Boris’s electric vehicle boasts are an inverted pyramid of piffle


 

There is no more deserving subject for a spin doctor award than the mayor on electric vehicles – even if the award is from the PR barons of the motor industry. He has generated headline after headline on London as the electric vehicle capital of Europe, whilst actually delivering nothing much at all, writes Darren Johnson AM

Tom-Daley-Boris-JohnsonIn May 2009 he launched his electric vehicle delivery plan, in which he states:

“There are currently 1,700 EVs operating in London out of a total of 8,000 nationally.

“However, the mayor is committed to a step-change in the EVs, with 100,000 vehicles (or five per cent of London’s fleet) on the capital’s streets as soon as possible.”

DVLA registrations 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Electric vehicles registered with the DVLA in London 1725 1776 1798 2144 2313
Hybrid vehicles registered with the DVLA in London 8357 10951 13376 14588 22536

Of course, the mayor will claim that as more electric vehicles come onto the market, his clever marketing and improvements to the charging infrastructure will deliver a step change.

The more experienced London journalists have developed a naturally sceptical eye which they cast over untrustworthy mayoral press releases. For example, on the subject of electric charging point infrastructure, the media did a wonderful job of correction in response to a mayoral press release of 14th February 2011 announcing that there would be 1,300 electric charging points by the end of 2013.

This was actually the same 1,300 charging points from which the mayor achieved very positive coverage for when he announced the previous February that they would be built over the subsequent next twelve months – something which clearly didn’t happen.

The mayor also claimed on 25th Feb 2010, that he had ‘confirmation’ that the money would ‘significantly speed up our existing plans’, enabling a total of 7,500 charging points to be delivered by early 2013.

This ‘confirmed’ funding now appears to have evaporated. That earlier press release also stated that the mayor would be helping to make London the electric car capital of Europe by installing 25,000 charging points by 2015, a previously solid mayoral target which has quietly disappeared from his latest press statements.

Unfortunately, several good journalists have been taken in by Boris Johnson and his promotion of electric taxis. It is not their fault, I imagine that even Boris believes what he says at the time.

A £1 million fund has featured in numerous media reports in October 2009 and again in December 2010, when:

“The Mayor and TfL have also announced a £1 million fund to encourage taxi owners to upgrade to low emission vehicles such as electric black cabs.”

Not only is the £1 million the same money in 2009 and 2010, but it hasn’t actually been budgeted or spent yet.

Some of the failure to deliver is down to the mayor’s lack of attention to detail.

Having been previously involved in the discussions about a hybrid taxi as part of our green budget deal with Ken Livingstone, I know Boris Johnson was genuine in 2009 when he said

“TfL is also in the process of putting in place a low carbon taxi trial where taxis utilising low carbon technologies will be tested and assessed in ‘real world’ working conditions.”

However, the 2009 project was cancelled for “legal reasons” when the Mayor got into a tangle over European contract law.

Rather than explain clearly that we had moved onto Plan B, the Mayor continued the hype. He told the Guardian in December 2010 that

“We are also offering a juicy carrot, with the establishment of a fund to help speed up the introduction of electric black cabs”.

However, after I got him to admit that this fund still hadn’t been spent, he made clear that it wouldn’t be, until:

“Taxi manufacturers produce a new, suitably qualified vehicle and this taxi commences operating in London”.

As recently as November 2011, the Metro carried the headline “All cabs to run off electricity by end of decade.”

To be fair to Boris that is not what he said.

He stuck to the policy which is the hope that all new cabs will be electric by 2020, which means that all black cabs might be electric around 2030 or later.

However, his press office were less concerned with this important difference and when asked about the story, emailed journalists to say that:

“The air quality strategy contains a pledge that taxis from 2020 will be zero-emission.”

Having asked further questions it has now emerged that the £1 million green taxi fund will not be spent on electric cabs as promised, nor hydrogen cabs as promised, nor even on developing a taxi with 60 per cent less emissions by 2015 as promised.

The priority is now to help taxi drivers to replace the cabs which are over the 15 year age limit.

They will be buying the new Euro 4 taxi, which many of them tell me are more polluting than the cabs they are being forced to get rid of. I hope this isn’t true, but I am rapidly losing faith in anything coming out of the mayor’s office on this subject.

The decisive blow to the confidence of any journalist in the mayor’s office was when it emerged that the £1 million green taxi fund was subject to sponsorship and they didn’t actually have any.

Before I saw this answer in Oct 2011, I was oblivious to this fact and having checked with several London journalists, they shared my ignorance. Despite two years of questioning, numerous press statements and reports, the mayor’s office can’t point to a single instance when they stated this rather significant fact.

I do hope that all journalists will check with someone before reprinting mayoral press releases. As the chair of the statistics authority has pointed out, Boris Johnson:

Does not always observe good practice in his use of statistics for media purposes.

See also:

Northern line extension “built for one purpose only – private profit” – Alex Hern, November 29th 2011

Ken v Boris: Six months out, Livingstone steps up the pressure on transport and crime – Shelly Asquith, November 8th 2011

Boris fiddles as London prepares for transport chaos – Alex Hern, October 19th 2011

A lesson from Delhi for Boris – Navin Shah AM, October 4th 2011

Boris’s transport boasts are pure piffle – Rob Jenks, March 31st 2011

This entry was posted in Public Services for All and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
  • Anonymous

    You might like digging into his cycle scheme

    140 million for 5,000 cycles.

    Do the mathematics.

    28,000 a bike.

    At the same time, try digging into Ken’s bendy buses. Lots of dirt there too.

  • Pingback: Jenny Jones()

  • Pingback: Darren Johnson()

  • Pingback: Valerie Shawcross()

  • Pingback: Darren Johnson()

  • http://twitter.com/neiallswheel neiall mullery

    The #LEZ wont #TESTmyEMISSIONS if i could show you all the BLURB associated . try this ….Memorandum submitted by the Environmental Industries Commission (EIC) (AQ 26)
    1. ENVIRONMENTAL INDUSTRIES COMMISSION (EIC)
    —————————————————————————-
    QUOTE::the effects of Particulate Matter on health and air quality are well documented, but there is a growing body of evidence confirming that black carbon, emitted from diesel engines, is a significant contributor to climate change. Black carbon has been estimated to be the second largest contributor to global warming, with emissions from diesel vehicles comprising nearly a quarter of total black carbon emissions.
    Diesel Particulate Filter fitment is the ????????most appropriate ???????action to take to reduce black carbon emissions.
    Using a Euro III double deck bus as an example, we estimate that the black carbon savings from fitting a DPF could be 30% of the total climate impact, equivalent to a ??????? 44% improvement in fuel consumption. Fitting DPF technology to diesel engines such as trucks, buses, construction machines, emergency generators and trains will not only improve air quality and public health, but will be highly beneficial to short term climate change and local urban warming in London.
    ————————————————————————-
    for ???? most appropriate????? read MOST PROFITABLE ( BY LAW ).
    1) How was this ‘decision’ reached?
    2) On what Evidence was this based?
    3) Compared to what OTHER technology?
    4) this stinks of corporately suppressing GREEN technology (and legislating against it)

    and for a 44% improvement in fuel consumption read A BLATENT LIE , filters BURN fuel NOT save how is that equivalent?
    An outstanding U turn by either party regarding lying to the public about their IMMEDIATE health and wealth. And a real Health URGENCY towards PARTICULATE matter, in fact the co-ordinated use of Law and Government towards 1) Fuel and its providers. 2) auto makers 3) a New British Standard of Emissions for ALL vehicles using a mot Testing device capable of testing for the Toxic elements (Nox, Co2, Hcc etc..)
    which would be required to be a higher standard than the EU emissions test cycle designed for both the auto makers (who cheat and dont test at speeds over 120 kph / 70 mph )
    and the oil companies (who are allowed to sell the Toxic stuff and therefore monopolize the entire market by not selling green fuels hereby dictating exactly How dirty our air is going to be)

    Heres my point (so far) there are approximately 8000 buses in London alone.
    Darren these questions need to be asked of Boris,

    1) Total Fuel (litres or gallons) used by Buses over the last year and the financial cost of fuel
    2) What number of these buses are rated at EURO 2, EURO3, EURO4 ,EURO5 ETC..
    3) how Many Tonnes of each harmful particulate have been released (in totals) in that same year nitrogen oxides (NOx), total hydrocarbon (THC), non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC), carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter (PM)

    these figures, when in reality ,will show the only choice capable of cutting emissions and saving fuel (in big percentages) is water fuel technology (which im guessing was never considered at any stage…even though its widespread in france and would Bolt onto the existing fleet)

  • Pingback: Darren Johnson()

  • Pingback: Bill Linton()

  • Timhenderson

    This evaporated funding wouldn’t be connected with the statement Boris had to issue to Europe outlining the additional measures to tackle London’s appalling air quality, would it ?

    Update to the Air Quality Plan for the Daily Mean PM10 Limit Value for Greater London Agglomeration Zone, UK: June 2011

    http://www.defra.gov.uk/consult/files/pm-update.pdf

    included the statement :

    “In addition, the Mayor has announced a financial incentives scheme to encourage drivers to purchase the cleanest available taxis. This will be established by the end of 2011.”

    Has he ?

    Cleanest available ?

    By when ?

  • Pingback: Darren Johnson()

  • Pingback: jo abbess()

  • Pingback: neiall mullery()

  • Pingback: Caroline Allen()

  • Pingback: Darren Johnson()

  • Pingback: Darren Johnson()

  • Pingback: Jenny Jones()

  • Pingback: Liam()

  • Pingback: Camden Green Party()

  • Pingback: jogga singh teidy()

  • Pingback: Mark White()

  • Pingback: neiall mullery()

  • http://twitter.com/neiallswheel neiall mullery

    in the healthiest possible approach to reading everything at least twice, i have to say that by confining emissions solely on vehicle age, no immediate action will ever be taken.
    there are SO MANY ways to reduce LONDONS vehicle related air pollution RIGHT NOW.
    if i can get a french kit and bolt it straight on my vehicle and halve my emissions on an older van how many taxi’s, buses and council vehicles could do the same????
    (you wont see me in London by the way coz im bureacratically banned until im willing to pay £100 a day or spend £2000 on an ineffective diesel particulate filter-see the ‘inside-out-london’ link below)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01b8v4z/Inside_Out_London_23_01_2012/

    if Biodiesel is also not recognised by #boris as a biofuel then there must be some excuse?
    even on the TfL website they seem to only cater for petrol hybrids (lpg etc..)and thereby show diesel owners that there is no clean fuel option for them. I could of course buy a large american RV with twice my engine size (5.6 litre) and even with LPG still be polling on the same scale. But thats alright? yes? at least thats the only option given. Farcical.
    If (a clean) plant based and recycled Biodiesel (with almost half the diesel emissions and NO CARCINOGENS) wasnt legislated against or even made available for older taxis, buses etc..
    then we could ALL bust a move and clean up our act NOW.

    http://www.eaem.co.uk/opinions/why-sustainable-biodiesel-illegal-uk

  • http://twitter.com/neiallswheel neiall mullery

    what i meant to say was by financing (or NOT) towards a future of electric cars its all spiel and greenwash somehow politically kicking the ball further down the road.
    its like another vid i saw of george bush saying hydrogen is the future. NO george its now. Clean up NOW. bolt on NOW. Kits available Globally. Its about time someone with an eye on our IMMEDIATE future took the reins

  • Pingback: Darren Johnson()

  • Pingback: Stephe Meloy()

  • Pingback: Bill Linton()

  • Pingback: Mark W Tebbutt()

  • Pingback: "No one uses TfL" Tory: Users should pay, except for my voters | Left Foot Forward()

  • Pingback: Darren Johnson()

  • Pingback: matthew howe()

  • Pingback: Jenny Jones()

  • Pingback: Boris Watch()

  • Pingback: Green Steve()

  • Pingback: etonmess()

  • Pingback: Lizzy()

  • Pingback: christine clifford()

  • Pingback: Darren Johnson()

  • Pingback: neiall mullery()

  • neiallswheel

    ……………….continued
    biodiesel
    CNG (as previously used by Merton Council)
    LPG
    BioMethane
    BioEthanol
    Hydrogen
    Hydrogen On Demand (BOLT ON -in kit form readily available )
    water mist………………. (BOLT ON – in kit form readily available)
    air ionizers……………… (BOLT ON – in kit form readily available)

    where are the protections for the public from a health and safety standard regarding airborne toxins?? consider the public awareness implications when emissions ratings e.g….
    __ carcinogens per hour___ are readily displayed in filling stations and on public vehicles in full view for all to consider. there are severe double standards here when tobacco products cannot be sold without warning the consumer.

    CO2 is an unacceptable singular ‘standard’ of emissions testing, especially as this helps the public dismiss the carcinogenic nature of the fuel, and each and every vehicles’ output of these fatal, crippling, harmful, obnoxious substances.

    where is the real health and safety on the streets of our cities? are bus drivers made aware of the harm theyre helping to distribute amongst their customers?

    London’s emissions will never be tackled this century without a short sharp transition to cleaner fuels. No bureaucracy will ever solve this.
    what city will we have in 10 years when the face of EVERY HISTORIC BUILDING needs complete restoration due to the carbon fuels polluting everything??

    for too long we have had this ”reduce emissions by 2% ” strategy imposed on the population.
    you want to HALVE the emissions?? open the doors for realtime emissions testing for all of these fuels on public transport, There are solid products and fuels ready for a testing fee amnesty.
    which is the most affordable option. ?

  • YouGov Tracker

  • Touchstone Economic Tracker

  • Best of the web

  • Archive