Reading between the lines, I think that we're pretty much all agreed on the following points:-
Everyone has the right to choose a vehicle that's right for their particular circumstances.
Not quite. The ownership and operation of
ANY kind of car, isn't a right, but a privilege. Probably truer to say that everyone is "entitled" to try and find a car that suits their circumstances, (and pocket), but (a bit like smoking in public places) nobody should have an automatic "right" to operate anything that adversely affects anyone else's health, when there's a viable alternative. That's just not fair.
Everyone knows that wealthier countries are exporting their pollution to poorer countries (or China) in order to meet [unrealistic] targets.
I'm not bothered by that so much as I'm bothered by the two-faced folk who (having happily exported their emissions to China) then turn round and say "well why should
I do anything to reduce
my emissions when China is producing far more? They can't have it both ways. Part of China's emissions
are their emissions! And what's unrealistic about the targets anyway? The only way the targets are unrealistic, is that they're not actually tough enough to meet the obligations that we all agreed to in Kyoto and Paris!
Everyone knows that the construction and everyday use of ALL vehicles involves mining, drilling and the creation of multiple forms of pollution.
So, we're all just using our own experience and intelligence to decide what the 'best' option is for us, as individuals, which is how it should be, isn't it?
Up to a point, yes. My beef on here, isn't that I feel nobody should be allowed to operate an ICE vehicle (indeed, I do so myself,on occasions). I don't have a problem with people who have
genuine reasons for not being able to shift to an EV yet. If Nutjob, for example (who does famously little annual mileage) were to say something like: "I'm not going to get an EV because with the extremely low annual mileages I do, an EV would't get the chance to offset its extra manufacturing carbon emissions in my lifetime", that would seem like a pretty sound argument (though I don't know how old he is). However, if he instead chooses to say "I'm not going to get an EV because it will set itself on fire and burn my house down", that's just BS and I have no time for it, whatsoever.
So it's not so much the fact that people are still driving ICEs that bothers me, it's the lies and misinformation intended to try and scare people off EVs that I have the real problem with.
