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

1…8788909293…191

Comments

  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,146
    rjsterry said:

    First.Aspect said:

    Pross said:

    First.Aspect said:

    Pross said:

    First.Aspect said:

    Pross said:

    First.Aspect said:

    shirley_basso said:

    Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

    There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.
    It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.
    Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?
    Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.
    I literally have no recollection of discussing this topic previously.
    Not directly with you but if you go back a couple of pages I tried to explain it then to others. It’s one of those things that people find counterintuitive so won’t accept.

    At the ridiculous end of the spectrum are people who argue cyclists should pay road tax because they contribute to wearing out the road (hopefully not on here!). After 30 odd years in highway engineering I’ve been told I’m wrong about virtually everything road design related as people think using the roads gives them knowledge of how they work at a technical level.
    But what about car parks. Surely they will all collapse?
    We did that one an' all. Are you sure dementia is not setting in.
    Whoosh
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    Well said Porsche, that's the attitude
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/07/26/porsche-911-sports-car-keep-making-petrol-engine-promise/
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    Interesting article: wonder how many other exceptions will be made?
    https://telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/electric-cars-unsuitable-armed-response-police-units/
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • pangolin
    pangolin Posts: 6,648
    Stevo_666 said:

    Interesting article: wonder how many other exceptions will be made?
    https://telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/electric-cars-unsuitable-armed-response-police-units/

    Hopefully these exceptions will be rolled out to everyone, swiftly followed by us all being allowed to carry glocks and MP5s.
    - Genesis Croix de Fer
    - Dolan Tuono
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,537
    Stevo_666 said:

    Interesting article: wonder how many other exceptions will be made?
    https://telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/electric-cars-unsuitable-armed-response-police-units/

    Does the "EVs aren't fast enough" headline not strike you as a bit fishy? Maybe even petrolbollox.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    pangolin said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Interesting article: wonder how many other exceptions will be made?
    https://telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/electric-cars-unsuitable-armed-response-police-units/

    Hopefully these exceptions will be rolled out to everyone, swiftly followed by us all being allowed to carry glocks and MP5s.
    Missing the point, probably deliberately.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Interesting article: wonder how many other exceptions will be made?
    https://telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/electric-cars-unsuitable-armed-response-police-units/

    Does the "EVs aren't fast enough" headline not strike you as a bit fishy? Maybe even petrolbollox.
    If you read the article and disagree with what it says then you'd be claiming it was 'policebollox'.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Given the rozzers can’t even catch 98% of bike thefts, I don’t think fast cars are the problem.
    _
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,135
    When electric cars exist that do 0-60 in 2.5 seconds, what's the problem exactly?
  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 3,605
    kingstongraham said:

    When electric cars exist that do 0-60 in 2.5 seconds, what's the problem exactly?

    The article also mentions police budgets.

    Partly I suspect they can't afford electric cars with sufficient performance. But they probably could afford a whole fleet of new ICE cars with sufficient performance either.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,315
    Jezyboy said:

    kingstongraham said:

    When electric cars exist that do 0-60 in 2.5 seconds, what's the problem exactly?

    The article also mentions police budgets.

    Partly I suspect they can't afford electric cars with sufficient performance. But they probably could afford a whole fleet of new ICE cars with sufficient performance either.
    The report is twisted. The main concern is not speed, it is budgets.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    edited July 2023
    What police to chase?

    Do police even bother going after criminals?

    A rather outdated view it seems.
    _
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    Jezyboy said:

    kingstongraham said:

    When electric cars exist that do 0-60 in 2.5 seconds, what's the problem exactly?

    The article also mentions police budgets.

    Partly I suspect they can't afford electric cars with sufficient performance. But they probably could afford a whole fleet of new ICE cars with sufficient performance either.
    Cost is clearly one point which is a wider issue than just for the police. The charging infrastructure is also mentioned as a concern as a police response vehicle won't be very fast at all if it can't get charged at the right time.

    But as I say, wonder how many other exemptions there will be? This is just one example.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    And the tide appears to be turning at last.
    https://telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/07/29/rishi-sunak-on-motorists-side-review-anti-car-policies/
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,537
    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Interesting article: wonder how many other exceptions will be made?
    https://telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/electric-cars-unsuitable-armed-response-police-units/

    Does the "EVs aren't fast enough" headline not strike you as a bit fishy? Maybe even petrolbollox.
    If you read the article and disagree with what it says then you'd be claiming it was 'policebollox'.
    Paywall cut in too quickly. I tried to find an alternative source but all that came up was a report in the Express that ambulance services were trialling EVs. Maybe you can suggest a source that hasn't spent the last decade grumbling about modernity.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 3,605
    The article is a general mishmash of anti electric cars stuff, with very little new content. If one part of central government has meant that charging points and grid capacity isn't keeping up with the requirements to satisfy other parts of central government, then maybe those in charge (nice pun) should get a grip on things.

    As for the war on motorists. Pull the other one. Motorists are pandered to in the extreme. Their/our cars clutter the place up when parked are responsible for cruddy air quality when moving and the less said about traffic jams the better.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,135
    Anyone got a link to the Essex police report?
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    Jezyboy said:

    The article is a general mishmash of anti electric cars stuff, with very little new content. If one part of central government has meant that charging points and grid capacity isn't keeping up with the requirements to satisfy other parts of central government, then maybe those in charge (nice pun) should get a grip on things.

    As for the war on motorists. Pull the other one. Motorists are pandered to in the extreme. Their/our cars clutter the place up when parked are responsible for cruddy air quality when moving and the less said about traffic jams the better.

    Clearly a lot of motorists feel hard done by. Maybe car haters like you don't but you need to be able to see it from their point of view.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,135
    Stevo_666 said:

    And the tide appears to be turning at last.
    https://telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/07/29/rishi-sunak-on-motorists-side-review-anti-car-policies/

    Let's just forget that he literally didn't know how to buy petrol.
  • super_davo
    super_davo Posts: 1,221
    Stevo_666 said:

    Jezyboy said:

    The article is a general mishmash of anti electric cars stuff, with very little new content. If one part of central government has meant that charging points and grid capacity isn't keeping up with the requirements to satisfy other parts of central government, then maybe those in charge (nice pun) should get a grip on things.

    As for the war on motorists. Pull the other one. Motorists are pandered to in the extreme. Their/our cars clutter the place up when parked are responsible for cruddy air quality when moving and the less said about traffic jams the better.

    Clearly a lot of motorists feel hard done by. Maybe car haters like you don't but you need to be able to see it from their point of view.
    They feel hard done by because the narrative that gets pedalled is that they have all this freedom today and ULEZ and LTNs are taking that away. Which is pretty irresponsible journalism all told.

    If the narrative was "We've had X million more cars on the road, journey times have increased by Y%, if you want to carry on using yours for the journeys that make sense for a car, things need to change" then motorists might see a different perspective.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    super_davo said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Jezyboy said:

    The article is a general mishmash of anti electric cars stuff, with very little new content. If one part of central government has meant that charging points and grid capacity isn't keeping up with the requirements to satisfy other parts of central government, then maybe those in charge (nice pun) should get a grip on things.

    As for the war on motorists. Pull the other one. Motorists are pandered to in the extreme. Their/our cars clutter the place up when parked are responsible for cruddy air quality when moving and the less said about traffic jams the better.

    Clearly a lot of motorists feel hard done by. Maybe car haters like you don't but you need to be able to see it from their point of view.
    They feel hard done by because the narrative that gets pedalled is that they have all this freedom today and ULEZ and LTNs are taking that away. Which is pretty irresponsible journalism all told.

    If the narrative was "We've had X million more cars on the road, journey times have increased by Y%, if you want to carry on using yours for the journeys that make sense for a car, things need to change" then motorists might see a different perspective.
    I'm fine with encouraging other forms of transport, but making life more costly and difficult for motorists in order to achieve that is not going to have the desired effect - as politicians are starting to find out.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    kingstongraham said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    And the tide appears to be turning at last.
    https://telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/07/29/rishi-sunak-on-motorists-side-review-anti-car-policies/

    Let's just forget that he literally didn't know how to buy petrol.
    Not sure how that's relevant to the debate, but let's not forget that Labour politicians don't always make a success of looking like 'a man of the people' :)

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,135
    Do these fabled "motorists" live in their cars and never venture outside them? Are they a separate breed from the rest of us car owners?
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,537
    Stevo_666 said:

    Jezyboy said:

    The article is a general mishmash of anti electric cars stuff, with very little new content. If one part of central government has meant that charging points and grid capacity isn't keeping up with the requirements to satisfy other parts of central government, then maybe those in charge (nice pun) should get a grip on things.

    As for the war on motorists. Pull the other one. Motorists are pandered to in the extreme. Their/our cars clutter the place up when parked are responsible for cruddy air quality when moving and the less said about traffic jams the better.

    Clearly a lot of motorists feel hard done by. Maybe car haters like you don't but you need to be able to see it from their point of view.
    'A lot'.

    You really want to align yourselves with Piers Corbyn and this crowd.


    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,380
    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Jezyboy said:

    The article is a general mishmash of anti electric cars stuff, with very little new content. If one part of central government has meant that charging points and grid capacity isn't keeping up with the requirements to satisfy other parts of central government, then maybe those in charge (nice pun) should get a grip on things.

    As for the war on motorists. Pull the other one. Motorists are pandered to in the extreme. Their/our cars clutter the place up when parked are responsible for cruddy air quality when moving and the less said about traffic jams the better.

    Clearly a lot of motorists feel hard done by. Maybe car haters like you don't but you need to be able to see it from their point of view.
    'A lot'.

    You really want to align yourselves with Piers Corbyn and this crowd.


    Your enemy's enemy etc...

    This article isn't too far from how I see the wider issue on cars (yes, it's a Telegraph article, yes the title is a bit provocative and yes it points out that the Tories have been at fault also...):
    https://telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2023/07/29/sunak-strikes-back-against-anti-car-zealots/

    Quoted in case it's paywalled:
    "It is right to seek to lower emissions, but not through coercion and a war on motorists

    It is greatly welcome that the Prime Minister is now publicly and explicitly standing up for Britain’s motorists. His interview with this newspaper signals a refreshing rethink for a party that had lost its way on this subject. By asking the Department for Transport to review the impact of low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) nationwide, one of the many pernicious anti-motorist schemes dreamt up by radical Left-wing urbanists and inexplicably endorsed by supposedly centre-Right politicians, Mr Sunak has shown he is not afraid to challenge the illiberal, anti-car agenda. This new dogma has shown itself to be electoral poison, and it is also profoundly un-Conservative.

    It was an error for Tories to have ended up in the anti-motorist vanguard. Yet in Canterbury it was a Conservative-led council that drew up a preposterous plan to use automatic numberplate-recognition cameras to carve the city into five zones and fine motorists who breached the rules. Astonishingly, it has been left to a new Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition to revisit the plans.

    The impact of anti-car policies – including Sadiq Khan’s vindictive and irrational Ulez extension in outer London – has often been most visible in cities. The rapid spread of urban LTNs during lockdown was an especially serious error. Again, it was a policy implemented with support from a Conservative government, and one that often saw local needs and democratic processes sidelined in the opportunistic push to make drivers’ lives worse.

    Yet it is outside the UK’s cities where the war on motorists really bites. Too many in the Westminster bubble have lost touch with just how essential private vehicles are for life beyond London’s Zone One and Two. In the absence of easily accessible public transport, cars are vital for all levels of our society. It is easy to understand why a party such as Labour, long dependent on its ultra-urban voters, treats drivers badly. It made no sense at all for the Tory Party.

    The private car, properly understood, is an emblem of a flourishing free society. It liberates families to transport themselves in comfort and safety. Instead of requiring locals to accept whatever services can be found within 15 minutes, cars overcome the tyranny of distance, expanding choice in healthcare, education, religious life and employment.

    For many of us – and why not? – cars are a delight in themselves. Life in a free society is not just about settling for what we need. It is right to seek to fight pollution, but this needs to be done through new technologies, not coercion. Electric cars are the future, but their rise should be allowed to happen spontaneously, rather than through absurd and arbitrary deadlines.

    As MP for a mostly rural seat, Mr Sunak will understand all this firsthand. Indeed, when he ran against Liz Truss for the leadership a year ago, his campaign pointed to his cuts to fuel duty as chancellor, and promised that in office he would “stop the war on motorists once and for all”. It is excellent news that he is now beginning to deliver on his promise."
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • super_davo
    super_davo Posts: 1,221
    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Jezyboy said:

    The article is a general mishmash of anti electric cars stuff, with very little new content. If one part of central government has meant that charging points and grid capacity isn't keeping up with the requirements to satisfy other parts of central government, then maybe those in charge (nice pun) should get a grip on things.

    As for the war on motorists. Pull the other one. Motorists are pandered to in the extreme. Their/our cars clutter the place up when parked are responsible for cruddy air quality when moving and the less said about traffic jams the better.

    Clearly a lot of motorists feel hard done by. Maybe car haters like you don't but you need to be able to see it from their point of view.
    'A lot'.

    You really want to align yourselves with Piers Corbyn and this crowd.


    That picture makes me laugh, it just shows the complete ignorance around the subject; stop gridlock, abolish LTNs.

    Gridlock is not caused by LTNs. It is caused by too many cars for the infrastructure available. There are only two possible solutions... improve that infrastructure or reduce usage.

    How much can we really improve infrastructure when we can't build enough houses and HS2? So the main way out is to reduce usage; which will probably involve policies that the Mail, Express and the increasingly tabloid Telegraph will say is "bashing motorists".


  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,462
    Backtracking on LTNs is bizarre but a classic example of this Tory government undoing a policy that they previously supported to the tune of £100 million plus as they have allowed a by-election result to convince them it’s a vote winner. About the only good thing Boris did was in relation to environmental issues and now his own Party want to wreck that as well.

    LTNs aren’t a ‘war on motorists’ they are there to stop motorists using inappropriate residential streets to avoid queues of traffic. The disruption they face on appropriate routes is down to too many people driving around. The answer shouldn’t be to allow them to drive on more roads to the detriment of those living in the areas.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,135
    So because the war on motorists is mostly felt outside the cities, let's concentrate on LTNs and ULEZ.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,329
    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Interesting article: wonder how many other exceptions will be made?
    https://telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/electric-cars-unsuitable-armed-response-police-units/

    Does the "EVs aren't fast enough" headline not strike you as a bit fishy? Maybe even petrolbollox.
    If you read the article and disagree with what it says then you'd be claiming it was 'policebollox'.
    Paywall cut in too quickly.

    Disable Javascript.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,145
    Mr Sunak said he had ordered the Department for Transport to see how LTNs were working. Earlier this month, Transport Secretary Mark Harper announced that the government was stopping the funding of new LTNs in England.

    It is not clear whether the government could make councils alter or scrap existing schemes.

    Mr Sunak said: "The vast majority of people in the country use their cars to get around and are dependent on cars.

    "I just want to make sure people know that I'm on their side in supporting them to use their cars to do all the things that matter to them," he said    .
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66351785

    This isn't a given it's a review.

Categories