Edinburgh, Scotland makes it illegal to advertise SUVs

Scope of Edinburgh’s Ban

• Ban targets ads on council-controlled sites only; private property and media remain unaffected.
• Prohibited categories include airlines/airports, fossil fuel companies (including petrol stations and fuel ads), cruise holidays, and most car ads.
• For cars: bans petrol, diesel, hybrids, PHEVs, and all SUVs; allows battery-electric and hydrogen cars that are not SUVs.
• Some see the headline focus on “SUVs” as misleading since the policy is broader.

Arguments in Favor

• Seen as a modest but positive step to reduce demand for high-carbon products.
• Compared to existing restrictions on alcohol/tobacco ads.
• Framed as addressing a “tragedy of the commons” where voluntary action is insufficient.
• Supporters argue perfect solutions shouldn’t block incremental progress.

Free Speech and Governance Debate

• Critics call it censorship and a violation of free speech and basic rights.
• Others respond that:
  • It limits commercial advertising, not individuals’ speech or product availability.
  • Corporations should not be treated as rights-bearing speakers in the same way as people.
• Some worry about “ruling class” hypocrisy if politicians still use banned products.

SUV Proliferation and Regulation

• One view: environmental and fuel-economy rules created an “SUV loophole,” making trucks/SUVs more attractive to manufacturers.
• Counterview: consumers choose SUVs for flexibility (towing, cargo, rough weather), and crossovers now get mileage close to sedans.
• Several note that modern “SUVs” are mostly crossovers on car platforms, not truck-based, with smaller MPG gaps.
• Others argue marketing plus looser standards steered demand.

Safety, Urban Form, and “Car Obesity”

• Pedestrians describe feeling less safe around larger vehicles and in streets where oversized cars barely fit.
• Discussion of an “arms race”: people upsize to feel safe against other large vehicles, worsening danger to pedestrians and smaller cars.
• Some attribute larger sizes partly to safety regulations (thicker structures), others to fashion and poor urban design that prioritizes cars.
• Disagreement over how “dangerous” roads really are; US per-capita fatality rates are cited as far higher than peer countries.

PHEVs and Vehicle Emissions

• Policy’s exclusion of PHEVs is questioned; some argue typical trip lengths make them very effective.
• Defenders of the exclusion cite studies and reports that many PHEV owners rarely plug in, leading to modest real-world savings.
• Others counter that home-charging incentives are strong and that PHEVs can “strategically dominate” EVs in some use cases (battery use, towing, infrastructure limits).
• Some suggest that if car ads are restricted at all, perhaps all car ads should be, since manufacturing, tires, and roads also emit.

Plastics, Single-Use Goods, and Externalities

• One thread questions whether bans on single-use plastics are “sensible,” arguing alternatives like paper or cotton can be environmentally worse over their life cycle.
• Others push back: plastic’s ocean pollution and microplastics are distinct harms; source-critical reading of pro-plastic opinion pieces is urged.
• Proposal to tax environmentally harmful materials instead of banning them, though skeptics note regulatory capture and weak taxation due to industry influence.

Heating and Building Efficiency Side Discussion

• Edinburgh’s old, protected buildings often use electric storage heaters and single glazing.
• Some praise storage heaters for using off-peak electricity; others say they perform poorly, overheating at night and running cold in the evening.
• Heat pumps are cited as far more efficient; insulation and timing of heat delivery are emphasized as key to efficiency.