I wonder if there might be a "middle way" that addresses pollution control without draconian measures such as banning vehicles over a certain age.

In the Canadian province I live in (Ontario), all vehicles over 8 years old are obliged to take an emissions test every couple of years before the vehicle registration will be renewed. If the vehicle meets the emissions requirements that were in force at the time the vehicle was built (in other words, if the vehicle has been well maintained), registration is renewed. If not, the vehicle must be brought back to spec before it can be used on the road.

This appears to work well, just based on visual observations (the absence of old, smokey cars on the road). Past a certain age - typically about 20 years - it becomes uneconomical to keep older 'daily drivers' on the road, and those vehicles disappear. But, enthusiasts who want to keep an older car on the road can do so, provided that they keep it well maintained and in good tune.

In Canada, motorcycles represent such a small percentage of the vehicle fleet that they are not controlled for emissions, although they are controlled for safety standards compliance. The relatively high cost of insuring them tends to keep the 'beaters' off the road... in other words, if you can afford the cost of insuring a bike, you can generally afford to own one less than 20 years old (unless, of course, you fancy a classic).

Michael

Makes sense. In Germany all vehicles have to undergo an MOT every 2nd year. This includes the emission test.

I wonder what would've they told to Her Magesty with her old Rolls Royce in case they adopted that measure.:cool:

I've read most of that. Any one got any idea about disable car's that are at zero rate tax, but is older than 15 year's? I have one and the reason I keep the one I have. It fit's my life style just perfect. Do I have to pay to charge?
John933

and diesels without a green sticker are banned from all the major urban areas.

Having children generates far far more pollution than any old motorbike.

The majority of polution a car makes is during it's manufacture and destruction, not it's running. Any car over 12 years old is already producing less lifetime polution than if it were scrapped in for a new one, I suspect it's the same with motorbikes.

Thats why the scrappage scheme was actually an environmental disaster, but then, that was never about the environment anyway.

Also, it assumes people can afford to buy new cars. I can't, which is why I run a 15 year old car in London! It's a policy against the mobility of the poor.

emissions tests should be relative to the age of vehicle. I for one would not want to see running a classic car being the sole preserve of those rich enough to be able to rebuild their engine every few years just to keep it legal. Many cars go through a stage of being cheap transport before being classics, so a policy of rendering old cars uneconomical to repair through excessively tight emissions controls will mean no future classics being preserved.

A case in point is Japan, where excessively draconian roadworthyness tests render cars of even a few years old uneconomic to keep on the road.

people in this country can rest relatively easy. The house of commons has a large and thriving classic car club!

IIRC it is every 3 years .. new shocks, brake lines ..etc. etc.

At least some of the 'old' cars get exported .. to places like New Zealand where they do sterling service. In Australia I think these 'old' cars get used for parts. Thus the 'old' cars get recycled quite well.

Some of their 'old' bikes get recycled for parts too.

--------------------
More and more use of public transport is probably the best solution to the city pollution problem. Banning vehicles I don't think will work, make the public transport cheaper and faster and you will have a natural migration.