ULEZ charge in 2021
Discussion
There is considerable variance from source to source (as you might expect with something so inexact), but the most surprising thing is the proportion of NOx and PM10 attributed to gas heating boilers - a move to electric heating in new developments should surely be a focus given the huge contribution to pollution. This is NOx in Camden:
NomduJour said:
There is considerable variance from source to source (as you might expect with something so inexact), but the most surprising thing is the proportion of NOx and PM10 attributed to gas heating boilers - a move to electric heating in new developments should surely be a focus given the huge contribution to pollution. This is NOx in Camden:
that's all those farting lesbians in Camden.
Gooly said:
Sure, and I would understand the issue if it was a ban on owning or running a private car within the ring roads but it isn't; it's a levy on older, higher emission vehicles. 1-3% in the context of London's already awful air quality is still significant. As I mentioned, there are numerous other things that need to be targeted and private car use is not the golden bullet; but its a start, a meaningful way to tackle an issue for which we are already 20-30 years behind schedule on.
Beyond that, the levy will also help tackle congestion, which will then help bus journeys become more efficient and perhaps encourage more people to cycle if the roads are slightly less busy. Theres far more to it than just the percentage of emissions currently emitted by private car use, its about slowly forming an attitude change and also taking off some of the worst polluting cars.
Once again, its not a ban and if its really that much of an issue then you can buy a Euro 4 compliant car, which these days aren't hugely expensive.
But yes, I too would love to see some of the ageing, filthy black cabs, non hybrid buses and random unregulated diesel units like RFUs taken off the road too. One can hope that with enough attention and political engagement given by those who complain about them, we will eventually see legislation pertinent to it. Contact your MP, petition, go through the many channels that allow your voice to be heard in a democratic political system.
Couldn't agree with this any more.Beyond that, the levy will also help tackle congestion, which will then help bus journeys become more efficient and perhaps encourage more people to cycle if the roads are slightly less busy. Theres far more to it than just the percentage of emissions currently emitted by private car use, its about slowly forming an attitude change and also taking off some of the worst polluting cars.
Once again, its not a ban and if its really that much of an issue then you can buy a Euro 4 compliant car, which these days aren't hugely expensive.
But yes, I too would love to see some of the ageing, filthy black cabs, non hybrid buses and random unregulated diesel units like RFUs taken off the road too. One can hope that with enough attention and political engagement given by those who complain about them, we will eventually see legislation pertinent to it. Contact your MP, petition, go through the many channels that allow your voice to be heard in a democratic political system.
The way that some are going on in this thread, you'd think that the car had been outlawed needlessly, with immediate crushing.
Taking action against private (particularly petrol) cars is a vote-winning sideshow when you actually look at the figures. Every left-leaning metro-liberal knows that cars are selfish, evil killing machines - telling them their central heating is the bigger problem isn’t going to get little Sadiq re-elected.
NomduJour said:
Taking action against private (particularly petrol) cars is a vote-winning sideshow when you actually look at the figures. Every left-leaning metro-liberal knows that cars are selfish, evil killing machines - telling them their central heating is the bigger problem isn’t going to get little Sadiq re-elected.
Sounds like they need to be charging anyone running a non-ErP compliant boiler £12.50/day, shouldn't be a problem they have been available for a while now so there is no reason no to buy one.Toltec said:
NomduJour said:
Taking action against private (particularly petrol) cars is a vote-winning sideshow when you actually look at the figures. Every left-leaning metro-liberal knows that cars are selfish, evil killing machines - telling them their central heating is the bigger problem isn’t going to get little Sadiq re-elected.
Sounds like they need to be charging anyone running a non-ErP compliant boiler £12.50/day, shouldn't be a problem they have been available for a while now so there is no reason no to buy one.
Some of the counter-arguments are truly hilarious.
NomduJour said:
There is considerable variance from source to source (as you might expect with something so inexact), but the most surprising thing is the proportion of NOx and PM10 attributed to gas heating boilers - a move to electric heating in new developments should surely be a focus given the huge contribution to pollution. This is NOx in Camden:
This was part of what I struggled with when you kept referencing the "1-3%" figure...NomduJour said:
C70R said:
You're absolutely right. And the majority of people inside the ULEZ don't even own or use a boiler, do they?
Some of the counter-arguments are truly hilarious.
Logic fail. Some of the counter-arguments are truly hilarious.
Comprehension fail.
Are you genuinely stupid or deliberately obtuse? Around 90% of London households have gas-powered heat and water - gas boilers are seemingly the major single contributor to the NOx and PM10 pollution which is the current concern.
If you want to make an impact you target the main causes, and the charts provided above clearly show that petrol-powered cars are a minor contributor to the problem. By way of analogy, there’s a reason the Dangerous Dogs Act targeted Pit Bulls and not Poodles.
If you want to make an impact you target the main causes, and the charts provided above clearly show that petrol-powered cars are a minor contributor to the problem. By way of analogy, there’s a reason the Dangerous Dogs Act targeted Pit Bulls and not Poodles.
NomduJour said:
There is considerable variance from source to source (as you might expect with something so inexact), but the most surprising thing is the proportion of NOx and PM10 attributed to gas heating boilers - a move to electric heating in new developments should surely be a focus given the huge contribution to pollution. This is NOx in Camden:
Awkward!Ahem - yes - the mutl-quoting is massively painful and unncessary. However, i was doing a "When in Rome...."
I also see you got somewhat lost in quoting so lets wind it back a little.
And to finish off, some information for you, because you appear as uninformed as I was until this afternoon. For your pleasure:
Gutted for you, really
I also see you got somewhat lost in quoting so lets wind it back a little.
C70R said:
Still sounds like sour grapes to me. The CCZ was well-intentioned, but poorly executed. In spite of that, a blanket ban with discount scheme is not remotely comparable with a widely-accessible scheme (remember the several hundred thousand eligible cars I found on Autotrader?).
The question of discounts and time banding is always going to come up because it's proven to be effective for CCZ.C70R said:
You're saying this like you've come up with anything remotely resembling a cogent alternative. Until you do, it's moot because something needs to happen.
My argument is that implementing CCZ will to be significantly more costly and disruptive than you're willing to accept. Since I'm pretty sure your heels are dug in deeper than an alabama tick, it isn't worth taking it further. I remember how disruptive the introduction of CCZ was.C70R said:
I've answered this several times. Allowing non-compliant vehicles to run at night and on weekends will have ZERO NET IMPACT on air quality. You'd have to be a special kind of idiot to think otherwise. And, you've misquoted me in your frothing - I said "lends itself perfectly to the CCZ".
No, I re-quoted you on purpose because the statement works both ways, but you're a bit stick in your ways and aren't willing to accept it.C70R said:
It's not even in the same ballpark as "OTT". You're being incredibly melodramatic. A blanket ban on all vehicles would be "OTT". Daily charging on all but hybrids would be "OTT". This is a flaky argument.
Your politics are pretty naive. People respond to the carrott, not the stick, and you're using a blunt instrument and "the beatings will continue until morale improves" thinking. It's pretty obvious you don't care if you get people on side, you're just a bit stuck in forcing this through.C70R said:
Again, use of over-emotive phraseology to support a flaky argument. Do you really only believe that there are two types of people in the world? Those like you, who put their 'pride' in their car above all else, and the plebs who treat cars like "white goods"?
Umm - yes, you kind of put it out there yourself. You have no emotional attachment to your cars. If i've owned my car a long time and have invested in its wellbeing, why is your answer "well you should just sell it". You're not listening (I think repeating myself here seems necessary but ultimately is a bit pointless). People grow connections to cars once they've had them longer than a single lease cycle. You haven't.And to finish off, some information for you, because you appear as uninformed as I was until this afternoon. For your pleasure:
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/complying-with-ulez said:
Residents
Guess what, I can drive my non-compiant car for free until 10/04/2022.- Registered residents who live in the ULEZ will be granted a time limited 100% discount to give them more time to change their vehicle to meet the ULEZ standards
- The discount will be available to those who live in the ULEZ from 8 April 2019 to 10 April 2022 and will only apply while they live within the zone
- From 11 April 2022, residents must pay the full daily ULEZ charge to drive a vehicle in the zone if it does not meet the ULEZ standards
- Residents will continue to pay the T-Charge, at a discounted rate of 90%, during the ULEZ resident sunset period
Gutted for you, really
gavsdavs said:
Ahem - yes - the mutl-quoting is massively painful and unncessary. However, i was doing a "When in Rome...."
I also see you got somewhat lost in quoting so lets wind it back a little.
And to finish off, some information for you, because you appear as uninformed as I was until this afternoon. For your pleasure:
Gutted for you, really
Why would you be gutted for me? That's fantastic news for you. You get to retain your comfort blanket attachment to a pile of metal and plastic for a couple more years, and the rest of us get to have a grown-up conversation without the need to listen to your 'politics of envy' drivel. I also see you got somewhat lost in quoting so lets wind it back a little.
C70R said:
Still sounds like sour grapes to me. The CCZ was well-intentioned, but poorly executed. In spite of that, a blanket ban with discount scheme is not remotely comparable with a widely-accessible scheme (remember the several hundred thousand eligible cars I found on Autotrader?).
The question of discounts and time banding is always going to come up because it's proven to be effective for CCZ.C70R said:
You're saying this like you've come up with anything remotely resembling a cogent alternative. Until you do, it's moot because something needs to happen.
My argument is that implementing CCZ will to be significantly more costly and disruptive than you're willing to accept. Since I'm pretty sure your heels are dug in deeper than an alabama tick, it isn't worth taking it further. I remember how disruptive the introduction of CCZ was.C70R said:
I've answered this several times. Allowing non-compliant vehicles to run at night and on weekends will have ZERO NET IMPACT on air quality. You'd have to be a special kind of idiot to think otherwise. And, you've misquoted me in your frothing - I said "lends itself perfectly to the CCZ".
No, I re-quoted you on purpose because the statement works both ways, but you're a bit stick in your ways and aren't willing to accept it.C70R said:
It's not even in the same ballpark as "OTT". You're being incredibly melodramatic. A blanket ban on all vehicles would be "OTT". Daily charging on all but hybrids would be "OTT". This is a flaky argument.
Your politics are pretty naive. People respond to the carrott, not the stick, and you're using a blunt instrument and "the beatings will continue until morale improves" thinking. It's pretty obvious you don't care if you get people on side, you're just a bit stuck in forcing this through.C70R said:
Again, use of over-emotive phraseology to support a flaky argument. Do you really only believe that there are two types of people in the world? Those like you, who put their 'pride' in their car above all else, and the plebs who treat cars like "white goods"?
Umm - yes, you kind of put it out there yourself. You have no emotional attachment to your cars. If i've owned my car a long time and have invested in its wellbeing, why is your answer "well you should just sell it". You're not listening (I think repeating myself here seems necessary but ultimately is a bit pointless). People grow connections to cars once they've had them longer than a single lease cycle. You haven't.And to finish off, some information for you, because you appear as uninformed as I was until this afternoon. For your pleasure:
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/complying-with-ulez said:
Residents
Guess what, I can drive my non-compiant car for free until 10/04/2022.- Registered residents who live in the ULEZ will be granted a time limited 100% discount to give them more time to change their vehicle to meet the ULEZ standards
- The discount will be available to those who live in the ULEZ from 8 April 2019 to 10 April 2022 and will only apply while they live within the zone
- From 11 April 2022, residents must pay the full daily ULEZ charge to drive a vehicle in the zone if it does not meet the ULEZ standards
- Residents will continue to pay the T-Charge, at a discounted rate of 90%, during the ULEZ resident sunset period
Gutted for you, really
That sounds like a win-win to me!
My final post to you on this thread will be to highlight your incredible ignorance and selfishness when it comes to politics.
gavsdavs said:
Your politics are pretty naive. People respond to the carrott, not the stick, and you're using a blunt instrument and "the beatings will continue until morale improves" thinking. It's pretty obvious you don't care if you get people on side, you're just a bit stuck in forcing this through.
When we talk about the people actually affected by and contained within the ULEZ, you seem to (conveniently) continue to forget that the large majority don't even own a car. Politics works by catering to the desires of the majority - do you think these people care more that you're oddly 'proud' of a lump of metal and plastic, or about their own health and wellbeing?"The people", as you put it, are already on my side.
Edited by C70R on Tuesday 9th January 21:13
captainaverage said:
Hi mate could you please tell me the name of your petition since the moderator has removed it? Cheers.
Not sure if I can post a link to another post on this forum?https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
C70R said:
When we talk about the people actually affected by and contained within the ULEZ, you seem to (conveniently) continue to forget that the large majority don't even own a car. Politics works by catering to the desires of the majority - do you think these people care more that you're oddly 'proud' of a lump of metal and plastic, or about their own health and wellbeing?
"The people", as you put it, are already on my side.
Despite all your eco-warrior bluster, it is kind of funny that the TFL residents discounts are almost exactly what i suggested would be sensible in the first place "The people", as you put it, are already on my side.
Edited by C70R on Tuesday 9th January 21:13
gavsdavs said:
C70R said:
When we talk about the people actually affected by and contained within the ULEZ, you seem to (conveniently) continue to forget that the large majority don't even own a car. Politics works by catering to the desires of the majority - do you think these people care more that you're oddly 'proud' of a lump of metal and plastic, or about their own health and wellbeing?
"The people", as you put it, are already on my side.
Despite all your eco-warrior bluster, it is kind of funny that the TFL residents discounts are almost exactly what i suggested would be sensible in the first place "The people", as you put it, are already on my side.
Edited by C70R on Tuesday 9th January 21:13
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff