The head of Highways England, Jim O’Sullivan, said that the only reason the UK had not moved to an 80mph speed limit on motorways was due to social acceptability as well as condemning classic cars in a recent interview with the Telegraph.

The interview, released yesterday, showed overwhelming support from Mr O’Sullivan for higher speed limits on parts of the motorway network, especially in the move towards smart motorways and more autonomous motorways. He also showed a move towards restricting the roads that classic cars could go on in the future, as they pose a “hazard” to more autonomous vehicles that are not able to communicate with them.

Not a new plan

Back in 2011, Philip Hammond, who was Transport Secretary at the time, created a plan to increase the motorway speed limit to 80mph but lack of backing from the Coalition Government at the time meant that plans were shelved in June 2013.

Back then, the variety of Transport Ministers meant that mixed messaging was sent out to motorists. Some ministers, such as former Roads Minister Mike Penning who promised to set up trials of the 80mph limit. Later Patrick McLoughlin said the plans were “not a priority” while a source close to the ministry said it was more over safety concerns than anything else.

Alienating female drivers

At the time, the move pushed down by Downing Street as they felt it could ‘alienate female drivers.’ A survey conducted in 2013 by the AA showed that 41% of women thought that the idea wouldn’t work while 73% of men supported the change.

However, five years down the line it is highly likely that this will have changed with the increasing number of women driving, an estimated rise of 700,000 since 2013, and more and more confidence from women drivers.

Roll-out

As it currently stands, the scheme would have to be tested against a strict set of security measures. Raising the speed limit means deadlier crashes, and poses a much higher risk. However, surely some of this comes down to driver skill, as referenced by Mr O’Sullivan below.

Mr O’Sullivan speaking on the issue of safety in the interview said: “Dependant on driver skill which is a different issue, there are parts of the network that could probably be [updgraded to 80mph]. We have not done a formal safety analysis but there are parts of the network that subject to a safety analysis could probably operate at 80 miles an hour.”

One other thing noted by Mr O’Sullivan was the social norm of driving at 70mph and changing the social attitude towards driving at a higher speed. This is thought to be the harder aspect of moving to a 70mph motorway, rather than any technical parts. Mr O’Sullivan said on this matter “I think there is a technical argument about speed and safety of vehicles etc but I think 70 miles per hour is so socially embedded in this country that I think it is probably not going to change, in fact, it’s almost certainly not going to change. I think that has more to do with public opinion and social views than it has with the technology of vehicles.”

Classic car condemnation

Along with statements about upgrading speed, he also revealed perhaps what could be come the future of motorway driving, fully autonomous with very little human engagement. The plan to remove classic cars from motorways initially but eventually all non-autonomous vehicles seems to be perhaps one of the most contentious points of the interview.

In a world that is fully reliant on vehicles, could it possibly be that in thirty years we would no longer be allowed to physically drive on a motorway but instead let a vehicle do the work for us?

This shocking idea shows the ideal way the government intends to send this country. Only on Tuesday did the government announce £100 million Research and Development funds for zero emissions development, along with other massive industry heads contributing millions. There are also plans to send a driverless vehicle on the roads by 2021, a mere three years ahead.

Mr O’Sullivan backed his point on removing classic cars by saying “Do you know what? Classic cars are not a lot of fun on a motorway if you have ever driven one.” Due to the lower speeds and the lack of technology in the car, in thirty years or so, it would be considered unsafe to have cars that cannot communicate with every other vehicle on the road, and while they may not be allowed on motorways in the not too distant future, there are no plans to ban them altogether, as “I [Mr O’Sullivan] think that classic cars are something people will continue to enjoy for many years to come. I can’t see a problem with continuing to operate classic cars.”

Do you think upping the speed limit will be good for the UK? Should classic cars be allowed on motorways? Let us know below

Motorists have been praying to the ‘Great God of Fossil Fuel’ for years to get car manufacturers to be a little more realistic about the emissions and MPG claims for their vehicles; we’ve always known that manufacturers massage the figures, but surely, we can work out for ourselves that a Range Rover won’t offer the same economy as a small Nissan, people just want honesty about it.

The Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP), which came fully in to force on 1st September 2018, has forced the manufacturers hand in to doing just that – being more realistic with the claimed figures, and in conjunction with the Real Driving Emissions (RDE) test, we should see at least semi-accurate figures being released.

Vehicle Excise Duty

Vehicle Excise Duty (VED), commonly known as car or vehicle tax, is generally based upon emissions, although the full regulations are quite complicated (and we simply don’t have the space for an in-depth review here), a shift toward more realistic emissions or MPG figures could, in theory, have a detrimental effect on VED.

We know that motoring and motorists are seen as an easy target for revenue generation – the last swathe of VED changes came as a result of the government not generating the expected revenue thanks in part to electric and hybrid vehicles, and that manufacturers are complying with their legislation and making more economical vehicles (less fuel duty, lower VED).

Changes were made to include some of the greenest cars – even zero emission vehicles are taxable if the list price is more than £40,000; it’s not purchase price, but manufacturer price, this also includes cars that are less than £40,000 but are then specced up with any additions or items of value, including higher specification engines.

Current regulations

Currently, any new diesel vehicle that doesn’t comply with the RDE2 emissions (which don’t actually come in to force until 2020) is subject to being categorised as one band higher than the official rating for the first year– to ‘encourage’ manufacturers to produce cleaner diesels, you’ll also pay a further £310 ‘luxury’ surcharge on anything costing over £40,000. (Petrol, diesel, hybrid or electric).

The point we’re making here is that the government has basically introduced new rates and legislation as a ‘catch all’ exercise to recoup some of their lost revenue. Now with the introduction of more and more electric and zero emissions vehicles, surely the government may introduce more methods to increase their revenue on the motorist.

The older vehicles (registered before 1st April 2017) will continue to pay VED at the old rate, based purely on CO2 emissions, but could a retrospective re-categorisation be introduced? After all, it’s a long-known fact that car makers have been a little reluctant in being completely open about the emissions of their vehicles, all the government would be doing is effectively charging the actual rate, rather than one based on fiction. Perhaps ‘the motorist’ should be thankful that we’ve had it so cheap for so long?

Differences

It’s very unlikely that a retrospective change will be imposed, but it does mean that there is a high chance that a model bought after 1st April of this year will undoubtedly cost more to tax than one purchased before that date, for the exact same model, purely because the figures used are more representative of real-world conditions. Yes, there have been campaigns by numerous consumer groups to highlight the extent of the problem, but with little regard given to the longer-term implications for the motorist – another financial hammer blow.

There is very little to be done – the first year’s VED is generally included in the OTR (On The Road) price of the vehicle, so with some negotiation, that can be negated to an extent, but going forward, it seems that the want for honest emission statements from the manufacturer will now be a need for further expenditure.

If you’re looking for a new car, then now is the right time to get yourself down to your favoured dealership as they try and clear the stockpile of cars that can’t be sold ‘as new’ due to the WLTP regulations – you’ll no doubt find a range of cars from all the main dealerships with significant discounts attached to the price.

It’s also worth noting that motorcycles don’t use the CO2 based taxation system, it’s based upon engine size, the most expensive being £88 for anything above 600cc, the cheapest being just £19 for the year (under 150cc) so if you’re looking for cheap VED vehicles, that are easy to park, cut a swathe through traffic and are generally congestion charge free, they are worth a consideration, if you are that way inclined.

What do you think about the new VED rate? Will the government retrospectively change categories? Are there any concerns for the future? Let us know in the comments.

If you drive a combustion vehicle in London, you could now receive a fine of £130 for driving on certain roads in the centre of London.

A new charge introduced yesterday in the centre of London means that any combustion engine, excluding hybrids, could face a £130 fine for driving in certain streets in London in peak times. This fine replaces the T-Charge to stop people altogether from driving in the streets, in an aim to reduce pollution and help improve air quality, in the already tightly packed centre of London.

A ‘pioneering’ scheme

The scheme has been hailed as a pioneering by Hackney and Islington Council, who are the first two to introduce the scheme. Councillor Claudia Webbe, of Islington Council, said: “We are proud to be leading from the front with Hackney in this pioneering scheme – the first of its kind in the UK.”

The aptly called “ultra-low emissions streets” are the first of their kind across the UK and with many more expected to grow as the government introduces methods to reduce emissions in city centres.

In this particular scenario, the restrictions only apply 7 am – 10 am and 4 pm – 7 pm, Monday to Friday in certain areas but it is expected to increase as time goes on. The scheme will be policed through Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) software, that detects the numberplates automatically and determines whether they are combustion or not through the vehicle database.

Historical issues

Complying with emissions standards has been a problem for many years with the UK government receiving a final warning from the European Commission in January this year. The warning gave them a period of time to implement a successful strategy before they are taken to the European Court of Justice and potentially imposed with large fines.

The UK has had dangerously high levels of nitrous oxide since 2011, leading to approximately 40,000 – 50,000 premature deaths a year. The shocking statistic shows why the European Commission is showing such an interest in bringing the UK to task, and while the UK is not alone in this, we are one in five of those under investigation. Alongside France, Germany, Hungary, Italy and Romania, we have been tasked with providing a suitable solution to the problem.

Two-tier motoring

Amanda Stretton, motoring editor at Confused.com, described the scheme as the introduction to what is becoming a ‘two-tier system of motoring,” splitting up those who can afford it, and those who can’t but need to drive around. If this becomes the case in cities and towns across the country, then motoring will take a massive U-turn and become something only the super-rich in society can afford, much like the early motoring times.

She also commented on the replacement of an electric or hybrid car and told the BBC: “Our own study has shown that many people would like to own an electric vehicle but are put off by the cost but also the lack of charging infrastructure.”

Motoring has become a pricier business recently, with the highest petrol prices in four years and people are having to choose between feeding their families and driving to work due to the high price of petrol.

How will it work?

Currently, nine streets are affected by the restrictions and are Blackall Street, Cowper Street, Paul Street, Tabernacle Street, Ravey Street, Singer Street, Willow Street, Charlotte Road and Rivington Street.
While this may seem like a small proportion of places, if this scheme works, and reduces congestion and pollution, then it likely becomes a template for other streets across the country especially in places of high pollution.

At the moment, any combustion vehicle entering the area, aside from residents and local businesses, will receive an instant £130 fine. This will be policed through ANPR cameras and while it is unknown about the contestation of the fine, it is thought that it will be fairly strict. The main aim is to reduce pollution at peak times, like the school run and commuter times, not only to encourage people to cycle or walk but to stop those who do cycle or walk from breathing in too much pollution.

Feryal Demirci, the deputy mayor of Hackney, said: “Failing to act on poor air quality, which causes nearly 10,000 premature deaths across London every year, is not an option, and that’s why we’re being bolder than ever in our efforts to tackle it. We’re thrilled to be launching our ultra-low emissions streets – the first of their kind in the UK – which will reclaim the streets from polluting petrol and diesel vehicles, and improve the area for thousands of people every day.”

Do you think that having electric only streets is a good idea? How easy do you think this will be to enforce? Let us know below

If you’re driving and you can’t read a number plate 20 metres ahead of you and the police stop you, there’s a chance you could lose your license. New measures to cut down on drivers with poor eyesight have been announced with the police now testing people at the roadside to stop dangerous or reckless driving.

On the spot test

So far, three forces have announced they are trying a new system where they check driver’s eyesight if they are stopped. Thames Valley, Hampshire and West Midlands police forces will ask drivers if they can read a number plate 20 metres away from the roadside. Drivers who cannot manage this could see their license revoked immediately.

The trial will take place over the course of September with the aim of ensuring everyone driving on the UK’s roads has the right level of vision. Police plan to stop drivers and put them through the test at strategic points across the road networks of the three areas. The data collected will be used to get a more complete picture of the poor driver eyesight issue in the UK, something that is currently underreported in government statistics.

Take vision seriously

According to the government and the police forces involved, the idea is to get drivers to take their eyesight seriously. Sergeant Rob Heard, speaking on behalf of the forces involves, said that everyone needs good vision to drive because not being able to see a hazard or react to a situation quickly enough can have catastrophic consequences.

Currently, the legal limit is being able to read a number plate at 20 metres, which is around five car lengths away. This is a minimum requirement, and there is talk that a regular eyesight test with an optician may also become compulsory for people wanting to drive.

Cassie’s Law

The move is part of the Cassie’s Law initiative that means driver licenses can be removed within hours if someone is found to be posing a threat to other road users. The changes took place in 2013 following a campaign by Jackie McCord, whose daughter Cassie was killed by an elderly motorist who had been told not to drive by the police.

Before the law, the police had to write or fax a request to have a license removed, but under Cassie’s Law, they could telephone or send an email to speed up the process. This means police can even email straight from their vehicles to a dedicated email address at the DVLA and the license will be immediately revoked. Police are then able to prevent the person from driving any further.

The new trial could also see drivers facing prosecution if they don’t manage to comply with the test. There is an estimated 1.5 million license holder on the roads who have never had an eye test and crashes involving drivers that are suffering with poor eyesight are thought to cause over 2,900 causalities a year.

Antiquated tests

Campaigners also say that the UK’s testing system is antiquated and not fit for purpose. Once motorists pass their test with good eyesight, there is nothing further that requires them to be checked during the course of their life.

Vision Express and Brake are two campaigners who want the government to tighten up driver vision laws and ensure that testing is compulsory before taking a test but also each time a photocard license is renewed.

Brake spokesperson Joshua Harris said that it ‘stands to reason’ that good eyesight is a fundament of driving. But the current system doesn’t do enough to protect people from drivers whose eyesight deteriorates. And that it is ‘madness’ that there is no requirement for drivers’ vision to be tested during the years of them driving.

Vision Express added that their recent survey showed 75% of people think a recent eye test should be mandatory when someone is renewing their driving license.

What happens if you lose your license?

What about for drivers who fail the test, often unaware that they were breaking the rules or how poor their eyesight was? The DVLA can revoke your license for a number of medical reasons and then you would have to apply for a new one including paying as if the licence was brand new. They will also give you a disqualification period during which you cannot reapply.

Once this is finished, you can reapply eight weeks before the end of the period. You may need to provide evidence that you are fit and well to drive and the DVLA will advise about this. After this, they then inform you if you are being granted a new license, but can refuse again.

Seeing the problem

For many drivers, they just aren’t aware that their vision isn’t up to the standard. Corrective glasses or contact lenses usually make a massive difference in the difference between looking and seeing. With the new crackdown, drivers are having to seriously consider their eyesight and how well they can see when driving.

How’s your vision? Could you pass the 20 metres test if you were stopped? And do you think eye tests should be mandatory for drivers? Let us know below

Most of us drive around and use the sight of a police vehicle as a sign that we are being monitored. However, police in some parts of the UK are using unmarked HGVs to spy on drivers and to then send out fines for a whole range of minor traffic offences.

Caught out at the wheel

Highways England revealed that last year there were over 4,000 drivers who were caught out by just three unmarked HGVs that they operated while hundreds of unmarked police trucks have caught more. Police are filming and fining people not wearing their seatbelt, eating at the wheel or using their mobile phone.

The lorries don’t tow trailers and, the officers sit in the cab, one driving and the other with a video camera to record offences. Northamptonshire police are the latest to admit to using this tactic and caught 43 drivers committing over 50 offences in a recent session. The higher viewpoint means that officers can look into cars and see what drivers are doing, said PC David Lee of the force.

Nothing new

It turns out this isn’t a new practice – police have been using the tactic for three years. Last year there were 213 people stopped for a variety of offences including 12 who were found to be reading books or eating while driving. Highways England also use the tactic and caught one lorry driver with his foot on the dashboard while talking on his mobile phone while driving, a ridiculous and highly dangerous idea.

A total of 28 forces have used the HGV cab safety initiative since it was started in April 2015. Over 4,100 drivers have been pulled over in relation to over 5,000 offences during the first two years – almost two-thirds were driving and using a mobile phone at the same time. Other offences included drivers steering with their knees and even brushing their teeth while behind the wheel.

The Road Police Unit from Surrey Police enjoys showing some of the ridiculous – and dangerous – things they have spotted since using an HGV. Have a look here: https://twitter.com/i/moments/894570962364100608

Strange driving practices

The unmarked vehicles have caught people doing a range of strange things while driving. One woman with a young child in the rear seat was found applying lipstick and mascara while travelling at 40mph along a dual carriageway. She was using her rearview mirror to ensure her makeup was perfect, although her driving can’t have been!

Two delivery drivers were caught inhaling nitrous oxide, a substance that is illegal for human consumption, in their parked van in Birmingham. Another driver was seen driving along a London road eating cereal with a spoon and bowl, that car must’ve been quite messy! Other more common offences including not wearing seatbelts and not being in proper control of the vehicle.

Using a mobile phone while driving remains the top reason that the unmarked HGVs have stopped drivers. One sting in Kent in March operated for three days and stopped 44 drivers, 31 of which were using their mobile phones behind the wheel. This now carries six penalty points and a £200 fine if you are caught using a hand-held phone. Bluetooth headsets, voice command or dashboard holders are all acceptable alternatives.

Unmarked car rights

Some drivers are a little nervous about the concept of unmarked police cars, even if they are doing nothing wrong. Following stories of people being followed by fake unmarked police cars, some drivers are worried about stopping for a vehicle that doesn’t look like a police car. One driver was signalled to stop by an unmarked vehicle, but when the man in the car didn’t have a police uniform on, she drove away, and real police officers said she did the right thing.

Unmarked cars and vehicles do have the right to stop drivers but the officers driving the vehicles must have a police uniform on when they get out. They don’t have to have a reason to stop someone and can ask for your name, date of birth and to see documents such as driving license, insurance and MOT certificate. These can be delivered later to a police station if you don’t have them on you within seven days.

If you are unsure that the vehicle is a genuine unmarked police car, the official police advice is to drive to the nearest police station or a public place such as a petrol station. Even an occupied house could do in remote areas but don’t stop somewhere where no-one is around.

Signal to the car to show you have acknowledged them, and a real police vehicle will happily follow you. You can also use hands-free devices to call 999 if you are worried and they can check the details of the vehicle. Don’t drive off at high speed, however, or real police will think you are trying to get away!

Extra caution needed

The new tactic by police shows that just because you can’t see a police vehicle, doesn’t mean you can get away with dangerous driving behaviour. As more forces around the country start to use this approach, people will have to be even more cautious while driving.

Have you ever been stopped by an unmarked police vehicle? Or have you seen the unmarked HGV? Do you think that this is acceptable for the police to do? We’d love to hear about your experiences!

An official review of the speeding laws is underway and if Britain’s Road Policing Chief for the National Police Chiefs’ Council gets his way, motorists will face penalties for going just one mile per hour over the speed limit.

Chief Constable Anthony Bangham hit the headlines early this year after his comments in favour of a zero-tolerance approach to speeding received fierce backlash from other police leaders and motoring organisations who say this approach is unworkable.

The ‘buffer’ zone

As the law stands, motorists face prosecution if they break the speed limit by any amount.

While most drivers know about the current ‘buffer’ of 10% plus 2 mph, any decision to issue a speeding penalty remains at the discretion of the police officer and the individual police force, with police and fixed speed cameras both able to enforce the speed limits and issue speeding penalties.

Motorists who hit the top of the buffer zone can expect to receive either a fixed penalty notice or take the Speed Awareness Course, which, depending on where you live and whether you’ve taken the course before, will cost you £75-£100. Over a certain amount above the speed limit and drivers will receive a court summons.

Chief Constable Anthony Bangham, who is also the chairman of charity Road Safety Trust says the public overuse speed awareness courses and those who break the law should instead receive fines and points on their licences.

The minimum penalty for speeding is a £100 fine, plus three penalty points. The maximum speeding fine is £1,000, but this increases to a maximum of £2,500 for exceeding the motorway speed limit. of 70 mph where no further evidence except a police officer’s opinion suffices for a prosecution.

The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) speeding penalty guidelines

Speed limit: 20 mph
24 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
35 mph: summoning

Speed limit: 30 mph
35 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
50 mph: court summons

Speed limit: 40 mph
46 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
66 mph: court summons

Speed limit: 50 mph
57 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
76 mph: court summons

Speed limit: 60 mph
68 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
86 mph: court summons

Speed limit: 70 mph
79 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
96 mph: court summons

Don’t ‘whinge’ when you’re caught

Anthony Bangham, Chief Constable for West Mercia Police, caused a stir in January when he said the current 10% plus 2 mph speed allowance leads drivers to think it’s fine to speed. He said the message should change to show that the police were proud to enforce the law, and it’s neither unfair nor should come as a surprise to drivers who get caught and booked for breaking the law, driving at 33 mph in a 30 mph zone—these drivers should feel embarrassed.

Mr Bangham stated that speeding motorists shouldn’t come ‘whinging’ to the police when the law has established speed limits for a reason.

“We need to change our messaging and ensure greater consistency of approach when dealing with those who exceed the speed limit.

“The existing speed enforcement guidance could, in fact, be encouraging driving at these more dangerous higher speeds rather than the actual speed limits.”

The Chief Constable said if the current guidance receives the proper understanding and application, it may offer forces with the flexibility that’s necessary, but that over time drivers often misunderstand its rigid application and understanding, with an expectation that “the ‘norm’ is ‘it is OK to speed'”.

We’re all aware that speeding is both illegal, has the potential to be dangerous, and that we should all do our best not to exceed speed limits. Becoming fixated with our speedometers is dangerous, too, but we now have the technology to help. From mobile apps and Sat Nav devices with audible speed limit alerts, together with devices to warn drivers of speed cameras, there’s plenty to keep us all on the right side of the law.

Neil at Drivesmart, a company who provide speed camera detectors to help people to drive safer, commented: “I think if [it] was just 1mph over the limit it would be unenforceable due to speedometer inaccuracy. Also, the appeals process would be backlogged as there would be a massive increase in people contesting their tickets. I personally think people just need to slow down and having a detector in the car actually makes you more aware of what is around you.”

For those who want to be extra careful and want to know when any speed cameras are around, Drivesmart have an exclusive offer for PetrolPrices members of 30% off their Alpha Speed Camera Detector which tells you when any speed camera is nearby and warns you in enough time to allow you to check that you’re driving at a safe limit. If you’re interested, have a look here: https://www.drivesmartdirect.com/product/drivesmart-alpha/

Should drivers fear zero-tolerance?

There is always a split public reaction to speeding. One camp will say there’s no excuse for speeding and therefore no reason for good drivers to fear a speeding fine or penalty points. Others will ask for leniency and common sense, not a world where motorists trying to keep within the speed limit while watching the road into criminals.

While it’s true that the current police speed enforcement guidelines—set in 2011—are under review, reassurance comes from a spokesperson for the National Police Chiefs’ Council, who said no action will take place until ALL police chiefs review the findings. The representative also expressed that it wouldn’t be realistic to prosecute people for driving one mile per hour above the speed limit, which will bring comfort to many motorists.

What’s your opinion on the potential for a ‘zero-tolerance’ law? Would you welcome this approach to policing or is this approach unfair? Tell us in the comments.

Birmingham is the latest UK city to announce that it is creating a clean air zone in the city centre to reduce pollution levels. The city council revealed the plans at the end of June to heated debate but look set to go ahead with them, offering a template for other cities around the country. So will all city centres soon become clean air zones?

What are clean air zones?

Back in 2015, the government announced plans to improve the air quality in the cities and announced five new Clean Air Zones that it wanted to be operational by 2020. A Clean Air Zone is an area where the local authority introduces measures aimed at improving the air quality. At first, the plans involved the most polluting vehicles such as buses, taxies and HGVs but following a legal challenge, ‘non-compliant private vehicles’ were also included in the zone.

The clean air zone plan was enforced after the Supreme Court ordered the UK to fix the emissions problem we have in the UK, as it is estimated 40,000 people nationally suffer as a by-product of emissions.

The step is part of the broader Air Quality Plan that the government released with the aim of reducing dangerous pollutants in the air, which is especially dangerous in the city centres. The Clean Air Zones can come in two kinds – non-charging and charging.

In a non-charging zone, the focus is on improving air quality but without charging drivers. Efforts will go to things like retrofitting vehicles to reduce pollution and to change traffic flow to spot areas where vehicles are stationary for extended periods. In a charging zone, like the one in London, drivers will have to pay to enter it with their vehicles if they meet a particular environmental standard.

Birmingham’s zone

The plan announced by the city council in Birmingham involves charging drivers of higher polluting vehicles to use the city centre within the A450 middle ring road. The charge will be introduced in January 2020 with the aim of discouraging drivers of the most polluting cars from driving around the city centre.

The move comes as an estimated 900 people a year die in the city prematurely due to the problems created by pollution. It also ties in with the government’s plans to develop these clean air zones in major cities.

Opposition to the plan

Opponents to the project were quick to point out that the move would likely hit the poorest the most – people who can’t afford to buy newer, less polluting cars. There is also concern about the impact for small businesses in and around the city centre who cannot afford to buy new, electric vehicles but need to access the area for their business.

Others point out that moving the pollution from the city centre to other areas simply moves the problem and doesn’t solve it. So while the city centre may be pollution free, surrounding areas could become much more polluted. Moving the pollution around does nothing for the environment. By merely taking the pollution and spreading it out over a wider area you are surely reducing the environmentally friendly plans aim to move it and make it someone else’s issue. Surely a better thought would be to reduce the cost of public transport and increase the efficiency to allow people to access the city centres for less money and reduce emissions.

Problems for businesses

As the government plans to roll out the scheme to more places around the country, it seems few of us, including companies, are aware of the changes that are coming. One poll by YouGov found that 40% of small and medium businesses that they spoke to have no idea that the Clean Air Zone scheme was being rolled out.

Also, 38% had no idea that their vehicles wouldn’t meet the new standards and could see them charged anywhere from £12.50 to £100 to drive within the clean air zones. The survey was carried out by the British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association (BVLRA) whose chief executive Gerry Keaney said that results showed more awareness is needed for people to understand what the new zones would mean for them.

Do clean air zones work?

The other big question with the idea is whether the clean air zones work at all. People are concerned about moving pollution from one area to other or just not solving the problem in the way that was expected.

However, there is evidence that the clean air zones do work. One study of a low emissions only zone in Germany found that there were significant reductions in the particular matter in the air in these zones – this is the stuff that causes health problems. Moreover, research in London after five years of the clean air zone found that levels had fallen 2.5-3.1% compared with just 1% outside the zone.

There is less evidence that levels of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are reduced inside the zones. These are also connected to health problems and are created particularly by diesel vehicles. However, experts believe this is more to do with the diesel emissions scandal than anything – the cars emitted more NOx than they thought when doing their testing.

Cleaning up the city

In Birmingham, the levels of pollutants are much higher in specific areas than the recommended 40 micrograms per cubic metre. The pollutants are particularly harsh on the lungs of children as they are still developing. So the clean air zones are seen as a way to reduce the pollution and help make us all healthier – but help may be needed for businesses who have to use these areas and could face extremely high costs.

Would you pay to enter a city? Apart from charging vehicles, what do you think could be done to help reduce emissions? Let us know in the comments below

There are diesels that create up to 25 times more pollution than official testing shows? Surely, that’s a mistake?

We’ve written about clean diesels, false emissions, and wayward fuel economy figures in the past, and while diesel emissions are always a hot topic; it seems that not one week goes by without another nail being placed in the coffin of diesels, but the manufacturers really aren’t helping themselves.

A recent headline by Which? states that nearly 80% of modern, Euro 6 compliant diesels aren’t reaching anywhere near the 0.08g/Km emissions standard to be Euro 6 compliant one model, in particular, is 25 times over that limit. Is this just ‘click-bait’ or a genuine bit of foul play by car manufacturers?

Witch? hunt?

Which? have tested 61 new car models (all diesel) since the beginning of 2017, with the intention of seeing just how close they are to the Euro 6 rate for emissions, specifically Nitrogen Oxides (NOx). 77% of the cars tested failed to meet the 0.08g per kilometre standard, with the Subaru Forester 2.0d Sport Lineartronic coming in at 2.022g, but on average, the NOx levels were at 0.27g/Km.

However, it must be pointed out that the testing wasn’t Euro 6 compliant testing, in fact, a spokesperson for the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said: “The non-official test employed by Which? is very different from the current EU testing, so it’s no surprise it delivers different results. Only the official tests accurately compare models on a like-for-like basis”.

The different test

Even under the new Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP), testing is mainly done under laboratory conditions, giving the manufacturer the ability to ‘optimise’ their test vehicle(s) settings, this can include switching to an ‘eco’ mode, tyre inflation, low fuel loads (reduced weight) and a number of other considerations.

Whereas the Which? test runs the vehicles in the standard mode that they start up in (no eco setting), with 200kg of weight (roughly the equivalent of two occupants and a full tank of fuel), with all systems – air conditioning, lights and radio in use and they include a motorway phase.

Clearly, it would seem that some manufacturers can optimise their vehicles better than others, but there were also a number of vehicles that fell way below the Euro 6 standard, even under the more arduous testing conditions, so what (if anything) does the test mean?

Legally speaking, the car makers aren’t breaking any law – they’re doing exactly as they’re allowed to do under the test procedures, this isn’t a ‘Dieselgate’ scandal, merely … an exercise in understanding and applying rules.

Comparisons

Targeting the consumer angle is a moot point – the WLTP tests (as the SMMT point out) are comparing like-for-like, which means the end result is a direct and truthful comparison between models or brands, so as long as you know that Car A has fewer emissions than Car B, you’re in possession of the relevant facts and figures.

Yes, understanding that in the real world, under strenuous conditions, Car A doesn’t actually get near the advertised figure is all well and good, but let’s be honest, if emissions and pollution levels drive your desire, you won’t be looking to buy a diesel, regardless of what the manufacturer claims.

The best and the worst

The top 5 dirtiest diesels:

1. Subaru Forester 2.0d Sport Lineartronic – 2.022g/km
2. Renault Grand Scenic Energy dCI 160 Bose Edition EDC – 0.896g/km
3. Renault Captur dCI 90 Intens – 0.725g/km
4. Peugeot 5008 BlueHDi 150 Allure – 0.700g/km
5. Ford Kuga 2.0 TDCi S/S Vignale 4×4 – 0.655g/km

And the top five cleanest:

1. BMW 2 Series 218d Active Tourer Steptronic – 0.014g/km
2. Mercedes-Benz E220d 9G-Tronic – 0.024g/km
3. Mercedes-Benz E220d 9G-Tronic Estate – 0.028g/km
4. BMW X2 xDrive 20d M Sport X Steptronic – 0.031g/km
5. Vauxhall Grandland X 2.0 Innovation Automoatic – 0.034g/km

Testing times

The WLTP testing has been in force (for new car types) since September 2017, with all new registrations being compliant by September 2018, but as we’ve pointed out, it will really only be useful for a comparison against different models or brands – not as a benchmark of what you can expect (especially in terms of MPG).

If you’re specifically looking to purchase a new vehicle, and it has to be diesel, then the figures will be relatable and perhaps a better indication than previous testing processes – the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) was introduced back in the eighties, and as such, it left a little to be desired as technology marched on, despite some flaws, the WLTP has to be better (and more accurate) than the NEDC, but whatever the process or procedure, there will always be an organisation willing to decry it as unrealistic.

Do you think better emissions tests should be introduced to reflect real-world driving? Is it a good thing that diesel will be banned from sale in 2040? Let us know below