Cars will be banned from London and all other cities across Europe under a draconian EU masterplan to cut CO2 emissions by 60 per cent over the next 40 years.
By Bruno Waterfield
The European Commission on Monday unveiled a “single European transport area” aimed at enforcing “a profound shift in transport patterns for passengers” by 2050.
The plan also envisages an end to cheap holiday flights from Britain to southern Europe with a target that over 50 per cent of all journeys above 186 miles should be by rail.
Top of the EU’s list to cut climate change emissions is a target of “zero” for the number of petrol and diesel-driven cars and lorries in the EU’s future cities.
Siim Kallas, the EU transport commission, insisted that Brussels directives and new taxation of fuel would be used to force people out of their cars and onto “alternative” means of transport.
“That means no more conventionally fuelled cars in our city centres,” he said. “Action will follow, legislation, real action to change behaviour.”
I can’t say I disagree, but before this step we need to phase out internal combustion engines by increasing efficacy of electric powered vehicles (by reducing charging time mainly) and bringing in of hydrogen powered machines.
I think 2050 is a very generous projection, it leaves ample time for change of technology.
I have been to Europe many times and driven in their cities. Technology in the future is fine. In 50 years it will not matter to me. just my children and they have been to Europe numerous times as well. What about the elderly, disabled, getting food to the inner cities, are they to take a bike like Amsterdam? It is hard enough to navigate their cities at present. By the way, their cities are like driving from Minneaplis to Richfield, MN. Distance small in scale to us in the US. Their grids are nothing like our open spaces. Have been to all and they are still in the dark ages when it comes to cars, park on sidewalks, lawns if available etc. Haven’t changed their infrastructure in 100 years. Take the train, Euro train, Metro underground, which by the way in England is fantastic as well as Paris, especially Paris to London on the chunnel, that sucker goes fast and it was a blast. Nothing like our present administration has on the table for Minnesota to Chicago. My Corvette can make it in twice the time. other than that only time will tell won’t it? Simply my unbiased opinion as always.
I think if they do this all that will result is the people will move out to where cars are allowed and business will follow. Abandon the city and go where movement is not hindered by outrageous environmental laws. It seems simple to me!
People always take the road well traveled. Not the reverse. Agree.
This is a great blog from The Resiliant Earth. I think it has a lot to do with what’s going on.
Precaution is now an established tenet of environmental governance, law, and public policy at the international, national and local levels. When it comes to pollution, toxic chemicals, genetically modified organisms, endangered species and climate change, the so called precautionary principle has become the guiding doctrine for timorous souls everywhere. But more than that, it is a codification of the idea that before anything new is allowed, it must be proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to cause no harm to anything in anyway, under any conditions, anywhereâ€”period. It is â€œlook before you leapâ€ on steroids and a major legal weapon used by environmentalists and neo-Luddites everywhere to hamstring human progress. Raising angst to an art form, progress hating activists have managed to block needed energy and industrial expansion at a critical time in humanity’s development.
They already have a 10 pound daily tax for driving into London (at least there was one 9 years ago) but hey, if they don’t want to burn the gas it’s more for me! In 50 years I’ll be 102 so it won’t really matter to me. I think that islam will destroy the world long before the gas farts from cars can do any more damage than it does today. America is still the best country in the world and if europe wants to become an island to the world it’s no skin off my ass.
oh, I don’t mind walking 100 miles anymore. It’s so fun.
I banned all my neighbors from driving by standing on my roof and screaming and throwing things at them as they drive by. Is that crazy? It’s not crazy when some socialist nation does it.
Brilliant Stan…. with brainpower like yours the human race is sure to figure out these serious and complex issues in no time. I’m so relieved there are geniuses like you alive and well.
Nice read Neil, Thank you. I now realize, as suspected, why Europe is in the connundrum they are in. They are not “risk takers” like Americans, and other Countries. Jam, bisquets and tea at a certain time by the way. They live in the past. Unfortunate isn’t it? Must be “Feely goody” I note, the one’s behind it and will not go further. I’m an old art major and dearly love books and art from the past but they are looking for a world that does not, nor ever will exist. My God, I’m glad I turned down doing sculpture for a living.! You just reaffirmed my decision.
Wow. I can follow a whole comment thread now!
You want we should make another 130 posts?
Did I say something offensive? Guess not. By the way did everyone read where Obama “pumped gas?” and said there is nothing he can do about gas prices? When I heard that statement I knew that he was a rookie and never should be in the position he has. He has no knowledge of reality as the Main Man. Where’s GW when you need him?
You got to give respect where respect is due, W is the man! Agree with him or not he stuck to his guns, any man that sticks to his guns has vision, he didn’t ruin the economy as some say, it was the corrupt bankers using the cover of war to institute ridiculous contracts, which people didn’t fully understand (because that’s how they were designed), when they came to and realized what kind of contracts they signed on to they get angered at the corruptness of the system and withheld payment as a form of protest (withholding of capital from corrupt lenders). There remained only 2 options; 1) total and utter failure of capitalism through inaction, or, 2) lender bailout (basically yielding to extortionism).
The worst part of all, people are so angered that this wonderful lawful civilized society we have is going to unravel, greed and corruption by those in power comes off very hurtful and condescending to those who learn that they’ve been had. And everyones been had. The rich grew richer, the poor poorer, the middle class earns 2-3X that of the poor, the rich earn 1000X that of the middle class (in other words the middle class’ pay is not in the middle of the rich and the poor, so the middle class doesn’t really exist anymore).
Tricky, tricky. I know you don’t believe that about Bush. Is there something wrong with being honest? Come on! Do you really expect us to be lieve that you respect GW Bush? As I read it I found it very hard to swollow, coming from you. But then, without missing a beat, or taking a pause, you launch a salvo into the class war! I’m starting to think that Paul was right, that you ARE Rob, because that is exactly the kind of thing he would say.
Yes, why isn’t Obama starting a war in the middle east like W did!? (oh, he is doing that in Libya), and why isn’t he able to keep gas prices as low? Oh, that’s right, W didn’t manage that either (just the opposite actually). In fact, I seem to remember W saying the exact same thing about the President’s ability to effect gas prices, and while he was Prez too. Selective memory and extreme bias does not equal logic and reasoning, or intelligence.
Interesting study in psychology isn’t it. Neil, dig further. My finger is getting tired. That said. I can always be regenerated in some fashion. V makes some points for which we agree, most I do not, nor do you. As stated in previousl posts, if everyone always agreeded we would never ever have public discourse whch is a major problem today. Get to know your adversary and never take sides until defined.
If everyone agreed the world would be a boring place.
George W. Bush is a man of great character whom I admire, when America was under attack he did not cower, he realized there were those who meant Americans harm and he waged war against them.
Republicans live in the past while democrats live in the future. I’m a centered person, I live in the present.
Neil, you’re wrong in thinking I have something against W, you’re probably reasoning that since I believe that we should put an end to oil burning and Bush is in the oil business that I have something against him. This is not the case. Bush is profiting from oil because of our dependence on it. And when I say “our” I count myself in as well. I burn as much organic compounds as the next guy, but I at least acknowledge that this practise is wrong. I say we need a replacement and that we need to advance our technology so we can cut this bad habit.
George W may have been somewhat misled by his staff (the experts) but I believe his heart was in the right place, he wanted what was best for the people.
In para two you contradict yourself. Suggest you research further as to what affiliation you are, if any at all.
Everybody should pay same % from income to taxes. If you make more you pay more. And if you do make more, you know why you do. The better educated you are the better your chance of success. Good healthcare keeps workers more productive for a longer period of time. You want to go without defence? I sure don’t. Social programs are a positive thing that are detrimental to the future growth of our civilization. Well these social programs cost money, it is unfair that someone that makes 100,000 per year and someone who makes 1,000,000 pay the same – and you’re thinking they don’t (but with write-offs they can be) – taxes need to be same for everyone, see how much personal income the person has and charge a percentage. Done.
Now to leave you with a thought. A business man profits when he sells a lot of products for a good price. How is he to profit if customers can’t buy his product? Think about that and see why socially oriented societies live so well. When people have money to spend they spend it. Taxes you pay return to you in the long run if you’re wealthy. It takes money to make money.
Minimal government involvement is not positive to a civilization, civilization is the result of the programs we pay for. You can go the stupid way and cut government out but be prepared to lose this Internet you’re reading this on. And personnel protection and safety. And schooling which teaches us to take our brilliant ideas and turn them into real products. And 80 year life expectancy would fall in half. Social programs are responsible for everything we see around us.
Sound lopsided? Well here’s the flip side. Those working the hardest should still have the most – that’s a given – if we tax 10% a person making $100,000 keeps $90,000 (no exceptions), a person who makes $1,000,000 keeps $900,000 (no exceptions). $900,000 is still more than $90,000, this is not profit sharing, this is program cost sharing. Those profiting the most from the program should be more than happy to pay a larger sum to increase probability of future profits.
Trying to cut costs is like cutting corners, you think you’re saving but in the end the product is just not up to par. Social programs should be thought of as investments into the future.
Make $1,000,000,000 pay $100,000,000.
How do you profit when people have no money?
Keeping everything for yourself is selfish, a free market hasn’t existed for a long time for a very good reason, it doesn’t produce. What it does produce though is opposition. People feel strongly on personal freedoms but they don’t fully understand the interdependence between profit and investment. In the last century our markets diversified immensely from a market which focused on necessities to a market that focuses on so much more. Anarchy (or anything close to(like libertarianism)) in other words lack of government involvement – like interlinking of the populace and instituting of policies – results in a backwards step in societal-evolution. If you think personal freedom and independence is great go and pick a fight with a group of 50 friends, you’ll learn a lesson on what socialism is (that is unless you’re Steven Segal, in which case the lesson will take about 10X more guys).
But republicans invest in stocks? Yes, but without social programs those stocks will wither in number. Technology is the result of human engineering, invest in people and they’ll make you rich.
Social assistance? Gives people a chance to turn things around, and for those who don’t it at least deters from crime. It provides them with the ability to survive without endangering those that have accrued assets. Social assistance is not a pithole, well actually it is, it is a pothole that we fill so the rest of the population don’t fall in. Honestly, I don’t blame those that steal to feed their children. You can watch them die or rob you or you can help them in the hopes that one day they’ll maybe help themselves. Who knows, they may grow to change this world by making it unimaginably better for everyone, now that would be a double whammy. Keep them from stealing from you and profit from it in the end, that’s a sweet deal.
V, Your main error is re: W. He is a sociopath, and the only American family he’s ever cared about is his own.
He seems like a good person, if he is evil then you are right – to be evil and not show it is antisocial personality – but I think that’s a wrong diagnosis on your point, where’s the proof? You can’t make an unwarranted claim like that unless you follow it with why. You’re allowed to believe he is, and prognose him as such, you need to prove it to say it.
If you were to say that in order to start a war he paid bin laden to orchestrate the 9/11 attack and as a result strategically engaged areas believed to hold the worlds #1 resource hired foreigners to “democratically” work on their own land for him as a business venture, I’d say where’s the proof? You can’t make an unsubstantiated claim. You can’t get fooled again.
He (W) showed it, just about daily as far as I could tell. That makes W a sociopath, not just anti-social. Not being able to discern the character of someone like W is VERY scary to me and explains why humans have such a hard time of it. We seem to like sociopaths- which makes sense only because they tend to be good at manipulation and can seem charming, to some people at least. We humans can be pathetic about these things. So sad, and disheartening.
I read a lot, and have studied politcs and those who need to be “in” it. But mostly it just takes the ability to see and think logically and rationally. Some people are able to do that better than others. Am I perfect? No. But I am not some naive fool with rose-colored glasses either.
V, simple question, why are you talking to yourself?
Take your pill Paul, V was addressing me I believe. Or more accurately putting words in my mouth, just like you guys like to do. Everyone needs a hobby I guess.
Keep talking to yourself. Love the discourse. Like mirroring?
Talking to myself is discourse? Only in your world with the strange colored sun…
What planet and solar system is that again?
Refresh my memory. You seem to have all the answers? Waiting.
When gas costs get even a little higher, let alone something like $9/gal. ICE cars will exterminate naturally anyway. Logical. And no amount of drilling in America can or will change the price. Fact. Deal with it and use your brains.
I believe Carter did, in fact, cap the price of oil in the 70’s at the height of that crisis. Result? The cost went down. I think big oil has been testing Obama to see if he would do or try the same thing, thus the gradual increase in prices and gouging. Obama is a corporatist in sheep’s clothing thus he hasn’t done what Carter did, nor will he. He saw what happened to Carter and doesn’t want to become a one-termer. Plus he’s much more a corporatist than Carter was.
I agree with Don that oil logos should be posted in broad daylight here on this site, regardless of Dan’s conveniently naive claims to the contrary. Hint: look at the men behind the curtain, could it be? Yes, it’s the Koch Brothers! What a surprise!
Naivete seems to be the wave of the future in todays youth.
And in certain old people as well. At least the young have the excuse of lack of experience. What’s your excuse?
Sorry, over the years have gained wisdom and that is not bragging simply a factual statement. Lack of experience, which I had as a young student, I understand. Stupidity? Now that is a different story. As posted before, all of my excellent mentors were in their late 70’s 80’s plus. They lived/experienced/knew/learned from success and failure. That my friend is your problem. Suggest a mentor. Oops, that right, they are “old People.” So was Aristotle.
My point wasn’t that old people in general aren’t smart and/or wise. This time it WAS about YOU. Funny you missed that because usually you take it personally even when it’s not. Another example of your intellectual limitations? Sheesh.
Must say that as you age you will finally understand. It is a learning experience that cannot be explained. Someday you will understand, however not today.
oh… real helpful and pertinent…. at my age of 49…. not. Try again. Or do you think 49 is young? Hint- it’s not.
That’s part of your problem. At 49 I was like a 25 year old. Now going on 64 I’m like 49! Feel excellent. Suggest that you exercise not only your body but your mind and never ever retire! Half my friends that did retire are dead. When I read retirement in the Bible, I will retire. Not until then.
OMG… Mr. Smarty-Pants has a retort to every little thing… btw… who am I???????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! V… or Rob……..?????? boo! Scared ya…..
My God, the most honest rsponse you have every given. Congrats. You must be pleased with the research you put into to it.
har har haw haw
You seem to get the drift. If not I feel sorry.