I seem to recall a lot of years ago the government telling us diesel was the way to go....and to help us along diesel fuel would ALWAYS be cheaper than petrol....
Of course, as usual, we got shafted along the way, as soon as more diesel transport was sold the price of the fuel went up and surpassed the petrol. ( watch what happens to the price of water once all these new, and old,houses have water meter installed !)

The other thing about diesel engines is the fact that particulate filters have been installed to cut down on emissions of soot etc...
all well and good I hear you say,BUT,the number of people that are taking their cars back to dealers /garages because the filter light has come on and put their pride and joy into limp home mode has increased.... so I am informed from within the trade.

apparently the answer is to run your vehicle at 60mph down the motorway for at least twenty minutes..... to clear the filter out and burn off the particulates..... well done you have successfully put all the captured crap into the air and cleaned your filter.

Wait a minute,why did we put a particulate filter on anyway and why have I just used even more fuel to clean it, resulting in more emissions, to clear the blasted filter.... shafted again.......

well done the government, the marketeers and the-do-gooders, not necessarily in that order...

 

Everything has emissions, this little debate is causing pollution just powering our computers and the network infrastructure to enable it.

It's about keeping perspective though. Those little journeys are a drop in the ocean pollution wise to all the big journeys and haulage that takes place around the world. I happen to feel using my car for the relatively short journey to my parents is justified both in time and effort saved, and because I enjoy driving. I have to physically be there so the journey is unavoidable and I'm happy with the car as a chosen means regardless of how green interest groups bleat about the emissions.

Far more good could be done getting rid of unnecessary long journeys, training people to actually be able to drive in traffic rather than the accordion stop start crap I see on the motorway everyday and even something as simple as us all checking our tyre pressures before we head off for work tomorrow.

Walking isn't cheaper if you value your time. Taking my typically hourly earning rate driving to my parents even in the S2000 in first gear the whole way would be a bargain. And I don't know what rail network you use but I can't think of any train journey I take that isn't cheaper by car just counting fuel. I already have the insurance and tax in place regardless of how I take an individual journey. If I can get a passenger to split the fuel bill a car is monumentally cheaper.

Some of the journeys I completely agree. The school run for instance I don't know what's happened in the last 20 years but when I was at primary school we walked, now it's a fleet of stupidly large cars driven by parents with no road craft and fat children

But I don't do any short journeys during peak time traffic. I drove to the train station last Sunday rather than walk (a train journey to Manchester that cost more than it would in petrol but I was drinking) and the roads were pretty clear. If I were getting the train to work early morning traffic would be too busy for driving there to make sense so I would walk.

Where do you draw the line? You would pollute even less if you don't offer any counter arguments to what I've said because whatever you're typing on is using power.

 

Perspective - this is about urban air quality which is significantly worsened by many of people making relatively short journeys. Nothing to do with motorway journeys or long distance driving.

My journey to work would be a 100 mile round trip. At 25mpg, that's 4 gallons, or about £25, then there would be parking charges of around £25 per day to add to that. Train fare is £11 return. It's also quicker using walk/train.

You are understanding now with the school run comment. That's exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about here. Today, as it's half term, there will be no local congestion, and a big reduction in pollution as a result.

I fully accept that me and my S2K buddies doing a 130 mile round trip for breakfast is a heinous crime with regards to pollution. But, as we mostly drive along green, leafy country roads, we are helping the plants with our CO2, so it's all ok

 

I can remember a time not that long ago when it was considered the norm to walk 2 miles to school and 2 miles back. It wasn't a safety issue as there was about 1500 of us doing it. The only congestion was at the school crossing over the main road when the few cars that were there had to wait for us to cross.

 

Why would anyone take a politician seriously on this subject? The incentives to get people into diesel and the denial about the facts surrounding that fuel being just one example of why they simply cannot be trusted.

As for putting the spotlight/responsibility on the small private user - bloody typical.

 

Those were the days.

 

They can probably be trusted, if you take a contrarian attitude to everything they say.

If one tells you to get off the line because there's a train coming, it's probably safe to cross. Because it's not built yet and has already cost twice as much as was envisaged...

 

I still hold that the bulk of that is caused by buses, taxis and delivery vans shuttling around barely above walking speed in heavily congested areas than examples like I cited taking a trip to the parents or saving a walk to the supermarket & train station.

My grievance is with Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett throwing out the statistic of 56% of journeys being short journeys. 56% of journeys isn't 56% of pollution. It's preying on people not delving deeper into the facts. I agree we would be best cutting down unnecessary journeys, but in my opinion my short trips to the supermarket, train station and parents are more necessary than the 100 miles a week I do to work. I'm sat at my office desk now typing this and I've done nothing all day that wouldn't have been just as easy at home, but old fashioned management thinking precludes that.

There are of course exceptions which prove the rule. I can only go anecdotally that every journey I make costs less in petrol than the equivalent public transport fair.

I'm going to Liverpool tomorrow evening and I have two choices. 20 minute walk to train station, £7.90 train fair 1 way, 1 hour and 20 minutes train journey full of drunken louts and uncomfortable seating followed by a 20 minutes walk to my destination. Or 45 minutes door to door and <£6 in petrol.

My flatmate commutes into Manchester at peak times everyday, and his diesel and parking costs less than a peak time monthly ticket ticket for which he wouldn't even be able to find a seat.

And don't let yourself be villified, you'd do more environmental good giving up beef

 

Cow particulates are a LOT larger than 10, I think you'll find.

 

If people walked and cycled there would be less need for buses and taxis.

I acknowledged earlier there are plenty of journeys where a car is cheaper than PT. There are also many journeys where a car is the only sensible choice. There are many journeys where walking or cycling would be better. As I said, horses for courses (although horse PM10 is best avoided!)

I wonder how come it is your flatmate can't find a seat on PT if it's so expensive and inconvenient?