John Williamson wrote:
On 05/11/2018 11:27, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:03:34
on Mon, 5 Nov 2018, David Cantrell remarked:

Wrong. The aim should be to reduce *pollution*, not to reduce polluting
vehicles. What's worse, a hundred polluting vehicles entering the zone
once a year each, or a single polluting vehicle entering every day?
Obviously the latter.

Changing it to "reducing the number of polluting *trips*" encompasses
both ideas, but still shows that its the regular commuters/deliveries
rather than people visiting Auntie Flo on her birthday who need to be
discouraged.

Something that might help somewhat, and would be virtually free to
implement,would be to make the congestion charge apply 24/7 rather than
just on weekdays.


The ULEZ will indeed operate 24/7, but the charge will be in addition to
the congestion charge:

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/ulez-where-and-when?intcmp=54312

There will be a 'sunset' period for some existing vehicles, giving their
owners time to replace them:

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/discounts-and-exemptions

Otherwise, the main vehicles to be hit will be all but the newest diesels.

HMU
CALL OR TEXT or watsapp ....+237682822983
Email :.......

hello we are leading suppliers of pharmaceutical product meds online
we operate on daily and retails basis and very reliable and our
product are 100% top quality am ready to supply on large and smaller
orders and i am looking in building a strong business relationship
with potential client around the world i do world wide delivery and
delivery is guarantee.
see price list offer and pm me or you can get me on whatsapp

FOR ZOLPICLONE 7.5MG SMALLER ORDER
250 tabs..........................‎£90
500 tabs...........................‎£150
1000 tabs.........................‎£250
2500 tabs.........................£350
5000 tabs.........................£500
7500 tabs.........................£700
10000 tabs........................£850
15000 tabs........................£1200
25000 tabs........................£1500
FOR DIAZEPAM SHALINA BRAND
diazepam 10mg 500pills £100
diazepam 10mg 300pills £70
diazepam 10mg 1000pills £150
diazepam 10mg 5000pills £350
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £120
diazepam 5mg 5000pills £300
diazepam 5mg 10000pills £500
diazepam 10mg 10000pills £700
FOR ROCHE DIAZEPAMS 10MG SMALLER ORDER
250 tabs..........................‎£90
500 tabs...........................‎£150
1000 tabs.........................‎£250
2500 tabs.........................£350
5000 tabs.........................£500
7500 tabs.........................£700
10000 tabs........................£850
15000 tabs........................£1200
25000 tabs........................£1500
TEVA 10MG DIAZEPAMS SMALLER ORDER
250 tabs...........................‎£90
500 tabs...........................‎£150
1000 tabs.........................‎£250
2500 tabs.........................£350
5000 tabs.........................£500
7500 tabs.........................£700
10000 tabs.......................£850
15000 tabs.......................£1200
25000 tabs.......................£1500
...
ketamine £20 each vial/1g
ketamine powder each gram £25
FOR TRAMADOL APPLE FLAVOUR
tramadol 50mg 250pills £80
tramadol 100mg 300pills £90
tramadol 225mg 300pills £120
tramadol 50mg 500pills £130
tramadol 100mg 500pills £140
tramadol 250mg 500pills £150
tramadol 50mg 1000pills £200
tramadol 100mg 1000pills £220
tramadol 250mg 1000pills £250
FOR TRAMADOL BULK ORDER
tramadol 50mg 5000pills £450
tramadol 100mg 5000pills £550
tramadol 250mg 5000pills £700
i also have my delivery records all around the worlds and i
providedated pictures with buyers name and my name CALL US OR TEXT
.....+2376682822983 email for detailsi supply more than the quantity
listed,i give additional discount to more larger ordersi look forward
in doing great business with reliable buyersthanks email for details
Research Chemicals Ltd

CALL OR TEXT or watsapp ....+237682822983
Email : ...........

On 05/11/2018 12:18, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:02:10 on Mon, 5 Nov
2018, Someone Somewhere remarked:

Arguably it should be e.g. £5 per journey, £10 for the most polluting
vehicles (and maybe an even higher figure for e.g. certain lorries),
and £2 for those that are emission free at the tailpipe (as they are
not entirely polluting free in general and there still needs to be an
aspect of congestion charging).Â* A journey could be classed as passing
through the congestion charge boundary inbound (with an exception that
twice within a very short time was obviously due to a circuitous
journey).

Putting aside the policy issue of charging at all for a moment, that
doesn't work on a topological basis. One car could be driving all day
long while staying inside the emissions zone (remember we are talking
about the N/S circular very soon), whereas another which just happened
to 'live' near the boundary could do half a dozen short trips spread
throughout the day, but nevertheless crossing the boundary.

Unless you set your "very short time" at say 12hrs, which isn't at all
what you meant.

We were talking about the City of London (which is what this thread
started as) and our own made up plans, not the emissions zone as
proposed by the Mayor of London.

The City is, of course, small enough for this to work.

In message , at 14:07:53 on Mon, 5 Nov
2018, Someone Somewhere remarked:
On 05/11/2018 12:18, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:02:10 on Mon, 5 Nov
2018, Someone Somewhere remarked:

Arguably it should be e.g. £5 per journey, £10 for the most
polluting vehicles (and maybe an even higher figure for e.g. certain
lorries), and £2 for those that are emission free at the tailpipe
(as they are not entirely polluting free in general and there still
needs to be an aspect of congestion charging).* A journey could be
classed as passing through the congestion charge boundary inbound
(with an exception that twice within a very short time was obviously
due to a circuitous journey).
Putting aside the policy issue of charging at all for a moment, that
doesn't work on a topological basis. One car could be driving all day
long while staying inside the emissions zone (remember we are talking
about the N/S circular very soon), whereas another which just happened
to 'live' near the boundary could do half a dozen short trips spread
throughout the day, but nevertheless crossing the boundary.
Unless you set your "very short time" at say 12hrs, which isn't at
all what you meant.

We were talking about the City of London (which is what this thread
started as) and our own made up plans, not the emissions zone as
proposed by the Mayor of London.

It's a bit confusing when people start talking about the congestion
charge, which as far as I know goes to TfL (or its Mayor) rather than
the City of London.

The City is, of course, small enough for this to work.

--
Roland Perry

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
On 02/11/2018 14:09, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:33:29 on Fri, 2 Nov
2018, John Williamson remarked:

Set the penalty at a bit more than it would cost to divert round the
restriction.

How do you measure such a cost? Just extra miles (and hence gallons) of
driving polluting people living further out, or does my time have a value
too?

Like all such things, the answer will be a fudge based on wage levels and
fuel costs.

Call it twenty quid a trip as a starter, and if that doesn't put enough
off, then increase it. It's a penalty to discourage people, not a carrot
to entice people to update their transport.

My time as a semi-retired person, is probably worth less than someone
with an urgent appointment in Central London.

If I had an urgent appointment in Central London, I'd either use public
transport or a pushbike, as they are the fastest ways to get round the
City. By about 2030, all buses will be electric, as will most cabs.

the problem is that this, and similar bans in other cities, aren't being
proposed for 2030

they are being proposed for 2020

tim

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 12:06:37 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
If I had an urgent appointment in Central London, I'd either use public
transport or a pushbike, as they are the fastest ways to get round the
City. By about 2030, all buses will be electric, as will most cabs.

the problem is that this, and similar bans in other cities, aren't being
proposed for 2030

they are being proposed for 2020

I'd love to see an electric bus that can make it up highgate or hampstead or
muswell hill more than 2 or 3 times before requiring a recharge being
available by 2020. Its one thing running electric buses in nice flat areas
such as southwark as is currently done, its quite another running them up
1:10 hills.

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 12:22:33 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 12:06:37 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
If I had an urgent appointment in Central London, I'd either use public
transport or a pushbike, as they are the fastest ways to get round the
City. By about 2030, all buses will be electric, as will most cabs.

the problem is that this, and similar bans in other cities, aren't being
proposed for 2030

they are being proposed for 2020

I'd love to see an electric bus that can make it up highgate or hampstead or
muswell hill more than 2 or 3 times before requiring a recharge being
available by 2020. Its one thing running electric buses in nice flat areas
such as southwark as is currently done, its quite another running them up
1:10 hills.

As a kid I used the 654 trolley bus route which ran between Croydon and Crystal Palace. They
handled the climb up Anerley Hill with ease. Then they were replaced by motor buses, which on the
first day could not get up the hill.

On 18/01/2019 16:21, Optimist wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 12:22:33 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 12:06:37 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
If I had an urgent appointment in Central London, I'd either use public
transport or a pushbike, as they are the fastest ways to get round the
City. By about 2030, all buses will be electric, as will most cabs.

the problem is that this, and similar bans in other cities, aren't being
proposed for 2030

they are being proposed for 2020

I'd love to see an electric bus that can make it up highgate or hampstead or
muswell hill more than 2 or 3 times before requiring a recharge being
available by 2020. Its one thing running electric buses in nice flat areas
such as southwark as is currently done, its quite another running them up
1:10 hills.

As a kid I used the 654 trolley bus route which ran between Croydon and Crystal Palace. They
handled the climb up Anerley Hill with ease. Then they were replaced by motor buses, which on the
first day could not get up the hill.

Yes but trolley buses needed overhead wires. I remember the excitement
in my schoolboy days when the bus came off the wires. I think it could
move on its battery - about 10 yards on the flat.

On 19/01/2019 08:57, MikeS wrote:
On 18/01/2019 16:21, Optimist wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 12:22:33 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 12:06:37 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
If I had an urgent appointment in Central London, I'd either use
public
transport or a pushbike, as they are the fastest ways to get round the
City. By about 2030, all buses will be electric, as will most cabs.

the problem is that this, and similar bans in other cities, aren't
being
proposed for 2030

they are being proposed for 2020

I'd love to see an electric bus that can make it up highgate or
hampstead or
muswell hill more than 2 or 3 times before requiring a recharge being
available by 2020. Its one thing running electric buses in nice flat
areas
such as southwark as is currently done, its quite another running
them up
1:10 hills.

As a kid I used the 654 trolley bus route which ran between Croydon
and Crystal Palace.Â* They
handled the climb up Anerley Hill with ease.Â* Then they were replaced
by motor buses, which on the
first day could not get up the hill.

Yes but trolley buses needed overhead wires. I remember the excitement
in my schoolboy days when the bus came off the wires. I think it could
move on its battery - about 10 yards on the flat.



Battery buses here in Guildford seem to cope with the hills with no
problems. They've just been introduced on the park and ride services
which all involve climbing hills many times a day.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message , MikeS writes
On 18/01/2019 16:21, Optimist wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 12:22:33 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 12:06:37 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
If I had an urgent appointment in Central London, I'd either use public
transport or a pushbike, as they are the fastest ways to get round the
City. By about 2030, all buses will be electric, as will most cabs.

the problem is that this, and similar bans in other cities, aren't being
proposed for 2030

they are being proposed for 2020

I'd love to see an electric bus that can make it up highgate or hampstead or
muswell hill more than 2 or 3 times before requiring a recharge being
available by 2020. Its one thing running electric buses in nice flat areas
such as southwark as is currently done, its quite another running them up
1:10 hills.
As a kid I used the 654 trolley bus route which ran between Croydon
and Crystal Palace. They
handled the climb up Anerley Hill with ease. Then they were replaced
by motor buses, which on the
first day could not get up the hill.

Yes but trolley buses needed overhead wires. I remember the excitement
in my schoolboy days when the bus came off the wires. I think it could
move on its battery - about 10 yards on the flat.

Indeed. I think the battery was just intended to prevent the bus finding
itself stranded in situations when the arms could not reach (or did not
have access to) any wires. I've only once seen a trolley bus on battery
power, and I think it was when it had to leave its normal path for a
short distance because of some roadworks. [For some reason, I keep
thinking of the problems that the original Daleks had when they needed
to go up and down up stairs - a totally foreseeable design flaw!]



--
Ian