[Closed] Forget tuition fees, how expensive is Diesel now

Mol - if you call someone an idiot, you can expect them to answer back. Or don't you realise that?

Sure, you can call me an idiot back. But you need rational grounds I'd have thought.

And you constantly preach - you jump on every 4x4 thread, you attack every fast car thread, etc, etc. If you worked from home, had no cars and never flew then maybe your arguments would carry a little more weight?

Does it matter what I do? I'm still right, aren't I? The thing is - this just is not about me or you personally. It's what we all need to do.

I don't think tax incentives work, ut it might be part of the solutuion.

That's why I said 'a first step' not 'the only thing required for a complete and effective solution' 🙂

Second step - nationalise public transport. All of it.

Junkyard - i gave an example above, admittedly im not a "charmless fop" though

It's too late now anyway, but, we could just make fewer journeys by car.

I think 'green' people have frightened 'non green' to an extent, by suggesting that they cycle resolutely on in the teeth of a gale, laden down with shopping, in the dark, frozen, the idea lacks appeal!

How about starting by leaving the car at home on a nice day, for a short journey? Just do a couple of trips by foot/bike a week if you can, encourage your partner/children to do the same.

Oh, just looked at the links TJ, I find Monbiot is initially compelling but insubstantial on closer inspection, so the exchequer receives £x per year directly from the motorist and 'may' pay £x+ to the NHS in lung damage, but how much indirectly from higher productivity? Too vague.

Gosh, I really must go to the launderette. I'll come back later.

clong 8)
Missed it and have just read it
As I said it is easier with a car but not impossible - that not impossible may mean quite difficult - but not having a car is not like not having food,water ,warnth etc . It can be a big pain in the rear and very difficult but not life threatening

"Again, what rubbish, in the 50's would you have been sayng that we should stick to the horse and cart?"

The future is rarely like the present but more so.

Reducing car use is not going backwards. You can not keep on having more people having more cars travelling more.

You can not keep on having more people having more cars travelling more.

Tell that to the Chinese and Indians

Junkyard - you could say that about many things, clothes for example. You don't need clothes to keep warm, but try and live without them....

Mind you, living near the fens there appear to be a few people that have adopted just that kind of lifestyle.

The plus side is the amout of daily mail readers that would implode through indignant rage.

Karinofnine - Member

"Why do people bash car drivers but not folk who live in great big (use lots of resources to heat) look-at-how-much=money-I-earn houses? and folk who crank up the heating so's they can wear a t shirt indoors in the winter? Why aren't they criticised?"

They are. Just not in threads about the price of diesel.

In fact most people need a car. Oh how the naive and self righteous make me giggle.

Let's admit it shall we oh car bashers - you all live in cities, you all have no idea.

Over 80% of the UK population live in urban areas. Of those 80%, probbly around 90% don't ultimately 'need' a car. They just have them because they can. They will then find any excuse to justify having one.

The actual number of people who 'need' cars in the UK is pretty low really.

It's not about being 'sanctimonious' or 'self-righteous', it's about taking responsibility for our actions, and collectively looking at ways we can reduce our consumption of precious resources. Owning a car just because you feel you 'need' it is simply selfish. For the majority of urban dwellers at least, a car is a luxury, nothing else.

We're all hypocrites in some way or another. I have my heating on probably higher than I 'need', because I want to feel comfortable. I concede that's a luxury. Generally though, as I don't drive, am very careful with my energy use otherwise, cycle where I can, use public transport etc, don't fly around the World every year, look after my clothes, bikes, other stuff etc so that I don't replace things needlessly all the time, don't have tellies on all over the house and that, I probbly have a much smaller carbon footprint than a lot of people in the UK. And if everyone did similar to me, then we'd save an awful lot of energy and resources.

But then, if we all lived in mud huts and caves, we'd save even more.

So we need a compromise, but one which suits people's [i]needs[/i], rather than their [i]wants[/i].

I'm offsetting my excessive carbon output with your savings Fred
So please keep up the good work, it's appreciated

For the majority of urban dwellers at least, a car is a luxury, nothing else.

Right. So how much luxury are we allowed? This really is the big question.

Clong - Member

TJ - I lived in rural norfolk ............

I fully accept and understand that that is what has happened. What I want is policies to reverse this trend over a similar time period.

It cannot be reversed overnight. It could in a generation. I will have to in 2 generations.

How would you encourage such reversal?

Elfinsafety - Member
...I probbly have a much smaller carbon footprint than a lot of people in the UK. And if everyone did similar to me, then we'd save an awful lot of energy and resources...

you're consumption of energy and resources is WAAAAY above average, if everyone did similar to you we'd still be using too much.

It's not about being 'sanctimonious' or 'self-righteous' ... if everyone did similar to me, then we'd save an awful lot of energy and resources.

you sir, are hilarious! - well done!

Molgrips. I have said it a zillion times.

slowly rack up the cost of motoring over a 25 year span. This makes commuting less viable. Its commuters that kill local services as they buy the houses but don't use the services and they push up the price of rural housing. Meaning in many parts a two way commuter - rural workers live in the towns and commute to the countryside / villages and urban workers go the other way.

Public transport can be subsidised with the money raised and as private motoring costs rise it also becomes more viable

As transport costs rise and customer base rises ( less commuters) local shops become more viable.

Our way of living has changed massivly in the last 50 years - it will have to do so again in the next 50. We simply cannot afford to use all this energy shifting folk around.

my parents live in the middle of nowhere, just past the back of beyond.
(they consider pickering to be a large busy metropolis)

life without a car really would be quite tricky.

i'm very curious to see what happens to these places as it becomes increasingly hard to manage with rising fuel costs / reduced travel

It'll evolve in whichever way all on it's own anyway, just like it's always done, so just do your own thing & sit back & let it

exactly - good point, well put.

as i said, i'm just curious to see what will happen - i'm not worried about it, just curious.

slowly rack up the cost of motoring over a 25 year span

I don't think that'd be good.

The distribution of jobs and work is not the same as the distribution of people. To make that the case, most people would have to live in a few ginormous cities.

It would also prevent people from enjoying quality leisure time. It'd be like the 1920s again with people staying in their home town all their lives apart from two weeks at the seaside once a year.

I'll not be voting for you in the next election.

You don't need clothes to keep warm, but try and live without them....

I see your point but we have bulit this dependencey because we own cars. Peole think they would die without them but they wont. Clothes - well I need them this time of year but I se eyour point

Molgrips - it is going to happen. Like it or lump it it will happen

Eoither we do it in a controlled manner or we react to circumstances. In 50 years time there will not be the oil to power cars.

Anyway it does not mean what you say. Towns and villages could easily be viable. People either work via the net or near their home or commute by train / bus.

MOlgrips - you cannot adopt a green ethos and think we can continue as we are. Our current lifestyle is unsustainable

I know it will happen, but it'll only end up in political unrest unless steps are taken to wean us off car dependency by means other than brute force.

MOlgrips - you cannot adopt a green ethos and think we can continue as we are. Our current lifestyle is unsustainable

You're really not reading carefully. I've been saying for years that the current setup is unstainable. I hate this aspect of modern society, and dearly wish it were otherwise.

I am not arguing against change, what I am arguing against is your idea of how to make it work.

I'm surprised that a leftie such as yourself (not an insult) seems to have such faith in the free market. I do not, which is why I favour intervention.

I am no0t of the left as you have been told many times.

I am a pragmatist. Of course it will need a lot of policies to make it happen but you need a driving force and financial is easiest. Fart easier than attempting to alter people behaviour by de#cree.

TJ - Bang on. I think the cost of motoring is starting to rise, slowly but surely. For instance, my first car was a 3.5ltr petrol guzzler. If i got more than 20mpg, i'd be surprised. And yet i could afford to run it then, whilst now, despite now earning many multiples of my salary then i ceratinly couldn't afford it now. The VED has changed, which i think is a bit of a con linking it to emissions, but ultimately its is more expensive for the average joe. The price rises may not be crippling at present, but the infrastructure is in place to make it so. The polices may not be upfront, but i believe its happening at a very sublte level. For instance, in a very general way that more people are commuting by bike, im seeing more on the roads, particulary in the summer. More people are looking at diesels, rather than petrol cars (which is a bit of a false ecomomy) but at least poeple are thinking about it. 20 years ago, and i'm willing to bet that the MPG of a car wasn't at the forefront of most peoples minds, but now.....How many people are having ask themselves wether a hour commute by car is really worth it (theres been a few threads on here i believe). Most teenagers now buzz around on mopeds/scooters, i cant think of any of my freinds during school that used scooters.

As you said the change can't happen overnight, it took gererations to build this dependancy, it will take the same to remove it. Remove the car over night and people such as my dad mentioned above will have a very tough time indeed.

Junkyard - Dammit, given the game away. Oh well, now you know, could you leave the light next time, night vision goggles are dammed uncomfortable, Ta.

Hey, I'm a pragmatist too!

Of course it will need a lot of policies to make it happen but you need a driving force and financial is easiest

But cruellest. By beating people with a financial stick you end up with a lot of people being very miserable straining to live on the breadline.

Plus people will just use the ballot box to bring down the cost of motoring (when it becomes a serious issue) and then you'll not get anywhere.

More people are looking at diesels, rather than petrol cars (which is a bit of a false ecomomy)

Not in CO2 terms it's not. At least, possibly not.

Bear in mind it only took maybe two generations to get like this. Maybe even only one. There's a lot govts could do RIGHT NOW to take a lot of traffic off the road without harming the economy, and I don't know why they aren't. Seems like an easy win if you ask me.

The [u]true total cost[/u] of motoring is far more than is raised thru all the motoring taxes. Thus non car owners subsidise car owners ( and road transport in general)

Hahahahahha! yeah, just make it up why don't you TJ - no figures as usual, just made up etheral feelings of "well, if you include the cost to then NHS of obesity caused by motoring then its more expensive" which of course ignores the value of a commerce and transportation structure brought about by car ownership, for example if you offset the value of tourism from mountainbiking to rural communities, which realistically would be impossible without car ownership, then any calculations of "real cost" become so wildly inaccurate and "fag packet" as to be impossible.

to put it in proportion, the govt reckons they'll raise 26 billion quid with a further £4 billion from the VAT on top of that (HMRC figures), plus the VAT on car sales, and licence funds, etc... thats over ten percent of ALL tax revenues, by way of comparison the govt spend about 6 billion on roads and repairs, not a bad deal really!

People either work via the net or near their home or commute by train / bus.

Yeah, I'm sure that the NHS is going to continue to function on that basis... TJ in townie with no understanding of country ways outside of his little Edinburgh inner city bubble shocker (by the way, hows that Tram system working out TJ? - whats the current "real" cost of that?)

Can I ask why almost all the urbanite STWers here that preach on and on take part in mountain biking? Surely it's a waste of resources to go all that way for no reason other than leisure. What selfish sods you all are.

Junkyard - your vitriol is like acid. You get so damn uppity and resort to insults that something must be sorely wrong. For that. I'm sorry and I hope it doesn't spoil your Christmas too much.

Just drove to the beach (SHOCK HORROR WE DIDN'T NEED TO), had a lush cliff run with the dog (DO WE REALLY NEED A DOG?) in the sun (HEY - I BURNT UP VALUABLE AIR), then lunch at a beachside bar (WE SHOULD HAVE HUNTED OUR OWN BURGERS) with the family. Utterly lovely.

I can tell many of you are feeling a bit cooped up in the snow. No need to take it out on others.

Hey when cars stop being viable, we'll just adapt. Hardly a tragedy. For now cars are about 234534345345 times more viable than public transport for those who don't live in some stinking, overcrowded city where it would appear getting "sanctimonious" tattooed to yourself is mandatory.

No wonder some of you get so uppity.

You've answered your own question there molgrips, its all to do with the ballot box. Thanks to the gutter press, the impression given is that the motorist is targeted as a cash cow and is hard done by, any direct measures that openly targeted motorists would be seen as another attack on the motorist. Since most of the voters are motorists, that would easily sway the ballot box come voting time. For the same reason, i doubt we will see a constructive policy on reducing car use from any goverment, at least not one that is long lived (Goverment or policy).

Mat, turn it down a bit for christ's sake. We're trying to have a proper discussion so wipe the foam from your mouth.

Honestly, the stuff you are writing right now is pointless garbage.

Right, Clong. Which is why being encouraged to work at home with incentives would help a lot. Many people would love to get rid of their nasty commutes, they'd save money, spend more time with their family and be all the happier for it.

It's not going to clear the roads of cars but it's a start.

What Mol, because we don't all agree with the endless waffle you spout?

No of course not...

Do I tell you to stop posting when you talk BS? No. Yet you feel qualified to have a go at me.

You are hypocritical beyond comparison.

Junkyard - your vitriol is like acid. You get so damn uppity and resort to insults that something must be sorely wrong. For that. I'm sorry and I hope it doesn't spoil your Christmas too much

I just occasionally wish you could answer a direct question. Alas your awesomeness has declined once more it is like you cannot back up what you say without rather tired and cliched insults.

What Mol, because [b]we[/b] don't all agree with the endless waffle you spout

I'm not a hypocrite at all, you just don't understand what I am trying to say.

Your post was just angry insults, which is why I said it was garbage. Not all your posts are, but that one was. Seriously, I could not find anything in it that contributed to the discussion.

Yet you feel qualified to have a go at me

Criticising your post, not you!

I just occasionally wish you could answer a direct question. Alas your awesomeness has declined once more it is like you cannot back up what you say without rather tired and cliched insults.

Ooh sorry, did I not grace you with enough attention to answer your question? Hey I was so disinterested in your little spat that I didn't even notice a question. Sorry Junkyard, my life does not revolve around answering to your every bitter little swipe. You've got it real bad, I simply don't give a stuff.

Now there's something for you to froth over while you pen your next barrage of abuse.

Mol - now you are someone that has a bit of sense, a certain grounded nature. My post was in response to the laughably idealistic goons on STW; the ones who simply lack a single ounce of realism and while preaching to everyone they can, probably cause as much, if not more environmental "crime" than those of a more realistic standing.

And I enjoyed writing it, even if no one else appreciated it 😉

Good point molgrips, a step in the right direction for sure. Its something that is encouruaged at my wifes work (Enviroment agency), but not mine (Multinational Oil company) despite a majority of my work easlily carried out at home. Again, there might be a generation thing, my bosses are mostly old school and tend to frown on home working, despite having the ability and the specific budget to allow people to do this. Maybe its the companies that are resisting the initiative to move to home working?

I feel like a adult having to have a parent to parent conversation over shouty kids. Play nice or i'll tell you father when he gets in, then there will be trouble...

"Mat, turn it down a bit for christ's sake."

+1 (and I've not contributed yet to this thread).

I think an important but subtle change that is very important is to shift the culture in this country that someone is somehow superior if they're in a car and second or third class if on a bike / public transport / or on foot. There are a lots of these unspoken attitudes - eg those cycle lanes that give way to every little road, pavement parking, general attitude of cars etc etc. In say Holland or Germany you really notice how non-car drivers are treated as equals. I do believe that these attitudes here need to change before we get anywhere; this odd car superiority thing (so beloved of The Daily Mail and that twunt in The Times who was banging on about knocking cyclists off their bikes) is a strange sign of insecurity to me.

OK I'm done. Carry on ranting, Mat!

Sorry folks, incentives aren't enough to win the battle against congestion. Any Social Marketer will tell you that behaviour change using incentives will only hit about 10 - 15% of the population. You can see this with the current anti-obesity campaigns, people are still getting fat... ...people are still driving silly distances despite the benefits to business of flexi and home working being tangible and the cost/benefit analysis being relatively simple to work out.

Nope, the only way you'll get folk out of their cages is by using financial penalties, either through higher fuel prices, higher parking prices or higher VED/insurance. History has taught us this with smoking, it's ridiculously expensive to by a pack of 20 fags now, so people have started to quit in more significant numbers.

Social Marketing does work, but you need sticks 'cos the carrots alone won't work in the kind of quantities we need them to.

Is there something in the Cornish water that makes those who live there a bit paranoid? s_m - you really do take things to heart don't you and get awesomely aggressive when your lifestyle choices are questioned.
Anyway I broadly agree with TJ, I own a car, I don't need to I don't use it very often. quite a few people I know are uterly dependent upon their cars to the point where they'll drive 300m to go to the shops and be surprised that I'll have walked there, been served and got back home before them. All those moaning about having to drive for 50 miles to get to work, it's only because you choose to drive that you have to do that journey so stop moaning.

Sorry folks, incentives aren't enough to win the battle against congestion

Depends on the incentive. You could give the incentives to employers - they are often pretty switched on about their bottom line, and they HATE paying corporation tax. Corporation tax linked to proportion of permanent office workers perhaps?

History has taught us this with smoking

Not sure it has to be honest. In many cases people still smoke so the high cost of fags just takes up money that could be spend on their kids or good food etc etc.

you really do take things to heart don't you and get awesomely aggressive when your lifestyle choices are questioned.

Yeah and I'm not even questioning his lifestyle choices this time.. merely the quality of his posts 🙂

oh deary me mat you joined a discussion forum then won’t answer reasonable questions but you have the time to insult people instead

your next barrage of abuse

Depends on the incentive. You could give the incentives to employers - they are often pretty switched on about their bottom line, and they HATE paying corporation tax. Corporation tax linked to proportion of permanent office workers perhaps?

The incentives are already there. The money can be saved if employers trusted their workforce and took the time to look into the savings to be made. 40p a mile is a lot of money when the meeting could've been done via a conference call (to pick a rather trite example), multiply that by the millions of business miles being carried out and that's significant savings. Govt. interventive and tax breaks aren't even necessary!

Not sure it has to be honest. In many cases people still smoke so the high cost of fags just takes up money that could be spend on their kids or good food etc etc.

The exception that proves the rule! (always loved that oxymoron, assuming it is one!)

Seriously though, I think on a population level it is accurate.

Let's admit it shall we oh car bashers - you all live in cities, you all have no idea. And why the hell do you mountain bike anyway? Think of all the resources you waste pursuing what is merely a LIFESTYLE CHOICE.

Well first I do live in a rural area. Second I do mountain bike because I like it. But then I use my bike for some shopping and I did commute to work using bike + Train.

But then maybe I am not looking at things the way they are. If I was to be as awesome as you (world champ in surf/triathlon/streetfighting) maybe I would actually reduce CO2 by driving my car. You mum doesn't need a car. She is just trying to justify her lifestyle one way or another. Maybe she could have less client but use a different form of transport to visit then. Maybe she could just reduce the number of people she is visiting full stop. She could re-train and do something else.

Bash him as much as you want but TJ is right in one thing. Owning a car is very cheap, and people have built a lifestyle around it.

People are not looking to live close to work anymore. They all find a 50 minute drive as a commute acceptable. Well fair enough, but then as you choose your lifestyle according to the car well assume all the choices, including the rising prices of petrol/diesel.

One problem is that human being is selfish and lazy, everyone is willing to do something for the planet as far as it doesn't changes their nice little comfort. Then when faced with the inevitable truth, very few keep a stiff upper lips bite the bullet and accept it. Most are looking for lame excuses to justify the lifestyle they have build around a car.

Mat SUV is a god example, as he apparently need one to tow is boat. Because obviously he can't keep the boat in a harbour/marina as boat are well know to sink if kept in the water too much.

But hey what would i know this is STW after all 😉

Why are some people so quick to assume that anyone who suggests gridlocked town centres and commutes measured in hours are not great ideas is advocating going back to the horse and cart?

The car-centred society we have now is bad in many ways, not to mention unsustainable. Unfortunately it's coupled to many different things (house prices, dual income families, the decline of local infrastructure etc etc.) so pulling the rug out overnight is clearly not on.

But there's a lot of middle ground in there and that's where change will happen, not at the extremes- there's no need to ignore that by getting all defensive.

I do agree with Peyote in that I think change will have to be (gently) forced on people though to get the ball rolling.

I doubt I can compete with the nonsense you just spouted to be fair but I have little need to compete. You are spectacularly unaware of how you present yourself on here and to think you do all this and work in PR.

Hey would you like to use that little PR line again? Are you upset I've ignored it? Hey yes I do work in PR - and it's a pretty successful business. Does this somehow upset you? I suspect it does.

Something's up with you Junkyard. You seem to like "stalking" me - you jump on almost everything I post. You insult me. You get upset when I don't answer your ranting moans. Come on, you are just attention seeking aren't you? Well you'll have to latch onto someone else.

This is a forum where people can CHOOSE what they respond to and what they ignore. 95% of your posts just make my eyes glaze over and I simply cannot be bothered to respond. The occasional post is slightly interesting.

You're boring Junkyard. Don't try and hide that by trying to appear "controversial."

As for Juan - a lost cause. Your post is so stupid and so full of complete lunacy that I will not even bother to respond.