PDA

View Full Version : VED (road tax as was)


Shaggy Sheep Driver
15th Feb 2015, 20:18
There's just been a BMW supercar on Top Gear which is a hybrid. That is, as well as a petrol engine it has batteries and some traction motors.

Bottom line is it does in the 'real world' as opposed to BMW's labs, (as Clarkson discovered) 30mpg. It has a top speed of a tad under 140mph. The VED is.... ZERO! And heaven knows what earth resources it takes to build one (and its batteries, which will need to be replaced after a few years).

In my garage among the motorcycles is a little Honda C90 (over 60,000,000 produced, so research and prototypes well amortised, not much resource to make one). 87cc, 7bhp, 120mpg, max speed about 55mph. VED 17 per year.

That is nonsense on stilts by any measure. But hey, wasn't it one Gordon Brown who introduced these skewed VED rates?

Time for a rethink on these zero rated 'hybrid' supercars? Or should I fix a traction motor to the C90's battery?

Random SLF
15th Feb 2015, 20:33
Wouldn't make any difference, it's the petrol engine which is type rated (if that's the right term) according to emissions and not power output. My car is smaller and lower powered than my wife's, yet I pay higher road tax. Ripoff Britain etc., etc.

Gertrude the Wombat
15th Feb 2015, 20:53
Honda C90 ... max speed about 55mph
I've had one do 60mph.

Downhill, and I had to get quite close to the juggernaut I was slipstreaming.

I was younger then, wouldn't do it now.

Tankertrashnav
15th Feb 2015, 21:58
Respect! I only ever had a C50. I dreamt of owning a C90.

55-60mph? Wow!

Wodrick
15th Feb 2015, 22:04
My first bike was a S90, never been able to ride a bike without a tank ever since.

Cyber Bob
16th Feb 2015, 09:06
FS1E for me in Yamaha racing colours!!

This wasn't mine but similar


https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRmlmCUOX-Bwlta_8pNlg5Eyww7cauQlDwSfsDipaK4W9sgR1xdui7x8NEN (http://www.google.co.uk/url?url=http://www.motorcyclehobbies.co.uk/FS1E.htm&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ei=-cDhVIC3MYLyOI7dgaAK&ved=0CBYQ9QEwAA&usg=AFQjCNFHBJBCFNk4Gpal-Tu4Z0W4zDTlNQ)

Shaggy Sheep Driver
16th Feb 2015, 09:23
Crikey, this is turning into a 'little bike' thread! Here's the C90, which will be going on eBay in the spring as it's place in the fleet has been replaced by a Honda Innova 125 step-through, the 'ultimate Cub'.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b132/GZK6NK/IMG_3209r_zpsd2768744.jpg (http://s18.photobucket.com/user/GZK6NK/media/IMG_3209r_zpsd2768744.jpg.html)

Lon More
16th Feb 2015, 09:41
IIRC the Prius requires more resources to build than a Hummer

Keef
16th Feb 2015, 10:15
The tax disc on my last 2L Mondeo Diesel said "NIL" in the price column. M's little Ka pays a lot more than that. It's a crazy system.

avturboy
16th Feb 2015, 10:28
High rates of car tax are making it uneconomical to run some older cars, leading to cars being scrapped when there is life left in them. Surely better to use them for a few thousand miles a year (even with poor CO2) than scrap them.

darkroomsource
16th Feb 2015, 10:34
The whole thing is just a case of politicians saying "look, we're doing something about it" when clearly they have no idea (or maybe it's no desire to get it right) of what they're doing.

That's the problem with letting people who are elected make decisions about anything that matters.

Loose rivets
16th Feb 2015, 10:35
Oh, NO! There's a rumor that the BMW is going to be reassessed. I was going to order one, but won't risk it now.:*

Shaggy Sheep Driver
16th Feb 2015, 11:18
The problem with diesel cars isn't upping the tax on them, it was encouraging people to buy them in the first place. That's what happens when politicians don't think things through and just concentrate on the greens shouting 'CO2', and set taxes accordingly.

I've been banging on for years about particulates - very nasty carbon granules that are carcinogenic and build up in the lung. Modern diesel engines have better combustion than the old smokers, but the particulates they produce are much more harmful in that they go straight through any filter, and are not usually visible being so fine.

It's high time diesel cars were taxed to move people over to petrol. It's just a pity the politicians got it wrong for decades and set taxes to work the other way - moving motorists from petrol to diesel.

MagnusP
16th Feb 2015, 11:32
Anyone else see the delightful irony in the fact that Rudolf Diesel was born in Paris? He probably chucked himself in la Manche 'cos he knew what the ffilthy ffrogs would do with his design. :)

avturboy
16th Feb 2015, 11:35
Just a quick point about the title of this thread.

For years government did not want us to refer to it as "vehicle tax", after all any use of the word tax can cause us to get quite emotive. The preference was to refer to it as VED, vehicle excise duty ... still a cost but not a tax, heaven forbid they would shoulder the motorist with extra taxes.

However, now if you look at any government documentation on the matter you'll see it all refers to 'vehicle tax'.

Just as we knew all along our political masters are quite happy to stuff the motorist with any extra charges they can, and now they don't even mind calling it a tax.

londonblue
16th Feb 2015, 11:56
Just a quick point about the title of this thread.

For years government did not want us to refer to it as "vehicle tax", after all any use of the word tax can cause us to get quite emotive. The preference was to refer to it as VED, vehicle excise duty ... still a cost but not a tax, heaven forbid they would shoulder the motorist with extra taxes.

However, now if you look at any government documentation on the matter you'll see it all refers to 'vehicle tax'.

Just as we knew all along our political masters are quite happy to stuff the motorist with any extra charges they can, and now they don't even mind calling it a tax.

It's not even a vehicle tax. It's still a road tax.

You're able to make a SORN (Statutory Off Road Notification) and not pay it at all, i.e. you only pay it at all if your car uses the public roads. If you only pay it if you use the roads it is a road tax in everything but name.

BusyB
16th Feb 2015, 12:06
Wasn't there a lot of stories about all petrol pumps needing vapour traps to stop people inhaling some toxic fumes from the petrol? Scandinavia was hot on it I recall.:confused:

Shaggy Sheep Driver
16th Feb 2015, 12:21
It's a tax to operate a road vehicle, rather than a road tax. The fact that the rate of tax is linked to emissions tends to confirm that. It is assumed that a SORNed vehicle will be stored, rather than running but off the public road.

ShyTorque
16th Feb 2015, 12:45
I lived in the far east some years ago. The government were trying to get everyone off diesel cars, and back into petrol, due to pollution issues. All the taxis were diesel.

We returned to UK to discover that the complete opposite was happening there, quoting the same reasons!

G-CPTN
16th Feb 2015, 12:55
My two most recent cars have been diesels.
Both achieved far better economy than my many previous petrol-fuelled cars.

If only that I am using less of the precious hydrocarbon fuel then isn't that justification?

My current VED is zero, but the previous vehicle VED is 230. This vehicle is still in use (though not by me).

londonblue
16th Feb 2015, 13:19
It is assumed that a SORNed vehicle will be stored, rather than running but off the public road.

Not necessarily. Vehicles can be used on private land, such as farms, without needing to pay a charge.

Shaggy Sheep Driver
16th Feb 2015, 13:30
Quote:

Not necessarily. Vehicles can be used on private land, such as farms, without needing to pay a charge.

Yes, of course they can. That doesn't in any way change the DVLA's assumption that SORNed vehicles probably will be stored, and in any event will not be run on the public road.

OFSO
16th Feb 2015, 13:51
the complete opposite

70% of the cars here are diesel. No problem with pollution, perhaps because the vehicle inspection system isn't privatised and a pollution test failure means car gets kicked off the road.

My Mondeo gets 55 mpg in mixed traffic, 65 mpg on motorways cruising at 70mph.

Weep, Prius owners.

ShyTorque
16th Feb 2015, 14:01
OFSO, if you mean the UK, I think you'll find that pollution is a problem.

Notice the road signs advertising "Smart" motorways? They will become 60 mph motorways very soon, to meet the air quality demands of someone in Brussels. Who presumably rides a push bike to work.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
16th Feb 2015, 14:12
..who has a taxpayer-funded chauffeur-driven car to work. And within a year there'll be an 'express lane' for Government officials (& mates). Remember the Olympics?

Loose rivets
16th Feb 2015, 14:23
What happened to the good old Road Fund License?

LookingForAJob
16th Feb 2015, 17:20
Warning - a bit of drift follows!

It's high time diesel cars were taxed to move people over to petrol.I think I must be a bit of a green at heart. Surely we should be talking about moving people away from hydrocarbons. Are we not reaching the point where cleaner means are available to generate energy?

The thing about car manufacturers and politicians is that when the cost of petrol/diesel is relatively low they don't worry about developing alternatives. I am old enough to remember the early 70s when oil prices quadrupled in six months. Politicians and manufacturers threw their weight behind alternatives for road vehicles (and other things).....but as soon as the supply became more assured and people got used to the prices that we had to pay, all of the alternative fuel initiatives got shelved. Little short of criminal in my mind. Maybe the much of the technology that makes it possible wasn't available then, but continued research could have produced many benefits, much earlier. But it's all driven by short-termism!

PS - Drive a 2.2L diesel-engined car. Lots of turbo-charging and still get 50 m.p.g. out of it on the highway and between 35-40 around town. And it does it way more stylishly than a Prius!

PPS - I know about the particulates, and agree they're not good, but I'm afraid I won't stop until we all stop.

Oh, and one more thing - the road tax (at least that's how I translate it) is just under 100.

Shaggy Sheep Driver
16th Feb 2015, 17:57
Move people away from hydrocarbons? To what?

Heavily subsidised high speed inter-city electric trains powered by nuclear electricity would save a lot of motorway hydrocarbon-burning (not least by HGVs), but won't address many journeys people make. What can be done about those?

LookingForAJob
16th Feb 2015, 19:42
Well, hydrogen has been a bit of a pipe dream for some for a good many years. Electricity is becoming practical for around town - and can be generated in lots of different ways. But of course, like bio-fuels, there's no way we could make a wholesale switch to an alternative fuel source overnight.

I don't want to go back to the dark ages but it's all about sustainability and not damaging the environment if we don't have to if we are going to continue overpopulating the planet.

OK - I think it's time for bed. I don't normally proselytise like this!

Shaggy Sheep Driver
16th Feb 2015, 19:50
Don't you have to supply a great deal of energy to generate hydrogen?

LookingForAJob
16th Feb 2015, 20:15
Yup, well usually anyway. But then you have to expend a huge amount of energy to get the liquid and gas hydrocarbons out of the ground and then separated into usable fractions, or burn the solids to get something more transportable out.

There's no easy win in any of this so I come back to sustainability and minimising damage where we can if we want the planet to support a population of 7 billion and rising in any comfortable way.

I knew I should have gone to bed. Really am going to now!

AtomKraft
17th Feb 2015, 07:23
Why not....

1. Build offshore wind turbines, but do not connect them to the national grid even to land.

2. Moor two huge gas tanks, shaped like barges at the base of each mast.

3. When a wind blows, let the wind turbines leccy output electrolyse the water that surrounds the turbine, and store the hydrogen in one tank, and the oxy in the other.

4. When tanks are full, a tug tows out empty ones and brings the full ones ashore to be used as fuel.

There's got to be a problem with this, right. But what is it?

P6 Driver
17th Feb 2015, 07:27
"What happened to the good old Road Fund License?"


It moved to the UK where Licence is spelt differently.

cockney steve
17th Feb 2015, 10:29
When tanks are full, a tug tows out empty ones and brings the full ones ashore to be used as fuel.

To get any worthwhile quantity and payload, you would need, first, to purge the other gases from the tank ("fill it") with the required gas....then, how do you propose to evacuate the contents without polluting the gas with air?

OK, the answer is, you need to compress the harvested gas.....As the size of the container goes up, it's strength goes down.....(Ever humped welding-gas bottles around? ) so, you need an enormously heavily built tank.....or you could compress the gas to liquid and refrigerate it....this would reduce the strength/weight requirement, but you'd need to add lots of insulation and a very big, power-hungry refrigeration-plant....this wouldn't be a problem, 'cos you could hook it up to your offshore generator.....oh, hold on........

radeng
17th Feb 2015, 10:41
One problem that nobody yet seems to have come up with an answer to is where the power stations are going to be to provide power for electrified railways - and where the network infrastructure is coming from for charging electric vehicles.

The previous government as well as this one prevaricated for years on making any decision on increasing power generation. What was REALLY criminal about the Labour government was that they happily signed up to EU wishes on decommissioning existing power stations without having a replacement policy in place.

OwnNav
17th Feb 2015, 10:45
Vehicle Excise Duty

MagnusP
17th Feb 2015, 11:01
No wonder the thread's been confusing me. I though it was about Vasculogenic Erectile Dysfunction.

Loose rivets
17th Feb 2015, 21:30
Is she licensed to buy a licence?

Oh, dear. It's all too much for my tiny brain. :(