[SmartCat]

According to this report, we will no longer have tax slabs based on length, ground clearance, engine size or fuel type. Instead, it will be based on CO2 emissions measured in grams per km.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com...w/64620552.cms

This seems quite logical. A big heavy SUV will need a large engine that emits more CO2. No more messing with the ground clearance to duck tax slabs.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/autos...scPh5RtRJ.html

European countries have such a system. Here is the tax slab rate in UK based on CO2 emissions -



So many slabs (at every 5 gm/km) incentivizes manufacturers to make even small improvements in CO2 emissions. Did a quick Google search for "Car Name CO2 emissions" -

Honda Jazz 1.2P -> 112 gm/km
Toyota Corolla 1.8P -> 156 gm/km
Audi Q7 3.0D -> 190 gm/km

However, I guess the system can be rigged (eg: VW) to show low CO2 emissions under test conditions but it might actually have higher CO2 emissions on the road.

[theredliner]

I feel they should take NOx emissions into consideration as well and with higher priority. Otherwise the diesels will get unfair advantage over the petrols in spite of being much more polluting like what we saw happen in Europe. Nonetheless, it is a good move.

[StarrySky]

I think it is a step in the right direction. This might also accelerate the move towards hybrid and electric cars. In the short term, diesel may gain favour over petrol cars as they tend to have lower CO2 emission values.

Originally Posted by smartcat

However, I guess the system can be rigged (eg: VW) to show low CO2 emissions under test conditions but it might actually have higher CO2 emissions on the road.

I guess this is one reason why the EU is moving to WLTP instead of NEDC. The change comes to effect from September 1 this year. Some manufacturers have already published CO2 emission values according to WLTP and invariably the value has gone up compared to NEDC (making cars more expensive to buy).

[IshaanIan]

This is in no way logical. As theredliner mentioned, they ought to take NOx emissions into consideration. It is a very dated method to tax cars based on CO2 emissions this began when European companies had lobbied around way too much and got Diesel marketed as a cleaner fuel just based on the lower CO2 emissions. Sad to see our country pick up such an old habit without even putting any thought into it. Perhaps with European countries taking big stands against diesel, the companies are now coming to 3rd world markets like ours to influence our governments into employing such unfair practices.

[Sutripta]

Some questions:
How will it be measured?
How are disagreements to be sorted?
How do I get my competitors vehicle retested?

Regards
Sutripta

[Thermodynamics]

Certainly it is a good sign the Government is thinking beyond old metrics. I do agree that cleaner vehicles deserve encouragement, provided the evaluation is logical (include NOX, SOX, PM) and subject matter experts have a voice in drafting.

I also hope the emission norms aren’t compromised that a polluting vehicle can be allowed by paying an extra tax.

Efficiency comes at a cost. An expensive vehicle can be less polluting than a budget car. It could end up in reverse taxing i.e. a poor man is taxed heavier than a rich man. The decision might get controversial either way, wish a lot of thought is given before making this move.

[sidhu_hs]

Originally Posted by smartcat

According to this report, we will no longer have tax slabs based on length, ground clearance, engine size or fuel type.

I hope this becomes a reality sooner than later. I think one of the first consequences of this policy would be that it would force manufacturers to offer more engines per model than they currently do; like one engine for garnering the lowest price point and another one for garnering rave reviews.

Edit: And if the 4m rule is done away with, we might even see Golfs and i30s!

[kaviprem]

Couple of questions.
1. Is this going to replace "road tax" in India?
2. If this replaces "road tax", will it be one road tax across PAN India?
3. I see that the EU tax says "tax for the first year". Does it mean this implementation would be tied to the annual emission check and tax to be collected every year based on the emission?
4. Will this implementation have any impact [positive] or any relation to the vehicle registration?

If we have affirmative answers to the above, I guess, it would be good if its implemented in the right way.

Prem.

[dark.knight]

The BS Brigade (National Auto Policy) are at it again. I appreciate the intention of the agencies worldwide to try and bring the emissions down.. however the elephant in the room is never acknowledged, instead everyone turn the other way and somehow look for ways to ignore the elephant. This has rung true ever since European emission authorities started pushing diesels claiming better economy and hence, lower CO2 emissions compared to petrols, when in reality high volumes of NOx started to get released into the air, causing breathing problems, lung infections, vision problems and even being the root cause for many carcinogens entering the human body.

The focus is now again into CO2 and not NOx, will diesels get a free pass once more?

The more interesting question is, how does one determine the exact output of CO2 into the atmosphere when speed isn't a constant?

Laboratory studies have provided a foundation of knowledge regarding vehicle emissions, but questions remain regarding the relationship between on-road vehicle emissions and changes in vehicle speed and engine load that occur as driving conditions change. Light-duty vehicle emissions of CO, NOx, and NMHC were quantified as functions of vehicle speed and engine load in a California highway tunnel for downhill and uphill traffic on a ∼4% grade. Emissions were measured throughout the day; average speed decreased inside the tunnel as traffic volume increased. Emissions of CO were typically 16−34 g L-1 (i.e., grams of CO emitted per liter of gasoline consumed) during downhill driving and ranged from 27 to 75 g L-1 during uphill driving. Downhill driving and moderate-speed uphill driving resulted in similar CO emission factors. The factor of 2 increase in CO emissions observed during higher-speed uphill driving is likely evidence of enriched engine fuel/air ratios; this was unexpected because uphill driving observed in this study occurred at moderate engine loads within the range experienced during the city driving cycle of the U.S. emissions certification test. Emissions of NOx (as NO2) were typically 1.1−3.3 g L-1 for downhill driving and varied between 3.8 and 5.3 g L-1 for uphill driving. Unlike observations for CO, all uphill driving conditions resulted in higher NOx emission factors as compared to downhill driving. NOx emissions increased with vehicle speed for uphill driving but not as strongly as CO emissions. Emissions of CO and NOx are functions of both vehicle speed and specific power; neither parameter alone captures all the relevant effects on emissions. In contrast to results for CO and NOx reported here and results for NMHC reported previously by Pierson et al. (Atmos. Environ. 1996, 30, 2233−2256), emissions of NMHC per unit of fuel burned for downhill driving were over 3 times greater than NMHC emissions for uphill driving. Emission rates of CO and NOx varied more with driving conditions when expressed per unit distance traveled rather than per unit fuel burned while NMHC emission rates normalized to distance traveled were approximately constant for uphill versus downhill driving during peak traffic periods.

[1]

CO2 is the chemical shorthand for carbon-dioxide, its an essential gas that creates livable temperatures in order for all life to sustain. Trees need CO2 and consume CO2 to the extent of 22 kgs of CO2 per annum.. of course it is said that 900 trees are required to offset the unnatural CO2 emission caused by 1 human being and his lifestyle (flatulence included, yes now we're diving into details). So that settles it, trees cannot help save the day when it comes to mankind's modern living ways. Much of the CO2 is also from emissions when refining oil and natural gas, it starts well before the fuel even reaches your tank.

So far we know that the variation of CO2 output from an automobile depends on multiple factors 1) Average speed 2) Tendency of the driver (whether sudden acceleration is done which increases fuel consumption or sudden braking is done constantly which reduces leverage of engine power to go that extra mile 3) Altitude of the road over which the car is being driven 4) Type of engine 5) Traffic situation. Of 5 factors, the only calculation being done is of engine specification and laboratory testing results in order to determine taxes? How would this leverage towards lower emissions? Also if one dives deeper down, kerb weight, laden weight (number of passengers) also influence economy and emissions. [2]

The conclusion : Its up to each and every one of us to drive responsibly, flog a vehicle for as long as possible so that more CO2 emissions aren't created during production of a new car. People may say that it's the little ways of change in which this beautiful earth can become better.. yes I agree, but now more than ever, its time to accelerate the healing process of this earth and its atmosphere, without it there shall only be sickness and destruction until all crease to exist. Its great to have the budget and go all out to buy a big car, however, restraint in driving it, using it till its near end-life and not counting on mere taxation in defining our eco-friendliness is the need of the hour. I hope this post is taken in the right spirit.

Producing a medium-sized new car costing £24,000 may generate more than 17 tonnes of CO2e – almost as much as three years' worth of gas and electricity in the typical UK home.

[3]

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es0263588 [1]

https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/transport/speed-limits [2]

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...tprint-new-car [3]

[StarrySky]

Originally Posted by kaviprem

3. I see that the EU tax says "tax for the first year". Does it mean this implementation would be tied to the annual emission check and tax to be collected every year based on the emission?

Here in Finland, there is a vehicle tax to be paid when registering a new car. All quoted vehicle prices are including vehicle tax and it is based largely on CO2 value.

Further, there is an annual vehicle tax, which consists of two parts. First part is again based on CO2 values. The second part is based on the fuel used - petrol powered cars do not have to pay this component of tax, but all other vehicles do (including hybrid and electric vehicles).

If you are buying a car for personal use, it is more economical to buy a petrol car as the annual tax component on diesel cars negate the savings on fuel costs. Unless, of course, you cover a lot of kms annually - which many people do.

[rish_arora]

I don't think the tax slabs should be based on the specifications of a car. It should be purely based on the car price.

The idea of tax slab being based on car's specifications is always abused by the manufacturers leading to new segments specifically for India(sub 4m) which in my opinion doesn't 'feel' like a proper car. Most of the petrol cars below 10 lakhs feel under-powered due to 1.2 L tax rule. Although the intentions of these tax rules were to reduce traffic congestion, emissions.

Similarly I believe that the new tax norms will lead to more under-powered engines powering big vehicles instead of manufacturers developing ways to reduce emissions on existing setup.

[sri_tesla]

In addition to this, Govt should remove the 12% GST on full-EVs for all vehicles that are made in India for at least few years.

Many state govts are already removing the road taxes for EVs and announcing sops for EV and battery manufacturers. There is a revolution happening in both automobile and energy(electricity) industries. India benefiting hugely from rapid decrease in prices of solar and wind projects for the last 3-4 years. If govt can support EVs with removing taxes, then it will be great for the country. Pollution is increasing at an alarming speed in all the cities.

[gopalnt]

As the usage of the car increases, the emission levels bound to change based on the state of the maintenance of the car. The current system is based on static parameters like length, engine size, etc but this new system is based on dynamic parameters. For example, a badly maintained small car will emit more than a properly maintained suv. How this will be taken care?

[Ironhide]

Interesting concept, novel & definitely laudable. At least the intent is right. What'll remain to be seen is how well is it implemented. Sure, there will be teething troubles starting from correct, foolproof & real- world methods to monitor emissions, to including other pollutants in exhaust emissions (particulate matter, NOx) for monitoring.


All the same, if implemented correctly and enforced strictly, this may result in us witnessing a dent in the pollution levels.

Here's another interesting article from BBC about how toxic really is our car exhaust.

Cheers !

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by Ironhide

All the same, if implemented correctly and enforced strictly, this may result in us witnessing a dent in the pollution levels.

Here's another interesting article from BBC about how toxic really is our car exhaust.

Quite right, the issue isn't all about CO2, CO2 is a greenhouse gas and is essential to earth's existence.. however its about the other things.. soot, NOx, carbon-monoxide, benzene, iron, nickel, sulfur, toluene, xylene, nitrogen, chromium etc which are present in crude oils and during the process of refining, get cast into the atmosphere.

Greenhouse gases by themselves, aren't harmful.. in fact there are so many ways to harness them. Here's another shocking fact : the largest greenhouse gas is not CO2, but is H2O, you got it right, its water.. vapor. Close to 70% of daily greenhouse gases present in our atmosphere is perceivable or invisible humidity.. this is what causes rains and the positive feedback loop of "global warming" so to speak. Without steam/water vapor the earth's livable temperature cannot be attained.. consider it a free for all sauna and the sun and earth's inherent carbon dioxide combine to sustain the cycle of evaporation-cloud formation-rains which are so important in drawing out pure water from the sodium-chloride (NaCl) laced sea water and spreading it across the lands so that trees and other life can draw from it.

It is the chemicals that emerge out of refining and out of running the vehicles that are to be feared. CO2 accounts for a paltry 20% of greenhouse gases which in turn is absorbed by grass, trees and biological beings (we draw 7% CO2 approximately when breathing in), the heaving we do after a long run is technically not due to lack of oxygen but due to lack of carbon-dioxide because all of it is replaced by pure oxygen when breathing heavily during exercise.

The only way to curb production of unnatural CO2 on earth is a simple mantra called reduce-reuse-recycle. Every motion, every desire on earth comes with an ecological burden.