‘Bold action’ including expansion of the ULEZ scheme and the use of road user pricing in the longer term are on the cards to cut congestion and emissions in London.
A new net-zero by 2030 report, commissioned by the Mayor and released today, says that car traffic must fall at least 27% in London by the end of the decade, in order to meet net-zero carbon emissions by 2030.
Said to be a “stark wake-up call” for the Government on the need for much greater support to help London tackle climate change, the new analysis shows more action will be required by City Hall, particularly around reducing vehicle use in London.
In order to reduce transport emissions even close to what’s needed to clean up London’s air, the capital will have to see a significant shift away from petrol and diesel vehicle use and towards walking and cycling, greater public transport use and cleaner vehicles. At the moment, just 2% of vehicles on the roads in London are electric.
However, it warns the Mayor does not have the funding or powers alone to deliver everything that’s required.
To achieve anywhere near a 27% reduction in car vehicle mileage, London will need a new kind of road user charging system implemented by the end of the decade at the latest. This would replace all existing road user charges – such as the Congestion Charge and ULEZ – and replace them with a pay-per-mile system.
Different rates would be levied, depending on how polluting vehicles are, the level of congestion in the area and access to public transport. Subject to consultation, the scheme would also bring exemptions and discounts for those on low incomes and with disabilities, as well as consideration around support for charities and small businesses.
The Mayor has already asked Transport for London to start exploring how such a scheme could be developed – but said it’s clear the technology to enable it is still years away from being ready.
In the meantime, an extension to the ULEZ could help cut emissions further. This would build on the existing scheme by extending it to cover the whole of Greater London and adding a small clean air charge for all but the cleanest vehicles.
The Mayor is also considering the interim use of a small daily ‘clean air charge’ – potentially around £2 and intended to “nudge behaviour” and reduce the number of short journeys by car.
Sadiq Khan also said a Greater London boundary charge could be feasible; this would levy a small fee on non-London registered vehicles entering Greater London, responding to the increase in cars from outside London travelling into the city seen in recent years.
The proposals will go under consultation with Londoners, local government and businesses, and all options under consideration would be subject to full equality impact assessments.
Sadiq Khan said: “We have too often seen measures to tackle air pollution and the climate emergency delayed around the world because it’s viewed as being too hard or politically inconvenient, but I’m not willing to put off action we have the ability to implement here in London. I’m determined that we continue to be doers, not delayers – not only to protect Londoners’ health right now, but for the sake of future generations to come.
“It’s clear the cost of inaction – to our economy, to livelihoods, to the environment and to the health of Londoners – would be far greater than the cost of transitioning to net-zero and reducing toxic air pollution. That’s why I’m today beginning a conversation with Londoners, local government and businesses about the best way forward to create the green, sustainable city we all want to see.”
The report comes just a week after new analysis showed vehicle congestion cost the capital £5.1bn in the last year, and has risen to pre-pandemic levels, leading to gridlocked traffic and filthy air pollution.
Professor Lord Nicholas Stern, chair of the Grantham Research institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science, said: “The latest science shows us the ever-more urgent need for action. Cities can lead the way to a zero-carbon economy. This transition will create jobs and growth, and if done well, should also cut air pollution and congestion, making London a more attractive, healthy and productive city.”
Essential proposals or just another tax on drivers?
The report’s findings have received a mixed reaction among the fleet and automotive sector.
The BVRLA said it welcomed the Mayor’s work to take the initiative and added that the proposals complemented its own ongoing support for shared mobility models and a clear roadmap for road pricing.
Chief executive Gerry Keaney said: “Importantly, this announcement gives the industry time to implement the changes that are essential to making the targets reality.
“London does not only have an emissions problem, it has a congestion problem too. We need fewer, cleaner private cars on the road. Car clubs, alongside rental and leased vehicles provide the solution to this while keep people mobile and offering positive alternatives to public transport.
“From electric car clubs to zero-emission delivery vehicles, BVRLA members are already providing the answers to the problems faced in London and beyond. Our members will play an essential role in the success of these plans and will have invaluable insights that will help the mayor deliver; we need to be at the table and ensure our voices are heard.”
But the Campaign for Better Transport charity said that road user charging must be implemented fairly.
Paul Tuohy, chief executive, commented: “Road user charging is key to reducing congestion, cleaning up the capital’s air and reducing emissions, but a pay-per-mile charge that varies by vehicle emissions and reflects actual journeys made would be much fairer than an extension of a blunt daily set charge. This is not complicated to deliver, and we would urge the Mayor and TfL to put this option up for consultation as soon as possible and for the Government to do more to restore people’s confidence in using public transport as an alternative to driving.”
The RAC meanwhile warned of massive financial challenges for individuals, families and businesses who run a car in London and even for those who visit the fringes of the capital.
Head of roads policy Nicholas Lyes commented: “We all want to see cleaner air and cleaner vehicles on the road and it’s right the Mayor has ambitions to reduce emissions from road transport but these proposals could be beyond the means of many and will punish those who simply cannot afford an electric car. Our research suggests fewer than a third of drivers in London expect to switch to an electric vehicle within the next five years, and at the same time the Mayor himself cannot commit to a zero-emission TfL bus fleet until 2037.
“Worse still, proposals to charge vehicles outside of London to enter the boundary are likely to impact hardest on workers such as carers, tradespeople and night-time economy staff for whom there is no alternative to using a vehicle. At a time when the basic cost of living for Londoners is soaring, these proposals seem to be poorly timed, so we strongly urge the Mayor to think again instead of defaulting to extracting more money from the pockets of London’s drivers.”
And while Logistics UK said it fully supported the Mayor for London’s environmental aims and the need to take action on air quality, it’s spoken out about the impact on the sector.
Head of policy – south Natalie Chapman said: “Today’s announcement raises concerns regarding potential additional costs to logistics businesses that are already facing recent increased charges as a result of the higher congestion charge and higher Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) costs recently introduced on London’s red routes. A Greater London boundary charge and further clean air charges – as proposed in the announcement – will place additional stress on industry, which already operates on small margins of between 1 and 3%. Logistics UK is keen to see greater detail on the consultation proposals; any new measures introduced must be proportionate, achievable and ensure that logistics businesses can continue to deliver for the capital, its residents and its workforce.”
