Diesel cars (toxic tax) announced

What's Hot
2456712

Comments

  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71952
    edited April 2017
    Stevepage said:
    Every time the government comes across a problem they're having difficulty solving, they seem to always settle for taxing the shit out of it. 

    This isn't how problems are solved surely? 
    It is if they get it right. By providing a financial incentive (or disincentive) to get people to do what they want, they achieve it without having to legislate in a heavy-handed way. In fact it's actually remarkable how easily people are led when they think they can avoid a tiny bit of tax.

    Although that does assume that the goal and the incentive are identified correctly, and that it doesn't produce a different distortion or a loophole which creates a new problem… governments don't have a good track record on that.

    Sporky said:

    And next they go for the Euro IV petrols (and earlier) which produce more particulates than a Euro VI diesel…
    Yes, that too.

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • hywelghywelg Frets: 4302
    "could" and "up to" 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • hywelghywelg Frets: 4302
    Sporky said:
    It's just scaremongering at this point.

    The firmest proposal so far only affected Euro IV and earlier.
    The London ULEZ is Euro4 petrol and Euro6 diesel 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • sweepysweepy Frets: 4158
    But, still very worrying for those on the Disabled Motability scheme, as I said earlier, the Petrol equivalent of all available vehicles is on average at least £1000 extra when paying the deposit 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • BucketBucket Frets: 7751
    Sporky said:
    And next they go for the Euro IV petrols (and earlier) which produce more particulates than a Euro VI diesel...
    Fucking brilliant, that's me buggered then.
    - "I'm going to write a very stiff letter. A VERY stiff letter. On cardboard."
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • DanRDanR Frets: 1041
    sweepy said:
    But, still very worrying for those on the Disabled Motability scheme, as I said earlier, the Petrol equivalent of all available vehicles is on average at least £1000 extra when paying the deposit 
    Not generally in a lot of cases petrol is cheaper now.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • ChuckManualChuckManual Frets: 692
    Ironwood burns at ridiculous temperatures. 
    Brother managed to melt a fireplace with the stuff. (Factory offcuts not decent bits) Stuff is so dense it sinks. 
    I've got a workbench made of the stuff - You should try lifting it!
    Not much of the gear, even less idea.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • HaychHaych Frets: 5594

    Ah wonderful isn't it, how a short sighted government basically conned the modern day motorist into investing in derv back in the early 90s (for, at least partially, environmental reasons IIRC, no less).  Now they've got us hooked it's now evil and we all need burning at the stake (assuming that won't emit Nox and particulates) for driving diesels.

    A scrappage scheme would be a better idea than taxation.

    I wouldn't worry too much, the world is running out of oil faster than OPEC will ever admit and soon enough (relatively speaking) we'll be taxed on how much methane is in a horse fart.

    There is no 'H' in Aych, you know that don't you? ~ Wife

    Turns out there is an H in Haych! ~ Sporky

    Bit of trading feedback here.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • SporkySporky Frets: 27569
    hywelg said:
    Sporky said:
    It's just scaremongering at this point.

    The firmest proposal so far only affected Euro IV and earlier.
    The London ULEZ is Euro4 petrol and Euro6 diesel 
    Ah, fair enough.

    Still over 3 years from happening though.
    "[Sporky] brings a certain vibe and dignity to the forum."
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71952
    edited April 2017
    sweepy said:
    But, still very worrying for those on the Disabled Motability scheme, as I said earlier, the Petrol equivalent of all available vehicles is on average at least £1000 extra when paying the deposit 
    That must be a deliberate distortion that needs to be removed - petrol models are usually slightly cheaper than diesels normally.

    Haych said:

    A scrappage scheme would be a better idea than taxation.

    No it wouldn't. Scrapping and building new cars is far more environmentally damaging than driving old ones, almost no matter how polluting.

    It still amazes me how a couple of hundred quid a year difference in road tax seems to be enough to sway people - it's small change in the total cost of driving. You use three or four times that a year in fuel, even if you don't drive much - let alone all the other costs.

    Taxation - or rather, removing a deliberately-created tax loophole - to level the playing field would be a start. Taxing diesel to correctly reflect the extra carbon content (16% higher) compared to petrol even more so.

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • impmannimpmann Frets: 12641
    edited April 2017
    Well... thankfully I don't need to visit many cities in my TDi Golf.

    When someone can find me a car that will return 60-65mpg (genuine) over my 70mile daily commute, with part prices that cheap, decent performance and comfort - and that costs less than £1k to buy s/h, I'll change the car.

    Til then, I'll let everyone flap around like headless chickens about how bad for health and the environment (m'kay) diesels are... and yet not even mention what they are going to do about delivery vans, buses, trucks, HGVs, trains and even boats that run on it.

    As said above - got a problem, tax the individual who can least afford to pay it. Welcome to the UK. Yep, you're welcome to it...
    Never Ever Bloody Anything Ever.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • SambostarSambostar Frets: 8745
    edited April 2017
    What about Salisbury and Southampton?  The road connects two docks FFS.  What they going to do with all the trade vehicles and HGV's stood in standstill traffic all day?

    Southampton are already talking about introducing a levy on HGV's and trucks in 2019 anyway.  What about 3.5T vehicles?  What if it extends to Millbrook and Redbridge and the docks or the M27?

    The whole thing is a scam to keep firms buying or leasing new vehicles and keep the finance companies flowing, which is pretty much all dealerships are these days, it's gone the way of the USA.  No way I'm getting a chassis cab on HP if they decide a seven year old commercial is too old they can stick their emissions laws up their arse or confine them to outside schools and actual town centres if they want to be fair.. 

    Salisbury Council fucked the traffic flow by letting Tesco and then Lidl's build on the A36 on the Soton side, it draws traffic onto the through road whichc is already at capacity, the result is not only 2 mile tailbacks in rush hour, but often all day, as the noddies from the other side of town are drawn into the A36 through traffic.
    Backdoor Children Of The Sock
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71952
    Yes, all the other diesel vehicles are a problem too - but that doesn't make it right not to do something about the most unnecessary ones, which are small urban cars. If you can't solve all the problems at once you need to start with the ones that you can.

    I agree that it should be your right to drive a diesel car if you want to - but you shouldn't be artificially subsidised for doing so, either by a road tax break or the fuel being too cheap. Make the playing field level in both ways and the problem will solve itself, because the only people who will still want diesels are those doing high mileages at motorway speeds, where it's genuinely more efficient.

    Then we can start using the same technology that's been developed for diesel cars to clean up the trucks and buses as well.

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • crunchmancrunchman Frets: 11411
    Bucket said:
    Keep thinking diesel might be the way to go for my next car, but if that were the case I'd only be looking at newer ones, finances permitting. Any older and I'd look at petrol, although ironically that would likely pollute more than many new diesels.

    Lots of newer diesel hatchbacks produce so little CO2 they qualify for zero road tax - will this change too?
    Already have changed it - on April 1st.  Diesels and Petrols now taxed at the same rate (£140).  The only cars that evade tax now are ones with zero tailpipe emissions.

    Sporky said:
    ICBM said:
    Bucket said:
    Keep thinking diesel might be the way to go for my next car, but if that were the case I'd only be looking at newer ones, finances permitting. Any older and I'd look at petrol, although ironically that would likely pollute more than many new diesels.

    Lots of newer diesel hatchbacks produce so little CO2 they qualify for zero road tax - will this change too?
    Yes, because the government has finally realised that the CO2 isn't the bigger problem - it's the NOX and the particulates which are.
    And next they go for the Euro IV petrols (and earlier) which produce more particulates than a Euro VI diesel...
    Is that the fictitious limits that a Euro 6 is meant to be able to achieve or the actual limits.

    Until there are real world Euro 6 tests and not just the current artificial conditions ones, then it should apply to all diesels.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • hywelghywelg Frets: 4302
    I've had my eye on this problem for a while. I will have to replace my ageing Ford Galaxy soon and need some clarity. Unfortunately Nottingham have form on taxing car users (Workplace Parking Levy), so I'm expecting trouble.

    I had deemed that my safest bet was to buy a Euro 6 diesel. You just cannot buy a petrol van. Finding a petrol big car is next to impossible. The government have to rework their taxation policies to stop penalising petrol vehicles. For instance , as a self employed, using my car for work I can claim it as a legitimate captial asset and thereby claim an allowance (reduced for personal use proportion). If you buy a car that has emissions above 130g/km you cannot claim the full allowance, you are only able to claim at 8% p.a., effectively never able to claim all of it. Below 130g/km and you can claim at 18% p.a. Now try and find a petrol vehicle of any size thats below that.

    Now if I buy a van I can claim the whole jolly lot (100%) in the first year and if that results in a financial loss I can carry that over to next year. No restrictions whatever on efficiency. So the manufacturers have no incentive to make a petrol or hybrid van.

    Crazy.

    The governments stance on this is to hide their heads in the sand and pretend its not their fuck up. By pushing it out to councils they avoid any of the blame. Only councils with solid majorities (like Nottingham) will risk taxing car drivers, they've done it before and will do it again.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • stickyfiddlestickyfiddle Frets: 26747
    Haych said:

    Ah wonderful isn't it, how a short sighted government basically conned the modern day motorist into investing in derv back in the early 90s (for, at least partially, environmental reasons IIRC, no less).  Now they've got us hooked it's now evil and we all need burning at the stake (assuming that won't emit Nox and particulates) for driving diesels.

    A scrappage scheme would be a better idea than taxation.

    I wouldn't worry too much, the world is running out of oil faster than OPEC will ever admit and soon enough (relatively speaking) we'll be taxed on how much methane is in a horse fart.

    Oil running out isn't going to be an issue at the rate electric (and driverless) cars are developing. In ten years most people won't want to buy anything with an internal combustion engine outside of niche sports cars, because the cost won't make sense.
    The Assumptions - UAE party band for all your rock & soul desires
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • sweepysweepy Frets: 4158
    DanR said:
    sweepy said:
    But, still very worrying for those on the Disabled Motability scheme, as I said earlier, the Petrol equivalent of all available vehicles is on average at least £1000 extra when paying the deposit 
    Not generally in a lot of cases petrol is cheaper now.
    Actually Petrol cars are more expensive on the Motability scheme, my wife is in receipt of higher level Mobility payment and we have had cars over the past 11 years, 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • CirrusCirrus Frets: 8481
    edited April 2017
    ICBM said:
    because the only people who will still want diesels are those doing high mileages at motorway speeds, where it's genuinely more efficient.

    And, presumably, only ever drive between two places that wouldn't incur a £20/day diesel pollution charge? Not that I think £20/ day is very likely, of course....

    But say I'm the ideal diesel user (still waiting for my prize) - My daily commute is a 75 mile round trip, of which ~60 miles are spent on a motorway. I drive like an old man, shuffling along with the lorries at between 56-60mph (my rule these days is that I don't force a lorry to overtake me).


     But my commute starts at the edge of Birmingham. And on average, 2-3 times a week I need to drive the 7 miles into the city centre. So, say there was a £5 diesel charge to enter the CBD in Brum. That'd be approx. £800/year in new taxes, before I think about the fact that sometimes, I take my diesel and do what it's good for, long motorway miles, on journeys that end in other cities for gigs. Obviously I'd need to change my ways, so I suppose it does the job, but it seems very harsh and I can imagine the uproar if they tried to implement it.

    Maybe they could let me legally remove the shitty active DPF from my car, so I can use less fuel overall. It burns more fuel to turn soot into dangerous particles that can seep through your lung tissue. It's actually got its own fuel injector. When it's regenerating you can watch yourself get 30mpg while coasting downhill at 60mph.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71952
    That's exactly why I'm in favour of pricing diesel to reflect carbon content and not charging the owners for going into towns. Then it becomes a fairer price rise which can be justified if you're still getting the better efficiency of diesel on long runs, but it would still discourage diesel use where it's least efficient.

    Basically if they stop trying to distort the market by tax incentives and price fuel by carbon content instead - which was the original intent of a carbon tax - the problem will largely solve itself.

    There seems to be evidence that the DPFs are part of the toxicity problem as well, by reducing the particle size, so removing them might be a good idea too.

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • crunchmancrunchman Frets: 11411
    ICBM said:

    There seems to be evidence that the DPFs are part of the toxicity problem as well, by reducing the particle size, so removing them might be a good idea too.
    The problem is that, whatever you do, diesel gives off obnoxious substances.  If you don't have a DPF there are the obvious clouds of filthy black smoke.  If you do then the particles are much smaller but possibly more dangerous.  DPFs don't do anything about NOx either.

    For regular city driving, diesel isn't good.  The problem is that there will always be a handful of people who do it occasionally, but for the rest of the time a diesel makes sense.  My parents live in Devon, and do a lot of motorway miles, and have a caravan.  For them, a diesel is the sensible option.  If they drive into London 3 or 4 times a year to visit us then it's overkill to punish them too heavily.

    You need to target the people who are the problem.  A lot of London boroughs are now charging extra for residents parking permits for diesels.  At least that is targeted at people who live in the area and shouldn't be driving diesels.

    I think a £3 charge to drive into a city would be enough to massively change habits, or alternativelty charge more for parking for diesels.  A lot of car parks around here have number plate recognition systems so it shouldn't be too hard to implement.  Charge 50% extra for parking for diesels in cities where there is a pollution problem.  Targeted measures like that would be far better.

     For most people, it's a relatively marginal call about whether to buy diesel or petrol anyway.  If you do less than 10,000 miles per year it's probably cheaper to run a petrol already for most people. The problem is that people are misled by headline mpg figures and don't look at the overall costs.  Going forwards they won't be any cheaper to tax than a petrol so that £100 or so in favour of diesel disappears as well.  For someone who isn't doing lots of motorway miles even a fiver a week extra would probably tip the balance and make a petrol cheaper to run - if they are capable of doing the sums properly.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.