Stop expanding the ULEZ to all the London boroughs in 2023

[Dryce]

The LEZ here only affects petrol cars between 20 and 30 years old , and diesels between 15 and 30 years old

Diesels can start at about 8 years depending on model.

ULEZ is a London thing just now , but so was LEZ a while back , and now it is here , spreading just like Covid .

Glasgow , for several decades , has had the most polluted street in the whole of Europe : Hope Street . Funny that a good part of it is buses and taxis only ...

The Glasgow LEZ is roughly equivalent to the London ULEZ - they presumably left the U off thing in Glasgow because they didn't already have a LEZ to prefix it to.

 

[Bellow]

, an ICE will always be powered by fossil fuel.

Nope. It could run on (fresh not fossilised) bio fuel and being carbon neutral mpg wouldn't matter. This is what you could have won....

 

[Dryce]

Nope. It could run on (fresh not fossilised) bio fuel and being carbon neutral mpg wouldn't matter. This is what you could have won....

I think in practice this isn't going to happen - bio fuel production on a large scale would likely compete with food production.

With EVs the level of electricity generation and infrastructure needed isn't generally talked about - to replace the kWh equivalent from the nasty fossil fuel.

I note the comments about fossil fuel power stations being cleaner in principle than ICE in cars. But we haven't been very good at building new big clean fossil fuel power stations over the last couple of decades. It's ironic that they very groups who would impede ICE usage to force EV usage will probably impede the construction of large power stations needed to provide energy security.

 

[Bellow]

I think in practice this isn't going to happen - bio fuel production on a large scale would likely compete with food production.

It could happen. But the meat industry is obviously valued over personal mobility. Short-sightedness that will be rued I suspect.

With EVs the level of electricity generation and infrastructure needed isn't generally talked about - to replace the kWh equivalent from the nasty fossil fuel.

I note the comments about fossil fuel power stations being cleaner in principle than ICE in cars. But we haven't been very good at building new big clean fossil fuel power stations over the last couple of decades. It's ironic that they very groups who would impede ICE usage to force EV usage will probably impede the construction of large power stations needed to provide energy security.

I have little faith that the grand electrification scheme - however laudable - will actually deliver and when that is realised it will be too late to utilise ICE. By then the ICE production lines will have been scrapped and no effort was made to incorporate bio fuels into the energy mix. A known technology (ICE) is being jettisoned when all it needs is that its fuel be sourced differently while there's a head long rush to a technology that is far too sensitive to geo-politics and nowhere near readiness and with its main product (EVs) being shunned by the public. By the time it is realised that a change of diet could have helped, it will be too late. A species so stupid deserves to fail.

 

[John N]

They’re the ones who have been here for years. Probably when that little turd was still in his shorts.

A Turd is a useful thing!

 

[markjay]

Nope. It could run on (fresh not fossilised) bio fuel and being carbon neutral mpg wouldn't matter. This is what you could have won....

We'll still be burning carbon..... and there's no way to do that with net zero harm to the environment.

The move to electric vehicles, on the other hand, will hopefully allow us to be in a position where eventually 100% of our electriity is generated from nuclear and/or renewables sources (solar/wind/hydro/tide etc) - even if it will take some time to get there.

The other issue is that any type of power plant - green or otherwise - has a massive environmental impact. The long term solution must involve a considerable reduction in our energy consumption, or at very least reigning-in the growth curve.

 

[Bellow]

We'll still be burning carbon..... and there's no way to do that with net zero harm to the environment.

Bio fuels release the carbon they absorbed in their growth. That is current and we benefit. The beneficiaries of carbon capture of fossil fuels are long gone.

The move to electric vehicles, on the other hand, will hopefully allow us to be in a position where eventually 100% of our electriity is generated from nuclear and/or renewables sources (solar/wind/hydro/tide etc) - even if it will take some time to get there.

The move to electric vehicles can be seen as the driver of electricity generation expansion. Equally likely is that they will become a drain on limited generation and distribution capacity needed elsewhere.

The other issue is that any type of power plant - green or otherwise - has a massive environmental impact. The long term solution must involve a considerable reduction in our energy consumption, or at very least reigning-in the growth curve.

Not happening though is it? Everyone is carrying on as though it's business as usual. Returning to this thread's topic. The sheer amount of times the distinction between harmful to planet and harmful to human health has had to be clarified more than implies a conflation of the two. The resistance to ULEZ will (IMO) be replicated when the real changes in behaviour are required to reduce CO2 emissions. Objections to ULEZs is mere foreplay for what's to come.

 

[ALFAitalia]

With EVs the level of electricity generation and infrastructure needed isn't generally talked about - to replace the kWh equivalent from the nasty fossil fuel

Plenty of electric to go round. The National Grid claim that if every ICE car magically turned into an EV tonight it would not be a problem.....and that should know. Only the anti EV folks say otherwise..

Busting the myths and misconceptions about electric vehicles | National Grid Group

Can the electricity grid cope with more EVs? And what really happens to old EV batteries? Find out the answer to these and many more questions about electric vehicles in our comprehensive EV myth-buster.

www.nationalgrid.com

 

[Fastcar155]

Plenty of electric to go round. The National Grid claim that if every ICE car magically turned into an EV tonight it would not be a problem.....and that should know. Only the anti EV folks say otherwise..

Busting the myths and misconceptions about electric vehicles | National Grid Group

Can the electricity grid cope with more EVs? And what really happens to old EV batteries? Find out the answer to these and many more questions about electric vehicles in our comprehensive EV myth-buster.

www.nationalgrid.com

Hi , what would reply in the middle of a cold dark December night.

 

[clk320x]

Plenty of electric to go round. The National Grid claim that if every ICE car magically turned into an EV tonight it would not be a problem.....and that should know. Only the anti EV folks say otherwise..

Busting the myths and misconceptions about electric vehicles | National Grid Group

Can the electricity grid cope with more EVs? And what really happens to old EV batteries? Find out the answer to these and many more questions about electric vehicles in our comprehensive EV myth-buster.

www.nationalgrid.com

Exactly. They seem to know more than the national grid lol.

 

[ChipChop]

Plenty of electric to go round. The National Grid claim that if every ICE car magically turned into an EV tonight it would not be a problem.....and that should know. Only the anti EV folks say otherwise..

Busting the myths and misconceptions about electric vehicles | National Grid Group

Can the electricity grid cope with more EVs? And what really happens to old EV batteries? Find out the answer to these and many more questions about electric vehicles in our comprehensive EV myth-buster.

www.nationalgrid.com

Is that the same National Grid group that saw its pre tax profits increase 104% to £3.4 billion last year? Appears to be very much in their interest to encourage EV ownership as EV's use a lot of electricity. Or is that a myth as well?

 

[davymead]

It could happen. But the meat industry is obviously valued over personal mobility. Short-sightedness that will be rued I suspect.

I have little faith that the grand electrification scheme - however laudable - will actually deliver and when that is realised it will be too late to utilise ICE. By then the ICE production lines will have been scrapped and no effort was made to incorporate bio fuels into the energy mix. A known technology (ICE) is being jettisoned when all it needs is that its fuel be sourced differently while there's a head long rush to a technology that is far too sensitive to geo-politics and nowhere near readiness and with its main product (EVs) being shunned by the public. By the time it is realised that a change of diet could have helped, it will be too late. A species so stupid deserves to fail.

Absolutely spot on. None so blind ….

 

[markjay]

Bio fuels release the carbon they absorbed in their growth. That is current and we benefit. The beneficiaries of carbon capture of fossil fuels are long gone...

It's not only about CO2. We need to stop burning stuff to produce energy. Biofuels may be better than fossil fuels, but ultimately even that is only a stop gap solution at best.

 

[markjay]

The move to electric vehicles can be seen as the driver of electricity generation expansion. Equally likely is that they will become a drain on limited generation and distribution capacity needed elsewhere.

As I said before, EVs do one good thing and they do it well - they remove harmful exhaust emissions from urban areas.

But other than that, they are not the solution to our personal mobility issues. We need to manufacture less cars, own less cars, and drive them less.

No form of personal mobility based on building large metal boxes to transport 1 to 5 people will ever be green.

 

[Bellow]

It's not only about CO2. We need to stop burning stuff to produce energy. Biofuels may be better than fossil fuels, but ultimately even that is only a stop gap solution at best.

No. Bio fuels are carbon neutral. No different from doing nothing except doing nothing isn't much of a way to live.

 

[Bellow]

As I said before, EVs do one good thing and they do it well - they remove harmful exhaust emissions from urban areas.

But other than that, they are not the solution to our personal mobility issues. We need to manufacture less cars, own less cars, and drive them less.

No form of personal mobility based on building large metal boxes to transport 1 to 5 people will ever be green.

We have a choice. Either we develop better utilisation of energy resources (and not be blinkered to exclude carbon neutral fuels at least as an element of the transition to electrification - which is not yet a reality and could be turned on its head if certain countries (countries not noted for their altruism) choose to play the game for their own ends - so we can continue to enjoy much of the benefits we've become accustomed to eg, the basics - heated homes, personal mobility, education, health care, etc. Or we can crawl into the back of the cave and die. There's a simple reduction in energy use to be had by closing all schools and hospitals. Is that what we want? If we don't shape up sharpish it's what we'll get.
Killing off the means of propulsion that has served us well for a century before an alternative exists in the required form when all it (ICE) needs is it's fuel to be harvested differently is utter folly.

 

[clk320x]

Is that the same National Grid group that saw its pre tax profits increase 104% to £3.4 billion last year? Appears to be very much in their interest to encourage EV ownership as EV's use a lot of electricity. Or is that a myth as well?

and it’s in the interest of the oil companies to do the opposite what’s your point?

 

[Darrell]

I’m feeling sorry for the owners of the modern classics.
Theres a lot of them where I live and sadly they won’t be out and about as much as usual.

 

[TeddyRuxpin]

E39 M5 is a bummer

 

[davymead]

We have a choice. Either we develop better utilisation of energy resources (and not be blinkered to exclude carbon neutral fuels at least as an element of the transition to electrification - which is not yet a reality and could be turned on its head if certain countries (countries not noted for their altruism) choose to play the game for their own ends - so we can continue to enjoy much of the benefits we've become accustomed to eg, the basics - heated homes, personal mobility, education, health care, etc. Or we can crawl into the back of the cave and die. There's a simple reduction in energy use to be had by closing all schools and hospitals. Is that what we want? If we don't shape up sharpish it's what we'll get.
Killing off the means of propulsion that has served us well for a century before an alternative exists in the required form when all it (ICE) needs is it's fuel to be harvested differently is utter folly.

Succinctly said.