Greenie Rant

One thing I'll do when I get home is dive through a series of websites having a look at what has happened over the day.

(Some people do that at work all day instead of doing work ... but I can't see how they find the time outside lunch or tolerance to suffer the limitations of internet at work)

Anyway. Latest one to cause a twitch is this one from Tomshardware - MIT Scientist Demands Gas Tax to Make Cars More Efficient.

There's not much in the story (Tomshardware is a bit of a lite news site which is ok cos lite = variation). But there's enough in there to tweak me into a rant mode. One thing that regularly hits the news is Green Taxation. Things like charging a congestion charge based on what people drive and where they drive. This usually gets touted as something needing devices to track exactly where you drive and thump you in the wallet if you dare to venture down the wrong alley.

I have a simple line when it comes to position tracking Congestion Charges. It's RUBBISH !!!!

The one in London is relatively ok but that's because it depends on number plate recognition for when you enter or leave the Forbidden Zone. But tracking people's cars is crazy in all sorts of ways. Every car would require a tracking device and that device would need to be monitored with the results translated into charging you for where you've been. Plus there's the Orwellian aspect of nabbing people for speeding based on the info from the tracker.

Device based tracking of cars for congestion charging is an awful way to go. I doubt whether the revenue raised would match the cost of the administration. It's too heavy handed and rather unnecessary.

So - this brings me to the article (which is ok and doesn't deserve a rant). It's looking for a gasoline tax, the idea being that vehicles that use more petrol get hit by the tax more. Petrol tax makes a huge amount of sense :

It's a charge on petrol used
People with gas guzzlers get hit hardest
Which makes Eco people happy
Driving on congested roads makes you burn more fuel
Doing Idiot speed is directly more expensive
It doesn't need any tracking devices

There's a lot of good reasons for it. In Britain, we have 2 main forms of tax associated with our cars : Road Tax and Petrol Tax. Road Fund Tax is a 6 or 12 month fee that gives you a disc that all cars over here need to display. To get one you need valid MoT (annual roadworthiness check) and Insurance. It has a sliding scale based on the car's emissions :

1999 Puma - £210 per year (actually £215 because it's old)
2002 Focus ST (hot one) - £260 per year (or £130 for the same age turbodiesel)
2011 Lexus CT hybrid - no charge
2012 Bentley Mulsanne (example!) - £460 per year with more in the first year

There's more charged in the initial years for the nasty cars. And that's not always the 4x4s ... The sporty cars tend to be nastier on emissions than the SUVs. Nissan's Juke SUV is the same tax as the Mk1 Focus turbodiesel.

Ok - how about petrol tax ... This is where the Greenies should wake up and realise there's already a massive congestion charge. More info here but it boils down to the government taking 80p out of every 133p per litre. (60%)

All those reasons I put above apply to petrol tax as a congestion charge. But that's not the end of the story. The Tomshardware article attacks the overriding trend of modern cars : More solidity leading to more weight, more power included in smaller engines being pushed harder. What cars have I had ?

Astra 1.6 - not too efficient carburettor engine, gave about 36 mpg. Light car, light engine - 90bhp/tonne.
Belmont 1.8 - fuel injected, gave 40-45mpg. Probably 110bhp/tonne. No catalytic convertor.
Puma - saddled with catalytic convertor - 36-40mpg. 110bhp/tonne.
Focus ST - 28-32mpg. 130bhp/tonne (maybe)
Lexus CT - 47-55mpg (expecting more in summer). 95bhp/tonne.
(bhp/tonne isn't the whole story - diesels develop less power but extraordinary torque. BHP = top speed, torque = acceleration. The CT has almost double the torque of the ST170 so acceleration is comparable)

The faster cars have been going Munchies on the fuel. Modern fuel injection gives better economy but it's taken away by the catalytic convertor. The engines have got more powerful but weight added for improved safety has kept them the same speed.

Yeah - cars have been getting more efficient (and consistent!) over the years with better and smaller engines ... but. Without innovative stuff like Toyota's hybrid system or the well intentioned stop/start devices, we'll not get more actual efficiency in our cars. Maybe it's a call for a return to light weight shopping trolley cars like that Mk1 Astra.

Oh my god I've Wall Of Texted again ...

Tax on fuel consumed = good (although I do remember buying fuel for a quarter the price we pay now)
Congestion charge by tracker device = nasty, unworkable, cost more than it could ever bring in.