The great gas guzzler debate.

Personally, I drive a 7 seater becase I have 4 kids. It has a 2.9 diesel engine because i tow a large twin axle caravan and its automatic because I am disabled. I accept that it may be seen to be a huge gas guzzler but it actually does about 35mpg but I dont fly my family abroad so perhaps my carbon footprint is not as big as some. My car is not a 4 wheel drive either. However, It seems i am going to get hammered for car tax. It is already £400 a year (£440 if you pay bi-annually) and in my own mitigation I have a big family and I need a big car. I know all of the arguements for and against.

Just one thought though, are Ministerial 4 litre Jaguars not gas guzzlers? They return about 8 - 10 miles to the gallon on a standard model and Lord knows what on one bullet proofed and padded with cast Iron?

Ministerial jags are gas guzzlers but as you'll know this will go down on their expenses, just like the mortgage on their 2nd home in London, any decorating they may have to do on the tax payers account and even if they fancy a convervatory to relax in after a hard days work - and these were just some of the expenses found to be claimed last year, not including prezza's food bill or Blair's lecky. Don't forget they fly around the world on jets with a dozen people in, to these carbon footprint summits so they can fcuk off if they think i'm doing anything towards it.

A new plant being opened in India will spew out more emissions in a week than the UK can save in a year which makes it all a very worthwhile task dontchathink. I too drive a 7 seater out of a lifestyle choice.

the foreign sec on Question time last night said that the reason ministers drive the guzzlers is because they are the only ones that are bullet/ bomb proof.

i have every simpathy for families and tax paying adults who have traditionally drove these larger cars through choice and necessity.

we lost our earned freedom in this country a long time ago.

I saw the minister mention that last night and it is a lame excuse. Any car can be bullit proofed/customised.

I drive a Volvo 2.3 Turbo so expect to foot the £200 tax bill a year.

Mind you I do drive it like it is bullet proof thou :PDT_Xtremez_42:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris48

Personally, I drive a 7 seater becase I have 4 kids. It has a 2.9 diesel engine because i tow a large twin axle caravan and its automatic because I am disabled. I accept that it may be seen to be a huge gas guzzler but it actually does about 35mpg but I dont fly my family abroad so perhaps my carbon footprint is not as big as some. My car is not a 4 wheel drive either. However, It seems i am going to get hammered for car tax. It is already £400 a year (£440 if you pay bi-annually) and in my own mitigation I have a big family and I need a big car. I know all of the arguements for and against.

Just one thought though, are Ministerial 4 litre Jaguars not gas guzzlers? They return about 8 - 10 miles to the gallon on a standard model and Lord knows what on one bullet proofed and padded with cast Iron?

---

Thought disabled people didn't pay car tax?

Does It depend on If your a working disabled person?

Depends on your level of disability. Some of the more disabled can get a car through motorbility (in replacement of their benefit) but not everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ged

Ministerial jags are gas guzzlers

---

These are special purpose bullet proof vehicle's, of which there are few, and discussing them as normal cars is a bit ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Don't forget they fly around the world on jets with a dozen people in, to these carbon footprint summits so they can fcuk off if they think i'm doing anything towards it.

---

They are not doing this for fun. They are on official high level government business. Image if they turned up in an old taxi doing foreign visits. What an image what would give.

Quote:

---

A new plant being opened in India will spew out more emissions in a week than the UK can save in a year which makes it all a very worthwhile task dontchathink. I too drive a 7 seater out of a lifestyle choice.

---

China and India have to get in line. Well your lifestyle choice may change as fuel bills rise. I was hearing the drones of some fool going on about fuel prices. He just bought a new car that did 25mpg. There are some cars around that can do 60mpg. He can always buy one of those.

I actually think they are doing it for fun - I think it's called an all expenses paid jolly - some in our business go on them too dontchaknow. They never get the big powers to tow the line, it could all be done much cheaper.

I see you conveniently missed out the bit about them committing fraud and fiddling expenses to the tune of thousands - well I suppose they do have to live in big posh houses, I mean - what sort of image would it give if they didn't ha ha ha....

All is not lost.

The overall thermodynamic efficiency of a state-of-the-art electric car is about 70-80% - battery discharge losses plus electric motor losses. The thermodynamic efficiency of an internal combustion engine is 20-25% at best.

So in an electric car, you only need to store about 1/3 of the energy to drive the same distance.

Electric cars with in-wheel motors are considerably lighter than internal combustion engine cars before adding the battery. Electric motors have a higher power density then internal combustion engines so they are lighter. Furthermore, an electric car can do away with the entire drivetrain, since the electric motors are inside the wheels, the transmission, the exhaust system and the cooling system, saving even more weight. All this freed up weight and space can be taken up by batteries.

Electric cars have regenerative braking and don't suffer from idling losses in city traffic, making them more efficient still. Modern electric motors also operate close to maximum efficiency at all speeds, while internal combustion engine cars don't.

The overall result is that it is now possible to build electric cars with a range of 500 km, which comes close to internal combustion engine cars, even if the energy density of batteries, on a energy/weight basis, is so much lower than petrol.

Range is not what's holding back battery-electric cars anymore. What's holding them back now is the current cost and limited lifetime of Li-ion batteries. Mass production will brings costs down. But that is changing quickly.

Toshiba have introduced a battery that can be 80% charged in a few minutes. So re-charging at a charging station will take no longer than filling a tank.

Even if the electricity used to charge a battery car were 100% derived from oil power plants, it would still use less oil per km than an equivalent internal combustion engine car. Modern combined-cycle thermal power plants are 60% efficient. Electricity transmission is 95% efficient. Charging/discharging about 80% and the electric motor about 95%. And don't forget that refining crude oil into petrol and its transport distribution takes a lot of energy too.

And no emissions from these cars, silent and a super smooth ride. What you will be driving in 5 to 10 years time. Mitsubishi are introducing a 100% electric car in a year or two. I can't wait.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ged

I see you conveniently missed out the bit about them committing fraud and fiddling expenses to the tune of thousands - well I suppose they do have to live in big posh houses, I mean - what sort of image would it give if they didn't ha ha ha....

---

Fiddling is another matter, which is unacceptable. You are mixing the two.

I'm not mixing them out of confusion though, it's all interlinked - jollys are included.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max

Thought disabled people didn't pay car tax?

Does It depend on If your a working disabled person?

---

Only if you get max Disability Living allowance Max. I dont get that because I am not disabled enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ged

I actually think they are doing it for fun - I think it's called an all expenses paid jolly - some in our business go on them too dontchaknow. They never get the big powers to tow the line, it could all be done much cheaper.

I see you conveniently missed out the bit about them committing fraud and fiddling expenses to the tune of thousands - well I suppose they do have to live in big posh houses, I mean - what sort of image would it give if they didn't ha ha ha....

---

I remember when the Duke of Westminster came to see the Williamson's Tunnels in a very 'low profile' visit. He turned up in a rather nice (but average) Jaguar and drive himself and his PA to the tunnels.

Then David Henshaw's Jaguar turned up and he was bloody DRIVEN from town to Edge Hill while he sat in the back. Henshaw looked very smug with himself as if to say 'where is your driver' when the Duke took his keys out of the ignition, got out, threw me the keys and 'asked me to look after it'.

The look on Henshaw's face was priceless as he knew that the Duke's Jag could have been nicked/written off and it wouldn't make a dent on his 800million quid in the bank :PDT10