You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
From the road to wigan pier:
And the peculiar evil is this, that the less
money you have, the less inclined you feel to spend it on wholesome food. A
millionaire may enjoy breakfasting off orange juice and Ryvita biscuits; an
unemployed man doesn't. Here the tendency of which I spoke at the end of
the last chapter comes into play. When you are unemployed, which is to say
when you are underfed, harassed, bored, and miserable, you don't want to
eat dull wholesome food. You want something a little bit 'tasty'. There is
always some cheaply pleasant thing to tempt you. Let's have three pennorth
of chips! Run out and buy us a twopenny ice-cream! Put the kettle on and
we'll all have a nice cup of tea! That is how your mind works when you are
at the P.A.C. level. White bread-and-marg and sugared tea don't nourish you
to any extent, but they are nicer (at least most people think so) than
brown bread-and-dripping and cold water. Unemployment is an endless misery
that has got to be constantly palliated, and especially with tea, the
English-man's opium. A cup of tea or even an aspirin is much better as a
temporary stimulant than a crust of brown bread.
The LEVC TX (the car we were in) says that's the range for battery only, but I looked and it's a hybrid, so I guess there's more to the story.
On a global scale we are 17th contributing 1.03% of global emissions. I think broadly speaking, we would be better off educating and holding other countries to account for their contributions
Hmm, a lot of emissions in places like China are created by them making the shit that we buy. So just because it's being emitted in China, doesn't mean we aren't responsible for it in some way.
Edinburgh has a very good public transport system
Visited last year and stayed a few miles outside. The bus service was a joy to use and the added bonus of being chauffeured past the beautiful architecture. Cant wait to visit again.
From the road to wigan pier:
Reread this a few weeks ago. it should be compulsory reading and rereading just like driving license renewals...
The LEVC TX (the car we were in) says that’s the range for battery only, but I looked and it’s a hybrid, so I guess there’s more to the story.
Ah right, if it's a plug-in hybrid then 60 miles is a big range, although not especially efficient given the 33kWh battery. The only other PHEV with an electric range like that that I know of is the latest model of Mercedes C and E class
Genuinely interested – is that from any point to any point?
I can't find the data right now so its from memory. Every once in a while there is a race done around Edinburgh. Bicycle v motorbike v car v bus
IIRC it showed bus and car journeys to be similar times. I cannot remember the actual routes - I think from the edge to the centre but not sure
Edinburgh has a very good and well organised bus service. an outlier .
He’s certainly chosen absolutely the wrong car if that’s the case. I can categorically say that you can easily get cars with much more range than that for not a lot of money. Sure, he’s driving around town, but that is actually more efficient than the open road for EVs. So either he’s clueless, bullshitting, or he’s chosen a terrible car.
Assuming it was a black cab driver they don't get a lot of choice in the matter (although that article is a bit out of date the electric ones are the LEVC as noted above).
China, doesn’t mean we aren’t responsible for it in some way.
We have offshored it... Having said that they are installing solar and replacing ICE vehicles at an incredible rate with EV's now cheaper in many instances than the ICE counterparts.
I’d love to know what it was.
Are there some rules about what a "black cab" driver can drive? Apart from "black", obvs.
EDIT - point bin made above.
Edinburgh has a very good and well organised bus service. an outlier .
I just tried picking random locations on Google maps and checking the times for cars versus public transport. You can drag and drop endpoints all over the map and it instantly calculates, so you can pick a wide variety of trips. In most cases the bus is double the car, even for suburb to suburb trips, and in a few cases they were comparable (trips involving Queensferry Road to city centre from the West it seems).
Don't get me wrong - this is a very good result, much better than Cardiff, but I think it's stretching it to say that the bus is quicker as a blanket statement. Still, that does indeed constitute an excellent network. In Cardiff you get shit like @51.5072611,-3.2067745,13z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x486e1db421c07867:0x4042fd8391bb351f!2m2!1d-3.1439959!2d51.5322878!1m5!1m1!1s0x486e1c71cdcf906d:0x5f406dba799492c!2m2!1d-3.190809!2d51.5271622!3e3?entry=ttu">this where a 3.3 mile trip between suburbs is a 10 minute drive or a 50 minute bus trip with a change (tbh I thought it would be longer than 50 mins). And is a scary bike ride due to the only two available roads being tight and busy. This may change in the next few years, because the area between those two places is being filled in with housing and they have the opportunity to make bus corridors and cycle links.
TFL say 1 in 10 are not complient, but this seems wrong. RAC says nearer 1/3 but I guess we will no know until the facts come in from the next few months. I live less than a mile from the ULEZ expansion in two directions. My streets are full of non-compliant cars, most people I know in the area, close to the ULEZ border, inside are very 50/50. I think the real figure is something between a 1/3rd and 1/2.
I didn't say quicker - I said similar times if you include all travel time door to door. Its partly because of a lack of parking in much of the city so you have to find a parking place and walk to your destination
Apart from “black”, obvs.
Doesn't actually have to be black!
I didn’t say quicker – I said similar times if you include all travel time door to door. Its partly because of a lack of parking in much of the city so you have to find a parking place and walk to your destination
As an aside to the ULEZ thing, this is a major factor in transport modelling that rarely gets included in most people's individual travel choices.
Certainly for short journeys, by the time you've got in the car, driven the journey, found a parking spot at your destination, paid for it (if applicable) and walked to your actual destination, the time is far longer - basically the same (if not longer) than just walking and almost always longer than cycling/scooting.
molgrips
Full Member
Yes but there are still lots of people who are poor but still need cars to get around, outside of London. I know a few. If we had decent busses then it wouldn’t be anywhere near as much of an issue, but we don’t. I know you’ll argue about this, but your world of experience is not universal.That said – is your typical small cheap petrol car ULEZ compliant?
Statistically, yes, but that doesn’t mean ALL lower income people don’t have cars. Don’t use averages and statistics to justify ignoring outliers.
But then should we ignore the majority to appease them?
And yes, our ~20 year old Fiesta meets the ULEZ, and despite my best efforts to keep it running is worth about a tank of fuel more than the scrap value.
The bleating about poor people not being able to afford a "new" car is from not-poor people claiming that the only alternative to their current old-ish car is a new one on £400/month PCP in the daily mail.
A couple of statistics that surprise people:
Based on household income, in the first decile only 35% own a car.
And it's not until you hit the top 30% that car ownership reaches 90%.
And those are national statistics, in London car ownership is a LOT lower.
I didn’t say quicker – I said similar times if you include all travel time door to door.
Google includes walking to and from PT stops but it seems to assume you can park where you want to go. But for long trips you're talking 30 mins by car and 55 mins by PT so you've got a lot of leeway. But that's being silly - the results are great for Edinburgh whichever way you look at it.
In Cardiff the river is a big problem there are only two bridges outside city centre and one of them is the motorway. Here's an @51.5292887,-3.1507836,15.06z/data=!4m9!4m8!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x486e1a5a5cd05df3:0x6361d3de485d03a0!2m2!1d-3.2629953!2d51.5190647!3e3?entry=ttu">even worse example. 18 mins by car and 1h13 by bus and train!
TFL say 1 in 10 are not complient, but this seems wrong. RAC says nearer 1/3 but I guess we will no know until the facts come in from the next few months.
Apparently TFL figures come from camera data, so cars being driven past cameras. RAC data is registered vehicles. Lots of vehicles registered in London don't drive there, eg commercial vehicles located elsewhere, I also suspect a lot of people living in London rarely drive into London.
But then should we ignore the majority to appease them?
The less-advantaged minority need more support than the capable majority, that's the whole point. That's why we have a progressive tax regime in this country (same as most) and why poorer people get stuff like income support.
I could moan about some people getting free cars whilst I have to pay for mine, but that would be a bit churlish wouldn't it?
So no, don't ignore the majority, but help the people who need help the most.
As an aside to the ULEZ thing, this is a major factor in transport modelling that rarely gets included in most people’s individual travel choices.
Certainly for short journeys, by the time you’ve got in the car, driven the journey, found a parking spot at your destination, paid for it (if applicable) and walked to your actual destination, the time is far longer – basically the same (if not longer) than just walking and almost always longer than cycling/scooting.
The lack of parking is what makes city centers actually nice places to be though.
A quick look on google maps and an average town center (I'm looking at Reading) must be about 80& shop floorspace and 20% streets?
Zoom out to the shopping parks and it's probably 10% shops, probably less because the retail park is about 75% car parking, and then there's a dual carriageway to reach it, slip roads, junctions etc.
So it's a direct result of that car dependency and car based town planning that means that it's a 30minute bus journey from the suburb to the center. It's literally 3x the distance because of cars. Build more shops in the car parks of existing shops and then people don't need to drive to shops on the far side of town, they can get to the shop 15 minutes away.
So no, don’t ignore the majority, but help the people who need help the most.
Of whom 65% don't own a car, and tend to live on main roads.
almost always longer than cycling/scooting.
True but when you factor in the time and cost of dealing with your insurance after you bike is nicked (as it inevitably will be) while you went to the shop, or cafe, or whatever, the equation changes.
True but when you factor in the time and cost of dealing with your insurance after you bike is nicked (as it inevitably will be) while you went to the shop, or cafe, or whatever, the equation changes.
I have never had a bike stolen from outside ( since the 70s when I used crap locks) when using one to get around. Decent locks and crap (looking) bikes
Of whom 65% don’t own a car, and tend to live on main roads.
And the 35%?
True but when you factor in the time and cost of dealing with your insurance after you bike is nicked (as it inevitably will be) while you went to the shop, or cafe, or whatever, the equation changes.
Not sure if this is tongue in cheek or not but what about the time taken to get your car fixed after an accident or when you need it repaired or when you sprain your ankle and can't walk or you have piles and can't sit in a driver seat or blablabla.
Bike theft is not inevitable, like those other things. Well, car crashes and breakdowns are, to some degree.
Lots of pent up rage and anger with buckets of class issues, doused with undertones of bubbletrap liberalism and flapping little englander in this thread, thoroughly enjoying it 😀
molgrips
Full Member
Of whom 65% don’t own a car, and tend to live on main roads.And the 35%?
Are impacted by it in the way it's intended, lowering the use of the most polluting cars and benefiting everyone. And as I pointed out, the cheapest cars on the road (small cars with small petrol engines) aren't impacted by ULEZ anyway.
People on low incomes are also more likely to smoke and drink, we tax those too.
Just reflecting on the cars are quicker discussion.
I don't think we have to resolve every journey having to be more convenient or quicker, or indeed as ULEZ is creating, made in a heavily polluting car.
If we can reduce the worst of air pollution by some journeys being in 'low emission' vehicles. If we can take some cars off the road. If more people walk or ride. If more people use the bus and train. If fewer journeys are made. If we live more within a 20 minute neighbourhood. Then we can claim to have solved much of the issue.
Not everyone has to be 'perfect' or indeed not have an environmental or social impact - but if everyone gives a little, it works.
Not everyone has to be ‘perfect’ or indeed not have an environmental or social impact – but if everyone gives a little, it works.
You've been to England? That will never catch on.
Not everyone has to be ‘perfect’ or indeed not have an environmental or social impact – but if everyone gives a little, it works.
Except its not everybody, its the 1 in 3 poor people who want/need a car who are being targeted.
A fairer way would be to charge all vehicles in the city then use the vast sums raised to provide small clean vehicles to those who really need them in the city (essential workers) and a much improved public transport and bike network for the rest.
Anyone who wants a personal car but doesn't actually need it continues to pay.
I have never had a bike stolen from outside ( since the 70s when I used crap locks) when using one to get around. Decent locks and crap (looking) bikes
Lucky you. I had a bike stolen from outside the Canny Man where I left it in order to walk MrsJ home, before she was MrsJ. She still hasn't paid for that bike.
You’ve been to England? That will never catch on.
Thankfully I stay north of that line.
Having been in a Scottish Government organisation sustainability workshop this morning, I am feeling once again that we up here have a different outlook. Not perfect. But different.
Or maybe the coffee was too strong and the view of Edinburgh skyline over the Parliament building in the sunshine just too inspiring.... 😂
Having been in a Scottish Government organisation sustainability workshop this morning, I am feeling once again that we up here have a different outlook. Not perfect. But different.
You sound like someone who is congenitally thin thinking you're better than people who are fat. Lots of places in England have a whole different set of problems to begin with. Transport is a result of a whole load of issues, only some of which are political. Many are historical and even topographical. So whilst it's perfectly possible for some places to be better run (frankly not hard in the case of the UK) don't get too smug.
You sound like someone who is congenitally thin thinking you’re better than people who are fat. Lots of places in England have a whole different set of problems to begin with. Transport is a result of a whole load of issues, only some of which are political. Many are historical and even topographical. So whilst it’s perfectly possible for some places to be better run (frankly not hard in the case of the UK) don’t get too smug.
harsh
Except its not everybody, its the 1 in 3 poor people who want/need a car who are being targeted.
And as repeatedly pointed out, the cheapest cars on the road are exempt from ULEZ.
Right, but you have to go and find one and sell the other, which can lose you money, you take a risk, you have to find one - they are probably going to go up in value. Whatever new car you can find might need work, new tyres whatever, you don't get your money back on repairs you've made to your car. And you then have to sell your now non-ULEZ compliant car. It's not as simple as you think.
This has been out there for a long time, people have had plenty of time to think about what they need to do ! There is help for those who need it available.
Everything is really simple and straightforward when someone else has to do it.
Anyway, I'm a relatively well off northerner so this issue doesn't affect me at all, I just think that it's not always as clear-cut for folk at the bottom.
Right, but you have to go and find one and sell the other, which can lose you money, you take a risk, you have to find one – they are probably going to go up in value. Whatever new car you can find might need work, new tyres whatever, you don’t get your money back on repairs you’ve made to your car. And you then have to sell your now non-ULEZ compliant car. It’s not as simple as you think.
There was lots of talk about the prices of ULEZ cars going up, but it never really seemed to happen except for recent-ish diesels.
Even for vans the price of a petrol Berlingo has dropped back down to what they were pre-pandemic.
The local newspapers have been full of this crap accompanied by photos of angry people for years. A particular highlight was the archetypal gammon faced angry person complaining that Sadiq was forcing him to sell his Crysler 300C and it would stop him driving to his ill dad's 2 miles up the road and make them both prisoners in their own houses.
The wingeing has been almost entirely by those occupying the middle of the income bell curve who might well have been caught out owning a 8-10yr old diesel that wasn't exempt. ULEZ has caused them to suddenly develop a social conscience and claim that it's an attack on blind Mrs Norris at number 53, won't someone consider how she's going to transport her free fridge off Gumtree?
ULEZ has caused them to suddenly develop a social conscience and claim that it’s an attack on blind Mrs Norris at number 53, won’t someone consider how she’s going to transport her free fridge off Gumtree?
And bike lanes. And LTNs (despite them not actually making anywhere inaccessible by car).
There is help for those who need it available.
If your cherished vehicle with a euro 5 engine, which you have been carefully maintaining and looking after for years, was worth £3 or £4k before ulez expansion, and now you are offered £2k for it, that represents a big hit. And I certainly wouldn't expect anyone to welcome that.
Just because people have perhaps borrowed some money to pay for a fairly decent family car it doesn't mean that they weren't, firstly struggling financially at the time, or secondly now struggling financially after a couple of years of a cost of living crises, increased energy costs, food costs, etc.
For a forum which decries so loudly Tory attitudes it a bit surprising to see a certain level of scant disregard for those less fortunate. Or perhaps not.
I'd love to say my comment was deliberately clever but it wasnt a good morning.
I (inaccurately) assumed Motability was means tested, I've had that notion disabused.
But if I wanted to lie and make myself look good, how many pundits crying for the poor are the exact same that would talk about anyone on benefits with a limp getting a free car?
FWIW I do have sympathy for those people that can't afford to change cars but the cynical way they are being used as an excuse by those who can (and wouldn't otherwise piss on them if they were on fire) is just pissing me off.
If your cherished vehicle with a euro 5 engine, which you have been carefully maintaining and looking after for years, was worth £3 or £4k before ulez expansion, and now you are offered £2k for it, that represents a big hit. And I certainly wouldn’t expect anyone to welcome that.
There is nothing stopping them selling it for £3 or £4k rather than scrapping it for £2k
ernielynch
Full Member
There is help for those who need it available.If your cherished vehicle with a euro 5 engine, which you have been carefully maintaining and looking after for years, was worth £3 or £4k before ulez expansion, and now you are offered £2k for it, that represents a big hit. And I certainly wouldn’t expect anyone to welcome that.
Just because people have perhaps borrowed some money to pay for a fairly decent family car it doesn’t mean that they weren’t, firstly struggling financially at the time, or secondly now struggling financially after a couple of years of a cost of living crises, increased energy costs, food costs, etc.
Blimey....i find myself agreeing with Ernie 🙄
This is exactly the situation a friend of mine is in. (I know someone is going to post a link to some ULEZ compliant POS on Autotrader and say "there's loads of cheap cars available")
On a global scale we are 17th contributing 1.03% of global emissions. I think broadly speaking, we would be better off educating and holding other countries to account for their contributions
What has any of that got to do with ULEZ's? I'll give you a clue - absolutely bog all.
@molgrips no need for that.
They can choose to sell their car! This was first touted 7 or 8 years ago. The inner London zone came in 2019 and it was known it would expand again.
In my lifetime there has been significant progress with localised air pollution and most (not all) vehicles are much better than they once were. Generally people are no longer cruising around in carburetted vehicles, on leaded petrol, with a manual choke fully on and no emission controls! Some of the most soot covered vehicles (apart from industrial, farming and site vehicles) I can remember were diesel buses and trains. Buses are now hybrids, but in the Manchester area we still have diesel trains and a disjointed public transport system a long way behind Londons worst parts. The progress is ongoing and will improve further as ICE vehicles are phased out.
I'm glad a referendum (seems the only way to get things done in this country) in my area has meant the majority are being listened to, for the time being! I'm not holding my breath 🙂 that the Manchester transport network will be significantly improved before the admin bods are given the green light to restrict movement, demand fees and handout fines left right and centre.
The attempted rushed GM implementation was being applied broad brush out to rural areas with few roads or any of the city centre traffic sited as the cause of air pollution. Only certain vehicles were going to penalised while you could still drive round in a V8 just by virtue of classification!
A lot of the misleading, alarmist and hysterical language, often repeated on the internet and used by some agencies is irresponsible and damages the cause. The ONS have recorded one death between 2001 and 2021 due to air pollution in the UK, that's not to say it doesn't cause any harm! The overzealous money grab by cash strapped local authorities looking to plug holes in their budgets by any means and quangos looking to sure up and expand their operations doesn't help either.
There is nothing stopping them selling it for £3 or £4k rather than scrapping it for £2k
Absolutely there is - the ulez expansion which has slashed the value of diesel vehicles with euro 5 engines.
A one worth £3 or £4k last year would never reach more than £2k now.
Furthermore the cost of second hand vehicles with compliant euro 6 engines has shot up in the South East.
So it is a double hit, ulez has made your vehicle worth considerably less, and considerably increased the price of the vehicle that you are likely to replace it with.
Why do you think some people are so upset and angry about ulez? It is not simply a case of comfortably well off individuals who are upset and angry for the sake of it. For many their car is their greatest investment other than perhaps their house.
It looks like I can drive through London with my Toyota Corolla Petrol 2005 Euro 4 ... woohoo!
This was first touted 7 or 8 years ago.
No it wasn't. Euro 6 diesel vehicles have only been around about 8 years.
They have been talking about zero emission vehicles for years, how about introducing a zero emissions zone next year?
how about introducing a zero emissions zone next year?
sounds great. Bicycles and pedestrians it is then.
And EV's.
They have been "proposing" zero emissions cars for years. Proposing means nothing. Ulez expansion was not announced by the Mayor until last year.
I’m glad a referendum (seems the only way to get things done in this country) in my area has meant the majority are being listened to
Majority in a referendum isn't always the best answer.
Evidence provided: Brexit
I take it you live in London and watch the London region news regularly like me. I seem to remember Boris putting this out there around 7 to 8 years ago. It’s been out there for a long time this was not sprung on Londoners last year! We had the inner London implementation in 2019 it was known then that it would expand London wide!
Majority in a referendum isn’t always the best answer.
It was in this case. I'll take local democracy over diktats any day.
I seem to remember Boris putting this out there around 7 to 8 years ago.
Boris Johnson hasn't been Mayor of London for years. Sadiq Khan, the current Mayor of London, announced the Ulez expansion last year:
Presumably what you are really trying to say is that people affected by it should have correctly anticipated its introduction this August about 8 years ago.
Not everyone can afford the luxury of investing money and buying vehicles with the very latest technology in anticipation of what might happen in the future.
I am sure that plenty on here are currently investing in zero emissions cars, and will maintain this callous 'tough titties' attitude towards those who haven't been able to afford to do that when it becomes critical. And then express their alledged disgust at the Tories on the political threads for not caring about those less fortunate.
harsh
Oh god, the level of Scotch self-satisfaction and self-convinced exceptionalism on this forum is unbelievable. Good that it gets taken down a notch. Scotland is hardly some kind of sustainable transport Valhalla.
And those are national statistics, in London car ownership is a LOT lower.
Some London figures can he found here: https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/car-ownership-london
When is the right time? What I’m saying is it’s been out there for people to take onboard for a very long time. There is help available for those that want it. As someone who commutes across London I welcome it what is your problem with it?London has had the central London congestion charge for around 20 years. The commercial LEZ for 15 years the inner London ULEZ since 2019! This has been the long term direction since the GLA was set up and you seem to imply Khan knocked this idea up on the back of a fag packet last year then dropped it on unsuspecting Londoners.
When is the right time?
Well according to the Leader of the Labour Party and the Labour Mayor of Manchester not during a cost of living crises which is disproportionately affecting those on lower incomes. I tend to agree with them.
Although personally I would go further and say that it is a problem which is currently resolving itself. As I have repeatedly pointed out that are less pre 2007 petrol vehicles and pre 2015 diesel vehicles on the roads every day.
how about introducing a zero emissions zone next year?
This world surely be best. Everyone with a motor is treated the same.... Including EVs with their brake dust and tyre wear.
Only allow vehicles that are essential to the functioning of a town.... Included in this are trades.
Well thankfully The Mayor has pushed ahead with the plan despite what Andy Burnham, Keir Starmer and Ernie of STW think.
Sunak was on the news being critical, quoting the hardships to the people caught up in it and how bad that was given the financial crisis hitting everyone. He couldn't be more critical of it quoting it is labour and a labour mayor.
What a shame the interviewer didnt ask if the mayrorial role changed to conservative, would the conservatives scrap the roll out.
Of course we know they wouldnt, but I would have been so nice to see him put on the spot
FWIW I do have sympathy for those people that can’t afford to change cars but the cynical way they are being used as an excuse by those who can (and wouldn’t otherwise piss on them if they were on fire) is just pissing me off.
Just to be clear, I think the ULEZ is a great idea. I'm just arguing with people who don't think any poor people will be affected or if they are it's their own stupid fault for being poor and struggling.
Well thankfully The Mayor has pushed ahead with the plan despite what Andy Burnham, Keir Starmer and Ernie of STW think.
I know that the perceived wisdom is that it will be all forgotten but it could cause problems for Sadiq Khan in next year's mayoral election.
In the last mayoral election Sadiq Khan only beat his extremely weak and poor Tory opponent by less than 5% in the first round, despite London being the biggest Labour stronghold in the UK. I am not sure that in 2024 Sadiq Khan will be quite as popular as he was in 2021.
And in my personal opinion it will be tragic if the Tories win the next London mayoral election.
I've been poking about van forums a bit recently, and I've seen loads of services to disable AdBlue - and googling reveals even more. I really don't get a) how people think that's a good idea, and b) how there hasn't been a massive crackdown on the people making money out of it.
I mean, whether you agree with the ULEZ charging or not, it seems really uncool to deliberately disable systems designed to reduce pollution.
What a shame the interviewer didnt ask if the mayrorial role changed to conservative, would the conservatives scrap the roll out.
The Tory candidate for the next London mayoral election has already publicly claimed that she will scrap it. Although I have my doubts that she actually would - it will generate a lot of revenue for TfL
I mean, whether you agree with the ULEZ charging or not, it seems really uncool to deliberately disable systems designed to reduce pollution.
Indeed. And would it not be necessary to re-enable it for the MOT test? It all sounds pretty pointless.
This world surely be best. Everyone with a motor is treated the same…. Including EVs with their brake dust and tyre wear.
Only allow vehicles that are essential to the functioning of a town…. Included in this are trades
I could get behind that.
Although to be honest week day central London traffic is mostly trade/deliveries/taxis and busses anyway.
Most sane people don’t drive in central London and I wouldn’t if I didn’t have to.
And would it not be necessary to re-enable it for the MOT test?
MOT doesn't test for NOx, which is what the AdBlue system reduces.
And in my personal opinion it will be tragic if the Tories win the next London mayoral election.
Amen
Just to be clear, I think the ULEZ is a great idea. I’m just arguing with people who don’t think any poor people will be affected or if they are it’s their own stupid fault for being poor and struggling.
Wasn't suggesting you were, my aim is more in the "media personality" direction.
MOT doesn’t test for NOx, which is what the AdBlue system reduces.
Pretty sure emission system defeats are now in or shortly going to be in the test.
week day central London traffic is mostly trade/deliveries/taxis and busses anyway.
Used to drive into various bits of London from central Essex <on site chippy). The number of single occupancy vehicles was crazy. Admittedly this was nigh on 20 years ago, but I doubt things have changed much.
We used to leave at 5:30 so we le beat the traffic jams. Knocked off at 3 so it wasn't all bad news.....
I mean, whether you agree with the ULEZ charging or not, it seems really uncool to deliberately disable systems designed to reduce pollution.
Look up "rolling coal" in the USA for it taken to extremes.
Although there some of the companies selling the kits are getting hammered with fines.
Look up “rolling coal” in the USA for it taken to extremes.
wtaf.
Although, in a way, making a statement against the environment/people seems more.... honest(?) than "I'm disabling this thing because I have to top it up, and maybe it might break and cost me money"
I’m just arguing with people who don’t think any poor people will be affected
Who are those people? Who are you disagreeing with?
Look up “rolling coal” in the USA for it taken to extremes.
https://jalopnik.com/diesel-tuners-hit-with-1m-fine-for-emissions-tampering-1850780397
Remember the wood burner tax?
No
And the pasty tax?
No
And the sugar tax?
You mean the thing that materially reduced the obesity rate among girls?
Only allow vehicles that are essential to the functioning of a town…. Included in this are trades.
Exactly what happens in Zermatt (and only approved EVs at that) with a justification on why vehicle is still required by business every few years. Okay Zermatt is a lot smaller than London but a good model.
The Tory candidate for the next London mayoral election has already publicly claimed that she will scrap it. Although I have my doubts that she actually would – it will generate a lot of revenue for TfL
The Tory candidate for the next London mayoral election makes Liz Truss look smart. She's a right wing, Trump-supporting fan of Boris Johnson who is seriously thick as mince and has so far said a load of total bollocks about what she'll do as Mayor, most of which aren't actually in her powers to do.
Still, the other Tory candidate dropped out because he'd been groping women* so I suppose she's the least worst of the two.
*Allegedly - he "strongly denied" the allegations.
Only allow vehicles that are essential to the functioning of a town
Define "essential"