advertisement


Ouch

I would think that as renewable tech becomes more efficient that electricity would become cheaper. TBH If one could have a setup in the home that generates their own needs then charging your own car would essentially come to pence. At present 100% or our electric comes from renewables.

If you think driving a car is going to become cheaper you need to think again.
 
why? Because governments would refuse to lose the money? Why can it not become cheaper?
Ok, suggest where else the income could be drawn from.

Edit to add: In 2019, (pre-pandemic) income from fuel duty was £28 billion with £16.4 billion (58.6 per cent) derived from the 32.9 million cars on the UK's roads at the time.
 
why? Because governments would refuse to lose the money? Why can it not become cheaper?

Reasons off the top of my head, there will be plenty more.

1. The cost of cars is rising. They are getting very, very expensive, particularly EV’s.
2. The govt will not lose the fuel duty revenue, it will be collected from the motorist one way or another.
3. Road pricing is almost certain, made easier as technology moves on at unprecedented speed.
4. Driving, however it’s done, is not ‘green’ in any way shape or form and will be environmentally taxed accordingly.
 
I don’t particularly like being overtaken by lorries when they can just barely get past.
At 60 they get overtaken.
So why not let everyone else make decent progress as is their want? The roads are still packed, people still go for drives in the country, and fuel isn’t actually all that expensive.
 
So why not let everyone else make decent progress as is their want? The roads are still packed, people still go for drives in the country, and fuel isn’t actually all that expensive.
To be fair, at 60 on the M25 he's not holding anyone up if his lane discipline is OK. Anyone doing 70 or better has the third lane. I find there's a sweet spot, depending on traffic. Tomorrow morning I'll be on the M1 about 8, which is a bloody awful time on a bloody awful road. Somewhere between 65 and 70 is probably easiest. Go faster and you end up in the queue in Lane 3 doing 70-75 and there's always some ringpiece trying to crawl up your arse or overtake on the inside because you've left more than 6 inches between your front bumper and the back of the next car. Slower and you get snarled up with the trucks. Around 65 you spend most of the time in Lane 2, drop back into Lane 1 when possible between trucks, you get a bit of space and all the tossers leave you alone.
 
To be fair, at 60 on the M25 he's not holding anyone up if his lane discipline is OK. Anyone doing 70 or better has the third lane. I find there's a sweet spot, depending on traffic. Tomorrow morning I'll be on the M1 about 8, which is a bloody awful time on a bloody awful road. Somewhere between 65 and 70 is probably easiest. Go faster and you end up in the queue in Lane 3 doing 70-75 and there's always some ringpiece trying to crawl up your arse or overtake on the inside because you've left more than 6 inches between your front bumper and the back of the next car. Slower and you get snarled up with the trucks. Around 65 you spend most of the time in Lane 2, drop back into Lane 1 when possible between trucks, you get a bit of space and all the tossers leave you alone.

But that’s not what he was criticising.
I know exactly how to ‘use’ the M25, and I often use lanes 1 and 2 to make better progress than lanes 3 and 4. But I don’t question the sense people doing 70+, whether they’re making better progress or not.
 
I'd never chip, either. For starters, the insurance premium for a chipped car is usually a lot higher than a car with the same BHP out of the factory. Something to do with algorithms /statistics that chipped cars are usually owned by *ahem* more enthusiastic drivers who tend to be more likely to make a claim.

My Nissan GT-R was remapped from 485bho to 590bhp, plus wider tyres. All declared to my insurance company.

My premium went up £16. That was one month after renewal so £16 for 11 months. I'm sure it's area dependent but that felt like no increase at all.
 
Some providers' policies seem better for chipped cars. When I got my Octavia remapped (better economy and power), Adrian Flux found me a policy barely dearer than the one I had before.
 
^^ same on the M40 / 42 / 6 yesterday. Traffic jams galore. Needed to fill up, 191.9 for E10 at Esso. Getting silly.
Read a Which review on EV’s. If you actually look at the cost per mile of public chargers, there’s really wasn’t much difference between electric and diesel. Home overnight cheap tariff was OK but good luck getting one of those. I’m coming to the conclusion the whole thing is a con.
Agree regarding the con and your thoughts elsewhere on this thread, the government will not let us save any money from owning an electric car.
 
Agree regarding the con and your thoughts elsewhere on this thread, the government will not let us save any money from owning an electric car.

Absolutely. It’s the new version of the switch to diesel push we had 20 years ago. I was toying with an EV but after reading the Which review, am firmly of the view that there is just no point. My petrol car is 3 years old in October and I’ve only done 18K miles in it. Should last until the next Emperor’s new clothes moment.
 
Ok, suggest where else the income could be drawn from.

Edit to add: In 2019, (pre-pandemic) income from fuel duty was £28 billion with £16.4 billion (58.6 per cent) derived from the 32.9 million cars on the UK's roads at the time.
There are plenty of things that get taxed and as time goes that 'thing' is no longer used and ceases to be a source of revenue. The reason for the high fuel taxes in my understanding is to try and push people to use public transport. We're meant to 'go green' with electric to save the environment and the current crop don't get taxed. Yes perhaps I'm naive but it really seems unfair to get everyone over to EVs and then say 'Oh, by the way now your all using EVs, we're going to switch the taxes we used to suck our of you on fuel to your EVs based on 'insert metric here'.
 
If fuel tax is supposed to push people into public transport then it needs to be much higher.

Your last sentence is exactly what will happen.
 
And public transport needs to be a) cheaper, b) more reliable and c) more accessible. I wonder what % of fuel tax goes towards improving/subsidising public transport? (I suspect it's the square root of bugger all).


massive North-South divide here. We (Herts) have had new infrastructure, upgraded stations, and all new shiny rolling stock. It has got more expensive, but reliability has improved, and accessibility locally has improved a lot.

Mind you, the fact that Shapps is our MP, might have something to do with the improvements locally. :confused:
 
And public transport needs to be a) cheaper, b) more reliable and c) more accessible.

And a nicer place to be when travelling. East Midlands Trains has replaced the rolling stock on the route I take to London with another TOC's cast-offs that are nothing better than upholstered cattle trucks; narrower seats and a loss of tables, power points and buffet service. Oh and the cost of a season ticket is now 8.5k. F**ckers.
 
18 months ago here in New Zealand we paid just $ 1.02 / liter for diesel and $ 1.80 / liter for 91 petrol. Diesel has also Road User Charges (RUC) which is 7 cents / kilometer. Roll forward and diesel is $2.80 / liter and 91 is $2.95 / liter. Not a good time to have a diesel....
There is already talk of introducing RUC for electric cars. Not to mention the fines if you get caught of not being up to date with your RUC.
 
And public transport needs to be a) cheaper, b) more reliable and c) more accessible. I wonder what % of fuel tax goes towards improving/subsidising public transport? (I suspect it's the square root of bugger all).

The tax just disappears into the black hole of govt coffers. Cheaper public transport means someone else has to pay for it. Who’s that going to be?
 


advertisement


Back
Top