You beat me to it.

I too don't recall anyone saying it isn't a threat. Though by any definition, it's alleged at the moment. Certainly, my point at least, is that there seems to be far too much emphasis on collecting money from your average person on the street.

Now, even if we mere mortals could dictate where that money went, which we absolutely can't, to the best of my knowledge, even the Govt. can't go and buy lovely fresh unpolluted air with it.

Further, when I see fewer aircraft journeys from ministers, USA take a positive step forward, along with China, a clear and concise guide as to how this extra tax is going to be put to use in order to combat climate change, then, and only then, will I begin to look at it with an equal degree of seriousness!

Telling me it needs extra money, without telling me how it's going to benefit me is no way to get me on board, that's a fact!

Oh, and a report that gives me just one "will see" or "will feel", as opposed to the customary "may see", and "might feel" would be nice too. I can create reports full of mights and maybes, but that is hardly going to convince anyone, now is it?

To give mights and maybes according to the unpredictability of changing weather is something that even I can pull off with a degree of success.

Ok, in denmark you get on your bicycle, go to town put it in the bike racks that are designed everywhere. |Put your bike helmet on you seat unlocked and off you go shopping.

COULD WE DO THAT HERE, NO BECAUSE IT WOULD BE STOLEN OR TRASHED.

Thinking of travelling to scotland, don't really want to drive but i am, the reason is it will take me 3 hrs longer on a train and in the night i will have to get off and wait for 2 hrs for the night sleeper train. I would have gone on my own, but there is no way i am hanging around a train station at 10 o'clock at night for 2 hours.

What is our alternatives - there are none.

As for food, go to the manufacturers and make them use less packaging. I dont want to buy a doll for my daughter when 9/10th of the box is packaging. I think before raising tax's they need to look at the big picture.

there you go........my thoughts

The thing is all about taxation though and filling the government coffers, there is a very environment friendly 4x4 but it costs considerably more to buy, to repair and to service, and what concession would the government give you if you bought it, a slightly reduced road tax fee and that's it, so why would any sane person bother with it? The government is hardly encouraging is it?
Toll roads another of their bright ideas, which is fine if it's like the M6 toll road, no traffic no speed camera and a lovely surface, I have no objections to paying to use it. However why am I charged to cross the Dartford toll, in rush hour you can sit in traffic for an hour just to cross the bridge or use the tunnel, and be charged for the priviledge. We were told originally the charge would cease once the costs of building the bridge had been recouped, but no the charge is staying and now increasing. They already charge us for driving in the congestion zone in London, and are planning on charging 4x4 £25 a day, why ? My 4x4 has a smaller engine and pollutes less than my previous executive saloon and is actually shorter in length as well, although slightly taller, so why should I pay £25 a day to drive my vehicle in my home town, when a car cost £8. The congestion zone has proved to be such a good earner it is increasing in size and will continue to grow, and it will spread to other cities and towns as long as they feel they can get away with it. Motorists are such easy targets

Oh tell me you didn't really fall for that old chestnut?

No of course I didn't, but just occasionally it would be nice to be told the truth.

lol So sad, yet so so true.

Can't even tempt you with the myriad of missed train connections, or the pleasure of standing on an overcrowded train for at least a quarter of your journey, perhaps?

Exactly!

on all points.

It's what I said we live the way we do because the governments have shaped our lives and leave little choice other than to go with the flow and then penalise us for it. But what can we do?...I would love all car travel to be a thing of the past and rely on my dogs to pull me around but we'd be killed soon as turn out of the estate...lol and if we did get anywhere I couldn't take them in with me cuz that's not allowed and couldn't leave them outside cuz they'd be nicked. I would bike everywhere but hate it on busy roads where I feel I could be wiped out at any minuet! and when I get to where I am going I can look forward to having my bike nicked too. I feel all to often people drive because they have to because there is no safe alternative which isn't our fault. No proper public transport out in the sticks it's like one bus a day and none after 6 or whatever...lol So unless you live right in town right next to the grocery store and next to your work your a bit screwed.

This is part of my point exactly!

I would happily use public transport to go to work (17 miles away), but the lack of buses/trains etc is ridiculous!

The nearest train station is 9 miles away, so I would have to drive to get there. That actually means driving south, when I work north of my home.

Buses? Hah! I could get a bus to the train station, if I walked 2 miles into the village to get the bus (1 every hour).

Or I could walk 2 miles into the village, get a bus (south) to the town, to change buses and take a 45 min journey north, for the bus to go past where I work, drop me off in the nearest town and walk to work (2 miles)

Any wonder I get in my car at 8.15 and am at work by 9?

My OH works 30 miles from home, of course he drives!!

The Govt can't expect everyone to just get rid of their cars if the local authorities don't provide the transport.

We recycle as much as possible, grow most of our own fruit and veg, are saving up for a wind turbine for some of our electricity, we try and do our bit, but sometimes we feel as if we're not doing enough, because we drive to work!

I would have thought it quite clear that the proposed taxation has less to do with increasing revenue than with penalising people for choosing (yes choosing) a lifestyle that is detrimental to the global climate. And as a number of you have made clear, you aren't going to choose to reduce your environmental impact out of conscience, so why shouldn't we as a nation make a bit of money out of your inertia, as well as providing an incentive to those who are wavering over their decision to "go green."

People will keep talking about the reluctance of the world's biggest polluters to change their ways, and if I had one wish, it might be to force them to see sense (it might alternatively be that I become supreme ruler of the universe, but that's another thread). In the absence of such facilities, however, consider that the US and China may between them contribute 50% of global carbon emissions. Well that leaves 50% being produced by people more amenable to change - hardly insignificant!

And finally, before I take my puppy for a walk, your demands for definites. Forecasting is forecasting, and there are no definites. Nonlinearities in our climate system make it imposible to forecast anything with 100% certainty, even a few days ahead (as exemplified by weather forecasts), so any climatologist who says you "will see" or "will feel" is not being very scientific. We're dealing with probabilities here, as we do in every facet of modern science. But having personally seen compelling evidence of the increase in global temperatures and sea levels over the last few decades, and being shown compelling mechanisms for their continuing rise, I feel safe (what a choice of words ) in the knowledge that we are in deep s**t.

Deep Sh*t OMG good job I've got big wheels on my 4x4 then