Follow the real science not what the Main stream media with there own agenda want you to believe!
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/08/16/ ... claration/


To get rid of ULEZ,pay by mile charging,and KHAN!

The implementation of Ultra-Low Emission Zones (ULEZ) in various cities around the world aims to improve air quality by restricting or taxing vehicles that emit higher levels of pollution. In London, Mayor Sadiq Khan has been a prominent advocate of ULEZ. While environmental goals are commendable, the rollout of ULEZ raises important questions about its social and economic implications, particularly its impact on poorer, working-class communities.

Targeting the Less Affluent?
The introduction of ULEZ has led to criticism that it disproportionately affects the economically vulnerable. Many working-class individuals, particularly those who are self-employed in semi-skilled jobs, rely on older, second-hand vehicles for their livelihoods. These are the vehicles most likely to fall afoul of new ULEZ standards.

Geographical Inequalities
Moreover, poorer communities often reside in suburban areas where public transport might not be as accessible or efficient, making vehicle ownership more of a necessity than a choice. These communities are penalised for their dependency on older cars, even as they struggle to make ends meet.

Questionable Political Background
Mayor Khan, who was a member of Tony Blair's government, has previously faced criticism for his stance on working-class communities. Accusations have been made about labelling such communities as "CHAVS," a derogatory term implying laziness and a lack of education, while underfunding schools in these areas.

The Irony of Environmental Impact
Questions have been raised about the purported environmental benefits of ULEZ when wealthier individuals, driving the latest low-emission but high-consumption vehicles like V8 Range Rovers, escape the penalties. Mayor Khan favourite mode of transport is a V8. Furthermore, the affluent who can afford the latest electric cars often lead lifestyles that include frequent international travel, contributing significantly to their carbon footprint.

Fast-Paced Implementation and the Scrappage Scheme
The speed of ULEZ's implementation and the management of the scrappage scheme have sparked debate about the true intent behind these policies. Is it genuinely about air quality, or is it a veiled attempt to levy more taxes on those who can least afford them?

Fuelling Conspiracy Theories
The disparate impact of policies like ULEZ can provide fodder for conspiracy theorists who argue that such policies are part of a larger agenda to exert control over poorer populations.

Conclusion
While improving air quality is an urgent and important goal, the means to achieve it should not disproportionately burden those who are least able to bear the cost. It's crucial to examine ULEZ and similar policies through a lens that considers social and economic equity, not just environmental outcomes.

Please do not think I'm being patronising. I want to contribute to the topic in a practical manner and not arouse bad feelings.

The crucial flaw in the LEZ expansion scheme is this. Tradesman who own non compliant vans,lorries or cars ARE adding their ULex fees to YOUR bills already! They are not changing their vehicles,but simply adding to their bill. You are paying their ULEZ charges.

The unforeseen consequence is that pollution is not going to be lowered in the Greater London area BUT poorer people and socially disadvantaged families will be very adversely affected.
Please consider this when reflecting on the reality of this ill thought out ordinance. 

There's more cameras being added all the time so its not really possible to avoid in the long term. I feel fo you as I use my car for teh same bt thankfully ulez compliant!

To the OP if you actually work out the annual cost of your car, servicing, MOT, insurance, parking permit, fuel AND include Depreciation then I'm pretty sure that amount will be larger than a few local taxi journeys a month

I can absolutely agree that the ULEZ rollout has happened too quickly for most and the scrappage scheme is not generous enough and will cause real costs to people and small businesses etc, i.e. the implementation of ULEZ has been a political & economic mess.

However I do not understand why anyone would be against cleaner air. Surely we can differentiate between these two things.
People who argue it won't make a difference are living in a city where an actual coroner decided air pollution was a significant factor in the death of a child.
I'll wager plenty of people argued against the introduction of mandatory insurance or MOTs or seat belts or non-smoking on petrol stations..at the time. Some people have always loved their cars and take any regulation of them rather too personallly it seems.
Additionally many who take this 'itbwont make a difference' route happily ally themselves with climate emergency deniers and'deep state' conspiracy promoters - astonishing, really.

Ah yes, the “big control agenda” and the “deep state” ….. I do wish I could work out whether I’m part of it, or have just been fooled by it!

Of course the ULEZ is a con and the moment people walks up to how the ‘climate’ is being used to manipulate polity, to control people the better.

Do you really think reducing the c.1% U.K. emissions will make any difference when China keeps upping their 28%+. Of course it won’t.

It’s a big control agenda, to take cars away from the majority is just one of the items on the WEF agenda. Another example, Heat pumps, are not great at all, so stick with your Gas, unless you do a total property conversion.

But, reducing the fumes from cars in cities has to be a good thing, but done at the right speed when people have affordable options - electric cars are still way too expensive.

ULEZ cameras - with that sort of mileage it is without question greener not to buy a new car - about 30% of the lifetime emissions of an average vehicle comes from manufacturing and the percentage will be much higher for a very low mileage vehicle.  And actually if your maximum exposure is £25 per month then economically it can't make sense to get a new car.

Hi
Thanks for the replies.

Some thoughts on the issues raised:

1. I walk almost everywhere, however I need to do a few journeys a month and they're local. To be clear I literally use my car twice a month. However for those journeys I must use my own car. Taxis and Zipcars won't work for me.

2. Because of the super low usage I don't want to buy a new car if I can help it, because I think it's probably greener to not do so.

The idea of registering for ULEZ so I can see where I have triggered cameras is a good one, thank you.

St Luke's Church in Thurleigh Road is hosting a public meeting on the climate in October for those interested - there are details on the website.

And Kirstie's Mom - first of all, Kirstie would probably appreciate you making an effort for the environment.  After all it is (I assume) her future that is at stake.  And secondly there is absolutely no doubt that in a capitalist economy the price mechanism does change behaviour; do you seriously doubt that replacing all the vehicles scrapped with new compliant ones won't have a beneficial environmental impact?  And it really isn't a money spinner - in fact, if it works it will generate precisely nothing but will still involve enforcement costs.

And I’m not sure how paying £12.50 for a non compliant car is going to help the air get cleaner . Most non related academic research has shown ULEZ adds very little if any value . It’s a money spinner .

Full agreement with previous replies. I can recommend investing in a wheelie trolley for carrying the shopping home.

I'd be pretty ashamed to post any website that ends with the phrase 'The Great Climate Con'.
The Climate Emergency is very real, backed by all reputable science and terrifying for a lot of the world and more so for those much poorer than us.
You may believe this too but a handy map with such propaganda in it title perpetuates the myth that there's some kind of doubt.
Sorry for both barrels but I think it's time we adopted a zero tolerance approach to even casual or accidental climate denial

Controversial topic but given ULEZ aims to give us all cleaner air, not sure asking your neighbours on how to dodge it is going to be so well received?