Border Reiver wrote:I think I'd rather pay extra fuel duty instead of ppm. That would mean those with more economical vehicles would pay less and visitors from overseas would also contribute. I think that might work for now until scientists and politicians can agree on what is needed to power our vehicles. It would be sods law if, after buying an electric car (not if I can help it), developers came up with a diesel or petrol engine that was overall* less polluting than an electric one. Either way, as long as I can afford to get to the hills and dales, I'll be happy enough.
*By overall, I mean in terms of total cost including sourcing materials for batteries, maintenance, disposal/recycling and cost to the environment.
I agree with a lot of what you say, here BR. The climate issue is clearly a real one, but there seems to be a lot of environmental false economy going on. Both consumer and environmental groups campaigned for many years to get car manufacturers to rust proof vehicles properly. Now we see new ways the industry is trying to get us to treat cars as disposable items. Both scrappage schemes and short term lease packages have become the new rust. I have family who work in the eco friendly car recycling business, and they say the most environmentally friendly thing a driver can do is keep their car as long as possible.