4 ms·

More precisely, Edinburgh just joined multiple other cities in banning the advertisement of an assortment of companies and products related to high consumption

More precisely, Edinburgh just joined multiple other cities in banning the advertisement of an assortment of companies and products related to high consumption of fossil fuels. This does include SUVs. From the proposed amendment that this WaPo story cites (https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/documents/s70730/9.1%20Policy%20on%20Advertising%20and%20Sponsorship%20-%20Proposed%20Amendments.pdf https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/documents/s70730/9.1%20Po...), this is what kind of ads are banned, along with the comments regarding these things: Airlines and airports: all advertising by airports and airlines which might reasonably be deemed to promote more flying There are no low carbon options for commercial air travel available currently or for the foreseeable future, so air travel per se should be treated as high carbon. Fossil fuel companies: all firms and associated sub brands or lobbying organisations that extract, refine, produce, supply, distribute, or sell any fossil fuels This includes, regardless of the companies’ potential sustainability commitments advertising or sponsorship: • showing fossil fuel products, energy from coal or hydrogen • showing petrol stations, and any ads promoting the price of petrol/diesel Cars: exclude all advertising and promotions for petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles and Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) Advertising for Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) and hydrogen fuelled vehicles are still permitted if these are not Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs). PHEVs have been shown not to yield meaningful emissions savings over conventional vehicles. Cruise holidays: Cruise ships emit more carbon per passenger kilometre than flying. They also generate black carbon and produce a lot of waste which is often discharged into the sea. Their engines run 24/7, often even at port which has damaging impacts on air quality.

oldpersonintx 2y ago
[dead]
giantg2 2y ago
"all firms and associated sub brands or lobbying organisations that extract, refine, produce, supply, distribute, or sell any fossil fuels" What about all the secondary products of refining? Things like plastics, waxes, etc? Seems like they should include those too.
- jay_kyburz 2y ago
  I wonder if you are allowed to advertise a holiday to Australia.
  - giantg2 2y ago
    I would guess so, bit that feels really arbitrary (like the rest of the restrictions).
screye 2y ago
Seems odd to exclude PHEVs. Most rides are under 50 miles, which means emission-free rides on most occasions. They don't hound chargers and need smaller batteries. Win-win if you ask me.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  They burn fossil fuels forever. EVs get greener as the grid approaches 100% low carbon energy, which will happen based on all available trajectory data. If cell manufacturing is the supply constraint, continue to scale up.
  - dzhiurgis 2y ago
    > If cell manufacturing is the supply constraint It hasn’t been for few years now
- giantg2 2y ago
  In my opinion, if we're banning ads for certain types of cars, we should ban ads for all cars. Tires, brakes, roads, manufacturing related pollution, etc are substantial for all. It just seems like feel-good legislation when we ignore the obvious.
  - screye 2y ago
    Good call. If I remember right, then tire-wear [1] is the primary contributor to particulate emissions and a signifcant portion of vehicular pollution comes from the existence of the vehicle itself. (manufacturing, road maintenence) [1] https://dynomight.net/tires/ https://dynomight.net/tires/
  - tzs 2y ago
    Personal cars are not going away anytime soon. All of the problems you mention are much less important than dealing with CO₂ and so more good is accomplished by allowing advertising to influence those who are going to buy cars to buy those that are lower when it comes to CO₂.
jdlshore 2y ago
> PHEVs have been shown not to yield meaningful emissions savings over conventional vehicles. Can you say or link to more about this? My family borrowed a PHEV Prius Prime for about six weeks. Our fuel economy over that time was ~210mpg, nearly an order of magnitude better than the sedan it temporarily replaced.
- josephcsible 2y ago
  That's because your family actually bothered to plug it in. A lot of people who drive PHEVs only do so for the tax credits, etc., and always just run them on gas.
  - mathgradthrow 2y ago
    what are you talking about? If you are after the tax credit, you're probably after the cost savings of plugging your vehicle in. This doesnt make sense as a hypothesis.
    - josephcsible 2y ago
      Okay, the reason is a guess, but it's proven that people aren't plugging in: see, e.g., https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/features/phev-owners-not-plugging-in https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/features/phev-owners-not... and https://www.autoweek.com/news/a60383277/wltp-phev-data-gap-report/ https://www.autoweek.com/news/a60383277/wltp-phev-data-gap-r...
    - VBprogrammer 2y ago
      It's a thing, though perhaps a UK specific thing. Perverse incentives in the tax system mean it's cheaper to own a company PHEV than the equivalent but there is little to no allowance for charging it at home.
      - mathgradthrow 2y ago
        Ok, but the people drawing generalizations from this are being crazy then.
TulliusCicero 2y ago
> PHEVs have been shown not to yield meaningful emissions savings over conventional vehicles. ??? Even just being a regular hybrid should offer meaningful emissions savings over standard ICE cars, due to the increased fuel efficiency, let alone a plug-in. I'd be very curious to see the data/calculations on this, because it certainly sounds like bullshit.
- wiredfool 2y ago
  My parents new hybrid rav4 gets 35mpg, which is approximately what my 7 seat ford galaxy minivan gets with a 2l diesel. That’s also approximately what my civic wagon got in the mid 90’s.
dzhiurgis 2y ago
> Their engines run 24/7, often even at port which has damaging impacts on air quality. IIRC all new cruise ships run on LNG, so air quality issue is a moot.
- 10u152 2y ago
  Really? Every ship I see in port is still belching clouds of black smoke from bunker fuel. Never heard of a LNG ship.
  - dzhiurgis 2y ago
    https://www.cruisemummy.co.uk/lng-cruise-ships/ https://www.cruisemummy.co.uk/lng-cruise-ships/ This lists 21 out of ~300 total cruise ships are LNG. This says most new passenger ships are LNG: https://www.cruisemapper.com/wiki/752-cruise-ship-engine-propulsion-fuel https://www.cruisemapper.com/wiki/752-cruise-ship-engine-pro... Obviously depends on cruise company and the tail is pretty long of smaller companies who aren't building new ones.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

oldpersonintx 2y ago

[dead]

giantg2 2y ago

"all firms and associated sub brands or lobbying organisations that extract, refine, produce, supply, distribute, or sell any fossil fuels" What about all the secondary products of refining? Things like plastics, waxes, etc? Seems like they should include those too.

jay_kyburz 2y ago
I wonder if you are allowed to advertise a holiday to Australia.
- giantg2 2y ago
  I would guess so, bit that feels really arbitrary (like the rest of the restrictions).

screye 2y ago

Seems odd to exclude PHEVs. Most rides are under 50 miles, which means emission-free rides on most occasions. They don't hound chargers and need smaller batteries. Win-win if you ask me.

toomuchtodo 2y ago
They burn fossil fuels forever. EVs get greener as the grid approaches 100% low carbon energy, which will happen based on all available trajectory data. If cell manufacturing is the supply constraint, continue to scale up.
- dzhiurgis 2y ago
  > If cell manufacturing is the supply constraint It hasn’t been for few years now
giantg2 2y ago
In my opinion, if we're banning ads for certain types of cars, we should ban ads for all cars. Tires, brakes, roads, manufacturing related pollution, etc are substantial for all. It just seems like feel-good legislation when we ignore the obvious.
- screye 2y ago
  Good call. If I remember right, then tire-wear [1] is the primary contributor to particulate emissions and a signifcant portion of vehicular pollution comes from the existence of the vehicle itself. (manufacturing, road maintenence) [1] https://dynomight.net/tires/ https://dynomight.net/tires/
- tzs 2y ago
  Personal cars are not going away anytime soon. All of the problems you mention are much less important than dealing with CO₂ and so more good is accomplished by allowing advertising to influence those who are going to buy cars to buy those that are lower when it comes to CO₂.

jdlshore 2y ago

> PHEVs have been shown not to yield meaningful emissions savings over conventional vehicles. Can you say or link to more about this? My family borrowed a PHEV Prius Prime for about six weeks. Our fuel economy over that time was ~210mpg, nearly an order of magnitude better than the sedan it temporarily replaced.

josephcsible 2y ago
That's because your family actually bothered to plug it in. A lot of people who drive PHEVs only do so for the tax credits, etc., and always just run them on gas.
- mathgradthrow 2y ago
  what are you talking about? If you are after the tax credit, you're probably after the cost savings of plugging your vehicle in. This doesnt make sense as a hypothesis.
  - josephcsible 2y ago
    Okay, the reason is a guess, but it's proven that people aren't plugging in: see, e.g., https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/features/phev-owners-not-plugging-in https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/features/phev-owners-not... and https://www.autoweek.com/news/a60383277/wltp-phev-data-gap-report/ https://www.autoweek.com/news/a60383277/wltp-phev-data-gap-r...
  - VBprogrammer 2y ago
    It's a thing, though perhaps a UK specific thing. Perverse incentives in the tax system mean it's cheaper to own a company PHEV than the equivalent but there is little to no allowance for charging it at home.
    - mathgradthrow 2y ago
      Ok, but the people drawing generalizations from this are being crazy then.

TulliusCicero 2y ago

> PHEVs have been shown not to yield meaningful emissions savings over conventional vehicles. ??? Even just being a regular hybrid should offer meaningful emissions savings over standard ICE cars, due to the increased fuel efficiency, let alone a plug-in. I'd be very curious to see the data/calculations on this, because it certainly sounds like bullshit.

wiredfool 2y ago
My parents new hybrid rav4 gets 35mpg, which is approximately what my 7 seat ford galaxy minivan gets with a 2l diesel. That’s also approximately what my civic wagon got in the mid 90’s.

dzhiurgis 2y ago

> Their engines run 24/7, often even at port which has damaging impacts on air quality. IIRC all new cruise ships run on LNG, so air quality issue is a moot.

10u152 2y ago
Really? Every ship I see in port is still belching clouds of black smoke from bunker fuel. Never heard of a LNG ship.
- dzhiurgis 2y ago
  https://www.cruisemummy.co.uk/lng-cruise-ships/ https://www.cruisemummy.co.uk/lng-cruise-ships/ This lists 21 out of ~300 total cruise ships are LNG. This says most new passenger ships are LNG: https://www.cruisemapper.com/wiki/752-cruise-ship-engine-propulsion-fuel https://www.cruisemapper.com/wiki/752-cruise-ship-engine-pro... Obviously depends on cruise company and the tail is pretty long of smaller companies who aren't building new ones.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]