Brexit, for once some facts.

[flecc]

I didn't suggest London do nothing, far from it ! i suggested it did he RIGHT thing, not con money from the people for a slight improvement (but a nice little earner)
The only way is to ban internal combustion engines when all is said and done.

But you can't say how that can happen, can you, so you are advocating doing nothing. Theory solves nothing, our actions do.

What you are saying about the congestion charge is nonsense as I've already shown, but I'll try again with what it's done in the years it's been in place:

1) It has halved the number of private cars coming into the centre.

2) It has doubled the London bus fleet, largely paid for by the congestion charge.

3) It has more than tripled the numbers cycle commuting.

and has been a major influence in creating all the other things I listed before.

We are working towards a ban on the internal combustion engine, but it cannot be done instantly. For starters there is no such thing as a viable battery electric bus anywhere in the world and everywhere had to get rid of trolley buses when the traffic conditions made them impractical. Trams can work where there's enough space as we've shown in South London, but they cannot do the job in central London, which is why we scrapped them many years ago.
.

 

[Zlatan]

Flecc
You are deliberately changing my point to make your own more viable.
I have never said or implied anything of kind about the policies not cleaning London's air up. Obviously they are and in some ways,especially so if you live there, that is to be applauded.
But lets examine exactly how this worthwhile goal of Mr Khans is achieved. Take for example the new T charge..All cars listed as not meeting Toxic standards are to be charged extra for entering London. That's going to be pre 2006 and many diesels. Now what happens to those vehicles? They get sold to parts of the country and carry on their polluting elsewhere...Meanwhile Londoners either have to fork out on new ( so called cleaner cars or pay the extra £20 a day)
Now, fair enough London is now cleaner but at the expense of the dirty cars now being used elsewhere. The overall pollution goes on unaffected. We,ll just end up with a concentration of clean cars around cities and dirty ones elsewhere. Is that really helping ? I think not. The whole country should operate under equal legislation, yes Londoners have a right to clean air but not at the expense of the rest of us.
If we go on like this in a piece meal fashion we,ll end up with all the dirty cars, taxis and vans in the country and clean ones in the Cities . Sadiq Khan should not be allowed to locally implement legislation. It should be the government protecting us all. Why should rest of country have to tolerate cars Sadiq sees as unacceptable in London. Its prejudiced and hypocritical. A car is either clean enough for UK roads or it isn't. Why should my grand kids have to be taught at a school next to a main road full of ex London dirty cars ??? Because Londoners can afford clean cars. ?
It must be either national efforts or not at all. If its not national the rest of us simply suffer at London's benefit.
London should be using its power to influence legislation for us all, not merely to protect Londoners.
Its the epitome of not on our doorstep and in long run gets nowhere.

 

[flecc]

Flecc
You are deliberately changing my point to make your own more viable.
I have never said or implied anything of kind about the policies not cleaning Lobdon's air up. Obviously they are and in some ways,especially so if you live there, that is to be applauded.
But lets examine exactly how this worthwhile goal of Mr Khans us achieved. Take for example the new T charge..All cars listed as not meeting Toxic standards are to be charged extra for entering London. That's going to ve pre 2006 and many diesels. Now what happens to those vehicles? They get sold to parts of the country and carry on their polluting elsewhere...Meanwhile Londoners either have to fork out on new ( so called cleaner cars or pay the extra £20 a day)
Now, fair enough London is now cleaner but at the expense of the dirty cars now being used elsewhere. The overall pollution goes in unaffected. We,ll just end up with a concentration of clean cars around cities and dirty ones elsewhere. Is that really helping ? I think not. The whole country should operate under equal legislation, yes Londoners have a right to clean air but not at the expense of the rest of us.
If we go on like this in a piece meal fashion we,ll end up with all the dirty cars, taxis and vans in the country and clean ones in the Cities . Sadiq Khan should not be allowed to locally implement legislation. It should be the government protecting us all. Why should rest of country have to tolerate cars Sadiq sees as unacceptable in London. Its prejudiced and hypocritical. A car is either clean enough for UK roads or it isn't. Why should my grand kids have to be taught on a main road full of ex London dirty cars ??? Because Londoners can afford clean cars. ?
It must be either national efforts or not at all. If its not national the rest of us simply suffer at London's benefit.

I don't understand why you are persisting with this line of argument.

It has to start somewhere and we've made that start. If we wait for elsewhere to act it will never happen, and that's why you are advocating do nothing. Instead of nagging me, nag the other places that aren't acting, that would at least be doing something useful instead of at present just being negative about somewhere making progress.

Manchester was a good example, they tried to follow us with a congestion charge to get the same large range of benefits we have, but the Mancunians shouted it down, preferring to do nothing and retain the god awful traffic situation they have there.

That's why we can't wait for others, when they are too stupid to act. As for national action, unfortunately TfL doesn't govern the country, only London's transport issues.

Complaining about others getting our dirty vehicles doesn't cut it. Others can also ban them since it's a power all local authorities have.
.

 

[Zlatan]

I don't understand why you are persisting with this line of argument.

It has to start somewhere and we've made that start. If we wait for elsewhere to act it will never happen, and that's why you are advocating do nothing. Instead of nagging me, nag the other places that aren't acting, that would at least be doing something useful instead of at present just being negative about somewhere making progress.

Manchester was a good example, they tried to follow us with a congestion charge to get the same large range of benefits we have, but the Mancunians shouted it down, preferring to do nothing and retain the god awful traffic situation they have there.

That's why we can't wait for others, when they are too stupid to act. As for national action, unfortunately TfL doesn't govern the country, only London's transport issues.

Complaining about others getting our dirty vehicles doesn't cut it. Others can also ban them since it's a power all local authorities have.
.

Its nothing to do with waiting for others. It should be central government passing national legislation. Its quite possible because of London being able to act unilaterally the rest of country may never. Its actually quite ridiculous.

So what happens to all the cars failing Lindon's stringent rules ?? The dirty buses and taxis go to India and or Vietnam...the cars ? They come up north...

And how does a village or small town pass legislation to fine dirty vehicles. That is a silly statement Flecc and a surprising one for you.
Imagine where we would be if pubs and clubs ( or Cities / towns) had freedom to ban smoking. We would have got nowhere. What London does is send its smokers elswhere.

 

[flecc]

It should be central government passing national legislation.

Exactly!

We've waited years for national governments to act, repeatedly pushing them to do so but almost nothing has happened.

So in the end the only way was to act ourselves since we were suffering far too much, including a very real and measured cost in lives.

Or governments aren't what they used to be. Back in the 1950s we were also losing lives through smog pollution which came to a head in 1952 when the great London smog immediately killed some 4000 people, followed by a further 8000 over the ensuing period.

So in 1956 the Clean Air Act was passed into law, banning some solid fuels and controlling others, immediately solving the problem for many years. Until today when it's our liquid transport fuels that are causing the same problem. But it seems our current governments are too incompetent or uncaring to bother to act further than fiddling around the edges. The current idiots even reduced the electric car subsidies!

So to repeat, we in London have to act to save lives now. I don't accept that has any serious effect on others now, though long term it will of course if they don't pull their fingers out and also act. If enough follow us the government will be forced to do something positive.
.

 

[Zlatan]

Exactly!

We've waited years for national governments to act, repeatedly pushing them to do so but almost nothing has happened.

So in the end the only way was to act ourselves since we were suffering far too much, including a very real and measured cost in lives.

Or governments aren't what they used to be. Back in the 1950s we were also losing lives through smog pollution which came to a head in 1952 when the great London smog immediately killed some 4000 people, followed by a further 8000 over the ensuing period.

So in 1956 the Clean Air Act was passed into law, banning some solid fuels and controlling others, immediately solving the problem for many years. Until today when it's our liquid transport fuels that are causing the same problem. But it seems our current governments are too incompetent or uncaring to bother to act further than fiddling around the edges. The current idiots even reduced the electric car subsidies!

So to repeat, we in London have to act to save lives now. I don't accept that has any serious effect on others now, though long term it will of course if they don't pull their fingers out and also act. If enough follow us the government will be forced to do something positive.
.

So we do agree on something at least.
Unilateral action is never going to get overall results , infact they probably have absolutely no affect at all on UK air quality for reasons mentioned...but you are right..its a start...and a method of London raising an extra tax which would be lost to them if we did have sensible national legislation.

 

[oldgroaner]

But you can't say how that can happen, can you, so you are advocating doing nothing. Theory solves nothing, our actions do.

What you are saying about the congestion charge is nonsense as I've already shown, but I'll try again with what it's done in the years it's been in place:

1) It has halved the number of private cars coming into the centre.

2) It has doubled the London bus fleet, largely paid for by the congestion charge.

3) It has more than tripled the numbers cycle commuting.

and has been a major influence in creating all the other things I listed before.

We are working towards a ban on the internal combustion engine, but it cannot be done instantly. For starters there is no such thing as a viable battery electric bus anywhere in the world and everywhere had to get rid of trolley buses when the traffic conditions made them impractical. Trams can work where there's enough space as we've shown in South London, but they cannot do the job in central London, which is why we scrapped them many years ago.
.

~Perhaps if someone started to check the alternatives?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyrobus
And here is another point. Businesses that sell larger items have moved to Retail parks on the outskirts where people can park and pick them up, creating a traffic problem further out from the city centre.
In Hull they have gone the whole hog and pedestrianised the City Centre. this has resulted in it turning into a shadow of it's former self.

 

[oldtom]

John Major stood up today and said exactly what a lot of people desperately want to hear from a current major politician:

Tom

 

[flecc]

In Hull they have gone the whole hog and pedestrianised the City Centre. this has resulted in it turning into a shadow of it's former self.

We've long ago pedestrianised Croydon's centre but it's still often choked with people and activity, so no failure here so far, despite having one of the country's largest out of town retail parks on Purley Way.

There are warning signs though, a new Westfield retail development repeatedly delayed, perhaps due to lack of confidence.

Longer term there's no doubt that high street retail has had it, and even retail parks will be threatened. John Lewis have announced that they will open no more new retail shops and are considering reducing what they have, their online click and collect service and delivery service having taken so much trade.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

We've long ago pedestrianised Croydon's centre but it's still often choked with people and activity, so no failure here so far, despite having one of the country's largest out of town retail parks on Purley Way.

There are warning signs though, a new Westfield retail development repeatedly delayed, perhaps due to lack of confidence.

Longer term there's no doubt that high street retail has had it, and even retail parks will be threatened. John Lewis have announced that they will open no more new retail shops and are considering reducing what they have, their online click and collect service and delivery service having taken so much trade.
.

There is a difference of course in that the City centre of Hull is really almost entirely a Shopping Precinct with only a few mixed businesses, so there isn't a big working population commuting into it.

Grimsby is far, far worse! miles of closed down shops and businesses too.
This is one of the many reasons people voted for Brexit, as they hoped it would bring better times.
Some Hope!

 

[flecc]

~Perhaps if someone started to check the alternatives?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyrobus

I think a proven dud. Switzerland did it first many decades ago but abandoned it, and the fact that this one is the only one in the world says it all.

They have to stop at every stop, passengers or not, and have to wait there while the flywheel speeds up. We have quite enough trying to paralyse London now thanks!

We have been trying all the alternatives, trams, hybrid-diesel, hydrogen fuel cell, hydrogen-diesel hybrid, ultra-low emission diesel and the latter has proved to be the most viable at present.
.

 

[oyster]

In summary the congestion charge zone should be viewed by what it will ultimately achieve and allowance made for the fact that not all measures can be instantly introduced.

Like the roads of a large part of London being the preserve of the rich who can afford Teslas, or laugh at the pathetically low cost (as it appears to them) of the charge.

 

[oldgroaner]

I think a proven dud. Switzerland did it first many decades ago but abandoned it, and the fact that this one is the only one in the world says it all.

They have to stop at every stop, passengers or not, and have to wait there while the flywheel speeds up. We have quite enough trying to paralyse London now thanks!

We have been trying all the alternatives, trams, hybrid-diesel, hydrogen fuel cell, hydrogen-diesel hybrid, ultra-low emission diesel and the latter has proved to be the most viable at present.
.

I have to say we had both trams, and then Trolley buses in Hull and the latter were very successful, they only failed on the cost of maintaining the Infrastructure compared to Diesel Buses, but they certainly had no problems keeping up with and negotiating traffic as I recall.
What killed off the trams was that the rail system was almost totally destroyed in the Air raids of WW2.

 

[oldgroaner]

Like the roads of a large part of London being the preserve of the rich who can afford Teslas, or laugh at the pathetically low cost (as it appears to them) of the charge.

A quick way of putting the Working Class 'erks in their place....Hmmm....

 

[oldgroaner]

I think a proven dud. Switzerland did it first many decades ago but abandoned it, and the fact that this one is the only one in the world says it all.

They have to stop at every stop, passengers or not, and have to wait there while the flywheel speeds up. We have quite enough trying to paralyse London now thanks!

We have been trying all the alternatives, trams, hybrid-diesel, hydrogen fuel cell, hydrogen-diesel hybrid, ultra-low emission diesel and the latter has proved to be the most viable at present.
.

Except of Course you can't trial Trolley Buses without investing in the infrastructure can you?
And they are more capable in traffic than Trams ever were.

Here's the Wikipedia article on the London Trolleybus system from the past
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolleybuses_in_London

 

[oyster]

I have to say we had both trams, and then Trolley buses in Hull and the latter were very successful, they only failed on the cost of maintaining the Infrastructure compared to Diesel Buses, but they certainly had no problems keeping up with and negotiating traffic as I recall.

My very limited experience of trolley buses was in Newcastle-upon-Tyne (don't think they ever reached the Emlyn version ). There was a turnround loop just up from my grandparents' house and yes, I do remember a man with a very long pole. I also remember the phenomenally complicated catenaries.

Struck me that if a bus had the ability to store just a hundred metres of energy, you could have simply not had wires at crossroads. Fifty or sixty years ago you would have had the problem of re-connecting at the other side - but this would surely be eminently achievable in this digital age? The same approach would have allowed such buses to skirt round short roadworks or traffic accidents.

 

[flecc]

Like the roads of a large part of London being the preserve of the rich who can afford Teslas, or laugh at the pathetically low cost (as it appears to them) of the charge.

Simply not true.

The popular Renault Zoe electric, an ideal urban car, is around £12,000 new from dealers, no dearer than a similar i.c. hatchback and cheaper than many, plus battery rental at circa £50 a month, probably what would be spent in petrol daily commuting and leisure mileage.

Alternatively with battery, this quote I've got currently £17,629. Then charge overnight at around £3 for a 150 mile average range, a tiny fraction of what petrol or diesel would cost.

Nissan Leafs are somewhat similar but a little dearer, new 2017s curently around at £17/18 thousand with battery.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

My very limited experience of trolley buses was in Newcastle-upon-Tyne (don't think they ever reached the Emlyn version ). There was a turnround loop just up from my grandparents' house and yes, I do remember a man with a very long pole. I also remember the phenomenally complicated catenaries.

Struck me that if a bus had the ability to store just a hundred metres of energy, you could have simply not had wires at crossroads. Fifty or sixty years ago you would have had the problem of re-connecting at the other side - but this would surely be eminently achievable in this digital age? The same approach would have allowed such buses to skirt round short roadworks or traffic accidents.

Absolutely !and home electronically on the next supply without human intervention.

 

[oldgroaner]

Simply not true.

The popular Renault Zoe electric, and ideal urban car, is around £12,000 new from dealers, no dearer than a similar i.c. hatchback, plus battery rental at circa £50 a month, probably what would be spent in petrol daily commuting and leisure mileage.

Alternatively with battery, this quote I've got currently £17,629. Then charge overnight at around £3 for a 150 mile average range, a tiny fraction of what petrol or diesel would cost.

Nissan Leafs are somewhat similar but a little dearer, new 2017s curently around at £17/18 thousand with battery.
.

And how do you charge one if you live in a flat?

 

[flecc]

Except of Course you can't trial Trolley Buses without investing in the infrastructure can you?
And they are more capable in traffic than Trams ever were.

They aren't capable at all in many modern traffic situations, that's why they were universally scrapped. I know, I lived with them being Bournemouth's only buses for many years until they became impossible.
.