Is The Demise of Diesel Cars just Slick marketing?

Hello,

If we really care about the impact that diesel cars are having, then why does our government continue to give them a preferential motor tax rate over petrol cars ?

The UK is successfully offloading a lot of it's older diesel cars to us, so we are just making our own problems worse, as we try to save a few quid by buying our cars in the UK and bringing them back home.
 
The powers that be knew that diesel cars were major pollutants decades ago, but kept it quiet; indeed the oil companies regularly bought out rival engine technologies and then suppressed the technology.
 
Whatever about the rights or wrongs of what was done in times past, there's absolutely no excuse for our government not taking immediate action to prevent more harm being done now and also, taking action to discourage the owners of diesel vehicles from retaining them !

It wouldn't surprise me if most of our government actually traveled separately by diesel powered vehicles to Sligo, for their great PR stunt called "Ireland2040" :rolleyes:
 
Leo,
"The move away from incentivising diesels is this country and many others, is these governments admitting they got it very wrong. So it's clear other opinions and alternative views are considered, but hopefully they'll just listen to the educated ones."

Makes me laugh when people suggest we listen to the "educated ones". I'm guessing the bankers, politicians, economists, et all, are the type of "educated" people we listened to when the world went belly up. Now we'll get "educated" scientists telling us diesel is the wrong way to go, we'll also get the "educated" scientists telling us that's a load of codswallop, then in the middle of all this are us unfortunate group of ignorant people who supposedly know nothing. You couldn't make it up ;)
 
noproblem said:
Makes me laugh when people suggest we listen to the "educated ones". I'm guessing the bankers, politicians, economists, et all, are the type of "educated" people we listened to when the world went belly up. Now we'll get "educated" scientists telling us diesel is the wrong way to go, we'll also get the "educated" scientists telling us that's a load of codswallop, then in the middle of all this are us unfortunate group of ignorant people who supposedly know nothing. You couldn't make it up ;)
Click to expand...

You need to be able to filter out the vested interests and understand the basis for sound scientific research. I've yet to see any peer reviewed study that disagrees with the fact that NO2, PAH or particulate emissions are bad for our health. Most of the science here is undisputed fact, to suggest that we are being herder like sheep to move away from diesel in some form of government led conspiracy is nonsense.
 
Leo said:
You need to be able to filter out the vested interests and understand the basis for sound scientific research. I've yet to see any peer reviewed study that disagrees with the fact that NO2, PAH or particulate emissions are bad for our health. Most of the science here is undisputed fact, to suggest that we are being herder like sheep to move away from diesel in some form of government led conspiracy is nonsense.
Click to expand...

Whatever you say Leo. I'm sure the scientists, like all your educated ones, are never wrong, ever. Doctors differ and patients die. I'll leave it at that, going for a spin in my diesel.
 
PGF2016 said:
I'd guess it's because there is a lot more infrastructure to be provided & maintained for cars compared to all other items you mention.
Click to expand...
Untrue. The demands on infrastructure and the damage caused by HGVs and farm machinery are far greater than those caused by cars, even the unnecessarily large Mammy-mobiles.

Have you ever seen what happens to road-surfaces when 40-tonne multi-axel HGVs turn? Or when giant farm-tractors drive in and out of fields during harvest time, ploughing or when silage is being cut? Yet these giants pay less for diesel (they get the VAT back) and less motor tax than I do for my 2-litre diesel Toyota; €800 / annum when paid quarterly, and 57 mpg from a Euro IV/V engine. HGVs, trains and the other vehicles I mentioned pollute more than cars but contribute less to fighting the conditions they cause.

In this country, as in others, the real polluters do not pay, the lowest guy on the totem pole pays. Ever was it thus.
 
Leo said:
You need to be able to filter out the vested interests and understand the basis for sound scientific research. I've yet to see any peer reviewed study that disagrees with the fact that NO2, PAH or particulate emissions are bad for our health. Most of the science here is undisputed fact, to suggest that we are being herder like sheep to move away from diesel in some form of government led conspiracy is nonsense.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that we were herded like sheep to move to diesel in a government led conspiracy ... people suspect the same trick is being pulled again.
 
I'm confused too as I see farmers and agricultural contractors featuring on Revenue lists as VAT-defaulters and receiving Revenue fines for the misuse of green diesel e.g. http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news...rs-feature-on-the-latest-tax-defaulters-list/

My key message is that the large commercial vehicle operators under-contribute to the pollution rectification funds and private diesel motorists bear the majority of the burden.
 
mathepac said:
I'm confused too as I see farmers and agricultural contractors featuring on Revenue lists as VAT-defaulters and receiving Revenue fines for the misuse of green diesel e.g. http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news...rs-feature-on-the-latest-tax-defaulters-list/
Click to expand...

Farmers can in theory opt to register for VAT but it makes little economic sense for them to do so as it they will invariably put them out of pocket. Any farmer who is carrying on a separate VATable activity is obliged to do so and to account for VAT, on their farm and off-farm turnover, once their turnover from that off-farm activity exceeds the registration threshold.

These days, owing to limitations on farm incomes, most farmers have separate off-farm income sources and these often include businesses with VAT exposure.

Agricultural contracting, in common with similar services, is a VATable activity.
 
odyssey06 said:
I think the problem is that we were herded like sheep to move to diesel in a government led conspiracy ... people suspect the same trick is being pulled again.
Click to expand...

That's exactly the problem, a number of governments, our own included significantly incentivised diesels as they thought it was an easy win on the way to meeting agreed CO2 emissions targets. They conveniently ignored the warnings and we are all paying the price now. Cities like Paris have been forced to take action due to rises in respiratory disease related deaths and move towards restricting or banning diesel vehicles. I don't see how there was any great conspiracy at play though, who do you think stood to gain?

I see the step away from incentivising diesel as a good thing, it's actually backed by sound science and that to me is a lot less sheep-like than sticking with a bad idea pretending it's all OK.
 
Leo said:
That's exactly the problem, a number of governments, our own included significantly incentivised diesels as they thought it was an easy win on the way to meeting agreed CO2 emissions targets. They conveniently ignored the warnings and we are all paying the price now. Cities like Paris have been forced to take action due to rises in respiratory disease related deaths and move towards restricting or banning diesel vehicles. I don't see how there was any great conspiracy at play though, who do you think stood to gain? I see the step away from incentivising diesel as a good thing, it's actually backed by sound science and that to me is a lot less sheep-like than sticking with a bad idea pretending it's all OK.
Click to expand...

It seemed to have been a green agenda conspiracy... for so many governments in the 21st century to get the science so wrong, heads were being buried in the sands.
Were the warnings ignored, I don't remember reading articles back when the policy was introduced about the risks so I wonder if certain voices drowned out or shut out?

It certainly makes me more suspicious of any government attempts to 'nudge' based on science.
The science wasn't wrong, as such, but the government process certainly was - any proper due diligence done by a government 15 years ago would have prevented the diesel debacle.

Probably disincentivising diesel is a good thing... my concerns are more about the 'process' rather than the specific 'policy'.
 
odyssey06 said:
It seemed to have been a green agenda conspiracy... for so many governments in the 21st century to get the science so wrong, heads were being buried in the sands.
Click to expand...

I think it was more mis-informed or partially informed people with good intentions creating political pressure and governments wanting to be seen to respond and failing to look at the bigger picture. The problems of diesel particulates have been documented since the '70s, so they can't claim plummeting air quality in cities was a surprise, perhaps governments didn't believe the incentives would be so effective?

A similar thing has been happening over the last couple of years as similarly mis-informed people with good intentions are installing more and more beehives in response to warnings on the bee population being threatened with extinction. Unfortunately they too are on contributing to the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top