London congestion charge up to £25 for most polluting vehicles
12 July 2006, 04:38 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: same time, different place
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
London congestion charge up to £25 for most polluting vehicles
... from 2008 or 2009, and I think that means most Scoobs; those over 225g.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-cent...t.asp?prID=842
On the other hand, Fatty Two Prius doesn't have quite the same ring to it?!
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-cent...t.asp?prID=842
On the other hand, Fatty Two Prius doesn't have quite the same ring to it?!
12 July 2006, 04:46 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Warrington
Posts: 4,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear!
Typical mixed up thinking.
A scoob takes no more road space than a 1.0l mondeo and so causes no more congestion
. In fact as it accelerates quicker it causes less congestion than a 1.0 Yaris that can only crawl away from the lights causing a tailback 
.
High emissions drivers pay for the privilaege on the VED, why should they pay twice for the privilege of going into London
<Off to burn a load of petrol while I can still a££ord it
>
A scoob takes no more road space than a 1.0l mondeo and so causes no more congestion
. In fact as it accelerates quicker it causes less congestion than a 1.0 Yaris that can only crawl away from the lights causing a tailback .High emissions drivers pay for the privilaege on the VED, why should they pay twice for the privilege of going into London
<Off to burn a load of petrol while I can still a££ord it
>
12 July 2006, 04:57 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As speedking has pointed out this can't possibly be about congestion as what comes out the exhaust isn't what causes the congestion. We have also seen that congestion is being engineered into road schemes, so it is clear that government actually wants congestion.
It was also interesting that when Red Ken claimed that the so called congestion charge reduced private car traffic by 30% he was unable to detail what reduction in pollution there was. When further pushed one of his "officials" finally admitted that there had been no measurable decrease in pollution despite the claimed 30% reduction in private cars in the zone.
So, the charge doesn't reduce congestion because it isn't aimed at congestion and it doesn't reduce pollution because it doesn't impact upon the most polluting vehicles. The only thing it does reduce is our choice to use our own private transport to make journeys that we wish to make. The only conclusion I can reach is that it is a control measure to stop the general population having access to private transport, now there's a surprise.
It was also interesting that when Red Ken claimed that the so called congestion charge reduced private car traffic by 30% he was unable to detail what reduction in pollution there was. When further pushed one of his "officials" finally admitted that there had been no measurable decrease in pollution despite the claimed 30% reduction in private cars in the zone.
So, the charge doesn't reduce congestion because it isn't aimed at congestion and it doesn't reduce pollution because it doesn't impact upon the most polluting vehicles. The only thing it does reduce is our choice to use our own private transport to make journeys that we wish to make. The only conclusion I can reach is that it is a control measure to stop the general population having access to private transport, now there's a surprise.
12 July 2006, 05:01 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
It's never been about congestion and always about emissions and air quality (which is why electric cars go free), they just worded it incorrectly in the first place.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sam Witwicky
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
17
13 November 2015 10:49 AM