Quote:
Originally Posted by Katana
Diesel is expensive because the government can get away with it, 70-80% of the cost per liter is pure tax. I also remember being told that diesel takes more energy to produce when distilling so oil companies charge more for it's production.
|
This is *exactly* why I made this post in the first place - this makes sense *only* in the UK. Elsewhere in the world, diesel is cheaper. Diesel is 10% cheaper in the Irish Republic, and I highly doubt the oil companies supplying diesel there uses a different method of distilling diesel!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piwoslaw
So this only depends on the engine and not on the driving style. I can imagine two cars with identical engines, both pay the same tax. But Driver A has a heavy foot, takes off and races everywhere, slows down to the speed limit only on red lights. FE_A= 16 l/100km. Driver B has heavily ecomodded his ride and is an ecodriving guru. FE_B= 5 l/100km. Now, even though they pay the same tax, they definately have a different CO2 footprint.
|
True, but do remember Driver A will use up more fuel, and pay more through fuel tax. The ecomodder will use less fuel, and pay less fuel tax. Like Katana says, UK fuel is about 80% tax. This method is simple and cheap - use more fuel, pay more tax. Drive through country roads, you use up more fuel, and thus more tax. Use motorways, you use less fuel, thus less tax. The satellite system will be a lot more accurate, but is it really worth the massive outlay? I believe the government is better off investing the money elsewhere, such as hydrogen fuelling stations, and clean methods of generating hydrogen for example.
You're quite right about taxing over engine displacement is a bad idea - my 1.7 litre Astra, which luckily comes under the newer tax system, would have cost £190 for 12 months if it was registered literally 1 year earlier[1], and my parents 1.25 litre Fiesta, which comes under the old tax system, currently costs £125 per year.
However, my Astra emits 119g/km of CO2, which falls in Band C of the new tax system, and currently costs £35 per year (£30 from 2010). If my parents Fiesta, which emits 165g/km of CO2, was registered literally one year later[1], it would have come under Band G of the new tax system, and would cost £150 per year (£155 from 2010), which I believe is fairer.
I quite like the new idea of a "showroom" tax starting April 2010, so anyone buying a Band M car (highest band) would pay £950 for the first year, and and then £435 per year afterwards. Cars under Band A-D will be tax free for the first year, and only A will continue to be tax free afterwards. This will hopefully encourage people to buy a car that emits at a lower band than they originally intended.
A happy ending to the story - my parents are currently looking to replace their Fiesta as it's starting to fall apart - very poorly built - and I'm really encouraging them to get a car that comes under Band A (sub 100g/km) that gets at least 60 MPGuk in the city and at least 90 MPGuk on the motorway. However, they're looking to use the scrappage scheme so the poor Fiesta will be crushed instead of being used for a few more years by someone else until it finally falls apart.
[1]The tax system changed in April 2000, my Astra was registered in 2001 and my parents Fiesta was registered in 1999. The tax system changed slightly in April 2009 and my Astra was, bumped up one band, from B to C to accomodate sub 100g/km cars however the costs stayed the same.