In 2015, the European Environment Agency report on Air Quality in Europe said that 72,000 premature deaths were attributable to Particulate Matter (PMs) and NOx exposure in 2012 across 40 European countries mainly because of exposure to diesel emissions. The EU called these figures ‘A public health emergency’. If the EEA is right, we should be seeing this massive death toll in our hospitals. This huge loss of life should be visible to everybody and we should be hearing about the extra strain put on the doctors, nurses and health services across Europe because of the thousands of these emission-related fatalities.
The massive jump in electricity demand, which a wholesale shift to electric vehicle demands, can’t be met with wind turbines. The same campaigners oppose tidal power and nuclear energy. Thus, the power would come from more conventional, fossil fuels. Recent power cuts in August 2019 have shown the fragility of electricity supply. And there’s the thing, it is utterly irresponsible to displace the emissions from, for example, central London to the Midlands. Furthermore, the environment lobby mixes up the difference between local air pollution and global climate change emissions. Ironically, in their demand for cleaner air locally, they have succeeded
Much has been made of the London Mayor’s Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ), as a way forward to improve the capital’s air quality. However, the new tax is seen by many as unscientific and unjust. Essentially, ULEZ represents a regressive ‘pay to pollute’ methodology, with an unfairly large effect on the least wealthy, and no effect on those who can afford to pay the ULEZ tax and carry on using their vehicles. Proof London’s ULEZ may not be working to improve air quality is described in depth later in this blog. Shaun Bailey, the Tory London mayoral candidate for 2020,
The public are dying in their thousands because of poor air quality, 40,000 to be precise.’ ‘Air pollution kills almost 9 million people every year – which is over 1.6 million more than smoking, research has revealed.’ These headlines are stark and instantly recognisable. But the majority of UK’s 37m road users argue this highly emotive claim is anecdotal, with no real-life cases presented to show a direct causal link to anyone dying from ambient vehicle exhaust emissions. There is one solitary case currently under consideration, involving a girl who already had extremely serious pre-existing health problems, and who had
Media and campaigning activity indicate there is clearly an agenda to try to wipe out carbon based fuelled cars, motorbikes, vans and trucks. The recent frenzied diesel debate and the London Mayor’s Transport Strategy both paint a grim picture for the future of car-based mobility. By 2041 Sadiq Khan wants 80% of all London journeys to be by public transport, cycling or walking and a zero emission London by 2050. It takes no account of mobility issues that affect the elderly, infirm and disabled. Passenger cars make up 36% of all London journeys and his vision is to reduce those
Table: UK public reaction from the FairFuelUK Survey to the way the media present the data is clearly disapproving. See poll results in the table below:
In 2018 and repeated in 2019, the award-winning Public Affairs Campaign Group, FairFuelUK conducted the biggest survey in the recent history of transport. 71,098 responded. And what the drivers said is an aide-mémoire for the Government. 90% regard their vehicle as critical to their daily lives with 67% saying they have categorically no choice but to use it every day. Those on significantly below average incomes, less than £20,000, say they have no choice but to spend up to a quarter of their hard-earned cash on petrol and diesel. The emphasis here is ‘we have no choice!’ The persistent demonisation
Battery production capacity for motor vehicles is currently scarce, expensive and suffering supply lags and challenges. This may change over time, but for some period securing an economic supply of battery production capacity will be pivotal to the successful commercialisation of electrified vehicles, and to the relative fortunes of individual auto makers. At the same time, electrification is a proven route to tailpipe carbon dioxide (CO2) reduction, or elimination. Therefore, the efficient deployment of available battery capacity between competing applications is critical to maximising fleet CO2 reduction. In summary, this data strongly suggests that policy unilaterally favouring one technology