It's only the first stage, but every two years the requirements go up one euro norm. So right now it affects barely anyone, but in a couple more stages it will (and is planned to by the city) affect some 30% of cars. The reqs will go up to the newest available norm, so despite starting very innocently, Warsaw's LEZ is a strong contender for the most draconic restrictions imposed on cars in any European city.
Not to mention the zone includes a large portion of the city, not just the center.
And the cherry on top is that cars are given euro norms by year of production and not actual emission or engines that power them. So you can have an old, but small and clean car banned from the city, but a new, big and polluting car will be fine. Hybrid cars count as if they never used electric engine and LPG is perceived as just as unclean as gas, even though it's about 24% less polluting.
The little Fiat 126p which emits close to nothing will be banned but the new 2024 Ford F-9001 Climate-Change Special Edition, is allowed, Poland as always being Poland
Point is it should be judged on emissions rather than production year. Because you can have a 20 year old Corrolla that emits way less than a 2021 Chevy, simple as. And people do drive 20 year old Corollas
many things should be done slightly differently in a perfect world, that doesn't mean we should strive for perfection and never do anything. Especially considering we don't live in a perfect world and doing things super fairly might cost more than it's worth.
> And people do drive 20 year old Corollas
And they'll be allowed to drive 20 year old Corollas untill 2034 when they'll have to upgrade to 17 year old Corollas. Which is the bigger imperfection with this law - it has no balls and does very little.
And even if they couldn't visit warsaw city center in their corollas, they can still drive them everywhere but the city center. Like, how much of an issue it really is, it requires a perfect blend of:
1. old car with great emissions
2. person who really really needs to be in the city center regularly and somehow can pay for parking
3. while not living there and being exempt
4. while being too poor to have a car that's less than 25 years old
5. and this imaginary person that might even not exist at all also needs to carry like 200 kg of stuff everywhere they go so they can't use public transport
6. and they apparently live in warsaw, because elected politicians have to care about their vote
There's maybe 1 such person, and hundreds of people will prematurely die because they won't just move to a different city.
Transportation is 16% of pollution in the air, wanna stop global warming and people dying from smog? Change coal to uranium, and leave my goddamn cars alone.
> Transportation is 16% of pollution in the air
This was never the case in warsaw, even if you don't count the amount of shit cars pick up from the road and reintroduce in the air (which you should, because that's what goes into your lungs and kills people).
> wanna stop global warming
This is much more complex, construction (remember, the cars need a lot of very expensive infrastructure that has to be redone every 10-20 years) is one of the biggest factors in global warming. Transportation and heating are up there as well. Now, I'd rather not freeze during the winter than drive a useless car, but that's apparently not a popular choice.
Also we're likely already over the 1.5°C temperature increase whatever we do (short of a global seppuku), how is getting nuclear in 50 years considered "stopping" the problem. If we still have todays emissions when your last coal plant goes offline we're fucked beyond imagination, irreversibly. Fucked so much we likely won't be able to keep the nuclear power running anyway. Might as well not build it and focus on something more useful, like spears or whatever cockroaches like.
> Change coal to uranium
Unless our source of energy is magic, we're still energy limited as a species or a country (remember, we must compete with more effective countries). It's never an effective way of doing things to carry 1000 kgs of steel everywhere you go. Asking to "change coal for uranium" is like asking people to do nothing - this can't happen in our lifetimes. And even if we dropped everything, agreed to do it, shot the people who don't agree and started some totalitarian bullshit, decided it's more important than fucking eating, it'd still take like 40 years. How is this an alternative in your head.
How about instead, everyone stops driving until we have this magic nuclear? I mean, you consider it a realistic solution, you should be the one waiting for it.
I suppose, but maybe it's not worth holding the entire thing for like 30 cars nobody even drives daily. And then holding it some more to discuss which other retro cars might be clean enough to be allowed.
Now why even ban? Those cars not meeting criteria are very few. So, what’s the real difference other than harrasing those who cannot afford 120 000 PLN for new VW Polo.
I think you're mostly right - sadly. This is very soft on private cars and not really worth doing. It's much less soft on diesel, including a lot of buses, vans and trucks, so that's at least going to do something. Those do drive a lot (vs. private cars who are parked for almost entirety of their lifetime).
>they insist that only around 3% of vehicles will currently be affected by the measures
Yep, I'm happy to learn that 97% of cars were already "clean". /s
I didn't say I'm leaving the city, I'm not rich enough to move out of the apartment I don't own and apparently I'm not rich enough to have a car too, thank you government
Then you should use public transit instead of a car.It is the chapter option. Regular car usage in a city IS A LUXURY.
Besides, people are getting their panties in a twist like next month only gold plated Teslas were to be allowed in. In 2028 the cutoff will be at 14 and 23 years (diesel/pertrol). You can buy a 2020 (8year old at the time car) and use it up to 2038.
The "think of the poor" argument is getting ridiculous. Should we, as a society, be okay with people shitting in the streets because they can't afford toilet paper and water? No, and we don't. We even provide toilets free of charge at all metro stations. And the same with transportation. There is a public option. Or rental. Or you can drive in with old vehicle up to 4 times in a year for free.
I'm not using my car in the city just for groceries but that's nowhere near center yet still at the border of the new zone.
What if I want to visit my family 300km away? I want to drive from my parking garage but living in the zone I won't be able to and my car is 2009 gasoline.
Just an example. I use the public transport everyday and car maybe once a week for groceries or random trips outside of the city.
Am I supposed to levitate?
Until 2030 for it to be one a problem for you. Are you still going to be driving the same car in 6 years time? It will be 21y old at that time.
It gives you ample time to save up and buy newer, second(or 3rd) hand car that is not old enough to drink.
In the mean time the maintenance on a 20yo car will get pricier and pricier, making it cheaper to upgrade to a less old vehicle. Is it so bad?
>The "think of the poor" argument is getting ridiculous. Should we, as a society, be okay with people shitting in the streets because they can't afford toilet paper and water?
No, this has nothing to do with "think of the poor", this is literally as if I took something from you and told you that I will not give it back to you because of reasons I just made up. I have a car and I want to use it. It's that simple. Also, don't compare air pollution made by cars to shitting on the street, cars take a really small part in air pollution, numbers are available everywhere.
You're talking about public transport, yeah cool, just make it work! I'm also sick of all those retarded people who drive 2km to work everyday, alone in their SUVs (which apparently poison me less than a 126p btw), but public transport sucks outside of Warsaw center. Try it yourself, I hope your bus will actually be there, let alone be there on time.
Then you can get an exemption for 3.5 years. Eventually you will need to drop your old cared vehicle and get something new (scrapyards are so eco). Although you could register as historic. There are ways to get it without age restriction. Even for brand new cars.
Not me. I'm all 4 limbs against that idea. In my opinion if your car already exists the most eco friendly is to keep it alive and well as long as possible. It was written just for car manufacturers.
>Warsaw has called on drivers to ensure they are prepared for the introduction next month of a “clean transport zone” that will ban older cars from the city centre. It is the first such measure implemented anywhere in Poland.
>The municipal authorities have [launched a website](https://sprawdzsct.zdm.waw.pl/) allowing people to check if their car is among those that will now be barred. However, they insist that only around 3% of vehicles will currently be affected by the measures.
>
>Last year, Warsaw [announced](https://notesfrompoland.com/2023/01/26/warsaw-to-ban-older-cars-from-2024/) that, from 1 July 2024, it would ban diesel cars over 18 years old and petrol cars over 27 years old.
>Those thresholds will then be gradually lowered in the next stages of the project to ban even younger cars. Eventually, by 2032, diesel cars over 11 years old and petrol cars over 17 years old will be banned.
>The clean transport zone covers an area of 37km2, representing 7% of the city. It includes the entire Śródmieście district at the heart of Warsaw, as well as parts of the adjacent Wola, Ochota, Saska Kępa, Grochów and Praga neighbourhoods.
>
>The aim of the ban is to reduce the negative impact of transport emissions on human health and the environment. Poland has some of [Europe’s most polluted air](https://notesfrompoland.com/2023/12/07/polish-city-records-worlds-second-highest-air-pollution-as-winter-smog-sets-in/), with vehicle emissions one of the leading causes.
>City hall estimates that, despite excluding only 3% of vehicles, the first stage of the project will already significantly diminish harmful substances in the air, with nitrogen oxide (NOx) expected to fall by 11% and particulate matter (PM) by 20%.
>By the time the measures are fully introduced in 2032, the city calculates that this will have resulted in an 80% reduction in NOx and a 69% drop in PM.
>
>Certain exceptions are allowed. Senior citizens, drivers who have a European parking card for people with disabilities, and those who drive a vehicle legally classified as being historic or as serving a special function can apply for exemption from the rules. So can companies that have their registered office or settle taxes in Warsaw.
>Those residing in Warsaw and paying taxes in the capital will be exempt from meeting the requirements of the zone in the first two stages of its introduction, meaning until January 2028.
>Poland’s second-largest city, Kraków, had [intended to be the first in Poland](https://notesfrompoland.com/2022/11/24/krakow-becomes-first-polish-city-to-ban-older-cars-in-anti-pollution-drive/) to introduce such a clean transport zone. However, its plans have been delayed after a [court ruled in January](https://notesfrompoland.com/2024/01/11/court-scraps-polands-first-clean-transport-zone/) that they had not been properly formulated.
Eat the poor!
Or at least force them to get shine new cars even if their current ride perfectly fine.
Oh, and before downvoting please check % of emissions in Warsaw coming from private cars.
Then check hard data on what part of the problem comes from old cars. And best part? You’ll breathe with my car exhaust anyway as it meets that new BS my friend.
My dearest amigo, I bike In the city center and old diesels are a problem I have that this legislation solves. Some of them literally spew tons of black smoke.
Congrats on the new(ish) car!
My sweetest friend, I feel sorry but still I am more symphatetic towards those who cannot afford as nice and shiny car as mine.
Again - I do not care, I live far from city center, I have nice, grey metallic car which can enter any downtown in EU and I have 2 funny cats. Could not care less about smog on Marszałkowska.
My most trusted comrade, maybe you could harness your love of the poor and imagine bikers as too poor to even afford a crappy car, thereby deserving the protection of such a champion of the downtrodden as yourself?
It's probably even true in some cases
There have been studies comparing air pollution in cities during covid lockdowns to pre-lockdown. Try looking for these. There seem to be more potent factors that determine air quality, although cars contribute to the problem, they are not by any means the main culprit.
You can find studies showing that cars contribute 2 to 8% to air primary emissions and up to 40% secondary emissions (lifting dropped particles).
That's why air quality in Warsaw fluctuates with seasons but not really with traffic and weekdays.
Well idk what would you want, we're living under capitalism and there's too much cars. Clearly whoever pays the most is going to be the one who gets to drive. What would you have, a state loterry? A bureaucrat deciding who needs the car more? Or just complain that poor people get to die from pollution and car accidents way more?
Oh, I find it hilarious that there will be still too much cars and only those who cannot afford newer models will suffer.
I do not cares anyway, I live nearby a large forest on the outskirts of Warsaw and I am an a car which is within the new limits.
> I find it hilarious that there will be still too much cars
Well, yeah, as long as roads and parking are top priority there's going to be at least as many cars as are required to fill the capacity. Our district recently introduced paid parking zone. With that they had "reorganized" parking (i.e. made it so there's a lot more of it) and made it so easy to park for locals that... we've bought a car. A car we barely need. But with the housing prices it's worth it just as extra storage honestly (esp. considering self-storage units are usually far enough from your home to require a car anyway and cost like 9kpln/year - just store your shit in a car lol). When we use it, once or twice a week, we mostly use it to go to places we'd bike to before (and maybe use carsharing every quarter).
People will get mad at you for keeping your trash, bikes, strollers etc in shared spaces. Even getting anyone to install any PUBLIC bike parking or a bench will make you face obstacles and haters. But if you just get a fucking car it's perfectly reasonable to take 12 square meters of shared space and nobody cares, you can keep industrial waste in it.
It's just an eyesore to everybody and a waste of space and air, but hey, the local government made it a reasonable choice, so people will take it.
New cars are expensive.
There are plenty of older cars which are dirt cheap to maintain .
And if are a plumber/ electrician/ painter/ etc having a car is essential for the job.
cars are expensive, because they require a shitload of expensive infrastructure that uses a shitload of expensive land and has to be expensively maintained. They also cause a shitload of health issues like noise, pollution, accidents etc. It's actually another kind of regressive tax we have - everybody is taxed the same, yet if you can afford a car you get all the expensive infrastructure. If you can't you just sponsor that shit for people who are better off than you are and get to die more and waste more time than you need for their comfort.
They are also expensive because of physics. It will always take less energy to move one 100 kg person than it takes to move 1000 kg of steel and 100 kg of person. Our economy boils down to energy and it's just the most energy inefficient way of getting around and will never be efficient.
> And if are a plumber/ electrician/ painter/ etc having a car is essential for the job.
This is not "just reality", that's something we've made. If you don't have to bring 1000 kg of building materials to the site (eg. electrician/plumber) it's [highly possible to conduct most of your business on a cargo bike](https://www.treehugger.com/uk-plumber-conducts-business-by-cargo-bike-5188214). We made cars cheap, made riding bikes in cities difficult, we subsidize cars while not subsidizing cargo bikes etc. That what makes cars "essential".
And this is not even an issue, because plumbers, electricians etc. are mostly essential jobs with little demand elasticity. I'm not going to live without a toilet because your costs increased because you had to buy a car that doesn't give kids (as much) asthma. I'm just going to pay whatever your new increased price is, because I have no choice. Now, I might not going to have to pay for car of someone who doesn't need their car to do their job, and market pressure might make them not use the car they don't need, and give kids less asthma. Which all isn't great, but it's the only way we have, because we decided we'll distribute limited things with money.
There is little to none factory jobs inside the LEZ in Warsaw. Besides, ita not like employees bring their own steel to work everyday.
There are 2 metro lines, ~10 tramways (and more lines going on them) in the LEZ, with convenient Park&Rides dotted along the city entrances.
And if you are worker without a set place of work but rather drive from place to place, then surely your business must be able to afford a car that is less than 15 years old. In not - sorry, but maybe you shouldn't be running a business if you need to pollute the air for it to turn a profit.
This is what I thought.
Don't take it personally, but it's typical that those who need something the least will take it from those who need it the most.
Over and out.
And who exactly is taking what from whom?
You are spewing a bunch of platitudes, and making it seem like poor masses are being oppressed, left with no other way but to walk while the rich and powerful are enjoying the luxuries of the road.
While the truth is that car usage and ownership is expensive (especially for older vehicles) and, in the inner city, doing so regularly is a luxury. There are plenty of alternatives, the restrictions are rolled out slowly, giving people ample time to change, either their habits or a car. The most restrictive regulation will still allow cars that are a decade old. And if you are old or disabled you are exempt from the restrictions all together.
So who, exactly, is being made to go without while having less to begin with?
> Do you have a standard office job
Sure. And everybody commutes to that job using a fucking car. And it really is a standard, e.g. big chunk of cars on the road just carry asses to offices.
> in a big city?
I mean, this is r/warsaw, and we're talking about warsaw law. Are you a bot trying a response that worked in some other thread?
Gas price are the same for older cars. And it is not dirt cheap. Repairs? Older cars definitely require more of them and more frequently as well. Old and bad cars are not good for poor people at all, it just a trap for them.
Companys should buy a newer car for its electricians, but they do it anyways, nobody wants to lose time because of 40 years old diesel breaks. People who works for themselves can take orders not in the citycenter.
I have a 25 years old Toyota Yaris, and in these 25 years I paid maybe 1000zl in total for repairs, not counting regular maintenance.
With newer cars, it might cost these much just to do diagnostics.
>People who works for themselves can take orders not in the citycenter.
In other words fuck self employed.
I have a 20-year-old car with LPG installation. It's often cheaper to go by car than to buy a public transport ticket. It costs about 20-25zł per 100km. And especially so if I'm not going alone.
Once I got over the initial repairs after buying it, all I pay for are technical reviews. I could have a functional, cheap and clean car for the next 10 years, but unfortunately I will have to sell this perfectly good car and buy a newer one in a couple of years.
About "taking orders not in the city center", i have no words, really. You have not been self-employed and you don't know what you're talking about.
And what about external costs of your car usage that you seem to ignore and that the LEZ aims to tackle?
There are no perfect solutions, but this one seems to be a good predictor of pollution from cars.
It seems to me like you are getting angry that city government is making it harder for you to give little Timmy asthma, and not with the entity you should be angry at : the contract giver (employer) who is underpaying you or not providing you proper equipment to complete the job.
The minority of air pollution in cities is caused by cars, much more of it comes from heating solutions for houses. That's why you get extreme rise in air pollution every winter, and never in the summer.
My euro 4 LPG car emits significantly less pollutants than oh-so-popular brand new diesel SUVs, that will be happily accepted into the zone forever. Your argument really doesn't hold water. There are emissions listed on every car's specifications list, it really isn't that difficult to go off that instead of year of production, is it? Or maybe allow people engine swaps and DPF/catalytic converter additions to pollute less?
It's not my problem yet, but it pains me how blatantly unrelated to air cleanliness the regulations are.
This bill has nothing to do with clean cars. You can have an old car burn clean. Instead of having emissions tests they are forcing people to buy new cars. IDK how sustainable this is in the long run
Well, it's something and it's cheap. Even if they were to ban only white cars it'd still be good, as it'd somewhat limit the number of cars on the streets. [Car age and type of fuel](https://bi.im-g.pl/im/61/fe/1a/z28307297IH,Emisje-samochodow-w-zaleznosci-od-wieku-i-normy.jpg) are great simple predictors of car emissions that can be widely applied and are extremely hard to forge or dispute in court.
So overall car from 2004, used about 5000 km per year will be banner, but the car from 2023 used about 30000km per year will not be banned.
But overall this old car will send less poisonous particles, than this new one...
People vote stupid into power, get stupid results, act surprised in the aftermath... If there is one thing that do not work in the slightest in Poland it's local governments - clownshows run by biggest morons you can find.
community note: this kind of laws are introduced all over the world and [they mostly work](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10962247.2013.868380)
That is a lie though - if you want to reduce pollution just ban all cars. You won't be tackling the biggest issue, and you will f over the poor, but hey, none cares about those poor sobs anyway.
Anytime there is even a suggestion of road reduction, or closure in front of a school or anything to reduce the car volumes in Warsaw there is a big uproar about the freedom being taken away. What exactly are the jobs that require people to drive into the city center every day (or multiple times a day), make it mandatory to use your private car and pay so little that all you can use is a 25 old Corolla with LPG. (That is, tbh, still more expensive to use and own than a 3 month transit ticket).
If one truly cares about poor people then one would do everything to improve their health, provide better public transit coverage etc. Not by letting everyone drive whatever they want, everywhere.
Garbage take - you do realise people actually live in the Great zone of nonsense? You are basically whining about people going into the zone - f them. People living in the zone are the ones getting shafted, again, because living in city center in Poland is terrible for all, especially for the poor.
> That is a lie though
it's a literal published scientific study
> if you want to reduce pollution just ban all cars
That'd be great, but they actually have uses.
> you will f over the poor
fucking over the poor is par for the course at this point. It's already almost impossible to live in warsaw and be poor. Renting a room (necessity required to live) for a month costs more than straight up buying your "new" car (which, at this point has to be less 27 years old and in the final version will have to be 17 years old). Parking will cost you more than a car. 2/3 of warsaw travels by bus/tram/rail/bike and they subsidize the car drivers. Which like 90% of them - the drivers - aren't really "the poor". The richer you are the more likely you are to drive daily. You're literally using the imaginary poor to excuse fucking the poor.
>just ban all cars
I wish. Cars are a cancer to a city. One day this will be reality and people will look on car dependance like we do on XVIII century personal hygiene.
That's too bad. Everyone knows that America is car centered because of General Motors. But no one wants to admit that the clean transport areas are a similar case, made just for the profit of the car industry.
Absolutely idiotic.
The positive outcome in air quality is minimum compared with the massive decrease of quality of life of common people.
This will result in cities for rich class , while working-class can suck it. As always.
No problem with moving out of cities... But in that case make working from home a RIGHT for all.
>Those thresholds will then be gradually lowered in the next stages of the project to ban even younger cars. Eventually, by 2032, diesel cars over 11 years old and petrol cars over 17 years old will be banned.
Ok, great, my 12 y/o Skoda Fabia is safe for now xD
Let's see for how long though.
I am hoping that Poland invests more into electric grid and infrastructure, so that more and more people switch to EVs or, at least, to hybrids.
It would also be nice if that nuclear power plant existed, because switching to an EV doesn't seem like it'd do much if Bełchatów lignite was used to charge it.
To be honest, I would prefer if Poland didn't have any nuclear power. It is too risky to have it with such unstable neighbours like Russia and Belarus. I wouldn't feel safe.
One would think that Chernobyl did enough damage to Poland.
Coal can easily be replaced with renewables (solar, hydro, wind, etc.). There are many renewable options in Poland, so there is no need for nuclear.
On top of security risk, building/installing/training/utilizing renewables is much faster and cheaper than nuclear.
While renewables are the way to go, they're not stable enough. They're constantly cutting solar and wind off the grid to prevent malfunctions. Coal plants must be replaced by other stable source of power.
>They're constantly cutting solar and wind off the grid to prevent malfunctions.
They are doing that not because solar or wind are unstable. They are doing that because the grid is old and oudated. The grid itself is unstable and mulfunctioning. It needs to be rebuilt and renewed no matter what source of power you use (renewable or nuclear).
And to renew the whoel grid is easy: Poland needs to invest billions into the grid instead of giving it to the church.
Well, I can ask you the same question about a nuclear plant: what happens when your nuclear plant is not working or, God forbid, blows up? Answer is: you are fckd.
Exactly that's why you never rely on one source of energy and one supplier (like Germany and Austria were relying on Russian gas before the war). A country should always try to diversify its energy portfolio: solar+wind+hydro+others.
There are no cases when you don't have at least one of renewables. Even at nights when there is no sun or win, there is always water (hyrdo).
Also, "clever" countries invest into energy storage as well. Meaning that if you produced excess energy during the day because of solar, you store it and use during night.
Can't wait, it's obviously a good change, but people like to focus on one small flaw and blow it out of proportion
inb4: poor poor people, they should be allowed to to park on pavements because parking is so expensive :(
This is about as softly-softly as you can roll these things out
It's only the first stage, but every two years the requirements go up one euro norm. So right now it affects barely anyone, but in a couple more stages it will (and is planned to by the city) affect some 30% of cars. The reqs will go up to the newest available norm, so despite starting very innocently, Warsaw's LEZ is a strong contender for the most draconic restrictions imposed on cars in any European city. Not to mention the zone includes a large portion of the city, not just the center. And the cherry on top is that cars are given euro norms by year of production and not actual emission or engines that power them. So you can have an old, but small and clean car banned from the city, but a new, big and polluting car will be fine. Hybrid cars count as if they never used electric engine and LPG is perceived as just as unclean as gas, even though it's about 24% less polluting.
The little Fiat 126p which emits close to nothing will be banned but the new 2024 Ford F-9001 Climate-Change Special Edition, is allowed, Poland as always being Poland
It's not Poland, it's the overeager politicians
There's no little Fiats 126p on warsaws streets anymore, why would anyone care. That has to be the strawmannest of strawmans.
Point is it should be judged on emissions rather than production year. Because you can have a 20 year old Corrolla that emits way less than a 2021 Chevy, simple as. And people do drive 20 year old Corollas
many things should be done slightly differently in a perfect world, that doesn't mean we should strive for perfection and never do anything. Especially considering we don't live in a perfect world and doing things super fairly might cost more than it's worth. > And people do drive 20 year old Corollas And they'll be allowed to drive 20 year old Corollas untill 2034 when they'll have to upgrade to 17 year old Corollas. Which is the bigger imperfection with this law - it has no balls and does very little. And even if they couldn't visit warsaw city center in their corollas, they can still drive them everywhere but the city center. Like, how much of an issue it really is, it requires a perfect blend of: 1. old car with great emissions 2. person who really really needs to be in the city center regularly and somehow can pay for parking 3. while not living there and being exempt 4. while being too poor to have a car that's less than 25 years old 5. and this imaginary person that might even not exist at all also needs to carry like 200 kg of stuff everywhere they go so they can't use public transport 6. and they apparently live in warsaw, because elected politicians have to care about their vote There's maybe 1 such person, and hundreds of people will prematurely die because they won't just move to a different city.
Transportation is 16% of pollution in the air, wanna stop global warming and people dying from smog? Change coal to uranium, and leave my goddamn cars alone.
> Transportation is 16% of pollution in the air This was never the case in warsaw, even if you don't count the amount of shit cars pick up from the road and reintroduce in the air (which you should, because that's what goes into your lungs and kills people). > wanna stop global warming This is much more complex, construction (remember, the cars need a lot of very expensive infrastructure that has to be redone every 10-20 years) is one of the biggest factors in global warming. Transportation and heating are up there as well. Now, I'd rather not freeze during the winter than drive a useless car, but that's apparently not a popular choice. Also we're likely already over the 1.5°C temperature increase whatever we do (short of a global seppuku), how is getting nuclear in 50 years considered "stopping" the problem. If we still have todays emissions when your last coal plant goes offline we're fucked beyond imagination, irreversibly. Fucked so much we likely won't be able to keep the nuclear power running anyway. Might as well not build it and focus on something more useful, like spears or whatever cockroaches like. > Change coal to uranium Unless our source of energy is magic, we're still energy limited as a species or a country (remember, we must compete with more effective countries). It's never an effective way of doing things to carry 1000 kgs of steel everywhere you go. Asking to "change coal for uranium" is like asking people to do nothing - this can't happen in our lifetimes. And even if we dropped everything, agreed to do it, shot the people who don't agree and started some totalitarian bullshit, decided it's more important than fucking eating, it'd still take like 40 years. How is this an alternative in your head. How about instead, everyone stops driving until we have this magic nuclear? I mean, you consider it a realistic solution, you should be the one waiting for it.
Too long, didn't read, ☝️🤓 I bet you don't even have a car yourself lol
> Too long, didn't read, ☝️🤓 don't worry, it's never about convincing you, it's about showing others how silly your views are
then what’s the point of banning them. if anything they should have allowances for historic vehicles
I suppose, but maybe it's not worth holding the entire thing for like 30 cars nobody even drives daily. And then holding it some more to discuss which other retro cars might be clean enough to be allowed.
Now why even ban? Those cars not meeting criteria are very few. So, what’s the real difference other than harrasing those who cannot afford 120 000 PLN for new VW Polo.
I think you're mostly right - sadly. This is very soft on private cars and not really worth doing. It's much less soft on diesel, including a lot of buses, vans and trucks, so that's at least going to do something. Those do drive a lot (vs. private cars who are parked for almost entirety of their lifetime).
>they insist that only around 3% of vehicles will currently be affected by the measures Yep, I'm happy to learn that 97% of cars were already "clean". /s
What happens if someone owns a car that got banned and lives inside this zone?
you're out of luck
No, seriously, what's their solution?
They will need to pay the fee, but if they have lived and paid taxes in Warsaw they are exempt from it for 3.5 years.
3.5 years? Damn that's generous, another reason not to live in a city
Great, more places for people that actually want to live in the city.
I didn't say I'm leaving the city, I'm not rich enough to move out of the apartment I don't own and apparently I'm not rich enough to have a car too, thank you government
Then you should use public transit instead of a car.It is the chapter option. Regular car usage in a city IS A LUXURY. Besides, people are getting their panties in a twist like next month only gold plated Teslas were to be allowed in. In 2028 the cutoff will be at 14 and 23 years (diesel/pertrol). You can buy a 2020 (8year old at the time car) and use it up to 2038. The "think of the poor" argument is getting ridiculous. Should we, as a society, be okay with people shitting in the streets because they can't afford toilet paper and water? No, and we don't. We even provide toilets free of charge at all metro stations. And the same with transportation. There is a public option. Or rental. Or you can drive in with old vehicle up to 4 times in a year for free.
I'm not using my car in the city just for groceries but that's nowhere near center yet still at the border of the new zone. What if I want to visit my family 300km away? I want to drive from my parking garage but living in the zone I won't be able to and my car is 2009 gasoline. Just an example. I use the public transport everyday and car maybe once a week for groceries or random trips outside of the city. Am I supposed to levitate?
Until 2030 for it to be one a problem for you. Are you still going to be driving the same car in 6 years time? It will be 21y old at that time. It gives you ample time to save up and buy newer, second(or 3rd) hand car that is not old enough to drink. In the mean time the maintenance on a 20yo car will get pricier and pricier, making it cheaper to upgrade to a less old vehicle. Is it so bad?
>The "think of the poor" argument is getting ridiculous. Should we, as a society, be okay with people shitting in the streets because they can't afford toilet paper and water? No, this has nothing to do with "think of the poor", this is literally as if I took something from you and told you that I will not give it back to you because of reasons I just made up. I have a car and I want to use it. It's that simple. Also, don't compare air pollution made by cars to shitting on the street, cars take a really small part in air pollution, numbers are available everywhere. You're talking about public transport, yeah cool, just make it work! I'm also sick of all those retarded people who drive 2km to work everyday, alone in their SUVs (which apparently poison me less than a 126p btw), but public transport sucks outside of Warsaw center. Try it yourself, I hope your bus will actually be there, let alone be there on time.
Then you can get an exemption for 3.5 years. Eventually you will need to drop your old cared vehicle and get something new (scrapyards are so eco). Although you could register as historic. There are ways to get it without age restriction. Even for brand new cars.
big thanks, you will burn my money 3,5 years later than you could, again, how generous of you
Not me. I'm all 4 limbs against that idea. In my opinion if your car already exists the most eco friendly is to keep it alive and well as long as possible. It was written just for car manufacturers.
>Warsaw has called on drivers to ensure they are prepared for the introduction next month of a “clean transport zone” that will ban older cars from the city centre. It is the first such measure implemented anywhere in Poland. >The municipal authorities have [launched a website](https://sprawdzsct.zdm.waw.pl/) allowing people to check if their car is among those that will now be barred. However, they insist that only around 3% of vehicles will currently be affected by the measures. > >Last year, Warsaw [announced](https://notesfrompoland.com/2023/01/26/warsaw-to-ban-older-cars-from-2024/) that, from 1 July 2024, it would ban diesel cars over 18 years old and petrol cars over 27 years old. >Those thresholds will then be gradually lowered in the next stages of the project to ban even younger cars. Eventually, by 2032, diesel cars over 11 years old and petrol cars over 17 years old will be banned. >The clean transport zone covers an area of 37km2, representing 7% of the city. It includes the entire Śródmieście district at the heart of Warsaw, as well as parts of the adjacent Wola, Ochota, Saska Kępa, Grochów and Praga neighbourhoods. > >The aim of the ban is to reduce the negative impact of transport emissions on human health and the environment. Poland has some of [Europe’s most polluted air](https://notesfrompoland.com/2023/12/07/polish-city-records-worlds-second-highest-air-pollution-as-winter-smog-sets-in/), with vehicle emissions one of the leading causes. >City hall estimates that, despite excluding only 3% of vehicles, the first stage of the project will already significantly diminish harmful substances in the air, with nitrogen oxide (NOx) expected to fall by 11% and particulate matter (PM) by 20%. >By the time the measures are fully introduced in 2032, the city calculates that this will have resulted in an 80% reduction in NOx and a 69% drop in PM. > >Certain exceptions are allowed. Senior citizens, drivers who have a European parking card for people with disabilities, and those who drive a vehicle legally classified as being historic or as serving a special function can apply for exemption from the rules. So can companies that have their registered office or settle taxes in Warsaw. >Those residing in Warsaw and paying taxes in the capital will be exempt from meeting the requirements of the zone in the first two stages of its introduction, meaning until January 2028. >Poland’s second-largest city, Kraków, had [intended to be the first in Poland](https://notesfrompoland.com/2022/11/24/krakow-becomes-first-polish-city-to-ban-older-cars-in-anti-pollution-drive/) to introduce such a clean transport zone. However, its plans have been delayed after a [court ruled in January](https://notesfrompoland.com/2024/01/11/court-scraps-polands-first-clean-transport-zone/) that they had not been properly formulated.
Eat the poor! Or at least force them to get shine new cars even if their current ride perfectly fine. Oh, and before downvoting please check % of emissions in Warsaw coming from private cars.
I live in the city center and would prefer not to have to breathe in your car's exhaust, no matter how poor you are
Then check hard data on what part of the problem comes from old cars. And best part? You’ll breathe with my car exhaust anyway as it meets that new BS my friend.
My dearest amigo, I bike In the city center and old diesels are a problem I have that this legislation solves. Some of them literally spew tons of black smoke. Congrats on the new(ish) car!
My sweetest friend, I feel sorry but still I am more symphatetic towards those who cannot afford as nice and shiny car as mine. Again - I do not care, I live far from city center, I have nice, grey metallic car which can enter any downtown in EU and I have 2 funny cats. Could not care less about smog on Marszałkowska.
My most trusted comrade, maybe you could harness your love of the poor and imagine bikers as too poor to even afford a crappy car, thereby deserving the protection of such a champion of the downtrodden as yourself? It's probably even true in some cases
Nope. I have zero sympathy towards bikers.
:(
I haven't downvoted you (yet). Where do I find this percentage?
There have been studies comparing air pollution in cities during covid lockdowns to pre-lockdown. Try looking for these. There seem to be more potent factors that determine air quality, although cars contribute to the problem, they are not by any means the main culprit.
You can find studies showing that cars contribute 2 to 8% to air primary emissions and up to 40% secondary emissions (lifting dropped particles). That's why air quality in Warsaw fluctuates with seasons but not really with traffic and weekdays.
Well idk what would you want, we're living under capitalism and there's too much cars. Clearly whoever pays the most is going to be the one who gets to drive. What would you have, a state loterry? A bureaucrat deciding who needs the car more? Or just complain that poor people get to die from pollution and car accidents way more?
Oh, I find it hilarious that there will be still too much cars and only those who cannot afford newer models will suffer. I do not cares anyway, I live nearby a large forest on the outskirts of Warsaw and I am an a car which is within the new limits.
> I find it hilarious that there will be still too much cars Well, yeah, as long as roads and parking are top priority there's going to be at least as many cars as are required to fill the capacity. Our district recently introduced paid parking zone. With that they had "reorganized" parking (i.e. made it so there's a lot more of it) and made it so easy to park for locals that... we've bought a car. A car we barely need. But with the housing prices it's worth it just as extra storage honestly (esp. considering self-storage units are usually far enough from your home to require a car anyway and cost like 9kpln/year - just store your shit in a car lol). When we use it, once or twice a week, we mostly use it to go to places we'd bike to before (and maybe use carsharing every quarter). People will get mad at you for keeping your trash, bikes, strollers etc in shared spaces. Even getting anyone to install any PUBLIC bike parking or a bench will make you face obstacles and haters. But if you just get a fucking car it's perfectly reasonable to take 12 square meters of shared space and nobody cares, you can keep industrial waste in it. It's just an eyesore to everybody and a waste of space and air, but hey, the local government made it a reasonable choice, so people will take it.
I'm a Warsaw resident so I still can drive my 17 year old DPF-less diesel 😂
For now :D
For 4 next years. I'll probably sell it or move out from Warsaw before it's banned.
Or just not use it in the city center. You can still use it outside centner
You mean like 1/3rd of the city?
Probably, didn't check. Within city center there's great public transport possibilities and there's not enough parking spots for everyone.
I finally found it, SCT is 37 Sq km, which is 7% of Warsaw's area (517 Sq km)
Because fuck poor people
It's better for poor people to use public transportation. Cars are expensive and unnecessary in the center of a city.
New cars are expensive. There are plenty of older cars which are dirt cheap to maintain . And if are a plumber/ electrician/ painter/ etc having a car is essential for the job.
cars are expensive, because they require a shitload of expensive infrastructure that uses a shitload of expensive land and has to be expensively maintained. They also cause a shitload of health issues like noise, pollution, accidents etc. It's actually another kind of regressive tax we have - everybody is taxed the same, yet if you can afford a car you get all the expensive infrastructure. If you can't you just sponsor that shit for people who are better off than you are and get to die more and waste more time than you need for their comfort. They are also expensive because of physics. It will always take less energy to move one 100 kg person than it takes to move 1000 kg of steel and 100 kg of person. Our economy boils down to energy and it's just the most energy inefficient way of getting around and will never be efficient. > And if are a plumber/ electrician/ painter/ etc having a car is essential for the job. This is not "just reality", that's something we've made. If you don't have to bring 1000 kg of building materials to the site (eg. electrician/plumber) it's [highly possible to conduct most of your business on a cargo bike](https://www.treehugger.com/uk-plumber-conducts-business-by-cargo-bike-5188214). We made cars cheap, made riding bikes in cities difficult, we subsidize cars while not subsidizing cargo bikes etc. That what makes cars "essential". And this is not even an issue, because plumbers, electricians etc. are mostly essential jobs with little demand elasticity. I'm not going to live without a toilet because your costs increased because you had to buy a car that doesn't give kids (as much) asthma. I'm just going to pay whatever your new increased price is, because I have no choice. Now, I might not going to have to pay for car of someone who doesn't need their car to do their job, and market pressure might make them not use the car they don't need, and give kids less asthma. Which all isn't great, but it's the only way we have, because we decided we'll distribute limited things with money.
Just one question. Do you have a standard office job in a big city?
There is little to none factory jobs inside the LEZ in Warsaw. Besides, ita not like employees bring their own steel to work everyday. There are 2 metro lines, ~10 tramways (and more lines going on them) in the LEZ, with convenient Park&Rides dotted along the city entrances. And if you are worker without a set place of work but rather drive from place to place, then surely your business must be able to afford a car that is less than 15 years old. In not - sorry, but maybe you shouldn't be running a business if you need to pollute the air for it to turn a profit.
This is what I thought. Don't take it personally, but it's typical that those who need something the least will take it from those who need it the most. Over and out.
And who exactly is taking what from whom? You are spewing a bunch of platitudes, and making it seem like poor masses are being oppressed, left with no other way but to walk while the rich and powerful are enjoying the luxuries of the road. While the truth is that car usage and ownership is expensive (especially for older vehicles) and, in the inner city, doing so regularly is a luxury. There are plenty of alternatives, the restrictions are rolled out slowly, giving people ample time to change, either their habits or a car. The most restrictive regulation will still allow cars that are a decade old. And if you are old or disabled you are exempt from the restrictions all together. So who, exactly, is being made to go without while having less to begin with?
> Do you have a standard office job Sure. And everybody commutes to that job using a fucking car. And it really is a standard, e.g. big chunk of cars on the road just carry asses to offices. > in a big city? I mean, this is r/warsaw, and we're talking about warsaw law. Are you a bot trying a response that worked in some other thread?
Gas price are the same for older cars. And it is not dirt cheap. Repairs? Older cars definitely require more of them and more frequently as well. Old and bad cars are not good for poor people at all, it just a trap for them. Companys should buy a newer car for its electricians, but they do it anyways, nobody wants to lose time because of 40 years old diesel breaks. People who works for themselves can take orders not in the citycenter.
I have a 25 years old Toyota Yaris, and in these 25 years I paid maybe 1000zl in total for repairs, not counting regular maintenance. With newer cars, it might cost these much just to do diagnostics. >People who works for themselves can take orders not in the citycenter. In other words fuck self employed.
I have a 20-year-old car with LPG installation. It's often cheaper to go by car than to buy a public transport ticket. It costs about 20-25zł per 100km. And especially so if I'm not going alone. Once I got over the initial repairs after buying it, all I pay for are technical reviews. I could have a functional, cheap and clean car for the next 10 years, but unfortunately I will have to sell this perfectly good car and buy a newer one in a couple of years. About "taking orders not in the city center", i have no words, really. You have not been self-employed and you don't know what you're talking about.
And what about external costs of your car usage that you seem to ignore and that the LEZ aims to tackle? There are no perfect solutions, but this one seems to be a good predictor of pollution from cars. It seems to me like you are getting angry that city government is making it harder for you to give little Timmy asthma, and not with the entity you should be angry at : the contract giver (employer) who is underpaying you or not providing you proper equipment to complete the job.
The minority of air pollution in cities is caused by cars, much more of it comes from heating solutions for houses. That's why you get extreme rise in air pollution every winter, and never in the summer. My euro 4 LPG car emits significantly less pollutants than oh-so-popular brand new diesel SUVs, that will be happily accepted into the zone forever. Your argument really doesn't hold water. There are emissions listed on every car's specifications list, it really isn't that difficult to go off that instead of year of production, is it? Or maybe allow people engine swaps and DPF/catalytic converter additions to pollute less? It's not my problem yet, but it pains me how blatantly unrelated to air cleanliness the regulations are.
This bill has nothing to do with clean cars. You can have an old car burn clean. Instead of having emissions tests they are forcing people to buy new cars. IDK how sustainable this is in the long run
Well, it's something and it's cheap. Even if they were to ban only white cars it'd still be good, as it'd somewhat limit the number of cars on the streets. [Car age and type of fuel](https://bi.im-g.pl/im/61/fe/1a/z28307297IH,Emisje-samochodow-w-zaleznosci-od-wieku-i-normy.jpg) are great simple predictors of car emissions that can be widely applied and are extremely hard to forge or dispute in court.
If cars owned by senior citizens are exempt, expect to have a lot of grandparents with 10 cars registered to them 😄 This is Polska. Tu siẹ kombinuje 😄
So overall car from 2004, used about 5000 km per year will be banner, but the car from 2023 used about 30000km per year will not be banned. But overall this old car will send less poisonous particles, than this new one...
Thank you for new cars, sincerely, inhabitants of eastern Lubelskie voivodship Edit: We are sorry for you
People vote stupid into power, get stupid results, act surprised in the aftermath... If there is one thing that do not work in the slightest in Poland it's local governments - clownshows run by biggest morons you can find.
community note: this kind of laws are introduced all over the world and [they mostly work](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10962247.2013.868380)
That is a lie though - if you want to reduce pollution just ban all cars. You won't be tackling the biggest issue, and you will f over the poor, but hey, none cares about those poor sobs anyway.
Anytime there is even a suggestion of road reduction, or closure in front of a school or anything to reduce the car volumes in Warsaw there is a big uproar about the freedom being taken away. What exactly are the jobs that require people to drive into the city center every day (or multiple times a day), make it mandatory to use your private car and pay so little that all you can use is a 25 old Corolla with LPG. (That is, tbh, still more expensive to use and own than a 3 month transit ticket). If one truly cares about poor people then one would do everything to improve their health, provide better public transit coverage etc. Not by letting everyone drive whatever they want, everywhere.
Garbage take - you do realise people actually live in the Great zone of nonsense? You are basically whining about people going into the zone - f them. People living in the zone are the ones getting shafted, again, because living in city center in Poland is terrible for all, especially for the poor.
> That is a lie though it's a literal published scientific study > if you want to reduce pollution just ban all cars That'd be great, but they actually have uses. > you will f over the poor fucking over the poor is par for the course at this point. It's already almost impossible to live in warsaw and be poor. Renting a room (necessity required to live) for a month costs more than straight up buying your "new" car (which, at this point has to be less 27 years old and in the final version will have to be 17 years old). Parking will cost you more than a car. 2/3 of warsaw travels by bus/tram/rail/bike and they subsidize the car drivers. Which like 90% of them - the drivers - aren't really "the poor". The richer you are the more likely you are to drive daily. You're literally using the imaginary poor to excuse fucking the poor.
>just ban all cars I wish. Cars are a cancer to a city. One day this will be reality and people will look on car dependance like we do on XVIII century personal hygiene.
what about the cars registered on yellow plates?
they are exempt afaik
I wonder if sct zone will lower the level of pollution 🤣😂🤣
Same here. Not sure at all
That's too bad. Everyone knows that America is car centered because of General Motors. But no one wants to admit that the clean transport areas are a similar case, made just for the profit of the car industry.
Absolutely idiotic. The positive outcome in air quality is minimum compared with the massive decrease of quality of life of common people. This will result in cities for rich class , while working-class can suck it. As always. No problem with moving out of cities... But in that case make working from home a RIGHT for all.
Rare Warsaw L
>Those thresholds will then be gradually lowered in the next stages of the project to ban even younger cars. Eventually, by 2032, diesel cars over 11 years old and petrol cars over 17 years old will be banned. Ok, great, my 12 y/o Skoda Fabia is safe for now xD Let's see for how long though. I am hoping that Poland invests more into electric grid and infrastructure, so that more and more people switch to EVs or, at least, to hybrids.
It would also be nice if that nuclear power plant existed, because switching to an EV doesn't seem like it'd do much if Bełchatów lignite was used to charge it.
To be honest, I would prefer if Poland didn't have any nuclear power. It is too risky to have it with such unstable neighbours like Russia and Belarus. I wouldn't feel safe. One would think that Chernobyl did enough damage to Poland. Coal can easily be replaced with renewables (solar, hydro, wind, etc.). There are many renewable options in Poland, so there is no need for nuclear. On top of security risk, building/installing/training/utilizing renewables is much faster and cheaper than nuclear.
While renewables are the way to go, they're not stable enough. They're constantly cutting solar and wind off the grid to prevent malfunctions. Coal plants must be replaced by other stable source of power.
>They're constantly cutting solar and wind off the grid to prevent malfunctions. They are doing that not because solar or wind are unstable. They are doing that because the grid is old and oudated. The grid itself is unstable and mulfunctioning. It needs to be rebuilt and renewed no matter what source of power you use (renewable or nuclear). And to renew the whoel grid is easy: Poland needs to invest billions into the grid instead of giving it to the church.
Yes, you're right. Now tell me what to do when wind doesn't blow. Is it also grids fault? That's part of instability.
Well, I can ask you the same question about a nuclear plant: what happens when your nuclear plant is not working or, God forbid, blows up? Answer is: you are fckd. Exactly that's why you never rely on one source of energy and one supplier (like Germany and Austria were relying on Russian gas before the war). A country should always try to diversify its energy portfolio: solar+wind+hydro+others. There are no cases when you don't have at least one of renewables. Even at nights when there is no sun or win, there is always water (hyrdo). Also, "clever" countries invest into energy storage as well. Meaning that if you produced excess energy during the day because of solar, you store it and use during night.
Tell me you know nothing about nuclear energy without saying that lvl999 Jesus Christ
Can't wait, it's obviously a good change, but people like to focus on one small flaw and blow it out of proportion inb4: poor poor people, they should be allowed to to park on pavements because parking is so expensive :(
And why it's a good change?