Buy all your VW California Accessories at the Club Shop Visit Shop

Bristol propose to ban diesel vehicles by March 2021

Lightning said:
The Boomers have lost the respect of the millennials unfortunately,

Agreed, it makes you wonder why millennials have lost respect for boomers...
Click to expand...
It does appear that there has been a pillaging of the future by older generations.
  • My father retired at 60 in 1995. He had a 2/3 final salary pension which has increased by 5% per year for 24 years, a 220% increase. That is being paid by the generations now in work.
  • Older generations had a free university education, paid for by even older generations. The current generation pay for their own university education, so older generations currently contribute nothing towards our universities having contributed nothing while they were at university.
  • Older generations have pumped 100 parts per million of CO2 into the atmosphere, reaping the rewards of cheap energy. Future generations will need to handle the costs.

Of course there are also great achievements of the older generations.
  • 1.1 billion fewer people in absolute poverty compared with 1990.
  • Polio and Smallpox eradicated (or nearly eradicated).
  • Information revolution.
Future generations will enjoy the rewards of these great achievements for free.
 
Amarillo said:
It does appear that there has been a pillaging of the future by older generations.
  • My father retired at 60 in 1995. He had a 2/3 final salary pension which has increased by 5% per year for 24 years, a 220% increase. That is being paid by the generations now in work.
  • Older generations had a free university education, paid for by even older generations. The current generation pay for their own university education, so older generations currently contribute nothing towards our universities having contributed nothing while they were at university.
  • Older generations have pumped 100 parts per million of CO2 into the atmosphere, reaping the rewards of cheap energy. Future generations will need to handle the costs.

Of course there are also great achievements of the older generations.
  • 1.1 billion fewer people in absolute poverty compared with 1990.
  • Polio and Smallpox eradicated (or nearly eradicated).
  • Information revolution.
Future generations will enjoy the rewards of these great achievements for free.
Click to expand...

Yes, I totally agree,

As one who often says to the boredom of many "I marched on foot a foot behind a foot" we have the proliferation of nuclear weapons. (Ban the bomb, for a few brief seconds I was one step behind Michael foot) :)

We have the enormous gulf in world equality:

We can really go on and on ..... and then start spilling out what we didn't have but todays generation does have .... etc.

Those have been the arguments of every generation. I wonder how many people immediately post Napoleon poured scorn on Pitt before plunging into the Crimea. However blaming the past can often be nothing more than a smokescreen (pun intended) for the indecision of today. Interesting that if you look at the ages of the collective that sparked extinction rebellion we are looking at "boomers"and the immediate generation after :)

Getting back on topic. Pollution is killing people in Bristol. Let's stop the killing. 10,000 people were killed directly by the great smog of 1952. The ruling generation of the time reacted with positivity. Whether Bristol is acting in the right way or the wrong way may be debatable but at least it is acting and not handwringing.
 
GrannyJen said:
A very generalist comment if I may say so and not something that I have particularly experienced within either my own family or within my own academic profession. In fact, I struggle to think of anyone I know who refers to their grandparents or grand-anyone in derogatory terms. If I did then I would probably think it represented poorly on the person being derogatory.

In my own lifetime I have often found one generation adopts the mantle of knowing and being better than the previous. That in many ways is simply progress. We all like to think we can do better than what preceded us. However there is a difference in inheriting the mantle of leadership and self-belief and being derogatory to those who preceded you.
Click to expand...
When discussing generations the conversation is generalised. I don’t think it’s a loss of personal respect between individuals, it’s a loss of respect for the system they have inherited, it appears to offer less favourable terms to millennials than Boomers received. The derogatory term applied to millennials generally by boomers and other generations is ‘snowflakes’, which came into being long before the OK Boomer meme. It’s not personal, it’s just what’s happened. The ok boomer meme is intentionally dismissive....

The politician in the video explains her rationale for using OK Boomer during that debate.

"OK boomer" recognizes that "you can't win a deeply polarized debate – facts don't matter," she said.:

"It is better to acknowledge that it is perhaps better to use energy elsewhere”

My use of the term ‘ok boomer’ was only in response to the use of the name Greta being used in a derogatory way at the start of this thread, by a boomer. Respect works in all directions.

Disclaimer - I’m Generation X
 
Lightning said:
When discussing generations the conversation is generalised. I don’t think it’s a loss of personal respect between individuals, it’s a loss of respect for the system they have inherited, it appears to offer less favourable terms to millennials than Boomers received. The derogatory term applied to millennials generally by boomers and other generations is ‘snowflakes’, which came into being long before the OK Boomer meme. It’s not personal, it’s just what’s happened. The ok boomer meme is intentionally dismissive....

The politician in the video explains her rationale for using OK Boomer during that debate.

"OK boomer" recognizes that "you can't win a deeply polarized debate – facts don't matter," she said.:

"It is better to acknowledge that it is perhaps better to use energy elsewhere”

My use of the term ‘ok boomer’ was only in response to the use of the name Greta being used in a derogatory way at the start of this thread, by a boomer. Respect works in all directions.

Disclaimer - I’m Generation X
Click to expand...


Ok, fair enough. As an individual I tend to try to avoid generalist terms so probably I don't pay as much attention to them as I should.

Interesting though. Greta is a young girl with all her life in front of her and whilst perhaps with age some may recoil with indignation at what she says she still has a voice, and who gave her that voice? As a "boomer" (you can see that I am really getting into the terminology now) we had to fight for our voice, we were definitely born to be seen and not heard, and I had all the scorn poured on me as a young activist that Greta has now.

Every generation has to hand the baton over to the next sometime, most do it reluctantly and hang on to it for too long. I just hope we can all work to make it as much of a civilised process as we can for the problems facing the world today require consensus of voice, not division.
 
Amarillo said:
It does appear that there has been a pillaging of the future by older generations.
  • My father retired at 60 in 1995. He had a 2/3 final salary pension which has increased by 5% per year for 24 years, a 220% increase. That is being paid by the generations now in work.
  • Older generations had a free university education, paid for by even older generations. The current generation pay for their own university education, so older generations currently contribute nothing towards our universities having contributed nothing while they were at university.
  • Older generations have pumped 100 parts per million of CO2 into the atmosphere, reaping the rewards of cheap energy. Future generations will need to handle the costs.

Of course there are also great achievements of the older generations.
  • 1.1 billion fewer people in absolute poverty compared with 1990.
  • Polio and Smallpox eradicated (or nearly eradicated).
  • Information revolution.
Future generations will enjoy the rewards of these great achievements for free.
Click to expand...

Yes, one of those circular conversations. I remember rationing, empty food shops and my paternal grandfather dying at a then respectable age of 66, having been retired through ill health without a pension or any other support. I remember few of my maternal uncles and never knew my Mothers father, all dying in late 50's, miners, from work-related illnesses. Thanks to the generation that brought me in to the world we have a health service, state pension and the much-derided Health and safety at work acts.

Your Father clearly had an enhanced pension, something that the vast majority of his generation did not have so a bit of an unfair comparison. As for pumping all that pollution into the atmosphere, we all had to breath it as well which thanks to successive clean air acts succeeding generations do not have to, although, back to topic, other emissions could now be proving to be equally toxic and requiring equal radical action.

I do fear for this present generation. The threat due to climate change is immediate. The destruction of much of the natural habitat of the planet to feed a population in number vastly more than could be envisaged even three generations ago is a huge challenge.

Each generation has had to face a challenge not of it's own making. Looking constantly over one's shoulders to tabulate "who had what and doesn't have now" is hardly going to help the planet overcome the challenges in front of it.
 
GrannyJen said:
Ok, fair enough. As an individual I tend to try to avoid generalist terms so probably I don't pay as much attention to them as I should.

Interesting though. Greta is a young girl with all her life in front of her and whilst perhaps with age some may recoil with indignation at what she says she still has a voice, and who gave her that voice? As a "boomer" (you can see that I am really getting into the terminology now) we had to fight for our voice, we were definitely born to be seen and not heard, and I had all the scorn poured on me as a young activist that Greta has now.

Every generation has to hand the baton over to the next sometime, most do it reluctantly and hang on to it for too long. I just hope we can all work to make it as much of a civilised process as we can for the problems facing the world today require consensus of voice, not division.
Click to expand...
www.irishtimes.com

Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering for certain men?

Articles of 2019: How can a 16-year-old girl in plaits inspire such rage?
www.irishtimes.com www.irishtimes.com
 
Lightning said:
When discussing generations the conversation is generalised. I don’t think it’s a loss of personal respect between individuals, it’s a loss of respect for the system they have inherited, it appears to offer less favourable terms to millennials than Boomers received. The derogatory term applied to millennials generally by boomers and other generations is ‘snowflakes’, which came into being long before the OK Boomer meme. It’s not personal, it’s just what’s happened. The ok boomer meme is intentionally dismissive....

The politician in the video explains her rationale for using OK Boomer during that debate.

"OK boomer" recognizes that "you can't win a deeply polarized debate – facts don't matter," she said.:

"It is better to acknowledge that it is perhaps better to use energy elsewhere”

My use of the term ‘ok boomer’ was only in response to the use of the name Greta being used in a derogatory way at the start of this thread, by a boomer. Respect works in all directions.

Disclaimer - I’m Generation X
Click to expand...

Your on the X Factor and don’t like older people ?
 
Lightning said:
From the map it looks like you cannot drive across the city anywhere. It extends all along Portway in the West and part way up the M32 in the East. As you say, it’s a long detour.
Click to expand...
For us Cali owners it will also depend on whether our vehicles are classed as commercial vehicles or private ones. If the former we will be charged for entering the larger area and for entering the central zone.
If private vehicles we will be able to drive thought the charging zone at no cost but be fined if we enter the central zone within 7am-3pm.

Time will tell how this all works out.

Alan
 
AlanC said:
For us Cali owners it will also depend on whether our vehicles are classed as commercial vehicles or private ones. If the former we will be charged for entering the larger area and for entering the central zone.
If private vehicles we will be able to drive thought the charging zone at no cost but be fined if we enter the central zone within 7am-3pm.

Time will tell how this all works out.

Alan
Click to expand...
That’s a good point, all the N1 converted vans will be hit by this. I think the plan still has to be approved by the government, so it may all change still.
 
We will all be using the bus in cities soon..

Birmingham
The UK’s largest council announced plans this month to ban private vehicles from driving through the city centre. Motorists would still be able to drive into the city, but would be prevented from crossing the city in a move to tackle air pollution and prioritise cycling, walking and public transport. Other measures include introducing car-sharing and 20mph limit in the city centre. The council has said that road transport accounts for a third of CO2 emissions in Birmingham.
York
The historic city aims to ban all non-essential private car journeys inside its medieval walls within three years to cut carbon emissions. Disabled drivers would be exempt. Many streets around the minster, above, are already pedestrianised. The city, which attracts almost 7 million tourists each year, aims to become carbon neutral by 2030.
Edinburgh
The Scottish capital is in the midst of an 18-month trial during which city centre streets are closed to traffic for several hours on the first Sunday of every month. It was the first UK city to join the Open Streets initiative to combat air pollution and reclaim city centres for pedestrians and cyclists.
Bristol
The city will become the first in the UK to ban privately owned diesel cars from its streets next year. It will prohibit such vehicles from entering a central zone from 7am until 3pm, or incur a fine. Taxis and emergency services will be exempt, and commercial vehicles will have to pay to enter the area.
Oxford
The city and county councils have proposed the UK’s first zero emission zone in the city centre. Drivers of diesel and petrol vehicles will be charged £10 a day to enter the zone, increasing to £20 in December 2024. The penalty for not paying the charge will be £120. People living inside the zone will pay a discounted rate of 10%.
Glasgow
The city council has proposed limiting private vehicle access to George Square. Under the plans to be debated this week, two sides of the famous city centre plaza would be pedestrianised, and the other two restricted to public transport and cyclists.
Manchester
Mayor Andy Burnham and cycling and walking commissioner Chris Boardman have launched a five-year plan to increase daily walking trips by a third and “double and double again” cycling journeys by 2025. “This isn’t just about switching from cars to bikes and cutting harmful emissions – it’s also about what we want our towns and cities to look like, and how we look after our public spaces,” Burnham said last week.
Portsmouth
Plans have been unveiled for the UK’s first car-free community. Planning permission has been sought for a new neighbourhood of 4,000 homes on the eastern side of Portsmouth harbour, with streets dedicated to pedestrians and cyclists, and vehicles confined to a vast underground car park. Portsmouth city council, which is backing the development, said it could be a “beacon for the whole of Portsmouth and the rest of the country”.
Cardiff
The city is planning to charge non-residents £2 to drive into the centre as part of £2bn “transport vision” to reduce congestion and improve air quality. Other measures include new tram/train routes, new park-and-ride sites, cheaper bus fares, more walking and cycling routes and an electric bike pilot scheme.
London
The capital pioneered the congestion charge in 2003 and it is now one of the largest in the world. In 2019 it introduced the 24-hour ultra-low emission zone, which will expand to cover all of Greater London next year. More than 27km of roads were closed on its annual car-free day last year. Mayor Sadiq Khan has said he wants 80% of all journeys in the capital to be made by walking, cycling or public transport by 2041, compared with 63% now.
 
Lightning said:
We will all be using the bus in cities soon..

Birmingham
The UK’s largest council announced plans this month to ban private vehicles from driving through the city centre. Motorists would still be able to drive into the city, but would be prevented from crossing the city in a move to tackle air pollution and prioritise cycling, walking and public transport. Other measures include introducing car-sharing and 20mph limit in the city centre. The council has said that road transport accounts for a third of CO2 emissions in Birmingham.
York
The historic city aims to ban all non-essential private car journeys inside its medieval walls within three years to cut carbon emissions. Disabled drivers would be exempt. Many streets around the minster, above, are already pedestrianised. The city, which attracts almost 7 million tourists each year, aims to become carbon neutral by 2030.
Edinburgh
The Scottish capital is in the midst of an 18-month trial during which city centre streets are closed to traffic for several hours on the first Sunday of every month. It was the first UK city to join the Open Streets initiative to combat air pollution and reclaim city centres for pedestrians and cyclists.
Bristol
The city will become the first in the UK to ban privately owned diesel cars from its streets next year. It will prohibit such vehicles from entering a central zone from 7am until 3pm, or incur a fine. Taxis and emergency services will be exempt, and commercial vehicles will have to pay to enter the area.
Oxford
The city and county councils have proposed the UK’s first zero emission zone in the city centre. Drivers of diesel and petrol vehicles will be charged £10 a day to enter the zone, increasing to £20 in December 2024. The penalty for not paying the charge will be £120. People living inside the zone will pay a discounted rate of 10%.
Glasgow
The city council has proposed limiting private vehicle access to George Square. Under the plans to be debated this week, two sides of the famous city centre plaza would be pedestrianised, and the other two restricted to public transport and cyclists.
Manchester
Mayor Andy Burnham and cycling and walking commissioner Chris Boardman have launched a five-year plan to increase daily walking trips by a third and “double and double again” cycling journeys by 2025. “This isn’t just about switching from cars to bikes and cutting harmful emissions – it’s also about what we want our towns and cities to look like, and how we look after our public spaces,” Burnham said last week.
Portsmouth
Plans have been unveiled for the UK’s first car-free community. Planning permission has been sought for a new neighbourhood of 4,000 homes on the eastern side of Portsmouth harbour, with streets dedicated to pedestrians and cyclists, and vehicles confined to a vast underground car park. Portsmouth city council, which is backing the development, said it could be a “beacon for the whole of Portsmouth and the rest of the country”.
Cardiff
The city is planning to charge non-residents £2 to drive into the centre as part of £2bn “transport vision” to reduce congestion and improve air quality. Other measures include new tram/train routes, new park-and-ride sites, cheaper bus fares, more walking and cycling routes and an electric bike pilot scheme.
London
The capital pioneered the congestion charge in 2003 and it is now one of the largest in the world. In 2019 it introduced the 24-hour ultra-low emission zone, which will expand to cover all of Greater London next year. More than 27km of roads were closed on its annual car-free day last year. Mayor Sadiq Khan has said he wants 80% of all journeys in the capital to be made by walking, cycling or public transport by 2041, compared with 63% now.
Click to expand...
Thank you for such an in depth update!!!. To be honest, it's been long overdue. Diesel fumes ain't good, especially when all confined to a small area (city).

Bring on Vegan diesel! Any inventions anyone? Beetroot? Cucumbers?....... You'll all a clever lot!
 
I’ve bought a vehicle therefore I have every right to drive it where, when and in whatever manner I like. REALLY!!
These are Fantastic initiatives. At last their forcing people to behave more responsibly.
The ‘tax’ can go to treating all the people we’ve poisoned.
 
Dunfermline said:
I’ve bought a vehicle therefore I have every right to drive it where, when and in whatever manner I like. REALLY!!
These are Fantastic initiatives. At last their forcing people to behave more responsibly.
The ‘tax’ can go to treating all the people we’ve poisoned.
Click to expand...
:confused:
 
Dunfermline said:
The ‘tax’ can go to treating all the people we’ve poisoned.
Click to expand...
You seriously believe that?
The “ poison” just hastens their demise by 3 months or so. They could do a lot more by changing their lifestyle in the preceding years.
 
6 months reduction in life expectancy for an 8 year old child today, if credit is taken for proposed pollution reductions. It also contributes to other health conditions. According to researchers of Kings College.

The fine particulates and nitrogen dioxide that pollute Bristol’s air cause about 260 people to die each year, the scientists calculated. These pollutants could cause up to 36,000 deaths across the UK each year, and also contribute to several health conditions including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease, stroke and diabetes.

The study found the annual cost of the health impact of air pollution in Bristol was up to £170m a year.

Public Health England assessed in a 2018 report that the total national cost to the NHS and social care budgets of air pollution could be up to £5.56bn for PM2.5 and NO2 combined.
gen_204

<a href="https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net...mp;amp;amp;amp;url=26507434" target="_blank"> <img data-fr-image-pasted="true" border="0" src="https://fw.adsafeprotected.com/rfw/...R300x250CPMSTDDRSRTG0107261/?adsafe_preview=${IS_PREVIEW}"></a>

<a href="https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net...mp;amp;url=26507434" target="_blank"> <img data-fr-image-pasted="true" border="0" src="https://fw.adsafeprotected.com/rfw/...R300x250CPMSTDDRSRTG0107261/?adsafe_preview=${IS_PREVIEW}"></a><span class="fr-marker" data-id="0" data-type="true" style="display: none; line-height: 0;"></span><span class="fr-marker" data-id="0" data-type="false" style="display: none; line-height: 0;"></span><span class="fr-marker" data-id="0" data-type="true" style="display: none; line-height: 0;"></span><span class="fr-marker" data-id="0" data-type="false" style="display: none; line-height: 0;"></span>
 
Like most things in life it isn’t that simple .
1. The earths population numbers are having a significant effect on Climate Change and the environment.
2. Scrapping all or some types of fossil fuelled vehicles will have a significant environmental and climatic cost during the destruction/recycling process
3. Replacing the scrapped vehicles with some form of “ clean “ replacement vehicle will also have a significant environmental and climatic effect which has not been quantified, and the overall effect - even more environmental/climatic damage for the global community.

On one hand we talk about population pressures on resources and the effect on global climate change and the increased environmental damage such an increase produces whilst in the next breath we’re talking about extending life expectancy and improving the standard of living globally.

Sad though it maybe but the two are mutually exclusive in the long term taking into account our present state of scientific capability.
 
In this case it really is that simple.
It is the NO2 and fine particulates which are subject of the study. Changing to EV in cities, where the population density is highest, directly improves local air quality. The reduction in pollution is said to directly increase the life expectancy of residents.
Scientists recognise that banning fossil fuelled cars from city centres has little impact of global CO2 levels, however it is considered helpful as a symbol of good intent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

treecity
Norway to 'completely ban petrol powered cars by 2025'
7 8 9
Replies
212
Views
15K
2into1
2into1
WelshGas
If you thought changing to an EV would be the end of the matter. Beware.
2 3
Replies
69
Views
5K
SusiBus
SusiBus
Ewan
Any budding TV stars out there?
Replies
6
Views
1K
Victor_Tango_
Victor_Tango_
M
Diesel ban in Belgium, Wallonia from 2023.
Replies
8
Views
3K
bxl_lad
bxl_lad
C
Should I be terrified of buying a new diesel California?
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
WelshGas
WelshGas

Useful links

VW California Club

  • CampervanBits Accessories
  • Comfort Insurance
  • VIP Membership
  • Conquest
  • Sale from Campervanbits
  • Hire a Vw California

About us

The VW California Club is the worlds largest resource for all owners and enthusiasts of VW California campervans.

Our Partners

Our Partners

Back
Top