London ULEZ expansion is going ahead
Discussion
WorldBoss said:
By far the nastiest vehicles on the road in London when I lived there were TFL transport endorsed vehicles - Buses and truck engined black cabs.
All London buses are Euro6 compliant (except a very few exceptions like buses used for training, etc).Every new taxi bought and licensed by TfL must be zero emission capable and existing cabs are subject to a minimum age and *i think* must also be euro6.
valiant said:
Ivan stewart said:
Good luck if you want a tradesman a a sensible price..
You can hardly get a tradesman at a sensible price in London anyhow. Adding £12.50 per day to the quote if he doesn’t have a compliant van is hardly going to make much of a dent in the final bill.z4RRSchris said:
it’s a great step for air quality, and discouraging drivers from taking short journeys. we need more measures now, more cycle lanes, LTNs, parking more expensive, expand CC, road pricing etc.
It has nothing to do with air quality, its about money. Once this has been running for a few years they will go after the compliant cars to keep the revenue flowing.z4RRSchris said:
50% of households don’t have a car, of the cars on the road 85% won’t pay ULeZ.
it’s a great step for air quality, and discouraging drivers from taking short journeys. we need more measures now, more cycle lanes, LTNs, parking more expensive, expand CC, road pricing etc.
I get where you’re coming from about short,needless journeys when there is a good public transport network for people making local journeys but spare a thought for the people who have to drive up there for work, making driving up there an even more miserable experience than it already is will likely only result in an uptick in calls to the Samaritans it’s a great step for air quality, and discouraging drivers from taking short journeys. we need more measures now, more cycle lanes, LTNs, parking more expensive, expand CC, road pricing etc.
.On the ULEZ I’ve got mixed feelings about it, I am cynical about his reasoning and do think it’s more a cash grab than a genuine desire to improve air quality, but at the same time improving air quality is a good thing itself.
It’s a bit annoying for me as I’ve got a mk8 diesel Civic which I use to commute 30 miles each way to near Heathrow which is just inside the zone, it’s not worth much so I’m not too bothered and will replace with something complaint, I was thinking of a euro 6 A7 but haven’t had a bad year and am really thinking of saying f
k it and getting an S or RS7 instead.If ULEZ is about air quality, shouldn't vehicles that don't meet the required standard simply be banned from entered the zone as opposed to just being charged £12.50 ?
"Your car is contributing to poor air quality and making people ill. However, if you pay us £12.50, then that's okay".
"Your car is contributing to poor air quality and making people ill. However, if you pay us £12.50, then that's okay".
Cotty said:
z4RRSchris said:
it’s a great step for air quality, and discouraging drivers from taking short journeys. we need more measures now, more cycle lanes, LTNs, parking more expensive, expand CC, road pricing etc.
It has nothing to do with air quality, its about money. Once this has been running for a few years they will go after the compliant cars to keep the revenue flowing.No way will they have spent millions on a system, only for the revenue to decrease year-on-year, as it will (even if no one was bothered about the cost, natural wastage would reduce the number of chargeable cars every year).
They are bound to shift the goalposts at some point, and it will be cheap for them to do so as well.
Plymo said:
Cotty said:
z4RRSchris said:
it’s a great step for air quality, and discouraging drivers from taking short journeys. we need more measures now, more cycle lanes, LTNs, parking more expensive, expand CC, road pricing etc.
It has nothing to do with air quality, its about money. Once this has been running for a few years they will go after the compliant cars to keep the revenue flowing.No way will they have spent millions on a system, only for the revenue to decrease year-on-year, as it will (even if no one was bothered about the cost, natural wastage would reduce the number of chargeable cars every year).
They are bound to shift the goalposts at some point, and it will be cheap for them to do so as well.
The wealthy will just pay up or buy shinny new electric cars, they will continue to drive as public transport is beneath them.
Those with company cars, or company vans, will just continue to drive 'as it's free', companies will pass on the costs to customers, eventually consumers will pay, the poor will be affected the most.
Tradesman with older vehicles will just charge their customers more, the consumer will pay.
Those on low wages that need to drive will have to pay up, or give up.
Like the congestion charge, it is a tax on the poor.
snuffy said:
If ULEZ is about air quality, shouldn't vehicles that don't meet the required standard simply be banned from entered the zone as opposed to just being charged £12.50 ?
"Your car is contributing to poor air quality and making people ill. However, if you pay us £12.50, then that's okay".
+1. It would be better to charge a smaller amount e.g. £2.50 to encourage those (as they do with tolls) who can afford to upgrade their vehicle rather than effectively force them to ditch their relatively new vehicle. Very unjoined up eco-thinking. For example, Putney High St is now filled with expensive electric cars and Porsche SUVs instead of smaller but possibly efficient small cars. None of these measures discourages short journies - if anything it’s the opposite!"Your car is contributing to poor air quality and making people ill. However, if you pay us £12.50, then that's okay".
Edited by fido on Saturday 26th November 14:03
fido said:
snuffy said:
If ULEZ is about air quality, shouldn't vehicles that don't meet the required standard simply be banned from entered the zone as opposed to just being charged £12.50 ?
"Your car is contributing to poor air quality and making people ill. However, if you pay us £12.50, then that's okay".
+1. It would be better to charge a smaller amount e.g. £2.50 to encourage those (as they do with tolls) who can afford to upgrade their vehicle rather than effectively force them to ditch their relatively new vehicle. Very unjoined up eco-thinking. For example, Putney High St is now filled with expensive electric cars and Porsche SUVs instead of smaller but possibly efficient small cars. None of these measures discourages short journies - if anything it’s the opposite!"Your car is contributing to poor air quality and making people ill. However, if you pay us £12.50, then that's okay".
Edited by fido on Saturday 26th November 14:03
Whoever dreams these schemes up really has zero interest in improving health.
Why you'd encourage people to scrap perfectly serviceable older stuff that's generally lighter in weight and suggest they drive round in hybrid Cayennes and 2 tonne electric cars instead I have no idea. Want to improve air quality? Improve public transport, smooth out existing traffic flow instead of making it more difficult and inefficient to get from A to B, remove speed bumps and stop-start traffic calming, minimise temporary traffic lights and only then ban cars full stop in areas that still have problems.
eg : "Toxic particles from tyre wear almost 2,000 times worse than from exhausts as weight of cars increases"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/0...
I'm just inside the 580-odd square mile Greater Manchester Burnham's-wet-dream Zone that's now been converted to a "non-charging congestion zone" after the councils got cold feet after getting a shouting at from us lot. The definition of a non-charging congestion zone seems to be it's exactly the same road network as before, except there's some cameras, loads of signs, less trees, and 78 million quid less in the bank.
This change to "non-charging" has been explained away as being because vehicle owners existing movement towards Euro 6 through gradual aging and replacement of their cars/vans/fleets will mean we'll meet the standards anyway in a few years. Oh, and covid. And anything else they can think of. Nothing to do with labour councillors and losing votes. Oh no...
We now have a fully operational 78 million quid camera system that's not being used for anything whatsoever, and we're also signed up to multimillion pound system monitoring and maintenance contracts for the next few years. To avoid looking like complete morons they keep telling us the police can use the nice new cameras for crime fighting purposes although their positions mean they're useless for average speed enforcement.
London! Take note!
Just tell 'em it's for the planet and they'll believe any old s
t.Edited by andy43 on Saturday 26th November 16:04
snuffy said:
If ULEZ is about air quality, shouldn't vehicles that don't meet the required standard simply be banned from entered the zone as opposed to just being charged £12.50 ?
"Your car is contributing to poor air quality and making people ill. However, if you pay us £12.50, then that's okay".
I think it would be tough to say that non compliant cars can't enter the zone at all. There will be people who have no choice but to enter the zone, but just cannot, for whatever reason, change their car at the current time. I have no issue with the current system of using a charge to encourage people into cleaner vehicles. "Your car is contributing to poor air quality and making people ill. However, if you pay us £12.50, then that's okay".
Or perhaps some people who maybe have to enter the zone, but only occasionally. A couple of incursions into the zone a year isn't going to have an effect on air quality, and you aren't forcing them to change their car for no good reason. They can just pay the charge as and when.
In preparation for the Manchester zone some tradesmen have scrapped their Euro Zero vans (hurray) and bought petrol people carriers or estate cars instead (booo). My Hermes courier guy said he’d just get a £1500 Berlingo estate instead of his Berlingo van. No idea how that works but it’s not going to help emissions much.
Try and buy a Euro 6 transit - they’re crazy money. Try and sell a Euro 5 transit - it’s worth buttons. Nuts.
The people who cannot afford to upgrade AND cannot afford to pay AND have to enter the zone daily include health workers, social workers, carers, teachers, self employed one man band tradesmen and so on. The very people a city depends on to keep running.
London has great public transport apparently, but the further out you try and push a congestion zone the worse the potential effects on peoples livelihoods. This has been very noticeable in Manchester and is one of the main reasons the councils bottled it. Silly Saddiq.
Try and buy a Euro 6 transit - they’re crazy money. Try and sell a Euro 5 transit - it’s worth buttons. Nuts.
The people who cannot afford to upgrade AND cannot afford to pay AND have to enter the zone daily include health workers, social workers, carers, teachers, self employed one man band tradesmen and so on. The very people a city depends on to keep running.
London has great public transport apparently, but the further out you try and push a congestion zone the worse the potential effects on peoples livelihoods. This has been very noticeable in Manchester and is one of the main reasons the councils bottled it. Silly Saddiq.
The congestion charge shouldn't apply to people who already own a non complainant car, if you buy a car after the charging scheme comes in that is non complainant then yiu should pay
Doing business inside a low emission zone must also go up as the type of vehicle able to enter it is restricted.
Should large engine vehicles not also be charged, maybe a charge that is related to the cars value?
Doing business inside a low emission zone must also go up as the type of vehicle able to enter it is restricted.
Should large engine vehicles not also be charged, maybe a charge that is related to the cars value?
andy43 said:
In preparation for the Manchester zone some tradesmen have scrapped their Euro Zero vans (hurray) and bought petrol people carriers or estate cars instead (booo). My Hermes courier guy said he’d just get a £1500 Berlingo estate instead of his Berlingo van. No idea how that works but it’s not going to help emissions much.
Try and buy a Euro 6 transit - they’re crazy money. Try and sell a Euro 5 transit - it’s worth buttons. Nuts.
The people who cannot afford to upgrade AND cannot afford to pay AND have to enter the zone daily include health workers, social workers, carers, teachers, self employed one man band tradesmen and so on. The very people a city depends on to keep running.
London has great public transport apparently, but the further out you try and push a congestion zone the worse the potential effects on peoples livelihoods. This has been very noticeable in Manchester and is one of the main reasons the councils bottled it. Silly Saddiq.
Can they not be used for crime enforcement?Try and buy a Euro 6 transit - they’re crazy money. Try and sell a Euro 5 transit - it’s worth buttons. Nuts.
The people who cannot afford to upgrade AND cannot afford to pay AND have to enter the zone daily include health workers, social workers, carers, teachers, self employed one man band tradesmen and so on. The very people a city depends on to keep running.
London has great public transport apparently, but the further out you try and push a congestion zone the worse the potential effects on peoples livelihoods. This has been very noticeable in Manchester and is one of the main reasons the councils bottled it. Silly Saddiq.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I know it's a shock, a politician doing what he said he would do if he got voted in, but I don't see why he doesn't have the authority. What happened to all this Brexity "will of the people" stuff. It seems the right are up in arms over this, but they love all that "will of the people" shtick. I don't know what they are moaning about.
According to the thread in GG.article said:
when London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan, ran a public consultation about extending the ULEZ, the response was overwhelming. Overall, 60 per cent of people said they weren’t in favour of it, and 80 per cent of workers in Outer London said no. And yet it’s happening.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff