ulez
Moderator: Long slender neck
-
- Regular
- Posts: 4714
- Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2019 3:36 pm
- Has thanked: 1126 times
- Been thanked: 762 times
Re: ulez
If folks decided to get shot of their smoke belching old grids then Khan wouldn’t make a penny would he.
Maybe that’s the aim here? As Spike has already pointed out, a blanket ban on old grids would bring hellfire down on Khan’s head. Surcharging the worst polluters is currently a reasonable way to encourage owners of such cars to get shot. As another poster has already mentioned, it doesn’t cost a fortune to get an Ulez compliant car.
Maybe that’s the aim here? As Spike has already pointed out, a blanket ban on old grids would bring hellfire down on Khan’s head. Surcharging the worst polluters is currently a reasonable way to encourage owners of such cars to get shot. As another poster has already mentioned, it doesn’t cost a fortune to get an Ulez compliant car.
- ComeOnYouOs
- Regular
- Posts: 3841
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:22 pm
- Awards: Colossal berk
- Has thanked: 79 times
- Been thanked: 1054 times
Re: ulez
Its not what i think, its what people who know what their talking about, and Ive read a few accounts from these people saying it wont make much difference.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:09 pmWhy do you think that taking the most polluting vehicles off the road will have only a "little effect" on pollution?ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:37 pmGood question.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 6:40 pm Do you not think he should be addressing climate change and pollution?
This will have such little effect ( if any), on pollution, it really isnt worth the cost to the poorer people of our city. As Ive said, it doesnt affect me personally, as my car is Ulez complient ( at the moment),
Its just gesture politics." Oh look at me, Im doing something about dirty air", when he's not really
This is just honest opinion
Even the most polluting cars are not that polluting, as they were say 30 years ago. Cars are cleaner than they have been in recent history.
I genuinely believe the amount of pollution removed will be minimal, and the cost is astronomical
- ChorizO
- Fresh Alias
- Posts: 321
- Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2023 7:12 am
- Has thanked: 72 times
- Been thanked: 69 times
Re: ulez
Then you genuinely have no idea what you are talking about.ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 10:10 pmIts not what i think, its what people who know what their talking about, and Ive read a few accounts from these people saying it wont make much difference.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:09 pmWhy do you think that taking the most polluting vehicles off the road will have only a "little effect" on pollution?ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:37 pm
Good question.
This will have such little effect ( if any), on pollution, it really isnt worth the cost to the poorer people of our city. As Ive said, it doesnt affect me personally, as my car is Ulez complient ( at the moment),
Its just gesture politics." Oh look at me, Im doing something about dirty air", when he's not really
This is just honest opinion
Even the most polluting cars are not that polluting, as they were say 30 years ago. Cars are cleaner than they have been in recent history.
I genuinely believe the amount of pollution removed will be minimal, and the cost is astronomical
-
- Tiresome troll
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:10 pm
- Has thanked: 138 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
Re: ulez
Khan was using the grant to offer free transport to the lazy louts in uni instead of using it to improve or maintain servicesBiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:24 pm ULEZ wouldn’t be a thing if the Tories didn’t scrap the grant to TFL in 2018. They’ve absolutely hamstrung London since Khan has taken over.
- Long slender neck
- MB Legend
- Posts: 14349
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:13 am
- Has thanked: 2523 times
- Been thanked: 3312 times
Re: ulez
https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute ... sion-zone/ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 10:10 pmIts not what i think, its what people who know what their talking about, and Ive read a few accounts from these people saying it wont make much difference.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:09 pmWhy do you think that taking the most polluting vehicles off the road will have only a "little effect" on pollution?ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:37 pm
Good question.
This will have such little effect ( if any), on pollution, it really isnt worth the cost to the poorer people of our city. As Ive said, it doesnt affect me personally, as my car is Ulez complient ( at the moment),
Its just gesture politics." Oh look at me, Im doing something about dirty air", when he's not really
This is just honest opinion
Even the most polluting cars are not that polluting, as they were say 30 years ago. Cars are cleaner than they have been in recent history.
I genuinely believe the amount of pollution removed will be minimal, and the cost is astronomical
You've been misled, again.
- StillSpike
- Regular
- Posts: 4181
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:18 pm
- Has thanked: 517 times
- Been thanked: 1200 times
Re: ulez
I'm sorry - unless you genuinely believe that COYOs has been misled it's very hard to believe you. As for the so-called facts and information that you've linked to, if you think that trumps someone's genuine beliefs - garnered from LBC, DailMail expert opinion pieces - then you are sorely mistaken my friend. Opinion (especially when genuinely held) always > facts.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 7:34 amhttps://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute ... sion-zone/ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 10:10 pmIts not what i think, its what people who know what their talking about, and Ive read a few accounts from these people saying it wont make much difference.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:09 pm
Why do you think that taking the most polluting vehicles off the road will have only a "little effect" on pollution?
Even the most polluting cars are not that polluting, as they were say 30 years ago. Cars are cleaner than they have been in recent history.
I genuinely believe the amount of pollution removed will be minimal, and the cost is astronomical
You've been mislead, again.
-
- Tiresome troll
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:43 pm
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 167 times
Re: ulez
my van is none compliant.
it passes M.O.T every year which includes emission test.
and responding to it does not cost much to by a car or van
that meets the requirements. £100 pounds is a lot to some people
let alone thousands to by another vehicle.
it passes M.O.T every year which includes emission test.
and responding to it does not cost much to by a car or van
that meets the requirements. £100 pounds is a lot to some people
let alone thousands to by another vehicle.
- Long slender neck
- MB Legend
- Posts: 14349
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:13 am
- Has thanked: 2523 times
- Been thanked: 3312 times
Re: ulez
Scrap the old banger mate.
As previously discussed, the M.O.T emissions test is totally different, unless you'd like the test changed so your van cant pass an MOT?
-
- Regular
- Posts: 4445
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 4:12 pm
- Has thanked: 895 times
- Been thanked: 963 times
Re: ulez
That didn’t happenType high wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 3:53 amKhan was using the grant to offer free transport to the lazy louts in uni instead of using it to improve or maintain servicesBiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:24 pm ULEZ wouldn’t be a thing if the Tories didn’t scrap the grant to TFL in 2018. They’ve absolutely hamstrung London since Khan has taken over.
- ComeOnYouOs
- Regular
- Posts: 3841
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:22 pm
- Awards: Colossal berk
- Has thanked: 79 times
- Been thanked: 1054 times
Re: ulez
Or maybe its you who have no idea what your talking about?ChorizO wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 1:26 amThen you genuinely have no idea what you are talking about.ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 10:10 pmIts not what i think, its what people who know what their talking about, and Ive read a few accounts from these people saying it wont make much difference.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:09 pm
Why do you think that taking the most polluting vehicles off the road will have only a "little effect" on pollution?
Even the most polluting cars are not that polluting, as they were say 30 years ago. Cars are cleaner than they have been in recent history.
I genuinely believe the amount of pollution removed will be minimal, and the cost is astronomical
-
- Regular
- Posts: 4738
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:48 pm
- Has thanked: 2083 times
- Been thanked: 1702 times
-
- Boardin' 24/7
- Posts: 7736
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:24 pm
- Has thanked: 3418 times
- Been thanked: 1764 times
Re: ulez
It's interesting that page ignores the Queen Mary / Imperial study that showed no impact (mentioned a few pages back)Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 7:34 amhttps://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute ... sion-zone/ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 10:10 pmIts not what i think, its what people who know what their talking about, and Ive read a few accounts from these people saying it wont make much difference.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:09 pm
Why do you think that taking the most polluting vehicles off the road will have only a "little effect" on pollution?
Even the most polluting cars are not that polluting, as they were say 30 years ago. Cars are cleaner than they have been in recent history.
I genuinely believe the amount of pollution removed will be minimal, and the cost is astronomical
You've been misled, again.
Follow the science... but only when it suits the agenda?
As for what ComeOnYouOs mentioned about the shifting goalposts, yup it's in the strategy document. Will be interesting on here what people say when their Euro4, Euro5, then Euro6 petrols get put onto the non-compliant list
- Long slender neck
- MB Legend
- Posts: 14349
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:13 am
- Has thanked: 2523 times
- Been thanked: 3312 times
-
- Boardin' 24/7
- Posts: 7736
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:24 pm
- Has thanked: 3418 times
- Been thanked: 1764 times
Re: ulez
If you call having your personal freedom of movement taken away progress, the kind of thing you'd expect from Communist China not a Western democracy
-
- Regular
- Posts: 4445
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 4:12 pm
- Has thanked: 895 times
- Been thanked: 963 times
-
- Boardin' 24/7
- Posts: 7736
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:24 pm
- Has thanked: 3418 times
- Been thanked: 1764 times
Re: ulez
When they define your car as one of those "sh*t cars" it'll be a different tuneBiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 1:07 pmPaying extra for a sh*t car isn’t having your freedom taken away
- Long slender neck
- MB Legend
- Posts: 14349
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:13 am
- Has thanked: 2523 times
- Been thanked: 3312 times
Re: ulez
One problem with the study is that the study period isnt long enough. Many would have changed their car well in advance of the introduction, others may have been influenced by the policy to change their car later, so they should have looked at data over a longer time period.researchers used publicly available air quality data to measure changes in pollution in the twelve-week period from 25 February 2019, before the ULEZ was introduced, to 20 May 2019, after it had been implemented
Just accept that less polluting vehicles on the road is a good thing.
-
- Tiresome troll
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:43 pm
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 167 times
Re: ulez
let me no when you have posted a cheque to help me out,Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 9:05 amScrap the old banger mate.
As previously discussed, the M.O.T emissions test is totally different, unless you'd like the test changed so your van cant pass an MOT?
sounds like money is no object to you.
- Max B Gold
- MB Legend
- Posts: 12374
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 2:12 pm
- Has thanked: 993 times
- Been thanked: 2821 times
Re: ulez
This is the part of the move to reducing pollution that bothers me.greyhound wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 1:31 pmlet me no when you have posted a cheque to help me out,Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 9:05 amScrap the old banger mate.
As previously discussed, the M.O.T emissions test is totally different, unless you'd like the test changed so your van cant pass an MOT?
sounds like money is no object to you.
As usual the lowest earners are being asked to pay the price whilst the polluters (oil companies, car manufacturers, tyre companies etc) dump their external costs on society get off Scotch free.
An easy solution would be to levy a windfall tax on big oil who have been profiteering at our expense since time began (I note fuel prices are on the rise again, Why?).
The tax money could be used to fund a proper scrappage scheme to help people like greyhound buy a Ulez compliant van/car.
Cleaner air is the goal here not some yaboo misdirection by the Tories to have a go at Khan.
-
- Fresh Alias
- Posts: 786
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 7:49 am
- Has thanked: 36 times
- Been thanked: 107 times
Re: ulez
The problem is not car emissions it is the particles from tyres and brakes that cause the most pollution.
Add in the fact that Khan is trying to make London a 20mph zone and you know that this is about raising money not emissions. The initial cost of expansion is £250m and rising. The next step which is documented by tfl is to charge cars by the mile.
It was Boris who thought of this in 2015, however, even for him this has gone too far.
Add in the fact that Khan is trying to make London a 20mph zone and you know that this is about raising money not emissions. The initial cost of expansion is £250m and rising. The next step which is documented by tfl is to charge cars by the mile.
It was Boris who thought of this in 2015, however, even for him this has gone too far.
-
- Regular
- Posts: 4445
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 4:12 pm
- Has thanked: 895 times
- Been thanked: 963 times
Re: ulez
I don’t agree with it but isn’t akin to being under communist rule. There are far too many cars on the road now, something needs to be done about it.gshaw wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 1:09 pmWhen they define your car as one of those "sh*t cars" it'll be a different tuneBiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 1:07 pmPaying extra for a sh*t car isn’t having your freedom taken away
- ComeOnYouOs
- Regular
- Posts: 3841
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:22 pm
- Awards: Colossal berk
- Has thanked: 79 times
- Been thanked: 1054 times
Re: ulez
Long as its someone elses car thats taken off the road, youll be ok with that?BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 2:10 pmI don’t agree with it but isn’t akin to being under communist rule. There are far too many cars on the road now, something needs to be done about it.gshaw wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 1:09 pmWhen they define your car as one of those "sh*t cars" it'll be a different tuneBiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 1:07 pm
Paying extra for a sh*t car isn’t having your freedom taken away
Also whats 'too many cars'?
-
- Tiresome troll
- Posts: 1299
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:11 pm
- Has thanked: 178 times
- Been thanked: 420 times
Re: ulez
Do you actually live or work in London?ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 2:14 pmLong as its someone elses car thats taken off the road, youll be ok with that?BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 2:10 pmI don’t agree with it but isn’t akin to being under communist rule. There are far too many cars on the road now, something needs to be done about it.
Also whats 'too many cars'?
You can’t, because you can’t seriously think that if you did.