Will clean air zones expand?

[styles]

For some context, I live near Edinburgh and have a filthy old diesel which isn't allowed into Scotland's low emissions zones.

Or well, you could drive in, but the penalty is £60-480 per day, so you'd have to be rich to bother.

I lived in London for a few years and supported the Mayor's expansion of the ultra low emissions zones to cover the area within the Northland south circulars. The scrappage scheme, exemptions, and the extent of public transport including at night time I feel made it appropriate.

At the moment though, with the exception of Birmingham and perhaps Glasgow, the clean air zones and low emissions zones in the rest of the UK appear to be quite small. Take Edinburgh for example - you basically can't drive to Waverley, Princes St, or the old town. You can drive to Haymarket fine, so if you're looking to drive to a railway station to park up at and have an old diesel, you have a really good option. Aberdeen's low emissions zones doesn't even cover the railway station.

Do you think these will eventually be expanded? It seems like it could be the nudge effect almost.

I would ask if we thought new clean air zones might be introduced, but they appear to have peaked and proposals for new ones somewhat stalling?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Manchester has now abandoned the idea. I do love the ULEZ - air in central London is now much better quality than small rural towns or seaside resorts - but I think the fast uptake of EVs is going to render them obsolete pretty quickly.

I would expect us to get a few town centre ZEZs (i.e. EV only) before they finally croak, though. But probably not many if any more whole-town schemes. It'll be maybe 30 years at most before the only ICEs being driven around are occasional-use classics or would be ULEZ compliant anyway, which is really about as clean as you're going to get with an ICE. Because petrol is cleaner, we're already at the point where there are really hardly any non-ULEZ compliant petrol vehicles on the road now, and the number of non-compliant diesels is dwindling quickly, most stinking diesels seem now to be vans and campers.

 

[JamesT]

Oxford currently has a tiny ZEZ which is proposed to be expanded to cover most of the city centre. However. like most transport schemes in the city, the Botley Road bridge works have nobbled it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oxford currently has a tiny ZEZ which is proposed to be expanded to cover most of the city centre. However. like most transport schemes in the city, the Botley Road bridge works have nobbled it.

Oxford is a bit of an oddity in that you really want to discourage ANY cars from being in the centre, but realistically can't ban them completely. The concepts that apply there might translate to Cambridge but probably won't to anywhere else.

 

[styles]

Manchester has now abandoned the idea.

Yeah there was a lot of opposition in Manchester, though there is with most schemes. Support for the expansion of the ULEZ in London was roughly 50/50 according to consultation and independent polling, though the papers may have us believe otherwise.

I do love the ULEZ - air in central London is now much better quality than small rural towns or seaside resorts - but I think the fast uptake of EVs is going to render them obsolete pretty quickly.

Well TfL have already suggested the ULEZ scheme is likely to become unprofitable in a few years time for precisely the reason you mentioned - compliant vehicle rates are constantly on the up. Short of expanding it (not much room left in their remit) or changing the emissions standards to be even more strict, neither of which I expect to happen, that's going to be it. But in that sense it will have done its job - once a city has something like 99% compliant vehicle journeys, it's not like people are going to rush out and buy old bangers to replace their cleaner cars just because the charge/restriction is removed.

I would expect us to get a few town centre ZEZs (i.e. EV only) before they finally croak, though. But probably not many if any more whole-town schemes.

Do you think it'll just be for personal vehicles though? Zero emissions HGVs and the like are a fair bit off. We do have some zero emissions buses but not on the long distance routes.

It'll be maybe 30 years at most before the only ICEs being driven around are occasional-use classics or would be ULEZ compliant anyway, which is really about as clean as you're going to get with an ICE. Because petrol is cleaner, we're already at the point where there are really hardly any non-ULEZ compliant petrol vehicles on the road now, and the number of non-compliant diesels is dwindling quickly, most stinking diesels seem now to be vans and campers.

Yeah my car was a matter of months away from the Euro 6 standard, so it's not ridiculously old, but I wouldn't replace it with another diesel now, even if it is mainly used for long journeys (100+ miles). At the same time, for as long as I maintain it and it remains roadworthy, I don't intend to replace it. Could have it for another 10 years yet.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do you think it'll just be for personal vehicles though? Zero emissions HGVs and the like are a fair bit off. We do have some zero emissions buses but not on the long distance routes.

Zero emission coaches are clearly feasible - Ember are operating a large network of them in Scotland. So I think we will see more of them.

Registered local buses appear to be exempt (the likes of NatEx will just put an extra stop in and register their route if it's not already, they already do some so they can claim Bus Service Operator's Grant).

HGVs I don't know, I guess they'll just have to pay if delivering inside the zone, and it'll discourage them from shortcutting through the centre. Probably no bad thing.

Full details of the proposals are here: https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/transport-and-travel/oxford-zero-emission-zone-zez/city-centre-zez

It's fairly notable that the station is excluded from the zone but the Westgate shopping centre car park only just isn't! I can see the centre petitioning to change that.

Proposed wider zero emission zone​

Expanding the ZEZ to a wider area of Oxford’s city centre to improve air quality

On this page​

• What is Oxford's ZEZ?
• How does it work?
• Indicative timeline
• Draft proposals for the wider ZEZ

What is Oxford's ZEZ?​

A small pilot ZEZ became operational on 28 February 2022 in Oxford city centre. It has allowed the county and city councils to test how the scheme works.
The pilot ZEZ is an area where zero emission vehicles (such as fully electric motorcycles, cars and vans) can be used without incurring a charge but where other motor vehicles may be charged.
All petrol and diesel vehicles, including hybrids, will incur a daily charge if they are driven in the zone between 7am and 7pm unless they have a 100 per cent discount or exemption.
We are now working on proposals for expanding the ZEZ to a wider area in Oxford city centre. The expansion of the ZEZ will be subject to further assessments, modelling, engagement and formal consultation.

Why we need a zero emission zone​

Vehicle emissions are harmful to our health and contribute to climate change.
A zero-emission zone will:

• encourage people to switch to low and zero-emission vehicles
• make other positive changes to their travel behaviour
• help reduce tailpipe, brake and tyre emissions in the city
• help improve the health and wellbeing of our communities, particularly for children
• generate funding to support the transition to zero-emission vehicles and encourage non-car modes of travel.

This will improve the air quality in Oxford and reduce traffic while still maintaining access for those who need it.

How does it work?​

Traffic signs identify the location of the zone. The scheme is enforced using automatic number plate recognition cameras.
Charges are payable by all vehicles unless they emit zero emissions or have a 100 per cent discount or exemption. Income from the scheme will be used to pay for its ongoing development and operation as well as to improve transport in the city, including schemes to support the transition to zero-emission transport.

Indicative timeline​

• Winter/Spring 2024 – Pre-consultation engagement with stakeholders
• Autumn 2024 - 2025 – Further assessments and modelling
• From Early January 2026 – Public consultation
• 2026 – Cabinet decision on whether to proceed with the wider ZEZ
• Implementation if approved by cabinet – timing to be confirmed, depending on Network Rail’s completion of work on Oxford rail station and Botley Road reopening.

Draft proposals for the wider ZEZ​

Map​

View a map showing the proposed area for the wider ZEZ (jpg format, 700KB).

Proposed daily charges for cars and motorbikes​

All proposed charges are subject to further assessments, engagement and consultation.

	Motorbikes and mopeds	Car
Zero emission vehicle (ZEV) (0g/km CO2)	£0	£0
Ultra low emission vehicle (ULEV) (<75g/km CO2)	£2	£2
Low emission vehicle (LEV) (Vehicles that meet the Euro 4/IV petrol or Euro 6/VI diesel standard)	£2	£4
All other vehicles	£2	£10
(Any vehicle not meeting any of the above standards)

Proposed daily charges for commercial vehicles​

	Van (up to 3.5 tonnes)	Minibus (up to 5 tonnes) Light truck (over 3.5 tonnes and up to 12 tonnes)	Bus/coach (over 5 tonnes) Heavy truck (over 12 tonnes)
Zero emission vehicle (ZEV) (0g/km CO2)	£0	£0	£0
Hybrid (Any hybrid engine)	£2	£3	£5
Low emission vehicle (LEV) (Vehicles that meet the Euro 4/IV petrol or Euro 6/VI diesel standard)	£4	£5	£10
Other (Any vehicle not meeting any of the above standards)	£10	£25	£50

Proposed non-chargeable vehicles/users​

The following vehicles and user groups are proposed to be exempt from daily charges in the wider ZEZ.

• Blue Badge holders
• People receiving mobility-related benefits
• Disabled tax class vehicles
• Professional health or care workers
• Registered local buses
• Oxford-licensed Hackney carriage vehicles (taxis) (non-Oxford Hackneys and private hire vehicles being considered)
• Euro VI buses, mini-buses or coaches used on qualifying home-to-school transport services
• Students in financial hardship moving in or out of the ZEZ
• Community transport vehicles
• Emergency service and qualifying health service vehicles
• Certain recovery vehicles
• Military vehicles
• Agricultural and similar vehicles (includes tractors, mowing machines, steam-powered vehicles, snow ploughs and gritters)
• Historic vehicles (including classic cars)
• Special vehicles (includes mobile cranes, pumping vehicles, digging machines, road rollers, and works trucks, e.g. forklift trucks)
• Hearses

Proposed chargeable but discounted vehicles​

• ZEZ businesses’ vehicles - 90% discount (for up to 10 vehicles)
• ZEZ residents’ vehicles - 100% discount for first vehicle, 50% second vehicle

 

[Sonic1234]

Depends if you see a Reform government happening in the future

 

[bluenoxid]

The possible reason for the station being excluded from a Zero Emissions Zone could be accessible taxis and other vehicles that would be accessing the station on an adhoc basis, whose lifespan won’t have been reached yet.

For example, they would struggle to get rail-replacement vehicles that meet a ZEZ in.

 

[cactustwirly]

Oxford is a bit of an oddity in that you really want to discourage ANY cars from being in the centre, but realistically can't ban them completely. The concepts that apply there might translate to Cambridge but probably won't to anywhere else.

Why would you want to discourage cars from the centre of Oxford?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Oct 2025 ==

Zero emission coaches are clearly feasible - Ember are operating a large network of them in Scotland. So I think we will see more of them.

Registered local buses appear to be exempt (the likes of NatEx will just put an extra stop in and register their route if it's not already, they already do some so they can claim Bus Service Operator's Grant).

HGVs I don't know, I guess they'll just have to pay if delivering inside the zone, and it'll discourage them from shortcutting through the centre. Probably no bad thing.

Full details of the proposals are here: https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/transport-and-travel/oxford-zero-emission-zone-zez/city-centre-zez

It's fairly notable that the station is excluded from the zone but the Westgate shopping centre car park only just isn't! I can see the centre petitioning to change that.

They already have a congestion charge

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why would you want to discourage cars from the centre of Oxford?

Why would you not? Have you ever been to Oxford? Cars are a very poor fit in old city centres.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Oct 2025 ==

They already have a congestion charge

A temporary one which is just to relieve problems caused by the Botley Road bridge closure.

 

[JamesT]

A temporary one which is just to relieve problems caused by the Botley Road bridge closure.

The locations of the cameras for the congestion charge, (which doesn't take effect until Wednesday), are the same as those for the future traffic filters. The difference being you won't be able to pay £5/day to go through the filters if you don't have a permit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The locations of the cameras for the congestion charge, (which doesn't take effect until Wednesday), are the same as those for the future traffic filters. The difference being you won't be able to pay £5/day to go through the filters if you don't have a permit.

The difference also being that with the filters you can get anywhere by car without paying, you may just have to go a long way round to do so.

 

[JamesT]

The difference also being that with the filters you can get anywhere by car without paying, you may just have to go a long way round to do so.

Apart from Botley Road being blocked, which makes the station/Westgate require one, the same is true of the congestion charge.
The ZEZ is different, but it's gone very quiet from the council regarding expansion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Apart from Botley Road being blocked, which makes the station/Westgate require one, the same is true of the congestion charge.

That's a pretty fundamental difference.

 

[JamesT]

That's a pretty fundamental difference.

It's not fundamental to the two schemes, there are 6 camera locations, only two of which affect the station. The congestion charge will almost certainly still be in place when Botley Road reopens.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's not fundamental to the two schemes, there are 6 camera locations, only two of which affect the station. The congestion charge will almost certainly still be in place when Botley Road reopens.

It's fundamentally different whether you can or can't avoid paying to enter a given area. That might not be technical to the scheme, but it's definitely of practical effect.

 

[PTR 444]

As others have said, it is inevitable that clean air zones will become obsolete in a few years as EV uptake increases.

EVs however do not solve the problem of congestion, so I think many towns and cities will require congestion charge zones to replace LEZs. Short of full road pricing, I can certainly see city-wide congestion charge zones being implemented for the likes of Greater London, Manchester, Oxford and Cambridge.

 

[Bletchleyite]

EVs however do not solve the problem of congestion, so I think many towns and cities will require congestion charge zones to replace LEZs. Short of full road pricing, I can certainly see city-wide congestion charge zones being implemented for the likes of Greater London, Manchester, Oxford and Cambridge.

To me urban parking taxation is the way to do this. People by and large don't object to paying for parking, and pay by phone schemes* mean it's feasible to implement charges everywhere rather than just in car parks and busy street locations where meter provision is viable. And what's the point of driving there if you can't park? Most people won't go through town centres by choice** as it's not usually quicker than going round the bypass, so the people driving in a town centre are going to that town centre, and if they're going to it they're going to park their car at some point.

* The ship of objecting to these is most of the way across the Atlantic now. Drivers who don't have any form of mobile phone (not even one that can make a call only) are basically not a thing.

** Yes, there are always exceptions - Bicester is one notable one, through the middle is in my experience almost always quicker than round the bypass. And there is a large industrial estate in Lancaster that can only be reached by going through the city centre (which in my view should be relocated and developed for housing, because the lorry traffic through the centre really does stink). However *mostly* this applies

 

[PTR 444]

To me urban parking taxation is the way to do this. People by and large don't object to paying for parking, and pay by phone schemes* mean it's feasible to implement charges everywhere rather than just in car parks and busy street locations where meter provision is viable. And what's the point of driving there if you can't park? Most people won't go through town centres by choice** as it's not usually quicker than going round the bypass, so the people driving in a town centre are going to that town centre, and if they're going to it they're going to park their car at some point.

Sounds good, but would the revenue go to the local councils (who are most likely to maintain the parking locations), or the treasury (who need to find a way to replace lost fuel duty revenue)? How would revenue allocation work for privately owned car parks?

* The ship of objecting to these is most of the way across the Atlantic now. Drivers who don't have any form of mobile phone (not even one that can make a call only) are basically not a thing.

Paying by app is still more time consuming than tapping a contactless card onto a parking meter.

** Yes, there are always exceptions - Bicester is one notable one, through the middle is in my experience almost always quicker than round the bypass. And there is a large industrial estate in Lancaster that can only be reached by going through the city centre (which in my view should be relocated and developed for housing, because the lorry traffic through the centre really does stink). However *mostly* this applies

This is where road pricing comes into its own, since you can apply a higher per-mile charge for the shorter through-town route than the longer bypass.

 

[thejuggler]

The current Clean Air Zones have been implemented due to Ministerial Direction to local authorities, they can't generally just be introduced.

'Your air is heavily polluted, its a public health hazard, do something about it"

Bradford's CAZ has been operating for a number of years, the last update was almost a year ago, but results look to be positive with NOX levels now below the upper limit of 40.

https://bradford.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s50443/DOC%20M%20CAZ%20Update.pdf

 

[cactustwirly]

Why would you not? Have you ever been to Oxford? Cars are a very poor fit in old city centres.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Oct 2025 ==



A temporary one which is just to relieve problems caused by the Botley Road bridge closure.

I drive there all the time, cheaper to park in the Westgate than park in the Park and Ride.

Nowhere as bad as Reading to drive into

 

[Bletchleyite]

I drive there all the time, cheaper to park in the Westgate than park in the Park and Ride.

If you go from the ring road via the shortest route to the Westgate it's probably OK, but if you go further in it'd be grim.

Nowhere as bad as Reading to drive into

Never driven into Reading, but part of why Oxford isn't too bad will be because a lot of people *don't* drive into it. Central London isn't too bad these days either due to the success of the C-charge. The best way of putting it is probably along the lines that these schemes mean people don't drive in most of the time, which has the side effect of making it less painful on the rare occasion that you actually have to, plus better for pedestrians and cyclists.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Oct 2025 ==

Sounds good, but would the revenue go to the local councils (who are most likely to maintain the parking locations), or the treasury (who need to find a way to replace lost fuel duty revenue)? How would revenue allocation work for privately owned car parks?

If it's replacing fuel tax one assumes it would be collected by central Government, or the block grant would be reduced further to take account of it. For private car parks I guess it's just a tax on their operation that is passed on to customers, not much different from VAT or similar. Or you tax them based on the number of spaces regardless of occupancy to encourage land to be given over to more efficient uses.

Paying by app is still more time consuming than tapping a contactless card onto a parking meter.

Given the appalling UI on many of them, I don't agree. I can start a parking session on RingGo within a couple of seconds, faster than I can buy a train ticket. But either way my point is the the ship has sailed - for better or worse this is already the majority method of paying to park and the only one accepted now at a huge range of car parks. The time to object to it has gone and it will not go away.

This is where road pricing comes into its own, since you can apply a higher per-mile charge for the shorter through-town route than the longer bypass.

Road pricing is probably more effective, but there would be uproar over it, whereas people accept that it is mostly necessary these days to pay if you want to park in an urban area.

 

[JamesT]

I drive there all the time, cheaper to park in the Westgate than park in the Park and Ride.

Nowhere as bad as Reading to drive into

Only if you're making a very short visit to the Westgate or have a car full of adults. £5 for a park and ride ticket that's all day parking and two people return on the bus. Westgate is £4.50 for an hour during the week.
Come Wednesday it will be even cheaper as the bus will be free so only £2.50 to park all day in the P&R.

I don't know about Reading, but there are frequently long tailbacks on the main routes in and out of the city.

 

[renegademaster]

Surely in 5 years most non Euro 6 vehicles will be gone and no local authority is going to want to put themselves through a huge political battle for tiny, if any , gains. Yes Khan still won he didn't win the huge swing every other Labour politician had at the time, and it helped the Tories hang on in a by-election .

 

[PTR 444]

Given the appalling UI on many of them, I don't agree. I can start a parking session on RingGo within a couple of seconds, faster than I can buy a train ticket. But either way my point is the the ship has sailed - for better or worse this is already the majority method of paying to park and the only one accepted now at a huge range of car parks. The time to object to it has gone and it will not go away.

How would you address the issue in parking locations where there is poor internet connection?

 

[Bletchleyite]

How would you address the issue in parking locations where there is poor internet connection?

It is addressed in some car parks in the Lake District and North Wales by giving you until midnight to pay for the parking so you can do so elsewhere. However, in 2025 there are very, very few urban areas where mobile signal at or near the car park does not exist. Alternatively those specific car parks could have machines, but that doesn't require all of them to have them. It is possible just to solve problems in the specific areas where they exist rather than needing a blanket solution.

 

[cactustwirly]

Only if you're making a very short visit to the Westgate or have a car full of adults. £5 for a park and ride ticket that's all day parking and two people return on the bus. Westgate is £4.50 for an hour during the week.
Come Wednesday it will be even cheaper as the bus will be free so only £2.50 to park all day in the P&R.

I don't know about Reading, but there are frequently long tailbacks on the main routes in and out of the city.

I paid the night rate which was £5

With the park and ride you have to pay for the bus fare and parking separately right?

I had a clear run from the A34 to the Westgate like a 10 minute drive

With Reading, coming from the East you're funelled around a one way system past Cemetery Junction and the Royal Berkshire hospital and down Sidmouth Street which is a real pinch point, takes half an hour to do a mile

West Side down Bath Road is much better

If you're traveling to South Oxfordshire it's basically your only option unless you go over the narrow and congested Sonning Bridge

 

[Bletchleyite]

With the park and ride you have to pay for the bus fare and parking separately right?

No. There is a combined rate available on RingGo and on the machines which is significantly discounted compared to paying the components separately, very significantly so if there is more than one passenger. It's nowhere near parking+3 quid a head each way, it's under a fiver all in or was last time I used it.

(That it offers discounted rates for more people is a bit ironic because single occupancy cars are what you want to discourage the most!)

 

[PeterC]

No. There is a combined rate available on RingGo and on the machines which is significantly discounted compared to paying the components separately, very significantly so if there is more than one passenger. It's nowhere near parking+3 quid a head each way, it's under a fiver all in or was last time I used it.

(That it offers discounted rates for more people is a bit ironic because single occupancy cars are what you want to discourage the most!)

The bus only adult return is £4

With the revised scheme there will be a temptation to enter a "ghost" registration number at the machine rather than pay the full fare for a third passenger. I am wondering if the council has a system in place to counter this?

Redbridge has a Travelodge next door and the stops are close to housing so it does get non P&R passengers as well.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With the revised scheme there will be a temptation to enter a "ghost" registration number at the machine rather than pay the full fare for a third passenger. I am wondering if the council has a system in place to counter this?

Probably not worth the cost of a tiny number of people deciding to do it during a three month trial. Most won't think of it.