emmissions rule Crystal Palace site (1 Viewer)

[rainbow chasers]

If the LEZ had defined borders, it wouldn't be so bad, but many outside visitors get confused and do not realise that places that used to be in kent, or Essex are not anymore and within the LEZ.

Lowering emissions is a good idea, but the way they are going around it is flawed in staying true to the eco friendly roots. Vehicles do not last long nowadays and need far more expensive parts that fail early due to them running so low to reduce emissions. Making those parts uses fuels, wastes more metal etc - and electric means they are building nuclear power stations doubling the UK's coal burn and producing nuclear waste they cannot get rid of. The power stations are always outside of the capital and to me is just a case of moving the smog to someone elses back yard.

It is a good thing, not having a go - but I do think there needs to be alternatives looked into without the fuel companies stopping or holding up the development. Alternatives that benefit everyone, not just London.

Oh - the op's question....get recovered to the site using onward journey, and return to a garage outside the emission zone afterwards - then drive home

Recovery trucks are exempt. Or do what most people do and visit somewhere else.

 

[Snowbird]

So because of the LEZ one side of the M25 is clean air and the other side polluted! NO WIND IN LONDON THEN. The Emissions from our power stations before they were fitted with filters used to travel all the way to SWEDEN. (acid rain)

Thousands of Welsh sheep slaughtered because of something that happened in Chernobyl.
The LEZ is nothing to do with putting cash in the coffers though

 

[GJH]

And if the LEZ is as beneficial to the area as claimed, why has one of the main sources of pollution, aviation, not been included? (or has it)!

Because the LEZ (rightly or not) is specifically aimed at reducing the level of particulates emitted from diesel engines, nothing else.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[buttons]

If the LEZ had defined borders, it wouldn't be so bad, but many outside visitors get confused and do not realise that places that used to be in kent, or Essex are not anymore and within the LEZ.

Lowering emissions is a good idea, but the way they are going around it is flawed in staying true to the eco friendly roots. Vehicles do not last long nowadays and need far more expensive parts that fail early due to them running so low to reduce emissions. Making those parts uses fuels, wastes more metal etc - and electric means they are building nuclear power stations doubling the UK's coal burn and producing nuclear waste they cannot get rid of. The power stations are always outside of the capital and to me is just a case of moving the smog to someone elses back yard.

It is a good thing, not having a go - but I do think there needs to be alternatives looked into without the fuel companies stopping or holding up the development. [HI]Alternatives that benefit everyone, not just London.[/HI]

Oh - the op's question....get recovered to the site using onward journey, and return to a garage outside the emission zone afterwards - then drive home

Recovery trucks are exempt. Or do what most people do and visit somewhere else.

I give in......what are they

 

[rainbow chasers]

I give in......what are they

How do I put this; In the country we have to travel much further, but we get caned with the same rules and taxes as the city - nearest supplier to me is 90 mile round trip. Neighbour has it worse, he has 160 mile round trip to his supplier. We need to travel. Buses still come once a week if you are lucky, cabs are around £5 a mile. We would benefit from green transport!

In the city, you fine yourselves every time you open your wallet and think that will solve it all. You pay more for goods and services, as they are fined, and pass that on to you. But you do have a great transport system, and suppliers nearby. You can all run electric, get no fines, pay no extra that those outside the lez - BUT that would mean the power stations to make the electric to run the vehicles to deliver those goods.

That mean nuclear waste needed disposal and according to Gov figures, they would double the UK rate of burn of fossil fuels - is that really green? Is that not just shifting the smoke elsewhere? See no Evil, Do no Evil type of thing?

There needs to be a form or sustainable low energy transport means that covers London AND he other parts of the UK. Electricity isn't the answer - It is a band-aid to a problem. Short sighted solution.

Can you imagine a nuclear super station being built in London - honestly, who would be the first to kick off about the emissions? You would end up in the same position.

I have a feeling it is hydrogen, or a way of super compressing air - but the fuel companies would go bust if they cannot find a means of making sure only they can supply it - which is probably why we are where we are now.