London has been subject to congestion charging and the ultra-low emission zones (ULEZ) for some time. Now, however, the outer London Boroughs of Hillingdon, Harrow, Bexley and Croydon are being included in the scheme. They are not happy. Conservative councillors in those boroughs have vowed to oppose this ULEZ extension.
So, what is the problem? The charge is £12.50 per day for vehicles that don’t qualify for exemption. Those owning older vehicles are complaining that they are being disadvantaged.
What are those vehicles? It appears that they are very old diesel and petrol vehicles.
My old ULEZ compliant Hyundai
I own a 12-year-old Hyundai. It has travelled over 129,000 miles, and it has been a good and reliable car, carrying probably tons of glass ‘objets d’art’ in its lifetime. It’s worth under £1,000, yet it is ULEZ compliant, so what sort of vehicle isn’t compliant?
I would suggest that they are old taxis, old vans and old 4WDs that are either petrol powered and built before 2005 or diesel powered before 2015. These are not vehicles in their first flush of youth.
I can empathise with the owners, but maybe they are not looking at the big picture.
The big picture is the pollution in London AND also here on the Kent Coast. The pollution drifts down here from London with the prevailing winds. What is being asked is that the polluter pays. These vehicles were state of the art, 10 to 20 years ago, but times have moved on.
What is the case for the government of London extending the ULEZ area?
- ‘The ULEZ is highly targeted at getting the most polluting vehicles off our streets. Expanding the ULEZ to cover most of London will strike the best balance between maximising the health and environmental benefits for Londoners while minimising the cost to drivers, especially as the cost of living increases. Already around 85% of vehicles seen driving in outer London meet the ULEZ standards and nearly half of London households do not own a car but are disproportionately feeling the damaging consequences that polluting vehicles cause.’
- The existing ULEZ scheme caused a 50% reduction in nitrogen oxide pollution and a 5 times faster reduction in pollution than elsewhere in the UK. In Outer London (the area for the expanded ULEZ), half a million people suffer from asthma. Public Health England estimated in 2018 that between 26,000 and 39,000 people die annually because of pollution and poor air quality in the UK. Transport includes aviation, which forms only a minor part of the total pollution caused by transport. The sources of transport pollution, according to a UK government report, are:
It is interesting to note that pollution from domestic transport has reduced by around 38%, HGVs by 5%, and buses by 60%, but pollution from vans has increased by 33%. Online deliveries may account for this, so our tendency to buy online is causing us all additional harm.
- No one appears to doubt the effectiveness of ULEZ. In fact, a report issued by Imperial College, carried out between 2018 and 2020 and published in November 2021, stated: ‘ULEZ…works best when combined with a broader set of policies that reduce emissions across sectors like bus and taxi retrofitting, support for active and public transport’ (Dr Marc Stettler, Dept of Environmental Engineering)
- A case study was quoted by Public Health England on work done by Brighton to reduce the emissions from buses in Brighton between 2013 and 2018. Retrofitting the bus fleet and acquiring lower emission Euro 6 vehicles reduced fleet emissions by 75% and cut overall roadside NOx emissions by 25%. In contrast, the Stagecoach East bus fleet in 2023 comprises around 250 vehicles, of which only 30% are Euro 6 or ULEZ compliant (unofficial Stagecoach SE fleet list). If the Brighton model of retrofitted buses under 10 years old were undertaken, around 50% of the fleet would be ULEZ compliant.
Arguments against those reluctant to get rid of their old polluting vehicles
- Cost of Living: Running a more efficient car or van will save money, and as I have shown, they are available at all prices.
- Can’t sell the existing car as it is worthless: I sold my car on the open market, and even scrap prices are high at the moment. TFL is running scrappage schemes for certain vehicles. So this argument aired by the BBC, of all people, and other more reactionary news media falls away.
- Exemptions: Some users will be given an exemption, but this is a matter for negotiation with TFL.
- Attrition: As vehicles get older, why prolong their lives by patching them up? Cutting air pollution provides substantial benefits above and beyond more fuel efficient vehicles.
Make us zero emission, but not yet …
The four outer London boroughs that are against the extension of ULEZ are not looking at the big picture. They are intending to use taxpayers’ money to fight on the grounds of lawfulness, not utility in cutting air pollution.
No doubt they have all signed up to being zero emission areas by 2030 (that’s only seven years away, dear leaders). Apparently, however, they don’t want TFL doing something about it in their patch. Perhaps they are being a little parochial. After all, climate change affects wealthy areas as well as poorer ones.
Instead of working with TFL to work out a scheme so that the old bangers are taken off the road, they pick a fight with TFL, no doubt to grub around for a few votes.
There are now 10 outer London boroughs expressing doubts, ranging from concern to outright hostility. Much of this can be put down to social media campaigns, or a negotiating ploy to obtain better scrappage/retrofit terms.
In short, the position of the outer London boroughs opposing the extension of ULEZ is that of Saint Augustine: ‘O Lord, make me chaste, but not yet!’
What I find sad is that we know that pollution from vehicles is a public health issue, we know that we must cut carbon emissions and that operating more efficient vehicles is one way to achieve lower emissions, so why defend the operation of the inefficient?
The motorist’s view
Part of the problem is that motorists do not see care of the environment and air pollution as a problem. In the 2022 RAC survey of driver concerns, the environment came joint 13th alongside the availability and cost of parking.
I think there are quite a few people who still have not got the message about pollution and climate change!
We cannot keep banging on about being world leaders in cutting pollution and carbon emissions if we don’t take the hard decisions about cutting vehicle emissions.
A grandad from Harrow
The situation is not helped by local newspapers trying to grab a headline to increase their failing circulation. This is what the Harrow Times reported:
‘A grandad from Harrow says the Mayor of London’s expansion of ULEZ into the borough means that he will have to pay £12.50 every time he leaves his driveway.’ The paper shows an irate Mr Paul Savage next to his silver car. It looks like a Chrysler 300c powered by, you guessed it, a V8. Mr Savage complains that ‘he doesn’t use his car much’ and that ‘he will have to buy a smaller car’. He also says that his ‘grandchildren will have to go to school by public transport’.
Well, Mr Savage, that’s what ULEZ is all about.
It is about using more fuel efficient and green vehicles, and better still, using public transport. Why not keep the V8 and do most of your journeys by bus? This won’t cost you anything, because you are entitled to a bus pass. Or if you have a 60+ Oyster Card you can go free on the tube and tram systems. I know Harrow has a tube line. The savings you make can pay for the ULEZ charge when you take your V8 out for a run.
So, things aren’t so bad, Mr Savage. It just means you and your family will have to be a little more active, which is better for everyone. It’s a win-win, all round, for the environment and Mr Savage’s wellbeing. Your grandchildren will thank you in the years to come, when you and your V8 have gone the way of all things. Hurrah for ULEZ!
The right to pollute?
This is what the leader of the Borough of Harrow is defending: the right of someone to use his V8 whenever he wants and not pay for the pollution it causes.
But opposing ULEZ is not going to cover the leaders of Hillingdon, Harrow, Bexley and Croydon in glory. It will not make life better for the generations to come. It is an entirely self-serving, short-sighted publicity stunt to gain votes in the forthcoming local elections from the owners of old cars.
It’s high time everyone realised that by opposing schemes to reduce carbon and other emissions, they are playing with fire.
We’ve all seen how our procrastination and not doing the right thing have cost us dearly. We saw very powerful winter storms, extreme summer heat waves and flooding late last year and early this year. The worst may be yet to come.
I do hope that the citizens of Bexley, Bromley, Hillingdon and Harrow do not have cause to rue the day when their leaders put their own political survival above measures to protect everyone’s wellbeing.
