[Closed] Increasing diesel price v reduction in congestion

so 'essential' equates to being able to afford the diesel then?

diesel powered:
[img] [/img]

Which is nice.

That might hold true if you are self employed...

... otherwise your employees / colleagues are going to be wanting more pay to be able to get to work

Foooook the poorer members of society then 🙄
let the bastids walk every where they deserve it for being poor .

It was the consistent comments from hauliers / other busineses (The news seems to have interviewed trades as diverse as electricians / landscaped garderners and the like) etc about the cost of diesel pushing the prices of goods and services up which made me start thinking. If the goods and trades can be delivered more efficiently their cost could go down

If the goods and trades can be delivered more efficiently

They can, but that would mean the road hauliers went out of business.

But if the price of their goods/services go up, there's less demand for them so there's fewer white vans clogging up the road network for my essential bike/kayak transportation.

oops double post - too much network traffic - you poor people shpuild be paying more so i don't waste my time dealing with your trivia

Foooook the poorer members of society then

Being able to afford to drive has never been a right.

Being able to afford to drive has never been a right.

No but it's still quite important for many people.

I could afford to see the cost of deisel increase a fair bit if it signifcantly reduced the conjestionon on roads (i.e. priced un essential / less essential users off the road) and allowed me to complete my business miles more efficiently

This is exactly what happened after congestion charge in London for plenty of tradespeople who had to drive in/around Central London. The reduction in congestion meant quicker travel time which meant the fiver was peanuts. If you have two employees sitting in a van, you're paying two hourly wages and for diesel.

By coincidence, I got to thinking something similar while cycling to work yesterday.
In 12km, I saw about 1000 cars* and [b]no[/b] other bikes.
The only reason I could think of is that fuel, or driving in general, is too cheap.

* This is a guess. I didn't really count them.

Konabunny - My point exactly. An had those tradesmen wanted, they could have reduced their prices to their customers to reflect the better efficiency in travelling to and from work.

By coincidence, I got to thinking something similar while cycling to work yesterday.
In 12km, I saw about 1000 cars* and no other bikes.
The only reason I could think of is that fuel, or driving in general, is too cheap.

Out on a ride over the moors last week I saw about 100 walkers and no other bikes
The only reason I could think of is that walking is too cheap

Out on a ride over the moors last week I saw about 100 walkers and no other bikes
The only reason I could think of is that walking is too cheap

That's not a very useful analogy unless you believe either: (a) people drive into town in the morning for fun; or (b) all those walkers were commuting to work.

But how did those walkers get to there walk? If they'd drove fuel is obviously still too cheap as it can be used for leisure activities.

By coincidence, I got to thinking something similar while cycling to work yesterday.
In 12km, I saw about 1000 cars* and no other bikes.
The only reason I could think of is that fuel, or driving in general, is too cheap

There could have been 100 ahead of you and 100 behind you traveling at the same speed. Its the same reason that cyclists witness more bad driving, becase they are overtaken by cars and cars generally are not

[i]A good example being when the kids on on holiday journeys which may take 1hr are typically reduced to 30 - 40 mins. allowing me to complete more productive fee earning work in the day. [/i]

Not a very good example; if the kids are on holiday, parents are often too...

But the govt need to double the price of diesel, and that way those of us who drive vehicles with proper engines (triple in the motorbike, V8 in the car) will have the roads to ourselves!

Car reliance will fall dramatically when Fuel prices pass the critical point beyond which people are forced to give up being lazy beggars...

Car reliance will fall dramatically when Fuel prices pass the critical point beyond which people are forced to give up being lazy beggars

Laziness isn't the only issue here. Using the car instead of walking only accounts for a tiny portion of fuel usage I reckon.

I've always been under the impression that marine fuel was the biggest consumer of oil. I suppose when the market hits that one then we'll notice it in the price of imported goods.

Fuel for private personal transport has got to be a pretty low consumer of oil in the big scheme of things. However, I think that a lot, maybe even the majority, of car journeys could be carried out by foot, cycle or public transport.

However, I think that a lot, maybe even the majority, of car journeys could be carried out by foot, cycle or public transport

I'm a big fan of public transport, but I'm not sure I agree with that...

However, I think that a lot, maybe even the majority, of car journeys could be carried out by foot, cycle or public transport

In a city, or town, yes. Move several miles out to a village or into countryside away from a village, even, and without a car you're stuffed. Maybe one bus out and back a day, at a time not designed to fit in with any sort of work hours, and a real probability of a walk of a mile or more to somewhere where you might possibly be able to catch that one bus. If my work collegue wanted to catch the bus from where he lives in Corsham six miles away, he couldn't start at 6am like he does now, and the bus takes over two hours to travel the scenic route. Bugger that!
A girlfriend had to move into Bath from Colerne, five miles or so away, because the only bus in the morning made her twenty minutes late for work at the Pump Room. She doesn't own a car. In rural areas, a car is not a luxury.