4lex

Perhaps you could provide me some links where I can read about your secret alternative fuels? I think the World Energy Council would be keen to hear from you on this too, though sadly they aren't based in Australia so I doubt they'd qualify for your unique insights.

renth

They might not be good for the environment and contribute to global warming but the ozone layer depletion is CFCs.

You need to get your facts straight. Some people like to pull caravans and boats and plenty of people get to drive "off the bitumen" here in WA so don't tell us what we can and can't drive.

Are you one of these cyclists who ignores red lights? you'd better not do it when I'm crossing the road with my kids because if you do I'll give you a smack.

4lex

Mate, with respect you have a lot more space in WA than north Sydney. I can well see a 4x4 being more than useful out there, but running around Manly in one is a joke.

I'll ignore your deliberately inflammatory remarks about cycling

bondipom

Sometimes government has to enforce for the collective good. That is why there are minimum safety standards for cars. Government can and will tell you what to do and the dual federal/state system does plenty of nannying.

4WDs are more likely to turn over, 22 times more likely to cause death in a side impact and are responsible for the majority of deaths where kids have been reversed over in the driveway. There is a safety issue.

The hardest part of regulating is trying to distinguish between those who need 4WDs and those who want urban armour.

North Sydney has plenty of hotels so caravans are not needed. The majority of 4wds are not off road or towing.

As for the answer on how to regulate I have no idea. North Sydney is just the start.

markeh

An interesting little tale,

when over in the UK there was a protest aboutthe cost of fuel, the number of cars entering Birmingham was drastically reduced (no petrol, no driving ) but odly there was not an improvement in air quality

Some people are too willing to blame the car's for all the polution, It's worth looking at industry,trains (Big diesel engines) and the Electricity producers.

Bye
Mark

bondipom

There is however a reduction in airborne particles at the weekend. The theory is that it contributes to sods law of rain on the weekend. Some studies have shown there to be a correlation between pollution and rainy weekends. Maybe the other polluters that you note emit less at the weekend.

Hutch

My sister lives in Oatley and drives a Landcruiser Prado. She also has a horse which she keeps down near Wollongong. She tows that horse to shows in her 4WD because the last time she checked, Nissan Micras weren't that great with two-tonne loads. I'll be sure to pass along your feelings on the matter though and suggest she buys herself a Shetland pony instead.

Sweeping (and insulting) statements are bad. Go to your room.

walaj

At the moment in the UK (living less then 2 miles from town centre/bus station/train station), and if we were staying, I would seriously consider a 4WD. Why? I have a 'family' car, but I am thinking of the coming dive season and taking other half and bubs down to the coast and wondering how it is all going to fit in (1 set of dive gear plus all the bubs stuff), and someone else will be towing the boat.

We will be going to Sydney and a 2nd child is planned (who knows we may even get a boat) and a 4WD vehicle is something that could cope with that task. We are, and probably will stay, a 1 car family. Should I get another vehicle for the city/suburbs driving, keeping the 4WD for the weekends? Surely that option is less favourable to the environment?

I don't mind paying more for using up more resources, but don't slate me if you see me driving such a vehicle through Sydney.

ShozInOz

This measure is a start, but nowhere near enough. First, the tax concessions on 4WDs have to go. They are outdated and were meant for farming folk. Now the highest concentration of 4WDs is North Sydney. We don't want to hurt the country folk who really need 4WDs.

So...here's my hi-tech plan. I offer this freely to any clever technoloogist/business person partnership. Modern optical technology would allow the design of a machine to scan each 4WD as it hurtles through Sydney's streets (within a 'dirt zone' comprising CBD, North Shore and Eastern Suburbs). The machine would scan the panels of the 4WD beast while a plate reader checks the number plate, which would have details of car type ('4WD beast'/'other'). A reflection would determine the amount of dirt, dust, and mud on the bodywork. If the 4WD was fairly free of mud and red dust, then there would be a $50 per day charge.

It may need some refinement, but I think it's a plan.

ShozInOz

[OPINION] Aside from my solution above, I see these cars as a mascot for the selfish and individualistic attitude that has developed in society. They offer generally good protection for those inside (except the roll-over risk). Of course they do - so would a tank. As for pedestrians and other road users - road kill. When large 4WDs strike a smaller car, they strike above the side impact protection bars. In any case, the mass of these cars would make mincemeat out of any side impact protection. These 4WDs provide a sense opf invulnerability which may explain why these (and those stupid shiney 'Utes' that have never carried goods in the back since new) seem to drive so close behind you and cut you up more than other cars. Along with other Aussie ultra-large engine cars (3.9L entry level), they make short work of Australia's 'prisine' environment.

How an Aussie explained it to me was that the bloke get's one of these cars, with dreams of going out to the bush/etc every weekend. It doesn't happen much, cos he's too busy, and in any case he gets the train to work. So the beast gets used by mum to drop the kids off at school.

By the way, it's not just a North Sydney problem. In North Africa, the abandonment of the camel in favour of the Toyota Land Cruiser has caused the destruction of many dust tracks, and resultant huge dust clouds. [/OPINION]

HiddenPaw

Who do you think pays for the roads that you drive on? Do you think Mr Rail Commuter might fund the road infrastructure out of the taxes he pays to the govt?

ShozInOz

Sweet Baby Jesus!

Like I was warned by Aussies when I got there, Australia is becoming more American than America.

bondipom

Sydney will jam up into gridlock if car users do not subsidise public transport. Car users are paying more and more in tolls and I reckon there will be a congestion charge.

bondipom

Harbour bridge is already paid yet there are still tolls. Toll roads a plenty are being built. The politicians will be making you pay one way or another and the toll roads are nearly a de-facto congestion charge.

Australians use public transport where it is available. Parking in the CBD and North Sydney is too expensive for most.

The idiots who misplanned Sydney forgot to leave space for enough roads.

elfman

Why is it wrong? You're effectively paying them to keep the roads clearer for you and your 5,000hp "muscle" car. Scrap public transport and all the people who rode the trains will suddenly be jostling for space on the same bit of road as you. And does Sydney (for example) have unlimited space for new and bigger roads? Do you want to turn Sydney into Los Angeles?

Got any figures to back that up? I wouldn't mind betting the $$$ spent by govt on road construction and maintenance comfortably exceeds the revenue from petrol taxes etc, and the extra has to come from general tax funds, which means that ultimately public transport users do subsidise road transport. I could be wrong, but you find me some figures to disprove it. And when we're talking about the cost of roads we're not just talking about the physical cost of building and maintaining them - more roads and more traffic means more accidents, more policing, more pollution, lower air quality, etc, all of which have costs which are ultimately shouldered by the general taxpayer but are reduced by having good public transport.