Carbon Offsetting

1 Oct 2007

Advertising from a london based company.
Zero impact means a responsible approach to carbon emissions management. We recommend that you reduce what you can through simple, but effective behaviour change, and then we’ll help you offset the rest through one of our carbon offset projects.
Is this just a way of rich companies throwing money at something so they can turn a blind eye? Or is it a bloody good idea? I think its a bit of sharp practice myself.

2 Oct 2007

Sky advertising on TV at the moment that they have been "carbon neutral" since 2006.
How the feck can anyone be carbon neutral dunno

I just don't understand how these claims can work.

2 Oct 2007

Its all a load of tosh if you ask me... It seems to me just a way to tax us all even more and make us think good about it.. Yeah as if!
Carbon Offsetting is just companies who claim to plant trees and the like to the same amount as they calculate you use. Odd really, the amount the whole of the UK contributes is a tiny amount of the so called problem worldwise.. and while yes its a great idea to reduce the amount of energy we all use beware the companies who are preaching this to us...
Example one.. We reduced our Electricity consumption through buying new modern machinery etc at work.. reduced the amount by over 60% and Guess what.. The electric company increased the price of the stuff by an overall cost of 63% What with daily charges etc.. Now .. seems to me they are having to do less now for the same if not more profit!
This will catch on in every home.. Use less they charge you more for it!
Same with this Government.. Green tax this that and the other.. Congestion charge etc etc etc, How is all the money going to change a fecking thing... you can't buy a new ozone layer or pay for new iceburgs can you?? Noooo but the money is handy for them all the same.. Just you feel obliged to cough up..
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh :doh:
Another rant is this...
Car tax and the like... Can anyone tell me how it can be justified that someone who runs a 4x4 or any higher taxed car now uses more fuel than a company rep in a 1.8 company car etc... or for that matter a 1.1 doing 100,000 miles a year.. Instead of the so called school run?? I doubt it..
Mike xx lol

2 Oct 2007

Quote by Lost

Is this just a way of rich companies throwing money at something so they can turn a blind eye?

I think that's Carbon Trading, which is what you say.
Carbon Offsetting is now not considered to be the best thing since sliced bread 'cos it usually takes the form of planting trees, which ultimately die and release the carbon back into the atmosphere. There are other ways like taking land out of dairy production, I think, but it is not considered very practical.
Some interesting articles recently about how James Harmon, advisor to Al Gore of 'we're all doomed fame', had got his sums wrong about global warming on the North American continent. It turns out that the warmest year last century wasn't 1998 - it was 1937! :shock: Another statistical myth is that the incidence of drought is increasing - hence global warming - in fact during the 20C the incidence of serious drought in N America decreased steadily - so I understand.
So - I dunno

.

2 Oct 2007

googling carbon offsetting and carbon trading as i type, dont know if ignorance is bliss in this debate or knowledge is good :confused2: i may be back!

2 Oct 2007

I heard some lengthy stuff a while back on the radio-box about carbon-offsetting....
large companies finding ways to *appear* to be doing the right thing, whilst actually putting the pressure onto others to clean up thier act, and maintain the highest profit levels ... I believe that was how I felt at the end of the broadcast
never trust a multi-national
here endeth the lesson
lp

3 Oct 2007

Quote by mdr2000
Its all a load of tosh if you ask me... It seems to me just a way to tax us all even more and make us think good about it.. Yeah as if!
Another rant is this...
Car tax and the like... Can anyone tell me how it can be justified that someone who runs a 4x4 or any higher taxed car now uses more fuel than a company rep in a 1.8 company car etc... or for that matter a 1.1 doing 100,000 miles a year.. Instead of the so called school run?? I doubt it..
Mike xx

You could even argue that £ per bang, the 4x4's may be more effecient.. I think Mallock raised this in an earlier thread.
And as for clearing all the fields of milk producing cows... if we used more local produce rather than transporting it to this country in massive road trains, wouldn't that reduce emissions dunno

I would have thought that cow farts were more envonmentally friendly anyway than exhaust fumes.

3 Oct 2007

Quote by GnV
Its all a load of tosh if you ask me... It seems to me just a way to tax us all even more and make us think good about it.. Yeah as if!
Another rant is this...
Car tax and the like... Can anyone tell me how it can be justified that someone who runs a 4x4 or any higher taxed car now uses more fuel than a company rep in a 1.8 company car etc... or for that matter a 1.1 doing 100,000 miles a year.. Instead of the so called school run?? I doubt it..
Mike xx

You could even argue that £ per bang, the 4x4's may be more effecient.. I think Mallock raised this in an earlier thread.
And as for clearing all the fields of milk producing cows... if we used more local produce rather than transporting it to this country in massive road trains, wouldn't that reduce emissions dunno

I would have thought that cow farts were more envonmentally friendly anyway than exhaust fumes.
Quite right....
My 4x4 is more efficient and cleaner than most of the 7.5 ton vehicles I inspect/service every night yet they pay £175 per year road tax and I pay £210...
Thats fair eh rolleyes

3 Oct 2007

Quote by GnV
I would have thought that cow farts were more envonmentally friendly anyway than exhaust fumes.

Nice one! As it happens they're not strangely enough. Methane is twenty times more active in terms of global warming than carbon dioxide gram fer gram (damn bluddy metrics!)- it's just that there's far less of it about.
.

3 Oct 2007

Quote by westerross

I would have thought that cow farts were more envonmentally friendly anyway than exhaust fumes.

Nice one! As it happens they're not strangely enough. Methane is twenty times more active in terms of global warming than carbon dioxide gram fer gram (damn bluddy metrics!)- it's just that there's far less of it about.
.
..although i seem to remember reading somewhere that its rate of increase was a lot higher than carbon dioxide...?

3 Oct 2007

Surely the 4x4 arguement doesn't work though does it? For example an average 2.5 ltr 4x4 driven averagely by an average driver would produce more pollution than the average driven averagely by an average driver in the same conditions?
A factor in the anti 4x4 thing surely is the infamous 'school run' It seems very conspicuous that these seemingly huge (Though i doubt in length they take up much more room than any other) motor cars driven by women mainly. Pull up outside schools and drop one little child off.
It maybe that the ratio of 4x4's to other cars is balanced. It just seems not to be. Surely the fact that they are noticed gives weight to the arguement that the balance is disproportionate.
Also why are 4x4's so popular? The school run vehicles i see have experienced no more offroad driving than I have space walking. Is it all to do with feeling secure sitting in these big high cars?
I have heard that there is genetic research into breeding cows that dont produce so much gas or fart a different green gas : lol

that would be cool cool

3 Oct 2007

Quote by Lost
Surely the 4x4 arguement doesn't work though does it? For example an average 2.5 ltr 4x4 driven averagely by an average driver would produce more pollution than the average driven averagely by an average driver in the same conditions?
A factor in the anti 4x4 thing surely is the infamous 'school run' It seems very conspicuous that these seemingly huge (Though i doubt in length they take up much more room than any other) motor cars driven by women mainly. Pull up outside schools and drop one little child off.
It maybe that the ratio of 4x4's to other cars is balanced. It just seems not to be. Surely the fact that they are noticed gives weight to the arguement that the balance is disproportionate.
Also why are 4x4's so popular? The school run vehicles i see have experienced no more offroad driving than I have space walking. Is it all to do with feeling secure sitting in these big high cars?
I have heard that there is genetic research into breeding cows that dont produce so much gas or fart a different green gas : that would be cool

My arguement on the 4x4 thing is a little simpler though.. and No I don't run a 4x4 but do pay the higher road tax..
My arguement is that most 4x4 owners and the like are low milage drivers.. not reps, or similar high milage users who opt for lower mpg cars that attract lower taxation.. They cover huge amounts of miles so therefor polute more surely? The road tax in my opinion is just a con! put a penny or two on the fuel.. makes it a whole lot fairer all round.. High miles higher tax.. Low miles Lower tax. Look after your car get better milage etc etc etc.. makes sense to me lol..

3 Oct 2007

Quote by mdr2000
Surely the 4x4 arguement doesn't work though does it? For example an average 2.5 ltr 4x4 driven averagely by an average driver would produce more pollution than the average driven averagely by an average driver in the same conditions?
A factor in the anti 4x4 thing surely is the infamous 'school run' It seems very conspicuous that these seemingly huge (Though i doubt in length they take up much more room than any other) motor cars driven by women mainly. Pull up outside schools and drop one little child off.
It maybe that the ratio of 4x4's to other cars is balanced. It just seems not to be. Surely the fact that they are noticed gives weight to the arguement that the balance is disproportionate.
Also why are 4x4's so popular? The school run vehicles i see have experienced no more offroad driving than I have space walking. Is it all to do with feeling secure sitting in these big high cars?
I have heard that there is genetic research into breeding cows that dont produce so much gas or fart a different green gas : that would be cool

My arguement on the 4x4 thing is a little simpler though.. and No I don't run a 4x4 but do pay the higher road tax..
My arguement is that most 4x4 owners and the like are low milage drivers.. not reps, or similar high milage users who opt for lower mpg cars that attract lower taxation.. They cover huge amounts of miles so therefor polute more surely? The road tax in my opinion is just a con! put a penny or two on the fuel.. makes it a whole lot fairer all round.. High miles higher tax.. Low miles Lower tax. Look after your car get better milage etc etc etc.. makes sense to me lol..
I cant argue against the tax on fuel rather than disk I totally agree Mike. Though I do think that the high mileage car users will possibly get economic use from there cars given the urban or motorwaydifferences in consumption and the stop start increased fuel usage. Also the fact that most company/leased cars are regularily serviced so should be runing relatively effeciently.
Really. Also bigger/heavier cars bigger pollution.

3 Oct 2007

I couldnt understand why our Golf GT TDI 1.9 diesel is only £110 tax for the year and yet my 1.8 toyota is £180 ish
I do about 30 miles a week in my car as the golf we do more than double...
I thought road tax was charged for people using vehicles on the road, if so then shouldnt our tax's be reversed
:doh:

3 Oct 2007

Quote by Lost
Surely the 4x4 arguement doesn't work though does it? For example an average 2.5 ltr 4x4 driven averagely by an average driver would produce more pollution than the average driven averagely by an average driver in the same conditions?
A factor in the anti 4x4 thing surely is the infamous 'school run' It seems very conspicuous that these seemingly huge (Though i doubt in length they take up much more room than any other) motor cars driven by women mainly. Pull up outside schools and drop one little child off.
It maybe that the ratio of 4x4's to other cars is balanced. It just seems not to be. Surely the fact that they are noticed gives weight to the arguement that the balance is disproportionate.
Also why are 4x4's so popular? The school run vehicles i see have experienced no more offroad driving than I have space walking. Is it all to do with feeling secure sitting in these big high cars?
I have heard that there is genetic research into breeding cows that dont produce so much gas or fart a different green gas : that would be cool

My arguement on the 4x4 thing is a little simpler though.. and No I don't run a 4x4 but do pay the higher road tax..
My arguement is that most 4x4 owners and the like are low milage drivers.. not reps, or similar high milage users who opt for lower mpg cars that attract lower taxation.. They cover huge amounts of miles so therefor polute more surely? The road tax in my opinion is just a con! put a penny or two on the fuel.. makes it a whole lot fairer all round.. High miles higher tax.. Low miles Lower tax. Look after your car get better milage etc etc etc.. makes sense to me lol..
I cant argue against the tax on fuel rather than disk I totally agree Mike. Though I do think that the high mileage car users will possibly get economic use from there cars given the urban or motorwaydifferences in consumption and the stop start increased fuel usage. Also the fact that most company/leased cars are regularily serviced so should be runing relatively effeciently.
Really. Also bigger/heavier cars bigger pollution.
If you have a rep doing 50 to a 100K a year he is going to pollute far more than anyone doing 5-10K a year no matter what the difference is in Motorway or urban use.. I know my car for a fact does around 2/3rds of its quoted figure for pollution, why not then base the tax on the figures gained at the MOT.. That would encourage everyone to maintain better.. No again just like everything its done for us.. we have no say no control.. Just pay up and shut up lol..
If it were really about Pollution anyway why all the efforts by councils etc to slow traffic to a near standstill.. Bus lanes, Speed humps etc.. All done to slow or near stop traffic.. meaning cars take longer to complete a journey and pollute even more so by crawling along as they do.. Its all crap! Its about nothing but Money.. How many cars fall into the lowest tax bracket? Not many eh.. I think only 2 kinds do One a city electric car.. and one a Polo of some sort.. How much carbon fuel is used to power the electric to charge the car up every night? How many toxic processes to make the bloody batteries lol?? Hypocracy at its finest levels.. Money is the only factor, bnugger all to do with Green issues.

3 Oct 2007

Surely the 4x4 arguement doesn't work though does it? For example an average 2.5 ltr 4x4 driven averagely by an average driver would produce more pollution than the average driven averagely by an average driver in the same conditions?
A factor in the anti 4x4 thing surely is the infamous 'school run' It seems very conspicuous that these seemingly huge (Though i doubt in length they take up much more room than any other) motor cars driven by women mainly. Pull up outside schools and drop one little child off.
It maybe that the ratio of 4x4's to other cars is balanced. It just seems not to be. Surely the fact that they are noticed gives weight to the arguement that the balance is disproportionate.
Also why are 4x4's so popular? The school run vehicles i see have experienced no more offroad driving than I have space walking. Is it all to do with feeling secure sitting in these big high cars?
I have heard that there is genetic research into breeding cows that dont produce so much gas or fart a different green gas : lol

that would be cool cool

My arguement on the 4x4 thing is a little simpler though.. and No I don't run a 4x4 but do pay the higher road tax..
My arguement is that most 4x4 owners and the like are low milage drivers.. not reps, or similar high milage users who opt for lower mpg cars that attract lower taxation.. They cover huge amounts of miles so therefor polute more surely? The road tax in my opinion is just a con! put a penny or two on the fuel.. makes it a whole lot fairer all round.. High miles higher tax.. Low miles Lower tax. Look after your car get better milage etc etc etc.. makes sense to me lol..
I cant argue against the tax on fuel rather than disk I totally agree Mike. Though I do think that the high mileage car users will possibly get economic use from there cars given the urban or motorwaydifferences in consumption and the stop start increased fuel usage. Also the fact that most company/leased cars are regularily serviced so should be runing relatively effeciently.
Really. Also bigger/heavier cars bigger pollution.
If you have a rep doing 50 to a 100K a year he is going to pollute far more than anyone doing 5-10K a year no matter what the difference is in Motorway or urban use.. I know my car for a fact does around 2/3rds of its quoted figure for pollution, why not then base the tax on the figures gained at the MOT.. That would encourage everyone to maintain better.. No again just like everything its done for us.. we have no say no control.. Just pay up and shut up lol..
If it were really about Pollution anyway why all the efforts by councils etc to slow traffic to a near standstill.. Bus lanes, Speed humps etc.. All done to slow or near stop traffic.. meaning cars take longer to complete a journey and pollute even more so by crawling along as they do.. Its all crap! Its about nothing but Money.. How many cars fall into the lowest tax bracket? Not many eh.. I think only 2 kinds do One a city electric car.. and one a Polo of some sort.. How much carbon fuel is used to power the electric to charge the car up every night? How many toxic processes to make the bloody batteries lol?? Hypocracy at its finest levels.. Money is the only factor, bnugger all to do with Green issues.
Totally and utterly in agreement with you Mike - Its all about hiding the ugly truth from Joe public and wrapping it up in the eco lobby excuse

3 Oct 2007

Also factor into the equasion that the government is putting pressure on us, a tiny nation, to do our bit for the state of the planet.
Someone look up the stats on China and Russia. I was watching a doccumentary recently that basically made any effort whatsoever to save the planet by turning Britain into a "green" nation is a complete waste of time because of those two countries in particular.
Carbon offsetting and greener lifestyles in Britain: It's like peeing into the ocean when swimming. Gives you a good feeling, but does sod all in the long run.

3 Oct 2007

Peeing in the ocean hmmm feeling good hmmmmm strange analogy but then carmeala wink

you are strange biggrin

the fact that the second and third worlds dont have a right to catch up on the first world doesn't matter then eh? So we exploit them for fu*king years then still end up saying they cant have the means to try and get within spitting distance of first world standard of living - thats pohh!.
Saying that I think the whole of the eco lobby is just another way to make money invent a new industry and exploit it to f*ck why not eh? Its all bollox lol

3 Oct 2007

It would be nice if anyone was making an effort to ask them nicely to stop doing to the atmosphere what the first world did during the industrial revolution, and perhaps not be so damn selfish about first world technology to help out with that.
I blame the government entirely. "Go green so you can feel good and we can salve our consciences that we have to increase tax to pay for the "greener" way of doing things... Oh and make ourselves a shitload of money in the process"
Yeah... I really think that they're passing the message on about going green to those other than the ones that pay their fat-cat salaries.

3 Oct 2007

Quote by tina1
I couldnt understand why our Golf GT TDI 1.9 diesel is only £110 tax for the year and yet my 1.8 toyota is £180 ish
I do about 30 miles a week in my car as the golf we do more than double...
I thought road tax was charged for people using vehicles on the road, if so then shouldnt our tax's be reversed
:doh:

A part that i can answer..... lol

:lol:
the Road tax that you are charge Depends on the Amount of CO2 Emissions and fuel type (for example diesel engines tend to be less polluting that petrol one, however hybrid engines tend to be less polluting that both of these) ....
the more CO2 it puts into the atmosphere... the higher the car tax is charged.......
I will wonder back thru my posts to see if i can find the rough guide......
for example......

5 Oct 2007

Tis a load of tosh, at the end of the day until the big companys pay there dues.
And the goverment stops trying to make us feel guilty for there gains... redface

sorry but thats my view smackbottom

yes please..
and a great thread by the way wink

7 Oct 2007

Talk about pollution and 4x4's is misleading
Road 'con' tax is calculated by CO2 emissions as has already been said. There are plenty of 'big' cars apart from 4x4's that fall into the highest brackets
What annoys me is that when you penalise occasional or rich users you also penalise those who buy out of necessity - farmers, people who live in rural areas and businesses who need a robust towing vehicle
If the tax was on the fuel, which I for one favour, then the more you used your vehicle the more your contribution, seems fair to me
We live in a free world, so why should someone be frowned on if they have chosen to buy something big and safe that protects their precious cargo of family??
Of course I use my old Range Rover for three reasons, protection, business (towing) and a caravan holiday, where I support the local economies and don't sit in a plane for hours pumping out tonnes of pollution..............hmmmmm

7 Oct 2007

Green taxes just make the government & anyone associated with the :fuckinghell: theory look good while expanding the coffers which in turn will fund other 'non green' processes - we sure don't have a say when Mr Brown funds another country that does not have any green policies do we! dunno

Please remind me how much carbon offsetting we have to do when the next nuclear upgrade is rolled out :doh:
This whole 'green debate' rammed down our throats is way off the mark & used in such a way as to make the man woman & child in the street so confused that they will follow any peer who champions to be greener than thou mad

Tis funny how being 'green' hits us in our pockets everytime!
But then we don't have corporate lawyers government handouts for a 'green Blue Peter Badge'
BUT... we do have those wonderful Carbon Offsetting Advisors who don't know what the fuck they're doing :doh:

8 Oct 2007

Quote by daverover
Talk about pollution and 4x4's is misleading
Road 'con' tax is calculated by CO2 emissions as has already been said. There are plenty of 'big' cars apart from 4x4's that fall into the highest brackets
What annoys me is that when you penalise occasional or rich users you also penalise those who buy out of necessity - farmers, people who live in rural areas and businesses who need a robust towing vehicle
If the tax was on the fuel, which I for one favour, then the more you used your vehicle the more your contribution, seems fair to me
We live in a free world, so why should someone be frowned on if they have chosen to buy something big and safe that protects their precious cargo of family??
Of course I use my old Range Rover for three reasons, protection, business (towing) and a caravan holiday, where I support the local economies and don't sit in a plane for hours pumping out tonnes of pollution..............hmmmmm

Picking out bits of quotes in bold what has my life come to :cry: I think you would find that kilo for kilo to drive the equivalent distances in planes in most international travelling the carbon emissions are less per mile travelled than that of most standard vehicles. Oh yes and the bit about proection Rover! whats that about?? eh? are you not frightening enough lol

11 Oct 2007

Um, aren't we missing something in this whole discussion... confused

:
Sure, the government is doing a crap job over the whole Carbon issue in my opinion, as all of you seem to think too. But ... AT LEAST THEY ARE DOING SOMETHING! In particular, they are helping to raise awareness of the seriousness of this issue and are putting it firmly into the minds of businesses and ordinary people alike - and that is VERY VERY important surely? The only way to reduce our carbon emissions as a country, and as a world, is if everyone is aware how important it is and our culture changes from that of a wasteful, energy-and-materials-inefficient one, to one that is efficient and conserves its resources wherever possible.
That's my opinion anyway.
Russell
Russell

12 Oct 2007

Quote by swing_fun_cpl
Um, aren't we missing something in this whole discussion... :
Sure, the government is doing a crap job over the whole Carbon issue in my opinion, as all of you seem to think too. But ... AT LEAST THEY ARE DOING SOMETHING! In particular, they are helping to raise awareness of the seriousness of this issue and are putting it firmly into the minds of businesses and ordinary people alike - and that is VERY VERY important surely? The only way to reduce our carbon emissions as a country, and as a world, is if everyone is aware how important it is and our culture changes from that of a wasteful, energy-and-materials-inefficient one, to one that is efficient and conserves its resources wherever possible.
That's my opinion anyway.
Russell
Russell

Sort of agree with you there. Although i think its the companies that the Govt should legislate against not the individual. But its the companies that tell the Govt what to do in the end not the people. And lets not penalise the from the floor up for a change.
Saying that as for climate change. I personally not a believer in the hype. Though ground pollution and space I think needs looking at. However lets look at sustained reduction in worl population not sustained 'growth' as is talked about. Oh sorry business will not allow that.

13 Oct 2007

Think you may have been mislead Lost
Try this link -
The evidence here seems to suggest that CO2 emissions are about the same

13 Oct 2007

Quote by daverover
Think you may have been mislead Lost
Try this link -
The evidence here seems to suggest that CO2 emissions are about the same

After looking at that link and others I'll concede that there is very little difference in per kilometer Co2 emissions the average car being 110-ishmgs/kilometer and that of a standard easy jet liner at 97.3 gms/kilometer. Avg over short and longhaul)
However this is based on an average car(inclusive of 4x4's) attaining an average 32mpg or How many 4x4's attain this average? to be honest i dont know. You drive a 4x4 Dave how many mpg do you get when using petrol?

13 Oct 2007

Being the good global citizen like what I am rolleyes

I have been doing the whole recycling bit for over a year now. I recycle all my glass, plastics, metals and paper, I also do the composting thing and was even considering going down the solar energy route .
Talking to a friend recently who is ‘in the know’ about all this sort of stuff he happily informed me, “of course you realise, all your efforts for the entire year will have been wiped out by just one local councillor flying up to Aberdeen for the “green conference”
:shock: BASTARD :taz: I really needed to know that :roll:
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve been into the whole environmental thing for years, I guess it’s a personal lifestyle choice at the end of the day but what I really do object to is having it rammed down my throat by the very people who have the power to do something about it, and them using it to extort even more money out of me in the name of saving the planet yeah right :roll: how bloody stupid do they really think we are? And worse yet, every Tom, Dick and cowboy ’lets pretend we’re doing good’ jumping on the band wagon trying to make yet more money out of us.
Ffs when are we all going to wake up and smell the con artist?
Yes it’s a serious issue, yes something has to be done. The problem is that anything you and I do is, as has already been so eloquently put, like pissing in the ocean. The only people who can have any real effect, or make the slightest difference to what’s happening are governments and industry.
For gods sake if you took every single motor car on the entire globe off the road tomorrow the difference it would make is miniscule. So if you want to buy into the whole personal carbon footprint thing that’s fine, if it makes you feel good that’s even better, but please don’t kid yourself into thinking that its actually making a difference coz it aint, not wile industry continues to pour greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere and is allowed to continue to pump billions of tons of effluent into the oceans, not while governments are allowed to commission all those highly pollutant (and profitable) contracts to the likes of bp, ici, gkn, unileaver etc. Make those feckers pay for the damage they are doing and just maybe the man in the street will see that the whole thing is being taken seriously, until then leave us the feck alone and stop disguising what are blatant stealth taxes and reductions in public services as green issues.
dunno

just my thoughts wave

13 Oct 2007

Quote by Lost
Think you may have been mislead Lost
Try this link -
The evidence here seems to suggest that CO2 emissions are about the same

After looking at that link and others I'll concede that there is very little difference in per kilometer Co2 emissions the average car being 110-ishmgs/kilometer and that of a standard easy jet liner at 97.3 gms/kilometer. Avg over short and longhaul)
However this is based on an average car(inclusive of 4x4's) attaining an average 32mpg or How many 4x4's attain this average? to be honest i dont know. You drive a 4x4 Dave how many mpg do you get when using petrol?
I drive a 4x4 and regularly attain 30mpg around town and over 40 on a m-way run solo and 30 while towing the caravan..
And its not a new one its 6 years old.