Fossil fuel usage must be taxed higher

The use of fossil fuels must be made more expensive so that people are incentivised to reduce or eliminate its use.

Importantly, the money raised through fuel duty needs to be used directly to offset the carbon emissions generated by the use of these fossil fuels.


Why the contribution is important

The use of fuel duty to off set the CO2e emissions generated by the fuel is vital to avoid Government stagnating on this issue. At present, the government is benefiting from the use of fossil fuels; this needs to stop to allow a new scheme to be developed.

For vehicles, it's suggested that road tax could be paid for based on usage; e.g., on registration the vehicle is taxed a set amount, if usage is less for the year, a credit can be given when paying for the following years road tax. 

by kirsten on March 22, 2021 at 12:32PM

Current Rating

Average rating: 5.0
Based on: 3 votes


  • Posted by TheResearcher March 23, 2021 at 21:07

    But the politicians will always make the same old lame excuse that it impacts the lowest paid the most. What the island needs is someone strong enough to make the right decisions, instead of making them out of self interest. The reopening of Broad Street is a perfect example of crumbling under public pressure, when all it will do is reintroduce a load of pollution daily to the area for all the pedestrians to breathe in, just because a few people can't be bothered to park at Pier Rd or Esplanade and walk for 5 minutes, or get a bus or taxi.
  • Posted by brucecarnegie March 25, 2021 at 10:08

    And now diesel made from recycled and renewable vegetable oil, with much less emissions than standard diesel is now available at the pump in Jersey. However it's much more expensive, (and I understand that is in part due to a higher fuel levy?) and this is a disincentive to switch to a less polluting fuel . Surely this product should be at the very least equitable in price or better still cheaper.
  • Posted by brucecarnegie March 25, 2021 at 11:06

    Yes agree with the potential reopening of Broad street. The communications surrounding it's closure and the mixed messages about it's reopening are very poor to say the least and demonstrate conflicting authorities. Not the way to proceed.

    The near hysteria regarding the closure of one street is also quite astonishing.

    It is though an excellent opportunity to redefine how roads could be reopened and a re prioritisation for users. One of the repeated criticisms of closing Broad street is that it penalises disabled drivers that have now lost valuable parking spaces in the centre of town. Well, why not retain the closure of the road to through traffic (those using it a a town centre cut through to get somewhere else) and open the road up for buses and disabled badge holders only, and increase the amount of disabled parking spaces along the street?
  • Posted by TheResearcher May 02, 2021 at 16:25

    Biofuels are just another fossil fuel producers con just more garbage to kick the can down the road. It's a Climate EMERGENCY, not a 500 year marathon.

    We need to focus on legislation that encourages and/or forces people into EV's, so that we get ZERO emissions, not some half baked version of emissions reduction that allows people to continue polluting whilst disregarding the rights of all living species on Earth to not go extinct, due to the stupidity, ignorance and greed of Humans.

    "With the review of the EU CO₂ emissions standards for cars and vans scheduled for June 2021, some, notably the oil and gas industry and automotive suppliers, are advocating adding CO₂ credits for advanced biofuels and synthetic fuels into the vehicle standards. T&E’s new analysis shows why this is not credible — neither from an environmental nor from an economic point of view."[…]/
Log in or register to add comments and rate ideas