lucyashton
New member
As all diesel reaches the 40p/litre price ex tax time for a serious think about bio diesel with fresh vegetable oil available at same price!-Merc OM636 will run on this if refined!
Red Diesal IMHO
- Thread starter DaCostaGreene
- Start date
Signed Out
Active member
I cannot get over how this thread went. The whole idea of people paying no tax for a wasteful leisure activity is absurd, and to campaign as such is selfish. Yes, I have a diesel engine, but realise that I should try and control it's use. Yes, OK, you can call me a raggie if you like, but, bloody hell, don't you all think it's rather short sighted to abuse the system like this. And what on Earth is the relevance of politicians making waste? OK, so it's fine do follow their lead in every way? Because others make mistakes, we all should?
If the designs are inefficient, be careful when using them.
And am I going mad, or did someone suggest that selling less red fuel will push it's price up? Eh?
Maybe I've just been thick and walked into someone else's bitch, but blow me if the whole forum about this matter is absurd.
Jem.
If the designs are inefficient, be careful when using them.
And am I going mad, or did someone suggest that selling less red fuel will push it's price up? Eh?
Maybe I've just been thick and walked into someone else's bitch, but blow me if the whole forum about this matter is absurd.
Jem.
No1_Moose
Active member
hm, and have you ever been on an aircraft before?
Signed Out
Active member
Yup, of course, and would agree with tax going on that too. I use cheap things while they are cheap, but realise sacrifice would be better. Cheap flights are terrible for the environment. And those contrails "making the Earth cooler"- good thing? Yeah, right.
philip_stevens
Active member
Wait a minute and think back a bit. I am also a raggie.
The fact is not that we are getting cheap diesel at a low rate of tax. The actual fact is that over many decades, different governments have added more tax - at almost every budget - to normal use fuel - excise duty and VAT on top of that - and even this red heating fuel has had tax increased.
Red diesel had a low rate of tax added to it during a previous government and that, according to the appointed officials of the EU, cannot be removed, even if a government now wanted to.
Just look at the price of fuel in the USA with low tax added. Now that is what the true cost should be, not having fuel users here, support every-which-way that governments want to waste tax money - just like road fund licence being used for other purposes.
That's my rant over, and I will not be responding to anyones reply! /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
The fact is not that we are getting cheap diesel at a low rate of tax. The actual fact is that over many decades, different governments have added more tax - at almost every budget - to normal use fuel - excise duty and VAT on top of that - and even this red heating fuel has had tax increased.
Red diesel had a low rate of tax added to it during a previous government and that, according to the appointed officials of the EU, cannot be removed, even if a government now wanted to.
Just look at the price of fuel in the USA with low tax added. Now that is what the true cost should be, not having fuel users here, support every-which-way that governments want to waste tax money - just like road fund licence being used for other purposes.
That's my rant over, and I will not be responding to anyones reply! /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Signed Out
Active member
Maybe I am naive, but my view is not that tax should be seen as a control as well as a revenue source. Just like congestion charge, tax the bloody cars of the roads, and keep the environment as clean and complete as possible.
I don't expect others to agree with everything (if anything), but surely it can be seen how low tax on fuel in the US is a VERY bad thing. It's them that are screwing up the world for the rest of us, along with the developing world who only look up to the US, or say "if they can have/do it, why can't we" about everything.
Jem.
I don't expect others to agree with everything (if anything), but surely it can be seen how low tax on fuel in the US is a VERY bad thing. It's them that are screwing up the world for the rest of us, along with the developing world who only look up to the US, or say "if they can have/do it, why can't we" about everything.
Jem.
No1_Moose
Active member
Yep, I agree with you (a bit). What I would add though is that tax can be used as a control as you say but don't you think the best way to use it as a control is to give tax breaks to things you want to encourage. I personally wouldn't charge any tax on 'eco schemes' such as hydrogen cars/biofuel stuff/lpg cars/solar panels/wind turbines e.t.c and I would agree with a bit more tax on fuel as long as the tax raised goes towards aforementioned areas and not supporting more illegal immigrants.
I've been in the US a lot recently and there current attitude to oil is quite frightening. One person I was talking to said he was struggling to put gas in his car because it was costing him $50 a day to get back and forward to work. I asked how many MPG his car/pickup did,,,,,10mpg,,,,,eek.
There was a survey on the news done to find out what Americans were most concerned about. The options were: Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Global Warming, Terrorism or the price of gas (which has recently been hovering around the lofty height of $3/us.gal). The price of gas was the thing that most worried them. I'm afraid that is what we are up against. Although G.Bush does seem to be going the right way by encouraging the use of ethanol and supporting the USAF trying to run their aircraft on biofuel (though that is more a security issue rather than an environment issue). GM and Co. are developing what they think will be the first commercially viable hydrogen car which should be available in about 10yrs.
Deep down they know they have to change and perhaps $70 oil will expedite the change.
I've been in the US a lot recently and there current attitude to oil is quite frightening. One person I was talking to said he was struggling to put gas in his car because it was costing him $50 a day to get back and forward to work. I asked how many MPG his car/pickup did,,,,,10mpg,,,,,eek.
There was a survey on the news done to find out what Americans were most concerned about. The options were: Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Global Warming, Terrorism or the price of gas (which has recently been hovering around the lofty height of $3/us.gal). The price of gas was the thing that most worried them. I'm afraid that is what we are up against. Although G.Bush does seem to be going the right way by encouraging the use of ethanol and supporting the USAF trying to run their aircraft on biofuel (though that is more a security issue rather than an environment issue). GM and Co. are developing what they think will be the first commercially viable hydrogen car which should be available in about 10yrs.
Deep down they know they have to change and perhaps $70 oil will expedite the change.
fireball
New member
Look at the availability of carbon fuels, and engines to consume them, and the amount of "free cash" people have these days.
Petrol prices on the road have increased massively, yet there are (reportedly) more and more cars on the road - so taxing fuel as a control is not working - or not reducing the amount of fuel burnt.
It would take a massive change in culture to remove ppl from their cars/motorbikes/lorries/vans/4x4s ...
alternatively - if it was made cheap and easy to run on green fuel (in whatever guise) without loosing the convenience of petrol/diesel engines then there would be a move towards the newer technology.
IMO the only way to reduce the number of vehicles on the road is to reduce the miles that you are legally allowed to drive - even then, there will be ways around it (like most things).
Tax on red diesel - a control ? I don't know, but I doubt it - it won't stop me from using my boat as my fuel consumption is minimal anyway - doubling the fuel cost is still less than 3 figures !! So I would think we'd only see reduction in engine use from the less well off (who (sweeping generalisation here!) use smaller boats) giving minimal impact on greenhouse gasses...
Petrol prices on the road have increased massively, yet there are (reportedly) more and more cars on the road - so taxing fuel as a control is not working - or not reducing the amount of fuel burnt.
It would take a massive change in culture to remove ppl from their cars/motorbikes/lorries/vans/4x4s ...
alternatively - if it was made cheap and easy to run on green fuel (in whatever guise) without loosing the convenience of petrol/diesel engines then there would be a move towards the newer technology.
IMO the only way to reduce the number of vehicles on the road is to reduce the miles that you are legally allowed to drive - even then, there will be ways around it (like most things).
Tax on red diesel - a control ? I don't know, but I doubt it - it won't stop me from using my boat as my fuel consumption is minimal anyway - doubling the fuel cost is still less than 3 figures !! So I would think we'd only see reduction in engine use from the less well off (who (sweeping generalisation here!) use smaller boats) giving minimal impact on greenhouse gasses...
Andrew_Fanner
New member
>>>
So I would think we'd only see reduction in engine use from the less well off (who (sweeping generalisation here!) use smaller boats) giving minimal impact on greenhouse gasses...
>>>
So the exact opposite of progressive taxation in fact!
Boat pollution is basically negligible as a proportion of the whole.
So I would think we'd only see reduction in engine use from the less well off (who (sweeping generalisation here!) use smaller boats) giving minimal impact on greenhouse gasses...
>>>
So the exact opposite of progressive taxation in fact!
Boat pollution is basically negligible as a proportion of the whole.
fireball
New member
[ QUOTE ]
Boat pollution is basically negligible as a proportion of the whole.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just cos it is a "negligible proportion" of the total doesn't mean we should just shrug our shoulders and do nothing about it does it?
I'm quite happy with my 18hp diesel inboard - cos I've got sails to push me along ... but does anyone really think about the waste of resources and impact on their surroundings when running an engine?
Is it nessersary to run an engine for an hour to "warm it up" ...
Fuel consumption figures for the non-displacement cruisers seem horrendus at less than 5mpg ... ok - so we've got money to burn - but is it the right thing to do? No worse than going for a "Sunday afternoon drive" perhaps ...
I have noticed a couple on LPG ... and I'm led to believe this is less harmful to the environment - but if it is so much better, why has the government done and still do very little to promote it?
As with everything these days - it is all SEP ... or rather SOBP (Some Other Buggers Problem) - when, if we all did our (even minute) bit it could have a noticable affect.
Right - I better stop posting as I need to run the generator to get the invertor powered to run my computer ... /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Boat pollution is basically negligible as a proportion of the whole.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just cos it is a "negligible proportion" of the total doesn't mean we should just shrug our shoulders and do nothing about it does it?
I'm quite happy with my 18hp diesel inboard - cos I've got sails to push me along ... but does anyone really think about the waste of resources and impact on their surroundings when running an engine?
Is it nessersary to run an engine for an hour to "warm it up" ...
Fuel consumption figures for the non-displacement cruisers seem horrendus at less than 5mpg ... ok - so we've got money to burn - but is it the right thing to do? No worse than going for a "Sunday afternoon drive" perhaps ...
I have noticed a couple on LPG ... and I'm led to believe this is less harmful to the environment - but if it is so much better, why has the government done and still do very little to promote it?
As with everything these days - it is all SEP ... or rather SOBP (Some Other Buggers Problem) - when, if we all did our (even minute) bit it could have a noticable affect.
Right - I better stop posting as I need to run the generator to get the invertor powered to run my computer ... /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Signed Out
Active member
Seems this threads going in the right direction now... Shame I've got no time to get my head working and reply... Damn shared PCs!
Jem
Jem
BrendanS
Well-known member
but fuel costs on boats really is negligible in impact compared to say road transport. To sustain road transport, huge roads and motorways are built by enormous plant machinery. All the materials, plant and labour brought from hundreds of miles away in teams of dumpsters.
Then repaired every few years.
Materials and emissions to lay just a couple miles of motorway probably outstrips 100 years worth of all the leisure boating fuel consumption and emmissions in the UK in total.
Huge factories. Which have to be built at again huge environmental cost: land, material, moving the material there, producing those materials, and a labour force of thousands commuting there every day. The cars themselves need material transported and mined over huge distances, components manufactured with shipping costs of materials and parts in other factories, and the cars then delivered across huge distances, as well as all the spare parts for them. That's the simple version.
Once that infrastructure is in place, millions in UK alone drive tens of thousands of miles a year in their cars, then scrap them when they die. Some sitting for hours a day in stationary traffic.
One the other hand we build very few boats, need relatively little infrastructure, the roads are largely self repairing though a bit bumpy at times! and we only do a hundred or two hours a year with engines on on average, and a lot less for raggies (well some of them anyway). Unlike cars, boats don't tend to be scrapped. They get patched up re-upholstered, new engines put in , new electronics sometimes, etc.
The difference in impact is mind boggling.
Yes we should be thinking about these things, but they need to be put into perspective
Then repaired every few years.
Materials and emissions to lay just a couple miles of motorway probably outstrips 100 years worth of all the leisure boating fuel consumption and emmissions in the UK in total.
Huge factories. Which have to be built at again huge environmental cost: land, material, moving the material there, producing those materials, and a labour force of thousands commuting there every day. The cars themselves need material transported and mined over huge distances, components manufactured with shipping costs of materials and parts in other factories, and the cars then delivered across huge distances, as well as all the spare parts for them. That's the simple version.
Once that infrastructure is in place, millions in UK alone drive tens of thousands of miles a year in their cars, then scrap them when they die. Some sitting for hours a day in stationary traffic.
One the other hand we build very few boats, need relatively little infrastructure, the roads are largely self repairing though a bit bumpy at times! and we only do a hundred or two hours a year with engines on on average, and a lot less for raggies (well some of them anyway). Unlike cars, boats don't tend to be scrapped. They get patched up re-upholstered, new engines put in , new electronics sometimes, etc.
The difference in impact is mind boggling.
Yes we should be thinking about these things, but they need to be put into perspective
fireball
New member
[ QUOTE ]
Yes we should be thinking about these things, but they need to be put into perspective
[/ QUOTE ]
as I said:
[ QUOTE ]
As with everything these days - it is all SEP ... or rather SOBP (Some Other Buggers Problem) - when, if we all did our (even minute) bit it could have a noticable affect.
[/ QUOTE ]
and no, I'm not telling you or anyone else who runs an engine (including me) to stop - but can you say "I've done a bit to help"
me - I keep breaking my outboard so I have to row to the mooring... /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
I still don't think that any proposed level of tax on fuel will have an effect on polution... as you say - there is probably so much waste in other areas that even if you remove all leisure boats from the UK there will be insignificant difference in polution levels - so any tax revenue is not "going to the environment" really ... is it?!
Yes we should be thinking about these things, but they need to be put into perspective
[/ QUOTE ]
as I said:
[ QUOTE ]
As with everything these days - it is all SEP ... or rather SOBP (Some Other Buggers Problem) - when, if we all did our (even minute) bit it could have a noticable affect.
[/ QUOTE ]
and no, I'm not telling you or anyone else who runs an engine (including me) to stop - but can you say "I've done a bit to help"
me - I keep breaking my outboard so I have to row to the mooring... /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
I still don't think that any proposed level of tax on fuel will have an effect on polution... as you say - there is probably so much waste in other areas that even if you remove all leisure boats from the UK there will be insignificant difference in polution levels - so any tax revenue is not "going to the environment" really ... is it?!
DaCostaGreene
New member
Well, I watched Fifth Gear on channel 5 and Honda have brought out another Hydrogen powered car - very environmentally friendly. The problem is, the cars still have to be made, and as above, the materials need to be shipped from all over the place and then the finished product has to be shipped and unless you use hydrogen powered vehicles to get them there, it kinda defeats the object of environmentally friendly - but on the other hand, Honda seem to be the only car manufacturer that are making any sort of decent progress in this area and are actually trying to make it econmical and viable for us (the public) to be able to buy these types of car or even replacement engines. All we need now are loads of Hydrogen plants so that we can fill up our cars. Why doesn't somepne in the Government take note of this, pull their fingers out of their asses and spend a few billion pounds on providing us with an economically viable solution that would actually work. I can imagine that with these types of engines you will still be able to get your supercars and off road vehicles to work and at no loss to performance. The little Honda did just over a ton, perfect for motorways and country roads - I'd rather my Taxes were spent on keeping me and my future family in a healthy condition, as well as everyone else.
Then ask the Government to Tax hydrogen!! See if they can do that then!!!
Nick
Then ask the Government to Tax hydrogen!! See if they can do that then!!!
Nick
No1_Moose
Active member
Re: Red Diesel IMHO
hm, hydrogen plants. You are going to need a whole load of electrickery from somewhere so best get campaigning in favour of some (lots) of nuclear power stations. Incidentally, BMW and Ford are doing a lot of work on Hydrogen cars. I've actually seen the Ford one, it sounds like the Star Trek Enterprise! Wvrrooommmm.
If somebody comes up with a Diesel/Electric hybrid car in the interim period it will be a winner, especially if it can run on biodiesel. The current (petrol) hybrid cars are rubbish because they are no more economical than a normal diesel and the CO2 emmisions in actually building the car are far greater than the emmisions produced in building a normal car.
hm, hydrogen plants. You are going to need a whole load of electrickery from somewhere so best get campaigning in favour of some (lots) of nuclear power stations. Incidentally, BMW and Ford are doing a lot of work on Hydrogen cars. I've actually seen the Ford one, it sounds like the Star Trek Enterprise! Wvrrooommmm.
If somebody comes up with a Diesel/Electric hybrid car in the interim period it will be a winner, especially if it can run on biodiesel. The current (petrol) hybrid cars are rubbish because they are no more economical than a normal diesel and the CO2 emmisions in actually building the car are far greater than the emmisions produced in building a normal car.
DaCostaGreene
New member
Re: Red Diesel IMHO
What does everyone think of an Electric/Diesal hybrid on a Cat then?? 8 knots on electric engines on the rivers and enough pace and power to cross the channel?? 50-60hp!!!
What does everyone think of an Electric/Diesal hybrid on a Cat then?? 8 knots on electric engines on the rivers and enough pace and power to cross the channel?? 50-60hp!!!
Other threads that may be of interest
