On 2006-03-22, Badger <
[email protected]> wrote:
> My disco (on LPG) is a 2000, so no probs there, really. My old 110 (1983,
> again on LPG) only does around 2000 miles a year tops however, so any
> increase is a pain and unfair as I see it due to the lower mileages done.
Yeah, I work from home so a mileage based tax would be ace for me! Do
it based on mileage recorded on MOT certs. A small proportion of
people would cheat however, so it's much more acceptable to RFID tag
everyone, put cameras on every road, recognise their numberplates and
put cameras in our homes, we'll all end up as brains in glass tanks I
tell you.
> Ahem.
Those damned smokey diesels eh.
> The type of pollutants (well, the main one of current concern anyway!)
> that disiesels emit (carcinogenic particulates) are considerably worse at
> local level than any other fuel types, we need to look at the bigger picture
> than simply global warming.
Hmm, what, universal pollution? Not sure diesel/petrol are much of a
problem on a solar system scale.
> That is only one small sector of the whole pollution "thing". As I
> see it, the only way of dealing with these particulates would be to
> retrospectively fit particulate traps to ALL diesel engined
> vehicles, especially buses, taxis and lorrys.
Or ban traffic from cities, who the feck wants to drive in a city
anyway! It's in the cities that the diesel pollution is a real
problem. I saw some article on the beeb website a few moons ago
talking about a study done that revealed that children living near bus
stations were 30x more likely to get whatever cancer than kids living
in the country. A petrol engine in the country causes almost as much
harm as one in a city, but a diesel engine in the country causes less
harm than one in a city because the pollution is more localised.
Note *more* localised, not entirely localised.. IIRC diesels don't
put petrol in the shade when it comes to the other pollutants, it's a
bit less but we're not talking 50% or anywhere near that. Can't be
arsed to look it up, still digesting my food.
> What fuels would you advocate burning in a diesel that aren't
> hydrocarbon based and therefore emit particulates?
Sod yer particulates! Put a hanky on the exhaust pipe. They're only
a problem in the cities and like I said before, they can be dealt with
on a local basis. Particulate pollution in Reading can be tackled
with action by the local government, but non-particulate pollution
that affects the atmosphere as a whole can't be dealt with locally.
Biofuels can help there, and diesels are currently most suited to
taking advantage of those. Those blasted hybrid cars are packed full
of electronics and dodgy battery chemicals, which doesn't help at all.
> emissions is LPG, and the ****ers have started to increase the duty on that
> now!
Any fuel that's cheaper soley down to reduced tax was going to end up
like this, I'm surprised anyone bothered with LPG as the vehicle has
to undergo an invasive conversion and then you have to hope the
government of the day doesn't whack the tax up on a whim.. Never
seemed worth it to me, especially when a diesel can run on camel
****.
--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!
