The dangers of London's streets...

[two sheds]

No, no, no, no, NO! How many times do I need to tell you people!!! Cyclists (because they are much smaller / lighter / slower) than a motorbike or car are physically incapable of causing anyone any damage or injury. There are literally dozens of threads proving this to be true. Please try and keep up ...

(And it won't appear in the stats anywhere ... and even if the police know who the cyclist is, they have not committed an offence by not stopping ... and they probably haven't got any insurance ...)

Is true, is true - you just have to look at the statistics to know bikes cause just as many deaths and injuries as cars.

And the contribution to global warming from cyclist sweat and carbon-dioxide laden breath emissions has been greatly underestimated by our cyclist-mad media. I think there's a conspiracy - how often have you seen lizards on bicycles? Once - that's all. Case proven, m'lud.

 

[detective-boy]

Is true, is true - you just have to look at the statistics to know bikes cause just as many deaths and injuries as cars.

As usual - misquotation.

I did not say - and am not saying - that cyclists cause just as many deaths and injuries. My only point is that they can / do cause some which is repeatedly denied on these boards. And it is pointless looking for statistics about this because they are not kept.

 

[tommers]

As usual - misquotation.

I did not say - and am not saying - that cyclists cause just as many deaths and injuries. My only point is that they can / do cause some which is repeatedly denied on these boards. And it is pointless looking for statistics about this because they are not kept.

what's that stat about more people being killed by donkeys than by air crashes or something?

if I could remember it it would be a good time to bring it up.

ban donkeys!

there must surely be statistics kept of deaths caused by cyclists?

 

[two sheds]

As usual - misquotation.

I did not say - and am not saying - that cyclists cause just as many deaths and injuries. My only point is that they can / do cause some which is repeatedly denied on these boards. And it is pointless looking for statistics about this because they are not kept.

Well, i didn't actually quote you but point taken - I thought after I posted that it was a bit unfair attaching my reply to your post.

I've not actually seen anyone on the boards claiming bikes never cause deaths or injuries, though. More likely that they've implied that - compared with cars, to within an order of magnitude or two i'd have thought - you can ignore the contribution of cyclists to deaths/injuries. I'm sorry, I'm with the cyclists on this one. As - now mainly - a pedestrian I've occasionally been buzzed by cyclists but they've mainly been young laddies (i blame the parents).

Motorists do tend to get very peeved about their rights on the road being challenged, but there is a question as to whether people do really have a right to pump out carbon monoxide and other stuff as they drive through city streets crowded with children, women and men. It's only because 'everybody does it' that it's allowed. I'd have thought that was just as important an issue as passive smoking, for example. I once read that living in London is the equivalent of smoking 10 cigarettes a day, so i live in the country and smoke 10 cigarettes a day instead.

I'm however saying this more strongly than i feel it, if you see what i mean. One of the things i don't like today is the fragmentation of society that the media promotes so much because it sells papers. The confrontational approach means we're all being set against each other, which makes us very defensive and so we don't look for a middle ground.

People need cars to get to work. The reason we've got dangerous, polluting cars is not the fault of the car drivers, it's the fault of the governments that have allowed car manufacturers to produce dangerous, polluting cars.

 

[tommers]

Motorists do tend to get very peeved about their rights on the road being challenged, but there is a question as to whether people do really have a right to pump out carbon monoxide and other stuff as they drive through city streets crowded with children, women and men. It's only because 'everybody does it' that it's allowed. I'd have thought that was just as important an issue as passive smoking, for example. I once read that living in London is the equivalent of smoking 10 cigarettes a day, so i live in the country and smoke 10 cigarettes a day instead.

you don't want to get me started on this one.

People need cars to get to work. The reason we've got dangerous, polluting cars is not the fault of the car drivers, it's the fault of the governments that have allowed car manufacturers to produce dangerous, polluting cars.

true, to a point. however, there are a lot of unnecessary journeys that are made. I do it as much as the next man. And that is the fault of "us".

 

[two sheds]

you don't want to get me started on this one.



true, to a point. however, there are a lot of unnecessary journeys that are made. I do it as much as the next man. And that is the fault of "us".

Yep is true. I did too when i had a car.

Most people are just trying to get through and just survive day to day though. I subscribe to modern quality improvement thought that 99% of problems come from management (in this case the government) rather than the workers. It's down to the government to set up the 'system'. In this case, to provide public transport that's good enough so that people get the habit of using it. Instead, we get governments that put crap systems in place and then blame everyone else for using them.

Like the present guilt-trip they're trying to put on people about leaving equipment on standby. It's the equipment manufacturers that have developed and designed the standby systems and promoted them as a real benefit to consumers, and the government were perfectly happy for them to do it. They knew exactly how much power it was going to drain, so i find it a bit hypocritical that they're now saying that 'we' are the ones who don't care about the environment for leaving things on standby.

People should just accept that the hippies were right all along - 'it's just the system, man'.

 

[roryer]

It's down to the government to set up the 'system'. In this case, to provide public transport that's good enough so that people get the habit of using it. Instead, we get governments that put crap systems in place and then blame everyone else for using them.

People should just accept that the hippies were right all along - 'it's just the system, man'.

Yes and no..

Actually most car trips are under 2 miles and really unecessary, but people get into the habit of taking the car.

People tend to overestimate the time it would take to do a trip by public transport (PT) and underestimate the amount of time it takes by car. Most people when interviewed do not know about the PT services which are actually already there.

Also London's PT is better than any other UK city, and improving with TfL subsidising the buses by £1b pa.

It is up to each one of us to make the effort to make as many trips as possible by alternative methods to the car.

It is also up to government to put in place policies that increase the attractiveness of the alternatives. Both sticks and carrots are needed. Reduce parking spaces and increase road user charges, use extra space for public living space, or cycle paths.

Also the government must not allow new development in the city that encourages car culture like low density housing or more superstores or retail parks with large parking lots.

Copenhagen and Amsterdamn had a similar car use to London in the 1960's. Through the government having a vision of what they wanted from their city environment they have protected a bicycle culture and very low KSI rates.

London can be the same.

 

[Roadkill]

You think that's heavy? Routemasters are light for a double decker, especially by modern standards.

Have you seen how much the buses that replace them weigh?

The Hydrogen fuel cell single deckers are 14.2 metric tonnes. Bendy buses weigh 16 tonnes.

Don't pander to Cobbles. He's the Jeremy Clarkson of u75: hates public transport, hates cyclists, thinks car drivers should have the God-given right to drive anywhere and everywhere without restriction and that they're hard done by if they can't etc etc.

 

[cybertect]

I guess he wouldn't have enjoyed himself in this crowd then



(although a raging tooth ache on the day didn't help my mood )

 

[Roadkill]

I suspect not.

I'd have gone along to say goodbye, had I been in London then.

 

[two sheds]

Yes and no..

Actually most car trips are under 2 miles and really unecessary, but people get into the habit of taking the car.

People tend to overestimate the time it would take to do a trip by public transport (PT) and underestimate the amount of time it takes by car. Most people when interviewed do not know about the PT services which are actually already there.

Also London's PT is better than any other UK city, and improving with TfL subsidising the buses by £1b pa.

It is up to each one of us to make the effort to make as many trips as possible by alternative methods to the car.

It is also up to government to put in place policies that increase the attractiveness of the alternatives. Both sticks and carrots are needed. Reduce parking spaces and increase road user charges, use extra space for public living space, or cycle paths.

Also the government must not allow new development in the city that encourages car culture like low density housing or more superstores or retail parks with large parking lots.

Copenhagen and Amsterdamn had a similar car use to London in the 1960's. Through the government having a vision of what they wanted from their city environment they have protected a bicycle culture and very low KSI rates.

London can be the same.

Can't argue with that.

 

[two sheds]

Yes and no..

Actually most car trips are under 2 miles and really unecessary, but people get into the habit of taking the car.

Although this is the only point that is really down to us as individuals.

People themselves can't really be held responsible for overestimating the time it would take to do a trip by public transport and underestimating the amount of time it takes by car. Estimating these times needs a phenomenal amount of information - average bus times, average car times - which we just don't have as individuals. Those mis-estimates come presumably come in some measure from all the ads and tv programs saying how convenient cars are.

Peole don't know about public transport services because they're not promoted properly, not just the individual services but public transport as a whole. We don't have the billions going into advertisements that we have going into new car ads, or articles in all the national and local newspapers going into how good the ride is in a particular new train that has been introduced All the advertising is where people get their information from - they can hardly be blamed for car companies lying and distorting facts in their advertisements.

Even taking those unnecessary trips - again all the advertisements saying how convenient cars are have to be largely responsible for that. If we had an equal playing field - more ads for public transport than we had for cars for example - then I think the number of unnecessary journeys would fall.

It does depend how you look at things - but as I say, I'm starting out from business quality improvement ideas - 99% is down to management. Only the management (government in this case) has the resources and authority to make any real changes. Workers (the rest of us) work within the system they set up. When the system fails us, it's up to us as individuals to do what we can. We shouldn't fool ourselves that we as individuals can do much about it, though.

Shifting responsibility onto individuals takes it away from the people who are really responsible. Government, local authorities, car companies etc.

 

[cybertect]

You make a reasonable point about marketing budgets, however,

All the advertising is where people get their information from - they can hardly be blamed for car companies lying and distorting facts in their advertisements.

The car companies would be taken to task by the Advertising Standards Authority if it could be proven they were lying...

 

[Mrs Magpie]

if they're bad drivers, they are also fairly likely to be uninsured drivers

Yes, sadly, this is so...I quite favour the idea mooted recently that police should have the power to impound/immobilise suspect cars so they can't be driven away...I think the crushing option is a tad too far though, and likely to result in expensive mistakes.

 

[two sheds]

The car companies would be taken to task by the Advertising Standards Authority if it could be proven they were lying...

Yeh it is mainly distortion rather than downright lies. It's such thorough distortion, though, that it becomes hard to distinguish it from lies. All those pics of shiny cars driving across beaches and pristine mountain ranges with their lovely wives and kids looking adoringly at the proud breadwinner driving his new car - none of them mention the air pollution, destruction of the environment, deaths of kids on the road, etc. Such one-sided presentation can't be described as honest.

Every time they claim a car is 'safe', for example, I'd call a lie - safe for the babies it hits? Every time they make a statement that their 2 mph improvement in fuel consumption is 'good' for the environment i'd say is a lie. 'Good' for the environment means not buying their car and taking public transport instead. So, I'm sort of including all the car society propaganda that we get thrown at us from the car manufacturers and that is reported uncritically by the media.

 

[two sheds]

I'd also say that, every time a car manufacturer or oil company says something like 'We care for the environment', that's a lie that the advertising standards board wouldn't pick up. If they cared for the environment, they wouldn't be manufacturing cars .

The propaganda is so woven into the media that we just don't notice the lies any more.

 

[roryer]

There's no question that the auto-industry does propagate the myth of efficiency through effective advertising backed by effective lobbying which is almost impossible to counter.

Public transport suffers from a bad image which a proffessional marketing campaign is required but spending subsidies and public perception rarely allow.

Actually most people actually support policies that restrict car use in favour of sustainable modes.

We need to ask for government action to help engender real change, higher road tax, fewer parking spaces and more car free living spaces, bicycle lanes, and wider pavements...

We are up against the press, run mainly by high earning men with big cars and egos to match, who usually portray any change towards sustainble communities as being anti-car rather than pro-living space, pro-road saftey and pro-community.

The politicians and high powered civil servants (also usually men with big cars) are thus scared to do anything (except Ken) and the people get more car addicted as roads are widened, car parking lots increased, out of town shopping and miles of faceless suburban sprawl built. Our kids get fat, trapped in cars with parents instead of playing on community streets where pedestrians have priority over cars in urban villages.

The politicians, press and car manufacturers do tell us lies, like it is bad for the economy, when Switzerland, Holland, Germany, Denmark all have lower car use but higher per capita earnings than us.

What ever happened to Reclaim The Streets? We still need it!

We need to continue to protest at the lies and missimformation we are fed and celebrate urban communities through days like the carfree day on 22nd Sept.

 

[nino_savatte]

We need to ask for government action to help engender real change, higher road tax, fewer parking spaces and more car free living spaces, bicycle lanes, and wider pavements...

The government pay lip service to the idea of sustainable transport. Cycle lanes are used as parking spaces by motorists...not advisory cycle lanes (though these are a waste of time) but proper cycle lanes. To give an expample: I was cycling down Kew Road and along the righthand side of the road, cars were parked in cycle lane. There was even a sign which read "8am to 6.30pm, Mon - Sun)" and had a pictogram of a bus and a cycle. It was 1.30pm when I was cycling down that road.

 

[geminisnake]

We need to ask for government action to help engender real change, higher road tax, fewer parking spaces and more car free living spaces, bicycle lanes, and wider pavements...

And what, at present, are people meant to do instead of driving? Some public transport is great in some cities, but there is a lot of the country that has shite or no public transport.

When I'm in London it costs me more for 4 days travel than it does to put petrol in my car for up to a fortnight(I don't go out much) and it takes me longer. In the time it takes to get across London I could(from here) drive 50+ miles to Aberdeen.
I have no idea how long it takes to drive places in London coz everyone I know uses PT but the entire country does not live in London and I know in most cities in Scotland gettting from one area to another means bussing into town to bus back out again, both expensive and time consuming.

 

[cybertect]

I have no idea how long it takes to drive places in London coz everyone I know uses PT

Bloody ages

which is one of the reasons I don't use my car in London unless I have no practical alternative.

 

[two sheds]

And what, at present, are people meant to do instead of driving? Some public transport is great in some cities, but there is a lot of the country that has shite or no public transport.

When I'm in London it costs me more for 4 days travel than it does to put petrol in my car for up to a fortnight(I don't go out much) and it takes me longer. In the time it takes to get across London I could(from here) drive 50+ miles to Aberdeen.
I have no idea how long it takes to drive places in London coz everyone I know uses PT but the entire country does not live in London and I know in most cities in Scotland gettting from one area to another means bussing into town to bus back out again, both expensive and time consuming.

Yep - this is the exact point. We shouldn't be making individuals feel guilty about driving a car because there is bugger all alternative unless you pretty well want to devote your life to it (and then there's all the other things we should devote our lives to).

I haven't got a car but I'm not conning myself that i'm making any particular difference. Any savings i make in a year from not pootling round Cornwall is drowned out by a single ticket on a transatlantic flight.

 

[two sheds]

There's no question that the auto-industry does propagate the myth of efficiency through effective advertising backed by effective lobbying which is almost impossible to counter.

Public transport suffers from a bad image which a proffessional marketing campaign is required but spending subsidies and public perception rarely allow.

Actually most people actually support policies that restrict car use in favour of sustainable modes.

We need to ask for government action to help engender real change, higher road tax, fewer parking spaces and more car free living spaces, bicycle lanes, and wider pavements...

We are up against the press, run mainly by high earning men with big cars and egos to match, who usually portray any change towards sustainble communities as being anti-car rather than pro-living space, pro-road saftey and pro-community.

The politicians and high powered civil servants (also usually men with big cars) are thus scared to do anything (except Ken) and the people get more car addicted as roads are widened, car parking lots increased, out of town shopping and miles of faceless suburban sprawl built. Our kids get fat, trapped in cars with parents instead of playing on community streets where pedestrians have priority over cars in urban villages.

The politicians, press and car manufacturers do tell us lies, like it is bad for the economy, when Switzerland, Holland, Germany, Denmark all have lower car use but higher per capita earnings than us.

What ever happened to Reclaim The Streets? We still need it!

We need to continue to protest at the lies and missimformation we are fed and celebrate urban communities through days like the carfree day on 22nd Sept.

Yep we need things like Reclaim the Streets, but mainly because it is so much fun. It's Blair that makes the decisions, and he wont' see Reclaim the Streets as the desire expressed by thousands people to live in a car-free society, he'll see it as anarchist-provoked illegal rave action that is very close to terrorism.

 

[roryer]

And what, at present, are people meant to do instead of driving? Some public transport is great in some cities, but there is a lot of the country that has shite or no public transport.

...the entire country does not live in London and I know in most cities in Scotland gettting from one area to another means bussing into town to bus back out again, both expensive and time consuming.

If you must drive and there is no alternative then drive. Just try not to drive when you don't need to, wheen yourself off the car addiction slowly, you will probably find your lifestyle improves when you reduce your hyper-mobililty.

If you are hyper mobile you probably don't have the time to meet or get to know your neighbours very well.

So try out a few local shops within cycling distance (under 6km) in your area that might need the trade more than the superstore with huge car park on a major junction. Change from one big weekly shop, to shopping at the local greengrocers every day for fresh food. Of course most community shops are closing now, because people prefer facless shopping with no interaction with other people, and seeing their money going out of the community to feed rich cats living in Jersey or Monaco.

As for costs, giving up your car will save you money! Actually a car costs you much more than public transport and your perceptions of the PT service are probably much worse than the reality.

The problem of course are the fixed costs of running a car, the AA estimates the average cost of running a medium sized car are 55p per mile when fixed costs of depreciation, insurance etc and parking, repairs and petrol are all taken into account.

You'd find that the buses are probably quite competitive when compared to the full costs of running a car, and as you get used to a car free lifestyle you will get to know the timetables and plan your trips to multi-task, the extra hour waiting for a return bus after a shopping trip you spend at a library, or having a coffee, art gallery or whatever your interest lies.

If you want to go carfree but still have access to a car for regular trips that you can't do any other way you can join a car club. These operate in most major cities but if there is not one operating close to you, you can get one going, get a group of 5 - 12 neighbours and buy a car which you share, each user logs how much they use it and you split all costs according to the amount you drive. (Ask your local council to find out details of car clubs in your area)

We are addicted to cars and as local community shops and services, post offices libraries close down replaced by one regional centre which is accessible only by car our car culture grows.

Pollution, road saftey, accessiblity for all, are all disreagarded in this march of madness. How is it better to lose community shops? How is it ok for kids, the poor, and the old to be almost unable to access essential services?

It is possible to reverse this trend and just swapping a few trips a week to sustainable modes helps.

Many people are living a car free life all over the country, including very rural areas. Try to get hold of the book Cutting your Car Use to learn how you can do it: if you live in Scotland you can get a free copy from: www.fifedirect.org.uk/travelandtransport

 

[roryer]

Yep we need things like Reclaim the Streets, but mainly because it is so much fun. It's Blair that makes the decisions, and he wont' see Reclaim the Streets as the desire expressed by thousands people to live in a car-free society, he'll see it as anarchist-provoked illegal rave action that is very close to terrorism.

Blair will die an unhappy man, the blood on his hands will never wash away. He is already on his way out and good riddance.

However you are right about RtS, its work is done, now we can work with our local authoities to organise car free community festivals.

I meant to get round to doing something about this for 22nd Spet., but I am too busy with my hyper mobile lifestyle to find the time.

 

[two sheds]

Impressive posts rory - I'd still vote for Reclaim the Streets parties, myself.

Just in case i'm giving off mixed messages, i don't mean anything i say to suggest people shouldn't reduce car use when they can. I love not having a car, and I've saved shitloads - not having the extra expense was the difference between staying afloat and going under for me financially a few years ago.

 

[geminisnake]

If you must drive and there is no alternative then drive. Just try not to drive when you don't need to, wheen yourself off the car addiction slowly, you will probably find your lifestyle improves when you reduce your hyper-mobililty.

If you are hyper mobile you probably don't have the time to meet or get to know your neighbours very well.

Aw bless You really don't seem to have a clue about life in the sticks.

I am not addicted to car driving, tbh I positively detest the number of twats on the road today and the way people seem to think it is their RIGHT to drive.

I don't WANT to know my neighbours thank you. I would cheerfully build a 6ft wall or move to a remote cottage if I didn't love my house/garden/view.

I don't work in km but my nearest shop is approx 2 miles away. I don't do a weekly shop I do a monthly one coz I hate shopping so much.
I could quite happily become a hermit/agrophopbic at the moment.

Giving up my car would not save me money, I did the maths on that one a while ago. My car insurance is less than £200 a yr, fully comp, because a) I am 41, b) I have full no claims c) I live rurally and probably in one of the lowest claim areas of the country.

Not having a go but please remember we don't all live where PT is available.

Afaik a return bus journey into town would cost £2.20 and I would be stuck in the town for hrs(there are only 2 buses in the afternoon). I would rather do any number of horrible things than that, it generally ends up costing me money to be stuck in town coz I wander aimlessly round shops and buy tat

I do agree with you that there are loads of folk out there who really could benefit from what you've written though

 

[snoogles]

r.e. the original post, surely most of the problems are caused by both drivers and cyclists who don't follow the rules? London cyclists in particular wouldn't have such a hard time of it if drivers (a) insured their cars (b) drove on the left (c) drove at a speed below 60 mph (d) actually bothered to stop at traffic lights. Pedestrians' lives would be much easier if cyclists cycled on the roads not the ruddy pavement. I've been run over twice by nutter hit and run cyclists doing 25 mph on the pavement (one of which landed me in hospital for a fractured rib) and live across the road from a busy junction where there has been at least one crash per week recently thanks to people driving too fast straight through red lights and not bothering to check if anyone else is approaching the junction. If everyone actually read the highway code things might be less dangerous London seems to be exceptionally bad in terms of ignorant drivers.

 

[Cobbles]

Yep we need things like Reclaim the Streets, but mainly because it is so much fun. It's Blair that makes the decisions, and he wont' see Reclaim the Streets as the desire expressed by thousands people to live in a car-free society, he'll see it as anarchist-provoked illegal rave action that is very close to terrorism.

Possibly because millions of people clearly don't want to live in a car-free society as ............they have a car.

 

[pogofish]

If you must drive and there is no alternative then drive. Just try not to drive when you don't need to, wheen yourself off the car addiction slowly, you will probably find your lifestyle improves when you reduce your hyper-mobililty.

If you are hyper mobile you probably don't have the time to meet or get to know your neighbours very well.

So try out a few local shops within cycling distance (under 6km) in your area that might need the trade more than the superstore with huge car park on a major junction. Change from one big weekly shop, to shopping at the local greengrocers every day for fresh food. Of course most community shops are closing now, because people prefer facless shopping with no interaction with other people, and seeing their money going out of the community to feed rich cats living in Jersey or Monaco.

As for costs, giving up your car will save you money! Actually a car costs you much more than public transport and your perceptions of the PT service are probably much worse than the reality.

The problem of course are the fixed costs of running a car, the AA estimates the average cost of running a medium sized car are 55p per mile when fixed costs of depreciation, insurance etc and parking, repairs and petrol are all taken into account.

You'd find that the buses are probably quite competitive when compared to the full costs of running a car, and as you get used to a car free lifestyle you will get to know the timetables and plan your trips to multi-task, the extra hour waiting for a return bus after a shopping trip you spend at a library, or having a coffee, art gallery or whatever your interest lies.

If you want to go carfree but still have access to a car for regular trips that you can't do any other way you can join a car club. These operate in most major cities but if there is not one operating close to you, you can get one going, get a group of 5 - 12 neighbours and buy a car which you share, each user logs how much they use it and you split all costs according to the amount you drive. (Ask your local council to find out details of car clubs in your area)

We are addicted to cars and as local community shops and services, post offices libraries close down replaced by one regional centre which is accessible only by car our car culture grows.

Pollution, road saftey, accessiblity for all, are all disreagarded in this march of madness. How is it better to lose community shops? How is it ok for kids, the poor, and the old to be almost unable to access essential services?

It is possible to reverse this trend and just swapping a few trips a week to sustainable modes helps.

Many people are living a car free life all over the country, including very rural areas. Try to get hold of the book Cutting your Car Use to learn how you can do it: if you live in Scotland you can get a free copy from: www.fifedirect.org.uk/travelandtransport

Dear god!

You clearly have never lived in the East of Scotland then.

Sorry, but you might as well be talking about another planet.

 

[pogofish]

how does that work? how come my 206 weighs 1.46 tons? Or are tonnes and tons different?

Yes, there are Metric Tonnes & Imperial Tons. Metric are lighter IIRC.