Have your say on the Ultra Low Emissions Zone

Over 15,000 Londoners took part in our Clean Air consultation last year to share views and ideas on improving the quality of the air we breathe. The latest in a suite of measures to follow this comes today, as the Mayor announced further consultation on detailed proposals for the Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ).

Proposals cover: 

  • Bringing forward implementation of the ULEZ to start as early as 2019, at that point replacing the T-charge and creating stricter emissions standards;
    • Petrol vehicles that don’t meet Euro 4 standards and diesel vehicles that don’t meet Euro 6 standards will face a daily charge of £12.50 (cars, vans and motorbikes) / £100 (buses, coaches and HGVs) if they drive in the ULEZ, which will initially cover the same ground as the congestion charging zone.
  • Expanding the ULEZ throughout the whole of Greater London for heavy diesel vehicles including buses, coaches and lorries in 2020.
     
  • Expanding the ULEZ up to the North and South Circular roads for cars and vans in 2021.

The ULEZ will apply to all vehicle types except black taxis and it’s estimated that its introduction in central London alone will result in nearly a 50% cut in road transport NOx emissions by the end of 2020.

The different timescales outlined are intended to provide Londoners, motorists coming into the capital from elsewhere and businesses which will be affected sufficient time to take the necessary steps to prepare for these new standards. They also reflect the minimum amount of time needed for Transport for London (TfL) to consult on and implement such technically complex schemes covering large parts of the capital.

You can have your say on the proposed early introduction of the ULEZ in central London, plus additional measures to reduce emissions, on TfL’s consultation portal until 25 June. A further statutory consultation on the proposed expansion of the ULEZ will take place in Autumn 2017.

 

4th Apr 2017
0
3 weeks ago (2:35 PM)

Comments:

charliemh

new

I am a zone 2 resident, commuter cyclist / runner and walker in central London. I support these plans and also look forward to the emissions zone being widened further. I use my diesel car for weekend leisure journeys outside the city and look forward to the time that I will be able to afford a low emission vehicle. I think wider engagement must continue to support commercial fleet operations and vehicles which spend a large proportion of their time operating within our city.

williewonka

new

I'm a bit confused here, perhaps TALK LONDON can Elaborate? I was under the impression from an email from Andrew Hatch TFL that a further consultation on wether or not to expand the ULEZ to include the South and North Circular would be undertaken after this one AFTER JUNE and not only that but he said that all who would be affected by any expansion would all be written to ,can you tell us please TALK LONDON if this is still the case?

livehere

new

There is a TfL ULEZ consultation that finishes in June - on this webpage:
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/environment/air-quality-consultation-ph...

Central Londoners should note that the plans include allowing (or insisting on?) nocturnal deliveries, which whatever the freight lobby says CANNOT be carried out quietly enough.
So there will be substantial late evening and all-night traffic in central residential areas, plus the crashing, banging and booming noise of the actual deliveries. The freight lobby has been working quietly with the government and TfL ( ‘out-of-hours consortium’ ) for some years to achieve this.

See the top of page 44 of this document (goes with the consultation):
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/environment/air-quality-consultation-ph...

So anyone who lives in an area used by day for deliveries and who does not want that noise and traffic switched to late eves and nights, please do go to that consultation and say so vigorously - there is a box for putting your own comments at the end of the radio button section.

Talk London

new

Hi williewonka,

There are two statutory consultation stages underway or still to follow. The current stage, open until June concerns the early implementation of the ULEZ in central London, plus additional measures to strengthen emissions standards. A further statutory stage focuses on the possible expansion of the ULEZ beyond central London. It is currently expected to take place in Autumn 2017 and will comprehensive engage individuals and businesses affected by any expansion in accordance with legal requirements.

The Consultation Stages section of the TfL Consultation Portal outlines the purpose and overview of content for each consultation stage.

Hope that's helpful,

Talk London Team
 

isb61

new

I have a Euro 6 compliant car so am not yet affect but imagine it will soon be, it is unacceptable that following the advice of government can turn round & badly bite you back just goes to show never trust a politician. Also how can motorbikes be included in this they reduce congestion

Frederick Harrad

new

My car is automatic and at 30 mph turns over at about 1,300 rpm but at 20 mph turns over at about 1,500 rpm because it selects a lower gear. I have tried, unsuccessfully, changing to a higher gear manually. Whilst it saves lives, injuries and accidents it does this at the expense of increased pollution.

bumphere

new

Not uprising considering that gearboxes are built for 30mph efficiency. Excessive traffic lights don't help either.

bumphere

new

I see Motorcycles produce 0% emissions according to the posted data on the consultation page. So exclude them.

The Cyclist

new

So why is sadiq khan wanting to charge them instead of giving them more room to move ? well said bumphere tell your London assembly mp find them on the tfl site here for your area and email them they are there for YOU ....ACT NOW... https://www.london.gov.uk/people/assembly well said bud, I'm a rider a driver and a cyclist this whole thing is poorly thought out and is aimed primarily at making funds obviously !

thorp

new

Corrupt complicit Sadiq Khan ignores the elephant in the room which is Heathrow flights. Too many flights, too low and too late/early already. He should veto LHR R3 by closing Tube, taxi & bus till they cancel their runway 3 plans. But we know he won't because he's weak and in on the whole thing.

As for ULEZ, extending to North & South Circular is excessive. Euro 3 standard petrol should be the minimum standard for petrol cars, many of which are small efficient cars. A one litre Nissan Micra from 2003 which is a perfectly clean car compared to a 2006 Range Rover would be banned. Not fair.

The Cyclist

new

yes Thorpe write to your London assembly mp its easy to find online

The Cyclist

new

tell your London assembly mp find them on the tfl site here for your area and email them they are there for YOU ....ACT NOW... https://www.london.gov.uk/people/assembly

Graham Pycock

new

This is ridiculous. A combination of improved technology through tougher controls on new cars and alternative forms of propulsion (electric, hydrogen etc) is already, and will increasingly, improve emissions. Trying to force vehicles of the road so quickly as a political gesture is unnecessary and punitive. A scrappage scheme would help speed up the introduction of newer and cleaner cars.

The Cyclist

new

PROBLEM IS tfl aint got the authority for a scheme and the government wont give you cash-only money towards a new one the rest you have to find, most folk aint got it.....the poor will be poorer while new cars for the rich will be in abundance.....Its WRONG..its actually discriminatory against the less well off...

C Smith

new

Very true!

livehere

new

I am sure Brexit costs and consequences will be used as an excuse for not funding more scrappage schemes for cabbies and other drivers.

Talk London

new

Hi Graham Pycock,

Transport for London and City Hall have a team of technical experts who proactively review and identify potential solutions to reducing emissions from vehicles and other sources as well as reducing exposure. This includes alternative forms of propulsion, which are at various stages of viability and usage. The first priority is to reduce emissions at source, through the measures currently under consultation, including the Ultra Low Emission Zone, upgrading the bus fleet, addressing construction and gas boiler-related emissions and other measures to reduce harmful pollutants in the air.

Regarding a scrappage scheme, the transport team at City Hall tell us that the Mayor strongly believes the Government should deliver national incentives exclusively under their control (such as taxation) to discourage diesel and to accelerate the uptake of alternatively fuelled vehicles. The Mayor has submitted a proposal to the Chancellor for a national vehicle scrappage fund to be delivered by Government, with the aim to make converting to cleaner vehicles affordable for motorists and businesses.  The Mayor’s proposal includes a fund of over £500m for London.

Talk London Team 

The Cyclist

new

How van you NOT INCLUDE BLACK TAXIS? Come on whos thinking this up? They sit there day in day out all day idling spewing Filthy black polluting smoke like the buses whilst cars
and bike drivers are going to suffer while they get away scot free...you have got be be kidding us !! SADIQ KHAN HAS TO GO this is just crazy and poorly thought out. If you also extend the ULEZ to include south London and north London basically greater London hundreds of businesses will suffer such as motorbike repair shops, diesel repair shops in their hundreds if not thousands ! What about motorbikes what are TFL doing to them? You are
wanting to charge them for riding in London-there are 55000 riders coming into London every day but instead of encouraging them and car drivers to get on a bike you want to charge them too? Come on TFL -POORLY THOUGHT OUT COMPLETELY..... leave the bikers alone free entry in and around London, free access to ALL bus lanes, charge the most pollutant you say but then you don't want to charge taxis ha ha ha ha ha ......I see an excuse here for TFL to make money this is not about pollution ....People are waking up word is getting around....You should be held accountable TFL..

C Smith

new

True ... true ";-)

livehere

new

They are exempt and apparently to be controlled via their licensing system. But all they will have to do by their deadline is to be zero emissions capable (ZEC). This is useless as few cabbies will bother to switch to clean fuel when in high pollution areas. Aren't they anyway mostly in those areas all the time? It is not as if the hybrid bus drivers bother - just watch them on Oxford Street with their diesel fumes belching out. Pollution that goes directly into our flats.

HenryG

new

Why exempt taxis when they cause 25% of the air pollution? Studies have also shown that all these 'sleeping policeman', speed bumps, etc. are also a major cause of increased air pollution, so why not take them all away?

C Smith

new

Quite right, outdated, expensive & dirty transport.

JsRoberts

new

I bought my first nearly new car 8 years ago, I spent 6 months looking for a car that would suit my requirements as it would have to last me at least 15 years as I had to medically retire early and would have to rely on my pension for income. Unfortunately, the only car I could find that matched my needs was a diesel toyota verso. I am unable to afford the price of a new or nearly new car, and the value of the verso has dropped from £5650 in January to £2200 this month , not that I could find and car dealers willing to buy it.
OK I accept the previous government got it wrong and diesels pollute. But what about aircraft? The highest pollution from a jet comes at take of and landing. In 2006 Heathrow pollution levels were 4 times the maximum allowed even though it is one of the few airports in the world to levy a pollution charge. 5 miles east from city airport on a cloudy day you can actually taste the kerosene in the air. How will effectively banning a few hundred diesel cars reduce this pollution? They have built a new factory to produce clean taxi's, so why are they exempt from this charge?
Once again, it is one law for the rich and powerful and us poor peasants better learn our place, open our wallets and say help yourself.

C Smith

new

Absolutely right JS.

lmodiano

new

I believe a rethink is required with regard to black taxis. They, together with buses, are among the worst polluters on London streets. I appreciate that often it is not the fault of the drivers, who have made an important investment in their cabs (even some of them, from the look of the black exhaust fumes, do not appear to service their vehicles properly).

But I urge TfL

a) to monitor every black taxi and prevent those whose emissions fall short of acceptable from circulating in London.

b) to increase the pressure on black taxis to change their vehicles for those with greener technology.

I also believe there should be a hotline to allow residents to report any vehicle that is clearly emitting black exhaust fumes.

oliverg8sr

new

Absolutely!
It's ironic that two of the international marketing icons of London are filthy and dangerous - black cabs and double decker diesel buses. Both things that TfL can fix, but seem reluctant to tackle at anything above glacial speed

Scott_209

new

Totally unfair! Bought at £25k diesel car in 2014 and it has a stop start engine to held reduce emissions whilet stationary yet I will be charged £12.50 a dat. The finance won't even be paid off on the car yet. I think older vehicles should be charged - or just larger ones. Something, but this isn't the answer

livehere

new

But why did you buy a diesel car in 2014, when the serious problem with the pollution they cause has been so well publicised for so many years?

bisgrg01

new

There need to be greater investment in charging points for electric cars/vehicles. At the moment they are few and far between, there could be partnerships with businesses to provide charging points on local high streets, shopping centres, super markets, work places, station car parks, and residential areas. Until the infrastructure is developed people will not move to hybrid and electric cars.

Steve R

new

I do not agree with this extension to the North and Soutn circulars, too far and too quick, leave the zone as it is and allow for the fact that many people would have to increase polution overall by going round the M25 to avoid the zone when we need to travel across the southern or northern for a trip of a few miles that becomes 40 instead.
It is an ill conceived scheme, to do nothing more than take more money from residents pockets or does it mean every resident gets an exemption as they do in the current zone?, I doubt this altruistic and reasonable move will occur.

mike@cnieu.com

new

As a small business based outside London, we plan to simply turn down every inquiry from inside the M25 from 2019 onwards. The cost and hassle of doing business in London is getting prohibitive. We need tools and equipment on site to work, and we have a cherry picker that would cost £60,000 to replace with a compliant one. We buy the second hand ones that councils keep for 10 years. We can't afford to use it inside the LEZ at £250 per day, so we rent a much more polluting one that is delivered and collected on an HGV. It is not a road vehicle, so the rules don't apply. Where's the sense in that? If you want clean air, don't live or work in London - simples!

livehere

new

Speaking as someone who is kept awake through so many nights by those noisy polluting cherry pickers and cranes, my view is that none of them should be exempt from charges, whether they are carried on HGVs or not. Local councils and their contracted services use noisy polluting diesel equipment round the clock where I live. Electric versions are available, and unless the use of these is made mandatory in the ULEZ residents will continue to suffer from the noise and air pollution.

harry stenchcloth

new

Got any more good advise that the good old motorist will have to pay for in 10yrs time? If diesel vehicles are as bad as you say they are own up to your stupid mistakes of the past, compensate us fools who believed you and ban them all completely. But there's no money in honesty is there, perhaps you should concentrate your minds on keeping traffic moving in London and stop sucking up to your biker mates, they won't pay your wages. What about a cyclists road tax, now there's something sensible to consider, then they would all have to own up.

djstern

new

I have been driving for 58 years and always resisted the choice of a diesel car in preference to a petrol one until I also succumbed three years ago to the Government sponsored messages that I was damaging the environment by sticking with petrol engines. This will be my last car as I am now 75 and only do less than 3,000 miles a year. If the ULEZ is extended to the North Circular, it will hit me quite often, just at an age when I need to use the car more.

I understand the need to reduce nitrous oxide and other pollutants in the air but I believe that recent diesel engines are, in fact, quite clean and a huge improvement on cars built 10+ years ago. Surely it would be fairer to spread out the hit to diesel car owners by only making them liable to the ULEZ charge when they are ten years or older. The write off would then be a lot lower for the scrappage of cars liable for the charge than it would for a three or four year old car, for example. After ten years, all diesel cars would be subject to the ULEZ charge exactly as currently proposed but not all at once in the next year or so. So London would have the same health benefits but just take a bit longer to get there, and the same ten year rule could also apply to buses and taxis.

I think my proposal would be a lot fairer and so gain far more support from current diesel owners than the Mayor's plan.

SmartSan

new

I would like to suggest the way to reduce the emissions and unemployment of homeless
The City could establish the equipment that generates power electricity by cycling and the storage.
So the city could pay for some amount of watt that were generated by cycling. And homeless will afford to pay for their food and shower. And the city will receive cheap electricity with no emissions

livehere

new

This could be done via the pavements, so that the mindless crowds of shopaholics and the commuters could all be making electricity as they move around the streets.

williewonka

new

Here folks !!

Click on this and fill in your details to stop TFL Blaming diesel drivers 100% for 11% of Londons pollution !!!
http://act.fairfueluk.com/lobby/dieselsolution

Takes 2 mins literally !!

livehere

new

This is a complete wimp-out, far to weak, practically useless. Black cabs should NOT be excluded. There is so far one Uber company that has gone all-electric. I have always supported and stuck to black cabs, but will be from now on using that uber company as often as possible. Furthermore, Khan and TfL, without real consultation, are going ahead with Oxford Street pedestrianisation. This means rerouting heavily polluting buses and cabs through the adjacent residential areas. It also means I guess that they will relax regulations on night time noise so that deliveries can take place during the night. These deliveries take place in residential side streets. So residents will be kept awake all night. The Mayor has failed to integrate noise and air pollution strategies, clearly does not give a toss about the thousands of central London residents whose health will be seriouslyundermined and lives made a misery. WHY is he not making lpg or electric mandatory BEFORE he saturates residential areas with buses, taxis, vans and cars.

eugeniy

new

Well, this charges will affect all business in London. It's already expensive, in the restaurants people complaining about the prices. With tax it will be even more pricey as it will effect all delivery vans! If you paying £2.70 for a coffee, will be at least £3. Wow!

What about motorcycle? Couriers, blood couriers and etc, also will be effected! Also people who just commute to work on motorcycles. I don't understand how is it fare?! How about making public transport more reliable, prices going up every year, but not wages! Service getting worse every year, all the strikes and etc.., we'll done TFL! In fact people, that work for TFL making lots of money, compare to some more dangerous jobs or hospitals... Well done! Leave motorcycles alone! We have a bit of joy for our crazy lifestyle, but government want to take everything and suck the last drop of blood from people. How about Chelsea, why didn't you extend congestion charge zone to that area, with I'm sure they can afford it! But you can not, as money ruling this world!

This all things just reminds me of communism, if not worse than that! We are legal slaves, feels like! But do not forget, that without people you government are ZERO!

julia couchman

new

The public should be made aware that wind direction is important. When the wind comes in from northern Europe their pollution is added to ours.

In addition to fuel changes and lets face it all fuel is polluting in different ways, efforts should be made to develop attachments to trap the emissions from the exhaust in a filter. This attachment should be made to fit on existing exhausts. I don't understand why no-one appears to working on this It would be profitable because so many could be sold quite cheaply.

And other practical ideas to cut down pollution;

Bus shelters should be open on the side away from the traffic. Over Christmas New Year the bus stop next to Baker Street Station on Marylebone Road was turned around and we now sit facing the traffic with our feet almost in the gutter exposing us to traffic pollution.

The lights on Marylebone and Euston Road for pedestrian crossings should not trap walkers in the middle of the road on a traffic island. This is especially bad at the Marylebone Lane Crossing and all the ones to the Great Portland street crossing. We need to cross in one go.

Tottenham Court Road, Baker Street,and their counterblow roads should be kept one way. It is most important that traffic is moved north to south and south to north as rapidly as possible.

All delivery vans should be electric including vans that distribute and collect cash.

Hire cars should not be allowed to have blackened windows and should not be allowed to sit waiting for hire. Old fashioned Taxis know the streets, speak English and are far safer for single women. Other hire cars should be reduced in number and maybe only operate in the suburbs where cross town bus routes are inadequate.

livehere

new

They already have filters, but deliveries vehicle owners have ways of getting them disabled to reduce fuel costs.

Robert Munster

new

julia couchman,

Some good ideas there, but the suggestion of straight-across pedestrian crossings would be counterproductive. The current arrangements allow pedestrians to cross without disrupting the flow of traffic. A straight-across crossing would basically mean stopping all the traffic for a minute or so to allow enough time for the slowest pedestrians to cross up to 6 lanes of traffic. This would mean vastly increased congestion and therefore vastly increased emissions. Indeed, just this kind of change has already greatly exacerbated the problem in the first place.

Of course, we could solve both problems at once by installing more pedestrian subways (or footbridges), but they are unfashionable at the moment.

Mike jones

new

What proportion of congestion zone users are residents.This may be the problem as they get 90percent discount. They should be charged the full amount to help reduce congestion and pollution.

LiamO

new

Mike Jones

This is an important point. There are currently around 2.6 million cars registerd in London. If they all receive a discount and continue doing the school run in their 4x4's or shopping locally, then it will further skew the effectiveness of a ULEZ. The result will be that those in the more central areas, who are the ones who will be driving the most modern vehicles, will be either exempted or heavily discounted. That doesn't make sense when you consider that owning a vehicle becomes more of a necessity the further out you go.

It has always been the case that the authorities look for ways to squeeze us for money (London once had a "window" tax), often by blaming us for things that they were responsible for allowing - think Asbestos, Thalidomide, leaded petrol, CFC gases. The thing they don't do is admit their involvement and look for a practical and fair resolution. I would have thought that, instead of worrying about a small amount of older vehicles, which by nature will be annually reducing in number, they should look forward and set a date for the cessation of diesel car manufacture. This would mean that people would have a clear mile-post to work towards rather than expecting compliance in the next 2-3 years. If you don't make them you can't drive them.

williewonka

new

SOLD MY DIESEL CAR YESTERDAY ! 2006 BMW 2006 58K MILES ! (left to me by my father before he died, well maintained)
1-Not because it harms the environment.
2-Not because it it causes " EQUIVELANT TO 9460 deaths every year" (whatever equivelant means-TFL refuse to reply to my requests on facts)
3- Not because I want to get on Buses/trains or taxis or airplanes (all of which are more polluting)

4-ALL BECAUSE- TFL have devalued my car by at least 35-40% based on lies.....thought I would get rid now to save something ! My father has this car from new , he bought this low mileage car as he was told diesel was the way to go by the Government. It wanted for nothing. My father grew up in in an era where we all had coal fires, stoves, backyard fires AND DIESELS... Yet as soon as sadiq khan comes to power "its bad". YES it is bad (diesel) BUT its only responsible for 11% of londons drivers causing pollution not the 100 % its being blamed for, how come heathrow, diesel trains, cranes, generators, muck trucks.....etc etc even black cabs get away with this? Hope you are happy SADIQ KHAN... Cannot wait until your next election...... On your bike...

mjt49@outlook.com

new

Dispense with all the zones, just get all the unlicensed, uninsured and unmaintained vehicles off the roads.

mjt49@outlook.com

new

Further to my previous rant I forgot to mention that there should be a concerted effort to ensure that all traffic flows at its most efficient, safe speed, not deliberately slowed down by speed bumps, badly sequenced traffic lights, doing away with bus pull-ins and diversions lengthening journeys. All of these increase pollution as well as wasting fuel and peoples time.

ptr

new

Pollution seems to be at it's highest in areas where there are new cycle lanes, bus lanes and a reduction on space for all other vehicles. Keep traffic moving and pollution will fall.

deedee

new

We have a desi car as thought better for environment and cannot afford a new one a scrapage scheme will not make up short fall
It is really unfair on working class Londoners who do not have the money to buy a newer car and live in the zone

julia couchman

new

Robert Munster! Perhaps if you were to think about it again, if you stopped traffic at the same time on both sides of pedestrian island on for instance Marylebone Road, you aren't stopping the traffic any more than you would be if you stopped one lane at a time. In fact as people didn't have to stop and re start walking when half way across the road, the overall time would be a few seconds quicker!

It would certainly be good for pedestrian lungs.

Then you could create a situation where all the pedestrian crossing times were co-ordinated so the traffic once restarted just flows on to the end. To a certain extent this does happen already.

Pages

Showing 51-100 of 105 comments