Car parking at University going off co2

Jono8 · 12 May 2011 at 23:50

So person A's car emits 100g CO2 and he drives 10 miles into Uni whilst person B's car emits 300g of CO2 but he only drives 2 miles into university............Who causes more harm to the environment

griffo_001 · 12 May 2011 at 23:56

Alex*TLR said:
Count yourself lucky!

I'm at Uni of Surrey (like jonny69 mentioned) and there is ZERO parking for students! Only a rip off pay and display. Lots of parking for staff though untill we steal it to test our formula student vehicle!

Physics gets ****ed off if we even start ours in the car park. So we do. A lot

Django x2 · 13 May 2011 at 00:53

epic, only £250pa for my 530d

MikeHunt79 · 13 May 2011 at 06:58

Alex*TLR said:
Count yourself lucky!

I'm at Uni of Surrey (like jonny69 mentioned) and there is ZERO parking for students! Only a rip off pay and display. Lots of parking for staff though untill we steal it to test our formula student vehicle!

I was told I wasn't even allowed to bring a car into Cambridge at uni...

I did anyway, just left my car parked up most of the year and used a bike, far quicker in somewhere where it's gridlock pretty much the whole day.

Lakeland · 13 May 2011 at 07:04

Email and ask them exactly what they are going to put the extra money into, donations to a charity? Or back into the uni pot? If so is it actually legal to charge based on co2 for no reason other than to make money?

clv101 · 13 May 2011 at 07:56

This sounds reasonable to me... certainly no less reasonable than car tax. It's just one more small attempt to make inefficient cars relatively less attractive compared to efficient cars.

And what's so bad about the uni raising money? Unless you haven't noticed universities are all having major changes to their budgets at the moment - increasing parking charges is a reasonable way to raise money and simultaneously discourage driving.

Irish_Tom · 13 May 2011 at 08:22

clv101 said:
This sounds reasonable to me... certainly no less reasonable than car tax. It's just one more small attempt to make inefficient cars relatively less attractive compared to efficient cars.

And what's so bad about the uni raising money? Unless you haven't noticed universities are all having major changes to their budgets at the moment - increasing parking charges is a reasonable way to raise money and simultaneously discourage driving.

Then raise the single, fixed rate of parking for all vehicles.

There are plenty of reasons in this thread already why it's such a bad idea. It makes no sense whatsoever.

There was little/no parking for Students at Bournemouth but you didn't have to pay anything during the times when student parking was allowed.

ubersonic · 13 May 2011 at 08:26

clv101 said:
This sounds reasonable to me... certainly no less reasonable than car tax.

Which is pretty unreasonable in itself >.>

clv101 said:
It's just one more small attempt to make inefficient cars relatively less attractive compared to efficient cars.

Again, pretty unreasonable in itself, why does X car goin 4 miles pollute more that Y car going 30 miles?

clv101 said:
And what's so bad about the uni raising money? Unless you haven't noticed universities are all having major changes to their budgets at the moment - increasing parking charges is a reasonable way to raise money and simultaneously discourage driving.

Surely they can raise money without scamming the student body though? Im all for saving the planet but until they can provide any conclusive proof that climate change is man made then green taxes will continue to be nothing more than greedy politicians fleecing the general public through fear.

lordrobs · 13 May 2011 at 09:10

There is talk about introducing this where I work in the name of carbon reduction / sustainable transport blah blah.

Basically they are seeing it as a way of making money from the parking that is currently free. I pointed out the difficulty in enforcing this on a day by day basis in a venue where up to 70% of the cars in the car park are using the conference facilities

TBH I hope they go ahead with it. I only live a few miles away from work and only take my car for work use so they can either let me park for free or every time I need to go out I'll have to bike home, lock my bike away, get the car out and do the same on the way back, suits me

clv101 · 13 May 2011 at 09:22

lordrobs said:
There is talk about introducing this where I work in the name of carbon reduction / sustainable transport blah blah.

Basically they are seeing it as a way of making money...

Or, maybe, they are trying to reduce the carbon emissions associated with the enterprise and increase more sustainable transport. Why's everyone so cynical today!

lordrobs · 13 May 2011 at 09:26

clv101 said:
Or, maybe, they are trying to reduce the carbon emissions associated with the enterprise and increase more sustainable transport. Why's everyone so cynical today!

Because it is in the middle of no where. The nearest public transport is a bus stop 2.7 miles away. So by charging what are they going to do? Get us all walking the 2.7 miles from the nearest public transport to the centre down country roads with no pavements?

Trust me, it is a money making exercise, they are simply using any sustainable transport / carbon reduction as a cover story.

Westyfield2 · 13 May 2011 at 09:34

dxg said:
If you're a Grade 1 or 2 staff (cleaners etc.) then the Unions insisted on a lower rate.

Whereas students are made of money :rolleyes:

.

=VTA=MANFACE · 13 May 2011 at 09:37

Good idea. Keep carbons emissions down, and get healthy by walking.

Youngsters today bah...

CliffyBiro · 13 May 2011 at 09:42

Because the carbon emissions of parked cars are a real planet killer...

=VTA=MANFACE · 13 May 2011 at 09:48

skippi90 said:
Because the carbon emissions of parked cars are a real planet killer...

Nope. But when a thousand cars arrive and depart, they are.

Muffin` · 13 May 2011 at 10:01

=VTA=MANFACE said:
Nope. But when a thousand cars arrive and depart, they are.

Planet killers?

Trifid · 13 May 2011 at 10:02

=VTA=MANFACE said:
Nope. But when a thousand cars arrive and depart, they are.

That is debatable.

clv101 · 13 May 2011 at 10:17

lordrobs said:
Because it is in the middle of no where. The nearest public transport is a bus stop 2.7 miles away. So by charging what are they going to do? Get us all walking the 2.7 miles from the nearest public transport to the centre down country roads with no pavements?

Trust me, it is a money making exercise, they are simply using any sustainable transport / carbon reduction as a cover story.

Look at the bigger picture! If the enterprise is currently poorly served by sustainable transport solutions it will eventually have to adapt by moving to somewhere the employees can travel to, convincing local government that sustainable transport infrastructure should be deployed closer or finding a way to operate with less employees actually traveling to site.

All this kinds of measure are intended to adapt behaviour, not just make money out of the same behaviour.

SeatIbiza · 13 May 2011 at 10:24

1. Get private plate.

2. stick it on a sub <100 car

3. buy supercar

4. take private plate and stick on said car.

5. profit?

<insert troll here>

CaptainRAVE · 13 May 2011 at 10:32

We have just had a survey at our university assessing travelling to the university. Among the suggestions were salary based permits and CO2 based permits - of course, we all know CO2 based permits are just a way for the university to make more money, just in the same way as the CO2 based road tax. It is a very sly way to make more money, after all, why are we bothering? Reducing CO2 in this country will have little impact when the US and China continue to pump it out.