Should 10 year old zeds be scrapped to help the environment?

Robin · Post by **Robin** » Sat 25 Apr, 2009 18:35

Under the new scheme you can get £2k towards a new car if you scrap your 10 year old one to help the environment

What do you think ?

_wendy_ · Post by **_wendy_** » Sat 25 Apr, 2009 18:37

well as a 10 year old zed is worth more than 2k, then no way is anyone getting anywhere near mine

Dav · Post by **Dav** » Sat 25 Apr, 2009 19:06

The scheme is designed more to kick start the motor industry rather than protect the enviroment

AW8 · Post by **AW8** » Sat 25 Apr, 2009 19:08

In a word to the OP's original question NO.

In response to Z3's being worth more than £2k many Z3 owners (& owners of other cars), would be in for a shock if they part exchanged now

Now a Micra was on my drive for a short while ago and for a few weeks. It had long MOT & tax & was bought for £175............if wanting my 2k from a p/x then thats the type of car I would use to change.

Anyway so many are making a big thing about 2k savings when in reality savings of £2k or far more from list already exist for many new cars.........a quick internet search will confirm this.

I heard of someone who bought a brand new Golf R32 not long ago for for £19k. Thats many many thousands off list for a brand new car with a proper engine not a washing machine electric motor that needs charging every 50 miles.

The link below shows jusdt one random sites deals on typical small family cars, (example below is for Astra's), & thats without having to part exchange anyhthing.

http://www.carquake.co.uk/default.asp?d ... 54#id38954

The current proposals are more to do with saving the motor industry from bankruptcy than saving the environment.

Another link to help owners of non eco cars to feel a bit greener...........

I know they are hybrid & not purely electric but another site alleges the following comments

"Consider the eco-conscious automobile par excellence, the Toyota Prius. As it turns out, manufacturing the Prius's battery is extraordinarily carbon-intensive. Paying off this carbon debt through fuel savings will take 46,000 miles" Source http://taxmanblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/ ... print.html

estocks · Post by **estocks** » Sat 25 Apr, 2009 19:54

Dav wrote:The scheme is designed more to kick start the motor industry rather than protect the enviroment

Convenient that only cars over the 10 year mark are eligible, the same cars that don't attract the new higher VED. Gordon Brown is a sneaky so-and-so.

PhoenixCoupe · Post by **PhoenixCoupe** » Sat 25 Apr, 2009 20:12

Ian_C · Post by **Ian_C** » Sat 25 Apr, 2009 20:31

no.

I can't see how scrapping a car and buying a new one is eco-friendly. Surely the carbon emissions used to build the new one outweigh the carbon emissions of continuing to run the old one?

IIRC I read that Land Rovers are the most eco-friendly cars since more than 70% ever made are still on the road. Anyone else read this or am I imagining things again?

muppet · Post by **muppet** » Sat 25 Apr, 2009 21:02

PhoenixCoupe wrote:yes.

you are having a laugh... but if you are being properly green you keep your car as long as possible, as I f i have got it right the main bit of carbon footprint for a car is manufacturing, not thedaily use
(waiting to get shot down in flames for this)

Stoned@Home · Post by **Stoned@Home** » Sat 25 Apr, 2009 22:27

correct it's mostly in the making, so i'm ment to scrap my 9 year old Zed in a years time...

Right.....
it only has 40K on it, so for much of it's life, it's been a good green car

oh but i could get 2k for it nice!!

Ferdinand · Post by **Ferdinand** » Sun 26 Apr, 2009 07:14

Both Land Rover and Rolls Royce and Bentley are actually some of the most ecofriendly cars.... though great fuel comsumption - they "live" much longer that other cars - and therefore carbon emmisions are lower for these cars - compared to other car companies....

Robin · Post by **Robin** » Sun 26 Apr, 2009 07:17

muppet wrote:if you are being properly green you keep your car as long as possible, as I f i have got it right the main bit of carbon footprint for a car is manufacturing, not thedaily use

You are spot on there. The scheme is completely potty. It can only be the result of heavy lobbying by the motor industry who after all donate to whichever party is in power. As do defence contractors. Hence the war in Iraq fought on an equally phoney excuse.

estocks · Post by **estocks** » Sun 26 Apr, 2009 11:01

Robin wrote:
muppet wrote:if you are being properly green you keep your car as long as possible, as I f i have got it right the main bit of carbon footprint for a car is manufacturing, not thedaily use
You are spot on there. The scheme is completely potty. It can only be the result of heavy lobbying by the motor industry who after all donate to whichever party is in power. As do defence contractors. Hence the war in Iraq fought on an equally phoney excuse.

America's economy was not growing for several years before the Credit Crunch. The $Trillion homeland government spending investment helped prolong the impression of good times in the economy. It could be reasoned that without the artificial stimulation, recession in the US (and hence here) would have come much earlier.

To coin a phrase from WW11, "Nothing like a war to stimulate an economy".

PhoenixCoupe · Post by **PhoenixCoupe** » Sun 26 Apr, 2009 23:45

Who gives a toss about the environment, there's still petrol to burn and oxygen to breathe - and still will be during my lifetime and my offsprings...
We'll also get warmer weather as a bonus.
But I said yes because it'll mean less Z3's about and push up the prices for those who kept theirs in the long run.

On a serious note, it will mean that there are very few 'normal' cars left from the 80's and 90's (there aren't that many at present anyway) - you rarely see an Escort, Maestro, Sierra, Cavalier on the road today. Yet 10 years ago you'd still see a reasonable number of 70's cars in everyday use.
A lot of mint examples of everyday cars of the 70's / 80's are getting unbelievable prices at auctions - well in excess of what they were new, even taking inflation into account.

danieltharris · Post by **danieltharris** » Mon 27 Apr, 2009 00:19

This whole saving the planet thing is a load of rubbish. By being "eco friendly" we are trying to preserve our way of life and our own existence and not the planet.

This planet has gone through much worse in the past and will very likely be around a lot longer than human beings will be.

danieltharris · Post by **danieltharris** » Mon 27 Apr, 2009 20:04

Doesn't logic dictate that somebody driving around in a car that is old and bad enough to warrant being scrapped for £2k isn't exactly going to be the most wealthy person in the world. Especially with the recession.

Buying brand new cars should be reserved for the rich and the stupid only imo :p I am neither lol.

estocks · Post by **estocks** » Mon 27 Apr, 2009 20:33

This scheme has been running in Germany for a few months, by and large people use the discount for small cars, where discounts are harder to come by.

smartypants · Post by **smartypants** » Tue 28 Apr, 2009 08:39

PhoenixCoupe wrote:Who gives a toss about the environment, there's still petrol to burn and oxygen to breathe - and still will be during my lifetime and my offsprings...
We'll also get warmer weather as a bonus.
But I said yes because it'll mean less Z3's about and push up the prices for those who kept theirs in the long run.

On a serious note, it will mean that there are very few 'normal' cars left from the 80's and 90's (there aren't that many at present anyway) - you rarely see an Escort, Maestro, Sierra, Cavalier on the road today. Yet 10 years ago you'd still see a reasonable number of 70's cars in everyday use.
A lot of mint examples of everyday cars of the 70's / 80's are getting unbelievable prices at auctions - well in excess of what they were new, even taking inflation into account.

smartypants · Post by **smartypants** » Tue 28 Apr, 2009 08:42

danieltharris wrote:This whole saving the planet thing is a load of rubbish. By being "eco friendly" we are trying to preserve our way of life and our own existence and not the planet.

This planet has gone through much worse in the past and will very likely be around a lot longer than human beings will be.

100000% spot on!

We humans have very little effect on the planet as a whole. We have a huge effect on our own environment, yes - but the planet will keep turning.

Coal and oil will not run out for a long long long time, before out great great great great grandchildren are long gone anyway. The strides the oil companies have made in technology in retrieving oil from otherwise thought off unretrievable places has seen to that.

But as long as they keep talking about it running out, they can put the price up and tax you more