advertisement


Ulez tommorrow 29th august ... are you ready ?

Alex S said:
I support this initiative since my 2004 Honda S2000 is ULEZ compliant. If I'd bought a diesel like the government told me to I'd be seething. Selfish, moi?
Click to expand...

The inconsistency is the issue IMHO. We were told to switch to diesel, then oh actually, back to petrol please. Mothers 2014 Toyota Auris diesel is £0 VED. Less than a decade ago it was classified as environmentally brilliant. Still must be as it remains zero VED. Yet Khan would want £12 a day. It’s a buggers muddle.
 
Rug Doc said:
What I would like to know is this - aside from a percentage to cover costs and admin of the system (surely mainly AI driven by now?) how much of the charge goes towards lowering pollution/green issues??

edit - found it.

is it a plane? Is it a boat? No it’s a bus called Superloop.. :rolleyes:

https://www.london.gov.uk/programme...connecting-outer-london-boroughs-more-quickly
Click to expand...
That's not the point, the point is that it reduces the number of non compliant vehicles in use and so reduces overall emissions.
 
And yet our 18 year old and 20 year old Audis are both compliant/exempt. Both are petrol engines.
 
I suspect tradies with non compliant vans are just going to pass the cost on, it's not like the customer will know with the rates they charge down there anyway.
 
suzywong said:
That’ll be the PM10 of which the governments own website says:

“However, around half of UK concentrations of PM comes from anthropogenic sources in the UK such as wood burning, and tyre and brake wear from vehicles.”

(They also state that about a third comes in from foreign countries, and 15% occurs naturally, such as pollen)

Curiously, no mention of petrol or diesel vehicle engines.

Indeed the same webpage shows that vehicles contribute less than “domestic combustion ( I assume this is cooking & heating.
Click to expand...
PM 10s and 2.5x come from a variety of sources. Who knew? Meanwhile *some* come from vehicle exhausts and this is the subject at hand. If you want to ban wood turning stoves in urban areas too, I'm with you all the way.
 
flutteringwow said:
No, just a witness of how it affected people the first time round, and listening to people during the second rather than basing it on the media.

Using the £2k car line is part of the propaganda ironically as there is a lot more to car ownership than the initial purchase.

Ah 'pollution', that old chestnut..

Whereabouts do you live in London?
Click to expand...

The clue's in the name, Kensal Rise. As a cyclist, I'm appreciating the cleaner air since the introduction of ULEZ. I drive too, I'm not anti car.

The £2k car isn't propaganda, it's a simple fact.
 
Actually, it was the “wood burning stoves” that caught my attention. There must be a lot of them about.
 
kensalriser said:
The £2k car isn't propaganda, it's a simple fact.
Click to expand...

Extracted from the Beeb website, Autotrader might question that figure:

“According to data from AutoTrader, the median price of a compliant Ulez vehicle in 2021 was £12,989. This has now risen to £18,295.
Its analysis also shows in February there were 43,359 Ulez-compliant cars for sale in London with an average cost of £15,000 and £19,991 for petrol and diesel respectively.
Only about 5,000 of these compliant cars are for sale under £5,000.
Within a 100-mile radius of London, there are about 90,000 compliant petrol cars, 8,000 of which cost under £5,000.”
 
Just searched Auto Trader for petrol cars 2006 and newer up to £2k within 30 miles of where I live in NW10 - 958 cars. Increase the budget by £500 and the number doubles. That's just one platform.
 
stevec67 said:
That's not the point, the point is that it reduces the number of non compliant vehicles in use and so reduces overall emissions.
Click to expand...
Same emission results could be achieved without disproportionately affecting those least able to actually afford the measures being introduced. I’d start with classic cars that don’t meet ULEZ compliance but I see they get to pollute my children for free because they are over 40 years old, you really couldn’t make it up.
 
Just about anything 40 years old is a collectors car and no way you would use one of these as a daily driver in London
 
flutteringwow said:
Kahn is the Tories biggest weapon. I despise him for this, and many of his other London failures. I've yet to meet anyone who supports him, yet he still gets voted in because their literally isn't anyone else.
Click to expand...
ULEZ was introduced by Boris Johnson when he was Mayor (not that that makes it a bad idea, however much I despise him). Khan was obliged to expand it as funding depended on it.
 
eevo1969 said:
Same emission results could be achieved without disproportionately affecting those least able to actually afford the measures being introduced. I’d start with classic cars that don’t meet ULEZ compliance but I see they get to pollute my children for free because they are over 40 years old, you really couldn’t make it up.
Click to expand...
Classic cars are small in number and little used. I'll take a Morris Minor doing 1000 miles a year over a modern car, it's not a significant contributor. When did you last see one? I've seen one so far in this whole summer, yesterday morning as it happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top