 Insulate Britain have provoked another outburst of road rage after blocking a highway in protest at government in action on climate change. Let's take a look. You heard there a very annoyed mum on a school run, threatening to drive through protesters if they did not get out of the road. The clip has sparked a debate on a couple of fronts. First, the familiar one about weather direct action of this type loses a cause more support than it gains, and the second, the morality of driving an SUV. Let's focus on the second one because lots of people responded to that clip saying the mum has a right to take their son to school and the protesters were choosing a dud target. Now the mum obviously does have a right to take her son to school, but what's less clear to me at least is whether parents should have the right to take their kids to school in a four wheel drive. Because I'm guessing that between that mum and her son's home and his school, there aren't many muddy fields, ditches or dirt roads to traverse. So it seems more than a little unnecessary to be driving such an overpriced gas guzzling monstrosity. The gas guzzling aspect really does matter here as reported in the new scientists, the increase in people purchasing SUVs has cancelled out any climate gains we have so far seen from the growing use of electric vehicles. The magazine also reports that between 2010 and 2020, global CO2 emissions from conventional cars fell by nearly 350 megatons due to factors such as fuel efficiency improvements as well as the switch to electric emissions from SUVs rose by more than 500 megatons. So in the same period, the benefit from fuel efficiency improvements more than outweighed by SUVs. They go on this trend means that overall emissions from all types of cars aren't falling despite the growth in electric vehicles. While the growth in EVs is encouraging, the boom in SUVs is heartbreaking, says Glenn Peters at the Cesaro Climate Research Center in Norway. That doesn't sound very good. Not a good advert for SUVs and we have some more SUV facts for you this evening. So as you can see here, it's collated by the Navarra media data team. 74% of SUVs in 2018 to 2020 were bought by city dwellers, so people who don't need them. And astonishingly, if SUVs were a nation, they'd have ranked seventh in CO2 emissions in 2018. These vehicles are a plague. They also happen to be more dangerous. If you get hit by an SUV, you're a lot more likely to die than if you get hit by a reasonable car which was designed to be used in a city. I think you should ban them or at least tax them so that they're incredibly uneconomical to use. Dalia, what do you think? Look, I always make a point and you will hear in the Planet B podcast that I always make a point of saying, climate breakdown is a systemic issue. We need a systemic response. You can't have a response that looks to just incentivize changes in individual behavior, like tempeh plastic bags or giving people recycling bins. It needs to be much bigger, much, much strategic. We can't focus on individual decisions and individual choices. We have to focus on marshalling the kind of massive financing and political will that we need to transition our economy away from fossil fuels and a kind of carbon growth model. SUVs may actually be the one exception just because those statistics are incredible. It's so clearly unacceptable to drive an SUV, particularly in a city, given that we are staring down the barrel of three to five degree warming by the end of this century, if we don't make the dramatic changes that we need to make. It should absolutely not be a decision that someone can make to have one passenger in a car in an SUV driving to school in the middle of a city. There's a lot of talk about interlate Britain's tactics. I have spoken before on the show where I say that it's really important for your tactics to communicate the politics of what you're doing to target and to frame themselves around the story of power that you're trying to tell, which is why when they were, when them and XR were blocking public transport, blocking public buses, I was like, well, this doesn't make a huge amount of sense because public transport is exactly the kind of thing that we are going to have lots of under under a just transition. But blocking a gas-guzzling SUV that's carrying one kid to school in a city actually kind of does communicate the politics because it says that, yes, there are some parts of the green transition that will take time to unfold. It will take time to retrofit everyone's homes. It will take time to build renewable infrastructure. But banning the use of SUVs particularly in cities is actually something we can and should do tomorrow. It's actually quite a quick low-hanging fruit thing that should have been done ages ago. And I say this, you know, as someone who I'm pretty into climate politics, as has become clear, even I didn't know that SUVs, if SUVs were a country, they'd be the seventh biggest emitter. Like that's comparable to the global shipping industry. So the fact that that was a moment of public education for us all, although, you know, I don't think that the mainstream media has really been focusing on that part of the story, which is why block what the role of SUVs are in climate breakdown, but instead, you know, using this as a stick to beat insulate Britain over the head with, you know, that's actually kind of what direct action is supposed to do. It's supposed to make a point and to communicate the politics of what you're trying to do. And in that point, in that moment, educate people and get people talking about something that they weren't previously talking about. So, you know, I think that we can talk a lot about what climate action should look like, but I think it shows a really, really, it shows that we're really far behind where we need to be when people, when the media is looking at that video and holding insulate Britain protesters to far more account than they are holding, you know, our politicians account who are continuing to commission coal mines and offshore oil and gas fields despite claiming to be, you know, climate leaders in the lead up to COP26.