|
|
Post by allentc on Jan 21, 2015 13:38:45 GMT
Looks like TFL are trying to bend their own rules to get make their Euro 5 Routemasters compatible with the new ULEZ zone! Apparently they are "nearly" Euro 6 rated but this has been disputed ;-) Also some inconsistency and possible confusion caused by allowing Euro 4 petrol cars in and only Euro 6 diesel cars. Source: Routeone Magazine News: www.route-one.net/industry/smmt-slams-ulez-flaws/ |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 21, 2015 15:05:45 GMT
Looks like TFL are trying to bend their own rules to get make their Euro 5 Routemasters compatible with the new ULEZ zone! Apparently they are "nearly" Euro 6 rated but this has been disputed ;-) Also some inconsistency and possible confusion caused by allowing Euro 4 petrol cars in and only Euro 6 diesel cars. Source: Routeone Magazine News: www.route-one.net/industry/smmt-slams-ulez-flaws/I've never trusted any figures released by TfL in terms of emissions released by any buses so this is no surprise what so ever. |
|
|
|
Post by allentc on Jan 21, 2015 16:09:53 GMT
You can't help but laugh at TFL being caught out by their own rules and then trying to wriggle out of it. I agree I don't believe negative pollution stats put out about buses. I remember reading that coach/bus travel is the cleanest form of travel there is beating planes, trains, boats and cars. I don't believe buses are such a large contributor of emissions if you consider it in the form of emissions emitted (grams of C02 or whatever) per passenger mile. It would interesting to know if TFL breaks down their figures as such. I can't believe say a 7 litre diesel bus carrying 10 people or more is worse for the environment than a diesel or petrol 2 litre car with one person in it. If it really is that bad now what about the pre-Euro days thirty years ago. The air must have been super toxic. One inhalation and you are dead.  |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jan 21, 2015 17:01:03 GMT
You can't help but laugh at TFL being caught out by their own rules and then trying to wriggle out of it. If it really is that bad now what about the pre-Euro days thirty years ago. The air must have been super toxic. One inhalation and you are dead. 30 years ago everyone worried about leaded petrol so different pollutants were in focus. No one had diesel cars. The other difference was trying to keep traffic moving, not the current idea of narrowing roads and having multi phase traffic lights that causes vehicles to idle rather than run at optimal engine speed. |
|
|
|
Post by londonbusboy on Jan 21, 2015 21:09:54 GMT
You can't help but laugh at TFL being caught out by their own rules and then trying to wriggle out of it. If it really is that bad now what about the pre-Euro days thirty years ago. The air must have been super toxic. One inhalation and you are dead. 30 years ago everyone worried about leaded petrol so different pollutants were in focus. No one had diesel cars. The other difference was trying to keep traffic moving, not the current idea of narrowing roads and having multi phase traffic lights that causes vehicles to idle rather than run at optimal engine speed. Quite a few traffic lights/crossings are laughable that they have to go through their phases even when no pedestrians have pressed the cross button and no cars are waiting in the other road that has a green light |
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Jan 21, 2015 22:09:26 GMT
I think TfL are being quite unreasonable they expect small businesses to obey rules that could come in, in 5 years time (which on several occasions TfL have said is 'enough time') but they themselves will be able to partially breach.
This is one of those moments when TfL is quite autocratic, the same way it is not easy for small businesses to meet the deadline, it is not easy for TfL to meet the deadline with budget and funding constraints.
I believe pollution is a serious matter for London and it is especially import for Buses to meet this deadline as soon as possible because they are the biggest contributors to air pollution.
Instead of the wasting money on 3 door double decker hybrids, we should been accelerating the testing and implementation of zero emission vehicles (such as hydrogen vehicles, virtual electric vehicles, 100% biodiesel powered vehicles, I could go on...)
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 21, 2015 23:35:26 GMT
For all the people who are jumping on TfL for "inconsistency" can I just say that they are not responsible for policy and the timing of it. The Mayor is responsible and he delayed the ULEZ thus creating a gap into which his policy of requiring the NB4L to be built fell. If we had remained on the original programme it is likely that a more rational choice of forcing the pace on zero emission vehicles would have happened. Only TfL can drive that scale of development in much the same way it helped push low floor single deckers, then low floor double deckers and then hybrid bus development. We are probably 2-3 years behind where we should be on having zero emission vehicles entering service in modest numbers to build up fleet operating experience.
TfL are asked to develop the requisite policy options and choices but they are not accountable for the final decisions. We should bear in mind that things may change even more post May 2016 in terms of a change of Mayor and their policies. Government funding decisions after Autumn 2015 are also key as to whether TfL can afford the requisite investment in a cleaner bus fleet. The whole thing may well unravel anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Jan 22, 2015 2:03:15 GMT
A new Mayor will hopefully scrap these silly plans... BoJo is going back to Parliament, so we'll have to see what the next plans...
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 3, 2015 10:28:13 GMT
 Someone's clearly not convinced! Seen on Twitter this morning. |
|
