pwa wrote:Psamathe wrote:I have always had reservations about a Diesel scrappage scheme paid for with taxpayers money. 8 years ago when I purchased my current car I considered diesel (cheap to run) vs petrol (causes fewer local air pollution issues). Back then I was very aware of the air pollution issues relating to diesel cars (though not the true scale of the early deaths).
I decided I would thus go for petrol. So I chose to avoid such contributions to the air quality issues even though it would cost me more. Others chose the cheaper running costs of the more problematic diesels. The information was available many years ago.
So for the last 8 years I've been spending more on petrol and now I'm expected to contribute to those who have been saving on running costs for years so they can get a replacement/new car. Those diesel owners have been benefiting from lower running costs and now expect further subside.
Not something I think fair. we make choice. The information was available if people wanted to find it (I found it).
Even that is not so clear cut. Diesels were promoted by the government and others as a way of reducing climate change emissions. Lots of us prioritised that over local pollution. Even now I am not 100% sure that petrol is more acceptable than diesel. You kill fewer people here but more people there. By choosing petrol you put urban UK people ahead of the rest of humanity. I can see why you thought it a good choice and I'm not sure you were wrong, but nor am I sure you were right.
Older petrol cars can produce more NOX than diesels, so if you want to clean up the vehicles on the road you have to look at them too.
(As a car diver as well as a cyclist) I'd also suggest increasing the tax on petrol. Though disproportionately faster on diesel. Discourage both but put greater emphasis on that causing the most immediate problems. i.e. as you say, don't only focus on one source of pollution.