France scraps ULEZ Zones
Discussion
France has just voted to scrap the low emission zones they have been introducing over the last few years due to it adversely effecting the poorer in society the most.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0mrpl2208no
Should we do the same here?
They do seem a bit daft as pollution blows around in the wind, Bristol has a coal fired steam train running inside their LEZ but non compliant cars have to pay to be inside the zone, they seem a bit daft.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0mrpl2208no
Should we do the same here?
They do seem a bit daft as pollution blows around in the wind, Bristol has a coal fired steam train running inside their LEZ but non compliant cars have to pay to be inside the zone, they seem a bit daft.
gruffalo said:
France has just voted to scrap the low emission zones they have been introducing over the last few years due to it adversely effecting the poorer in society the most.
I could have told them that.What's funny is that if I pay £12.50, I can take a diesel van to the middle of London and drive round all day or even just leave it parked up with the engine on (I forget if that's legal or not) then just fill up and continue. But it's fine and healthy for London because I paid my £12.50!
I was on the tube earlier and saw a sadiq khan brain-washing poster claiming the ULEZ results are in, and pollution is down 27%
Just searched and appears to be from this https://www.london.gov.uk/media-centre/mayors-pres...
Don’t believe a word the lying shysters say
Just searched and appears to be from this https://www.london.gov.uk/media-centre/mayors-pres...
Don’t believe a word the lying shysters say
It hasn’t been a success in Glasgow, with a study showing it had no meaningful impact and pollution actually increased outside the zone.
Edinburgh council spent £millions on their scheme, including scrapping perfectly serviceable vehicles from their own fleet to comply and replacing them, at the same time as they are cutting services to the most vulnerable in society. My issue is that there never seems to be any cost benefit analysis or consideration to the opportunity cost on these type of schemes, probably as it is ideological driven.
Edinburgh council spent £millions on their scheme, including scrapping perfectly serviceable vehicles from their own fleet to comply and replacing them, at the same time as they are cutting services to the most vulnerable in society. My issue is that there never seems to be any cost benefit analysis or consideration to the opportunity cost on these type of schemes, probably as it is ideological driven.
As a Londoner I didn't agree with the extension in the first place but wouldn't like to see it go now after 2 years. The time has passed in my view. Especially because of the types of people pulling down cameras causing expense, inconvenience and danger for others. Especially at pedestrian crossings.
TFL earns around £3 billion per year - £0.25bn is from ULEZ, £0.3bn from Congestion Charge. Wouldn't mind if they just loaded it onto passenger fares. It should be subsidised at National level, not left to made-up taxes! To put this amount into perspective TfL estimates it loses approximately £0.13bn to fare evasion.
Randy Winkman said:
As a Londoner I didn't agree with the extension in the first place but wouldn't like to see it go now after 2 years. The time has passed in my view. Especially because of the types of people pulling down cameras causing expense, inconvenience and danger for others. Especially at pedestrian crossings.
Have there been significant recent activity of the type you describe in Bromley, then? I’ve not heard of much about this sort of thing for a long time. BunkMoreland said:
Mistake IMO
I get the point above about if you pay the pollution doesn't matter. Which of course it doesn't.
But I'm in favour of less polluting cars (most often Euro5 and earlier diesels) being removed from our cities and by default lessened on our road networks. I live in the London Ulez zone, and its now noticeable when I am elsewhere and stuck behind some s
t spewing diesel. So its having the desired effect.
Even if we tacitly accept it's a fundraiser first, health thing second
They could just ban ICE from cities if deadly serious about it all.I get the point above about if you pay the pollution doesn't matter. Which of course it doesn't.
But I'm in favour of less polluting cars (most often Euro5 and earlier diesels) being removed from our cities and by default lessened on our road networks. I live in the London Ulez zone, and its now noticeable when I am elsewhere and stuck behind some s
t spewing diesel. So its having the desired effect.Even if we tacitly accept it's a fundraiser first, health thing second
TX.
Terminator X said:
BunkMoreland said:
Mistake IMO
I get the point above about if you pay the pollution doesn't matter. Which of course it doesn't.
But I'm in favour of less polluting cars (most often Euro5 and earlier diesels) being removed from our cities and by default lessened on our road networks. I live in the London Ulez zone, and its now noticeable when I am elsewhere and stuck behind some st spewing diesel. So its having the desired effect.
Even if we tacitly accept it's a fundraiser first, health thing second
They could just ban ICE from cities if deadly serious about it all.I get the point above about if you pay the pollution doesn't matter. Which of course it doesn't.
But I'm in favour of less polluting cars (most often Euro5 and earlier diesels) being removed from our cities and by default lessened on our road networks. I live in the London Ulez zone, and its now noticeable when I am elsewhere and stuck behind some s
t spewing diesel. So its having the desired effect.Even if we tacitly accept it's a fundraiser first, health thing second
TX.
The thing that blows my mind is that I can freely drive a 5 litre V8 around most of those zones yet someone driving a 25 year old 1.1 Fiesta would have to pay...
sherman said:
And I just bought a Crit Air, cleaned my the inside of my car window and stuck it carefully in the windscreen 
Same here. Seen more in cars here in the UK than I saw in France.Another trip planned and now I need a f
king German one. It takes 7 to 14 days to be delivered but I wanted to go tomorrow.I miss the days when I used to just jump in the car/on the bike, on a whim and head off to Europe.
Now you have to preplan and prepay. In Belgium you need a different sticker for different cities.
So no, I'm a bit knackered, let's stop at Antwerp, oh s
t! I didn't buy a fekin sticker before leaving.BunkMoreland said:
Mistake IMO
I get the point above about if you pay the pollution doesn't matter. Which of course it doesn't.
But I'm in favour of less polluting cars (most often Euro5 and earlier diesels) being removed from our cities and by default lessened on our road networks. I live in the London Ulez zone, and its now noticeable when I am elsewhere and stuck behind some st spewing diesel. So its having the desired effect.
Even if we tacitly accept it's a fundraiser first, health thing second
Agreed.I get the point above about if you pay the pollution doesn't matter. Which of course it doesn't.
But I'm in favour of less polluting cars (most often Euro5 and earlier diesels) being removed from our cities and by default lessened on our road networks. I live in the London Ulez zone, and its now noticeable when I am elsewhere and stuck behind some s
t spewing diesel. So its having the desired effect.Even if we tacitly accept it's a fundraiser first, health thing second
croyde said:
sherman said:
And I just bought a Crit Air, cleaned my the inside of my car window and stuck it carefully in the windscreen
Same here. Seen more in cars here in the UK than I saw in France.Another trip planned and now I need a f
king German one. It takes 7 to 14 days to be delivered but I wanted to go tomorrow.I miss the days when I used to just jump in the car/on the bike, on a whim and head off to Europe.
Now you have to preplan and prepay. In Belgium you need a different sticker for different cities.
So no, I'm a bit knackered, let's stop at Antwerp, oh s
t! I didn't buy a fekin sticker before leaving.Although it does not affect me personally, I understand the need for ULEZ in cities, where air quality might be poor.
I also recognise that it may place an unnecessary burden on those less well off, but since when was car ownership a necessity/right, even less so in a city with good public transport infrastructure.
However, when cities like Aberdeen adopted the scheme, I was less convinced it was about pollution and more to do with revenue generation.
Never have comparisons, been more apt ‘No urinating zone of a swimming pool’ ‘No smoking area of a restaurant’ ‘No children…………….’
If you’ve ever been to Aberdeen, you’ll know the chance of pollution hanging around for a quick smoke, is highly unlikely.
I also recognise that it may place an unnecessary burden on those less well off, but since when was car ownership a necessity/right, even less so in a city with good public transport infrastructure.
However, when cities like Aberdeen adopted the scheme, I was less convinced it was about pollution and more to do with revenue generation.
Never have comparisons, been more apt ‘No urinating zone of a swimming pool’ ‘No smoking area of a restaurant’ ‘No children…………….’
If you’ve ever been to Aberdeen, you’ll know the chance of pollution hanging around for a quick smoke, is highly unlikely.
Having just cycled across Paris (Gare de Nord to Versailles) and enjoyed it immensely, quite why anyone would choose to drive there is beyond me.
The amount of protected cycle lanes is phenomenal. You can get pretty much anywhere on two wheels quickly and safely.
Air quality seemed ok too although obviously that’s anecdotal.
Public transport wasn't bad either: a 45 minute train journey back from Versailles cost the equivalent of £2. The route back from St Lazare to GdL’est was also on protected cycle routes. Easy peasy.
There has clearly been a massive amount of investment in active travel and PT and the results bear fruit, as long as you’re not mad enough to try to drive around. The whole place seemed to be one massive traffic jam.
The amount of protected cycle lanes is phenomenal. You can get pretty much anywhere on two wheels quickly and safely.
Air quality seemed ok too although obviously that’s anecdotal.
Public transport wasn't bad either: a 45 minute train journey back from Versailles cost the equivalent of £2. The route back from St Lazare to GdL’est was also on protected cycle routes. Easy peasy.
There has clearly been a massive amount of investment in active travel and PT and the results bear fruit, as long as you’re not mad enough to try to drive around. The whole place seemed to be one massive traffic jam.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff