ULEZ charge in 2021
Discussion
gavsdavs said:
Though I am largely in favour of deterring the use of cars, I am in favour of it targetting the busiest times of the week, like the school runners. This was also the strategy of the CCZ. This 24/7 s
t is OTT and the lack of flexibility on this is very disappointing (and kind of backs up your paranoia)
At what times do cars pollute less? t is OTT and the lack of flexibility on this is very disappointing (and kind of backs up your paranoia)bad company said:
C70R said:
Or, you could get all hysterical about it. Either is fine.
Only one person here getting hysterical.There are far too many people who seem to think this constitutes a blanket-ban on all cars, when it's patently untrue. Even if you were to completely ignore diesel cars, the person who has that 'must-do' journey or wants to 'rebel against the man' can still choose from more than a quarter of a million petrol-engined cars on Autotrader which will allow them to drive in the ULEZ with no charge.
This really isn't the end of the world. It's a smart decision to improve the lives of people living in London.
C70R said:
And all of that is fine. Nobody is banning cars from the ULEZ.
Literally any petrol-engined car made in the past 13 years is absolutely fine to drive in the ULEZ without charge. You have the choice of more than A QUARTER OF A MILLION CARS on Autotrader right now.
Or, you could get all hysterical about it. Either is fine.
I can afford to buy a ULEZ conforming car, it's just a slight annoyance that I have to buy some uninspiring appliance car to satisfy a political exercise. Friends of mine aren't so lucky and are trying to find the money to replace their non-compliant cars. I also see a lot of non-compliant cars that live in my area and all are going to have to be replaced, not everyone has the luxury of a couple grand lying around to buy even a cheap car.Literally any petrol-engined car made in the past 13 years is absolutely fine to drive in the ULEZ without charge. You have the choice of more than A QUARTER OF A MILLION CARS on Autotrader right now.
Or, you could get all hysterical about it. Either is fine.
Moving the ULEZ out this far will have next to no effect on air quality and will just cost people money.
j_4m said:
C70R said:
And all of that is fine. Nobody is banning cars from the ULEZ.
Literally any petrol-engined car made in the past 13 years is absolutely fine to drive in the ULEZ without charge. You have the choice of more than A QUARTER OF A MILLION CARS on Autotrader right now.
Or, you could get all hysterical about it. Either is fine.
I can afford to buy a ULEZ conforming car, it's just a slight annoyance that I have to buy some uninspiring appliance car to satisfy a political exercise. Friends of mine aren't so lucky and are trying to find the money to replace their non-compliant cars. I also see a lot of non-compliant cars that live in my area and all are going to have to be replaced, not everyone has the luxury of a couple grand lying around to buy even a cheap car.Literally any petrol-engined car made in the past 13 years is absolutely fine to drive in the ULEZ without charge. You have the choice of more than A QUARTER OF A MILLION CARS on Autotrader right now.
Or, you could get all hysterical about it. Either is fine.
Moving the ULEZ out this far will have next to no effect on air quality and will just cost people money.
As for the idea of "the luxury of a couple of grand", there are nearly 7,000 qualifying cars under £1500. If someone can't survive without a car (meaning that they probably have one already), then surely £1500 isn't much of a "luxury"?
At any rate, based on the available cars on Autotrader (both diesel and petrol), there's a good chance that these people will already have a qualifying car.
I feel like you're blowing these 'issues' out of proportion.
Schmed said:
The ability of some people to bang on about how "good" London public transport is, never ceases to amaze. Where is this magical land of denial ? Public transport in London is st. It is continually late, delayed, overcrowded, cancelled, non air conditioned, and quite frankly dangerous. Trains are also bloody expensive in my view, this is the real reason everybody drives. Cut the damn fares and increase capacity and maybe you have an alternative. Currently you do not.
The Metropolitan Line which I use to get into to City has A/C. So does the overland I use to get to Chiswick. Getting a seat at peak time can be a challenge but I often stand anyway, especially for the short journeys.t. It is continually late, delayed, overcrowded, cancelled, non air conditioned, and quite frankly dangerous. Trains are also bloody expensive in my view, this is the real reason everybody drives. Cut the damn fares and increase capacity and maybe you have an alternative. Currently you do not.When I had a parking space at work I'd occasionally drive in but that was usually only when it was massively hot. But then I switched to cycling.
Regarding the cost, if I'd driven in today I'd have has to pay the CC and also a day's parking charges. Hardly cheap.
As others have pointed out Londoners are really not that bothered about commuting by car at all. It's just not an issue.
C70R said:
This really isn't the end of the world. It's a smart decision to improve the lives of people living in London.
No, it's not, and either you know it and you're blatantly lying, or you're living in Khan's utopia and therefore there's no point in arguing.Paying an extra £12 won't improve at all the air quality (like the CCZ didn't), but will give the Mayor and TfL some extra funds to squander on pointless vanity projects. If charging for the use of a private car is going to solve the air quality issues, then i would like to see also the bus service charged for when buses are waiting and creating congestion on their own in Elephant and Castle, or Minories, or any other Z1 area you may prefer. I would like to see an efficient phasing of traffic lights and a removal of those which are not needed, a removal of the zig-zag chicanes getting into the city and a lift on the pointless 20mph limits which we all know that not only lead to more accidents, but also cause drivers to use lower gears, hence compounding on the pollution problem.
But we all know why we won't see any of the above, don't we?
Edited by Enricogto on Monday 17th December 13:52
C70R said:
I don't understand this "uninspiring appliance car" thing. I can think of dozens of cars that qualify that I'd love to own.
As for the idea of "the luxury of a couple of grand", there are nearly 7,000 qualifying cars under £1500. If someone can't survive without a car (meaning that they probably have one already), then surely £1500 isn't much of a "luxury"?
At any rate, based on the available cars on Autotrader (both diesel and petrol), there's a good chance that these people will already have a qualifying car.
I feel like you're blowing these 'issues' out of proportion.
The 'issue' is that it's not about air quality, it's about Khan doing a bit of politicking at our expense. The increases in duty on diesel fuel and the incentives to buy hybrids and EV are already doing the job, not to mention the transition of delivery trucks, taxis and busses to those technologies. Slapping an arbitrary £12.50 charge on car owners does absolutely nothing but massage Khan's ego.As for the idea of "the luxury of a couple of grand", there are nearly 7,000 qualifying cars under £1500. If someone can't survive without a car (meaning that they probably have one already), then surely £1500 isn't much of a "luxury"?
At any rate, based on the available cars on Autotrader (both diesel and petrol), there's a good chance that these people will already have a qualifying car.
I feel like you're blowing these 'issues' out of proportion.
Killboy said:
gavsdavs said:
Though I am largely in favour of deterring the use of cars, I am in favour of it targetting the busiest times of the week, like the school runners. This was also the strategy of the CCZ. This 24/7 st is OTT and the lack of flexibility on this is very disappointing (and kind of backs up your paranoia)
At what times do cars pollute less? t is OTT and the lack of flexibility on this is very disappointing (and kind of backs up your paranoia)C70R said:
If your "older car" contributes towards poor air quality for the people who live there, then there will be a charge to disincentivise use.
The only way the ULEZ is going to magically reduce emissions levels will be when traffic lights and junction phasings are reverted to settings which encourage traffic flow, rather than hindering it. Road traffic is decreasing (despite the large rise in numbers of private hire cars and local delivery vans), but congestion is increasing. Congestion means pollution (although I suppose City Hall would probably be content with EV traffic jams). We’ve had the arguments before, with all the supporting evidence, about what the major sources of NOx and particulate pollution are (and how they could effectively be tackled) - and it certainly isn’t Z1 & Z2 residents using their car for the odd weekend journey. Still, I’m sure the mayor will find good use for all those £12.50 levies.
C70R said:
Schmed said:
The ability of some people to bang on about how "good" London public transport is, never ceases to amaze. Where is this magical land of denial ? Public transport in London is st. It is continually late, delayed, overcrowded, cancelled, non air conditioned, and quite frankly dangerous. Trains are also bloody expensive in my view, this is the real reason everybody drives. Cut the damn fares and increase capacity and maybe you have an alternative. Currently you do not.
Hyperbolic, much?t. It is continually late, delayed, overcrowded, cancelled, non air conditioned, and quite frankly dangerous. Trains are also bloody expensive in my view, this is the real reason everybody drives. Cut the damn fares and increase capacity and maybe you have an alternative. Currently you do not."Continually late/cancelled/delayed": My commute is 2 changes right through Z1, and it's rare than I have more than +/-5min variance.
"Overcrowded": Show me a major world city where public transport isn't overcrowded.
"Non air conditioned": Some lines are, but it's not a big deal aside from a couple of weeks in summer.
"Dangerous": I can only imagine that you were running out of things to moan about, but I'm keen to know what's so dangerous compared with other public transport systems.
"Bloody expensive": Relative to other big cities, London really isn't that expensive.
I've travelled in a lot of cities with extensive public transport networks, and none are without their issues. Keen to see what your benchmark of "good" for the above are, if you rate London as "sh*t".
If you're talking about suburban commuter trains, then you might have a point. But that's not London transport, and this is a thread about central London and the people who live there.
VS a car all these factors make public transport mighty unpleasant and the car wins easily. But you're clearly on the happy pills.
VS other cities' public transport systems that I've travelled on London is f
king awful.Schmed said:
C70R said:
Schmed said:
The ability of some people to bang on about how "good" London public transport is, never ceases to amaze. Where is this magical land of denial ? Public transport in London is st. It is continually late, delayed, overcrowded, cancelled, non air conditioned, and quite frankly dangerous. Trains are also bloody expensive in my view, this is the real reason everybody drives. Cut the damn fares and increase capacity and maybe you have an alternative. Currently you do not.
Hyperbolic, much?t. It is continually late, delayed, overcrowded, cancelled, non air conditioned, and quite frankly dangerous. Trains are also bloody expensive in my view, this is the real reason everybody drives. Cut the damn fares and increase capacity and maybe you have an alternative. Currently you do not."Continually late/cancelled/delayed": My commute is 2 changes right through Z1, and it's rare than I have more than +/-5min variance.
"Overcrowded": Show me a major world city where public transport isn't overcrowded.
"Non air conditioned": Some lines are, but it's not a big deal aside from a couple of weeks in summer.
"Dangerous": I can only imagine that you were running out of things to moan about, but I'm keen to know what's so dangerous compared with other public transport systems.
"Bloody expensive": Relative to other big cities, London really isn't that expensive.
I've travelled in a lot of cities with extensive public transport networks, and none are without their issues. Keen to see what your benchmark of "good" for the above are, if you rate London as "sh*t".
If you're talking about suburban commuter trains, then you might have a point. But that's not London transport, and this is a thread about central London and the people who live there.
VS a car all these factors make public transport mighty unpleasant and the car wins easily. But you're clearly on the happy pills.
VS other cities' public transport systems that I've travelled on London is f
king awful.By car, my commute this morning would have taken almost twice as long. Ditto most others who commute into and around the centre of London.
I wouldn't call that "winning easily".
Keen to hear which cities these are, and how they surpass London. Genuinely.
Enricogto said:
C70R said:
This really isn't the end of the world. It's a smart decision to improve the lives of people living in London.
No, it's not, and either you know it and you're blatantly lying, or you're living in Khan's utopia and therefore there's no point in arguing.Paying an extra £12 won't improve at all the air quality (like the CCZ didn't), but will give the Mayor and TfL some extra funds to squander on pointless vanity projects. If charging for the use of a private car is going to solve the air quality issues, then i would like to see also the bus service charged for when buses are waiting and creating congestion on their own in Elephant and Castle, or Minories, or any other Z1 area you may prefer. I would like to see an efficient phasing of traffic lights and a removal of those which are not needed, a removal of the zig-zag chicanes getting into the city and a lift on the pointless 20mph limits which we all know that not only lead to more accidents, but also cause drivers to use lower gears, hence compounding on the pollution problem.
But we all know why we won't see any of the above, don't we?
Edited by Enricogto on Monday 17th December 13:52
A few points:
- The CCZ wasn't intended to reduce emissions. The clue is in the name.
- Most waiting buses do so with their engines off. A quick Google will reveal TfL's plans to make buses pollute less too. This isn't a conversation about buses causing congestion - you're getting yourself confused.
- 20mph are here to stay, and are largely irrelevant in most parts of town given the congestion.
- If you think those 'zig-zag' chicanes are one of the biggest issues on London's roads, then there's not much hope of having a sensible conversation with you.
Another point possibly not discussed or indeed argued over.
Currently the route around the CCZ is a fugging nightmare. A ring of non moving traffic pumping out fumes all day.
So that is now going to be repeated on the already gridlocked North as well as the impossible South Circulars.
I'm about half a mile from the South Circular here in SW London and am not looking forward to the knock on effect of an absolutely jammed solid by pass of the new 2021 ULEZ.
I'd imagine pollution levels will go up by many factors, as have happened from TFL's attempts to bring central London to a standstill.
As a Londoner, you'd have to put a gun to my head to make me drive in and around the city of my birth during most times of the day. I even told the ex wife where to go last week when she suggested that I drive her to Harley St for a PET scan to see why she could barely walk.
I do realise that cars in town have to go. I'm not arguing that.
I'm not sure who is still driving 24/7 across London but if my work journey from Stratford to Acton last night via the North Circular was anything to go by, it seems that a vast majority of drivers think it's ok to sit in log jams and spend hours traveling a few miles.
After all, they can't all be working unsocial hours on a Sunday, can they?
Currently the route around the CCZ is a fugging nightmare. A ring of non moving traffic pumping out fumes all day.
So that is now going to be repeated on the already gridlocked North as well as the impossible South Circulars.
I'm about half a mile from the South Circular here in SW London and am not looking forward to the knock on effect of an absolutely jammed solid by pass of the new 2021 ULEZ.
I'd imagine pollution levels will go up by many factors, as have happened from TFL's attempts to bring central London to a standstill.
As a Londoner, you'd have to put a gun to my head to make me drive in and around the city of my birth during most times of the day. I even told the ex wife where to go last week when she suggested that I drive her to Harley St for a PET scan to see why she could barely walk.
I do realise that cars in town have to go. I'm not arguing that.
I'm not sure who is still driving 24/7 across London but if my work journey from Stratford to Acton last night via the North Circular was anything to go by, it seems that a vast majority of drivers think it's ok to sit in log jams and spend hours traveling a few miles.
After all, they can't all be working unsocial hours on a Sunday, can they?
Killboy said:
gavsdavs said:
I'm not sure if you're struggling with basic english comprehension, but the example i provided was "Sunday 5am, driving straight out". Not a log of queues then.
So, would you answer be what? No ULEZ charges at 5am? Whats the magical cut off time?Guvernator said:
j_4m said:
Yes, it is TfL's fault that my 4.8 mile commute from E7 to E1 can take over an hour.
Unfortunately I don't earn the requisite five grand a month which would let me rent a flat within walking distance to my office, but I guess that's my fault for not being a CEO.
Don't bother, C70R seems to live in some alternate dimension vastly disconnected from certain realities of life where public is transport is perfect and it's your failures in life that have lead to you having to use a crappy car in London.Unfortunately I don't earn the requisite five grand a month which would let me rent a flat within walking distance to my office, but I guess that's my fault for not being a CEO.
k off!cb1965 said:
Guvernator said:
j_4m said:
Yes, it is TfL's fault that my 4.8 mile commute from E7 to E1 can take over an hour.
Unfortunately I don't earn the requisite five grand a month which would let me rent a flat within walking distance to my office, but I guess that's my fault for not being a CEO.
Don't bother, C70R seems to live in some alternate dimension vastly disconnected from certain realities of life where public is transport is perfect and it's your failures in life that have lead to you having to use a crappy car in London.Unfortunately I don't earn the requisite five grand a month which would let me rent a flat within walking distance to my office, but I guess that's my fault for not being a CEO.
k off!How sad.
Still waiting for all the London public transport detractors to point to all these utopian cities who have perfect systems. Still not seeing any replies.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff