Argument works both ways. I've seen no figures proving it does less harm to the environment. Depends on whether you see it as guilty before proven innocent or vice-versa The only way we'll ever know for certain is if companies are forced to monitor carbon output - and they do so diligently.

No - the point is you're reading a one-dimensional argument and responding in the same vain. Environmental improvements are not all about carbon footprints, energy usage and saving the planet from climate change - any arguments made either for or against retaining old cars based solely on these buzzwords is flawed.

And if we're playing the Eco card, then why not let us put the £2k towards a push bike?! £2k would buy a nice bike. There's got to be loads of people for who trading up to a bicycle would be a viable option.

You can buy a bike for the cost of a tank of fuel - if someone was paying to run a car one would hope they could afford to upgrade to a pushbike without needing a bursary from the government!

Rob.

So...basically it's producing more harmful emissions than a newer car? Thus reducing air quality, making the environment in which you live worse, contributing more to respiratory conditions, etc.

Rob.

There's got to be some equation here/calculation --

Something like ---

A =expected lifespan of car * emmisions = aa

B = polution making new car to replace old car .

C= pollution equivalent of work to produce finance to pay difference .

IF A > B+C THEN scrappage is effective

IF A< B+C THEN scrappage is NON effective .

POINT OLD GOBBY(of the Brown Pants@No 10 .gov.uk) HAS FAILED TO CONSIDER .

but then , several generations of Lab Govt have failed to look at this in the past few years - consider BL/BMC , Now look at the bank fiasco .

COMPARE

So...basically it's producing more harmful emissions than a newer car? Thus reducing air quality, making the environment in which you live worse, contributing more to respiratory conditions, etc.

An interesting point. But servicing a car properly can significantly reduce particulate, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbon emissions. Then again I guess that's what the MOT is for.

You can buy a bike for the cost of a tank of fuel

Oh ok £2k worth of public transport passes or something then

So...basically it's producing more harmful emissions than a newer car? Thus reducing air quality, making the environment in which you live worse, contributing more to respiratory conditions, etc.

Rob.

Correct. However I am not getting a car shipped to me on a boat from the continent or further afield, and taking all those things into account I'm pretty sure it is better for the environment that I drive this car for another 10k and then possibly scrap it.

Also if I loose my job because I cant afford a car, the amount of stuff I would have to dump would be enormous. More stuff bad for the environment.

It's never as easy as 'it is always like this or always like that'. This car is more economical on short journeys than the diesel was. On long journeys it is the opposite.

Plenty of variables, and whether it is worth repairing or scrapping does depend on the value of the vehicle, cost of repair, and cost of purchasing new. The 10k premium of a new vehicle would just make no economical sense to me whatsoever in my current condition.

Any argument that tries to get me to get rid of my car before I can afford it is also flawed by definition

An interesting point. But servicing a car properly can significantly reduce particulate, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbon emissions. Then again I guess that's what the MOT is for.

Undoubtedly - but that's usually only going to be within the parameters of "as good as it was designed to be at the time" rather than as good as current tech can get it. For example, a 1970s Fiesta could pass an MOT and be maintained meticulously, but it's still horrendously bad for air quality compared to a 2009 model...

Rob.

This car is more economical on short journeys than the diesel was. On long journeys it is the opposite.

Fuel consumption is not necessarily related to how harmful the emissions from a car are...

Rob.

For example, a 1970s Fiesta could pass an MOT and be maintained meticulously, but it's still horrendously bad for air quality compared to a 2009 model...

True but anyone with a 1970's fiesta will probably be keeping it as a classic. Nearly all the cars that will end on the scrapper through this scheme will have had to meet the stricter emissions criteria brought in around 93 or something?! They'll have a catalytic converter, ECU, and Lambda sensor. Ok there's been technological improvements (more lambda sensors, better refinement), no idea on the limits newer cars are expected to meet though.

Fuel consumption is not necessarily related to how harmful the emissions from a car are...

Rob.

That is a totally fair point well made

I think it is fair to say though that most cars have the 'best' emissions when they're warmed up properly. A small engined petrol (with cat converter) vs a derv (even with a particulate filter) would in that case be better for a short journey (or better still, cycle or walk hehe).

Having just spent >400 quid on fuel over the past month :eek: my future driving will involve not driving mostly.

I would love to see electric cars which use solar and a mains connection to be charged. This would be very suitable for short journeys and zero (local) emissions.

Hybrids are good for in-town due to no emissions or low emissions whilst in start-stop traffic.

Another, slightly different angle on all this though is that I would be moving near my office if I could afford to. It would mean making use of the car very sparingly and only short distance in that case. Annoyingly due to house prices, that won't be happening :(

Germany have just extended their scrappage scheme, but at what cost to the economy. There are now major questions being asked about what happens after the scheme ends. Some dealers are now questioning the logic behind the scheme, and are expecting a major slump after the scheme ends. Meanwhile, perfectly good cars including Merc SLKs and the like are being crushed.

BBC NEWS | Business | Scrappage criticism mounts in Germany

Makes an interesting read, especially having just come back from a quick visit to germany and seen how high VAT is now, which is just under 20% on everything. Just think that 1/5 of everything they buy goes to their government.

Holland's VAT rate was 17.5% for absolutely ages, not sure what it is now but it is higher too :(

I wonder if this will have any limits on the state of the car or not. Otherwise I have been thinking about stripping mine down for spare when I go to go rid of it, but leaving it in a driveable state. Arguably lowers the waste from scarping it as its being reused and saves new parts being needed.

However, the 12 month ownership thing (should it be used) could have some snags. I got my car in August 2008 and it's slowly dying on me but if I try to replace it soon then it won't apply for the scheme, despite my paying decent money for it and intending to keep it until it dies. It this case how will it help people as if I bought a £100 banger to tide me over that wouldn't apply either, meaning it would be of know help.

Britain doesn't really have much of a car industry, so most of the profits would go elsewhere while the rest of us have to put up with higher taxes to pay for it.

It really does sicken me that the major car magazines are all supporting it!?

Makes an interesting read, especially having just come back from a quick visit to germany and seen how high VAT is now, which is just under 20% on everything. Just think that 1/5 of everything they buy goes to their government.

Yup, but who has the better quality of living and services?

Given the choice, I'd much rather live in Germany.

I think I'll p.ex my VRS for a Gee Wiz then. Hope they have a forum discussing the virtues off sport suspension, 312 brakes and a remap off course. Just think, no more juddering clutches/flywheels, exhausts falling off, contaminated fuels etc.