ULEZ nonsense.. Someone make it make sense..

[uk_senator]

Saw these a few days ago, in the upcoming ULEZ extension.

Car one, a Jan 2002 registered 147, Euro 3, 1970cc twinspark engine, official emissions of 211g/km, NOT ULEZ compliant...

Car two, Sept 2001 registered GTV, Euro 3, 1970cc twinspark engine, official emissions of 220g/km.. Is ULEZ compliant...

Someone make it make sense please.. 😐

[Nullzwei]

Being pragmatic swap the number plates over when you want to drive the 147. Or better still find out the reg number of Khans range rover V8 and use his plates to park on double yellows, run red lights etc etc.

Or appeal.

[uk_senator]

4 minutes ago, Nullzwei said:

Being pragmatic swap the number plates over when you want to drive the 147. Or better still find out the reg number of Khans range rover V8 and use his plates to park on double yellows, run red lights etc etc.

Or appeal.

They aren't mine, just random spots from a couple of days ago, literally round the corner from each other (with another 147 in the next road too). As they were on the cusp, I decided to check their ULEZ status & found that the 147 wasnt compliant.. Its been owned since it was 6 months old & has only done 17,000 miles, but is being hit with non-compliance for some reason, thats going to risk it getting scrapped, which really pisses me off..

[Nullzwei]

10 minutes ago, uk_senator said:

They aren't mine, just random spots from a couple of days ago, literally round the corner from each other (with another 147 in the next road too). As they were on the cusp, I decided to check their ULEZ status & found that the 147 wasnt compliant.. Its been owned since it was 6 months old & has only done 17,000 miles, but is being hit with non-compliance for some reason, thats going to risk it getting scrapped, which really pisses me off..

All makes no sense. Wonder what criterea bar euro level or g/km co2 they are working to?

[uk_senator]

5 minutes ago, Nullzwei said:

All makes no sense. Wonder what criterea bar euro level or g/km co2 they are working to?

Precisely.. Its absolute bollocks. I regularly check Y reg & 51/52 plate cars for compliance, its not the first time I`ve seen this kind of nonsense.

Its risking cars as well, as older owners check/get a letter & just immediately decide to scrap them, rather that questioning it or selling them on. I`ve seen so many increasingly rare, very tidy, low mileage, suspected OAP owned cars near me being scrapped in the last few months, its frankly depressing..

[Nullzwei]

15 minutes ago, uk_senator said:

Precisely.. Its absolute bollocks. I regularly check Y reg & 51/52 plate cars for compliance, its not the first time I`ve seen this kind of nonsense.

Its risking cars as well, as older owners check/get a letter & just immediately decide to scrap them, rather that questioning it or selling them on. I`ve seen so many increasingly rare, very tidy, low mileage, suspected OAP owned cars being scrapped in the last few months, its frankly depressing..

Your not wrong. Recently had the chance to buy a near immaculate Mercedes s202 c250 turbodiesel estate R reg from a guy down in Teddington SW London. He bought it brand new, full history etc. He was so down on it not being complaint he only wanted £600 for it with MOT. I procrastinated and missed it but this non compliant bollocks is making  some people think a valuable car has no value. Which is not right on so many levels, including the sheer waste of working cars that have to be replaced you would assume. Not environmentally friendly at all either.

[andy18s]

I know of someone who sold their 05 Legacy as it wouldn't pass. It was on a private plate which he removed to keep.

 

When the DVLA issued a new number, he put that into the system and it passed...

[vaughant]

4 minutes ago, uk_senator said:

Precisely.. Its absolute bollocks. I regularly check Y reg & 51/52 plate cars for compliance, its not the first time I`ve seen this kind of nonsense.

Its risking cars as well, as older owners check/get a letter & just immediately decide to scrap them, rather that questioning it or selling them on. I`ve seen so many increasingly rare, very tidy, low mileage, suspected OAP owned cars near me being scrapped in the last few months, its frankly depressing..

It's like the scrappage scheme all over again, unveiling old beauties that the old folk have been talked into getting rid of to "save the grandchildren".

I went up the scrappy in the middle of the first scheme and my god they had some lovely cars in there.

They'd cut the back off a 16k K11 Micra to make it a pick up which was to be fair totally mint.

Although I believe, and I think @LightBulbFunmay have the answer, but you can re-categorise some cars based on another figure on the v5c?

[uk_senator]

9 minutes ago, andy18s said:

I know of someone who sold their 05 Legacy as it wouldn't pass. It was on a private plate which removed to keep.

 

When the DVLA issued a new number, he put that into the system and it passed...

I mean... What?!?

Weirdly, one of my friends told me that one of his friends did it the other way round, put a private plate on something that shouldn't be compliant, & magically, it then was compliant...  Its just... ugggg... 😑

[uk_senator]

4 minutes ago, vaughant said:

It's like the scrappage scheme all over again, unveiling old beauties that the old folk have been talked into getting rid of to "save the grandchildren".

I went up the scrappy in the middle of the first scheme and my god they had some lovely cars in there.

They'd cut the back off a 16k K11 Micra to make it a pick up which was to be fair totally mint.

Although I believe, and I think @LightBulbFunmay have the answer, but you can re-categorise some cars based on another figure on the v5c?

I dread to think whats going through Redcorns gates at the moment (the SE`s biggest scrappy), they were on the BBC news a couple of months ago, they`d already seen a 60% jump in cars being scrapped (from an average 300 cars a day to 1000), & he predicted that would be increasing.. 😐 (they just depollute & squash everything coming in, as there is no time to strip them).

[vaughant]

1 minute ago, uk_senator said:

I mean... What?!?

Weirdly, one of my friends told me that one of his friends did it the other way round, put a private plate on something that shouldn't be compliant, & magically, it then was cimpliant...  Its just... ugggg... 😑

It's like anything else that gets rolled out without all the bugs ironed out, that's plenty of exceptions that sneak through, just luck of the draw which one it is.

I saw many Merc E-Class for sale when we were looking for one, newer than our c class, but still part of the old shape that had the Euro 5 engine rather than the Euro 6 our W205 came with.

Many sites advertising these euro5 cars as compliant but they shouldn't really be, so I can only think that it's still quite a "manual input" exercise to alter details rather than getting the algorithm to do it all for you.

In fairness, I think this is common for companies to send in their data in one form, then either the algorithm or humans to alter it to suit, this was basically my lads job when he started at Deloitte. He has now developed a tool to do it for them but they still have a lot of human intervention.

And as we know, no system is infallible.

[uk_senator]

14 minutes ago, vaughant said:

It's like anything else that gets rolled out without all the bugs ironed out, that's plenty of exceptions that sneak through, just luck of the draw which one it is.

I saw many Merc E-Class for sale when we were looking for one, newer than our c class, but still part of the old shape that had the Euro 5 engine rather than the Euro 6 our W205 came with.

Many sites advertising these euro5 cars as compliant but they shouldn't really be, so I can only think that it's still quite a "manual input" exercise to alter details rather than getting the algorithm to do it all for you.

In fairness, I think this is common for companies to send in their data in one form, then either the algorithm or humans to alter it to suit, this was basically my lads job when he started at Deloitte. He has now developed a tool to do it for them but they still have a lot of human intervention.

And as we know, no system is infallible.

Thing is, systems like this affect people in drastic ways, and affects the poor & elderly especially, so they should be bulletproof before being rolled out, but it seems that cars like this Alfa 147, & their owners, are an acceptable level of attrition, which, to me, is not on..

I take 500-2000 pictures of London's cars a month, mostly 80`s & 90`s stuff, you`d be amazed how many of these cars a either 1 owner from new, or very long term owned, & a very high percentage do less than 2000 miles per year (a fair number, which I suspect belong to the elderly, doing 500-1000 miles a year).. How much are these cars contributing to pollution in the grand scheme of things? How many of these elderly people cant face buying another car & are losing their last form of independence, & will result in depression & a shortening of lifespan? 

There`s implications that simply aren't being considered, or, are being considered & are being seen as acceptable casualties, & that doesn't sit well with me..

[uk_senator]

Also, yesterday, 2 huge USAF Boeings went over London at low altitude, one circled south London a couple of times, how much did they add to our pollution levels compared to Dorris doing 700 miles a year in her 1999 1.0 Yaris, but that's totally ignored...

[horriblemercedes]

1 hour ago, Nullzwei said:

All makes no sense. Wonder what criterea bar euro level or g/km co2 they are working to?

Why wonder? It's published! You can find out. It's neither of those things. It's NOx output 

[horriblemercedes]

1 hour ago, uk_senator said:

Saw these a few days ago, in the upcoming ULEZ extension.

Car one, a Jan 2002 registered 147, Euro 3, 1970cc twinspark engine, official emissions of 211g/km, NOT ULEZ compliant...

Car two, Sept 2001 registered GTV, Euro 3, 1970cc twinspark engine, official emissions of 220g/km.. Is ULEZ compliant...

Someone make it make sense please.. 😐

It is possible that they are fitted with slightly different versions of a similar engine. Without being a nerd about these cars or this engine, I can't say. 

 

It is also possible that the data held by the DVLA for one of them is incomplete or not quite right. It might be that both should be compliant or both should not be compliant

 

Another possibility is that one is an import and the data is not working correctly for that reason. My old 2003 diesel Mercedes ML shows as compliant and I believe it's down to it being an import 

[uk_senator]

3 minutes ago, horriblemercedes said:

Why wonder? It's published! You can find out. It's neither of those things. It's NOx output 

Both are Euro 3 & are as near as dammit the same g/km.

[horriblemercedes]

7 minutes ago, uk_senator said:

Both are Euro 3 & are as near as dammit the same g/km.

Exactly! Impossible to tell from that data alone, unfortunately. But Nullzwei wonders which of those things makes a car compliant or not, and as the system specifies, it's neither of those things

[uk_senator]

11 minutes ago, horriblemercedes said:

 My old 2003 diesel Mercedes ML shows as compliant and I believe it's down to it being an import 

Well that just makes no sense..

As far as imports are concerned, I`ve seen numerous ex-Japan, 2000`s Volvo`s, Mercs & JDM`s here, which should meet compliance regs, but don't, & yet these ex-Mexico things are Euro 4 & 5b, & do comply, somehow:

[horriblemercedes]

8 minutes ago, uk_senator said:

Well that just makes no sense..

As far as imports are concerned, I`f seen numerous ex-Japan, 2000`s Volvo`s, Mercs & JDM`s here, which should meet compliance regs, but don't, & yet these ex-Mexico things are Euro 4 & do comply, somehow:

I'm sure we've covered this before. 

 

It does make sense. Somewhere a mistake was made. It really is that simple. Incorrect or incomplete data, probably 

[uk_senator]

3 minutes ago, horriblemercedes said:

It does make sense. Somewhere a mistake was made. It really is that simple. Incorrect or incomplete data, probably 

Well, no, if its wrong data, then it isn't "sense", & needs to be rectified.

[sierraman]

I’ve been reliably told that Sheffield will extend the CAZ to cars in 18 months to 2 years. It will just kill off the town centre, they think in their heads at the council that the bus service is an acceptable alternative. It’s already in place for vans etc, the tradesmen who I completely agree with, just add a £100 loading on to any city centre work. Why should they pay to change their van?

[horriblemercedes]

6 minutes ago, uk_senator said:

Well, no, if its wrong data, then it isn't "sense", & needs to be rectified.

It does make sense; you asked why. That reason is perfectly simple to understand. Mistakes are made all the time!

 

Just because something is wrong doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. I despise the ULEZ system, but I think that the way to attack it is political, not claiming that potential mistakes made by the DVLA 22 years ago are difficult to understand

[wesacosa]

Jeez, anyone would think it was an ill thought out money making ruse/vanity project for a narcissistic mayor desperate to get it through before the Mayoral elections next year

[Nullzwei]

57 minutes ago, horriblemercedes said:

Why wonder? It's published! You can find out. It's neither of those things. It's NOx output 

Thanks. As i do not live anywhere near a low emissions zone i have never looked into it. I do however feel very sorry for Londoners and anyone else residing in or on the border of a low emissions zone having to put up with this nonsense.

 

[uk_senator]

34 minutes ago, sierraman said:

I’ve been reliably told that Sheffield will extend the CAZ to cars in 18 months to 2 years. It will just kill off the town centre, they think in their heads at the council that the bus service is an acceptable alternative. It’s already in place for vans etc, the tradesmen who I completely agree with, just add a £100 loading on to any city centre work. Why should they pay to change their van?

You also have to remember that London has already had a commercial vehicle ULEZ roll out about 8 years ago, so the tradesmen already had to upgrade their vans not that long ago, those vans that are now not compliant again. My cousins one of them, he`s a gardener, in the extension zone & has a 2012-ish HiAce which is now not compliant, but he`s not got the money to upgrade it to a 2016 onwards van, so is looking at paying per day & will have to pass that daily charge on to his customers. I told him to get a pez Galaxy/Sharan or similar, but he doesn't want to look unprofessional by turning up to jobs in a converted people carrier.. One man bands cant keep taking a ten grand hit like this, especially at the moment.

[sierraman]

I 100% would pass the cost and more on to the customers. People don’t realise this when they vote idiots like the current mayor in. 

[horriblemercedes]

1 hour ago, sierraman said:

I 100% would pass the cost and more on to the customers. People don’t realise this when they vote idiots like the current mayor in. 

Or even the previous mayor, under whose governance it started

[somewhatfoolish]

2 hours ago, uk_senator said:

You also have to remember that London has already had a commercial vehicle ULEZ roll out about 8 years ago, so the tradesmen already had to upgrade their vans not that long ago, those vans that are now not compliant again. My cousins one of them, he`s a gardener, in the extension zone & has a 2012-ish HiAce which is now not compliant, but he`s not got the money to upgrade it to a 2016 onwards van, so is looking at paying per day & will have to pass that daily charge on to his customers. I told him to get a pez Galaxy/Sharan or similar, but he doesn't want to look unprofessional by turning up to jobs in a converted people carrier.. One man bands cant keep taking a ten grand hit like this, especially at the moment.

Vinyl on the windows to advertise and black them out; what's unprofessional about aiming to deliver your services at the lowest price commensurate with earning a living?

[sierraman]

3 minutes ago, horriblemercedes said:

Or even the previous mayor, under whose governance it started

Pair of them. Useless. 

[LightBulbFun]

5 hours ago, uk_senator said:

Saw these a few days ago, in the upcoming ULEZ extension.

Car one, a Jan 2002 registered 147, Euro 3, 1970cc twinspark engine, official emissions of 211g/km, NOT ULEZ compliant...

Car two, Sept 2001 registered GTV, Euro 3, 1970cc twinspark engine, official emissions of 220g/km.. Is ULEZ compliant...

Someone make it make sense please.. 😐

simple really, the Petrol ULEZ cut off is Euro 4 however the only emissions figure they care about for petrol cars is the NOx figures, now having a Euro 4 petrol car will guarantee you meet those figures, but a lot of older Petrol cars do still meet those requirements, just by way of design, however there is no guarantee that they will, the only way to find out is lookup their specs etc

CO₂ emissions really dont matter when it comes to ULEZ actually! its only NOx figures, (and for diesels PM's also) that they care about, so I would ignore the  CO₂ figures on the DVLA, I mean they are worth noting, but just for the fact to know that "yes Emissions data is recorded for this vehicle" which is why there is a hard cut-off around the Y prefix mark point, as simply before that point they never bothered recording anything

but the cutoff point that matters for ULEZ compliance is is 0.08g/km of NOx if your even just 1 part over your stuffed, as we recently found with @Six-cylinder's old Mazda MX-5 for example!  hopefully this helps clears things up  

On 15/06/2023 at 13:09, LightBulbFun said:

not sure we would have so much luck here as I see online that it does have some emissions data recorded, CO₂ emissions  at least, so it likely just has NOx levels above the ULEZ requirements sadly

 

@Six-cylinder if you have the V5 to hand, is there any data in the "V: exhaust emissions" section? specifically the ones pertaining to NOx?

(the Petrol ULEZ cut-off is technically Euro 4, but they only care about NOx levels, and a lot of Pre Euro 4 petrol cars do squeak under, but there is always the chance some might not)

 

On 15/06/2023 at 14:04, Six-cylinder said:

 

 

On 15/06/2023 at 14:13, LightBulbFun said:

"NOx 0.081"

"To pass Euro 4 standards, petrol cars had to produce CO of no more than 1.0g/km, Total Hydro Carbon (THCs) emissions of no more than 0.10g/km and NOx emissions of 0.08g/km"

 

Bugger! so close to making it! 

 

4 hours ago, vaughant said:

Although I believe, and I think @LightBulbFunmay have the answer, but you can re-categorise some cars based on another figure on the v5c?

thats for when you have an older car you know is compliant but the data is missing/not recorded on the V5, if you get an official letter from the manufacturer of your car/its engine, then TfL will accept that as proof of meeting the ULEZ requirements, and manually white-list your car