New London £10 a day "Toxic" charge comes into force for older cars - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;52811776][I]You don't need a car to travel in Central London.[/I][/QUOTE] It's so much worse trying to use a car in central London rather than just walking or using public transport anyways. You're basically paying to make your life harder :v:

Honest truth the big issue is not old cars on their own, it's mosly diesel veichles that pollute a shitton, hell some petrol cars from the 80s are way less polluting than diesel cars from the 2000s. I'd rather see diesel being outphased soon and replaced by electric/hybrid veichles personally.

[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;52811627]My 2006 truck is still worth $8000 why in gods name would I scrap it for a fraction of a fraction of its worth? Most cars from '00 to '06 are still worth more than scrap if they were maintained at all. Also applying the fine as a blanket on all 06 and older cars is stupid. There's plenty of eco friendly 06 and older cars that get good mileage. I'd definitely bet money on an '04 Honda Civic polluting less than a '15 F150 or Jeep Wrangler. On a different tangent, why is London's air so bad? I've never been but there's tons of complaints. It sounds worse than New York City or Chicago... I've been to both of those places and the air is fine.[/QUOTE] Because we have a shit load of diesel cars. In early 2000s it was decided in an effort to reduce CO2 emissions that diesel would be incentivized. Yeah they fucked that one up. It's also not for all cars pre 2006. It's for cars that don't meet Euro 4 emissions standards.

I think there ought to be more of an incentive or way to make it easier for those less financially able. For example, have incentive programs to replace one's old catalytic converter in reward maybe having a couple months pass on the BBC bill or something to that effect. Even moreso they should incentivise grandfathering in older cars for the financially less able by getting a mechanic to tune up their engine (or even better their ECU if its a mid 90s car or newer) to try and get it to peak efficiency. Who the ban should really go after are those who intentionally bypass the catalytic converter or go rolling coal like some of the idiots we have here in the south.

The buses and taxis need to be tackled more than the regular car. But Khan won't do that

[QUOTE=PyroCF;52811342]I'm glad i3s are becoming more popular in London, they are the perfect city car.[/QUOTE] i just wish they didn't have such a horrible paint job. i saw one on the road that was just plain black, with resprayed trim to match and it looked nice, but thats the only one Ive ever seen that was one tone.

What's wrong with Buses? I get that they are big machines but they are far better than cars in terms of passengers to emissions.

This only applies to central London, right? That's really not too bad. Wonder if my 97 Volvo V70 with an LPG system would be exempt, not that I ever intend to take it to central London to find out.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;52811354]i've noticed, at least here in the US, many people who are driving older cars are not doing so out of want but because they cannot afford anything else. perhaps things are different across the pond but i can't imagine fining people who are driving a polluting shitbox will give them any easier of a time getting something cleaner.[/QUOTE] Fine people and allow anyone to cash out their fined total, if the money goes towards a better vehicle? And keep the interest profits, haha.

[QUOTE=nVidia;52812014]Fine people and allow anyone to cash out their fined total, if the money goes towards a better vehicle? And keep the interest profits, haha.[/QUOTE] Something like that, though I am neither a politician nor an economist so I guess my suggestion is mostly shooting into the dark. I don't think the government should be keeping any profits as that feels somewhat antithetical to what a government should be but I haven't taken too many civics classes so again, I may be speaking out of my ass with that.

[QUOTE=rampageturke 2;52811927]The buses and taxis need to be tackled more than the regular car. But Khan won't do that[/QUOTE] All new black cabs have to be electric as of 1st January 2018. They are also putting a 15 year age limit on black cabs as well.

This really hurts people that work in London as tradesmen. I'm a French polisher by trade and a lot of my work is in central London for hotels and townhouses, we drive a van to hold our tools and supplies, we pay the congestion charge to get to work, pay £9 an hour to park and now an extra £10. There are bigger contributors to air pollution than Diesel vehicles, but they'd have something to say about harsher regulations so the buck is passed on to someone else.

[QUOTE=PyroCF;52811817]It's so much worse trying to use a car in central London rather than just walking or using public transport anyways. You're basically paying to make your life harder :v:[/QUOTE] I don't understand wanting to drive in central London. Motorbike yes, but not a car, seriously it's so much quicker to catch the tube or even a bus than drive. 20 minutes of walking + tube gets me to work in central London, but driving would be well over an hour. I think for work vehicles it should be an exception, but for someone commuting to work solo in a car, absolutely place the T charge on them.

[QUOTE=rampageturke 2;52811927]The buses and taxis need to be tackled more than the regular car. But Khan won't do that[/QUOTE] A good 1/4th of the London bus fleet is low emission already, and it's probably only going to get better as time goes on. So, there's clearly progress being made.

[QUOTE=cyclocius;52812169]This really hurts people that work in London as tradesmen. I'm a French polisher by trade and a lot of my work is in central London for hotels and townhouses, we drive a van to hold our tools and supplies, we pay the congestion charge to get to work, pay £9 an hour to park and now an extra £10. There are bigger contributors to air pollution than Diesel vehicles, but they'd have something to say about harsher regulations so the buck is passed on to someone else.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure what else would be a greater source of local air pollution in central London? Electric vans like the E-NV200 exist as well. If you are driving around in densely populated areas you should be paying for the damage your emissions have on people's health.

[QUOTE=Morgen;52812212]I'm not sure what else would be a greater source of local air pollution in central London? Electric vans like the E-NV200 exist as well. If you are driving around in densely populated areas you should be paying for the damage your emissions have on people's health.[/QUOTE] Should you have to pay for all the environmental damage caused by the manufacture of Nissan Leafs? Because I can guarantee your car's footprint is not invisible. Where do you draw the line - just before it affects [I]you?[/I] Convenient, that is. Emissions are a problem that need to be addressed, but forcing a subset of car owners to pay for it while you wash your hands of any responsibility for the damage [I]you are also partaking in[/I] is asinine and childish. I have defended you in the past but as time goes on your upper lip curls ever upward, sit down and lose the elitism wherever you found it.

[QUOTE=Morgen;52812212]I'm not sure what else would be a greater source of local air pollution in central London? Electric vans like the E-NV200 exist as well. If you are driving around in densely populated areas you should be paying for the damage your emissions have on people's health.[/QUOTE] I suspect that the business that cyclocius works for is not in the black enough to where they can afford to purchase an electric van. the technology is getting more inexpensive over time, but it is still not cheap enough where the majority of people can switch over to it without risking serious financial harm.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;52812220]Should you have to pay for all the environmental damage caused by the manufacture of Nissan Leafs? Because I can guarantee your car's footprint is not invisible. Where do you draw the line - just before it affects [I]you?[/I] Convenient, that is.[/QUOTE] Yes, all damage to the environment and local populations should be priced into just about all products imho. I don't think I should be exempt from that at all. I pay extra to source all my energy from green sources as well, which I use to charge my Leaf 99% of the time.

if the government wishes to effect a change in the populace, they should put some money up to help said populace effect that change. otherwise it may be pushing the burden onto people who cannot afford it.

[QUOTE=Clive;52811345]Yeah that's why I added I agree with you though, it's just stupid when people own cars with engines that they don't really need. What's the point. You car can do 0 to 60 in 4 seconds? Great, when would that be useful, top speed of 160mph? I bet you can't wait to go on the motorway so you can do 70mph...pointless.[/QUOTE] First of all let me state that I agree that this is a real issue. However I really don't agree with your argument....it's a matter of preference and fun. Why wear nice clothes when you can just buy the cheapest stuff around, why have nice food when you can just eat bread? Not everything has to be practical, some things are are just because their nice.

All 1st world governments have more than enough money to support a large and immediate shift to electric powered vehicles. Eliminating gas and diesel putt-around grocery-getting type cars without affecting enthusiast/hobbyists is more than possible, but governments are run for profit and not for people. I would hedge my bets that if every non-enthusiast switched to electric there'd be no more emissions concerns from automobiles, even if every remaining gasser in enthusiast hands was running pure unadulterated gasoline and venting straight off the headers.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;52812220]Should you have to pay for all the environmental damage caused by the manufacture of Nissan Leafs? Because I can guarantee your car's footprint is not invisible. Where do you draw the line - just before it affects [I]you?[/I] Convenient, that is. Emissions are a problem that need to be addressed, but forcing a subset of car owners to pay for it while you wash your hands of any responsibility for the damage [I]you are also partaking in[/I] is asinine and childish. I have defended you in the past but as time goes on your upper lip curls ever upward, sit down and lose the elitism wherever you found it.[/QUOTE] All environmental damage should be either factored into the cost of the product, or covered by a tax on the goods. There's no line being drawn by anyone here except you apparently. Was your post supposed to be some sort of a zinger? Basically nobody here is going to disagree with you. The problem is getting legislators to do it - Facepunch doesn't govern the world.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;52812241]if the government wishes to effect a change in the populace, they should put some money up to help said populace effect that change. otherwise it may be pushing the burden onto people who cannot afford it.[/QUOTE] They are. £4500 grant for zero emission vehicles, £500 grant for a home charger, up to £7500 grant for taxi drivers. London has shit loads of charging stations as well. Emissions can not remain at illegally high levels in London forever. Most people don't need a car to travel in central London. The only people who might have a valid excuse are tradesmen, and taxi drivers.

[QUOTE=Morgen;52812252]They are. £4500 grant for zero emission vehicles, £500 grant for a home charger, up to £7500 grant for taxi drivers. London has shit loads of charging stations as well. Emissions can not remain at illegally high levels in London forever. Most people don't need a car to travel in central London. The only people who might have a valid excuse are tradesmen, and taxi drivers.[/QUOTE] i'm glad they're putting forwards grants to help people move to greener technology, then. as i have said previously, there's likely some cultural disconnect happening. where i come from, it is unimaginable to be able to live without a car, public transportation is either too unreliable or nonexistent to be able to use it for work, and distances between places are vast enough to where walking or biking is wholly unreasonable. it is difficult for me to conceive of a life without either owning a car or knowing someone who does and is willing to transport you.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;52812266]i'm glad they're putting forwards grants to help people move to greener technology, then. as i have said previously, there's likely some cultural disconnect happening. where i come from, it is unimaginable to be able to live without a car, public transportation is either too unreliable or nonexistent to be able to use it for work, and distances between places are vast enough to where walking or biking is wholly unreasonable. it is difficult for me to conceive of a life without either owning a car or knowing someone who does and is willing to transport you.[/QUOTE] London has amazing public transportation. If you choose to drive in central London you are actively paying to make your life more difficult. It's simply not needed unless you need it for something business related.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;52812266]i'm glad they're putting forwards grants to help people move to greener technology, then. as i have said previously, there's likely some cultural disconnect happening. where i come from, it is unimaginable to be able to live without a car, public transportation is either too unreliable or nonexistent to be able to use it for work, and distances between places are vast enough to where walking or biking is wholly unreasonable. it is difficult for me to conceive of a life without either owning a car or knowing someone who does and is willing to transport you.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxevb.shtml"]Most EVs in America are eligible for tax credits.[/URL]

What's with Europe's hate boner for cars recently?

[QUOTE=PyroCF;52812308][URL="http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxevb.shtml"]Most EVs in America are eligible for tax credits.[/URL][/QUOTE] Tax credits are good, but $7,500 is still only a dent in the price of an electric vehicle, and not a big enough one for the majority of middle to lower class people who rely on cars for their livelihood to be able to make the leap responsibly.

[QUOTE=Savage Octane;52812346]What's with Europe's hate boner for cars recently?[/QUOTE] Most European cities are developed in a way that mixes residential and commercial areas, so you can walk to work, then walk to the grocery store, walk back home, throw everything in the fridge, and then do whatever. Cars are a massive hassle on tiny streets, and all they do is clog up the streets because of the infrastructure required to support them. It's less about working people with vans driving from site to site, it's more about single-passenger cars clogging up the roads, when they could be inside the bus like everyone else.

the situation regarding electric vehicles will likely shake out okay as time goes on, technology improves, and used electric vehicles start hitting the market at a large volume, and those people will eventually be able to buy them, but at the moment they're still not viable for many people due to their cost