Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 3 months later...

I'd throw another cat in and say that anyone who was "mislead" buying a diesel should really have spent 5 minutes researching beforehand. The toxicity has been known about and published for years. That doesn't excuse the government or car makers for peddling otherwise though.


These proposals seem fair; it won't be for another 7 years that anyone in ED will have to pay.

I don't understand this method of penalising people without first providing viable alternatives. Perhaps Southwark can install more electric charging points on residential roads? Hopefully electric/hybrids will become cheaper but those with flats, terraced homes and front gardens that don't have OSP (I think, the majority of the SE22) won't be able to charge the vehicles. Could the Mayor hurry up and improve SE22's public transport connections into London e.g.local bike scheme, a rail/tube service that delivers a frequent reliable service; basic stuff that exists elsewhere (albeit costly). If we have good alternatives we shouldn't need cars but our options are inadequate. Yes we want to prevent avoidable deaths! If the Mayor and TFL are really committed to this then they have to invest first (yeah that would make sense!)

Talking of investing, how much would it actually cost to set up the cctv system needed to monitor the north /south circular route.


I found a document from Islington https://www.islington.gov.uk//~/media/sharepoint-lists/public-records/environmentalprotection/qualityandperformance/reporting/20152016/20150401islingtonulezextensionstudyfinalreport that suggests a cctv network would cost ?10.2 million in 2014 (allowing for inflation) per km


The north circular is 41.4 km long (source https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Circular_Road)

the south circular is 33km long (source https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Circular_Road,_London)


A total if 74.4 km at a potential 2014 cost of ?10.2 million per km makes it ?758.88 million


Allow for inflation from the 2014 estimate, cost overrun and other costs and that could be closer to a billion pounds in 2019 just to implement then there is the potential cost to householders to replace their vehicles that don't meet the necessary levels. Finally there is the cost to run the scheme, I assume capita will manage it on behalf of tfl.


I would be interested to see the figures that the mayoral office predicts for implementing as far as the north and south circular


Whilst cost should not be a factor compared with lives saved, it has to be considered.


Equally did anyone see top gear a few years ago where they did no2 comparisons during and after a London wide bus strike ?


They showed that no2 levels dropped significantly during the bus strike, and the following study backed it up http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2394054/oxford-street-pollution-plummeted-during-bus-strike-say-scientists


Therefore turning all buses to electric or converting to run on petrol rather than diesel will aide a drop in pollution levels which is a good start.


As Bil pointed out above south London doesn't have an effective transport system to replace cars if they are taxed off the road.


By restricting heavy traffic to the south circular and further out, it means that the already congested, slow and heavily polluted south circular will just get worse thus moving the no2 problem out to the south circular , which depending on weather and wind direction could cause it to drift into the edges of east Dulwich


Finally, deliveries to stores and businesses in the new zone will potentially increase cost wise which may be passed on to consumers as vehicles will either have to be converted, replaced or pay the new charge.


Overall I believe that there needs to be a better understanding of what expanding the ultra low emmision zone from the current congestion zone to the north and south circular roads actually means for London and Londoners as a whole before we can make any sort of informed decession.

Hi The ArtfulDogger,

I very much doubt it would cost anything like that to actively monitor it. But I suspect much of the monitoring would be via where vehicles are registered.

Witnessed air pollution of moving vehicles what 10 years ago. The system cost ?100,000 then per vehicle lane. They could tell how many cylinders were working from the emitted air pollution. So the systems available now must be even smarter and significantly cheaper.


Hi bil,

People can find alternatives to diesel vehicles but people can't avoid breathing (for long). So again I think the balance of unfairness is people having to breath polluted air over finding replacements for cars and vans.

Hi James, I was talking of the cost to implement the necessary cameras or systems to know when a vehicle enters the zone, plus the need for cameras to monitor vehicles already in the zone, after all people shouldn't be charged a daily rate if their vehicle is on their drive!


Not quite sure what your air pollution of moving vehicles statement is actually saying, it seems very confusing.


As I said I want to see the projected costs for implementing, running and maintenance of the proposal before making any decision


As Bil said in his post, before penalising drivers in the south, we need better transport alternatives implemented first he wasn't questioning the unfairness of alternatives to diesel vehicles, although the mayors proposal is that we replace or convert any vehicle that doesn't meet the standards, a lot of Londoners simply can't afford to do that especially those who use cars infrequently but still need them

Bit off topic, but re monitoring, I know many people would say Big Brother etc but why isn't it made compulsory for every vehicle to carry a tamperproof GPS transmitter so that it can be seen to enter any chargeable zones - which could also be used to enforce speed limits, prove red light jumping, track stolen vehicles, stop hit and runs etc etc. I know, loads of people will hate the idea, but at the moment traffic laws are a joke, broken by most people some of the time due to lack of traffic police. I'd accept one on my bike to prove I don't jump reds if that would help!

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bit off topic, but re monitoring, I know many

> people would say Big Brother etc but why isn't it

> made compulsory for every vehicle to carry a

> tamperproof GPS transmitter so that it can be seen

> to enter any chargeable zones - which could also

> be used to enforce speed limits, prove red light

> jumping, track stolen vehicles, stop hit and runs

> etc etc. I know, loads of people will hate the

> idea, but at the moment traffic laws are a joke,

> broken by most people some of the time due to lack

> of traffic police. I'd accept one on my bike to

> prove I don't jump reds if that would help!


Same reason we don't have a national identity card to stop things like benefit fraud, infringement of civil liberties

TheArtfulDogger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Same reason we don't have a national identity card

> to stop things like benefit fraud, infringement of

> civil liberties


Yes, but cars are already constantly monitored on the road by ANPR cameras, speed cameras, CC cameras, so it wouldn't be something new, it'd just be being done better.

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> bil Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I don't understand this method of penalising

> > people without first providing viable

> > alternatives.

>

> There are many viable alternatives to high

> pollution cars.



Dogkennelhillbilly...please explain those alternatives. I'm sure that will help those people with old cars who can't afford the upgrade.

TheArtfulDogger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Talking of investing, how much would it actually

> cost to set up the cctv system needed to monitor

> the north /south circular route.

>

> I found a document from Islington

> https://www.islington.gov.uk//~/media/sharepoint-l

> ists/public-records/environmentalprotection/qualit

> yandperformance/reporting/20152016/20150401islingt

> onulezextensionstudyfinalreport that suggests a

> cctv network would cost ?10.2 million in 2014

> (allowing for inflation) per km

>

> The north circular is 41.4 km long (source

> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Circular_Roa

> d)

> the south circular is 33km long (source

> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Circular_Roa

> d,_London)

>

> A total if 74.4 km at a potential 2014 cost of

> ?10.2 million per km makes it ?758.88 million

>

> Allow for inflation from the 2014 estimate, cost

> overrun and other costs and that could be closer

> to a billion pounds in 2019 just to implement then

> there is the potential cost to householders to

> replace their vehicles that don't meet the

> necessary levels. Finally there is the cost to run

> the scheme, I assume capita will manage it on

> behalf of tfl.

>

> I would be interested to see the figures that the

> mayoral office predicts for implementing as far as

> the north and south circular

>

> Whilst cost should not be a factor compared with

> lives saved, it has to be considered.

>

> Equally did anyone see top gear a few years ago

> where they did no2 comparisons during and after a

> London wide bus strike ?

>

> They showed that no2 levels dropped significantly

> during the bus strike, and the following study

> backed it up

> http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2394054/oxfor

> d-street-pollution-plummeted-during-bus-strike-say

> -scientists

>

> Therefore turning all buses to electric or

> converting to run on petrol rather than diesel

> will aide a drop in pollution levels which is a

> good start.

>

> As Bil pointed out above south London doesn't have

> an effective transport system to replace cars if

> they are taxed off the road.

>

> By restricting heavy traffic to the south circular

> and further out, it means that the already

> congested, slow and heavily polluted south

> circular will just get worse thus moving the no2

> problem out to the south circular , which

> depending on weather and wind direction could

> cause it to drift into the edges of east Dulwich

>

> Finally, deliveries to stores and businesses in

> the new zone will potentially increase cost wise

> which may be passed on to consumers as vehicles

> will either have to be converted, replaced or pay

> the new charge.

>

> Overall I believe that there needs to be a better

> understanding of what expanding the ultra low

> emmision zone from the current congestion zone to

> the north and south circular roads actually means

> for London and Londoners as a whole before we can

> make any sort of informed decession.



Very interesting. Thanks for the info!

bil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > bil Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > I don't understand this method of penalising

> > > people without first providing viable

> > > alternatives.

> >

> > There are many viable alternatives to high

> > pollution cars.

>

>

> Dogkennelhillbilly...please explain those

> alternatives. I'm sure that will help those people

> with old cars who can't afford the upgrade.

It ain't rocket science but luckily you've got 7 years to figure it out.

Well yeah, realistically for travelling into central London (especially during the week) the train is easily the best way. But a car's certainly very useful for nipping around South London, or journeys out of London, or when the train's not running over the weekend.


I guess the silver lining is that buying a basic second-hand eligible car isn't going to cost much more than your annual running costs.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • What "stricter" consequences could there be for shoplifting (or any other crime) than being put into jail, do you think? Though our prisons are of course full enough already, without more people being shoehorned  into them.
    • Returning to the original question, I had my jabs at Tessa Jowell yesterday. I was early and I was  seen on time, and it was a lovely pharmacist who did them, but the admin beforehand (not by her) was a bit iffy. I was given forms to fill in but not told what to do with them afterwards, so I  presumed I had to take them into the consulting room, as the rest was supposed to be filled in by a clinician, but no! After some time had elapsed and I had found a seat (there was no information on where to sit either, so people were sitting in two separate areas, neither of which had many seats) my name was called and  the forms were taken behind the counter. Be aware if you don't have an appointment - even in the relatively short time I was there, three people turned up without appointments having been sent there by a GP (I presume) or having  previously been  asked by the pharmacy to come  back at a different time, and they were all sent away again because the pharmacy didn't have enough flu vaccine until the following day. I have no idea if this was due to a misunderstanding on the people's side, their GP's or the pharmacy's, but none of them were very happy, and one lady said she "couldn't keep coming back" 😭  At least one of them didn't seem to understand what he was being told, possibly due to a language issue. I felt quite sorry for the pharmacist, who was giving jabs all day on top of her usual workload but still managing to stay cheerful! Though she wasn't the one dealing with the unhappy people! I have a sore arm from the Covid jab (I chose to have the jabs in different arms), but no other ill effects so far, touch wood. 
    • Line speed and the strength of your Wi-Fi signal are two separate things.  The first is determined by the type of connection (fibre/copper etc) to the outside world and the second is the connection between the device (printer/TV/laptop/tablet etc) and the router. If you are connecting a device to the router using cables (as Alec1 is) then this is will give the best possible connection but isn't practical for many without a degree of upheaval and even then not all devices (tablets for example) will allow a wired connection. So you relying on the quality of the Wi-Fi signal from the router to the device and this will depend on the quality of the router, the type of Wi-Fi connection (the frequency), line of sight etc - many different things.  This is why some people opt for a "mesh" type setup which is supposed to give a solid quality of Wi-Fi signal around the house with little or no blackspots.  It's expensive though and still requires the devices that send and receive the signal (like the plug-ins you have) to be wired to the router.
    • We have had a few cat flaps over the years but none have been electronic. They just have a small clip that you turn to lock or open.  Some come with a magnet and a matching magnet that the cat wears on its collar  This prevents other cats entering.  I've not used these as I don't like the idea of a cat wearing a collar. Cats do like to be out at night and you need to encourage yours to return after a late evening sortie. Calling,rustling treat wrappers worked for ours but he seems to have now got into the habit of coming back about 9pm. without this.        
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...