Unfortunately, suggesting yet another increase in taxes as the answer plays wonderfully into the politician's hands who see the "green initiatives" as a great money spinner. Why was the London congestion charge zone extended? Because the original zone worked too well and not enough people paid the tax. Prof King will only get government support as long as he continues to advocate new tax generating measures.

David Bennett, Chesham, United Kingdom

The overall amount of CO2 emitted by vehicles could well greatly reduced if the government got it's act together. For many years now I have seen , in many parts of the country, long, hardly moving, daily traffic queues, particularly around the "rush hours", all pumping out the CO2 and needlessly consuming fuel.
A prime target for the Government should be to eradicate all traffic queues by road improvements. The problem is not too many vehicles but badly designed systems, too many roundabouts, not enough turn right filters and "obstructive" parking. Time we sacked all our traffic engineers and Highways Agency staff - they have not been able to get it right.

Chris Goodman, Fareham, Hampshire

Professor King is right. Hydrogen will cost much more than petro-fuels, even if HFC vehicles can be sold for under $100,000. They're a million apiece now,
Resale values of Toyota RAV4 EV electrics (the few hundred actually sold) still exceed the original purchase price.

Fueling EVs with electricity produced by burning fossil fuels reduces overall emissions by over 90%, when the emissions caused in producing petro-fuels are also included.

Mitsubishi and Subaru will be selling full-sized EVs before 2010; by then, Tesla, Miles, Commuter Cars, Miles and others may also have highway-capable, 100-mile-range EVs on sale.

In Orlando, Florida, USA, I'm waiting impatiently, and don't need incentives.

Hugh E Webber, Orlando, Florida

Unbelievably the chancellor has already made a huge concession to drivers using vegetable oil as a biofuel. My diesel runs perfectly well on a 50:50 mixture of vegetable oil (straight from the supermarket shelf) and diesel from the pump.
George Brown (for he was chancellor at the time) set an allowance of 2,500 litres a year, duty free. At least half of my emissions are carbon dioxide neutral. At the moment I am running on corn oil grown in this country, Good for the environment Good for Britain.

Mark Dakers, Frimley,

Thank god for professor Julia, where would we be without this magical electrickery stuff? God that's so clever using something that's like free and naturally occurring all that. Wish I'd thought of it. Those batteries, are they made from fluffy bunnies or something?

Think I'll just stick to driving my open topped 5 litre V8 TVR, I'm far too dumb for all this climate science malarkey. It's lovely though when the sun is out and you can feel the heat on your face and watch the trees smile when they slurp my CO2.

Odd isn't it that it gets warmer when the sun is out? That wouldn't have anything to do with the temperature would it? You know, the fact that CO2 levels kinda follow temperature rises not precede them? You know Julia, cause and effect and all that. Still, what do I know, I'm not a scientist.

To quote Jim Royle, CO2 my arse.

Rob, Peterborough,

Its time for all sensible people opposed to this money rasing thievery to organise a slow drive thru london on a sunday b4 the budget and bring all traffic to a halt for 3-4 hours therby saving the planet all ideas welcome this gov has to go into the dusbin on history, for good, one small country cant offset the co2 from eg china pl mr brown stop kidding urself and martyring the british people for some old bags idiotic ideas based on a communists ethos screwing the havs to cover the hav nots and the asylum seekers not

yeshurun, london, england

So the government wants to tax larger cars. That means you and I will pay more for government ministers to drive around in big cars

doug george, Chester, UK

The energy needed to manuafacture a new car is huge, I rarely use my car but need it to ferry children and their stuff to and from university, and short trips to the station. If I scrap my old car and buy a new efficient one it will take many years for the energy saved to compensate for the energy of manufacture of that new car. People should be encouraged not to change their cars so frequently, and tax should be paid on car use rather than on a yearly vehicle license.

Stuart Greenhalgh, Stafford

Stuart Greenhalgh, Stafford, UK

How is this fair? Other countries are far more polluting than we are, once again the British government is using pollution and climate change as a means to tax the hell out of us.

The British public should vote with it's feet at the polling stations. I am aware we should clean our act up but taxing us even more than we're being taxed no is rediculous. Where does this extra tax go anyway? I'd bet my last 50p (after tax) that all this money raised through backward green initiatives goes on asylum seekers and the rubbish NHS.

I've got an idea, why don't we abolish free handouts for lazy people or people that have six kids on purpose so they don't have to work, that way they can't afford fuel or electricity, thus reducing out carbon output*.

*Please note people may die as a result but if that means no more taxing of hard working people such as myself then good.

Footnote - I despise people who don't work and claim benefits when there is nothing wrong with them.

Luke Faichney, Robin Hood's Bay, North Yorkshire

There is a germ of a good idea in this but, as the RAC says, people cannot change their cars overnight without heavy financial loss. Also, manufacturers need time to design and tool up for the production of the officially-approved tiny, poor-performing yet expensive models we will be pressured into buying.
If this is to be the way forward, it would be sensible to leave taxes etc where they are on all vehicles currently licensed until the end of their lives. The new, penal, taxes should not start until some date in the future - say in three years' time. This would give everyone a breathing space and time to adjust to what seems inevitably to be an increasingly cramped, restriction-ridden future.

Dave Lee Thompson, Wakefield, UK

The dying days of a Government which has lost any sense of what it is like in the real world and the cost implications for everyone. We know its just another, of many, tax grabs!!

kevin, Hartlepool, UK

The government can't afford to do this, if everyone drove low tax low fuel use cars where would the govrnment recoup all the lost tax? Also where does the power come from for the electricity? and if you live in the countryside and get a lot of powercuts in the winter e.g. farmers, do you just leave the animals feed/worl and wait for the power to come on so you can charge your car/tractor?

Electric cars graet if you live in a city no good else where.

CG, Fife, Scotland

Second hand 4x4 on eBay = £1500.00, second hand Prius on eBay = £9000.00. Grant available to convert 4x4 to LPG = £0.00 with the likelihood you will still pay the higher rate duty anyway. The message I take from this is that green initiatives will only receive Government support if they also provide an additional, or increased, revenue stream. Drive green by all means but understand that excise duty for green cars will inevitably rise in step with increased ownership. This coninued avaricious approach to green issues will deliver a degree of support equalled only by that 'achieved' by the poll tax.

Martin Elphick, Swindon, England

This is just another hidden form of taxation. Why do they not do the same thing as in Japan where a NEW car his heavily subsidised thus making it more affordable for people on lower incomes, (the very people who can't afford another £1,000.00 increase). Its just down to profit and greed all round. If this country was really dedicated to green issues it would produce cheap and efficient motoring.
In the meantime, how about stopping all the junk mail I get through my letterbox. If you were to calculate the amount of rubbish that goes straight in the bin it would add up to a LOT of wasted energy and pollution in its manufacture.

Mike Jones, Farnborough, Hampshire

"cars in Band G which produce more than 225g/km of CO2"

well, only if they're driven. So why tax the car when the damaging thing is the mileage?

William McIlhagga, Ilkley,

So Professor King can reduce CO2 emissions by changing to battery powered electric vehicles!
Even if the charge/discharge cycle were 100% efficient - an it's NOT - she would only move the emissions to the power station. So by extrapolation of this logic she must be proposing a move to 100% nuclear generation. Seems to me that Professor King is singing from political hymn sheet as she doesn't seem to have a clue where energy comes from.

Clive, Newport, South Wales

Better to charge a surtax on Chinese imports than hit our drivers who pay enough tax on our vehicles as it is.When you consider the pollution caused by the Chinese set against a few 4x4's in this country, the only conclusion is the obvious one, that this has nothing to do with the enviroment but more to do with tax raising robbery.

Kenneth O'Boyle, Perth, Perthshire

If the govt's desire is to reduce global warming, it should tax the production of greenhouse gases directly. That would be done by taxing fuel, since it is the burning of fuel that produces CO2, not the ownership of a car. Similarly the production of new cars, hybrid batteries and new infrastructure also produces CO2, and this should be taxed at the same rate as the burning of fuel.
If CO2 production is the bad that must be reduced somehow by taxation, then production of other, far more potent greenhouse gases must be taxed at appropriate rates. Methane gas is 21 times more hamrful than CO2, so tax on cows needs to be set appropriatly.
If the harmful production is not taxed such a manner, it will drive the wrong behaviour, which will not lead to the stated desired outcome, reduction of the greenhouse effect. Alternativly, it could be that our political leaders don't believe that is the objective of tax policy on CO2 and it is cynical tax raissing hidden behind a fake greeen agenda

Mark Baker, Grays, Essex

Surely a more equitrable solution to reduce CO2 output from cars would be to reward the use of the current stock of cars; and penalise those who do buy new cars with for example a two tier system?

I read somewhere, that in terms of CO2 output, it was more environmentally friendly to run a clapped out old car that burns more oil than fuel for the next 25 years as supposed to buying a new car, considering the amount of energy and input that is required to manufacture it.

So once again it would appear the government is going about the issue in a A over T manner again. Rather than attacking the consumer and penalising us, why do they not tackle the source of the issue.

Another example of this is say, Recycling packaging, If there were no packaging from supermarkets etc, the ability to act sustainably would be increased ten fold. But yet the government is seeking to penalise us for something we have no control over (the source!)

Oh well, at least Mr. Browns pay packet is safe!

Chris, Sevenoaks, Kent

Professor King should think again on batteries. They are a high cost, short life item, and it doesn't matter whether you buy it or lease it, you will pay. Messing about with finance options is wholly secondary to the key issue - what is the life of a battery and what does it cost to use it over the life of the car? The market will soon sort that issue out. It will not be cheap.

She has a lot of good points, though, with penalties for gas guzzling at the top of the list. Few people buy large engined cars with their own money, so why not make it economically unacceptable to run such a car on a company or state account? A special tax on new engines over 150gm/km would soon sort that out, and at the same time, reduce excessive speed. German car makers are resisting this but they will come into line eventually, especially if sales in their key markets fall dramatically.

Colin , Shrewsbury,

As a family of 6 who NEED an MPV, purely to do all those normal things like shopping, taking a parent out with the family, and all those other essentials.
I use buses for many things; but when you have a large family public transport is not practical for lweekly shops, or long journey's needing luggage- and at this time of year Christmas presents.
We are already penalised by higher car tax, petrol charges and maintenance costs.
This will be one tax too many, so the Treasury should expect a drop in the income tax received by those who need large cars but can't afford the penalty.

C. Bevitt, nottingham, uk

I feel as if I'm being hounded by Government and the Police for driving a car!

Just this week alone, we have had a raft of Government proposals introduced via the media. To go over a certain speed twice means you will lose your license. To fail to insure your car means that it will be crushed. To chose to drive a family saloon will cost a thousand pounds more...the list goes on!

Twice this week on a bridge overlooking the A55 near Broughton, Chester, between 8 - 10 police cars with flashing lights were swooping, one after another, on cars having passed a Camera Van actually on the A55 a half a mile before the bridge!

Last night I drove to a shop only to have a laser light shone in my face from a police car parked up and hidden, off of a minor B road in St David's Park, Ewloe! It most definately temporarilly blinded me! I wasn't speeding - but he was hunting!

We officially now live in the Republic of Brunstrum were druggies are ok but drivers are loathed! It's that crazy!!!

David, Chester, UK

How I do wish these plonkers could major in simple arithmetic, The UK yet again carries the cross of the world`s emissions in CO2.
A highly disputed science, now taken by the UK to be of course factually precise and exact, and of course taxeable to the nth degree...

Ian Paterson, Dunfermline, UK

Julia King is completely wrong about hydrogen production and it seriously concerns me that someone with so much influence should be so technically ignorant.

It is entirely possible to produce massive amounts of hydrogen using electrolysis powered by renewable sources such as offshore wind, wave and tidal. In fact there is a small project demonstrating this in Scotland.

If this is the quality of advice this Govt is getting then its a case of the blind leading the partially sighted.

Go to www.h2stations.org and see where all the hydrogen refuelling stations are now around the world.. Look at the UK. and there's one little dot in the N of Scotland.

Dick Winchester, Aberdeenshire,

Green taxes - don't make me laugh. Where is all this extra money going? It certainly will not be on green issues. Why don't the government lead by example? None of this flying to this conference and that conference, having several households, and numerous family cars. They want us to fund their frivolous lifestyle, while the rest of us struggle to survive.

Chris, Birmingham,

Does anyone really believe this government wants to simply reduce carbon emissions? Consider new airport runways, terminal 5,etc. As they slowly reduce our quality of life compared to our European neighbours & play on the electorate's ignorance in order to increase govt.revenues - who's paying for Iraq? - it's time people with some influence got more organised and led the revolt!

Martin Elson, Burwash, UK

Oh dear, yet more penalties for the evil motorist. I find two of these recommendations complete nonsense. I drive a big 4x4...why? Because I like them and it's a relatively free country. I don't use it everyday, I use public transport. I only ever drive it on odd evenings and weekends. Therfore my 'carbon footprint' is lower than my neighbour in their angelic hatchback, which is used every day. Not long now until we view those with big houses as 'anti social'. The future is to travel in souless cars to your tiny souless new build eco box. How exciting.

Richard Gooch, London, UK

Here we go again, the government finding another excuse to steal money from the private motorist, who contributes a minute proportion of total CO2 emissions.
If we're serious about CO2, why aren't all government cars running on LPG where the CO2 emission is zero?
And let's start hearing about the real cause of the planet's problems - human overpopulation. Want to give an example to the world? Let's start with a UK two-child policy, initially it can be fiscally encouraged, if that doesn't work then more than two children can be fiscally discouraged, then withdrawal of ivf on the NHS, and so on. Strange that we find it necessary this wek to fuss about the (tiny) population of wild boar and the damage it might (not) do, yet our own grotesque world overpopulation - the cause of global warming - is ignored. And we're supposed to be the most intelligent animal?
I don't think so.

Ivor Duarte, Shepperton, UK

What about the awful congestion from school users : on a school holiday there are almost no cars on the road where I drive and it takes 25 minutes to work. After school, it becomes more than 1 houir and there is massive congestion. Why doesn't someone fix this problem and there will be massive reduction of CO2; also drivers should take special tests on how to reduce consumption by driving sensibly e.g. no point in accelerating massively to 50 mph towards a road block or traffic jam that is 50 yards away and slamming on the brakes !!!!!!

Albert Stein, Leeds, UK

Electric cars will NOT reduce carbon emmissions. Where do the idiots that think so simply think the electricity comes from? Thin air. To get the electricity to power every car in teh UK we woudl need a massive new construction initaitive for power stations, probably coal or oil fired since the same nimbies who want to force this ide athrough get shaky at the thought of nuclear energy.
And before they start, wind and wave energy are non-starters. Wind energy cannot hope to supply all our current needs, never mind what would be required for cars and buses. And what about the toxic impact of all those lectric batteries? They don't last forever and would have to be disposed of somehow. Bet none of the supergreenies had considered that little problem.

JimmyD, Cardiff, Wales

I love electric cars! You plug them into a wall socket and it charges causing no envimental affect, this stuff just fills up from the wall amazing!!
Come on!

andy, Petersfield,

1. climate change is going to change forever the way we think and behave with regard to travel
2. we have, or within the next few years will have reached Peak Oil and the combination of rapidly increasing prices and unstable sources of supply will also forever change the way we think and behave with regard to travel.
3. Tax and incentives are the best policy tools to change behaviour.
4. Therer are huge vested interests that will fight tooth and nail with sophisticated and powerful voices to resist this.
5. electric cars are the only affordable, available, practical solution that will enable us to keep on driving
6. the emissions from electric cars are lower than any other existing technology even when emissions from power stations are included, that's why Professor King supports them.
7. electric cars will soon provide a better driving experience than current ICE cars. They will be cheaper, quieter, less polluting and faster.

Keith Johnston, London, UK

This is just old fashioed class warfare where you tax the rich again for spending their hard earned money. Worse, generating electricity produces emissions but these are not taken into account in the calculations.

Peter German, St Helier,

Every perceived problem is answered by taxation by this government, without a thought for the people who matter - the voters. At some time they will bite back.
The nonsense of these proposals are revealed without any real analysis - motorists are already taxed a huge amount at the pumps - that causes them to use their fuel guzzling vehicles sparingly. The emissions created by the manufacture of alternative vehicles easily outweighs the emissions created by large vehicles being driven low mileages annualy. All these expensive studies will have many unintended effects - look at what is happening to the inflating price of food as more land is used to produce these hugely inefficient biofuels. More people everywhere will actualy starve to death - now thats a sobering thought. A great example of muddled thinking is the huge tax on diesel - when most diesel engines have a much lower output of CO2. Of course the treasury likes the income, so this tax will never be reduced

Diddly Do, Liverpool,

If cars use less fuel it will mean cheaper motoring. We could choose to pay less tax by choosing a more fuel efficient car.

Robert, Cumbria,

This is all about tax and not about green energy or reducing CO2 at all. IF it was about CO2, then they would look at solutions that do not need to increase tax. For example, IF these greenies didn't have such a vile hatred of cars and they watched Top Gear, then they would have seen the solution. In 2003, when James May demonstrated a GM concept vehicle that ran on seawater and the only emission was water vapour. That was truly a zero CO2 emissions car AND it produced enough electricity not only to power the car, but to power your home too! This was a real, proven concept in 2003. IF the man-made CO2 climate change argument stood up to scrutiny (it doesn't) then this would the part of the solution and the car manufacturer's should be compelled by law to manufacture these in large numbers for zero tax.

But that would look too much like a solution, wouldn't it? The Government does not want solutions, they want to look green but still steal our tax.

Ken Hall, Barrow in Furness, UK

If we are going to be taxed more it should be on vehicle use and not ownership but at the end of the day this government does not care about the environment this is just another revenue raiser.

Alan Mackay, Aberdeen, Scotland

Well call me a pessimist but it’s just another tax albeit a very big one.

All this pseudo CO2 concern is just to hide the Governments strategy to tax everyone for anything. Do you really think that if they produced a car with zero emissions, and overnight everyone bought one, there would be no tax at all the next day?...of course not. The Government would just find an alternative so they would reap the same revenue.

It makes me angry. In fact it made me so angry I left the country for good. Don’t get me wrong, the grass isn’t necessarily greener on the other side but at least its different grass.

By the way petrol is around 15p a litre here

Nigel Sweet, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Might I suggest Professor Juia King goes to the website of a UK company called Torotrak. There she will find a company that has developed a transmission that will give 15% fuel improvement, improved vehicle performance, a transmission that is scalable from lawn mowers to Trucks/buses and is all available NOW. Will the vehicle manufactures use it - NO because they have invested too much money in old technology such as 7 speed auomatic gear boxes and the like. And one other thing - the formula 1 industry is intending to use a development of this for obtaining additional regenerative power without the use of weighty and expensive batteries and expect it to be in place for the 2009 season.

Get real Professor and come out of your ivory tower and into a world that exists NOW!

neil, KL, Malaysia

So, I may have to pay a lot more to continue to run my ten year old large family car. But that cost will take a LONG time to break even given that to replace my car with something of similar size and comfort yet more carbon efficient will cost me at least £20-25,000. I'll be well into my 80's by then and probably won't be driving any more anyway! Just another tax that won't have any effect on my driving but will put more cash into the government's coffers.

Brian, Farnham, UK

What ever action that we take here in the U.K. will have no effect on global warming as the remedy lies in the third world and the U.S.
It is just an excuse to increase taxes.
All this will do will make car ownership avaliable only to the well off as it was once in the early decades of the last century.
A case of BACK TO THE FUTURE.

The case a case of " ON YOUR BIKE" Professor.

Bernard Parke, GUILDFORD,

forget climate change -this is all about energy security and cost of importing fuel
in this respect it is sensible to influence purchase of new vehicles with potential 10 year life
what is not acceptable is to keep on loading road tax on existing vehicles many of which are owned by people in the country who have essential need for a car but cant afford to replace with new
it is about time Government were more honest about pending energy supply probems

john , ipswich,

Once again we see how this government operates. Having found that increases in direct taxation are hugely unpopular, they look around and see if they can find some other tax-cow to milk. "Ah, yes", they say, "Why not the motorist, he has an inifintely deep pocket, and after all, they are the source of all problems." Typical New Labour, same as Old Labour, tax and spend, tax and spend. Remember, just because it's labelled "Green" or an Eco-tax, a tax is still a tax, is atill a tax...

Adrian Ryan, Donegal, Ireland

"Why don't the governement replace the miles of unused cycle lanes with wider roads, making journey times shorter, and thus reducing the volume of fuel used - hence reducing CO2 naturally."

...Or we could all use the cycle lanes and truly feel alive! We could eradicate obesity and save the environment at the same time. Shrink our roads and plant trees at the sides, widen the pavements and treat pedestrians favourably. I whizz past all the cars stuck in traffic on my bike and the best thing is that to power it i just move my legs! I don't need to drill miles and miles below Alaska to find Oil and I'm not held to ransom by the near $100 price!

Cycling is great, try it some time.

Callum Scott, Oxford, United Kingdom

It is inevitable that mankind will burn all the oil until it runs out. Why does it matter whether this process is completed in 50 years or 80 years or 100 years? We might as well enjoy the oil while we are here, rather than leave it for our descendents. What more right do they have to use the oil than we?

This is just another excuse for our communist government to extract more money from the already over-burdened taxpayers.

David Rochester, Liverpool, UK

How does this effect disabled people whom have difficulty getting in and out of ordinary cars.
I have MPV disabled car because its easier to get in and out not because of emmisions.
People will buy what they want if they have he money what they want not what the goverment wants. Its up to the manufacures to supply green cars for all. Including LPG, that won't make any diffrence its our money in tax the goverment wants and they will raise prices to get that money.

Peter, Hastings, UK

Hasn't anybody noticed the paltry global warming of the last century has stopped. Global mean temperature has declined since 1998.
Global warmists at NASA Godard Centre have been forced to admit they got the figures for the last century wrong, 1934 was the warmest year. The IPCC is falling apart. Its hockeystick graph that shows mean temperatures as flat for a thousand years then sharply rising towards the end of the last century has been discredited as false. Volcanic activity beneath the north pole is responsible for the ice fluctuations. Antartica has more ice than previously measuered. All these facts and many more are being suppressed by governments and an ignorant media.
So much fuss about government lies but why is the biggest lie of them all going unchallenged? This lie is costing us our liberty and our livelihood.

Bob, Faversham, UK

Calm down everyone. It's only yet another report from yet another academic who is far removed from the real world. Isn't it?

John Osborne, Grantham,

As usual the goverment builds a tax system for social engineering, rather than achieving their stated aims, and then need so many exclusions to recover from the un-intended impacts - it is simple - if you want to reduce the amount of CO2 produced increase the duty on fuel - this then puts choice in to the hands of people - you can reduce how much you pay by using public transport, but still keep a car for when public transport doesnt work. It is simple to introduce, simple to collect and obviously fair.

Dave, Reading,

"18 per cent come from deforestation. " really? I think there is need for more intelligence when looking at these statistics.

A tree locks up carbon when alive, but when it dies it releases that carbon - through a long a complicated cycle it actually is carbon neutral.

I'm sorry to tell you that to remove carbon, you need to actually lock it up permanently, and one unpalitable way to do this is to turn it into tarmac.... yes - MORE ROADS!

stick that in your carbon free pipe and don't smoke it.

I'll be suprised if the times print this, they have removed other such comments.

Paul, Milton Keynes,

This makes very little sense... As has been said, the tailpipe emissions of electric cars will be 0 but the electricity still needs to be made using... oh yes, fossil fuels!
Hydrogen fuel cells will never work, they are a waste of time and monet. The hydrogen cannot be safely contained in the cars fuel cell (BMW have tried but after 3/4days the hydrogen leaks out of the tanks due to the size of its molecules) and it is close to impossible to pump the stuff. If we start using hydrogen cells then we will have to stop using our garages (because the hydrogen leaks out and fills the garage making it a time bomb waiting to explode) and start having to change fuel pumps every 5kmiles at a maximum.
Ms King may have a grasp of emissions and the environment but she clearly has no idea of the engineering challenges which are preventing these alternative fuels becoming viable. It is very dangerous to start making such recommendations without understanding the full picture.

M.B., London,

Obviously electric cars are impossible out of town because of the 30 mile range. They're impossible in town too if you (a) need to carry children (they're 2 seaters), or (b) don't have a drive and outdoor powerpoint where you can recharge it overnight. So unless you're single and live in a £2 million house in central London they're utterly useless. God save us from another ivory tower "academic" trying to impose her absurd ideas on the real world.

Also, since it became law that all children have to sit on a booster seat until they're about 9 years old, even small/medium size cars don't work if you've got more than 2 kids. Don't believe me? Run the tape measure across the back seat of something like a Fiesta and divide by 3 for the boosters. They won't go in. So you have to buy something bigger. Joined up government? In your dreams.

Redcliffe, London,

Fuel escalator tax, vat on household fuel, landfill tax, mineral extraction tax, tax on aeroplane flights, increased fuel duty for larger cars, congestion charging and more. And now proposals to tax household bins,

Yes our ordon has certainly raised billions and billions of pounds on so called environemental taxes - but where does it go. Certainly not on the green issues!

No, our prudent chancellor, now Prime Minister needs all of this taxation to fund an extra 1,000,000 million civil servants and to fund a war in Iraq.

Big government with ever increasing state surveilance is the legacy of our iron chncellor - and sadly more to come.

w hutcheson, Luss, Scotland

Land Rover has the lowest immissions per mile over the life of the vehicle. This is because of the high emmissions that are caused when a vehicle is manufactured .... and over 70% of Land Rovers ever produced are still on the road. Any car made in the last twelve years has ECU control which is tested for correct operation at MOT. ie. old cars do not create more polution. They get scraped because they are low in value and not consumer attractive. More money spent on keeping them going and constraining the purchase of new cars would get a much bigger result.
I am advised on this by my sons. One of whom has an economics degree from Cambridge and the other is doing Politics and economics at Oxford.

Regards

Peter White, Kings Langley, Herts

Possible other Green Measures more useful.

Severn Estuary Tidal Barrage estimated at 5% of UK electricity needs. Maybe one in the Thames Estuary and elsewhere.

(Reduce imports of Gas/Oil/Coal for electrical power generation, provide construction work in SW/Wales and platform for wind power)

More offshore wind , wave power and hydro power. Mandatory solar panels on all new HMG buildings.

Better building regulations re CHP in larger developments.

Replacement of some nuclear plant (if unable to be filled via wind and wave)

Hypothecated Green Taxes into encouraging long term renewables or savings eg subsidized energy efficient bulbs.

sm, London,

World oil production will peak shortly, then fall. China, India, etc. require ever greater quantities of oil for their expanding economies and rocketing car use. Oil prices are set to soar.

The oil age will soon end, and with it the ever expanding global economy based on cheap energy. We need to prepare for a low carbon, low energy future. Cuba - as a communist dictatorship hardly an example for anything else - was forced to do this when the Soviet Union collapsed and it lost its subsidized oil supplies. Its economy & food production collapsed & it was forced to change course, as we all will soon (industrialized farming depends on cheap oil & cheap oil products).

Dave, Wrexham,

Lets also consider the impact of scrapping all those so called gas guzlers - how much energy has already been spent making the exisiting fleet of cars on today's roads?
If cars were made to last longer and be more efficient then this would serriously cut emmisions - why always penalise the consumer! After all we can only buy what is made for us to purchase!

Nic, Cardiff,

I could not care less about the whingers and spinners complaining below. I think it's a great idea.
Why are we happily pouring money into the pockets of Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia? Anything that means better vehicle economy standards is good with me. We buy less oil then.

The less fuel burnt, the less money goes to people we do not consider the most deserving of it. If it means the blunt weapon of taxation needs using, then go right ahead. I'll enjoy the proceeds of the exercise in better MPG and cleaner air in our cities.

Roy Ellor, Salford, UK

It is easier and more profitable for this government to tax the motorist than to face the real challenge of CO2 production from the likes of China.

Craig Murray, Glasgow,

How is this latest "inititive" from our squeaky clean Government going to save the planet from the emissions from the legions of massive SUV's that are vehicle of choice in North America? What about the new coal fired power stations that China and India are franticaly building? The methane from the zillions of flatulent cattle and sheep that we keep? Get real. If the whole of the UK abandoned motor transport compltely it would not make a significant amount of difference to the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

W D Toulman , Walkington East Yorkshire, UK

How is this latest "inititive" from our squeaky clean Government going to save the planet from the emissions from the legions of massive SUV's that are vehicle of choice in North America? What about the new coal fired power stations that China and India are franticaly building? The methane from the zillions of flatulent cattle and sheep that we keep? Get real. If the whole of the UK abandoned motor transport compltely it would not make a significant amount of difference to the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

W D Toulman , Walkington East Yorkshire, UK

Just where will all the electricity to recharge the cars batteries come from and how will that process be powered?

andrew brown, Perth,

The temperature on MARS increases by the same as planet Earth, yet here its man that caused it not the sun activity which is making us warmer eh?

Paul Lavin, York, uk

More tax and spin, why doesn't Labour just admit it, they have no idea how to clean up the environment.

Cramming people on Public transport doesn't work when the tax they are trying to get the public off roads hit transport companies aswell rising cost of fuel = rising ticket prices.

Asking people to use hybrid cars e.g. electric when they admit the UK is heading to an energy crisis due to insufficent Power Stations being built. (Nuclear is not an option only CO2 stations will do;)

Failure to promote Biodiesel by not reducing the Road Duty or offering incentives for Oil companies to develop and sell it quicker.

"The Chancellor has decided that the revenues from any real terms increases in fuel duties will, in future, go straight in to a ring-fenced fund for improving public transport and modernising the road network."

Pre Budget 1999, poor public transport, poor roads , poor management.

Lam Thai, Telford, Shropshire

Another 'Carbon Emissions Farce' from our exalted leaders. Until we crack down on other nations like China and India, I'm afraid we are merely urinating into a strong headwind! My uncle works in transport. He has a regular run where he picks up raw wool from a mill in Manchester. He takes it to the docks (immingham I think) where it goes on a boat to China. They make socks out of it, it goes back on the boat, arrives at the dock where my uncle picks it up and takes it to a warehouse about 1/2mile from the original mill! How about cracking down on things like that before picking on someone who has no option but to use their vehicles, especially poor people in rural areas. It is a scam by the government and we just put up with it. Why don't they crack down on people going abroad by plane, which create more CO2 than thousands of cars with every trip they make? Brown out!

Terrance Brown, Manchester,

I seem to recall David Cameron coming up with this idea not long ago! A little like the death duties idea that Gordon pinched. What next, a ban on Scottish MPs voting on English issues!

roger Kingston, York,

Ah, but you see the UK government has a major problem on the horizon. In 2010, the EU is planning to level all the fuel taxes and Britain's is, for example, 2, 95 times that of Spain's for diesel fuel. So to comply Britain must reduce the cost of fuel considerably and where are all those billions going to be recovered? At the moment, Britain is losing millions in tax due to HGVs and long distance buses refilling on the Continent where fuel is much cheaper.

So the answer cannot be an increase in fuel prices and do not expect a reduction in the road fund tax either.

B J Deller, Marbella, Spain

You can tell from the vehemently hostile posts here that the govt has got its work cut out selling these proposals to the large 'jeremy clarkson' faction of the electorate!

I support them though. Oil is running short and if the worlds car fleets (inc the UK) can switch from 30mpg average to >60mpg over the next 10-15 years then it may eke out the supplies long enough for alternatives to come on stream (otherwise the future is very bleak). Google 'peak oil' for the reason why.

There's really no need to drive to tescos in an overengineered 3 tonne SUV, or waste fuel in a 150mph saloon car (that spends most of its life at less than 60) when you'll get banned for doing over 100.

I hope they bite the bullet and force this one through despite the cost in votes.

paul newbold, sheffield, UK

More Tax and to pay for what ? Petrol is now at £1.03 + a litre and nobody seems to be complaining ??

Steve, Kidderminster,

The only sensible and logical answer is congestion charging. The larger - in practice, the longer - your vehicle, the more space you take up. Charging should be based on vehicle length, time of day and distance travelled. Of course, if you take passengers with you, you can reduce the cost per person dramatically.

Barry, Wallington, UK

Public transport in this country is a disgrace. Perhaps the government should address the pollution from the old, empty double-decker buses that drive down my road belching out huge plumes of black smoke.

Im afraid this is just another stealth tax. The government obviously sees that wealthier drivers can be screwed for a bit more tax.

It wouldnt be so bad if the money went into improving our decrepit public transport systems, but Im sure it does not.

K Jirackova, Newcastle,

This article seems awfully obsolete - plug-in hybrids are the clear economically viable choice for significantly lower emissions. A plug-in with a 40 mile electric driving range (like the Opel Flextreme coming out in 2010) will avoid at least 90% of gasoline and carbon emissions will be reduced commensurate with the level of carbon produced in generating the electricity they take from the grid. All-electrics clearly are not yet convenient nor viable alternatives nor do they make any economic sense.

kent beuchert, Tampa, USA Florida

Biodiesel biodiesel biodiesel! Why the hell does this government not reduce the tax on biofuels so that more people will use it? I will tell you why? Because all they want to do is screw every bit of money they can out of motorists! Stick stick stick! No carrot whatsoever from this thieving Labour government! Reduce tax further on biofuels and force motor car manufacturers to honour warranties for 100% biodiesel use and also force forecourts to supply the blooming stuff!! Wake up!!!

Babis Gakis, Braintree, Essex

I am 6 foot 2 inches tall and have trouble finding a car that is big enough for me. Even some of the larger cars are too cramped in the cockpit and I have no chance of getting into even a mid-range sized car let alone a city runabout.

Are tall people about to be hit with punitive taxes simply because they are tall?

I am all for the green movement but the Government needs to get car makers to make smaller cars that are capable of sitting taller people comfortably first.

As for this move to diesel, well, you wonder why the UK has one of the highest rates of asthmas and other lung diseases in the World - diesel is the reason! It is a dirty fuel which is causing health problems for millions of people!

Jan C, Swansea, UK

Mr Stockford, please scrap that old car immediately! A recent SMMT study showed that a modern car is up to 76% cleaner than a 20 year old equivalent model and 98% cleaner than a 30 year old equivalent.

Chris, London,

Surely people should pay on a "cause and effect" basis-tolling major roads as they do abroad and we do here on bridges and tunnels?

RE, Canterbury, UK

As usual we have a thoroghly impractical government
unable to think "out side of the box". The government should by law make every office worker that can work from home do so, the technology is mostly now available. I ndeed they should give tax reliefs to encourage it. A worker could have an extra hour in bed, rather than using fuel and creating CO2, the railways and roads would need less maintenance, hence capital savings. There would be more family life.
Of course those that really only go to work for a personal buzz, or to slide off to see the pole dancers would hate it. But as long as the work gets done who cares!

DAVID VINTER, Louth, Lincs,, UK.

Yet anothe stealth tax under the guise of saving the planet when in reality the money goes to subsidise the social engineering we have all been subject to by this hopeless government.

Pete, Nuneaton, Warwickshire

More muddled-headed thinking from academics whose thinking runs the entire gamut of A-B. Where does Prof King think batteries obtain their energy from? Electricity. And what fuel generates electrical power. Here's a hint - coal and fossil fuels. And what does is the by-product from burning coal and fossil fuel? C02. Doh. Pro King would be better off working out a way to tax cows. The methane gas they emit does far more damage than CO2, a natural gas which does not pollute.

Ian White, London, UK

I might take this more seriously if ministers scrapped their big limousines in favour of something like a Nissan Micra, they won't of course. What about trade vans are they to be hit with this lunatic idea.

Frank, Carlisle, UK

I would prefer a positive suggestion, and I have one. Driving cars slower has two benefits, less road deaths and lower pollution. So why not use the network of speed cameras, not to fine speeders, but to reward slower drivers? You gain points, not lose them, and you can credit these against your fuel tax and duty bills.

Antony Watts, Barcelona, Spain

The government keep using the green issue to increase rates and taxes - bearing in mind the government are making alot more tax income on fuel now than they were this time last year (15% more) where are the BIG investments in green projects?

Why is it still 300% more expensive (and slower...) to take public transport if you live outside of london - for example I have to commute 100 miles a day (I wish I didn't) the car is £8 and takes 4-5 hours a day!! The over crowded train - I'd love to take it rather than drive on congested motorways - costs £25 return a day excluding the cost of getting to the station so where's my carrot to move out of the car or do we just use sticks in this country??

The office of national statistics also anounced recently that the biggest CO2 polluter is... the government! specifically the environment agency whose CO2 emissions increased 20% year on year! Go figure!

John Freedland, Hampshire, UK

This plan is just another backdoor tax. If you really want to reduce emissions you have to reduce consumption, not by cars, by humans. Of course that would shrink the economy and no government wants that.

However, there's no need to reduce emissions. There are plenty of scientists who think the CO2 theory is fundamentally flawed, but their opinions are rarely heard. Global warming has become a money making opportunity for government, business and scientists alike, so it's a rather convenient 'truth'.

Sadly it appears that, on a number of fronts, the motorist has become the devil incarnate and I'm growing rather weary of it.

David, Lancashire,

As jerehada says, this proposal makes no allowance for car usage, simply lumping all usage together.

I work at home 3 days a week, driving only 2 days. Though my car is relatively high in the CO2/mile stakes, I contribute a lot less CO2 than someone driving a "better" car, but 5 days/week.

Plus, those people with "big"/"performance" cars already get taxed to death - it's the tax taken by government every time petrol is purchased.

If the goverment really wants to improve the environment, they should compulsory purchase "bad" cars (at a fair price), thereby allowing the owners to purchase a "good" (i.e. lower CO2/mile) car.

Then again, how can we trust the government on anything green when they're giving the go-ahead to more runways.

Let's see them set a 10% year-on-year decrease on the airline industry, leaving it to airlines whether they reduce total flights or CO2/flight.

CB, Epsom, England

we could connect our hybrids to a exercise cycle bike in the house. then every night after work you do a mandatory 1 hour cycle on the bike to recharge the hybrids batteries.
there you have it, i have saved the planet from emissions and combated the uk,s growing obesity problem in 1 hour.

michael mckeary, paisley, scotland

Yes reducing carbon emissions is important, but lets wake up here. Taking the lead is good, but are we sleepwalking into massively increased taxes and being told to feel good about. When in reality whatever we do will do virtually nothing to reduce global warming, when the usa, china and india account for roughly 75% of emissions and are doing nothing about. President Bush very cleverly recently said that the usa would do the same as whatever india and china do about it, he knows they will do nothing. This is just primarily about raising tax and hoping we won't realise or if we do feel good about it. Labour has done a great deal of good, and this is in principle a good idea. But in reality jpurely a justifiable way to increase tax.

Pete, Newcastle,

At last someone influential with some sense. Forget about hydrogen; bio fuels are marginal; but electric vehicles are the future.

And as long as their mostly charged at night, the current infrastructure is quite adequate, and emissions will be substantially lower than current vehicles (especially if powered from nuclear or renewable power stations.)

Alex, Tunbridge Wells,

It's time for Labour to go, simple as that.

It probably doesn't matter too much who replaces them, as they would be hard pushed to be as feckless as Gordon's cronies.

MGB, Carmarthen, Wales

As the man who runs The Weather Channel said - global warming is the greatest scam ever. And the supine British public have fallen for it hook line and sinker. Where will the extra tax be deployed? Like all increased taxes under NuLab it will go to increase the number of pointless civil servants, who will contribute to CO2 emissions as they travel to work, and sit in heated or air-conditioned offices. The lunatics are in charge of the British asylum.

TG, Newark,

The reason you have family sized saloons, is because you have family sized families. You cannot get a family of four, with a dog or two and either suitcases or shopping into any of the hybrid cars, or the small cars that there are plenty of. This is no more than a tax on families, from a government that knows how to tax more than any other.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

...er what happens to families who happen to have four children or more? Are these families supposed to but two "smaller cars" to transport themselves?

and ...er, what about the requency with which cars are changed in the market..and the lifetime carbon cost of a vehicle in a given set of circumstances?

Is this money to be re-invested - what is the carbon cost of an illegal war? This government abuses our intelligence daily, it is frankly sickening and a little bit frightening to feel so impotent and frustrated.

Ian, Ampthill,

The only green transport is walking or cycling so we had better get ready to do one or the other as all the "alternatives" to fossil fuels get exposed as wishful thinking and the oil wells run dry. If you have to drive to work you are in the wrong job, if you drive your kids to school they are in the wrong school and if you have to drive to see your friends and relatives you live in the wrong place. Think how well we did in this country before the car was invented with our global empire and then tell me the motor car is a good thing for society.

Clive Stringer, Eggesford, Devon

The electric car that is 80% cheaper to run than our current vehicles, and can shfit 0-60, is just round the corner.

We pay too much tax and get very little value for money from our Government. We live in a world that is far too dependent on oil/gas and the states that produce it.

It's time the big players in the car industry started innovating - instead of tinkering around the edges with hybrids and stopped bragging about some really dated diesel technology.

Andrew, Cheshire,

Recently I filled in an online form and found out that, without a car, and with NZ getting most of its electricity from non-fossil fuel sources, I emit less greenhouse gases than the average Indian.

I am feeling very proud of myself now.

On a more relevant note. The government should steadily improve the overall efficiency of the vehicle fleet. Taxing large vehicles and spending the proceeds on more homes and infrastructure for unwanted immigrants isn't the way to go unfortunately. Without an indigenous auto industry this will be difficult. Perhaps the UK should develop a new electric car industry along with companies like Honda or Toyota?

Ben in New Zealand, Auckland, New Zealand

The better fuel consumption becomes, the more miles people seem to drive. Also, having paid a swingeing amount of annual tax, people may feel that they therefore have to make maximum use of their car and avoid public transport as much as possible. Therefore will the proposals make that much difference? Why should someone who drives 5,000 miles per year in a 3 litre car pay more annual tax than someone who drives 30,000 miles in a 1.8 litre Car? Why on earth not just increase the tax on fuel for private cars so that at least it is fair and and is more in proportion to emissions. In fact why not abolish annual tax altogether and put it all on fuel; people may then feel that it is worth while to cut back when they see large sums of money regularly leaving their pocket. This would cut down on bureaucracy and reduce government spending.

Trevor, Leatherhead, UK

Another tax hike! Why are we suprised at that. I would love to know what the extra tax would be spent on - more speed cameras, sleeping police men, mobile speed cameras? I would wager the extra tax will not be spent improving roads, the environment or public transport. As a motorist i feel less socialy welcome than a drug dealing chain smoker from an Eastern European country. Here just take the shirt of my back now Mr Brown as i am off to by a bike and i am going to peddle to Austrailia!

Barry, Cannock, England

The amount of CO2 produced is directly proportional to the number of litres of fuel burned. A low CO2 producing vehicle doing 30,000 miles per year outputs far more than a low mileage higher output vehicle. The road fund licence is a political agenda only. The tax should be on the CO2 produced and that means taxing the fuel. Only this way will people (including the lower output vehicles) look to reduce the number and length of journeys they make.

Sam Rubra, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire

How about putting a stop to immigration that would have the biggest impact on pollution !
more people = more pollution + less services

steve, Chalfont, Bucks

It's all about taxation and spin. There is no "global warming" The governments are using this issue to make people feel guilty and to tax people - they removed a critical spike in temperature after the bronze age when they were putting forward their "scientific" analysis (very convenient) The earth has been going through cycles for millions of years - making you and I change our cars is ging to do nothing to reduce global warming.
What the people of this country need to be more concerned about are governments and supra govenment like the one run from Brussels, because they will create a monster that will make the old USSR look like utopia.

Justin, London,

4 years and counting before I leave for the Land of the Free.
Bye-bye Britain and its apathetic, taxed to death people.
I cant wait until I can earn a dollar and keep most of it.

Phill Barlow, The Wirral, England

One of the major scandals with regard to transport policy is the public transport systems have complete disregard for passenger safety. How many times have you been forced worse than cattle on to a dangerously overcrowded train, bus or tube train? Until the same safety standards are applied to these systems as are required for private family car's i.e. seatbelts and a seat for each passenger I will refuse to put my family in such a vulnerable position. The argument that these systems are safe falls apart when planes are considered, they are known to be the safest transport yet i haven't been on a plane without seatbelts. I think it will be a turning point when a major crash occurs on an overcrowded train then hopefully the government will stop demonising the private car which is the only reliable, safe and efficient transport outside of London.

Bruce Mcaaw, Grantham,

Until the world stops Peggy Sue driving her 7 Litre SUV to Disneyworld for a long weekend the rest of us can just swivel.
The UK can be very clever with laods of consultants in Universities and yet stupid missing the points about therest of the world & their driving habits- But heh lets just tax the Brits again !!

Rich, Gloucester, UK

Unfortunately for Professor King, as far as the real world is concerned, her opinion is irrelevant. Since the 60’s, governments of various colours have destroyed the British car industry, with the predictable result that any decisions regarding technological change will be made by Far Eastern car manufacturers. Her comments will however give spurious credibility for yet more “Green” tax.
Perhaps her efforts could be rewarded by a generous grant to Aston University, to develop a Trabant like vehicle, made of recycled paper. This “Peoples Car” (if VW don’t object) would be powered by batteries, have a range of 20 miles, with a top speed of 15 mph. Our leaders however would cruise by in the “Zil” lane, in their hydrogen fuel cell Toyotas and Hondas. Incidentally we have battery powered vehicles now. They’re called Milk Floats

Peter , West London ,

Either this government is trying to sneak in yet another tax (I believe this!) or it is simply to stupid to know what it is talking/legislating about (I believe this too!).

Just because some Hollywood 'personalities' buy a Honda Prius for its 'look at me' value, the government think we should all be forced to do the same. Unfortunately the Prius is a LOT LESS GREEN than many small diesels.
- Firstly it needs a lot of energy to manufacture something that complicated - and all the energy needed for its batteries.
- Secondly it starts the "official" CO2 test with a fully charged battery - which it is allowed to use in the test - but it doesn't end up that way. If you allow cheating this way a 50 year old milk float is the greenest vehicle it is possible to create!

If you add in all the factors, it comes out a lot LESS GREEN that a V8 Ford pickup, and this government want us to buy it - Lunatics!

Mike Bibby, St ALbans, England -not EU

So if we all plug our electric cars into the 13 amp socket in the garage every night, what happens at the power stations? How are their emissions going to be reduced if we all increase our consumption of electricity?

Stuart Leese, Forres,

No wonder we are sceptical. In this report Julia King reports that hydrogen for fuel cells produces 400% more CO2 than normal fuel. In the section with Question of the Week in this newspaper today there is a report that we need to utilise more hydrogen fuel cells to protect the environment.

And you want us all to believe in global warming?

jimd, Norwich, uk

What plans has Ms King got for power station fuels,
because if the whole country switched to electricity
to run their cars new stations would certainly be needed. What about the carbon pollution produced
for the batteries.

Barry Holmes, Christchurch, New Zealand

Why don't the governement replace the miles of unused cycle lanes with wider roads, making journey times shorter, and thus reducing the volume of fuel used - hence reducing CO2 naturally. Maybe that's because the longer that we sit in queues with engines running, the more revenue the tax man gets from wasted burned fuel.

Where does all of this 'green' menoy go to? I haven't seen any green measures being put into place in Manchester. The trams are overcrowded, the buses block the city centre as there are so many of them causing even more CO2 with engines running in their self inflicted bus jams.

Yes, the government should stop taking money out of mine and your pockets and start putting some back.

Gary Rudolph, Manchester,

These propositions will have an infinitesmal effect on global warming but will significantly add to costs for the people of our country. What we need from Government is wealth creation so that we can all increase our living standards -- not more taxes. A fruitless expectation from the dreary present lot. The sooner we have an election and replace Brown's administration the better.

Mike Cowan, Paris, France

Is it not greener to drive a 20 year old car, as I do, than to place demands on production and oil and carbon by buying a new one - even if it is a family saloon?

Dominic Stockford, Teddington, England

It would be grossly unfair to further penalise poor people by increasing road tax on old, large cars - the only ones they can afford. Not everyone has access to public transport.

And does Mr Bainbridge think farmers keep cows and sheep as pets?

PR, Cornwall,

I don't like all the plans that retrospectively and punitively tax people on car that they have already purchased. I bought my car before the world was going to end ! Secondly why are non of the figures reflective of milaege - I use my car aparingly and pubic transport where possible yet I will have to pay the murderous Vehical Excise Duty. Oh I remember why putting it on fuel gets people out on the street..

jerehada, Berks, UK

This is just another revenue stream for the government, label it a 'Green Tax' and everyone shouts hooray, please can we have more! When are we going to stop the politicians abusing our trust, and stealing money from the British public at every turn?
Everyone should read the Dust to Dust Energy Report (www.cnwmr.com) published 2006, makes for interesting reading, although goverment don't want you to read it.

FMD, Chipping Norton, England

"Yet another stealth tax from this thieving government. I think the key word in this article is FORCE. How about we force this wretched communist government from power and start again?"

So you want a people's revolution do you? :-)

Andy, London, UK

Instead of hitting cars again how about subsidising farmers to not replace some of their animals, which produce far more damaging emissions than cars. I read in the times that a moose emits the more greenhouse gases than it takes to drive a car over 12000 miles.

Reduce amoung of sheep, cows, moose and it will have more impact than tinkering with cars.

At the end of the day you either need to do something that will work (so joined up government thinking and planning) and take aggressive action, or just admit your going to do nothing until you have to. Just tinkering at the edges does nothing to improve the situation its just lip service.

ian bainbridge, durham, england

Metric system (SI), mks (metre, kilogram, second). So near, and yet so far.

Andrew Milner, Karuizawa, Nagano

If they put as much effort into reducing imports from the most CO2 polluting countries like China we could look at the bigger picture, reducing our output by the amounts banded around is unattainable until we build nuclear power plants to charge these electric cars until then the charging cycle requires a CO2 production likely to be equivalent to driving a 1.0L car for 20 miles. I have seen an increase in traffic calming and restrictions and a number of measures to reduce the vehicles on the road, all have failed and just increase congestion at which point the CO2 increases further! I drive 40K miles per year through work and get taxed every step of the way, there is no way I can carry my tools and parts on any form of public transport and cover up to 400 miles in a day. An electric car would be useless a hybrid would produce as much CO2 as my current diesel and LPG is a fossil fuel and not a long term solution. Leave us drivers alone and cut down industrial polution World wide.

Ian Steward, Bristol,

Yet another stealth tax from this thieving government. I think the key word in this article is FORCE. How about we force this wretched communist government from power and start again?

Cromwell, Leeds , England