It’s just another fine and dandy day in the life of the motorist.  In case you haven’t heard the news and ergo have no bloody idea what I’m talking about, let me fill you in.  I’m referring to the idea that motorists who leave their engines running whilst stopped could be fined £20 under new anti-pollution plans.

Traffic wardens have been told to look for “offenders” who pull up at level crossings and on busy streets, presumably causing congestion and of course emitting all that nasty CO2 into the environment.  It could even go further, with drivers stuck in traffic jams with their engines running if they are seen to be idling ‘too long’.

Of course, the astute amongst you will point out that surely this is madness.  After all, if you are stuck in a jam, then you don’t want to be there in the first place, so receiving a fine for being in one with your engine running is like a slap in the face.  So, the ‘kindly’ warden will give you a warning first.

I’d be interested to know how they’ll do this.  Especially if it is a slow-moving, but nonetheless moving, queue.  Are they going to look at the driver, hoping that each one will wind down their window to be given some verbal abuse from a government official just waiting to slap them with another fine simply because they had the audacity to be sitting behind the wheel with their engine running?

In this day and age, I find it really hard to believe that ANYONE actually leaves their engine idling for any longer than strictly necessary.  Just look at the price of fuel!  If you run a gas guzzler, then this is going to be especially true.  On top of this, some engines are actually quite inefficient at the on/off process, especially when cold.  Ergo, they’ll consume far more fuel by being turned off than they would when being left to idle – at least for a short period.

Perhaps what is most telling of all is that buildings produce “nearly half of the UK’s carbon emissions” (source: http://campaigns.direct.gov.uk/epc/) which is “almost twice that of cars and planes” (source: ibid).  So, by the government’s own admission, buildings produce a huge amount more of the nasty stuff that is apparently giving the greenies a case of the meanies.  So, what’s next?  A fine for those who leave their heating on “irresponsibly”?  A massive tax for those who don’t get their house double glazed?  No, I didn’t think so.  Let’s just stick another tax on the motorist…

Liberty Electric Cars Ltd is investing £30 million in the re engineering of large luxury cars and 4 x 4’s into emission-free, high performance electric vehicles.  The company is designing and manufacturing a unique electric drive-train platform to power a wide range of large vehicles, which also have the flexibility to incorporate emerging technologies.

Annual vehicle production plans, which include the world’s first zero emission, electrically powered Range Rover, are in tens of thousands and, creating around 250 new technology and manufacturing jobs.  The Liberty Electric Range Rover drives cleanly and quietly around roads and cities, free of tax, congestion and parking charges, making less environmental impact than even the smallest, most fuel efficient petrol car, yet still offering the comfort and security of a luxury 4 x 4.

Electric vehicles have 80 per cent lower running costs than petrol cars.  Electrical power is also a more efficient source of power, and enhances a car’s dynamic performance because of its instantly available torque.  Liberty Electric Cars’ management team is lead by Barry Shrier, founder and CEO.  Barry Shrier is a technology entrepreneur. As managing director at Deutsche Bank, he developed the mobile payment system - Pay Box.  He is also a non executive director of Washington-based satellite technology company Leo Terra LLC.

Consumers and businesses are increasingly more concerned about global warming and climate change, and market demand for zero emission electric cars is developing rapidly.  As a result, a whole new technology base needs to emerge quickly, to keep pace with social and legislative change.

Liberty Electric Cars recognises that a significant challenge to turn innovative zero emission ideas into volume production rests with the industry’s first tier of component suppliers.  The purpose of the Liberty Zero Emission Vehicle Foundation is to raise awareness, and attract funds and investment into this sector from private and public sources.  It will accelerate the market introduction of zero emission vehicle technologies, over what can be achieved by global market forces alone.

Barry Shrier, CEO, Liberty Electric Cars, says: “There is a great wealth of UK automotive engineering ingenuity and innovation that can lead the world in the newly emerging zero emission vehicle space. However, a major and rapid ‘environmental technology’ shift across the entire industry is a significant challenge for suppliers looking to develop prototypes into volume production - made even more difficult in the current credit crunch climate. The Zero Emission Vehicle Foundation is the catalyst that will enable the leading technology innovators to get the support they need. ”

The Foundation’s board is chaired by Lord Anthony St John of Bletso, and will include other prominent figures from the automotive industry, the sciences, Government and the private sector.

It brings component suppliers and vehicle manufacturers together, to create the right connections, through its quarterly meetings. The Foundation is attracting funding from large corporations that have a vested interest in the earliest possible arrival of zero emission driving. It will also co ordinate with the Technology Strategy Board, which is set to launch the Low Carbon Vehicles Integrated Delivery Programme, backed by £70 million of Government investment.

If you’re a regular commuter by a mode of transport other than car (or perhaps you have a chauffeur), you may have already read the article that tickled my funny-bone when on the way to work this morning.  It was an absolute, and I mean absolute, classic.  Whilst the government is spending all this hard earned cash on telling us what to do in order to avoid putting out more CO2 than we need to, an overwhelming majority are remaining absolutely bloody clueless.  What do I mean by that?

Let’s put it this way.  Four percent of us think a hybrid car is two cars welded together.  If you’re one of them can I just quickly say “Oh my lord”.  As James May might say, “What a clot”.  I’m sorry, but you are.  Unless of course you were joking.  In which case, I might let you off.  I just have a horrible feeling that you aren’t though.  Let me be clear on this, a car made from two vehicles is called a ‘cut and shut’, is incredibly dangerous and absolutely illegal.  A hybrid car however normally means a car with a petrol engine and an electric engine.  Therefore hybrid as it has two types of power.

Amazingly though, there are the same percentage of people who are firmly entrenched in their belief that those wonderful new electric cars leak battery acid.  How much?  Who knows.  I hope it doesn’t just dangerously spurt all over the road.  Those who think that hydrogen cars produce water are at least partially right though (they also produce some heat).

Most worrying of all for the government is the 25 percent of people who believe that biofuel cars will produce no CO2 at all.  Ironic given that all our petrol is now a ‘bit’ bio-fuel (5% is still from crop sources, unless the government have backtracked on that as well) yet my car still produces the same amount of CO2, I’m sure yours does too.

What about our carbon footprint?  Well, frankly it’s a ridiculous term and far too hard a ‘sell’ for most people.  I’m not surprised that 85 percent of people have no idea what their car’s emissions are.  Who cares?  Well, some people do thanks to the road tax hike.  For a lot of people though, this is still simply a non-issue.  I suppose the irony of surveys in general was shown up in the last statement of the report (from the British Motor Show): 70 percent of people want to reduce their emissions.  A bit weird isn’t it then that 85 percent have no idea how much CO2 their car puts out?

You couldn’t make the sort of stuff up that comes from a G8 meeting.  Let me give you a (non-car related) example – just the other day Gordon Brown came out with the statement of ‘don’t waste food’ – for me that sounds like good advice.  I don’t as a rule waste food (you may as well just throw away money right) but I’m sure plenty of people do.

However, this was on the same day when he reminded us that people were starving in Africa, whilst that night the G8 group tucked into a rather lovely champagne dinner of eight sumptuous courses.  Bearing that in mind, you can’t very well expect their environmental advice to be particularly good or free of double standards now can you?

First, the G8 summit has agreed (bear in mind that this isn’t all of the nations in the free world here, and given how long it took America to sign up to the Kyoto protocol I doubt this is at all realistic) to hit 50% reduction targets for their countries on emissions.  They aim to reach this goal by using 25 measures, including outlawing normal light bulbs.  Fair enough.  What makes less sense is the idea that all British citizens who drive will have to move over to electric cars by 2020.

Apparently, our very own Gordon Brown wants to incentivise low and zero-emission cars to try and induce people to make the switch.  This is what is known as in politics as giving the carrot.  On the other hand, you have the stick.  The stick in this case is forcing people who run a big engine, high emission car to pay far more than they used to.

Why is this bad?  Well first of all, if you want everyone to switch, merely cutting a charge that is only costing people around £180 (I say ‘only’, it’s really quite a lot for a family with children) is not the correct way to go about things.  Why not knock £1,000 off a decent electric car?  Given the appalling safety record of the G-Whiz, I think you’d be a completely irresponsible parent to put your children in one of those.  So what remains?  Well hybrids aren’t that great.  What remains?

A hugely complex solution.  Hydrogen fuel cells.  Why hydrogen?  Well given the fact that in order to power your nice new electric car all manner of fossil fuels have to be burnt, then something else has to be done.  How about a nice clean source in the form of hydrogen?  I think so.  We shouldn’t be trying to focus on anything else – there are just too many solutions out there that don’t make much sense.  This however does.

In my opinion, the government should give a huge whack of money to a contractor to stick a bunch of refuelling units up and down the country.  They should then trial these vehicles – as far as I can tell, Honda’s car has been very successful.  So Mr Brown, what’s it to be?  Are you going to force us to ‘go green’ in an incorrect way, or just beat us with sticks to pay you and those who kept the infamous ‘John Lewis list’ in second homes with lovely plasma TVs?

Fuel rationing – if that phrase doesn’t send a shiver of terror down your spine then you either don’t drive or you’re a mad greenie.  I would be firmly against any such proposal (I like my metal screaming fast or failing that screeching tyres, hair waving in the wind) and it sounds very big brother to me.  If you agree then make sure to kick up a fuss if you ever see or hear about the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC).

They want the Government to give everyone some carbon credits that people can use to follow such amusing pastimes as driving their car, or even heating their houses (that after all requires energy too) and who knows what else.  You’re allowed in this crazy scheme to buy more credits from motorists who won’t use theirs.  So, the rich will have 50,000 miles allowed (just in case) whilst the poor will be able to go 50 and then aren’t allowed to travel anymore?

The EAC outlined this scheme and it is known as Personal Carbon Trading.  It is aiming toward environmental protection and sustainable development.  Apparently, this is a more efficient way to reach ‘green goals’ than simply slapping another tax on to us motorists (already quite put upon if you ask me).

Apparently, a spokesperson made this rather nonsensical statement:

“Carbon trading could be essential if the UK is to meet its emission targets”

What’s wrong with that?  Well either something is or is not essential.  For my money, if this ‘essential’ to meeting targets I’d rather stick two fingers up to the EU or whoever decided to lump us with these unrealistic targets – after all it’s not like China or India are slowing down their massive, rampant growth and burning of fossil fuels just because someone in a beige jumper is telling them they have to.  There are better ways to go about things than that.

If Jeremy Clarkson can accept (however begrudgingly) that climate change is a fact, I suppose that I can too.  However, one thing I’ve never heard him have any sort of positive comments about is this whole idea of eco-towns.  For the purpose of this article, a quick explanation of what exactly constitutes an eco-town is necessary.

An eco-town is one described as being small, with zero carbon emissions and being “built on brownfield” land.  They comprise of 5,000-10,000 homes and would have strong public transport links to towns and cities.  All sounds very good yes?  So why the title?

In insane proposals put forward by the government, those who live in Gordon Brown’s ideal future ‘towns’ could face fines for both driving out of town and also be forced to park their cars away from their homes (as their weird eco-towns will be mainly pedestrianised).  They’ll then be expected to leave their vehicles and walk or cycle back to their abodes.

Naturally, the proposals go a little further.  There will be a requirement to pay a fee for a permanent parking space (I don’t recall paying a ‘fee’ when buying my house so I could park my car on my drive) and potentially penalties for driving the car outside of the town above a certain set number of times a year – though god knows how many times this will be.

There’s also another major concern.  Those who need to use a car for whatever reason (whether disabled, needing to ferry around the kids, the elderly and so forth) will find journeys apparently more difficult.  How can a young mum cope with two kids and a shopping trip without a car to do this?  Likewise for an elderly person who may struggle with heavy bags.  How fair is that?

What should we all say or do about this?  Well, I think it is ABSOLUTE MADNESS.  It is crazy.  I’ve got a better idea for the government.  If they are that focussed on these issues, why not just ban cars altogether?  Well, the answer’s on the wall folks.  It’s linked in with fuel prices.

Recently, Gordon Brown went to see the Saudis regarding the procurement of more oil in order to lower prices here in the UK (you can read more about this here).  This is something I’ve written about before, as prices really are shockingly high.   In light of this, what did the Saudis have the ‘audacity’ to say?

Lower taxes Mr Brown.  Bearing in mind that the UK pays almost 70p to the £ for the privilege to drive around, I think their logic is pretty sound.  However, it highlights exactly why you’ll not see a total ban on cars.  Why bother when the government can simply tax every action you perform with your vehicle?

If you feel that these proposals are quite offensive and/or worrying, contact your local MP immediately to tell him your concerns.  When you do contact him/her, ask exactly what they are going to do.  There are better ways to support green ideals – forcing those who move to ‘green’ areas to pay more is not one of them.

If you want a really good idea, how about we take some of each MP’s average salary (circa £61,820) and expenses (not sure on that one but it’s no doubt quite a lot judging by the recent furore) and put that money into a special fund researching more on green fuels?  It may solve the problem in a more proper way than eco towns, which frankly sound like they will cause more problems than solutions.

In case you just can’t decide which fuel you want to use, perhaps the new Lotus Exige 270E Tri-Fuel is going to be your sort of thing. It has a top speed of 158mph and charges from zero to 60 in 3.9 seconds, yet manages to chuck out less of the black stuff than most standard hatchbacks. How’s that work then?

This amazing little car can run on normal petrol, bio-ethanol or methanol – you choose the fuel. Given the current climate, I doubt many will choose normal petrol though. Amazingly, the two biofuels can be added to a part-petrol mix to make this one of the most environmentally friendly sports cars around.

So, is this really a development then? Well yes, of course. Not least because in the current climate, if you’re not driving something a little more friendly than a standard 2.0 litre petrol you’re not exactly going to fit in with the Joneses. Not only that, but climate change is, like it or not, a fact.

Whether you want to debate it is due to cars or not however remains a separate issue. Granted, this car is not a going to change the planet. But, and I use a big BUT here, it does show that traditional sports car manufacturers are actually considering their product and their customers. People are interested in doing their bit, whether that’s switching to a small diesel or a bio-fuel powered sports car. Nonetheless, this car is special.

This car is special because it is a Lotus Exige. If you’ve never been on a Lotus experience day, I can wholeheartedly recommend it. Why? Lotus makes simply fantastic cars. The Exige is, without a doubt, the pinnacle of the hard work that goes into one of their creations. It is the perfect pocket rocket whether you’re a track day star or a sports car enthusiast. It has a mix of raw power matched with very light weight (875kgs) making it a superb undiluted sports car.

How does it handle? Well, give it a few revs and you’ll see what the fuss is about. It will simply launch forwards, taking your head with it. Push on hard and at 6,000 rpm the VVT engine will open up for a boost of power. This is matched to a lovely slick, quick-shift gearbox. You won’t be left wanting in that regard.

The car itself is simply a dream – the steering is sharp, with a nicely weighted feel. You’ll get almost completely flat cornering, though if you want to have fun that’s possible too. The miles of grip the car provides will give you a lot of reassurance if you don’t happen to be the next Lewis Hamilton. It’s not all dreams of power though, given that you’ll find the frustrations of the car are evident in a lack of space and not-that-great visibility. Nonetheless, it is an amazing feat of engineering.

I think that shows why I like the Lotus Exige 270E so much. Yes, it’s a Lotus Exige. But it’s better. It gives you all that the standard car offers, then adds a big dollop of ‘yes, we do care’ on top. If you buy one – after it has been showcased at the Co-operative Sexy Green Car Show in Cornwall on 23-31st May – you’ll be the envy of just about anyone on the road, let alone the race track.

If the points above haven’t convinced you of the fact, let me just spell it out to you. The Lotus Exige (especially in this powered up, more environmentally friendly form) is a symbol. It represents all that’s right about driving – control, power and manoeuvrability. Best of all, you’ll never get bored driving it. So, let’s all give some respect to the clever folks at Hethel.

Unless you’ve been in a cave (or simply aren’t interested in how much fuel you have to buy and what’s in it), you will have heard of the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO). This is a fairly simple rule that says 2.5% of all petrol and diesel sold on UK forecourts must come from renewable biofuel sources. This requirement will rise to 5% by 2010.

So, renewable and greener eh? What can be bad in that equation? Well, it seems that this scheme might well be contributing to human rights abuses and rising food prices. Shock horror - something that’s meant to be good turning out to be bad after all.

Oxfam has said that the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues had estimated some 60 million indigenous people faced clearance from their land to make way for plantations such as palm and rapeseed oil (along with sugar cane and maize) - crops that can be farmed before processing into fuel.

Various locations are under the eye of Oxfam as they are currently throwing their own people off land in order to grow these crops. Asia, Africa and South America are all on the list. Obviously these are some big landmasses, and no doubt there are many other places that would be of interest to the charity.

Of course, another massive issue is food. What I mean by this is that if landmasses are being taken off the farmers, where will food crops be grown? Granted, you could say that it will still be available. No doubt this is true. Grain prices however will continue to rise, forcing the poorest out of the market - a market where being forced out could well mean starving to death.

Finally, there are others who say that there is a bigger failing in the scheme still - one that undermines the whole principle behind it. Their opinion is that biofuels are in fact not at all sustainable, due to continuing deforestation and damaging farming practices (including the use of fertilisers). This also leads to exacerbation of the problem of climate change itself - making the switch to biofuel completely pointless.

The government, in their usual style demand that nothing is wrong and we should go ahead. For once, in the whole green issue, I remain unconvinced. It really does sound as if Oxfam has a strong case here - and if it turns out that just one farm growing rapeseed means that someone has to starve then I’d say we’ve got it terribly, terribly wrong.

Friends of the Earth insist that the way forward is to create better public transport. That’s never a bad idea - I’d like to be travelling in a clean, quiet bus that isn’t shoving out horrendous amounts of Co2. But I think that’s ignoring the problem a little. Cars are not going to go away. They are an amazing invention. We all really need to think very carefully though about where we go from here.

Given all this information, I really feel that we’re on the cusp of something great. If bio-diesel isn’t the answer, maybe a manufacturer will really take the plunge and create something sustainable, efficient and able to manage more than 100 miles on a single charge. I personally think it’s going to be Honda. Their hydrogen fuel cell is something to amaze - and it shouldn’t starve anyone of force them off their land.

Car owners could now face fines if they (or indeed their passengers) throw litter from their vehicle if they are caught on camera. This is a move being considered by the government to reduce the amount of fly tipping/littering that takes place from our various vehicles.

Ministers are holding talks with town hall chiefs around the UK in a bid to close a loophole that has stopped officials from imposing new fines of up to £80 for this type of offence. Currently, they cannot take action against the registered keeper of the car but only the individual who litters. This has proved to be difficult from an identification point of view.

The fact that this sort of offence is quite difficult to police makes me upset. I find it quite a horrible sight when someone is driving along and then happens to throw out a used pack of cigarettes for instance. I once saw a person even throw a whole pizza box out of their window. Would you do it on your street? I doubt it - so don’t do it on mine or anywhere else. There’s no excuse for it in this day and age.

What I’d like to go on to mention are some other bad habits that you could see on Britain’s roads - some of which are actually quite dangerous. Others of which will just prove rather bad to your wallet. Let’s take a look at what some of us do wrong on (and off) the roads.

Indicators And Their Use
It is a legal requirement that cars must have indicators on the road - this is a benefit both for the driver who uses these signalling lights (it shows people what you’re planning to do) and other drivers, as they can adjust their driving and pulling away accordingly. However, indicators work both ways. What I mean is that I was recently almost in an accident. I approached the roundabout, slowed down, put on my right indicators, and when safe to go I did so.

Unfortunately, a driver of a rather nice 231bhp Mazda RX-8 totally ignored my indicator and sped into my path. I pressed the horn to make sure he was aware of me. He became aware and apologised profusely. This is what I mean by the indicators working both ways. Use yours wisely, and make sure that you look out for other people using theirs.

Tailgating
There is absolutely no excuse for doing this to anyone - especially at motorway speeds as this proves to be incredibly dangerous. Do you remember your stopping distances? No? Well go back and take a look. Do you really believe that you can stop in the 5 feet or so that you’ve given yourself if the car in front slams on their brakes? OF course, the irony is that the closer each car is to the one in front, the more likely that each person has to aggressively use the brakes. OH well, we are a sensible bunch aren’t we!

Lane Discipline
Some drivers are all over the place - such as the wrong side of the road. Okay, some junctions are small and it’s easier to get out when you’re just edging into the wrong lane. However, when someone is tramlining across a roundabout straight across your lane then it moves from being annoying to actually incredibly dangerous.

Driving Too Slowly
I’d never recommend you to speed around, unless you are speeding around on a track - but then that’s the point there. What I will say though is to do the legal speed limit, provided it is safe to do so. What I mean by that is if it is a 30 road but there’s a few inches of snow, then please do go slower and make sure you (and the other drivers on the road) stay safe and not crashed into.

On the other hand, there’s no excuse for doing 20mph in a 30mph zone with perfectly clear conditions and a straight run of the road ahead. I don’t care if you’re 17 or 70 - if you’re not capable of safe, legal driving up to the limit in conditions that allow it, you shouldn’t be on the road. To give an example of this, I was recently trapped behind someone driving a car that kept putting on the brakes. We were doing 25mph - I know this as I kept the same distance away. Why he kept applying the brake when there was nothing in front I have no idea, but it was wasteful on fuel and wound me up!

Overall, there are quite a few issues on our roads, but rubbish certainly shouldn’t be one of them. I’ll give a few tips on better driving in a post of the future. In the meantime, why not keep a plastic bag in your car for rubbish, that you then empty (or put itself into the rubbish) once a week?

There’s no doubt that going ‘green’ is at least somewhere on everyone’s agenda at the moment, whether they are a motorist or not.  I’d certainly recommend though, if you drive a car, that you look again at exactly what it costs.  This includes your own driving style, and whether you’re a bit heavy with the old right foot at times.

It’s a wonderful thing that people are taking more interest in green models, not least because the manufacturers are doing just the same.  This means that you aren’t exactly going to be wanting for choice - even if you are wanting for money due to the state of the economy.  Nevertheless, for those who can afford it, let’s see what some of the major manufacturers are up to and what you could be driving to save you money.

BMW will provide you with something a bit special (as usual, at least if you like their cars) in the form of their ‘efficient driving dynamics’.  This new range contains both efficient diesels and petrols, with stop/start technology to cut Co2 emissions and increase fuel economy.  This has led to their BMW 1 Series 118D car being voted the 2008 World Green Car, and is also the reason for it being the main image with this post.

Citroen are not far behind mind you.  The French are a nation not to be outdone by the Germans (especially at the moment, anyone seen the new C5 advert?  Ooooohhh!), so the fact that they are the winners of the Green Car Manufacturer of the Year should be no surprise.  Their line-up of the lowest Co2 emitting diesel vehicles around should mean there is something for everyone, whatever their size or shape preference (as it were).

Once again, these vehicles are fitted with stop/start technology to keep you clean sailing in a traffic jam.  Arguably the pick of the bunch - certainly for fuel efficiency - is the C1 city car.  This lightweight packs a 1.4 litre turbo diesel that is both fun to drive and emits only 109g/km along with a 69mpg return.  Best of all, you can easily pick one up for under £10,000.  When you look at it that way, what’s not to like?  Well, perhaps you wouldn’t be satisfied with it on a longer motorway journey, but I digress…

Seat is the Spanish brand that shares a lot (including vehicle platforms) with parent company Volkswagen.  This means that they have access to technology in order to create the wonderful ‘Ecomotive’ range.  Silly branding aside, this line-up really does mean business.  Once again, the standout is a smaller car - the 1.4litre Ibiza.  At 99g/km you’re exempt from road tax in this funky little car with the S badge, whilst the 73mpg return will put more pennies in your piggy bank.  An impressive set of figures for a car that costs slightly over £10,000.

Seat is even offering a performance car with superb economy figures - the rather tasty Seat Leon 1.9litre turbodiesel.  Granted, it might not have the badge that you want and it isn’t the most refined of engines, but putting out 148bhp and moving to 60 in less than 9 seconds is pretty good for a diesel.

There are of course a wealth of other manufacturers out there all doing there own thing, but for now, I’ve really just cherry-picked the best of what looks like a bumper crop this year.  So, if you’re in for a new car, why not go green?  Your wallet will thank you for it, as will the environment…