logoalt Hacker News

graemeptoday at 9:59 AM2 repliesview on HN

A few things standout to me from the article.

1. London when the ULEZ was brought in was already a lot less polluted than historically.Are there gains from that? London was not that bad by global standards.

2. This was followed by the benefits of COVID lockdowns (not a phrase often used!) as pollution dropped much further.

3. Is this effect even across London? Suburbs vs centre, different types of housing etc.? I grew up a the edge of London and the difference in pollution was visible (i.e. you did not need instruments to see signs of it).

4. There was also a reduction in sales of diesel cars which had been heavily encouraged (because of lower CO₂ emissions) in previous decades.

5. As the articles notes, there have been a lot of other changes at roughly the same time. It only mentions one, but there have been significant lifestyle changes, so a lot of potential confounding variables.


Replies

foventoday at 10:33 AM

1. Less than historically still has a quite high baseline compared to after ULEZ - if it was more polluted, presumably the change seen here would be more dramatic.

2. Definitely kickstarted it, but we're looking at taking that impact and continuing it for some 5 years after covid ended now.

3. You can look at the ULEZ map and it really covers everything but the outer tube line suburbs [1].

5. The control group in Luton, presumably, has the same lifestyle changes - it's not that far away (about 30 miles), so it is as close as you can get to a one to one comparison, not accounting for the fact that Luton is likely to be more deprived than London (especially in the council estates, which have horrible reputations).

[1] - https://tfl.gov.uk/ruc-cdn/static/cms/images/ulezdetailedmap...

show 1 reply
dabinattoday at 10:21 AM

Wouldn’t most of those effects also be in the control group too?

show 1 reply