Whats your strategy for year 2030 / ban of ICE vehicles?

[DrNick]

An old S plate diesel Vauxhall pick up (so talking about 1977 ish) drove past me today. The stink it made was horrendous. There’s no way keeping that on the road is environmentally friendly even considering how much resource goes into a new one.
It also shows how bad it was in those days.

 

[DrNick]

I know the truth, its in front of my eyes, on my drive, its 21yo and good for another 20 i hope, i don't need to replace it and use even more steel creating CO2 or anything else for that matter.

You could compromise and get it converted to ️
Very green. Electric and no new steel used up and no more emissions of any description, except of course for tyre particles and brake dust, which are also the work of the devil.

 

[ChipChop]

How long do you think it will take before "the masses do not drive"? Keeping in mind that 2030 is just the beginning of a long process at the end of which the majority of ICE cars will be off the road. How long do you think ICE cars can continue to be driven after the last new one is purchased on 31st December 2029?

Urban Pay to pollute money making schemes like ULEZ will expand and become ever more expensive. ICE taxed off the roads. How long the extinction process takes is going to be a fine balancing act juggling public anger levels and what policy makers think they can get away with.

Once again what are the consequences of such a regressive social policy?

Where is the social cost to benefit analysis?

 

[ChipChop]

An old S plate diesel Vauxhall pick up (so talking about 1977 ish) drove past me today. The stink it made was horrendous. There’s no way keeping that on the road is environmentally friendly even considering how much resource goes into a new one.
It also shows how bad it was in those days.

Powered by a biofuel possibly if an old indirect injection diesel engine. Very green, sustainable and very clean.

 

[markjay]

You could compromise and get it converted to ️
Very green. Electric and no new steel used up and no more emissions of any description, except of course for tyre particles and brake dust, which are also the work of the devil.

EVs hardly produce any brake dust, due to regenerative braking. The disc and pads are used mainly in 'panic stops'. In fact, on some EVs the regenerative braking is arbitrarily suspended by the computer from time to time to clean any surface rust from the disks. It is thought that on most EVs the discs and pads will be good for the life of the car and never need replacing. Which is also a factor in the very low running costs of an EV. That said, the level of regenerative braking can usually be selected by the driver, so if you really wanted to you could avoid it altogether and the brakes will work like they do on any other car. But it will obviously reduce the range.

 

[markjay]

Urban Pay to pollute money making schemes like ULEZ will expand and become ever more expensive. ICE taxed off the roads. How long the extinction process takes is going to be a fine balancing act juggling public anger levels and what policy makers think they can get away with.

Once again what are the consequences of such a regressive social policy?

Where is the social cost to benefit analysis?

Understood. Do you have a rough estimate though?

 

[ChipChop]

EVs hardly produce any brake dust, due to regenerative braking. The disc and pads are used mainly in 'panic stops'. In fact, on some EVs the regenerative braking is arbitrarily suspended by the computer from time to time to clean any surface rust from the disks. It is thought that on most EVs the discs and pads will be good for the life of the car and never need replacing. Which is also a factor in the very low running costs of an EV. That said, the level of regenerative braking can usually be selected by the driver, so if you really wanted to you could avoid it altogether and the brakes will work like they do on any other car. But it will obviously reduce the range.

What brilliant news for parts manufacturers and motor factors up and down the land. Stand up and rejoice as they all head to the dole queue.

Social cost of the EV.

 

[markjay]

What brilliant news for parts manufacturers and motor factors up and down the land. Stand up and rejoice as they all head to the dole queue.

Social cost of the EV.

I'd put it the other way around... that our environmental issues are caused by our obsession with consumerism and manufacturing that 'create jobs' while killing the planet.

 

[Tonye]

You could compromise and get it converted to ️

Naaaaar, much more green to keep as is, battery and motor and all that other manufacturing of bits

 

[Tonye]

You could compromise and get it converted to ️

Put the roof up and down 3 times and I'm down to 30 miles before a recharge

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

What brilliant news for parts manufacturers and motor factors up and down the land. Stand up and rejoice as they all head to the dole queue.

Social cost of the EV.

If that happens then it will be a similar impact to that of every other social or technological advance in history. The ways we do things as humans - including occupations - changes over time. Some occupations adapt, some fall away, some stay just the same. It’s evolution.

For example, people working on the production lines must have also “rejoiced” when robots and mechanised manufacturing replaced people when making many of things we take for granted today. Many of the ICE cars belonging to posters on this thread were at least in part made by robots or automated machinery. But that extends to food, clothing, etc too.

Typists must have “rejoiced” when PCs became widespread. Those working on the railways must have “rejoiced” when car ownership became a supposed right than a luxury. Messengers must have rejoiced when telephones became widespread. Printers must have “rejoiced” when printing became mechanised.

So hands up who’s giving up their ICE cars, manufactured goods, mass produced food and clothes, PCs, phones, telephones, newspapers, books, etc?

 

[E55BOF]

We all are, but barring a few nutters, not until we die....

 

[DrNick]

Powered by a biofuel possibly if an old indirect injection diesel engine. Very green, sustainable and very clean.

No it wasn't running on chip fat. Definitely dino juice and very obnoxious. But of its time - which should have long gone by now.

 

[ChipChop]

If that happens then it will be a similar impact to that of every other social or technological advance in history. The ways we do things as humans - including occupations - changes over time. Some occupations adapt, some fall away, some stay just the same. It’s evolution.

For example, people working on the production lines must have also “rejoiced” when robots and mechanised manufacturing replaced people when making many of things we take for granted today. Many of the ICE cars belonging to posters on this thread were at least in part made by robots or automated machinery. But that extends to food, clothing, etc too.

Typists must have “rejoiced” when PCs became widespread. Those working on the railways must have “rejoiced” when car ownership became a supposed right than a luxury. Messengers must have rejoiced when telephones became widespread. Printers must have “rejoiced” when printing became mechanised.

So hands up who’s giving up their ICE cars, manufactured goods, mass produced food and clothes, PCs, phones, telephones, newspapers, books, etc?

Pricing the masses out of cars, taking away their personal mobility is not a social or technological advance in history it is a regressive step. Society going backwards.

 

[Benzowner]

I'd put it the other way around... that our environmental issues are caused by our obsession with consumerism and manufacturing that 'create jobs' while killing the planet.

I don't think mankind has the ability to kill the planet, only the current inhabitants, that may not be a bad thing eventually What amazes me is that the dinosaurs managed it without the ICE just relied on a wayward comet

 

[DrNick]

Pricing the masses out of cars, taking away their personal mobility is not a social or technological advance in history it is a regressive step. Society going backwards.

I don't understand why you think this will happen. Personal mobility does not necessarily depend on owning a car.

As a general view (excluding all outlier cases, of which there will always be a few) personal mobility just requires transport to be available at the right time. Privately owned vehicles are seen as the most convenient as they are always available to you. You may see busses as the other end of the scale, as you share it and you have to plan to meet its schedule. There's a cost, convenience and possibly time balance that apples in both cases. What we want is the convenience and timing of cars without the high cost and other issues associated.
As an example, taxis are a compromise between the two. What you want is a personal on demand taxi that you pay for only when you use it.

Who can argue with a system where a vehicle turns up at exactly the time you want it, takes you to where you want to go, drops you off (no parking issues), then picks you up exactly when you want picking up, takes you home and then goes away.

Exactly the same convenience as a car, but without the capital cost of buying it in the first place, and no need for maintenance. In fact its even better than having a car, because soon, not only will you have to buy the car, pay the annual road tax, and pay the tax on the fuel but you will also have to pay per mile anyway.

Such a system, as well as requiring self driving cars, also takes away all the emotion. It does depend on you not wanting to own a car. Personably for most journeys, I don't care about what vehicle I'm in. However, I can also see the attraction of driving eg a classic for the fun of it. Like all these things, it doesn't need to be all or nothing. Society changes slowly. Give people the choice that meets their needs and they will choose it. Legislation does encourage and inform the choice though!

I know such a system isn't here yet, but here is no reason why it couldn't come in the next few years - around here we have these pay per journey electric scooters that are very popular. They weren't here a couple of years ago. Change happens, driven by need.

Its the faster horse argument again.

 

[Dryce]

I know such a system isn't here yet, but here is no reason why it couldn't come in the next few years - around here we have these pay per journey electric scooters that are very popular. They weren't here a couple of years ago. Change happens, driven by need.

I note that around Milton Keynes they are a bit of a trip hazard at night. They just get abandoned along the walkways. It's also pretty obvious that the demographics of those using them are mainly focused on youngsters.

We see quite a few rental bicycles out and about in our area - but I get the impression that those using them are doing so for leisure rather than commuting or business.

I've been quite taken with the scooters as a form of personal urban transport because folding versions should be much more manageable than bicycles.

 

[ChipChop]

I don't understand why you think this will happen. Personal mobility does not necessarily depend on owning a car.

As a general view (excluding all outlier cases, of which there will always be a few) personal mobility just requires transport to be available at the right time. Privately owned vehicles are seen as the most convenient as they are always available to you. You may see busses as the other end of the scale, as you share it and you have to plan to meet its schedule. There's a cost, convenience and possibly time balance that apples in both cases. What we want is the convenience and timing of cars without the high cost and other issues associated.
As an example, taxis are a compromise between the two. What you want is a personal on demand taxi that you pay for only when you use it.

Who can argue with a system where a vehicle turns up at exactly the time you want it, takes you to where you want to go, drops you off (no parking issues), then picks you up exactly when you want picking up, takes you home and then goes away.

Exactly the same convenience as a car, but without the capital cost of buying it in the first place, and no need for maintenance. In fact its even better than having a car, because soon, not only will you have to buy the car, pay the annual road tax, and pay the tax on the fuel but you will also have to pay per mile anyway.

Such a system, as well as requiring self driving cars, also takes away all the emotion. It does depend on you not wanting to own a car. Personably for most journeys, I don't care about what vehicle I'm in. However, I can also see the attraction of driving eg a classic for the fun of it. Like all these things, it doesn't need to be all or nothing. Society changes slowly. Give people the choice that meets their needs and they will choose it. Legislation does encourage and inform the choice though!

I know such a system isn't here yet, but here is no reason why it couldn't come in the next few years - around here we have these pay per journey electric scooters that are very popular. They weren't here a couple of years ago. Change happens, driven by need.

Its the faster horse argument again.

Are you proposing some form of state intervention? A fleet of UK plc on demand hire cars on every street corner rented by the minute. Or would you leave the leasing aspect in the hands of the private sector? If you favour the private sector model why is it acceptable for private companies to own vehicles but not private individuals?

Newcastle upon Tyne also has electric scooter hire available in the city centre. A council run scheme using a Chinese companies bright orange scooters. Neuron scooters. £1 to unlock and then 18 pence per minute. You have to be over 18 to rent one. A run for profit scheme by the Chinese company in collaboration with Newcastle city council.

China is a long way from Newcastle so what an odd deal for a council to broker. Maybe all expenses paid trips to the far East were the clincher for the council wallers. Fact finding missions i think they call them. Wonder if they offset the carbon using tax payers money?

 

[markjay]

...why is it acceptable for private companies to own vehicles but not private individuals?

Is this a serious question?

Taxis, Uber cars, minicabs, buses, and trains, are all owned by private companies or by self-employed individuals, operating the vehicles as a business that serves the public. This is how public transport works.

And this is also how you achieve a relatively-small fleet of vehicles ferrying a large number of people daily.

There are currently shy of 70m people living in the UK, and just over 40m vehicles, of all types. Sounds insane, I know....

 

[markjay]

I don't understand why you think this will happen. Personal mobility does not necessarily depend on owning a car.

As a general view (excluding all outlier cases, of which there will always be a few) personal mobility just requires transport to be available at the right time. Privately owned vehicles are seen as the most convenient as they are always available to you. You may see busses as the other end of the scale, as you share it and you have to plan to meet its schedule. There's a cost, convenience and possibly time balance that apples in both cases. What we want is the convenience and timing of cars without the high cost and other issues associated.
As an example, taxis are a compromise between the two. What you want is a personal on demand taxi that you pay for only when you use it.

Who can argue with a system where a vehicle turns up at exactly the time you want it, takes you to where you want to go, drops you off (no parking issues), then picks you up exactly when you want picking up, takes you home and then goes away.

Exactly the same convenience as a car, but without the capital cost of buying it in the first place, and no need for maintenance. In fact its even better than having a car, because soon, not only will you have to buy the car, pay the annual road tax, and pay the tax on the fuel but you will also have to pay per mile anyway.

Such a system, as well as requiring self driving cars, also takes away all the emotion. It does depend on you not wanting to own a car. Personably for most journeys, I don't care about what vehicle I'm in. However, I can also see the attraction of driving eg a classic for the fun of it. Like all these things, it doesn't need to be all or nothing. Society changes slowly. Give people the choice that meets their needs and they will choose it. Legislation does encourage and inform the choice though!

I know such a system isn't here yet, but here is no reason why it couldn't come in the next few years - around here we have these pay per journey electric scooters that are very popular. They weren't here a couple of years ago. Change happens, driven by need.

Its the faster horse argument again.

Good post.

Zip cars work very well down here in London, at work we use them all the time. Most are electric. Car clubs are a great solution for densely populated areas.

Which is why incentivising people to buy EVs makes no sense.

In populated areas, we should take away half the parking spaces and convert them to car club spaces. Then we should tax the cr@p out of private car owners (other than disabled etc), and take away the VAT from car club cars. And we are nearly there....