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
2 months ago (2:35 PM)



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

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.


I agree in principle but I believe that the general design of pedestrian crossings on major roads is flawed. There has been a tendency in recent years to build lateral islands in the middle of the road which funnel pedestrians into a right turn on the island and then out through a left turn to the other side of the crossing. This means that pedestrians are passing each other on a small island. This is particularly counterproductive for wheelchair users, people pushing buggies/prams and the elderly. I believe it would be better to have a wide open space marked out by black & white stripes which allows people to cross quickly in a straight line.
The light phases should also be smarter so that the cycle is only a complete one when a pedestrian pushes the button on the post. In this way there would be no pedestrian part of the cycle during quiet times, or at night, when traffic is often stopped while no-one is crossing. At present the lights are on a continual cycle but the buttons on the posts do nothing as they have no influence on the cycle.

julia couchman

Many thanks on expanding my comment to include how important it is for the handicapped in wheel chairs, the baby buggies and push chairs. I would like to add, cyclists pushing their bicycles, people using scooters, people with carry cases, people enlarged because they have knapsacks on their backs, people trying to hold onto their small children, the blind with a dog and other people who find road crossings difficult. The space is tight on those islands. The system where there is an island barricading people inside it so they are safe from traffic but then creating a situation where the pedestrians have to cross each other to set off to the other side of the road is a nightmare for the nibble footed and I imagine almost impossible for anyone else. Society at the moment is anti vehicle and pro cyclist and it is omitting to consider the plight of pedestrians who if the streets are too difficult will take a car or if they can afford it a taxi.


I agree with the comments that are asking questions about honest data which may be able to tell which gases and particulates are the ones needing strict control, and which energy sources are the most polluting.
When fossil fuels are being burned, pollutants are formed. This will include gas cookers, gas boilers, household fires, and especially wood burning stoves.
As usual, only vehicle emissions are being addressed.
Reducing congestion would help a lot. Cars sitting at idle in stationery jams are more polluting than ones completing their journeys. Probably,(diesel powered) taxis spend far more of their time stationery at idle, than actually on route with a fare.
Unfortunately, there does not appear to be definitive knowledge to help at the moment.
A recent survey in U.S.A. cities stated that vehicle emissions included small particulates, around 2.5 microns, which caused all sorts of health hazards. Because this survey was in America, the vehicle emissions blamed came from petrol engines, because they have a very small number of diesel cars, which have been prevented from competing in the market by strict emissions.Diesel particulates generally are much larger in diameter.
At the moment, the drive to be seen to do something is overreaching.
It may be too difficult to determine accurate data, but surely we should try.This is not just a London issue, it is worldwide.


If the ULEZ is all about emissions and pollution. Why are all the boats on the river and all the planes that fly over the area not included? yet you include motorcycles, that don't pollute. And you want to charge electric vehicles that cost more than £40k extra road tax. I don't think you have any idea about the problem. You are just looking at money making schemes. But it seems your team does not have any experience in this field. I think a team of junior school children could do better. And why are you changing the sequencing of traffic lights in London all of a sudden? perhaps in the hope that everyone believes your crap about too much traffic and pollution. We know your game!

thomas hayward

I think that in central London there are no need for cars I believe that they are the main cause of pollution the only motorised vehicles that need to run are buses and delivery vans for trade and transport otherwise there are no need for cars there is the London underground with stations everywhere and they are all within walking distance of each other also there are buses there are several bus stops on every street going to everywhere around central London and even outer London and then there is the dlr, London over ground and the national rail so why is there a need for cars they could really solve the massive problem of pollution and they would only be gone in central London not the rest of London.


In principle I agree in that the public transport system in central London renders it unnecessary to use a car to get around IN London, and I would suspect that most people living in London would not drive into the centre out of choice as far as possible (I certainly avoid it like the plague!). However the issue for the ULEZ (especially the expanded version) is that people own cars in London not to get around London itself but because they have a need to go to places OUTSIDE London that are served very poorly, or not at all, by public transport. These people would be caught by the scheme if they owned an older car and would have to pay a huge amount of money merely for driving the few miles a year they need simply to get out of the zone, even if otherwise they try to use more environmentally friendly options where possible. Why should these people bear the brunt of the charges if they happen to own an older car that they need to do only a very low number of miles?

peter caton

I'm think it's a shame once again motorists are being blamed for the pollution as most of the buses etc are the real culprit and the traffic clogging cycle lanes, one mustn't also not forget that it was government who advised motorists to buy diesel cars ,shows how poor their advice was not surprising as it was labour in power at the time if I'm not mistaken.

Talk London

Hi all,

Many thanks for your continued discussion on Talk London on this issue.

While policy officers are periodically checking this discussion, the main way of sharing your views on the ULEZ proposals is by taking part in the current consultation on the Transport for London Consultation Portal. The survey is open until 25 June 2017. This consultation covers the proposal to introduce the ULEZ early, in 2019. Feedback from Londoners will inform a report by Transport for London to the Mayor, after which he will take a decision on whether or not to introduce the ULEZ early.

A further statutory consultation will follow in Autumn regarding the possible expansion of the ULEZ to the North and South Circular Roads.

Here is a timetable of all the consultation stages. You can read a review of all the ULEZ and Clean Air consultations to-date here.

Talk London Community Manager


To include motorbikes at all is ridiculous they only account for under 1% of any pollution and should not be charged for riding anywhere in London, especially as it is hard enough having one and having to worry if it will be there when you come out of work. The Mayor should step up his game and do more for motorcyclists not charge them by penalising them the same as cars or vans. They filter through traffic and do not cause traffic jams.
Expanding the ULEZ to include the South and NORTH circular will mean the whole of London will have to pay £12.50 a day every day, have you any idea how many hundreds of thousands of drivers this will affect some not so well off as others? Terrible idea and poorly thought out. its like another tax on motorists.

The Cyclist


Black taxis are worse than anyone of them put together how come an Exemption for them is it because they have a bigger lobby group? How on earth can you charge a motorbike or a car but not a Black Deisel Taxi please don't say youre gonna clamp down on them later it doesn't answer the madness ......Absolutely madness

mark elbourn

Mark Elbourn
Can anyone advise me. I live and work in the low emission zone and need to replace my 15 year old van. If i purchase a new euro 6 diesel van ( this could cost me £ 25000.00 ) will i still be able to drive it in London in say ten years time, i will need to work for another ten years before retirement and need to make the right decision now !!


My food business, based in Highbury, has two diesel engined delivery vans going into central London every day, spewing out filthy exhaust fumes, polluting the air, and costing us £5,500 a year in congestion charges . I would dearly love to trade them in for cleaner vehicles that are c charge exempt. All electric is no good though. They would have to be hybrid vans that could power the refrigeration. But here's the thing - do you think anyone makes such a van? Not a single van manufacturer. Mercedes had a concept model on their website, but decided not to make it. TfL's attitude to this, with all their invective about diesel vans being the main culprit in polluting the air, is a mere shrug of the shoulders. I would have thought there would be some encouragement to put such vehicles into production. Very frustrating!


Why penalise people who don't use their cars much!
I cycle everywhere hence my 14 year old car has lots of life left.
I generate much less pollution than a newer car driving more mileage.
Manufacturing new cars damages the climate.

Give say 10 days credit to cyclists.

Definitely ban diesel. As a cyclist, I can barely breath around them. I have been saying for years that they are anything but clean.


I agree with you - the charge should not unduly penalise people like you who make a massive effort to get around in an environmentally friendly manner most of the time, but need to drive for a small number of miles in an older car.

Unfortunately as I've made the comment so many times on this web site that a flat charge simply targets the wrong people and won't help the problem and have received absolutely no acknowledgement from TfL or the Mayor's office that this criticism has been heard that I have little faith that it has, or will be. I suspect strongly that they have already decided on a flat charging system (probably because it is the cheapest to implement) and therefore won't listen to those of us who are saying that a flat charge is completely unfair - and indeed won't even help the problem. Why should a person driving a big 4x4 that happens to be 2006 registered and Euro IV compliant pay nothing to drive 10,000 miles a year when someone driving an older "city" car with a small engine but was registered in 2005 and is only Euro III compliant pay potentially a huge amount of money to do only a few tens of miles when clearly that would not pollute anywhere near as much? And what incentive has the 4x4 driver got to buy a smaller car or drive less, which WOULD help reduce air pollution? Absolutely none!


It's been a year now that Londoners have answered the survey about air polution, and so far I can see nothing except "consultations" for 2019 plans. With the hot summer days ahead of us, I'm getting tired of all the pollution I'm forced to breath every single day for the pleasure of a minority who prefer to use their car in Central London.
I live on Long Lane, close to SMithfield market, and I work in St Pancras area. Everyday I walk to work because it's cheap, it's good for my health, it's quick and nice. But the more I see the amount of cars, buses, lorries and traffic jams and the more I'm thinking it might be a bad idea for my health.
London is home to 8+M people, the richest city in Europe and yet it's air quality is the *worst* even compared to city like Paris or Rome. On top of that, with the new mayor elected I was really hopping things would start to change, but I'm extremely disappointed to see nothing happening, talks for 2019 plans while Londoners are breathing this filthy air everyday.
Paris has banned Diesel cars older than 10 years (banned!), closed one of its main boulevard to make it pedestrian and open more and more pedestrian street everyday... while London still look like a 20th century city where cars are king and pollution is something inconvenient for politics instead of being the heart of local policy. Very sad...



The worst aspect of the ULEZ proposals is the plan to lift restrictions on all-night deliveries. Residents need to sleep at night. Where I live, we would get a constant stream of incredibly noisy deliveries right outside our windows. The so-called 'Quieter' Deliveries Code and the Quieter Deliveries technology can never reduce deliveries noise enough to prevent deliveries from waking residents up. Thousands of London residents will suffer.



One relatively easy fix would be to encourage drivers to switch off their engines while stationary. I wonder whether there could be an education campaign and/or signs put up to that effect. Outside my house, for instance, there are often people sitting in cars texting or just hanging out with their engines on - often for ages. Just belching fumes out into the atmosphere. And we live right opposite a primary school so their playground is affected by this.

Talk London


Hi Balletnut

Thank you for your suggestions.

Idling Action London share your views and are currently running a campaign with local authorities and vulunteers, to encourage drivers to switch off their engines when parked.

Talk London


Showing 101-120 of 120 comments