Skip to content

Rather over egging it

Sadiq Khan’s ultra-low emission zones are becoming less effective at tackling pollution despite a major expansion, according to official figures that cast doubt on proposals to roll out the scheme across Greater London.

New figures published by Transport for London show restrictions are having a more limited impact on containing deadly nitrogen dioxide.

In central London, levels of the deadly fumes

NOX, in and of itself, isn’t wholly desirable, no. But “deadly fumes ” is taking it a little too far.

“Pollution we’d prefer not to have” is perhaps better?

9 thoughts on “Rather over egging it”

  1. It depends on your health. NOₓ is a nuisance if your lungs are reasonably OK, but if you’re asthmatic or have COPD it can trigger massive breathing problems and put you in hospital.

  2. Be interesting to see why it’s failed.

    My guess is human nature.
    – If you’ve got to pay to drive in a small, central part of London, with lots of tube trains, you don’t drive there.
    – If you’ve got to pay to drive in a large part of outer London, much of which has pretty crappy public transport, you pay. And once you’ve paid, you might as well drive into the centre too.

  3. Have their road “improvement” schemes led to that popular route from A to B being longer? Have they also yielded more traffic idling in jams?

    Is it possible that proportionately less NOx comes from traffic than they thought?

  4. After diesel became persona non-grata, manufacturers switched to microscopic turbocharged petrol engines. Really economical if you drive like the New European Driving Cycle — but if you did that you’d be quicker walking — if you drive merely slowly then the turbo is spooling all the time, increasing NOx emissions (higher cylinder pressure = more thermodynamically advantageous to make NOx) as well as fuel consumption. WLTP does seem to have killed off mid-sized cars with 1.0-litre three pots — at least in the new market — but the ones already built will be with us, using excess fuel and generating excess pollution, until their engines blow up or a turbo oil seal fails.

    Here in W Yorkshire, my 3.0-litre 1 series uses less fuel just bimbling around than my mother-in-law’s 1.2-litre Captur, despite being a quarter-ton heavier, because the under-capacity engine in the Renault spins up its turbo just looking at a hill.

  5. We find the answer is not to drive in London at all. In fact we don’t drive in towns much if we can help it. In the countryside presumably our NOx eventually becomes fertiliser? Or does it just disperse through the atmosphere and make crows cough?

    I probably ought to know but it’s impossible to keep up with all the Green scares and scams.

  6. Could it be possible that the real purpose of this tax was not to control congestion, or pollution, but to price the plebs off the road, forcing them into ‘public transport’ (ie herd them into knife crime kill zones) and leaving the zil lanes for the rich in their limousines and black cabs?

  7. Starfish, I think at this point it just saves time if you assume the function of any impending legislation is to punish the ordinary fella.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *