ULEZ charge in 2021
Discussion
No surprise on a car forum to see people pretending their cars don’t throw out endless poisonous gases 
In Germany anything older than euro4 has been banned from most cities for years and now it’s changing to euro6.
That’s Banned, not just a free market-style tax so that all the rich people can continue to drive around in whatever they want.
Visits back to London are a reminder of how numbed to the effects of diesel fume inhalation most of its residents must be - it stinks.
In Germany anything older than euro4 has been banned from most cities for years and now it’s changing to euro6.
That’s Banned, not just a free market-style tax so that all the rich people can continue to drive around in whatever they want.
Visits back to London are a reminder of how numbed to the effects of diesel fume inhalation most of its residents must be - it stinks.
dan98 said:
No surprise on a car forum to see people pretending their cars don’t throw out endless poisonous gases
In Germany anything older than euro4 has been banned from most cities for years and now it’s changing to euro6.
That’s Banned, not just a free market-style tax so that all the rich people can continue to drive around in whatever they want.
Visits back to London are a reminder of how numbed to the effects of diesel fume inhalation most of its residents must be - it stinks.
Do you have a source for that statement re. German cities, I thought it was specifically old dagdags in Hamburg and Stuttgart?In Germany anything older than euro4 has been banned from most cities for years and now it’s changing to euro6.
That’s Banned, not just a free market-style tax so that all the rich people can continue to drive around in whatever they want.
Visits back to London are a reminder of how numbed to the effects of diesel fume inhalation most of its residents must be - it stinks.
dan98 said:
No surprise on a car forum to see people pretending their cars don’t throw out endless poisonous gases
In Germany anything older than euro4 has been banned from most cities for years and now it’s changing to euro6.
That’s Banned, not just a free market-style tax so that all the rich people can continue to drive around in whatever they want.
Visits back to London are a reminder of how numbed to the effects of diesel fume inhalation most of its residents must be - it stinks.
How do ordinary working class people afford to keep up with new regs. in Germany ?In Germany anything older than euro4 has been banned from most cities for years and now it’s changing to euro6.
That’s Banned, not just a free market-style tax so that all the rich people can continue to drive around in whatever they want.
Visits back to London are a reminder of how numbed to the effects of diesel fume inhalation most of its residents must be - it stinks.
dan98 said:
No surprise on a car forum to see people pretending their cars don’t throw out endless poisonous gases
.
So what would you choose to believe then? The rhetoric or the governments own facts and figures? .
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
Just look at the graphs, the air is hugely cleaner than it was in 1970 or 1990. On another link which I can't find just right now, apparently particulate emissions and nitrogen oxide are down by 60+ and 70+% since 1990.
And, some more info coincidentally today about the 'perils' of cycling in todays killer air https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/1...
which yet again supports the overwhelming view that its the air inside that we should worry about, where we spend 90% of our time, rather than the air outdoors.
Also: Consider a dutch child born in say, 1965, and began cycling to school in about 1970. Whilst very young cycled past millions of cars running on leaded petrol and which required choking to start and run cold, and then through the early days of diesel. According to our rhetoric they should be dead now, but instead they're possibly the healthiest group of 50 yr-olds on the planet.
‘Study shows people in cars and buses spend longer in toxic air, as do walkers on main roads‘
It’s a time based study.
I don’t get why you are taking this stance to be honest. Studies show that cyclists inhale more PM2.5 particulates and deeper into their lungs because of their higher heart rate and that just like the jogger researchbof the 70s the real damage is done because during these periods of higher heart rate the body opens up the alveoli to get more oxygen in so the human body takes in more damaging particulates into the most dangerous part of the body.
I also don’t get why you don’t see that a fall in overall particulates is not necessarily pertinent as it is the size, shape, surface area and chemicals on the surface that are relevant in terms of long term human health.
Like trying to use longevity stats while ignoring the dominant drivers of regional differences.
It’s a time based study.
I don’t get why you are taking this stance to be honest. Studies show that cyclists inhale more PM2.5 particulates and deeper into their lungs because of their higher heart rate and that just like the jogger researchbof the 70s the real damage is done because during these periods of higher heart rate the body opens up the alveoli to get more oxygen in so the human body takes in more damaging particulates into the most dangerous part of the body.
I also don’t get why you don’t see that a fall in overall particulates is not necessarily pertinent as it is the size, shape, surface area and chemicals on the surface that are relevant in terms of long term human health.
Like trying to use longevity stats while ignoring the dominant drivers of regional differences.
If you don’t like longevity stats, how about diagnosis rates of lung diseases such as COPD and Lung Cancer? You’d expect the diesel based cesspit that is London to be off the scale for lung disease (after all 5000 Londoners are being killed by diesel a year ... allegedly). Strangely, London is middle to bottom of the pack for all major lung diseases. Stats are all on the BLF website.
It would be interesting to know what these thousands of people are dying of, if not lung disease.
I’ve lived in London for decades, the air is cleaner that it ever has been in my lifetime. Cycling in the 80s involved coughing up crud after every ride through town.
It would be interesting to know what these thousands of people are dying of, if not lung disease.
I’ve lived in London for decades, the air is cleaner that it ever has been in my lifetime. Cycling in the 80s involved coughing up crud after every ride through town.
It’s another age statistic isn’t it. And on top of that one that is massively linked to rate of industrial decline, wealth and lifestyle.
With both the long term wealth of London, the much earlier de-industrialisation you would expect health figures such as lung disease among the older population to be lower.
The other big problem that you have is the highly transient nature of the London population. It’s like no other U.K. city in terms of duration of stay and turnover of population.
With both the long term wealth of London, the much earlier de-industrialisation you would expect health figures such as lung disease among the older population to be lower.
The other big problem that you have is the highly transient nature of the London population. It’s like no other U.K. city in terms of duration of stay and turnover of population.
dan98 said:
egor110 said:
How do ordinary working class people afford to keep up with new regs. in Germany ?
I can't speak for all 'working class' people in urban Germany.However my friends without cars use public transport, bicycle, and DriveNow / Car2go when required.
Buses that are efficient,clean and well run and cheap to use,that go where people need to go,and are working as part of an integrated transport infrastructure.
Cycle paths that are safe and respectfully used, not a white line painted on the side of the road
Car hire that is sensibly priced
If the powers that be want us out of cars,they have to provide alternatives that people can realistically use.
C70R said:
TheAngryDog said:
C70R said:
Rovinghawk said:
C70R said:
What is this spurious "equipment" you're talking about?
In my case a theodolite, tripod, survey staff, coupla cans of spraypaint, sledgehammer & a few steel pins plus a laptop & a packed lunch.It's your employer you should take umbrage with, not TfL.
Some people need to carry too much gear for public transport to be a viable option. Sometimes there is no realistic alternative to having a private vehicle. Councils need to accept this; just because their people only need to carry a small amount doesn't mean that everyone's situation is similar.
Rovinghawk said:
Going all the back this from a long time ago:
Some people need to carry too much gear for public transport to be a viable option. Sometimes there is no realistic alternative to having a private vehicle. Councils need to accept this; just because their people only need to carry a small amount doesn't mean that everyone's situation is similar.
Nor does it make it any kind of norm. The solution to that anomaly being to have a compliant vehicle?Some people need to carry too much gear for public transport to be a viable option. Sometimes there is no realistic alternative to having a private vehicle. Councils need to accept this; just because their people only need to carry a small amount doesn't mean that everyone's situation is similar.
bristolracer said:
Which is all fine and dandy when you have
Buses that are efficient,clean and well run and cheap to use,that go where people need to go,and are working as part of an integrated transport infrastructure.
Cycle paths that are safe and respectfully used, not a white line painted on the side of the road
Car hire that is sensibly priced
If the powers that be want us out of cars,they have to provide alternatives that people can realistically use.
Yeah, because nobody in London uses public transport do they?? And nobody cycles either presumably??Buses that are efficient,clean and well run and cheap to use,that go where people need to go,and are working as part of an integrated transport infrastructure.
Cycle paths that are safe and respectfully used, not a white line painted on the side of the road
Car hire that is sensibly priced
If the powers that be want us out of cars,they have to provide alternatives that people can realistically use.
Policy should be used to push things forward. You don't not do something because it might not work for a one person who can't ride a bike or has an unexplained phobia of buses. Stop trying to find the fault in everything.
We live in London so according to eco wisdom we don't actually need a car. The problem with that is we have a young family which blows that well meaning theory out of the water. Sure we could probably cope without one but it would make our lives 100 times harder, we aren't the only one in this situation. Fortunately we are lucky enough to be able to afford to change our car to a Euro6 compliant diesel, many people aren't.
PS If you'd asked me about a large diesel car before we had a kid I'd have laughed in your face, I used to think diesel was a dirty word. EV may be a viable alternative in a few years but it's not quite there yet.
PS If you'd asked me about a large diesel car before we had a kid I'd have laughed in your face, I used to think diesel was a dirty word. EV may be a viable alternative in a few years but it's not quite there yet.
Guvernator said:
We live in London so according to eco wisdom we don't actually need a car. The problem with that is we have a young family which blows that well meaning theory out of the water. Sure we could probably cope without one but it would make our lives 100 times harder, we aren't the only one in this situation. Fortunately we are lucky enough to be able to afford to change our car to a Euro6 compliant diesel, many people aren't.
PS If you'd asked me about a large diesel car before we had a kid I'd have laughed in your face, I used to think diesel was a dirty word. EV may be a viable alternative in a few years but it's not quite there yet.
What’s the cheapest sort of monthly on a complaint car? £200 tops? Isn’t it the case that in studies, for the poorest, it’s the running costs which are the largest burden? PS If you'd asked me about a large diesel car before we had a kid I'd have laughed in your face, I used to think diesel was a dirty word. EV may be a viable alternative in a few years but it's not quite there yet.
https://www.motoringresearch.com/car-news/average-...
Guvernator said:
We live in London so according to eco wisdom we don't actually need a car. The problem with that is we have a young family which blows that well meaning theory out of the water. Sure we could probably cope without one but it would make our lives 100 times harder, we aren't the only one in this situation. Fortunately we are lucky enough to be able to afford to change our car to a Euro6 compliant diesel, many people aren't.
PS If you'd asked me about a large diesel car before we had a kid I'd have laughed in your face, I used to think diesel was a dirty word. EV may be a viable alternative in a few years but it's not quite there yet.
Apparently you all need to cycle, that's according to the holier than thous who judge everyone else's lives by their own needs rather than thinking about it and considering that not everyone can live as they do!PS If you'd asked me about a large diesel car before we had a kid I'd have laughed in your face, I used to think diesel was a dirty word. EV may be a viable alternative in a few years but it's not quite there yet.
cb1965 said:
Apparently you all need to cycle, that's according to the holier than thous who judge everyone else's lives by their own needs rather than thinking about it and considering that not everyone can live as they do!
Silly remark. Especially as the building of cycle highways for the affluent has increased London congestion. DonkeyApple said:
cb1965 said:
Apparently you all need to cycle, that's according to the holier than thous who judge everyone else's lives by their own needs rather than thinking about it and considering that not everyone can live as they do!
Silly remark. Especially as the building of cycle highways for the affluent has increased London congestion. cb1965 said:
DonkeyApple said:
cb1965 said:
Apparently you all need to cycle, that's according to the holier than thous who judge everyone else's lives by their own needs rather than thinking about it and considering that not everyone can live as they do!
Silly remark. Especially as the building of cycle highways for the affluent has increased London congestion. 
DonkeyApple said:
1. I don’t get why you are taking this stance to be honest. Studies show that cyclists inhale more PM2.5 particulates and deeper into their lungs because of their higher heart rate and that just like the jogger researchbof the 70s the real damage is done because during these periods of higher heart rate the body opens up the alveoli to get more oxygen in so the human body takes in more damaging particulates into the most dangerous part of the body.
2. I also don’t get why you don’t see that a fall in overall particulates is not necessarily pertinent as it is the size, shape, surface area and chemicals on the surface that are relevant in terms of long term human health.
1. I have never seen any study, ever I believe, that shows that overall people that do exercise end up worse off than people not doing exercise, and as we well know, it's not doing exercise that is a *real* shortener of lives (and is the over-riding factor in what will shorten my life imo) than the 3 days on average that particulate emissions costs us according to Greenpeace.2. I also don’t get why you don’t see that a fall in overall particulates is not necessarily pertinent as it is the size, shape, surface area and chemicals on the surface that are relevant in terms of long term human health.
There's some more govt figures here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
>>Emissions of PM10 in 2016 have fallen by 73 per cent since 1970, to 170 thousand tonnes. Emissions of PM2.5 in 2016 have fallen by 78 per cent since 1970, to 108 thousand tonnes. emissions decreased by 3.7 per cent between 2015 and 2016.<<
Since 1970, when there were more people cycling than today, key particulate emissions have fallen by 73 and 78%! And in any case, after the cyclist has finished his ride, where does he go then? Indoors, where he spends most of his time, where *every* resource and/or authority appears to be saying that pollution levels are higher.
So I completely dismiss any notion that cyclists or anyone else, is in any material danger from air pollution here in the UK by exercising outdoors.
I take my stance because:
Air quality is possibly the best it's ever been since records began.
The notion that air quality is getting worse is completely the opposite of the facts, but this is the message being pushed.
Vehicles overall are the cleanest they've ever been since records began* (with a proviso).
Vehicle overall are becoming and will become ever cleaner.
Electric vehicles are coming which could huge differences to levels of local pollution, even if they may poison other people elsewhere.
Electric bicycles are coming, and if we would only make provision for them (which most UK towns and cities won't ) they could make a major change in urban travel.
For these reason our air is going to get ever cleaner and there's no need for local politicians to interfere (we wouldn't have had the diesel 'crisis' had politicians not interfered imo).
I mean, look at the lines on some of those graphs on the govt doc that I've liked to - there's multiple 45 degree lines on those graphs, such are the improvements in recent times.
My proviso over vehicles - Imo the internet has played a significant factor in emissions, because up to just a short 20 years ago or so we could not buy unlimited tat and have it delivered to our doors, and nor could we recycle around the country the tat we don't like. I think it's amazing that I can have a small package of plastic widgets for my latest old car delivered to work for £2.99 all in, but how many diesel-powered miles have those widgets done, and where in the world did they originate? I've no idea, but I know I only paid £2.99 for them, including packing and single-use polythene packet.
I know there's no more hgvs on the roads than decades ago, but I think they're travelling many more miles and there's been a big growth in numbers of vans/light commercial traffic, and these may be the reasons why there's been a decline in the rates of improvements in air quality in the last few years (but still doesn't mean air quality is getting worse).
And of course, we could always copy Europe - close the shops on Sundays; stop most hgvs from operating on Sundays; get millions of people out of cars and onto bicycles, should they want to. And pick the sodding litter up! Birmingham is simply awash with litter, all decaying and decomposing and blown about by the wind. From what I'm seeing , this is an issue that western Europe has got sorted whilst the UK couldn't care less. There are many things that could be done, before penalising people who just want to go to work.
2. I just do not accept that. Particulates come with living on Planet Earth (dust being possibly the most common form of particulate), diesel and vehicle particulates has been with us for decades, and the only difference in recent years, according to the govt, is there's distinctly less of it nowadays.
Edited by heebeegeetee on Saturday 15th December 09:24
Edited by heebeegeetee on Saturday 15th December 11:20
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff