Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t JoNova; Even EVs like Tesla are not safe from this new demand from the green British Conservative Government.
Ditch cars to meet climate change targets, say MPs
By Roger Harrabin
BBC environment analyst
22 August 2019
People will have to get out of their cars if the UK is to meet its climate change targets, MPs say.The Science and Technology Select Committee says technology alone cannot solve the problem of greenhouse gas emissions from transport.
It says the government cannot achieve sufficient emissions cuts by swapping existing vehicles for cleaner versions.
The government said it would consider the committee’s findings.
In its report, the committee said: “In the long-term, widespread personal vehicle ownership does not appear to be compatible with significant decarbonisation.”
It echoes a report from an Oxford-based group of academics who warned that even electric cars produce pollution through their tyres and brakes.
Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49425402
From the government press release;
Government’s target for ‘net-zero’ by 2050 undeliverable unless clean growth policies introduced
…
Plan for reducing vehicle emissions: The Government must bring forward the date of its proposed ban on the sales of new ‘conventional’ cars and vans to 2035 at the latest, and ensure that it covers hybrids too. In the near-term, the Government must reconsider the fiscal incentives for consumers to purchase both new and used vehicle models with lower emissions. The Government should also work with public services and owners of public land, such as schools and hospitals, to accelerate the deployment of electric vehicle chargepoints, and introduce measures to ensure that chargepoints are interoperable, compatible with a smart energy system, reliable, and provide real-time information on their current functionality. Although ultra-low emissions vehicles generate very little emissions during use, their manufacture generates substantial emissions. In the long-term, widespread personal vehicle ownership therefore does not appear to be compatible with significant decarbonisation. The Government should not aim to achieve emissions reductions simply by replacing existing vehicles with lower-emissions versions.
…
Read more: https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/science-and-technology-committee/news-parliament-2017/clean-growth-report-published-17-19/
If you ever attempted to get anywhere by British public transport you would know how absurd and out of touch this demand is.
Sure, getting about on the London metro underground is easy enough, but there are vast swathes of the country, even in the home counties close to London, where public transport, if available, is expensive, slow and unreliable.
When I lived in Britain I was approached on more than one occasion in London and elsewhere by groups of gentlemen hanging around public transport terminals, who seemed to want me to share the contents of my wallet with them. Though to be fair, after vigorous discussion, everyone always agreed that I could keep my money.
No remotely plausible investment in British public transport would replace the convenience, safety and accessibility of private vehicle ownership.
Of course if this policy is implemented, politicians and other important people would still enjoy a chauffeured limousine service; the prohibition will only affect private ownership of vehicles.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Prosperity is not compatible with large decarbonization.
astonerii
Neither is poverty.
our freedom is largely based on cars, washing machines , tap water, central heating and refridgerators.
Only the (very) rich do not need these machines as they are able to employ servants to wash their clothes and carry their water.
Any attack on the ownership or production is an attack on our freedom.
Hmm … no private property rights. That sounds a bit like communism to me.
Or maybe England can give all the property to a few lords. In exchange for protection and a place to live, the people would give a percentage of their labor to the lords. We can call the people who are not lords serfs. And who would be a lord? Well, the existing lords naturally would be. But certain people who have enough money could be a lord, provided they actually have the right viewpoint.
Go for it-so we can watch.
Copy and repeat at the UN so we can expose that one too.
This time they really have gone too far. This is great ammunition for those of us who recognise AGW as history’s greatest fraud.
‘If you ever attempted to get anywhere by British public transport..’
It depends where you are. In a major UK city you would find plenty of safe, clean, fast public transport. There is little point owning a car in London, for example.
In Norfolk or the Scottish Highlands… public transport is at US levels.
Fortunately in London and other major UK cities, Emergencies and Urgencies don’t occur out of schedule with bus routes. Or after 10PM once the sidewalks get rolled up. and Everyone who gets off work at 5pm can wait until 6pm to get home (16K away). Oh I forgot, everyone in large cities lives within walking distance to work and amenities and never need to drive anyplace. Like New York City.
No more food delivery for a Soccer game. Oh that’s right nothing is more wasteful then and carbon generating than a sports event. Kiss that goodbye.
Thankfully, this will put accidents on a schedule. C’mon man it’s a feature.
Return the UK to birth mortality rates of the early 19th century.
Safe travelling on the trains in UK apparently from Griffs favourite source
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/05/crime-soars-on-britains-railways
I used to laugh at the movie premise in the Invasion of the Body Snatchers from the town doctor that waived off the early warning signs as “symptoms of mass hysteria.” Now I guess that movie needs to be reclassified as a documentary film.
Sort of like “Idiocracy” ?
“It is not a movie, but a documentary… sent back from the future as a warning.”
These people have been watching too much Downton Abbey.
They hunger for a return of that way of life.
Aristocracy, peasantry, and academics as the new clergy with their old privilege and authority.
Upstairs and downstairs, know your place.
It’s not about pollution of the air –
it’s about not putting on airs above your station.
I can make explosives and have plenty of rope. Bring it on, you insane EMPLOYEES!
“Let them ride bikes, and eat cake. Win-win!”
There’s no living your own life with this bunch.
They’ll get another wild hair tomorrow. And another one after that.
There’s never any reason to indulge them on anything.
Try to distinguish between things you don’t want to hear and things that are incorrect. It’s stupid to argue that public transit will never be better than it is now—any strategy to get rid of cars obviously must involve providing superior alternatives. It’s also stupid to say “because I want to own a car, reality must adapt to me.” Sometimes reality is not as we could wish. Grow up.
something,
I think you are the one that needs to “Grow up”. You do not have the right to restrict my choice of conveyance. There is no climate crisis. There is no CO2 crisis. All of these ideas are BS.
I don’t live near a large city and I don’t want to. It is not feasible to provide Public Transport everywhere. If you improve Public Transport, more will use it. Until then, don’t put the cart before the horse.
Rule #1 – Never punish everyone for the sins of a few.
Any ‘strategy to get rid of cars’ is pretty much based on ill-informed conceit, or totalitarian agenda.
Try banning private auto ownership in California or Texas. LA no car? Political reality?
Obviously, the idiots have lived a pampered life and hence cannot imagine life in a small town, implications of public transit only for people who have real life problems such as shiftwork, two working parents, daycare, kid activities, and so on.
Or alternatively they are Zombie soldiers who believe in fascism light where we are forced to spend money which we do not have on ….
Curiously no one suggests banning tourism, banning construction, or banning vacation property
“Worldwide tourism accounted for 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions from 2009 to 2013, new research finds, making the sector a bigger polluter than the construction industry.”
Why stop there? End private ownership of property because of climate change! The higher purpose persons obviously know better than we what is for the greater good. End the wasteful practice of democratic choice in governance! End the chaotic and confused practice of choosing our life partners! Life would be so much simpler without choice. Just relax and be taken care of.
Article: People will have to get out of their cars if the UK is to meet its climate change targets.
The questions British people survive the climate change targets and are they necessary based on what they don’t know.
My but the UK is devout…
Bring it on – the sooner the daft Climate Cult following politicians put this kind of idiocy into their election manifestos, the sooner we get rid of the daft Climate Cult politicians for good.
As the saying goes (and a great album by The Clash), “Give ‘Em Enough Rope…”
When are Britons going to divest themselves of the crypto-fascist, Fabian socialist political class that is now ruling (not governing) them and “de-leftify” themselves.
Or is that option still open to them?
It’s not a “government committee”. It’s a House of Commons committee, the “The Science and Technology Select Committee”. Of the 11 members of the committee six are members of the Opposition.
The government is expected to respond to any recommendations that are made, so it’s the government’s response that may give you a clue about what legislation might be proposed. In other words y’all are being rather hysterical.
It has to be remembered that Karl Marx wrote Das Kapital in the British museum in London. Engels and Marx wrote the communist manifesto again in the British museum in London. The rest is history.
Actually, it was at Chetham’s library in Manchester that he wrote Das Kapital. His desk is on display.
Some also claim it was written in a flat in SOHO. Many claims could be correct. He was probably shlepping around as a shnorrer.
And the Britons are not on the streets to tell them what time it is?
It’s like the pressure of the boiler is rising and no one reads the manometer. Until all rivets pop at once.
“…widespread personal vehicle ownership…”
The key word to focus on is “widespread”.
It is not everyone who must give up their cars…and they will tell you who can keep their car after the law is passed to ban most of them.
But I will tell you now: If you are not sure if some people should give up their cars, and you are also not sure if you would be among the chosen, then you are not among the chosen and you must definitely hand yours in.
One by one you need to turn “consensus” scientists into “contrarian” scientists.
It probably requires years of work because so many have their careers and futures linked to perpetuating the “CO2 is evil” theme.
How about starting #CO2ISINNOCENT
As long as nobody exposes the true agenda – eco-totalitarianism – most won’t perceive the threat and the insanity will continue; Naked Emperor Syndrome.