Jump to content


Beware of the Low Emission Zone


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_earthman_*

Guest_earthman_*
  • Guests
Any motorhome owners plan on driving any where within the M25 area next year, check your reg on the site below, if non compliant you have to pay a daily charge of £100/200 depending on the size of vehicle.

We have already received a letter from TFL informing us that our Peugeot Boxer is non compliant. :158:

We do live close to the M25, anyone else who's further away had this letter?

http://www.tfl.gov.u....aspx#container

#2 Whotsit

Whotsit

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poole
Didn't want to go there anyhow, they can keep their smelly old place, so there.


That makes me feel better

Ken

#3 Guest_earthman_*

Guest_earthman_*
  • Guests
Yes Ken, I can't blame you, sadly some of us are stuck near the place.

The zone is basically the whole area within the M25, from where I am/go to on holiday I doubt that it will affect me much any way, I can imagine that it could be a pain if one didn't like motorway driving or wanted to cross part of that large area to travel on A roads whether it be from North to South, East to West for example, or if the M25 is just solid with traffic.

I've just thought of this, what if there's been a bad accident, the Police close the road ahead so everyone is forced to drive into the zone, will drivers still be fined???

#4 Whotsit

Whotsit

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poole
I would imagine under those circumstances one would be under the instruction of the police and therefore be in the clear.

I don't know how or where it would be monitored but what happens if you are driving from the west clockwise around the M25 and want to go to Wisley ( just as an example) you would have to leave the M25 on the near side and go into the low emission zone before getting to the other side of the M25, there must be a tolerance area inside the M25????

ken

#5 Supertractorman

Supertractorman

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 1,117 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Errol, Perthshire
  • Interests:Vintage Tractors, Creating and Running a CL, Looking after Doves, Chickens & Ducks, plus keeping Shadow the Duck from biting our Westies bums.
  • Make of Motorhome:Only Tractors


Out of interest has anyone noticed any improvement in air purity in that area since the Low Emmision zones started ?.

David

#6 enodreven

enodreven

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 524 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Make of Motorhome:none at the moment
Hi, What I find amazing is that it is targeted towards Diesel engined vehicles (Petrol RV's and large petrol vans etc are exempt) but if you look on the site that lists green cars i.e. those with low CO2 emissions the really low ones are nearly all Diesel powered, its only a very small amount of petrol cars that can get under the 100gms of CO2, so why are they only targeting Diesel powered vehicles

This link shows 10 cars that meet the under 100 gms of CO2 so therefore qualify for an exemption from the London Conjestion Charge and 8 of them are diesel, so why are TFL directing there Low emission Zone specifically at Diesel powered vehicles, surly this must show that Petrol powered vehicles are generally more polluting than diesel.

http://www.which.co....-charge-241659/

#7 Graham Hadfield

Graham Hadfield

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acklam, Tees-side
  • Interests:Skype name gjhtside
  • Make of Motorhome:Burstner T625 Harmony
  • Where did you find us:Invite from Dave
The LEZ has nothing to do with CO2 emissions. It is specifically targeted at particulate matter which is emitted by certain diesel engines. That is the reason why some diesel engines and engines using other fuels are not affected. See http://www.tfl.gov.u...tkt-tab-panel-5 and linked pages for more detail.

The LEZ is alsodifferent from the Congestion Charge with different rules.

#8 enodreven

enodreven

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 524 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Make of Motorhome:none at the moment
Hi, Graham

I appreciate that they are different schemes but surely the reason the low CO2 cars are exempt from certain taxes is in itself is evidence that they are less polluting than other vehicles with higher CO2 emissions, and the point I was making is that Diesel powered vehicles seem to be the only ones that can meet these low standards and surely that must say something about the Diesel engine against its Petrol powered counter part,

So why are they TFL now being selective in the pollutants that are measured for the LEZ which are specifically directed at Diesel powered vehicles , against those that the Government are using to provide an overall better environmental standard for the whole UK environment which is reflected in there range of Road Tax levels which are based upon the CO2 emissions of cars.

It appears we have two measurements of transports effect on environmental pollution, one range being used by TFL for its LEZ and another range of measurement being used by TFL and the government to cover the whole UK environment including the congestion charge area

#9 Guest_earthman_*

Guest_earthman_*
  • Guests
I think that the whole thing is just a ploy to get folk to buy a newer vehicle, there is no other option really, who's going to spend £2.5k on a filter or pay £100/200 per day to enter that zone? It's just not realistic is it, £10/15 per day would have been a better sum if they wanted to invent an extra tax on the motorist, I wonder how they will get the money back for putting all those cameras up, maybe they will earn their keep in some other way??

#10 enodreven

enodreven

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 524 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Make of Motorhome:none at the moment
Hi, Earthman

That's a very good point how will they pay for the cameras, I know they wanted/tried to extend the congestion zone which I believe was to try and help pay for that system as I can only assume not enough people were paying the congestion charge or getting caught,

Be very interesting to find out just how much the LEZ system has cost to put in place and how much it costs to run as it appears its main income stream is/will be from people/vehicles which don't meet the standards.

#11 Graham Hadfield

Graham Hadfield

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acklam, Tees-side
  • Interests:Skype name gjhtside
  • Make of Motorhome:Burstner T625 Harmony
  • Where did you find us:Invite from Dave
There seems to be a bit of confusion about the various schemes.

The London Congestion Charge has nothing to do with pollutants emitted by vehicles. As TfL say, the purpose of the Congestion Charge is to reduce the number of vehicles within the affected area:

The Congestion Charge has been effective in reducing traffic levels and allowed us to invest in improving transport in London.

  • There has been a six per cent increase in bus passengers during charging hours
  • By law, all net revenue raised by the charge (£148m in financial year 2009/10) has to be invested in improving transport in London.
Increases in congestion

Sadly, congestion has risen back to pre-charging levels but would be much worse without the charge. The rise in congestion is due to:
  • Widespread water and gas main replacement works, which have greatly reduced the road capacity
  • Traffic management measures to help pedestrians and other road users


The (larger) LEZ, on the other hand is specifically aimed (as I mentioned before) at reducing particulate emissions which are produced by older diesel engines. Particulate emissions are not all that much of a problem in wide open spaces but they cause various health problems when there is a high concentration in a (relatively) small area.

Different again is the national tax regime based on CO2 emissions, a response to the overall aim of governments to reduce CO2.

I'm not arguing for the rights or wrongs of any scheme, just pointing out that they have different bases.

#12 enodreven

enodreven

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 524 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Make of Motorhome:none at the moment
Hi, Graham

Having lived in London for quiet some time I am aware of the different schemes, the point you seem to be missing is the the Congestion charge while I know the original reasoning behind it was solely to control the congestion, it does appear to have widened its remit in that it now uses the emissions from vehicles to determine the level of charge it imposes, so it in affect is now acting in part similar to the LEZ hence my comments regarding the removal of any charges based solely on the emissions which appears to be in the most part, only obtainable via Diesel Powered vehicles.

Example:- My new car is a Ford Fiesta 1.6 ECOnetic Diesel and takes up just the same amount of space as any other Fiesta thereby creating just as much congestion as any other Fiesta but i am exempt from the Congestion charge solely because of the low emission it produces, hope that makes sense.

#13 Guest_earthman_*

Guest_earthman_*
  • Guests



I don't know how or where it would be monitored but what happens if you are driving from the west clockwise around the M25 and want to go to Wisley ( just as an example) you would have to leave the M25 on the near side and go into the low emission zone before getting to the other side of the M25, there must be a tolerance area inside the M25????

ken


Some how I doubt very much that there will be any tolerance, if you stray into that zone I bet the fine get's home before you do. I guess that we will all have to look out for those signs, 'U turn to avoid LEZ' etc.

http://www.tfl.gov.u...tkt-tab-panel-2

#14 Whotsit

Whotsit

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poole
My apologies, I got it wrong, it should have been anticlockwise around the M25.

These senior moments are really coming fast and furious now.

Ken

#15 Whotsit

Whotsit

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poole
That map makes more sense of it Earthman.

Ken

#16 enodreven

enodreven

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 524 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Make of Motorhome:none at the moment
Hi,

Most of the places where i have seen the signs warning you you are about to enter the LEZ do in fairness appear to have a route close by giving you a chance to take avoiding action rather than entering.

#17 Graham Hadfield

Graham Hadfield

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acklam, Tees-side
  • Interests:Skype name gjhtside
  • Make of Motorhome:Burstner T625 Harmony
  • Where did you find us:Invite from Dave

Hi, Graham

Having lived in London for quiet some time I am aware of the different schemes, the point you seem to be missing is the the Congestion charge while I know the original reasoning behind it was solely to control the congestion, it does appear to have widened its remit in that it now uses the emissions from vehicles to determine the level of charge it imposes, so it in affect is now acting in part similar to the LEZ hence my comments regarding the removal of any charges based solely on the emissions which appears to be in the most part, only obtainable via Diesel Powered vehicles.

Example:- My new car is a Ford Fiesta 1.6 ECOnetic Diesel and takes up just the same amount of space as any other Fiesta thereby creating just as much congestion as any other Fiesta but i am exempt from the Congestion charge solely because of the low emission it produces, hope that makes sense.

Thanks Brian, I didn't realise that such a change had been made. I see from page 30/31 at http://www.tfl.gov.u...on-charging.pdf that

The GVD has replaced the Alternative Fuel Discount (AFD) which was a 100% discount for certain vehicles powered by alternative fuels. The AFD was introduced to encourage the uptake of such vehicles; however the benefits of these vehicles have in some cases been outpaced by technological development in conventional vehicles. The GVD has been introduced to allow for a more technologically neutral approach to the discount.

It does seem rather strange.

#18 Guest_earthman_*

Guest_earthman_*
  • Guests
Even an old small Astra van is non compliant, a plumber in my road has had to upgrade to a newer model.

I'm wondering how classic vehicle owners will get on, the London to Brighton run for example and what about the army who seem to run old diesel vehicles??

#19 HAGAR

HAGAR

    hagar

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 736 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Shropshire
  • Make of Motorhome:Chausson 94
  • Where did you find us:recommended
Hi, And a Merry christmas to one and all.
Can anyone tell me what exactly the LEZ actually achieves??, except for swelling an organisation's bank balance. If it's for cleaner omissions from the exhaust, why does the Catalytic converter on a Diesel engine not form part of an MOT test for Diesel engined vehcles. If you are unlucky enough to have your CAT stolen, replace it with a straight piece of pipe. Online automotive 0844 8807878 for details.
cheers hagar.

#20 Graham Hadfield

Graham Hadfield

    MHT Member

  • MHT Members
  • Pip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acklam, Tees-side
  • Interests:Skype name gjhtside
  • Make of Motorhome:Burstner T625 Harmony
  • Where did you find us:Invite from Dave
What the LEZ achieves is to lower the level of diesel particulates (basically, soot) in the area. Diesel particulates cause respiratory problems and are particularly dangerous to asthmatics like me. If you've ever seen the black smoke coming out of the exhaust of an old bus or lorry you've seen diesel particulates. If the smoke has caused you to cough you've experienced a low level of the attack which can kill an asthmatic.

Particulates are only one form of pollution. Catalytic converters reduce other forms (carbon monoxide, unburned hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen). Some objectors point to the fact that the LEZ does nothing about other forms of pollution such as that from aircraft. That is so but it does not negate the argument for particulate reduction.

There are (IMHO) a number of inequitable/unfair aspects to the way in which the London LEZ has been implemented but the underlying scientific basis is undeniable and those who support the LEZ from a health basis have a much better case than those who simply object to having to pay the charge from a financial viewpoint.

Graham




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users