Green light for ULEZ expansion
From August 2023 it'll cost you £12.50 to drive into Greater London in a non-compliant car...
The expanded ULEZ zone is coming. From August 29th next year the ULEZ will extend out to the Greater London Authority boundary, which, if you don’t live in or near London, falls within the M25. So cross that threshold at any time of the day or night and you’ll have to pay £12.50 if your vehicle isn’t a Euro 4 petrol or Euro 6 diesel. Those are the facts, but how do we feel about it? Arguments around the ULEZ have raged on both sides, but those against are hard to win because they go something like this:
"Do you want children to die?"
"Definitely not."
“Do you want children to be able to breathe cleaner air?”
“Oh yes.”
“Will the ULEZ help children breathe cleaner air?”
“I guess so.”
“Then are you in favour of widening the ULEZ zone?”
“Err, yes?”
Yet 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.
I’m not actually against the ULEZ in principle. If it’s shown to work it makes sense, and there is data that indicates it’s doing something. One report in 2020 estimated that the ULEZ had reduced NOx emissions in the capital by 35 per cent. The trouble is that word ‘estimated’ and the fact the report was from Mayor of London’s website. Which is rather like marking your own homework.
Another report, produced by Imperial College, looked at London’s air pollution before and just after the rollout of the initial central London ULEZ in 2019. The average reduction of nitrogen dioxide concentrations was less than three per cent, and the effects on ozone and particulate matter (PM2.5) were ‘insignificant’. While air quality had improved, the report found that most of the improvement had actually occurred prior to the ULEZ being introduced.
As always, it’s easy to find one report that claims something’s great and another that says the opposite. But what really irks me is the idea of having a public consultation, to ask people what they think, then ignoring it. Public consultations cost the public money, so if there was never any intention to abide by it, why waste the money? And I know it wasn’t people voting in a referendum, but it all strikes me as rather undemocratic.
It's also an odd time to introduce this, in the midst of a very real cost of living crisis. Mayor Khan explained this had been a "key consideration" and it had "not been an easy decision" but added that "in the end, public health comes before political expediency".
There are some positives. There will be a £110m increase in the scrappage scheme fund; those who scrap polluting cars will be offered travel cards; and there will improvements to Greater London’s public transport network, which, it is accepted, isn't as prolific as it is in central London. According to the Mayor’s office, there will also be a grace period until 2027 for disabled drivers with non-compliant cars.
I hope the extended ULEZ does save lives, because then it is completely justified in my opinion. If not, it's a lot of unnecessary financial pain for an awful lot of people.
Easily approved when you can sell the Green credential card.
Most people living in the proposed areas will be fine.
Disproportionately effects those who typically buy sub 10k cars.
If everyone could afford a new car, theyd have one. So, as usual lets charge those who cant afford a newer car more money.
Very much doubt anyone on the breadline is running a pre-2000 petrol car as the maintenance would be horrific, much more likely they're in a 2002 fiesta or whatever.
I was toying with the idea of a manual Maserati 4200 but it looks like it's not ULEZ which is a bit of a shame but I guess I'll just need to stick to the 996.
Very much doubt anyone on the breadline is running a pre-2000 petrol car as the maintenance would be horrific, much more likely they're in a 2002 fiesta or whatever.
I was toying with the idea of a manual Maserati 4200 but it looks like it's not ULEZ which is a bit of a shame but I guess I'll just need to stick to the 996.
The NOx figure is that which determines whether your car is ULEZ compliant or not.
Why then won't Sadiq place a daily £12.50 charge for the use of your heating ?
(Could it be that it wouldn't be a very popular move ?)
[Domestic Boiler Emission Testing
Greater London Authority
Project reference: 60566063
Report reference: 60566063_1
November 2018]
"....estimates that the expansion of ULEZ would generate an average of an additional 36,600 tonnes of scrappage waste per annum in the first few years after implementation. It could also result in an increase in fly tipping or illegal waste operations...
It was no surprise that he would completely ignore the public likely to be affected and steam rollered it through anyway.
The letter starts off ....."....the mayor's decision was informed by the consultation process blah blah blah".
Oh really , seems contrary to what is being reported by the BBC as 80% of people in the affected area were in opposition.
So the question is . How do we get this decision reversed ?
Also posted on the main ULEZ thread
I'll probably just suck it up and pay the charge when I have to drive.
I'd catch the train but peak Croydon / London tickets are an absolute rip-off.
Fuel injection and has cats.
It gets taken to handful of shows per year.
£12.50 a pop is annoying when I do <500 miles per year in it.
It is going up for sale, to be replaced by a 40 year old carb fed classic
which will belch out 10 times the CO and I will do more miles in as it's ULEZ exempt.
Go figure.
Very much doubt anyone on the breadline is running a pre-2000 petrol car as the maintenance would be horrific, much more likely they're in a 2002 fiesta or whatever.
I was toying with the idea of a manual Maserati 4200 but it looks like it's not ULEZ which is a bit of a shame but I guess I'll just need to stick to the 996.
1.) "...4.3.1. We received five petitions during the consultation period. Each of the five petitions were opposed to the proposed expansion of ULEZ. None of the petitions referenced the Proposed MTS Revision and therefore have not been included in this report.
Some of these petitions had as many as 100,000 signatures against.
2.) Page 105 of the report shows that 1149 private individuals who took part were for the MTS / ULEZ expansion, while 4600 were against.
My Ferrari 360 on the other hand has better emissions and I'll need to pay for that.
Forums | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff