Pragmatic green and hybrid cars and other things

Oct 06, 2009 18:11

I'm a biologist. I am a supporter of sustainable self-sufficiency. I suppose in that sense you could call me 'green'. It's not for everyone and I hold no brief nor have any interest in pointing fingers at anyone else's choices. That said I often look at self-proclaimed 'green' people and want take their heads and push them into the bowl and give ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

reverancepavane October 7 2009, 22:37:32 UTC

Then again, a great majority of SUV in Australia don't manage to get anywhere near a dirt track (unless, of course, the dirt track comes to the city in the form of a dust cloud). I think the majority of people buy them because of the mistaken belief that they are safer, when, as "commercial" vehicles, the safety standards are much more lax. And to see over the top of other cars (hence the innate moral superiority of the seagull).
And the original complaint was that kids are getting injured (fortunately not seriously) because drivers can't actually see the kids around these hulking monsters. Which is why they wanted them removed from the area immediately in front of the schools (but that might of meant that the drivers might have had to actually get out of their cars and walk a little bit in order to pick up their kids...).
Besides, the increased tax proposal (which has been around a long time [one mustn't forget that the state of journalism in Oz is rather deplorable and sensationalist (a problem when you don't really have much news ( ... )

Reply

davefreer October 8 2009, 05:08:38 UTC
The trouble is the caveats need to be upfront, and are emasculating of the purpose. In the UK for eg, an elderly landrover from the back end of nowhere gets hit with the same extra charge as a chelsea tractor. I'm no friend of the 4x4 - would you call it a van? without a bin, Pajero's are a typical local eg, that live in towns and cities (without snow) that are a status symbol and not 'needed' or even used for bad/offroad conditions (I'm extremely ambivalent about off-road driving on public property. Not convinced it is necessary or a good idea). But there is a big baby with the bathwater problem. Firstly you need to clearly define your terms: what is a 4x4? A suzuki vitara or subaru Forester? Hardly high or even fuel thirsty in relative terms - but 4x4. Secondly: for country/farming use. Where does country start and where does farming start? Is a small-holder who works in town a farmer? And what is 'use'? Is it better for the environment to have the person who fishes in remote places on weekends or goes on an Annual Australian ( ... )

Reply

jpfuel October 8 2009, 07:33:14 UTC
More sillyness ( ... )

Reply

davefreer October 8 2009, 19:39:17 UTC
Well, I have some interest in space to earth microwave transmission, and wave power. I've always wondered about the water-vapour issue.
The EcoHole is my point. Not that it can't be solved, or shouldn't be solved, but that it exists, and we need to think about when replacement is actually worse.

Reply

jpfuel October 9 2009, 07:07:22 UTC
Problem being, most of those really loud for all these changes really, on close inspection, are not Acting like they believe what they are pushing ( ... )

Reply

reverancepavane October 8 2009, 09:58:45 UTC

I believe the proposal was based on existing regulations and definitions. That is, if you have a farm (as defined for tax purposes and the definitions of farm are actually quite loose), or satisfy the conditions for the country fuel rebate (have a residence a certain defined distance from the cities), then you are excluded from paying the levy on a certain class of commercial vehicle (which includes the SUV). It's probable that government and corporate vehicles satisfying the class would also be excluded.
Not perfect, I admit.
Although I do admit that whilst working at one of the private hospitals my boss got curious enough to do a survey of the SUV in the doctor's parking lot. Only one out of thirty or so had been taken offroad (either that, or they made use of the most exacting of car detailers to clean every part of their vehicle.

Reply

davefreer October 8 2009, 18:59:48 UTC
Better than nothing I feel. But the onus is still on those who will be penalised rather than those who want them penalised. It's like the google thing - where copyright is now something that you have to go to their site and assert if you want to be paid. They want to use my material - they can look for me and pay me.

Reply

davefreer October 8 2009, 19:40:16 UTC
And BTW, yes, I scant to zero sympathy with the doctors and their SUVS.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up