Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
So make the Bristol standard the national one, problem solved.
That would be one way of doing it, but personally I take the view that London has a better handle on such things and is a better standard to follow.
So make the Bristol standard the national one, problem solved.
That would be one way of doing it, but personally I take the view that London has a better handle on such things and is a better standard to follow.
But what Bristol has to achieve is lower NO/NO2 levels and diesels produce much more than petrol cars so London’s “solution” doesn’t solve Bristol’s problem.
London has a separate congestion charge and both schemes operate around the idea of allowing people to pollute if you pay more, Bristol's appears to be nearer the idea that paying to pollute shouldn't be an option and we should just clean up the air instead.The London ULEZ zone is also there to improve air quality, i.e. to reduce NOx and particulates, it's hard to imagine that Bristol's requirements are different to London's
London has a separate congestion charge and both schemes operate around the idea of allowing people to pollute if you pay more, Bristol's appears to be nearer the idea that paying to pollute shouldn't be an option and we should just clean up the air instead.
A Euro 6b isn't environmentally friendly, it's just slightly less polluting that older diesel engines but more polluting than most petrol engines.
But new diesels pollute more than older petrol cars. London may be willing to ignore this however it dosent mean that everybody has to.
Bristol is tasked with reducing the NOx levels, CO2 and CO are not seen as such an issue for air polution, especially CO2. The government push to diesel in the 00s was a classic fudge along the lines of 'if I use a slightly short knife it wont cause as much damage' however nobody with any experience of diesel could really say that they're 'clean'. At some point people (myself included) will have to accept that we cant just carry on tinkering around the edges of major problems like air polution.define more polluting. Only interested in NOx or considering other gasses like CO2, CO and HC?
Diesel is higher in NOx but that is only a by product of how the engine works- and that leads to lower emissions of other gasses like CO2, hence the push to tax on CO2 back in the early 00’s meaning a diesel suddenly became the car of choice...and the limits on the newer diesels is still pretty low and cars will normally come in at 50% or so of the limit for it if not less otherwise you will get issues with durability when approving the vehicles, diesel has just been turned into the villain and the car is easy, but there’s other things to be worrying about too rather than newer cars.
if this scheme gets the green light it will make going to put head office fun as that’s in Bristol, will need to check where the zone is but will mean careful selection of hire car or making sure who ever is going gets the Prius pool car we have.
Bristol is tasked with reducing the NOx levels, CO2 and CO are not seen as such an issue for air polution, especially CO2. The government push to diesel in the 00s was a classic fudge along the lines of 'if I use a slightly short knife it wont cause as much damage' however nobody with any experience of diesel could really say that they're 'clean'. At some point people (myself included) will have to accept that we cant just carry on tinkering around the edges of major problems like air polution.
Changing car is not necessarily a viable option.
Not if they've got a new perfectly good diesel that will lose them money to trade in.
I’m convinced when this is approved somehow temple meads will be outside the boundary.
Temple Meads is one of the more polluted areas (not helped by the trains of course!). The idea is to encourage people to use public transport, not to encourage people to drive to train stations.I’m convinced when this is approved somehow temple meads will be outside the boundary.
If you want to encourage transport by train stopping people driving to the main train station seems ridiculous. Especially as it will affect the key workers needing to run the service - I suppose they may get some form of exemption if they register their vehicles. Kind of how the drivers got fuel passes to get priority in the fuel shortage.
So pollution is OK as long as you can afford a new car!TBH I'm not sure it will be approved, I can see it being ramped back to something more like the London ULEZ i.e. Euro VI diesels still permitted, at least for private cars.
Yes but you can say the same thing about buses. Pollution is ok as long as you ride a diesel busSo pollution is OK as long as you can afford a new car!
However, the pollution per capita is much lower if you have 70 people on a bus.Yes but you can say the same thing about buses. Pollution is ok as long as you ride a diesel bus
As I said earlier, the proposed Bristol zone is effectively much larger than the area shown on the map, in fact by some miles in one direction. That is because it is either not physically or not legally possible to turn round, park or drop someone off at the boundary itself - the nearest opportunities will be much further out.they've got a choice between doing so or parking outside the zone and walking or cycling in (the zone is not very big).
I will probably end up leasing my next car: the current one is too young to scrap.So pollution is OK as long as you can afford a new car!
Marvin Rees has removed the southern end of the Portway from the zone covered by the diesel ban - https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/cabot-circus-plimsoll-bridge-removed-3795873 - which I hope will only be the first change made to the scheme. I think that not operating the ban at all at weekends would be a good move otherwise footfall in Broadmead may go down quite a lot. For my part I will carry on using Temple Meads while I need to (fortunately I live within reach of the Severn Beach line) but that may not be necessary when / if the diesel ban comes in. And I think quite a few people will go elsewhere for shopping and socialising.But again refering to a point in my earlier post, the ban includes the south end of the Portway at the western end of the old docks. This is a relatively open area, much of it open water; it is some distance from the city centre, has little housing, and is flanked to the west by the river and then parkland; so I find it hard to believe that there is a NOx problem here. By including this part of the Portway, a trunk road (it's the A4), they are severing North Bristol from South Bristol on the western side. I cannot help feeling that this aspect is just spite, although the main losers will be businesses in Bedminster.
As for advice to get a different type of car - sorry, won't happen, as they keep moving th goalposts so fast that people have lost any trust in what will happen next. You could buy a different car one week only to find that is banned or penalised the next. So I shall keep what I've got as long as it is practicable and see what the longer term brings. Meanwhile I won't be doing any business or socialising in central or south Bristol, or using Temple Meads station if this ban goes through; I shall just go elsewhere FTTB - sorry if that is not the intended effect
Temple Meads is one of the more polluted areas (not helped by the trains of course!). The idea is to encourage people to use public transport, not to encourage people to drive to train stations.
As for advice to get a different type of car - sorry, won't happen, as they keep moving th goalposts so fast that people have lost any trust in what will happen next. You could buy a different car one week only to find that is banned or penalised the next. So I shall keep what I've got as long as it is practicable and see what the longer term brings. Meanwhile I won't be doing any business or socialising in central or south Bristol, or using Temple Meads station if this ban goes through; I shall just go elsewhere FTTB - sorry if that is not the intended effect
And the bus service is atrocious and has been massively cut back in the last couple of years!
For example I will be prevented from picking up my elderly mother at Temple Meads when she visits, and it might tip the scales for me driving her all the way home instead of her using the train. No, I won't be asking her to walk or cycle the last two miles even if I could get that close.
the ban includes the south end of the Portway at the western end of the old docks. This is a relatively open area, much of it open water; it is some distance from the city centre, has little housing, and is flanked to the west by the river and then parkland; so I find it hard to believe that there is a NOx problem here. By including this part of the Portway, a trunk road (it's the A4), they are severing North Bristol from South Bristol on the western side. I cannot help feeling that this aspect is just spite, although the main losers will be businesses in Bedminster.
An outbreak of common sense. Thanks for that info. From the link :Marvin Rees has removed the southern end of the Portway from the zone covered by the diesel ban - https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/cabot-circus-plimsoll-bridge-removed-3795873 - which I hope will only be the first change made to the scheme.
Same as I said earler in this thread, and in emails I sent to some shops and other companies in Bedminster (south Bristol) I sometimes do business with. It would be nice to think that I helped in some of the pressure that has been put on the council.Changes have also been made to the boundaries around the Cumberland Basin area [the west end of the old docks] allowing for diesel cars to travel between the A370 and the A4 north of the river.
Mr Rees [the Mayor] said: “The planned boundary cut off a route for people who wanted to skirt round the zone from the south to the north, and vice versa. We have therefore altered the boundary giving access via Plimsoll Bridge and Portway.
The 'trivial' Portway P&R station costs £3million and rising, the Portishead line is £120milling and rising and those are the easy ones! Any scheme that uses rail lines in Bristol is also unattractive not because the users will be middle class but because Temple Meads isn't where people want to be anyway.As for access to TM station, it would not be so bad if a frequent service Bristol metro/tram system, using the existing, disused or freight railway lines centred on TM, were established. Such schemes have been proposed for many years but we are still waiting. Bristol's left-wing councils have regarded such schemes as only benefiting the middle-classes and commuters living outside their boundary (eg from Portishead, W-s-M and Thornbury) - so much for "joined up government". They cannot even manage to put a halt on the single track Severn Beach branch ine alongside the existing Portway Park-and-Ride car park, a trivial task I'd have thought. So I have zero sympathy with Bristol Council in their present fix.
if it were me, I certainly wouldn’t want to be parking elsewhere and making my way across Bristol on foot after midnight or at 4am! It’s not safe.
Then you should change your car, or perhaps consider a second runaround (small 1l petrol cars are cheap, and a petrol car of any age is allowed). But for most people it is adequately safe. Our cities, despite what many people think, don't turn into the Wild West at 4am. In practice, it's around pub kicking out time that the most risk is posed.
It is my view that the scheme should be more like the London ULEZ at least in terms of what is allowed (so Euro VI diesels should be for the next 10 years or so at least, and older petrols not) so as to standardise a bit, but even so that situation is still going to arise.