ULEZ charge in 2021
Discussion
Graveworm said:
Still nothing from the mayor as to how many fewer people will die or not get ill so we can compare it to other heath interventions on a cost benefit basis.
'Other health interventions' - like what? The ship has sailed. Too late. ULEZ isn't going anywhere and you (and many others) are ignoring the future use of the infrastructure.braddo said:
Graveworm said:
Still nothing from the mayor as to how many fewer people will die or not get ill so we can compare it to other heath interventions on a cost benefit basis.
'Other health interventions' - like what? The ship has sailed. Too late. ULEZ isn't going anywhere and you (and many others) are ignoring the future use of the infrastructure.
k.braddo said:
'Other health interventions' - like what? The ship has sailed. Too late. ULEZ isn't going anywhere and you (and many others) are ignoring the future use of the infrastructure.
More healthcare staff, social care, school sports, dietary support, etc. Edited by Graveworm on Wednesday 5th April 16:36
Fastdruid said:
You seem to be in the mindset of "any method must reduce all NOx massively if not to zero immediately otherwise it's pointless". ULEZ is a method of influencing long term decisions while also nicely paying its way.
ULEZ is a way for Khan to milk cash from people whilst introducing road charging infrastructure by the back door - absolutely nothing more. NOx from vehicle traffic will continue to decrease whatever stupid scheme is implemented.
NomduJour said:
Fastdruid said:
You seem to be in the mindset of "any method must reduce all NOx massively if not to zero immediately otherwise it's pointless". ULEZ is a method of influencing long term decisions while also nicely paying its way.
ULEZ is a way for Khan to milk cash from people whilst introducing road charging infrastructure by the back door - absolutely nothing more. NOx from vehicle traffic will continue to decrease whatever stupid scheme is implemented.
NomduJour said:
Fastdruid said:
You seem to be in the mindset of "any method must reduce all NOx massively if not to zero immediately otherwise it's pointless". ULEZ is a method of influencing long term decisions while also nicely paying its way.
ULEZ is a way for Khan to milk cash from people whilst introducing road charging infrastructure by the back door - absolutely nothing more. NOx from vehicle traffic will continue to decrease whatever stupid scheme is implemented.
I suspect that may put the nail in the coffin of the argument that the ULEZ zones have any noticeable impact on air quality.
NomduJour said:
ULEZ is a way for Khan to milk cash from people whilst introducing road charging infrastructure by the back door - absolutely nothing more.
NOx from vehicle traffic will continue to decrease whatever stupid scheme is implemented.
Hopefully the next mayor rights this wrong and backtracks from ULEZ and road charging. When are the next mayoral elections ?NOx from vehicle traffic will continue to decrease whatever stupid scheme is implemented.
Graveworm said:
braddo said:
'Other health interventions' - like what? The ship has sailed. Too late. ULEZ isn't going anywhere and you (and many others) are ignoring the future use of the infrastructure.
More healthcare staff, social care, school sports, dietary support, etc. Edited by Graveworm on Wednesday 5th April 16:36
Remember, the UK's cities are mandated by the UK Government to take measures to improve air quality, under threat of large fines. Ultimately the ULEZ et al (and future road charging) are being driven by the national government.
Road charging is not a mayoral initiative or a Labour one.
Tory ministers calling for road charging to fill the fiscal hole from fuel duty:
https://www.suttoninsight.com/all-articles/conserv...
braddo said:
Graveworm said:
braddo said:
'Other health interventions' - like what? The ship has sailed. Too late. ULEZ isn't going anywhere and you (and many others) are ignoring the future use of the infrastructure.
More healthcare staff, social care, school sports, dietary support, etc. Edited by Graveworm on Wednesday 5th April 16:36
Remember, the UK's cities are mandated by the UK Government to take measures to improve air quality, under threat of large fines. Ultimately the ULEZ et al (and future road charging) are being driven by the national government.
Road charging is not a mayoral initiative or a Labour one.
Tory ministers calling for road charging to fill the fiscal hole from fuel duty:
https://www.suttoninsight.com/all-articles/conserv...
If you have 250 million of other peoples money, to spend, you have a choice to spend it on addressing Nox from road transport - or you could spend it on health interventions or just not take it in the first place. It's only irrelevant, if you ignore that there could be better things to do with other peoples money.
Edited by Graveworm on Wednesday 5th April 21:23
Nox is a local air quality issue. Hence it being targeted in clean air zones in cities. A national chart is irrelevant.
And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
braddo said:
Nox is a local air quality issue. Hence it being targeted in clean air zones in cities. A national chart is irrelevant.
And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
Those dirty diesels would have vanished from the roads in any case. I believe the average car lasts 10 years in the UK?And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
The youngest "dirty diesel" is now 7 years old.
braddo said:
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
The difference will be tiny, if it’s even quantifiable and actually able be attributed to ULEZ. For over two hundred million quid. Edited by NomduJour on Wednesday 5th April 22:16
youngsyr said:
braddo said:
Nox is a local air quality issue. Hence it being targeted in clean air zones in cities. A national chart is irrelevant.
And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
Those dirty diesels would have vanished from the roads in any case. I believe the average car lasts 10 years in the UK?And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
The youngest "dirty diesel" is now 7 years old.
braddo said:
Nox is a local air quality issue. Hence it being targeted in clean air zones in cities. A national chart is irrelevant.
And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
That's PM 2.5 not Nox you brought up mandated targets from govt. PM 2.5 is the mandated target and that target is 35% not locally but nationally. Wherever you are less than half of PM 2.5 vehicle emissions comes from the engine. And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
Again you can't have it both ways if more PM2.5 in London comes from car exhausts then, given that the exhaust element from cars has fallen at a much faster rate, than other sources, then, in London, air quality will have already improved compared to the rest of the UK.
IF it's only a local issue then outer London is already much closer to meeting targets than central London so why the expansion?
In 2017 the contribution, in London, from exhausts to PM 2.5 was estimated by the GLA to be 13% their predictions were that it would fall to 2% by 2030 without extending ULEZ to outer London. From GLA figures we know they will decrease this by 2% so - without ULEZ expansion 2% with ULEZ expansion 1.96% .....
https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/pm2....
Edited by Graveworm on Thursday 6th April 00:14
C70R said:
bad company said:
He sounds sensible and balanced.“I live yards from the zone so will be done daily. Can't wait to see if I get a ticket lol.”
I'd love to hear his views on 5G.
braddo said:
Nox is a local air quality issue. Hence it being targeted in clean air zones in cities. A national chart is irrelevant.
And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
It doesn't "Pay for itself" it is funded by people paying - either through additional charges or direct taxes. And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
If they are going to take money off people, to spend on something, then it matters that it is spent where it will do the most good. If it's best spent on the gains from ULEZ, then great,; but I haven't seen any evidence that it is the best use of that kind of money, If they want to spend another 250 million a year on top of the 227 million they are already taking under ULEZ then, shouldn't they be able to show that?
Graveworm said:
braddo said:
Nox is a local air quality issue. Hence it being targeted in clean air zones in cities. A national chart is irrelevant.
And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
That's PM 2.5 not Nox you brought up mandated targets from govt. PM 2.5 is the mandated target and that target is 35% not locally but nationally. Wherever you are less than half of PM 2.5 vehicle emissions comes from the engine. And ulez infrastructure is also for road pricing in the future. It will pay for itself.
The people who live on busy roads in outer london are going to benefit from dirty diesels being priced off the road. Do you think that is a waste of money?
Again you can't have it both ways if more PM2.5 in London comes from car exhausts then, given that the exhaust element from cars has fallen at a much faster rate, than other sources, then, in London, air quality will have already improved compared to the rest of the UK.
IF it's only a local issue then outer London is already much closer to meeting targets than central London so why the expansion?
In 2017 the contribution, in London, from exhausts to PM 2.5 was estimated by the GLA to be 13% their predictions were that it would fall to 2% by 2030 without extending ULEZ to outer London. From GLA figures we know they will decrease this by 2% so - without ULEZ expansion 2% with ULEZ expansion 1.96% .....
https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/pm2....
https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/library/annualreport/v...
DEFRA said:
The UK’s National Emission Ceilings Regulations (NECR) 2018 (UK Government, 2018) sets emission reduction commitments (ERCs) for the total emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX), oxides of sulphur (SOX), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC), ammonia (NH3) and particulate matter as PM2.5 in 2020 and 2030
DEFRA said:
The revised Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) and National Emission Ceilings Regulations (NECR) requires the UK to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides by 55 per cent compared to emissions in 2005 by 2020 and in each subsequent year, up to and including 2029 (and by 73 per cent compared to emissions in 2005 by 2030).
DEFRA said:
The most immediate air quality challenge is tackling nitrogen dioxide concentrations. NO2 is associated with adverse effects on human health (COMEAP, 2015), (COMEAP, 2018). Estimating the long-term impacts of NO2 pollution is difficult, because of the challenge of separating its effects from those of other trafficrelated pollutants. Although it has been more difficult to estimate the level of impact, there is enough evidence of such health effects to support the need to take action now.
Now unless I've got my sums wrong, legally the UK has to reduce NOx down to <0.47 (million tons) from the current 0.67 Million tons by 2030. A reduction of roughly 1/3rd of the current amount. Fastdruid said:
Now unless I've got my sums wrong, legally the UK has to reduce NOx down to <0.47 (million tons) from the current 0.67 Million tons by 2030. A reduction of roughly 1/3rd of the current amount.
The comment was in relation to legally binding targets that central government were forcing on London. There are several but the only air quality one is PM 2.5. They have committed to reduce NOx nationally, but it's not a legally binding target and none have been mandated on London by them. despite the fact they have beat ERC targets. I don't know about your maths but they claim they don't have to cut any further to meet the 2029 NECR or CLRTap commitments.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
Edited by Graveworm on Thursday 6th April 01:19
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff