Made my thoughts known to TFL via the consultation form, unfortunately if this goes through this will encourage me to move away from London. I have a Campervan that doesn’t comply and live just inside the zone. It does less than 3000 miles per year (90% of which wouldn’t even be in London!) and I simply do not agree with having to pay a daily charge every time i use it.
I have a 17 year old car and am planning to replace it this year anyway. It is only just not compliant. By 2020 when this comes in, non compliant Petrol cars will be 20+years old so I wonder how many will really still be in circulation. My bigger concern has been raised by someone else - i’m buying a new car, but how long until the requirements get tightened again? Absolutely understand that pollution/air quality is a major issue, but scrapping cars after 3 years because higher and higher standards are required isn’t environmentally sound, if you look st the whole production lifecycle. Although it is, or course, good for the car industry. We need a lot more work in the technology and infrastructure for electric vehicles to enable a wholesale switch, and in the meantime, some of us will still be using cars.
I went to visit a friend in Paris recently. He was late and messaged the two of us waiting for us he would be there soon, once he had parked. As we were having a few beverages we prepared to ask him why he had brought the car.
Turns out in Paris they have an excellent system of electric cars used much like Boris Bikes, all electric I believe, and costing less than a taxi fare to use. You have an app to see which cars are available where, and available parking spaces (there are dedicated spaces to park these cars).
To me this is the sort of thing we will need \ have in the future together with driverless cars \ cabs as well as the cleaner public transport \ lorries etc mentioned above. In theory this might mean less car ownership, probably saving on what you pay on cars (I’ve not done the maths I admit!) for those who don’t use them regularly,
Short term as I live in Brockley Rise and have 2 kids at Dalmain, I’m happy with anything that will reduce pollution on that road, though I accept the argument that some of it will transfer other areas.
The South Circular is a residential route, not like the N Circular. There are houses and schools upon it and the increased levels of pollution that are already above the limits acceptable will sky rocket.
How is this acceptable in anyone’s eyes?
Push the zone out to the M25 where the motorways are created to manage pollution levels, rather than encumber ordinary people with increased pollution and the problems that traffic bring with it.
My car which is Summer 2006 is not compliant and will be 15 years old by the time this is implemented so I will be forced to ditch it if I wont to continue to drive north.
There are zip car parking spaces in Forest Hill which does pretty much what you just described from Paris , sign up on website , see if it is free and off you go plus further down mayow road there is a zip van space for larger purchases, think it was £ 7 the last time I used it for the van
The only difference being however that you have to drop your vipcar/van back in the same spot you picked it up from (unless they’ve changed the system recently). Whereas in Paris you can pick up the car and drop it off at another location in the city - similar to a Boris bike.
You can do one way with zip car flex but I think we are heading off topic
I agree, whilst I am in favour of action to reduce pollution in London, I don’t believe it is right that the boundary of the ULEZ will be the south circular. I live very near to the south circular and the traffic levels are terrible, this will only make it worse.
That is a real pain. I thought the standard they are planning to apply was brought in in 2001so any cars after would be compliant. Mind you, I have been told mine isn’t compliant but someone else on here with a car also from 2000 is. It’s very confusing.
I agree. We need to cut pollution levels urgently. I agree with the ULEZ but I think it should have a bigger boundary and not impact mostly on those just outside of the boundary. So we should say yes it should happen but suggest the boundary is further extended.
I appreciate it is painful for people who have non-compliant cars (including me) but the pollution really is killing us. I think that is a lot worse and we have to act urgently and ideally more urgently than 2021 in my view.
We have 3 years to upgrade vehicles. I think this is enough in the current polluting circumstances.
You can check if your car is compliant on the TFL website. My car was made in 2011 and it says it isn’t compliant.
I’ve read the original link but can’t see anything about what proportion of vehicles currently would fail and how many are unlikely to be replaced beforehand? I’d like to know this before making any final comment on the proposal. Has anyone come across the information?
Many cars/vans are now leased so those are likely to be replaced before 2021. What % of diesels are currently older than 5-6 years old (thinking of the age those failing would be in 2021) and % of cars that would older than 14?
My view on traffic and pollution impacts will be substantially different the higher the proportion of traffic that will be forced to the outer boundaries.
My car also made in 2006 is compliant with the ULEZ so I guess it just depends on each car.
Mine is a bit big so I guess that is why!
Like most people I don’t want to pollute but I can’t afford to replace my car now so I’d say I’m more likely to switch my driving inside the zone to outside the zone
Interesting link at the BBC.
Using the WH Smith postcode gets this result:
“A rating of 4 means there is a strong chance of nitrogen dioxide levels exceeding the annual legal limit. Asthma sufferers should manage exposure and exercise levels, and there are likely to be some health impacts of long-term exposure.
This is higher than the average for Lewisham, which is 3 out of 6 (slightly polluted).”
Unfortunately the introduction of the ULEZ will do little to help that location, and if some of the concerns listed above about additional traffic being pushed to the South Circular come to fruition - may even make it worse
This sounds intuitively right but also may not be the case. I imagine a lot of traffic on the South Circular is there to access areas inside the extended ULEZ, in which case those vehicles will probably conform to the emission standards anyway.
Also, a lot of the NOx will be coming from buses which are gradually being improved (https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/buses/improving-buses?intcmp=42923). Am not sure to what extent this will have done so by 2021, and how this will impact locally, but some changes are happening. Was pleasantly surprised recently to be on a new bus on the P4 route which had stop start ignition. This made the journey much more pleasant and if there was more of this much less pollution from idling would occur. Many more cars will have this as time progresses too.
I presume that TfL has done some modelling on this. Would love to see it.
That all said, it is surely better to push for further extension of the ULEZ, than try and stop this extension. Even if there was talk of extending further at a later date then this would nudge future vehicle purchases in the right direction.
I thought it might be interesting to see what would happen if the ULEZ were more balanced across north and south London. The North Circular stretches out to 12km from central London, while the South Circular is just 7km from the centre of London due south.
So I’ve drawn a new map which stretches to conjestion zone down to Thorton Heath, leaving Croydon, Bromley, and Kingston town centres outside the ULEZ.
The improved boundary would improve air quality over a larger area of south London, with millions more people benefiting from air-quality improvements, particularly along the South Circular.
Why should South London become known for having worse air than North London?