Forum menu
Remember when covid was taking off and the government suggested people shouldn't go to the pub, but let them stay open anyway, so the pubs were inevitably rammed? That's where we are now with climate change.
Unless the government takes drastic action to change consumer behaviour, we will continue to do all the terribly selfish things to which we've become accustomed to enjoy, which are slowly killing the planet.
Yes I took a risk – a calculated risk as we were concerned about losing our twins at that moment in time. I would do the same today if I felt the life of a loved one was at risk and I am not apologising so don’t try to tell me otherwise.
I don't want you to apologise for it.
It would be nice if you had a think about it and asked yourself was actually necessary (ie, should you have asked the maternity department if they were going to send an ambulance or if it was ok if you just drove in yourself) but I guess that's too much to ask .
It would also be nice if you could recognise the irony in saying that letting down tyres could be a life or death issue because it would stop you going out and putting other people's lives at risk but again, I assume that's too much to ask.
No its not. Its a terrible point (unless you were being sarcastic, that doesn’t come across in type 🙂
You said, we need to be more punitive towards those that choose to be part of the problem. I asked you directly if that includes you? Based on the examples I gave of climate damaging activity - not just owning a particular type of car?
I asked you directly if that includes you?
Yes it does. It includes everybody
However few miles you do in your SUV you’d have less of an impact doing it in a smaller more efficient car.
I'm going to self-declare here.
I sort of own an SUV - a 4x4 yeti. A micro suv - is that a thing? I live at 200m above sea level in the highlands. Winters can be cold - we had snow of the ground outside the house every day from xmas eve to valentines this winter. A 4x4 yeti with winter wheels feels like a suitable car for the location.
To offset this (and because I like doing it!) I ride a bike to get from a-b (shopping, visiting people, commuting - not just a-a riding for fun).
In my situation an SUV that does reduced mileage plus bike when I can feels like the best worst option. Having another car for use when not biking and not in winter conditions feels like a bad thing environmentally.
Long term an electric 4x4 small suv at 'everyman' affordability levels would be awesums. I can't imagine it's on the top of many manufacturers to list mind.
It would be nice if you had a think about it and asked yourself was actually necessary (ie, should you have asked the maternity department if they were going to send an ambulance or if it was ok if you just drove in yourself) but I guess that’s too much to ask .
I had no idea if it was necessary but at that time at 8am on a Sunday morning I had a choice of potentially losing two unborn children at almost full term or potentially having an accident on the way to the hospital having just been told we needed to get there as soon as possible because the signs were that my wife was miscarrying. I do not recall the specifics surrounding the discussion of getting an ambulance versus driving ourselves there (it was 12 years ago) so I can't help with that one – I just know we were told to get there as soon as possible.
Yes it does. It includes everybody
Well we can agree on that 👍
Yes I took a risk – a calculated risk as we were concerned about losing our twins at that moment in time. I would do the same today if I felt the life of a loved one was at risk and I am not apologising so don’t try to tell me otherwise.
I wouldn't bother mate, Bruce is quite clearly more interested in 'winning' an online argument rather than any response from you.
He also clearly has no idea how dire the Ambulance situation is in North Yorkshire. If you had waited for one you'd have been waiting a long time!
I'm also enjoying him continually ignoring the fact that incorrectly inflated tyres might be a little bit dangerous too.
I have a small 4x4 SUV and come on here looking for some more robust tyre recommendations! In mitigation, I live down a gravel track and have already had 3 punctures in 4 months - last winter at our last house we got snowed-in for 10days.
It’s not just the size of the big 4x4s like Q7s, Range Rovers but the ridiculous low profile tyres fitted on 20” rims which means they can’t/won’t drive on anything but tarmac for fear of damaging their wheels/tyres - which gets a bit tricky when most of the roads around here are singletrack with passing places - not all passing places are tarmac either, the council contractors in their wisdom deciding to leave a 6” drop onto soft ground that is now deeply rutted.
Say what you like but SUV's are an absolute marketing triumph. Its kind of amazing that they exist.
Take a normal vehicle, make it a bit worse in almost every way, then sell it for more money. Amazeballs!
Even the name S... U... V...
Its utter nonsense.
Sports? :). I mean c'mon. Most of them have got clattering 4 pot diesels trying to drag 1,600kg plus of metal with a roll centre about a foot higher than it needs to be. Some of the big 4.0 litre monsters might actually be quite fast but they are about as sporty as playing darts.
Utility? Well maybe some of them, but the majority sit on low profile summer rubber all year round. Some of them aren't even 4WD. Matey boy's Land Rover on summer rubber that he needs to access the wilderness of Aberfoyle has much less "utility" than a FWD Golf with winter tyres.
Vehicle: Well okay I give them that.
Rename them Pointless Fashion Vehicles and they might be less popular.
Although, Conspicuous Uneconomical Nonsense Transportation would be even better.
I wouldn’t bother mate, Bruce is quite clearly more interested in ‘winning’ an online argument rather than any response from you.
It did make me laugh that on the other thread everyone in Aberdeen wanted to fight him when he lived here. And yet the rest of us didn't experiance that.
I have a Land Rover Discovery - reason...I really like them
I wouldn’t bother mate, Bruce is quite clearly more interested in ‘winning’ an online argument rather than any response from you.
Actually, what I'd really like is an acknowledgment of the irony of using the argument that deflating tyres can be lethal because it would stop someone going out and greatly exceeding the speed limit and jumping red lights.
I also think it's a pretty good metaphor for this entire argument. My needs come first and if that means that others have to possibly die then so be it.
Just don't touch my stuff.
I wouldn’t bother mate, Bruce is quite clearly more interested in ‘winning’ an online argument rather than any response from you.
Yeah it did seem to be going that way - I wasn't going to respond again if he posted again.
There's an important point in all this that collectively we need to disassociate ourselves from being marketed 'unnecessary performance' across a wide range of consumer goods. In an ideal world - given what has been known about climate from the scientists for over 30 years - by this point in time the car industry should have (and could have) adapted to collectively offer the consumer options which minimise impact. Even now as we transition to electric cars, just look at whats being marketed, still stuck in the fantasy of performance from what is fast becoming a bygone era. We don't need day to day vehicles that do 2-3 times the speed limit and do 0-60 in 4 secs. It was fun while it lasted but what exactly are we accelerating so fervently towards? It would be great but just an idealistic fantasy, if the car industry could pool resources to develop viable vehicles that forgo performance to instead focus on minimising impact, being recycle-able, simply durable & repairable, be actually affordable and maximise range not speed to encourage a swifter electric transition - this would be concurrent with being small and light but good design could still make them practical. That sort of vehicle may only be capable of doing 80mph max and 0-60 in 12 secs or so if the other things are prioritised. That's fine and would have the added advantage of taking a lot of aggressive behaviours of fragile ego's out of the equation. The roads would be a better place for it. Motorsport can exist in its own space on a track, where it should be. The fact that we collectively seem so far from this way of thinking now is not a good indicator for our future. If we carry on our rabid consumer fantasy as before, we're probably screwed.
The problem with these protestors is they seem to think that the normal rules of society such as respect for each other
Oh the ironing.
So you think it is ok for someone who you have never met before to let your tyres down because they don’t like the car you have chosen to buy? Really? Perhaps you would be so philosophical if they came down your street and let your car tyres down because they don’t like your choice of front door colour, or the way you cut the grass. I really don’t see how anyone can defend the action of these people.
You said, we need to be more punitive towards those that choose to be part of the problem. I asked you directly if that includes you? Based on the examples I gave of climate damaging activity – not just owning a particular type of car?
Let’s start by having punitive penalties towards all those who choose to have children. Let’s face it the average western child has a massive carbon footprint certainly way more than any vehicle you can imagine. From a climate change perspective more children are a huge part of the problem
Totally agree endoverend 👏
Even the name S… U… V…
Its utter nonsense.
Sports? :). I mean c’mon. Most of them have got clattering 4 pot diesels trying to drag 1,600kg plus of metal
Um, rich.
I think you've missed the point ( unless I have) it's even worse than that.
I think the name is actually because they are pretending that the vehicles are for facilitating sport, ie real sport, not driving.
The idea is that these vehicles are bought by sporty, healthy outdoorsy types as s utility to facilitate that sport. Ie you put kayaks on the roof (proper lols) or use the rugged 4wd to get you to your gnarrcore climbing destination etc
Does sound pretty far fetched TBH so perhaps I'm completely wrong...
Let’s start by having punitive penalties towards all those who choose to have children. Let’s face it the average western child has a massive carbon footprint certainly way more than any vehicle you can imagine. From a climate change perspective more children are a huge part of the problem
Actually I would go further. It's impossible to live without a carbon footprint. Anyone who chooses to continue living should face massive punitive penalties in order to encourage as many people as possible to kill themselves.
Did I win Whataboutery Top Trumps?
Years ago, on my Clockwork up in the Pentlands. Proper snow, really cold. Postman was happy doing his rounds in a little Mk1 Fiesta. He said it was by far the best vehicle for the job.
It did make me laugh that on the other thread everyone in Aberdeen wanted to fight him when he lived here. And yet the rest of us didn’t experiance that.
Glad I could brighten your day.
Maybe it was my questioning of car culture that upset the locals, who knows.
endoverend and chrismac are on the money.
Have a read of this: https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/energy-and-environment/2017/12/1/16718844/green-consumers-climate-change
Tl;dr - If you're a middle class or above westerner, regardless of how green you think you are, it's not enough, and all you're doing is tinkering around the edges rather than making any meaningful difference.
SUV or EV makes no meaningful difference - the answer is no car.
Factory farmed meat or organic meat makes no meaningful difference - the answer is no meat.
Big house with gas boiler or big house with heat pump and solar makes no meaningful difference - the answer is small house.
Short haul flight holidays or long haul makes no meaningful difference - the answer is no flying.
Having children that do all the wrong stuff or having children that do all the right stuff makes no meaningful difference - the answer is no children.
OK flameproof overalls on here goes.
I have a 4.8 X5 18 miles to the gallon it is a V8 and an 08 registration.I have driven company cars and vans up until I retired and with one knackered knee can get in and out the x5 as the floor is level with no lip to get foot over the X5 is auto and I do about 1200 miles per year, backed up on MOT mileages.
Having driven across the England Wales for work before retiring with up to 50,000 mile per year.The car was bought after 3 previous owners and it costs £500.00 road tax per year.Why should I not be allowed to buy what I want as having driven diesel barges all the years 40+ .
Petrol is paid as I use the high octane E5.
Not got a private plate and service by BMW at their prices so probably costs me in the region of £2000.00 pr year. Cannot have a van as not allowed in the local tip.
Not got a private plate
Ah well, in that case.....
Just because you can/want doesn’t mean you should.
Plenty of selfish attitudes on here, a sad reflection on us as human. Proud of taking pointless flights and owning unnecessary cars? No wonder the planet is f*d
I’m alright * everyone else
****s
The wisdom of Father Fintan Stack:
"I had my fun, and that's all that matters."
richmtb - its interesting I used to be adamant that I'd never own a pointless 4x4 and they really served no benefit. My wife was even more adamant. Then through a set of circumstances I found myself with time constraints and limited options and saying screw it I'll take the Honda CRV to tide me over. Best car I've ever had! Whilst 50 mpg might not be amazing its better than many cars I had before it (none were especially sporty and I don't drive like crazy). It was a family waggon moving four or more people in comfort, sometimes moving boats, kayaks, bikes (sometimes all three + luggage). When the time came to replace it we looked at octavias etc - and my short arse wife says the visibility isn't as good as the raised position in the SUV, my slightly aging parents in law find getting in and out their own low down car increasingly hard and we want to be able to move them around when needed. So I'm part of the problem (although "only" a little under 6000 miles a year part of the problem!) - the SUV name is stupid, and fashion may be a factor but if the product managers of the "estate" ranges are scratching their head wondering why these bricks are so much more popular they probably want to spend some time looking at how people actually use their vehicles and what makes them tick. By the way neither previous nor current SUV are actually 4x4.
Back on Page 1 someone said - just hire a 4x4 when you need one. I assume that person has never tried to hire a 4x4 in peak season (e.g. when there's snow or flooding) nor get a commitment from a hire company that a vehicle will have a tow bar.
FWIW I live 3 minutes walk from a train station, but 80% of my car journeys would be totally impractical if not impossible by public transport. The pandemic makes people hesitant to use public transport, there's no service after midnight and we've had sunday rail strikes for almost a year. Glasgow is 35 minutes away by train but this popular busy town (15K people) had no direct bus service to Glasgow - it takes nearly 2 hrs to go by bus. My parents live about 50 minutes drive away but its over 2 hrs on public transport. When no trains running I'm actually quicker to cycle it, but that's not a practical solution. Even when a service is running - to take a family of four by train and bus costs about £50. It's probably £15 in fuel + running costs on the car. Really the problems aren't the SUV owners. There's a lack of infrastructure and pricing that is unattractive for multiple people combined with poor service / restrictive times. All driven by governments who are scared to invest heavily in pushing people out their cars. Any "look its the SUV owners" nonsense is just a smokescreen so the other car owners can feel better about themselves.
do E-MTB's fall into the same massive SUV/Truck usage, jsut becasue you can, doesn't mean you should bracket 😉
do E-MTB’s fall into the same massive SUV/Truck usage, jsut becasue you can, doesn’t mean you should bracket 😉
The question should maybe be 'do they fall foul of the 'unnecessary performance' criteria by offering a rider the climbing power beyond the fittest TDF rider', would they not be better if they were a more honest capability enabler relative to a bicycle? So maybe half the power, but with more range, which may actually suit more people. Wouldn't be 'fun' enough so never catch on...
do E-MTB’s fall into the same massive SUV/Truck usage, jsut becasue you can, doesn’t mean you should bracket 😉
Without getting in to 'that topic' again, my own feeling is that yes for the most part EEBs are superfluous and marketed to the middleclasses as expensive outdoor lifestyle toys. There are reasonable use cases (IMO) for people with mobility issues or those looking to replace a car with a less polluting alternative for local utility.
But for the most part they're sold and used for propelling mostly able bodied people round trail centres...
There obviously is some hypocritical finger-wagging, but choice of vehicle is a pretty clear indication of where you lie on the spectrum of social responsibility vs convenience/pleasure/status isn't it? Chances are the same people are likely to also have at least an average number of kids/foreign holidays/eat lots of meat etc
From a climate change perspective more children are a huge part of the problem
Pretty important if the point is for the human race to survive though.
Can we get onto the environmental impact of dog ownership (trail or otherwise) yet?
Jesus christ, I despair.
****ers letting down tyres with no idea of what the need for the car is or what the consequences of it being out of action are.
Self righteous pricks. I wonder if they would get the same support for doing it to T5 vans !
No ****ing need for em in urban blah blah.
no idea of what the need for the car is or what the consequences of it being out of action are.
Turns out not much, which I guess is kind of the point eh.
Thats it, we've arrived at Brexit...5 pages in.
wonder if they would get the same support for doing it to T5 vans
Yeah that’s not been mentioned before on this thread. You know we’re at T6.1’s now?
But I imagine exactly the same. I’ve got an 11 year old T5, 85k on the clock, maintain it myself, never ever drive the kids to school in it, but had some flippin’ brilliant camping trips when the alternative could be a week abroad. But, I wouldn’t be in the least but surprised to find a flat tyre or 2. I’m not perfect, we’re all hypocritical in some way when it comes to our green credentials. I’m aware my van isn’t the most environmentally friendly, and as the kids are now to big for it I’ll be selling it next year. It certainly won’t be replaced with a SUV though.
That Volvo Stat has been disproven sooo many times. Yes, currently, if you look favourably at the production of a petrol car and pessimistically at the production of an electric car and assume full scrap at the end of 100k miles and that the electric car is ran at most on 30% renewables, and that there are no emissions associated with oil extraction, pumping, transporting and refining - then, yeah, you get to that number. But in reality renewable contributions are only ever going to go one way, the reuse of batteries (or even the whole car - 100k miles? Really?) or materials will be high given their value and as ever the system boundaries on production and use of a petrol car are waay smaller than those of the EV as people (like Volvo) struggle to deal with Tesla's rise in the US and the fact that they have but a few EV models to compete with.
I thought of sticking a 'Penalty charge notice' on car windscreens with some environmental info inside / cycle to work schemes etc. Never got round to doing it but letting down tyres is a bot hardcore for me!
Bunch of pricks. Anyone thinks they have the right to mess with someone else’s property is mistaken, and all they’re going to do is turn people against them.
You started off defending SUV ownership, then got derailed into a 180degree U-turn with some insight into the plight of the countries dealing with the effects of climate change and the disdain those people feel for people in the global North who needlessly pollute at their expense putting their economies, livelihoods and property at risk.
Good work.
Turns out not much, which I guess is kind of the point eh
And you know this how ?
Who needed to make an urgent trip but couldn’t cause some **** immobilised their only car ?
But, I wouldn’t be in the least but surprised to find a flat tyre or 2. I’m
And you’d be happy enough with that ? Someone vandalising your car ?
Cause that’s what it is.
Thats it, we’ve arrived at Brexit…5 pages in.
You’ve turned into brexit how exactly?
I’ve missed that but lol
I support them all the way. It's about time SUV drivers were called out.
The missus has an suv, its quite a nice place to sit when stuck in the urban traffic jams.
Quite tricky to lift my ebike onto the roof though as it's so high up.
About 20 years ago, I was a paid up member of the Alliance Against Urban 4x4s 🙋♂️
They did plenty of this type of stuff, but I was a little young to participate, sadly.
Even if those toffs aren't gonna change their habits, maybe some of the thousands of people who read the news stories about it will make better decisions down the line - that's probably more the point...
It’s about time SUV drivers were called out.
Do you drive? If so, please share the great environmental credentials of your vehicle/s so we can emulate you.