Stephen Ladyman, the Transport Minister, are considering how to include road transport in the European emissions trading scheme, under which companies have to buy permits to cover any CO2 emissions above a specified level.

Mr Ladyman said: “Somewhere down the supply chain, it will have to be more expensive to supply fuels which are high in CO2.

“The thrust of any policy post-2010 has to be to make people make greener choices.”

But Mr Ladyman admitted that he had not chosen the greenest option himself. He said that he had considered a Prius “for, ooo, about a millisecond”, before opting for an Alfa Romeo GT diesel.

It produces 165 g/km, far better than petrol versions of the car but not as good as the Prius at 104 g/km.

Mr Ladyman said that all cars would become less polluting from 2010 under plans to force suppliers to produce 5 per cent of transport fuel from renewable sources, such as crops or animal fat, by 2010. “We have to look at increasing the proportion to far more than 5 per cent after 2010,” he said.

In the short term, the Government is considering raising vehicle excise duty for gas guzzlers. The Treasury is understood to favour proposals from the RAC Foundation for a new top rate of £200 to cover cars that produce more than 250g of CO2 per kilometre.



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: 2muchliberty; automobile; automobiles; autos; britain; cars; driving; energy; england; greatbritain; moronsrus; nosoup4you; sanctimonioustwit; uk; unitedkingdom
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last
To: mylife
On top of all that Ive read the paramedics refuse to use the jaws of life on the hybrids because of fears that they will sever a 400? amp cable in the process.

WOW!  I hadn't heard that.  I am in emergency services here in the USA, and here we are cautioned to be careful not to cut that cable when doing a vehicle extrication but I haven't heard of any USA EMS or Fire organization refusing to work on hybrids.  Amazing!

21 posted on 02/27/2006 6:40:24 PM PST by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

I wish I could tell you where I read that


22 posted on 02/27/2006 6:42:45 PM PST by mylife (The roar of the masses could be farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
Image hosted by Photobucket.com i had to put the Jeep in 4WD to get out of the driveway this morning...
23 posted on 02/27/2006 6:52:17 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist ©®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
Stephen Ladyman.... Mr. Ladyman...

I think I'd change my last name.

24 posted on 02/27/2006 6:54:29 PM PST by NewHampshireDuo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife
I wish I could tell you where I read that

It saddens me terribly but doesn't really surprise me, considering what I've heard about so much of the rest of current British society. 

I'm hoping that drivers in the UK consider this when making an auto purchase.  An auto accident can permanently cripple a person in an instant (if it doesn't kill you) and it's just awful to be lying in that hospital bed thinking "would I even be here if I had bought a car that was just a little bit bigger and heavier?"

Even in Britain and Europe, gas is incredibly cheap when compared with a lifetime of misery or death from an auto accident caused by trying to be politically correct in one's auto purchasing choice.

25 posted on 02/27/2006 6:59:27 PM PST by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: All

When 4x4's are outlawed, only outlaws will have 4x4's. Hell every thing I own is four wheel drive, exept the'70 Roadrunner and '68 GTX.... I guess I'd be penalized aplenty.


26 posted on 02/27/2006 7:02:13 PM PST by 383rr (Those who choose security over liberty deserve neither-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Chode
i had to put the Jeep in 4WD to get out of the driveway this morning...
 

It sounds like you live in an area that has 'real seasons' unlike me  :-)  But even if you didn't, I'd still want you to be able to choose whatever sort of car you would want to buy, based upon whatever criteria you might choose to employ.  That's an essential freedom, in my view.

27 posted on 02/27/2006 7:03:50 PM PST by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NewHampshireDuo
Stephen Ladyman.... Mr. Ladyman...

I think I'd change my last name.

Yes....just about anything would be better (except "Gore", "Clinton" and a few others)

28 posted on 02/27/2006 7:05:37 PM PST by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 383rr
When 4x4's are outlawed, only outlaws will have 4x4's. Hell every thing I own is four wheel drive, exept the'70 Roadrunner and '68 GTX.... I guess I'd be penalized aplenty.

From the tone of the article, it sounds as though you would be more than merely "penalized' in Great Britain....it sounds like you would be picketed 24/7 by massive, organized crowds until you took all of your vehicles to be squished at the wrecking yard and then they would burn your tiny British house to the ground for good measure.

God, I love America!

img92/8947/bushflightsuit1qa.jpg

29 posted on 02/27/2006 7:12:06 PM PST by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

30 posted on 02/27/2006 7:30:54 PM PST by AirForceBrat23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

Absolutely...


31 posted on 02/27/2006 7:36:49 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist ©®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: AirForceBrat23
ROTFLMAO!!!


32 posted on 02/27/2006 7:42:19 PM PST by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
An auto accident can permanently cripple a person in an instant (if it doesn't kill you) and it's just awful to be lying in that hospital bed thinking "would I even be here if I had bought a car that was just a little bit bigger and heavier?"

This logic works fine....until you remember that the other party in an auto accident is just as likely to be a pedestrian or cyclist (especially in an urban environment). That other party (or rather their surviving relatives) isn't going to be that impressed by the argument that the driver was justified in buying an otherwise unnecessarily heavy car to enhance their own safety. And yet...thinking it through a little further, isn't your logic equally suspect for motor vehicle only collisions? Because if everyone adopts this principle, there will be a continuous leapfrogging of weight and power until everyone is driving main battle tanks - and even then you can't count on being safe, since if you've got a Chieftain someone else will mow you down with an Abrams or whatever. Isn't this a bit like wage-inflation hopscotch in the 1970s? Nobody ever wins - apart from the car makers and salesmen, of course, who are laughing.

33 posted on 02/28/2006 12:41:15 AM PST by Winniesboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Winniesboy
 
An auto accident can permanently cripple a person in an instant (if it doesn't kill you) and it's just awful to be lying in that hospital bed thinking "would I even be here if I had bought a car that was just a little bit bigger and heavier?"

This logic works fine....until you remember that the other party in an auto accident is just as likely to be a pedestrian or cyclist (especially in an urban environment). That other party (or rather their surviving relatives) isn't going to be that impressed by the argument that the driver was justified in buying an otherwise unnecessarily heavy car to enhance their own safety. And yet...thinking it through a little further, isn't your logic equally suspect for motor vehicle only collisions? Because if everyone adopts this principle, there will be a continuous leapfrogging of weight and power until everyone is driving main battle tanks - and even then you can't count on being safe, since if you've got a Chieftain someone else will mow you down with an Abrams or whatever. Isn't this a bit like wage-inflation hopscotch in the 1970s? Nobody ever wins - apart from the car makers and salesmen, of course, who are laughing.

Re your argument about a pedestrian or a cyclist, they are each going to be just as dead regardless of how heavy the car is.  Your notion of someone being "justified" in buying a car that is "unnecessarily" heavy is a perspective that is popular in Socialist countries where people are expected to justify what they do to the Government, because they are subjects of the Government, not free citizens,  but is not a part of a free society where Government exists at the pleasure of the populace and not the other way around.  Perhaps in Europe and the UK a court would ask if you were "justified" in owning such a large car but here in the USA such a question would never be dreamed of in a court of law.  People have a right and a responsibility to protect themselves and their families to the best of their abilities, and if a person isn't careful and crosses the street illegally and gets hit, we call that an 'accident', not a crime committed by the driver because they bought a safe car.

As to motor-vehicle only collisions, the important point that you are overlooking is that 'everyone' WON'T do this, because so many believe as you do, that what they do needs to be justified to the Government., and also many people believe the hype about global warming, running out of gasoline, etc. etc or they simply want to have a tiny, politically-correct car so that their friends down at the espresso bar won't shun them  Big cars as well as tiny cars have been available since the mid part of last century, and here we are, sixty years later, and we still have LOTS of big cars and LOTS of tiny cars and LOTS of bicycles.  In the real world, it simply doesn't work the way Leftist economics professors might have one believe.  People do not all think alike (thankfully) and so their economic and consumer choices will always be different.....providing they live in a free society and are allowed to exercise self-determination.

My hope is that you will enjoy your freedoms and buy whatever car you want to for whatever reasons motivate you (even a perceived 'justification' to the Government if that pleases you) and that you might leave the rest of us to the same freedoms, in a world that is free from busybody Socialist politicians attempting to micromanage every aspect of our lives.

 

34 posted on 02/28/2006 1:30:37 AM PST by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro

Maybe they'd prefer a Harley?


35 posted on 02/28/2006 1:31:46 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Maybe they'd prefer a Harley?

I saw (and heard!) lots of Harleys tinGermany the last time I was there....they seemed to be quite popular.

36 posted on 02/28/2006 1:36:05 AM PST by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
"Owners of cars with high emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, face higher taxes. "

Bigger and heavier doesn't necessarily translate into higher emissions of CO2 -- compare the Prius with, oh, a Fiat Panda or a SEAT Cinquecento.
37 posted on 02/28/2006 2:05:55 AM PST by Cronos (Remember 9/11. Restore Hagia Sophia! Ultra-Catholic: Sola Scriptura leads to solo scriptura.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

well, actually, let people buy what they want -- but tax accordingly -- the lighter the car, the lesser the pollution, the lesser the tax. If Joe Bloggs wants to drive a 20 ton gas belcher and is willing to part with a significant amount of quid for the privilege, let 'im


38 posted on 02/28/2006 2:09:45 AM PST by Cronos (Remember 9/11. Restore Hagia Sophia! Ultra-Catholic: Sola Scriptura leads to solo scriptura.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
Bigger and heavier doesn't necessarily translate into higher emissions of CO2 -- compare the Prius with, oh, a Fiat Panda or a SEAT Cinquecento.
 

Even though I don't have corroborating evidence in front of me, I'm sure that you're right if only because the entire "Greenhouse gases" mantra is bad science masquerading as fraudulent public policy from one end to the other.

In addition, other posters have mentioned the very real spectre of the battery disposal issue.  I understand that at present there's no viable recycling option for the batteries and so every few years a Prius owner will need to shell out $3,000.  for another eight hundred pounds of batteries, and put the old ones....where?

Those who want to sacrifice safety and comfort for political correctness are welcome to....they will keep our healthcare industry stocked with trauma patients.

39 posted on 02/28/2006 2:16:38 AM PST by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

I'm almost tempted to buy a Hybrid SUV to make their wittle bitty heads explode.

Actually, buying and Toyota Hybrid Synergy Drive badge off eBay and sticking it onto a Hummer H2 sounds like good clean fun...


40 posted on 02/28/2006 2:21:53 AM PST by gridlock (eliminate perverse incentives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson