ULEZ and other similar schemes we are being told are all about clean air for everybody but are they really just a means of making money from motorists?

[@Lee]

4 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Apparently not then??? My 2013 reg car was Euro 5 and my 2017 is Euro 6.

I'm saying the 'poor people' you were worried about could have a cheap nineteen year old petrol car and be ULEZ compliant.

[Graham Butcher]

4 minutes ago, @Lee said:

 

I wouldn't be driving to the UK and if I did and entered the ULEZ, where would they send the fine  

I've only ever driven into central London and what now constitutes the ULEZ once. I've always found it's far easier to travel to somewhere just outside the M25 and get the tube in. 

Arh, don't get confused, driving in central is called the congestion zone and is where all cars except electric do have to pay, the ULEZ is for all areas within the M25 circle but outside the central zone.

[Graham Butcher]

6 minutes ago, Stonekeeper said:

 

 

The Nissan xtrail does not use the engine to move the car on that model.

Oh its one of those then, well I guess then the emissions are within the parameters.

[Stonekeeper]

The ulez permission is based on Nox not co2

 

The nox level for diesel and petrol are the same at 0.08g/km

 

Euro 4 met it for petrol Euro 6 reached it for diesel

 

Euro 5 diesel limit was 0.18g/km

[Graham Butcher]

4 minutes ago, @Lee said:

I'm saying the 'poor people' you were worried about could have a cheap nineteen year old petrol car and be ULEZ compliant.

Well if the parameters for the emissions are right that might be true, but not so for diesels, and if I had to sell my old diesel and buy another that it comply, it would have been cost prohibitive for me. As it was my old car got written off and so I was able to get a newer model with the payout that did comply. This still came at a cost, I lost the car I had from new, with full known history and 78,000 miles on the clock for a car with unknown history apart from a HPI check etc, and 140,000 miles on the clock, one with similar miles was out of my reach.

[Graham Butcher]

Yes, I'm aware that the relevant emission is based on Nox, not CO2 as my car emits 119gm/km of CO2 whereas the Aston Martin emits 394 gm/km. But that said, CO2 is being blamed for global warming so a reduction in engines would greatly impact on global warming and to reduce the rate of increase. In my view, 2 litre engines can produce vast amounts of HP and torque, so why do need big thirsty engines?

 

On the Nox side as well, the UK air is extremely low on Nox and is well within the safe levels.

[J.R.]

3 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

Have you actually ran your registration plate through the ULEZ checking website?

 

Nope, why would I bother?

 

I know my engine is EU5 and not compliant.

 

Like Lee I have no intention of driving in London (but never say never) if I were to get an enforcement notice I would add it to the extensive collection of parking tickets awaiting a blank garage wall to once again decorate.

 

None of the UK speed camera flashes or average speed camera contraventions ever got sent to France, we however send ours to the UK!

[J.R.]

3 hours ago, @Lee said:

I'm saying the 'poor people' you were worried about could have a cheap nineteen year old petrol car and be ULEZ compliant.

 

My now ex UK neighbour bought a 2014ish MK2 Facelift Octavia Estate after being impressed with my Mk 2, he tells me that he can no longer use it to pick up visitors from Heathrow, that the M25 is OK but the airport is within the ULEZ.

 

However the last century POS Japanese city car (automatic) that his wife ended up buying as an act of charity from her potless son when he emigrated to the states, the same son that insists they collect him and the ever growing family from Heathrow when they come to scrounge, the car that she wont let him get rid of despite it smoking like a Pompier, costing a fortune to insure and tax (it has a huge CO2 rating) turns out to be ULEZ compliant 🤣

 

I cant even tell you what it is, its a POS but reliable so other than polishing the yellowed headlights I have never worked on it or paid any attention to it, I think it may be a Toymotor.

 

So Lee is correct and someone with a later expensive vehicle is more likely to find themselves up **** creek with the ULEZ than someone poor with an old schnorrer.

[Graham Butcher]

4 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

My now ex UK neighbour bought a 2014ish MK2 Facelift Octavia Estate after being impressed with my Mk 2, he tells me that he can no longer use it to pick up visitors from Heathrow, that the M25 is OK but the airport is within the ULEZ.

 

However the last century POS Japanese city car (automatic) that his wife ended up buying as an act of charity from her potless son when he emigrated to the states, the same son that insists they collect him and the ever growing family from Heathrow when they come to scrounge, the car that she wont let him get rid of despite it smoking like a Pompier, costing a fortune to insure and tax (it has a huge CO2 rating) turns out to be ULEZ compliant 🤣

 

I cant even tell you what it is, its a POS but reliable so other than polishing the yellowed headlights I have never worked on it or paid any attention to it, I think it may be a Toymotor.

 

So Lee is correct and someone with a later expensive vehicle is more likely to find themselves up **** creek with the ULEZ than someone poor with an old schnorrer.

I presume that the Octavia Estate was a diesel Euro 5 engine, like my 2013 Superb was and yet all of these other compliant cars were pumping far more of dangerous for the planet CO2 which causing global warming.

[lol-lol]

5 hours ago, @Lee said:

I'm saying the 'poor people' you were worried about could have a cheap nineteen year old petrol car and be ULEZ compliant.

 

My Renault Megane Scenic was and that was an 03 plate.  

[lol-lol]

4 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

Yes, I'm aware that the relevant emission is based on Nox, not CO2 as my car emits 119gm/km of CO2 whereas the Aston Martin emits 394 gm/km. But that said, CO2 is being blamed for global warming so a reduction in engines would greatly impact on global warming and to reduce the rate of increase. In my view, 2 litre engines can produce vast amounts of HP and torque, so why do need big thirsty engines?

 

On the Nox side as well, the UK air is extremely low on Nox and is well within the safe levels.

 

It is now after ULEZ and updating buses taxes has now halved the NOX....

https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-strategies/environment-and-climate-change/environment-and-climate-change-publications/air-quality-london-2016-2024

About the report

Since 2016, London’s air quality has improved dramatically, and the number of Londoners living in areas that exceed the UK’s legal air pollution limits has decreased significantly. Drawing on data from London’s comprehensive monitoring network and the latest modelling from the London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (LAEI), this report evaluates how air quality in London has improved between 2016 and 2024 and assesses the ambitious policies that have contributed to these changes.

Improvements in monitored pollution levels

Average concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) were much higher in London than the rest of the UK in 2016 – and yet have fallen much more steeply in London compared to the rest of the country. Annual average roadside NO₂ concentrations across London dropped by nearly half (49 per cent) between 2016 and 2023, compared to 35 per cent in the rest of England, 39 per cent in Scotland and 31 per cent in Wales over the same period.

Preliminary figures also indicate that average annual concentrations of NO₂ in London dropped to the lowest levels ever recorded in 2023, lower even than the first year of COVID-19 lockdowns. 2023 was also the first year since records began when annual mean particulate matter (PM_2.5) concentrations did not exceed the latest interim World Health Organization (WHO) air quality target across London’s active air quality monitoring sites.

New data from London’s more than 150 reference-grade air quality monitoring sites also show the capital has made significant progress towards reaching the UK’s legal air pollution limits. The number of monitoring sites across London exceeding the UK’s annual legal limit for NO₂ has decreased from 56 sites in 2016 to just five in 2023. There has also been a 99 per cent reduction in the number of hours when NO₂ concentrations exceeded the UK’s hourly legal limit since 2016 – dropping from 4,130 hours in 2016, to just 22 hours in 2023.

Air Quality in London 2016-2024.pdf

[Graham Butcher]

1 hour ago, lol-lol said:

 

It is now after ULEZ and updating buses taxes has now halved the NOX....

https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-strategies/environment-and-climate-change/environment-and-climate-change-publications/air-quality-london-2016-2024

About the report

Since 2016, London’s air quality has improved dramatically, and the number of Londoners living in areas that exceed the UK’s legal air pollution limits has decreased significantly. Drawing on data from London’s comprehensive monitoring network and the latest modelling from the London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (LAEI), this report evaluates how air quality in London has improved between 2016 and 2024 and assesses the ambitious policies that have contributed to these changes.

Improvements in monitored pollution levels

Average concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) were much higher in London than the rest of the UK in 2016 – and yet have fallen much more steeply in London compared to the rest of the country. Annual average roadside NO₂ concentrations across London dropped by nearly half (49 per cent) between 2016 and 2023, compared to 35 per cent in the rest of England, 39 per cent in Scotland and 31 per cent in Wales over the same period.

Preliminary figures also indicate that average annual concentrations of NO₂ in London dropped to the lowest levels ever recorded in 2023, lower even than the first year of COVID-19 lockdowns. 2023 was also the first year since records began when annual mean particulate matter (PM_2.5) concentrations did not exceed the latest interim World Health Organization (WHO) air quality target across London’s active air quality monitoring sites.

New data from London’s more than 150 reference-grade air quality monitoring sites also show the capital has made significant progress towards reaching the UK’s legal air pollution limits. The number of monitoring sites across London exceeding the UK’s annual legal limit for NO₂ has decreased from 56 sites in 2016 to just five in 2023. There has also been a 99 per cent reduction in the number of hours when NO₂ concentrations exceeded the UK’s hourly legal limit since 2016 – dropping from 4,130 hours in 2016, to just 22 hours in 2023.

Air Quality in London 2016-2024.pdf 1.86 MB · 0 downloads

The truth is Londons air quality has been getting better year on year and also UCL who TFL commissioned to do a report in favour of the ULEZ were unable to come out and declare that the scheme was going to make any appreciable difference to the quality as international research and monitoring already proved beyond doubt that it was already rated good and that they could not back up the claim of X number of people were dying prematurely due to the poor air quality.   

Edited 28 March by Graham Butcher

[Graham Butcher]

1 hour ago, lol-lol said:

 

My Renault Megane Scenic was and that was an 03 plate.  

Yes, because it had a Euro 4 petrol engine. Many people are driving around in diesels of similar age which is a result of the fact there were loads of diesels on the 2nd market because of the UK governments push towards diesels as the fuel of the future, subsquently proven to be incorrect and the reason for so many adverts now about class actions against almost every maker of diesel cars for compensation as a direct result of them being mis-sold. Those people are now finding that they cannot afford to change to a compliant car as their old car has lost a huge chunk of value and compliant cars have significantly increased in value as a result of ULEZ.

[Ootohere]

@Graham Butcher   What do you want, or others against the ULEZ, just to moan, or to just let their be more emissions or pollution in London? 

[Graham Butcher]

3 minutes ago, Rooted said:

@Graham Butcher   What do you want, or others against the ULEZ, just to moan, or to just let their be more emissions or pollution in London? 

I'm all for having clean air, but the point is we already have it, check on the official monitoring stations dotted across London, see where they have been located and you will see that the worst levels of air quality is in the south which is largely residential, check up on the precise locations of the worst reading stations and check on the surrounding road networks and buildings etc and it becomes apparent that the traffic contribute less to the reading then is being claimed.   

[Ootohere]

And?

Vote in a Tory Mayor and people can fill their lungs with what ever. 

 

You do not have a Vote for a London Mayor though do you? 

 

How is Vicky Ford MP doing in your region with getting pot holes filled and reducing congestion, maybe getting more EV public charging? 

Edited 28 March by Rooted

[BTandSid]

@Rooted, there can’t be many that don’t accept that air quality is important and I suppose one way of effecting that is to take all the smokey old exhaust emitting vehicles off the road. There was initially an emissions zone in central London but what upset thousands was the manner in which Khan applied its expansion to cover pretty much everything inside the M25. Although there was warning and the change didn’t just come in overnight, you can’t expect people with non-compliant cars to simply trade up for something that is. As has been said non-compliant cars tended to be in the ownership of the less well off who struggled to keep a car on the road in the first place and so to tell them that they needed to spend money, and a lot of money at that, didn’t sit well. Cameras have been thrown up not just at the edges of the zone to catch those driving in, but throughout the entire zone to catch anyone living inside and having the audacity to try and use their non-compliant car without paying the £12.50 daily charge. Many of these cameras are regularly being sawn down by ‘vigilantes’. They’re reinstated, only to be sawn down again.

From a personal perspective I had a great 2013 Freelander, properly maintained etc etc which I absolutely loved. It was ok until ULEZ was extended to include my home address. This meant I’d have been paying £12.50 every time I moved it, to the shops, visiting my elderly mother, days out and such. We’d have probably been looking at £62.50pw so well over £3000pa. We bit the bullet and p/ex the car towards our Karoq. We could have kept the Freelander (with hindsight wish we had) and kept paying the charge as it’d have cost us less than buying the Karoq. However there were noises about what Khan might have proposed in future such as reviewing the qualifying ages to meet compliance so we reluctantly sold up. 

[Stonekeeper]

Whilst i don't have a problem with ulez zones in principal, people outside of an ulez zone have a choice whether to continue giving the businesses in them their custom and if they do wish to enter they could use public transport.

 

But i don't think it reasonable to expect every existing resident in the zone to be able to instantly comply so vehicles registered to an address within the zone at the time of implementation should have been exempt.

 

It would have been easy to do with the rules also stating that a subsequent non-compliant car could not be added.

[Ootohere]

What seems wrong is that you can just pay up and take in the supposedly more polluting vehicles.

 

That is rather different from Glasgow where what you pay is a fine, not a toll charge. 

[Stonekeeper]

3 minutes ago, Rooted said:

What seems wrong is that you can just pay up and take in the supposedly more polluting vehicles.

 

That is rather different from Glasgow where what you pay is a fine, not a toll charge. 

 

Glasgow's lez zone is minuscule compared to London's and residents within that zone where given 2 years to comply

[Ootohere]

@Stonekeeper  Indeed,  Peoples lungs will be the same though.

 

Glasgow Council could not even get their own act together and have compliant vehicles leased or bought in time so that they did not need to hire ones. 

The issue is that people get incompetents running things, and they always will. 

[Graham Butcher]

2 hours ago, Rooted said:

And?

Vote in a Tory Mayor and people can fill their lungs with what ever. 

 

You do not have a Vote for a London Mayor though do you? 

 

How is Vicky Ford MP doing in your region with getting pot holes filled and reducing congestion, maybe getting more EV public charging? 

The short answer to these questions is:-

I doubt that it would make any difference now what party the next London Mayor comes from, the revenue stream has been created and they will not want to lose it.

 

Vicky Ford appears to be making zero difference with the pot holes, congestion is getting worse, the ECC is Tory lead and they openly admitted that they have deliberately slowed the traffic entering my city and you will have seen my other post regarding the woeful provision of EV public charging in the city. Public transport in the city is also dreadful, all the supermarkets are towards the city fringes and are not served by any regular public transport, so the only way for most people to reach them is by car. City centre is rapidly becoming a venue for eating out and residential areas are springing up everywhere in the centre as many shops are converting what was upstairs sales area, into flats, office blocks being converted to flats.

Edited 28 March by Graham Butcher

[Graham Butcher]

1 hour ago, Rooted said:

What seems wrong is that you can just pay up and take in the supposedly more polluting vehicles.

 

That is rather different from Glasgow where what you pay is a fine, not a toll charge. 

Does that not suggest that it is more about money than clean air?

 

Incidently public transport in London is also not fit for purpose if you need to visit other areas of London by bus, there is the Superloop express service which runs around London between the fringes and central London and it takes 9 hours to go end to end as this video shows, weekday and notice the apparent lack of traffic in the video as well.

 

 

Edited 28 March by Graham Butcher

[J.R.]

7 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

I presume that the Octavia Estate was a diesel Euro 5 engine,

 

IIRC it was EU4 and the MK1 before it was EU3, I may have got that wrong, the MK2 had a PD engine, no DPF, no regens or any of that nonsense.

[Graham Butcher]

@J.R. If it had no DPF then I think it was more likely to be EU4.