Mizter T wrote:
It's a good point of course, but some of the I've come across about
replacing old equipment for new, more efficient and less emitting kit
is rather surprising in the way it often comes down in favour of the
new - taking into account so many years of the old kit continuing to
be used in its less efficient and more emitting glory. Sorry to be so
unspecific but I'm talking in a broad brush way about many fields.

This is true, but it depends rather on usage. The problem I have with the
LEZ is that it's a very blunt instrument. The daily charges are very high,
so they're only worthwhile if you're using your vehicle all day. If you're
a delivery driver, for example.

If you're, say, a part-time builder who drives a van from your house to the
builder's yard to the job and home again, 200 pounds is a very steep burden
on a job where you might be earning 20 pounds an hour. Actually there might
be only an hour's driving per day. If I were in that situation, I'd give
up.

And then there are people driving vans, minibuses or motorhomes for
recreational purposes, who make no profit at all. How many community
projects have a minibus for occasional use? Will it really cost 200 quid to
drive the old ladies to church once a week?

Of course, some of this can be adjusted by changes in behaviour (eg use
three MPVs instead of the church minibus) but they'll probably increase
costs and the resulting pollution may not be reduced.

If the costs of conversion were also reasonable then I'd have less of an
objection (TfL's website makes no indication at all of how much this would
be).

Theo