ROAD MADNESS
CAMPAIGNERS CALL FOR LONDON’S CONTROVERSIAL ULTRA LOW EMISSION ZONE TO BE SCRAPPED
Campaigners have called for London’s ‘money-grabbing’ Ultra Low Emissions Zone to be scrapped after scientists warned it has barely had any impact on improving the capital’s dirty air in the month after it launched. According to MailOnline, researchers from Imperial College London say the controversial scheme – which was last month expanded and made 18 times bigger – is not effective on its own. The team looked at the level of pollu- tants over a 12-week period, starting before and ending after the ULEZ was launched by Mayor of London Sadiq Khan in April 2019. They found just a 3 per cent reduction in nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels over this time, and ‘insignificant’ drops in levels of ozone (O3), which can damage the lungs, and tiny particles of dirt and liquid called PM2.5 that are thought to reach the brain. Amazingly, at some sites around the capital, air pollution actually worsened, despite the ULEZ coming into force. These new findings show that the ULEZ – which costs drivers of diesel vehicles that do not comply a whopping £12.50/day – is ‘not a silver bullet’ in tackling air pollution. It comes less than a month after London’s ULEZ zone was widened to include all areas within the North and South Circular roads, catching another 130,000 drivers. Hugh Bladon, from the Alliance of British Drivers, called the ULEZ ‘ridiculous’ and suggested it should be scrapped. “There is a mindset in this country of having a hatred of people driving around in cars and vans - they don’t seem to realise that people need to get about,” he told MailOnline. “If you’ve got to go in five days a week it’s going to cost more than £60 - that is ridiculous. And the biggest problem is it hits those who can least afford it, as better-off people are able to buy newer cars.
74
Public transport works for many but is inflexible for hundreds of thou- sands who use the car instead. Allow- ing them to drive and park at the places with a direct alternative route in and out of London would cut conges- tion and pollution. “However, it might well be that Lon- don authorities have become so
“This is an example of officials trying to rob motorists of whatever pennies they have in their pockets.” AA spokesman Luke Bosdet told MailOnline: “I think we have to bear in mind that confidence in public transport has not yet returned to pre-covid levels. Some of those would- be passengers will be making car trips. Road traffic is only one source of low- level pollution but is the easy hit for trying to reduce levels. It is also very lucrative in generating charges and fines income for London. “One of the big failures of London transport planning has been not providing the means for commuters and drivers to leave their vehicles on the outskirts and take public transport or cycle into the city. “If Cambridge can convert 3.6 million car commuter trips into bus journeys each year, imagine what London could do if it followed the example by having Park and Ride or Park and Cycle in the right place, at the right time, at the right price. Pump prices at record levels would also encourage the switch. “There seems to be a complete lack of understanding that for many to find affordable housing there is a need to move to the suburbs or further afield.
dependent on the driver pound (parking, road access charges, fines, etc) that they can’t afford for cars to stay out – instead constantly looking for new ways to milk the motorist for cash.”
But Shirley Rodrigues, London’s Deputy Mayor for Environment and Energy, told MailOnline that the study was ‘very misleading’ and its findings had been ‘queried by experts within the university’, adding that the ULEZ had already helped cut toxic roadside nitrogen dioxide pollution by nearly half since it first launched. It comes after Mayor Sadiq Khan refused to allow an extension to the November 1 deadline for the widened scheme, saying last month that it was a ‘matter of life and death’ and adding: “We can’t afford to wait any longer.” When the latest study is compared with a previous analysis by the Greater London Authority, the results indicate that a smaller reduction in air pollution can be attributed to the ULEZ. The Greater London Authority said ULEZ had caused a 29 per cent reduc- tion in roadside NO2 concentrations in central London from July to September 2019 and a 37 per cent reduction from January to February 2020.
DECEMBER 2021
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90
