ULEZ charge in 2021

[NomduJour]

braddo said:

Blah blah

Lol lol.

braddo said:

ULEZ is getting more dirty diesels off the roads inside the M25 and the cameras are the infrastructure for road pricing in future which we all know is inevitable.

It won’t impact pollution to any meaningful degree, hence you accept it’s merely a front for future road pricing.

Why the pretence? Are all holders of fashionable opinions happy lying to themselves about this kind of thing?

[anonymous-user]

braddo said:

Blah blah.

ULEZ is getting more dirty diesels off the roads inside the M25 and the cameras are the infrastructure for road pricing in future which we all know is inevitable.

Spot on, the health issues caused due to diesels are well documented, why wouldn't you want to get them off the road? The fact that drivers of late diesels are going to be forced to get rid of them or pay £12.50 a day is just a necessary evil.

[Guvernator]

So if according to the stats, so many cars are already compliant, why bother going to the huge expense of putting up loads of camera's for a measly 10% of cars. If the aim is to remove older polluting cars from the road to improve air quality, just increase the road tax on them so they are no longer economically viable or ban them altogether. They already have the data available to implement this, far simpler, cheaper and will achieve the same result.

As usual the green agenda is being used as a front to either generate revenue or worse, introduce something more insidious.

[NomduJour]

Joey Deacon said:

the health issues caused due to diesels are well documented, why wouldn't you want to get them off the road?

Maybe because it won’t make any difference to pollution or to health or to anything else (but people’s bank accounts), and you’d be far better off focusing on something that did?

[rallycross]

Joey Deacon said:

braddo said:

Blah blah.

ULEZ is getting more dirty diesels off the roads inside the M25 and the cameras are the infrastructure for road pricing in future which we all know is inevitable.

Spot on, the health issues caused due to diesels are well documented, why wouldn't you want to get them off the road? The fact that drivers of late diesels are going to be forced to get rid of them or pay £12.50 a day is just a necessary evil.

But most of them are not dirty diesels they are things like 2010-15 smax and bmw 330 2012-2106 which have Dpf fitted and don’t kick out loads of pollution.

[youngsyr]

Joey Deacon said:

braddo said:

Blah blah.

ULEZ is getting more dirty diesels off the roads inside the M25 and the cameras are the infrastructure for road pricing in future which we all know is inevitable.

Spot on, the health issues caused due to diesels are well documented, why wouldn't you want to get them off the road? The fact that drivers of late diesels are going to be forced to get rid of them or pay £12.50 a day is just a necessary evil.

Except it's not a necessary evil - the number of diesel cars on the road is already falling dramatically each year without ULEZ.

There will be a vanishingly small number of non-compliant diesels on the road in 7 years with or without it.

[braddo]

youngsyr said:

Except it's not a necessary evil - the number of diesel cars on the road is already falling dramatically each year without ULEZ.

There will be a vanishingly small number of non-compliant diesels on the road in 7 years with or without it.

It's anti-diesel legislation (i.e. ULEZ and the others) that is driving the dramatic move away from diesel. If the ULEZ et al didn't exist the move out of diesels would have been far, far slower because there would be no incentive to do so.

[NomduJour]

Why is it also happening in every part of the country outside any emissions zone? Are they all planning to move to Khan’s paradise?

[fatboy18]

NomduJour said:

Why is it also happening in every part of the country outside any emissions zone? Are they all planning to move to Khan’s paradise?

Its not about Low emisions, its about Zone charging, in other words they want you out of your cars and using public park and ride systems and busses with the great unwashed knife carrying scum public. Its all about Road pricing, and its about time people woke up to what's really happening.

[NMNeil]

C70R said:

Macron said:

bad company said:

Undercover McNoName said:

bad company said:

Mrs BC & I will be there.

Is this a joke?

I’m not laughing.



Take look at the ‘Action Against ULEZ Extension’ group on Facebook.

Quoted for comedy value.

Was it year 4 or 5 who made the posters during wet play time?

That's incredible. I bet they were made by some bloke in his 30s, who lives in his parents' attic in Bromley and drives a 'modern classic'.

Edited by C70R on Tuesday 28th March 13:40

So he'll be paying the 12.50 to drive his 'classic' to the protest?

[bad company]

This one’s a bit better.

[braddo]

NomduJour said:

Why is it also happening in every part of the country outside any emissions zone? Are they all planning to move to Khan’s paradise?

Two reasons:
- the low emissions zones are already in the UK's two biggest cities and other cities are following, so consumers see it's real and have seen it coming for several years now, namely that charging for dirty diesels will spread to cities across the UK; it is not a London issue only.
- the point above affects car values. Consumers realise that diesels will hit them with higher depreciation and that when buying on finance, the residual values for diesel cars have been lower than petrols for some time (at least for lighter cars, probs not a big Land Rover product for example).

Basically, there has been a financial incentive for people to move away from diesel for some years now. And hey presto, they're now 5% of new car sales.

[braddo]

Guvernator said:

So if according to the stats, so many cars are already compliant, why bother going to the huge expense of putting up loads of camera's for a measly 10% of cars. If the aim is to remove older polluting cars from the road to improve air quality, just increase the road tax on them so they are no longer economically viable or ban them altogether. They already have the data available to implement this, far simpler, cheaper and will achieve the same result.

As usual the green agenda is being used as a front to either generate revenue or worse, introduce something more insidious.

Your suggestions are not simpler or cheaper, or any more acceptable politically. It's a funny paradox that libertarians objecting to the ULEZ suggest that things should be banned by the State instead.

The ULEZ cameras are an investment, where they will mostly likely be used for road pricing policies in the future. Even the Tories have said this is the most likely way to tax transport with the move away from fossil fuels.




I'm in the acceptance phase. ULEZ is coming, the cameras are coming, road pricing is coming. Phones already track your movements and habits and unless people here are posting from Bond-villain-spec untraceable VPNs then moaning about Big Brother on internet forums is....

[swisstoni]

Why, if diesels are only 5% of new car sales, and the existing ones will be dying off, would you spend lots of money on a monitoring infrastructure for them?

[Guvernator]

braddo said:

Your suggestions are not simpler or cheaper, or any more acceptable politically. It's a funny paradox that libertarians objecting to the ULEZ suggest that things should be banned by the State instead.

The ULEZ cameras are an investment, where they will mostly likely be used for road pricing policies in the future. Even the Tories have said this is the most likely way to tax transport with the move away from fossil fuels.




I'm in the acceptance phase. ULEZ is coming, the cameras are coming, road pricing is coming. Phones already track your movements and habits and unless people here are posting from Bond-villain-spec untraceable VPNs then moaning about Big Brother on internet forums is....

This the problem right here, they will only come if we allow it. People have already given up. We are the most surveilled citizens in the Western World, the last thing we need is more camera's and road pricing tracking your every car journey. The French were burning cars in the streets a few weeks ago, we just sit and take it.

[NomduJour]

swisstoni said:

Why, if diesels are only 5% of new car sales, and the existing ones will be dying off, would you spend lots of money on a monitoring infrastructure for them?

Mayor Khan’s stunning and brave ULEZ is the exact reason evil diesels have seen a global sales crash.

Without him spending another £200m on road pricing cameras saving the lives of poor children, everyone would be swapping a 6.7 Cummins into the family car and rolling coal on the way to Tesco.

Let’s not forget exactly how toxic “the cleanest city in the world” is:

https://worldpopulationreview.com/world-city-ranki...

[braddo]

Guvernator said:

This the problem right here, they will only come if we allow it. People have already given up. We are the most surveilled citizens in the Western World, the last thing we need is more camera's and road pricing tracking your every car journey. The French were burning cars in the streets a few weeks ago, we just sit and take it.

The problem for a minority of people (like you) is that most people are OK with it.

And for some perspective on France, legislation is taxing hot hatches off the road, let alone large SUVs. The French are not rioting about that. They're not rioting about the multiple clean air zones that are already in force in places like Paris, Reims, Grenoble, Rouen.

[youngsyr]

braddo said:

youngsyr said:

Except it's not a necessary evil - the number of diesel cars on the road is already falling dramatically each year without ULEZ.

There will be a vanishingly small number of non-compliant diesels on the road in 7 years with or without it.

It's anti-diesel legislation (i.e. ULEZ and the others) that is driving the dramatic move away from diesel. If the ULEZ et al didn't exist the move out of diesels would have been far, far slower because there would be no incentive to do so.

"ULEZ and the others", that's a weasly way to defend your claim that ULEZ expansion is a necessary evil.

How do you know it's not "the others" that are responsible for the dramatic decline?

[braddo]

youngsyr said:

"ULEZ and the others", that's a weasly way to defend your claim that ULEZ expansion is a necessary evil.

How do you know it's not "the others" that are responsible for the dramatic decline?

Eh?

I'll mention again that I think the expansion out to the M25 is happening too soon. Politics is at play there. But it's about when, not if.

My point was that multiple clean air zones like ULEZ (which is the first and biggest) and the other clean air zones that have been implemented or are planned for other cities have been a massive catalyst for getting out of diesel cars. Because the ULEZ and others are real things - tangible evidence of diesels being targeted. If there was nothing tangible, people would ignore the environmental impacts and keep buying diesels because they had better fuel economy.

[Cotty]

braddo said:

I'll mention again that I think the expansion out to the M25 is happening too soon. Politics is at play there. But it's about when, not if.

Do you mean including the M25 or just up to it.