UK’s first EV rapid charging station in Sunderland

Well they're more polluting than cars, you'd have thought they'd be thinking of this tbh
No because people need their two foreign holidays a year. Easier to drive the motorist into the ground. It’s not about pollution, it’s about taxation. If people really care about pollution and air quality why don’t they stop buying clothes from major brands, as they’re all made in slave labour countries and shipped over here. How far do you take it?
 


I personally don’t believe that normally aspirated cars cause as much pollution as people say. If we really want to stop “pollution” and improve “air quality”, why not ban all airplane travel and imports brought to the UK by lorry?

You sound like a flat earther here.

I cycle through London, on days of the worst air quality it physically hurts my lungs. The air is filthy, it's literally killing people and taking years off their lives. We need to clean the air which involves binning off cars and forcing a switch to less polluting engine types.
 
You sound like a flat earther here.

I cycle through London, on days of the worst air quality it physically hurts my lungs. The air is filthy, it's literally killing people and taking years off their lives. We need to clean the air which involves binning off cars and forcing a switch to less polluting engine types.
It would also help if you didn't have to take a mortgage out to buy an electric car
 
There's limited reasons to own a car in London to be fair. They're expensive because they're expensive to manufacture, it'll come down in time.
There's less moving parts, how can it cost more?

The infrastructure to build them is already in place, it's not as if its a completely new thing
 
The battery and all that? I have no idea. Never given it any thought, it's not something I've ever looked at buying.
Less parts means more space, surely? How big is the battery? Bigger than an actual engine?

They're probably more expensive because they know you'll save more money on the lifetime of owning the car, so sting you for more up front instead..
 
Less parts means more space, surely? How big is the battery? Bigger than an actual engine?

They're probably more expensive because they know you'll save more money on the lifetime of owning the car, so sting you for more up front instead..

It’s related to the rare earth elements needed to make a battery.

Mining of these is costly and produces a different type of pollution.

Then there’s how to dispose of after the car’s useful life.
 
It’s related to the rare earth elements needed to make a battery.

Mining of these is costly and produces a different type of pollution.

Then there’s how to dispose of after the car’s useful life.
Just drop them into the bucket at Lidl?
 
I personally don’t believe that normally aspirated cars cause as much pollution as people say. If we really want to stop “pollution” and improve “air quality”, why not ban all airplane travel and imports brought to the UK by lorry?

I don't even know where to start with this.

The city pollution data and source of such pollution is available from research by the World Health Organisation.

The main polluters are older vehicles, particularly diesels and poor air quality is responsible for many respiratory problems.

Children in built up areas are particularly susceptible to poor air quality. It's not even up for debate man.

I just don't follow the logic of your last sentence.
 
I don't even know where to start with this.

The city pollution data and source of such pollution is available from research by the World Health Organisation.

The main polluters are older vehicles, particularly diesels and poor air quality is responsible for many respiratory problems.

Children in built up areas are particularly susceptible to poor air quality. It's not even up for debate man.

I just don't follow the logic of your last sentence.
The same world health organisation that said being gay was a mental illness up until 1992? That’s who I’m meant to trust? Get real.
 
The same world health organisation that said being gay was a mental illness up until 1992? That’s who I’m meant to trust? Get real.

In that case clearly every single bit of data or research from WHO is compomised and should thus be immediately discounted.

Jesus wept.
 
In that case clearly every single bit of data or research from WHO is compomised and should thus be immediately discounted.

Jesus wept.
Who’s to say the “facts” in this case won’t be discounted later down the line? It was a “fact” in 1991, according to the WHO, that being gay was a “mental illness”. Things change. Who did the studies? On what sample size? Over what time period? What medical measures were used to specify the “damage”? How did they differentiate between the “damage” from traffic pollution and other pollution factors? How much “pollution” does the average person come in contact with every day? How does this change geographically? What role does genetics play? What about lifestyle factors? Who sponsored/paid for the studies? Do they have a vested interest?
 
Who’s to say the “facts” in this case won’t be discounted later down the line? It was a “fact” in 1991, according to the WHO, that being gay was a “mental illness”. Things change. Who did the studies? On what sample size? Over what time period? What medical measures were used to specify the “damage”? How did they differentiate between the “damage” from traffic pollution and other pollution factors? How much “pollution” does the average person come in contact with every day? How does this change geographically? What role does genetics play? What about lifestyle factors? Who sponsored/paid for the studies? Do they have a vested interest?

Walk or cycle around any major city choked by cars and you'll see it for yourself. It's minging, I have no idea how you can deny it. You can physically feel it.
 
Walk or cycle around any major city choked by cars and you'll see it for yourself. It's minging, I have no idea how you can deny it. You can physically feel it.
I work in a “major city” mate and I haven’t seen anything of the sort. I don’t “physically” feel exhaust fumes that dissipate into the atmosphere. If this is the case, how come somewhere like Tokyo doesn’t have a lower median life expectancy?
 
I work in a “major city” mate and I haven’t seen anything of the sort. I don’t “physically” feel exhaust fumes that dissipate into the atmosphere. If this is the case, how come somewhere like Tokyo doesn’t have a lower median life expectancy?

Okay, so you're one of them. I will never understand.
 
I work in a “major city” mate and I haven’t seen anything of the sort. I don’t “physically” feel exhaust fumes that dissipate into the atmosphere. If this is the case, how come somewhere like Tokyo doesn’t have a lower median life expectancy?

One of the factors will be that Japan, realising the effects of diesel pollution in big cities, in the late 90's effectively taxed diesel cars out of the equation.

Japan were similarly ahead of the game by being one of the first countries to ban the use of leaded fuel in 1985.

Or are the poisonous effects of tetra ethyl lead just another WHO scare story?

Sorry to be blunt but you're spouting bollocks.
 

Back
Top