ULEZ expansion ruled lawful by High Court

[Spartacus]

Funny thing, thete was a lot of noise when it was extended to the South and North circulars, you just have conveniently forgotten it. 

The superloop is partly smoke and mirrors, some express services were renamed superloop and only a few new services actually were introduced. Way fewer buses and routes than were cut in central London. 

Again, the scrapage scheme wasn't enough to replace a vehicle, and the cost environmentally of producing new cars far outweighs the cost of maintaining an existing car that has already paid its environmental construction dues.  Surly in this age of thrift mend amd maintain is the cheaper option both financially and environmentally? 

[malumbu]

So you are suggesting cars get kept for longer?  Putting motor manufacturers out of business.  Good, we agree on that one 

[Spartacus]

No

I'm suggesting that the claimed environmental benefits of getting a new car aren't as ripe as the cost of keeping a car on the Road for longer lessens the current 3 to 5 year replacement overhead madness. 😀 

[Earl Aelfheah]

1 hour ago, Spartacus said:

Again fair point, except buses in Central London have been cut over the past year* thete are no new tube lines planned or coming south and network rail is outside the Mayors remit. 

 * we almost lost the no 12 route last year but now it is less frequent than before. 

Well we wouldn’t want to increase investment at all then

Best to follow a principle of polluter doesn’t pay and socialise the costs.

[Spartacus]

Except he perceived polluter does pay: 

VED, VAT, IPT, fuel duty and in some circumstances CPZ charges.

Not sure how much harder you can squeeze them pips before the rebellion starts 🤔 

Edited April 15 by Spartacus

[malumbu]

The revolution will be televised but I expect it will be in the States following Trump's conviction and the the extension of a ultra low lethal weapon zone from the murder hotspots to mid town America.

Three to five years replacement?  If you are talking about leasing, I though that that was even shorter, but the house of cards will have to tumble sooner or later.

[Spartacus]

Wait till the electric batteries start failing in 3 to 5 years, that's the largest cost financially and environmentally 

[Dulwich dweller]

12 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Again fair point, except buses in Central London have been cut over the past year* thete are no new tube lines planned or coming south and network rail is outside the Mayors remit. 

 * we almost lost the no 12 route last year but now it is less frequent than before. 

They needed to be cut and services reviewed because they were running on pre covid timetables. User numbers on public transport have fallen across the board as have journey's. Several drivers on the 63 and 363 routes have told me that. Work from home plus bike hire will have put a huge dent in passenger figures. I no longer have to sit on an idling bus while it ' helps regulate the service' because they've crossed London a lot quicker than usual so have to make up time by parking up and often with the engine still running. The city of London is much quieter and less populated during the working day. The 12 route is still a regular service. I rarely have to wait more than five minutes for it. There was a time not long ago when two and three of them were lined up behind each other along the route. The traffic flow in London will improve with less vehicles on the road.

[Earl Aelfheah]

12 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Except he perceived polluter does pay: 

VED, VAT, IPT, fuel duty and in some circumstances CPZ charges.

Not sure how much harder you can squeeze them pips before the rebellion starts 🤔 

They don’t pay the full cost of driving though, despite the moaning. Private cars are effectively subsidised. The amount of land given over to cars, the cost of deaths, injuries, air pollution, greenhouse gasses, congestion etc., these costs are largely externalised and when added to investments in road building and maintenance outweigh the revenues obtained by motorists, probably very substantially.

[Spartacus]

@Dulwich dweller buses were cut, during covid, due to passenger numbers yet TfL recently said passenger numbers were back to 90% of pre covid, so why hasn't the service been restored. Instead we have more people on fewer buses. 

Obviously you don't use the 12 regularly as it went from an every 5 to 6 minute service to an every 12 to 15 minute service, and still gets "regulated" so that isn't a winner for passenger journey times. 

@Earl Aelfheah again this rhetoric that parking your car is long term storage, its not. Most cars move in and out of parking on a regular basis freeing up the space for others.

Persinally, yes, drivers do pay the full cost of motoring despite your moans, its a net positive revenue generator for the government. 

 

But as I gave pointed out, the £130 million isn't used for health or roads so its an additional tax on motorists. 

 

[Penguin68]

21 hours ago, malumbu said:

But can you imagine the uproar if local or national government banned wood burners.

Absolutely none (or not so as you'd notice). Certainly in London. Wood-burners are an AB purchase, and in socialist London there is little or no sympathy for their pain, the older and arguably more polluting vehicles are owned and operated by C2DE families as an element frequently of necessity, particularly for tradespeople and families in the less-well-served by public transport outer London areas (between the M25 and the South and North Circulars). The actions of the Mayor in extending the ULEZ hit the poor (or at least much less wealthy) and hence the natural outcry. Actions against wood burners would be broadly applauded (even, perhaps, by some of the more aware wood- burning classes).

And (I was there at the time) - there was no real outcry against the introduction of limitations on domestic coal burning in the 1950s as part of the Clean Air acts. And that hit everyone, not just the despised rich.

[Rockets]

Bus services have been being cut in London since 2017....22 million miles in fact: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpde37700jjo#:~:text=The data%2C from the DfT's,a reduction of almost 14%.

 

It seems that TFL took Covid as a strategic opportunity to cut things further and they have not returned despite passenger numbers returning. Meanwhile motorists are seen as a revenue raising opportunity by TFL and local councils at a time when public transport is declining...drivers are caught between a rock and a hard place and seem to be the go-to solution if you have a funding gap!

 

One has to wonder where all this revenue is actually going - when I look at the £1.5m Southwark are spending on further updates to the Dulwich Village junction (and I know this is not TFL) I do wonder whether a lot of money is being wasted on ludicrous and utterly unnecessary ideological vanity projects that are championed by a few who have the ear of their local decision-makers.

4 minutes ago, Penguin68 said:

Wood-burners are an AB purchase, and in socialist London there is little or no sympathy for their pain

Although I do often wonder whether London doesn't ban them because it would hit champagne-socialist voters the hardest and that may not be a vote winner!! 😉

[Earl Aelfheah]

1 hour ago, Spartacus said:

@Earl Aelfheah again this rhetoric that parking your car is long term storage, its not. Most cars move in and out of parking on a regular basis freeing up the space for others.

Persinally, yes, drivers do pay the full cost of motoring despite your moans, its a net positive revenue generator for the government. 

 

But as I gave pointed out, the £130 million isn't used for health or roads so its an additional tax on motorists. 

 

According to research by the RAC Foundation, there are about 25 billion car trips per year, and some 27 million cars, suggesting an average of just under 18 trips per car every. Since the duration of the average car trip is about 20 minutes, the typical car is only on the move for 6 hours in the week: for the remaining 162 hours it is stationary – parked. Since there are 168 hours in a week, the typical UK car is parked 96.5% of the time. In London I suspect there are many cars which fail to move from one week to the next. So it's difficult to see how anyone can really argue that significant amounts of land are not given over to car storage. It is undeniably true that this is the case. 

What is not true is that motoring is a net positive revenue generator. It may be if you completely ignore the substantial externalities of motoring, but this is clearly naïve economics. All serious attempts to estimate the true cost of motoring conclude that it is subsidised (although by exactly how much may reasonably be debated).

As for the £130m - it is all reinvested in transport. It. You're suggesting that it's fairly for the marginal costs of high polluting vehicles should be borne by the tax payer, not the polluter. That is wild imo.

Edited April 16 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

37 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

So it's difficult to see how anyone can really argue that significant amounts of land are not given over to car storage.

We have seen this narrative peddled as some sort of issue - can someone explain why some are so fixated on the amount of land for car storage - it seems to be the narrative of those (mainly the bike lobby) who want the space turned over to their chosen use?

Surely the true value of car ownership is the flexibility of being able to jump into a car and perform a journey and not be beholden to the limitations of public transport? 

45 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

As for the £130m - it is all reinvested in transport.

If it is (and I am not convinced it is) then is the transport system in London fundamentally broken?  Given the repeated bail-outs TFL has had to fight central government for and given the increased revenues from ULEZ (and other revenue generation schemes targeting motorists) combined with the continued reduction in public transport is something foundationally broken with the whole system or is it now the mother of all political footballs with both sides happy to give it a good kick?

[malumbu]

Johnson screwed TfL over.  COVID compounded this.  I'm a regular user of public transport and generally happy. I have my moans but tend to pick these up with TfL or my MP.  I can't remember the last time I drove a journey under 2 miles.  I don't think of the convenience it may provide, assuming I could park, but the harm it presents.  I'm pleased that the current Mayor has taken further measures to discourage some car journeys.  And recognise some of the good the last one did, despite his many failings.  I'm disappointed that the current PM is the first one publicly pro car since Thatcher, but he will go (not soon enough).

I went on the wonderful 30 year ride and party for critical mass on Sunday, in central London, having been there 30 years ago at the first one.  It was wonderful to celebrate the large increase in cycling since I moved to London.  

[Chick]

Wat is critical mass

[Dulwich dweller]

8 hours ago, Spartacus said:

buses were cut, during covid, due to passenger numbers yet TfL recently said passenger numbers were back to 90% of pre covid,

On tubes apparently.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-65821633#:~:text=The number of trips made on the London,101 million for the same month in 2019.

 

 

8 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Obviously you don't use the 12 regularly as it went from an every 5 to 6 minute service to an every 12 to 15 minute service, and still gets "regulated" so that isn't a winner for passenger journey times. 

Obviously not in your case because i do use it and have never waited for more than 6/7 minutes never mind 12/15. I use it daily from the Gardens or is that not regular enough for you? It still gets regulated because it's obviously covering it's route quicker than expected.

Obviously,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

https://www.swlondoner.co.uk/news/14032024-tfl-journeys-nearly-half-a-billion-a-year-below-pre-pandemic-levels

[Spartacus]

 

interesting @Dulwich dweller. According to the live bus tracker, every 12 to 15 minutes and this also  confirms it 

http://www.londonbusroutes.net/times/012.htm

Not sure how you magically get one every 5 minutes (which is how the service ran pre cuts) 

9 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

According to research by the RAC Foundation, there are about 25 billion car trips per year, and some 27 million cars, suggesting an average of just under 18 trips per car every. Since the duration of the average car trip is about 20 minutes, the typical car is only on the move for 6 hours in the week: for the remaining 162 hours it is stationary – parked. Since there are 168 hours in a week, the typical UK car is parked 96.5% of the time. In London I suspect there are many cars which fail to move from one week to the next. So it's difficult to see how anyone can really argue that significant amounts of land are not given over to car storage. It is undeniably true that this is the case. 

Your assumption is that every car is parked on the road 

Outside central Lindon, a lot are parked off road, lor in garages.

Some do move less frequently than others, granted but some more frequently and most trips are longer than 20 minutes outside perhaps the school run.

Your whole calculation is based on wide open assumptions and little fact. 

Edited April 16 by Spartacus

[Dulwich dweller]

10 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Not sure how you magically get one every 5 minutes

Not sure how you magically got five minutes when my post said six to seven. If it means you win the debate by all means move the goal posts as much as you need but my original post stands.

 

10 hours ago, Spartacus said:

According to the live bus tracker, every 12 to 15 minutes and this also  confirms it 

It confirms it for you. Look at different times of the day and you'll get differing times. It was 22 minutes not long ago.

 

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Not sure how you magically get one every 5 minutes (which is how the service ran pre cuts) 

Is this wrong? You never offered an opinion

https://www.swlondoner.co.uk/news/14032024-tfl-journeys-nearly-half-a-billion-a-year-below-pre-pandemic-levels

Edited April 17 by Dulwich dweller

[Earl Aelfheah]

11 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Your assumption is that every car is parked on the road 

Outside central Lindon, a lot are parked off road, lor in garages.

Some do move less frequently than others, granted but some more frequently and most trips are longer than 20 minutes outside perhaps the school run.

Your whole calculation is based on wide open assumptions and little fact. 

No, you’re speculating / making assumptions. I’m using figures which come from research by the RAC Foundation

20 hours ago, Rockets said:

We have seen this narrative peddled as some sort of issue - can someone explain why some are so fixated on the amount of land for car storage - it seems to be the narrative of those (mainly the bike lobby) who want the space turned over to their chosen use?

Surely the true value of car ownership is the flexibility of being able to jump into a car and perform a journey and not be beholden to the limitations of public transport? 

If it is (and I am not convinced it is) then is the transport system in London fundamentally broken?  Given the repeated bail-outs TFL has had to fight central government for and given the increased revenues from ULEZ (and other revenue generation schemes targeting motorists) combined with the continued reduction in public transport is something foundationally broken with the whole system or is it now the mother of all political footballs with both sides happy to give it a good kick?

The issue is simply that there is a cost to land use. Sparticus wants to talk about costs and revenues. 

It is a statutory requirement that any net revenue generated by ULEZ  is reinvested back into London’s transport network. If you have evidence of law breaking you should probably share it.

Edited April 17 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

18 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

The issue is simply that there is a cost to land use.

So, by that measure, I presume you would be happy to charge for use of cycle lanes then?

[Spartacus]

On 16/04/2024 at 05:01, Dulwich dweller said:

 I rarely have to wait more than five minutes for it. There was a time not long ago when two and three of them were lined up behind each other along the route. The traffic flow in London will improve with less vehicles on the road.

Nothing magical at all... you clearly stated 5 minutes 🙄 

[Spartacus]

@Earl Aelfheah you used a figure estimated by the RAC then applied assumptions (journeys are less than 20 minutes, and led the reader to the conclusion that cars are parked solely on the road)  which is a leap of speculation done on the back of a torn beer mat. 

If you can demonstrate the average motor vehicle journey (categorised into vehicle type) and not just quote urban myth, account for rural vs town usage plus show the proportion of vehicles parked on the Road , off road and also account for random factors including vehicles in 2nd hand forecourts, classic vehicles in garages, vehicles that are being restored and SORN then your estimate might be closer to fact but at the moment it is just that, your estimate. 

[Earl Aelfheah]

Nope. The 20 minutes on average is from the same RAC Foundation report. 

The Department for Transport's latest travel survey says 35 minutes.

Either way, most cars spend most of their time not moving (at least 90%), Probably more in London.

Edited April 18 by Earl Aelfheah

[Earl Aelfheah]

On 17/04/2024 at 07:00, Rockets said:

So, by that measure, I presume you would be happy to charge for use of cycle lanes then?

Can't dispute the point, so engage in whataboutery. I haven't called for road charging generally, just challenged the idea that revenues from car taxes cover all of (the suggestion is more than) the costs they externalise. They clearly don't (and car storage is one part of that equation, along with health impacts associated with inactivity, road injuries and deaths, congestion, climate change, air quality etc).

I did suggest that the owners of highly polluting vehicles should pay something towards the additional costs that imposes on everyone else. Happy for the same emission standards to be applied to bikes 🤣.

Edited April 18 by Earl Aelfheah