|
|
Post by zanygame on Jul 30, 2023 21:05:58 GMT
Surely in a country as overpopulated as the UK and with cities as congested it makes sense to restrict the use of private motor vehicles in such cities. Most other major cities in Western Europe have already introduced such restrictions. What is the rationale for the UK being an exception? Because in Europe they put the other infrastructure in place first. Reliable and cheap public transport would make the whole thing acceptable. Still need some method of getting trades in. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 30, 2023 21:14:53 GMT
I'm sure some kind of reasonable accommodation could be be made for trademen's vehicles, perhaps even some incentive for them to go electric, but what proportion of road traffic do they represent in somewhere like London? A very small one I'd have thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 30, 2023 21:15:25 GMT
My problem with ULEZ is that it prices the poor off the roads. Why is that a problem? - the whole headlong charge to Net Zero is based on people travelling less. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jul 30, 2023 21:20:03 GMT
I'm sure some kind of reasonable accommodation could be be made for trademen's vehicles, perhaps even some incentive for them to go electric, but what proportion of road traffic do they represent in somewhere like London? A very small one I'd have thought. I'd have said quite a high proportion. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jul 30, 2023 21:20:40 GMT
My problem with ULEZ is that it prices the poor off the roads. Why is that a problem? - the whole headlong charge to Net Zero is based on people travelling less. No it isn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 30, 2023 21:21:04 GMT
Got any data?
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jul 30, 2023 21:21:52 GMT
I'll have a look tomorrow if I get a chance. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2023 21:27:17 GMT
My problem with ULEZ is that it prices the poor off the roads. Why is that a problem? - the whole headlong charge to Net Zero is based on people travelling less. Everyone travelling less. Not the poor not travelling at all whilst everyone else carries on as normal whilst paying more to do it. And I doubt very much that ULEZ actually has much to do with net zero, whatever the propaganda. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 30, 2023 21:29:41 GMT
Mind you the 'headlong charge to Net Zero' seems a little iffy when you consider that China's airline growth is expected to grow from 700 million in 2020 to 1.5 billion by 2030, at which point it will have surpassed the USA.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 30, 2023 21:36:52 GMT
Why is that a problem? - the whole headlong charge to Net Zero is based on people travelling less. No it isn't. Oh yes it is.. "They found only one scenario in which the industry could meet its 2050 net zero goal.
It involves trillions of dollars of investment in decarbonisation measures, prioritising trips that reduce emissions the most - like rail and road - as well as caps on long distance journeys."
Sustainable travel charity calls for caps on long distance flights and limits on aviation growth |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 30, 2023 21:42:09 GMT
Why is that a problem? - the whole headlong charge to Net Zero is based on people travelling less. Everyone travelling less. Not the poor not travelling at all whilst everyone else carries on as normal whilst paying more to do it. And I doubt very much that ULEZ actually has much to do with net zero, whatever the propaganda. Yes, but whatever the system any net zero measure is going to disproportionally hit the poor. People like Tony Blair and Rishi Sunak are not going to change their travel plans - and we currently have John Kerry travelling the globe in his private jet warning about the end of the world unless the people (he means people like you) stop flying or driving cars. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jul 30, 2023 21:46:27 GMT
Mind you the 'headlong charge to Net Zero' seems a little iffy when you consider that China's airline growth is expected to grow from 700 million in 2020 to 1.5 billion by 2030, at which point it will have surpassed the USA. The eco zealots just cannot get this into their heads . The journey to world net zero will not be influenced or affected much by us. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 31, 2023 6:13:07 GMT
My problem with ULEZ is that it prices the poor off the roads. ULEZ exempt vehicles are far more expensive to buy and rely on the kind of access to charging points that most poorer people do not have at home. And the nationwide infrastructure with reliable charging points in every car park and filling station is woefully deficient right now. Until these problems are resolved it is morally wrong to penalise those mostly poor people who have no drive or garage at home and who cannot afford to buy an electric car anyway. It is indeed questionable to see the poor being priced off our roads whilst the rich continue to fly everywhere in their personal jets and helicopters with total impunity. steve , i agree with your post , but can i just point out ULEZ exempt vehicles arnt just hybrid or ful electric relying on charging points?
As you know i used to have a caravan , and our family car was bought new (four years old now) for towing. Its a full on heavy duty 2.2 diesel , non hybrid non electric , yet it complys with glasgows ULEZ and is exempt. If you ever travel to glasgow , or any other city that has ULEZ , normally the local council will give you a helpfull website to enter your car reg details to confirm if you are exempt from ULEZ. Its based on emmissions from the car , not wether its solely non petrol/diesel , so normally the newer cars are emission compliant.
Your point about pricing the poor off the road is spot on , and why there is a growing backlash to ULEZ and many green policies.
thought this a great article on the wider subject...
We’ve had enough sanctimonious lecturing from the Greens
The SNP’s coalition partner is alienating voters, threatening Scotland’s net zero ambitions
Who represents the biggest threat to achieving net zero? Donald Trump? President Xi? Sir Jim Ratcliffe of Ineos? Nope. Right now I could make a case that the biggest threat to decarbonising Scotland comes from Patrick Harvie’s Scottish Green Party closely followed by Just Stop Oil. Cue fulmination on Twitter (X, sorry).
Yet almost every action of the Scottish government right now, tutored by Green Party ministers, seems calculated to alienate the very people upon whom the fate of the planet depends: ordinary voters.
Penalising them for using their cars when there is no reasonable alternative, except for the rich, is bound to generate justifiable resentment.
Voters are deeply sceptical right now, however. They don’t buy coercive policies whose impact on climate change is nugatory and the purpose of which appears to be to allow politicians to curry favour with green lobbyists.
The backlash has already started over policies such as ultra-low emission zones, which is why Rishi Sunak insists he is now “on the side of the motorist”. There is mounting discontent at the Scottish government’s diktat to homeowners to rid themselves of gas central heating boilers.
green propaganda is turning into its opposite: it is antagonising the people it seeks to persuade.
Sunak has sensed the change in public mood and now insists that the North Sea is a vital part of the UK’s energy security. He has stolen a march on the Greens by enthusiastically backing carbon capture and storage in Aberdeen, a policy rejected by many Scottish environmentalists because they think it might extend the lifetime of the fossil fuel economy.
The Tory pivot is crude politics but don’t underestimate its appeal during a cost of living crisis. Energy costs are rising again. Voters want a break from what David Cameron called “green crap” and winter is coming.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jul 31, 2023 6:16:28 GMT
Mind you the 'headlong charge to Net Zero' seems a little iffy when you consider that China's airline growth is expected to grow from 700 million in 2020 to 1.5 billion by 2030, at which point it will have surpassed the USA. But have you heard of the GCAB? Giant China Elastic Band project. 😅 😂 🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 31, 2023 9:00:25 GMT
Going back to Zany's opening post, I agree with him I think.
The original ULEZ zone going out broadly to the North and South Circular seems sensible - relatively few people live inside the zone and public transport and parking issues mean that relatively few have cars anyway.
The extension broadly to the M25 takes in a lot of residential areas where public transport remains patchy. Its probably the right idea to extend it but needs more notice for people to change their cars.
Maybe delay expansion for five years by which time most people with older polluting cars (including tradesmen) may well have had the opportunity to change them anyway.
It will be important to design clean air measures and carbon avoidance measures that clearly have majority support and are clear in their benefits compared to the cost.
Especially the case if Sunak has given up on doing his job and intends to fight the next election on cynical UKIP style populist crap. Not convinced the public will buy that and hopefully he will get the hammering he deserves.
|
|
