ULEZ is expanding

CatmanV2

Member
Messages
48,938
Well woodburners are responsible for 25% of pollution(1), so they should be first...

C

(1) Yes, I am aware that this is clearly BS as stated but this is what the BBC was peddling last week.
(2) The website has a far more nuanced, but still slightly nonsensical stat: 'Data from Imperial College shows that 17% of PM2.5s in London now comes from wood-burning.'

C
 

DLax69

Member
Messages
4,355
Well woodburners are responsible for 25% of pollution(1), so they should be first...

C

(1) Yes, I am aware that this is clearly BS as stated but this is what the BBC was peddling last week.
(2) The website has a far more nuanced, but still slightly nonsensical stat: 'Data from Imperial College shows that 17% of PM2.5s in London now comes from wood-burning.'

C
1677933094980.jpeg
 

j s pollo

Member
Messages
162
Well woodburners are responsible for 25% of pollution(1), so they should be first...

C

(1) Yes, I am aware that this is clearly BS as stated but this is what the BBC was peddling last week.
(2) The website has a far more nuanced, but still slightly nonsensical stat: 'Data from Imperial College shows that 17% of PM2.5s in London now comes from wood-burning.'

C
Ha ha i like it used my burner for over winter and with the government help of £67 per month i did not pay a gas and electric bill for six months .
Alas now run out of logs had to switch the central heating back on this sucks .
 

jasst

Member
Messages
2,319
I heard somewhere (down the pub) that wood burners are going to be banned in some inner city areas, and some clean air group wants them banned totally, as i live in the sticks and that is my main source of heating, shall we just say 'it aint going to happen' lol Sorry don't have an official source for this, but I daresay with some digging it could be found.
 

CatmanV2

Member
Messages
48,938
I heard somewhere (down the pub) that wood burners are going to be banned in some inner city areas, and some clean air group wants them banned totally, as i live in the sticks and that is my main source of heating, shall we just say 'it aint going to happen' lol Sorry don't have an official source for this, but I daresay with some digging it could be found.

There are sections of the population advocating the banning of gas stoves as well. There does appear to be a catastrophic failure of ability to assess risk.

C
 

DLax69

Member
Messages
4,355
There are sections of the population advocating the banning of gas stoves as well. There does appear to be a catastrophic failure of ability to assess risk.

C
It's all the rage over here, currently, with the most "enlightened" individuals. My Fisher-Paykal 48" 6 burner with griddle and broiler ain't going anywhere...nor my gas-fired tankless water heater, nor my NG grill...

1677977166800.jpeg
 

mowlas

Member
Messages
1,743
The one thing you can guarantee under Mayor Khan is that if it can get worse for drivers, it will.


Not that I’m a DM doom cheerer, but with Mr Khan, he definitely has form. It’s why I immediately signed the petition Adam shared above.
 

lozcb

Member
Messages
12,586
The one thing you can guarantee under Mayor Khan is that if it can get worse for drivers, it will.
Hes only looking out for your kids and your kids kids , all in the name of a leftist utopian dream ............whats wrong with that .....some might consider him far too right wing , almost fascist , I could have sworn when he was answering that committee this week his crossed finger were making a swastika sign :whistle:
 

rockits

Member
Messages
9,184
Never seen this before. Can't see why Sad Khant would want to reduce cars or traffic. Too much of a cash cow!

YearLEZ Charge IncomeULEZ Charge Income
2019/20£1,123,800£66,056,275
2020/21£3,792,800£30,608,750
2021/22£17,846,200£93,120,437.50

Fines:

YearNbr ULEZ FinesULEZ Fine IncomeNbr LEZ FinesLEZ Fines Income
2019/20594,916£41,382,61339,751£3,742,566
2020/21273,311£16,988,66424,819£1,599,157
2021/221,010,573£46,800,82672,163£8,278,098
 

Nibby

Member
Messages
2,131
What a nasty bit of work that Khan is.
Because a lot of people understandably don’t want to be £12.50 out of pocket every time they use their car he starts saying that they’re far right thugs. Vile creature that Khan.
 

CatmanV2

Member
Messages
48,938
What a nasty bit of work that Khan is.
Because a lot of people understandably don’t want to be £12.50 out of pocket every time they use their car he starts saying that they’re far right thugs. Vile creature that Khan.

Yes that was a particularly distasteful set of conflations he stated

C
 

rockits

Member
Messages
9,184
The irony is he condemns the car driver but he is happy to keep taking their money when they use the car.

We know that taxing things more doesn't stop it happening. So it is not directly fixing and lowering emissions by any meaningful measurable amount. So is kind of missing the point completely.

Emissions have naturally reduced because people are doing less miles, cars have become lower emitters and people are working from home. That has had more measurable effects than any tax Sad Khant introduces.
 

j s pollo

Member
Messages
162
Good news the cockneys are fighting back they are ripping down cameras cutting wires etc
well done to the people of london just keep giving Khan the finger to everything he does better still get rid of the lefty mayor bring back Boris.
 

Nibby

Member
Messages
2,131
I do get the feeling now it’s a case of ‘How far can we take the pi££ in the name of being green’
 

Nibby

Member
Messages
2,131
Good news the cockneys are fighting back they are ripping down cameras cutting wires etc
well done to the people of london just keep giving Khan the finger to everything he does better still get rid of the lefty mayor bring back Boris.
50 years ago London air pollution needed cleaning up and that’s what’s happened. If now someone still does not find that satisfactory the only alternative is for that person to move out of London. It’s not London that needs to change anymore, it’s them.