In article , tim...
wrote:


"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , tim...
wrote:


"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , mechanic
wrote:
On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 11:39:32 -0000, tim... wrote:

It depends. If 'they' tax the f**k out of diesels etc or ban
them totally in towns, they might be the only option for
commuter journeys.

Yeah right.

Ban petrol cars whilst the alternatives all cost over 40 grand

He was talking about diesel powered cars. I'm a bit surprised that
the govt hasn't announced an intention to do this some time in the
future. They are a menace.

Then the Government will have to compensate the owners of diesel
engined cars. We bought them because the Government recommeded them
as creating less polution than petrol ones and reduced road tax to
prove it.

Most people who are suggesting banning diesels have suggested a date
of 2025 for implementation.

ISTM that 9 year's notice is sufficient for people who already own
one, people who buy going forward from today, are already "on notice".

The big problem with banning diesels is in lorry/van usage. This
market uses diesels because of the greater longevity of the engines
and forcing commercial operators to use vehicles that need scrapping
sooner will push up costs

Quite a few rail locos still use diesel, too. The cost of electrifying
all the railways lines is going to be horrendous.

but unlike electric cars

the capital and maintenance costs of operating electric trains is less
than for diesel

Over a 40 year life-time the savings on the total costs of ownership of a
fleet of electric trains pays back the costs of electrifying the line
(well it did before unreasonable H&S pushed up the costs of
electrification by 300%)

Overhead electrification often requires bridges to be rebuilt - or it did
on the East Coast line. That is presumably why the government has put a
stop to the proposed GWR electrification.









--
from KT24 in Surrey, England