Please Ask Defra to Implement Proven Solutions to Lower Emissions Instead of Tax

In July, DEFRA will publish its Air Quality Plan for Cities.

They are under pressure from environmental groups to punish millions of hard working drivers by introducing toxic taxes, higher parking charges and even, charging drivers by the mile to go to work.

In addition, the clueless Treasury are looking at raising taxes to lift us out of those austerity policies of recent years. Yet again, consumers and businesses will have to pay for Government ineptitude. There is a real risk that the already highest Fuel Duty in the world will be increased to help them out of their fiscal hole. Former Chancellor Nigel Lawson suggests an increase in fuel duty to help with public spending.

They still don't get it, do they? That high taxation kills economic growth, whereas stimulating consumer spending produces more tax revenue to the Treasury for public services.

With only 11% of emissions attributed to diesel cars, why should hard-working drivers, families, white van man, small businesses be held responsible for 89% of the issue and also be asked to pay for the austerity blunders of the last 7 years.

In our recent survey of 16,000 drivers, only 1 in 100 UK drivers believe that adding a pollution tax to diesel will improve the environment. With 4 out of 5 diesel drivers saying they have no choice but to drive the same mileage even with a speculative green tax added to their cost of motoring. 98% of drivers believe such a tax hike would cost jobs, increase inflation and purely just raise extra cash for the Treasury and the Mayors of UK Cities.

Waging war on 15m hard working diesel drivers is crass, ill thought out and deceitful. NOx is already falling in our cities without fleecing motorists with another quick cash grab. Poor policy based on emotion is driving Whitehall decisions with Ministers ignoring low emission alternatives that will lower emissions more effectively than tax hikes

It's strange that UK diesel drivers are already punitively taxed more so than those in Germany, France, Greece and other EU economies. These nations all subsidise diesel with lower taxation compared to their petrol levies. Amazingly Greek diesel drivers pay a massive 25p less than petrol at the pumps. The UK is the only nation that nearly always pays more at the pumps for diesel than petrol. So, any additional tax hike masked under a Green label will be unfair and pointless.

Here is YOUR chance to ask Defra's Minister Michael Gove to see common sense and adopt more effective ways than taxation to lower city emissions. You can read about three we selected to send to DEFRA at this link: https://www.fairfueluk.com/alternative-solutions.pdf

Here is how to contact Defra. We've made it really easy for you to email them, but follow these instructions carefully:

Instructions to send email to Defra:

1. Scroll down and add your name and address. Remember Defra will not respond or act unless you show that you exists. So your postal address is essential.

2. Scroll through the example email letter to Michael Gove shown below. Edit, change the content to suit your style or send as shown as it contains detailed evidence to support alternative solutions instead of tax hikes.

3. To show you're an actual person, then complete the simple calculation, such as "what is two plus four = ?"

4. Once you are happy sign the box and press the 'Continue' button.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ref: DEFRA Air Quality Plan

Title *

First name *

Last name *

Your email *

Address *

Address 2

Town *

Postcode *

Subject

Dear Michael Gove and Therese Coffey Your department is about to issue a ‘Clean Air Plan for Cities’. I hope that you will not be pressurised by emotive unsubstantiated health data and impulsively decide to tax hard working drivers and businesses.  
<ul>
<li>With only 11% of emissions attributed to cars, why should hard-working drivers, families, white van man and small businesses be held responsible for 89% of the issue and be asked to pay for the austerity policies of the last 7 years too. </li>
</ul>
 In FairFuelUK's recent survey of 16,000 drivers, only 1 in 100 UK drivers believe that adding a pollution tax to diesel will improve the environment. With 4 out of 5 diesel drivers saying they have no choice but to drive the same mileage, even with a speculative green tax added to their cost of motoring. 98% of drivers believe such a tax hike you may be considering would cost jobs, increase inflation and just raise extra cash for the Treasury and the Mayors of UK Cities. Would any of this extra money be used to reduce congestion, caused by cycle lanes and to improve the condition of roads across the UK?  I doubt it! Waging war on 15m hard working diesel drivers is crass, ill thought out and deceitful. NOx is already falling in our cities without fleecing motorists with another quick cash grab. And even more relevant, UK diesel drivers are already punitively taxed more so than in any other country in the world. Germany, France, Greece and other EU economies for example, all subsidise diesel with lower taxation. Amazingly Greek diesel drivers pay a massive 20p less than petrol at the pumps. The UK is the only nation that nearly always pays more at the pumps for diesel than petrol. So, any additional tax hike masked under a well-intentioned Green label will be unfair and pointless.  Nowhere in The London Mayor's Transport Strategy can I find any incentives for consumers to change their behaviour. The modal shift from cars will be driven by extra costs through taxation and road and zone restrictions. Simply put, there will be places in London where you won't be able to use or park a car at all and other places where you'll have to pay for every mile you travel. There's no mention of concessions for EV drivers who could have free parking, bus lane use or even road priorities.  TfL have been practicing a car-reduction strategy for a long time - also with unintended consequences. 260 diesel buses an hour on Oxford Street hasn't helped NOx and PM10 pollution (16% from buses in the centre of London) and adding 175,000 Private Hire Vehicle licenses for the new army of Uber drivers has just added 18,000 extra cars a day to, an already, long and winding traffic jam.  Narrowing of roads and the Cycle Super Highway has also slowed traffic flow considerably (stationary traffic produces four times more emissions) and increased pedestrian-level pollution. London's road system is the most congested it has ever been. Targeting passenger car drivers, (as already stated is a relatively narrow band of polluters at 11% of NOx) won't make a significant difference to the air Londoner's breathe.  According to the London Assembly Environment Committee, gas central heating produces 16% of NOx, domestic wood burning 12% of PM10s, diesel vans 5% of NOx, rail 8% of NOx, diesel plant and machinery 14% of NOx and ground-based aviation 8% of NOx. And you can add shipping, industrial combustion, air conditioning and planes to a list of other polluters that get scant mention in the diesel debate. And while we're on the subject of ships this may surprise you as much as it did me.
The London Port Authority, who oversees the 50 million tonnes of cargo passing through the tidal Thames every year, has 'no calculations from emissions of pollutants'. That's diesel-powered ships, remember, with diesel generators that run 24/7 when they're in port. The LPA are doing an emissions audit but this is a potentially very large source of diesel emissions that we should have measured by now.  Tyres and brakes of all vehicles generate over 50% of particulate matter that stays on the road and is repeatedly swirled up into the atmosphere from all traffic movements. What are we doing about that and why haven't we found technological solutions to clean our road surfaces of dangerous recycled particulate matter?
You simply won't make the real difference we desperately need to London's air unless we look at this considerable range of other polluters and stop shifting all responsibility onto passenger cars, trucks and vans. That's far too lazy, predictable and wrong.  Nowhere am I seeing any bold scientific strategy to address these other significant sources of ultra-fine particles, NOx and NO2. TfL says that passenger car use in London has actually declined 10% since 2001, so how can cars alone be the cause of so much increased pollution? It simply doesn't add up.  And there's another worry to all this. If we don't apply some proper world-class science to the air quality debate, London's faulted Transport Strategy may be repeated by the boroughs, used as a template by councils in other cities across the UK and be driven forward by reactive legislation from central government. And if that happens we'll have lost an historic opportunity to categorically improve our air, and the 37 million drivers in the UK will never take the social vision of improving air quality seriously again.  And that's why I support FairFuelUK's call for an Air Quality Working Party, free from vested interests, to scientifically determine where the greatest levels of particulate and nitrogen dioxide pollutants really come from and how to reduce them in the short to medium term.  We owe it to London, we owe it to the rest or the country but most of all we owe it to the health and future of the next generation. Poor policy based on emotion maybe driving Whitehall decisions, as it seems Ministers continue to ignore practical and proven clean air methods that will lower emissions more effectively than tax hikes.  With FairFuelUK, we would like to point out to you that there are effective solutions to cleaning up the air in our cities. Here are three, amongst many that the Government seems to ignore, that would lower emissions immediately without hurting the tax paying motorist. It would be a dereliction of your Ministerial duty if you did not consider these pragmatic and fair ways to improve urban air quality:  
<ul>
<li>1. There is much talk of an expensive scrappage scheme for older diesels. Yet, by using considerably lower priced retrofit type systems such as the innovative hydrogen fuel additive system from CGON Ltd, proven to increase fuel efficiency by up to 25%, cut engine pollutants by up to 80% and keep diesel particulate filters clean, this low priced approach will also benefit drivers by saving money on motoring costs and lower emissions too.  </li>
<li>2. There is another very cost-effective way to improve both air quality and carbon emissions immediately, using E10 Fuel (10% ethanol blended with petrol) that's widely used in the US and Europe. By 2020, 99% of cars will be warranted for E10 and since March 2016, it has been the optimal reference fuel for all new cars. E10 seems a quick and easy solution in helping lowering emissions and is recognised to be so, by the DfT. Amazingly, making E10 available now would be the equivalent of taking 700,000 polluting cars off the road. </li>
<li>3. And last, but by no means least, (cast in a US State Legislation), all bulk diesel deliveries to fuel stations in Texas must include a liquid combustion catalyst that helps to lower harmful diesel emissions. Since this Texas 'State implementation Program' (SIP) to reduce air pollutants began, the results have been staggering: Ozone reduced by 26%, NOx reduced by 67% and SO2 reduced by 56%. With nearly 4 billion gallons of diesel consumed per year, the TxLED program is one of the key Components to the emissions reduction program in Texas. And that's not all! Using this highly successful additive when filling up, also means more efficient fuel combustion, cleaner engines, consequential lower maintenance costs and improved MPG. The Texas Low Emission Diesel (TxLED) regulations apply to all diesel fuel sold or supplied for use in motor vehicles and non-road equipment. </li>
</ul>
 If DEFRA recommended all three of these proven real-life solutions to lowering emissions, not only would it be fair to millions of drivers but it would benefit the economy and clean our city air massively. The introduction of all three would negate the need to hike extra taxes and the punitive costs on drivers.  I hope that you do not pay just lip service to this email and ignore the thousands you will receive from FairFuelUK supporters across the UK. FairFuelUK campaigns tirelessly to convince your Government that drivers contribute so much to the economy, yet get so little in return. It's time we should be incentivised and not be punished for issues beyond our control.
You owe it to London, you owe it to the rest or the country but most of all you owe it to the health and future of the next generation to get this right but not by punishing drivers. Please be fair. Thank you for your time and consideration.

To show you're an actual person, what is 2 + 4 ? *

By submitting this form, I agree to allow you to forward the above message to Defra after reviewing the content for abuse. I understand my data may be retained for monitoring purposes but not passed onto any 3rd Party.

The FairFuelUK Privacy Policy can be reviewed at

https://www.fairfueluk.com/privacy_policy.html

None of your personal information collected here is displayed to or passed onto third parties. That is guaranteed. FairFuelUK is committed to ensuring that your privacy is protected. Should we ask you to provide certain information by which you can be identified when using this service, then you can be assured that it will only be used in accordance with this privacy statement that can be accessed at: https://www.fairfueluk.com/privacy_statement.pdf

Data will be processed by Organic Campaigns: Privacy policy. Acknowledgements