Ireland Declares Climate Emergency

https://www.independent.ie/irish-new...-38098129.html

What are people's thoughts on this - how will this affect those who rely on (and, in the case of petrolheads, enjoy) the combustion engine?

I think all reasonable people appreciate climate change is a problem, but my concern is how governments including ours approach this. The obvious response will of course be to increase tax on fossil fuels, but I am not sure how well this would go down here with a middle class that is already pretty much at breaking point and where motor tax and the cost of motoring generally is stupidly high as it is. To me the only sensible approach would be to do the opposite and increase tax incentives for moving away from fossil fuels, but I am not sure there would be the political will for that here either.

From my own perspective, I am worried that this will lead to measures that make the use of performance cars such as M cars prohibitive even before I've really had a chance to own one.

Are others as pessimistic about this as I am or am I maybe overplaying it?

I hope I'm wrong but I'm pretty pessimistic about the future of combustion engines. My thoughts are that in the not too distant future, it will become socially unacceptable to be driving around in big engines - similar to the smoking ban!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 318 iS Cosmos

My thoughts are that in the not too distant future, it will become socially unacceptable to be driving around in big engines - similar to the smoking ban!

---

That's an interesting point and you're probably right. That wouldn't be enough to stop me from doing it though! But combined with a prohibitively high tax bill it might...

It was one of the reasons (albeit not top of the list) that led me to selling my own M3 last year. There is nothing stopping the government from significantly increasing the cc based tax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 318 iS Cosmos

It was one of the reasons (albeit not top of the list) that led me to selling my own M3 last year.

---

Only to be replaced by a €1494 annual tax car....:p

Combustion engines are dead - Amsterdam will be banning all petrol/diesel engine cars by 2030 and other countries/cities will follow suit before/after then.

Admittedly battery powered cars will have come on massively by then, but a vintage E46 M3 with €56 annual motor tax will keep one foot in the old-school....;)

The interesting bit about this vote is that, according to Morning Ireland this morning, there were 6 TD’s in the Dail to vote on it.

If that’s a measure of commitment then I don’t think we need to send all the M’s to the recyclers just yet.

It is coming though.

Thinking that even prohibiting internal combustion engines in Ireland will have the slightest impact on global climate change, is so beyond ridiculous when the likes of China and India and 100% of the developing world doesn’t give a f@&k! Because guess what, when people can barely afford to get by they don’t care what’s coming out of their exhausts.

That’s not even getting into the taboo discussion that climate change has more to do with farming and meat consumption than combustion engines (cause I’m partial to a side of steak to go with my large capacity engine :D)

Honestly though, when your one main interest / hobby / passion is so heavily taxed here, it’s reason enough to move to another country and save on VRT, obscene motor tax rates and the constant threat they’re going to get worse, or a ban imposed.

United States of Trump Lands is looking pretty good right about now..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter-E36

Honestly though, when your one main interest / hobby / passion is so heavily taxed here, it’s reason enough to move to another country

---

I suppose that's the thing though, in a week when the UN report came out, the sense of urgency about the need for change is accelerating, and change will come because the generation('s) following behind us lead it and shame us in to doing something. We can point the finger at other groups, producers of waste and pollution, and countries, and say that my change won't help until they do something, but the thing about leadership is that someone has to do the right thing first.

I wouldn't have thought Ireland would have been mentioned in that context, and I fear that our track record to date may show the words to be worthless when the difference between the words and our deeds is massive, but we do need to put our shoulders to the wheel.

So, lets look at how we can get cows to fart less, and lets look at what global population growth has contributed to the situation (people breath, producing CO2, and they eat, requiring the clearing of massive land masses to produce food) and how we can reduce the impact, and maybe fly and drive a little less.

One way that things have changed in recent decades is how we deal with disease and natural disasters. These things, through the millenia, have kept populations in check and ensured that massive centres of population don't survive in unsuitable or unsustainable locations, but we've gotten (too) clever (we think) as a human race to overcome these natural checks on sustainability and figured out ways to protect from these natural deterrents, but generally at a high cost to the planet when all rolled up to the global level.

I suspect that Mother Nature will fight back though, and probably win by brute force. Antibiotic resistant diseases and illnesses and new strains of things will probably achieve what the Spanish Flu did after WW1, etc. A couple of new world wars could help too and we (humans) haven't been clever enough to not elect or inherit nuts with their fingers on the nuclear buttons, so I'd say Darwin will be proven right about natural selection in the end. A good nuclear war would sort out a lot of the population sustainability issues we face. The main risk for those that survive is that nuclear poisoning means each has two mouths to feed instead of the one we have today.

I think the ICE engine will eventually die when we reach the stage where we can efficiently generate electricity. At the moment I firmly believe electric cars are a total cod, yes they are warranted in large cities to reduce smog, pollutants etc. but its not fooling anyone on how that power is generated. Coal primarily (or worse turf in our case!), wind is great but the fact a generator has to be kept on standby (running not generating electricity) makes it seem a bit daft and wasteful. Gas powered turbines can circumvent this due to quick starting time (Germany is rolling out loads) but until we get to terms with nuclear power, I think half of this is an exercise in stupidity. For the consumer yes it's great due to tax reliefs, but from an environmental impact point of view it makes little difference.

As Dergside mentioned one of the primary causes of greenhouse gases is methane from agriculture. Maybe we should go vegan and drive V8s :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dergside

I suppose that's the thing though, in a week when the UN report came out, the sense of urgency about the need for change is accelerating, and change will come because the generation('s) following behind us lead it and shame us in to doing something. We can point the finger at other groups, producers of waste and pollution, and countries, and say that my change won't help until they do something, but the thing about leadership is that someone has to do the right thing first.

I wouldn't have thought Ireland would have been mentioned in that context, and I fear that our track record to date may show the words to be worthless when the difference between the words and our deeds is massive, but we do need to put our shoulders to the wheel.

So, lets look at how we can get cows to fart less, and lets look at what global population growth has contributed to the situation (people breath, producing CO2, and they eat, requiring the clearing of massive land masses to produce food) and how we can reduce the impact, and maybe fly and drive a little less.

One way that things have changed in recent decades is how we deal with disease and natural disasters. These things, through the millenia, have kept populations in check and ensured that massive centres of population don't survive in unsuitable or unsustainable locations, but we've gotten (too) clever (we think) as a human race to overcome these natural checks on sustainability and figured out ways to protect from these natural deterrents, but generally at a high cost to the planet when all rolled up to the global level.

I suspect that Mother Nature will fight back though, and probably win by brute force. Antibiotic resistant diseases and illnesses and new strains of things will probably achieve what the Spanish Flu did after WW1, etc. A couple of new world wars could help too and we (humans) haven't been clever enough to not elect or inherit nuts with their fingers on the nuclear buttons, so I'd say Darwin will be proven right about natural selection in the end. A good nuclear war would sort out a lot of the population sustainability issues we face. The main risk for those that survive is that nuclear poisoning means each has two mouths to feed instead of the one we have today.

---

Maybe we need a Thanos.....