Eco RANT !

[F Body]

Has this flipping government totally lost the plot
OK so we may have global warming and it might be affected by the amount of carbon dioxide our cars emit and as I've said before, any tax should be added to the price of petrol, so the more you use the more you pay !

But they are now bending over and dropping their pants to the tree huggers ?

This weeks proposal.

The Government hopes to introduce eco-friendly skills to the DOT L test. Under new proposals, pupils would be scored down for "revving the engine, jumping from brakes to accelerator, changing down gears unnecessarily or failing to switch off the engine in hold-ups," said Driving Standards Agency (DSA) assistant chief examiner Bob Millard.

The revised test would be part of a bigger shake-up of services being considered by the DSA. Also part of the body's latest consultation is a ban on all soft-tops at test centres - widening the current exclusion beyond the MINI Convertible and Ford Streetka - Why ???

In addition, the DSA hopes to step up its anti-fraud measures by giving examiners new powers to seize driving licences if they suspect them to be fake. Only the police are currently allowed to do that.

What's more, the theory test could be extended to include new questions on eco-driving and uninsured motorists. This part of the assessment would see a 33 per cent price hike, to £28.50 ( just like the new MOT we end up paying ) while criminal history checks are also being recommended.

Why not just fail everyone and make them take the smelly smokey old serious poluting bus

End of rant

[Mustangus]

Quoting: F Body

Why not just fail everyone and make them take the smelly smokey old serious poluting bus

thats the bit that really pisses me off. If you look at the crap coming out of most buses it must be far worse than any car. Taking driving tests is also insanely expensive, especially if you use an instructor car.

The government tax the crap out of us and then you get posts like this on 'another' forum:

"Has anyone got dual fuel capability in their Mustang ? Would it be feasable in a 2005 model. And any ideas of who, where, or cost ?

The reason I ask is that I'll be using mine for business use and my work is in a government agency. 'green' & ' sustainable' are now the buzz words. I think I'll have an increasingly hard time using it for work. I don't want that to stop me from the joy of owning one."

[Pod]

All it will do is persuade more people to drive without a licence (or mot or insurance or tax).

The only time that will be a problem is if you are stopped.
Even then, from the news stories I've seen, all they seem to do is ban you from driving! What's the point of that when you weren't supposed to be driving in the first place!

[philoldsmobile]

Quoting: Mustangus

"Has anyone got dual fuel capability in their Mustang ? Would it be feasable in a 2005 model. And any ideas of who, where, or cost ?

no,  but there is absolutely no reason whatsoever why it cant be done..

Dads 96 chevy tahoe has been running with a multipoint LPG system for nearly 40,000 miles now, and its incredible..


alternative automotive fuels in woburn sands did dads conversion, and were very good, dont entertain anything that isn't multipoint as it simply wont run as well.

with LPG you are entightled to £10 per annum london congestion charge (instead of £8 per day) and will likely fall into a MUCH lower  road tax bracket, as there are much cheaper rates for alternative fuel converted cars

Expect to pay close to £3000 for a good conversion (dads was £2700 3 years ago) if someone offers to do it for £1500 walk away, as its going to be junk,  one of the best systems is the prins multipoint sequential one, the kit alone is over £2k, also it is not DIY-able, as your insurance will be invalid without there being a valid certificate of instalation for the car.

[Mustangus]

great, thanks for that, I'll pass that on to the guy asking the question. Didnt realise about the congestion let off, sounds like a plan That said 3k gets a lot of congestion tickets

[Cunning Plan]

Quoting: F Body

Under new proposals, pupils would be scored down for "revving the engine, jumping from brakes to accelerator,

what crap.. we have one of the hardest tests around and they are making it harder by adding this kind of thing to think about??

And as said everytime this subject comes up, isnt it planes producing almost all of the carbon dioxide around??  

Quoting: F Body

Why not just fail everyone and make them take the smelly smokey old serious poluting bus

The thing about diesels is most will run just fine on pure veg oil and maby 5 quids worth of diesel to mix and help with cold starting - what emissions do you get from the engine then??? but the goverment wont let you run on that becuase they cant charge you 6,7,8p more than petrol using the excuse that it pollutes more..  

[55starchief]

Quoting: Cunning Plan

what crap.. we have one of the hardest tests around and they are making it harder by adding this kind of thing to think about??

Our test is a complete waste of time, what they should be doing is teaching people to drive properly rather than to pass a test

[Roadkill]

Quoting: F Body

failing to switch off the engine in hold-ups

Ahh, great, that's gonna single-handedly make traffic jams, that one.

[HardRockCamaro]

You're not guaranteed a discount on the congestion charge just for having LPG.
It's become a bit more complex.
The vehicle and the conversion must be on a special list in order to qualify.

As for switching the engine off all the time, are they aware how much fuel it takes to start an engine?

[55starchief]

Personaly my take is in large cities there is no need for large cars. If i lived in london it would have to be a smart car for me. Also with the new generation of electric vehicles i see no reason why delivery firms should be running petrol or diesel vehicles that goes for cabs as well. By cutting out these vehicles poloution could be reduced

[philoldsmobile]

Quoting: HardRockCamaro

You're not guaranteed a discount on the congestion charge just for having LPG.
It's become a bit more complex.

ahh, just read a PDF on it... something else to make matters more complicated.

[HardRockCamaro]

Quoting: 55starchief

Personaly my take is in large cities there is no need for large cars. If i lived in london it would have to be a smart car for me. Also with the new generation of electric vehicles i see no reason why delivery firms should be running petrol or diesel vehicles that goes for cabs as well. By cutting out these vehicles poloution could be reduced

That's fine in theory, but it doesn't work in practice.
Most small deliveries within London are done on bikes, it's simply quicker.
Deliveries via lorries or vans are mostly either coming into London (ie goods manufactured outside of London for cheapness) or to a lesser extent leaving London.  An electric vehicle does not have enough power to move that kind of weight and secondly does not have the range, you'd have to transfer goods to and from regular diesel vehicles at the edge of the city.

As for having a Smart Car, it's fuel consumption isn't really that much better than any other small car.  Throw in the fact it has only 2 seats and no luggage capacity and it has a limited range of uses, most of which would be better met by using public transport anyway (eg the tube).

You have ot bear in mind the fact that the pollution from vehicles is only a small amount of the total pollution produced by the UK, some 5% I believe, and I seem to remember reading that the UK contributes only 1% of the worlds pollution anyway.  So if you stopped all cars on all roads in the UK (with catastrophic economic consequences) the difference made to the worlds climate change would be 0.05%.  Due to tehj economic growth of China and the corresponding growth in their pollution, that 0.05% saving would be gone in less than 90 days as China increased its output.
So you would have madea  0.05% difference to the pollution output of the world for less than 90 days in return for *mass* unemployment, house reposessions and thus evicitions, rioting in the streets and complete chaos and anarchy.

Even *if* you believe the climate change hype (and while I do I don't necessarily believe their explanations for it) the solution is not so simple.

[Pod]

Quoting: HardRockCamaro

rioting in the streets and complete chaos and anarchy

[Cunning Plan]

Quoting: HardRockCamaro

Quoting: 55starchief
Personaly my take is in large cities there is no need for large cars. If i lived in london it would have to be a smart car for me. Also with the new generation of electric vehicles i see no reason why delivery firms should be running petrol or diesel vehicles that goes for cabs as well. By cutting out these vehicles poloution could be reduced


That's fine in theory, but it doesn't work in practice.
Most small deliveries within London are done on bikes, it's simply quicker.
Deliveries via lorries or vans are mostly either coming into London (ie goods manufactured outside of London for cheapness) or to a lesser extent leaving London. An electric vehicle does not have enough power to move that kind of weight and secondly does not have the range, you'd have to transfer goods to and from regular diesel vehicles at the edge of the city.

As for having a Smart Car, it's fuel consumption isn't really that much better than any other small car. Throw in the fact it has only 2 seats and no luggage capacity and it has a limited range of uses, most of which would be better met by using public transport anyway (eg the tube).

You have ot bear in mind the fact that the pollution from vehicles is only a small amount of the total pollution produced by the UK, some 5% I believe, and I seem to remember reading that the UK contributes only 1% of the worlds pollution anyway. So if you stopped all cars on all roads in the UK (with catastrophic economic consequences) the difference made to the worlds climate change would be 0.05%. Due to tehj economic growth of China and the corresponding growth in their pollution, that 0.05% saving would be gone in less than 90 days as China increased its output.
So you would have madea 0.05% difference to the pollution output of the world for less than 90 days in return for *mass* unemployment, house reposessions and thus evicitions, rioting in the streets and complete chaos and anarchy.

Even *if* you believe the climate change hype (and while I do I don't necessarily believe their explanations for it) the solution is not so simple.

Well said

[Roadkill]

HRC for President !

[Cunning Plan]

Quoting: Roadkill

HRC for President !

RK for Vice President for agreeing

[ianjpage]

Quoting: Cunning Plan

Quoting: Roadkill
HRC for President !


RK for Vice President for agreeing