Ones own space is worth paying through the nose for, cash wise and environment wise.
You share pavements, trains, buses. So why not a smaller vehicle? You don’t have to speak to your fellow travellers.
That’s the problem, fellow travellers have no inclination to speak to me 
1 Like
That’s a good thing, surely?
There’s a lot to be said for personal space. Trams are a good environmentally friendly alternative but our cramped cities aren’t always able to accommodate them.
1 Like
Thanks for waiting so long to consider your reply.
I’d note that its a fraction on top of existing / natural CO2 output. The “on top” of is important. It is not a fraction of. It is a bit more, at time when we need to be producing a bit less.
No-one is arguing with that goal. However those actions are surely a bit of wasted effort if in the meantime we are also producing more and more CO2.
Again, few would disagree. However, that only creates a benefit if it obliges people to shift from private vehicles to shared public transport. Improving public transport, connections and reach will enable some of that shift. But I suspect there will always be many who would never get on a bus and prefer their car. If the shift from private to public does not happen on scale then the production of such public transport vehicles risks being more like the polluting you highlight from shifting from petrol to EV - that is, it is simply making more vehicles.
I didn’t see the notification until last night. The on top of is a marginal amount vs the natural CO2. IMO CO2 isn’t the issue, every action humans engage in to be “civilised” has an impact on our environment. Plastics entering the ecology of the planet, mining, landfill, pesticides etc. These have a far more serious impact than burning fossil fuels. As for the latter it’s a cumulative effect that has taken centuries to reach the current state and deforestation is a major part of that problem. 10 years of driving our cars in the UK isn’t going to impact on the bigger picture, particularly when polluting manufacturing in other parts of the world is through the roof because of demand in other parts of the world. The effect of mining for lithium isn’t being addressed
it’s never a wasted effort to re-green, plant and encourage people to focus on the small steps they can make to create a more favourable environment for plant and animal life.
my feeling is that you are fishing for reasons to disagree with my points because you don’t feel comfortable agreeing with anything I say. A poorly calculated public transport project such as HS2 is indeed a waste but that’s down to direction stupid again. More well thought through and well consulted schemes, particularly in rural areas are needed. There will always be the need for motor transport for some, particularly older or disabled drivers. The aim and challenge is to reduce dependence on cars and make public transport more accessible and joined-up.
3 Likes
Two excellent posts Annie, and agree on all counts. Especially the point of completely changing the motor vehicle industry to electric in such a small space of time. The waste and the extra use of resources has saved nothing. In fact if anything it has boosted the emission of man made CO2 off the scale. All we have done is to move the problems of pollution to other places.
The same thing with the energy industry. It was stated on TV last night (Martin Lewis) that the cost to connect all of the offshore wind turbines to the grid will be astronomical, and at present we are paying for energy we haven’t got access to yet. It was suggested by the CEO of Octopus energy that the price of energy will keep on rising and we won’t start benefiting from the ‘free’ energy of wind and solar until 2035, when most of the turbines and panels will need replacing…
The power generation industry and the transmission of said energy is far too complex for an incapable government to administer, and should be in the hands of a special national team of experts who actually know what they are doing. And not receiving backhanders from any hair brain so called experts who are only init for the money. They don’t care about you or the environment, we are being taken for fools.
1 Like
OGF all options are at risk of corruption, be it panels of independent experts or politicians. The select committees are a good watch as it is up to the government to challenge direction stupid. Which they frequently do for many other matters of public concern via this route.
Not if one want’s to be in control of the vocalization activity 
1 Like
Perhaps you need to re-read my post - it contains the exact words “few would disagree” and “no-one is arguing”. I’m sorry if these phrases are not my clear endorsement of what you had written … but they are a clear endorsement of what you had written.
The “but” that follows is meant simply as a build. Yes we need to re-green but it would be better to re-green whilst reducing greenhouse gas production rather than only using re-greening as tool against increasing greenhouse gas production. Yes improved public transport would reduce reliance on & use of individual petrol vehicles but real life tells us such improvements would not be enough for many to make them change. I’m not looking to disagree but I am looking to get responses to the weaknesses in the solutions put forward.
Here are my solutions. While re-greening reduce petrol car usage to reduce pollution emitted (see your very valid public transport argument) thus achieve a greater benefit more quickly. While improving public transport usage switch those determined to use their own car from a polluting one to a non-polluting one.
Third solution - bicycles. (Oh oh, here comes the anti-cyclist brigade.)
It’d be lovely to see the cycle tracks/lanes that have been built (at great cost to road widths and parking spots) actually being used to full capacity. It’d be lovely too if, perhaps, some enterprising folk could use some of the shopping units we have to create safe (perhaps “manned” or whatever the non-gender term is nowadays) places for cyclists to store their bikes while they went to the local shops and cafe’s.
It’d also be a good way to expand the number of e-bikes.
Having said that, it would also be a potential way of generating substantial income for the far too many people who do cycle, who pay scant attention to the Highway Code and who should be identified, fined, and educated about the need to stop behaving in such an entitled manner.
2 Likes
I like your post Dex!
In the first instance we need a crackdown on cyclists and e-bikers who whizz around on the pavement, seemingly with impunity. I very much doubt it’s going to happen alas!
1 Like
Why are you so obsessed with something that we cannot alter…?
For the UK to reach the net zero targets will only create poverty and damage our industries and communities, which it has probably done already, and produce no benefit to the environment whatsoever other than cutting localised pollution.
So what are we talking about with the CO2 situation…
The Earths atmosphere comprise of 0.038% of CO2…
According to AI In 1950 the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was 0.03%…
So in 75 years it has increased by just 0.008% and that’s if it was even possible to measure to thousandths of a percent then…In all probability it hasn’t altered at all…
I agree that enforcement is very weak - but in principle it should be applied in the same way that bad driving is prosecuted. You do wrong, you get a punishment.
It must be so very re-assuring not to be worried by climate change. I imagine that you are rarely impacted by climate change. I strongly suggest that you do not speak to anyone living in a place vulnerable to the impact of climate change. You might get to know them and worry about them. Much easier to not give a sh**.
Saw an overtaking maneuver (by a car) tonight that, if it had gone wrong, it would have caused carnage, such carnage could not be caused by any sort of powered bicycle.
The cycle lanes built around Doncaster are totally impractical. Because they are built at the edge of the footpath, people waiting for busses have to cross the cycle lane to enter the bus, and passengers alighting the bus step onto the cycle lane. Furthermore, vehicles reversing out from properties also have to obstruct the cycle lane (I know that people should not reverse onto a main road, but it doesn’t stop the majority from doing it) A cyclist could be travelling at at anything from 10 mph to 20 mph and these obstructed cycle lanes are as much a hazard to the cyclist as they are to pedestrians.
If I rode into the town centre on my bike, I would use the road and not the death trap cycle lane.
1 Like
You mean inclement weather, why do you insist on calling it ‘Climate Change’ The climate is derived from an average taken over many years not just a month of rain or snow, or even one hot summer.
It’s sad that people have to endure hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, drought, and wild fires, but can you honestly say that if humans didn’t exist none of this would happen?
And don’t give me that old chestnut about them being worse because of a 0.008% change in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Ain’t got a Scooby Doo what’s goin on, but, summat is