The Big 'Let's sell our cars and take buses/ebikes instead' thread (warning: probably very dull)

webboo · January 2023

First.Aspect said:

TheBigBean said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:
Offshore is popular? There's a tonne of it already and loads more planned!!
Er. Not sure what you are saying.

Everything is popular until it affects people personally, then is wildly unpopular. Which is why, as I've argued before, there are essentially no wind farms in the south of England. It is not because the wind stops bowing at Watford, it is because most. Tories are southerners. Same applies to solar.

Of all the options, offshore seems to me to be least likely to give rise to objection, because it will be tens of miles away from any house. And we have such extensive coastal waters there is no reason not to use them in this way.
There is more than enoygh room for more than enough capacity and we really could be exporting wind energy. Also makes use of a really effective marine service industry we already have.
I mean, there is already a tonne of offshore wind and a load that is already signed off to go.

If people are objecting, they haven't been doing a very good job.
Give it time. But hopefully it's just going to be accepted.

This should be a major manufacturing industry in the UK. Of course, we've been left behind and are buying them in instead.
Vestas build some turbines on the Isle of Wight. Plus there are a load other industries that support offshore wind.
True, but most of the really big kit is coming from countries halfway good at making stuff, not us.

I thought there was a Siemens factory in Hull making the turbine blades.

First.Aspect · January 2023

This forum is so binary.

mully79 · January 2023

First.Aspect said:
This forum is so binary.

If people = 1 and you subtract 1 all the problems in this thread disappear !

briantrumpet · January 2023

First.Aspect said:
This forum is so binary.

No they isn't.

focuszing723 · January 2023

It would be fascinating to see how other planets civilizations have evolved.

briantrumpet · January 2023

I probably shouldn't be amused...

rjsterry · January 2023

Has he not reminded them that the plan is endorsed by the Transport Secretary?

briantrumpet · January 2023

rjsterry said:
Has he not reminded them that the plan is endorsed by the Transport Secretary?

I'll have another look to see if The Telegraph reported that...

briantrumpet · January 2023

Well, there's a surprise, no Mr Shapps (or any of his aliases) were mentioned in the DT report. All nasty Mr Khan's fault, obvs.

First.Aspect · January 2023

I've been thinking. One advantage of public transport is that as a passenger you don't need to be responsible for wearing a seat belt when it's moving.

Stevo_666 · January 2023

Pross said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:
Sorry, I meant how is it different from seatbelts, crash helmets and smoking in public places? Obviously there are differences in the details but they are all at their root, situations where the balance between personal liberty and public benefit was reset in the face of initial resistance and long periods of campaigning.
There are big differences between the seatbelts / crash helmets / smoking points and stopping people using their own private means of transport. I could see a clear benefit to those:
- Seatbelts - saves lives and is no big imposition.
- Crash helmets - saved my bonce while MTB'ing more than once.
- Smoking indoors - prevented making my stuff stink/saved me taking my stuff to the dry cleaners/avoiding passive smoking.
I don't recall many people objecting that hard to those (although can't remember the seatbelts episode, maybe too young?).

However, stop people using cars - no obvious upside for most people but significant inconvenience/extra time to do stuff etc for many. Try imposing that on the public.
You mean apart from cleaner air, reduction in CO2 emissions, reduction in road casualties etc.

All of the other things you list also had a lot of people who enjoyed doing them arguing that it was bad. Your post only highlights the benefits you can see to yourself, people need to look beyond what is good for them at what is good / necessary for the majority. I enjoy the convenience of using my car as much as anyone and quite enjoy driving on journeys through country A or B roads but ultimately know that it is becoming increasingly important to reduce that behaviour as much as possible.

I though electric cars will solve the air qulaity issue before too long? If its CO2 you're worried about we are p1$$ing in the wind compared to the big emitters like China and the US. Taking cars off the road to will not solve that problem. And if we have that many buses and ebikes on the road to get everyone where they need to go there will still be casualties - who knows how many?

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

Dorset_Boy · January 2023

First.Aspect said:
I've been thinking. One advantage of public transport is that as a passenger you don't need to be responsible for wearing a seat belt when it's moving.

You do on coaches I think (eg National Express)

First.Aspect · January 2023

Dorset_Boy said:

First.Aspect said:
I've been thinking. One advantage of public transport is that as a passenger you don't need to be responsible for wearing a seat belt when it's moving.
You do on coaches I think (eg National Express)

You know what...who... I'm getting at though.

briantrumpet · January 2023

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.

davebradswmb · January 2023

China may be the biggest polluter, but the majority of that pollution is generated in the manufacture of products that are consumed in the West. If we made responsible decisions about sourcing then we could demand that China used only green energy in the production of our products. It would then be a bit churlish of us to refuse to clean up our act if we are asking China to clean up theirs.

Stevo_666 · January 2023

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.

As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.

First.Aspect · January 2023

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.
As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.

We only contribute towards that persuasion by making it economically attractive for people we buy stuff from to make it sustainably.

So just getting on with enjoying life is going to involve paying more for things to be made for us. Quite a lot more, potentially.

Stevo_666 · January 2023

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.
As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.
We only contribute towards that persuasion by making it economically attractive for people we buy stuff from to make it sustainably.

So just getting on with enjoying life is going to involve paying more for things to be made for us. Quite a lot more, potentially.

How would you propose to do that?

rjsterry · January 2023

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.
As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.

It's not wringing hands: it's dealing with the problem. The move to EVs is more to do with reducing emissions generally, particularly CO2. See also ratcheting up of building regs, phasing out of gas boilers, etc. The ULEZ and similar schemes in other cities are targeting particulates and NOX.

China is investing fairly heavily in renewables, too. Makes more sense to work on the bits we can influence than give up because it'll inconvenience a few people.

First.Aspect · January 2023

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.
As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.
We only contribute towards that persuasion by making it economically attractive for people we buy stuff from to make it sustainably.

So just getting on with enjoying life is going to involve paying more for things to be made for us. Quite a lot more, potentially.
How would you propose to do that?

Well, I suppose we could use this mechanism called tax, you know on imports.

Stevo_666 · January 2023

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.
As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.
We only contribute towards that persuasion by making it economically attractive for people we buy stuff from to make it sustainably.

So just getting on with enjoying life is going to involve paying more for things to be made for us. Quite a lot more, potentially.
How would you propose to do that?
Well, I suppose we could use this mechanism called tax, you know on imports.

Trade barriers? Very Brexity. Also may encourage retaliation. More detail is needed of your plan I think.

First.Aspect · January 2023

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.
As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.
We only contribute towards that persuasion by making it economically attractive for people we buy stuff from to make it sustainably.

So just getting on with enjoying life is going to involve paying more for things to be made for us. Quite a lot more, potentially.
How would you propose to do that?
Well, I suppose we could use this mechanism called tax, you know on imports.
Trade barriers? Very Brexity. Also may encourage retaliation. More detail is needed of your plan I think.

Oh do things get into the country tax free at the moment or ever? Do we buy them without some form of tax on them?

You don't see the world through Tory coloured spectacles mate, you are fully in a hall of those bendy mirrors.

Stevo_666 · January 2023

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.
As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.
We only contribute towards that persuasion by making it economically attractive for people we buy stuff from to make it sustainably.

So just getting on with enjoying life is going to involve paying more for things to be made for us. Quite a lot more, potentially.
How would you propose to do that?
Well, I suppose we could use this mechanism called tax, you know on imports.
Trade barriers? Very Brexity. Also may encourage retaliation. More detail is needed of your plan I think.

Oh do things get into the country tax free at the moment or ever? Do we buy them without some form of tax on them?

You don't see the world through Tory coloured spectacles mate, you are fully in a hall of those bendy mirrors.

No, you just haven't thought it through properly. Try again.

First.Aspect · January 2023

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.
As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.
We only contribute towards that persuasion by making it economically attractive for people we buy stuff from to make it sustainably.

So just getting on with enjoying life is going to involve paying more for things to be made for us. Quite a lot more, potentially.
How would you propose to do that?
Well, I suppose we could use this mechanism called tax, you know on imports.
Trade barriers? Very Brexity. Also may encourage retaliation. More detail is needed of your plan I think.

Oh do things get into the country tax free at the moment or ever? Do we buy them without some form of tax on them?

You don't see the world through Tory coloured spectacles mate, you are fully in a hall of those bendy mirrors.

No, you just haven't thought it through properly. Try again.

You will have to explain it to me then. I'd have thought that vehicle excise duty was an example you might have come across. Here are some others.

https://www.nao.org.uk/reports/environmental-tax-measures/

These things have the power to cause perturbations in the free market, so naturally you object. But if purchasing and importation patterns shift as a consequence, then there's an economic benefit where the goods/commodities come from to work around them.

It is an under utilized mechanism, imo.

Stevo_666 · January 2023

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

You are also missing the point that the majority seem to be in favour of what I'm saying is good for me. And this is a democracy...

I'm not sure if it still holds true, but for a long time a clear majority of the British public were in favour of the death penalty after it had been abolished, but Parliaments refused to bring it back.

Anyway, that wasn't the point you were making before.

And, unless my understanding is very mistaken, the biggest effect on breathing in pollutants in London will be by reducing emissions in London, not China.

Climate change pollutants is another argument.
As mentioned above, the rise of EV's and banning new ICE car sales from 2030 is meant to sort out the air quality issue in the cities etc. At least I thought that was the idea.

Agree, greenhouse gases don't have similar boundaries, so on that front we are better off trying to persuade the big emitters to scale it back and just get on with enjoying life here rather than wringing our hands about it.
We only contribute towards that persuasion by making it economically attractive for people we buy stuff from to make it sustainably.

So just getting on with enjoying life is going to involve paying more for things to be made for us. Quite a lot more, potentially.
How would you propose to do that?
Well, I suppose we could use this mechanism called tax, you know on imports.
Trade barriers? Very Brexity. Also may encourage retaliation. More detail is needed of your plan I think.

Oh do things get into the country tax free at the moment or ever? Do we buy them without some form of tax on them?

You don't see the world through Tory coloured spectacles mate, you are fully in a hall of those bendy mirrors.

No, you just haven't thought it through properly. Try again.
You will have to explain it to me then. I'd have thought that vehicle excise duty was an example you might have come across. Here are some others.

https://www.nao.org.uk/reports/environmental-tax-measures/

These things have the power to cause perturbations in the free market, so naturally you object. But if purchasing and importation patterns shift as a consequence, then there's an economic benefit where the goods/commodities come from to work around them.

It is an under utilized mechanism, imo.

Its your proposal, you explain it to me. Then I can comment on it.

First.Aspect · January 2023

Whatever I have in mind, it will be perfectly acceptable to import a muscle car via an offshore trust based in Gibraltar, so don't worry.

Stevo_666 · January 2023

First.Aspect said:
Whatever I have in mind, it will be perfectly acceptable to import a muscle car via an offshore trust based in Gibraltar, so don't worry.

Why would I need to do it again?

rick_chasey · January 2023

✌🏻✌🏻

https://twitter.com/asluhn/status/1617821997265989632?s=46&t=VWQydfHiszvjqjFCErCDBw

briantrumpet · January 2023

rick_chasey said:
✌🏻✌🏻

https://twitter.com/asluhn/status/1617821997265989632?s=46&t=VWQydfHiszvjqjFCErCDBw

I just don't get the thing with big cars at all. And especially with EVs, it's nuts.

Pross · January 2023

Trying to find a decent size 'normal' estate car in electric form is a challenge. I can't work out if this is because it is difficult to make them for some reason or just because the manufacturers have decided that SUVs are what sells and therefore are only making SUVs twhich becomes self-perpetuating.

The Big 'Let's sell our cars and take buses/ebikes instead' thread (warning: probably very dull)

Comments

Categories