MSE News: £10 London T-charge comes in on Monday - what you need to know

wymondham

aleph_0 wrote: »

The pollution is reduced through people deciding to use a less polluting vehicle in order to avoid the charge. It should encourage early replacement of high polluting vehicles for business entering central London every day, or for firms with multiple vehicles, they might ensure the less polluting vehicles are used for central London deliveries. It may also result in owners of more polluting private motor vehicles decide to walk, cycle or use public transport for their journey instead.

This wont work. The majority who use polluting cars/vans are traders who will continue to come in, only now they will pass on the extra charge to their clients. This does not reduce pollution.

aleph_0

wymondham wrote: »

This wont work. The majority who use polluting cars/vans are traders who will continue to come in, only now they will pass on the extra charge to their clients. This does not reduce pollution.

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/environment/air-quality-consultation-phase-two/user_uploads/report-to-the-mayor_final.pdf

2.4.2
Table 1: Approximate number of vehicles affected by the ES
Vehicle type Affected vehicles per day
Cars 7,000
Vans 2,000
HGVs 400
Non-TfL buses and coaches, including
minbuses
600
Powered three-wheelers and quadricycles <50

It seems unlikely your suggestion is true. Feel free to find evidence supporting your case, but TfL's modelling shows it's mainly cars that are polluting, and the numbers are low enough that a trader would put themselves at a competitive disadvantage if they tried to directly pass on the charges (indirectly, it's possible that the general cost-of-business is higher, through upgrading vehicles more frequently). Many competing traders will have already voluntarily ensured they have a clean vehicle, though.

If anything, the weakness of the T-charge is it's more a publicity stunt rather than making a serious dent. The ULEZ will be the real step-change.

aleph_0

michaels wrote: »

I know it is cheap and easy to have a blanket cut off but I am sure there are some post 2006 cars that are a lot 'dirtier' than other pre 2006 cars. I wish they could use a method that reflects actual pollution levels rather than something arbitrary that may in some cases drive counter-productive behavior. For example those driving a super efficient Audi A2 or Honda insight might end up switching to a much more polluting 2007 petrol or diesel gaz-guzzling 4x4 in order to avoid the charge whilst increasing their pollution by an order of magnitude.

The cut off is actually vehicles meeting the Euro 4 standard, the media have simplified the story. The standard came into effect in 2005, so cars purchased after then are certainly compliant, but all vehicles meeting Euro 4 are fine. It looks like the later Audi A2's are included here. A bit of digging suggests that TfL are having to do some manual updating of their database for early Euro 4 vehicles.

The CO2 observation is reasonable, however the biggest concern right now is NOx and PM pollution. I don't think TfL have released a breakdown of vehicle by previous standards, but I think it's unlikely that there will be many people switching upwards in CO2 emissions.

Mids_Costcutter

redux wrote: »

That isn't a solution, and sounds rather closer to the complacent arrogance of these people letting themselves think it's somebody else's fault.

For most of this country's urban areas, government statistics show pollution is gradually improving.

Not in London.

Yes air pollution is falling overall in the UK, but many cities are still exceeding safe limits for particulates and NOx. At least London is taking action.