Stop expanding the ULEZ to all the London boroughs in 2023

[markjay]

Kahn is desperate to get that London air clean isn’t he?



Mayor deploys fleet of Ulez camera vans to catch drivers

I wonder if these are zero-emissions vans....

 

[AMGeed]

Londoners could sabotage the ULEZ scheme quite simply by refusing to pay the £12 50.
How many journeys are there within the ULEZ zone every day? The councils would have no chance of keeping up with the fines for non payment. They would drown under the paperwork within a week. Imagine the cost of sending all those summons alone. Then imagine the backlog in the courts of those refusing to pay the fines for the summons.
I reckon the French would revolt.

 

[Darrell]

I wonder if these are zero-emissions vans....

You’d like to think so.

 

[JHS]

As I said, even Boston has more appeal over London even given that statistic.Which btw, is 8 years out of date.

 

[markjay]

Londoners could sabotage the ULEZ scheme quite simply by refusing to pay the £12 50.
How many journeys are there within the ULEZ zone every day? The councils would have no chance of keeping up with the fines for non payment. They would drown under the paperwork within a week. Imagine the cost of sending all those summons alone. Then imagine the backlog in the courts of those refusing to pay the fines for the summons.
I reckon the French would revolt.

But only those Londoners who own a non-compliant car can participate in this 'rebellion'. That 700,000 car owners (out of 2.6m cars), spread across all boroughs - might not be enough to "drown the Council under the paperwork".

 

[TC350]

It’s appears to be working in some cases though.

Some people simply don’t like to bend over and take it up the **** though. People obviously feel strongly about this.

Luckily we’re all different.

So what can those who feel strongly in favour of ULEZ do? Nothing. Once again it’s only the shouty ones who get heard, Meanwhile, a possible majority of those who aren’t against it get ignored. Democracy or victory for the loudest?

 

[TC350]

Londoners could sabotage the ULEZ scheme quite simply by refusing to pay the £12 50.
How many journeys are there within the ULEZ zone every day? The councils would have no chance of keeping up with the fines for non payment. They would drown under the paperwork within a week. Imagine the cost of sending all those summons alone. Then imagine the backlog in the courts of those refusing to pay the fines for the summons.
I reckon the French would revolt.

France is far stricter on clean air zones. I see no revolts.

 

[Darrell]

So what can those who feel strongly in favour of ULEZ do? Nothing. Once again it’s only the shouty ones who get heard, Meanwhile, a possible majority of those who aren’t against it get ignored. Democracy or victory for the loudest?

Victory for the loudest unfortunately.

Seems to be happening more and more these days. Oh, and along with minorities and vandals.

 

[TrueSpirit]

This has nothing to do with clean air.
Imperial college modelling was out by 1000% on covid, mad cow etc. Its a nonsense to rely on such mathematical modelling without having a range of research papers for comparison and even then the health implications stress this will cause to families struggling already may far exceed any supposed and dubious claims of death caused by emissions from the specific non compliant ulez cars

The is part of the great reset , which will become pay per mile next

 

[TC350]

This has nothing to do with clean air.
Imperial college modelling was out by 1000% on covid, mad cow etc. Its a nonsense to rely on such mathematical modelling without having a range of research papers for comparison and even then the health implications stress this will cause to families struggling already may far exceed any supposed and dubious claims of death caused by emissions from the specific non compliant ulez cars

The is part of the great reset , which will become pay per mile next

I’m surprised you haven’t hung yourself if you believe all that nonsense.

 

[clk320x]

stress this will cause to families struggling

What?

They literally give you £2k to buy a suitable car if you don’t have one - if you own a sub £2k value vehicle it’s a free upgrade essentially.

If you own a more expensive car, you sell it on privately and buy another equal value compliant one. (Assuming you can’t afford the extra money needed to buy a newer car)

Some people are upset they have to replace their flashy Euro 5 oil-burner with an older petrol car as they can’t afford the additional cost to buy a (newer) flashy Euro 6 equivalent oil-burner. Is that the end of the world when we’re in a ‘cost of living crisis’… as a lot on here seem to keep reminding us?

 

[clk320x]

As I said, even Boston has more appeal over London even given that statistic.Which btw, is 8 years out of date.

I’m surprised Boston Lincs isn’t the most visited city in the U.K….

Surely a clean air zone makes a city more appealing?

 

[poormansporsche]

What?

They literally give you £2k to buy a suitable car if you don’t have one - if you own a sub £2k value vehicle it’s a free upgrade essentially.

If you own a more expensive car, you sell it on privately and buy another equal value compliant one. (Assuming you can’t afford the extra money needed to buy a newer car)

Some people are upset they have to replace their flashy Euro 5 oil-burner with an older petrol car as they can’t afford the additional cost to buy a (newer) flashy Euro 6 equivalent oil-burner. Is that the end of the world when we’re in a ‘cost of living crisis’… as a lot on here seem to keep reminding us?

Although you are shit out of luck if you are a minimum wage Waller living 50 yards outside the zone.

Still if you are a pikey with 10 different shitter tippers with bent Mots you are quids in

 

[markjay]

This has nothing to do with clean air.
Imperial college modelling was out by 1000% on covid, mad cow etc. Its a nonsense to rely on such mathematical modelling without having a range of research papers for comparison and even then the health implications stress this will cause to families struggling already may far exceed any supposed and dubious claims of death caused by emissions from the specific non compliant ulez cars

The is part of the great reset , which will become pay per mile next

I suppose you don't believe in all this modern Quantum Mechanics nonsense either, right? I mean, they are telling us now that Newton got it wrong back in the day, so why should we listen to what any of these 'sciencey' types have to say today? Be done with them all, I say. Let's just go back to medieval times, before we had science, everything was great then.... when the Church was infallible and its teachings the eternal truth - you always knew what to believe, unlike today.

 

[TrueSpirit]

I’m surprised you haven’t hung yourself if you believe all that nonsense.

What nonsense are you referring to specifically. Why not discuss how you think that 4000 deaths figure is accurate then. I'm waiting

@markjay I'm a biochemist specialising in HIV. I've read well over 1000 scientific papers and thats a conservative number. Good science is based on demonstrable hypothesis which works withing given parameters that is repeatable over and over. Mathematical modelling is not science, never was, never will be. Don't be conned by slogans like trust the science which are nothing but dogma. Scientific theory constantly evolves. Taking newtonian physics, it works brilliantly with the theories on motion and calculus and helped revolutionise science.

 

[ChipChop]

I suppose you don't believe in all this modern Quantum Mechanics nonsense either, right? I mean, they are telling us now that Newton got it wrong back in the day, so why should we listen to what any of these 'sciencey' types have to say today? Be done with them all, I say. Let's just go back to medieval times, before we had science, everything was great then.... when the Church was infallible and its teachings the eternal truth - you always knew what to believe, unlike today.

I am happy to post the March 2020 Imperial College London report replete with catastrophic mortality figures for the UK and USA if you wish? All incorrect. You may also remember the ICL man responsible for this modelling exercise ignored his own 'non pharmaceutical intervention' advice and carried on his extracuricular activities regardless during 2020. Apparently even he considered his own advice to the UK and US governments to be nonsense.

 

[markjay]

I am happy to post the March 2020 Imperial College London report replete with catastrophic mortality figures for the UK and USA if you wish? All incorrect. You may also remember the ICL man responsible for this modelling exercise ignored his own non pharmaceutical intervention advice and carried on his extracuricular activities regardless during 2020. Apparently he considered his own advice to the UK and US governments to be nonsense.

Is that the "If we do nothing" prediction? If so, then in order to claim that the report was wrong, you'll also need to assume that none of the mitigations worked (lockdowns, social distancing, vaccination, medical treatments, etc). Which is a legitimate assumption, but it's also an arbitratory one. And yes, you can get a model to show any result you want if you carefully choose the assumptions that will lead you there. This works both ways....

At any rate, I wasn't trying to resurrect the COVID debate, instead my point was that the fact the science works by trial-and-error leads people to think (incorrectly) that a dogmatic infallible model of the world is better than an experimental and exploratory one. Which, in other words, means that they prefer the story that religion or tradition etc tell us, to scientific discoveries.

EDIT: You will note that in my response to the post by TrueSpirit I actually accepted - for argument's sake - his assertion that Imperial got it wrong - my point was that even if they did got it wrong, suggesting that all science coming out Imperial should now be ignored, if false logic.

 

[ChipChop]

The conclusions from the Jacobs Solutions 200 page report on the expanded ULEZ scheme is available in the House of Commons library. See link below.

Quick synopsis of the report...

A moderately positive effect of NOX (a 1.4% fall)
A minimal effect on particulate matter (a 0.1% fall)
A moderate negative impact on disabled people that do not qualify for motability
A moderate negative impact on people on low incomes accessing employment in outer London
A moderate negative impact on people with restricted mobility
A moderate negative impact on people who recieve domicillary care
A moderate negative impact on mobile healthcare services and informal care in outer London
A minor negative impact on contraction of the labour market, increased costs for light goods vehicles and a loss in retail spending.

Appear to have more negatives than positives. Sounds like a tax to me.

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2022-0240/CDP-2022-0240.pdf

 

[ChipChop]

Is that the "If we do nothing" prediction? If so, then in order to claim that tge report was wrong, you'll also need to assume that none of the mitigations worked (lockdowns, social distancing, vaccination, medical treatments, etc). Which is a legitimate assumption, but it's also an arbitratory one. And yes, you can get a model to show any result you want if you carefully choose the assumptions that will lead you there. This works both ways....

At any rate, I wasn't trying to resurrect the COVID debate, instead my point was that the fact the science works by trial an error leads people to think (incorrectly) that a dogmatic infallible model of the world is better that an experimental and exploratory one. Which, in other words, means that we prefer the story that religion or tradition etc tell us, to scientific discoveries.

The if we do nothing argument was played out in reality thanks to Sweden.

That countries Uppsala University also borrowed ICL's modelling and adapted it to their country with similar catastrophic results to the UK and US. Proving the ICL model was nonsense.

 

[markjay]

The if we do nothing argument was played out in reality thanks to Sweden.

That countries Uppsala University also borrowed ICL's modelling and adapted it to their country with similar catastrophic results to the UK and US. Proving the ICL model was nonsense.

I refer the honourable member to the EDIT added to my post #1,957