Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
IRELAND IS SET to fall far short of achieving its 2020, 2030 and 2050 climate change targets, the state’s climate change watchdog has warned.
In a scathing annual report the Climate Change Advisory Council says Ireland is now in an “even worse position” than last year as greenhouse gas emissions increased again.
Instead of dropping by one million tonnes per year emissions are in fact increasing at a rate of two million tonnes per year, the report finds.
The council is calling for the introduction of a range of measures to help the state achieve its goal of becoming a low-carbon, climate-resilient economy by the middle of the century.
It recommends a €10 increase in the carbon tax, up to €30 a tonne, in the upcoming budget, and an increase to €80 a tonne by 2030. It also suggests raising excise duty on diesel to the same level as that on petrol.
“We need immediate and urgent action to put us back onto a pathway to achieve transition to a low-carbon, climate-resilient and sustainable economy and society,” Chair of the Council, Professor John FitzGerald, said.
‘Deeply disappointing’
The Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment described the projections as “deeply disappointing”.
He said that recent economic growth contributed significantly to the projections because of increases in emissions from the agriculture and transport sectors.
“The projected shortfall to our targets is further exacerbated by both the constrained investment capacity over the past decade due to the economic crisis, and the extremely challenging nature of the target itself,” he said.
The Government is doing everything it can to ensure that we, at an absolute minimum, meet our 2030 target.
‘Going backwards’
The report sparked a flood of reaction from opposition parties. Fianna Fáil’s spokesperson on climate action, Timmy Dooley, said it is a “damning indictment” of the government’s failure to address climate change.
“It’s clear to all that climate change is real and it has consequences for us all. In a number of key areas, the Government has failed miserably,” he said.
Green Party spokesperson, David Healy, said Fianna Fáil itself isn’t without blame for the situation while adding that the council had been as direct as it could be.
“This report sends a clear message to the Government, and to Fianna Fáil who are keeping them in office, that they are failing in their duty to reduce emissions,” he said.
Catherine Murphy of the Social Democrats said the government needs to “cop itself on”.
The country is going backwards on our climate targets to such an extent that you’d have to wonder if there’s anyone in charge at all.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Raising taxes doesn’t work in the short term, and slightly increasing the price of diesel won’t send people running out to buy lower emissions cars. Besides I thought diesel was the saviour of the planet, or did the greens get it wrong??
@dB O’Neill: They’ll do away with all cars eventually. Even electric ones use carbon
@Conor Walsh: I’m pretty sure they use electricity
@Conor Walsh: and what’s wrong with cycling for a six hour commute to work? Sure wouldn’t it be great for obesity levels as well and we could get rid of roads. We’re also an island, we could use paddle boats to get to work as well. *tongue in cheek*
@Spiderman: you are a man with a plan,I would vote for you
@Daney Howard: ok brains how do you get electricity in Ireland?
@Conor Walsh: If you’re excessively using the grid, then primarily Gas at the moment. Coal & Peat accounted for 15% back in 2015 and are surpassed by Renewables at this point.
@Thomas McGuire: Sorry, that should be “exclusively”.
@Daney Howard: burning fossil fuels that’s how!
@dB O’Neill: tax tax tax, loadamebollix, everything gets passed on to the consumer so producers can be indifferent to simple tax addons in the long run. Only directly swapping tax from one tech to another will things change. Each million increase in the carbon take should see a million more put into alternative sources.
@Conor Walsh: Fossil fuels is one way yes but not the only way.
@Stephen Devlin: in Ireland electric cars are mostly charged using electricity produced using carbon emitting electricity production methods! On top of this the most efficient Diesel engines emit nearly as little co2 per 100km as an electric car not to mention the >17 tonnes of co2 to produce a Tesla battery!
@Daney Howard: do you understand how
@Daney Howard: do you understand how electricity in Ireland is produced?
@joe: I’ll make it easy for you. A diesel car will always be powered by diesel, a petrol car will always be powered by petrol. Electricity grids are getting greener and therefore the electricity to power electric cars.
And even now, electric cars powered by the most carbon producing electricity emit fewer emissions than diesel cars
https://electrek.co/2017/11/01/electric-cars-dirty-electricicty-coal-emission-cleaner-study/
@joe: “do you understand how electricity in Ireland is produced?”
Do you understand how Petrol and Diesel and in Ireland is produced?
@joe: Issue with fossil fuels also is that they run 24/7, when demand is low or being wasted overnight this could be a good time to capitalise and store the energy in vehicles for use during the daytime.
I really thing that the government will want to let homeowners sell energy back through the grid. This will
A. Create a bigger market for solar and wind products (taxes)
B. Assist with grid demand.
Right now it’s a waste of time to have solar or wind for personal use since in most cases you still need to be tethered to the grid (unable to sell any unused power) making it financially unviable.
So here we go again, tax our way out of the situation, increase carbon taxes yet again when we have no other means of trying to heat our homes, most of which were built years ago with scant regard for insulation and few can afford to retro fit insulation to the required standard so we will pay,pay pay, shiver and pay.
Yup, it’s the stick for us again. You would wonder where all the carrots are.
@Honeybee: Cows fart, Dubs pay, whats new.
@Honeybee: we already have paid hundreds of millions because of the hurricane, snow blizzard and droughts in one year. While I agree that the people at the bottom shouldn’t pay for all of it, we all have to do our best as well as the government or we are going to leave a dead planet to future generations. As things stand if we stopped producing greenhouse gases now sea levels will still rise 20metres
People who vote fg,ff and independent only care about themselves and definitely don’t care about environmental issues because these politicians only care about the rich, plan short term or local issues when we need to plan long term and collectively if we are to deal with the coming environmental disasters which are inevitable if we keep polluting the planet
No, a rise of 20 feet is the estimate. Six metres, not 20 metres.
There are six and a half million cows in Ireland, what percentage of Ireland’s green house gases do they produce?
Will the government be putting a tax on these animals?
@Josh Hanners: Don’t be silly. Cows don’t have pockets to keep money in.
@Josh Hanners: Not likely, China has just opened it’s market for Irish beef so watch the sector grow, we will pick up the tab for the methane explosion.
@Josh Hanners: any pet owners on this thread? There’s another source, but your lobby is probably afraid to broach that one. What about culling all the other methane producers while we’re at it, wild animals and insects and a few billion humans too.
@Lisa Saputo: A cow tax would be difficult to stomach. Not least because cows have four stomachs.
Our national superhero taxman will come to save the day
Honest question here, is it a requirement that new housing estates and apartment blocks in particular are being future proofed to be able to put in charging points electric cars?
@Benny: Can’t see it. I know some major employers are providing charging points for employees in the car parks.
@Benny: No, but they certainly should be.
It’s something I’ve seen discussed on Twitter.
@Benny: Pretty sure it’s a requirement for new office buildings that provide parking anyhow that a certain portion must have charging points.
@Shane Corry: cool but when does the BIK kick in?
More carbon tax scam money will fix it. All about the scam in this filthy corrupt country run by corrupt half wits completely out of their depth.
@Ronan Sexton:
We’ll be told that these taxes are for our own good.
Despite the fact that we all share the same sky and that China and the USA combined put more tons of Co2 into the atmosphere in a single day than we do in a year.
We’ll insist on financially punishing ourselves for that and it won’t make a blind bit of difference.
@Tweed Cap: this point shows that the government’s policy (and any proposed policy based on this information) is devoid of common sense. As this weighted system of ranking makes us out to be the bad guy
I’m not saying let’s not cut our emissions, but innovation, and only innovation, should be the proposed solution. Any tax increase is imperious.
This is a national disgrace. Why do the ordinary taxpayers and consumers of Ireland have to fork out again just because our politicians will not do their job. We need to find a better way of holding the government to account. Opposition politicians are similarly completely ineffective in this area. It’s not like the targets were not known and we have the example of other “greener” countries to follow. Unfortunately in Ireland we seem to either reinvent the wheel, badly, or do nothing at all.
@Arthur Senior: A good solution the very relevant problem you addressed would be having a system of direct democracy like they have in Switzerland. It would give more power to the people by forcing referenda on certain issues.
@Arthur Senior: Because ordinary consumers and taxpayers use too much energy. Most drive for example, and many do even when there is an alternative. The agricultural produce is for export so it is a bit unfair that we are blamed for the damage done when rearing cows that Germans eat.
With all due respect to him, what does John Fitzgerald know about the science of climate change. He has no background in any hard science. He is an economist and not even an economist with a specialization in the economics of natural resources.
What do you get when economists and other unqualified people get involved in climate change? You get people misusing ideas like the Kaya Identity to try to prove climate change. Worse still, this research is backed, funded and published by the IPCC. Anti-science if I’ve ever seen it…
The Great Climate Change Shakedown is only beginning…..
The misuse of the Kaya Identity by the IPCC must raise questions with any rational individual. Likewise, the IPCC has stated that natural CO2 and man-made CO2 are different and they treat them as such in their studies….That’s a ridiculous position. Can anyone here tell me why natural CO2 and man-made CO2 are different?
@Low Energy Jeb: Yes. Let’s do nothing and ruin the planet for our children’s children “Jeb”
@Mark Fitzmaurice: So, you don’t have any answer to the question I asked.
In 1750, the level of atmospheric CO2 was 280ppm.
In 2013, the level of atmospheric CO2 was 397ppm.
So we have an increase of 117ppm.
Over this time period:
1. 26,000ppm of natural CO2 flowed into the atmosphere.
2. 185ppm of man-made CO2 flowed into the atmosphere.
So far, everything I’ve stated is accepted by the IPCC. However:
1. The IPCC states that 26,000ppm of natural CO2 flowed out of the atmosphere.
2. Only 68ppm of man-made CO2 flowed out of the atmosphere.
Therefore: The increase of 117ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere is down to man-made CO2.
Again, I ask can anyone tell me why the IPCC treats natural CO2 and man-made CO2 different? Can you tell me, Mark? Or are you just going to continue to be a sheep and swallow everything you are told?
@Mark Fitzmaurice:
“Jeb” will inform you if you’d like….
@Low Energy Jeb: interesting, however, the figures make little sense without context….link please?
Also, natural sources of co2 emissions are not necessarily independent of human emissions….this is where the context of the figures is required. Do they consider sources such as livestock and land use change natural sources?
@Low Energy Jeb: I did a bit of digging on but still cannot find any reference to the figures you stated so still interested to see a source,
anyway, a suggestion as to why the IPCC treats natural and man-made co2 different is that pre-industrial revolution co2 concentrations in the atmosphere were relatively stable for about half a million years suggestion a balance between natural sources and natural co2 sinks. It would appear reasonable to conclude that the sharp increase in recent history has been as a result of human activity, as we do not balance out our activities with a sink. So, in essence, we cannot do much nor need to do much about natural sources and we may need to eventually accept responsability.
@Markonline: “suggesting”
@Low Energy Jeb: His daddy was Taoiseach.
@Markonline: The figures are obtained from Working Group 1 – IPCC 2007.
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/index.php?idp=95
Human emissions include fossil fuels (87%), industrial uses (4%) and land use change (9%).
The figures I highlighted suggest the same conclusion as you. That natural sinks balanced natural emissions pre-industrial revolution. However, they also suggest that post-industrial revolution, nature has remained constant and all the change in CO2 level comes from man-made CO2.
That’s a pretty big assumption. Let’s consider these hypothetical figures. Over the time frame:
1. 185ppm of man-made CO2 flowed into the atmosphere.
2. 26,000ppm of natural CO2 flowed into the atmosphere.
Now let’s not discriminate between man-made CO2 and natural CO2. Therefore, it is perfectly logical to say that over the time frame:
1. 175ppm of man-made CO2 flowed out of the atmosphere.
2. 25,893ppm of natural CO2 flowed out of the atmosphere.
So this also gives the117ppm increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. It is made up of 10ppm man-made CO2 and 107ppm of natural CO2.
With these figures, we break the IPCC’s absurd assumption that natural balance does not even slightly change since 1750 (Inflow vs Outflow) and also break the nonsense assumption regarding differences in how man-made and natural CO2 are treated. But only very slightly. What do we have now?
In this hypothetical world, man-made CO2 has only contributed 10ppm out of the 117 ppm increase in CO2 level in the atmosphere…
@Low Energy Jeb: This line of argument is highly confusing to me.
Firstly: I have never seen the units ppm’s used to describe flux rates before but rather to describe concentrations in a volume, please clarify my misinterpretation if so?
Secondly: how can we make reasonable assumptions from hypothetical figures like you suggest?
@Low Energy Jeb: Also i’ve been looking for the 26,000ppm figure in the link to an index you suggest to no avail, can you please provide the exact chapter/sub-chapter link so I can verify the figures and the context.
@Markonline: I can’t find it either, I went hough the whole document he linked to. 26,000 does not appear anywhere in it.
You’re right, his figures are nonsensical, flux is never expressed as ppm (that is concentration). Flux is expressed but tons or Tg (trillion grams).
There is however a figure in the IPCC 1990 & 1992 report stating that humans were responsible for 26,000 teragrams of CO2 emissions in 1990.
@David Jordan: indeed, with the promise of (“Jeb” will inform you if you’d like….) I was hoping for a bit more of an education on the matter!
No, the initial figures I used are correct. I use ppm as units for simplicity as they are the units often reported in climate articles.
Using the simplifying assumption that the time period 1750-2013 represents a move to equilibrium, ppm provides the net effect of the whole cycle. Where 1ppm is roughly 2.13 GtC02, go to the first figures in the IPCC report. They are titled “Main Components of Natural Climate Cycle” and “Human Perturbation”.
Now, look at the number given for average annual inflow and outflow in both figures. Convert to PPM. You’ll get approx 98ppm inflow and outflow per year for Natural CO2. And 3.3ppm inflow per year for human CO2 but only 1.8ppm outflow. Leaving 1.5ppm per year addition to the atmosphere level.
Multiply by the number of years in the equilibrium cycle. And you get the figures I’ve highlighted. I will put up the figures in other units if you’d prefer but it would get messy…
It’s not rocket science lads. Are the two of ye actually denying that atmospheric CO2 has not increased from around 280ppm to around 400ppm today?
@David Jordan: You might have went through the whole document but you didn’t really look, David…
So based on my update, can any of you explain why the IPCC treat Natural CO2 and Man-Made CO2 differently? Why do we assume that all the extra CO2 in the atmosphere is man-made C02? Is it possible that quite a bit of the extra CO2 is natural?
Daftness, you have a strange understanding of numbers. Please provide the link to the explaination of your figures. Im almost convinced you believe urself.
“going backwards” pretty much describes Ireland alright
Raise taxes all you want the trend won’t change until viable alternatives are brought to the consumers, climate change = higher taxation better get used to it!
They’ll have to bite the bullet and put in 1-5GW installed capacity of solar panels. Can be a mix of domestic and solar farms. Then close some gas and coal powerstations, stop doing things like giving SSSE Airtricity a contract to pump a load of smoke into the air from Tarbert like they have done in recent days. The national grid is the biggest polluter of all.
Bringing in a good rail freight network again would be a good idea as would reducing the fares on under-utilised rail lines to almost nothing.
Instead what you’ll see happening is that they’ll be giving out to us for buying diesel cars and saying the property tax will have to be tribbled or quadrupled to pay EU fines. This could possibly have a good outcome as it might trigger a clamour for leaving the EU but I’m not holding my breath
@Quiet Goer: The EU provide some oversight to our Government. I don’t expect you’ll agree but can you imagine how bad they would be without an external eye on them, a watchdog.
Desperate enough as they are.
@Quiet Goer: “They’ll have to bite the bullet and put in 1-5GW installed capacity of solar panels.” Feed-in Tarriff for domestic solar would be good (no planning permission required under a certain size)… Course, we instead seem to focus on projects which can be objected to: Wind farms? Objection; Solar farm? Objection; Battery storage? Objection…
@Tom: You’re right. I remember the air pollution in Ireland years ago. And the beaches were a lot worse.
@Quiet Goer: I’m not sure where I picked it up along the way but I think solar has been dismissed as a viable option at our latitude with current solar to useable electricity efficiency rates.
@Markonline: What’s the point in installing a 2kW solar system on my home that would send excess generation to the grid several hundred thousand wonder…
Well, hardly surprising… Ireland… we’ve twice as many walking mooing methane bags as people… We have no forests to speak of, as most of the land is cleared for Cows, Sheep and Pigs..
We’ve one off housing dotted all over the place..out of reach of public transport.. Our cities are full of cheap parking and surrounded by huge shopping centres with massive car parks leading to car dependence with congestion and pollution..
We still burn ancient bogs to keep a power plan going…
So basically, we’re fecked Ted!
@Dotty Dunleary: Yes but who else is going to supply the Chinese with all their beef and dairy? Brazil I reckon, and best of luck to them.
I propose putting a super high tax on avocados and lentils. We’ll see how the enviros like a taste of their own medicine…
@Mártan Ó Conghaile: oh a hipster food tax.
@Mártan Ó Conghaile: yep..air miles carbon on both of them must be sky high. It might not be as bad on beard wax though.
@Mártan Ó Conghaile: Lol! We, *cough*cough* showed them! This idea of us v’s them liberal v conservative is working nicely.
We should get Europe to increase our cap under the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). Its the fore runner to the carbon tax and was supposed to include aviation, maritime transport, and forestry by 2012. None of which happened or is going to happen. which undermines and nullifies any agreement. Europe can’t fight alleged climate change alone and Ireland won’t change much other than create fuel poverty for many. Expenses cover all carbon taxes for politicians.
Where are our government spending all this extra cash from the carbon tax? we have levy’s on our energy bills to pay for renewable energy. we pay VAT after these levy’s and carbon taxes are included.
Its rich for the green party to blame Fianna Fail for failures to hit impossible targets. Are we supposed to shrink our economy with borrowing of 200million euros and a yearly EU membership of over 7 billion euros. By increasing fuel costs we hurt people traveling to work, schools and shopping, fuel that is already over taxed. We turn people back to cutting turf and using other fossil fuels instead of decreasing its use. We need a new plan or just let climate change take its course like other countries do.
So they decide to tax us again and yet do not make green energy available or make else make it difficult to achieve. Insulation has rocketed in price in the last few years for example. Taxes will not direct people to green energy as it is too expensive where it is available.
nearly everyone in rural Ireland burn their household waste in the stove or out the back rather than pay bin charges. Not sure how much difference it would make if everyone recycled and paid for bin collection but Im sure it might help.
Currently, Ireland’s carbon tax is €20 per tonne CO2 and generates €400 in government revenue. From 2020, Ireland is facing significant financial penalties from the EU of up to €600 million per year for not adhering to CO2 emissions targets. And these fines are likely to be passed onto businesses and consumers in the forms of higher carbon taxes. To absorb the cost of the potential penalties would require an increase to €50 per tonne CO2.
Sweden is one of the most progressive countries in this area with a carbon tax of €120 per tonne CO2. Since 1990, Sweden has seen 26% decrease in CO2 emissions, with a corresponsing 75% increase in GDP.
Personally think there should also be a tax on politicians who cant seem to manage this situation at all.
Jesus we will all drown in crocodile tears from our government ministries this climate change is nothing more than a a new way for governments to rip off joe public with new tax’s if they had any real interest in doing something for the environment the could start with stopping the monopoly the ESB have on the electricity market millions of householders could generate electricity for little or nothing as could factory’s all over the country but for well known reasons the have not got the ball to do it its easier to screw the public for more taxes and let the ESB screw there costumers for as much as they can Bob Geldof viewers on this country 40 years ago has never changed and sadly he was right
We’re tiny. It’s the USA and China
The additional tax is to pay for the fines we will get from the EU. Why not start by banning older diesal cars in the city centre? Why not try and get traffic moving on the m50? 10e extra tonne doesnt seem drastic to me
I’m not convinced that banning is the way to go. Why not provide alternatives first? If all petrol stations were far outside the city, and only electric cars could be charged in city centres, maybe? Paris is better organised with the Metro and electric cars.
Some incentives to use the other options would really help people. Cycle lanes, decent cross-city public transport. Metro North. We’re really waiting on those for over eleven years now.
So we are going to tax people into believing that what some eco friendly money generating politician thinks is the way forward is the only way. Ireland has not invested in its eco future just baying lip service to Europe and the rest of the world LAUGHABLE
All the refugees allowed in
We are a tiny country, think about it, what we do, unless every large state in the world does the same, is irrelevant.
There are many options out their with regards to green energy that governments world wide ignore. Politicians should be ashamed of themselves for not putting our interests and our children’s and grandchildren’s futures into thought. This makes another excuse for our phony career politicians to implement stupid taxes that’s do nothing but make citizens poorer. Disgraceful!
Fine Gael and their free market ideology only care about the short term and individuals, especially those with the most capital, when we need to planning long term and collectively to deal with climate change
Whether it’s the heritage Bill killing huge numbers of birds and bees, extending the burning of peat for electricity, increasing our cattle herd by 300,000, no grants for solar power this collection of fine Gael politicians have been extremely destructive to the planet
If we stopped emitting greenhouse gases today sea levels would still rise by 20 metres but FG are top of the polls, ff who are also a free market party and independents who only care about local issues so it appears that most Irish people don’t care about the fact that the children born today are facing societal collapse because of a combination of climate instability and resource depletion by the time they’re middle aged
@Marcus Briody: Fine Gael are so far away from free market economics it’s unbelievable. Not to mention completely incompetent with dealing with climate change. There are practical ways we can tackle climate change without taking people’s money, but government doesn’t want to explore them.
@Daniel Donovan: they are the most Thatcherite party in the history of the state, there solution to everything is that market can solve everything which is why we have a housing crisis
Please list off all the things that we can do for free. Taxes are not the only solution but if used right like promoting domestic renewable energy use then they can be effective. we are already paying hundreds of millions because of a hurricane a blizzard and a drought in one year. Prevention is better than waiting for thinga to get worse but most Irish people and this government appear to not care about the mess we are leaving for future generations
@Marcus Briody: Would you relax and turn your measuring tape over. 20″ is not 20 m.
Is there anything we’re “on course” with.
@Brian harris: Begrudgery…
Jesus we will all drown in crocodile tears from our government ministries this climate change is nothing more than a a new way for governments to rip off joe public with new tax’s if they had any real interest in doing something for the environment the could start with stopping the monopoly the ESB have on the electricity market millions of householdsers could generate electricity for little or nothing as could factory’s all over the country but for well known reasons the have not got the ball to do it its easier to screw the public for more taxes and let the ESB screw there costumers for as much as they can Bob Grldof viewers on this country 40 years ago has never changed and sadly he was right
@Frank Leonard: ESB don’t hold the monopoly of the market. Not since Bord Gais and other entered the electricity energy market.
@niall: are they not just reselling or more accurately re-invoicing electricity? The grid is still ESB networks. They decide their own production and who they buy from.
@niall: yes they do Niall. They are also preventing the development of green energy in Ireland as it will reduce electricity sales. Have a look at their solar panel offer. Its a joke. Basically they take the electricity the panels generate when you are not using it (say all day while you are at work) and do not pay you for it. They will not allow you to store it in batteries for nightime use. They charge about 6k to install it in your house. That summarises their attitude to the consumer.
And then this report comes out suggesting we tax carbon because we are not using enough ‘green’ energy.
@Greg Blake: some companies definitely are just buying and selling what ESB Generation produce, but there are several companies generating through their own power stations, such as BnM, Bord Gais, SSE, etc. Yes, the grid belongs to Networks.
A carbon TAX on farmers as animal agriculture s the biggest polluter.
@dB O’Neill: diesel still makes sense in rural areas and on motorways but not in urban areas. It was the most efficient fuel until recent advancements in petrol technology. As for the people saying electric cars are not good, 27% of our electricity came from renewable energy last year and this figure is going up again. Most wind blows at night so if you charge your car at night you massively increase the likelihood that you are using renewable energy
Globally over three million people die annually from poor air quality so electric vehicles are better for our lungs
Ireland, for the love of money. Hydroelectric to burning tires.
There’s oh so many people setting their guns against the greens and motor tax. It’ pure arrogance and ignorance (and irony) enmeshed in one.
It wasn’t the greens solely. If we let the Greens take total rein, we would havebe way more hybrids and electrics without the need to import the majority of them from the UK. heir had was pushed by FF if you want to get technical. Ireland has near zero automotive industry experience, little experience to question the differences between petrol and diesel, port injectio and direct injection, carbon emissions and smog/photoarchive chemical emissions. Having the CO2 based system was a miracle of an achievement, by chance (to whoever’s scorn).
Who told us (and famously PM Brown) that diesel was better?
It was the long efforts of Automakers, reviewers (Top Gear) and lobbyists themselves that have convinced the general public that diesel was better. In the late 90s it was the perfect, present solution, when turbo diesels had over 10 years of racing experience and over 20 years in domestic markets like France. ALL the while electrified vehicles were still novelties being leased and experimented in Japan and California.
And yes, we (all of Europe) bought diesels because of the short term cost savings, for private and fleet use alike.
Resist the urge to scape goat the greens again. For them, this now looks like a compromise, but still a beneficial one that’s still compatible a dedecade later as vehicles improve. Not for just the sake of emissions, but to also protect those of us from high running costs. A family who buys a big, sexy V6 and ends up feeling the pain 4 years later was common, much more so in the US.
Just go back two decades in time. A lovely family Xantia 1.4l I believe averaged over 180g/km. Now, only (non plugin) Porsches sit up there.
Leave Ireland alone! Tiny country being bullied by these f*kwits….there are bigger fish to fry now buzz off.
Ireland needs a Donald Trump stance on carbon tax.
Our country needs a good leader.
@John O Connor: Shell to Sea would be the least of it if we did. Don’t forget the FF crowd selling off our natural resources.
have your say