The Big 'Let's sell our cars and take buses/ebikes instead' thread (warning: probably very dull)

Wheelspinner

I'm of the view that cars in isolation really aren't the problem, in terms of whatever definition of "sustainable" you want to use. It's the activities they currently both generate and enable that are the issue, and the social change implications of getting rid of (most private) cars are vast.

Who currently makes a living from private car ownership? Car salesmen, service and repair shops, panel beaters, painters, spare parts and tools manufacturers and distribution people, tyre shops, accessory places to tart up your car with stuff, even insurance company, advertising agencies, finance company staff and - heaven forfend - recruitment consultants placing people in jobs in those industries. Plus, all the secondary ones like people working in service stations, public sector jobs in motor registry offices, and those other businesses that exist solely (largely) because people can currently drive their car to it.

Remove private car ownership and replace with public transport, and what will all those people do for a living? To keep funding the infrastructure development required to move millions of people about, you need them to have gainful employment so they are paying tax, and earning enough to spend it on keeping someone else employed. You need to replace that pool of employment with something. If the job they had no longer exists, will you still even need as much transport infrastructure, and why?

A car is often touted as the second biggest purchase anyone will make, after a home. It's both the incentive (currently) for a lot of people to work harder, and they are bought as the symbol of achievement to show to the neighbours.

If you take that away, and people are still working just as hard to "achieve" success, what will they spend the money on to show the world they've done well? Bigger house? More trips away on holiday? More stuff? Is that environmentally any better?

Cars are *a* problem, but they are far from being *the* problem for future.

People - specifically too many people with money to spend and time on their hands - are the problem.

All this talk about essential versus non-essential car trips are conveniently ignoring the fact of what people are doing at the end of that trip being "a problem". We as a society do far too much pointless, wasteful, frivolous activity to be sustainable. Whether we drive a car or use PT to get to the place we do those things is trivial.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

Not sure what the size compared to London has to do with anything. The supposed opposition ULEZ a load of carefully orchestrated whingers if you ask me given that almost half of Londoners don't even own one. Air pollution is still a problem so there's still work to do.

Our local Conservatives sent a flyer through saying this:



Which isn't true.

Yep, it's £12.50 a day.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

There is not demonstrated majority opposition to it.

There's a couple of polls that say 51% in favour, 27% against if the premise in the question is to control emissions (sadiq), and 51% against, 34% in favour if the premise in the question is to raise money (tories).

Keep your dirty car out in the sticks.

Nope.
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/16/three-five-londoners-oppose-sadiq-khans-ulez-expansion/

I only mentioned two polls, and that was one of them.

So you agree there is significant opposition?

Stevo_666

DeVlaeminck said:

pblakeney said:

It's funny but I'd guess it will happen - if you live just inside the zone why wouldn't you keep a car just outside if at all possible.

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

Interestingly, it looks like they're going to include a congestion charge here in the 'bridge which is £5 a day for using your car, even if you live there.

Presumably that's a usage charge, so you don't incur it if you live in the zone but the car is parked?

Yeah. £5er for every day you actually use your car. So you're gonna pay nearly £2k a year if you want to drive every day.

Presumably that includes you?

Nah. I use it once or twice a fortnight. I've got moss growing in the window seal.

OK, so it does include you, but you only get stung for about £250 a year. Could be quite a lot for some who don't earn much but need to drive.

There are a lot of chickens and eggs in the deprioritising of car transport, not least the economic choices that are taken. I find that most habitual car drivers will insist that nearly all of their car journeys are essential, and base their entire existence around cheap motoring, without considering other possibilities.

If you look at somewhere like London I reckon cars have already been de-prioritised quite a bit. (I saw what you said upthread about this being something that is more for cities and big towns).

It's a bit black and white saying is something essential or non-essential. Pretty sure very few are absolutely essential but there are good reasons for a lot of them. A few examples of these:
- An old dear who is maybe a bit frail and slow moving around might struggle to get to the bus stop. Not essential as she could struggle to get to the bus stop and wait around in the cold and wet.
- My daughter at uni in Liverpool and often works until after dark in the campus library. A bus trip would take her through some pretty ropey parts of town - lone female with a phone and a laptop? Not essential as she could take the chance several times a week.
- Busy day on a weekend for your average bod like me who finds himself going to multiple places in a day to get things done (supermarket for a weeks worth of shopping, get things from a shop or two in town, DIY store to get some heavy things, take stuff to the tip, go to meet friends etc). Not essential but could I get that lot done without a lot of extra time and effort?

fun.

Excellent point - it's easy for us to talk about using public transport but for women after dark it can be a different ball game. Even if the bus stop is just 5 minutes walk from home that isn't always a walk that a woman (or sometimes a man I suppose) considers safe.

A real life example that is rather close to home. I notice nobody has rebutted what I wrote.

rjsterry

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

Not sure what the size compared to London has to do with anything. The supposed opposition ULEZ a load of carefully orchestrated whingers if you ask me given that almost half of Londoners don't even own one. Air pollution is still a problem so there's still work to do.

Our local Conservatives sent a flyer through saying this:



Which isn't true.

Yep. Pretty much the only thing I've heard from my local MP in three years has been a load of overblown guff about the ULEZ.

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

There is not demonstrated majority opposition to it.

There's a couple of polls that say 51% in favour, 27% against if the premise in the question is to control emissions (sadiq), and 51% against, 34% in favour if the premise in the question is to raise money (tories).

Keep your dirty car out in the sticks.

Nope.
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/16/three-five-londoners-oppose-sadiq-khans-ulez-expansion/

I only mentioned two polls, and that was one of them.

So you agree there is significant opposition?

I stick by what I wrote.

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

Not sure what the size compared to London has to do with anything. The supposed opposition ULEZ a load of carefully orchestrated whingers if you ask me given that almost half of Londoners don't even own one. Air pollution is still a problem so there's still work to do.

Our local Conservatives sent a flyer through saying this:



Which isn't true.

Yep, it's £12.50 a day.

No, it's £0.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

Not sure what the size compared to London has to do with anything. The supposed opposition ULEZ a load of carefully orchestrated whingers if you ask me given that almost half of Londoners don't even own one. Air pollution is still a problem so there's still work to do.

Our local Conservatives sent a flyer through saying this:



Which isn't true.

Yep, it's £12.50 a day.

No, it's £0.

For non compliant cars it is.

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

Not sure what the size compared to London has to do with anything. The supposed opposition ULEZ a load of carefully orchestrated whingers if you ask me given that almost half of Londoners don't even own one. Air pollution is still a problem so there's still work to do.

Our local Conservatives sent a flyer through saying this:



Which isn't true.

Yep, it's £12.50 a day.

No, it's £0.

For non compliant cars it is.

I don't have one of those.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

There is not demonstrated majority opposition to it.

There's a couple of polls that say 51% in favour, 27% against if the premise in the question is to control emissions (sadiq), and 51% against, 34% in favour if the premise in the question is to raise money (tories).

Keep your dirty car out in the sticks.

Nope.
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/16/three-five-londoners-oppose-sadiq-khans-ulez-expansion/

I only mentioned two polls, and that was one of them.

So you agree there is significant opposition?

I stick by what I wrote.

The poll I quoted speaks for itself

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

There is not demonstrated majority opposition to it.

There's a couple of polls that say 51% in favour, 27% against if the premise in the question is to control emissions (sadiq), and 51% against, 34% in favour if the premise in the question is to raise money (tories).

Keep your dirty car out in the sticks.

Nope.
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/16/three-five-londoners-oppose-sadiq-khans-ulez-expansion/

I only mentioned two polls, and that was one of them.

So you agree there is significant opposition?

I stick by what I wrote.

The poll I quoted speaks for itself

That's the point though I was trying to make, it really doesn't.

It's a deliberately skewed question, and even then only just gets over half to oppose it.

That's why I mentioned the other poll.

If you only listen to one, you aren't serious about wanting to actually know.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

There is not demonstrated majority opposition to it.

There's a couple of polls that say 51% in favour, 27% against if the premise in the question is to control emissions (sadiq), and 51% against, 34% in favour if the premise in the question is to raise money (tories).

Keep your dirty car out in the sticks.

Nope.
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/16/three-five-londoners-oppose-sadiq-khans-ulez-expansion/

I only mentioned two polls, and that was one of them.

So you agree there is significant opposition?

I stick by what I wrote.

The poll I quoted speaks for itself

That's the point though I was trying to make, it really doesn't.

It's a deliberately skewed question, and even then only just gets over half to oppose it.

That's why I mentioned the other poll.

If you only listen to one, you aren't serious about wanting to actually know.

Depends how you ask the question as ever. Even after Sadiqs poll asked it in a way that would elicit a more positive response, the majority in favour was less than the widely redefined Brexit referendum result.

kingstongraham

People here who have non compliant diesels aren't very happy, obviously. But apparently that's not many people.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

Not sure what the size compared to London has to do with anything. The supposed opposition ULEZ a load of carefully orchestrated whingers if you ask me given that almost half of Londoners don't even own one. Air pollution is still a problem so there's still work to do.

Our local Conservatives sent a flyer through saying this:



Which isn't true.

Yep, it's £12.50 a day.

No, it's £0.

For non compliant cars it is.

I think you're on to something there.

MattFalle

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Pfft, it's shifted a bit, but to go all Chasey, look at the difference between London or Bristol (or Lyon, come to that) and Amsterdam, and see how far the dial could be shifted, if the will was there. But cars still dominate massively, and will remain so unless the car's primacy in urban environments, both in policy and public perception, can been overturned. We're nowhere near that.

You're going all Chasey by assuming that cars 'dominate massively': Tfls own data for London shows that less than 1/3rd of journeys in london are by private car. And declining.

Amsterdam is an outlier, not necessarily a target.

That's not just happened by chance. It's at least 20 years of active effort and still some way to go.

Amsterdam isn't much of an outlier if other Dutch cities and towns are comparable. Copenhagen is much the same. They've just been doing it for longer.

Both much smaller cities than London it should be noted.

And the London change has probably gone far enough, if the majority opposition to Sadiqs ULEZ expansion is anything anything to go by (which he ignored anyway).

Not sure what the size compared to London has to do with anything. The supposed opposition ULEZ a load of carefully orchestrated whingers if you ask me given that almost half of Londoners don't even own one. Air pollution is still a problem so there's still work to do.

Our local Conservatives sent a flyer through saying this:



Which isn't true.

surprised they didn't put it on the side of a bus

MattFalle

just out of interest, where are all these trained and vetted bus and train drivers going to come from?

pblakeney

MattFalle said:

just out of interest, where are all these trained and vetted bus and train drivers going to come from?

Petrol station till counters obs.

MattFalle

Coolio.

Are the maintenance staff (mechanics, etc) plus all the countless bods who do all the behind the scenes ridiculouly technical work we have absolutely no idea about going to come from the hand car washing places?

pblakeney

MattFalle said:

Coolio.

Are the maintenance staff (mechanics, etc) plus all the countless bods who do all the behind the scenes ridiculouly technical work we have absolutely no idea about going to come from the hand car washing places?

Duh, car garages. Car washers go to clean hospitals after the cleaners have quit due to low wages. Car cleaners work for less than minimum wage. It's the future.

photonic69

orraloon said:

I'm sure I posted a version of this Amsterdam street comparison pics before somewhere, but I know which version I prefer. Anyone favour the middle one?

Is that really Amsterdam? It's got a slope on it.

MattFalle

How are we going to finance the thousand of miles of new trackway needed?

gonna need shitliads of it.

and gravel. where is all that going to come from?

more to the point, where are the new rail nd tramways going to go?

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

People here who have non compliant diesels aren't very happy, obviously. But apparently that's not many people.

It's enough to make an extra 9 figure sum for TFL. But I'm sure thats not motivating them at all...
https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2022/10/tfls-income-increased-by-100m-from-the-expansion-of-londons-ulez/#:~:text=The%20move%20to%20make%20the,economic%20impact%20of%20the%20decision.

Also beware the law of unintended consequences, such as:
https://lbc.co.uk/news/ulez-expansion-will-put-enormous-financial-pressure-on-the-nhs-and-carers-warns/

But don't worry, that's not many people.

pblakeney

MattFalle said:

How are we going to finance the thousand of miles of new trackway needed?

gonna need shitliads of it.

and gravel. where is all that going to come from?

more to the point, where are the new rail nd tramways going to go?

Revert the Beecham closures and put them back.
Shame the cycle paths will have to go. Oh.

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

People here who have non compliant diesels aren't very happy, obviously. But apparently that's not many people.

It's enough to make an extra 9 figure sum for TFL. But I'm sure thats not motivating them at all...
https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2022/10/tfls-income-increased-by-100m-from-the-expansion-of-londons-ulez/#:~:text=The%20move%20to%20make%20the,economic%20impact%20of%20the%20decision.

Also beware the law of unimpeded consequences, such as:
https://lbc.co.uk/news/ulez-expansion-will-put-enormous-financial-pressure-on-the-nhs-and-carers-warns/

But don't worry, that's not many people.

😆

MattFalle

pblakeney said:

MattFalle said:

How are we going to finance the thousand of miles of new trackway needed?

gonna need shitliads of it.

and gravel. where is all that going to come from?

more to the point, where are the new rail nd tramways going to go?

Revert the Beecham closures and put them back.
Shame the cycle paths will have to go. Oh.

different gauges and construction/safety standards so couldn't do anyway, no?

pblakeney

MattFalle said:

pblakeney said:

MattFalle said:

How are we going to finance the thousand of miles of new trackway needed?

gonna need shitliads of it.

and gravel. where is all that going to come from?

more to the point, where are the new rail nd tramways going to go?

Revert the Beecham closures and put them back.
Shame the cycle paths will have to go. Oh.

different gauges and construction/safety standards so couldn't do anyway, no?

The gauges (rail lines) have been removed so start afresh.
Only people that will get upset are cyclists and who cares about them?

MattFalle

pblakeney said:

MattFalle said:

pblakeney said:

MattFalle said:

How are we going to finance the thousand of miles of new trackway needed?

gonna need shitliads of it.

and gravel. where is all that going to come from?

more to the point, where are the new rail nd tramways going to go?

Revert the Beecham closures and put them back.
Shame the cycle paths will have to go. Oh.

different gauges and construction/safety standards so couldn't do anyway, no?

The gauges (rail lines) have been removed so start afresh.
Only people that will get upset are cyclists and who cares about them?

gauges will be different so will need more space and different set up for heavier rolling stock. but hey, lob them in anyway.

as an aside, where is the new rolling stock coming from? and who is paying for it?

kingstongraham

MattFalle said:

pblakeney said:

MattFalle said:

pblakeney said:

MattFalle said:

How are we going to finance the thousand of miles of new trackway needed?

gonna need shitliads of it.

and gravel. where is all that going to come from?

more to the point, where are the new rail nd tramways going to go?

Revert the Beecham closures and put them back.
Shame the cycle paths will have to go. Oh.

different gauges and construction/safety standards so couldn't do anyway, no?

The gauges (rail lines) have been removed so start afresh.
Only people that will get upset are cyclists and who cares about them?

gauges will be different so will need more space and different set up for heavier rolling stock. but hey, lob them in anyway.

as an aside, where is the new rolling stock coming from? and who is paying for it?

Melt down the cars.

rjsterry

MattFalle said:

just out of interest, where are all these trained and vetted bus and train drivers going to come from?

Largely a problem of running a system that relies on lots of overtime for decades.

MattFalle said:

pblakeney said:

MattFalle said:

How are we going to finance the thousand of miles of new trackway needed?

gonna need shitliads of it.

and gravel. where is all that going to come from?

more to the point, where are the new rail nd tramways going to go?

Revert the Beecham closures and put them back.
Shame the cycle paths will have to go. Oh.

different gauges and construction/safety standards so couldn't do anyway, no?

MattFalle said:

pblakeney said:

MattFalle said:

How are we going to finance the thousand of miles of new trackway needed?

gonna need shitliads of it.

and gravel. where is all that going to come from?

more to the point, where are the new rail nd tramways going to go?

Revert the Beecham closures and put them back.
Shame the cycle paths will have to go. Oh.

different gauges and construction/safety standards so couldn't do anyway, no?

It's been 4' 8 1/2" for at least the last 100 years so I don't think that's a problem. We are building HS2, so I think we could manage a few branch lines if we chose to.

First.Aspect

They have has some success reopening rail lines up here. But even those, where the embankments and moat of the route hadn't been built on, turned out to be too expensive to do properly. God only knows how expensive it would be to start from scratch, in order to serve lesser deman areas.

And do not, I warn you, wish for trams. We put too much crap under the roads for that to be anything other than a money pit to install the rails. They are also a nightmare for cycling and no faster than busses.