FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Clean air zone and congestion charge
Clean air zone and congestion charge
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If you buy a classic car that had been registered pre 1983, then you are exempt from clean air zone charges.
"
If you buy a vehicle that's ultra low emission, then you are exempt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It works superbly!! Not by limiting the polution but for its primary purpose - raising money. No one fights Government taxes that target people "doing wrong" so, soon, the whole country will be a ULEZ. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
You bet it achieves something. Massive income for TFL and other authorities that are jumping on the 'banned wagons'.
Quite how paying to do so stops the vehicles concerned from continuing to emit gases is a mystery to many of us. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"If you buy a classic car that had been registered pre 1983, then you are exempt from clean air zone charges.
Can we all just stop and cry a moment that 'classic' car's are from the 80s now"
My diesel estate car conforms to the requirements of ULEZ, as does say a 1973 Vauxhall Victor.
Wonder which would be the least polluting.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If you buy a classic car that had been registered pre 1983, then you are exempt from clean air zone charges.
"
great didn't no that I'll take my MK2 E cort out more then cheers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If you buy a classic car that had been registered pre 1983, then you are exempt from clean air zone charges.
great didn't no that I'll take my MK2 E cort out more then cheers"
Nice car, what is the MPG?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
It unambiguously improves air quality.
It also raises money to fix the crappy roads and cross-subsidise public transport.
I've not noticed any taped number plates in London and don't know how attempting to do this is dealt with.
Not a good time to extend ULEZ in a cost of living crisis though. Should be delayed but perhaps to try to resolve a financial crunch. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If the goverment want clean air its so easy.just look up nuclear subs they stay under without surfacing and changing the air for upto a month with 200 sailors re breathing the air because the air is past through a carbon scrubber.
This is old tech been going since the 60s with the moon landings.
You take the tried and tested carbon scrubbers and make a tower then suck out of the air the co2 .
You then sell on the co2 to.
Drinks companys and fire extinguisher companys and food companys who all use carbon dioxide.
You make a profir and clean the air at the same time.
As for the other air polutants.its a known fact that runing water like waterfalls or water cascades pulls in gas traps it and converts it into othe compounds when mixed with water.
Thankfully water features like water runing down metal walls seems to be more popular in cities these days |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I guess you have a choice.
Hand over your cash to the Government or buy a new car and hand over your cash to a big car company.
But sure, this is about protecting children's health. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I guess you have a choice.
Hand over your cash to the Government or buy a new car and hand over your cash to a big car company.
But sure, this is about protecting children's health."
...not forgetting the health of the new car trade |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What are peoples thoughts on this?
Does it actually work or archive anything?
One thing I’ve noticed when in these areas of cities is a lot of cars driving around with tape over number plates "
Has any1 else noticed lots of taped over number plates? I never have, but maybe I wasn't looking closely enough? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Air quality has never been as good in cities. This is restriction of movement and the thin end of a very large wedge. It needs to be fought against and not complied with."
Why do you think that air quality has never been so good?
What is this "wedge" for? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"This is nothing more than a tax on the poor, you can't take your old Ford 1.5 in without getting charged, but my nice shiny new 6litre V12 is perfectly acceptable and free to enter."
What is a charge on emissions based on? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"If the goverment want clean air its so easy.just look up nuclear subs they stay under without surfacing and changing the air for upto a month with 200 sailors re breathing the air because the air is past through a carbon scrubber.
This is old tech been going since the 60s with the moon landings.
You take the tried and tested carbon scrubbers and make a tower then suck out of the air the co2 .
You then sell on the co2 to.
Drinks companys and fire extinguisher companys and food companys who all use carbon dioxide.
You make a profir and clean the air at the same time.
As for the other air polutants.its a known fact that runing water like waterfalls or water cascades pulls in gas traps it and converts it into othe compounds when mixed with water.
Thankfully water features like water runing down metal walls seems to be more popular in cities these days"
I think that it's a bit more complicated than that when it involves millions of tonnes of pollution in an open system. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Air pollutant emissions in the UK have collapsed from over 11 million tonnes in 1970 to well under a million tonnes in 2022. This is fact not "what I think ". The wedge is to force everyone bar the very rich out of cars. Part of the agenda 2030. Of course this is designed to restrict the freedom of people to move. Not surprised you are in favour. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"Air pollutant emissions in the UK have collapsed from over 11 million tonnes in 1970 to well under a million tonnes in 2022. This is fact not "what I think ". The wedge is to force everyone bar the very rich out of cars. Part of the agenda 2030. Of course this is designed to restrict the freedom of people to move. Not surprised you are in favour."
What does this reduction in pollutant mean to me on the street, are the levels safe for me to be healthy amongst traffic? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Air pollutant emissions in the UK have collapsed from over 11 million tonnes in 1970 to well under a million tonnes in 2022. This is fact not "what I think ". The wedge is to force everyone bar the very rich out of cars. Part of the agenda 2030. Of course this is designed to restrict the freedom of people to move. Not surprised you are in favour."
What has happened to cause this sudden collapse over 52 years?
Is this all air pollutants? What about in cities?
Does London's pollution exceed recommended levels?
Why does this "Agenda 2030" want to restrict people's freedom to move?
Why would I be in favour of whatever it is that you believe I am in favour of? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rFunBoyMan
over a year ago
Longridge |
"This is nothing more than a tax on the poor, you can't take your old Ford 1.5 in without getting charged, but my nice shiny new 6litre V12 is perfectly acceptable and free to enter."
Sold a Nissan Note I used as a runabout last year that did 38mpg and would be subject to charges.
I have a diesel 4x4 that regularly returns 42mpg and this would too get charged.
Yet, a brand new Nissan Xtrail hybrid that returns at best, 35mpg, is completely exempt from any charges. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"This is nothing more than a tax on the poor, you can't take your old Ford 1.5 in without getting charged, but my nice shiny new 6litre V12 is perfectly acceptable and free to enter.
Sold a Nissan Note I used as a runabout last year that did 38mpg and would be subject to charges.
I have a diesel 4x4 that regularly returns 42mpg and this would too get charged.
Yet, a brand new Nissan Xtrail hybrid that returns at best, 35mpg, is completely exempt from any charges."
39.9 mpg for the 2022 Nissan Xtrail hybrid. There are better performing versions and brands too.
Non-plug in hybrids not, actually, a very good idea. However the question in this case is, what are the emissions per gallon?
I understand that anyone would be annoyed at having to replace their vehicles.
I did too, but mine is now significantly more fuel efficient (second hand). You're allowed to do that too.
As I said, I don't think that the timing is particularly good.
However, does London meet air safety standards? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The following link has an interactive live map to show current levels of pollution.
It would appear London is no worse, and in fact better than quite a few other places.
https://www.iqair.com/air-quality-map/uk/england/london |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I objected to the Greater Manchester clean air zone not because of the charges but because the implementation was unfair.
It penalised occasionally used vehicles while letting the worst polluters move about without charge.
For example, someone who has done their best by having a small new car would get charged every time they took their motorhome off the drive, which added £20 to every weekend away. However, their neighbours who used a big old 4x4 as their daily driver and also used it to tow a caravan would not be charged at all.
The many drivers of old diesel cars around here also wouldn't be charged.
It should have applied to all vehicles to make a difference. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rFunBoyMan
over a year ago
Longridge |
We kicked the Manchester Clean Air Zone down the road by voting many years ago.
Then it came back, covering a wider area without any vote. If public transport was more favourable than simply pricing people out of cars, then by default less vehicles would be driving around the city.
Trains = failure, buses = failure transport = nightmare if the loop is blocked due to breakdown.
Since moved to Preston where PrestonBus are driving around in worn out smoke billowing old N and P registered second hand buses. How they get away with it is beyond me.
Get their own house in order, the rest will follow. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We kicked the Manchester Clean Air Zone down the road by voting many years ago.
Then it came back, covering a wider area without any vote. If public transport was more favourable than simply pricing people out of cars, then by default less vehicles would be driving around the city.
Trains = failure, buses = failure transport = nightmare if the loop is blocked due to breakdown.
Since moved to Preston where PrestonBus are driving around in worn out smoke billowing old N and P registered second hand buses. How they get away with it is beyond me.
Get their own house in order, the rest will follow."
I agree. The college buses around here are awful. Finches run 30 year old double deckers which belch out black smoke as they sit in the gridlocked traffic. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The following link has an interactive live map to show current levels of pollution.
It would appear London is no worse, and in fact better than quite a few other places.
https://www.iqair.com/air-quality-map/uk/england/london"
Does it meet accepted safe levels? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"I objected to the Greater Manchester clean air zone not because of the charges but because the implementation was unfair.
It penalised occasionally used vehicles while letting the worst polluters move about without charge.
For example, someone who has done their best by having a small new car would get charged every time they took their motorhome off the drive, which added £20 to every weekend away. However, their neighbours who used a big old 4x4 as their daily driver and also used it to tow a caravan would not be charged at all.
The many drivers of old diesel cars around here also wouldn't be charged.
It should have applied to all vehicles to make a difference."
Agreed if that is the case. Poor implementation. Sounds like some "interested parties" were involved in the framing of this, because it doesn't appear to make any sense. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"We kicked the Manchester Clean Air Zone down the road by voting many years ago.
Then it came back, covering a wider area without any vote. If public transport was more favourable than simply pricing people out of cars, then by default less vehicles would be driving around the city.
Trains = failure, buses = failure transport = nightmare if the loop is blocked due to breakdown.
Since moved to Preston where PrestonBus are driving around in worn out smoke billowing old N and P registered second hand buses. How they get away with it is beyond me.
Get their own house in order, the rest will follow."
Yes, policy needs to be connected. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The following link has an interactive live map to show current levels of pollution.
It would appear London is no worse, and in fact better than quite a few other places.
https://www.iqair.com/air-quality-map/uk/england/london
Does it meet accepted safe levels?"
I have no idea what 'accepted safe levels' are. Was just providing a tool for people to view. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The following link has an interactive live map to show current levels of pollution.
It would appear London is no worse, and in fact better than quite a few other places.
https://www.iqair.com/air-quality-map/uk/england/london
Does it meet accepted safe levels?
I have no idea what 'accepted safe levels' are. Was just providing a tool for people to view."
You added the information that London is no worse, and better than other places. Which I don't doubt.
Why give that information but not if this performance is good? It's not an accusatory question, just interesting to know.
When I had a look on the same site, London was 6.5 times higher than safe levels defined by the UN.
Is it responsible for a city adminstration to do something about this, or not? That's the root question.
Execution is the next one, and there seem to have been a few examples of poor execution given. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
Polluting the air with car fumes is obviously compounded in a city by the numbers of cars on the roads at any given time. However, less built up urban areas, or even rural areas surely can't be ignored?
I visit family who live in a town with a population of approx 220K, not big numbers but when you see the school runs and the amount of cars littering the streets with their engines running, it makes me think these schemes could be used to target places that really need to be cleaned up for the health of the young in this example.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The following link has an interactive live map to show current levels of pollution.
It would appear London is no worse, and in fact better than quite a few other places.
https://www.iqair.com/air-quality-map/uk/england/london
Does it meet accepted safe levels?
I have no idea what 'accepted safe levels' are. Was just providing a tool for people to view.
You added the information that London is no worse, and better than other places. Which I don't doubt.
Why give that information but not if this performance is good? It's not an accusatory question, just interesting to know.
When I had a look on the same site, London was 6.5 times higher than safe levels defined by the UN.
Is it responsible for a city adminstration to do something about this, or not? That's the root question.
Execution is the next one, and there seem to have been a few examples of poor execution given."
I provided a tool and provided a little context.
Not exactly sure why you're trying to bait me into some sort of debate.
The UN says satisfactory is under 100. London currently is in the 90s. It was much lower at 8:45 this morning. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The following link has an interactive live map to show current levels of pollution.
It would appear London is no worse, and in fact better than quite a few other places.
https://www.iqair.com/air-quality-map/uk/england/london
Does it meet accepted safe levels?
I have no idea what 'accepted safe levels' are. Was just providing a tool for people to view.
You added the information that London is no worse, and better than other places. Which I don't doubt.
Why give that information but not if this performance is good? It's not an accusatory question, just interesting to know.
When I had a look on the same site, London was 6.5 times higher than safe levels defined by the UN.
Is it responsible for a city adminstration to do something about this, or not? That's the root question.
Execution is the next one, and there seem to have been a few examples of poor execution given.
I provided a tool and provided a little context.
Not exactly sure why you're trying to bait me into some sort of debate.
The UN says satisfactory is under 100. London currently is in the 90s. It was much lower at 8:45 this morning."
"Bait" you? That's pretty paranoid.
Fine. Conversation ended. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The following link has an interactive live map to show current levels of pollution.
It would appear London is no worse, and in fact better than quite a few other places.
https://www.iqair.com/air-quality-map/uk/england/london
Does it meet accepted safe levels?
I have no idea what 'accepted safe levels' are. Was just providing a tool for people to view.
You added the information that London is no worse, and better than other places. Which I don't doubt.
Why give that information but not if this performance is good? It's not an accusatory question, just interesting to know.
When I had a look on the same site, London was 6.5 times higher than safe levels defined by the UN.
Is it responsible for a city adminstration to do something about this, or not? That's the root question.
Execution is the next one, and there seem to have been a few examples of poor execution given.
I provided a tool and provided a little context.
Not exactly sure why you're trying to bait me into some sort of debate.
The UN says satisfactory is under 100. London currently is in the 90s. It was much lower at 8:45 this morning.
"Bait" you? That's pretty paranoid.
Fine. Conversation ended."
Yes, bait me. I gave you answer which you didn't like. You then asked a question.
By asking that question, that's baiting.
And now you call me paranoid? What is it with you calling people paranoid? Anyone who questions your motives is paranoid? You're really not important enough for me to worry about being paranoid  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
There was a paper published by the government over 25 years ago, it was laying out the plans to spread the congestion zone to include everywhere inside the M25. Looks like it is not far from happening, only with a differrnt name. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Polluting the air with car fumes is obviously compounded in a city by the numbers of cars on the roads at any given time. However, less built up urban areas, or even rural areas surely can't be ignored?
I visit family who live in a town with a population of approx 220K, not big numbers but when you see the school runs and the amount of cars littering the streets with their engines running, it makes me think these schemes could be used to target places that really need to be cleaned up for the health of the young in this example.
"
Totally agree. Clean air in side the M25 will make it more expensive to live there at least there is better transport links in to London. But if you wanted to drive out would be more of a problem.
Don't know if the ULEZ comes up on a surch when purchasing a home.
If it did not when you perched should it comply to that person.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
According to research air pollution is attributed to up to 36k deaths a year, almost 10k of those in London. Not all is related to road vehicles but it's a significant factor. It is estimated to cost the NHS around £1.6bn per year in worsening health conditions like asthma, lung cancer and dementia.
Clean air zones have been proven to reduce pollution significantly. They are expensive and obviously significantly effect the poor. But then most people prefer taxes to be based on the people who are responsible. Same as tax on fuel, cigarettes etc.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *yth11Couple
over a year ago
newark |
"Air pollutant emissions in the UK have collapsed from over 11 million tonnes in 1970 to well under a million tonnes in 2022. This is fact not "what I think ". The wedge is to force everyone bar the very rich out of cars. Part of the agenda 2030. Of course this is designed to restrict the freedom of people to move. Not surprised you are in favour.
What has happened to cause this sudden collapse over 52 years?
Is this all air pollutants? What about in cities?
Does London's pollution exceed recommended levels?
Why does this "Agenda 2030" want to restrict people's freedom to move?
Why would I be in favour of whatever it is that you believe I am in favour of?"
The decline of coal and industry has caused air quality to vastly improve to the point where some days the pollution comes from other countries such as Germany when they ramp their coal power stations and there is a easterly wind. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Air pollutant emissions in the UK have collapsed from over 11 million tonnes in 1970 to well under a million tonnes in 2022. This is fact not "what I think ". The wedge is to force everyone bar the very rich out of cars. Part of the agenda 2030. Of course this is designed to restrict the freedom of people to move. Not surprised you are in favour.
What has happened to cause this sudden collapse over 52 years?
Is this all air pollutants? What about in cities?
Does London's pollution exceed recommended levels?
Why does this "Agenda 2030" want to restrict people's freedom to move?
Why would I be in favour of whatever it is that you believe I am in favour of?
The decline of coal and industry has caused air quality to vastly improve to the point where some days the pollution comes from other countries such as Germany when they ramp their coal power stations and there is a easterly wind."
So you are talking about the overall reduction including industrial pollution which required laws to be put in place at significant cost to companies and households who had to change their fuel sources.
So, Germany should also tighten their regulations and spend lots of money on new power generation?
Is this all part of "Agenda 2030s" plan? To force us to breathe cleaner air against our will?
What is the air quality like in cities with lots of road traffic? Do they exceed accepted limits? Do we want that?
Why does this "Agenda 2030" want to restrict people's freedom to move?
Why would I be in favour of whatever it is that you believe I am in favour of? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Polluting the air with car fumes is obviously compounded in a city by the numbers of cars on the roads at any given time. However, less built up urban areas, or even rural areas surely can't be ignored?
I visit family who live in a town with a population of approx 220K, not big numbers but when you see the school runs and the amount of cars littering the streets with their engines running, it makes me think these schemes could be used to target places that really need to be cleaned up for the health of the young in this example.
Totally agree. Clean air in side the M25 will make it more expensive to live there at least there is better transport links in to London. But if you wanted to drive out would be more of a problem.
Don't know if the ULEZ comes up on a surch when purchasing a home.
If it did not when you perched should it comply to that person.
"
The law applies to everyone.
Perhaps you could sir your surveyor if you didn't bother to check the ULEZ website before spending several hundred thousand pounds? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *yth11Couple
over a year ago
newark |
The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This is nothing more than a tax on the poor, you can't take your old Ford 1.5 in without getting charged, but my nice shiny new 6litre V12 is perfectly acceptable and free to enter.
Sold a Nissan Note I used as a runabout last year that did 38mpg and would be subject to charges.
I have a diesel 4x4 that regularly returns 42mpg and this would too get charged.
Yet, a brand new Nissan Xtrail hybrid that returns at best, 35mpg, is completely exempt from any charges.
39.9 mpg for the 2022 Nissan Xtrail hybrid. There are better performing versions and brands too.
Non-plug in hybrids not, actually, a very good idea. However the question in this case is, what are the emissions per gallon?
I understand that anyone would be annoyed at having to replace their vehicles.
I did too, but mine is now significantly more fuel efficient (second hand). You're allowed to do that too.
As I said, I don't think that the timing is particularly good.
However, does London meet air safety standards?"
All it is based on is the euro standards - for petrol cars it's euro4 my v12 way exceeds this, in London I'd expect to see about 10-12 mpg. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"This is nothing more than a tax on the poor, you can't take your old Ford 1.5 in without getting charged, but my nice shiny new 6litre V12 is perfectly acceptable and free to enter.
Sold a Nissan Note I used as a runabout last year that did 38mpg and would be subject to charges.
I have a diesel 4x4 that regularly returns 42mpg and this would too get charged.
Yet, a brand new Nissan Xtrail hybrid that returns at best, 35mpg, is completely exempt from any charges.
39.9 mpg for the 2022 Nissan Xtrail hybrid. There are better performing versions and brands too.
Non-plug in hybrids not, actually, a very good idea. However the question in this case is, what are the emissions per gallon?
I understand that anyone would be annoyed at having to replace their vehicles.
I did too, but mine is now significantly more fuel efficient (second hand). You're allowed to do that too.
As I said, I don't think that the timing is particularly good.
However, does London meet air safety standards?
All it is based on is the euro standards - for petrol cars it's euro4 my v12 way exceeds this, in London I'd expect to see about 10-12 mpg. "
What point are you making relative to pollution levels in London? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero."
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We have it starting this June in Glasgow. My gripe is, if politicians expect the public to invest in cleaner vehicles, then they should invest in better road experiences for the road user.
I don't mean, just better road surfaces rather than ones that resemble war zones. I mean smarter light systems, I mean is you sitting at a red traffic light at 3am in the morning, when there is no vehicle for miles, waiting for the lights to go through their preset program necessary. When modern technology can have smart traffic lights that sense traffic and let it flow.
In Glasgow City centre we have one way system and 24hr bus only routes which if you are not a taxi means taking a half mile detour to get to the next street.
Also see road that are closed for months for building work or something. Where the traffic lights coming from there still turn green causing other traffic to stop, when there's never going to be any cars coming from this direction. Prime example is a off ramp on the M8 motorway that has been closed for about 2 years, but the light for it still is causing unnecessary stops on the main road. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero.
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion."
Which part? The congestion charge is intended to reduce private and commercial traffic as much as possible.
A large level of emissions are generated from brakes and tyres too, from a health perspectives. So fewer is better regardless.
With the law ending combustion engine sales anyway they have probably decided that it will be irrational for people buy them so no need to incentivise EV purchases. I'm not so sure about that as a decade is beyond the time horizon of most new car buyers and fleet managers.
It is possible that the acceptable Euro emissions standards will be tightened over time, but normal vehicle lifetime is ten years so will effect relatively few vehicles as the Euro 6 for diesel will already push most of those out of towns. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"We have it starting this June in Glasgow. My gripe is, if politicians expect the public to invest in cleaner vehicles, then they should invest in better road experiences for the road user.
I don't mean, just better road surfaces rather than ones that resemble war zones. I mean smarter light systems, I mean is you sitting at a red traffic light at 3am in the morning, when there is no vehicle for miles, waiting for the lights to go through their preset program necessary. When modern technology can have smart traffic lights that sense traffic and let it flow.
In Glasgow City centre we have one way system and 24hr bus only routes which if you are not a taxi means taking a half mile detour to get to the next street.
Also see road that are closed for months for building work or something. Where the traffic lights coming from there still turn green causing other traffic to stop, when there's never going to be any cars coming from this direction. Prime example is a off ramp on the M8 motorway that has been closed for about 2 years, but the light for it still is causing unnecessary stops on the main road."
The money rsised is intended to be spent on public transport and congestion, but it is a little "chicken and egg". You don't get the money to spend until you start charging. There should be an immediate reduction in traffic as casual journeys are diverted. This might shift congestion to other areas though. It takes a while to work through. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"We have it starting this June in Glasgow. My gripe is, if politicians expect the public to invest in cleaner vehicles, then they should invest in better road experiences for the road user.
I don't mean, just better road surfaces rather than ones that resemble war zones. I mean smarter light systems, I mean is you sitting at a red traffic light at 3am in the morning, when there is no vehicle for miles, waiting for the lights to go through their preset program necessary. When modern technology can have smart traffic lights that sense traffic and let it flow.
In Glasgow City centre we have one way system and 24hr bus only routes which if you are not a taxi means taking a half mile detour to get to the next street.
Also see road that are closed for months for building work or something. Where the traffic lights coming from there still turn green causing other traffic to stop, when there's never going to be any cars coming from this direction. Prime example is a off ramp on the M8 motorway that has been closed for about 2 years, but the light for it still is causing unnecessary stops on the main road.
The money rsised is intended to be spent on public transport and congestion, but it is a little "chicken and egg". You don't get the money to spend until you start charging. There should be an immediate reduction in traffic as casual journeys are diverted. This might shift congestion to other areas though. It takes a while to work through."
I have often thought it would be a good idea to incentivise haulage and other commercial deliveries into working evenings into early hours, and leaving the roads before 06:00 am.
I know this would have a knock on effect to businesses waiting for deliveries, but if goods are arriving quicker and not stuck in rush hours and part of the pollution, it could reduce the cost, fuel and time to move goods.
Now this is only a thought in my head based on my musings, I’m not proposing I know the first thing about logistics, but I have a feeling I’m going to get schooled |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have it starting this June in Glasgow. My gripe is, if politicians expect the public to invest in cleaner vehicles, then they should invest in better road experiences for the road user.
I don't mean, just better road surfaces rather than ones that resemble war zones. I mean smarter light systems, I mean is you sitting at a red traffic light at 3am in the morning, when there is no vehicle for miles, waiting for the lights to go through their preset program necessary. When modern technology can have smart traffic lights that sense traffic and let it flow.
In Glasgow City centre we have one way system and 24hr bus only routes which if you are not a taxi means taking a half mile detour to get to the next street.
Also see road that are closed for months for building work or something. Where the traffic lights coming from there still turn green causing other traffic to stop, when there's never going to be any cars coming from this direction. Prime example is a off ramp on the M8 motorway that has been closed for about 2 years, but the light for it still is causing unnecessary stops on the main road.
The money rsised is intended to be spent on public transport and congestion, but it is a little "chicken and egg". You don't get the money to spend until you start charging. There should be an immediate reduction in traffic as casual journeys are diverted. This might shift congestion to other areas though. It takes a while to work through.
I have often thought it would be a good idea to incentivise haulage and other commercial deliveries into working evenings into early hours, and leaving the roads before 06:00 am.
I know this would have a knock on effect to businesses waiting for deliveries, but if goods are arriving quicker and not stuck in rush hours and part of the pollution, it could reduce the cost, fuel and time to move goods.
Now this is only a thought in my head based on my musings, I’m not proposing I know the first thing about logistics, but I have a feeling I’m going to get schooled "
Jackal will be along to give you the full run down on these thoughts.
My thoughts are that most haulage firms actually run 24hr. It's just that the 'delivery' takes place during business hours. I might even be wrong on that as Im sure a lot of supermarkets have night time deliveries. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero.
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion.
Which part? The congestion charge is intended to reduce private and commercial traffic as much as possible.
A large level of emissions are generated from brakes and tyres too, from a health perspectives. So fewer is better regardless.
With the law ending combustion engine sales anyway they have probably decided that it will be irrational for people buy them so no need to incentivise EV purchases. I'm not so sure about that as a decade is beyond the time horizon of most new car buyers and fleet managers.
It is possible that the acceptable Euro emissions standards will be tightened over time, but normal vehicle lifetime is ten years so will effect relatively few vehicles as the Euro 6 for diesel will already push most of those out of towns."
It's silly because in my opinion, it removes the incentives for ownership of a less polluting vehicle. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero.
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion.
Which part? The congestion charge is intended to reduce private and commercial traffic as much as possible.
A large level of emissions are generated from brakes and tyres too, from a health perspectives. So fewer is better regardless.
With the law ending combustion engine sales anyway they have probably decided that it will be irrational for people buy them so no need to incentivise EV purchases. I'm not so sure about that as a decade is beyond the time horizon of most new car buyers and fleet managers.
It is possible that the acceptable Euro emissions standards will be tightened over time, but normal vehicle lifetime is ten years so will effect relatively few vehicles as the Euro 6 for diesel will already push most of those out of towns.
It's silly because in my opinion, it removes the incentives for ownership of a less polluting vehicle. "
The congestion charge isn't only about emissions though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero.
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion.
Which part? The congestion charge is intended to reduce private and commercial traffic as much as possible.
A large level of emissions are generated from brakes and tyres too, from a health perspectives. So fewer is better regardless.
With the law ending combustion engine sales anyway they have probably decided that it will be irrational for people buy them so no need to incentivise EV purchases. I'm not so sure about that as a decade is beyond the time horizon of most new car buyers and fleet managers.
It is possible that the acceptable Euro emissions standards will be tightened over time, but normal vehicle lifetime is ten years so will effect relatively few vehicles as the Euro 6 for diesel will already push most of those out of towns.
It's silly because in my opinion, it removes the incentives for ownership of a less polluting vehicle.
The congestion charge isn't only about emissions though."
Of course. It's about congestion.
I just think it's silly that they're removing the exemption for less polluting vehicles. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero.
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion.
Which part? The congestion charge is intended to reduce private and commercial traffic as much as possible.
A large level of emissions are generated from brakes and tyres too, from a health perspectives. So fewer is better regardless.
With the law ending combustion engine sales anyway they have probably decided that it will be irrational for people buy them so no need to incentivise EV purchases. I'm not so sure about that as a decade is beyond the time horizon of most new car buyers and fleet managers.
It is possible that the acceptable Euro emissions standards will be tightened over time, but normal vehicle lifetime is ten years so will effect relatively few vehicles as the Euro 6 for diesel will already push most of those out of towns.
It's silly because in my opinion, it removes the incentives for ownership of a less polluting vehicle.
The congestion charge isn't only about emissions though.
Of course. It's about congestion.
I just think it's silly that they're removing the exemption for less polluting vehicles. "
It's all honesty it doesn't really affect me so maybe I see it differently but EVs still cause congestion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero.
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion.
Which part? The congestion charge is intended to reduce private and commercial traffic as much as possible.
A large level of emissions are generated from brakes and tyres too, from a health perspectives. So fewer is better regardless.
With the law ending combustion engine sales anyway they have probably decided that it will be irrational for people buy them so no need to incentivise EV purchases. I'm not so sure about that as a decade is beyond the time horizon of most new car buyers and fleet managers.
It is possible that the acceptable Euro emissions standards will be tightened over time, but normal vehicle lifetime is ten years so will effect relatively few vehicles as the Euro 6 for diesel will already push most of those out of towns.
It's silly because in my opinion, it removes the incentives for ownership of a less polluting vehicle.
The congestion charge isn't only about emissions though.
Of course. It's about congestion.
I just think it's silly that they're removing the exemption for less polluting vehicles.
It's all honesty it doesn't really affect me so maybe I see it differently but EVs still cause congestion."
Pollution and CO2 emissions don't affect you? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero.
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion.
Which part? The congestion charge is intended to reduce private and commercial traffic as much as possible.
A large level of emissions are generated from brakes and tyres too, from a health perspectives. So fewer is better regardless.
With the law ending combustion engine sales anyway they have probably decided that it will be irrational for people buy them so no need to incentivise EV purchases. I'm not so sure about that as a decade is beyond the time horizon of most new car buyers and fleet managers.
It is possible that the acceptable Euro emissions standards will be tightened over time, but normal vehicle lifetime is ten years so will effect relatively few vehicles as the Euro 6 for diesel will already push most of those out of towns.
It's silly because in my opinion, it removes the incentives for ownership of a less polluting vehicle.
The congestion charge isn't only about emissions though.
Of course. It's about congestion.
I just think it's silly that they're removing the exemption for less polluting vehicles.
It's all honesty it doesn't really affect me so maybe I see it differently but EVs still cause congestion.
Pollution and CO2 emissions don't affect you? "
I can see them rasing the charge for polluting vehicles to being double that of electric vehicles. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *9alMan
over a year ago
Bridgend |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero.
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion.
Which part? The congestion charge is intended to reduce private and commercial traffic as much as possible.
A large level of emissions are generated from brakes and tyres too, from a health perspectives. So fewer is better regardless.
With the law ending combustion engine sales anyway they have probably decided that it will be irrational for people buy them so no need to incentivise EV purchases. I'm not so sure about that as a decade is beyond the time horizon of most new car buyers and fleet managers.
It is possible that the acceptable Euro emissions standards will be tightened over time, but normal vehicle lifetime is ten years so will effect relatively few vehicles as the Euro 6 for diesel will already push most of those out of towns.
It's silly because in my opinion, it removes the incentives for ownership of a less polluting vehicle. "
A lot of cars last more than 10 years my newest car is 15 years old |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The congestion charge will apply to zero emission fully electric cars from dec 2025 which will catch a few out.
Also I expect a tightening of ULEZ rules around 2025/26 as the focus will move to net zero.
I didn't know this. Just looked it up.
This is silly, in my opinion.
Which part? The congestion charge is intended to reduce private and commercial traffic as much as possible.
A large level of emissions are generated from brakes and tyres too, from a health perspectives. So fewer is better regardless.
With the law ending combustion engine sales anyway they have probably decided that it will be irrational for people buy them so no need to incentivise EV purchases. I'm not so sure about that as a decade is beyond the time horizon of most new car buyers and fleet managers.
It is possible that the acceptable Euro emissions standards will be tightened over time, but normal vehicle lifetime is ten years so will effect relatively few vehicles as the Euro 6 for diesel will already push most of those out of towns.
It's silly because in my opinion, it removes the incentives for ownership of a less polluting vehicle.
The congestion charge isn't only about emissions though.
Of course. It's about congestion.
I just think it's silly that they're removing the exemption for less polluting vehicles.
It's all honesty it doesn't really affect me so maybe I see it differently but EVs still cause congestion.
Pollution and CO2 emissions don't affect you? "
Congestion doesn't affect me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"It’s not got a thing to do with cleaning up any air the air now is cleaner than it’s ever been it’s money making scam for them by brain washing the stupid "
Cleaner than it's ever been, or cleaner than it's been since appalling levels of pollution?
Is that enough then? Should we not aim to get to safe levels of pollution?
Wanting to reduce illness from pollution is stupid? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
Petrol cars built after 2006 and diesel cars after 2015 are exempt from ULEZ.
Those are pretty old and relatively cheap compared to the higher repair rate that older cars demand.
I still don't believe that doing this in a cost of living crisis is correct, but it is not quite what the gloomsters and the doomsters are claiming.
The latest report (from TFL, but peer reviewed by Imperial College) indicates:
"NOx, particularly produced by diesel engines, are 23% lower across London as a whole and 26% lower within the zone.
PM2.5s, were calculated to be 19% lower than they would have been and 7% lower across the whole city."
https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/10/ulez-cut-toxic-nox-pollution-across-london-by-23-report-finds |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking "
Ban them all? Really? Your solution is all or nothing?
How is that sensible? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Polluting the air with car fumes is obviously compounded in a city by the numbers of cars on the roads at any given time. However, less built up urban areas, or even rural areas surely can't be ignored?
I visit family who live in a town with a population of approx 220K, not big numbers but when you see the school runs and the amount of cars littering the streets with their engines running, it makes me think these schemes could be used to target places that really need to be cleaned up for the health of the young in this example.
Totally agree. Clean air in side the M25 will make it more expensive to live there at least there is better transport links in to London. But if you wanted to drive out would be more of a problem.
Don't know if the ULEZ comes up on a surch when purchasing a home.
If it did not when you perched should it comply to that person.
The law applies to everyone.
Perhaps you could sir your surveyor if you didn't bother to check the ULEZ website before spending several hundred thousand pounds?"
Don't no if I would have looked if buying a home in KENT I'm in East Sussex on the coast guess it will include us next as we are only 50m from London if I'd did I would see it as just a tax |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
Ban them all? Really? Your solution is all or nothing?
How is that sensible?"
From my perspective its very sensible. You want to cut pollution you remove the pollutant. In this case the ICE vehicles. And only allow non polluting vehicles in. Or at least at the tail pipe.
Might not be sensible but thats the ultimate answer to pollution.
And I drive a 2017 Astra into the zone most days that does not meet ULEZ.Don't really want to but thats what I was given a a company car.
But anyone can see its a way of raising money. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
Ban them all? Really? Your solution is all or nothing?
How is that sensible?
From my perspective its very sensible. You want to cut pollution you remove the pollutant. In this case the ICE vehicles. And only allow non polluting vehicles in. Or at least at the tail pipe.
Might not be sensible but thats the ultimate answer to pollution.
And I drive a 2017 Astra into the zone most days that does not meet ULEZ.Don't really want to but thats what I was given a a company car.
But anyone can see its a way of raising money."
So should company not dive out cars would that not be better and reduced the burning od all fule in ULEZ completely.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
Ban them all? Really? Your solution is all or nothing?
How is that sensible?"
It's sensible because you get of the very things causing pollution in the first place |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking "
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others "
I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place "
Totally with that all pollution in a built up area is bad and most generator engines are massive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place
Totally with that all pollution in a built up area is bad and most generator engines are massive. "
But most only run on rare occasions or the weekly test. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place "
Leaving aside your weird confusion about scientists and "the woke brigade".
Isn't this what the various congestion charges do. Reduce the number of polluting engines, generators etc. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place "
Green energy never take off here.No matter how much money the government wastes throwing at it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place Green energy never take off here.No matter how much money the government wastes throwing at it."
That is wrong beyond reason, and fact 
Of course, data is of no interest to you because of the second amendment and guns, or something.
There is plenty of information available to tell you that renewable energy is cheaper to install and far cheaper to generate than those of fossil fuels.
Wind generated 20% of Texas' power and 12% of the US and growing, for some reason... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Petrol cars built after 2006 and diesel cars after 2015 are exempt from ULEZ.
Those are pretty old and relatively cheap compared to the higher repair rate that older cars demand."
I don't know what car you drive, but my experience differs. My 2010 car has been tramping along at 25,000 miles a year for the past 5 years with nothing more than an annual service (£200). A ULEZ-compliant (2016) version of my car would cost me £7,000, whereas the 2010 version (the one that I've got) is going for £3,300.
As long as I don't have to go into the ULEZ very often, it seems to me that running the older car is significantly cheaper. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
Ban them all? Really? Your solution is all or nothing?
How is that sensible?
From my perspective its very sensible. You want to cut pollution you remove the pollutant. In this case the ICE vehicles. And only allow non polluting vehicles in. Or at least at the tail pipe.
Might not be sensible but thats the ultimate answer to pollution.
And I drive a 2017 Astra into the zone most days that does not meet ULEZ.Don't really want to but thats what I was given a a company car.
But anyone can see its a way of raising money."
So your company is paying £12.50 every day.
Why are you upset about about the ULEZ if you think it's a better idea to ban all petrol and diesel vehicles immediately rather than slowly changing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place "
The "woke" brigade "thinks" that pollution kills people?
Would you stand in a garage for an hour with an engine running?
Is there any advantage to a relatively slow transition to cleaner vehicles rather than a sudden one which you think is the "correct" way to introduce a change? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place
The "woke" brigade "thinks" that pollution kills people?
Would you stand in a garage for an hour with an engine running?
Is there any advantage to a relatively slow transition to cleaner vehicles rather than a sudden one which you think is the "correct" way to introduce a change?"
Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they where Diesel ?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place
The "woke" brigade "thinks" that pollution kills people?
Would you stand in a garage for an hour with an engine running?
Is there any advantage to a relatively slow transition to cleaner vehicles rather than a sudden one which you think is the "correct" way to introduce a change?
Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they were Diesel ?? "
.
Most are but there are some Hydrogen and a few Electric. And of course the Boris hybrid busses. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they where Diesel ?? "
They are. Diesel engines can be made to be very clean nowadays, to the point where the emissions are getting difficult to detect. That's why environmental activists have started focusing on 'tyre particulates', tiny bits of rubber that are shed when tyres roll across rough surfaces. It's much easier to measure those than anything coming out of a new diesel engine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *I TwoCouple
over a year ago
PDI 12-26th Nov 24 |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place Green energy never take off here.No matter how much money the government wastes throwing at it."
It will take off once they realise they backed the wrong horse in fact they backed a donkey and a pony.
Tidal power is the horse |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they where Diesel ??
They are. Diesel engines can be made to be very clean nowadays, to the point where the emissions are getting difficult to detect. That's why environmental activists have started focusing on 'tyre particulates', tiny bits of rubber that are shed when tyres roll across rough surfaces. It's much easier to measure those than anything coming out of a new diesel engine."
Cue an initiative for cars with no tyres. hovercraft? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I work I London but need tools and spairs I trial a ford transit last week and it did not even get me in to London 45miles and it was flat.was listed as can do 215 mile on a full charge.
So I will be getting another diesel EV is no where close to it yet.
And if ever job goes up in cost to cover the ULEZ charge I guess that's more inflation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they where Diesel ??
They are. Diesel engines can be made to be very clean nowadays, to the point where the emissions are getting difficult to detect. That's why environmental activists have started focusing on 'tyre particulates', tiny bits of rubber that are shed when tyres roll across rough surfaces. It's much easier to measure those than anything coming out of a new diesel engine."
Not true that the emissions are "difficult to detect" at all.
However, brake and tyre particulates are, indeed, harmful.
Not sure why anybody wouldn't wish to not continue to reduce pollution levels. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"I work I London but need tools and spairs I trial a ford transit last week and it did not even get me in to London 45miles and it was flat.was listed as can do 215 mile on a full charge.
So I will be getting another diesel EV is no where close to it yet.
And if ever job goes up in cost to cover the ULEZ charge I guess that's more inflation."
Never heard of a differential that large in battery range.
What did the dealer say? Not that they all seem that well trained. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If you buy a classic car that had been registered pre 1983, then you are exempt from clean air zone charges.
great didn't no that I'll take my MK2 E cort out more then cheers
Nice car, what is the MPG?? "
about 35 40 depends if thrash it cheers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place
The "woke" brigade "thinks" that pollution kills people?
Would you stand in a garage for an hour with an engine running?
Is there any advantage to a relatively slow transition to cleaner vehicles rather than a sudden one which you think is the "correct" way to introduce a change?
Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they where Diesel ?? "
There are 3,854 hybrid buses, 785 battery electric buses, and 22 hydrogen fuel cell buses operating in London, as of March 2022, out of a total bus fleet of 8,795 - this is around 53% of the bus fleet.
The Diesel buses are Euro 6. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place
The "woke" brigade "thinks" that pollution kills people?
Would you stand in a garage for an hour with an engine running?
Is there any advantage to a relatively slow transition to cleaner vehicles rather than a sudden one which you think is the "correct" way to introduce a change?
Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they where Diesel ??
There are 3,854 hybrid buses, 785 battery electric buses, and 22 hydrogen fuel cell buses operating in London, as of March 2022, out of a total bus fleet of 8,795 - this is around 53% of the bus fleet.
The Diesel buses are Euro 6."
So how meny of the delivery lorrys in to London are hydrogen or do they just drive in an out out of hours to avoid the cost. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I work I London but need tools and spairs I trial a ford transit last week and it did not even get me in to London 45miles and it was flat.was listed as can do 215 mile on a full charge.
So I will be getting another diesel EV is no where close to it yet.
And if ever job goes up in cost to cover the ULEZ charge I guess that's more inflation.
Never heard of a differential that large in battery range.
What did the dealer say? Not that they all seem that well trained."
They comaind about having to recover it and Commented it was over waight and I was running the heater at full as it was cold.
Was only over waight as the battery waight decrease pay load witch is pointless |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place
The "woke" brigade "thinks" that pollution kills people?
Would you stand in a garage for an hour with an engine running?
Is there any advantage to a relatively slow transition to cleaner vehicles rather than a sudden one which you think is the "correct" way to introduce a change?
Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they where Diesel ??
There are 3,854 hybrid buses, 785 battery electric buses, and 22 hydrogen fuel cell buses operating in London, as of March 2022, out of a total bus fleet of 8,795 - this is around 53% of the bus fleet.
The Diesel buses are Euro 6.
So how meny of the delivery lorrys in to London are hydrogen or do they just drive in an out out of hours to avoid the cost."
Nope they can only deliver when the delivery spot wants then to.Some lorries on lacal deliveries are electric.Seen a couple of LPG and any cost is passed on to the customer.Hence why London is so expensive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place
The "woke" brigade "thinks" that pollution kills people?
Would you stand in a garage for an hour with an engine running?
Is there any advantage to a relatively slow transition to cleaner vehicles rather than a sudden one which you think is the "correct" way to introduce a change?
Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they where Diesel ??
There are 3,854 hybrid buses, 785 battery electric buses, and 22 hydrogen fuel cell buses operating in London, as of March 2022, out of a total bus fleet of 8,795 - this is around 53% of the bus fleet.
The Diesel buses are Euro 6.
So how meny of the delivery lorrys in to London are hydrogen or do they just drive in an out out of hours to avoid the cost."
New question as that one was answered then?
I do not know. If you do not either then it's a pointless question.
LEZ for HGVs runs 24 hrs.
They may also all meet the required emissions standard or will have to pay the £100 fee or a fine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The way I see it Congestion Charge, LTNs and expansion of ULEZ (all Labour policies introduced by Ken Livingston and Sadiq Khan direspectively) are money making schemes to get more money from people. If they really want to get rid of pollution then they would ban cars, lorries motorbikes heck even smoking
So would you also ban back up diesel generators like the 4 large black stone and strarling ones under the bank of England and all others I'm not saying I back that but if the 'woke' brigade are saying things like pollution kills so many people a year then why wont the same woke people ban the things that cause polltution in the first place
The "woke" brigade "thinks" that pollution kills people?
Would you stand in a garage for an hour with an engine running?
Is there any advantage to a relatively slow transition to cleaner vehicles rather than a sudden one which you think is the "correct" way to introduce a change?
Oh and what are these cleaner vehicles you talk about is it London busses. I thought they where Diesel ??
There are 3,854 hybrid buses, 785 battery electric buses, and 22 hydrogen fuel cell buses operating in London, as of March 2022, out of a total bus fleet of 8,795 - this is around 53% of the bus fleet.
The Diesel buses are Euro 6.
So how meny of the delivery lorrys in to London are hydrogen or do they just drive in an out out of hours to avoid the cost.
Nope they can only deliver when the delivery spot wants then to.Some lorries on lacal deliveries are electric.Seen a couple of LPG and any cost is passed on to the customer.Hence why London is so expensive."
London has always been expensive, not only since the congestion charge was brought in. It may contribute, but it's tiny.
London is expensive because of property prices that feeds through to everything. Not the cost of delivery. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Bullshit tax for the motorist.
I pay £0 road tax as low emmissions but have to pay the Birmingham caz.
I take an extra 20mins driving around the caz to get to the same place causing more mileage etc.
If they really want clean air they would ban all traffic.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Bullshit tax for the motorist.
I pay £0 road tax as low emmissions but have to pay the Birmingham caz.
I take an extra 20mins driving around the caz to get to the same place causing more mileage etc.
If they really want clean air they would ban all traffic.
"
Dont promise me a good time !!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
