So if 90/95% are compliant how much difference will this make?
I believe there should be more carrot less stick...
Moving everyone into newer cars doesn't fix the congestion issue.
@MSP Manchester is a mess.
Oh I know, I lived in Manchester for nearly 40 years, and have now lived in Germany for just over 10 years.
Where I live in Germany has also banned older more polluting cars from the city center (not a charge a complete ban). But there is also joined up thinking, a pretty decent and still improving cycle network, a decent tram network (even if it is frequently overcrowded in rush hour, a tram and bus terminal at the train station, bike racks at many tram stops and many bike racks at the train station. There are multiple points in the conurbation that I guess can be described as mini tram and bus terminals.
I lived for 7 years in Germany without a car, because that was possible and didn't cause any great impact on my life. In the UK for most people I don't think that choice is anywhere near as easy, it shouldn't just be forced on the poorest people who have to pay with time and stress just to make the basic journeys that modern life entails.
It isn't a quick fix, but it is clear that massive investment is required, and just using financial penalties isn't the best solution, it isn't even a good solution unless lots of other things are also being done to create alternatives.
Cars used to weigh less than half the weight ie less than 1000kg. Most EV’s are now 2000kg or more.
Let's clear that up a bit. Cars generally used to weigh 1000kg in the 80s, when they were flimsy and had little safety gear (with some exceptions). That went up to around 12-1400kg in recent years. A comparably modest EV is around 1600kg - my last one and my current one are around that. The 2t ones are the monstrous premium SUV types, whose ICE counterparts aren't that much lighter. So it's not accurate to say that EVs are twice as heavy as a general statement.
Have a look on eBay, lots of cars have “ULEZ compliant” in the description and you can get a Fiesta, Aygo, etc for about £1000.
That's the kind of car most of the 'poor' people I know are already driving.
I dont know about that. Cars used to weigh less than half the weight ie less than 1000kg. Most EV’s are now 2000kg or more. Of course they will cause more damage, probably not twice as much, but definitely more.
Is that because they have become larger SUV's in the process?
But there is also joined up thinking, a pretty decent and still improving cycle network, a decent tram network
You could be describing Manchester TBH. I live in Chorlton, and the Tram stop is a 5 min walk away, and they're currently hosting the 2023 North West Championship Road Works installing a cyclops junction at a notorious accident spot and connecting up a segregated cycle path that goes all the way to the centre of town. Plus next year all the buses are regulated again, and will run to a timetable that suit passengers and the trams not the bus companies, and we'll have a one-ticket-for-everything travel that's promised to be cheap...
But Burnham's apparently a weather vane politician so I expect I'm just imagining all this.
@fossy I don’t want to sound like a broken record but public transport has no relevance to the Manchester CAZ as it wasn’t going to include private cars.
The fact that people who live in GM don’t appear to know this just shows how poor the official comms and how effective the misinformation was.
@nickc It’s very variable though - in Bury/Rochdale/Oldham you’d be hard pressed to know there was a Bee Active Network. Bus re-regulation very promising mind you…
On a brighter note - I posted about being in central Glasgow last week for a couple of days and how much nicer it was. I also chatted with another person cycling from Dunblane - Stirling Uni yesterday. This is becoming more and more common - I have gone from nearly the only bike (plus my neighbour) to most days overtaking / being overtaken by 2-3 bikes in one 30 min journey.
We are starting to see change and mode shift happening.
It is painful, ULEZ most of all, and needs huge investment in public transport and active travel infrastructure, but it is coming.
And the whataboutery complainers can [s]get in the sea[/s] go play in the road....
I believe there should be more carrot less stick…
It has been shown time and time gain that a diet of carrots does nothing to enable modal shift. You can put on the world's greatest free bus service but if people are used to driving, they'll still drive. You absolutely need stick as well. Ideally beforehand because the stick (be that LTNs, congestion charge, parking charges, ULEZ...) gets them out of cars and then the money raised can be reinvested into public transport and the fewer cars on the road, the better the public transport will be.
Putting 1000 new buses onto existing roads just means you have 1000 buses stuck in traffic.
Moving everyone into newer cars doesn’t fix the congestion issue.
I agree with that but the point with all these measures is they're supposed to be used as part of a package, a combination of tools to enable modal shift (like putting in LTNS, bike lanes etc), discourage car use (by making it more expansive and less convenient) and by encouraging public transport use (more frequent/reliable buses - which you can only do if you take out some of the car traffic).
The £2k scrappage fee is enough to buy a compliant vehicle and just about anyone qualifies.
You can only buy new vehicles under the scrappage schemes.
The fact that people who live in GM don’t appear to know this just shows how poor the official comms and how effective the misinformation was.
@ratherbeintobago - I didn't see a single piece of official comms. Nothing. And I'm someone who generally pays attention to this kind of thing. The misinformation I saw lots of, but I took it all with the usual bucketload of salt
in Bury/Rochdale/Oldham you’d be hard pressed to know there was a Bee Active Network.
This is very much the case. We have one bus an hour into Manchester (which I always use if I'm heading into town - I never drive), and this is constantly being threatened with removal. My nearest tram stop is 5 miles away, the nearest station 6 miles away
Chorlton has had money spent, you go East, nothing.
@binners I assume this is because they thought that, as private cars weren’t included, they didn’t have to do any. But of course if there are no official comms, then there’s a big hole for disinformation to fill.
In terms of cycling provision, GMCA is long on fine words but has no power to compel councils, hence Rochdale has one scheme that’s not nearly complete and has taken more than three years to get to the point it’s at, which doesn’t connect to anything else except the canal towpath, and isn’t part of any strategic borough-wide plan because there isn’t a strategic borough-wide plan /rant
Chorlton has had money spent
As has Trafford and Rusholme, Hulme and Moss side. They all got the cycle lanes before Chorlton did. The curry mile cycle lane is so old it's not even current standard any more.
I'm not going to pretend it's perfect, but at least there's a plan, and it's getting built, and the buses are being re-regulated.
Is that because they have become larger SUV’s in the process?
They haven't. There are many small EV options, we looked at them. The issue is that people like big SUVs.
It has been shown time and time gain that a diet of carrots does nothing to enable modal shift.
We need the right balance of carrot and stick, and not to beat people who have no realistic choice whilst letting off those who do. I don't think anyone's advocating no stick at all.
PS you all know that this isn't what the carrot/stick metaphor really means right?
The £2k scrappage fee is enough to buy a compliant vehicle and just about anyone qualifies.
And what if your 8 year old non compliant vehicle is worth £5k? Or at least was before the ulez expansion was introduced.
And what about someone who lives just outside Greater London (and therefore doesn't qualify for the scrappage scheme) and drives into the outskirts of London a couple of times a week.... suck it up buttercup and cough up £25 a week?
This is a scheme designed to generate revenue for Transport for London which is in dire financial straits following lockdown and the pandemic (£240 million was raised last year for the much smaller inner zone) if everyone drives compliant vehicles it will have failed in its most important aim. The 3% improvement in nitrogen dioxide levels following the inner London expansion was simply an added bonus.
I think what all this illustrates is the complete and utter absence of anything even remotely resembling a proper transport strategy in this country
It seems more like an experiment in chaos theory
And what about someone who lives just outside Greater London (and therefore doesn’t qualify for the scrappage scheme) and drives into the outskirts of London a couple of times a week…. suck it up buttercup and cough up £25 a week?
That just sounds like the polluter pays principle in action to me.
Regarding Manchester…
This is the main issue. The area I’m in was in the zone, but the public transport in areas like this is virtually non-existent.
Proposed zone was huuuge. Everyone was in the zone - not city centre, not inside M60 but the whole of Greater Manchester all the way to the West Yorkshire border.
This is a scheme designed to generate revenue for Transport for London
Well, the amount of edgelord car-rights folks on Twitter and the like who bang on about how they pay road tax...This should make them well happy, they're finally being charged directly for their use of roads.
That just sounds like the polluter pays principle in action to me.
Or, those least able to afford to buy a new vehicle pays principal.
I think what all this illustrates is the complete and utter absence of anything even remotely resembling a proper transport strategy in this countryIt seems more like an experiment in chaos theory
+1.
Tories gonna Tory - they're all dinosaurs who are still wedded to this "motoring is freedom" idea from the 60's, they're all in the pocket of big oil / big auto and (with a few notable exceptions like TfL), there's no joined up thinking, no ambition and everything is mired in consultation -> water down to avoid upsetting the gammons -> reconsult -> run out of money -> put plans on hold -> reapply for money -> reconsult on new plans -> water down to avoid upsetting the gammons -> build something entirely shit -> spend the next 40 years consulting on rebuilding it marginally better.
Everyone was in the zone
Excellent news! Here's a BBC report and the first paragraph explains who gets charged. The fact that the scheme has been mothballed indefinitely just goes to show the power of of the car-rights propaganda machine
Well, the amount of edgelord car-rights folks on Twitter and the like who bang on about how they pay road tax…This should make them well happy, they’re finally being charged directly for their use of roads.
Is that what people with older vehicles are....."edgelord car-rights folk"?
Just to say I mentioned the tyre particulates thing not as an ice Vs EV thing but as a general pollution thing, IE we need to really be thinking about improving alternatives to private cars & especially large private cars, EV sports cars & SUVs are definitely not the solution...
Or, those least able to afford to buy a new vehicle pays principal.
At some point (that will never be the perfect time) we have to make a decision about whether we continue to let people suffer from pollution related diseases, or we change how we move people around. The least able to afford that change will always suffer, how much we mitigate that should be the argument, not whether this is the right thing to do.
Is that what people with older vehicles are…..”edgelord car-rights folk”?
Nope.
Or, those least able to afford to buy a new vehicle pays principal.
Those least able to afford should be assisted. Those buttercups who are able to afford the £25 a week should pay, after all the people who live where they are driving to are already paying indirectly for the consequences of their actions through air pollution, traffic congestion etc.
At some point (that will never be the perfect time) we have to make a decision about whether we continue to let people suffer from pollution related diseases, or we change how we move people around. The least able to afford that change will always suffer, how much we mitigate that should be the argument, not whether this is the right thing to do.
This is bang on. This thread actually reminds me of the absolute fury that TfL incurred when they built a segregated cycleway through Chiswick, there's always a loud group who just will not accept the requirement that we will need to materially change how we move about as the status quo is not scalable, or even currently acceptable, in cities with limited space and already poor air quality.
At some point (that will never be the perfect time) we have to make a decision about whether we continue to let people suffer from pollution related diseases, or we change how we move people around.
This one gets brought up a lot as part of "there's a cost of living crisis, we shouldn't charge people more at this difficult time" but you then get to the point of - well WHEN is a good time? Next year the argument will be "people are still recovering from the cost of living crisis..." and the year after it'll be "well inflation is still really high..."
The counter argument is that there is actually no better time to do it than in a CoL crisis because you're potentially enabling someone to finally shift away from their expensive car - ditch it altogether, no more tax, insurance, fuel, parking, ULEZ etc - and they can use the better P/T that has been paid for by the ULEZ charges.
Same with bike lanes, LTNs, bus lanes. Make it easier and cheaper to use bikes and buses and people can start to shift away from the very expensive car ownership. It's not instant, it doesn't happen overnight but, especially using ULEZ in conjunction with other measures like LTNs, parking, hire scheme like ZipCar, Lime etc, you can gradually start to get people away from the notion that a private car is essential for everyone.
Bury/Rochdale/Oldham you’d be hard pressed to know there was a Bee Active Network
No one in their right mind would ride a bike around Rochdale. A police culture driven by lack of resources leads to tolerating bad and dangerous driving in Rochdale and Oldham. It's enforced the idea among drivers that anyone on a bike is just holding them up and is therefore fair game for a dangerous overtake.
Rochdale is where people come to practice their overtake-and-immediately-turn-left technique. Even segregated infrastructure won't protect against this and might even make it worse. It needs driver education and some action from the police.
a health worker who crosses London daily to 14 appointments/7 elderly people and earning minimum wage made we wonder
Unless they're doing their rounds in a Diesel Range Rover I imagine this won't affect them, if it does then they can claim it on expenses from their employer or there's the scrappage scheme to get them into a compliant vehicle.
Ideally they'd ditch the car entirely and use the scrappage scheme to get an electric cargo bike, but I appreciate that's not the solution for everyone.
My sister lives in the new expanded ULEZ zone, between seeing her and the occasional run to Heathrow I reckon the expansion will cost us approximately £100-£200 a year.
If that means than my baby Nephews and Niece who live in zone 3 are less likely to grow up with serious lung problems due to air pollution then so be in, bargain IMHO.
Anyone watch the BBC breakfast news this morning?
They had a roving reporter who just happened to have two random strangers to interview
Anti ULEZ person was a middle aged female carer. Nice tug of the emotional heart strings.
Pro ULEZ person was a trans cyclist called Julie.
I have to think the BBC knew exactly what they were doing by choosing Julie to go on camera and be interviewed. I can only begin to imagine what the typical enlightened member of society had to say about that.
That’s the kind of car most of the ‘poor’ people I know are already driving.
Exactly, and why the "think of the poor people" argument is tosh.
I think what all this illustrates is the complete and utter absence of anything even remotely resembling a proper transport strategy in this country
I think at least part of that comes from the absolutely abhorrent cost of doing anything involving infrastructure in this country. Almost every project is double what it would cost elsewhere in the EU. I really don't understand why, but I'm guessing nimbyism, land ownership and price, everything privately contracted?
I dont know about that. Cars used to weigh less than half the weight ie less than 1000kg. Most EV’s are now 2000kg or more. Of course they will cause more damage, probably not twice as much, but definitely more.
A BMW 120d is 1450kg
A BMW i3 with the biggest battery pack is 1345kg and has more interior space.
Anti ULEZ person was a middle aged female carer.
Who probably hasn't checked her vehicle yet and won't be affected anyway. *sigh*
Exactly, and why the “think of the poor people” argument is tosh.
No - I said most of the poor people I know. That doesn't mean NO poor people are affected.
For example, lots of people get given cars from friends and relatives, so they drive whatever they can get. Being forced to change it and pay the going rates could put them under financial pressure. And there could be all sorts of issues.
You cannot use a statistical majority to justify every decision. Statistically, the overwhelming majority of people can walk up steps into a shop. But we still need to put ramps in.
I guess today is also the day that all the Boomers in their compliant cars who drive in from the home counties get to find out that not everything they read in the Mail or on Facebook is true...So that's something.
You can only buy new vehicles under the scrappage schemes
Can someone please direct me to this as I couldn't find anything on the tfl website in the pages which hadn't crashed due to demand.
I'm a SE London resident and I've one 2007 euro 4 petrol car and one 1991 non-compliant campervan so curious.
I wonder how this topic is playing out over on Pistonheads...
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/scrappage-schemes/car-and-motorcycle
I can't see anywhere that says you have to use the money to buy a new car; in fact one of the offers is for £1600 plus a year's TFL PT pass, which you presumably don't need if you're getting a new car with the scheme.
@tthew - ??
You can only buy new vehicles under the scrappage schemes
Can someone please direct me to this as I couldn’t find anything on the tfl website in the pages which hadn’t crashed due to demand.
It's not a scrappage scheme like the one in 2008(?) where payment was only towards a new vehicle. You can spend the London ULEZ scrappage grant money on C&H if you want.
Grant payment
We will process your grant payment cheque once we have received and verified the evidence that you have scrapped or retrofitted your vehicle. Your cheque will be made payable to the applicant (you) and sent by post to the address on your RUC account. If you applied for adult-rate Annual Bus & Tram Passes, these will also be posted to your address.
A BMW 120d is 1450kg
A BMW i3 with the biggest battery pack is 1345kg and has more interior space.
More space maybe. But still only 4 seats compared to 5!
And i3 is pretty niche example - doesn't it use lots of carbon body panels to achieve a comparable weight?
I'm not that familiar with the range, but i4 vs 4 series gran coupe might be a fairer comparison? I'm seeing 1990kg for the lightest i4 vs 1825kg for the heaviest (M440i xdrive)
’m seeing 1990kg for the lightest i4 vs 1825kg for the heaviest (M440i xdrive)
So less than 10% difference then?
The iX I had for a couple of weeks was 2.7T
