Slow down, you're killing the planet

petrol costs me on average £0.12p a mile. say i wanted to go from my house to the middle of town, this would cost me £1.80 on the bus and its 3 miles away £0.36p

i know you have to add the cost of tax + the car and repairs to the bill but i find public transport to be an absolute joke. it can cost me £5 to get from my house to my girlfriends and back on public transport which is only 8miles round trip.

StevenG
 
Yeah, tax motorists even more :mad:, why can't they increase fines for all the offenses the green lobby always makes: trespassing ( resulting in loss of profit, stupid green hippies recently blocked coal ships from entering the port here in Rotterdam), pollution ( horse poo in JC's garden), sabotage, vandalism, etc...
 
Dogbreath said:
They parp methane, not CO2.
Click to expand...

Which is even worse as a greenhouse gas.

Maybe if public transport was as cheap as a car, as efficient as a car abd rekuavke as a (non-shed) car then people might stop using them.

I only ever use the train to go to London or work (at the Birmingham office) because the intercity services in thsi country are just too unreliable and too expensive (and the one to London isn't exactly not either of those two negatives, either).

Besides, I doubt road domestic road travel in this country is the biggest carbon dioxide generator in this country. I can't find any stats on it, however.
 
mrthingyx said:
Which is even worse as a greenhouse gas.

Maybe if public transport was as cheap as a car, as efficient as a car and reliable as a (non-shed) car then people might stop using them.

Besides, I doubt road domestic road travel in this country is the biggest carbon dioxide generator in this country. I can't find any stats on it, however.
Click to expand...

Typing fail :D

Last paragraph seconded.
 
Even if public transport was relatively cheaper, more efficient/reliable and more comfortable I would still drive a car everywhere.

Who the hell wants to share all of their journeys with the smelly public?
 
Yes, but if it were more comfortable than driving (as well as being cheaper etc), which was what [I think] you were saying, then why would you still choose to drive?
 
What if I don't want to 'save' the planet? What happened to freedom? I say anarchy!
 
Dup said:
What if I don't want to 'save' the planet? What happened to freedom? I say anarchy!
Click to expand...

I suggest buying a hummer:
1255354039431.png

:p
 
miniyazz said:
Yes, but if it were more comfortable than driving (as well as being cheaper etc), which was what [I think] you were saying, then why would you still choose to drive?
Click to expand...

That would not be possible, low price + same comfort as car...

For the same comfort, I'd need my own ''space'' with a comfy heated seat, private climate control, my own speakers blasting music at ridiculous volumes so I can feel the bass in my stomach, etcetc... If a bus had all this, it'd cost a hell of a lot more to use.

In the bus or subway, it's sometimes even impossible to sit, let alone sit in comfort...
 
snowdog said:
That would not be possible, low price + same comfort as car...

For the same comfort, I'd need my own ''space'' with a comfy heated seat, private climate control, my own speakers blasting music at ridiculous volumes so I can feel the bass in my stomach, etcetc... If a bus had all this, it'd cost a hell of a lot more to use.

In the bus or subway, it's sometimes even impossible to sit, let alone sit in comfort...
Click to expand...

I agree, but this was about if public transport was more comfortable than your own car, not about how to make it that comfortable ;)

Captain_Slick said:
Because I'd rather be slightly less comfortable on my own than comfortable and surrounded by morons/smelly fatties/dirty people/annoying people/etc. I'm sorry nature.
Click to expand...

Surely a more comfortable place is somewhere you'd rather be, and must therefore already have taken into account other factors like morons/smelly fatties etc? :p
 
the fact is if traveling to work on public transport between 8-9:30 youd be lucky to get a seat unless u board at the first stop, then you have other smelly, fat, annoying people sitting next to you so you need to buy an ipod if you dont already have one to drown the annoying ones out!

so thats if you get a seat. if you dont you pay say £5 a day to stand on a bus/train/metro for x amount of minutes/hours a day, id rather have the more expensive car and sit in comfort with my music blasting with the heating on.

screw the c02 of cars im sure there are bigger worries than cars for c02 pollution they're just attacking drivers as its the easiest option, what they dont realise is that we still dont want to use public transport even if it is cheaper.

StevenG
 
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/ssdataset.asp?vlnk=7280

There is a spreadsheet of where end user UK carbon emissions come from, the only ones rising are transport and "other" although I am sure a lot of the emissions are from commercial as well as domestic.

The scary part is that on current trends, transport could be the largest single contributor of UK CO2 in a few years time.

However, you cannot just Tax this without providing a more viable alternative, and if the Govt want people to use their cars less, they need to provide decent public transport links. If everyone who could use public transport all did so, on the same day, chaos would be the outcome.

I would like to see more rail freight terminals used, reduce commercial vehicle miles, 1 train from London to Scotland (or any other major route) is way better than 40 container lorries.

The roads would also become safer with less commercial vehicles (not due to the commercial vehicle drivers themselves, but due to the way many people drive when stuck behind a commercial vehicle for any distance).

I Don't agree with taxing a problem to make it go away, it doesnt work, it punishes those who have no alternative, what we need is investment in infrastructure to increase the viability of alternatives. Only with a viable comfortable alternative will people give up their cars for their daily commute.

Electric cars has been tried before, it was quite successful in California before Bush and his team (inc Arnie) destroyed them in favour of the mythical Hydrogen Fuel Cell, a technology that actually nets more CO2 emissions than fossil fuel.

I can recommend "Who Killed the Electric Car" as compulsive viewing, and battery technology has moved on a lot since then!
 
Did anyone read the report?

The report states that lowering the limits to 120km/h limit for cars and 100km/h limit for Vans and lorries on GERMAN autobahns reduces emissions.

120km/h is 74mph and 100km/h is 62mph - so they are both higher than the speed limits we have on UK motorways atm.
 
One of the largest (A proposed whopping 8,000,000 sq ft in total over 670 acres) rail freight terminals in Europe was being planned to be built not a few miles from me, but ProLogis have now put it on hold as they're not sure it's economically viable in the current climate. It would eventually remove between 100,000,000 and 2,000,000,000 HGV miles from the road network. That's gotta be a lot of CO2. All the NIMBYS have their signs up, but I'm all for it.
 
Last edited:
amigafan2003 said:
Did anyone read the report?
100km/h is 62mph - so they are both higher than the speed limits we have on UK motorways atm.
Click to expand...

62mph is higher than UK motorway speed limit?

I think you need to resit your theory test mate, last time I checked it was 70mph.

:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom