ULEZ London 2021

[Zitouns]

Any views on this from PH's with the older cars?

[uzziwozzi]

I'm new to PH but I'm really vexed with this.

Bought a BMW X5 two years ago and its old enough for it to have the ULEZ charge.

It would mean I would need to pay to get to Walthamstow FFS.

I understand central London.

Will look at buying a cheapo petrol/hybrid car for those drives into London and my husband can drive that (uber delivery etc.) and I'll use my X5 to venture to my folks across the M25.

I think a LOT of people won't be prepared and will need to exchange, buy or sell their cars.

In the grand scheme of things I know that we have to be careful with the environment - the science doesn't lie now does it.

[AC43]

Zitouns said:

Any views on this from PH's with the older cars?

It's annoying for quite a few of my mates with older interesting cars that don't hit the1981 (or is it 1982?) cutoff. Basically, you'll be able to run anything that's 40+ years old on the date it's introduced. But I can only think of four of them - a 911, a TR6 a DS and an SM.

The ones affected are roughly between, say, 1982 and around 2004 when Euro IV kicked in.

I guess the more loaded ones will just take a hit when it happens, others will sell them to people not affected.

It's a shame because there have always been lots interesting older cars in London.

But if it's the price to pay to get rid of thousands and thousands of God-awful diesels then so be it.

EDIT; actually PH should do an issue on the interesting cars that will be able to run that are either less than 20 years old or more than 40 when (if?) it happens. For example, you can have stuff from the 70's as above OR an SL55k, 997, AM V8, XKR, etc etc etc.

Edited by AC43 on Saturday 16th November 14:49

[selondonman]

extension of ulez is a complete con

normal families driving normal diesels with low road tax

[llanero1969]

selondonman said:

extension of ulez is a complete con

normal families driving normal diesels with low road tax

1) ULEZ is completely redundant in its current coverage, hence it is a con by definition. Normal people can't/won't even dream of queuing up for 2 hours to get from Limehouse to Paddington, for argument's sake.
ULEZ will hit the highly polluting offenders such as taxis, buses, HGV and even goods vehicles up to 3.5 tons. ULEZ should not be an option whereby the costs of non-compliance are transferred to customers.

2) The extension of ULEZ is sort of a con behind a very well spirited principle. The issue is not ULEZ in itself, is how you phase out polluting cars (just simply by making people pay the issue doesn't go away)

[cedrichn]

I am glad I came here: i didn't know about the extension ! I live in Zone 2 and drive 90miles round trip to go to work, so pretty well impacted....I drive today a Lexus hybrid (CT200h), and I was looking for a saloon: 2000-ish diesel was target. I guess the list has to change now...

I am not really for the extension, as it impacts me... I never drive in Zone 1 on weekdays, so don't care about the CC. My two current cars (the Lexus and a cheap 40+years old classic) qualify for the ULEZ, so I can still drive in Zone 1 (or cross should I say - as traffic is often so bad). But maybe I am just selfish, and should accept the extension ?

For sure, it will be interesting to see what's going to happen: they are so many non-ULEZ compliant diesel cars inside the future zone !

[putonghua73]

llanero1969 said:

selondonman said:

extension of ulez is a complete con

normal families driving normal diesels with low road tax

2) The extension of ULEZ is sort of a con behind a very well spirited principle. The issue is not ULEZ in itself, is how you phase out polluting cars (just simply by making people pay the issue doesn't go away)

This. I absolutely agree with the principle - the problem is, as with the Govt's announcement to bring forward plans to phase out petrol, diesel and hybrids by 2035, is the lack of any sort of plan in terms of energy requirements, infrastructure, phasing out and removal of polluting vehicles. I am already concerned that HS2 has doubled in budget to over £100bn and yet the Govt is likely to still press ahead, despite some of the benefits being dubious.

The Govt (all persuasions) does not have good form with the law of unintended consequences: Gordon Brown introducing tax incentives (lower VED) for diesel to incentivise people to drive vehicles with lower CO2 emissions, despite diesels not being appropriate for inner-city, small trips - which exacerbated air pollution with nitrogen oxides and particulates.

The writing for diesel was on the wall a couple of years ago, as my garage warned me start of 2016 that if I was planning to sell, I ought to do it soon because they received a heads up of the tougher testing regime and saw the direction of travel. I believe that Bristol and Oxford have completely banned all diesel; and that Luton is drawing up plans to restrict / ban diesels.

Aspirations are all well and good, but require solid, joined-up planning and thinking - especially for ones which are as ambitious and far-reaching. As I have said, Govts of all persuasions do not have a good track record with complex projects.

[Spy]

Those of you opposed to the ULEZ extension, please sign this petition: https://www.change.org/p/sadiq-khan-stop-mayor-kha...

[s4rpf]

Just signed this realised that I will be about 0.3 miles within the ULEZ zone. So will have to go through all the side residential streets to not get charged on the odd occasion I use the car.
I’m normally cycling on roads which are just plain dangerous with the size of pot holes currently in them.

[RiccardoG]

Spy said:

Those of you opposed to the ULEZ extension, please sign this petition: https://www.change.org/p/sadiq-khan-stop-mayor-kha...

Thanks for highlighting it, signed. Spread the word!!