What do you reckon?
-
Good idea -
Bad idea -
Don’t care either way -
Other (please comment)
0 voters
Political comments welcome, but if you make one, please use a new topic in the Politicos category (join Politicos to see this)
I chose bad idea. Perhaps surprising from a non-driver who advocates for public transport. But I’m not convinced this is the right solution. It seems to me that the existing low-emission zones and congestion charge haven’t solved any pollution crisis so I just don’t understand what another ‘tax’ will do.
If indeed diesel or petrol vehicles registered before 2006 are the key problem, then move to ban them all together. But in a phased manner and with proper incentives as some other mega cities are doing.
3 Likes
I went for Other as I still don’t know enough about the detail of the proposal to make a truly informed comment.If really pressed right now I’d come down on the side of “bad idea” as well.
I must confess to a vested interest here: I presently drive a diesel car, since when I bought it back in 2011 the official Government line was that diesel was the less polluting option. If the Government now wants to take the opposing view, and to actively punish those who took its advice only 6 years ago, then I think it’s reasonable that I and others like me should feel aggrieved. I’m going to be out of pocket right now, and the resale value of the car haa totally tanked when I come to replace it with a less polluting option.
Furthermore, there’s no commitment that I can currently see to use monies collected from this levy on measures designed to combat pollution, so right now this seems like just another money making scheme for the general fund pot.
IMHO, if Saddiq Khan is genuinely concerned about mitigating the effects of diesel usage in London he should instigate a 3 part strategy:
1 - set up a scrappage scheme for existing private diesel car users, along with incentives to replace their diesel with hybrid or electric vehicles
2 - make a commitment that all monies raised by the “toxicity charge” will be used exclusively on improving air quality
3 - look at ways of limiting commercial diesel vehicle usage in London during normal working hours at least.
I’d be happy to vote Yes for a package like that.
2 Likes
I think it is pretty much waste of time. I mean who drives through central London unless they have to and if the congestion charge doesn’t put you off then another £10 wont make any difference. I can’t see this changing people’ s behavior much. I haven’t driven in the Congestion Zone for years and I never will as I just don’t need to and for those that need to go there this will just increase the cost.
Also I gave up trying to see if my car qualifies or not - several pages in and I have to submit a form to then just to check if would have to pay - maybe that’s the plan - make everyone so confused they just give up driving in the congestion zone.
I have to agree with @starman - time for more drastic measures.
1 Like
The first £10 per day is the cost of driving and therefore doing business in Central London for a lot of people; however, the second £10 is the cost of using a diesel rather than a petrol vehicle. The new charge is hardly likely to reduce congestion, but I think that it push a number of delivery vehicles to switch to petrol from diesel.
The most dramatic action is the Ultra Low Emissions Zone planned for September 2020. The ULEZ appears to merely involve extending the Congestions Charge to 24 hours per day (from the current 7 am to 6 pm).
I expect that the Mayor of London alone lacks the authority to take any dramatic actions, and this is a matter for the Government requiring legislation. It’s a hugely important issue that needs to be addressed before September 2020 as, in the meantime, there will be stillborn babies, premature and underweight babies, children growing up but developing a reduced lung capacity, and premature elderly deaths all from air pollution.
2 Likes
The new charge starts today.
Seems all the diesel black cabs are exempt from the charge, but other private hire vehicles will have to pay…
1 Like
Licensed and insured private hire vehicles have always been exempt from the congestion charge
Any vehicle with a Private Vehicle Hire license is exempt so mini cabs, Uber (for now) and Addison Lee as well.
ETA
What a shame that this doesn’t apply to mini cabs and black cabs. All appear to have been given a licence to pollute.
Back in Jan 2016 Addison Lee did a nice bit of anti-Uber publicity that states that the increase in mini cabs have increased journey times by 10%. So not just more cars on the road, but slower journey times.
Uber stepped in to say “Londoners would be “astounded” that the Mayor had excluded black taxis from his ultra low emission zone as they are responsible for almost a fifth of nitrogen oxide fumes in central London.”
That line of thinking allowed all the private hire companies to get exempted too. Londoners are no doubt double-astounded that so many journeys are exempt. And we have probably now reached the point where it could be cheaper for me to get an Uber car into work than to take my own car. Something is just weird in that situation, but I’m sure the private hire companies will be most satisfied.
I think it would be nice for all polluters to pay the same, even if they have a taxi licence from TfL.
5 Likes
Pollution is killing us (literally) and anything that can be done to reduce this needs to be done. Carrot, stick, anything
3 Likes
I really cannot understand why do they need to create all that charges for drivers, including the con.charge in C. London in order to tackle the pollution when they could demand car manufacturers to develope some sort of filter or collector that can be fitted on the exhaust or inside the exhaust to collect all polluting particles. Or may be smth else. Why drivers and businesses have to be punished for smth they dont have control over?
I think this will help:
2040 is a long way off, but the effect of this policy will begin today, with car manufacturers forced to accelerate their electric vehicle R&D, and consumers more likely to demand EVs.
The government could have acted sooner, but it’s only recently that viable fully-electric cars have become affordable. Also the secondhand market lacks EVs. Things will change radically in the next few years. I have a Tesla on order and am very excited about it.
Great! If that works to bring new technologies into car business, I will support the ban. It is only needed for scientists backed up by car industries to come together and create a solution. The same applies for polluting factories. Great news!
Just imagine how amazing London will be once everything is electric. I’ll probably be dead by the time that happens though 
So, 23 years to develop the tech, infrastructure and the ability to charge a huge range of vehicles (37.5 million in 2017 so add one or two more to that by 2040). Smother me in sceptic!
1 Like
Electric cars will not solve particular pollution from PM10 which is largely due to brake and tire wear. We need fewer car journeys.
2 Likes
Interesting - although I do think the anti-car lobby are potentially being ideological here.
One thing missing from that article is a like-for-like comparison of brake / tire wear air pollution compare to exhaust pollution. If the harm from both is equivalent then perhaps EVs aren’t worth bothering with after all.
If, on the other hand, brake / tire pollution is fractional compared to exhaust pollution, then articles like this are dangerous because they will put environmentalists off EVs despite real-world benefits
Regenerative breaking, already used in hybrid and fully-electric vehicles, severely reduces break dust pollution, but the author of the article likely imagined that adding such a fact wold dissuade from his point, so left it out.
3 Likes
Not according to this study (the higher vehicle weights seem to counteract the benefits from regenerative breaking).
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135223101630187X
From 2020 all newly registered private hire vehicles will have to be zero emissions in order to get a license as well.
2 Likes