London pollution & ULEZ

[jonneymendoza]

Data | Keep Islington Moving

Our aim here is provide the key statistical evidence to support the main arguments underlying our overall Anti-LTN position.

www.keepislingtonmoving.com

Apparently the Ltn around Islington barely made much of an improvement on the pollution levels

 

[Deleted User 298457]

Also, I'm not sure why you've chosen to compare residential 20/30 zones to abattoirs. Baffling.

Because you've misinterpreted the statistic. Of course more people are killed or injured when the speed limit is 30 or less. Know why? Because generally there are far fewer pedestrians or things to kill on roads that greater than 30mph.

 

[FoxEye]

Because you've misinterpreted the statistic. Of course more people are killed or injured when the speed limit is 30 or less. Know why? Because generally there are far fewer pedestrians or things to kill on roads that greater than 30mph.

Demonstrably rubbish.

And? Cyclists should obey the speed limit too. Many cyclists can do more than 30mph, too.

This whole discussion is about residential areas, where statistics show that most fatal and serious accidents are already occuring.

And people think that it's unfair to be made to drive slowly in residential areas.

The mind literally boggles.

You then asked for a source, which I gave you. Now you're saying that what I said above is a misinterpretation?! Let's examine that claim:

Me: "This whole discussion is about residential areas, where statistics show that most fatal and serious accidents are already occuring."
You: "Of course more people are killed or injured when the speed limit is 30 or less."

Where is the misinterpretation? You are agreeing with me, after telling me I got it all wrong? Bizarre.

 

[esmozz]

........... iirc fiat 500s seem to have that "cool" factor (I dont know why personally)....

Going off slightly at a tangent - I used to have to pick up a hire car every month for work, I generally got around the level of a Golf, Astra, Seat etc. One month I was given a Fiat 500 - I can catagorically say it was the worst car I have ever driven in my life.

 

[SPG]

It’s already happening.

All new TfL taxis are at least PHEVs and must meet euro 6. That goes well beyond ULEZ standards.

Uber will be fully electric by 2025.

P.S. there are not actually that many taxis on the roads and they are dwarfed by the numbers of private vehicles by several orders of magnitude.

Yes because London (TFL) is really like the rest of the UK.........

 

[Deleted User 298457]

Demonstrably rubbish.

You then asked for a source, which I gave you. Now you're saying that what I said above is a misinterpretation?! Let's examine that claim:

Me: "This whole discussion is about residential areas, where statistics show that most fatal and serious accidents are already occuring."
You: "Of course more people are killed or injured when the speed limit is 30 or less."

Where is the misinterpretation? You are agreeing with me, after telling me I got it all wrong? Bizarre.

You are using the stat as a stick when it is just obvious, re: my abbatoir comment. Itd be more surprising if you said more pedestrians died on the motorway, for obvious reasons.

You've then suggested it's because the speed limit is 30 that the deaths make up 2/3rds which is utter rubbish.

 

[bigmike20vt]

Going off slightly at a tangent - I used to have to pick up a hire car every month for work, I generally got around the level of a Golf, Astra, Seat etc. One month I was given a Fiat 500 - I can catagorically say it was the worst car I have ever driven in my life.

lol i have a similar story only it was a cinquecento (i may have butchered the spelling)..... awful car that was supplied as a courtesy car when my fiat coupe went in for some work.

(note i realise that IS a 500 in Italian but for a time it was its own model over here and not what most picture when you say fiat 500)

 

[Hades]

Of course more people are killed or injured when the speed limit is 30 or less. Know why? Because generally there are far fewer pedestrians or things to kill on roads that greater than 30mph.

For some reason this reminds me of the statistics for injuries in WW1. After the British introduced steel helmets the number of head injuries went up, not down. At one point there were even people considering withdrawing the helmet, until it was pointed out that injuries went up because before the helmet those people would have been counted among the dead instead.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

For some reason this reminds me of the statistics for injuries in WW1. After the British introduced steel helmets the number of head injuries went up, not down. At one point there were even people considering withdrawing the helmet, until it was pointed out that injuries went up because before the helmet those people would have been counted among the dead instead.

Yep...and the famous fighter plane pictures with the wing holes...

 

[jigger]

I’m

OTOH, slow moving traffic is less likely to prove fatal to the boy who stumbles off the pavement into the road.

We can't put all the onus on the pedestrian to ensure their own safety. The driver/rider/cyclist must take responsibility as well.

As someone who started their road-user "career" on a motorbike, the one thing that was hammered home to us was to "expect the unexpected". This is mostly true in residential areas. Expect a car door to open. Expect a cat to shoot out from under the van. Expect the boy to cross the road between two cars. Expect a pothole or oil slick. Expect other people to behave dangerously. Compensate.

Compensate, both to keep yourself and other people safe, to the greatest extent humanly possible.

Too often you encounter a very different attitude. "Why should I drive slowly?" "Why should I be responsible for their actions?" "I drive how I want, for my own personal enjoyment and benefit."

Obviously no safety measure can stop people being ducks if they're determined to be so. Enforcement only goes so far; people have to voluntarily embrace these safety measures, and if they don't, they will fail.

Good, you seem to have calmed down and given some thought to what I said. Your welcome BTW

IMO this is just another half baked scheme for people in office to look as though they are dealing with problems, when in reality it will achieve very little past issuing fines and prosecutions to motorists. That seems to have become the British way of dealing with public problems. We don’t attempt solve issues anymore, we do just enough to give ministers a response to opposition questions.

As for giving way, it’s sometimes impossible for everyone to have the distance needed to act safely. As in the scenario. Pedestrians to the right cyclists to left demanding 1.5 metres, driver in between. Cyclists don’t care about pedestrians standing between lanes. They don’t even notice. Same for the pedestrians.

The concept of ultra low emission zones is flawed unless the target is negative emissions in very select areas. Otherwise it’s going to hurt business and increase pollution in the surrounding area’s. Most people drive what they can afford (want - like) not what’s best for society.

On some roads I can think of excluding cyclists and/or pedestrians would be a great idea as the layout simply isn’t suitable and has been designed primarily for moving traffic at high speed but have since been down rated because of cyclists using what IMO is an unsafe route and getting hit. Some roads in mind, could safely carry a 50-60mph limit instead of 30-40mph.

 

[bigmike20vt]

For some reason this reminds me of the statistics for injuries in WW1. After the British introduced steel helmets the number of head injuries went up, not down. At one point there were even people considering withdrawing the helmet, until it was pointed out that injuries went up because before the helmet those people would have been counted among the dead instead.

funnily enough wasnt a similar argument made by people who didnt want to wear seat belts (number of belt related injuries going up) as well as FUD about airbags decapitating you or some such?

 

[jigger]

funnily enough wasnt a similar argument made by people who didnt want to wear seat belts (number of belt related injuries going up) as well as FUD about airbags decapitating you or some such?

I’m 100% sure some people will have made those claims.

 

[bigmike20vt]

On some roads I can think of excluding cyclists and/or pedestrians would be a great idea as the layout simply isn’t suitable and has been designed primarily for moving traffic at high speed but have since been down rated because of cyclists using what IMO is an unsafe route and getting hit. Some roads in mind, could safely carry a 50-60mph limit instead of 30-40mph.

personally i in principle am in favour of banning cyclists off roads which have a cycle lane servicing them. the problem with that is, for that to work the cycle lanes would have to be fit for purpose, and unfortunately at the moment many are not, which gives some cyclists a legitimate reason to not use them.

it cheeses me off in cambridge however as many of the lanes here are better than the roads (which admittedly at the moment is a pretty low bar but they still often go unused.)

I do know however if i am going into cambridge i will always use the park and ride.... its a great system, fairly inexpensive and dodges the huge parking fees in the centre. i get its not useful for residents, but if everyone who could use it DID use it, it would then make it better for everyone. my car will be compliant for what ever green air policy cambridge implement........ but i will still use the P&R its just better for me when getting about the city

 

[jigger]

personally i in principle am in favour of banning cyclists off roads which have a cycle lane servicing them. the problem with that is, for that to work the cycle lanes would have to be fit for purpose, and unfortunately at the moment many are not, which gives some cyclists a legitimate reason to not use them.

it cheeses me off in cambridge however as many of the lanes here are better than the roads (which admittedly at the moment is a pretty low bar but they still often go unused.)

Another great point. We have road surfaces that seem to be maintained to a level of below fit for purpose and getting worse.

 

[fez]

it cheeses me off in cambridge however as many of the lanes here are better than the roads (which admittedly at the moment is a pretty low bar but they still often go unused.)

Are they though? People always say this when they look at it from a very narrow perspective.

Are they properly separate from the main road?
Are they just painted lines?
Do they stop and start all the time?
Do you have to leave them constantly because people have parked in them?
Do they have lanes on roundabouts?
Can you easily access the road if/when the lane disappears or are you trying to join fast moving traffic?
Are the across drives so you are constantly worried about drivers just coming out and hitting you or they are so bumpy they are unusable?

Its genuinely funny how many drivers will whinge about cyclists slowing them down as they sit behind a cyclist for 30s and then sit behind another line of cars for 20 minutes on their commute. The number of drivers who pass me dangerously when you can see that there is traffic 200m down the road.

 

[jigger]

Demonstrably rubbish.

You then asked for a source, which I gave you. Now you're saying that what I said above is a misinterpretation?! Let's examine that claim:

Me: "This whole discussion is about residential areas, where statistics show that most fatal and serious accidents are already occuring."
You: "Of course more people are killed or injured when the speed limit is 30 or less."

Where is the misinterpretation? You are agreeing with me, after telling me I got it all wrong? Bizarre.

Standing next to a motorway and the sense of danger is increased. He has a point.

 

[jigger]

Are they though? People always say this when they look at it from a very narrow perspective.

Are they properly separate from the main road?
Are they just painted lines?
Do they stop and start all the time?
Do you have to leave them constantly because people have parked in them?
Do they have lanes on roundabouts?
Can you easily access the road if/when the lane disappears or are you trying to join fast moving traffic?
Are the across drives so you are constantly worried about drivers just coming out and hitting you or they are so bumpy they are unusable?

Its genuinely funny how many drivers will whinge about cyclists slowing them down as they sit behind a cyclist for 30s and then sit behind another line of cars for 20 minutes on their commute. The number of drivers who pass me dangerously when you can see that there is traffic 200m down the road.

So what is the solution? I’ve been hit in cars twice by cyclists and have to compensate for peoples lack of self awareness pretty much every journey, even with me affording them as much curtsey and room as possible.

It’s not an us vs them issue, although I’d say cyclists are generally of that mindset.

 

[SixTwoSix]

funnily enough wasnt a similar argument made by people who didnt want to wear seat belts (number of belt related injuries going up) as well as FUD about airbags decapitating you or some such?

I remember something in the 90's around the simple 'across the waist' seat belts in the back seats of cars causing some pretty bad abdominal injuries on severe breaking/impacts.

 

[fez]

So what is the solution? I’ve been hit in cars twice by cyclists and have to compensate for peoples lack of self awareness pretty much every journey, even with me affording them as much curtsey and room as possible.

It’s not an us vs them issue, although I’d say cyclists are generally of that mindset.

The solution is to make better infrastructure for cycling. Make changes to the driving test and increase punishments for dangerous driving. I have to compensate for drivers lack of self awareness constantly when I am driving or cycling. Drivers need to accept that cyclists have just as much right to be on the roads as they do and to drive safely around them. Cyclists are not even remotely the cause for slow journeys. They are just the subject of peoples ire because they are not a car and they are especially slow for those few seconds you are behind them. You feel like you can get past them. You don't feel like you could get past a 100m line of cars in traffic.

The reason cyclists feel like its "us vs them" is because the consequences are so much higher for people on bikes. Added to the fact that you might be a conscientious driver but far too many aren't and when you are passed too close by someone doing 60 or a tipper truck nearly sucks you under its wheels you might appreciate that its an emotive subject.

Also, go read any dailymail article with even a passing emphasis on cyclists and you will see the utter vitriol that cyclists deal with from drivers.

 

[jigger]

The solution is to make better infrastructure for cycling. Make changes to the driving test and increase punishments for dangerous driving. I have to compensate for drivers lack of self awareness constantly when I am driving or cycling. Drivers need to accept that cyclists have just as much right to be on the roads as they do and to drive safely around them. Cyclists are not even remotely the cause for slow journeys. They are just the subject of peoples ire because they are not a car and they are especially slow for those few seconds you are behind them. You feel like you can get past them. You don't feel like you could get past a 100m line of cars in traffic.

The reason cyclists feel like its "us vs them" is because the consequences are so much higher for people on bikes. Added to the fact that you might be a conscientious driver but far too many aren't and when you are passed too close by someone doing 60 or a tipper truck nearly sucks you under its wheels you might appreciate that its an emotive subject.

Also, go read any dailymail article with even a passing emphasis on cyclists and you will see the utter vitriol that cyclists deal with from drivers.

But don’t punish cyclists at all? build mini roads to them to fight over?

I agree the standard of driving is not great and seems to be getting worse. Some people simply shouldn’t be allowed behind the wheel of a car. Same goes for people on bikes.