ULEZ & The Environment

Log in to stop seeing adverts
This page may contain links to companies such as eBay and Amazon. As an affiliate of these sites I may earn commission if you click the link and make a purchase

popillius said:
I hate mine.

I have no problem with the infrastructure which seems to be growing and with fast charging it really doesn't take me much longer to get anywhere than it would with internal combustion. What I hate is the car. It's taken any joy away from driving for me and it's now a passive experience.

I've taken to using my bikes for almost every journey unless there is snow on the ground, just because I feel more 'connected' to the process of riding them.

My Tesla is also badly finished in places. The inside of the door hinges are not painted to match the doors as an example. It all feels a bit 'that'll do' and when you've shelled out a whole heap of cash it's frustrating when the details haven't been properly considered. I don't know whether I'd like a different electric car and maybe I should test drive a few but I am pretty committed to binning the whole concept off and getting myself an ozone killer again.

However, if there is anyone in the market for a Tesla Model S then they are brilliant cars and I would never hesitate to buy another one. Just message me.
Click to expand...
lt's a top, top car and you're lucky to have it.

pork pie fox said:
Have you seen one in the flesh? They look like a skip on wheels.
Click to expand...
They look like the bastard child of a Hummer and a DeLorean.
 
Thera are some good Evs. None of them are Tesla & none ever will be. Thats the essence of Musk really & everything he does. Style over substance.

Why does anyone think he sucked up to Trump? All those lovely tariffs so if you're in the US & want an EV you either buy a Tesla or do without.

Saving the planet my arse.
 
Interesting to hear feedback from people who don’t like them - you rarely hear that in debates.

I will probably get an EV but not a horrible not-quite SUV and someone designs something that is actually nice. Closest so far is the 308. That’s nice enough
 
I need some help please anyone?

Just before the London Mayoral election in the middle of last year a report was due to be published on the results of emission reductions in London due to the measures undertaken by S Khan.

The report publication was then (conveniently I believe) delayed until after the Mayor Election. I’m pretty sure the report was being compiled by Imperial College (very reliable previously, not).

Does anyone know where this report can be accessed as I can’t find it on line? My guess is that it has been suppressed as the results don’t fit the mantra?

This affects all cities in the UK as London was being rolled out as a prime example and a blueprint for all else to replicate.

Thanks.
 
camberwell fox said:
I need some help please anyone?

Just before the London Mayoral election in the middle of last year a report was due to be published on the results of emission reductions in London due to the measures undertaken by S Khan.

The report publication was then (conveniently I believe) delayed until after the Mayor Election. I’m pretty sure the report was being compiled by Imperial College (very reliable previously, not).

Does anyone know where this report can be accessed as I can’t find it on line? My guess is that it has been suppressed as the results don’t fit the mantra?

This affects all cities in the UK as London was being rolled out as a prime example and a blueprint for all else to replicate.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
This one that came out in July 24?

London-wide ULEZ Six Month Report

A report evaluating the first six months of operation of the London-wide ULEZ. The report covers preliminary analysis of the impacts on vehicle compliance, air pollutant emissions and concentrations, and traffic.
www.london.gov.uk www.london.gov.uk
 
pork pie fox said:
I don’t think you’re going to agree with it regardless though, Cambers, are you?
Click to expand...
Well, billions of tax payers money has been spent on this along with individuals spending habits (changing their cars to electric as one such example) plus the shape of our cities are being changed on this basis.

I’m not against improving the environment or making streets safer, I just want to see the proof (generated from a report) showing that xyz emissions have improved air quality by xxx% measured from 2018/19 v 2022 to 2024.

The whole premise that lives are being taken due to emissions is (it appears) unproven. There doesn’t seem to be much opposition that poor air quality may be a contributory factor for asthma and so on but trying to use the death of a young (I think) 9 year old whose doctor (or other professional) deemed had died from the “London smog” is a dangerous way to shape a policy costing 10’s of billions and to a certain extent destroying London and other cities at the same time.

What are your thoughts?
 
camberwell fox said:
Well, billions of tax payers money has been spent on this along with individuals spending habits (changing their cars to electric as one such example) plus the shape of our cities are being changed on this basis.

I’m not against improving the environment or making streets safer, I just want to see the proof (generated from a report) showing that xyz emissions have improved air quality by xxx% measured from 2018/19 v 2022 to 2024.

The whole premise that lives are being taken due to emissions is (it appears) unproven. There doesn’t seem to be much opposition that poor air quality may be a contributory factor for asthma and so on but trying to use the death of a young (I think) 9 year old whose doctor (or other professional) deemed had died from the “London smog” is a dangerous way to shape a policy costing 10’s of billions and to a certain extent destroying London and other cities at the same time.

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
As I say, it sounds like your mind is made up though, so I’m not sure the report will change that, no matter what it says.

If you’re asking me if, in principle, I agree with a policy like this, even though it doesn’t greatly affect me, then I agree with you I’d like to see some greener policies come in. We rely on our elected officials to make choices as to which of these to pursue, so that’s where we’re at, I guess. If it turns out to be a disaster, then I suspect it’ll turn out badly for him, but this was a policy introduced by a Conservative mayor, backed by a Conservative PM at the time and carried on and expanded by a Labour mayor, so it would seem to be a policy that both main parties support and is therefore likely to continue.
 
pork pie fox said:
As I say, it sounds like your mind is made up though, so I’m not sure the report will change that, no matter what it says.

If you’re asking me if, in principle, I agree with a policy like this, even though it doesn’t greatly affect me, then I agree with you I’d like to see some greener policies come in. We rely on our elected officials to make choices as to which of these to pursue, so that’s where we’re at, I guess. If it turns out to be a disaster, then I suspect it’ll turn out badly for him, but this was a policy introduced by a Conservative mayor, backed by a Conservative PM at the time and carried on and expanded by a Labour mayor, so it would seem to be a policy that both main parties support and is therefore likely to continue.
Click to expand...
My stance is clear:

If the report showed an improvement of 1-5% then I would argue that there are areas in need of investment instead of this (knife crime, police on the streets, social housing and the homeless to name but a few).

If the report showed an improvement of (say) 6-10% then I would support it but perhaps as the results aren’t huge, then some of the money could be diverted as per my point above.

If the report showed an improvement of 10% and higher then I couldn’t really not support it.

I just want proof, my guess is the report showed a very small % and was therefore suppressed to avoid any negative publicity towards S Khan in his election year.
 
I have a work colleague that lives in Eltham and works at Isle of Grain his car wasn't ULEZ compliant so he sold it to another colleague who lives in Thurrock. Same car causing the same pollution but just at a different location, let's hope the wind isn't blowing in a SW direction as all those emissions will be blown back to Eltham.

I'm sure the Government has a department that is solely there to invent new ways of taxing people and coming up with ways to justify the taxes that hopefully the public won't notice.

You can bet the results of ULEZ were made up long before it was implemented, hard to role out nationwide if it turns out it made no difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

P Pld Pts
1Liverpool2150
2Arsenal2244
3Nottm F2244
4Newcastle2238
5Manchester C  2238
6Chelsea2137
7Bournemouth2237
8Aston Villa2236
9Brighton2234
10Fulham2233
11Brentford2228
12Palace2227
13Manchester U2226
14West Ham2226
15Tottenham 2224
16Everton2120
17Wolves2116
18Ipswich2216
19Leicester2214
20Southampton226

Latest posts

Back
Top