A scheme that involves the public dipping into their pockets every day is rarely greeted with enthusiasm, but the success of the London Congestion Charge has silenced most of its critics.
However, Volvo Car UK recently issued a Press release challenging the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, to review the basis of charging for the London congestion charging zone.
Is the congestion charge unfair?
Volvo believes the principal of hybrid cars being exempt from the charge is outdated.
Currently, only alternative fuel vehicles are exempt from the London Congestion Charge. This means if you drive a hybrid car such as the Toyota Prius or Honda Insight; an electric car such as the G-Wiz or NICE Mega City; an LPG converted car; or an alternative fuel vehicle such as the Volvo CNG V70; then you can travel in and out of the city centre for free.
The problem in the case of hybrid cars however, is that their emissions vary widely. Their outputs currently range from 89g/km of carbon dioxide (CO2) to 219g/km of CO2.
It’s easy to see why Volvo is so keen to point out the discrepancy. Its own S40 1.6 DRIVe with start/stop technology (pictured below) emits a mere 104g/km of CO2 and was recently named as the What Car? Green Car of the Year. Yet its drivers are still charged £8 a day to enter the capital. Indeed Volvo is not alone in having reason to complain – at the end of 2008, there were 13 non-hybrid cars from other manufacturers emitting less than 105g/km of CO2.
Not the first time…
In 2008, Boris Johnson ended proposals to introduce a CO2 charge which would have meant vehicles emitting 226g/km or more would have had to pay £25 a day to drive into the zone following a legal challenge from Porsche which claimed the plans were “unfair and disproportionate”.
At the same time, a 100 per cent discount for vehicles emitting up to 120g/km of CO2 was removed leaving many of the businesses and consumers who had bought low emission cars expecting them to be charge-exempt, feeling cheated.
Is it hard to argue with success?
The London Congestion Charge was devised as the capital suffered the worst traffic congestion in the UK, and some of the worst in Europe. Drivers in London spent 50 per cent of their time in queues according to official statistics and every week day morning the equivalent of 25 busy motorway lanes of traffic tried to enter the central area. This was proving costly, not only for the environment and for frustrated commuters, but for the economy too – it is estimated that London lost £2-4million every week due to lost time caused by congestion.
So a charge of £5 was implemented to enter a 21sq km patch of the city centre – a fee that has since increased to £8. The result is that the number of cars has fallen by a fifth, while the number of public buses has leapt by 25 per cent. Indeed a spokesman for Transport for London told the New Scientist last year, on the fifth anniversary of the charge’s implementation, that nitrogen oxides had fallen by eight per cent and particulate matter created by diesel engines had dropped by 15 per cent.
However, even if we accept that the scheme has been a success, with so many advancements in motoring over the last six years, isn’t it time to review how the congestion charge works?
Our verdict…
Here at TheGreenCarWebsite.co.uk we believe the congestion charge needs to be reviewed and updated. Technology has moved on, and it’s time to reflect these changes.
Rather than simply hitting the biggest polluters with a heavy charge and letting those with low emitting vehicles pass through for free, as was proposed in 2008, we suggest a staggered charging system similar to VED bands. Just as road tax is now linked to emissions, the congestion charge could follow a similar structure.
The cars with the lowest emissions – say below 100g/km – could be charge-free. Then those with emissions from 101-120g/km would be hit with a £2 charge. The remaining bands would be: 121-140g/km £5 charge; 141g/km-180g/km £8 charge; 181g/km-220g/km £10 charge; and 221g/km and above would face a £12 charge.
This would encourage drivers to consider greener alternatives and would no longer show a strong bias towards hybrid cars unless their emissions were low. It would also allow the remaining alternative technologies, such as electric and hydrogen power, to prosper.
Here at TheGreenCarWebsite.co.uk we’d love to know what you think of our proposals and the existing system. Is it time for a change? Perhaps you think the congestion charge should be scrapped altogether? Leave a comment below with your thoughts.
Faye Sunderland
