The dumb thing about this taking myself as an example.
I drive a large heavy diesel 4x4, yes it’s not great on the pollution front I understand that.
But it’s all about perspective, I use mine to go on camping holidays for example.
Listening to someone who drives a Tesla criticise me for my lack of environmental awareness while going on 4 overseas flights per year that I don’t take is peak hypocrisy.
One long return flight per year contributes almost as much as my evil 4x4 does in a whole year.
Has the possibility of renting a camping-suitable car for that couple-of-times-a-year-event while driving something less wasteful for an everyday commute, crossed your mind?
Or is paying for the additional fuel and taxes year-round on a bigger car genuinely cheaper?
If it is, I’d point out that the whole point of a tariff like this, is to change that.
Wait till they find out it’s also damn near just as easy to go camping with a bicycle. Not the solution for every one or every climate, but it’s certainly viable for many.
I live in a very camping friendly part of the US, but I’d have to be a hell of a lot more fit than I am now to even consider trying to bike to a place where camping is permitted, unless you count the local homeless encampments.
It definitely varies on locale for sure. Where I live (BC) it isn’t much more to do, but still isn’t for everyone. Just to tack on to that as well, good transit options for the first leg of the trip is a massive help.
If you live in a big city, then unless you’re using it for more than camping, you’re absolutely wasting money (your money), and polluting unnecessarily.
If you don’t live in a big city, then I totally get it. You need a bigger vehicle to deal with undeveloped rural roads, and adverse weather conditions year round. Personally, I’m a hunter, so I need my big truck nearly every weekend during hunting season, and in the off season I love to camp as well.
Everyone should get the same carbon budget a year. Maybe as a separate currency. It can then be saved up or traded to use as you see fit. Want to go on oversee flights? Better buy some carbon from some tree huggers with budget to spare.
the point here is not to blame large 4x4 owners for global pollution, it is to prevent them from parking in the city’s streets, to avoid local air pollution and endangering other road users (pedestrians, bicycles…).
When you want to enter the city there is no issue if you leave your vehicule in a public parking around the city and take transports to go downtown.
It is only a message sent to carmakers, and suv buyers, saying big cars are not adapted to cities (no shit sherlock)
The dumb thing about this taking myself as an example.
I drive a large heavy diesel 4x4, yes it’s not great on the pollution front I understand that.
But it’s all about perspective, I use mine to go on camping holidays for example.
Listening to someone who drives a Tesla criticise me for my lack of environmental awareness while going on 4 overseas flights per year that I don’t take is peak hypocrisy.
One long return flight per year contributes almost as much as my evil 4x4 does in a whole year.
Has the possibility of renting a camping-suitable car for that couple-of-times-a-year-event while driving something less wasteful for an everyday commute, crossed your mind?
Or is paying for the additional fuel and taxes year-round on a bigger car genuinely cheaper?
If it is, I’d point out that the whole point of a tariff like this, is to change that.
I have no idea what "camping " means to you, but I can tow a pop up camper with my Impreza.
Wait till they find out it’s also damn near just as easy to go camping with a bicycle. Not the solution for every one or every climate, but it’s certainly viable for many.
I live in a very camping friendly part of the US, but I’d have to be a hell of a lot more fit than I am now to even consider trying to bike to a place where camping is permitted, unless you count the local homeless encampments.
It definitely varies on locale for sure. Where I live (BC) it isn’t much more to do, but still isn’t for everyone. Just to tack on to that as well, good transit options for the first leg of the trip is a massive help.
If you live in a big city, then unless you’re using it for more than camping, you’re absolutely wasting money (your money), and polluting unnecessarily.
If you don’t live in a big city, then I totally get it. You need a bigger vehicle to deal with undeveloped rural roads, and adverse weather conditions year round. Personally, I’m a hunter, so I need my big truck nearly every weekend during hunting season, and in the off season I love to camp as well.
Everyone should get the same carbon budget a year. Maybe as a separate currency. It can then be saved up or traded to use as you see fit. Want to go on oversee flights? Better buy some carbon from some tree huggers with budget to spare.
the point here is not to blame large 4x4 owners for global pollution, it is to prevent them from parking in the city’s streets, to avoid local air pollution and endangering other road users (pedestrians, bicycles…).
When you want to enter the city there is no issue if you leave your vehicule in a public parking around the city and take transports to go downtown.
It is only a message sent to carmakers, and suv buyers, saying big cars are not adapted to cities (no shit sherlock)