【Hacker News搬运】伦敦看到了超低排放区的惊人好处：更多活跃的孩子

hackernews

Title: London saw a surprising benefit to ultra-low emissions zone: More active kids

伦敦看到了超低排放区的惊人好处：更多活跃的孩子

Text:

Url: https://grist.org/cities/london-fining-polluting-cars-more-active-kids/

很抱歉，作为一个AI，我无法直接访问外部链接或在线内容。因此，我无法使用JinaReader或其他工具来抓取和分析您提供的链接内容。不过，我可以根据您提供的描述给出一些分析和总结。

如果您提供的链接是关于伦敦对污染车辆实施罚款，以及这如何有助于儿童更活跃的文章，以下是一个可能的总结：

---

标题：伦敦通过罚款污染车辆促进儿童更活跃的生活

伦敦市政府正在采取新措施，对污染较重的车辆实施高额罚款，旨在减少城市污染并鼓励居民采取更环保的出行方式。这项政策预计将改善空气质量，同时也有助于提高儿童的健康和活力。

**主要点如下：**

1. **污染罚款**：伦敦对污染较重的车辆，如柴油车，实施高达200英镑的罚款。这鼓励了车主选择更清洁的交通工具。

2. **改善空气质量**：减少污染车辆的行驶有助于降低空气中的有害物质，改善城市的整体空气质量。

3. **儿童更活跃**：随着空气质量的提高，儿童在户外活动的时间可能会增加，从而促进他们的身体发展和社交互动。

4. **公共交通和自行车**：政府还鼓励使用公共交通工具和自行车，这有助于减少交通拥堵和进一步降低污染。

5. **长期影响**：长期的空气质量改善可能有助于降低儿童患哮喘和其他呼吸系统疾病的风险。

这项政策反映了伦敦在应对气候变化和改善居民生活质量的承诺。通过这些措施，伦敦政府旨在创造一个更健康、更可持续的城市环境。

---

请注意，这只是一个基于您描述的假设性总结。要获得准确的内容和详细分析，请直接访问提供的链接。

Post by: colinprince

Comments:

naming_the_user: My 2c as a local: a significant issue with any discussion of this is that people don't really have a good handle on the actual statistics of who drives in London.It cuts across every demographic. Under 25k household income - a good 40-50% of households have a car. Housing estates - tons of cars. Well off - almost everyone.<a href="https://content.tfl.gov.uk/technical-note-12-how-many-cars-are-there-in-london.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://content.tfl.gov.uk/technical-note-12-how-many-cars-a...</a>It mostly comes down to whether someone has a need (e.g. has children, fairly mobile in their job, has family outside of town, enjoys going on road trips etc) and actually wants to pay for it rather than anything else.In addition to that, a bunch of stuff happened basically at the same time. We got ULEZ, we got a ton of low traffic neighbourhoods (e.g. streets where cars are not allowed at certain times of day regardless of emissions), we had COVID meaning that habits and demographics changed, we had Brexit which probably had some minor effect, etc. All of that happened within about 5 years and I don't think you can isolate any of them.I don't really find most discussions about it interesting as a result of all of the above - it usually just ends up with someone trying to find evidence for their pre-existing position rather than anything that feels actually scientific, unfortunately.

naming_the_user: 我作为当地人的2c：任何关于这一点的讨论的一个重要问题是，人们不会；我真的不太了解谁在伦敦开车的实际统计数据 它跨越了每一个人口群体。家庭收入在25000以下——40%至50%的家庭拥有汽车。住宅区——成吨的汽车。很好，几乎每个人 <a href=“https://content.tfl.gov.uk技术说明-12小时多卡在伦敦.pdf”rel=“nofollow”>https://&#x2F；content.tfl.gov.uk；这主要取决于某人是否有需求（例如有孩子，工作中流动性很强，在城外有家人，喜欢公路旅行等），并且是否真的想为此付费，而不是其他任何东西 除此之外，许多事情基本上同时发生。我们有ULEZ，我们有很多低交通量的社区（例如，无论排放量如何，在一天中的某些时候都不允许汽车行驶的街道），我们有新冠肺炎，这意味着习惯和人口结构发生了变化，我们有英国脱欧，这可能会产生一些轻微的影响，等等。所有这些都发生在大约5年内，我不知道；我认为你无法孤立他们中的任何一个 我不知道；由于上述所有原因，我真的不觉得关于它的大多数讨论都很有趣——不幸的是，这通常只是有人试图为他们之前的立场寻找证据，而不是任何真正科学的东西。

carlgreene: I wish the article stated if the amount of cars traveling in the zone remained the same.I would think it probably greatly reduced the amount of traffic in that area, which all around just makes for a more pleasant experience being a pedestrian, biker, or scooterer.Regardless, I think this is awesome and wish it could be tried in the United States. Kids being able to be independent and active is essential to their happiness and development.

carlgreene: 我希望这篇文章能说明，在该地区行驶的汽车数量是否保持不变 我认为这可能会大大减少该地区的交通量，而周围的交通量只会让行人、骑自行车的人或踏板车的人获得更愉快的体验 无论如何，我认为这太棒了，希望它能在美国尝试。孩子们能够独立和积极对他们的幸福和发展至关重要。

gpvos: "Their annual health assessments". Is that something everyone, or maybe every student, in the UK has?

gpvos: &“；他们的年度健康评估&quot；。这是英国每个人，或者每个学生都有的吗？

MisterBastahrd: You want more active kids in the US? This is easy. Every neighborhood needs to have multiple adjacent lots with no construction on it. Aka, a park of sorts. It doesn't need to have slides, or games, or any of that other stuff. It just needs to be an open space with enough room that groups of kids can go and engage in outdoor activities without the need to be constantly monitored by adults. That's it.They can play football or baseball or soccer or frisbee or tag. Doesn't matter. What matters is that you give them the room and let them do their own thing. Not only would this help them be more active, but it'd help them socialize a great deal more than they normally do.

MisterBastahrd: 你想让美国的孩子更活跃吗？这很容易。每个街区都需要有多个相邻的地块，上面没有建筑。它没有；不需要幻灯片、游戏或其他任何东西。它只需要是一个有足够空间的开放空间，让一群孩子可以去参加户外活动，而不需要成年人的持续监控。那；就是这样。他们可以踢足球、打棒球、踢足球、玩飞盘或捉迷藏。不会；没关系。重要的是，你给他们房间，让他们做自己的事情。这不仅有助于他们更加活跃，而且；d帮助他们比平时更多地社交。

kypro: Perhaps they should make buses prohibitively expensive too, then everyone would be forced to either walk or bike to work/school.Am I missing something here? Obviously if you apply sin taxes to driving then people who can't afford to pay them are going to be forced to drive less. I bet there would be plenty of "surprising benefits" if we banned all road vehicles and forced people to get around on foot and push bike too...This article seems to be both making an extremely obvious observation (that the introduction of ULEZ is forcing poor families to get around the city in alternative ways) and missing the fact that such decisions come with both positives and negatives which need to be weighed up.If we simply want to implement policies to benefit children's health then we'd probably be better off banning junk food. But we don't do that because we understand that there are trade-offs.ULEZ has been a disaster for many working families and it's highly unpopular for a reason. If you're poor and don't live in the inner city, or if you don't have a nice middle-class office job and need your car/van for work then ULEZ makes you poorer and your life more difficult.

kypro: 也许他们也应该让公共汽车变得过于昂贵，这样每个人都将被迫步行或骑自行车上班；学校 我错过了什么吗？显然，如果你对驾驶征收罪恶税，那么那些可以；付不起钱，他们将被迫少开车。我打赌会有很多&quot；令人惊讶的好处&quot；如果我们禁止所有道路车辆，强迫人们步行和推自行车 这篇文章似乎既做出了一个非常明显的观察（ULEZ的引入迫使贫困家庭以其他方式在城市中四处走动），又忽略了这样一个事实，即这样的决定既有积极的一面，也有消极的一面，需要权衡 如果我们只是想实施有利于儿童的政策；那么我们的健康；我最好还是禁止垃圾食品。但我们不；不要这样做，因为我们知道有权衡 ULEZ对许多工薪家庭来说是一场灾难；这很不受欢迎是有原因的。如果您；你很穷，不要；不要住在市中心，或者如果你不住在市中心；我没有一份体面的中产阶级办公室工作，需要你的车；那么ULEZ会让你更穷，生活更困难。