5 ms·

I'm very familiar with this part of London. I haven't quite lived on the road in question but I know people who have. It's not clear the exact location but I im

I'm very familiar with this part of London. I haven't quite lived on the road in question but I know people who have. It's not clear the exact location but I imagine it to be near a busy junction with lots of vehicles idling. Ultimately in a system where people bid for housing this sort of thing is bound to happen. It's notably cheaper to live on a main road, near a pollution hotspot, etc; there's also commonly social housing in those sorts of locations, which makes moving less about marginal income and more about navigating a bureaucracy (if you're paying below market rent you may need double or triple the amount to move to a nearby privately rented place). In my view we should heavily tax diesel cars out of existence, at least in busy cities. The alternatives are to either demolish large amounts of housing (the South Circular Road and A2 in London are lined with residential; so too are most major roads in the capital), to basically delete the road network, or to accept these deaths as a way of life.

osrec 7y ago
I believe they've started the taxation in some sense. I can no longer drive my old diesel car in London without paying £18 per day for the privilege. That's enough to make me never want to drive it in central London.
- esotericn 7y ago
  The South Circular Road (where this girl lived) is due to be the boundary of the ULEZ[1] in 2021 when it is expanded. At the moment it only covers a very small area of the central congestion zone (smaller than Zone 1). If anything the pollution there is likely to become worse as it forms the official diversion. We already see this; Marylebone Road, the current northern boundary of the ULEZ and Congestion Charge zone, is one of the most polluted roads in the capital. I work around there. Me and my team actively avoid walking along the main road for that reason. [1] Ultra Low Emission Zone https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone
- 7952 7y ago
  I wish they would just ban these dirty cars completely from the zones. Being able to poison the air is not a privilege that you should be able to buy. It turns a moral issues into a financial one.
mjevans 7y ago
The closer to "Caves of steel" (Azimov) for cities, the better.
SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
>In my view we should heavily tax diesel cars out of existence, at least in busy cities. Strong opinion you have there. How much do you know about Diesel engines that utilize DEF? And how do you weigh NOX output against that from a petrol engine? Or do you have strong opinions without knowing the actual science behind this? Because I’d like to see your sources that show modern diesels should be taxed out of existence. Edit: Nope, turns out I received no support for the argument at all but rather OP really just means for all cars to be banned or at least taxed so only rich people can drive in London. Because when I go to Singapore with its like tax model I see equality, and opportunity!
- esotericn 7y ago
  This is all band-aid style stuff. The real issue is that personal cars don't need to be driven in Inner London, petrol or diesel. It's simply unnecessary, public transport here is fantastic and more buses could easily pick up the slack. A blue-badge style disabled exemption, and more frequent inspections for things like emergency services / trade vehicles. Done. The diehards can use electric cars if they wish. Lewisham/Hither Green, where this girl lived, has frequent trains into Central London (15-20mins), buses all over the place, and Google Maps' current estimate to cycle in to London is 33 mins (vs 36 mins for driving).
  - SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
    So now you’ve changed from diesels should be taxed out of existence, unable to explain that position, to now include petrol and that no one should drive in London at all. Ok then.
    - esotericn 7y ago
      People can drive in major cities if they wish, but they should pay for the externalities imposed on residents. Both petrol and diesel cars pollute above acceptable levels, I'm not willing to accept that a car with "reduced pollution" is clean when alternatives are readily available.
alimw 7y ago
> there's also commonly social housing in those sorts of locations I never noticed this. Is there some reason for it or just your general impression?
- esotericn 7y ago
  I think you're misinterpreting my comment; I'm not stating that the majority of social housing is located in high pollution areas but rather that some of it is (a decent amount). These people are effectively in a sort of rent-control style scenario in which moving out and in to privately rented accommodation might mean doubling the rent and moving from a stable long-term tenancy to a yearly thing. They technically have the ability to move whilst being heavily discouraged from doing so. This is quite different to, for example, someone who owns or rents a house that costs 25% more than an equivalent one in a side street, say. It's more of a cost benefit analysis for them. There is however the issue still that eventually, someone is going to end up living there, because housing in London isn't going to be left empty if it exists.
frereubu 7y ago
I live in Brighton (55 miles south of London) and regularly come up by train. But as soon as it's more than me - my wife and daughter joining me to see an exhibition for example - it often costs more to travel by train than it does to drive (in my polluting diesel car I bought quite a while ago when people still thought they were good), including fuel, central London parking and the congestion charge, presuming we don't know three months in advance that we want to do that (when we'd be able to buy cheap super-advance off-peak tickets). The ULEZ will change that calculation a bit. But the thing I hate the very most is the reduction of government subsidies for public transport when the effective subsidies for cars - including things like NHS treatment for this poor girl - is astronomical. I would love my diesel car to be taxed out of existence. But unless there's some kind of provision for public transport (both cost and capacity) to balance that out, it's going to be a real shitshow.
- esotericn 7y ago
  Would it not work to drive to the edge of the Oyster zone and get the train in? Somewhere around East Croydon or one of the tram stops, say? I agree that you wouldn't do it at the moment because it'd be more hassle, but if the cost went up it'd make sense right? (I'm not that familiar with the drive from Brighton but it feels like there must be a station somewhere you can use; there are tons of stations in SE London that have unrestricted parking 10 mins walk away). I agree that National Rail pricing is absurd. We should fix that. There's this silly two-tier thing going on whereby getting a journey within the Oyster zone is trivial and getting one outside (i.e. most of the bloody country) is this escapade of finding advance tickets, finding the cheapest time, etc. Ultimately though, things are going to get more expensive. A poster below commented something along the lines of "so only the rich should drive in London" - and that's what's going to end up happening, unless you ban driving entirely, which would be the nuclear option. Not all problems, particularly those to do with pollution, have an easy "everyone wins" answer. It might just be the case that things we previously considered normal and standard just won't be possible if we want to preserve health and the climate.
  - frereubu 7y ago
    As I've said below, I should have been clearer that I do take the train rather than drive. My point was more about the calculations that don't make sense, and until those change in tandem with more investment in public transport (and yes, sort out those stupidly confusing fare structures on National Rail) we'll be treading water (literally, in London). I wouldn't really care if only rich people drove in London, if they paid enough to make a difference to public transport for everyone else. Even if they didn't the much cleaner air might be worth it. There are stations like the ones you're suggesting. Forest Hill has free on-street parking less than five minutes from the station, but that would increase journey time significantly with the switch to another mode of transport with family in tow, and make a day trip much less feasible. Fair point about some things not being possible though. Better to reduce the number of people travelling if it means a much cleaner, healthier London. I've even considered trying to commute to London from Brighton via bike during the summer, staying a night with a friend and riding back the next afternoon... That would be much nicer if I didn't feel like I was inhaling exhaust fumes for half the journey.

osrec 7y ago

I believe they've started the taxation in some sense. I can no longer drive my old diesel car in London without paying £18 per day for the privilege. That's enough to make me never want to drive it in central London.

esotericn 7y ago
The South Circular Road (where this girl lived) is due to be the boundary of the ULEZ[1] in 2021 when it is expanded. At the moment it only covers a very small area of the central congestion zone (smaller than Zone 1). If anything the pollution there is likely to become worse as it forms the official diversion. We already see this; Marylebone Road, the current northern boundary of the ULEZ and Congestion Charge zone, is one of the most polluted roads in the capital. I work around there. Me and my team actively avoid walking along the main road for that reason. [1] Ultra Low Emission Zone https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone
7952 7y ago
I wish they would just ban these dirty cars completely from the zones. Being able to poison the air is not a privilege that you should be able to buy. It turns a moral issues into a financial one.

mjevans 7y ago

The closer to "Caves of steel" (Azimov) for cities, the better.

SlowRobotAhead 7y ago

>In my view we should heavily tax diesel cars out of existence, at least in busy cities. Strong opinion you have there. How much do you know about Diesel engines that utilize DEF? And how do you weigh NOX output against that from a petrol engine? Or do you have strong opinions without knowing the actual science behind this? Because I’d like to see your sources that show modern diesels should be taxed out of existence. Edit: Nope, turns out I received no support for the argument at all but rather OP really just means for all cars to be banned or at least taxed so only rich people can drive in London. Because when I go to Singapore with its like tax model I see equality, and opportunity!

esotericn 7y ago
This is all band-aid style stuff. The real issue is that personal cars don't need to be driven in Inner London, petrol or diesel. It's simply unnecessary, public transport here is fantastic and more buses could easily pick up the slack. A blue-badge style disabled exemption, and more frequent inspections for things like emergency services / trade vehicles. Done. The diehards can use electric cars if they wish. Lewisham/Hither Green, where this girl lived, has frequent trains into Central London (15-20mins), buses all over the place, and Google Maps' current estimate to cycle in to London is 33 mins (vs 36 mins for driving).
- SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
  So now you’ve changed from diesels should be taxed out of existence, unable to explain that position, to now include petrol and that no one should drive in London at all. Ok then.
  - esotericn 7y ago
    People can drive in major cities if they wish, but they should pay for the externalities imposed on residents. Both petrol and diesel cars pollute above acceptable levels, I'm not willing to accept that a car with "reduced pollution" is clean when alternatives are readily available.

alimw 7y ago

> there's also commonly social housing in those sorts of locations I never noticed this. Is there some reason for it or just your general impression?

esotericn 7y ago
I think you're misinterpreting my comment; I'm not stating that the majority of social housing is located in high pollution areas but rather that some of it is (a decent amount). These people are effectively in a sort of rent-control style scenario in which moving out and in to privately rented accommodation might mean doubling the rent and moving from a stable long-term tenancy to a yearly thing. They technically have the ability to move whilst being heavily discouraged from doing so. This is quite different to, for example, someone who owns or rents a house that costs 25% more than an equivalent one in a side street, say. It's more of a cost benefit analysis for them. There is however the issue still that eventually, someone is going to end up living there, because housing in London isn't going to be left empty if it exists.

frereubu 7y ago

I live in Brighton (55 miles south of London) and regularly come up by train. But as soon as it's more than me - my wife and daughter joining me to see an exhibition for example - it often costs more to travel by train than it does to drive (in my polluting diesel car I bought quite a while ago when people still thought they were good), including fuel, central London parking and the congestion charge, presuming we don't know three months in advance that we want to do that (when we'd be able to buy cheap super-advance off-peak tickets). The ULEZ will change that calculation a bit. But the thing I hate the very most is the reduction of government subsidies for public transport when the effective subsidies for cars - including things like NHS treatment for this poor girl - is astronomical. I would love my diesel car to be taxed out of existence. But unless there's some kind of provision for public transport (both cost and capacity) to balance that out, it's going to be a real shitshow.

esotericn 7y ago
Would it not work to drive to the edge of the Oyster zone and get the train in? Somewhere around East Croydon or one of the tram stops, say? I agree that you wouldn't do it at the moment because it'd be more hassle, but if the cost went up it'd make sense right? (I'm not that familiar with the drive from Brighton but it feels like there must be a station somewhere you can use; there are tons of stations in SE London that have unrestricted parking 10 mins walk away). I agree that National Rail pricing is absurd. We should fix that. There's this silly two-tier thing going on whereby getting a journey within the Oyster zone is trivial and getting one outside (i.e. most of the bloody country) is this escapade of finding advance tickets, finding the cheapest time, etc. Ultimately though, things are going to get more expensive. A poster below commented something along the lines of "so only the rich should drive in London" - and that's what's going to end up happening, unless you ban driving entirely, which would be the nuclear option. Not all problems, particularly those to do with pollution, have an easy "everyone wins" answer. It might just be the case that things we previously considered normal and standard just won't be possible if we want to preserve health and the climate.
- frereubu 7y ago
  As I've said below, I should have been clearer that I do take the train rather than drive. My point was more about the calculations that don't make sense, and until those change in tandem with more investment in public transport (and yes, sort out those stupidly confusing fare structures on National Rail) we'll be treading water (literally, in London). I wouldn't really care if only rich people drove in London, if they paid enough to make a difference to public transport for everyone else. Even if they didn't the much cleaner air might be worth it. There are stations like the ones you're suggesting. Forest Hill has free on-street parking less than five minutes from the station, but that would increase journey time significantly with the switch to another mode of transport with family in tow, and make a day trip much less feasible. Fair point about some things not being possible though. Better to reduce the number of people travelling if it means a much cleaner, healthier London. I've even considered trying to commute to London from Brighton via bike during the summer, staying a night with a friend and riding back the next afternoon... That would be much nicer if I didn't feel like I was inhaling exhaust fumes for half the journey.