Green Energy

The issue of motoring and the environment is one of the most hotly debated issues on the green agenda. As we know, a majority of the cars on our roads contribute in a greater or lesser measure to the pollution in our environment. People are not going to stop driving, and the issue of transport pollution is not going to slip off the agenda, so surely something has to give. Is there a way that we can keep driving and stop contributing to the pollution of our environment?

One thing that seems certain is that it is not going to become illegal any time soon to drive a car that causes a certain amount of pollution. Even the more gas-guzzling cars are not going to be banned, even if they may be taxed more heavily in some places. A car can be declared unroadworthy if it gives off more than an agreed level of fumes, but at the moment this seems to apply to cars that have a specific fault, and is not going to take the majority of high-pollution cars off the roads any time soon.

The possibility of driving a hybrid car that uses another fuel – hydrogen being one, or electricity another – to augment the power that it gets from less environmentally sound fuels is one that a lot of people are now considering. At the moment, there is a body of opinion that feels the less polluting cars of this nature to be inferior mechanically to pure gas cars. As technology improves, the chances are that this viewpoint will decrease, and at that point we will be on the road to greener driving in our cities.

Any big plan to make a difference in the world, in this day and age, is likely to be met by at least one person, and probably several more with the question “And who’s paying for all this?”. It is typically a rhetorical question, although they’re usually prepared to offer the answer themselves anyway. The implication, or the bald statement is that they fully expect the cost of the project to come out of their taxes and they don’t much appreciate this frittering away of their hard-earned cash.

Now, there are arguments to be made for and against that argument. Certainly, there always ought to be some consultation before any municipal or federal body spends tax money on a big project. However, the idea that all environmental projects amount to stealth taxes on the citizen is one that falls somewhat wide of the mark. As often as not, the funds are raised for these projects entirely separately from the tax levy – and equally often, the projects concerned are for the betterment of the area as a whole.

The idea that governments are prepared to visibly cock a snook at their taxpayers to fund an unpopular pet project defies political logic, apart from anything else. Environmental projects are rarely, if ever, just an excuse to milk the taxpayer for a few extra coins. More often, they are designed to stop a blossoming problem before it becomes a crisis. If we ignore the various problems that may arise, who will be paying? Us, our kids, and generations to come.