Despite being implemented to improve air quality by restricting older vehicles, Glasgow’s Low Emission Zone has resulted in a 10% increase in traffic-related pollution levels. The Telegraphhas the story.
Pollution levels of gases linked to traffic rose by about 10% in the centre of Glasgow after the SNP set up a ‘draconian’ Ulez-style scheme, official figures show.
Nitrogen dioxide levels in the city’s Hope Street, which has repeatedly had the country’s worst air quality, were measured at an average of 34 micrograms per cubic metre between June and August this year.
This compared with a figure of 31mg in the same period last year, before the city’s low emission zone (Lez) was introduced – a rise of 9.7%. The legal limit is 40mg.
Levels of another pollutant from motor vehicles, known as fine particulate matter, surged by 11.5% over the same period, from 5.2mg to 5.8mg per cubic metre.
The SNP-run Glasgow City Council said the weather could be responsible for the surge, but the figures prompted further questions about whether cars should be included.
Experts said buses and coaches are the largest polluters and they have been subject to the Lez since the end of 2018. Enforcement of other vehicles started on June 1st this year.
One air quality expert, who did not wish to be named, told the Scottish Mail on Sunday: “Buses are the main polluters, hence the reason levels remain more or less the same as before, and therefore you have to question the point of banning cars given all the cost, disruption and inconvenience.”
An older car entering the zone each day would face penalties of £60, a penalty that doubles with each subsequent breach of rules up to a daily cap of £480 for cars and vans and £960 for buses and HGVs. The fine is reset to £60 if there are no breaches for 90 days.
It emerged last month that the city council was spending £100,000 on renting vehicles to replace those within its fleet that did not comply with the new rules.
You’ll need to set up an account to comment if you don’t already have one. We ask for a minimum donation of £5 if you'd like to make a comment or post in our Forums.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
14 Comments
Oldest
NewestMost Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mogwai
1 year ago
This ULEZ lark is going the way of the masks, lockdowns and even the death jabs isn’t it? Whereby the public are sold a narrative for the rationale of its implementation but over time more and more evidence is accumulated which shows the intervention is both ineffective at what it was supposed to do but also harmful. The evidence becomes mountain-like but still is ignored by authorities and the intervention remains in place regardless. Over time more and more people twig that they’ve been sold a pack of lies, they aren’t benefiting like they were told they would and it becomes ever more apparent that there’s an underlying agenda at play. The parallels with all the other garbage narratives we’ve been told from government are plain as day.
”Under the current data protection laws of the country, use of any data the police can access must meet thresholds to satisfy that use of such data is necessary and proportional. And this massive uplift in powers brings up concern for a number of reasons.
Firstly, this new dimension to the monitoring of the ULEZ zone and the increased surveillance it entails, has gone through without any public consultaton. Bear in mind the diminished trust in the Met, which earlier this year was found to be institutionally racist, misogynistic, and homophobic, it’s not clear the public trust them enough with such a huge amount of data about their daily movements.
Secondly, the Surveillance Camera Code states: “A surveillance camera system should only be used in a public place for the specific purpose or purposes it was established to address. It should not be used for other purposes that would not have justified its establishment in the first place.”
ULEZ’s camera network for ANPR, itself lacking much oversight or regulation, has been intended for one purpose, and as the biometrics and surveillance camera commissioner – also chair of the ANPR Independent Advisory Group (IAG) – pointed out, there is limited evidence that extending the functions of this camera network would bring benefits, making its legality questionable. At the very least, you need consent to roll out a new purpose, or possess a clear obligation set out in law. Overreach of ULEZ data collection has already been seen during the pandemic as ANPR was used to identify people breaking lockdown rules.”
No it isn’t. It’s being implemented as part of a bigger plan for controlling and limiting human behaviour to what a small group.of self appointed oligarchs called the C40 decide. Its all on their website.
Spotted your earlier post Hux. Does this mean we can stop worrying about Amazonian and Indonesian deforestation (we can buy teak & mahogany furniture again), or the methane buried organic matter creates (no more concerns about cow farts and meat eating), or arson/DEW created forest fires (no more land-grabs), or soil degradation and consequent increased flooding risks (no more worrying about ‘extreme weather events’) etc etc…….or is it ONLY the trees Billyboy cuts down on the land he owns for the tax credits? Yeah, thought so. Big Brother would be proud.
Except technically, trees are the opposite of lungs.
Trees: CO2 in, O2 out
Lungs: O2 in, CO2 out
All part of the wonderful carbon cycle, so guess what happens when you reduce CO2.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
This ULEZ lark is going the way of the masks, lockdowns and even the death jabs isn’t it? Whereby the public are sold a narrative for the rationale of its implementation but over time more and more evidence is accumulated which shows the intervention is both ineffective at what it was supposed to do but also harmful. The evidence becomes mountain-like but still is ignored by authorities and the intervention remains in place regardless. Over time more and more people twig that they’ve been sold a pack of lies, they aren’t benefiting like they were told they would and it becomes ever more apparent that there’s an underlying agenda at play. The parallels with all the other garbage narratives we’ve been told from government are plain as day.
”Under the current data protection laws of the country, use of any data the police can access must meet thresholds to satisfy that use of such data is necessary and proportional. And this massive uplift in powers brings up concern for a number of reasons.
Firstly, this new dimension to the monitoring of the ULEZ zone and the increased surveillance it entails, has gone through without any public consultaton. Bear in mind the diminished trust in the Met, which earlier this year was found to be institutionally racist, misogynistic, and homophobic, it’s not clear the public trust them enough with such a huge amount of data about their daily movements.
Secondly, the Surveillance Camera Code states: “A surveillance camera system should only be used in a public place for the specific purpose or purposes it was established to address. It should not be used for other purposes that would not have justified its establishment in the first place.”
ULEZ’s camera network for ANPR, itself lacking much oversight or regulation, has been intended for one purpose, and as the biometrics and surveillance camera commissioner – also chair of the ANPR Independent Advisory Group (IAG) – pointed out, there is limited evidence that extending the functions of this camera network would bring benefits, making its legality questionable. At the very least, you need consent to roll out a new purpose, or possess a clear obligation set out in law. Overreach of ULEZ data collection has already been seen during the pandemic as ANPR was used to identify people breaking lockdown rules.”
https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/whats-wrong-with-ulez-its-not-what-you-think/
No it isn’t. It’s being implemented as part of a bigger plan for controlling and limiting human behaviour to what a small group.of self appointed oligarchs called the C40 decide. Its all on their website.
I expect better from the DS.
I couldn’t believe the headline when I saw this yesterday – cutting down trees when trees are the lungs of the planet!
https://expose-news.com/2023/09/02/bill-gates-cutting-down-70m-acres-forests/
I posted this two or three days ago.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/07/19/snp-chopped-down-16m-trees-develop-wind-farms-scotland/
The SNP had a trial run in Scotland, kind of showing Billy how this is done.
I think the western governments have gone stark staring mad!
Spotted your earlier post Hux. Does this mean we can stop worrying about Amazonian and Indonesian deforestation (we can buy teak & mahogany furniture again), or the methane buried organic matter creates (no more concerns about cow farts and meat eating), or arson/DEW created forest fires (no more land-grabs), or soil degradation and consequent increased flooding risks (no more worrying about ‘extreme weather events’) etc etc…….or is it ONLY the trees Billyboy cuts down on the land he owns for the tax credits? Yeah, thought so. Big Brother would be proud.
WW – I think your conclusions are entirely reasonable.
Except technically, trees are the opposite of lungs.
Trees: CO2 in, O2 out
Lungs: O2 in, CO2 out
All part of the wonderful carbon cycle, so guess what happens when you reduce CO2.
Glasgow like all Scottish ‘cities’ has the cleanest air in Britain! Exactly what pollution is it they’re pretending to eradicate?
Humans.
Why does the headline photo show a street sign which declares:
glasgow. gov.uk / LEZ
Is this LEZ actually a UK government scheme rather than SNP?
Anyway, what the article exposes is yet more lies. Fancy that.
I think .gov.uk is the website name designation used by councils in the UK, therefore, glasgow.gov.uk is the council’s website address.
Ok, thanks Chris.