Stop expanding the ULEZ to all the London boroughs in 2023

[markjay]

You have chosen to conflate two different elements of tailpipe emissions. Exclude ICE from cities if you want but ICE in rural settings poses no significant threat to human health - and you know it.

So you'd be in favour in banning ICE cars from all city centres, village centres, and other urban areas, allowing new biofuel powered ICE cars to be sold but only driven in areas away from populated centres? That's not a very practical suggestion, I don't think, and certainly county folk will be up in arms for being effectively banned from population areas. The funny thing is that they would be allowed to drive their John Deere into town (my understanding is that agricultural machinery are currently exempt from the 2035 ban), but not their biofuel powered G-Wagon.

 

[Bellow]

I think a few struggle to accept new technology, unfortunately for them EVs are now the present rather than future.

And some struggle to 'believe' that the new technology will actually exist at the scale required.

I’m sure there would have been similar people arguing the case for the horse and cart over the original motor vehicle.

This goes way beyond horse and cart or cars. A significant amount of electricity generation which is not going to be sufficient for all needs is to be consumed by EVs leaving a shortfall. Who goes without? Does your need for your car exceed a hospital's need for electricity? A car can run on bio fuel (both SI and CI) but not a hospital. You can't just wave away these concerns with a lazy accusation of Ludditism.

 

[Bellow]

So you'd be in favour in banning ICE cars from all city centres, village centres, and other urban areas, allowing new biofuel powered ICE cars to be sold but only driven in areas away from populated centres?

Yes. If it saves soft-lunged city dwellers having to give up their wood burning stoves or deal with their crap traffic management.
Remind me how an EV fares outside a city - its range plummets and the recharging facilities are inadequate. Yeah, best confined to cities.

That's not a very practical suggestion, I don't think, and certainly county folk will be up in arms for being effectively banned from population areas.

That is already the case for those who do not have compliant vehicles.

The funny thing is that they would be allowed to drive their John Deere into town (my understanding is that agricultural machinery are currently exempt from the 2035 ban), but not their biofuel powered G-Wagon.

And if they can't afford a compliant vehicle then they can't afford a John Deere - or a G-Wagon.

 

[clk320x]

And some struggle to 'believe' that the new technology will actually exist at the scale required.

Good for you then, you keep on believing what you want to believe. Quite frankly I couldn’t care less.

I wish you all the best with your biofuel powered rust bucket.

 

[clk320x]

Remind me how an EV fares outside a city - its range plummets and the recharging facilities are inadequate. Yeah, best confined to cities.

I’ve driven all over the country and Europe in mine and had no issues with recharging facilities or range, that includes to remote parts…

 

[markjay]

...Exclude ICE from cities if you want but ICE in rural settings poses no significant threat to human health...

I wasn't questioning the science... my question was: how would you put this into a practical solution? And my answer was that you can't... the only practical way of stopping exhaust pollution in urban areas is - in the long term - by replacing all ICE cars with zero tailpipe emissions cars. It's just not practical to have cars that can only be driven in non-populated areas.

 

[Benzowner]

I’ve driven all over the country and Europe in mine and had no issues with recharging facilities or range, that includes to remote parts…

But it would appear to be a Tesla S which for me at 72 years of age and a pensioner could no way afford, try your experiment in a Nissan Leaf, lucky to make it to the end of the street.

I followed the governments advice and got rid of my S320 petrol and bought a E300 diesel, to save the earth from dreaded CO2, followed this with a B180 diesel and now have a Nissan Qashqai 1.6 diesel unfortunately Euro 5. There are thousands of people like me are in this position of owning a Euro 5 car. I can only speak for my car, current retail values around £10k trade in £7.5k so if I want to trade my car I loose £2.5k and buy a second hand petrol which if it is another QQ will cost £180 VED as opposed to £30 currently paid it will do far less mile per gallon also. If I push for a diesel, the exact same car Euro 6, again £180 road tax Euro 6 compliant re exhaust emissions, but put out more CO2 than my current car.

I have asked the question a few times, why can't my car be allowed to be upgraded to Euro 6? Apparently they can convert vans for just a few hundred pounds, but will DVLA accept that they are now Euro 6? If the work is carried out at time of MoT say, by a reputable garage and tested for MoT standards for a Euro 6 vehicle why could this not be accepted? It would save a lot of money for an awful lot of people.

 

[clk320x]

I have asked the question a few times, why can't my car be allowed to be upgraded to Euro 6?

I’m pretty sure they can be, it’s just a long winded process. Some bikers have had their motorbikes tested and found they meet Euro 6.

 

[Bellow]

I wasn't questioning the science... my question was: how would you put this into a practical solution? And my answer was that you can't... the only practical way of stopping exhaust pollution in urban areas is - in the long term - by replacing all ICE cars with zero tailpipe emissions cars. It's just not practical to have cars that can only be driven in non-populated areas.

There is absolutely no reason why ICE running on bio fuels cannot meet the required limits on pollutants that are harmful to human health. More so when it is accepted that engines running on carbon neutral fuels no longer have to prioritise CO2 emission reduction. That enables a reduction in the in-cylinder pressures that create NOx and, re-opens the door to SI engines that can be so low in NOx production as to be negligible and devoid of particulates. Further, such engines can be built cheaply and if the choice is between expensive EV and cheap CO2 neutral with ULEZ compliant ICE, I can guess which curries favour with the public in these financially straitened times.
In this quest for reducing pollution to the absolute minimum., the pollution (over which we have very little control) in the mining of the materials required for electrification cannot be glossed over as it currently is. Or the conflicts in the countries that have these resources - war has a significant carbon footprint and the most cursory of glances at Africa shows how volatile it already is.
Back to your point ie,

It's just not practical to have cars that can only be driven in non-populated areas.

that is exactly what ULEZs are doing with the vehicles that cannot meet the criteria - but are still usable cars elsewhere.

More broadly, there is not going to be enough electricity for all the required needs for decarbonisation. There are enough reports out there quantifying the exact shortfall. To arrive in that situation when we could have freed up three quarters of the land currently used to fatten animals for human consumption and deployed it as a source of CO2 neutral energy is a staggering failure to grasp what a deficiency in energy production will actually look like.
Meat is an unhealthy dietary choice. To then find that the hospital required to treat the ailments it inflicts can't keep its lights on is the point where humankind lost sight of its place in the universe. We got as far as we did by being smart. Being stupid will land us back where we began.

 

[Bellow]

I have asked the question a few times, why can't my car be allowed to be upgraded to Euro 6? Apparently they can convert vans for just a few hundred pounds, but will DVLA accept that they are now Euro 6? If the work is carried out at time of MoT say, by a reputable garage and tested for MoT standards for a Euro 6 vehicle why could this not be accepted? It would save a lot of money for an awful lot of people.

And it has been answered previously.
Anyway, MOT tests don't test for NOx (it requires a rolling road dyno just for starters) so any improvement in NOx reduction (which will cost much more than £hundreds - where did you get that figure? - it's absurd) couldn't be measured. Remember, reducing NOx output on an engine that prioritises low CO2 emission (and hence high mpg) is so difficult the OEMs resorted to cheating when they found they couldn't do it.

 

[TC350]

I followed the governments advice and got rid of my S320 petrol and bought a E300 diesel, to save the earth from dreaded CO2, followed this with a B180 diesel and now have a Nissan Qashqai 1.6 diesel unfortunately Euro 5. There are thousands of people like me are in this position of owning a Euro 5 car. I can only speak for my car, current retail values around £10k trade in £7.5k so if I want to trade my car I loose £2.5k and buy a second hand petrol which if it is another QQ will cost £180 VED as opposed to £30 currently paid it will do far less mile per gallon also. If I push for a diesel, the exact same car Euro 6, again £180 road tax Euro 6 compliant re exhaust emissions, but put out more CO2 than my current car.

I’ll happily concede that you may be in a very small minority to have changed your car solely to save the planet, but I very much doubt it. I’d be very surprised if it wasn’t mainly a financial decision based on improved fuel consumption figures and VED savings. Over the years, those savings will have mounted up, possibly considerably.

Like most (all?) diesel owners, it was more about government financial incentives than government advice. When has anyone ever taken heed of government advice when there’s been nothing in it for them?

You‘ve had your years of cost savings over those of us who chose not to go the diesel route, so now it’s time to financially cough up - before even more of us are medically coughing. Swings and roundabouts.

 

[markjay]

...I followed the governments advice and got rid of my S320 petrol and bought a E300 diesel, to save the earth from dreaded CO2, followed this with a B180 diesel and now have a Nissan Qashqai 1.6 diesel unfortunately Euro 5. There are thousands of people like me are in this position of owning a Euro 5 car...

I would phrase this slightly differently. People who bought Diesel cars 10 years (a) were mostly business users who did so because of the low BIK tax on Diesel cars at the time, and (b) this only applied tova new car on a business lease, which is typically two or three years long.

The people who own these Diesel cars now are not the same people who benefited from the tax breakes all those years ago. These are mostly people who bought their Diesel cars second hand not because they were 'following government advice', but because Diesel is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as more frugal and cheaper to run, and in part also because there was a much larger choice of Diesel cars coming out of leases than petrol cars.

So it is questionable to what extent the government is liable for the potential financial losses of those people who bought second hand Diesel cars in recent years.

And while there's a valid argument here and it's that the government got it wrong with Diesel 10 years ago, so why should we trust them now, the bottom line is that people do not really have a choice when the government applies behaviour-shaping incentives and punitive measures, other than to comply or pay-up. The way to fight an unfair policy is through your MP in Parliament and petitions, as well as through a media campaign and even demonstrations. But ultimately people will have to comply with lawful government's decisions, whether they like it or not.

 

[Benzowner]

I would phrase this slightly differently. People who bought Diesel cars 10 years (a) were mostly business users who did so because of the low BIK tax on Diesel cars at the time, and (b) this only applied tova new car on a business lease, which is typically two or three years long.

The people who own these Diesel cars now are not the same people who benefited from the tax breakes all those years ago. These are mostly people who bought their Diesel cars second hand not because they were 'following government advice', but because Diesel is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as more frugal and cheaper to run, and in part also because there was a much larger choice of Diesel cars coming out of leases than petrol cars.

So it is questionable to what extent the government is liable for the potential financial losses of those people who bought second hand Diesel cars in recent years.

And while there's a valid argument here and it's that the government got it wrong with Diesel 10 years ago, so why should we trust them now, the bottom line is that people do not really have a choice when the government applies behaviour-shaping incentives and punitive measures, other than to comply or pay-up. The way to fight an unfair policy is through your MP in Parliament and petitions, as well as through a media campaign and even demonstrations. But ultimately people will have to comply with lawful government's decisions, whether they like it or not.

Ran my own business, never leased a car always ran my own and claimed mileage so had to drive a minimum 2 litre car to achieve the best benefit

As regards conversion costs, a quick google and this is online How Much Does a Euro 6 Conversion Kit Cost? - New Valley News. Priced in Euros although its a Wiltshire/Dorset site. But as said, no reference as to whether DVLA will recognise the conversion and update their databases accordingly.

 

[ToeKnee]

After reading this thread one thing is certainly obvious, whether you're pro ulez or anti, pro ev or anti nothing anyone says on here is going to change your mind.

 

[davymead]

A simple point.
If those folks in this country capable of buying expensive EV’s believe that they can force the vast majority of people to ’upgrade‘ their mostly unloved cheap personal transport by spending money they genuinely don’t have, they clearly live in cloud cuckoo land.

 

[Will]

The whole thread seems to just go around in circles.

Why all the talk of EVs? It’s got nothing to do with that really - just a move to get mainly middle aged dirty diesels out of the urban environment.

No one needs to buy a brand new car, and certainly it doesn’t have to be an EV either.

Why would someone with a £2/4/6k or whatever ten/twenty year old car suddenly need to buy a £40k one?

Fair enough if you would like to, but that’s not what you need to do for compliance sake.

Considering how long the ULEZ has been in place, how widely publicised it has been, the fact that it’s not just in London etc I don’t see how people still seem to misunderstand the scheme

 

[markjay]

A simple point.
If those folks in this country capable of buying expensive EV’s believe that they can force the vast majority of people to ’upgrade‘ their mostly unloved cheap personal transport by spending money they genuinely don’t have, they clearly live in cloud cuckoo land.

You are talking about the looming ban on sales of new ICE cars, but this thread is about ULEZ.

A couple of relatives has Hondas from 2002 and 2004 and they were both ULEZ compliant... and very cheap.

Granted, some people will potentially lose money when they change their cars from Diesel to petrol, but this issue is nowhere near the cost or replacing your ICE cars with an EV - the two are very different issues.

 

[markjay]

EDIT

 

[Dryce]

I’ve driven all over the country and Europe in mine and had no issues with recharging facilities or range, that includes to remote parts…

I'm guessing you're not driving one of the cheap short range ones then?

My observation is tat the number of EVs as a % of vehicles thins significantly out once you get away from main urban centres and interconnects between them. And the majority of those I encounter on open remote road / motorway are being driven with a level of circumspection when it comes to speed. I would add that those I see most frequently in Scotland up north on the likes of the A9 or appearing to tour the highlands are Tesla models. The ones in towns and residential areas tend to be of a wider variety.

My threshold for a minimum EV is one that can deal with me having to travel up over the Highlands at a time not of my choosing and in a season not of my choosing. Yes they are available. But not cheap. Ad the cheaper (but still expensive) variety probably wouldn't be a safe bet on winter night.

Note that's not the same as the city / urban environment. But then anybody buying a cheaper (but still expensive) variety may well be overshooting the vehicle requirement.

 

[clk320x]

I'm guessing you're not driving one of the cheap short range ones then?

My observation is tat the number of EVs as a % of vehicles thins significantly out once you get away from main urban centres and interconnects between them. And the majority of those I encounter on open remote road / motorway are being driven with a level of circumspection when it comes to speed. I would add that those I see most frequently in Scotland up north on the likes of the A9 or appearing to tour the highlands are Tesla models. The ones in towns and residential areas tend to be of a wider variety.

My threshold for a minimum EV is one that can deal with me having to travel up over the Highlands at a time not of my choosing and in a season not of my choosing. Yes they are available. But not cheap. Ad the cheaper (but still expensive) variety probably wouldn't be a safe bet on winter night.

Note that's not the same as the city / urban environment. But then anybody buying a cheaper (but still expensive) variety may well be overshooting the vehicle requirement.

Yeah I have a Tesla Model S, I’ve been all over the place including to the Highlands and never driven slowly for the sake of range, the charging network is so good. You’ve got plenty of superchargers to choose from on the A9 at Perth, Aviemore and Inverness.

To be fair when it comes to long range EVs IMO Tesla wins due to its charging network, they got that right from the start.

Although the 3rd party networks are improving now and Tesla have opened a few sites to non-Tesla vehicles. I still wouldn’t move away from the brand though personally.