Car Viewing tomorrow (Maybe)

[MikeSh]

4 hours ago, anchorman said:

Well that’s two people in the whole world that doesn’t believe in climate change, you and Trump.

What? Climate change and pollution are two different issues. They may have some common contributors, such as road vehicles producing pollution and CO2, but the ULEZ is about pollution, not climate change per se.

[anchorman]

14 minutes ago, MikeSh said:

What? Climate change and pollution are two different issues. They may have some common contributors, such as road vehicles producing pollution and CO2, but the ULEZ is about pollution, not climate change per se.

I know Mike but climate change is also about carbon emissions and we’ve been reckless over the years.  If clean engines are available, we should be using them.  

[anchorman]

1 hour ago, Cyker said:

That's a rather disingenuous stretch, there's no need to try and put words in my mouth just because I hold a different view to you; It's perfectly fine for disagreement - I'm just talking about the effect the ULEZ has had on the air quality in London, i.e. minimal. IIRC this is even backed up by KHAAAN's own commissioned studies, which he disavowed because it didn't fit with his agenda...

 

As someone who actually lives and works here, I can honestly say if anything the areas I traverse regularly are actually worse since things like ULEZ and LTNs have come into force.

This is not surprising since traffic is being forced along fewer roads, concentrating it.

I'm sure the places they put monitoring stations to show improvement, well away from these areas, measure an improvement, until they want to implement another scheme, then they'll measure it at these higher concentration areas.

It's too easy for them to manipulate the figures, and after he rejected his own survey's findings because they didn't reflect what he wanted them to, I find it difficult to trust later released figures that suddenly do...

 

We’re going to have to agree to disagree because the notion that excluding older vehicles from cities - all cities doesn’t work is bewildering.  Charging people discourages them and we should be using the cleanest engines available.  Not doing because people can’t or often won’t change to a cleaner engine is like allowing sewage and plastic to be dumped in the sea because it’s cheaper.  

[anchorman]

1 hour ago, Cyker said:

That's a rather disingenuous stretch, there's no need to try and put words in my mouth just because I hold a different view to you; It's perfectly fine for disagreement - I'm just talking about the effect the ULEZ has had on the air quality in London, i.e. minimal. IIRC this is even backed up by KHAAAN's own commissioned studies, which he disavowed because it didn't fit with his agenda...

 

As someone who actually lives and works here, I can honestly say if anything the areas I traverse regularly are actually worse since things like ULEZ and LTNs have come into force.

This is not surprising since traffic is being forced along fewer roads, concentrating it.

I'm sure the places they put monitoring stations to show improvement, well away from these areas, measure an improvement, until they want to implement another scheme, then they'll measure it at these higher concentration areas.

It's too easy for them to manipulate the figures, and after he rejected his own survey's findings because they didn't reflect what he wanted them to, I find it difficult to trust later released figures that suddenly do...

 

Subjective.  

[MikeSh]

1 hour ago, anchorman said:

I know Mike but climate change is also about carbon emissions and we’ve been reckless over the years.  If clean engines are available, we should be using them.

Climate change is almost all about CO2 emissions. Urban pollution is almost nothing to do with CO2 emissions. ICEs produce a lot of both, but reducing the pollution from them has little effect on CO2 produced. (Conversely you could probably build one that had reduced CO2 but more pollution ... Oh, that'll be the diesel I guess.)

Using the wrong argument or terminology just opens the door for the deniers - Cykers or Trumps - to mangle the facts to their advantage.

You clearly understand the difference so why conflate them? If you say or write something that is wrong you confuse other people and discredit yourself.

[MC1216]

Can i suggest for the sake of the OP this thread has gone off topic so if you want to discuss your Google science on climate change you start a new thread and discuss it on that.

I have been on many forums and somehow whatever the thread is someone always turns it around on to climate change,Brexit or American gun law.

I hope this forum isn't the same.

[RonYarisX]

9 hours ago, MikeSh said:

Cykers or Trumps...

🤣    That was my first reaction too.

Whether we all agree or disagree, I'd love to see the evidence where pollution has effectively increased as a result of ULEZ. Cyker may be on his own because even a Trump or a Farage isn't that ignorant.

As a commuter from Kent to central London from the late 90's to 2005 and having friends living all around London who I visit every few years, I can assure you the city is a different place. I never contemplated moving to nearer the city for that very reason. Our office was in High Holborn and especially during summer months, I can remember sitting at an outside pub table nearby with the air blue, tears in my eyes and choking - I couldn't sit there for more than 15mins. It's now completely changed. The same can be said for many parts of the London area. It's nonsense to suggest otherwise.

Just read an article on Autocar which the naysayers may want to read, all about the USA in the 70's. History repeating itself.

70's USA

I don't lagree with the way the ULEZ and it's likes have been implemented in cities across the UK, I'm not 100% convinced a reduction in emissions is the main goal, but there's no denying the air is much cleaner. !Removed! hell, you just need to walk down Renfield Street in Glasgow today compared to just a few years ago to notice the vast difference. It's incredible.

Perhaps Nox has gone to the deniers heads. Either that or they're watching too much GBnews 🤣

[Bob66]

1 minute ago, MC1216 said:

Can i suggest for the sake of the OP this thread has gone off topic so if you want to discuss your Google science on climate change you start a new thread and discuss it on that.

I have been on many forums and somehow whatever the thread is someone always turns it around on to climate change,Brexit or American gun law.

I hope this forum isn't the same.

Most Forums deviate, just an exchange of information... why stifle debate ?

What does the gun laws in the USA have to do with cars ...a bit off-topic huh ?

[MC1216]

12 minutes ago, Bob66 said:

Most Forums deviate, just an exchange of information... why stifle debate ?

What does the gun laws in the USA have to do with cars ...a bit off-topic huh ?

Yes they deviate and debate is good but i find that once you get on to certain debates (Climate change being one) you may as well open a new thread as it's unfair on the OP who is looking for answers to a certain question.

Okay the gun law was a bit left field but it was for some reason discussed too often on a watch forum i was on.(Yes it was a UK forum only)

[Bob66]

42 minutes ago, MC1216 said:

Yes they deviate and debate is good but i find that once you get on to certain debates (Climate change being one) you may as well open a new thread as it's unfair on the OP who is looking for answers to a certain question.

Okay the gun law was a bit left field but it was for some reason discussed too often on a watch forum i was on.(Yes it was a UK forum only)

I understand and agree with most of what you are saying, but most forums are similar,  in that ...as in a normal conversation...we tend to find many rabbit holes to inhabit...just like we are doing now.  I quite like it this way...but as my mam always said..."it takes all sorts"...even in the liquorish type.  🙂

[anchorman]

Mmmm, liquorice assorts.  Especially when looking at a car tomorrow.  On topic foul averted.  

[Bob66]

4 minutes ago, anchorman said:

Mmmm, liquorice assorts.  Especially when looking at a car tomorrow.  On topic foul averted.  

What..,another car...thought that you were sorted with your new UX ?

[anchorman]

5 minutes ago, Bob66 said:

What..,another car...thought that you were sorted with your new UX ?

I made reference to the topic before got told off 😉.  I’m very happy with the UX but I did swing by and look at the updated version yesterday!

[Trewithy]

Staying on topic, this afternoon I am going to have a look at the Yaris Cross and the LBX.

[Jimota]

Ideally, I would like an electric car but as I live in a flat it makes ownership a bit more problematic compared to having a self charging hybrid.  I do have genuine concerns about pollution and protection of the environment and that is one of the reasons that I moved away from ICE cars.  Technology is ever evolving and my humble opinion is that ICE cars will eventually be phased out.  When it happens some people might look back with nostalgia but I prefer to look forward.  How many of us would still like to see cross-ply tyres, no ABS brakes, no seat belts, no air bags, no air conditioning, no ECVT gears, no LCD lights and last but not least - starting handles.  Mind you a starting handle might come in handy for the unlucky Yaris/Yaris Cross owners who’ve had 12v Battery problems.

[Jimota]

Staying on topic as well, I’m getting slight urges to look at the new CHR but I think I’ll stay with the Yaris Cross for a while yet.

[Primus1]

All those features are still available, it called a pushbike 

[MikeSh]

2 minutes ago, Jimota said:

Technology is ever evolving and my humble opinion is that ICE cars will eventually be phased out.

I agree though I think the current (political) targets are unrealistic. Even if we (the world) can build the vehicles it will be pointless if the grids supplying the power aren't simultaneously decarbonised. And that is a very big, and expensive, business.

[Cyker]

The irony is making new cars is itself a big source of emissions; EVs don't magically remove pollution from the air when they pop out the factory, they are just a lower direct source of them over their life-time but they still have the same large initial foot print as any car.

If we were serious, we'd ban the sale of new cars almost completely and manufacturers would have to pivot to maintaining old ones, but the knock-on effect of that to the world economy would likely be catastrophic as everything involved in the supply chain suddenly looses its income.

There's just no quick and easy solution short of decimating the world's population. Everything is too interlinked, and pulling on one thread will just unravel others without careful planning.

[Bob66]

1 hour ago, anchorman said:

I made reference to the topic before got told off 😉.  I’m very happy with the UX but I did swing by and look at the updated version yesterday!

That's a beautiful car. 🙂

I enjoyed my UX...and would have loved to have the new iAWD...with the bigger rear motor, but the price is just a little bit more than I want to pay...no discounts available.  So, I've ordered a Premiere Cross iAWD instead.

[Bper]

3 hours ago, RonYarisX said:

🤣    That was my first reaction too.

Whether we all agree or disagree, I'd love to see the evidence where pollution has effectively increased as a result of ULEZ. Cyker may be on his own because even a Trump or a Farage isn't that ignorant.

As a commuter from Kent to central London from the late 90's to 2005 and having friends living all around London who I visit every few years, I can assure you the city is a different place. I never contemplated moving to nearer the city for that very reason. Our office was in High Holborn and especially during summer months, I can remember sitting at an outside pub table nearby with the air blue, tears in my eyes and choking - I couldn't sit there for more than 15mins. It's now completely changed. The same can be said for many parts of the London area. It's nonsense to suggest otherwise.

Just read an article on Autocar which the naysayers may want to read, all about the USA in the 70's. History repeating itself.

70's USA

I don't lagree with the way the ULEZ and it's likes have been implemented in cities across the UK, I'm not 100% convinced a reduction in emissions is the main goal, but there's no denying the air is much cleaner. !Removed! hell, you just need to walk down Renfield Street in Glasgow today compared to just a few years ago to notice the vast difference. It's incredible.

Perhaps Nox has gone to the deniers heads. Either that or they're watching too much GBnews 🤣

Hi Ron, I lived in Islington for 22 years and worked all over London and in all honesty never encountered any problems with the air. I could however clearly see the pollution on the underground. Whenever we go back and we have to use the tube its like we have never been away.

[Bob66]

10 minutes ago, Cyker said:

The irony is making new cars is itself a big source of emissions; EVs don't magically remove pollution from the air when they pop out the factory, they are just a lower direct source of them over their life-time but they still have the same large initial foot print as any car.

If we were serious, we'd ban the sale of new cars almost completely and manufacturers would have to pivot to maintaining old ones, but the knock-on effect of that to the world economy would likely be catastrophic as everything involved in the supply chain suddenly looses its income.

There's just no quick and easy solution short of decimating the world's population. Everything is too interlinked, and pulling on one thread will just unravel others without careful planning.

I was hoping that Hydrogen , would be the future for ice cars, but it's really quiet on that score...perhaps there are more problems harnessing it than was initially envisaged.

[Bob66]

New bike...along with my current Cross...suitably positioned .  🙂

[Jimota]

I thought my comments might have got us off topic again.

[MC1216]

48 minutes ago, Trewithy said:

Staying on topic, this afternoon I am going to have a look at the Yaris Cross and the LBX.

An update later with your views would be nice.

The LBX has had some great reviews.