What vehicle for bushcraft?

[British Red]

Okay all 4x4 drivers are eco vandals except:

1. Those who live or work in the country and need off road capability
2. Those who offset the CO2 output
3. Those who use biodiesel
4. Those who drive Freelanders
5. Those who drive Range Rover Sports
6. Those who carry lots of equipment and tow trailers
7. Thosewho use the extra seating capacity to mean the g/CO2 per passenger mile is lower
8. Those who don't fly abroad and therefore reduce other equivalent emissions
9. Those who use low footprint transport in the week
10 Those who drive very old vehicles and therefore reduce the manufacturing output CO2

Yes but OTHER than them all 4x4 drivers are eco vandles

So what HAVE the Romans ever done for us?

Red

 

[pumbaa]

Nice idea, but ATV's are not Road Legal in the UK.

Actualy Atvs/Quads can now be bought road legal , or with the aid of an SVA test you can register them for the road . Arctic Cat have had some of theirs homologated for road use . I think they are te first maufacturer to do this , but i am sure others will follow .
Pumbaa

 

[bogflogger]

Problem Sorted!

 

[Martyn]

Okay all 4x4 drivers are eco vandals except:

Your words red, no one elses. We were talking about old series landrovers, disco's, warriors, Range Rovers etc, not all 4x4's. But the following from your list are valid points..

1. Those who live or work in the country and need off road capability
2. Those who offset the CO2 output
3. Those who use biodiesel
6. Those who carry lots of equipment and tow trailers

These points...

4. Those who drive Freelanders
5. Those who drive Range Rover Sports
7. Thosewho use the extra seating capacity to mean the g/CO2 per passenger mile is lower
8. Those who don't fly abroad and therefore reduce other equivalent emissions
9. Those who use low footprint transport in the week
10 Those who drive very old vehicles and therefore reduce the manufacturing output CO2

...dont make sense.
*Freelanders and many other small and modern 4x4's have quite low CO2 emissions. There is no reason to highlight them.
*I dunno where RR spots comes from??
*Most cars have passenger seats - anyone can reduce thier production by carrying passengers.
*Many people dont fly and dont own 4x4's. How do you justify it to those people?
*If you cycle in the week, good for you, your series landy is still a polluter.
*Old vehicles? Lets see some numbers Red? I dont believe driving an Old series landy saves CO2 because it cuts down on manufacturing. It's a meaningless statement without some numbers.

Look, people will drive whatever they want, and so they should. I'm not anti-landrover. I love old landrovers and I would love to own one, but I just dont have an offroad need and I cant justify it ...believe me, I've tried. No matter how you try and stack the cards, old landrovers are eco-vandals no question and if you drive one without a need for off-roading, or humping and towing stuff over fields, then you are contributing a significant tonnage of CO2 to the atmosphere for no good reason. It's perfectly legal to do that, it's up to you. But I do find it shocking when someone asks for a vehicle reccomendation for a shopping trolley with no offroad requirement, that they immediately get "an old landy" as the most popular suggestion. I'm no bushcrafter, but it strikes me as being a little out of sync with the bushcraft ethic, dont you agree?

 

[British Red]

Lets see some numbers Red?

Righto Martyn - some numbers for you

The last full set of necessary statistics available for this exercise are 2001 but they are good enough for our purposes (if you would care to do some statistical research for yourself, please feel free)

Population of the world 6100000000
tonnes of CO2 output per person 3.9
Total world output of co2 23790000000
(source - the Kyoto treaty)

Number of Landrover Defenders sold in UK 2001 5148
(source SMMT)
Assume a 15 year working life
Number on the road 77220

g of CO2/km output 299 (Gov figures for a manual diesel 110 defender)
number of avearge miles driver 12,000
number of kilometeres 19312
annual tonnes co2 per vehicle 5.77
annual tonnes of co2 for a 1.4 hatch 3.4
Incremental tonnes of Co2 by all Defender drivers 183011.4

Effect of these drivers changing on world CO2 emissions?
As a proportion of world CO2 emission? 0.000008

Thats less than 8 parts in a thousand of one percent! That assumes that all LR drivers drive above average miles, never need the car off road, never use biodiesl etc. - shall we say half of that? less?

Did you also know that aviation fuel emissions account fo 2% of the total CO2?
thats 2 not 0.008 per cent.

If we got rid of all of those cars we will retain 99.992% of all world CO2

Way to save the environment

Of course there are things we can do - reduce air flight, food miles etc.

on no hang on

I do travel by air because it's the only realistic way for me to reach my chosen destination.

It's not realistic to suggest we should all live as environmental saints, people work hard and like to travel on thier time off. Flying, although it has a huge environmental impact, is the only realistic way for most people to travel abroad.

Martyn, you could choose not to fly abroad - simple.

Yet, you choose to do something you know has, in your own words, a massive environmental impact. Instead theres this attack on a brand of car whose contribution to world CO2 is so small that it complete elimination would be statistically insignificant.

CO2 emissions can be tackled if everyone contributes, that means less elecrticity, little or no flying, using local food, no air conditioning etc. However, if a person can't be bothered to give up what they like but that they know pollutes (thousands of times more damagingly than Landrovers), I don't think they are in a position to ask others to make a contibution that they do not.

Its a masiive life change for all or a "can't be bothered personally" for everyone - changing a few thousandths of a percentage point will make no difference at this stage

So - what are you going to give up?

Red

 

[wingstoo]

Red,


Were giving up electricity at the moment...Power has gone down for maintenance work...

But I have a stack of batteries and a nice little inverter...so lights, TV and laptop still going, Gas kettle out of the shed, freezer shut and clamped,

Glad I am prepared for this, boring if I wasn't

LS

 

[British Red]

Hardly a problem in your case LS - self reliance is always a good thing - guess it may become more dificult in say 18 months or so

Red

 

[Doc]

I'm reminded of the Parable of John Travolta, posted by Great Pebble about 6 months back:


Originally Posted by Great Pebble
It's just a matter of where you set your personal standard with relevance to what is "essential" and what is "wasteful".. Harken to the "Parable Of John Travolta":-

John Travolta is fond of flying. He owns an ex-Quantas Boeing 707 (early 4 engined intercontinental jetliner) and a Gulfstream 2 (twin engined business jet).
One day John decides to go and visit a movie star friend who lives a hundred or three miles down the road. He goes out to the hangar and is climbing up the steps into the 707 when he thinks "What about the planet?"...

Instead he climbs aboard the Gulfie, and flies off to see his mates.

All weekend John felt really smug about his contribution to the environment.

 

[Martyn]

So - what are you going to give up?

Red

Nice spin Red, but you totally failed to answer the question.

You claim that by running an old landrover, you reduce the CO2 pumped into the sky because of a lower vehicle turnover. I'm sorry, I dont believe it.

Prove it with numbers not speculation?

The information we need is:
How many tons of CO2 does it take to make a 1.4L?
How many Tons of CO2 does it take to make a 110?
What's the life expectancy of a 1.4L?
Whats the life expectancey of a 110?
How many tons of CO2 does a 1.4L produce for 10,000 miles/year x life expectancy?
How many tons of CO2 does a 110 produce for 10,000 miles/ year x life expectancy?

By comparing these numbers, we will be able to get real and meaningful information about the CO2 budget of a 110 compared to a 1.4L.

If we are going to do comparative analysis, we should at least try to compare apples with apples.

Comparing all the landrover emmisions in the world to aeroplanes is nonesense, it's just spouting a meaningless set of numbers that dont add up to anything, except perhaps a seat on the Labour Party back bench.

 

[Martyn]

I'm reminded of the Parable of John Travolta, posted by Great Pebble about 6 months back:


Originally Posted by Great Pebble
It's just a matter of where you set your personal standard with relevance to what is "essential" and what is "wasteful".. Harken to the "Parable Of John Travolta":-

John Travolta is fond of flying. He owns an ex-Quantas Boeing 707 (early 4 engined intercontinental jetliner) and a Gulfstream 2 (twin engined business jet).
One day John decides to go and visit a movie star friend who lives a hundred or three miles down the road. He goes out to the hangar and is climbing up the steps into the 707 when he thinks "What about the planet?"...

Instead he climbs aboard the Gulfie, and flies off to see his mates.

All weekend John felt really smug about his contribution to the environment.

Good one Doc.

 

[Martyn]

I'll give you a quick example of how the equation works with made up numbers.

Lets say a landerover has twice the life expectancy (~30 years) of a 1.4l, but they both take 5 tons of CO2 to make. The lady makes 6 tons a year and the 1.4L makes 4 tons a year.

Landrover x1 = 5 tons, x (6tons x 30 years) = 185 tons.
1.4l x2 (they last half as long) = 10 tons, x (4tons x 30 years) = 130 tons.

You can play with the numbers but I very much doubt you'll end up with the landrover looking a cleaner bet. In fact if you reakon the life expectancy of a 1.4l to be a very silly 5 years (meaning you need to buy 6 of them for every one landrover), you still only get a total of 180 tons for the 1.4L in total. Still less that the one landrover.

You gotta scratch that one of your "excuse" list I'm afraid.

 

[British Red]

Martyn,

Nice spin yourself me old mucker but no dice, don't focus on one line please and ignore the many, many lines proving beyond refute that banning Landrovers and doing nothing about the rest of CO2 emissions will ahve no appreciable effect - that is my point

I've published a full set of statistical research and quoted my sources that prove that your personal prejudice against Landrovers in not motivated by any meaningful research into their net environmental impacts but a blind repetition of an exploded tabloid theory.

Feel free to hold all the (incorrect) theories you want, but they aren't facts. Global warming is occasioned by net cumultive CO2 emissions not insignifcant proportions of insignificant proportions. Your turn to back up your theories now. You prove to me with statistics and quoted sources how Landrovers are a significant contibutor to net CO2 or in any way more damaging than the way you choose to spend you income - on flights abroad - or are you just as bad as those you sit in judgement on but you would prefer to ignore the harm that your pleasure seeking causes and focus on theirs?

red

 

[Martyn]

This isnt about me, you or even John Travolta Red, it's about Landrovers, so lets not personalise it eh? For the sake of argument ...and to take me out of the equation, lets assume I've just planted 20 trees. OK?

 

[Spacemonkey]

Ok, how about making it a little simpler... You don't need a big 4x4 to drive to the shops when a 1.4l ****box can do the job, so lets ban them. Yeah! Oh, and you don't need a custom made £250 handcrafted knife when a Frosts Mora does just as well (if not better...), so lets ban them too!
Oh hang about, you want a fancy knife, simply because you like it?
Hey, wait a minute, I've got an idea! Lets get rid of jet planes and re introduce Zeppelins, then we can all drive Landies safe in the knowledge that the world will be a better place.

 

[Martyn]

Lets look at a couple of your numbers, which do illustrate how you stats illustrate a lot of spin. Though I'm sure you didnt intend me to pick up on these particular numbers, they are interesting...

Population of the world 6100000000
tonnes of CO2 output per person 3.9

and from the same post...

annual tonnes co2 per vehicle [Landrover Defender] 5.77

That's stunning. It means that your defender on it own produces almost twice the global population average of CO2 per year. Imagine if everyone on the planet owned a defender? The only reason your statistics dont impact with stupendous consequence, is because compared to the population of the planet, Defender owners, are indeed, a small minority - and thank goodness they are.

Now, Factor in Isuzu troopers, Nissan Patrol's Range Rovers, 110. 90's etc, etc, etc.

...spinning right round, like a record baby.

 

[British Red]

Martyn,

I wasn't being personal . I was merely exploring fallacies - such as

Ithe old series landies are eco-vandals, no question

Well actually there is a question - people have posted here and on other threads how they run old series Landies on eco diesel, others compensate or offset. Others in turn choose not to dump tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere for pleasure flights and make their net CO2 footprint lower that way. Landrovers as proven above are statistically insignificant in terms of global CO2 emissions (fact). Many other vehicles pollute just as much (they are listed in this thread) - fact.

I'm in favour of solving Global CO2 problems and work hard towards doing my share, but focussing on a tiny portion of 1 percent of 1 percent of the problem doesn't actually help

Red

Thoroughly enjoying the debating society by the way - and its still your turn to publish hard evidence

 

[British Red]

And indeed another startling figure - a single family holiday to LA is also more than the world average CO2 output and a 1.4 litre hatchback is very nearly as much

 

[British Red]

Now, Factor in Isuzu troopers, Nissan Patrol's Range Rovers, 110. 90's etc, etc, etc.

...spinning right round, in a circle baby.

How strange - my last post disappeared - ah well

Yes lets factor in 110s and 90s - oh no - hang on 110s and 90s ARE Defenders

Spinning it right back

 

[Martyn]

Ok, how about making it a little simpler... You don't need a big 4x4 to drive to the shops when a 1.4l ****box can do the job, so lets ban them. Yeah! Oh, and you don't need a custom made £250 handcrafted knife when a Frosts Mora does just as well (if not better...), so lets ban them too!
Oh hang about, you want a fancy knife, simply because you like it?
Hey, wait a minute, I've got an idea! Lets get rid of jet planes and re introduce Zeppelins, then we can all drive Landies safe in the knowledge that the world will be a better place.

You know you're right. You make a good point. But you gotta see the funny side...

What about a new bumper sticker for a bushcrafters 1978 109?

"take only photographs and leave only footprints"

 

[British Red]

Or one for 747s

Take only photos leave only another 3" of sea level?

Googled Tuvalu lately?

Red