• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

Whats your strategy for year 2030 / ban of ICE vehicles?

Dickster said:
My point is, nothing against cyclists), if they have been breaking the law for years, what’s the issue with scooters?
Click to expand...

I think the issue is with anything that is motorised and can be driven on public roads (and pavements) without insurance or driver licence.

These things move quite fast and can catch-out pedestrians and motorists.
 
markjay said:
These things move quite fast and can catch-out pedestrians and motorists.
Click to expand...
This ^^

And the riders hardly ever seem to be wearing safety gear or using lights. They creep up on you unseen.

When I’m cycling in the winter I’ve got 2 lights on the back, 2 on the front, my jersey has luminous bits on it along with my backpack.
 
Incidentally, over the years there have been suggestions to license cyclists. This is unlikely to happen though in the current political climate (pun intended) due to the green credentials that bicycles have. That, and the practical difficulty in enforcing it, given that police can't really chase offending cyclists.
 
Darrell said:
This ^^

And the riders hardly ever seem to be wearing safety gear or using lights. They creep up on you unseen.

When I’m cycling in the winter I’ve got 2 lights on the back, 2 on the front, my jersey has luminous bits on it along with my backpack.
Click to expand...
I’ve been motorcycling to work in London for over 30 years, and you I’m afraid are in the minority. And the situation is worse now that more people are cycling during Covid. In the winter it’s dark on my commute and I see a lot of cyclists in London with no lights whatsoever and dark clothing - are they not a danger to themselves and others?

I see the problems with scooters but think we should embrace their use in cities. I’ve seen many commuter skateboarders too over the years. Always brings a smile to my face.

There was also a campaign against motorcycles using bus lanes, on safety grounds. I think it’s been a great success and don’t understand why we can’t use all bus lanes.
 
markjay said:
Incidentally, over the years there have been suggestions to license cyclists. This is unlikely to happen though in the current political climate (pun intended) due to the green credentials that bicycles have. That, and the practical difficulty in enforcing it, given that police can't really chase offending cyclists.
Click to expand...
And the fact that Mr Plod will never give chase to little Jimmy on his balance bike.

Imagine the scene. 🤣🤣FF45A2CA-19F9-48A1-8CFD-D0958031F533.jpg
 

Attachments

  • E3AF76C1-ECC0-4B4A-B3F7-4A80EC3D740D.png
    E3AF76C1-ECC0-4B4A-B3F7-4A80EC3D740D.png
    2 MB · Views: 5
Last edited:
markjay said:
I think the issue is with anything that is motorised and can be driven on public roads (and pavements) without insurance or driver licence.

These things move quite fast and can catch-out pedestrians and motorists.
Click to expand...
And so can ebikes and mobility scooters
 
Darrell said:
It was on my Christmas list for last year but it didn’t happen but from Jan 4 I’m starting a new job which is central London based so…….
Click to expand...
The solar is def a lot better than the bogist, we initially both had bogist ones, but mine broke down and the company offered me a refund which i took and upgraded
 
DRF20000 said:
The buses that I see around here look awful, usually only occupied by one sad looking old lady and absolutely filthy.

I can't imagine a transport scenario I less want to put myself into.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right. Humans rarely wish to share close travelling. Those that do are in the main forced to by finances and circumstances.
 
With China’s relentless march towards global domination, do we really think that once theyve completed their take over of Africa they are not going to start building coal fired power ststions there? Until China, Russia and India change significantly the rest of us are quite simply pi55ing in the wind and being taxed and curbed heavily in the process.
 
My view is that what the environment and COVID have in common, is that the initial actions taken by our government in the early days were 90% based on the available science (which, admittedly, wasn't perfect) and 10% based on internal politics, and in both cases over time the balance has shifted and we ended-up with actions being taken 90% based on politics and 10% based on the science.
 
I am concerned that the argument in favour of eliminating polluting vehicles from densely populated urban areas could be lost here

There are many ways of achieving this: EVs or Hydrogen powered vehicles is one, better and cheapet subsidised (zero-exhaust-emissions) public transport, banning or partially-banning private vehicles from city centers, better design of new urban areas, etc etc. All of the above are achievable if we disentangle then from the planet and the environment.

The latter is a major battle, which as has rightly been pointed-out, we won't be able to win on our own or any time soon, but the former is doable in our lifetime if we don't condition it on fixing the planet first.

And I also think that bringing onboard rural communities and those living in villages and towns by giving them assurances that their needs will be address is paramount. Many rightly fear that they will become the first casualty of the war to save the planet, in spite of the fact that they cause the least damage.

As for farming communities... we need to remember that farmers only grow and raise as much food or livestock as there's demand for, and this demand naturally comes mainly from the population centres in urban areas. Additionally, farming is an important component of our nation's food security, and any attempt of a change there should be carefully considered.
 
markjay said:
I am concerned that the argument in favour of eliminating polluting vehicles from densely populated urban areas could be lost here

There are many ways of achieving this: EVs or Hydrogen powered vehicles is one, better and cheapet subsidised (zero-exhaust-emissions) public transport, banning or partially-banning private vehicles from city centers, better design of new urban areas, etc etc. All of the above are achievable if we disentangle then from the planet and the environment.

The latter is a major battle, which as has rightly been pointed-out, we won't be able to win on our own or any time soon, but the former is doable in our lifetime if we don't condition it on fixing the planet first.

And I also think that bringing onboard rural communities and those living in villages and towns by giving them assurances that their needs will be address is paramount. Many rightly fear that they will become the first casualty of the war to save the planet, in spite of the fact that they cause the least damage.

As for farming communities... we need to remember that farmers only grow and raise as much food or livestock as there's demand for, and this demand naturally comes mainly from the population centres in urban areas. Additionally, farming is an important component of our nation's food security, and any attempt of a change there should be carefully considered.
Click to expand...
This is a different argument to the ban of ICE vehicles. And I’m of the opinion that plenty had been done to reduce pollution in cities.

I also think that farming is skewed by the ridiculous subsidies. They’ve also needed protection from the supermarkets for years and never got any. Have farming friends (some well off and some struggling)
so I am on the side of farmers.
 
I live in a housing association flat, there are 30 flats on the development and 28 parking spaces none of which are allocated and the usual questionable parking happens at an alarming rate. I do not see the housing association landlord installing charging points for any of the parking spaces.

The housing association is a country wide body (from what I have seen from the blurb they send residents) and as such the cost of charging point installation for 1 point per property would be prohibitive without some kind of government grant to pay for it.
 
BMF said:
I live in a housing association flat, there are 30 flats on the development and 28 parking spaces none of which are allocated and the usual questionable parking happens at an alarming rate. I do not see the housing association landlord installing charging points for any of the parking spaces.

The housing association is a country wide body (from what I have seen from the blurb they send residents) and as such the cost of charging point installation for 1 point per property would be prohibitive without some kind of government grant to pay for it.
Click to expand...

You raise a valid point

How can Housing Associations be incentived to install charges?

If there are no allocated parking sports, the residents can't be expected to pay for their own charges, even if they wanted to. So it would seem that this has to come from the Housing Association.

EDIT: I guess that the solution is for the Housing Association to sign a contract with an energy provider where the provider installs the chargers FOC for (say) 2 of the parking spaces, and these spaces will be prioritised for EVs. But such a scheme can't be profitable for the energy provider until residents start buying EVs, and they won't buy EVs before there are chargers in place..........
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BMF
markjay said:
You raise a valid point

How can Housing Associations be incentived to install charges?

If there are no allocated parking sports, the residents can't be expected to pay for their own charges, even if they wanted to.
Click to expand...
If they were to install charge points it would probably only be 5 maybe 10 (but I doubt it), the chances of actually being able to use it would be a lottery what with the way some people park. I know I could buy a hybrid but the cost of an equivalent to the C220 Sport Premium Plus with the toys I have would be extortionate 😳
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom