closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 143

Thread: ULEZ Expansion 2023

  1. #51
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    246
    i understand why they are doing this but feel for the families who will have to now sell their cars (for peanuts, as no one will buy them cos of ulez) and possiblly go into more debt to buy a compliant car and all in this current ecomonic climate

  2. #52
    Grand Master wileeeeeey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    15,629
    I'm outside it by about 5 inches for some reason, even though we're in a London borough, would rather be in it.

    No doubt the long distance commuters will flock to our set of roads before getting the tube into central.

    Hopefully the neighbourhood asks for permit zones now to discourage commuter traffic.

  3. #53
    Nothing other than revenue.

    The whole pollution control is just complete fiction. Breathe clean air whilst you are stabbed for your watch/phone/bag should be their slogan. Awful place.

  4. #54
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    1,655
    Quote Originally Posted by dougair View Post
    Cambridge also proposing a similar scheme.
    As currently proposed, the Cambridge scheme is actually a true vehicle congestion charge: all private motor vehicles would pay a flat £5/day, regardless of power source, emissions etc.

  5. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by bigup View Post
    i understand why they are doing this but feel for the families who will have to now sell their cars (for peanuts, as no one will buy them cos of ulez) and possiblly go into more debt to buy a compliant car and all in this current ecomonic climate
    This. The scrappage scheme will not anywhere near enough for a compliant vehicle and in any case is only available to those on benefits living in the ULEZ area.

  6. #56
    Master Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    9,596
    I live inside this zone. As someone who uses the car as little as possible and uses a bicycle 90% of the time, I wouldn't object to charges if TfL used the funds to do something useful and improve infrastructure to actually try and reduce unnecessary car journeys and hence emissions.

    Even something as simple as painting advanced stop lines at traffic lights makes cycling so much safer. Traffic lights in Greater London are pot luck whether you filter to the front and find an ASL or end up squeezed by the side of a car in the gutter.

    I also feel like the Mayor's "clean air" thing is just lip service and this is another way to fill TfL's black hole.

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by MacDeath View Post
    Nothing other than revenue.

    The whole pollution control is just complete fiction. Breathe clean air whilst you are stabbed for your watch/phone/bag should be their slogan. Awful place.
    This...

  8. #58
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Christian View Post
    I also feel like the Mayor's "clean air" thing is just lip service and this is another way to fill TfL's black hole.
    Possibly, but these figures on the results of combined anti-pollution measures are encouraging:
    “New research looking at London traffic trends for 2021 shows that CO2 emissions from traffic were cut by 5%, while particulate matter (PM) emissions fell by 40% and NOx emissions were reduced by almost 54%.”

    However an Imperial study earlier on concluded:
    “Our research suggests that a ULEZ on its own is not an effective strategy to improve air quality – the case of London shows us that it works best when combined with a broader set of policies that reduce emissions across sectors like bus and taxi retrofitting, support for active and public transport, and other policies on polluting vehicles.”

    Also:

    “Between 2016 and 2020, the number of Londoners living in areas with illegally high levels of nitrogen dioxide fell by 94 per cent, and alongside this there were other reductions in London’s air pollution. New research from Imperial has found that changes in air pollution around the introduction of the ULEZ in April 2019 were small in comparison to these longer-term improvements.”

    So it’s not the ULEZ on its own that’s achieving it, but a 94% reduction in illegal NO2 levels sounds worthwhile, NOx and PMs are quite literally shortening our healthy lives. I enjoy driving and can see both sides of this, but I’m glad central London is cleaner than it used to be.

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by deanlad View Post
    You are almost right. Itís a maximum 6 year old vehicle Iím potentially being forced to buy.
    Being commercial, nearly all vat reg. At around the £15 k mark + vat, itís not really a viable option for me.

    I think whatís beginning to gripe is the fact that you donít have a choice, or is it a day in the matter.
    Expansion was well and truly opposed overwhelmingly/80%Ö. Yet it goes aheadÖ.

    - - - Updated - - -

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...s-the-poorest/
    There isnít really any evidence in that article to support the headline. Iíd be surprised if actually most of the poorest in London didnít use public transport rather than a car. To be honest of all the places in the country thereís not much excuse for the majority using cars in London. You can get around quite easily using public transport.

  10. #60
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    993
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by dougair View Post
    There isnít really any evidence in that article to support the headline. Iíd be surprised if actually most of the poorest in London didnít use public transport rather than a car. To be honest of all the places in the country thereís not much excuse for the majority using cars in London. You can get around quite easily using public transport.
    I can indeed, but not with a ton of sand, bags of cement and a mixer on the bus, a wheelbarrow and tools on the tube, or lengths of timber on the busÖ🤔

  11. #61
    I am pleased to see this coming into effect there in no need to drive a vehicle in London unless you are disabled, trades person or delivery driver.

  12. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by bloater View Post
    Bristol launch it later this month the Clean Air Zone looks like the same restrictions as ULEZ and a £9 a day fee.
    If you want to see the writing on the wall, Oxford has recently launched a trial for its ZEZ. Although it currently only covers a few streets, it will ultimately cover the city centre (and probably beyond, in time).

    And yep, ZEZ = ZERO EMISSIONS ZONE.

  13. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by deanlad View Post
    I can indeed, but not with a ton of sand, bags of cement and a mixer on the bus, a wheelbarrow and tools on the tube, or lengths of timber on the busÖ🤔
    So you have to add the charge on to the job price, tradesman have been doing this since the congestion charge came in.

  14. #64
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    993
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by dougair View Post
    So you have to add the charge on to the job price, tradesman have been doing this since the congestion charge came in.
    Condition is still prevalent all over London. Not sure how much busier it would be if charge abolished.

    Emissions though, you can still pay the fee and continue to pollute, and to essentially pass it on to the customer, itís no more than a stealth taxÖ.

  15. #65
    Master Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    9,596
    Quote Originally Posted by boring_sandwich View Post
    I am pleased to see this coming into effect there in no need to drive a vehicle in London unless you are disabled, trades person or delivery driver.
    I agree with this. I'm zone 5 and never need to drive "inward". The only time I really use my car is going outside the M25.

  16. #66
    To be fair, Khan did consult with the effected population on extending ULEZ to the outer London boroughs, we received a consultation survey.

    70% said no to it.

    Read all about the consultation process, 43 documents on the TfL website, it's a blast.

  17. #67
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    South West, UK
    Posts
    2,055

    ULEZ Expansion 2023

    Elephant in the room is that brake and clutch dust contributes much more to air pollution. So why arenít these new SUV hybrid and EVs (not clutch) being taxed as they contribute much more to air pollution than say, an old fiesta or cords.

    Ultimately this is a regressive tax in every regard

  18. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodder View Post
    Elephant in the room is that brake and clutch dust contributes much more to air pollution. So why aren’t these new SUV hybrid and EVs (not clutch) being taxed as they contribute much more to air pollution than say, an old fiesta or cords.

    Ultimately this is a regressive tax in every regard
    They will be, when all vehicles are ULEZ compliant, the scheme won't be wound up. The infrastructure will be used for entry and dynamic road use charging.
    Last edited by BillyCasper; 30th November 2022 at 12:27.

  19. #69
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    South West, UK
    Posts
    2,055
    Quote Originally Posted by BillyCasper View Post
    They will be, when all vehicles are ULEZ compliance, the scheme won't be wound up. The infrastructure will be used for entry and dynamic road use charging.
    I suppose that makes sense. Makes you wonder why road tax canít be a little more dynamic and do the job that way

  20. #70
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Posts
    5,280
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodder View Post
    Elephant in the room is that brake and clutch dust contributes much more to air pollution. So why arenít these new SUV hybrid and EVs (not clutch) being taxed as they contribute much more to air pollution than say, an old fiesta or cords.

    Ultimately this is a regressive tax in every regard
    Brake, tyre and clutch dust (where applicable) is well known and isnít exactly an elephant in the room.

    The government produced a paper back in 2019 that attempted to draw together what was known at that point about Non Exhaust Emissions (NEEs), including the one from emissions analytics which seemed to kick off the debate before the world became preoccupied with other things.

    https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/assets/d...eset_Final.pdf

    The executive summary is a good picture of where itís at, if you donít fancy wading through 90+ pages, but mitigation for it will be to reduce overall traffic volume, and look at encouraging different driving styles where itís a particular problem.

    Interestingly, they do differentiate between EVs and other vehicles, regenerative braking in electric vehicles means they donít emit the same amount of NEEs as other comparable weight vehicles, so itís not always as easy as it appears to Ďtax a problem awayí.

    The problem with the fiesta/corsa line is that older cars generally donít control particulates as well as Euro 6 models, so despite the lower amount of NEEs, net effect is similar or at least very hard to measure.

    The bottom line is that the only Ďgreení motoring is no motoring at all, we can argue all day long that one group of vehicles is better or worse than others, but they all emit and all contribute to early deaths in people.

    I can see why cities are falling over themselves to introduce schemes that aim to reduce the amount of traffic entering it, whilst at the same time helping to fill the budget holes that are getting bigger.

  21. #71
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    South West, UK
    Posts
    2,055
    But thatís my point. It is well known but it has been completely ignored. Hence, the exclusion of it makes it the elephant in the room. It means the scheme lacks robustness, fairness and it wonít reach its goal of improving pollution as efficiently as if it had been considered.

    Also, itís fair to say the scheme is not popular. Partly because itís not equitable. And having the general population on side will only help the goal of reducing pollution. Ultimately, itís a regressive tax that will hit the poor, and as result disadvantaged groups the hardest.

    Some speeding fines are linked to income. Why not do the same with ULEZ?

  22. #72
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Posts
    5,280
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodder View Post
    But thatís my point. It is well known but it has been completely ignored. Hence, the exclusion of it makes it the elephant in the room. It means the scheme lacks robustness, fairness and it wonít reach its goal of improving pollution as efficiently as if it had been considered.
    Yes, I took your point, but mine was really about how NEEs had been picked up on, but whether itís exhaust emissions or some other type, the cure is the same which is to discourage vehicles from travelling in cities.

    Whether itís an old Fiesta or a modern SUV, they both pollute and I doubt anybodyís lungs care where it came from.

    Also, itís fair to say the scheme is not popular. Partly because itís not equitable. And having the general population on side will only help the goal of reducing pollution. Ultimately, itís a regressive tax that will hit the poor, and as result disadvantaged groups the hardest.
    Inequity is everywhere, whether itís rich folk in Paris who have two cars with number plates that allowed them to travel into the city every day of the week when the other plate was banned, through to those same disadvantaged groups who live alongside some of the most congested roads in London being poisoned by the folks who drive on them.

    Why would targeting the more well off be more popular? Surely the idea is to get more people into ultra low emission compliant vehicles, and itís not a very high or expensive bar to get over especially compared to the costs of living or working in London.

    I used to spend £11k a year getting the train into London, it would have been cheaper to drive in, but that was hell.

    Some speeding fines are linked to income. Why not do the same with ULEZ?
    Is it meant to be a carrot or a stick? It sounds just as inequitable to differentiate on the grounds of how much the car costs, especially if the whole emissions footprint isnít all that different.

    City leaders need to make their minds up whether itís a congestion or ULEZ charge, perhaps itís both, but they should at least be upfront about why theyíre looking to introduce it, and take account of the views of the populations they apparently serve.

  23. #73
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    14,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Tooks View Post
    City leaders need to make their minds up whether itís a congestion or ULEZ charge, perhaps itís both, but they should at least be upfront about why theyíre looking to introduce it, and take account of the views of the populations they apparently serve.
    In London at least, they have both. On the very infrequent times we travel into London by car, we donít pay the ULEZ charge as our vehicle is Euro6 but still have to pay the congestion charge.

  24. #74
    Master reggie747's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    The Mersey Riviera
    Posts
    6,493
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    In London at least, they have both. On the very infrequent times we travel into London by car, we donít pay the ULEZ charge as our vehicle is Euro6 but still have to pay the congestion charge.
    Your balls in a vice is how it is (and the grip will only get tighter)

  25. #75
    Master Sinnlover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    9,020
    Quote Originally Posted by BillyCasper View Post
    To be fair, Khan did consult with the effected population on extending ULEZ to the outer London boroughs, we received a consultation survey.

    70% said no to it.

    Read all about the consultation process, 43 documents on the TfL website, it's a blast.
    Yeah but those 70% were protest votes he is sticking up for the silent majority who didnít respondÖ

  26. #76
    Had my first ever ulez experience this year , live and work in leeds so never go south really , son wanted to see a concert on the Saturday, so booked the hangerlane premier as we did 4/ 5 yrs ago . Down the M1 off at hanger and parked in the car park used the tubes/buses to get around . Back to hotel sleep then breakfast, out of the car park and up the M1 . 5 days later £160 fine , the hotel was now in the ulez zone that had been extended this year . Genuinely didnít know I own a blue efficiency merc2013 thought it was ok but no, offered to pay the £12 X2 fee , not a chance ! Pure money maker not going to London again lesson learnt

  27. #77
    What a bunch of cry babies.
    You donít like it? Move.

  28. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinnlover View Post
    Yeah but those 70% were protest votes he is sticking up for the silent majority who didnít respondÖ
    There was a vote? well nobody told me, i live just outside the southern extension and now pleased to hear it's covering my area, should have been extended earlier.

  29. #79
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,049
    Six-cylinder BMW petrol engines are ULEZ compliant back to the E46 3-series. Not expensive. The E9X shape 320i is a good option.

  30. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by watchlovr View Post
    What a bunch of cry babies.
    You donít like it? Move.
    Yep, good idea. Swap a modest 3 bed semi for a Footballers McMansion ooop nerth.

  31. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by noTAGlove View Post
    Yep, good idea. Swap a modest 3 bed semi for a Footballers McMansion ooop nerth.
    The problem with that plan is the homeowner moves away from their overpaid for doing nothing job and can't replace their inflated salary, so they take a less paid job and can't afford the gardener.

  32. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by MacDeath View Post
    The problem with that plan is the homeowner moves away from their overpaid for doing nothing job and can't replace their inflated salary, so they take a less paid job and can't afford the gardener.
    Who cares when you are 55-60 and you are looking for your first G&T at four in the afternoon.

  33. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by noTAGlove View Post
    Who cares when you are 55-60 and you are looking for your first G&T at four in the afternoon.
    Someone ordering a G&T at that time oop North would likely not be met with open arms lol.

  34. #84
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    14,486
    Quote Originally Posted by reggie747 View Post
    Your balls in a vice is how it is (and the grip will only get tighter)
    Not really, it was the first time in fifteen years that either me or the wife have driven into London. If we go to London (and I try not to), we go by train wherever possible.

  35. #85
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    14,486
    Quote Originally Posted by peter2704 View Post
    Had my first ever ulez experience this year , live and work in leeds so never go south really , son wanted to see a concert on the Saturday, so booked the hangerlane premier as we did 4/ 5 yrs ago . Down the M1 off at hanger and parked in the car park used the tubes/buses to get around . Back to hotel sleep then breakfast, out of the car park and up the M1 . 5 days later £160 fine , the hotel was now in the ulez zone that had been extended this year . Genuinely didnít know I own a blue efficiency merc2013 thought it was ok but no, offered to pay the £12 X2 fee , not a chance ! Pure money maker not going to London again lesson learnt
    Ignorance is no excuse as they say. We checked both ULEZ and congestion before she went.

    Also, was it ULEZ or congestion charge that you were fined for? They are two separate charges.

    Iím not defending it but itís not rocket science and every road is clearly signposted. There really is no excuse for not knowing. Itís the same as the Dartford crossing; itís not nice but thereís no excuse for not paying.

  36. #86
    Master reggie747's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    The Mersey Riviera
    Posts
    6,493
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    Not really, it was the first time in fifteen years that either me or the wife have driven into London. If we go to London (and I try not to), we go by train wherever possible.
    Not specifically your balls........ "ones" balls my man !!

  37. #87
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    947
    Just introduced in Bristol now too. Any difference in the traffic this morning. Nope. As busy as ever...

    Sent from my SM-A202F using TZ-UK mobile app

  38. #88
    Grand Master Chris_in_the_UK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Norf Yorks
    Posts
    41,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Hocuspocus View Post
    Just introduced in Bristol now too. Any difference in the traffic this morning. Nope. As busy as ever...
    London is always rammed - the charges do not seem to reduce traffic at all.
    When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........

  39. #89
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    UK, Maldives, Singapore
    Posts
    791
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_in_the_UK View Post
    London is always rammed - the charges do not seem to reduce traffic at all.
    Thatís also down to the fact London is 20mph just about everywhere now.

    Charges for driving in London should increase the further outside of London you live.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  40. #90
    Grand Master learningtofly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Everywhere & nowhere, baby
    Posts
    34,948
    Quote Originally Posted by optix View Post
    Thatís also down to the fact London is 20mph just about everywhere now.

    Charges for driving in London should increase the further outside of London you live.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yeah, that's an absolute nightmare (especially on a bike, as it's so easy to go quicker than intended).

  41. #91
    Master Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    9,596
    Quote Originally Posted by learningtofly View Post
    Yeah, that's an absolute nightmare (especially on a bike, as it's so easy to go quicker than intended).
    Same on a pushbike if theres even just a shallow decline to be honest!

  42. #92
    I stick to the 20mph limit rigidlyÖjust for lolz

  43. #93
    Grand Master wileeeeeey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    15,629
    Worst part of commuting into London on a 1200cc bike was the 20 limit.

    Bit fast for 1st but very juddery in 2nd due to the revs being low. I ignored it where I could.

  44. #94
    Master Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    9,596
    I just don't see the appeal of driving anywhere in London. I had to drive to Kings Hospital recently because of the train strikes and the experience is just unpleasant. There's the stress of traffic jams, bad/overly-aggressive driving, constantly being watched by camera in case you accidentally infringe any bus lane or box junction...then when i got there there was nowhere to park in the vicinity, so I dropped my wife off, drove home then cycled back...doing the 12 miles was about the same time on my push bike!

  45. #95

    ULEZ Expansion 2023

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian View Post
    constantly being watched by camera in case you accidentally infringe any bus lane or box junction...
    This completely.

    Unless you are a commuter and know you route back to front, every camera on every bus lane and bus and every junction is watching you.

    Stop a wheel in a yellow box junction, pull into a bus lane just to let emergency vehicles pass, or just merge 5 yards to early into a bus lane, and £160 fine will land in your lap.

    There is an appeal process, but forget it.

  46. #96
    Grand Master wileeeeeey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    15,629
    I agree with you but I do it often and I'm used to it. More relaxing in the car but the EV congestion charge exemption ends Dec 2025 I think so I'll rethink then.

    I like the Overground but can't stand the tube. I'm tempted to get an electric Brompton to avoid the tube when it's dry and not turn up to external meetings full of sweat.

  47. #97
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    UK, Maldives, Singapore
    Posts
    791
    Quote Originally Posted by wileeeeeey View Post
    I agree with you but I do it often and I'm used to it. More relaxing in the car but the EV congestion charge exemption ends Dec 2025 I think so I'll rethink then.

    I like the Overground but can't stand the tube. I'm tempted to get an electric Brompton to avoid the tube when it's dry and not turn up to external meetings full of sweat.
    Do you wear a Canada Goose on the Tube?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  48. #98
    Grand Master wileeeeeey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    15,629
    Quote Originally Posted by optix View Post
    Do you wear a Canada Goose on the Tube?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    No, just my BMI

  49. #99

    ULEZ

    So I have a Insignia 2014 diesel ecoFLEX remember the days the government said by a diesel their clean this was one of those cars, I don't even have to pay road tax yes its free? but our friend the mayor of London has decided its not ULEZ compliant what the Fu-----k

  50. #100
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Bedfordshire, UK
    Posts
    1,559
    I remember working in London in the 90ís the amount of black crap that I blew out of my nose after a day in the city was alarming.
    Now I wfh I spent a day down there to go to the theatre recently, back home and zero nasal horror.
    Iím not going to attribute it all to TFL but there has definitely been an improvement.
    I realise that the need to pay or change car must be a pain but if you want to drive an archaic smog machine then thatís your choice and it is a choice as there are plenty of affordable alternatives.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information