Would Electricity Need To Have Hmrc Tax & Duties As High As For Fossil Fuels When Cars Are Electric And Planes Are Run By Liquefied Hydrogen (Which Need Electricity To Produce)

[willbewhatiwill]

Everyone wants clean environment to live in. New technologies, education & governmental incentives & legislation can help to curb pollution of carbon dioxide, plastics, smog, toxins, etc. Banning the sale of cars run solely on fossils fuels by 2040 is an example of governmental incentives & legislation to curb pollution.

About half of all fossil fuels had been burnt since the industrial revolution & has given raise nearly a degree centigrade rise in global temperatures. Thus if the rest of fossil fuels are burnt a total of about 2 degree centigrade rise will be likely. Hotter air can cause extreme climate. Global warming of around 2 degrees centigrade will cause increased coastal flooding, as well as more drought & famine - turning agricultural land into desert (in an era of exponential population rises).

Apparently, UK experimental SABRE (Synergistic Air-Breathing Rocket Engine) ram jet engine is capable of single-stage-to-orbit capability at over Mach 5.2 (3,800 mph). SABRE engines burns hydrogen with atmospheric oxygen and when the space plane reaches an altitude of around 16 miles and five times the speed of sound (i.e. Mach 5), it switches to its onboard liquid oxygen tank to reach orbit. Being in orbit, such a craft can travel in opposite direction to the rotation of the earth thus saving energy & time of travel.

For example, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/9709041/Britain-to-Australia-in-four-hours-with-new-engine.html confirms that using space plane travelling between UK to Australia could take around 4 hours.

[ToraToraTora]

ok ZM so put them up to £25 a pack!

[willbewhatiwill]

Zacs-Master: "Figure 11 in your link puts hydrocarbon receipts at about £17bn for the last year not nearly £27bn"

Figure 11 of my links shows hydrocarbon taxes of over £26bn for year 2016/17. What you are referring to is the red line - i.e. the percentage of GDP relative t the receipt in hydrocarbon taxes for the financial year!

[Zacs-Master]

Ha! Nah, stick to £40. And do it tomorrow so we can solve the NHS crisis as well.

[Zacs-Master]

My apologies Will. You still got your 5% figure wrong and the answers received so far uphold my point about your pointless waffle clouding the issue.

A forum isn't really the place to debate such complex issues.

[willbewhatiwill]

Zacs-Master,

I halved 10% of £566. 8bn to £28.68bb (when it should have been £28.34bn).

General discussion of how to replace taxes lost is not complex.

[EcclesCake]

Yet another wibble, wobble, waffle cut and paste post.

Yawn.

[willbewhatiwill]

EcclesCake,

My post is my original authorship, incorporating my take, opinion, knowledge, sentence construction, etc. I supplied the links (also known as 'references') to support the points I am making. I can write my own articles.

[Zacs-Master]

Will, one classic example of why your posts contain unnecessary facts is where you state:
'About half of all fossil fuels had been burnt since the industrial revolution & has given raise nearly a degree centigrade rise in global temperatures.'

this is a whole debate in itself and clouds what could have been a simple debate as to how the shortfall in taxes from hydrocarbon fuel duty could be made up.

'General discussion of how to replace taxes lost is not complex'

It is when you throw in extra, needless, debates such as whether the 1deg rise in temp is SOLELY due to burning of fossil fuels.

[willbewhatiwill]

youngmafbog: "There is no proof whatsoever, the earth is not stable and changes continually. Using 200 year old records to base your 'facts' on is ludicrous".

You said the 'earth is not stable and changes continually' yes - like the interaction of CO2 in trapping heat from the sun like in a greenhouse.

Using 200 year old records are facts! Future ones are not facts.

[ToraToraTora]

....and what's all this BS about hydrogen?

[ToraToraTora]

the clouds trap most of the heat.

[ToraToraTora]

the oceans produce most of the carbon.

[ToraToraTora]

have you ever considered studying the subjects you post on?

[ivor4781]

nuclear is the only way to go but very expensive to build even more expensive to decommission ,the waste storage can and has to be be solved.wind and wave power not reliable enough. we have hundreds of years of coal beneath the uk but nothings been done so far about carbon capture,to make it viable again

[ToraToraTora]

"Using 200 year old records are facts! Future ones are not facts. " - think YMB means that basing any sort of prediction on 200/4.5 billions of the data is not really telling us anything.

[ToraToraTora]

we need a flux capacitor ivor!

[Zacs-Master]

Eccles, what was that post you wrote about the other day....something about taking a step back before you offend people. Maybe you would have done well to heed your own advice before writing 'It must give you such an air of superiority thinking you are wallowing in a soup of uneducated folk with a significant dearth of fellow graduates'

the hypocrisy on here is staggering sometimes.

[albaqwerty]

gawd, he's not back to posting stupidly long alleged question is he?

A couple over the weekend were nicely condensed.

[EDDIE51]

The only viable source of Hydrogen is the splitting of water, H2 0, into Hydrogen and Oxygen by electrolysis. If we can supply the electricity for the electrolysis from solar ,wind, tidal power we really will have unlimited 'free' power. There are other problems such as developing batteries that can store the power , but they are solvable.