London Emmisions Surcharge - 'The Banger Tax'

[gavsdavs]

Yipper said:

Something def has to be done about London smog. It has gotten bad. Well over the half the city exceeds legal limits for nitrogen dioxide. Driving in from the Isle of Dogs toward London Bridge at the moment is like driving back into the 1950s (stock image below).

But the congestion charge is very unfair. Buses, trains and planes cause as much pollution as cars, bikes and trucks, but are being hit much less hard on tax (e.g. congestion charge going sky high). The war on the motorist is getting worse.

The image you have highlighted here (isle of dogs to london bridge) is largely OUTSIDE the CCZ - these are the roads I mentioned are most heavily congested with people skirting round the CCZ. They're also probably the most heavily trafficked with the cross rail building effort and the amount of building going on on the isle of dogs itself.

The CCZ is the only area they can effectively police/monitor at this point as there is sufficient camera coverage to do it. Trying to expand this to the North/South circular will require exponentially more cameras to monitor vehicle movement. I currently don't see that effort as realistic.

[corozin]

I neveer thought I would see this from a Labour Mayor.

MAYOR KHAN : "Hey you there, peasant poor person. You can't afford a new car so I'm going to tax the crap our of you"

Is that what Labour is doing to increase it's vote in London? He'll be bringing back workhouses next.

[danllama]

talksthetorque said:

What do you propose?
Do you live inside the North Circular but outside the Congestion Charging Zone?

I personally live a bit outside the North circular but within the M25.

The only way it can possibly be fair is if it does not affect residents living in the zone, and by that I mean they shouldn't have to pay it.

But I don't support it at all. It's using a sledge hammer to fix a crack. Turning out peoples pockets will not stop them owning older cars, they own old cars because they can't afford new ones. What it will do is cause more poverty in areas where money is already tight for families, and that in turn will mean less disposable income for the economy etc. It just doesn't make sense one bit.

The congestion zone boundary now is fine. Most people don't drive there unless absolutely necessary. But extending it to the primarily residential areas of Greater London is absolute bullst. It stinks of wanting to be seen to be doing 'something'!

Edited by danllama on Sunday 19th February 01:50

[Swanny87]

Some strange posts in this thread.

Driving into and in London is st anyway. Why would anybody in their right mind choose to do that? I should know, I used to live there.

PT isn't that expensive when you take into account parking fees etc...

[slk 32]

I work in central London and cycle across the city on a Boris bike every day from Vauxhall to Holborn

The number of private cars i see can be counted on one hand. It's all buses, black cabs, uber mini cabs and delivery vehicles.

The biggest cause of pollution are the buses. This surcharge is a mere figleaf allowing Khan to pretend he's doing something whilst ignoring the elephant in the room

[Slushbox]

Permanent taxation, instead of limiting older cars on bad-air days is going to adversely affect those with lower incomes. DEFRA themselves said that removing diesels from London would not greatly alter NOX levels, given that 51% of them came from other sources. and 'air quality is at the mercy of climate conditions.' Car-free Oxford Street is mostly a canyon filled with bus and taxi fumes. It will get better as buses and taxis move to hybrid.

Paris, Lille/Strasbourg etc have introduced the Crit'Air Vignette grading system, during 'episodes of pollution'; it would be interesting to hear how that is doing. One report suggests 'chaos' but, as we've seen from the Guardian, we can't always trust the Green Press.

I applied for my Crit'Air sticker a month ago but it hasn't arrived. Duh.

Crit'Air:

http://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/fleet-industry-new...

Edited by Slushbox on Sunday 19th February 08:37

[normalbloke]

You might want to take on board how much fuel is burnt per day from aircraft leaving the airports in the surrounding area. Especially Heathrow, given its location and where most of the weather prevails from. Jet fuel is also mostly untaxed. I know the one pipeline I was involved in that runs into Heathrow was capable of flowing 800,000 litres per hour. There are several,other pipelines into the airfield too.

[croyde]

languagetimothy said:

Apart from making deliveries etc., I don't know why people drive into London at all. I work in the city and live somewhere which has a very good mainline train service. My station provides many non stop trains which can take less than ten minutes to reach London Bridge on a good day. And they run late in evenings n weekends too.
Cost of fuel, and stress must all add up if driving, and I would think that drivers spend more time in a queue of traffic on London Bridge than my whole commute. If you live further out, drive near the station or move!
I wouldn't like the hassle ten times a week. And I don't live in a "posh" area.

Agree on the whole but then I had to be here in Stratford, East London for 6am this morning. Not possible on public transport and last night I finished work in Camden at 8pm and it took 2 hours to get home. Tube, 2 trains and then my car.

Normally do it in 75 mins in my car and don't have to sit with drunks

[myvision]

kiethton said:

A lot of the issue is also construction plant which don't have to meet any emissions regs and commercial generators

Walk past a cross rail building site and you'll see for yourself the door coming from the cranes/excavators etc

All the major projects I've worked on all the plant has had limits imposed on us by the client.
I'm not sure of what the limits are but I'll talk to the plant manager next week and find out.

[Tim bo]

Swanny87 said:

Some strange posts in this thread.

Driving into and in London is st anyway. Why would anybody in their right mind choose to do that?

Exactly.

I've lived in London for 25 years, and not once have I driven into the CCZ. Driving is for going out of the city. The trains and tubes are for going into the city.

[myvision]

Fordo said:

Apologies if theres a thread somewhere else - I couldn't find one with the search. Theres some good info on the upcoming banger tax in London:

http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2017/02/londons-10-banger...

And a link to where you can enquire if your vehicle meets the standards or not

In that article it says,

The T-Charge is a vital step in tackling the dirtiest diesels before I introduce the world’s first Ultra Low Emission Zone as early as 2019

I thought this was due in 2020?
Is he planning on fetching it in earlier?

[delta0]

myvision said:

In that article it says,

The T-Charge is a vital step in tackling the dirtiest diesels before I introduce the world’s first Ultra Low Emission Zone as early as 2019

I thought this was due in 2020?
Is he planning on fetching it in earlier?

He was proposing moving the inner London (North to South Circular) low emissions zone forward by a year when he first became mayor. Originally the proposal was going to be Euro 5 diesel and Euro 3 petrol and before that would pay the charge. Seems like this has gone back to Euro 3 for both.

[Evilex]

powerstroke said:

I call all the LEZ etc the st hole tax I'm glad my work no longer takes me into that place anymore ...

Absolutely this.
I hate London with a vengeance. Used to go there quite a bit. Lived there for a while, but now I rarely go inside the M25 unless driven by great need. Probably once a year. I'll even "miss out" on going to events or making major purchases if it means I can avoid going there.
This IS what they want, right?

[Walter Sobchak]

croyde said:

Up to a year ago, I had spent my 53 years as a Londoner living in London. I have to say that since the congestion zone started, I have always driven around the zone if I need to use a car. I have never gone into the zone unless outside the times it is in effect.

If I really needed my own transport to get into the centre, I used my Triumph Street Triple or lately my 2009 Vespa 300.

My worry is that it looks like Khan wants to increase the zone to within the North and South Circular and then on to the M25.

I doubt my Vespa is exempt and my 1998 owned from new BMW is certainly not exempt. Weirdly my 2016 Mustang 5.0 V8 might be OK.

What is this madness. How can forcing individuals and companies to change their vehicles be green.

I know fleet operators that have already spent huge amounts to change their vehicles only for the goal posts to keep changing.

In the late 80s the government persuaded the driving population to get into diesels, thankfully I didn't, and now they are punishing that same group of people.

I think he'd get away with the North and South circular but within the M25 surely would be a bit of a struggle for him to get through given that a lot of it falls in Kent,Essex,Surrey,Herts etc.
Personally I can't stand driving in London anyway, my main concern is wether this will affect the sale value of my car.

[delta0]

Walter Sobchak said:

I think he'd get away with the North and South circular but within the M25 surely would be a bit of a struggle for him to get through given that a lot of it falls in Kent,Essex,Surrey,Herts etc.

There already is an LEZ within the M25. It operates on commercial vehicles at the moment. I expect this will become part of a larger ULEZ if that were to happen. http://www.fta.co.uk/policy_and_compliance/road/ur...

[DonkeyApple]

MarshPhantom said:

It's not that bad, like most Londoners I'm pretty much unaffected by the congestion zone during the week.

Exactly. It only impacts on those that don't live here and out of those it's the ones adding the most to the air problem. All those traffic jams in central London aren't caused by people who live in central London.

[jmflare]

*communism intensifies*

Not really bothered as central london seemed a bit overrated and lifeless last time i visited. My issue is if anywhere else tries to follow in Khans footsteps.

The Tube is brilliant though, so i'd be using that anyway.

Edited by jmflare on Sunday 19th February 11:04

[Engineer792]

Swanny87 said:

Some strange posts in this thread.

Driving into and in London is st anyway. Why would anybody in their right mind choose to do that? I should know, I used to live there.

PT isn't that expensive when you take into account parking fees etc...

Then again, if a small fraction of drivers have reason to drive into the city a small fraction of the time, it still amounts to an awful lot of traffic

[nipsips]

I only ever drive in as far as Newbury Park or Stratford to park then tube in.

However not sure how they expect people to use public transport from my area when the great eastern mainline is out of service most weekends with replacement buses in from Witham.

Time and cost is against you. From Ipswich its £40 return on the train. £15 in diesel return for 5 to Newbury Park then tubes - which you'd have to top oysters up to use even if you went into Liverpool Street.

When public transport can either be cheaper or quicker at weekends I'd use it.

Till then I'd stick with me car and tube in from the outskirts and avoid the CCZ completely.

[Walter Sobchak]

delta0 said:

There already is an LEZ within the M25. It operates on commercial vehicles at the moment. I expect this will become part of a larger ULEZ if that were to happen. http://www.fta.co.uk/policy_and_compliance/road/ur...

Yeah I'm familiar with the commercial vehicle LEZ, I'd wonder though how Kahn would be able to justify increasing it that far when there is a fair amount of within the M25 which isn't London, and doesn't have the right to vote for the Mayor, plus air quality and congestion isn't as much of an issue in these areas.
I'd honestly be surprised if he could get it further than the North and South circulars without strong opposition.