Extension to ultra-low emission zone to north/south circulars

[Penguin68]

Those statistics, like those on the average income or the average wealth of Londoners, are close to meaningless because of the huge variability underlying those numbers.

This was the point I was trying to illustrate. Without a detailed analysis of household make-up and life-stage, proximity to (good and effective) public transport and so on, a simple %age figure has no real meaning. When I was working (and had a young family) my weekly week-end shop couldn't have been carried by one person, or even two. Nowadays life is simpler, but I'm much older. I make no excuse for still driving to shop. It takes me 7 minutes to drive to the shops, playing half an hour on the bus - when you're at the end of life 46 more minutes (both ways) of not lugging shopping (ignoring waiting times) is time you relish.

[DulwichLondoner]

rendelharris Wrote:

> A brisk walk? A short bicycle ride? How did our

> grandparents manage when almost nobody had a car?

> This is the level we've reached, when people can't

> see an alternative to having a car for a 2KM

> journey. No wonder we're all getting fatter!

Not always are these realistic options. Some of those short journeys may be dangerous for a woman alone on a winter night. In other cases the pedestrian route might be even longer than those 2 kms. Not everyone wants to cycle, especially in a rainy winter. And, quite understandably, not everyone wants to add 20-30 minutes each way to an already long commute!

For me, those are yet more reasons why I hate places like Weybridge and I'll never move there, but to each their own.

Not to mention that, for many people, driving these short distances is the only feasible way to drop off kids at school (catchment areas are not 300 metres everywhere).

[Earl Aelfheah]

It took me over an hour to St Pancras the other day. If you've done it in 30 minutes odd, then you've been exceptionally lucky I'd say.

[rendelharris]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It took me over an hour to St Pancras the other

> day. If you've done it in 30 minutes odd, then

> you've been exceptionally lucky I'd say.

It always takes me that long, there's a direct train from Peckham Rye at 04 and 34, it takes 24 minutes.

[Cardelia]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It always takes me that long, there's a direct

> train from Peckham Rye at 04 and 34, it takes 24

> minutes.

Isn't this a good example of the general point that if you live close to a well-connected train (or tube) station then it can be quick and easy to get around London? Whereas if you don't live close to a train/tube station it is difficult?

Imagine living by Dulwich Library: if you can get to St Pancras in under an hour from there then you're exceptionally lucky.

[rendelharris]

Bus Dulwich library to Denmark Hill takes twenty minutes tops with a choice of several buses, direct train from Denmark Hill to St.Pancras twenty-one minutes.

[Cardelia]

Twenty minutes in the middle of the day. Not during rush hour.

But anyway, you have to walk to the bus stop (couple of minutes), wait for the bus (pot luck how long this takes!) then hope the bus doesn't get stuck in traffic, or at traffic lights, or have lots of people getting on/off, or some other reason why the timetabled 20 minutes suddenly turns into 30. Because if it does, you've missed the train you were aiming for and have a long wait for the next one.

If everything goes smoothly and according to timetable, you might be able to get from Dulwich Library to St Pancras in under an hour. But the point is, if everything goes smoothly, you've been exceptionally lucky.

[rendelharris]

Get the live bus app, then you'll be able to make sure you arrive at the stop in time for the bus. Give yourself a ten minute buffer for emergencies (it doesn't take half an hour from DL to DH even at the height of the rush hour) and you'll still be in St.P in less than an hour.

[Penguin68]

Give yourself a ten minute buffer for emergencies (it doesn't take half an hour from DL to DH even at the height of the rush hour) and you'll still be in St.P in less than an hour.

Because, of course, trains around here always run to time (and are scheduled frequently), are never cancelled and rarely too full to get onto.

[alex_b]

sally buying Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not only diesel cars but petrol cars.

>

> Well maintained and pristine cars scrapped because

> of Khans Ill thought out idea and not thought all

> the way through.

The youngest no compliant petrol car will be 15 years old at the point the ULEZ is expanded. The idea that this is going to take ?well maintained and pristine vehicles? off the road seems unlikely.

[flocker spotter]

a

[rendelharris]

Have you really nothing better to do, FS? That's very sad.

ETA Good, you've withdrawn your post pompously telling others to stop. Maybe even you have realised how sad it is.

[spider69]

alex_b Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> sally buying Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Not only diesel cars but petrol cars.

> >

> > Well maintained and pristine cars scrapped

> because

> > of Khans Ill thought out idea and not thought

> all

> > the way through.

>

> The youngest no compliant petrol car will be 15

> years old at the point the ULEZ is expanded. The

> idea that this is going to take ?well maintained

> and pristine vehicles? off the road seems

> unlikely.

So Am I right in thinking that well maintained cars older than 15 years will have to pay ?12.50 to remain on and be able to use the road within the N/S circular roads

If so I can see many many cars being taken of the road and not being able to be replaced.

If my car is 14 years old in 2021 does that mean it has to be replaced in 2022 when it reaches 15 years?

[flocker spotter]

yes/ no- it however is not age specifc but EURO3 or 6 (petrol vs derv)is the trigger. you are not obliged to sell your car but you will have to pay

my neighbour has a 993 carerra with 25k on the clock.he will not be able to use in in the area without paying the ULEZ charge after the full start date.

throwaway comments about certain outcomes being "unlikely" are not helpful or based on fact but completely in line with much of the pointless posting on this thread.

[Sue]

You can put the vehicle reg number into the ULEZ website and it will tell you whether or not the vehicle is compliant.

Mine isn't.

I had hoped there would be some exemption, or at least a discount, for residents, but it seems not.

And no system for modifications for "normal" cars, either.

Goodbye car :(

[mikeb]

Mine too. Well that?s annoying. And expensive. As above, does anyone know any examples of compliant MPVs?

[rendelharris]

mikeb Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mine too. Well that?s annoying. And expensive. As

> above, does anyone know any examples of compliant

> MPVs?

Any petrol vehicle, including MPVs and 4x4s, built since 2006 will be Euro 4 compliant and so not charged; any diesel built since 2015 will be Euro 6 compliant and so exempt.

[rendelharris]

flocker spotter Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> yes/ no- it however is not age specifc but EURO3

> or 6 (petrol vs derv)is the trigger.

Seeing as how you love to loftily tell others they're wrong - you're wrong. Petrol cars have to meet Euro 4 to avoid the ULEZ charge, not Euro 3.

[rendelharris]

spider69 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If my car is 14 years old in 2021 does that mean

> it has to be replaced in 2022 when it reaches 15

> years?

No because it would have been built after 2006 and so be Euro 4 compliant (assuming it's petrol-driven).

[Cardelia]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Get the live bus app, then you'll be able to make

> sure you arrive at the stop in time for the bus.

> Give yourself a ten minute buffer for emergencies

> (it doesn't take half an hour from DL to DH even

> at the height of the rush hour) and you'll still

> be in St.P in less than an hour.

You've slightly missed the point in that the app will give you control over the time you can arrive at the bus stop, but it won't give you control over what time the bus actually turns up, nor will it give you control over the time the bus arrives at its destination. You also won't know if the bus is full hence will drive straight past. It's not an everyday occurrence but I have experienced it during the middle of the day so it does occur.

If I *had* to be at St Pancras for a given time (meeting someone, connecting to another train, etc.) then I'd be leaving a lot more than 10 minutes as an emergency buffer!

[rendelharris]

Yes things can go wrong. They can go wrong with cars too. But looking at the live bus app right now, there are six buses that will get you to Denmark Hill or Peckham Rye arriving at Dulwich Library in the next twelve minutes. That's hardly poorly served, is it?

Maybe I'm just very lucky, I go up to St.P about seven or eight times a year to meet friends from Paris as they pass through the Eurostar. I think in the last four years I've had one train cancelled - in which instance I just hopped the next train to Victoria, got the tube across and was still there in good time.

I'm no cheerleader for the train and bus companies, they're awful sometimes. But I do think this whole poor East Dulwich is so badly served (and so by association we really must use cars) thing is way overplayed. We have three major stations (four if you count Forest Hill), serving multiple central London stations, within easy reach, plus the Overground, plus a plethora of bus routes, plus it's now possible to cycle virtually the whole way into the centre of town on off-road cycle paths. We're really quite well off.

[Captain Marvel]

I have a 28 year-old car, that does about 2,000 miles a year. It is taxed and expensively insured. It passes emission tests every time. I love it and want to keep it.

But soon it will cost twelve quid to leave my drive and if I pop out of the zone, twelve quid to come back. A salesman doing 150k a year will pay the same

Seems a bit harsh

[bodsier]

Popping out of the zone and returning on the same day would cost ?12 wouldn't it? It's really harsh I agree especially as co2 levels will rise as electric cars are not meeting financial needs or regenerating needs right now.hopefully they will by then. I haven't read this thread fully, but a pressure group for a decent scrapping scheme would be worth building. I was under the I,press ion the hours would be just 7-6 but it's 24/7....I rarely use my car, I cycle or use public transport but will have to get rid even though it's euro 5, only 7 years old....

The Co2 levels continue to increase globally, but the aim seems to be for health protection locally....a case of 'not in my back yard' to some degree, almost turning a blind eye for now to the consequences of increased co2 in the build up to 2030/40 when they hope to create an electric only car ownership....it's sort sighted and unfair, and really seems an attempt to generate more tax. Particularly when government extolled diesel cars initially. , scrappage scheme would help compensate for that.

Another alternative would be to allow cars clemency according to their number plate on certain days of the week, thus avoiding the waste that would result in the scrapping of perfectly decent cars.....

[rendelharris]

I agree with some of your points, but don't forget that electric cars generally produce the same CO2 emissions in total (including power generation, manufacturing pollution etc) as the tailpipe emissions of a petrol car running at 51mpg. But that disregards the CO2 cost of producing gasoline, transporting it by ship, and then transporting it by tanker to the petrol stations, which significantly increases the overall CO2 footprint of a conventional petrol car. It would be far clearer if CO2 figures had to reflect the overall CO2 cost of every type of car, but the motor manufacturers won't wear that.

It does seem unfair that low-level users like Captain Marvel are penalised for having such low usage, but the only way round that would be to have mileage monitors in all cars, linked to GPS, that would log all car use. Personally I wouldn't have a problem with that (be a great way to stop speeding too) but I'm sure the public outcry at the thought of Big Brother knowing exactly how, where and when cars were used would be enormous.

Don't forget, also, that the chief aim of the ULEZ is to reduce Nox emissions, which are the main public health concern in London at present, and for electric cars the tailpipe emmissions in that respect are zero. It's all very complex and there will be a considerable amount of pain for some people, but I do believe that at some point in our lifetimes we'll look back and see the concept of using highly polluting internal combustion engines on our streets as being as ludicrous as the amount of pollution London had in the days of the lethal smogs before the Clean Air Acts.

One last point - if Captain Marvel's right and one will have to pay the ULEZ charge every time one re-enters the zone (can't find any clear information online) then that's unfair, it should be like the current congestion charge zone in that one pays for a day's use.

[bodsier]

Popping out of the zone and returning on the same day would cost ?12 wouldn't it? It's really harsh I agree especially as co2 levels will rise as electric cars are not meeting financial needs or regenerating needs right now.hopefully they will by then. I haven't read this thread fully, but a pressure group for a decent scrapping scheme would be worth building. I was under the I,press ion the hours would be just 7-6 but it's 24/7....I rarely use my car, I cycle or use public transport but will have to get rid even though it's euro 5, only 7 years old....

The Co2 levels continue to increase globally, but the aim seems to be for health protection locally....a case of 'not in my back yard' to some degree, almost turning a blind eye for now to the consequences of increased co2 in the build up to 2030/40 when they hope to create an electric only car ownership....it's sort sighted and unfair, and really seems an attempt to generate more tax. Particularly when government extolled diesel cars initially. , scrappage scheme would help compensate for that.

Another alternative would be to allow cars clemency according to their number plate on certain days of the week, thus avoiding the waste that would result in the scrapping of perfectly decent cars.....