ULEZ - Plans (and would you have to pay?)

[Peter Sarf]

Hydrogen fuel cells powered cars are EVs. The fuel cell produces electricity, and an electric motor is used to propel the car

My bad. I meant obviating the need to make, re-charge, replace and dispose of Lithium batteries which see to be not great ecologically. But we will have to wait and see if the aspirations turn out to be fulfilled.

That's no different to many other roads in the country which only have one lane in each direction.

Anyway even if that were more of an issue across the country can you answer me this; which vehicles are the ones where there's too many which are causing the traffic congestion, is it the cycles or is it the cars?

Also, why do the cycle lanes need to have bollards installed, is it so the cyclists stay in their lane or is it so cars stay in theirs?

If there wasn't so much of an issue with general traffic impacting on cycle lanes then the "lost" road lane could have been formed with some paint so that emergent services could have used it with cars and cycles moving (right and left accordingly) out of the way.



Whilst 88 (bus) is greater than 10 (cycle), 10 is greater than 3 (car) for the same road space. (Although it should be noted the reality would be that you could probably fit more cycles into the space).

The issue with buses is that they are often slower (even when there's no congestion) than cycling (as you've got to get to/from the bus stop) - especially if you've got to allow for a 20 minute or less frequent service. They are less reliable. They cost more (my bike is 15 years old and had cost me less than £1,000 for everything, including my waterproof coats, lights, charging the lights, etc.).

Now if the issue was that there were too many cyclists and they were getting stuck in cycle only jams, then you may well have a point. However, the bottom line is that there's still far too many cars. It's unlikely that someone in a bus would switch to driving, if they switch to cycling the impact is unlikely to be noticeable. What is noticeable is when car drivers switch to cycling or the bus, even if only 3% of them do so.

Even 10% would make it like the school holidays during term time - so there's still plenty of scope for people who need to to be able to drive.

Maybe you should call for a congestion charge for Croydon to resolve the issues you've highlighted. As that would speed up the buses and result in more people in the cycle lanes (which probably are fairly busy, it's just that cyclist are less obvious than a queue of cars and they aren't delaying each other as much as cars).

A congested road up to a set of traffic lights with a queue of 10 cars getting through each set of lights is far more noticeable than 10 cycles in the same 25 second window, at the traffic lights, or over the 60-90 second for the cycle time of the traffic lights when they are away from the lights.

An old boss of mine, when people would challenge us on there being a car every (say) 8 second would often look at his watch say car, wait the 8 seconds and then say car again. It's surprising just how long that is, especially for a cycle which is so much smaller and less visually intrusive than a car or van. Of course cycles aren't likely to be spread out, each 8 seconds away from the last, so you could see three and then none for 30 second before seeing another two (and 30 second really does feel a long time when clock watching).

My bold.

Well obviously cars take up more room that cycles. But bear in mind cycles are impractical for many older or disabled people or people moving more than a little shopping/luggage/equipment. A bus has more use for that so don't forget public transport in the argument.

How many car drivers break the rules ?. I doubt it is many and maybe about as many as cyclists who ride on the pavement. Which vehicle has a number plate - not the cyclist.

Twisting the argument there suggesting I think about a congestion charge for Croydon. The problem is that there is less and less reason to go to Croydon (those planners again). Exacerbated by the public transport no longer getting near enough to what is left of the shopping centre due to cycle lanes. Almost none of the affected roads are used by cars so a congestion charge or ULEZ would have little effect.

On the subject of traffic lights see the end of this post.

London's traffic levels are far from constant each week, for years have always been about 20-30% lower in school holidays. Consequently going to be very slow to get reliable statistics on any shift. It would be very easy to make a bad comparison between August (in holidays) and September using raw numbers.

There might be something in TfL Board papers for the committees in October that gives early hints, perhaps even some bus usage figures, but I am not sure there will be a full 4 week reporting period since ULEZ expansion, might simply be too early.

If you assume outer London is roughly 10% of UK population (allowing for some outside border who regularly cross into zone) then applying UKs new car sales (nearer 1.7m, but over 2m per year pre covid), get something like 15,000-20,000 cars per month in zone are being replaced each month. Within couple of years ULEZ won't be a moneyspinner as will only be about 3 or 4% who need to pay.

If only affecting 3 or 4% (say 1 in 30) in couple of years, then not going to be much of an incentive to mode switch from cars

Yes. the number of people remaining in older non-ULEZ-compliant cars will dwindle over a few years to a point where the cameras will need to be justified by a new use.

A 30% fall in traffic during the school holidays is quite a lot.

Whilst schools directly account for about 10%, so there'll be a bit more due to holidays being taken, there's also still people using childcare settings.

Whilst delays can easily reduce by 1/3 (so an hour during term time to 40 minutes in the holidays) that's because a junction at over 85% capacity rapidly adds delays with each few percent it increases by, whilst under 85% capacity then any delays are limited. As such some fairly small changes in traffic volume can have a much more noticeable impact on journey times.

That is quite thought provoking. With the school runs the congestion they cause is not exactly at the same time as the commuting peaks. So during school holidays it is possible it is quite a dramatic drop in traffic levels for that pat of the day. I certainly notice the difference when I am walking around at the right time. What I really also notice is the number of cars parked waiting with the engine running - is car air-conditioning adding a lot to pollution, perhaps it is a need to power the mobile devices that are so essential these days ?. I don't see how ULEZ will reduce this unless the "second" car is not ULEZ compliant.

---

On the subject of traffic lights. I have now had it from some people who should know that the traffic lights get altered to favour bus routes. The new Super Loop routes trigger a discussion/survey on which roads turning off/on to the bus route are low priority. I was amazed to see some quite important roads classed as unimportant - just because they don't have busses going along them. Maybe the congestion (and resulting pollution) would go away if the light phasing was not biased in favour of public transport but as a bus user perhaps I should keep quiet on that. But it just goes to show how affected the statistics might be.

 

[jon0844]

EV batteries are either re-used in battery storage or recycled, with the metals recovered. There are lots of videos of recycling plants around the world, and they're somewhat cleaner and more effective than recycling ICE vehicles.

 

[The Ham]

Well obviously cars take up more room that cycles. But bear in mind cycles are impractical for many older or disabled people or people moving more than a little shopping/luggage/equipment. A bus has more use for that so don't forget public transport in the argument.

Maybe you missed the point where I said about the impact reducing car use by 10% would have - I know we have an aging population but I don't think we're quite at the point where 90% of car drivers fall into those brackets (and certainly not at the times when congestion is at its worst).

Anyway, there's lots of examples of older people and those with disabilities using cycles to get around.

The last few times I went to the shops the stuff I brought was able to fit into a few plastic bags (I didn't use a few plastic bags, I'm using this to compare the volume of stuff purchased), and so would have been able to have been carried on a bike.

Whilst a weekly shop wouldn't (a lot of people get this, or at least a monthly shop, delivered to them anyway) unless it's a cargo bike or you're shopping for one, even then it's possible to make it work (for example a monthly shop delivered and/or doing shopping more often than once a week).

How many car drivers break the rules ?. I doubt it is many and maybe about as many as cyclists who ride on the pavement. Which vehicle has a number plate - not the cyclist.

As a highway engineer I undertake pavement designs - this is designing how thick the materials which make up the construction of the pavement based on how many lorries are expected to use the pavement over a (typically) 40 to 60 design life.

I suspect that you are taking about the number of cyclists who ride on the footway.

Anyway on rule breaking, car drivers almost universally do brake rules - even if that is going 1mph over the speed limit, parking where they shouldn't (there's so many examples of what this looks like to detail them), failing to actually stop at a stop sign, having any part of their car overhanging the stop line at a traffic signal when it's red, and so on and so forth.

Anyway, even for people walking on a footway, the risk of actual harm is low (yes there's cases of cyclists causing death to pedestrians, however they are fairly rare, although not quite a rare as pedestrians killing motorcyclists https://www.lancs.live/news/lancash...orcyclist-died-catastrophic-internal-27165974 - should pedestrias have to have number plates) from cyclists who ride on it. Pedestrians on footways are likely at greater risk from cars:

https://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2023-08-28/five-injured-after-car-crashes-into-pedestrians-near-school

Five people have been left injured after a car crashed into pedestrians in Tintagel, Cornwall.

Police were notified at 11.50pm on Sunday 27 August to reports of a collision involving a Mazda MX-5 which had collided with a group of five pedestrians who were on a pavement [footway] close to Tintagel Primary School on the B3263.

Air Ambulance attended the scene, together with South West Ambulance Service, Cornwall Fire and Rescue and Devon and Cornwall Police.

All five casualties were all taken to Derriford Hospital with varying levels of injury, none of which are believed to be life-threatening.

That's not too excuse cyclists from doing so, rather it's to highlight they there's a reason why cars have a greater level of regulation. As it's a comparison between a 1,000kg vehicle with a top speed of over 70mph Vs 120kg (total weight including rider) and a top speed (unless you're really quick and probably with a bit of a down hill to assist) which is likely to be no more than 35mph.

 

[Trainbike46]

How many car drivers break the rules ?. I doubt it is many and maybe about as many as cyclists who ride on the pavement. Which vehicle has a number plate - not the cyclist.

I'm aware of one comparative study that looked at levels of rule breaking between people on bikes and people driving cars, and it found way lower rates of rule breaking by people on bikes. It's by no means a perfect study, but I don't know of any better ones.

It's also important to remember that the ability to do harm is much higher from people in a car.

Cyclists Break Far Fewer Road Rules Than Motorists, Finds New Video Study

Busting the myth of the "scofflaw cyclist" Danish Road Directorate studies reveal that while 66% of motorists routinely break road traffic laws only 5% of cyclists do so. Law breaking by cyclists is higher where there is no cycle-specific infrastructure.

www.forbes.com

There is an obvious reason to prioritise buses at traffic lights - it makes the bus more attractive relative to driving, leading to fewer people driving, leading to less congestion which benefits everyone, including the people remaining in cars

This is definitely going off-topic though

 

[E27007]

Hydrogen fuel cells powered cars are EVs. The fuel cell produces electricity, and an electric motor is used to propel the car

The hydrogen fuel cell charges a traction battery, the traction battery can cope with the wide range of power requirements of a vehicle, acceleration, hills to ascend / descend, the traction battery is in effect the prime mover of the vehicle, I had a two-hour conversation with a fuel cell R&D engineer, fuel cells are not simple dependable devices, very tempremental , hard to start, therefore should not be switched off once active, prone to "backfiring" and internal contamination, I have my doubts as to the feasibilty of fuel cell technology for mass-market uses such as cars!

 

[MasterSpenny]

The expansion made one person destroyed 150 cameras related to ULEZ - and more are to be destroyed. The first £180 fines have been sent according to Transport for London - source - the below link.

Ulez ‘Blade Runner’ vigilante: I’ve destroyed 150 cameras and won’t stop until expansion is scrapped — Evening Standard

TfL says first £180 fines have been sent to drivers who failed to pay mayor’s £12.50 levy

apple.news

Ulez ‘Blade Runner’ vigilante: I’ve destroyed 150 cameras and won’t stop until expansion is scrapped


TfL says first £180 fines have been sent to drivers who failed to pay mayor’s £12.50 levy
A “Blade Runner” vigilante who claims to have destroyed more than 150 Ulez cameras says he has no plans to stop.


It came as the first fines imposed on motorists who have failed to pay the Ulez since it expanded across Greater London were due to land on doormats.


The father of three told how he vandalised cameras in Bromley in the dead of night – describing it as “unpaid voluntary work”.


Speaking to Talk TV, the unnamed man said the attacks on the Ulez enforcement cameras had ramped up since Mayor Sadiq Khan expanded his clean air zone across to the Greater London boundary on August 29.


He said he was prepared to risk going to prison. “We are reflecting the voice of the public,” he said.


“It started off as a small group of people and it has gradually grown. The numbers have increased significantly. We are like a pack of lone wolves. We sometimes work together. We work in isolation. We all have this common goal.


“We don’t disrupt the general public in their daily activities. We don’t block roads or glue ourselves to buildings. We target the camera network itself. Lawful rebellion is totally OK in my book.”


Asked if he had a message for the mayor, he said: “We are not stopping until you stop – that is the bottom line.”


During the first four weeks of the enlarged scheme, drivers of non-compliant vehicles who failed to pay the £12.50 daily levy received a warning letter rather than an £180 penalty from Transport for London.


But TfL has confirmed that the penalty regime started to be enforced from September 26 – with the first fines arriving in the post this week.


A TfL spokesperson said: “As with previous schemes we have exercised our discretion in the last month and some people have received warning notices but drivers need to be aware that they must pay the charge or face a fine.”


Petrol vehicles registered before 2005 and diesel vehicles registered before 2016 are likely to be liable for the charge. TfL expects the Greater London Ulez to generate £200m a year in levies and fines in its first two years.


The Met police announced earlier this week that it had recorded 795 crimes relating to Ulez cameras between April 1 and September 30.


This includes 200 reports of cameras being stolen and 595 cameras being damaged. The total number of cameras damaged or stolen is likely to be higher as a recorded crime can include multiple offences.


The Met insists that it treats Ulez vandalism serviously and had “deployed considerable resources” to hunting down culprits.


But only three people have been arrested – most recently a 52-year-old man apprehended in Bexley on September 22 on suspicion of criminal damage. He has been bailed until 19 December 19 pending further enquires.

 

[jon81uk]

Not quite sure how the offenders see vandalism and criminal damage as "lawful rebellion".

 

[jon0844]

Not quite sure how the offenders see vandalism and criminal damage as "lawful rebellion".

People pick and choose the laws they want to follow these days.

 

[Trainbike46]

People pick and choose the laws they want to follow these days.

I don't think that's a new thing...

It certainly seems to be how our politicians feel

 

[jon0844]

I don't think that's a new thing...

It certainly seems to be how our politicians feel

No it isn't a new thing, but I think most people do it because they see everyone else do it. As such, laws aren't followed because it's the right thing to do - they're followed by people who fear being caught or punished. Take away the fear and you may as well do what you want.

Politicians, as well as celebrities, footballers and so on are all telling people to just do what you want to do. Don't let anyone tell you what you can and can't do.

 

[greyman42]

No it isn't a new thing, but I think most people do it because they see everyone else do it. As such, laws aren't followed because it's the right thing to do - they're followed by people who fear being caught or punished. Take away the fear and you may as well do what you want.

Politicians, as well as celebrities, footballers and so on are all telling people to just do what you want to do. Don't let anyone tell you what you can and can't do.

Which footballers are you referring to?

 

[jon0844]

Which footballers are you referring to?

You can pick and choose from any footballer misbehaving on the pitch and sending out mixed messages that reverberate through the lower leagues, and fans alike. I picked random examples, so don't need to single out any one person.

While politicians might not be considered role models like the other examples, they are still people who should be held to a higher standard. When nothing happens to them, others will copy. (The FA has of course clamped down hard on bad behaviour for a while now, which seems to have had a positive effect after initial moans).

 

[greyman42]

You can pick and choose from any footballer misbehaving on the pitch and sending out mixed messages that reverberate through the lower leagues, and fans alike. I picked random examples, so don't need to single out any one person.

You said that footballers were telling people to do what you want to do. I am not aware of any footballers telling people to do what they want to do. I think you have just seen footballers as an easy target.

 

[Krokodil]

The expansion made one person destroyed 150 cameras related to ULEZ

No it didn't, they made their own choice to do that.

 

[jon0844]

You said that footballers were telling people to do what you want to do. I am not aware of any footballers telling people to do what they want to do. I think you have just seen footballers as an easy target.

I think you're somewhat missing the point I was making. I have no idea why you are singling out footballers either.

 

[The Ham]

The expansion made one person destroyed 150 cameras related to ULEZ - and more are to be destroyed. The first £180 fines have been sent according to Transport for London - source - the below link.

Ulez ‘Blade Runner’ vigilante: I’ve destroyed 150 cameras and won’t stop until expansion is scrapped — Evening Standard

TfL says first £180 fines have been sent to drivers who failed to pay mayor’s £12.50 levy

apple.news

Interesting phase from that article:

"unpaid voluntary work"

Errrrr, last time I checked unpaid work was voluntary and vice versa.

 

[Ted633]

I've had a couple of charges to my ULEZ auto-pay account recently. Thinking I've finally been caught out and may need a new car now.
However, you can also see the images they have taken. The ANPR system is picking up a van (compliant, ironically) with a number plate 1 letter out from mine (a W instead of a T). The images show it is struggling to read the W, so the system seems to be just guessing and going with me! Now having to dispute the charges, which takes 10 working days.

Edit - credit now applied to my account. At least that was easy!

 

[The Ham]

Apparently the first report into the expanded ULEZ is due out in about two weeks time.

 

[DC1989]

Compliance rate up to 95.3% one month in up from 88% in May. Storm in a teacup?

 

[MasterSpenny]

A news report on ITV News this evening (it’s from watching the TV so I can’t quote it) suggests that TfL may not be able to pay for brand new tube trains, and a large sum of money is required. So that it ties in with this thread:
Could TfL encourage bringing non compliant cars into the ULEZ zone so that they can get some of the money they need? Or does that just sound out of practice?

 

[AM9]

A news report on ITV News this evening (it’s from watching the TV so I can’t quote it) suggests that TfL may not be able to pay for brand new tube trains, and a large sum of money is required. So that it ties in with this thread:
Could TfL encourage bringing non compliant cars into the ULEZ zone so that they can get some of the money they need? Or does that just sound out of practice?

That suggestion sounds like the sort of conspiracy theories that the minority anti-ULEZ mob put out to try and pretend that the scheme is just scam, and that there's no pollution issue in London. So no , having got such high compliance in the scheme, TfL is not going to encourage the dinosaurs to pollute just to increase receipts.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That suggestion sounds like the sort of conspiracy theories that the minority anti-ULEZ mob put out to try and pretend that the scheme is just scam, and that there's no pollution issue in London. So no , having got such high compliance in the scheme, TfL is not going to encourage the dinosaurs to pollute just to increase receipts.

I spent the weekend in Leeds (as anyone who noticed my Delay Repay thread may have noticed). I was absolutely shocked by how polluted it was, it was really unpleasant, you could taste it in places, particularly on the approach roads. If I lived there I'd be shouting VERY loud for a ULEZ.

One thing I did wonder is whether the London ULEZ has caused noncompliant diesel cars (it was mostly diesel fumes) to be sold into cities without ULEZs, making them worse?

 

[AM9]

I spent the weekend in Leeds (as anyone who noticed my Delay Repay thread may have noticed). I was absolutely shocked by how polluted it was, it was really unpleasant, you could taste it in places, particularly on the approach roads. If I lived there I'd be shouting VERY loud for a ULEZ.

One thing I did wonder is whether the London ULEZ has caused noncompliant diesel cars (it was mostly diesel fumes) to be sold into cities without ULEZs, making them worse?

That may be the case, so hopefully, there will be a race among cities that care about their residents' air quality to get their schemes in place. That means that the rogue vehicles can be shuffled off to where they are still accepted rather than be the
last scheme to go online and having the diehards make a lot of noise about 'their rights'.

 

[Krokodil]

On ITV Wales this evening (sorry, couldn't find a web link) the residents of Llandeilo and Llanelli were complaining about air pollution because of traffic. The report said that applying a toll to busy roads is an option being put forward to the WG.

 

[Bald Rick]

I spent the weekend in Leeds (as anyone who noticed my Delay Repay thread may have noticed). I was absolutely shocked by how polluted it was, it was really unpleasant, you could taste it in places, particularly on the approach roads.

Yep you do notice it after a while of being used to London. In a way its similar to way back when smoking was banned in pubs here, and a couple of months later I walked into a bar in Spain…

 

[Krokodil]

Yep you do notice it after a while of being used to London. In a way its similar to way back when smoking was banned in pubs here, and a couple of months later I walked into a bar in Spain…

I went into a brauhaus in Germany and was shocked to find that in some states it still remains up to the licencee whether smoking is allowed in the bar.

 

[bramling]

On ITV Wales this evening (sorry, couldn't find a web link) the residents of Llandeilo and Llanelli were complaining about air pollution because of traffic. The report said that applying a toll to busy roads is an option being put forward to the WG.

Knowing Llanelli fairly well, it’s a fair bet that the vast majority of this traffic is from people who live or work in Llanelli itself. And with essentially one railway station there, I’m not convinced there’s much scope for rail to play a part.

So unless there is the expectation that everyone in Llanelli is either going to suddenly embrace buses en-masse, or decide to reduce the number of journeys they make, I’m not sure what they expect this to achieve apart from costing them money.

This rather strikes me as another variant of the attitude widely seen during Covid, “we decided to go for a day at the beach and were *shocked* to find it was busy”.

As for Llandeilo, perhaps the people of Ammanford might be unhappy when people from Llandeilo drive through “their” town? This sort of thing all becomes rather silly.

 

[Krokodil]

As for Llandeilo, perhaps the people of Ammanford might be unhappy when people from Llandeilo drive through “their” town? This sort of thing all becomes rather silly.

Llandeilo sees quite a lot of lorry traffic passing through and the A483 really isn't suitable for the amount of through traffic - bits of it through town aren't even wide enough for a full width lane in each direction. They've been talking about a bypass for years. Maybe it will finally happen.

Llanelli probably is largely local traffic. Converting the buses to electric will help somewhat. Making it easier for locals to walk or cycle about town will help too.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Can we wait for a supply of suitable ULEZ compliant cars to build up please before we start driving demand up again.

I have in the last week encountered two people who cannot get a suitable car.

One kind of disabled (various minor ailments) actually gave up her VW Golf in favour of the bus. She has noticed she picks up ailments more often. Now wishes she had kept her car and swallowed the ULEZ charge. She has looked at a replacement car and found them to be too expensive.

Another lady lost her car in an accident. It was "written off" but was fine. She settled for the money and then discovered all she could get is an unreliable car that now sits outside her house awaiting a decision on whether to throw more money at it.

Actually I planned ahead and bought a Vectra that has turned into a money pit. Spent no more on it since end of August as it does not work (head gasket). Looking at a replacement and finding they are scarce. Should have kept my 1994 Vauxhall Carlton. I am really struck with how unreliable new cars are. I ave also noticed how cumbersome newer ICE cars are. They are heavy and large - that does not seem very ecological to me.

The supply of reasonably priced second hand compliant cars is just not there.

 

[DustyBin]

Can we wait for a supply of suitable ULEZ compliant cars to build up please before we start driving demand up again.

I have in the last week encountered two people who cannot get a suitable car.

One kind of disabled (various minor ailments) actually gave up her VW Golf in favour of the bus. She has noticed she picks up ailments more often. Now wishes she had kept her car and swallowed the ULEZ charge. She has looked at a replacement car and found them to be too expensive.

Another lady lost her car in an accident. It was "written off" but was fine. She settled for the money and then discovered all she could get is an unreliable car that now sits outside her house awaiting a decision on whether to throw more money at it.

Actually I planned ahead and bought a Vectra that has turned into a money pit. Spent no more on it since end of August as it does not work. Looking at a replacement and finding they are scarce. Should have kept my 1994 Vauxhall Carlton. I am really struck with how unreliable new cars are.

I'm not sure a Vectra counts as a new (or even modern) car though?!