|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Campaign for Fresh AirCampaign for Fresh Air Date: Mar 16, 2008 06:28
Anyone wanting to check if their vehicle is compliant with LEZ or will
be. Should check it here BEFORE you think of coming inside the M25
zone or you might find yourself £100 per day out of pocket.
Tough but we need something to lessen the pollution here so I'm all
for it.
http://lezlondon.tfl.gov.uk/lez/vehicles/default.aspx
The objective of the Low Emission Zone (LEZ) is to improve air quality
in London.
London has the worst air pollution in the United Kingdom and amongst
the worst in Europe, adversely affecting the health and quality of
life of many Londoners.
The Mayor of London has a legal obligation to take steps towards
meeting national and European Union air quality objectives which are
designed to protect human health.
In London, road transport is the single biggest source of Particulate
Matter (PM10) and oxides of Nitrogen(NOX). These are the primary
causes of air quality-related health problems, including asthma.
|
| Show full article (1.10Kb) |
|
| | 134 Comments |
|
|
Author: ConorConor Date: Mar 16, 2008 06:39
In article 4ax.com>, Campaign for
Fresh Air says...
> The Mayor of London has a legal obligation to take steps towards
> meeting national and European Union air quality objectives which are
> designed to protect human health.
>
> In London, road transport is the single biggest source of Particulate
> Matter (PM10) and oxides of Nitrogen(NOX).
Most of which comes from buses, the very things k.Livingstone wants
people to use more as NOx and PM comes from diesels mostly.
Oh the irony.
> These are the primary
> causes of air quality-related health problems, including asthma.
Actually, an overly high population density has more to do with it.
--
Conor
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams
|
| |
|
| | 5 Comments |
|
|
Author: Campaign for Fresh AirCampaign for Fresh Air Date: Mar 16, 2008 06:55
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 13:39:22 -0000, Conor hotmail.com>
wrote:
>In article 4ax.com>, Campaign for
>Fresh Air says...
>>> The Mayor of London has a legal obligation to take steps towards
>> meeting national and European Union air quality objectives which are
>> designed to protect human health.
>>
>> In London, road transport is the single biggest source of Particulate
>> Matter (PM10) and oxides of Nitrogen(NOX).
>
>Most of which comes from buses, the very things k.Livingstone wants
>people to use more as NOx and PM comes from diesels mostly.
>
It does seem a little ill thought out. I don't see why cars are
excluded. It should be all or nothing. Public transport is a slightly
different consideration.
|
| |
| 11 Comments |
|
|
Author: ConorConor Date: Mar 16, 2008 07:04
In article 4ax.com>, Campaign for
Fresh Air says...
>>Most of which comes from buses, the very things k.Livingstone wants
>>people to use more as NOx and PM comes from diesels mostly.
>>
>
> It does seem a little ill thought out.
It's more than a little.
--
Conor
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Knight Of The RoadKnight Of The Road Date: Mar 16, 2008 08:33
"Campaign for Fresh Air" yahoo.co.uk> wrote
> It does seem a little ill thought out. I don't see why cars are
> excluded. It should be all or nothing. Public transport is a slightly
> different consideration.
The main effect it has had is that London removals firms, whose
pantechnicons are traditionally old because they cover very little mileage
and don't wear out, and scaffolding firms likewise, have had to replace
their entire fleet with compliant vehicles, and this has sharply pushed up
the price of house removals and scaffolding for Londoners.
Living on the east Kent coast, I'm sure you can understand *exactly* how
concerned I am about this.
|
| |
| 11 Comments |
|
|
Author: ConorConor Date: Mar 16, 2008 10:02
In article bt.com>, Knight Of The
Road says...>
> "Campaign for Fresh Air" yahoo.co.uk> wrote
> >> It does seem a little ill thought out. I don't see why cars are
>> excluded. It should be all or nothing. Public transport is a slightly
>> different consideration.
>
>
> The main effect it has had is that London removals firms, whose
> pantechnicons are traditionally old because they cover very little mileage
> and don't wear out, and scaffolding firms likewise, have had to replace
> their entire fleet with compliant vehicles, and this has sharply pushed up
> the price of house removals and scaffolding for Londoners.
>
> Living on the east Kent coast, I'm sure you can understand *exactly* how
> concerned I am about this.
>
> ...
|
| Show full article (1.12Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Campaign for Fresh AirCampaign for Fresh Air Date: Mar 16, 2008 10:08
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:33:29 -0000, "Knight Of The Road"
hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Campaign for Fresh Air" yahoo.co.uk> wrote
>>> It does seem a little ill thought out. I don't see why cars are
>> excluded. It should be all or nothing. Public transport is a slightly
>> different consideration.
>
>
>The main effect it has had is that London removals firms, whose
>pantechnicons are traditionally old because they cover very little mileage
>and don't wear out,
They cover very high mileages. The problem is because they are a
unique vehicle and cost a fortune to have built to order.
> and scaffolding firms likewise, have had to replace
>their entire fleet with compliant vehicles, and this has sharply pushed up
>the price of house removals and scaffolding for Londoners.
I fear he may have pushed it a bit soon.
|
| Show full article (1.07Kb) |
| 4 Comments |
|
|
Author: Campaign for Fresh AirCampaign for Fresh Air Date: Mar 16, 2008 10:12
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 17:02:01 -0000, Conor hotmail.com>
wrote:
>In article bt.com>, Knight Of The
>Road says...>>
>> "Campaign for Fresh Air" yahoo.co.uk> wrote
>> >>> It does seem a little ill thought out...
|
| Show full article (1.21Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: ConorConor Date: Mar 16, 2008 10:16
In article 4ax.com>, Campaign for
Fresh Air says...
>>Likewise up here in the wilds of East Yorkshire. I'm also about as
>>equally concerned by the amount of noise that Terminal 5 and an extra
>>runway at Heathrow or any of the UK airports causes.
>
> Even if you're paying for it?
So what's new?
> Try to look at the big picture and
> forget the narrow minded view on life.
>
I always look at the big picture and it would appear that you should
take some of your own advice. You seem to have forgotten the increase
in business, and therefore income, that it'll generate.
--
Conor
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Knight Of The RoadKnight Of The Road Date: Mar 16, 2008 10:16
"Campaign for Fresh Air" yahoo.co.uk> wrote
> They cover very high mileages.
No they don't. They spend the vast majority of their working lives
stationary, being loaded or unloaded and when they do travel the trips are
generally over a short distance. Please don't introduce baseless speculation
as argument.
> You will be if you dare venture up here to complain to Ken about it
> whilst visiting Madame Tussaud's.
Why would I do any of those things? The only one of those I ever do is drive
in London but my truck, like all non-specialised transport vehicles it is
relatively new and fully compliant, as would the truck I was driving ten
years ago be.
The bottom line is that the LEZ is a stealth tax, dressed up as concern for
the environment, to fund the Olympics. Still, now nobody smokes any more,
*someone* has to pay for them, and Iraq, Afghanistan etc and that's where
the motorist comes in.
|
| |
| 2 Comments |
|
|
|
|
