Ulez expanded to include whole of outer London

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
O dear, it seems the independent reviewer of the proposed ulez expansion Dr Gary Fuller. this guy has to be fully independent of the organisation being reviewed including financial links, it has come to light that between 2021 and 2023 he was awarded £891,992 by you guessed it city hall so he is very impartial. remember Birmingham in 2016 well Mr Fuller urged them to instigate lez's everybody refused to pay the fines and they scrapped them. yes Mr Kahn is squeaky clean my A-s he is a liar and a cheat and needs to be got rid off as soon as.
 
The Government has all the data and they are using it to push their own agenda ie going green as soon as possible, irespective of how much it costs poor joe public
It’s going to cost us a f**ksight more if we don’t get to zero carbon emissions ASAP, we’ve had years of warnings but have failed to act, mainly due to lies and confusion spread by the petro-chemical industries. If anything there now seems to be a rush to get as much oil out of the ground as possible in a revolting rush for profit regardless of the fact we are rapidly creating a hostile environment that threatens our very existence.
I see the end result of this as large proportions of Africa, India and the Middle East becoming inhabitable, causing endless droughts, famine and mass people movements to cooler parts of the planet.
Hope you’ve got room on your island for a few hundred thousand extra people.
 
I'm a bit more concerned about the poor kids who sit in classrooms were the roof might fall on them. i live for now not 3000 years down the road, mother earth will look after self no matter what we do, i tend not to listen to much to crackpot predictions by crackpots who are making a good living out of it
 
It’s going to cost us a f**ksight more if we don’t get to zero carbon emissions ASAP,
So why didn't they put a blanket ban on all polluting cars instead of a charge for them to enter and keep polluting, if they were serious about air quality they would have banned them.
 
So why didn't they put a blanket ban on all polluting cars instead of a charge for them to enter and keep polluting, if they were serious about air quality they would have banned them.
Considering the backlash against the ULEZ, typified by comments on here, how politically acceptable do you think an outright ban would be?
 
So why didn't they put a blanket ban on all polluting cars instead of a charge for them to enter and keep polluting, if they were serious about air quality they would have banned them.
Exactly. If you want clean air in London then pedestrianise it. Ah, but making people pay to enter it make more money doesn’t it!
 
So why didn't they put a blanket ban on all polluting cars instead of a charge for them to enter and keep polluting, if they were serious about air quality they would have banned them
You are conflating two things here. ULEZ is about reducing NOx and particulate pollution, the stuff that’s making many kids living in poorer neighbourhoods asthmatic and causing early deaths. This will have a minimum effect on CO2 induced global warming.
Net Zero is (or is meant to be) the drive to reduce the emission of greenhouse gasses, chiefly CO2 and methane, in the vague hope of keeping the global average temperature rise to 1.5 C above average pre Industrial Revolution levels. We are failing dismally with this as we are selfish and unable to think or plan beyond the short term. Our politicians are more afraid of losing votes than they are of the impending climate catastrophe.

To address your point, they are trying to modify behaviour, encouraging people still driving old polluting cars to either use public transport or swap to a less polluting vehicle. This has worked in the current zone, there has been a 60% reduction in non-compliant cars entering the zone. An outright ban would be great but would cause even more chaos and anger than there is already.
 
That is a bold statement it's like saying we will make you a better person.
It’s not that bold. It happens all the time, like making fags £20 a packet reduces the amount of people smoking them.
Some people might say that driving a bit less, using public transport or having a less polluting car does make you a better person, or at least less selfish.

As for your other point, just because you didn’t get cancer through smoking doesn’t mean smoking does not lead to a massively increased risk of cancer. I think it’s about 50% of smokers that die of cancer so I guess you are, so far, in the lucky half.
 
Back
Top