Not looking good for diesels in Germany

About 25 years ago we were all conned into buying diesel cars etc because they were less polluting than petrol engines and diesel was much cheaper than petrol,
Now that more people have diesels than petrol engined vehicles, it is about 10p per litre more expensive.
we are now being encouraged to go electric, without any energy infrastructure and are penalised for using our previously cleaner diesels, all a spin / con, call it what you will.
In about 20 years these electric vehicles will be causing isues with disposal etc, and causing yet more pollution !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also where is all of this carbon free / green electricity going to come from and at what cost, in carbon footprint, is it going to cost to produce the generating equipment.
If diesel is so bad for our cities why are all black cabs still diesel and why are there so many old ones still allowed on the roads.
This is just my view on the current round of hype.
Joe
 
in Germany, the standard of air cleanliness required from a car in the streets, in the Umwelt zones, means that you could be fined for running it in the streets, but you could leave it running in the corner of your office and that would pass the office air quality laws.. nuts
 
It seems to me there hasn't been any real hard facts into what the politicians have made such dramatic decisions for our future air pollution control, The Ulez zone around London is a perfect example just like the use of plastic bags at the supermarket.
You are allowed to drive these high polluting vehicles in London as long as you pay to pollute the air we breath, that is quite acceptable in the politicians eyes.
We know the damage plastic bags can do to the environment so we won't give them to you for free, but you can still buy them.

So let's ban diesel cars, but we don't have an alternative to replace it, hardly rocket science but then again you just have to listen to the crap they talk on question time to realise what a bunch of ignorant tossers politicians really are.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Oil is at $50.70 a barrel and we are paying around £1.30 a litre,the last time it was at this level we were paying just over £1 a litre. When will we don the the Yellow vests or do we link yellow with Cowards and do nothing ?
 
joe and sue said:
About 25 years ago we were all conned into buying diesel cars etc because they were less polluting than petrol engines and diesel was much cheaper than petrol,
Now that more people have diesels than petrol engined vehicles, it is about 10p per litre more expensive.
we are now being encouraged to go electric, without any energy infrastructure and are penalised for using our previously cleaner diesels, all a spin / con, call it what you will.
In about 20 years these electric vehicles will be causing isues with disposal etc, and causing yet more pollution !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also where is all of this carbon free / green electricity going to come from and at what cost, in carbon footprint, is it going to cost to produce the generating equipment.
If diesel is so bad for our cities why are all black cabs still diesel and why are there so many old ones still allowed on the roads.
This is just my view on the current round of hype.
Joe
Click to expand...

We must have Voted for it? Did We?.:rolleyes:

robnchris said:
It seems to me there hasn't been any real hard facts into what the politicians have made such dramatic decisions for our future air pollution control, The Ulez zone around London is a perfect example just like the use of plastic bags at the supermarket.
You are allowed to drive these high polluting vehicles in London as long as you pay to pollute the air we breath, that is quite acceptable in the politicians eyes.
We know the damage plastic bags can do to the environment so we won't give them to you for free, but you can still buy them.

So let's ban diesel cars, but we don't have an alternative to replace it, hardly rocket science but then again you just have to listen to the crap they talk on question time to realise what a bunch of ignorant tossers politicians really are.
Click to expand...

The principle behind it. Is that all the "plebs" cannot afford it, so that leaves more room on the roads for those with the Money and Influence eg; Politicians, Beurocrats, "Fat Cats", Pop Stars etc;(y)

bigtree said:
The sooner we Exit the better and get some backbone back the better.
Click to expand...

Sorry to say IMV, "Backbone" is in short supply with the Millenial/Liberal/Snowflake society we have to-day. There is much rumbling in the graveyards of the UK, it`s the previous generations, to many of whom who gave all in 2 wars for this lot, whirling in their graves.:mad::cry::cry::cry::cry:
 
IMO the simple aim of these measures is to stimulate the economy by encouraging or intimidating drivers to upgrade their vehicles. It is nothing less than an attack on the poorer end of the motoring world for the benefit of big business.
 
I don’t see a problem for the Germans with diesel motors. They will get on to the bloke at VW and he will rewrite their emissions test . Simples. Haha

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Last year in Berlin we used a lot of cab's and only one was a very old Mecedes diesel.

All the rest were Hybrids.
 
Just another example of the all consuming greed that controls everything in the world today. Inflated fuel prices to screw as much out of us are the tip of the iceberg. Being charged to use polluting vehicles in a city has absolutely nothing to do with improving the air quality, but everything to do with making money. Ban the dirty vehicles if you sincerely want improvements, but that would reduce your income...... Why not reintroduce window taxes or charge people for how many sheets of toilet paper they use? I can remember someone being interviewed on tv about an engine that ran on water. When asked about the loss in fuel tax that the government would suffer if these engines ever came to pass he said that he guessed you would have to buy "special water" to run them with an equivalent tax levied on it. Says it all really. I wonder if the technology actually exists but the water engine is being suppressed by the fuel industries?
 
The problem with including autobahn in LEZ is that the traffic moves onto smaller roads and due to slowing and accelerating more often and traveling slower pollution actually increases overall , not intended outcome I think .
 
Surely whether we are talking about everyone doing a bit

Charging 5p for a disposable shopping bag has significantly reduced th3 number of bag used, thereby reducing landfill and use of polymers. If they had been stopped completely customers would have complained, what I don’t understand is why we aren’t using brown paper bags.

Driving modern diesels was at one point in time better, now it’s not, that’s progress not a con.

Burning fossil fuels has probably been more difficult to defend, but nuclear is now the safer option and renewables have progressed to the point that they are an option. Windmills and and solar farms might not be pretty, but surely better than power stations.

In my opinion moving freight to rail has to be the way forward.

All the main countries are dabbling in these environment improvements, the real gains would be in the developing economies such as India/China for USSR.

The LEZ, Crit Air and other similar schemes don’t effect me, but as they expand they will.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Moving freight to rail is ok but successive governments have encouraged building where there is not any rail network so roads are the only option.
 
Ivory55 said:
I don’t see a problem for the Germans with diesel motors. They will get on to the bloke at VW and he will rewrite their emissions test . Simples. Haha
Click to expand...
Which is no doubt what they were doing 20 years ago to make them appear to be so much less polluting.
 
Ivory55 said:
Moving freight to rail is ok but successive governments have encouraged building where there is not any rail network so roads are the only option.
Click to expand...
Lorries are needed to deliver to the railheads, but long distance in gauge loads should be on rails. Large tonnages of stone and other raw materials are carried by rail.
 
ymfb said:
Surely whether we are talking about everyone doing a bit

Charging 5p for a disposable shopping bag has significantly reduced th3 number of bag used, thereby reducing landfill and use of polymers. If they had been stopped completely customers would have complained, what I don’t understand is why we aren’t using brown paper bags.

Driving modern diesels was at one point in time better, now it’s not, that’s progress not a con.

Burning fossil fuels has probably been more difficult to defend, but nuclear is now the safer option and renewables have progressed to the point that they are an option. Windmills and and solar farms might not be pretty, but surely better than power stations.

In my opinion moving freight to rail has to be the way forward.

All the main countries are dabbling in these environment improvements, the real gains would be in the developing economies such as India/China for USSR.

The LEZ, Crit Air and other similar schemes don’t effect me, but as they expand they will.
Click to expand...
Steady on your post makes sense can't you rant on about the past and be a bit more selfish about using an old polluting car and chucking as much plastic away as you like. Next thing you will be saying future generations will all be decent people like they have been in the past and deserve to have the best chance of a better future than we had.
 
The Wino said:
Steady on your post makes sense can't you rant on about the past and be a bit more selfish about using an old polluting car and chucking as much plastic away as you like. Next thing you will be saying future generations will all be decent people like they have been in the past and deserve to have the best chance of a better future than we had.
Click to expand...
Of course you're right ...
I think what gets people's backs up is the casual way past generations are blamed for pollution. But in fact more waste can be generated by a family today.
 
sdc77 said:
Of course you're right ...
I think what gets people's backs up is the casual way past generations are blamed for pollution. But in fact more waste can be generated by a family today.
Click to expand...
The difference is past generations did not have the knowledge what was going on . I don't think past generations generally get the blame but there seems to be a general feeling on here of it won't affect us so carry on regardless and I coulndn,t believe someone really thought the world wars were fought by people so we could pollute the planet as much as we like 70 years on.......unbelievable!!!!
 
ymfb said:
Charging 5p for a disposable shopping bag has significantly reduced th3 number of bag used, thereby reducing landfill and use of polymers.
Click to expand...
Don't see that as you now have to buy plastic bags to put in your rubbish bins.

ymfb said:
In my opinion moving freight to rail has to be the way forward.
Click to expand...
Slight problem most of the rail freight yards are now housing estates.

We need to get rid of all the plastic packaging that comes on food, another advantage, I would be able to get at my food without swearing and cursing.
 
Norfolk Nomad said:
https://www.carscoops.com/2018/11/germanys-diesel-ban-starting-expand-autobahn-network/
Click to expand...
It will never happen ,or if it does the people will rise up, both for & against uniting, like they did with the 'no smoking ' on stations ban that resulted in them having to introduce smoking areas the next day to get people back working.

robnchris said:
any real hard facts into what the politicians have made such dramatic decisions for our future air pollution control, The Ulez zone around London is a perfect example ju
Click to expand...
Because most have no common sense, are as thick as s***, shouldn't even really be allowed out & are led by the nose by those who can walk & talk into what there agenda requires. :mad:
robnchris said:
but then again you just have to listen to the crap they talk on question time to realise what a bunch of ignorant tossers politicians really are.
Click to expand...
You answered your own paragraph from above(y)
bigtree said:
Nein years tene postes,interesting.
Click to expand...
"man is the only creature that eats when not hungry, drinks when he has no thirst,
speaks when he has nothing to say":LOL:

sueandjohn said:
worryingly it mentions euro5 !! our swift is 3 years old and euro5 so hardly what i would expect to see in a dirty diesal list
Click to expand...
In Spain the law already passed bans all sales of new petrol & diesels from 2030 ,
all existing use of petrol & diesel from 2040 ,
everything including hybrids from 2050,
leaving the only legal method of transport being electric.
This from a country that decimated the solar power industry when they arbitrarily & illegally revoked all existing feed in tariffs & required registration & payment of tax for any solar installation with the minimum fine for failure being 6million euros.
As you can see politicians of all countries are made from the same scum pit & should be treated as such .

MikeD said:
Last year in Berlin we used a lot of cab's and only one was a very old Mecedes diesel.

All the rest were Hybrids.
Click to expand...
Which are only any use if you drive them like you are on the Mobil economy run. Otherwise they are just a means of side stepping the legislation.:(


ymfb said:
what I don’t understand is why we aren’t using brown paper bags.
Click to expand...
Exactly.If you wish to ban something then you do it. Any means of payment to provide it whether the buying /selling of carbon credits, payment to enter emission zones, congestion zones, etc; is merely then a means of generating income.

ymfb said:
Driving modern diesels was at one point in time better, now it’s not, that’s progress not a con.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately not. They were dirty at the outset but supposedly better , now they are so clean you can sit in a room breathing in the exhaust fumes. They have just become the need to be banned to move people on to the next money making scam. :(

ymfb said:
Burning fossil fuels has probably been more difficult to defend, but n
Click to expand...
So why are there grants for' industrial' wood burning schemes?o_O
Why were wood burners & the manufacture of them no outlawed with the 'clean air act?'o_O
ymfb said:
the real gains would be in the developing economies such as India/China for USSR.
Click to expand...
Which I said should have happened at the outset with the Montreal protocol back in the '90's .No, it was easier to offload the old technology & allow the use of the now illegal ozone depleting refrigerants by the 'developing ' countries, so allowing the western world to be scammed by having to pay to develop ,change, introduce & use all new refrigerants whilst allowing the removed & disposed of at great cost & price ,to be then sold on to the 'developing countries' ? :mad::mad::mad:
Everything is a scam when introduced by politicians as they are led, in most cases, by those with an agenda.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Last edited:

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Join us

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Back
Top