The EU has sent a written warning to the UK government, stating that the UK exceeds acceptable pollution levels in its cities. If the UK does not begin to resolve this soon, the EU may see fit to begin issuing fines. Rather than admit culpability for past policy decisions that led to this situation, in a month’s time the government will announce a series of measures to tackle the crisis. Nearly all of them will penalise drivers of high-polluting cars.
The government is set to announce strict new measures on diesel drivers shortly, including a ‘toxin tax’ (or T-charge) on those driving in up to 35 locations around the UK (10 cities and 25 towns). The tax could be as much as £20 per day for the worst polluted areas.
London leads the way
The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has announced this week that the T-charge for drivers of pre-Euro 4 engine cars in central London will be £10 per day, starting from October. The charges will run alongside the existing congestion charge of £11.50, meaning that drivers of cars classified as “polluting” will pay £21.50 a day to drive around central London. The aim is to improve the city’s air quality by discouraging the owners of high emissions vehicles to drive into central London.
Nor is that all. An ultra low emission zone (ULEZ) will replace the T-charge as of April 2019. At that time, the fee for pre-Euro 4 vehicles will increase to £12.50, meaning that drivers’ total daily fee will reach £24.
If the London Mayor has his way, the ULEZ will expand in 2020, with taxis, buses, HGVs and coaches all incurring charges. Some will be charged up to £100 to drive in the zone under the proposed scheme. Khan believes that this will cut nitrous oxide levels by up to 50% by 2020. ULEZ will be the first ultra low emission zone in the world.
Both initiatives intend to ‘price out’ drivers of high emissions vehicles from central London. As many as 10,000 vehicles are likely to be affected by the T-charge.
Government plan
Environment Secretary Andrea Leadsom will announce the government’s plan to tackle the problem in the next month. It is expected to contain a range of measures to combat urban pollution, including taxes for driving into towns and cities and increased parking charges. The aim is to discourage polluting vehicles from entering cities. Areas such as Birmingham, Southampton and Leeds are on the government hit list.
The measures could even include an enforced ban on private diesel cars and commercial vehicles entering cities during the “peak hours of the day.”
Not long ago, the government proclaimed diesel cars to be a greener and more environmentally friendly option than petrol cars. It encouraged consumers to buy them instead of their petrol equivalents. As such, the new plans are likely to create widespread outrage amongst diesel motorists, who feel betrayed by the government.
The new regulations will likely be enforced via a camera network similar to those already operating in London. The investment needed to create these new urban networks of anti-pollution cameras will run into the millions.
PetrolPrices.com members say ‘no’ to taxes
In an online poll conducted by PetrolPrices.com of 150 members, a massive 92% of respondents said they would refuse to pay the new ‘toxin charges.’ This illustrates the huge challenge that the government and local councils will face.
The government’s long-term plan seems to be to make all new cars and vans ‘zero emissions,’ or preferably electric, by the year 2024. This will bring the UK in line with other leaders in diesel emission-reducing initiatives around the world. Many major cities (including Paris, Madrid, Athens and Mexico City) plan to enforce new regulations that prohibit or discourage the use of diesel and ban diesel vehicles by 2025.
The Dutch government plans to go one step further and prohibit the sale of both petrol and diesel cars by 2025 – it is keen to set a precedent in encouraging the sale of electric cars.
Based on the reaction of PetrolPrices.com users to the toxin tax, it seems the government could face a public backlash at the new T-charge and ULEZ schemes.
It certainly seems extraordinary that the government plans to penalise drivers for polluting cities, without running a comprehensive high polluting vehicle scrappage scheme alongside such plans.
We’d love to hear your views about these new government plans. Let us know in the comments section what you think about the new diesel penalties. Would you pay these charges? Would you scrap your high polluting vehicle for cash if it was offered?
I have to drive 30 miles to work every day, and I don’t earn enough to replace my car. If their plan includes a way to replace it, I support it, but if I am going to get fined for driving to work, I’ll sue them, as that will do me out of a job.
Diddums. Get the train or bus.
I am a pensioner on a limited income with a diesel vehicle. How will I cope with this extra expenditure? Even if a scrappage scheme is introduced, where will the extra money come from to buy a newer car. I was encouraged to buy a diesel vehicle by the government of the time. I use the bus as much as possible, but sometimes I need to use my car.
Send the fines to the cheating German car manufacturers. Reduce the population we have become overcrowded too many people living in too little space, blame the globalists.
What about who through disability who have no option to have to use Wav wheelchair Accessible Vehicles? All of which are diesel?
Of we don’t pay we become housebound. Maybe that’s the Government’s plan
A lot are available as petrol.
I retired 3 years ago and used some of my retirement fund to buy my ‘ rest of life car’ which is a diesel car.
It was intended to last me for 15-20 years, knowing that I would not be able to afford another new(ish) car.
Now what a mess this is for people like me who have invested in such a vehicle at my time of life.
I read an interesting article recently that said that diesel cars were only the tip of the diesel pollution iceberg, and that the world is driven by diesel….lorries, buses, farm vehicles, ocean going liners and container ships…to the extent that a rethink on this proposed ‘band-aid’ solution was necessary.
I therefore hope that agencies like Petrol Prices, the AA, RAC etc, will be able to persuade the government that there has to be a ‘get-out’ clause for existing owners, and that any regulatory changes and financial penalties should apply to new cars only.
The motorist as always is the easy target to raise money. I am a pensioner with a well maintained low mileage diesel car. I have no chance of affording another car unless the scrappage scheme won’t be for second hand cars. We won’t be able to afford to go anywhere. My husband’s car is also a diesel as we tow a caravan in order to get any holidays.
Is it Oxford Street, London that has no private cars? Is it Oxford Street that is the most polluted?
Southampton has high levels of pollution when the cruise ships are in because they have to generate their own electricity with their diesel generators because no high capacity electricity cable has been laid to the docks to enable them to plug in.
Well maintained private vehicles are a minor source of pollution and total elimination will not bring pollution levels down to legal requirements.
Why doesn’t this government and any future government just impose a single figure that will prevent any one from buying any car/vehicle used or otherwise unless one has won a huge lottery prize.
I am more convinced than ever that we are seen as the diamond studded golden cash cows.
The various governments end game is to have us all using the public transport systems that for the most part had failed long long before they they began slowly but surely began squeezing us out of our cars.
Perhaps the ‘End Game Plan’ is to have us all exceedingly fit by walking everywhere that the fast disappearing buses have long-since forsaken.
Hey Ho – Timpsons and the like will do well with all of the shoes that will need to be soled & heeled before they fall to bits with over-use and deterioration from continually getting wet from the puddle soaked roads that will be left behind.
Perhaps there will be a resurgence in roller skates again and they will then blame that for any further deterioration in the road surfaces.
“Pre Euro 4”. Well that’s useful information, isn’t it…? Can anyone tell me what it means in terms of dates or anything old-fashioned like that? I have a 2006 VW Polo 1.2 ES I think , one up from entry level, but is it pre-Euro4/5/7/22/99.5…….?!
It seems very unfair to penalize diesel drivers, when a few years ago the public was encouraged to purchase diesel vehicles. Surely diesel drivers should be compensated if the governments now intend to phase out diesel vehicles.
I also find it difficult to understand why Petrochemical companies are allowed to sell their ‘cleaner and more efficient’ fuels at a significantly higher price than ‘standard’ fuels. Why do governments allow two tiers of fuel when there is such a focus on a cleaner environment? Surely big companies should be encouraged to do the ‘right’ thing before drivers are penalized. Where is the environmental consciousness of these companies?
I notice MONEY that good old non-pollutant (stealth tax) that seems to eradicate all the Governments pollution problems, and they are starting with the car owner, and eventually (in 3 years time) get to the big boys like HGV’S and buses, which of course leads to higher fares and prices in the shops. But just like ANY tax imposed here it will not affect the rich of this country financially, the moral here is drivers WILL have to pay the “pollution tax” to go to these places so how does that get rid of the problem of the pollution? the Government get richer and the pollution is still there. (STEALTH TAX) plain and basic.
the government encouraged and gave incentives for people to buy diesel , and now they move the goal posts
so if you’re going to point your finger , point it at the government , in the real world some people just can’t change their car or they need a certain type of car
as the government caused this it’s the government who should pay
How much would you pay to save your children’s or grandchildren’s lives?
We shove so many poisons down the throats of our children now. Would you give them arsenic or rat poison? Then why poison them with diesel fumes
OK, it can be expensive to take precautions to stop your children from dying, but paying more for fuel is as nothing compared to losing your child. If the cost of refuelling concerns you, get a more economical car.
Petrol cars were killing us all, that was a mistake apparently.
Diesel emissions were declared preferable to petrol emissions. Apparently that was also a mistake.
CO2, was designated a pollutant by the American, Environmental Protection Agency. That is clearly a mistake as we can’t live without the stuff. Another mistake.
Atmospheric CO2 has increased from 280ppm (parts per million) to 400ppm in the last 100 years or so. It was said we were all going to suffer increased hurricanes, droughts, famines, sea level rise etc. thanks solely to man’s activities. But all those events are no more active than they were 100 years ago, in fact most have declined. They were mistaken about that.
A recent NASA study of their own satellite data demonstrates the planet has greened by 14% in the last 30 years, 70% directly attributable to increased atmospheric CO2 alone. That equates to two continents the size of mainland USA worth of extra vegetation. So far from harming us, increased atmospheric CO2 is beneficial to humanity and the planet. They were mistaken about that.
When the planet was at 280ppm atmospheric CO2, it was 80ppm away from meaningful plant life beginning to die. Had it dropped to 150ppm, man would be extinct as no meaningful plant life can live at that level. The suggestion we should artificially sequester atmospheric CO2 is so expensive it would bankrupt the world and make no meaningful difference to CO2 levels. Another mistake.
Our nominated leaders have comprehensively screwed up every major life affecting decision for the last 100 years, if not longer. We have suffered 2 global wars and numerous smaller wars because of their incompetence. Iraq was an illegal war and no one (namely Blair) has been held to account for it. It has precipitated the worst period of global terrorism ever known to man. More mistakes.
So please tell me, why should I believe them now about diesel emissions? So Genghis Khan can fill the coffers of London with more money whilst the rest of the country who are not affected by pollution, because they have the sense not to live in a city, pay through the nose for the convenience of the London elite?
hi if the problems with diesel cars buses etc , is only affecting towns and cities then instead of people driving in why don’t they introduce more park and ride schemes for tourists visitors etc and people who do not really need to be gridlocking the roads and these include the gas guzzlers {petrol cars } that also contribute to emissions ie :- people who really do not need to use their vehicle all this amounts to by the mayor of london is a money making scheme put upon the vunerable motorist yet again the mayor says it will stop countless deaths and effects of emissions but it will not really affect the high earners people with top of the range vehicles who will not use public transport and the £24 pound charge is a drop in the ocean to these people but will almost certainly affect the daily lives of people who most certainly have no other choice i myself own a diesel van {work } and also drive a diesel car with a DPF FILTER for most of my working life but there are always two sides of the coin do not tell me that diesel is more toxic than most of these gas guzzling old petrol cars vans etc because they are not its all fossil fuels at the end of the day !! ithe mayor wants it fair then spread it across all vehicles in and out of the city and i hope when emissions figures are released they will be for petrol and diesel cars so we can all compare but i doubt that will happen and just a thought for the farmers country folk you could be next ! as emissions from cows pigs etc do not say i have not warned you’
You can add my name to that 98%!
This is an appalling imposition on diesel drivers, not to mention the environment.
Diesel engines are some 25% more efficient than petrol engines therefore vehicles have to carry less fuel which adds to their efficiency. Fuel tankers have to transport 25% less diesel than petrol, so could be 25% smaller. 25% less of the planets dwindling oil resources have to be extracted to meet transport demands.
Diesel is cheaper to refine than petrol and therefore less energy intensive. Diesel engines are cheaper to manufacture than petrol engines despite premiums placed on them by manufacturers, cashing in, once again, on idiotic government policy that almost mandated we all drive them.
And who is driving all this lunacy? Yep, the London elite, followed slavishly by every other city keen to cash in on a money bonanza of more insane government legislation.
The whole country, where by and large, diesel is considered beneficial to the economy, personal wealth and the environment, is being made to suffer, once again, for the inner city, madcap government officials who cloak themselves with a ‘green’ mantle to avoid the backlash of public opinion.
And the real polluters in terms of vehicle emissions? Public transport, with buses and trains running regularly, and frequently. Empty, but for two hours of the day when commuters pack them. Once more, insanely promoted by government officials as clean transport.
This utter scam imposed on us by a union we are leaving is strangling the country. The global warming scam has been utterly discredited and is dying a slow death, so the UK government has to make up the £Billions of taxpayers money wasted on it by imposing yet more taxes.
Incompetent mismanagement of the nations finances barely describes the situation we are now in. And is Lord King bothered? Yet another failed scientific advisor to the government. Not a bit, as he retires into obscurity an obscenely wealthy man. Nor do I object to wealth, but when it’s gained from incompetence at public expense, then I do object.
I am so annoyed that my words may sound all mixed up. I agree with everything you say.
I purchased a diesel car last May and I am very happy with it mainly because when you put your fingers inside the exchaust after use, your fingers come out clean.
LETS GET OFF THE ROAD THE OLD LORRIES, BUSES, MACHINERY AND CARS THAT PUT OUT MORE DANGEROUS FUMES – WHY ISN’T THAT BEING DEALT WITH? IT IS SO EASY TO HIT THE ORDINARY MOTORIST. I USE MY CAR FOR SPORT WHICH DOES ENTAIL GOING THROUGH CITY CENTRES, SO WILL HAVE A KNOCK ON EFFECT ON PEOPLE PARTICIPATING WHICH IS SENDING OUT THE WRONG MESSAGE.
WILL DISABLED PEOPLE HAVE TO PAY THE NEW TAX?
As previously stated in the comments for another article, if these diesel engines are so bad for our health, why are thousands being imported each week into our ports around the UK Would it be anything to do with the tax they generate??
My Home is situated on the A370 Bristol Road, and, as I am in the countryside, I have to rely on a car for most journeys. No bus service between villages, unlike the A370 which has more buses than ever, and the quarry lorries and other commercial vehicles all pervade my home to the extent that, I cannot have a window open for much of the day, particular in rush hour, so, this so called ‘T’ Tax is just another impediment for the likes of myself, a Pensioner with dwindling money resources. I voted to Leave the EU simply on the grounds that there were too many introductions of charges, like V.A.T., and Insurance Premium Tax just as an example.
Close the Door and Put up the Border Barriers, and, let us return to our own useful way of life without these parasites in the EU determining what we have to do!
There is a Freudian parallel to this constant milking of the diamond studded golden cash cows. and the constant crap that we are being fed by the government with regard to recycling of the various waste materials and for that matter one could also include the health issues around the added sugars and salt that is pumped into our foodstuffs on a daily basis.
STOP hitting us with the resolves by expensive and not working recycling practices – take the food produces to task and stop pussy-footing around.
Bread,cake,biscuit produces,crisp producers and a great many other producers of every day requirements are continually producing them in totally non-recyclable wrappers and packaging in general and have the balls to state on the packaging in small print – not currently recyclable or some other similar reason for putting the onus on the consumer to deal with the issues and the aftermath of their profitttering at our expense.
Fuel pricing is not the only thing that others are taking us for a ride on.
at least the london mayors proposal is on the right lines…. ban old polluting vehicles not ALL diesels… BUT it must be noted that the worst offenders are buses etc, usually old and badly polluting.
Diesels (modern ones) generally have turbo systems that only work at higher speeds (30mph+) but town planners deliberately slow the traffic and therefore increase pollution.
It must be noted that diesel restrictions will hit the disabled the most….
in order to fit disabled aids (ramps, lifts etc) you need larger and therefore heavier vehicle…. these are inevitably diesels, so diesel restrictions will hit the disabled far more than able-bodied people… my own NEW model is ONLY available as diesel… they don’t make it as petrol or LPG and the electric version is VAN ONLY.
I have said this before, (& I will keep saying it too). I got my ‘Dream Car’ through the Motability Scheme some 5 & a half years ago now. At the end of my 3 year contract I was able to extend the contract which I did for 2 years & then got a loan to buy it about 6 months ago now. Now, as far as ‘Pre Euro 4′ is concerned, I ain’t gotta clue what that means & which way my car falls in respect to that, although I do have a sneaky suspicion. As far as the ’emissions scandal’ is concerned, as Michael Bowden says, send the fines to the said manufactures, who in my mind are the ones to blame & not Joe Public. Like another person who commented, my thought was that my car will last me for the rest of my driving ‘life’, if I look after it. I have been told by an experienced mechanic that my engine will do 300k before it packs up. That will mean it will should still be going at least for another 20 years, give or take. That will take me until I am nearing 70 which is the ‘main’ reason I got my ‘dream’ car in the diesel version. If that makes me a criminal then arrest me………
The legal framework consists in a series of directives, each amendments to the 1970 Directive 70/220/EEC.[8] The following is a summary list of the standards, when they come into force, what they apply to, and which EU directives provide the definition of the standard.
Euro 1 (1993):
For passenger cars—91/441/EEC.[9]
Also for passenger cars and light trucks—93/59/EEC.
Euro 2 (1996) for passenger cars—94/12/EC (& 96/69/EC)
For motorcycle—2002/51/EC (row A)[10]—2006/120/EC
Euro 3 (2000) for any vehicle—98/69/EC[11]
For motorcycle—2002/51/EC (row B)[10]—2006/120/EC
Euro 4 (2005) for any vehicle—98/69/EC (& 2002/80/EC)
Euro 5 (2009/9) for light passenger and commercial vehicles—715/2007/EC[12]
Euro 6 (2014) for light passenger and commercial vehicles—459/2012/EC[13]
These limits supersede the original directive on emission limits 70/220/EEC.
Like many other people commenting on this subject, I too am retired and living on a low, fixed income. We barely have enough free money to enable us to go away on holidays, our last holiday was in 2005!
Last year, we purchased a nearly new Skoda Yeti SE as we needed something large enough to carry my wife’s craft work to venues. We looked around and found that we were restricted in choices due to other factors like visiting our family in the midlands, a distance of 250 miles from where we live; electric cars do not have the range to make that journey in one day, so we had no choice but go the internal combustion route. Of the two choices, we were told that diesel is the best economic, cleaner fuel to use and so that’s what we purchased.
Now we are probably faced with having to pay this ludicrous tax! As for scrappage schemes! Will that be enough to enable us to purchase an electric car with the range and carrying capacity to suit us? I don’t think so, so we will have to pay this tax regardless. We do have another alternative which is easy for us retired folk – don’t go into these towns and cities that impose this tax, ignore them take your shopping and leisure interests elsewhere. Imagine the outcry when the London traders lose custom because of the tax.
One other point, if we are leaving the EU, why bother implementing their stupid taxes? Ignore them – what could they do in response?
So a Labour Mayor of London wants to penalise diesel drivers, after his party encouraged people to buy them, not so long ago in the first place.
Emissions and pollution are not necessarily the same thing. My understanding is that there are CO2 emissions which cause climate change and diesels engines are more fuel efficient than petrol so create less CO2. This I think is why diesels were said to be better, hence the government action of the past etc. Car tax is based on CO2 emissions. Pollution is the nasty particles that are emitted and has gained recent press about causing breathing difficulties, illness and death due to high concentrations in cities. In this respect petrol engines are much better or so we are currently led to believe.
It could therefore be incorrect to say a Chelsea Tractor gas guzzling V12 is high polluting. It might be but it may be very clean but it does pumps out lots of CO2 but then so do we when we breathe and we can’t really ban people from cities can we!. Equally within reason, a tanker or ferry emitting clouds of black smoke across the oceans isn’t too much of an issue but the global CO2 greenhouse gas emission are so better for those to have dirty diesel with low CO2 than cleaner petrol with higher CO2.
The problem in cities is loads of vehicles, generally not going anywhere due to congestion, Diesels pumping out loads of pollution being inhaled by loads of people and this does need to be got rid of somehow. There probably isn’t a nice solution but the choice is whether you’d rather have people dying in cities or driving in cities.
Thank you K. Mitchell for telling us when “Euro 4” dates from. Pity sundry newspapers didn’t do the same.
We were encouraged by the then government to buy diesel some years ago so we did. Now we’re being told we shouldn’t have. No wonder no-one trusts politicians any more! Does anyone know which towns and cities are involved so we know where to avoid?
Being totally disgruntled with the constant impositions being placed on the motorist I will add my tuppence worth.
I would simply say Google “Benzine” and read the results – here is just one
>>Long-term health effects of exposure to benzene. The major effect of benzene from long-term exposure is on the blood. (Long-term exposure means exposure of a year or more.) Benzene causes harmful effects on the bone marrow and can cause a decrease in red blood cells, leading to anemia <<
The Government is trying to turn us to Petrol or Electric (not viable for me and many others I suspect)
I would suggest they have done their sums on the amount of ££££'s that can be recovered but not the Health aspect – OR HAVE THEY????
I LIVE IN WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS NORTH WEST LONDON ALBEIT OUTSIDE THE LONDON POSTAL ZONE. MY WIFE IS DISABLED AND OTHERS I REQUIRE A LARGE VEHICLE FOR THAT REASON AND TO CARRY MY DAUGHTER AND HER FAMILY. I TOO FELL UNDER THE GOVERNMENT SPELL OF BUYING A DIESEL VEHICLE WITH THE PROSPECT OF IT BEING THE LAST CAR I WILL OWN DUE MY AGE AND BEING RETIRED ON A BASIC STATE PENSION SO HAVE NO PROSPECT OF AFFORDING A NEW GREENER CAR.
I WOULD ALSO COMMENT THAT LONDON HAS MORE AIR TRAFFIC FLYING OVER IT THAN PROBABLY ANY OTHER CITY IN THE WORLD DEPOSITING EXHAUST MATERIAL ALL ACROSS GREATER LONDON AND IS SET TO GET WORSE WITH ADVENT OF THE THIRD RUNWAY AT HEATHROW. AIRCRAFT FLY ACROSS LONDON TO AND FROM NOT ONLY HEATHROW AND CITY AIRPORTS BUT ALSO TO LUTON, STANSTEAD, GATWICK, SOUTHEND, FARNBOROUGH WITH EVEN LOW LEVEL APPROACHES TO BRIZE NORTON BY VERY LARGE AIR FORCE TRANSPORT PLANES. ARE TO BE PENALISED FOR ALL THIS POLLUTION BECAUSE AIRCRAFT OPERATORS SURELY WILL NOT BE.
Can all this really be true? We have an ageing population in the UK. And if the pollutants were that bad would that not have the opposite effect on the elderly. Maybe just another way of robbing us motorists.
Excuse me but what has Europe got do do with any of our laws, if i remember we are now OUT of europe.
BLAH BLAH Government BLAH BLAH (again).
Same old way of screwing us.
Four star petrol then unleaded came out a lot cheaper.
Everyone bought unleaded then they hiked the price up and changed it from per gallon to per litre.
Let’s cause city congestion by lowering speed limits on ring roads and putting traffic lights every 50 yards and on roundabouts.
It used to take 20mins to drive from centre of Nottingham to 7 miles out,now can take up to 40mins.
Progressive evolution,well done.
We were in London last weekend – we live in the North East. It was just so polluted! We have one of the Skoda VW diesel engined cars where VW, instead of actually doing something about it, just put in cheating software.
I worked in Radiation Safety most of my working life and have experience both with environmental issues and with politicians inability to understand anything but soundbites.
The problem is that there is a real problem, not created by politicians, except that they stopped listening before the “but” and as usual then blame the EU for not listening properly. Yes diesels do produce less carbon dioxide but they also produce more nitrogen oxides and particulate pollution with unpleasant aromatic carbon compounds on them.
The big problem is really the nitrogen oxides, as the carbon particulates are largely collected on the particulate filters and burnt out on modern cars – older cars are not so good on this.
What infuriates me is that everyone *EXCEPT* the people at fault – the car manufacturers – get to take the blame and pay the price. The problem is to make the burn both complete and cool enough that the nitrogen oxides aren’t produced. The technology is there,if not completely mature. There are ways to make a retrofit system and these are available for buses and trucks but *NOT* for cars! I know – I’ve searched for one.
Let’s put the blame squarely where it belongs. The manufacturers. They need to be fined until they do produce retrofit systems and until they sort out the technology so that there is no longer a problem. As long as they think they can get away without doing so, they won’t do anything.
It is possible to move around cities without a car. We always “park and ride” in York, because there’s so little parking. In London last weekend we parked our cat at the hotel and used public transport.
It’s doable!
Point your anger at the right people. If we can force VW and other companies into paying for us, then they’ll have the only incentive they understand to make cars that don’t pollute.
I was six at the time of “the Great Smog” which brought in the clean air acts, yet I still remember how vile it was and smelt. How you could choke and choke in the filth. The problem is real. It can be solved. There just needs to be the will to do so. In the mean time, we’ll just drive around these places…
Hi,
I live in the North West of England and I drive a Diesel vehicle, but is it only the diesel vehicles which cause this pollution, because we have Hybrid bus in our town and I have never seen one of these bus yet run on the battery, as I have been told that the battery has not go the power to work the bus properly, also as one of the other comments said what about all the other vehicles which cause pollution.
Also if the Government want us to all go to a much cleaner vehicle, then the Government should pay each diesel owner enough money to get a cleaner vehicle as they caused this issue in the first place indicated diesel vehicles were cleaner than petrol vehicles
Also they should also get the vehicle manufacturers to produce cleaner vehicles which are able to compete with diesel MPG as it seems that lately the petrol cars can not match the MPG and also get the manufacturer to stop cheating the MPG figures and give us the true MPG for each vehicle when run on actual roads
Also the Government should get the manufacturer to make vehicle to run on H2O, I know some manufacturer have made some, but this is only available in the US and we have no filling stations for this vehicle in the UK, Why is this.
One minute it is advised for us to buy Diesel cars then the next minute they want to slap taxes on us and then add insult to injury, those over the water think they are going to fine us, has nobody told them that we don’t want anything to do with them and we as a nation voted OUT OUT OUT of the eu !
I work in London in the evenings. I have to carry equipment. I drive home after the last train has gone. I feel safer locked in my car rather than on a tube or mainline train. I drive a diesel. 1995 VW. If I am penalised for switching to diesel as the government suggested I do a few years back then presumably I just give up my job, go on the dole and they pay me all the tax they’ve collected because I did what they suggested?
If public transport was not so expensive I would consider it, but it currently outweighs the cost of my driving to my place of work and home again.
Are all the police and government vehicles, Mrs Mays taxi electric? Petrol?
After experiencing China recently I agree our lungs prefer clean air, but I don’t like being lied to.
More technical jargon, what the dickens is a pre euro 4 engine, if I lift up my car bonnet will it be clearly stamped on the engine somewhere visible or will there be a plate welded to the body showing the engine number and what type it is?
How many of the country’s car owners keep abreast of all the tech jargon and detailed specifications of all the cars they may ever buy, I imagine very few.
So where do we go to find out if our cars have pre or post whatever graded engines. With the VW group does that actually prove anything at all?
I am getting sick with the constant money grabbing by dictatorial governmental bodies be it local, regional or national level. My local council for instances-pears to be hell bent on charging for parking anywhere in the town, the local councils in the areas seem less inclined to do that,, but I can’t avoid it without moving.
If Diesel is a more significant proven polluter than Petrol, something must be done to reduce this problem of additional particulates from Diesel. This can be done by ensuring the Manufacturers standards are reproduced in the real world of actual usage, and by more regular mandatory emission checks ahead of the current 3rd Year and ongoing MOT Test regime.
I have never taken to diesel and would like air quality improved, but even I can see that not compensating those that were encouraged to buy diesels is unfair. Of course it’s much easier to tax than admit to making a mistake and compensating those affected!
I have been behind a number of diesel cars when every time the driver accelerates black smoke full of unburnt carbon issues from the exhaust this is a pollutant this normally comes from diesel engines whose particle filters have ceased to function. These filters collect the carbon particles heating them up to a very high temperature converting them to harmless carbon dioxide. If these vehicles travel at regular uninterrupted speeds of above 40 mph the particle filter does its job if not a warning light comes on which means the driver has to increase the cars speed straight away to at least 40 mph for over 10 mins if the driver fails to do it the driver has a second chance and if he fails to do this a second time has to purchase a new particle converter which I understand cost £1500 + VAT no matter whose manufactured the engine. Regarding CARBON DIOXIDE it is NOT A POLLUTANT it is a natural gas and without it all plants trees and crops would die The most effective GREENHOUSE GAS is water in its gaseous form which is formed in the main by the very hot exhaust gases from jet engines heating up the surrounding air and converting the moisture in the air to gas, the second most effective gas is methane the decaying vegetation from the Amazonian rain forests followed by farm animals waste products which also emit methane and rotting waste from rubbish tips. Carbon dioxide comes right at the bottom of the list and of course us humans together with all mammals breath it out. Some people also get confused between Carbon Monoxide emissions which are tested for at the MOT and if breathed in a sufficient quantity will kill you and Carbon Dioxide which is part of the air we breath and a totally harmless gas.
The cheek of the EU who have supplied most of the cars on UK roads inc ambulances and many emergency vehicles. Perhaps we should stop all imports of VW Audi built cars and anything associated with them along with the French Renaults who have all been found to be the worst polluter by tests done by “Which” magazine. Stuff Brussels and the EU with all their annoying Diktats.
the government is not used to good ideas or thinking them up ,
Sorry I haven’t time to read all of the comments but would like to through an idea in to the melting pot if it hasn’t been mentioned before.
Rather than a car scrappage scheme why not an engine scrappage one, far more environmentally friendly than scrapping a whole car.
Car manaufacturers could be “encouraged” to produce direct repalcement engines, modification kits or even to recycle engines that together with a scrappage scheme could minimise the costs of having an environmemtal friendly vehicle.
I to am retired only a distant access to public transport and would find it extremely difficult to replace a vehicle with something new.
So why should we be threatened by bureaucrats in the EU. They need telling to DO ONE frankly.
Diesel is stinking smelly stuff, and petrol cars have always been my choice, but pollution is the price we all pay for having freedom to move about WHEN we want, and to WHERE we want. As others have commented, if public transport was reliable and cost effective, people would use it more, but I doubt there’s ever going to be an answer that prevents us motorists from being ripped off on an almost daily basis.
Perhaps Mr Khan, the London mayor, should look at all the massive wastage of money in his city, before hitting people going about their business. Building flower bedecked bridges at millions of pounds cost that most people couldn’t give a stuff about, for example.
But as far as EU demands go……. Tell them to mind their own blasted business. We are leaving their nasty little club. We owe them SFA.
Indeed let us hope for a clean Brexit & not the dirty [soft] Brexit the remoaners seem now reluctantly prepared to settle for. A dirty Brexit could leave us still open to interference from unelected bureaucrats trying to control the minutiae of our lives through European law that only they can present to the European parliament, as it cannot initiate or change any legislation not presented to it.
I haven’t read all the posts on here, but of those I have read I have seen no mention of the fuel in use other than diesel or petrol. Is there not a fuel known as biomass, or similar name, which could be used to reduced pollution considerably without requiring much diesel engine modification? Are there not hydrogen fuelled cars already on the road? I think the vested interests of the oil and fuel companies and their distribution systems through the forecourts of the various companies are preventing progress along these lines.
Can someone please tell me what the government will do with all the money they get with this tariff, and how is this going to improve air quality?? As I see it, people will just pay up as there are no real alternatives.
Outraged!!!!!
Having been encouraged to but a diesel car ,I did. Now, I find myself ‘demonised’ for what will make a minuscule difference to the atmosphere
I find this an appalling situation!
Buy diesel, it’s cleaner and more efficient. It will ensure that the environment is cleaner and you will get more miles per gallon. Now I find myself being demonised for something that will make a fraction of a difference.
Just returned from Australia and Singapore where they all drive big, huge, gas guzzlers which must create more pollution than smaller cars. And, what are they powered by? Yes, you’ve guessed it, diesel!
Are they hounded and badgered for their car types………..again you know the answer, NO!!!!
When I mentioned this to people they thought I was nuts and just couldn’t understand what I was on about.
Yet again, our nutty country sits and takes notice of a few extremists to determine policy. Everybody else is then too scared politically to oppose them and their followers grow rapidly.
I have just returned from Berlin and we know what happened their historically.
Drivers are , and always have been, nothing but a Government ‘cash cow’. We are easy pickings.
Gordon Brown introduced a 5p per litre health tax on diesel when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. How have the Government used this tax to help?
So, we’re all going to be driving around in electric cars by the mid 2020’s eh? An interesting idea, but what I’d like to know is how will all the extra electtical power required to allow this?
The national grid can only just cope with the current domestic and industrial demands on it at present. It simply doesn’t have the capacity to handle the enormous extra power that would be required by millions of electric vehicles on top of this.
Even if, by some miracle, the Goverment did manage to increase electricity output enough to handle 100% of cars, buses, lorries and taxis being electric powered, how will this be achieved? The amount of fuel neede to produce this power will be absolutely enormous and require a huge increase in the consumption of fossil fuels used by power stations to generate the electric power for this…How self defeating is that going to be??
Bill
We are a small business that visits the overnight wholesale markets in London. We recently replaced our van for a 3 yo Euro4 van. This was as much as we could afford. The new charges will mean we can no longer be in business, we cannot afford another van neither will we be able to pass the t zone charges on to the customers. We will have to pay twice per visit as we arrive before midnight and leave after. What is this government thinking! It will be the same for many small businesses.
Diesel issues :
In order to reduce air pollution and make a better environment for ALL especially the young in our inner cities
01. Suggest Mr Khan, local Councils and the government get their house in order first, or in addition, before further penalties for all road users. Fix Buses, Black Cabs, Private Hire Taxis, Ambulances, Council Refuge Trucks, Fire Engines, Police Vehicles and ALL vehicles EQUALLY who produce this unwanted air pollution.
02. Traffic times across our major cities has increased drastically which has further contributed to vehicles sitting in queues LONGER producing these unwanted gases. Sort the traffic jams and the delays which is got to be good for the environment, for everyone and good for business.
03. Get vehicle manufacturers to fix the problems with these unwanted emissions. Better exhaust filters.
04. Great suggestion from others about ENGINE Scrappage rather than the whole car scrappage to lessen the financial impact on those who have followed previous government guidelines and bought diesel vehicles.
05. Government to own up to the mistakes made and assist with fixing the problem not just taxing us to death.
06. It’s about time there were incentives to guide vehicle manufacturers down the avenue for producing vehicles that meet our human expectations; better Hybrids, more efficient Electric powered, Bio-gas powered and any other technologies that we as human’s desire.
07. Reduce the number of vehicles entering cities which would reduce congestion resulting in reduced emissions and YES less pollution. Various plans could be set up. Certain vehicles only allowed in at certain times but parking for them must be provided which is both convenient and cost effective. People already commute across the whole day so encourage various working times. Provide some sort of inner city transport system that meets our environmental expectations for business to get around the city that is cost effective, meets pollution expectations and allows ALL business to function across the cities. How many Black Cab Taxi’s and Private Hire Licences does a city need to function correctly. Let’s stop just giving out licences willy nilly for the council gains and set a limit, manage this and monitor their efficient usage. Come on let’s all get our thinking caps on and find better SOLUTIONS that meet ALL our needs instead of just resorting to TAXING which may or may not fix the problem.
08. Oh! What am I thinking of in para 07. – we may reduce the revenue gained from the Congestion Charges and any Emission Charges we get. That revenue reduction would not help the environment, and that would not do, would it ? Let’s not do that then !!
Lastly whatever gets sorted out – probably the only one that will get adopted is Taxing further (as it appears those who have the power are incapable of working out any other possible better solution) then let’s see the money gained from these taxes put to better use in combating the pollution problems rather than going to pay for any other unrelated activities. Let’s see some verifiable gains from these unfair taxes.
What brainless schemes next?
How much Extra Pollution (EP) will the extra electricity generated cause?
How much EP will the vast quantities of new vehicle production cause?
How much EP will the building/modification of the factories to make all these new products cause? (With of course all the transportation involved)
How much EP will the extra public transport required cause?
How much chaos will be caused by unknown numbers of electric cars obstructing the roads because when they run out of electric power, the driver can’t top up with a can of electricity?
How much EP will the manufacture of millions of extra batteries cause? (Assuming that enough graphite and lithium can be produced to make them) And don’t forget that they need renewing every few thousand recharges, at considerable expense.
How much damage to the economy will be caused when drivers can’t get into cities without changing to public transport? (As said driver arrives late and red-faced trying to explain to the waiting foreign business person about the whole stupid situation)
How much EP will be caused by the dismantling and recycling of the billions of parts of all the scrapped vehicles?
How much ENORMOUS EP will be generated when this whole ridiculous scheme turn out to be not only utterly impractical, but also fails to significantly lower any type of pollution?
The ONLY way to reduce the various types of pollution is to MODIFY ALL vehicle emissions at affordable costs. If we can send vehicles to the Moon and Mars, I can see no problem in producing a solution. VW managed to reduce emissions during the fiddle to pass the MOT. If that reduces performance , so what?