Climate Change

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, andypen said:

So what about the many people who can't afford a new car, or the extra £300 a month just to go about their business? Fuck em eh? The Uxbridge election result proves just how unpopular this scam, sorry scheme is. Starmer shit his pants and Sunak is now considering a rethink on his Net Zero timeline. The ULEZ tax will now be extended to other major cities if many councils have their way. You have been warned.

My car is 8 years old, has a 2 litre engine, and is exempt for all ULEZs currently in operation  or scheduled to be introduced

 

Edited 29 July, 2023 by badgerx16

[Whitey Grandad]

21 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

You don't need to buy a new car. 

What about the people who want cleaner air, fuck em eh?

This is far too simplistic. It’s not either one thing or the other. This idiotic scheme will make no difference to the air in London yet it will kill many businesses who are based near the outside. Make your choice.

1. Clean air and a job.

2. Clean air and no job.

[Whitey Grandad]

17 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

My car is 8 years old, has a 2 litre engine, and is exempt for all ULEZs currently in operation  or scheduled to be introduced

 

Well bully for you. So you’re all right jack. 
 

What about everybody else?

[badgerx16]

4 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Well bully for you. So you’re all right jack. 
 

What about everybody else?

It shows you don't need to buy a new car to comply, which seems to be a common gripe.

[Fan The Flames]

7 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

This is far too simplistic. It’s not either one thing or the other. This idiotic scheme will make no difference to the air in London yet it will kill many businesses who are based near the outside. Make your choice.

1. Clean air and a job.

2. Clean air and no job.

Grandad you say I'm being simplistic, them offer a simplistic project fear choice.

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Here's a bit news for you, people don't need to drop down dead in the street for us to want to do something about it, see smoking or obesity.

So they're not dropping down dead in the street as you previously claimed?

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Do you really think that that stuff is just a one off purchase.

No. Hence why I mentioned the additional seven years of building in that success.

Although the local press is announcing today that two bus routes serving a school are being axed because they don't make enough money - which shouldn't be a problem as the Bristol ULEZ is there to fund buses....  Looks like they're not bothering with that bit...

[Fan The Flames]

Just now, Weston Super Saint said:

So they're not dropping down dead in the street as you previously claimed?

I know you are trying to walk me to a ridiculous position. I said he was cukcoo to think we shouldn't worry about something just because people weren't dropping down dead in the street.

[Weston Super Saint]

49 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

My car is 8 years old, has a 2 litre engine, and is exempt for all ULEZs currently in operation  or scheduled to be introduced

 

Until they change the rules

[andypen]

12 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

It shows you don't need to buy a new car to comply, which seems to be a common gripe.

OK, I didn't mean a "brand new" vehicle, more likely a newer post 2006 MY car which would comply. Even with the scrapage scheme of £2k, or a trade in with a dealer,many people will be faced with forking out thousands to upgrade their older vehicle, not to mention commercial vehicles which will drive up costs to businesses.

[Fan The Flames]

1 minute ago, Weston Super Saint said:

No. Hence why I mentioned the additional seven years of building in that success.

Although the local press is announcing today that two bus routes serving a school are being axed because they don't make enough money - which shouldn't be a problem as the Bristol ULEZ is there to fund buses....  Looks like they're not bothering with that bit...

The councillors must be trousering the loot and flying off first class to Monaco then.

[Weston Super Saint]

1 minute ago, Fan The Flames said:

I know you are trying to walk me to a ridiculous position. I said he was cukcoo to think we shouldn't worry about something just because people weren't dropping down dead in the street.

So, in your view, he's cuckoo for pointing out something that isn't happening. Right-o.

You've already mentioned that people have a choice and don't need to drive which is fair enough, the same choice exists for living in a city...

[Weston Super Saint]

1 minute ago, Fan The Flames said:

The councillors must be trousering the loot and flying off first class to Monaco then.

Stranger things have happened, like looney Marvin insisting the city can afford to build a metro system!

[Fan The Flames]

1 minute ago, andypen said:

OK, I didn't mean a "brand new" vehicle, more likely a newer post 2006 MY car which would comply. Even with the scrapage scheme of £2k, or a trade in with a dealer,many people will be faced with forking out thousands to upgrade their older vehicle, not to mention commercial vehicles which will drive up costs to businesses.

People change cars all the time for newer models. Those that can't afford to carry anymore debt can sell and buy a car of similar value.

[Weston Super Saint]

2 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

People change cars all the time for newer models. Those that can't afford to carry anymore debt can sell and buy a car of similar value.

Not sure that fixes the problem....

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/ulez-auto-trader-mayor-transport-for-london-nissan-b1097299.html

[Fan The Flames]

6 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

So, in your view, he's cuckoo for pointing out something that isn't happening. Right-o.

You've already mentioned that people have a choice and don't need to drive which is fair enough, the same choice exists for living in a city...

You're really trying hard to gotcha me, you are just looking silly.

I never said the second paragraph, lot's of people dont have a choice, for those that don't its very easy to be ULEZ compliant. You guys are really catastrophising the situation.

Edited 29 July, 2023 by Fan The Flames

[Fan The Flames]

3 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Not sure that fixes the problem....

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/ulez-auto-trader-mayor-transport-for-london-nissan-b1097299.html

Better model may cost more shocker.

[sadoldgit]

2 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

This is far too simplistic. It’s not either one thing or the other. This idiotic scheme will make no difference to the air in London yet it will kill many businesses who are based near the outside. Make your choice.

1. Clean air and a job.

2. Clean air and no job.

Of course it will. If you know anything about London you will know that the traffic in boroughs like Croydon and Bromley (outside the south circular road) probably have worse traffic problems than inner London boroughs. The air is already cleaner since efforts to improve it were brought into place but it still doesn’t comply with international regulations so more work needs to be done.

I appreciate that Batman struggles with the concept of air that moves around but I am sure that you understand that the quality of the air doesn’t automatically get better it worse with side of the north and south circular roads.

Funny that exactly the same people who don’t give a toss about the negative effects that Brexit have had on this country are getting their knickers twisted about a policy that will improve the health of tens of thousands of people and have an adverse financial effect for relatively few.

The notion that it is just a money making scam is complete crap. If it was why the help in assisting people in the lower income brackets? Why the scrappage schemes? Surely they would make more money by making compliance as difficult as possible for as many people as possible?

I heard that caller in the David Lammy show live and my first thought was that he wasn’t in the least bit being rational. Lammy didn’t press him on his claims and I think that was because he thought the bloke had lost it. How you can say that the ULEZ scheme is worse for you family than the horrors of the last 13 years of Tory governance god only knows. The energy price hike alone will have cost him more and I am sure the mortgage rates have also made a bigger dent in his finances. Perhaps it was the final nail in his particular coffin, but he can’t blame ULEZ for the state of his finances overall. So this man, who was at his wits end, was happy to vote for the same party who has shafted him for well over a decade because of a policy brought in to help make his family healthier in the long term 🤔. Sounds a bit cuckoo to me. Maybe when he calmed down a bit he realised that there is a bit of a difference between voting for a party to run the country based on wider factors rather than just one local issue.

 

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Grandad you say I'm being simplistic, them offer a simplistic project fear choice.

That is the choice. Like it or not.

[Whitey Grandad]

7 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Of course it will. If you know anything about London you will know that the traffic in boroughs like Croydon and Bromley (outside the south circular road) probably have worse traffic problems than inner London boroughs. The air is already cleaner since efforts to improve it were brought into place but it still doesn’t comply with international regulations so more work needs to be done.

 

That’s because drivers are avoiding entering the ULEZ in the south of London and are staying south of the South Circular Road.

I know London very well having been born there and lived there for quite a while, my wife even longer. My relatives that used to live inside the M25 are no longer with us and what few I have left have all moved outside. My parents are both buried inside and if I ever feel like visiting their grave I shall have to pay the punitive fine.

None of this will make any difference to the air in London. 

[egg]

2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Until they change the rules

Yep...cars that are currently ULEZ compliant will not remain compliant for the entirety of their serviceable life...the parameters for compliant vehicles will change in time. 

[badgerx16]

7 minutes ago, egg said:

Yep...cars that are currently ULEZ compliant will not remain compliant for the entirety of their serviceable life...the parameters for compliant vehicles will change in time. 

Ultimately we will all be driving zero emission vehicles.

[egg]

2 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Ultimately we will all be driving zero emission vehicles.

"We" may mean us in this country, albeit without the infrastructure to support it. There's zero chance that the rest of the world will move that way though, and I won't get started on the environmental damage caused by that alleged environmental exercise. 

[Weston Super Saint]

15 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

People change cars all the time for newer models. Those that can't afford to carry anymore debt can sell and buy a car of similar value.

 

15 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Better model may cost more shocker.

You're all over the place on this one.

As the article points out, if you want a ULEZ compliant car then you have to pay the price penalty.  Therefore buying 'a car of similar value' isn't going to solve the issue for many people.

[Fan The Flames]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

 

You're all over the place on this one.

As the article points out, if you want a ULEZ compliant car then you have to pay the price penalty.  Therefore buying 'a car of similar value' isn't going to solve the issue for many people.

Mate stop this school boy debating shit, if you can't see that those statements are complete unconnected then you're a bit stupid.

[sadoldgit]

15 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

That’s because drivers are avoiding entering the ULEZ in the south of London and are staying south of the South Circular Road.

I know London very well having been born there and lived there for quite a while, my wife even longer. My relatives that used to live inside the M25 are no longer with us and what few I have left have all moved outside. My parents are both buried inside and if I ever feel like visiting their grave I shall have to pay the punitive fine.

None of this will make any difference to the air in London. 

Others will beg to differ about the air quality Whitey but if you have lived in London you will know just how bad the traffic is outside the north and south circular roads. I spent many years living near and in Bromley and in Sidcup and for areas very close to the green belt the traffic was horrendous 20 years ago. I can’t imagine that it is any better now. As for the “punitive fine” you will only have to pay if your car is non compliant. If it isn’t, don’t think if it as a fine, think of it as contributing to the well being of our current and  future generations 😉

Yes, it will be a pain for some, but major changes will always have a negative impact on an element of society but we learn to live with it and move on. I remember the fuss caused by smokers when smoking was banned in pubs. No one says anything about it now and we can all enjoy our drinks and meals without inhaling other people’s air pollution. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

16 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Ultimately we will all be driving zero emission vehicles.

And then the cameras will be used for pay per mile charges. Anyone who thinks this is about saving lives is delusional, naive in the extreme or just wants to show us what a “good” person they are. 

[AlexLaw76]

17 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Ultimately we will all be driving zero emission vehicles.

Jabril thanks you for your custom

[Lord Duckhunter]

 

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Jabril thanks you for your custom

And your point is ?

 

[badgerx16]

26 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

Is your car compliant ?

[buctootim]

2 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

And your point is ?

 

Batman with a point? Hm. Interesting idea but I dont think he'd could go for it.  

[Weston Super Saint]

6 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Mate stop this school boy debating shit, if you can't see that those statements are complete unconnected then you're a bit stupid.

No idea what your point is then!

I thought you were saying those that can't afford to buy a new car could buy a different one with a similar value (that would be ULEZ compliant)????

[sadoldgit]

8 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

And then the cameras will be used for pay per mile charges. Anyone who thinks this is about saving lives is delusional, naive in the extreme or just wants to show us what a “good” person they are. 

Just like those damned people who fought against the slave trade, against shoving children up chimneys, who developed vaccines to improve public health and are working to find cures for cancers - just trying to show us what good people they are.🙄

Assuming you are a grandparent, would you criticise other grandparents for wanting their grandchildren to grow up in a healthier environment as just wanting to show what “good” people they are?

Little wonder you swallowed the guff spewed out by Farage. He played on your nasty narrow view of other human beings. Enjoy your cynicism whilst you eye up the nine pinters down at your local ale house.

 

[egg]

12 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Just like those damned people who fought against the slave trade, against shoving children up chimneys, who developed vaccines to improve public health and are working to find cures for cancers - just trying to show us what good people they are.🙄

Assuming you are a grandparent, would you criticise other grandparents for wanting their grandchildren to grow up in a healthier environment as just wanting to show what “good” people they are?

Little wonder you swallowed the guff spewed out by Farage. He played on your nasty narrow view of other human beings. Enjoy your cynicism whilst you eye up the nine pinters down at your local ale house.

 

Mentioning that stuff in the same breath as this additional road tax rather makes Duckies point. 

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

Just like those damned people who fought against the slave trade, against shoving children up chimneys, who developed vaccines to improve public health and are working to find cures for cancers - just trying to show us what good people they are.🙄

Assuming you are a grandparent, would you criticise other grandparents for wanting their grandchildren to grow up in a healthier environment as just wanting to show what “good” people they are?

Little wonder you swallowed the guff spewed out by Farage. He played on your nasty narrow view of other human beings. Enjoy your cynicism whilst you eye up the nine pinters down at your local ale house.

 

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

On 30/07/2023 at 10:37, sadoldgit said:

 I remember the fuss caused by smokers when smoking was banned in pubs. No one says anything about it now and we can all enjoy our drinks and meals without inhaling other people’s air pollution. 

Thank you for making my point.

People were banned from smoking in pubs, not allowed to do so once they paid £12.50 a visit. 

Edited 31 July, 2023 by Lord Duckhunter

[buctootim]

17 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Thank you for making my point.

People were banned from smoking in pubs, not allowed to do so once they paid £12.50 a visit. 

Crap analogy. More like we dont want to ban cigarettes but we want to deter their use - so put £12.50 tax on a packet.  Deterring harmful behaviours and incentivising better ones, like using public transport is Tory policy donchakonw. Not like those nasty Labour communists who want to ban everything...eh?  

Edited 31 July, 2023 by buctootim

[Sheaf Saint]

13 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Thank you for making my point.

People were banned from smoking in pubs, not allowed to do so once they paid £12.50 a visit. 

Yes, and eventually all petrol and diesel cars will also be completely banned from driving into city centres as well. But obviously it's not feasible to introduce such a ban anywhere yet, because of the massive impact it would have on the economy and people's livelihoods.

So until such a ban is feasible, the only option is to try and encourage people to start making the transition to less polluting vehicles as early as possible. And the only really effective way to change people's behaviour is to make it more expensive for them to carry on with the old behaviour.

[AlexLaw76]

1 minute ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Yes, and eventually all petrol and diesel cars will also be completely banned from driving into city centres as well. But obviously it's not feasible to introduce such a ban anywhere yet, because of the massive impact it would have on the economy and people's livelihoods.

So until such a ban is feasible, the only option is to try and encourage people to start making the transition to less polluting vehicles as early as possible. And the only really effective way to change people's behaviour is to make it more expensive for them to carry on with the old behaviour.

we are years, probably decades from that. You know it, we all know it.

In the meantime, we will be taxed to high-heaven for the privilege 

[Lord Duckhunter]

6 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

we are years, probably decades from that. You know it, we all know it.

In the meantime, we will be taxed to high-heaven for the privilege 

It’s nothing to do with public health, cleaner air or any other such pony. It’s all to do with raising revenue now as well as getting the infrastructure in place for future raids on the motorists wallet. 

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

It’s nothing to do with public health, cleaner air or any other such pony. It’s all to do with raising revenue now as well as getting the infrastructure in place for future raids on the motorists wallet. 

I assume you have never crossed the Humber Bridge or driven the M6 Toll, the Mersey or Thames tunnels, let alone any motorways in France.

Edited 31 July, 2023 by badgerx16

[Sheaf Saint]

2 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

we are years, probably decades from that. You know it, we all know it.

In the meantime, we will be taxed to high-heaven for the privilege 

Yes, we are. But if we don't start incentivising people to make the transition now, it will only take longer and people will be even less prepared for it when it finally happens.

In the mean time, the revenue raised from the incentive schemes can be used to invest in the necessary improvements to infrastructure, like a functional charging network.

[AlexLaw76]

4 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Yes, we are. But if we don't start incentivising people to make the transition now, it will only take longer and people will be even less prepared for it when it finally happens.

In the mean time, the revenue raised from the incentive schemes can be used to invest in the necessary improvements to infrastructure, like a functional charging network.

incentivising people by taxing them into poverty is not going to work. Already see a slight (and welcomed) shift today, by the PM.

[hypochondriac]

My elderly father in law has had a stroke and currently resides in Chessington which is just inside the new ULEZ. If I want the whole family to go and visit their grandfather and I stay overnight, I have no choice but to use my old people carrier and pay Khan £25 every time I go. He is a giant wanker. 

 

Edited 31 July, 2023 by hypochondriac

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

I assume you have never crossed the Humber Bridge or driven the M6 Toll, the Mersey or Thames tunnels, let alone any motorways in France.

Exactly, it’s revenue raising dressed up as saving the environment, and saps like soggy lap it up. Nobody tries to pretend toll roads or bridges are anything else. 

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

incentivising people by taxing them into poverty is not going to work. Already see a slight (and welcomed) shift today, by the PM.

The current zone has reduced the emissions in central London so it has worked in that respect. Using tax to change people’s behaviour does work. It’s how you target it to those who can afford it that’s the problem.

I don’t know many details about this expansion but when I lived in London I didn’t often use my car but the further out you go the more you tend to need it so I get the objections.

The recent bi-election and Sunak’s opportunism shows how difficult it is for western democracies to take the necessary action on climate change, that’s why scientists have been warning us for decades yet precious little has been done. 

Edited 31 July, 2023 by aintforever

[Scally42]

Figure 2. This figure shows the annual values of the U.S. Heat Wave Index, from 1895 to 2020. These data cover the contiguous 48 states. This index defines a heat wave as a period lasting at least four days with an average temperature that would only be expected to occur once every 10 years, based on the historical record. The index value for a given year depends on how often heat waves occur and how widespread they are. Source: Graph from Environmental Protection Agency, “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves,” accessed August 14, 2021, https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-heat-waves# . Data Source: K. Kunkel, Figure 2.3 in “Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate,” U.S. Climate Change Science Program: Synthesis and Assessment Product 3.3, originally published in 2008, updated in 2021, accessed August 14, 2021, www.globalchange.gov/browse/reports/sap-33-weather-and-climate-extremes-changing-climate

 

It sure did look warm in the States in the 30's, I stand to be corrected though

 

Edited 31 July, 2023 by Scally42

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, Scally42 said:

Figure 2. This figure shows the annual values of the U.S. Heat Wave Index, from 1895 to 2020. These data cover the contiguous 48 states. This index defines a heat wave as a period lasting at least four days with an average temperature that would only be expected to occur once every 10 years, based on the historical record. The index value for a given year depends on how often heat waves occur and how widespread they are. Source: Graph from Environmental Protection Agency, “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves,” accessed August 14, 2021, https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-heat-waves# . Data Source: K. Kunkel, Figure 2.3 in “Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate,” U.S. Climate Change Science Program: Synthesis and Assessment Product 3.3, originally published in 2008, updated in 2021, accessed August 14, 2021, www.globalchange.gov/browse/reports/sap-33-weather-and-climate-extremes-changing-climate

 

It sure did look warm in the States in the 30's, I stand to be corrected though

 

From your own link:

Key Points

• Heat waves are occurring more often than they used to in major cities across the United States. Their frequency has increased steadily, from an average of two heat waves per year during the 1960s to six per year during the 2010s and 2020s (see Figure 1).
•  In recent years, the average heat wave in major U.S. urban areas has been about four days long. This is about a day longer than the average heat wave in the 1960s (see Figure 1).
• The average heat wave season across the 50 cities in this indicator is about 49 days longer now than it was in the 1960s (see Figure 1). Timing can matter, as heat waves that occur earlier in the spring or later in the fall can catch people off-guard and increase exposure to the health risks associated with heat waves.
• Heat waves have become more intense over time. During the 1960s, the average heat wave across the 50 cities in Figures 1 and 2 was 2.0°F above the local 85^th percentile threshold. During the 2020s, the average heat wave has been 2.3°F above the local threshold (see Figure 1).
• Of the 50 metropolitan areas in this indicator, 46 experienced a statistically significant increase in heat wave frequency between the 1960s and 2020s. Heat wave duration has increased significantly in 29 of these locations, the length of the heat wave season in 44, and intensity in 17 (see Figure 2).
• Longer-term records show that heat waves in the 1930s remain the most severe in recorded U.S. history (see Figure 3). The spike in Figure 3 reflects extreme, persistent heat waves in the Great Plains region during a period known as the “Dust Bowl.” Poor land use practices and many years of intense drought contributed to these heat waves by depleting soil moisture and reducing the moderating effects of evaporation.⁶

[Scally42]

1 hour ago, aintforever said:

From your own link:

Key Points

• Heat waves are occurring more often than they used to in major cities across the United States. Their frequency has increased steadily, from an average of two heat waves per year during the 1960s to six per year during the 2010s and 2020s (see Figure 1).
•  In recent years, the average heat wave in major U.S. urban areas has been about four days long. This is about a day longer than the average heat wave in the 1960s (see Figure 1).
• The average heat wave season across the 50 cities in this indicator is about 49 days longer now than it was in the 1960s (see Figure 1). Timing can matter, as heat waves that occur earlier in the spring or later in the fall can catch people off-guard and increase exposure to the health risks associated with heat waves.
• Heat waves have become more intense over time. During the 1960s, the average heat wave across the 50 cities in Figures 1 and 2 was 2.0°F above the local 85^th percentile threshold. During the 2020s, the average heat wave has been 2.3°F above the local threshold (see Figure 1).
• Of the 50 metropolitan areas in this indicator, 46 experienced a statistically significant increase in heat wave frequency between the 1960s and 2020s. Heat wave duration has increased significantly in 29 of these locations, the length of the heat wave season in 44, and intensity in 17 (see Figure 2).
• Longer-term records show that heat waves in the 1930s remain the most severe in recorded U.S. history (see Figure 3). The spike in Figure 3 reflects extreme, persistent heat waves in the Great Plains region during a period known as the “Dust Bowl.” Poor land use practices and many years of intense drought contributed to these heat waves by depleting soil moisture and reducing the moderating effects of evaporation.⁶

So the most extreme heatwaves were in the 30's, the excuses given would apply to several decades before and after. Yet no extreme heat.

Edited 31 July, 2023 by Scally42