[CoolFire]

Originally Posted by Aroy

Calling Diesel "subsidised" in India, is in my opinion a misnomer. What is actually happening is that the taxes collected on Diesel are less than on petrol.

An analysis Diesel Fuel Prices

As depicted the prices in US are less than a dollar (inclusive of about 35% taxes). Diesel in India is much more than that. Hence we should point out to the honourable minister; as have the oil companies a number of times; that there is no "subsidised" diesel, hence we should aim for per-km pollution standards, rather than target SUV, which may have lower consumption compared to gas guzzling Government Vehicles.

As diesel vehicles are inherently more fuel efficient (especially CRDI variants), such vehicles should be encouraged rather than discouraged!

The taxation system in US cannot compared with ours. There, indirect taxation (tax on goods and services) is comparatively much lower. Most of their revenue is from direct taxation and this is one of the reasons why the run up such a huge fiscal deficit.

Even there, you may note that taxes on diesel is almost 50% more than gasoline.

[rjalihal]

JR is among the better ministers in the cabinet and this statement was due to frustration i guess. The government spends millions subsidising diesel for farmers only to see it flowing towards pricey cars/SUVs. Now how does that make him feel? But before pointing fingers at the general public, he needs to set an example by making other diesel SUV driven ministers change their mode of transport. That will not happen any time soon. So if our own ministers use gas burners, why should the public be blamed? There is nothing wrong in using diesel SUVs/cars in India. People who are willing to pay a premium are justified in doing so. There is no need to tax them more. That is not the solution. I think the current tax on imports/luxury vehicles is high enough.

[airbender]

Originally Posted by anilisanil

Now this is the reason I hate TOI- Nothing in the published article means or tend to mean "Discourage the sale of BMWs and Audis". The minister even said that he does not have any control on what people buy, so he never meant what headlines say.

Agree with you. Why only blame TOI, even the person who created this thread has done the same mistake.

[pgsagar]

Central/State ministers' cavalcade of Safaris and Scorpios burns more diesel than Beems and Auds. No, it is not about fuel efficiency of Germans over Indians. It is because a tiny number of BMWs/Audis cannot be compared to sheer volume of Safaris/Scorpios on our roads. Would the Minister now say boycott Scorps and Safaris? If so, then let him preach to his fellow ministers first.

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by CoolFire

The taxation system in US cannot compared with ours. There, indirect taxation (tax on goods and services) is comparatively much lower. Most of their revenue is from direct taxation and this is one of the reasons why the run up such a huge fiscal deficit.

Even there, you may note that taxes on diesel is almost 50% more than gasoline.

May be I was not very clear in my post. What I wanted to say is that inspite of higher taxation load on diesel in US, it is still retailed at lower price.

As far as I know consumption of diesel by private vehicles does not even touch 2% of the total diesel consumption. The major portion is used by industry followed by railways, farmers and commercial vehicles.

Interesting article, 4 years old How Diesel Technology Could Cut Oil Imports - Technology Review

[acidkill]

As a staunch advocate of the free market, i think pricing of all fuels must be completely deregulated. including diesel, LPG and Kerosene. Id rather pay more money for food, then pay higher taxes and see my taxes embezzled.

on another point, by targeting SUVs, the minister is indulging in petty symbolism typical or bourgeois socialism.

What proportion of cars on Indian roads are these large SUVs? Not many - even less that 1% i am sure. Hence, even if those SUVs consumed 5 times as much fuel as they do now, they still wont make much of a difference to the overall carbon footprint of the country.

Bottom line: If he really cared about making a significant impact on the quality of air, he would rather target the cars that have capacities of less than 1.5 L and ask them to increase their efficiency by 10% irrespective of whether they are diesel or petrol burners

[aargee]

Following the news of this red taped minister, here's the response from German Ambassador

Germany today took exception to Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh’s remarks that SUVs like BMW were bad emitters saying German auto technology was far advanced in reducing fuel consumption and emissions.

“It is very difficult to imagine that Mr Jairam Ramesh, Minister of Environment & Forests has made such specific comments on fuel technology with reference to German Automotive Manufacturers,” German Ambassador Thomas Matussek said in a statement here.

Launching a strong defence, he said the German Automotive Industry had the “most outstanding expertise” in the area of engine development and its technology was “far advanced in reducing both fuel consumption and fuel emissions.”

“The German industry is also proud to have some of the most sustainable car companies in the world who have pioneered CO2 emission cuts and have next generation fuel efficiency standards in engines,” Mr Matussek said.

At a UN function here yesterday, Mr Ramesh strongly favoured taking “gas guzzling” Sports Utility Vehicles (SUVs) off Indian roads saying they emitted more carbons and called their use in the country as “criminal“.

He had favoured a reformed diesel policy as the real beneficiaries of the subsidy were the owners of the “BMWs, the Benzs and Hondas” and not farmers.
BMW and Mercedes-Benz are leading automakers founded and based in Germany, and popular the world-over.

Mr Matussek said Germany’s success in reducing CO2 emissions had contributed widely to variety of fuel-saving and emissions-reducing measures implemented by the German Automotive Industry.

“The German Automotive industry has been continuously progressing to secure a sustainable future with fuel saving engines, state of the art recycling techniques and greener production facilities,” he said.

“Leading German Automotive Manufacturers are already engaged in developing ground breaking fuel efficiency standards which may define how cars of tomorrow may be conceptualised,” Mr Matussek said.

Source - The Hindu : Sci-Tech / Energy & Environment : Germany objects to Ramesh's SUV remarks

Germany objects to Ramesh's SUV remarks

[anjan_c2007]

Originally Posted by anjan_c2007

The climax of the comment is this news from the German media. the viewer's comments below the news in some cases make funny reading. Some a re balanced but some vitriolic!

Indian official calls German cars 'criminal' - The Local

Originally Posted by aargee

Following the news of this red taped minister, here's the response from German Ambassador


Source - The Hindu : Sci-Tech / Energy & Environment : Germany objects to Ramesh's SUV remarks

Germany objects to Ramesh's SUV remarks

The catalyst was the German media (above post) and now the reaction is from none other than the German Ambassador in India, Mr Thomas Matussek.
I think the German Ambassador has got his facts and figures right and his statement comes with all the homework done.
Our Minister's outburst lacked ground data and facts to justify his points.

[shibujp]

Originally Posted by raul

No one will disagree that luxury cars or any cars for that matter should not get the diesel subsidy, it just doesn't make sense. I can't think of a single argument for this.

For the diesel subsidy the most sensible solution would probably to add an additional amount to the price of the car which negates the subsidy and this amount can be placed in the diesel subsidy fund.

You are spot on on this. Also Mr. Ramesh did not categorically say "do not buy BMWs or AUDIs". The only point that he brought up was that - when the diesel subsidy is intended to ensure that essential commodities are transported at a reasonable cost, it is not right that the subsidy goes to expensive cars and SUVs.

IMHO there are a few things that can be done

1. Extreme (not a fan) - do not allow cars above a certian price with diesel engines.
2. For cars above a certain price point have differential tax structures - i.e petrol and diesel cars at that level should not have the same tax.
3. At the time of buying the car impose a one time tax that is a certian percentage of the average amount of the diesel subsidy that the car will enjoy over it's lifetime.

Drive on,
Shibu.

[airbender]

Originally Posted by anjan_c2007

Our Minister's outburst lacked ground data and facts to justify his points.

You are very much wrong. The minister did not say buying SUV's is criminal. He only meant using susbsidised diesel for luxury SUV's is criminal. Criminal for the users or the administrators for allowing that to heppen, he did not clariy that. It's the german minister who lacked ground data and facts.

There is another statement from Sunita narian today:

Sale of SUVs dishonourable, says environmentalist Sunita Narain

Sale of SUVs dishonourable, says environmentalist Sunita Narain - Hindustan Times


"Diesel is reserved for the public and poor sector and that’s why the price is always kept low," Narain told HT on the sidelines of the Summit in Delhi.
"Private cars are being allowed to use that same cheap diesel, and that’s clearly something Indian industry has maximized," she said.


I totally agree with her.

[aargee]

How about our Govt babus using so much of convoys unnecessarily? Are all those Ambassadors petrol ones? How much crores does it cost to make a day's session at Parliament? And how easily those guys makes noise & get each day adjourned instead of making constructive progress? Not to mention the freebies they get legally.

Anyway, my point is, do not even consider implementing dual pricing Diesel policies, instead, remove all the freebies offered to people or Govt babus. Let the country realize that except Sunlight, nothing is free in this world & let everyone work to earn for their living.

Probably the hon' Minister wanted to state the fact of subsidised Diesel being used in cars that are used for personal use. Some monkey in the media would've probably added Merc/BMW to cause trouble (pray it isn't that way). But again my question goes unanswered, why only BMW/Merc/Audi's, why not Safari, Aria or Ambassadors? Why those weren't mentioned?

[Daewood]

Originally Posted by aargee

How about our Govt babus using so much of convoys unnecessarily?

That's an essential precaution. Would you call an ABS or Airbag as unnecassary expense.
When a CM or PM is driven around in a convoy with high security that is not a protection for the individual, it is for the post he holds.
If every Tom, Dick and Harry can attack or hurt a person who holds such an important post, this country will crumple.

Obama's security bill for 2 days in India was 900crores. Was it essential or not? The people of America feel it's essential when you're in an unsafe place..

Originally Posted by aargee

Probably the hon' Minister wanted to state the fact of subsidised Diesel being used in cars that are used for personal use. Some monkey in the media would've probably added Merc/BMW to cause trouble (pray it isn't that way). But again my question goes unanswered, why only BMW/Merc/Audi's, why not Safari, Aria or Ambassadors? Why those weren't mentioned?

+1. They too should have been mentioned.

This thread and that comment by Jairam Ramesh will all become meaningless, if the GOI has the guts to go ahead and implement what Kirti Parekh had recommended. i.e Slap a one time tax of Rs. 80 k on all personal vehicles using subsidised diesel.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by Daewood

Obama's security bill for 2 days in India was 900crores. Was it essential or not? The people of America feel it's essential when you're in an unsafe place..

This figure was quoted by one Indian newspaper based on some anonymous source. Then all other newspaper quoted that newspaper as a cite for that figure. It also spread to the US right wing blogs etc.

I still haven't been able to locate a non-anonymous cite for this figure.

[anjan_c2007]

Originally Posted by airbender

You are very much wrong. The minister did not say buying SUV's is criminal. He only meant using susbsidised diesel for luxury SUV's is criminal. Criminal for the users or the administrators for allowing that to heppen, he did not clariy that. It's the german minister who lacked ground data and facts.

There is another statement from Sunita narian today:

Sale of SUVs dishonourable, says environmentalist Sunita Narain

Sale of SUVs dishonourable, says environmentalist Sunita Narain - Hindustan Times


"Diesel is reserved for the public and poor sector and that’s why the price is always kept low," Narain told HT on the sidelines of the Summit in Delhi.
"Private cars are being allowed to use that same cheap diesel, and that’s clearly something Indian industry has maximized," she said.


I totally agree with her.

Originally Posted by anjan_c2007

The Hon"ble Minister should first do his homework and come out with figures.
Of the thousands of people's representatives (elected and holding public positions) at the Union Territory,State and Central levels, most of them are obsessed with the ownership of diesel motor vehicles be it a UV, MUV,SUV luxury car or anything else.Its a different fact that coming to the ownership papers, they own none of these in their own names, in a majority of cases.
They win elections using diesel powered motor vehicles through which they run their election campaigns.
Is all that criminal?

I am very much right airbender. You are in fact wrong and I beg to disagree with you. Please get your facts and homework done and then comment.
There has to be a balance between environment and automobiles.None can overrule the other.
Before passing such sweeping comments you may please gather statistics about the 1970's, 80's and 90's diesel automobiles owned by the government and semi government agencies and still running on the roads in India.
I own a SUV. I like thousands of others have not bought it for the subsidised diesel. The subsidy component on diesel at present is around Rs 2/-plus.The government must remove this subsidy and tax all such luxury diesel cars/SUV's and the like for the fuel they guzzle. I and thousands of others will readily pay for it.Its not my fault that my SUV consumes subsidised diesel but a policy matter. And we in Maharashtra pay just a few rupees less for diesel than what petrol costs in many cities where its cheaper.
I have practically bought the SUV (Euro III Compliant) only for the fortress like feel, security and safety it offers to me and my family in the totally chaotic, messed up,unsafe and unpredictable Indian road conditions.
With all this facts in mind I cannot be called a criminal by anyone (even the reference about the use of subsidised diesel is not tolerable-they should tax it!) however high or mighty he or she may be.
This allegation of calling the owners or the use of subsidised diesel criminal is defamatory,bad in law,derogatory,demeaning,vexatious, insulting and even mischievous. It can invite the filing of a defamation suit seeking damages on behalf of all SUV owners in India who have been branded criminals.

[Rahulk76]

Originally Posted by anjan_c2007

There has to be a balance between environment and automobiles.None can over rule the other.
I own a SUV. I like thousands of others have not bought it for the subsidised diesel. The subsidy component on diesel at present is around Rs 2/-plus.And we in Maharashtra pay just a few rupees less for diesel than what petrol costs in many cities where its cheaper.
I have practically bought the SUV (Euro III Compliant) only for the fortress like feel, security and safety it offers to me and my family in the totally chaotic, messed up,unsafe and unpredictable Indian road conditions.
With all this facts in mind I cannot be called a criminal by anyone however high or mighty he or she may be.
This allegation of calling the owners criminal is defamatory,bad in law,derogatory,demeaning,vexatious, insulting and even mischievous. I can even go to the extent of filing a defamation suit seeking damages on behalf of all SUV owners in India who have been labelled criminals.

Couldn't agree more on this.
1. Someone has to say something to get attention eh. eg. Sale of SUVs dishonourable, says environmentalist Sunita Narain - Hindustan Times. (Reminds of xyz ka insaaf kinda fame games Lolz)

2. What is the percentage of those so called SUV etc are to other vehicles present on road ? This # is not even known i guess. We have so called old gen diesels older than 10 yrs still belching smoke right.. what is the percentage of those vehicles ? contributing to the so called carbon footprint. Its a pointless debate.
3. Petrol is more expensive to store and i guess produce as well ( i might be wrong here) than diesel.

The issue, is the govt. policy overall on this aspect..
Lets not loose sleep over arguing counter arguing

edit: I guess every one who buys so called diesel "SUV" is already paying a premium over petrol counter parts right ? I wonder why then these comments come from. The govt coffers are getting richer anyways from these sales.