Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > Drs against Diesel : A subsidy mafia Front

nby, this story?

Jan 28, 2017 at 2:45 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Try the BBC News App - posted there 2 hours ago. Diesel cars will be charged 50% more for parking.

Jan 28, 2017 at 2:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll

Thanks both - yep, it's a parking surcharge rather than a vehicle ban:

"Westminster City Council is banning or charging extra for diesel cars.

Will this kill the London Taxi?

Jan 28, 2017 at 12:06 PM | Unregistered Commenter golf charlie"

Jan 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM | Unregistered Commenternot banned yet

I mentioned it yesterday
Times pg 15 Westminster to add 50% parking surcharge on diesels from April the plan

Jan 29, 2017 at 8:00 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

stewgreen & not banned yet

So Westminster City Council ARE NOT banning taxis, buses, bin lorries, ambulances, delivery trucks, etc that need to burn diesel on Westminsters streets, just those who choose to, because the Green Blob decided it was better for them to burn diesel.

It is a Green Blob Tax, on people who did what the Green Blob wanted them to do. I wonder why no one trusts the Green Blob?

French and German car manufacturers have invested heavily in diesel cars, and they are going to get hit harder still financially, especially if the EU has it's way.

Jan 29, 2017 at 9:09 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Heat that spiral a little bit different,
Contraction subtraction fractionation efferent.

Jan 29, 2017 at 10:34 PM | Unregistered Commenterkim

Jan 30, 2017 at 7:59 AM | Unregistered Commenternot banned yet

I hope anti-fracking protesters enforce a ban on diesel fuelled protesters, journalists and broadcasters from turning up. Better still if they insist on battery cars only. Their protests would be so much quieter.

Jan 30, 2017 at 2:16 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Electric vehicles mass? Ozone alert.

Jan 31, 2017 at 9:31 AM | Unregistered Commenterkim

For kim:

I think the "big panic" will be low noise emissions.

Jan 31, 2017 at 10:06 AM | Unregistered Commenternot banned yet

Thanks, nby. There's a post over at Judy's by Roger Caizza which is provoking a nice discussion of 'bad ozone'(ground level) as opposed to 'good ozone'(stratospheric).


Jan 31, 2017 at 10:25 AM | Unregistered Commenterkim

1989 I used to live in Philadelphia. My eyes often streamed and burnt.

"Ah that's the traffic ozone" people said.

In the UK I never felt like that.So whilst not perfect in London I think the perspective is that London is not a world priority.

Jan 31, 2017 at 11:02 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Today @Messenger posted :
Did anyone else hear Roger Wheeliebin at about 6.15am on Radio 4 Today implying that discarding diesel cars won't be a problem in the end because " ...we are moving towards electric cars" = because of CC, of course.

Shameless- and not a caveat within sight or sound

Jan 31, 2017 at 11:05 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Yes, heard that, Messenger. Gave me a great excuse to shout at the radio. Hazzabin totally failed to mention where the electric power was to come from to charge all these replacement cars, nor where the pollution would likely move to as a result.
BTW: Supreme irony is Hazzabin demonising diesel cars yet never dsaying a word about dirty STOR diesel emissions. No surprise there then.
Jan 31, 2017 at 9:34 AM | Unregistered
Harry Passfield

Jan 31, 2017 at 11:06 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Greenblob also ordered HUGO RIFKIND to the front. In an evidence free article today.
january 31 2017, 12:01am, the times pg27
Even a sceptic has to believe in air pollution

"Andrea Leadsom should ignore the bickering about global warming and take radical steps to clean up our toxic cities"

Key phrase
"You may have heard that urban wood burners were to blame, which is true, but not very true"
Evidence given zero
Whole article is just emotional rhetoric.

Jan 31, 2017 at 11:25 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Rifkind uses the rhetorical trick of false dichotomy
Believe or not Believe.

Real world needs perspective And context.

I found this in the Independent
"Debunked: Wood burners are not the real culprit behind London’s air pollution"
But again its assertion quoting activists and not very robust.
By Tom Bawden 16:16 Friday January 27th 2017

Jan 31, 2017 at 11:37 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Rifkind on Twitter:

"Re today's column, I've just had my first email from an air pollution denier."

Jan 31, 2017 at 12:52 PM | Unregistered Commenternot banned yet

stewgreen, woodburning stoves may not have been invented in Scandanavia, but many famous names originated in those colder countries with lots of trees, and not so much coal. Are they not getting upset about the prospect of trying to heat their winter saunas and country retreats with solar power?

Jan 31, 2017 at 3:14 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

gc - there is a large body of work on sauna emissions and health impacts. It is an area of ongoing interest.

For example:

Picking up your theme of low emission saunas:

Jan 31, 2017 at 5:59 PM | Unregistered Commenternot banned yet

8:50am Caught the end of anti-diesel seg on R4Today
Seemed unbalanced featured Camilla who no longer works in gov used to be on Cameron's greenteam.

Humphries shouting "Why don't we just ban diesels"
She suggested scrappage scheme.

Hmm if it wasn't about selling EVs then there would be other schemes

- Car free days
- Walk to school campaign
- incentive for country people to swap their petrol car for city persons diesel.

The hurry is fishy
Genuine problems are resolved with long term planning.

What about adblue?

Feb 1, 2017 at 9:39 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Times is well on the campaign
pg5 Cornwall to evacuate polluted zones
compulsory purchase of homes to get them away from "diesel vehicles"
pg 29 Editorial says see this is what happens when ministers refuse.

all media now Mail

Feb 1, 2017 at 12:53 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

1'35pm Radio 2 just had an interesting discussion with the bloke who did BBC4 doco enthusing about diesels.

"Diesel is amazingly efficient and omnipresent ...I met a lot of experts who told me how much diesels had been cleaned up so that would be the way to go"

Thicko Vine couldn't understand the difference between CO2 and pollution so he suggested more biofuel as a solution.

Feb 1, 2017 at 4:46 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

The remarkable thing was the framing the presenter chose
"Everyone is anti-diesel these days...should we take a moment to celebrate the diesel engine?"

Em that's a well known psychological sales technique called anchoring. It frames Vine's desire as the NORMAL position when in fact it is not.

Possible Translation of Vines BeeboidSpeak

"Everyone is saying"= Something was in theGuardian and me and my bubbleworld friends just believe it.

Feb 1, 2017 at 4:58 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

The train is leaving the station, and, heh, it's a diesel-electric.

Water transport is cheaper than by rail. Obviously, everything should just be transported by water.

Well, pipelines are probably safer.

Feb 1, 2017 at 6:17 PM | Unregistered Commenterkim

I was given to understand that the growth in diesel use was significantly driven by governmental obsessions with higher efficiency, i.e. less CO2 emissions than petrol vehicles.

Then there was the bio-diesel débâcle.

Spot a common theme here? Notwithstanding improvements in diesel technology, kowtowing to environmentalist demands will often lead to bad or counterproductive laws and regulations.

Many particulates and nitrogen oxides are real pollution. Carbon dioxide is not real pollution. Yet Greenpeace and friends are not capable of a rational analysis where both costs and benefits are carefully identified and weighed up. They want to ban everything now, while still enjoying the fruits of industrialisation on their iPhones at Starbucks, and face the consequences of their own wilful ignorance later. There is a real need for Drs Against Greenpeace.Org

Feb 2, 2017 at 3:04 PM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart