The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > It’s not the size of your engine, it’s what you do with it > Comments

It’s not the size of your engine, it’s what you do with it : Comments

By Gaurav Sodhi, published 20/6/2007

If the Queensland Government was really interested in helping the environment it would be advocating higher petrol taxes, not higher car registrations.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All
Market forces (and government policies) cause damage when externalities are ignored in the interests of powerful groups in the community. Essentially this allows them to privatise the profits and socialise the problems. If the developers had to pay and pass on the full costs of the new desalination plant in Melbourne, instead of doubling the water bills of existing residents, Melbourne would be a far less attractive destination.

In terms of motor vehicles I tend to agree with Alzo that standards should be written in terms of performance, rather than specifying a particular technology. Another issue that has been ignored is the weight of the vehicle. The damage done to the roads goes up with the fourth power of the mass, so that a 3 ton truck will do 81 times the damage of a 1 ton truck. (There was a New Scientist article on this some years ago.) This damage is not adequately reflected in registration or other taxes. Goods that could more efficiently be sent by rail or by ship go by truck, and fleet owners save on labour costs by using bigger trucks, since you and I will be paying for the extra damage to the roads.
Posted by Divergence, Friday, 22 June 2007 10:39:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The tax should go to the car companies/manufacturer for being stupid, not the consumer, remember, not all of us can afford the extra cost of more taxes/price hikes on fuel as it is. Will the companies we work for increase the wage to compensate us? I think not!. 1971, cars got about 28- 32mpg. in fuel consumption. Now we hardly see that mark, yet a ford focus has more power than an 83 vk brock comodore. Why?Not many have fuel efficency of any kind, 30+ yrs on.oh we can go fast but not far. Does everyone need to blast away at the lights? Think about this people..we have mines who pump so much crap its not funny but we have to bare the cost? most of the rubbish being funneled by big industry can be reburnt to purify but we cant have that..it might cost the billion $ company to much..let the idiot mases take it on..Yehah, then we get morons writing crap like this because they're too narrow minded to take a look about for themselves. Its easy mate, to write crap, leaning to side of governments, to weak to stand up to multinatonals..Get rid of coal power..go gas..beattie can still sell his coal to china, let them choke on the crap and workers are still employed. Leave us and our cars alone. Get the wheezy heaps off the road, even if we have to subsidise new purchases for some.Ban 2 strokes. What about jets?Boats?Oops sorry too hard mate aye. easier to thump the low earner isnt it?. GO AWAY WANK!!
Posted by nmac, Tuesday, 26 June 2007 11:07:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alzo

“Why worry...its going to happen regardless. We will just have to switch fuels. Lots of options.”

No alternatives, nor combination of alternatives comes anywhere near replacing oil at anything like a similar cost. Whatever we do, it is going to cost a whole lot more, and therefore change macro and microeconomics and our basic practices in major ways. Whether we can smoothly transition ourselves into this higher-cost energy paradigm is the big question. It is indeed a major cause for worry. It certainly isn’t just a matter of letting it happen and of simply switching fuels when we are forced to.

“Wouldn't have needed them if the push to urbanise hadn't been so successful.”

So you agree then that regional population caps are a necessary part of proper strategic planning in areas with growth pressure?

“Don't think much of your fellow man, do you?”

Overall, no. We’re a pretty damn dumb species – kidding ourselves that we are really smart while trashing the planet and our future!

“In what way duplicitous?”

Governments can’t get away with god-awful policies if the community objects strongly enough. So we can’t just blame successive governments for overpopulated, under-watered, under-infrastructured, poorly health-facilitied, road-congested southeast Queensland for example, without the general community being duplicitous by way of their lack of protest.
Posted by Ludwig, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 10:01:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy