FUCK OFF BBC - Diesel moan

[UltraWomble]

I was fine with this article until I came across the following:

 

 

dirty diesel drivers 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34262990

 

Now I want to rampage and pillage the BBC offices leaving mounds of burning corpses.

[steve_earwig]

Maybe he means that they'll be charging extra for cars that are both running on diesel and in need of a wash

[Pillock]

but the bigger quote is 

 

 

 In London, dirty diesel drivers could soon be paying an extra £12.50 to drive in town

 

Are they using the term "dirty diesel" for all diesels, or is it "drivers of diesels that are dirty", i.e. a subset of diesels so it'll calculate charges based the level of Euro emissions it has. I always wondered why my Ford Focus used to have "EURO4" in the model name when doing a lookup on the reg, maybe this is why.

 

Maybe it's just the fact that diesels kick out more clag, that's why they have particulate filters. If it's not got a DPF, then it is actually dirtier - where's that pic of krujoe leaving a black line down the road from his Peugeot exhaust?

 

Maybe it's the drivers who are dirty, in a diesel. Dogging and picking up hookers and stuff.

[srad34]

probably another lame excuse to hike fuel costs.... 

[dollywobbler]

I'm not fine with that story at all. It's sensationalist bollocks of the highest order - a complete non-story. Based on some shoddy guesswork, we may be left 'at the mercy' of the global fuel market, because we buy more diesel than we make. Which we already are. Bloody awful journalism, pretty much just publishing someone else's sorry excuse for a press release. 

[Slappy]

Am with DW on this. Diesel consumption only went up I'm fairly sure because that was where the favourable tax breaks came in for company cars as well as the significant rise in both fuels. If for whatever reason (health, environmental, maintenance costs), petrol regains favour again in the next few years, then the "predicted increase" in diesel use will be anything but...

[oldcars]

Does not apply to Rover 75 drivers becasue there winners.

[mercrocker]

My nearest conurbanation mis-managed pile of architectural carbuncle that was once a decent city is one of those mentioned as having to address an excess of whatever the current pollutant of public enemy is.   Its been well documented that its hapless road management and re-active use of traffic lights (the roundabout into work has no less than five sets to contend with just to make a right turn) has actually done more than anything else to increase airborne pollution. 

 

If a car stalls at a red light on the northern outskirts of town and misses his "go" there will be tailback off the motorway at the southern end within 25 minutes.   

 

Me, I hate the place (work is just outside the "zone") and if this diesel ban comes in I am considering buying a Perky powered Maestro van just to make sure I cant get in....

 

And, yes it seems to be the case that tax (and emissions?)  breaks were given to diesel cars - hence the plethora of inappropriately-badged oil burners that appeared over  the first part of this century.   George Orwell couldn't have made some of this shit up.....

[MarvinsMom]

other scare stories with regard to diesel (apart from the kittens, polarbears and children that it kills each time I start my car up) is they want to charge diesels to enter London, derby, Nottingham, leeds and Bristol? I've been to all these places, with the exception of Bristol and they are total shit holes. the one saving grace for allof them is the road back out!!

 

and quiet how it will work for leeds when the M62 and M1 run right through the heart of the place, shows just how much thought has been put into the idea.

 

really they should be paying folks to go in to these dreadful places, not charging for the friggin' privilege!!

[Richard]

Dirty bastards.

[UltraWomble]

They [whoever they are] will not be happy until we are all driving Smiths milk floats with lots of batteries under the seats at 28mph everywhere.

[Taff]

other scare stories with regard to diesel (apart from the kittens, polarbears and children that it kills each time I start my car up) is they want to charge diesels to enter London, derby, Nottingham, leeds and Bristol? I've been to all these places, with the exception of Bristol and they are total shit holes. the one saving grace for allof them is the road back out!!

 

and quiet how it will work for leeds when the M62 and M1 run right through the heart of the place, shows just how much thought has been put into the idea.

 

really they should be paying folks to go in to these dreadful places, not charging for the friggin' privilege!!

 

Objection! Bristol IS a shithole, and has appaling traffic issues. It is however a proclaimed Green city, so we expect some sort of financial levy for the privilege of driving here in the not-to-distant future. This will cause issues, as there is a very large segment of the UK defence industry based here, and while all us arms dealers are absolutely minted, the Civil Servants we supply are in the same boat as nurses, fireman, cops etc, low-ish wages but need to live as close as is reasonable to work.

[Pillock]

Nottingham doesn't even have any traffic issues. It's got both tram and bus park and ride from various points outside the city. I sometimes work in Nottingham and I drive straight in at 8.30am without a single jam.

It's not a shithole though. 

[cros]

My nearest conurbanation mis-managed pile of architectural carbuncle that was once a decent city is one of those mentioned as having to address an excess of whatever the current pollutant of public enemy is.   Its been well documented that its hapless road management and re-active use of traffic lights (the roundabout into work has no less than five sets to contend with just to make a right turn) has actually done more than anything else to increase airborne pollution. 

 

If a car stalls at a red light on the northern outskirts of town and misses his "go" there will be tailback off the motorway at the southern end within 25 minutes.   

 

Me, I hate the place (work is just outside the "zone") and if this diesel ban comes in I am considering buying a Perky powered Maestro van just to make sure I cant get in....

 

And, yes it seems to be the case that tax (and emissions?)  breaks were given to diesel cars - hence the plethora of inappropriately-badged oil burners that appeared over  the first part of this century.   George Orwell couldn't have made some of this shit up.....

Maestro diesel van is the crown jewels, don't waste time thinking

[brickwall]

Diesel is for trucks, works vans, 4x4s, tractors and Autoshitters. 

[chaseracer]

They [whoever they are] will not be happy until we are all unable to drive anywhere, leaving the roads free for their limousines.

 

[castros_bro]

What a load of BBC wanky toss (professional analysis after 30 years in the petroleum industry)

 

"If supply is interrupted, then at best we'll see sharp rises in forecourt prices and, at worst, there is the unlikely but real possibility of pumps running dry."    No shit Sherlock! 

 

The report this article seems to be based on states

 

There have been significant improvements in air quality over the last five decades through the introduction of a range of measures in the UK .  There have been significant falls in emissions across a range of pollutants , (figure 1).
Emissions of nitrogen oxides alone have fallen by 62% since 1970. This is largely due to the regulatory frameworks put in place or supported by Government at local, national, European or international level,
 significant investment by industry in cleaner processes.  For example, reductions in emissions from power stations have been driven by improved combustion technologies (such as low NOx burners and by retro - fitting coal fired power stations), legislation including the Large Combustion Plant and Industrial Emissions Directives and the shift in the UK fuel mix away from coal towards nuclear ,gas and renewables. The UK continues to meet international and European ceilings for emissions of NOx. The UK will continue to implement and enforce regulatory controls over industrial processes in the UK to ensure that their contribution to NOx emissions continues to decline.

 

 

Which is not the same as doom n destruction n end of the world NOx KAOS.

 

The BBC ain't what it used to be etc.

[Richard]

Doing away with industry must have gone a long way towards reducing emissions.

[Alexg]

To be fair it's more fuck off RAC, the BBC are just reporting their drivel

[Junkman]

I haven't read that much concentrated bollocks in a long time.

[Bear]

Objection! Bristol IS a shithole, and has appaling traffic issues. It is however a proclaimed Green city, so we expect some sort of financial levy for the privilege of driving here in the not-to-distant future. This will cause issues, as there is a very large segment of the UK defence industry based here, and while all us arms dealers are absolutely minted, the Civil Servants we supply are in the same boat as nurses, fireman, cops etc, low-ish wages but need to live as close as is reasonable to work.

 

Having driven in Bristol recently, I think a reduction in localised pollution should be a driving force - the place seems to get gridlocked if a pigeon shits on the one-way system and the signage is dreadful for people who don't know the way around. But the solution to these issues is not really to ban cars, it's to implement cheap to use, large clean trams running 24/7. Why do we drive into cities if we don't already live there? Usually for smaller shopping items and entertainment - being able to leave the car somewhere safe, spacious and easy to get to is not a chore, it's a pleasure, because then you can go browse in shops, watch a movie, have dinner etc. without worrying about parking time limits or having to drive in a claustrophobic, badly signposted inner city network.

 

Birmingham would struggle to make that change due to the way the A38 works and how spread out it is. London has it with the Underground - even when I had exemption from C-charge for a low emissions car AND blue badge, I never drove into London - I'd park at one of the easily accessed, cheap (free with the badge of course, but I don't need it anymore) stations and take the tube in.

 

Government won't do it though. They don't think properly long-term with infrastructure investment - a good tram system isn't a 5-year, next-election project, it's something that should last 60 years+ and enrich the lives of generations.

[Angrydicky]

Nottingham.

 

Hilly. Far too hilly, and I mean some of the residential areas, not even outside the city, are built on the most insane slopes. Must be a nightmare owning a vintage car around there. Everyone is overly cheerful to each other, and you get called "dook" at every opportunity.

 

As for diesels, I wouldn't mind seeing the back of them, they're horrible anyway. But I don't support the idea of forcing people to buy new cars just to be able to drive in the city of their choice.

 

Sincerely,

 

A. Grumpy Southerner.

[Uncle Jimmy]

Objection! Bristol IS a shithole, and has appaling traffic issues. It is however a proclaimed Green city, so we expect some sort of financial levy for the privilege of driving here in the not-to-distant future. This will cause issues, as there is a very large segment of the UK defence industry based here, and while all us arms dealers are absolutely minted, the Civil Servants we supply are in the same boat as nurses, fireman, cops etc, low-ish wages but need to live as close as is reasonable to work.

Bristol is the shitist city in the country. Official.

[HH-R]

It sounds fair enough TBH, they're horrible, filthy, stinking, carcinogenic* things. Unfortunately for diseasel drivers they're probably going to have to suffer more and more digs in the press as it's demonised and they're "encouraged" to buy something else through taxation (petrol hybrids? electric?). When everyone has bought into that they'll whinge about neodymium stocks being depleted, etc.

 

*I know petrol exhaust isn't exactly good for you either.

[Bear]

Factory-fit LPG. Cars should last longer, it shouldn't be a ballache or rob the car of space if it's properly developed for install, maintenance and crashworthiness. Better yet, factory-fit LPG powering rear-mounted Wankel small rotary engines at high RPM to run range extenders on electric cars with battery weight and volume optimised for 100 mile EV range - enough to get around British cities and suburbs, but not making the whole car into a heavy battery. All of them should be 4WD with front and rear differentials and two motors, allowing redundancy/efficiency and providing the solution to most people's justification for an SUV (even when they're not 4x4) and the cars should use composite materials to make them as light, airy and connected to their environment as possible without scaring the Euro-NCAP people away.

[Junkman]

I'd hicks... rather hicks... ave them hicks... runnin on hicks... allerhol.

[Bear]

Fantastic idea in Brazil when the sugar crop was exceeding car ownership (lots of poverty, few cars, lots of farming) - sadly a bit difficult here, it's bad enough with all that crap rapeseed stuff everywhere trying to up biodiesel production. Algae-based methane seems to be the most interesting way of retaining internal combustion without running on geological extraction, and again rather than using batteries, a mixte-type drive with a generator running at optimum efficiency, a large capacitor (or flywheel, KERS style) and a motor.

[Junkman]

I'm missing the big bloody V8 in there.

[inconsistant]

They [whoever they are] will not be happy until we are all driving Smiths milk floats with lots of batteries under the seats at 28mph everywhere.

Is the answer 'randy 70s housewives in nighties'?

 

 

 

(Btw, Pat Mustard was my second choice of username when I joined.)

[Bear]

To be honest, I'm a fan of separating the roles of cars, and entirely in favour of fantastic/fun handling sports cars and so forth for the majority of roads - not least because a big, overpowered V8 engine is one of the most calming, longest-lasting solutions to long distance driving. When it comes to suburban/city use I think the status/joy/fun factor of the car should be entirely secondary. There are so many cars in the UK that it's not unreasonable to think families might own two cars as an assumption, and that a car for high-days and holidays offers the range and enjoyment that an electric solution doesn't.

 

Trying to be all things to all people is impossible. The reason I suggest the AWD solution isn't because I think it would be good for greenlaning, but because the entire South East of England grinds to a fucking halt the moment there's a flake of snow on the M25 because either the drivers cannot cope, or the inevitable upshot of everyone choosing a BMW 3/5 with sports suspension and stupid elasticband tyres (whilst complaining about speedbumps/potholes) is that they're slithering around uncontrollably at the first hill.

If I lived in London, I'd own a car - but it wouldn't be used in London. It would be for trips to Scotland, or just enjoying the car in places where you can. The times when I've driven in London what I actually want is a car that lets me see every hazard, is tiny enough to park anywhere, and doesn't cost a lot to just be idling pointlessly. If it can shrug off minor dents and so forth, even better.