Ulez expanded to include whole of outer London

Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Benfleet Brewery said:
Why? Because it isn’t stopping vehicles polluting the air of course?

https://www.essexhighways.org/highw.../highway-schemes/basildon-schemes/air-quality
Click to expand...
1. I see no motorway
2. I see good reason for speed restrictions
3. It was people's feedback that raised this air quality speed limit
4. from your point (it isn't stopping vehicles polluting...) I can only surmise that you wish for no non EV vehicles to be on the road or death rates from air pollution to be acceptable.
 
lancon said:
1. I see no motorway
2. I see good reason for speed restrictions
3. It was people's feedback that raised this air quality speed limit
4. from your point (it isn't stopping vehicles polluting...) I can only surmise that you wish for no non EV vehicles to be on the road or death rates from air pollution to be acceptable.
Click to expand...

1,2 & 3. I didn’t mention motorway. I said I have an EV and still have my speed restricted to reduce emissions which it doesn’t in my case

4. Not at all. I just don’t agree with slapping a tax on those who can’t afford to buy a newer car and allowing the more well off to carry on polluting free of charge
 
Benfleet Brewery said:
Not at all. I just don’t agree with slapping a tax on those who can’t afford to buy a newer car and allowing the more well off to carry on polluting free of charge
Click to expand...

Small edit - I just don’t agree with slapping a tax on those who can’t afford to buy a newer car and allowing the more well off to carry on polluting free of charge because they can afford to pay £250 a month to drive in the zone.
 
Last edited:
Chippy_Tea said:
Small edit - I just don’t agree with slapping a tax on those who can’t afford to buy a newer car and allowing the more well off to carry on polluting free of charge because they can afford to pay £250 a month to drive in the zone.
Click to expand...
So surely the answer is to ban all non ULEZ cars from London (& all large cities/towns) as the first step and then all non EV as the second step.
 
lancon said:
So surely the answer is to ban all non ULEZ cars from London (& all large cities/towns) as the first step and then all non EV as the second step.
Click to expand...

This thread keeps going round in circles this has been discussed several times.

Banning all polluting vehicles would obviously be the answer to air quality in London but its never going to happen for the foreseeable future for several reasons -

There wouldn't be enough room on public transport for all those Londoners who's cars were banned to move around the city if there was a blanket ban.

The scrappage scheme would help some but there is not an unlimited number of £2000 cars that would be allowed in the zone and you can bet prices would rise as soon as dealers realise there is extra demand.

They would be crucified by their own voters at the next election and that is why they are allowing those that can afford £250 a month to carry on pollution the streets of London and those that cannot to find another means of travelling in the city.
 
I agree Chippy I am fed up of reading the same old same old this thread is past its sell by date to me just "he said she said"
Just a thought
 
Rodcx500z said:
Interesting MSN
Click to expand...

That is interesting Rod i had never given rat runs a thought obviously people are going to learn where the cameras are and are going to avoid them, soon sat-navs will have ULEZ camera warnings and it'll get worse. ;)



Newcastle City Council has abandoned its Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) scheme after a review found that the limitations had made traffic worse.

The trial 18-month scheme began in March 2022 and closed off several streets in an attempt to reduce the number of vehicles using local streets, as well as encouraging more residents to cycle or walk.

Yet data collected from the trial showed that traffic increased, as vehicles were forced to used surrounding roads instead, resulting in congestion.

The council also said that the LTNs had not encouraged people to walk or cycle instead.
Click to expand...
 
Chippy_Tea said:
This thread keeps going round in circles this has been discussed several times.

Banning all polluting vehicles would obviously be the answer to air quality in London but its never going to happen for the foreseeable future for several reasons -

There wouldn't be enough room on public transport for all those Londoners who's cars were banned to move around the city if there was a blanket ban.

The scrappage scheme would help some but there is not an unlimited number of £2000 cars that would be allowed in the zone and you can bet prices would rise as soon as dealers realise there is extra demand.

They would be crucified by their own voters at the next election and that is why they are allowing those that can afford £250 a month to carry on pollution the streets of London and those that cannot to find another means of travelling in the city.
Click to expand...
As in the cyclical discussion, (I) increase public transport, (ii) I haven't mentioned scrappage scheme, and (iii) if it is done after a general election then there will be little against, save from the libertarians and conspiracy theorists, who by their own admission often decry the electoral system.
 
If you delve further into the the removal of the LTN scheme in Newcastle you would note that the council are putting in a different LTN next year.
And having good knowledge of the area I know that the removed LTN was not going to work, it's far too small an area to make a difference with relatively few houses compared to LTN areas in London.
 
lancon said:
(I) increase public transport,
Click to expand...
There is no way they could increase public transport by the amount needed to cover a blanket ban so again its not going to happen.

(ii) I haven't mentioned scrappage scheme,
Click to expand...
I never said you did i said "This thread keeps going round in circles this has been discussed several times"

(iii) if it is done after a general election then there will be little against, save from the libertarians and conspiracy theorists, who by their own admission often decry the electoral system.
Click to expand...
They have already introduced the £250 charge they are not going to introduce a blanket ban anytime soon its all about making money (to go round in another circle) as was posted earlier -


enfleet Brewery said:
Not at all. I just don’t agree with slapping a tax on those who can’t afford to buy a newer car and allowing the more well off to carry on polluting free of charge
Click to expand...

Small edit - I just don’t agree with slapping a tax on those who can’t afford to buy a newer car and allowing the more well off to carry on polluting free of charge because they can afford to pay £250 a month to drive in the zone.
Click to expand...
 
1693924468553.png

The argument that they can't sort out public transport is just more naysaying. remove the cars and plenty of room to have enough public transport running efficiently.
 
This would have been a much better solution why didn't they think of that? (video cut to start at the relevant part)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Chippy_Tea
T-Charge: New London traffic charge comes into force
Replies
18
Views
1K
simon12
simon12

Latest posts

Back
Top