Oxford city centre is set to ban petrol and diesel vehicles from 2020

" The government is laying out the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) as the path for us to follow, as it sets about fulfilling its pledge to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2040. However, there are obstacles in the way that prevent people from considering the switch. One of the biggest appears to be the lack of a public charging network. High insurance costs are also proving to be a barrier for many

Another problem is that rapid charging points - at 50KW and above - are crucial for drivers using their electric vehicles for long journeys. However, these same points are useless for plug-in hybrid vehicles if they can only charge at 3.6KW

According to quotes on the comparison site, the average premium for an electric vehicle stands at £1,070. That's a whopping 45% more than for the average petrol or diesel vehicle, which comes in at £740. The reason given for this is that the repair of electric vehicles is more expensive, especially if the battery is damaged in an accident "

https://www.petrolprices.com/lack-public-charging-network/

Ok so what laws prevent horses and mules, as long as their poo is caught at the source?

How about electric milk floats?

This is how stupid people are. The government sets 2040 then the idiots start to auction on who will bid earliest.

Sturgeon was the top idiot. Then Khan, but now?

Did the Oxford council members consider the impact on their tourism and even local eateries and shops and pubs?

Foolish imbeciles, "educated" idiots.

Did anyone start a petition against this?

Or will vehicles be allowed to pay a daily fine like London, which is clearly a money source in addition to the congestion charges?

Which haven't worked to reduce congestion apparently.

The Greeks have far more intelligence, odd reg vehicles one day, even reg vehicles the next. Business adapted.

Glenn65 said:

SNP are wanting to bring it in for next year. Think yourself lucky

Click to expand...

.
This is why I say now is the time for protest to prevent such stupidities, but people don't and then these daft ideas suddenly become law.

Like biweekly rubbish collection is now a pest infested problem in every place it's been implemented.

When people protest now, the council says "but it's not new, it was implemented years ago and not enough people complained, so sorry!".

The Italians dumped rubbish on the council office steps before the next morning on the night of the very day the scheme was announced and it was cancelled.

So can this stupidity be stopped if people get on the streets or think of better ways to block it.

But that's not what the GBP does.

Then they look for scapegoats.

.

J.J.X.T said:

We use the Park and Ride system when we go to Oxford which isn't bad. Presumably the council will be replacing its entire bus fleet with electric vehicles? There are also a lot of open top buses in Oxford for the tourists hope the City council can fund its lofty ambitions!!!!

Click to expand...

.
The problem is that there are no details, are there?

Like if people can drive in but pay a fine if they do, or a real complete and total ban?

If they can drive in and pay a small fine, like clever Khan intends, then.people will pay and it will raise a lot of money.

If it's a big fixed fine like £60 then commercial vehicles might pay it but private car owners won't unless it's an emergency. If it's a heavy variable fine depending on vehicle size then it will be a killer.

So that will shape what the councils intend.

But I do wonder if they've thought it out?

.

Another thought...

What about people with disabled badges, who can't afford an electric car?

And people on benefits who are currently provided with cars, the tax payer will have to foot the bills for the new electric cars immediately. And there are hundreds in every city!

The nightmare of costs grows.

Good job it's in London and Oxford, ennit, enjoy, GBP!

.

I'm north London based but (as yet) outside the various penalty zones. But if I want to travel into the zones (and there are plans to extend them) I have to pay both "congestion charge" and the new "T charge" (T for Toxic apparently!). The trigger point for the "T" change is compliance with Euro 4. Now many diesel X type owners like myself find that our vehicles meet Euro 4 limit values (the numbers are in the V5 log book) but the vehicles are actually certified to Euro 3 and it is that level of compliance registered on the TfL (Transport for London) system. So we have to pay even though we are as clean as any other Euro 4 vehicle. TfL does recognise that some manufacturers were "early adopters" of lower limits and are prepared to exempt a vehicle where this is the case. However, being TfL they will not accept the obvious evidence of a V5 showing the Euro test results. They insist on a letter signed by someone in Jaguar's homologation department confirming the values. Jaguar in turn do not seem to be aware of TfL's demands and are only prepared to sell me a copy of the original vehicles Certificate of Conformity (usually surrendered in the initial vehicle's registration procedure) at £100.

Khan, like Boris and Ken before him, is only a mouthpiece for TfL which is run by an unelected commissioner I think. This is the organisation that brought London the infamous "Bendi-bus" despite being told that very long vehicles do not work well on London's congested roads and were scrapped after a few years (ironically due to a dislike by Boris' cycling cronies) at a huge loss and now being replaced by the latest "Ego bus" as a so called replacement for the "much loved Routemaster". This new bus was designed to retain the best features of the Routemaster; the use of a conductor for ticketing as a second crew member on board to reassure passengers and an open platform to speed up entry and exit. It costs several times more than a conventional double decked bus. Almost predictably the conductor only lasted a few months (and in daytime only) and the rear platform is enclosed by a door preventing access between stops in stationary traffic..... Locally we now have TfL funded Hybrid buses which are noticeable for the constantly running diesel engines while at stops.

It is true that London is awash with vehicles and the road system is close to breaking point. But rather than try to solve the problem to official line by organisations such as TfL seems to be that it is much easier to drain money out of those who use them than solve it. And other councils seem to be seeing this as a good way of adding to their own revenues. And none of them appear to be able to foresee the consequences of their decisions until it all goes wrong (e.g. Bendi-buses in London).
I could rant on for hours - and probably will later - but have to go out now to fight my way across to South West London!
Ian C

Jim_S-V6_2004 said:

So Ian is there any protest body that we and you can sign up with to stop this lunacy since it's clearly intended to take in money rather than solve any problems?.

Click to expand...

As far as I'm aware there is no EFFECTIVE way of challenging these decisions. TfL does not appear to be subject to public scrutiny - their policies and decisions are implemented by the Mayor of London, he in turn says he's been fully advised by his specialists .... TfL. Other local councils then say "London did it why can't we?" and on it goes.

Those with a local area "Mayor" - or are likely to get one in the foreseeable future - will find they have another political millstone around their bank balances. In London it has always been a choice between the very bad and possibly worse with Ken, Boris and now Khan. They have virtually unlimited funds and can pursue any project they have a personal fancy for. Hence under Boris' rule they spent countless millions on cycling "initiatives". Some may have merit but in my local area thousands of pounds have been spent on painting dotted lines and Bike Symbols on the roads for "cycle lanes". These are totally useless as more often than not they are legally covered by parked cars and being close to the side of the road are positively dangerous for cyclists as they try to shepherd them into the area littered with pot holes and badly maintained drainage channels. Plenty of Cycle route roads signs too (there's one in my road for some reason I can't fathom out as it doesn't actually go anywhere just a residential area) all of which use up copious amounts of our council tax. As one of the older generation now, I'd far rather the mayor spent half of the money being used to pander cyclists on re-opening all the closed toilet facilities in stations and elsewhere. I'm sure those unfortunates who live or have shops close to pubs, bus stops and stations would approve as it will be likely to reduce the number of times they have to wash down rivers of urine that appear overnight. But like most politicians actually finding out what people want, rather than what they think they want, is not how they see the job. Khan's political aim seems to be increased housing to increase the numbers of people living in London. For me in the long term this is going to be another foreseeable disaster although I have some sympathy for those trying to get on the housing ladder who may benefit (but VERY FEW WILL). Locally high rise flats are going up everywhere - former petrol stations and pubs with car parks are the principal targets for land - but there is NO corresponding investment in medical. education or transport needs. I wonder how much of the atmospheric particulate matter that diesels are being blamed for actually comes from the building work as demolition and concrete mixing / laying generates clouds of dust. Not to mention diesel powered generators, compressors, mixers and material transport.

Sorry gone off on another rant - I did warn you....

In short the country is lacking a decent raft of decision making politicians. Election of MPs and local government equivalents should be restricted to those who have lived for an extensive period in their constituencies - and not allowed to decamp permanently to London on the excuse it isn't easy to travel daily. Being an MP is a position to represent a community not for personal gain. I'd start by banning the concept of political degrees, PPE or whatever, or at least making the possession of one a negative factor in selection :twisted:

Ian C