Khan Can

[yossarian247]

1 minute ago, Roy124 said:

In a way that could be worse.  A bit like the Brown initiative that had people switching to diesel  only to have diesel demonised in turn. 

If people upgraded old diesels (mine was an 05 diesel) to Euro 5 only to find them ulezed a couple of years down the road they would have been doubly dischuffed.

Perhaps so, but then in a few years the ULEZ charge will almost certainly be extended to include Euro 6, then to all ICE powered vehicles, and so on. I think it would be naive to think that once all of the Euro 5 (and older) vehicles have been scrapped, then TfL will say 'job's a goodun' and tear the cameras down. 

[Roy124]

You're a realist.  

Like EV.  There will be no way that rurals with off road charging, solar and Battery banks paying peanuts for charging (ignoring capital costs) will be able to maintain  the benefit while townies pay through the nose for Highways charging.

[Cyker]

1 hour ago, yossarian247 said:

Perhaps so, but then in a few years the ULEZ charge will almost certainly be extended to include Euro 6, then to all ICE powered vehicles, and so on. I think it would be naive to think that once all of the Euro 5 (and older) vehicles have been scrapped, then TfL will say 'job's a goodun' and tear the cameras down. 

Actually it won't - The ULEZ won't exist in a couple years time: The millions poured into the ULEZ infrastructure will be pivoted to be used for Per Mile Charging, which will affect ALL vehicles.

And by then it'll be too late for the idiots who are supporting KHAAAAAAN saying what he's doing is good and swallowing his bull about it being about pollution to complain.

It's like Brexit all over again - People believed the same sort of transparent lies, e.g. that it was for the good of the country and we'd all be better off and could take control of our borders and destiny - They let themselves be sold a dream - and now the reality that everyone else was telling them would happen that they ignored or denied has come to pass, they're now protesting this wasn't what they voted for. But it's too late; We can't go back, and it's happening again with this.

The fact the people as intelligent as anchorman have actually bought the lies that this has anything to do with emissions just shows how doomed we are to go down this route of shooting ourselves in both feet over and over again.

 

[anchorman]

1 hour ago, Roy124 said:

In a way that could be worse.  A bit like the Brown initiative that had people switching to diesel  only to have diesel demonised in turn. 

If people upgraded old diesels (mine was an 05 diesel) to Euro 5 only to find them ulezed a couple of years down the road they would have been doubly dischuffed.

Why can I drive into London on Saturday morning without paying the congestion charge?  Can I drive round all day for free provided I don't leave and reenter?

Exactly.  My 62 plate RAV with a D-CAT was a hair’s breadth off being a Euro 6 but it wasn’t and thats that.  You have to have a cut off point and you have to have a cut off date which is never going to be popular if we prevaricate for ever more.  That was when I changed a perfectly good car (in the day) for a newer one with an E6 engine and Burnham keeps holding back for fear of upsetting folk.  I’d put an end to the lot by 2025 nationwide.  

[yossarian247]

The irony is of course that the air quality in many UK cities is now the cleanest it's been for about 150 years. I'm just old enough to have walked to school in the 70s and 80s alongside a main road where you could pretty much chew the unburnt petrol fumes and see the blue haze coming out of the exhausts! 

[anchorman]

Just now, yossarian247 said:

The irony is of course that the air quality in many UK cities is now the cleanest it's been for about 150 years. I'm just old enough to have walked to school in the 70s and 80s alongside a main road where you could pretty much chew the unburnt petrol fumes and see the blue haze coming coming out of the exhausts! 

I remember it clearly.  I used to crawl in traffic with the stench of cars on choke.  

[anchorman]

15 minutes ago, Cyker said:

 

The fact the people as intelligent as anchorman 

 

🥰

[Cyker]

9 minutes ago, yossarian247 said:

The irony is of course that the air quality in many UK cities is now the cleanest it's been for about 150 years. I'm just old enough to have walked to school in the 70s and 80s alongside a main road where you could pretty much chew the unburnt petrol fumes and see the blue haze coming coming out of the exhausts! 

That's another thing - The car fleet would have improved naturally over time as old cars break and new ones get cycled in; This is just trying to force it to happen on an accelerated timetable, but it's really just making it harder for that process to happen as it's literally taking money away from people who are on older vehicles, making it harder for them to save for newer vehicles.

Classic poorer get poorer and richer get richer economy mechanics.

I was lucky as I had been saving for an EV in the first place, but getting the Mk4 has wiped out the majority of that fund and royally  my long term financial plans - The likelyhood of me getting an EV, and for that matter my own house in London, are now vanishingly small. But at this rate I'll probably follow the exodus of people leaving London in a few years time anyway, depending on how my employment holds, so maybe that'll be less of a problem...!

 

 

[Cyker]

9 minutes ago, anchorman said:

🥰

Hey, I may not agree with your opinion but I still respect you as a person

(Largely in part because you're still here, and also as you're the only person on here fearless and/or mental enough to dismantle a brand new car!  )

 

[Yugguy1970]

We watched Guy Martin in Columbia, and they are trying to sort the country out and one of the cities they completely pedestrianise it at the weekends.

I kind of like that idea.

[yossarian247]

11 minutes ago, Cyker said:

That's another thing - The car fleet would have improved naturally over time as old cars break and new ones get cycled in; This is just trying to force it to happen on an accelerated timetable, but it's really just making it harder for that process to happen as it's literally taking money away from people who are on older vehicles, making it harder for them to save for newer vehicles.

 

 

 

Yes, most Euro 4 vehicles have already gone, and many Euro 5 will be reaching the end of their natural lives and being scrapped in the next few years. No need for fines and a network of cameras, it'll happen anyway. There can't be many environmental problems which if you sit back and do nothing they fix themselves anyway, but this is one of them. 

[Bper]

Sadiq Khan, has suggested that the home counties adopt their own scrappage scheme's. The £2000 grant offered for scrappage of non compliant vehicle's under the Ulta low emission zone has raised many questions on how this will effect those on lower incomes who cannot afford to change their cars. What is a fair amount that should be offered to help those who will struggle under this scheme.?

[Big_D]

And where is this £2000 going to come from?? Our pockets of course. Khaaaaan has enough cash from the ULEZ to fund his own scrappage scheme.

In this world where we are so environmentally conscious, why get rid of a perfectly good car because it doesn't meet specific requirements??

And as @Bper says how this will effect those on lower incomes who cannot afford to change their cars

[Cyker]

I had a letter from my MP saying the Scrappage Scheme fund is being increased and extended to apply to more people, but didn't elaborate on what that meant. Worse, apparently this won't kick in until 1 week before the ULEZ expansion kicks in... so basically it's useless, since they're unlikely to be able to process applications in time if there's any significant takeup, and the long lead times on new cars would mean they're effectively paying for their own scrappage payment!

Total waste of money as you say - It only benefits people rich enough to buy a new car or people stupid enough to take on finance on a new car they can't actually afford, unless part of the change is to allow it to be used to buy 2nd hand cars as well as new ones (Unlikely, but watch out for flying pigs...!). Would have been far better spend improving the public transport network, or at least improving working conditions so they don't keep going on strike so much!

 

 

[Big_D]

7 minutes ago, Cyker said:

Total waste of money as you say - It only benefits people rich enough to buy a new car or people stupid enough to take on finance on a new car they can't actually afford

So true

[Bper]

 

How are these people allowed to stay in office when they make these statements?

Sadiq Khans office has been accused of trying to 'silence' scientists over publishing research that showed his ultra-low emissions zone (Ulez) policy had 'insignificant' effect on pollution, as protestors brought traffic to a standstill on Saturday to fight against expansion of the scheme.

The claims were made following a series of emails between Shirley Rodrigues, the London Mayor's deputy for environment and energy and Professor Frank Kelly, director of Imperial's Environmental Research Group, which has received £800,000 of funding from the London Mayor's office since 2021.

In the emails, seen by The Telegraph, Ms Rodrigues said she was disappointed that Imperial College had  published a study by the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering that showed Ulez cut nitrogen dioxide by less than three per cent and had achieved an insignificant impact on ozone and particulate matter.

Sadiq Khan has said that people that object to the ULEZ are racists and Covid deniers.

[Roy124]

48 minutes ago, Bper said:

Sadiq Khan has said that people that object to the ULEZ are racists and Covid deniers.

We obviously got it wrong.  I thought it was taxi drivers, delivery drivers, workers who can't afford better vehicles 

[Cyker]

Ugh the man is a lying snake. He's exactly the kind of person I hate intensely, cloaking himself in good intentions and pitting us against each other, even when we know his agenda is primarily to screw more money out of as many as he can to cover his financial mismanagement. Doesn't give a damn about the negative effects it will have on peoples' lives, as long as it benefits him.

To be fair we share some of the blame - Can't really make fun of the Americans voting in a literal psychopath any more, when we keep doing the same thing!

 

[Bper]

11 hours ago, Cyker said:

Ugh the man is a lying snake. He's exactly the kind of person I hate intensely, cloaking himself in good intentions and pitting us against each other, even when we know his agenda is primarily to screw more money out of as many as he can to cover his financial mismanagement. Doesn't give a damn about the negative effects it will have on peoples' lives, as long as it benefits him.

To be fair we share some of the blame - Can't really make fun of the Americans voting in a literal psychopath any more, when we keep doing the same thing!

 

Funny really, many of the MSM say with 380 million Americans, are Biden and Trump the best they can offer. Ironically, we have 70 million in this country that we know about and whilst we didn't vote for Richie Rishi Sunak, who have we got at the next General Election, Sunak or Sir Keir flip flop? what a choice. Heaven help us all.

[Haliotis]

Frankly, I think this Net Zero is nonsense.  I can remember when most residential chimneys belched out smoke from coal or coke fires, factories and office blocks burned coal (although some were gas-fired) to run their manufacturing operations and heating - and there were a heck of a lot more of them, then. Buses and lorries belched out black clouds of diesel (Derv) smoke. Locomotives and ships burned coal. Even a modest car, with inefficient carburettor and poor combustion could only reach about 30mpg - as did my nine horsepower Standard 9.   And millions of tons of ordnance was burned in two world wars.  Yes, we did sometimes get smogs, but the climate was generally stable.

Now, and very suddenly, we are supposed to be at a deadly crossroads with global warming, despite the technological advances that have cleaned up a lot of the pollution problems.  To my mind, there are four main contributors to our problems.

1. Runaway growth in population of the planet.

2. Insane. Rapid devastation of the forests - the lungs of our planet.

3. Hundreds of airliners pumping CO2 into the upper atmosphere 24/7.  These aircraft are kept in the air as much as possible, because their highest cost is when on the ground.

4. The ageing Sun.  The Sun is about 4 billion years old, and roughly half way through its life span.  As it turns hydrogen into helium it will gradually expand and swallow up the solar system.  This will not happen like throwing a switch - it will be a long process over time.  So, is there not a chance that some of our problems are due to these changes in the Sun?  The so-called experts of climate change seem not to have included this possibility.  Are the powers-that-be using Net Zero to fuel their own agenda and have things their way whilst they still can?  Like others, I just have my own opinions, but something certainly does not add up!

[Yugguy1970]

Sorry, I can't buy in to this modern trend of mocking science that you don't agree with.

You wouldn't call someone who'd spent years at medical school and years specialising in a specific field a "so-called expert brain surgeon."

[Haliotis]

Don’t get me wrong, Guy, I’m not mocking science.  But experts can be wrong as well as right, as history has proven.

And regarding ULEZ, Khan is expanding it to cut down pollution.  But, if you pay £12.50, it’s OK to enter the zone. Where does cash cure the respiratory organs of all the population inside the area?

We also hear experts at odds with each other, one denying the other’s “science”.   Even those who are not experts can appreciate that both camps cannot be right. 

One argument I heard is that, if we take too much CO2 out of the atmosphere, plant life could well suffer on an epic scale and we would be worse off than we are now.  Nature is a delicate thing, and any imbalance caused by humans can result in horrific consequences.

[Yugguy1970]

The great majority of scientists and studies show a link between human activity and CO2 levels. 

CO2 is a global warming gas, this is basic science in that it traps reflected sunlight.

It makes me think of the MMR autism thing.  A great many major studies show no link between the mmr jab and autism.  One small, flawed, discredited study does.  People latch onto that one study because it matches their view then use the Gallileo fallacy to try and justify it.

 

[Haliotis]

It’s a subject upon which many will never agree.  Myself, I am a great believer in Nature.  What we cannot sort out, in the long term Nature will, and she has more time than we mortal humans.  We need to remember that planet Earth was not created for the human race - we just happened by accident, and we could just as easily unhappen.  It will not bother Nature!

[CPN]

1 hour ago, Haliotis said:

It’s a subject upon which many will never agree.  Myself, I am a great believer in Nature.  What we cannot sort out, in the long term Nature will, and she has more time than we mortal humans.  We need to remember that planet Earth was not created for the human race - we just happened by accident, and we could just as easily unhappen.  It will not bother Nature!

Couldn't have put it better myself!

This planet of ours has been doing what it has been doing for millions of years and it is outstandingly arrogant of the human race to think that we can have any bearing on that outcome.

We need to feel a little more humble when it comes to working with nature and not so self-important!