How much will Greta cost us?

The place to discuss everything else..
Cheshire Cat
Posts: 505
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:17 pm

Post by Cheshire Cat »

Not quite off topic, but with the UN Climate statement telling us we are all doomed and the fact that our Government is hosting the COP 26 in Glasgow, I suspect they will do the usual knee jerk, sound bite politically correct thing and bang up taxes on ICE vehicles thus destroying an already fragile economy. Climate change is serious, but target the main polluters i.e. China and the U.S.A. before making us pay. The UK has done more than most to combat CO2 emissions, but this Government will want to be seen to be doing something. Stand by for fuel duty and RFL rises. It won't work as those that move to EV's will leave an ICE for someone else to use, so they won't disappear. It will be interesting to see how Greta gets to Glasgow. Longboat to Aberdeen, Horse and cart to Glasgow?
Dolomite Silver 'S' with red leather 14 way seats, Pano roof, Bose, Air suspension with pasm, Chrono pack, PDLS, Surround view, 911 turbo wheels, heated screen, spare wheel, ioniser,75 lt tank, black tail pipes, black roof rails.

User avatar
F1 Nut
Posts: 228
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:04 pm

Post by F1 Nut »

Let's hope Porsche continue with their investments in bio-fuel technology!
Current: Macan Turbo 2021 http://www.porsche-code.com/PM513BZ5
Previous: BMW 540i 2018
GWL
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 10:55 pm

Post by GWL »

I think the future of our planet, and the world we want our children and grandchildren to grow up in, is more on my mind than worrying about more tax on ICE transport. I won't be buying another ICE car. We owe it to future generations.
Current car : Macan GTS Gen 2
Previous :
Macan Turbo Gen 1 - my 1st Porsche :D
BMW X1 (F48)
BMW M135i
Crazy diamond
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2016 1:06 pm
Location: Wiltshire

Post by Crazy diamond »

Actually what is wrong with the debate we are all having about EV v ICE is that the main contributor to CO2 production is consumerism coupled with population growth. For a battery EV, 46% of its total carbon footprint is generated at the factory, before it has travelled a single mile. Accordingly it would be better if we all kept our vehicles for 20 years rather than changing them every 3-5 years, whether it be an EV or ICE. Of course no government would ever condone this sort of action but I am frankly fed up of evangelists buying
Expensive EV on PCP. If we are serious about saving the planet(?) then lets take real action and enough of this greenwash.
jonnydrama
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:27 pm

Post by jonnydrama »

I don't think it's resolvable to be honest... Enjoy your time here, by all means do your bit but don't expect climate change to roll back as that's not how it works.

Look at the stats, the Beatrice windfarm is 85 offshore turbines, enough to power 450,000 households. There are 29million homes in the UK, we'd need almost 5,500 offshore turbines alone to power households. Then in 15-25 years your 5,500 turbines are knackered and potentially the jackets they're sat on too. What about the other options? Orbitals 02 tidal power generator will do 2,000 homes. The yield just isn't there.

Then you have to power electric cars, heavy industry etc on top of this demand?

To put that into perspective there are under 200 offshore oil and gas platforms in the North Sea, and at times we've had energy independence from a small handful of them.

What will end up happening is we'll shut in all of our oil and gas wells here to come across all virtuous, renewables will be no where close to filling the energy gap and we'll end up importing energy produced using dirty methods from other countries. People will turn a blind eye to it the same way that they do with British companies tankers, ships etc being gas axed on beaches in Bangladesh.
Ralf Ramone
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:57 pm

Post by Ralf Ramone »

Nuclear innit.
jonnydrama
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:27 pm

Post by jonnydrama »

Ralf Ramone wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 8:07 pm Nuclear innit.
That’s the clear solution to me but the lefties won’t av it!
User avatar
pmg
Posts: 2983
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:31 pm

Post by pmg »

It may be 50 years since I did A level physics and 49 since I did 1st-year university applied maths, but is there not a simple physics theorem that says energy never destroys itself just transfers to another form. We have a climate problem because we have released too much energy stored in carbon into the atmosphere and it is there as heat. If this is true, nuclear does not solve the issue because it is releasing the energy stored within atoms ultimately into the atmosphere. Is that why the solution has to be to take excess energy from the atmosphere via wind and solar and in carbon storage. of excess energy in the atmosphere.
2019 Macan S Porsche code PKW8WKI8
Deleted User 4436

Post by Deleted User 4436 »

we all need Elon to speed things up a bit so we can drive our Macans on Mars. Problem on Earth is there are just too many people. As the number of people continue to increase , even with a pandemic, there will be more and more demands on energy, natural resources etc. Ultimately no amount of wind turbines or plastic free drinks bottles will solve the problem of over population. Nature is currently having a go at sorting out that issue itself, and will undoubtedly have an even better go at it in the not-so-distant future ( if Americans or Russians with itchy nuke fingers don’t get there first ) but ultimately we need to go somewhere else or stop filling the planet up with people
Last edited by Deleted User 4436 on Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Deleted User 4325

Post by Deleted User 4325 »

I try not to watch the news.

I tell my Dad if it's in the Daily Mail it's not true anyway!!!

And they're only on about climate change as there is no pandemic news and China hasn't yet invaded Afghanistan!!!!!
Post Reply

  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post