[parmnion]

Pointless or not?

[thesheriff443]

As always it will hit the poorest hardest, if you ain't got a lot of money, you are not going to be driving a new car or van.

[Toy Soldier]

I think probably a bit pointless. Your vehicle only has to be Euro 4 to avoid it, I think? Which is something like 05 plates. I don't think it particularly hits the poorest hardest, you can pick up and 05/15/06 car for a couple of hundred? They should maybe have had a small scale scrappage scheme I guess, requiring proof that you live / work in London, giving say £1000 for 02 - 05 plates. You can definitely get a decent enough newer car than that for £1000 .

But yeah, most family / individual vehicles aren't affected anyway, surely? More likely to affect vans and delivery trucks, I guess.

[parmnion]

Mr kahn on the news this morning...saying it will help the health of the children in the poorest areas of london...maybe if he had introduced the charge in these areas then yes...but its not..so no.

[waterhog]

this is inspiring _ I am going to introduce a P charge ?

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I think probably a bit pointless. Your vehicle only has to be Euro 4 to avoid it, I think? Which is something like 05 plates. I don't think it particularly hits the poorest hardest, you can pick up and 05/15/06 car for a couple of hundred? They should maybe have had a small scale scrappage scheme I guess, requiring proof that you live / work in London, giving say £1000 for 02 - 05 plates. You can definitely get a decent enough newer car than that for £1000 .

But yeah, most family / individual vehicles aren't affected anyway, surely? More likely to affect vans and delivery trucks, I guess.

People with 08 vehicles need to check before they drive in the zone because depending on the vehicle, they may have to pay.

This is just another stealth tax. If they were really concerned about pollution, perhaps they need to tax all those leisure boats on the river that consume and pump out diesel fumes. What about the old style buses and taxis that are so abundant in our city and what about all the unnecessary gas guzzling Chelsie tractors?

[DemolitionRed]

New or old - which is greener?

Berners-Lee estimates that a rough guide to the carbon footprint of a car is 720kg for every £1,000 you spend on it. So let’s take the example of a typical family car, a Volkswagen Golf. With emissions of 123g/km, running a brand-new 1.4 TSI S 5-door for 40,000 miles – or about five years’ use for the average private car driver – would produce a total of just over 7.9 tonnes of carbon dioxide. But with a list price of £19,400, producing the car will incur around 14 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, making a total of 22 tonnes, according to Berners-Lee’s theory.
How does that compare with buying a 10-year-old Golf (right) instead, or keeping your old one? Let’s take a similar model from 10 years ago, the first of the fifth-generation models. A 1.6 FSI S 5-door emitted 163g/km of carbon dioxide. Let’s add on 10g/km to account for the engine going out of tune with age. Even so, the total amount of carbon dioxide produced in your five years’ motoring only adds up to 11 tonnes’ worth, half that involved in buying a new car.
Of course, the carbon emissions incurred in keeping an old car on the road are a separate story. New parts and lubricants incur their own carbon footprints and disposing of the old parts is often hard to do in an ecological way. However, while this really is a “how long is a piece of string?” question, as it will vary drastically from car to car, you’d have to be driving an incredibly unreliable car for it to incur a similar amount of carbon dioxide in repairs to the production of a brand-new car. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/...s-greener.html

[waterhog]

there is going to be allot of anger from this once the £ starts clocking up.

[Livia]

If Sadiq Khan wants to contribute to saving the planet, turn off some of the lights in and outside empty buildings all night. London's lit up like a Christmas tree 24/7/365.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Mr kahn on the news this morning...saying it will help the health of the children in the poorest areas of london...maybe if he had introduced the charge in these areas then yes...but its not..so no.

Originally Posted by Livia

If Sadiq Khan wants to contribute to saving the planet, turn off some of the lights in and outside empty buildings all night. London's lit up like a Christmas tree 24/7/365.

Yeah, not the best of Mayors is he tbh

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

People with 08 vehicles need to check before they drive in the zone because depending on the vehicle, they may have to pay.

This is just another stealth tax. If they were really concerned about pollution, perhaps they need to tax all those leisure boats on the river that consume and pump out diesel fumes. What about the old style buses and taxis that are so abundant in our city and what about all the unnecessary gas guzzling Chelsie tractors?

I'm pretty sure 05, most 55 and all 06 "family cars" had to be Euro 4? Everything from a 2 door hatchback up to a range rover. However I'm not sure when it came into force fully for vans / trucks / other commercial vehicles so that may be why people still have to check those.

But yeah, I agree that it's a bit of a stealth tax and if it was actually about the environment, they would be better off targeting those commercial vehicles, vans, HGVs etc. rather than personal use cars. Maybe offer tax incentives to companies to replace outdated vehicles? Carrots rather than sticks, and all that.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

New or old - which is greener?

Berners-Lee estimates that a rough guide to the carbon footprint of a car is 720kg for every £1,000 you spend on it. So let’s take the example of a typical family car, a Volkswagen Golf. With emissions of 123g/km, running a brand-new 1.4 TSI S 5-door for 40,000 miles – or about five years’ use for the average private car driver – would produce a total of just over 7.9 tonnes of carbon dioxide. But with a list price of £19,400, producing the car will incur around 14 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, making a total of 22 tonnes, according to Berners-Lee’s theory.
How does that compare with buying a 10-year-old Golf (right) instead, or keeping your old one? Let’s take a similar model from 10 years ago, the first of the fifth-generation models. A 1.6 FSI S 5-door emitted 163g/km of carbon dioxide. Let’s add on 10g/km to account for the engine going out of tune with age. Even so, the total amount of carbon dioxide produced in your five years’ motoring only adds up to 11 tonnes’ worth, half that involved in buying a new car.
Of course, the carbon emissions incurred in keeping an old car on the road are a separate story. New parts and lubricants incur their own carbon footprints and disposing of the old parts is often hard to do in an ecological way. However, while this really is a “how long is a piece of string?” question, as it will vary drastically from car to car, you’d have to be driving an incredibly unreliable car for it to incur a similar amount of carbon dioxide in repairs to the production of a brand-new car. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/...s-greener.html

This logic is sound in planetary terms but the London tax seems to be more about air quality in that specific small area of the planet... Rather than the impact on the planet as a whole incurred through manufacturing.

[DemolitionRed]

It started today TS.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...oxic-car-fumes
Pre-Euro 4 vehicles are typically those registered before 2006, but Transport for London suggests that anyone who has a vehicle registered before 2008 checks if it is liable for the charge. The total daily levy can be reduced by £1 if drivers register to pay the congestion charge automatically.

Also, I just looked this up: Black London cabs are allowed a 15 year rolling age limit unless exempted. So you can drive a vintage black cab within the zone and not get charged

[Vicky.]

Another stealth tax, brilliant.

Best way to stop so many people driving unneccesarily would be to actually sort out public transport. Both the cost of it, and the reliability of it. In my area (not London mind, may be different there, sure the amount of buses per hour ir anyways ) there is one bus per hour into town. Half the time its either very late, very early, or doesn't show up at all Fares are 4 quid for the journey. Can get a taxi for half the price if theres 2 of you, so damn sure I would be driving rather than using buses as driving costs much less than taxis so maybe it would be like 2 quid or something if driving myself.

A lot of my friends say they would use public transport if it came on time, often enough to actually get them to work in time rather than you having to be there 2/3 hours earlier to make sure you actually got there..and was not a riiculous price

So if the issue actually was the enviroment rather than just wanting to rob more people, this would be a good start. But its never about that is it...

[DemolitionRed]

Its interesting that Pendragon got a much-needed upturn when the scrapping for new scheme came into practice. Pendragon though, is in trouble again. https://www.theguardian.com/business...gon-fall-by-17

Is the new London charge the boost Pendragon needs?
It would be interesting to know who the major shareholders are in that business.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Can get a taxi for half the price if theres 2 of you, so damn sure I would be driving rather than using buses as driving costs much less than taxis so maybe it would be like 2 quid or something if driving myself.

When I lived about 2 miles outside of our nearest town, a bus fare was £4.10 return for an adult and £2.05 child... so, £12.30 for two adults and two kids to town and back.

Taxi was £3.50 each way... so £7 for the exact same trip. Plus it's door to door to where you want to go, no waiting at the bus stop, and no having to sit listening to junkies fighting on the bus. Short distance public transport is a pointless rip off, IMO.

Very, very rarely use any form of public transport now that we're driving. I don't mind the train AS much for longer trips solo but even the train with kids is a nightmare compared to driving. I remember going to visit the in-laws in England on public transport... taxi, train to Glasgow, trek across Glasgow with kids and suitcases, then 2.5 hour train to England. Now we would never even consider doing anything but driving it, even though it's a 4 hour drive.

[Oliver_W]

Two miles. Why didn't you just walk?

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Two miles. Why didn't you just walk?

Because when you have arms full of shopping and kids in tow, walking isn't always ideal. Especially if you have to cross a lot of roads.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

When I lived about 2 miles outside of our nearest town, a bus fare was £4.10 return for an adult and £2.05 child... so, £12.30 for two adults and two kids to town and back.

Taxi was £3.50 each way... so £7 for the exact same trip. Plus it's door to door to where you want to go, no waiting at the bus stop, and no having to sit listening to junkies fighting on the bus. Short distance public transport is a pointless rip off, IMO.

Very, very rarely use any form of public transport now that we're driving. I don't mind the train AS much for longer trips solo but even the train with kids is a nightmare compared to driving. I remember going to visit the in-laws in England on public transport... taxi, train to Glasgow, trek across Glasgow with kids and suitcases, then 2.5 hour train to England. Now we would never even consider doing anything but driving it, even though it's a 4 hour drive.

In central London it works out a lot cheaper and quicker to use public transport than it does to drive and park.