Expanded ULEZ

motorbiking said:
how would that be fixed by the UK leading the way? 1% of global emissions reducing by 50% would be a huge economical burden in the UK and make little to no difference globally.
Click to expand...
Maybe not - it's up to the Indian govt. to fix their own problems but we can show them it is possible by cleaning our own air...and enjoying the benefits as well.
 
Odds said:
Maybe not - it's up to the Indian govt. to fix their own problems but we can show them it is possible by cleaning our own air...and enjoying the benefits as well.
Click to expand...
Too outsource their heavy industry like this country has?
 
gant said:
Too outsource their heavy industry like this country has?
Click to expand...
Riposte...

Lahore, once known as the city of gardens for its lush greenery, has grown intensely polluted due to its surging population, now at 242 million people, and rapid urbanisation. [Yesterday], the concentration of PM 2.5, or tiny particulate matter, in the air approached 450, which is 30 times higher than the World Health Organization’s recommended maximum average daily exposure and considered hazardous.

“The weather is such that everyone has a bad throat and bad eyes, and everyone’s health is getting affected,” said Mohammad Salahuddin, a private guard in Lahore. Experts say the burning of crop residue at the start of the winter wheat-planting season is a key cause of the pollution.

After the killer smog in 1952 (?) The Clean Air Act enforced a reduction in coal fires and sulphur emissions to prevent so many deaths in future - we saw the benefit of this over the years so why complain about taking another step towards making less pollution from old, carbon-coughing vehicles?
 
It will drop, because people will no longer visit the businesses and services in the expanded zone. occasional pollution swapped for job losses.
 
I suspect you and I are similar age, and my tan from spending 4-6 months in the med every year is a match for your builders tan gained from tarmac-ing drives. As I've said earlier, it's not people like me who lose out. It's the poorest in London who pay the fees and those who scrap are still waiting to be paid.

ULEZ expansion was only ever about taxing poor people.
 
Odds said:
After the killer smog in 1952 (?) The Clean Air Act enforced a reduction in coal fires and sulphur emissions to prevent so many deaths in future - we saw the benefit of this over the years so why complain about taking another step towards making less pollution from old, carbon-coughing vehicles?
Click to expand...
Because there's always a trade off, sure who wouldn't want a pollution free environment but it's coming at a financial burden to those who can least afford it in its present format of being tackled.
 
Its not the well to do of Surrey, Kent and Essex who drive old diesel cars. It's the landscape gardeners, window cleaners and shop workers, pensioners most likely to have non-compliant vehicles. 85% of charges come from the expanded zone.

There was never a problem - only a business opportunity for Khan to tax those who cannot vote him out.
 
We here it all the time of the shortage of social care workers, then proceed to tax district nurses doing their business in less than state of the art vehicles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top