Slashdot Mirror


Paris To Test Banning SUVs In the City

thecarchik writes "Paris may be the first city to experiment with such a policy. Next year, it will begin to test restrictions on vehicles that emit more than a certain amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) per kilometer — the measure of a car's contribution to greenhouse gases. An official within the Parisian mayor's office, Denis Baupin, identified older diesel-engined cars and sport-utility vehicles as specific targets of the emissions limit. Residents and travelers have responded by buying thousands of electric cars, including the low-speed fiberglass G-Wiz — despite major safety concerns with the vehicle."

10 of 509 comments (clear)

  1. Weather Alert by Bloodwine77 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Heavy smug clouds are developing over Paris. Seriously though, isn't the pollution just move upstream when it comes to electric cars? Or have there been recent improvements in that regard?

    1. Re:Weather Alert by javahead76 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Electric "plants" are more efficient at producing energy than the combustion engines that cars use. I don't think there is anything recent about that.

    2. Re:Weather Alert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Gotta love it when slashtards SMUGLY criticize others for being smug. I know slashdot is all about ludditism when it comes to changes in technology, but for god sake cant you idiots have an open mind for anything without making up bullshit insults and excuses for what amounts to simply a fear of change?

    3. Re:Weather Alert by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You do realise that America gets twice as much oil from Canada as from Saudi, right?

      Which is actually irrelevant to the price of oil. OPEC sets pricing (through setting production directly, which controls the supply directly which controls the pricing indirectly). Canada can either follow that pricing or sell the oil well below market pricing, losing money just to make the US happy. I don't like Scott Adams, but his comment (via Dogbert) regarding the definition of "fungible" was apropos.

  2. How much carbon ... by PPH · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ... will producing all those additional 'city cars' people will need to buy consume?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  3. Re:Not new. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The "zOMG co2!" thing should get people riled up(at least here across the atlantic); but I suspect that this is(in the guise of being 'green'); basically just the same arrangement.

    There are more and less efficient engine designs and(over short distances, if you don't count upstream emissions) even a main battle tank could emit zero co2 if it packed enough batteries; but, on average, this is basically going to target old cars(more likely to be noisy, lax on assorted noxious emissions) and large cars(more metal rolling, more energy needed. Period.)

    It is an interesting quirk of French politics that you would bring up the co2 thing to make such a ban more palatable; but the effects of this proposal seem pretty much identical to most other schemes aimed at making dense cities more pleasant and less congested: all of them target big, loud, and noxious vehicles, through a mixture of either Orwellian cameras(Hi London!), landscaping changes aimed at 'pedestrianizing' the city, or just plain legal fiat backed by traffic cops.

    In general, I get the impression that(at least among city dwellers, suburbanites commuting in are rather the target) such schemes are reasonably popular. Above a certain density, you just get smog-huffing gridlock that tends to grind out the vibrant street-level life of a city. Culling the more obnoxious vehicles, and replacing them with some mixture of better walkability, public transit, and smaller vehicles(sometimes as part of zipcar-like arrangements), tends to bring some of the charm back, and isn't too inconvenient in very high density areas. Trying to be the suburbs, when you are 10x or more as dense, just doesn't scale very well. Cities reacting against this trend are fairly common, though generally not by hitting co2 related metrics...

  4. Safety by Andy+Smith · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The safety issue really concerns me. I don't want people being forced by legislation to buy smaller, weaker cars, for city driving, because most people can only afford one car so they'll also be taking those same small, weak cars out on fast roads.

    I'm a news photographer and I often attend accident scenes. As a rule, whenever there is an SUV involved, the occupants of the SUV survive and the occupants of the car _all_ die.

    Renault Megane vs Range Rover. Both people in the Megane killed. Minor injuries in the Range Rover.
    http://www.meejahor.com/wp-content/uploads/FatalcollisiononB9006CantraywoodtoCroyro_A156/FatalcollisionB9006CantraywoodtoCroyroad2.jpg

    Vauxhall Corsa vs Mitsubishi Shogun. Both people in the Corsa killed. Injuries in the Shogun.
    http://www.meejahor.com/wp-content/uploads/Newspaperphotosfromthelastfewmonths_CD67/A9Dalwhinniefatalcollision5of8.jpg

    Vauxhall Astra vs Mitsubishi Shogun. All three people in the Astra killed. Minor injuries in the Shogun.
    http://www.meejahor.com/wp-content/uploads/818q3025.jpg

    1. Re:Safety by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So ... the answer is, what? Everybody should drive an SUV? Then the soccer moms will want something bigger because they want to be 'safer than the other guy'?

      PS: That's only impacts with other vehicles, overall SUVs are not any safer, any kind of swerving or loss of concentration is much more likely to kill you in an SUV.

      "According to NHTSA data, SUV's and pickups are at a disadvantage in single-vehicle accidents (such as when the driver falls asleep, or loses control swerving around a deer), which comprise 43% of fatal accidents, with more than double the chance of rolling over. This risk relates closely to overall US motor vehicle fatality data, showing that SUVs and pickups generally have a higher fatality rate than cars of the same manufacturer"

      source

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:Safety by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I generally consider myself a pretty careful driver and I have had my share of mistakes. Anyone who is a safe driver should be able to identify many instances where they 'got away' with a lapse in concentration.

      The problem is that shit drivers do that ten times as often, and they probably aren't even aware of it.

      Last week I had some idiot nearly[1] hit me on a pedestrian crossing who was using his blackberry. Now the crossing was green, which means the light he'd gone through had been red for a few seconds - the light is the other side of a junction, and they're timed so there's a two second neutral period when it's red every direction. I don't think the stupid idiot even saw the light, or the pedestrain crossing. He didn't see me until the last second. Did he hit the brake? No, the horn. Wanker.

      Later the same day I'm crossing with my son in a pushchair. Again, I have the green, traffic has read. Some idiot in an SUV is stopped in the correct place. Driver yapping on a cellphone and looking behind him. As I'm passing in front of him the car starts moving forward. Relatively slow, but I don't have time to get out of the way so I kick the front of his carjust to make a noise. This actually gets him to look in the direction he's going. Twat gets out and threatens to set the police on me for vandalism. I tell him go ahead - this was right outside the police station. He hadn't seen that either...

      [1] And it was only nearly because I jumped out of the way.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  5. Misleading article by rainmouse · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As you and many others perhaps have falsely presumed, this may be some kind of attack on SUV's or American culture. That is just bad journalism and media manipulation to make a bland article more interesting. The ban specifically targets any vehicle which crosses a certain Co2 threshold per km travelled. Of course the author chose to headline SUV's and feature a massive SUV picture in order to falsely manipulate you into believing its an attack on US culture and judging by many posts here its clearly worked. The article also makes it very unclear if London's congestion charges or these new French ban on high emission vehicles is the cause of the buying of thousands of new electric cars.