Global warming update

domd1979 · June 2007

No it doesn't. It imposes major costs.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe
And motoring provides a major boost to the economy, despite the bogus claims of the anti-car lobby.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Joe Sacco · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by domd1979

No it doesn't. It imposes major costs.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe
And motoring provides a major boost to the economy, despite the bogus claims of the anti-car lobby.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

sounds to me like you are one of those anti-car lobbyists with their bogus claims[:)]

domd1979 · June 2007

Car ownership isn't the problem - excessive car usage is. Germany (for instance) has a higher rate of car ownership than the UK, but lower car usage, alongside more use of public transport. Key differences are attitudes to car use, and the UK's lower investment in public transport (and less willingness to restrain car use).

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Gary Askwith

One car per household address only should be imposed-no exceptions apart from disabled [}:)]

Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....

Archcp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

I am in the majority which is those who want to own and use a car. Yes, a lot of people may or may not like a car pool scheme but as it doesn't exist it cannot be counted can it!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Er, such schemes do exist, here and there...

http://www.york.gov.uk/transport/Public ... b/whizzgo/

I've not had occasion to use it - I manage pretty well with my bike - but I've seen them about town...

If I had a baby elephant, it could help me clean the car. If I had a car.

domd1979 · June 2007

Except I own a car....[:p] However, those that claim that cars, and the current level of car usage, are doing our economy a big favour and apparently do not impose massive costs have their heads firmly in the sand.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco
sounds to me like you are one of those anti-car lobbyists with their bogus claims[:)]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

Instead of this hair brained car pool idea, why not just massively improve the bus services?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Because buses are shite. They don't take you to where you want to go, and no improvement in the bus services would enable them to. Buses are noisy, horrible great hulks of the road, and should all be done away with. They cause more traffic jams than they solve, and are a moneypit when the only people on them are old biddies on their way to the bingo and students on their way to the fish and chip shop where they're probably intending to pay by cheque. Therefore, buses are an unnecessary nuisance and society would be much better off without them. On the few occasions that I've had the misfortune to go on one they aren't comfy at all and throw you around all over the place, and I swear the one to matlock hasn't even got suspension it's such a boneshaker, and it takes over 2 hours for a 22 mile journey, you could cycle in less than that. Buses persist in going all the way round the houses, when there's a perfectly good direct route and even when there's going to be precisely zero people getting off and on in these obscure areas.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

No waiting around for your turn in the car, which is the bigest problem I see. There would always be a regular bus to take you to pretty much anywhere.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
But there wouldn't be too much waiting. Think how many cars there are on the roads in Britain now - shedloads, and I bet at least half of them are not being driven at any one time. Probably a lot greater proportion of them even. It would be engineered to achieve the desired effect - to encourage people to only use cars when they need to, and this would actually free up more cars, probably to such a point where you wouldn't even need to book one for a lot of journeys.
You don't have to 'wait' for a car even NOW, when people are allowed to hog cars for themselves - so how are you going to have to wait for a car when all cars are public?! This isn't a system whereby all car use has to be one of a fleet of new cars that are made specifically for a car pool and all the others just sit around on people's drives, this is a system where private car ownership is NOT ALLOWED, and everyone therefore has to sell their car to the state, for it to become a public car, i.e. ALL cars have to be given over to the pool scheme! It's not just a pie in the sky idea Joe it's going to happen and ALL cars are going to become part of it including YOUR porsche. I think it would be fun just not knowing what sort of car you were going to get, and it being a surprise, I quite like driving different cars I get bored with the same old one all the time.
It would obviously only work if ALL cars were public... people would get mileage credits in return for their car, proportional to the carrying capacity of it and its mechanical soundness / expected lifespan.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Peyote

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe

And motoring provides a major boost to the economy, despite the bogus claims of the anti-car lobby.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's not true. It's subsidised and a major drain on the economy.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Absolute bollox.

Nobody ever got laid because they were using Shimano

The Bosscp · June 2007

You're right smokin, it is complete bollox.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

zimzum42 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

I swear the one to matlock hasn't even got suspension it's such a boneshaker, and it takes over 2 hours for a 22 mile journey, you could cycle in less than that. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">You took a bus to Matlock, no wonder it was a heap, that part of the UK isn't even with electrity yet, let alone metalled roads.......

[:D] www.addiscombe.org [8D] [8D] www.darhotwire.com [8D] [8D] www.muzikmedia.com [:D]
My Bikes My Commute

domd1979 · June 2007

Please do enlighten me, because you've got your head in that bucket of sand.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Peyote

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe

And motoring provides a major boost to the economy, despite the bogus claims of the anti-car lobby.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's not true. It's subsidised and a major drain on the economy.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Absolute bollox.

Nobody ever got laid because they were using Shimano
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Joe Sacco · June 2007

The Benj, sounds to me like you would end up with pretty much the same number of cars if you are saying there would be no waiting for your turn. If everyone who wants to use a car has one freely available to use from the pool then how would there be any less traffic/cars on the road?

So remind me what the gain was with this idea again?

domd1979 · June 2007

Bonj. You know precisely nothing about buses.

Cause traffic jams - er, no.

If buses didn't go where people wanted to go, people wouldn't use them would they? Except they do, so there goes your theory there. Obviously no public transport is door to door, but it can provide for a lot of point to point journeys with a short walk and/or interchange, which is entirely reasonable.

"The" bus to Matlock?!!! So Matlock only has one bus service does it? Sounds like you've travelled on a Mercedes "breadvan" which admittedly aren't particularly quality vehicles, although they serve a purpose. Their numbers are now in decline amongst operators. However, the majority of Matlock's services are operated by far better vehicles. Trent's fleet is excellent - and incidentally, they have a good record of achieving modal shift away from the car.

Not direct routes? As you seem to like bringing up Matlock, probably the only time you've ever caught a bus - Matlock has a bloody good direct link along the A6 on the TransPeak, operated by some pretty nice coaches. Doesn't really get more direct does it?

More investment in the bus and rail networks (and some new light rail) would be massively beneficial, especially if accompanied by some sensible demand management on the car side of things.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss
Because buses are shite. They don't take you to where you want to go, and no improvement in the bus services would enable them to. Buses are noisy, horrible great hulks of the road, and should all be done away with. They cause more traffic jams than they solve, and are a moneypit when the only people on them are old biddies on their way to the bingo and students on their way to the fish and chip shop where they're probably intending to pay by cheque. Therefore, buses are an unnecessary nuisance and society would be much better off without them. On the few occasions that I've had the misfortune to go on one they aren't comfy at all and throw you around all over the place, and I swear the one to matlock hasn't even got suspension it's such a boneshaker, and it takes over 2 hours for a 22 mile journey, you could cycle in less than that. Buses persist in going all the way round the houses, when there's a perfectly good direct route and even when there's going to be precisely zero people getting off and on in these obscure areas.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Cretin · June 2007

Well I have cars and bikes. You could say I don't need either, because I've got legs and they're free.

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by zimzum42

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

I swear the one to matlock hasn't even got suspension it's such a boneshaker, and it takes over 2 hours for a 22 mile journey, you could cycle in less than that. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">You took a bus to Matlock, no wonder it was a heap, that part of the UK isn't even with electrity yet, let alone metalled roads.......

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yeah obviously, 'cos you don't need computers or fancy custom software to design new sections of tube network do you, so why would you need electricity to do that? No, I mean why? Surely Londoners could do just do a whole lot better on the back of a fag packet?

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

The Benj, sounds to me like you would end up with pretty much the same number of cars if you are saying there would be no waiting for your turn. If everyone who wants to use a car has one freely available to use from the pool then how would there be any less traffic/cars on the road?

So remind me what the gain was with this idea again?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Firstly it's not my idea, I'm just supporting it. But NickM had the best idea for why there would be less cars on the road. People would only drive when necessary, in order to be higher up the queue when they really need a car. If I'm understanding him correctly, he suggested a system whereby the more you use a car, the lower down you are on the priority list for booking. So it would encourage you to only use a car when necessary and combat the exact problem that we've got - which is people using cars willy nilly.
And the gain therefore would be that although there would be the same amount of cars in total, there would be less of them being used at any one time. Therefore less congestion, less fuel depletion.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

The Benj, sounds to me like you would end up with pretty much the same number of cars if you are saying there would be no waiting for your turn.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
The whole point is that you would have to consciously think about how many 'turns' you take - but the point is that it we may need some of limiting the amount of 'turns' we take anyway.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Peyote

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe

And motoring provides a major boost to the economy, despite the bogus claims of the anti-car lobby.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's not true. It's subsidised and a major drain on the economy.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Absolute bollox.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No, it's true, straight up!

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by domd1979

Bonj. You know precisely nothing about buses.

Cause traffic jams - er, no.

If buses didn't go where people wanted to go, people wouldn't use them would they? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
No, and they don't. The average bus I see has about 3 people on it.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by domd1979

"The" bus to Matlock?!!! So Matlock only has one bus service does it? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Well, only one at from where I live to matlock, yes. Why would there need to be more than one covering the same route?

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by domd1979

Sounds like you've travelled on a Mercedes "breadvan" which admittedly aren't particularly quality vehicles, although they serve a purpose. Their numbers are now in decline amongst operators. However, the majority of Matlock's services are operated by far better vehicles. Trent's fleet is excellent - and incidentally, they have a good record of achieving modal shift away from the car.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
"Trent's fleet are excellent" ! What gobshite you talk - all they do is shuttle old biddies between the town centre and darley dale down the A6 once a day- they can't even get up bank road!

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by domd1979

Please do enlighten me, because you've got your head in that bucket of sand.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Peyote

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe

And motoring provides a major boost to the economy, despite the bogus claims of the anti-car lobby.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's not true. It's subsidised and a major drain on the economy.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Absolute bollox.

Nobody ever got laid because they were using Shimano
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
According to a financial expert interviewed on Radio 2, total tax revenue generated by all things automotive is 50 billion per annum. Add to that all the jobs that depend on cars, from producing them to writing tickets and sticking them on the windscreen and the automobile is a powerful contributer to the economy. All the leading economies have strong automobile industries, if your claim was true that would not be the case.

I'm afraid the Utopian dream that the wealth generated could be replicated by people producing bicycles and fixing headsets is just pie in the sky.

Nobody ever got laid because they were using Shimano

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

You're right smokin, it is complete bollox.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No, it's not. It's completely true.

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe

According to a financial expert interviewed on Radio 2, total tax revenue generated by all things automotive is 50 billion per annum. Add to that all the jobs that depend on cars, from producing them to writing tickets and sticking them on the windscreen and the automobile is a powerful contributer to the economy. All the leading economies have strong automobile industries, if your claim was true that would not be the case.

I'm afraid the Utopian dream that the wealth generated could be replicated by people producing bicycles and fixing headsets is just pie in the sky.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Well, if you're going to ignore all the negative effects and erect straw man arguments for those who disagree with you, then of course you're going to be right!

Me, I prefer to view things a bit more objectively, sure they contribute in some ways to the economy, but the detract massively more than they contribute. The health impact, the social decay, the pollution, environmental damage. I suspect we haven't even seen the true losses associated with this particular industry yet.

BigWomble · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

The Benj, sounds to me like you would end up with pretty much the same number of cars if you are saying there would be no waiting for your turn.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
The whole point is that you would have to consciously think about how many 'turns' you take - but the point is that it we may need some of limiting the amount of 'turns' we take anyway.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Experience has shown that a ratio of 1 car per 5 people is about right. When people no longer have a car just sitting on the driveway, turning into a pile of rust, they make journeys by a wide range of different methods, of which the car club is just one. The car club is not appropriate for some people who use a car every day, but a lot of people just instinctively reach for the car keys without thinking about their choices.

The issue that you raised earlier about people looking after car club vehicles - the management of the car club maintain the vehicles, paid for out of the usage payment. In the more successful car clubs, the user is responsible for returning the car sans junk, and are charged if they fail to do this.

Ta - Arabic for moo-cow

BigWomble · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Peyote

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe

According to a financial expert interviewed on Radio 2, total tax revenue generated by all things automotive is 50 billion per annum. Add to that all the jobs that depend on cars, from producing them to writing tickets and sticking them on the windscreen and the automobile is a powerful contributer to the economy. All the leading economies have strong automobile industries, if your claim was true that would not be the case.

I'm afraid the Utopian dream that the wealth generated could be replicated by people producing bicycles and fixing headsets is just pie in the sky.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Well, if you're going to ignore all the negative effects and erect straw man arguments for those who disagree with you, then of course you're going to be right!

Me, I prefer to view things a bit more objectively, sure they contribute in some ways to the economy, but the detract massively more than they contribute. The health impact, the social decay, the pollution, environmental damage. I suspect we haven't even seen the true losses associated with this particular industry yet.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Car industries are created to meet the demand for cars from a wealthy society, and not vice versa. As for cars propping up the economy, we used to have wall-to-wall horses. They are now gone, but the economy has never been stronger. If there were no more cars (unlikely), people would spend the money on something else. Indeed, this is the problem with the idea of banning things, so that we can deal with global warming. People will spend the money on other things, which might have a worse impact.

Ta - Arabic for moo-cow

domd1979 · June 2007

You can't base the economic effects of the car purely on the manufacture of them. The external costs of private motoring are massive and are not covered by the direct costs incurred by driver. Congestion alone places a massive cost on the economy - lost time, longer delivery times, increased fuel consumption to name a few. Add to that the cost of accidents and treating ill health due to conditions attributable to exhaust emissions.

As an aside your point about manufacture doesn't really hold water either seeing as the UK car industry is none too hot at the moment (demise of Longbridge, Peugeot in Cov etc) is it?

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Smokin Joe
According to a financial expert interviewed on Radio 2, total tax revenue generated by all things automotive is 50 billion per annum. Add to that all the jobs that depend on cars, from producing them to writing tickets and sticking them on the windscreen and the automobile is a powerful contributer to the economy. All the leading economies have strong automobile industries, if your claim was true that would not be the case.

I'm afraid the Utopian dream that the wealth generated could be replicated by people producing bicycles and fixing headsets is just pie in the sky.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

domd1979 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss
No, and they don't. The average bus I see has about 3 people on it.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

So you've rather tediously claimed several times before. The average bus (including all those you don't see) has more than 3 passengers on it.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Well, only one at from where I live to matlock, yes. Why would there need to be more than one covering the same route?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Plenty of bus routes have sections of route in common with other bus routes.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
"Trent's fleet are excellent" ! What gobshite you talk - all they do is shuttle old biddies between the town centre and darley dale down the A6 once a day- they can't even get up bank road!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Well that's proof that you know nothing about Trent's fleet or their network (or any other bus operation for that matter). Just for information they run 330 buses with an average age of 3 years. They're regarded as a leading operation, and with some justification.

BigWomble · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

Instead of this hair brained car pool idea, why not just massively improve the bus services?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Because buses are shite. They don't take you to where you want to go, and no improvement in the bus services would enable them to. Buses are noisy, horrible great hulks of the road, and should all be done away with. They cause more traffic jams than they solve, and are a moneypit when the only people on them are old biddies on their way to the bingo and students on their way to the fish and chip shop where they're probably intending to pay by cheque. Therefore, buses are an unnecessary nuisance and society would be much better off without them. On the few occasions that I've had the misfortune to go on one they aren't comfy at all and throw you around all over the place, and I swear the one to matlock hasn't even got suspension it's such a boneshaker, and it takes over 2 hours for a 22 mile journey, you could cycle in less than that. Buses persist in going all the way round the houses, when there's a perfectly good direct route and even when there's going to be precisely zero people getting off and on in these obscure areas.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

No waiting around for your turn in the car, which is the bigest problem I see. There would always be a regular bus to take you to pretty much anywhere.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
But there wouldn't be too much waiting. Think how many cars there are on the roads in Britain now - shedloads, and I bet at least half of them are not being driven at any one time. Probably a lot greater proportion of them even. It would be engineered to achieve the desired effect - to encourage people to only use cars when they need to, and this would actually free up more cars, probably to such a point where you wouldn't even need to book one for a lot of journeys.
You don't have to 'wait' for a car even NOW, when people are allowed to hog cars for themselves - so how are you going to have to wait for a car when all cars are public?! This isn't a system whereby all car use has to be one of a fleet of new cars that are made specifically for a car pool and all the others just sit around on people's drives, this is a system where private car ownership is NOT ALLOWED, and everyone therefore has to sell their car to the state, for it to become a public car, i.e. ALL cars have to be given over to the pool scheme! It's not just a pie in the sky idea Joe it's going to happen and ALL cars are going to become part of it including YOUR porsche. I think it would be fun just not knowing what sort of car you were going to get, and it being a surprise, I quite like driving different cars I get bored with the same old one all the time.
It would obviously only work if ALL cars were public... people would get mileage credits in return for their car, proportional to the carrying capacity of it and its mechanical soundness / expected lifespan.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I think 'The Boss', you have a very cynical attitude towards buses! In a nutshell, cars journeys work like this ...

1) wiggle, wiggle, wiggle down the side roads towards the major road
2) down the major road
3) wiggle, wiggle, wiggle up the side roads to the destination.

The traditional bus only does part 2. So it is only of any use when the amount of wiggling at each end is small (~200yards). In the future, a new system, called DRT (demand responsive transport) could be introduced, which calls at people's homes along the way. It's a bit more expensive, as you'd expect.

In addition, there is a wait of approximately 1/2 the service interval.

Buses suit a lot of people, particularly those people going to and from the CBD as their commute. Some journeys, particularly non-radial journeys, will always be difficult by bus, and some places, where there are very few people like a village, are unlikely to see much of a bus service. I use a bus to get to work, and it's okay.

Buses need not be noisy. Electric, hybrid and trolley buses are very quiet. Buses need not be horrible, they can be very well presented if the bus company can be bothered. Buses need not be slow, there are ways of running efficient bus services. Buses need not run empty, this depends on the neighbourhood (single people/old people/families), service interval and cost. Buses reduce congestion. They count as 2 cars each, but carry more than 3 people each on average.

Bus companies manage their bus stocks by having places where they bring on new buses (like Bath [:D]) and places where the buses go to die, like Southampton and Weymouth. The one I used in Weymouth should have been left in the museum. They still charged the full fare, though
[:(!]

Ta - Arabic for moo-cow

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by BigWomble

Car industries are created to meet the demand for cars from a wealthy society, and not vice versa. As for cars propping up the economy, we used to have wall-to-wall horses. They are now gone, but the economy has never been stronger. If there were no more cars (unlikely), people would spend the money on something else. Indeed, this is the problem with the idea of banning things, so that we can deal with global warming. People will spend the money on other things, which might have a worse impact.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Interesting point of view. I agree that if cars were banned this is would be the likely fallout. Fortunately there are very few people out there who do want cars banned!

All I want is for society to move away from being so motor-centric, to accept that there are other forms of transport (yes, even buses Bonj!) which really do have benefits over private vehicle transport, to invest in these other forms and make them viable options. It would also be nice if people realised the full effects that cars have on themselves as individuals, on their communities and on society as a whole. I can't help but feel we've been sold a dream without being informed about the downsides, which we are only now beginning to understand let alone figure out a way of tackling.

I know private vehicle transport is never going to go away, I don't have an issue with that. It's necessary in many cases, but also unnecessary in a lot of cases.

I do have an issue with people not recognising the impacts of their choices. But I guess everyone feels like that...

PS - The global warming thing? Not convinced it's a very good argument. Local pollution, congestion, health effects and community isolation seem to be easier to prove and more tangible.

mjones · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Peyote
...

PS - The global warming thing? Not convinced it's a very good argument. Local pollution, congestion, health effects and community isolation seem to be easier to prove and more tangible.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I'd agree in part with this. I'm pretty convinced of the potential threat of global warming, as per the scientific consensus, however when it comes to CO2 reduction it is quite difficult to achieve very large reductions through modal shift. This is especially true for local transport because the trips are shorter, so you'd have to increase the amount of cycling many times over to get a relatively small percentage drop in transport CO2.

If CO2 were the most important consideration of transport policy then it would be best to focus on improving vehicle fuel efficiency and on measures that constrain traffic growth. However, the congestion, accessibility, health and quality of life arguments are more than enough to justify measures to reduce car traffic and get more people cycling and on buses; and in doing so you still get some CO2 reduction as a bonus.

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by domd1979

Well that's proof that you know nothing about Trent's fleet or their network (or any other bus operation for that matter). Just for information they run 330 buses with an average age of 3 years. They're regarded as a leading operation, and with some justification.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
They still can't get up bank road. A bustling public-sector pillow-biting navel-gazing busybody can probably be held to blame, for instisting on lots of redundant overly-heavy health and safety equipment that is completely unnecessary, not to mention the need to carry 86 passengers when there's never going to be more than 12.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

Because buses are shite. They don't take you to where you want to go, and no improvement in the bus services would enable them to.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's because you want to go on a journey that private transport has created for you. The journey wan't there before private transport created it for you and it won't be there when private transport is no longer a viable option.

Think of your bus-less jorney as a small blip in man's tranport history.

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Global warming update

Comments

Categories