“Diesel restrictions and penalties – an unacceptable abuse of public authority.”
In 2001, Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) and CO2 emissions were inextricably linked, the rationale being that vehicles with a higher level of CO2 were the ones responsible for polluting the environment, therefore, they should be made to pay. Diesel, by its very nature produces less CO2, giving rise to a boom in sales and an increase in benefits – buyers were actively encouraged to purchase diesel.
As the implications of emissions and pollutants became clearer, diesel became a much-contested topic, with the government implementing stringent measures to counter the effect of diesel pollution, leaving those motorists that were encouraged to buy, severely out of pocket. Surely, the government has some culpability in all of this?
One petition agrees
A new petition has been created for just that – “to get policymakers to face up to their past mistakes rather than slap more taxes on people. The creation of further diesel restrictions and penalties is an unacceptable abuse of public authority.”
We’ve written extensively about the demonisation of diesel – increased parking charges, city-wide bans, congestion & T-Charges, all aimed at tackling the air pollution problem caused by vehicles, or if you’re a cynic, aimed at revenue raising for the authorities.
There is no denying that we (that is, the UK and the world as a whole) have a problem with air pollution, to argue against that would be an exercise in futility, but this petition is about innocent buyers following best-practice guidelines from the government, and being penalised for it. The modern-day equivalent would be being taxed for recycling your waste.
The other side of the coin
Of course, there is debate regarding the information; the government were acting on information that was believed to be correct at the time, it’s only through the passage of time that further information came to light and changed policy.
While that is absolutely acceptable – governmental policy is ever evolving – what is at issue here is the punishment being meted out on that advice, and the effect it’s having not only on the diesel drivers, but the motor manufacturing industry as a whole – as of September this year, new diesel sales were down by a staggering 42.5%, and residual resale values are through the floor.
The petition, created by Stuart Coster, isn’t looking to drop the charges, or lessen the severity of them, but to just put the whole ‘diesel is the spawn of the devil’ attitude on hold, giving the government, industry experts and manufacturers the opportunity to come up with a fair way of dealing with the situation, it could almost be said that we’re potentially looking at the automotive version of the PPI mis-selling debacle.
We’re not alone
One such answer could be similar to proposals set out by the German government – a retrofit of cleaner hardware, or viable scrappage schemes in which the manufacturers are offering up to €10,000 in discounts against a new car. While it does seem to have some of the manufacturers backing, it must be said that other brands are reluctant – after all, they were selling perfectly legal, legislation compliant vehicles, and therefore, hold no liability. Although perhaps some car makers may be on weak ground.
The reality is that the motoring industry, government and buying public need to take action, with an aim of reducing emissions as a whole, without the consumer being penalised for taking ‘expert’ guidance in effective measures against vehicle pollution.
There was a time that buying a diesel would see a financial benefit in year two of ownership, today, however, that maths is somewhat different: A diesel Volkswagen Golf would take sixteen years of ownership for it to be more cost-effective than its unleaded counterpart. That’s the price of diesel ownership.
Agree?
Whether you drive unleaded or diesel, this petition could be the start of making the government answerable for some of their motoring related decisions. It’s worth knowing that with just 10,000 signatures, the government must at least respond, and if 100,000 people sign it, it will be considered for debate in Parliament.
This isn’t so much about diesel as a single issue, but about justification, and making the government see that motorists can’t or won’t sustain the decisions for much longer; if you chose a diesel vehicle on the advice of the government or based on the fact that you were incentivised to do so, then you should consider signing it.
To be clear, we aren’t saying that we should avoid any action to help reduce pollution, nor do we believe that some penalties shouldn’t be applied for certain vehicles, but lets at least make it fair for both the motorist and the driver. PetrolPrices.com does not endorse this petition, we simply wish to make our members aware of a current debate happening, and if someone chooses to act on this then that is on their own choice and not from us. We have not been paid to promote this and have no connection to the petition owner.
You can sign the petition here: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/228534
Do you feel that diesel penalties are fair? Should the motoring public make a united stand against demands from the government? Let us know in the comments.
Being penalised for something we were encouraged to do
News articles published on the BBC website in 2001 saying diesel had been classed as a carcinogen. Why didn’t you listen to that or is the 1p a mile you save more important?
Being encouraged to buy diesel and then being penalised for it is bad enough, but as of next year Sadiq Khan’s ULEZ comes into force!!! Great as a money making exercise but not so good when your disabled, don’t have the income to replace your vehicle, but need it to attend medical appointments etc. So every hospital appointment will mean having to pay an additional £12.50 a day!!! If nothing else, I’d love for clear information to be published as to what this revenue will be spent on…. Yeah as if that’s going to happen!!! 😭
We will always be hit, and don’t you go thinking that Boris wouldn’t have done the same!
Vehicles that are registered in “Disabled” road tax band are exempt from ULEZ charge.
A fair comment. However when the disabled person is the passenger and is not the driver because they are unable to drive, this concession cannot apply since the driver would not be able to use the car on their own.
There are thousands who although disabled, like me, don’t claim mobility and run a mobility car so we will hav eto pay.
If you are using your own vehicle to transport your disabled spouse or relative you can apply for the main vehicle used for this purpose to be road tax exempt. The vehicle is then recorded as being in the relevant road tax bracket. Prior to getting a Motability car my wife owned a V6 Ford Probe, when she became disabled we successfully applied for the car to be tax free.
That is an over simplification Kieth, many people with various disabilities do not qualify and, obviously not in every case, are more likely to have older vehicles.The only people, or close relatives of, that qualify for zero payment disabled road tax are as follows: the terminaly ill, recipients of Peronal Independance Payments mobility section 12 points (PIP) or the now defunct Disability Living Allowance (DLA) Higher Rate.
You cannot rock up to a Post Office/DVLA and claim £0 vehicle licence. Thousands of people have had the higher rate DLA stopped as it was phased out by the government. If the former claimants wish to continue receiving benefits they had to claim from the begining again for PIP. Sadly huge numbers have been either refused altogether or not re received the necessary 12 points to get the full exemption. This has not only means that the claimants have to pay some or all the road tax and even if only paying half the vehicle tax they will have to pay the full ULEZ charge if driving a qualifying vehicle.
Worse still large numbers of former DLA recipients have been refused or received an award of less than 12 points meaning they have had to hand back their Motability car many with expensive disability adaptations.
Anti poll tax type riots will stop the ULEZ nonsense dead as London totaĺly grinds to a halt
Well said Lewis, we should be told where the money generated from this stealth Tax is being used. People in your circumstance will be made to pay £12.50 a day and in theory still be poluting the air so no gain being made here for cleaner air quality, It`s a money making exercise. The thing is, this trend is being taken up in all the cities in the Uk. I have no problem with trying to get cleaner air quality but a longer phase out time for diesel vehicles should have been made.
I have the same problem in respect of my disabled wife who unfortunately is unable to use Public Transport. On top of the congestion charge you probably have to pay to park at the hospital car park as well. Disabled people are getting less of a fair deal in this day and age.
It’s all another money making exercise nothing more paying to drive in the zone doesnt wave a magic wand to clean air but brings in extra revenue.
Just introduce a rule which says all exhaust fumes must exit the car via the air vents. If it’s good enough for pedestrians to breathe it’s good enough for the occupants. Since the fumes are harmless, there should be absolutely no grounds to argue with this.
So, when a driver is walking around a town or city they aren’t breathing in the same air as the pedestrians?
What air are occupants of cars breathing when they drive with a window down, or their fans on, you know, the things that draw air in from outside to cool the cars cabin area?
How will this work with a taxi or a big smokey diesel bus, coach or train, what about dleivery vehicles, vans and lorries, what about the tractors, combines and other agriculteral vehicles, what about the emergency services vehicles, say an ambulance responding to a child or oap or a fire engine it’s going to be a bit difficult for them to do their jobs when they are choking on fumes, what about the aircraft, aside from the commercial aircraft what about things like the air ambulance…. i mean, you can’t turn around and say make the exhaust fumes exit the car via the air vents and then not include ALL vehicles can you, that would be unfair.
to build new super higwey for bikes that nobody use most off the day but Sadiq Khan can feel good about himself when his driven around London on bus line doesn’t know what’s traffic looks like
No they are totally unfair the ones causing most trouble are the lorries and vans travel behind them and it’s obviously them the mot should be tightened up as these vehicles seem to get away with it most car owners of diesel cars don’t kick out any pollution lay off responsible car owners now.
If you stopped all the lorries and vans coming into cities there would be nothing on the shelves for you to feed your family on. All petrol and diesel engine vehicles produce pollution even your small diesel car, and some of the worst polluters are the owners of older high mileage diesel cars that are running poorly and emitting clouds of black smoke even at tickover. The regulations on vans and lorries are much stiffer than cars, the London LEZ, being evidence of this, take a well maintained noncompliant van or lorry into the LEZ and you pay £200 per day for the privilege, there is no restriction on old diesel cars in the LEZ.
Sorry but that’s not correct. Lorry and Bus emissions are much more. Using per passenger data is a fraud as the amount of pollution is the same
Not really, as you don’t understand the system I’ll explain. Euro ratings are done on emissions of particulates and co2 from the vehicle regardless of size, the particulates are the ones that get in your lungs. So a euro 6 bus or truck puts out less particulate pollution than a euro 2 car . Oh and less nitrous oxide too with adblue system fitted.
I’m afraid it’s not that simple. It’s very hard to compare the two because they are measured differently. “Heavy duty” emissions (lorries and buses) tests are done on an engine dynamometer. “Light duty” emissions (cars and vans up to about 3.5 tonnes) are done on a rolling road. You can’t say that a Euro VI bus or truck will put out less particulate emissions than a Euro 2 car (although it probably IS true if you compare a good Euro VI truck with a bad Euro 2 car).
No I don’t think it’s fair car drivers are paying the price as always what about trucks diesel locomotive and all other diesel powered equipment if diesels are bad what about them are they going to run everything on petrol
Trains are monumentally more efficient than cars, their emissions aren’t worth mentioning.
Trains more efficient? They might just be so if there was a place get on and alight from them within a few hundred yards of every home in the Country. Mike. R.
Trains monumentally more efficient than cars? erm no, I don’t think so, only because one loco say an English Electric class 47 can pull lets say nine carriages loaded with passengers, (im sure theres a few anoraks out there can tell how many people that is) in one go. But & its a big but, has anyone been at a big London stn (or other stn) & watched one start & rev up & pull away? the plume of black smoke is horrendous, & we’re devout diesel drivers whose 2.0L car chucks out less emissions than most 1.6L petrol engines. Silly Sadiq is as bad as Bumbling Boris, neither know what they’re talking about or the real facts, so as we used to say back in the 60’s & 70’s, stick that in your pipe & smoke it Sadiq! Diesel, same as fags, of course they don’t want you to stop, cos look at the lost revenue!
Trucks are well ahead of cars mate, been running adblue since 2006 an euro 6 engines since 2013. We’re almost on euro 7 the way it’s been pushed! Planes an ships are far worse, was one told 16 contaianer ships make as much pollution as every car in America being started at once!
I think it’s Patheric. I pay no road tax as my diesel car does not produce enough emission. But I am being punished by paying a arm and a leg for my fuel?
We really are being taken for a ride by government. In France there is a deliberate hiking of prices to make diesel as dear as unleaded. In a matter of a few weeks the price has risen from around 1.30E to 1.55E and is now only 5 cents cheaper than unleaded. Coincidence – I don’t think so!
That’s correct John, I have just returned from France. At one time I used to fill my tank in France before I crossed the channel but now there is little difference between the price of fuel there and at home. I understand at one time the French gave subsidies to diesel car buyers which is why there are so many old small diesel cars still on the road in France.
The cost of diesel at my local Sainsbury’s filing station is 133.9 ppl. Two weeks ago in France I paid 1.41 Euros per litre which at today’s exchange rate is 98 ppl.
strange, google just told me 1.41 Euros is £1.24. as of 49 mins ago. my hubbys phone & our sons both verified this
I wish you were correct but you’re not. At today’s exchange rate €1.41 = £1.24
I’m afraid, but €1.41 is £1.23, and not .98p
Diesel in the UK is at least 4p dearer than petrol ( around here anyway.)
I wish (I could get my diesel for the same price as unleaded , at present I pay about5 or 6p a litre more.
diesel is dearer than petrol because you fill up less often because it goes a lot further than on the same amount of petrol.
There is more than one sort of “emission” from cars! Your car is taxed on its CO2 emissions (which is great, and it means your car produces very little CO2). However, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t produce any other pollutants! Just because the CO2 emissions are low, doesn’t mean the partculates or oxides of nitrogen will be low too!
I have owned petrol cars since 1983, then in 2016 I listened to current feelings and bought my first ever diesel car. I paid my £30 tax disc and was delighted. I now pat £1.32 /L of diesel. Petrol prices are £1.26 I feel robbed.
You still get 50% more mpg though. That is the biggest incentive to buy diesel even now.
Unfortunately mpg for both is now very similar
Not if you compare like for like. e.g. the Torque an engine produces. Since a lot of people buy a Diesel for towing, you’ll be hard pushed to find a petrol engine that can do the job which gives anywhere near the same mpg.
Sorry I don’t buy this. I drive a 420d. Quoted mpg for the diesel is 63 mpg. I am regularly getting mid-50’s. The petrol equivalent delivers a quoted mpg of 44mpg. That is a 43% better fuel economy for a 4% difference in fuel price. No brainer. Even factoring in the cost of Ad Blue and slightly higher servicing costs.
You pay extra in buying the car to gain that advantage and very very few diesels do anything like 50% more MPG than petrol.
To save carbon emissions etc why hasn’t the governments of the world insisted on making goods both last much longer and easily reparable. I have a 20 year old Toyota Landcruiser. Admittedly it has needed some welding this last MOT but for a days work it will last many more years. For me to trade in this for some battery car or hybrid many tons of new carbon waste was made to produce it and carbon will be produced re cycling a perfectly good vehicle. I f everything was made to last then factories producing new goods would not be in demand. We have to get out of this cycle of Profit/greed and “Must have” to save this planet. Also why isnt the UK planting trees in vast numbers. They turn Carbon into something useful.
Well said Jeff, older cars are user serviceable too.
Instead the railways are cutting down thousands of trees to sell for fuel.
I don’t know where you got the idea that the railways sell the trees for fuel. It’s not true. I was a train driver for 25 years and all the trees are left trackside to rot down naturally. The reason they’re felled is to try to avoid the “leaves on the line” problem which is a real safety issue..
Sorry but you’re wrong, they now use private contractors a lot of the time and they take the “waste” away which is logged and sold off.
I have a 20 year old Jaguar and a 22 year old Mitsubishi Delica and both are still in frequent use but I wonder how long before both succumb to tightening legislation. I have been considering replacing both but the cost of doing so is exorbitant and finding replacements that are capable of towing a 3k kg trailer doesn’t give much of a choice, let alone the reliability.!
The way to end the disposable society & make the need to recycle a thing of the past is easy. First all government needs to do is slowly increase the statutory minimum gaurantee period, so forcing the use of better quality components. I have a washing machine that came with a 10 year gaurantee & so it is possible. Next It would of course help if by law all appliances were designed to be maintainable. My final suggestion to end the disposable society is to return to the use of glass which is reusable, instead of plastic which is not. Think of all the wasted effort currently deployed into recycling that could be redeployed.
The trouble is that glass is very heavy, brittle and sharp when it breaks. You’d have to offset your savings against the extra fuel required to lug round glass headlight lenses, instrument glass and other plastic items in a car.
I had a Rover 420 Diesel which ran until it was 21 years old… then lack of spares for the braking system took it of the road.
You just need to get the right car, and service / maintain it regularly.
The cost of building a Bev is most probably about the same as or less than an ICE vehicle due to the fraction of parts required maintenance is negligible on an BEV, I have a 2017 30kWt Leaf and my miles cost is £0.02p a mile my wife has a Qashqai which will be going back in 14 months once PCP is fisished, she ask me to top up the tank £47 it cost for that amount of money I could drive 2300 miles in my Leaf
The worst thing about your vehicle is the NO2 and CO2 noxious pollutants that children are breathing in on there way to school. Social Responsibility by people is sadly lacking.
Your not the brghtest soul about are you? The cost of building electric vehicles vs internal combustion is alot higher. This Goverment, and others abroad, have been dishing out grants to people to encourage them to buy them for years
. Also, do you not know just how much energy and raw materials it takes to build a vehicle? I think youll find its a considerably large amount and thats before we get to how dirty lithium iron mines are or how the energy is produced to actually charge it………
People like yourself are blinded by all of this because they produce zero exhaust emmisions out the tailpipe and cost 2p per mile to run, so you believe ‘your doing your bit’ , which at best, is pathetic.
You do know that it takes 5kWh to refine a gallon of fuel? So before you’ve even left the garage forecourt you’ve produced almost as much pollution as an electric car will produce after it has finished it’s journey.
Join the discussion…how many kwh to refine a ton of aviation fuel
Ian, you are forgetting about the dirty coal used to make the energy for the electric car. Sure, its not dirty at the car, you just shifted the pollution to the power station. You are also forgetting about the energy used to mine and transport the coal to the power station. Surprised you forgot that one.
So…. let me get this right…. you think you’re “saving the planet” by driving a 20 year old version of one of the biggest and heaviest 4x4s on the market?! Come on! Pull the other one! I have a 3 litre petrol “weekend car” that will be 30 years old next year, but I don’t try to kid myself (or anyone else!) that it’s the “green” option!
I fully agree with a petition to the government regarding the very unfair demonisation of diesel owners.
Maybe the government should penalise the lorries that belch out black smoke instead of the ordinary driver going about their business and who followed the guidelines about the type of engine to use when driving a large amount of miles and also diesels are needed when towing. Caravan owners spend so much money in the uk when holidaying. Where would this revenue from the staycation people come from.
If you stopped all the lorries and vans coming into cities there would be nothing on the shelves for you to feed your family on. All petrol and diesel engine vehicles produce pollution even your small diesel car, and some of the worst polluters are the owners of older high mileage diesel cars that are running poorly and emitting clouds of black smoke even at tickover. The regulations on vans and lorries are much stiffer than cars, the London LEZ, being evidence of this, take a well maintained noncompliant van or lorry into the LEZ and you pay £200 per day for the privilege, there is no restriction on old diesel cars in the LEZ.
You can already report a smoky lorry or bus!
https://www.gov.uk/report-smoky-vehicle
You can’t do the same for cars. Stop making out that car owners are being hard done by!
Yes I agree
Yes I agree
I agree , diesels now are clean. The stigma and uncertainty affects our logical decisions re purchase. I’m not happy subsidising those wealthy enough to buy an electric car. I need and can only afford a 5-10 year old car
I have just signed the petition and thus far there are only 494 signatures on it so how serious are people about this issue. C’mon people, if you can whinge by making comments in various locations sign up to try and get some common sense applied on this issue. It is simple, click where it says ‘a new petition’ in the article and it takes you to the Govt website.
I have a new diesel with the ad blue technology. I’m under the impression that this makes the car a lot cleaner than an original diesel but gets dragged into the same argument because it’s a diesel. This seams unfair and should be highlighted in the media
Yes your diesel is a euro 6 engine with the technology to drastically reduce nox gases. On eof the cleanest engines in existance. Why isn’t the government encouraging this type of technology? The car makers must push this right under the governments nose!
I also have a ad Blu engine in my Citreon garden shoe (well its a Cactus, but looks like one) I was told to fill my car with this sheep p**s, or it wouldn’t start and fail its mot. So I filled the adblu tank with watered down adblu, then none and he-presto. It has passed three mots now. As my mot examner told me ‘ it swirts some of this urea into the exhaust after the cat, so you may have to buy an exhaust rear pipe after four or five years. Now thats what I call a crock. And its not going to fail any roadside monitors either. Don’t really know what adblu does, but its like my Oil Burner after I have been driving it In the city. A smokeacreen.
There’s a lot of ignorance surrounding the use of AdBlue. It is a solution of urea in distilled water. Not it isn’t sheep p**s (or human p**s, or indeed ANY p**s), it is, however, a chemical found in p**s. But don’t take my word for it, feel free to p**s into your AdBlue tank and let us know how you get on! (Just be ready for the big repair bill….)
AdBlue is used to reduce emissions of various oxides of nitrogen. MOT (and roadside) gas analysers are so crude, they can’t even DETECT oxides of nitrogen, so your car would pass an MOT even if you poured all the AdBlue down the toilet! It is for that reason that your car won’t restart if it runs out of AdBlue. You’ll get warnings from the car from about 2000 miles onwards, and the warnings get more severe as you pass the 1000 mile mark. There really is no excuse for running out of AdBlue!
And no, your exhaust won’t rot as a result of it. Remember the “good old days” when an exhaust would only last about 3 years? That’s when cars didn’t have cats and fuel quality was worse. These days most original equipment exhausts will last 10 years or more.
Your car will be better on oxides of nitrogen (because of the AdBlue) and particulates (because of its particulate filter) than older diesels that were not equipped with either. It might well be better than a PETROL car on particulates, in fact! It will also be better on CO2 and unburned hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. HOWEVER, partly as a result of certain manufacturers cheating, and partly as a result of ALL manufacturers ruthlessly exploiting the weaknesses of the standard type approval tests, it is unlikely to be as good on oxides of nitrogen as it SHOULD be. It will probably be worse than the equivalent petrol model in that one respect.
My MG 6 DTi actually does 58.8 MPG and has just had her 1st MOT. Due to the large bin (DPF) mounted in front of the Engine, she passed with flying colours and no CHEATING (Oh of course the car is BRITISH). So why do I have to pay the same for Fuel as those driving vehicles that Do CHEAT?
I think we all are singing off the same songsheet here. We were encouraged by way of incentivising a lower road tax. It worked, was working; technology got better (notwithstanding the VW scandal) and CO2 emissions dropped as did road tax. Indeed it was a universal process used across Europe. Clearly tax revenue reduced. Thereafter the slippery slope of Government kicked in. Knowing the ratio of Diesel owners had increased, they raised the cost of Diesel. Then we had the VW Dieselgate scandal and after and on the basis of a single scientific report, the government changed the Road Tax (VED) at a basic start threshold for all at £140. Brazenly, in the thick of austerity, they said the change was to generate extra revenue (no thought of the environment) and this system of road tax decoupled us from the universal process across the continent. This decision caused the unintended consequences of exceeding both our national and European levels of CO2, through greater Petrol purchases (as electric is still too expensive to most) so we now have two problems! The global barrel price has been dropping since March this year but our prices have increased. The government don’t intervene nor say anything as 90% of fuel sales is government tax; this is a win-win for them. Brazenly again, they then tell us they are again freezing the fuel duty whilst they have fleeced us through the ever increasing pump price. It really is simple, uf we want to help the environment and the motorist; invest in Hydrogen fuel which’s only by-product is water out of the exhaust and only charge tax on the fuel so you pay only for the mileage you undertake. Finally, the motorist, of which there are over 40 million, is easy money for the treasury. Forget VED or fuel, everything you pay as part of owning a car from insurance, servicing mot etc. has a tax revenue and the government know it – but guess what, so do the public.
Of course the penalties are not fair, we took advice from the so called experts.diesel is cheaper to produce being a by product of petrol production therefore being penalised twice over.
Diesel is no cheaper to produce. Crude oil is distilled in a Crude Oil Distillation Unit at a refinery – several products are produced; petrol, diesel and kerosene (jet fuel) are just some of them. The product slate can be adjusted depending on the crude oil feedstock. Diesel is not a byproduct.
Totally agree with this! I am a diesel car owner and am fed up being penalised at the pumps for owning a car I bought with the intention of helping reduce air pollution. Not only that but I do very little mileage a year, less than three thousand, there must be a fairer way to tackle the problem! Surely mileage should come into the equation? One would hope that by signing this petition, the government will be forced to take some positive action.
We will only get robbed again on mileage as we did when we went on to litres
I second that, my small diesel car for my disability bought new Feb 2011 only done 5,320 miles, approx 700 miles a year, never reached 1,000 a year in it’s life. If it wasn’t for tyre walls cracking the original tyres would last full life of car, still got 7mm tread at recent service by ATS, why would I ever want to swap it, it will do all I need for rest of my life, I live in a very rural area so doubt my emissions can be traced as very little. I doubt batteries on a car would last very long with my kind of use as would be long time between charges, would lose more power through being stood unused.
Actually, your sort of usage is probably PERFECT for an electric car! If you have a driveway and can leave it plugged in, you need never worry about it losing charge whilst being stood, and unlike your diesel, it will have no particulate filter (or even an exhaust!) to change!
You were badly advised to buy diesel if you are only doing 3,000 miles a year. The break point is considered to be around 15k. Plus you will probably wreck your particulate filter at this low mileage – that is an expensive repair bill.
Diesels in city centres are the ones being targeted by low emission zone proposals. If you don’t take it into a city centre where one of these zones is planned, then you won’t get penalised. It doesn’t matter if you only do 5,000 miles a year and a rep with the same car does 50,000 miles a year. if you both drive 5 miles in a city centre, you’ll both put the same amount of pollutants into the air.
I was encouraged to buy a Gas Car by the Government a few years ago, again on misinformation, they then realised that it was still a fossil fuel and withdrew the grant !
I fully agree with a petition to the government regarding the very unfair demonisation of diesel owners.
Absolutely agree we were encouraged by the then labour government to buy deisel cars and have been increasingly penalised since also it is causing hardship for our motor industry as they try to adapt to the governments demand for electric or hybrid vehicles.
The government encouraged us to buy diesel and now punish us for doing so making lots of extra money in taxes which I’m sure will not be used on any project designed to improve environment. I agree there should be a petition .
If you pay you can carry on polluting, what a con. If the authorities were that worried they would ban those polluting. Goes to show its nothing more than tax raising and a quick way to get again money from the motorist. It really is “Highway Robbery”. Turpin for PM.
Exactly. Today the trend is if it’s bad for us then tax it. It should be if it’s bad for us then ban it. I wonder why this is!!
What are the alternatives though? Would you prefer them to crush all diesels currently on the road? Ban them outright? I agree that any money raised should be ringfenced for tackling pollution and maybe treating its victims, but being pragmatic, what else can we do? Increasing tax on cigarettes and booze does seem to reduce consumption of both.
whilst we agree with you Philby, your name wouldn’t happen to be Kim Philby from the 60’s would it? & against our government lol.
Surely the way forward would be to retrofit diesel particulate filters and whatever else is necessary to reduce particle emissions to a satisfactory level on vehicles where it is cost effective to do so, and have a government sponsored scheme by which to do this, and introduce a scrappage scheme for those vehicles where the economies don’t stack up. The government should really take up the cost on this as it was their advice that led to so many people and organisations choosing diesels. It should also be noted that diesels are far more efficient at consuming hydrocarbons than petrol or lpg engines and so if the particle emissions are addressed they are still a viable alternative to the petrol and lpg engines until cleaner automotive propulsion is commonplace.
It should also be noted that electric vehicles may be clean at the point of use, but hydrocarbons are still utilised in producing energy for them at the current time.
Totally agree-I bought a diesel due to government incentives with low road tax and due to economy-using half the volume of fuel that my previous petrol car did. Now I am prevented from using it within towns and would lose a fortune if I sold it!
Owing a small van fitted with a diesel engine I find myself with a big problem. In London, where I live, I am going to be banned from using it in the near future with the threat of £1000 per day fines. As it is only 9 years old and in perfect condition this seems a bit harsh. I would have thought that phasing them out using their normal life would be a better idea.
We, as tax paying public, as usual are not see as hard working individuals who cannot afford to change our cars at every Government whim. Us individuals who listened to the ‘buy diesel’
plan are now the ones paying the price. I wonder what cars the MPs
drive, oh of course that does not matter, it all goes on expenses.
Expenses that we also pay.
It is truly humbling to read the comments from all those decent folk out there who bought diesels purely out of a desire to “do the right thing” and try to help the government meet its environmental targets! I feel really bad about myself now, because I bought a diesel to save a shed-load of money on fuel!
My top off the range Mazda 6 diesel emits lower CO2 and lower NOX than the petrol equivalent, which, incidentally, was a more sluggish drive.
Increase of fuel needs to be looked at.
Fuel price needs to be looked at.
Fuel prices need to be looked at.
Replace the rain forest.and clean the air naturaly,even the weather has been extreem since its decresing area ,but who could the governments tax ,diesel keep it going ,
hang the politicians who waste public – OUR – money
I have a diesel car but only do about 4000 miles a year. Another driver in a diesel or petrol vehicle doing 10000+ miles a year puts out double the CO2 emissions than I do, yet I have to pay the same. This is surely unfair. The cost should be put on fuel, that way those that are releasing more CO2 due to mileage pay the appropriate cost and low mile drivers like myself are not punished unfairly. This is common sense surely?
The cost is put on fuel. It’s called fuel tax!! The more you drive the more you pay. Similarly the less efficient your car the more you pay. Simple. Road tax should be scrapped – it is nothing more than a rip off.
Road tax is not just there to raise money these days, although it does raise around £6bn (fuel duty is about £28bn). It’s a way of ensuring that people get their cars an MOT – no MOT, no road tax renewal possible. It’s other function is to steer people towards less environmentally damaging vehicles when they come to change.
I totally agree with the petition
It was the goverment who got people to buy diesel cars in the first place.lower car tax.
but fuel prices through the roof.totaly unfair.
All fuels polute in some way. The more fuel used, the more potential polotion. Large commercial vehicles use more fuel, we need to sort the big problems first rather than pick on the good old soft target THE CAR DRIVERS.
Here we have another one. New trucks are less polluting than your old 2001 car. Mine does 10.7mpg at 44 tonnes so your super light car should do 200mpg or more since it’s only pulling 1.5 – 2 tonnes but it does not as it’s not as fuel efficient as the big trucks of to day!
Absolutely. So do electric cars. How do we produce electricity in this country? A significant proportion is still generated by burning fossil fuels. Until we move to a completely renewable energy economy this will always be the case. Don’t let the green brigade kid you otherwise.
But an increasing proportion of it is less dependent on fossil fuels. An electric vehicle charged today will have (overall) emissions that reflect the mix of renewables in the National grid. When that car is 10 years old, its emissions will reflect any improvements made in renewables over those 10 years. How many ICE engined vehicle owners can say that their car’s emissions will be BETTER when the vehicle is 10 years old?!
Yes I do think dirsel penalties are unfair. We bought a fiesel car thinkibg we were doing the right thing and are now stuck with it.
I agree and support the above position that has balanced arguments. At this time I and no doubt many others have concerns regarding the life and range of electric vehicles which when combined with the lrelatively limited number of charging stations means that the country’s infrastructure could not cope with a major increase in electric vehicles in the immediate future.
Further considerations include the environmental implications of manufacturing and decommissioning the vehicle batteries. Additionally the increased load on the National Grid to produce the electricity need to be accommodated before wholesale conversion to electric vehicles is truly a realistic proposition.
Having said that I agree that we need to reduce the use of fossil fuels to help combat climate change Therfore I fully support the petition to have government learn from past experience and take a responsible approach that neither demonises or victimises motorists.
Yes I got a diesel because of what the government said and a lot of things said about diesel is coming from the EU as we are getting out of the EU why are we implementing what thy are saying or are we still under there rule ??????????
Don’t you want better air quality? What are we going to do when we DO leave the EU? Allow vehicles in the UK to meet the same emissions standards as China or even India?
My ‘66’ diesel is EU6. It’s the Brussels lot that’s to blame if they don’t legislate again NOx
They do. That’s why they fined VW a billion Euros – for failing to meet EU NOx limits.
Not only being penalised for doing what we were encouraged to do but being stung with several p/litre dearer than unleaded. The only country in Europe to get away with robbing its motorists by charging more duty for inferior unrefined oil than petrol. Government must have realised that if they’d priced diesel below unleaded their revenue would fall as diesel became more popular so in a display of typical reverse logic got us to pay more to make up their shortfall.
Your comments are spot on, Rick. We are being totally ripped off in the U.K. most people don’t realise that diesel fuel is cheaper outside the U.K., particularly in the Eurozone. I was amazed to see it being sold at 12 cents (11p) cheaper per litre in Ireland earlier this year. No wonder they love their diesels, like we used to! It’s all about political manipulation for financial gain, at our expense. Sorry to say it, but we are mugs in the U.K., and it doesn’t matter which political party is in power, they all rip us off.
Absolutely right Kev. Last time I checked prices for both fuels at the two main filling stations in Gibraltar (BP and Morrison’s) diesel was several pence per litre less than unleaded. Since the Gib pound is 1:1 with GBP in this British territory the residents there are clearly not going to stand being mugged!
I wholeheartedly agree with this argument. The government needs to reflect on its part in encouraging diesel use and help users, not penalise them.
So sick of seeing the black smoke emitted by the numerous HGVs which I rarely see from the diesel cars
No one critises these.
Much of these goods could be transported in much more efficient manners.
The general public should not be penalised after another government inspired miss information
Don’t talk bo$%#ks, no wagons that are on the road today put out big clouds of smoke. You still driving in 1960 or some thing? If your going to comment don’t talk out of your a**e. Most of todays wagons are cleaner than cars due to law being much tighter on hgv than cars euro 5-6 being the norm.
Diesel engines
Diesels
STOP DEMONISING DIESELS
The government policy makers encouraged us to buy diesels but we are paying the price of their bad judgement so thee government should compensate people who followed their advice and negligence?
That seems fair. They could compensate diesel owners for the difference in residual value that their cars have suffered as a result of government policy….
…LESS, of course, any saving that the owner has made of their their period of ownership as a result of reduced fuel consumption!
Fair?
All this scaring about diesel engines is really, in my opinion unfounded. I have had diesels for the past 40 years and have seen how the government has gone from praising them, for low emissions, to what they are saying about them now. For the first time in 40 years I have now bought an unleaded vehicle, with th hope that the government will not change the goalpost, in fleecing me again. So, I’m now on petrol, but I would still defend diesel engines, as I feel we have been severely taken for a ride.
Petrol and diesel are both being demonised by the electric body. Who would be a car manufacturer?
I hope everybody is following the link within the article to sign the petition…”A new petition has been created for just that…”
Seems like it’s the only chance of getting a fair hearing for those of us who were ‘suckered in’ by following Government advice at the time and are now being held as pariahs for doing so.
When I signed it there were only 790+ signatures and we need min 10k for it to go anywhere, so please get signed up now.