EV Acceleration + Idiot - Experience = Dangerous?

[markjay]

There's no doubt that the combination of measures such as ULEZ, congestion charging, closing residential neighbourhoods for through-traffic, closing roads next to schools during school hours, imposing 20mph speed limits, and incentivising EV ownership over ICE, will see in the long term far less people suffering from Asthma and other respiratory diseases, as well as cancers.

 

[Dippo]

There's no doubt that the combination of measures such as ULEZ, congestion charging, closing residential neighbourhoods for through-traffic, closing roads next to schools during school hours, imposing 20mph speed limits, and incentivising EV ownership over ICE, will see in the long term far less people suffering from Asthma and other respiratory diseases, as well as cancers.

You've lumped a variety of things together there and said they generate benefits which nobody would deny are desirable. Not all those things you list work to the stated ends. Closing residential neighbourhoods to through traffic has been found to generate a lot more congestion and pollution on the roads around the restricted areas (which tend to be where the poorer people live).The 20 mph speed limits seem to cause more congestion; people who used to drive recklessly in 30 mph areas still drive recklessly in 20 mph zones. Closing roads next to schools during school hours would be extremely difficult, as many schools are on quite major roads. Road pricing in the form of Congestion Charges and ULEZs simply mean that you are allowed to pollute if you can afford it.

 

[markjay]

You've lumped a variety of things together there and said they generate benefits which nobody would deny are desirable. Not all those things you list work to the stated ends. Closing residential neighbourhoods to through traffic has been found to generate a lot more congestion and pollution on the roads around the restricted areas (which tend to be where the poorer people live).The 20 mph speed limits seem to cause more congestion; people who used to drive recklessly in 30 mph areas still drive recklessly in 20 mph zones. Closing roads next to schools during school hours would be extremely difficult, as many schools are on quite major roads. Road pricing in the form of Congestion Charges and ULEZs simply mean that you are allowed to pollute if you can afford it.

In any event, the answer is: use public transport where possible, or cycle if practical. I seriously doubt that all 4m+ daily cars car journeys in Greater London are both necessary and could not be completed by public transport instead. If using the car in city centres becomes progressively more expensive and less convenient, then fewer people will use them. And we'll all benefit from cleaner air and less road accidents.

 

[markjay]

As for the 'rich'... they also have better dental care, nicer cars, they live in bigger houses and have more luxurious holidays. But this is because we're not living under a Communist regime... if you study hard and work hard and have natural abilities then you earn money, and you can use your hard-earned wealth to try and have a more comfortable life than others. It's been like that for ages (in the West, anyway).

 

[Dippo]

As for the 'rich'... they also have better dental care, nicer cars, they live in bigger houses and have more luxurious holidays. But this is because we're not living under a Communist regime... if you study hard and work hard and have natural abilities then you earn money, and you can use your hard-earned wealth to try and have a more comfortable life than others. It's been like that for ages (in the West, anyway).

I detect deliberate obfuscation. Yes, the rich can afford better things. Pollution is either good or bad; you shouldn't be able to pollute because you can afford it.

 

[ALFAitalia]

In any event, the answer is: use public transport where possible, or cycle if practical. I seriously doubt that all 4m+ daily cars car journeys in Greater London are both necessary and could not be completed by public transport instead. If using the car in city centres becomes progressively more expensive and less convenient, then fewer people will use them. And we'll all benefit from cleaner air and less road accidents.

But the problem with it is that its only any good if you live and work in the same town....and a town with good public transport links.....No use to me ...I only live about 12 miles from my work but they are no direct bus or train links so changing would be needed....Id have to drive four miles to the station anyway....might as well just drive the extra eight and go all the way. I used to live in a village with one bus into Chichester PER WEEK!! And, most importantly to me, no form of public transport (taxis aside....and that's just another car) can get me from door to door (there is always a journey to walk or taxi the other end), none of them can I have the temp as I want it, the music as bad and as loud as I want it......and I don't have to share my car with the great unwashed or raucous school kids....and of course I can pop out at lunch and pick stuff up in my car anytime I want.
I don't know if you use it.....but I'm convinced that those extolling the merits of public transport have not actually tried it too often. There might well be an answer to the traffic/pollution issues......but for the vast majority in the UK, public transport is not it.

 

[markjay]

I detect deliberate obfuscation. Yes, the rich can afford better things. Pollution is either good or bad; you shouldn't be able to pollute because you can afford it.

Fair enough, but this would be a novel idea, given that (for example) AMG cars have always been legal in the UK (and still are): i.e., if you can afford it, pollute away. Same applies to private jets, BTW, and many other things. Legislation that will make it illegal for anyone to create more than X amount of Carbon-fuel pollution - I.e. illegal and punishable by law, as opposed to just taxable - will indeed solve this problem. But, again, we don't have such a system yet. Historically, those with money could afford to pollute more, and they still can today. Not right? Possibly, but it's down to government and Parliament to change it. In any event, it's not an 'EV issue'.

 

[markjay]

But the problem with it is that its only any good if you live and work in the same town....and a town with good public transport links.....No use to me ...I only live about 12 miles from my work but they are no direct bus or train links so changing would be needed....Id have to drive four miles to the station anyway....might as well just drive the extra eight and go all the way. I used to live in a village with one bus into Chichester PER WEEK!! And, most importantly to me, no form of public transport (taxis aside....and that's just another car) can get me from door to door (there is always a journey to walk or taxi the other end), none of them can I have the temp as I want it, the music as bad and as loud as I want it......and I don't have to share my car with the great unwashed or raucous school kids....and of course I can pop out at lunch and pick stuff up in my car anytime I want.
I don't know if you use it.....but I'm convinced that those extolling the merits of public transport have not actually tried it too often. There might well be an answer to the traffic/pollution issues......but for the vast majority in the UK, public transport is not it.

Think of overcrowded A&E departments. Same principle applies: I am not advocating that people with urgent medical needs should not attend A&E. What I am saying is that the overcrowded A&E departments are the result of all those people who are there but shouldn't be there, and who we should encourage to seek alternative routes for obtaining the medical help they believe they need. Similarly, I have no doubt that some people have no viable alternative and do need to use their private cars in town - but many others don't....

And, in cities such as Oxford or Edinburgh where the city centre is closed to private cars, this seems to work well (I mention these two cities because two of our daughters went to uni there and lived there for a number of years).

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Unfortunately public transport is very expensive in relative terms and so it’s difficult for existing car owners/drivers to justify using public transport purely on cost grounds unless other things increase the cost of car use, or reduce the cost of public transport. Perhaps one exception being the cost of long stay parking for those working in (or regularly visiting) large cities.

My son has just changed schools and now catches the bus to school which is a couple of village away. By car it takes 10 minutes but by bus it takes 25 minutes as it stops often and takes a less direct route, ie it passes through two extra villages on the way and meanders through those villages.

Including the walk and wait it probably takes four times longer (80 minutes rather than 20 minutes per day) and costs at least four times more (£7.60 per day), and that’s for a child’s fare to go to school. We currently choose to pay more for him to use the bus than us take him by car because (a) it is possible and (b) we think it’s good for our son to have that independence. That is not an easy decision though, it’s expensive!

 

[BTB 500]

BTB Jnr's school is a 15 minute drive away (about 6 miles), but the council provides a free school bus service from the surrounding villages. There's no public transport at all in our area.

 

[markjay]

Unfortunately public transport is very expensive in relative terms and so it’s difficult for existing car owners/drivers to justify using public transport purely on cost grounds unless other things increase the cost of car use, or reduce the cost of public transport. Perhaps one exception being the cost of long stay parking for those working in (or regularly visiting) large cities..

In Central London, Congestion Charge is £15, and if you park it's around £20 for 4 hours in Pay and Display bays. Add to this the cost of petrol/Diesel.... and yet around 2m cars enter the Congestion Zone daily. A typical private car journey into Central London can easily cost around £40. In comparison, the Daily Cap for public transport use is around £9 for a 24h period. It's really difficult to tell how much more expensive does it need to get for drivers to ditch the convenient option of driving their cars in favour of public transport.

 

[Deleted member 126251]

I detect deliberate obfuscation. Yes, the rich can afford better things. Pollution is either good or bad; you shouldn't be able to pollute because you can afford it.

Rich people will generally have newer and better maintained cars.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the (%) ownership of EVs is greater amongst the rich.

 

[JHS]

Rich people will generally have newer and better maintained cars.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the (%) ownership of EVs is greater amongst the rich.

That's not me then!

 

[Deleted member 126251]

That's not me then!

Not rich, no EV or poor maintenance of your car ?

 

[JHS]

Not rich, no EV or poor maintenance of your car ?

2/3

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Today I have joined the electric revolution. I’m rocking and rolling in a brand new Mercedes-Benz EQA. Loving it so far, very impressive.

 

[SmartAmg]

Today I have joined the electric revolution. I’m rocking and rolling in a brand new Mercedes-Benz EQA. Loving it so far, very impressive.

Nice one! Bet your Buzzing.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I’m sat in the car as I type and a Kia EV just did a three point turn in front of me. She used the accelerator pedal like an on/off switch. Bum twitching as she accelerated towards me.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Nice one! Bet you’re Buzzing.

Sadly not to keep, just a courtesy car. Enjoying every moment though

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Interesting to note that the car knows when to “coast” and when to regen when I remove my foot from the accelerator. I haven’t yet worked out whether it’s using location, reading road signs, observing other traffic or a combination of them all, but it works very well. Does anyone know?