Today's news scrapping old cars.

[HERBIEMERCMAN]

hi everyone, i think one of the members has a nondeplume of "profitofdoom", may be i should have chosen that one, however some of you may have seen the national news this morning where german car makers are flat out and so are their scrap yards. the general propoganda was that everyone gains, the environment, workers, the ecconomy etc. sounds to me like we are being groomed for a similar scheme here. the germans still have the choice of looking after and keeping their old cars, but i will bet "guines to bricks" that an emissions law for their mot is waiting in the wings. if i were "dronsfields" the well established used merc. parts specialists in oldham i would be contacting the german car crushers to get the parts before the cars are crushed. i just hope we in the uk, and across europe, that we will need spare parts for old mercs?
i know "popuptoaster" thinks we are ok and i hope he is right. i have just spent £1,000 on my bus and it would be a crime to let it be crushed. the propoganda is so powerful on anything to do with "our carbon footprints" and i would argue that scapping and processing cars just to save jobs is not green. i am also aware that on a "balance of trade" bassis, the uk do not make cars anymore !. herbiemercman.

 

[jberks]

The carbon argument is really strong..until you realise that the carbon footprint of manufacturing a car is greater than that of running one.

I suspect the idea is to get people out of 10 year old Toyotas and into new eco VWs. Allegedly its cost free as the payments made by the gov are countered by the VAT earned on the new car - and if they didn't the sale wouldn't have happened so its neutral to the taxpayer. but as Gordo only backs stupid, expensive and predictably innefective ideas (Ladies and Gentelmen I give you the vat cut..), I can't see them going for it. Shame, since japanese or not, a lot of the cheap cars are actually made here now.
Then again, given his (and his idiot home secretary)'s Stalinist leanings, if he could make it compulsory he might go for it.

 

[BarnDoor]

The carbon argument is really strong..until you realise that the carbon footprint of manufacturing a car is greater than that of running one.

I read an article yesterday that estimated that 6 tonnes of CO2 was created to manufacture a car. It also said that the average car (CO2 emmissions of 167) produces 2.4 tonnes a year based on 15k KM.

If Mr(s) average traded in their average car and purchased a low emmision Polo (CO2 99)then they would probably reduce their emmissions by 1 tonne a year, so would need to own the car for at least 6 years to be carbon neutral.

 

[st4]

Its just euro socialism.

They all want us in french made eco boxes terrified witless that we are emiiting CO2 (actually not a major global warmer in the scale we as a race emit) and that we speed. Hence all this carbon this, global that propoganda. Propoganda is a device of socialism and it should be recognised as that.

Anything nice (like an older nice car) has to be removed so we are all driving eco snotboxes made in france (strong in the eu and big in making snotboxes). As nice old cars are now affordablish, thats no good for the EU and their pervese ways, so they legistlate against them.

 

[popuptoaster]

I read an article yesterday that estimated that 6 tonnes of CO2 was created to manufacture a car. It also said that the average car (CO2 emmissions of 167) produces 2.4 tonnes a year based on 15k KM.

If Mr(s) average traded in their average car and purchased a low emmision Polo (CO2 99)then they would probably reduce their emmissions by 1 tonne a year, so would need to own the car for at least 6 years to be carbon neutral.

that depends on who's info you beleive and what car your looking at, takes a lot of effort to make the batteries for a Prius for instance and not as much to nail togther the girders for a jeep chassis.

 

[bigasotonuk]

Hi,
I,ll probably raise a few hackles here but i actually believe global warming is a reality, but the influence on it by the human race is negligable as its happening naturally, just the life cycle of the planet.
The 10 year life cycle of the car, and this pathetic wishy washy governments desire (though I don,t think the "others" are any better) to fall in line with everything the EU demands of it, I do think that if it ever became an EU policy, We,ll be fighting tooth and nail to keep are beloved machines.
Just my 2p's worth.

 

[brandwooddixon]

The propoganda surrounding car manufacture "carbon foot print" and running one often ignores that of producing the raw materials in the first place.

Carbon footprint also ignores more environmentally damaging factors e.g. mercury in compact florescent light bulbs; lead and nickle processing for the Prius etc.

Ultimately it's surely better for the environment to not produce any cars at alll and just keep our old ons going, but then that would put a lot of people out of work wouldn't it?

 

[st4]

Hi,
I,ll probably raise a few hackles here but i actually believe global warming is a reality, but the influence on it by the human race is negligable as its happening naturally, just the life cycle of the planet.
The 10 year life cycle of the car, and this pathetic wishy washy governments desire (though I don,t think the "others" are any better) to fall in line with everything the EU demands of it, I do think that if it ever became an EU policy, We,ll be fighting tooth and nail to keep are beloved machines.
Just my 2p's worth.

Your car should really be able to do a 20 year life cycle. Most decent cars @ 10yrs old are absolutely fine. My old man has a 993. Its a 1995 car so 14yrs. Its in great nick and should easily fufill a 20yr life, probably 30 before anything major.

Yes climate change is natural too. The phrase global warming is a dangerous one as it can get colder too, as apparenty it has for the last 10yrs. Still, the corrupt pseudo socialists coined the climate change so we can be taxed whatever the weather.

 

[jibcl500]

Its all bollox, global warming is another excuss to tax people, its logical, our existance is destroying the planet and those with money are doing it more so and as a result wealth gets taxed.

Posrche disputed the congestion charge in london at £25 a day, porsche researchers identified 186,000 tons of extra C02 would be produced each year because cars would drive alternative routes to avoid the CC.

Heathrow airport produces 186,000 tons of C02 in 4 hours and yet they go ahead with a 5th runway.

Banning cars is another way of generating tax for Gay Gordons coffers and it will become EU law one day as a result because the EC and each country will get more revenue as a result.

We live in a dictatorship, its simple they dictate, make it law and we pay.

Personally I'd like to see gaydon gang raped by the welsh rugby team, no offense if your welsh or a rugby player. Or possibly just shot.

jib

 

[popuptoaster]

Global warming has been proved to be speeded up by mans activities, the is it or isnt it argument was over among all the credibal scientists 5 years ago, the argument now has moved on to how much its gonna change and if we can slow it down, the internet sites claiming its not happeneing have all been discredited and are only supported by the publics desire to be absolved of all responsibility for their actions.

plenty of the measures being taken are ****** stupid and do end up costing us extra taxes, but most of them come with built in bonuses that allow you to pay LESS tax if you have a greener lifestyle/business so in actual fact they only cost you money if you refuse to take action, which is exactly what they are designed to do.

The carbon footprint of a car is differnt for every model and even every individual car depending on how its used so is almost impossible to calculate, but there does come a point when keeping an old on going IS worse than making a new one.

However, i still dont think anyone should be forced to give up an older car, and i'm certauinly opposed to any initiative that makes it more likely there will be less classics for our kids to love and cherish, particulally now when the oil reserves are getting low, we could be the last generation to be running petrol cars and as such these cars will be worth saving as the last of the breed.

Dont even bother arguing about sunspots, natural climate change warm and cold periods, little ice ages or any of that unless your prepared to go research some proper scientific sites as well as the ones denying it happening.

 

[st4]

Dont even bother arguing about sunspots, natural climate change warm and cold periods, little ice ages or any of that unless your prepared to go research some proper scientific sites as well as the ones denying it happening.

You mean the sites whose info uses data spanning 150yrs which had massive error margins which can slay the man made climate change model. The sites that proclaim man changes the climate, but cannot explain how climates changed before we were here, sites that do not explain the politics and the reasoning behind why governments want to promote this theory (socialist policies rely on social control and fear, and this is what this CO2 thing is turning out to be).

I don't mean to be rude, but you can put those sites and info where the sun don't shine, the info they contain is duff (how can we accurately know what the temp was 15oyrs ago and accurately compare it to todays, along with these spurious CO2 graphs ) and they are written and sponsored by people who's politics (Nu Lab) I wouldn't grace the bottom of my shoes with.

 

[Seeker_UK]

On the plus side - under this new proposed scheme, you'll get £2500 off the price of a new car.

 

[popuptoaster]

You mean the sites whose info uses data spanning 150yrs which had massive error margins which can slay the man made climate change model. The sites that proclaim man changes the climate, but cannot explain how climates changed before we were here, sites that do not explain the politics and the reasoning behind why governments want to promote this theory (socialist policies rely on social control and fear, and this is what this CO2 thing is turning out to be).

I don't mean to be rude, but you can put those sites and info where the sun don't shine, the info they contain is duff (how can we accurately know what the temp was 15oyrs ago and accurately compare it to todays, along with these spurious CO2 graphs ) and they are written and sponsored by people who's politics (Nu Lab) I wouldn't grace the bottom of my shoes with.

here we go again, just cos a measuremnt is old, dont make it inaccurate, the greeks knew how big the earth was 2000 years ago, taking tempretures is MUCH easier than that, besides, we can make measurements NOW, from vegetation and microscopic particles laid down in rock and ice going back thousands and even millions of years, as i said before, your taking way to much notice of discredited info.

the Mercury thermometer was invented about 1714 i think, is easy to calibrate because water boils at 100 degrees so they are accurate, and easy to read and have been for 300 years, why you think people were to dim to take accurate temperture measurements 150 years ago when all these items

sewing machine
gyroscope
fiberoptics
rayon
pasturisation
washing machines
the internal combustion engine
elevator
machine gun
plastic
dynamite
typewriter

were invented around that time i dont know???

 

[st4]

On the plus side - under this new proposed scheme, you'll get £2500 off the price of a new car.

For it to be scrapped 10yrs later. How would that effect its value in 3yrs time, or 5 yrs time. Betcha more than £2500.

It encourages manufacturers to build cars cheaply as they won't need to stand the test of time. (8yrs plus is what separates the men from the boys when it comes to making cars-christ it can take an I6 M3 BMW to fully loosen up 8rs if the car does 10k miles).

Great for the French as they can't make a car to save themselves, so their shoddy snotty ecoboxes will reign in this CO2 dilluded world, but decent cars will not as they need longer to prove their worth.

 

[st4]

here we go again, just cos a measuremnt is old, dont make it inaccurate, the greeks knew how big the earth was 2000 years ago, taking tempretures is MUCH easier than that, besides, we can make measurements NOW, from vegetation and microscopic particles laid down in rock and ice going back thousands and even millions of years, as i said before, your taking way to much notice of discredited info.

the Mercury thermometer was invented about 1714 i think, is easy to calibrate because water boils at 100 degrees so they are accurate, and easy to read and have been for 300 years, why you think people were to dim to take accurate temperture measurements 150 years ago when all these items

sewing machine
gyroscope
fiberoptics
rayon
pasturisation
washing machines
the internal combustion engine
elevator
machine gun
plastic
dynamite
typewriter

were invented around that time i dont know???

It does make it inaccurate though, statisitical analysis, sampling techniques were different. How on earth did they ascertain atmospheric CO2 levels in 1850, and the instrumentation would be different anyway giving an instrumental error.

I've used pH meters of the same brand and model in a lab, and tested them in the same solution and both have given different measurements so even modern instruments can vary, how would older ones fare to ones today. Your water example doesn't hold true, you need to consider pressure and purity (salinity) too .

When proposing a scientific case, 99% accuracy isn't good enough, you need to be 99.9% accurate. Man made climate change is maybe 90% and thats not considering other factors (like we beleive it happened before). Present that sort of work normally and you'd be laughed at. Its only because pursuing the hysterical man made climate change model makes money does the scientific community more or less back it.

bear in mind your past triumphs argument that we believed there was a man with a hot pointy stick in the centre of the earth, that the world was made in 7 days, and that the plague was a punishment from god, and that if a woman floated in water she was a witch, and that leeches were a cure for illness....there is equal argument against us getting it right in the past. May I ask why this may be any different given the social implications this CO2 may have.

 

[turnipsock]

On the plus side - under this new proposed scheme, you'll get £2500 off the price of a new car.

If that is the case, then the cost of a 9-10 year old car will be fixed at that price as people will buy them to get the £2500 off a new car.

My estate has more than doubled in value!

Actually, if they wanted to crush it, they would have to crush me with it. They would be doing me a favour the way the job market is.

 

[st4]

Actually, if they wanted to crush it, they would have to crush me with it. They would be doing me a favour the way the job market is.

Not having a job isn't worth that....

 

[popuptoaster]

It does make it inaccurate though, statisitical analysis, sampling techniques were different. How on earth did they ascertain atmospheric CO2 levels in 1850, and the instrumentation would be different anyway giving an instrumental error.

I've used pH meters of the same brand and model in a lab, and tested them in the same solution and both have given different measurements so even modern instruments can vary, how would older ones fare to ones today. Your water example doesn't hold true, you need to consider pressure and purity (salinity) too .

When proposing a scientific case, 99% accuracy isn't good enough, you need to be 99.9% accurate. Man made climate change is maybe 90% and thats not considering other factors (like we beleive it happened before). Present that sort of work normally and you'd be laughed at. Its only because pursuing the hysterical man made climate change model makes money does the scientific community more or less back it.

bear in mind your past triumphs argument that we believed there was a man with a hot pointy stick in the centre of the earth, that the world was made in 7 days, and that the plague was a punishment from god, and that if a woman floated in water she was a witch, and that leeches were a cure for illness....there is equal argument against us getting it right in the past. May I ask why this may be any different given the social implications this CO2 may have.

it was always small minority of the population that believed those things, in fact a small minority still do, despite all the scientifc evidence to the contrary, much like the argument against global warming, some people will still be saying it never happened in 2000 years i reckon, dont see why you lot are so dead set against it, even if you are right and everyone else is wrong, it wont do any harm to clean up our act so where your issue is i dont know, the fact that your not willing to give up your big car and cant be arsed to put your rubbish in seperate bags seems little selfish to me considering you cant prove it ISNT ruining the planet for your kids.

 

[st4]

it was always small minority of the population that believed those things, in fact a small minority still do, despite all the scientifc evidence to the contrary, much like the argument against global warming, some people will still be saying it never happened in 2000 years i reckon, dont see why you lot are so dead set against it, even if you are right and everyone else is wrong, it wont do any harm to clean up our act so where your issue is i dont know, the fact that your not willing to give up your big car and cant be arsed to put your rubbish in seperate bags seems little selfish to me considering you cant prove it ISNT ruining the planet for your kids.

So you know what I do with my rubbish now? I do recycle and you again make the age old mistake of confusing recylcing waste/efficiently using raw materials etc food and fuel with man made climate change caused by CO2 emissions.

How does my sorting of cans from glass change Co2 levels. After all the energy still has to be used to take them for recylcing as opposed to the tip + there is the enegy involved in recyling etc.

Its not that big a car, its a meagre 4 and a bit meters long, not even 5

We laugh at many scientific theories made in the past, such as the ones I listed above, and I am fairly certain that our descendents will laugh at this one, especially our so called response to it (i.e. tax and penalise the privileged few-again a socialist trait)

The climate/weather would be exactly the same whether we were here or not. You see man is so arrogant/ignorant (the choice is yours) it actually believes it can change the climate and weather of the atmosphere it lives in.

So whilst I agree we should use our resources more freely as they are finite, using them faster won't change the weather, it will just mean we will have to finding something new sooner.

 

[popuptoaster]

i cant see how you can try to make out that recylcing dont reduce emissions, if it takes less energy to reuse something than make a new one then of course it helps, saying transporting it uses energy makes no sense as the raw materials needed to make new items dont magically fly into the factories ya know.

one ton of office and computer paper with recycled paper stock can save nearly 3,000 kilowatt hours over the same ton of paper made with virgin wood products.

A ton of soda cans made with recycled aluminum saves an amazing 21,000 kilowatt hours by reducing the virgin bauxite (bozite) ore that would have to be mined, shipped, and refined. That’s a 95% energy savings.

A ton of PET plastic containers made with recycled plastic conserves about 7,200 kilowatt hours.

The San Diego County Office of Education has figured out that recycling one glass bottle saves enough energy to light a 100 watt light bulb for four hours.

The Steel Recycling Institute has found that steel recycling saves enough energy to electrically power the equilvalent of 18 million homes for a year.

and none of that takes into account the space in landfill saved as well as the pollution land fill can cause.

i have to point out i'm no eco warrior, i just think it cant hurt to try and fix the problem as at worst it'll waste some money, and at best it could save the planet.