Pay to ride into central London

[srob]

I can completely understand it. I mean they clearly want the cleaner, more efficient and more eco-friendly historics in the City centre

[LoonR1]

srob said:

I can completely understand it. I mean they clearly want the cleaner, more efficient and more eco-friendly historics in the City centre

On the face of that it makes no sense, but how many of those bikes still exist and how many would be ridden daily I to the City?

[black-k1]

Pothole said:

Fleegle said:

Pothole said:

black-k1 said:

LoonR1 said:

black-k1 said:

For me, , I object to this as it's simply tokenism. It's a tiny revenue stream but may have a big impact on individuals. The impact on air quality will be insignificant, especially while the bus and taxi issues are not addressed, and pushing the possible scrapping ahead of "natural life end" is counter productive on the wider green agenda. Juat letting time take care of the removal of older bikes would be a much better approach.

Good point, they aren't dealing withy he taxi or bus side of things at all. Oh hang on .......

Looking at the air pollution caused by older bikes compared to busses and taxis, they are not addressing the issue but are merely implementing a token gesture. Of course, if you know otherwise then feel free to enlighten us!

TfL Buses

As part of the ULEZ, we are taking extra steps to reduce emissions from our buses and to increase the number of zero emission capable vehicles.

[b]By 2020, all double deck TfL buses operating in central London will be hybrid and all single deck buses will be zero emission (at point of use). This means a substantial number of double deck buses operating in inner London will be hybrid, as will many in outer London
We will progressively increase the number of these buses. From 2020 only buses of this type will be allowed to operate on routes in the ULEZ[/b]

Tokenism at its most rampant, I agree!

Tokenism refers to bikes older than 2007

Not in the post I quoted it doesn't.

I give up, campaign to scrap the whole idea because you stand to be affected negatively if it floats your boat, you grumpy old git! I'll happily waltz into the zone on my post 07, fuel injected, super efficient, British built bolide smiling at you as I see you fumbling for phone and credit card...

All references to tokenism in my posts so far in this thread refers to the restrictions on pre 2007 motorcycles. The restriction will have very little impact on air quality and cost more to police than any financial reward that may come from it.

We'll see how the busses and taxis go. Plans are one thing, implementation is something else.

[srob]

LoonR1 said:

On the face of that it makes no sense, but how many of those bikes still exist and how many would be ridden daily I to the City?

I was only joking

I'm sure there's a few 'historics' being used in the City, and I wouldn't be surprised if there becomes a few more once this is enforced. Some are pretty usable!

[LoonR1]

srob said:

I was only joking

I'm sure there's a few 'historics' being used in the City, and I wouldn't be surprised if there becomes a few more once this is enforced. Some are pretty usable!

I know. I really should learn to use the smileys better.

[CC07 PEU]

This is the biggest load of fking ste ever. The reason I took up motorcycling was for a fast, cheap, fun way of getting around London. The new rules mean both of my bikes will be fking useless for this in five years time and those five years will pass incredibly quickly. It's not that I can't afford a newer bike either, I love the value for money old bikes offer and if they're well maintained they will last for years. Next thing will be the congestion charge for motorbikes or something equally ridiculous like asking cyclists to pay an emissions charge because they exhale more CO2 in the process of cycling into work... Bullst.

[RumpleFugly]

For me, this is the prescient point, not everyone who works is London is well off and I feel sorry for people who will be put in this position.

Article said:

If, however, you are employed to clean that hedge fund’s offices and you ride a 2002 scooter because it costs £10 a week in petrol rather than £6 a journey on the Tube all the way in (and it will be a long way in, because you obviously can’t afford to rent or buy in the city itself any more), then you’re screwed.

http://www.superbike.co.uk/blogs/own-a-pre-2007-sp...

[Willy Nilly]

CC07 PEU said:

This is the biggest load of fking ste ever. The reason I took up motorcycling was for a fast, cheap, fun way of getting around London. The new rules mean both of my bikes will be fking useless for this in five years time and those five years will pass incredibly quickly. It's not that I can't afford a newer bike either, I love the value for money old bikes offer and if they're well maintained they will last for years. Next thing will be the congestion charge for motorbikes or something equally ridiculous like asking cyclists to pay an emissions charge because they exhale more CO2 in the process of cycling into work... Bullst.

Quite moaning.

If I have understood this http://transportpolicy.net/index.php?title=EU:_Mot... correctly, bikes are still only at Euro 3 and Euro 4 doesn't even come into effect for existing (new) bikes until 2018. The emission regulations are stricter than that for off road vehicles, which means my tractors exhaust is cleaner than my bikes.

[Fleegle]

It seems to me that those who are defending this charge are those that it doesn't immediately affect. This is just an introduction, the thin of the wedge.

How long before it comes to a City/Town near you?

[LoonR1]

Fleegle said:

It seems to me that those who are defending this charge are those that it doesn't immediately affect. This is just an introduction, the thin of the wedge.

How long before it comes to a City/Town near you?

Never. They tried to introduce the Congestion Charge into Manchester a few years ago. It didn't make it past the referendum or basic planning stage. You've had the congestion charge for over a decade and nobody else has implemented it since, ditto the Low Emissison Zone.

[black-k1]

LoonR1 said:

Fleegle said:

It seems to me that those who are defending this charge are those that it doesn't immediately affect. This is just an introduction, the thin of the wedge.

How long before it comes to a City/Town near you?

Never. They tried to introduce the Congestion Charge into Manchester a few years ago. It didn't make it past the referendum or basic planning stage. You've had the congestion charge for over a decade and nobody else has implemented it since, ditto the Low Emissison Zone.

With the local authority becoming responsible for the NHS in Manchester, I can see pollution charges being introduced very soon on health grounds. Actually it'll just be a way of getting more money into a failing health care system.

[Pothole]

black-k1 said:

Pothole said:

Fleegle said:

Pothole said:

black-k1 said:

LoonR1 said:

black-k1 said:

For me, , I object to this as it's simply tokenism. It's a tiny revenue stream but may have a big impact on individuals. The impact on air quality will be insignificant, especially while the bus and taxi issues are not addressed, and pushing the possible scrapping ahead of "natural life end" is counter productive on the wider green agenda. Juat letting time take care of the removal of older bikes would be a much better approach.

Good point, they aren't dealing withy he taxi or bus side of things at all. Oh hang on .......

Looking at the air pollution caused by older bikes compared to busses and taxis, they are not addressing the issue but are merely implementing a token gesture. Of course, if you know otherwise then feel free to enlighten us!

TfL Buses

As part of the ULEZ, we are taking extra steps to reduce emissions from our buses and to increase the number of zero emission capable vehicles.

[b]By 2020, all double deck TfL buses operating in central London will be hybrid and all single deck buses will be zero emission (at point of use). This means a substantial number of double deck buses operating in inner London will be hybrid, as will many in outer London
We will progressively increase the number of these buses. From 2020 only buses of this type will be allowed to operate on routes in the ULEZ[/b]

Tokenism at its most rampant, I agree!

Tokenism refers to bikes older than 2007

Not in the post I quoted it doesn't.

I give up, campaign to scrap the whole idea because you stand to be affected negatively if it floats your boat, you grumpy old git! I'll happily waltz into the zone on my post 07, fuel injected, super efficient, British built bolide smiling at you as I see you fumbling for phone and credit card...

All references to tokenism in my posts so far in this thread refers to the restrictions on pre 2007 motorcycles. The restriction will have very little impact on air quality and cost more to police than any financial reward that may come from it.

We'll see how the busses and taxis go. Plans are one thing, implementation is something else.

you've got a cost breakdown now, have you?

[LoonR1]

black-k1 said:

With the local authority becoming responsible for the NHS in Manchester, I can see pollution charges being introduced very soon on health grounds. Actually it'll just be a way of getting more money into a failing health care system.

It's two years old, but the last paragraph says it all.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greate...

[Fleegle]

LoonR1 said:

black-k1 said:

With the local authority becoming responsible for the NHS in Manchester, I can see pollution charges being introduced very soon on health grounds. Actually it'll just be a way of getting more money into a failing health care system.

It's two years old, but the last paragraph says it all.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greate...

Congestion charge and LEZ are 2 different things

[LoonR1]

Fleegle said:

Congestion charge and LEZ are 2 different things

True, but they seem to come hand in hand. Fact is that there is no appetite for either from the public and little chance of them implementing it. Not least as there isn't one council covering the whole of Manchester.

[black-k1]

Pothole said:

you've got a cost breakdown now, have you?

No, but it would have to be very very cheap to be less than the likely income from the very few bikes that will be paying either through charge or through "fine".

[Pothole]

black-k1 said:

Pothole said:

you've got a cost breakdown now, have you?

No, but it would have to be very very cheap to be less than the likely income from the very few bikes that will be paying either through charge or through "fine".

It's mostly automated, isn't it? The costs arise when people don't pay or want to dispute it. I suspect the fines are set at a level to pay for the admin.