FOLLOWING A STUDY by insurer AAMI that showed 77 percent of passenger car drivers consider four-wheel-drives a danger on the road, a new Queensland petition wants them banned from school zones and shopping areas.
Tabled by the opposition Liberal National Party (LNP) in Queensland’s state parliament this week, the petition - with 19,728 signatures - also called for higher registration fees for non-commercial roadgoing four-wheel-drives.
The petition focuses on what the LNP describes as the negative environmental impacts of four-wheel-drives, claiming that the large vehicles use almost twice as much fuel as regular passenger vehicles.
“A four-wheel-drive vehicle uses almost double the amount of fuel, emits 17 times the amount of air pollution and three times the greenhouse gases of a two-wheel drive vehicle,” the petition claims.
The petition says that in addition to their negative environmental effects, four-wheel-drives represent a physical danger to pedestrians and smaller vehicles in a collision.
However a spokesperson for BMW Australia responded to TMR refuting the petition’s claims. The BMW X5 xDrive30D - which accounts for 80 percent of X5 sales - uses just 8.7 litres of fuel per 100km - less than both the Holden Commodore and Ford Falcon.
Loading ...
Comments
Click here to jump to Add Comment box
How do you get a picture next to your name?
Get a Gravatar. Click here to find out more.
Totally agree with this. The old man won’t be happy, but it is definitely something that should be addressed. Don’t let them park in shopping centres either. I’m sick of near misses caused by large 4WD’s who block your view whilst trying to reverse out of a park.
How else are the morbidly obese supposed to get around?
Visibility is a real issue in tight, hilly suburban streets. I’ve often had to gamble my life in order to pull out of driveways when a huge 4WD is parked to my immediate right blocking any visibility of oncoming traffic.
So I guess People-movers are ok? And a 2wd Ford Territory is a much safer option than the 4wd version? Same goes for the Tuscon City etc.
Here’s an idea: How about the parents taking responsibility for their own kids and keep them safe from ALL other vehicles!
This has to be the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard, whats a 4WD anyway. Do they want to get rid of Ford Territory’s but only the 4WD ones? any number of utes that have little or no difference between 2WD and 4WD. Where do you draw the line for AWD? Get rid of those dastardly Suzuki SX4s,Daihatsu Terios or Subarus. Is it only real 4WDs with a dual range gearbox? Is it just on the size of these things, we should get rid of people movers, delivery vans, buses , trucks and probably limo’s. Maybe get rid of every car that cant better 10L/100km city cycle. Perhaps we should get rid of those cars that chew up masses of natural resources in creating and disposing of there Ni-MH battery packs. Its alright for most people to get rid of something as long as it doesn’t effect them.
Here’s another great idea. Registration charges by the volume of the car multplied by the fuel consumption, it would work for land rates as well house volume divided by the number of occupants
I wonder what evidence these ‘experts’ base their claims on.. If a vehicle uses twice as much fuel, how does it generate 17 times the air pollution and 3 times the greenhouse gasses? Dont accept these claims as the gospel truth… they have been written to suit a group with an agenda, thinking everyone is stupid. Obviously 20,000 people must be to some degree!
A small car doesn’t suit everyone.. I live rural and have good reason to tow large loads a lot, and a 4WD is the safest way to do this (but I am not a primary producer). My late model ‘large’ 4WD averages 10 to 11L/100KM with a new powerful, high efficiency, clean burning diesel engines. I know many 2WD cars do not achieve these figures.
As for safety.. try seeing out the back of many of the new cars with the high styled boots - I bet you can’t! Rear (and front) parking sensors and even rear cameras are standard on many new vehicles, and maybe they should be required in some cases instead of bans or additional charges.
This type of petition no doubt comes from city dwellers that cant accept that there are other others who have different needs in a vehicle to themselves. Before they make claims and statements they should be 100% correct in their facts first, or they look rather stupid… I hope the government isnt sucked in by this type of ‘popular’ hype.
This is one of the most stupid things I’ve heard. I am really disappointed with the LNP in Queensland for supporting this thing. The National party is meant to represent people in rural areas, where a lot of their voters would drive 4WDs. Hope they enjoy shooting themselves in the foot.
Heres a start, keep your kids off the road. PROTIP: all cars can hurt children and adults alike. Not just 4WD. So do we want to take all cars off the road?
If you like telling other people what they aren’t allowed to buy, move to China. If people want to spend their money on 4WDs they should damn well be allowed to own and drive them shopping.
mobile blind spots - highly overrated.
I heard somewhere that suv’s and commercials are taxed at a lower rated than the much safer passenger cars - why?
As others have said, where do you draw the line? Is it a vehicle being 4WD? That’ll count out all Subaru’s whilst leaving massive 2WD behemoths on the road. Is a visibility thing, because a lot of smaller cars have bigger blind spots than some 4WD’s. Is it size, because out goes people movers. Fact is there is no line that you can draw, a 2 tonne car will do just as much damage to a 40kg child as a 1.3 tonne car. Everyone is responsible for controlling and paying attention to the surroundings of their vehicle regardless of what it is.
Where is the evidence of 4WD’s killing more children than passenger cars? If you are that concerned about the environment, tax all cars based on their fuel consumption, which is what fuel tax does anyway. I can’t believe the LNP have supported this.
Thats amazing! that the Liberal Nationals could actually gather together 20,000 signatures.
Having thought about it though maybe its not. that surprising to think there is 20,000 odd (pun) petitioners who are gullible enough to believe such would go anywhere.
Totally agree with most informed commentators. What a load of garbage that petition is. Absolute lies. These idiots don’t even know what a 4WD is. Do they mean a boxy station wagon style vehicle with a bonnet? Well I am going to petition that we ban all low riding vehicles with only two seats and no roof, as that is a selfish form of transport that is inherently dangerous from skin cancer, falling trees and bird shit. Why don’t we ban ladders as well, because lots of people fall off them and end up in a morgue or hospital. Who are these idiots persecuting 4WDs???
Wow, these people are RETARDED. Ban your 4wd audis and subarus with safety features and emissions controls that many other cars don’t have. I’ll just continue on driving my 7.5L 9mpg F-250 because it’s only 2wd. It would mow down much more than any of these cars and puts out more pollution, but hey, 4wd’s are horrible right? I agree that a LARGER vehicle can be worse for the environment, but common, really?
Stupid idea probably concocted up by stupid ill-informed people. Not even worth discussing!
I think by “4WD” they mean the large SUV-style vehicles here, whether or not it’s a 2WD version.
A lot of people here commenting are misinformed themselves and bashing on those who’ve signed it. While I don’t quite support such a harsh ban, I would like to see more restrictions placed on larger vehicles or at least some kind of driver training scheme.
But then, what defines a large vehicle? Where do you draw that line?
Half the problem is that many of the people that are driving these sorts of vehicles are a)poor drivers, b) get the larger vehicle because they deem it more ’safe’ for themselves therefore putting others at higher risk when combined with ‘a’ and c) are really small people who can barely see anything over the steering column anyway.
I don’t think its just against 4WDs, I think its more against the bad driving of the soccer mums in them. They are the drivers I’m the most worried about… got the death-grip on the steering wheel that they can barely see over, too busy talking to the kids in the back to check lanes before moving across, etc etc
Just another way for government to scam more money..good one…but really this must be the most stupid ridiculous idea I ever heard …btw I drive a monster of 4wd an Outlander lol
i am a LNP supporter, but these mob of dipsticks must be running on empty for even thinking about getting mixed up in this.Anyway, its not the 4WD’S fault, it’s the dropkick behind the wheel.next thing they will want to ban cars all together
Matt has made a brilliant point about “soccer mums” - most of these women probably previously owned tiny city hatchbacks, and then think they can drive a LandCruiser in the same manner. Once again, the most appropriate solution is DRIVER EDUCATION, not just banning everyone from doing everything.
Excellent point Kieran
Unfortunatley theres going to be alot more to this argument, such as:
Safety:
- What classifies as a 4wd ?
- What about the wagons / suv’s / utilities that are bigger than the 4wd’s ?
Enviroment:
- Some 4wd’s use less fuel than your holden / ford.
- Should people by a second car so they can drive to school ?
Cost:
- If 4wd’s have to pay more rego for whatever reason, shouldn’t road cyclists have to pay something as well ?
- Should 4wd’s pay more rego than hoon car’s ?
- Should 4wd’s pay more reog when they are only used for holidays / towing and may only do 5,000 to 10,000 k’s a year ?