Do you support the ULEZ expansion?

[icecream99]

Just curious as it is due to start at midnight tonight and could potentially cause a lot of chaos. I don't support it.

YANBU - I DON'T support ULEZ expansion

YABU - I DO support ULEZ expansion

How do you think that shops on existing pedestrianised streets get deliveries?

It's the ranting about "freedoms" and the comparisons with North Korea that make it look so.

@Jumpingthruhoops all tax payers pay for roads. I neither drive or cycle yet still I pay tax to maintain roads - you're welcome.

I thought you wanted the whole of central London pedestrianised? If we do that how will the tradesmen and delivery drivers even get close to where they need to be?

The same way they currently service pedestrianised areas you buffoon.

It is common for many older French cities to have the heart of the city pedestriansied and direct traffic to outer ring roads. There are measures to allow service vehicles in at certain times.

You're very rude. I suppose all those can drivers in central London right now are driving round for the fun of it. A pp suggested the whole of central London should be pedestrianised...I'm questioning how that would work logistically. Yes it's obvious how a small pedestrianised could cope but miles and miles of London with no road access? Madness

Well I am not the poster who said the whole of London should be pedestriansied - but a lot more of it could. Most people do not need to drive in to Central London at all.

Pedestrianisation does not mean no no access - it means restricted access at certain times or to certain types of vehicles.

Most people dont. Very few private cars are driving round central london. It's vans and taxis mainly. No one drives in central London unless they have no other choice.

@Ginmonkeyagain I suspect you don't live in Islington.
Loads of streets randomly blocked by giant flowerpots that are there 24/7 - very much no access unless your a pedestrian or on a bike.

The NOx problems in London are largely in the centre and Heathrow.

A considerable amount of the ULEZ expansion region doesn't have a NOx issue at all.

The strategy should be focussed on reducing the pollution where NOx is dangerously high if they want to do some real good.

They could increase the penalities for the high region (original ULEZ) to stop people driving where the problems actually are, not extend the zone to regions where there are no issues, which is what they have actually done.

A tiny % maybe. But let's not pretend the motorist isn't already screwed for every last penny just to be able to get from A to B: Road tax, insurance, MOT, maintenance, fuel, parking, existing tolls.
Now some will have to pay £12.50 on top!

Actually what's more interesting is the amount of NOx and PMs in London has dropped quite a bit since 2013. I found one report that shows 2013, 2016 and 2019 NOx and PMs. NOx levels appears to have roughly halved in the centre.

London NOx levels in the centre dropped considerably between those years, probably mostly due to the improvements in car technology as that is before the ULEZ implementation in 2019 (?)

The plots for 2019 onwards seem strangely difficult to get hold of. Make of that what you will.

The vehicles causing the worst of the emissions were always going to retire over time, so you'd see some reductions whatever you did.

Also there was a lot of nasty pollution in central London from diesel buses and black cabs, both of which have been addressed by other means, so that will have made a lot of difference too.

Agreed.

I think it is also a matter that covid complicates understanding the data.

With the lockdowns as well as the increasing tendency to wfh following covid, my guess is the pollution levels post 2019 have collapsed, which probably is a strong further argument that the new ULEZ expansion is more about grabbing cash than decreasing pollution.

Then there is the issue of the increased prevalence of electric cars (like the taxis), which are replacing petrol and diesel ones and generating zero NOx ...

Did my picture not load? You permit those who actually need to drive somewhere to do so, with time restrictions and automated bollards to ensure that it's not abused.

Do you have any idea how many tradesman and delivery drivers are driving round London at any one time....it makes up such a huge percentage of the traffic that being pedestrianised would be totally pointless. Ffs...this is a city. People need to move things round it.

I live right by the south circular. The traffic in the morning is horrendous ...I'd say over 50% is made up of vans and lorries.... sometimes when I'm bored I count them

You do not pay all of the additional charges to use the roads. So your opinion is frankly redundant.

I'm not the one causing all of the potholes

The ULEZ has definitely reduced my use of my non compliant car. It's annoying, but in my case effective. I am concerned about the effect of air pollution on children especially.

Even if I had a compliant car it's made me think about the reasons given for it and I think I'd drive it less (I try to walk or take public transport anyway).

So I'm in favour of it because it does work.

This debate isn't about potholes, it's about the blatant cash-grab that is ULEZ.

TFL lost a lot of money in fares during the lockdowns. When some of us warned on here that lockdowns wernt free and that organisations would try to claim the money back somehow, we were shouted down
We told you so

Exactly...this is just about plugging the gap in the tfl budget. Very cleverly they've managed to pretend it's all about our health so if anyone objects those in favour can scream at us that children are dying... we're all dropping like flies. Stunted lungs, teenagers with high blood pressure blah blah blah.

Yep the same tactics used during Covid Sadiq Khan has used the same silencing tactics that were used during Covid. Calling anyone who doesnt agree with ULEZ Nazis right wing and anti vaxxers