2024 London Mayoral Election Thread

[Gecko1978]

NiceCupOfTea said:

I realise I am very much in the minority but ULEZ has ruined my enjoyment of my classic. I didn’t drive it very much anyway and only ever straight out of Greater London. However, having owned it since 2005 and spent much time, energy, love and money on it since then, I am now thinking about selling up as a result of ULEZ. I know that I could just set up autopay and not worry about - and I have tried doing that. However, it such a bitter pill to swallow, needing to make sure I get my “money’s worth” each time I drive it, that it totally sucks the enjoyment out of it for me. I didn’t ask for it, I didn’t vote for it, it is such a small proportion of people who it affects (and so a minimal effect), the consultation was against it, and yet it exists. It’s made all the worse by the fact that most of the time when I have to close windows in the car due to poor air quality it will generally be because of a 10 year old bus which has supposedly been made compliant, or a newish diesel van with DPF clearly removed, neither of which will be paying any ULEZ charge.

A quick look at any of the anti-ULEZ groups show them mostly to be populated by rabid Britain First types which I am most certainly not aligned with, and makes it all the more depressing that I feel I am completely on my own. There must be other people in my situation, modern classic drivers…? Where are they hanging out?

Central London and the outer boroughs are such different places and yet we have “one size fits all” policies - ULEZ in the outer boroughs makes next to no difference to pollution, just rakes in cash. A blanket charge when you’re smoking around central London all day in a knackered diesel is not equivalent to driving a mile and a half out of London in a well maintained petrol which might well be within limits but was registered before Euro4 and is somehow unable to be tested

I think what surprises me the most is how few car people seem to sympathise with this viewpoint. I think most car enthusiasts must either have classics or something newer and compliant. I expect more people would object if it affected them personally - presumably PPM will come in before long and maybe more people will take notice. But where are all the Mk.2 Golf / 205 GTi / 80s Ford / 90s Jap owners? Are they selling up? Are they paying? Are they moving out of Greater London? Or are they just leaving them in the garage and crying into their warm beer like me?

Yeah I know, first world problems. Entitled, middle aged, middle class, privilege etc…

Khan got 40 some % of the vote. So combined the rest of the votes which a posed him was greater. Where it's 1 role perhaps a run off would be better but is what it is. People who use tube etc likely don't care about ULEZ and that's many in London.

[and31]

Randy Winkman said:

Are you sure your science works? Why more emissions?

Because the engine revs will be the same, but the vehicles will be doing a slower speed in a lower gear,so take more time to complete the journey,thus more emissions.
How does your your science work?
Why isn’t the air quality improving in the capital ?
Despite all the euro 6 vehicles..

Edited by and31 on Sunday 5th May 19:49

Edited by and31 on Sunday 5th May 19:51

[NiceCupOfTea]

Gecko1978 said:

Khan got 40 some % of the vote. So combined the rest of the votes which a posed him was greater. Where it's 1 role perhaps a run off would be better but is what it is. People who use tube etc likely don't care about ULEZ and that's many in London.

Yes, I appreciate that. Unfortunately non drivers don’t care, drivers in central London won’t care as it won’t going to change for them anyway, outer London drivers with a petrol car less than 20 years old won’t care.

Those remaining will mostly buy newer cars or moan vociferously.

It’s ostensibly about getting people into less polluting cars if you believe Khan (although I suspect it’s more about looking like you’re doing the right thing but raking in more money). Within 5-10 years most of those cars would be off the road anyway so it all seems rather pointless

It’s a vanishingly small percentage that’s like me that actively wants to drive a car from this era (occasionally), and I’m kind of stuck with it if I want to continue with my hobby rather than admit defeat. I suspect most of the people in the ULEZ groups would shut up if they were offered a newer compliant car.

I still don’t understand how all the 11 and 12 plate buses I see aroun Bromley and Croydon are compliant. My throat and eyes tell me they shouldn’t be. And yet they drive around 24-7 without any sanctions.

I know the answer is “suck it up, if you don’t drive it much what’s the problem?”. I thought that was going to be the route I would take, but it upsets me so much and I find it so unjust it completely ruins any enjoyment I might get of taking it out. Plus of course we all know how well cars respond to not being run very often, so chances are I’d pay £12.50 for the privilege of waiting at the side of the road for the RAC…

[funinhounslow]

and31 said:

funinhounslow said:

and31 said:

I’d rather just look out of the windscreen for objects that might be infront of me.

I thought the reason for these cameras and scanners was because of HGV’s blind spots?

So how is it ok to not have them in other cities? As I said, I can see what I need to see in my correctly set up mirrors-the cameras are a massive distraction.dangerously so in my professional opinion.
Next we are going to be forced to have scanners for stuff in front of us ffs!! We already have a mirror for looking right down the front .

Dunno.

Probably not necessary in cities that provide properly segregated cycling infrastructure as opposed to painting a dotted line in the gutter and calling it a day.

Or maybe other cities put restrictions on HGVs in the centre?

The majority of cyclist deaths in London are due to contact with an HGV or tipper truck so something’s clearly going wrong…

[and31]

NiceCupOfTea said:

I still don’t understand how all the 11 and 12 plate buses I see aroun Bromley and Croydon are compliant.

They aren’t-euro 6 came in 2014-we have a 64 plate lorry that was first of the euro six models-funnily enough it’s always playing up due to the emissions stuff on it

[and31]

funinhounslow said:

and31 said:

funinhounslow said:

and31 said:

I’d rather just look out of the windscreen for objects that might be infront of me.

I thought the reason for these cameras and scanners was because of HGV’s blind spots?

So how is it ok to not have them in other cities? As I said, I can see what I need to see in my correctly set up mirrors-the cameras are a massive distraction.dangerously so in my professional opinion.
Next we are going to be forced to have scanners for stuff in front of us ffs!! We already have a mirror for looking right down the front .

Dunno.

Probably not necessary in cities that provide properly segregated cycling infrastructure as opposed to painting a dotted line in the gutter and calling it a day.

Or maybe other cities put restrictions on HGVs in the centre?

The majority of cyclist deaths in London are due to contact with an HGV or tipper truck so something’s clearly going wrong…

Something to do with the cyclists going down the Nearside of a lorry despite it indicating left perhaps?
you’d be amazed at how often these clueless cyclists do this-headphones on as well.I absolutely hate central London
Cambridge is even worse.
It’s amazing the amount of people that insist on cycling in the road despite a cycle lane being available too .

[Type R Tom]

and31 said:

Randy Winkman said:

Are you sure your science works? Why more emissions?

Because the engine revs will be the same, but the vehicles will be doing a slower speed in a lower gear,so take more time to complete the journey,thus more emissions.
How does your your science work?
Why isn’t the air quality improving in the capital ?
Despite all the euro 6 vehicles..

Edited by and31 on Sunday 5th May 19:49

Edited by and31 on Sunday 5th May 19:51

Have you included the extra fuel burnt accelerating to 30 instead of 20? The fuel that is the energy that is wasted when you inevitably stop 100m up the road? Or the extra particulates released from brakes and tyres due to the extra speed?

[Randy Winkman]

and31 said:

Randy Winkman said:

Are you sure your science works? Why more emissions?

Because the engine revs will be the same, but the vehicles will be doing a slower speed in a lower gear,so take more time to complete the journey,thus more emissions.
How does your your science work?
Why isn’t the air quality improving in the capital ?
Despite all the euro 6 vehicles..

Edited by and31 on Sunday 5th May 19:49

Edited by and31 on Sunday 5th May 19:51

Cheers. I've not got any science because I've not claimed anything. But I do know that aerodynamic drag is a big deal, especially for flat fronted trucks. If my car's about to run out of fuel I'm not sure I should drive faster to get the the petrol station quicker.

[CoolHands]

Still get 08, 09 and 2010 buses round here in NW London and ps the noise of them is fking horrendous. To me the noise of them is a blight, but that isn’t chargeable

[valiant]

NiceCupOfTea said:

I still don’t understand how all the 11 and 12 plate buses I see aroun Bromley and Croydon are compliant. My throat and eyes tell me they shouldn’t be. And yet they drive around 24-7 without any sanctions.

Every London bus operated on behalf of TfL is Euro6 compliant and have been since 2021. Buses built before Euro6 standards will have been retrofitted with kit to make them compliant. If you feel a bus is faulty then report it via the TfL website and raise a complaint. It will be looked into.

London runs one of the greenest fleets in Europe with plans to have a completely emissions free fleet by around 2034.

[NiceCupOfTea]

valiant said:

NiceCupOfTea said:

I still don’t understand how all the 11 and 12 plate buses I see aroun Bromley and Croydon are compliant. My throat and eyes tell me they shouldn’t be. And yet they drive around 24-7 without any sanctions.

Every London bus operated on behalf of TfL is Euro6 compliant and have been since 2021. Buses built before Euro6 standards will have been retrofitted with kit to make them compliant. If you feel a bus is faulty then report it via the TfL website and raise a complaint. It will be looked into.

London runs one of the greenest fleets in Europe with plans to have a completely emissions free fleet by around 2034.

Yet if you drive behind one of the older ones, it is choking. It stinks, you can taste the particulates. I know what they say, but I do not believe it. They chuck out filth. My non compliant Saab puffs out fresh air in comparison. Yet I would pay £12.50 to drive out of town, as opposed to crawling all round SE London day in and day out. Sorry, I just do not buy it.

Plus, it was lovely to allow them to be retrofitted. You’re not allowed to do that with private vehicles for any amount of money. Double standards.

[and31]

Randy Winkman said:

Cheers. I've not got any science because I've not claimed anything. But I do know that aerodynamic drag is a big deal, especially for flat fronted trucks. If my car's about to run out of fuel I'm not sure I should drive faster to get the the petrol station quicker.

If your car was about to run out of fuel, you’d surely not drive at 20 mph in a low gear? Didn’t think so…

[and31]

valiant said:

Every London bus operated on behalf of TfL is Euro6 compliant and have been since 2021. Buses built before Euro6 standards will have been retrofitted with kit to make them compliant. If you feel a bus is faulty then report it via the TfL website and raise a complaint. It will be looked into.

London runs one of the greenest fleets in Europe with plans to have a completely emissions free fleet by around 2034.

What kit can bring a non euro 6 engine up to euro 6 standard?

[valiant]

and31 said:

What kit can bring a non euro 6 engine up to euro 6 standard?

Kit was the wrong word. They’ve changed the engines.

https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2...

[Countdown]

Gecko1978 said:

Khan got 40 some % of the vote. So combined the rest of the votes which a posed him was greater. Where it's 1 role perhaps a run off would be better but is what it is. People who use tube etc likely don't care about ULEZ and that's many in London.

Didn't the Tories scrap the preference voting system precisely because it would benefit Labour more than other parties?

[Randy Winkman]

and31 said:

Randy Winkman said:

Cheers. I've not got any science because I've not claimed anything. But I do know that aerodynamic drag is a big deal, especially for flat fronted trucks. If my car's about to run out of fuel I'm not sure I should drive faster to get the the petrol station quicker.

If your car was about to run out of fuel, you’d surely not drive at 20 mph in a low gear? Didn’t think so…

I'd be amazed if my Vectra used much fuel at all at 20mph if I just used my common sense and put it in the gear that seemed be stressing the engine the least. I'd guess 3rd would be about 1500rpm. But that is a guess. I'm not sure I could use much less fuel than that and while the car is moving so I'm not sure I'd chose to go any faster. Happy to hear to the contrary from a technical expert though. And of course, it was a statement about trucks that I questioned in the first place.

[funinhounslow]

and31 said:

Something to do with the cyclists going down the Nearside of a lorry despite it indicating left perhaps?
you’d be amazed at how often these clueless cyclists do this-headphones on as well.I absolutely hate central London
Cambridge is even worse.
It’s amazing the amount of people that insist on cycling in the road despite a cycle lane being available too .

So you agree there’s an issue with (inexperienced) cyclists putting themselves in harm’s way around HGVs but object to in the installation of technology to help drivers spot them?

And if cyclists ignore a bike lane there’s usually a pretty good reason…

[and31]

funinhounslow said:

and31 said:

Something to do with the cyclists going down the Nearside of a lorry despite it indicating left perhaps?
you’d be amazed at how often these clueless cyclists do this-headphones on as well.I absolutely hate central London
Cambridge is even worse.
It’s amazing the amount of people that insist on cycling in the road despite a cycle lane being available too .

So you agree there’s an issue with (inexperienced) cyclists putting themselves in harm’s way around HGVs but object to in the installation of technology to help drivers spot them?

And if cyclists ignore a bike lane there’s usually a pretty good reason…

Like I said-I find the cameras very very distracting.
But what would I know.
The technology already exists-mirrors
Someone that doesn’t look in their mirrors isn’t looking at their camera either

[and31]

Randy Winkman said:

I'd be amazed if my Vectra used much fuel at all at 20mph if I just used my common sense and put it in the gear that seemed be stressing the engine the least. I'd guess 3rd would be about 1500rpm. But that is a guess. I'm not sure I could use much less fuel than that and while the car is moving so I'm not sure I'd chose to go any faster. Happy to hear to the contrary from a technical expert though. And of course, it was a statement about trucks that I questioned in the first place.

I can assure you my lorry uses more fuel at 20mph than it does at 30.

[z4RRSchris]

could just ban lorry’s from central london and use last mile logistics, vans, bikes, scooters etc,