To think that people that drive diesel cars know that they're killing children

[dieselKiller]

Diesel cars are destroying our towns and villages. The health effects on kids are particularly bad. People must know this by now. So AIBU to think that people who drive diesel cars know that they're killing kids (and everyone really)?

It's like smoking: it's not possible to smoke in public without affecting others' health. This seems to have been accepted by most people. What makes diesel different?

Hahahahahahaha.

I waited 18 minutes for a tube that I could actually get on this morning, at which point half a million sweaty sardines masquerading as commuters went instantly blind at the sight of my "baby on board" badge and when a seat did become free at the next stop I was almost trampled in the rush of people to grab it.

Miracle my bum!!!

I waited 18 minutes for a tube that I could actually get on this morning, at which point half a million sweaty sardines masquerading as commuters went instantly blind at the sight of my "baby on board" badge and when a seat did become free at the next stop I was almost trampled in the rush of people to grab it.

And of course, you'll pay handsomely for the priviledge.

Makeourfuture's posts sound like the old soviet Russia. In Human Hub, pleasant lifestyle lives you!

"Carrots" are key. I think the Soviet system relied to heavily on "sticks". Our mindset now is to view humanity harshly. It is understandable.

But I think there is too the urge to do good, and I think that as one poster said above regarding EV cars, that early policy adoption by a few can make the process gather critical momentum. The "natural exuberance" I spoke of earlier come later as this momentum grows and the right choice actually becomes very desirable and easy.

Oh yes, the growing momentum of natural exuberance.

You do sound like a Pravda writer of the best or is it worst kind. And I've read my share of Pravda.

Rebecca - oh if only more of those tube commuters cycled - How much more pleasant your journey would be!

I don't like havung a diesel tbh but bought it off dh who bought them as he believed they were green good for the environment cars . I had no idea however that I am a child murder op. Thanks for the enlightenment.

Oh aye - until I get off at the other end to walk up to my office and nearly get flattened by even more Lycra clad tools ignoring all sorts of traffic signals.

Only last night I saw a woman drop her coffee all over her coat because a cyclist swooshed straight over the zebra crossing after she had set foot on it and she had to jump back. Of course she was the "fucking cunt", not the man on the bike.

Why not allow market forces do their job - as companies are forced into lowering carbon emissions, 'brown' decisions will become more expensive. Job done.

Markets will in all likelihood be with us for a while. But they are not, and can never be, free. Smith admits this, although cons seem to gloss over those passages.

The problem with this sort of evolutionary economics is that like evolution in nature, markets often cannot adapt quickly, or rationally enough.

He's sounds like a piece of work to be sure but here's a shout out to all those lovely law abiding cyclists who are not driving to work in diesel/petrol cars and clogging up the roads

It's well known in transportation that air quality and diesel emissions are a huge silent killer but it's not been the government policy to prioritise it until recently.

Also there are multiple impacts on the environment and sometimes what's better for global warming is worse for human health, there are hard decisions.

We need to change our two diesel cars soon and it's hard to know what's best.

Overwhelmingly I think the best way to cut emissions is to just use the car less. For ever essential car journey I probably do another 2 I could have walked or cycled. Then cars will have lower mileage and not need replacing with new which is a whole other environmental impact.

A bit like how by small steps recycling has increased from a few % to 50% ish in last 15 years.

I just saw one cyclist wave back to you, lethal.

makeourfuture I never suggested that markets are entirely free. In this case, they're quite clearly bound by carbon targets - that was the point of my post.

Your post is, in a word, vague. Do you have any specific critiques of carbon targets forcing companies into greener technologies, or just a theoretical ones?

@Rebeccaslicker 18 mins for a use? Yikes! Are you zone 2 south London on the northern line?

I had to wait for a second central line train and thought that was annoying enough.

Nope, that was the delightful district line train! For some reason when they only run them every 6 minutes they are quite busy... funny that, isn't it TFL?!

Waterloo and city, Central and Victoria are so much quicker than the others. Jealous of your central line skills

Only last night I saw a woman drop her coffee all over her coat because a cyclist swooshed straight over the zebra crossing after she had set foot on it and she had to jump back. Of course she was the "fucking cunt", not the man on the bike.

I see this shite every time I step foot in the square mile. It seems to have become a self-selecting arrangement whereby only those having maximum testosterone make their way on bikes, always in lycra.

Exactly, curry. This is why I can't bear city cyclists but smile cheerfully at the ones in the countryside. Completely different attitudes.

Also as an aside, why is it that men who've cycled to work, all sweaty and stinky, shove their Lycra clad frank n beans into the lift - to go up ONE FLOOR to the showers? Surely if you've cycled in you can walk up one flight of stairs, rather than making those of us who have files to get up 14 flights of stairs stop at every sodding floor!

Do you have any specific critiques of carbon targets forcing companies into greener technologies, or just a theoretical ones?

Unintended consequences is an important one, as shown by this thread.

I’m an advocate of appropriate constraint/direction of markets, but it must take a holistic view to avoid merely swapping one problem for another - and leaving the consumer carrying the can.

Do you have any specific critiques of carbon targets forcing companies into greener technologies, or just a theoretical ones?

Well, there is an underlying truth isn't there? We have built our systems on cheap carbon. Switching to renewable sources will be tricky.

There is talk about whether this is possible at all. But assuming it is, and we probably have to really, the true grave danger may be in the irrationality of markets.

As seen so many times with economic contagion, it may not be the fundamentals that drive the rout. And it is the risk of this happening which is really the base of our modern financial system.

I am not necessarily worried about the UK. We can, for a number of reasons, adapt. We have trains and buses.

The US is another matter entirely. And again, whether they can actually wean themselves from carbon, may not matter. They may simply choose not to.

When the Resource Wars begin, and it could be argued that they have already, we will not be able to remain isolated.

We recently bought a new car , they were trying to sell us a diesel . I’ve never had a diesel and will never have one . I don’t understand why people are buying them still. All my neighbours have them. They are like tractors starting up!! And these are £30-50k cars !!😱😱

So the OP isn't coming back to answer any of our questions. Funny that.

Unintended consequences is an important one, as shown by this thread.

Well, sure - but there's no solution to that, other than no change, which is untenable.

I’m an advocate of appropriate constraint/direction of markets, but it must take a holistic view to avoid merely swapping one problem for another - and leaving the consumer carrying the can.

But realistically, who can carry the can, other than the consumer? In the absence of malfeasance, there's no liability - no liability, no recourse.

The US is another matter entirely. And again, whether they can actually wean themselves from carbon, may not matter. They may simply choose not to.

Non-renewables are going to become increasingly expensive as renewables become cheaper, so I have an abstract faith in the US's ability to adapt.

WRT the Paris Accords - Trump won't be president forever, it's entirely possible that the US never abandons it. The targets are self-regulating in any case.

Rebecca you lost me on that waving post - eh?! Also saying you hate all city cyclists is bordering on plain bigoted - you can't possibly hate call of one group of people?!

I meant there was only one cyclist who is law abiding.

And yeah. Yeah I absolutely can. The hatred stops when they get off their sodding carbon carnage machines and stop hurtling them across pedestrian crossings and holding up traffic.

Carbon carnage machines?! Eh? And surely the traffic would be ten times worse if they were driving rather than cycling!

Carbon carnage machines?! Eh? And surely the traffic would be ten times worse if they were driving rather than cycling!

I think the point Rebecca might be making is how much it would improve congestion if they operated within the confines of the law and basic courtesy. Like riding in the cycling lane rather than the car lane, even if their super-human powers are way too awesome for the cycling lane.