Jump to content
IGNORED

Diesel ban near AG (merged)


Red Army 75

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Nibor said:

Not sure about sales but I use a recruitment agency that works from home completely and the last time I dealt with a broker they worked from home.  It's very odd that large companies insist on incurring a huge cost and forcing everyone to come to an expensive central location to sit in a cubicle and work at a computer or over a telephone.

These are high street agencies, not sure these things so changeable in the short term.

Brokers...talking more B2B, B2C- sales, that kind of thing. There's a lot in Bristol and central areas especially.

Interesting article here in general.

https://thebristolcable.org/2019/04/seeing-through-the-fog-air-pollution-facts/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

These are high street agencies, not sure these things so changeable in the short term.

Brokers...talking more B2B, B2C- sales, that kind of thing. There's a lot in Bristol and central areas especially.

Interesting article here in general.

https://thebristolcable.org/2019/04/seeing-through-the-fog-air-pollution-facts/

That article just goes to prove how wrong the Council have got it.

The stats show that most emmisions come from people living within the City...sighting it's from people driving 2km only...not from people commuting into the City. 

School runs make a massive problem to our roads. It's so noticeable when their are school holidays. School buses are needed or get the little blighters to bloody walk or cycle.

Also those stats show how bad woodburners are. Ban those in the City. Makes more sense. 1 hour burning worse than 18 diesel cars. Common sense.

Funny how all the large car parks are in the city boundary too. Now that makes sense to encourage driving into the City.

As for the average of cyclists being injured being more than other Cities, is down to there being more cyclists in the City...many who don't abide by traffic laws.

And perhaps the planning department should reconsider how many pedestrian crossings their are. Way too many close to one another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

Park at the P&R in Brislington? Or buy a non diesel car? 

They are trying to avoid things like this? 

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/air-pollution-it-is-a-question-of-life-and-death-of-crores-of-people-in-delhi-ncr-region-says-sc/articleshow/71939053.cms

I do agree however that we need viable alternatives before we can make a difference. In the same way I appreciate what Extinction Rebellion and others are trying to do, we can't all go back to a pre - industrial state overnight. 

Sorry this may have been picked up on further in the thread (playing catch up), but why should owners of newer diesel cars (like me) have to trade their car in and change to petrol, just a few years after the government were advising people to trade in their petrol cars and buy a newer more "environmentally friendly" diesel car? They were even throwing money at it trying to encourage people to do so. 

Many people did, and now they've changed their minds completely and say go electric or get a newer petrol.

This ban will only work if public transport is improved significantly. We all know how inept BCC are, so this is never going to happen.

It will kill off the high street, because more people will either drive to out of town outlets with free parking, or do more online shopping.

I agree something needs to be done, but this is  not the answer. 

Oh and as for the planting more tree suggestion, that's not going to happen when you can build a block of flats on the same green space. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Taz said:

Sorry this may have been picked up on further in the thread (playing catch up), but why should owners of newer diesel cars (like me) have to trade their car in and change to petrol, just a few years after the government were advising people to trade in their petrol cars and buy a newer more "environmentally friendly" diesel car? They were even throwing money at it trying to encourage people to do so. 

Many people did, and now they've changed their minds completely and say go electric or get a newer petrol.

This ban will only work if public transport is improved significantly. We all know how inept BCC are, so this is never going to happen.

It will kill off the high street, because more people will either drive to out of town outlets with free parking, or do more online shopping.

I agree something needs to be done, but this is  not the answer. 

Oh and as for the planting more tree suggestion, that's not going to happen when you can build a block of flats on the same green space. 

I fully agree public transport must be improved significantly- in quality, quantity and cost.

e do, but at the same time unsure our city get its fair share from Central Government- we fall into a sweet spot, which in fiscal terms isn't so sweet at all.

We aren't a London or a rich borough of London that has cash pouring in, or some rich place with few social issues like the South East. Whereas, OTOH nor are we a city with serious areas of deprivation that may have had more cash poured in. Nor are we politically important enough to justify other goodies. So yes, the Council should take a decent chunk of the blame absolutely, but Governments- and I include all parties- haven't done us many favours spending wise IMO.

Quite possible- but at the same time we have to do something drastic, there's a Central Government angle here as well- targets, 300 deaths due to pollution. I'd also suggest this stuff needs to be phased in nationally so that cities who take bold steps are not unduly penalised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Taz said:

Sorry this may have been picked up on further in the thread (playing catch up), but why should owners of newer diesel cars (like me) have to trade their car in and change to petrol, just a few years after the government were advising people to trade in their petrol cars and buy a newer more "environmentally friendly" diesel car? They were even throwing money at it trying to encourage people to do so. 

Many people did, and now they've changed their minds completely and say go electric or get a newer petrol.

This ban will only work if public transport is improved significantly. We all know how inept BCC are, so this is never going to happen.

It will kill off the high street, because more people will either drive to out of town outlets with free parking, or do more online shopping.

I agree something needs to be done, but this is  not the answer. 

Oh and as for the planting more tree suggestion, that's not going to happen when you can build a block of flats on the same green space. 

Totally agree.

The school thing has evolved over the past generation or so. Years ago every child went to their local school, good or bad you went there. Now schools have League tables and there was a spate of people moving house to be in a ‘good’ school’s catchement area. I think this has changed again where people can apply to ANY school and if not oversubscribed the child can travel quite a few miles to attend. I live on the edge of Bristol which has Keynsham the same distance as travelling into the city centre. Many of my children’s peers went to school in Keynsham or even Bath rather than the local comp. Parents are driving around 50 miles a DAY round trip to take their child to these schools if buses aren’t used. That is a crazy amount of time, money and pollution added.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, RedM said:

Totally agree.

The school thing has evolved over the past generation or so. Years ago every child went to their local school, good or bad you went there. Now schools have League tables and there was a spate of people moving house to be in a ‘good’ school’s catchement area. I think this has changed again where people can apply to ANY school and if not oversubscribed the child can travel quite a few miles to attend. I live on the edge of Bristol which has Keynsham the same distance as travelling into the city centre. Many of my children’s peers went to school in Keynsham or even Bath rather than the local comp. Parents are driving around 50 miles a DAY round trip to take their child to these schools if buses aren’t used. That is a crazy amount of time, money and pollution added.

IME much of this school run is not caused by lazy kids or entitled mothers rather it is a combination of the council closing smaller local schools (usually then sold off for housing) meaning that the one everyone used to go to isn't there any more and the vast increase in housing costs meaning that both parents have to work so the mother (usually) has to fit in taking their child to school around work which means getting the car out.

I accept that parents can now apply to any school but they are often doing this becauise their previous local school is now a new build housing estate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/11/2019 at 15:32, Red-Robbo said:

Although diesels emit less CO2 ,the issue in urban areas is NOx (Nitrogen Oxide) and soot particulates. Both can cause cancer as well as other health ill-effects, and both tend to hang about in city centres where there are lots of stop-start short journeys. New generation diesels (ie: those produced since the VW emission rigging scandal) tend to be much better at filtering particulates but are still above what the WHO considers safe for NOx emissions.

I think if you do a lot of motorway and countryside driving, diesels are fine - and still a greener alternative. If a significant proportion of your driving is in large towns and cities,  it's unwise to own one.

FWIW I think the BCC proposal is too draconian, and it needs some measure of phasing in, and a rethink as to how it applies to newer, cleaner vehicles.

 

so far I think this is the best post on this thread so far, nibor and kitr had a good go.

I cant believe the number of people who still believe their throat burning,eye stinging diesels are cleaner. I work in a garage with an mot bay. try feeling the effects of a day testing diesels, even with more than adequate ventilation. they stink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, glos old boy said:

Hardly fair that the biggest polluters......buses.... can continue to spew out there rubbish without any charge...will we see electric buses soon or derv vans having their own lanes as they will soon paying two taxes to drive on Bristols roads.

Is the council determind to excelerate the death of town shopping, been back to Bristol many times cannot remember the last time I visited Broadmead though much rather go to the out of town stores around ring road and The Mall/Yate etc

It's can depend on how it's measured. Buses. Many car journeys are single occupancy- would have to look at figures but if say 25 cars carried 30 people, or there were 30 people on a bus then which is a bigger strain on the environment? I'd guess 25 cars! However yes, buses need to be made cleaner too.

Interesting that you should mention The Mall/Yate etc. South Gloucestershire also has pollution issues- does not surprise me that they appeared on a list last year- surely they'll need to bring in some kind of measures moving forward?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, redsquirrel said:

so far I think this is the best post on this thread so far, nibor and kitr had a good go.

I cant believe the number of people who still believe their throat burning,eye stinging diesels are cleaner. I work in a garage with an mot bay. try feeling the effects of a day testing diesels, even with more than adequate ventilation. they stink.

I agree Mr Squirrel although I think most people are well aware of the dangers of derv and have been for some time. The problem is that diesel has been forced upon us by the Eu choosing to ignore  NOx and concentrating solely on limiting CO2 emissions, therefore promoting the manufacture of diesel cars. We’ve been sold the lie for 20 odd years and now we’re being punished for it!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gakoe said:

I agree Mr Squirrel although I think most people are well aware of the dangers of derv and have been for some time. The problem is that diesel has been forced upon us by the Eu choosing to ignore  NOx and concentrating solely on limiting CO2 emissions, therefore promoting the manufacture of diesel cars. We’ve been sold the lie for 20 odd years and now we’re being punished for it!  

There was never a European law that meant diesel had to be promoted, but after the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 the UK government, along with some other EU governments, took the  decision to do so based on what was then considered best scientific advice for reducing CO2 emissions.

The  UK government, not the EU, sets fuel duty levels. If you drive abroad a lot, you'll notice they significantly vary throughout Europe.

Much of the work on the harm of particulates and NOx derives from a large-scale study carried out in the US in 2010, and a study undertaken in this country by Kings College, London, in 2011.

So, while it might be tempting to "blame" someone for making diesel artificially price competitive until recently, the politicians were only being guided by the scientific advice they were given.

If Bristol does impose the diesel exclusion zone, it won't be the first place to do so. You already cannot drive a diesel car into central Paris and I think several German cities have similar zones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/11/2019 at 08:01, spudski said:

 

And perhaps the planning department should reconsider how many pedestrian crossings their are. Way too many close to one another.

I know the argument that it's vehicles that create congestion but if you look at some of the recent road 'improvements' in the centre these must have only added to the problems.

Temple Circus Gyratory as an example. Before the changes you could drive from Redcliffe and simply go across the roundabout and up Temple Way. Now you are directed away from this to join all the traffic coming in from Bath. I'm no expert (and would question the planners are!) but forcing more traffic onto the same road can't be the answer. And it's a similar story driving into Bristol.

And then there's the Centre itself. Closing roads and stopping traffic make turns into perfectly useable roads just lengthens people's journeys.

Then add to this the 24 hour bus lanes, numerous pedestrian crossings, traffic lights, closing Prince St bridge etc. all just restricts the flow of traffic which must add to the congestion and pollution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

The  UK government, not the EU, sets fuel duty levels. If you drive abroad a lot, you'll notice they significantly vary throughout Europe.

If Bristol does impose the diesel exclusion zone, it won't be the first place to do so. You already cannot drive a diesel car into central Paris and I think several German cities have similar zones.

Only pre-2006 diesel cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Laner said:

I know the argument that it's vehicles that create congestion but if you look at some of the recent road 'improvements' in the centre these must have only added to the problems.

Temple Circus Gyratory as an example. Before the changes you could drive from Redcliffe and simply go across the roundabout and up Temple Way. Now you are directed away from this to join all the traffic coming in from Bath. I'm no expert (and would question the planners are!) but forcing more traffic onto the same road can't be the answer. And it's a similar story driving into Bristol.

And then there's the Centre itself. Closing roads and stopping traffic make turns into perfectly useable roads just lengthens people's journeys.

Then add to this the 24 hour bus lanes, numerous pedestrian crossings, traffic lights, closing Prince St bridge etc. all just restricts the flow of traffic which must add to the congestion and pollution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I totally agree. The way the roads have been planned only makes for more congestion. Which leads to cars stationary and idling. Causing pollution. Add the ridiculous amount of pedestrian crossings so close to one another...it's constant stop/start.

The worst imo, are from the bus depot to the M32. And the 4 pedestrian crossings at St Mary Redcliffe roundabout. Sometimes you get a continual flow of people walking across, with no cars moving.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps the answer is to ban diesel cars to those living within the City boundary.

As the article above showed, it's people doing short journeys within the City that's the main problem...as well as banning wood burning fires within the City boundary. These equate to 18 diesel cars running per hour.

Those driving into the City from outside in Diesels are either delivering..in/out...or parking up in a car park and not using the car once in the centre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, spudski said:

I totally agree. The way the roads have been planned only makes for more congestion. Which leads to cars stationary and idling. Causing pollution. Add the ridiculous amount of pedestrian crossings so close to one another...it's constant stop/start.

The worst imo, are from the bus depot to the M32. And the 4 pedestrian crossings at St Mary Redcliffe roundabout. Sometimes you get a continual flow of people walking across, with no cars moving.

 

In Germany, I'm pretty sure you can be fined for idling- don't know if there is a minimum allowable threshold though.

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/driving-fine-air-pollution-engine-london-westminster-council-gove-a8912696.html

Legislation could help to address this one- saw a good comment below the line too!

Quote

Good idea ONLY if the government puts every penny of the fines towards subsidizing electric cars. Many people want electric cars but cannot afford to buy them.

Proceeds of any fines should be put in a big pot and ring fenced for this, I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Laner said:

I know the argument that it's vehicles that create congestion but if you look at some of the recent road 'improvements' in the centre these must have only added to the problems.

Temple Circus Gyratory as an example. Before the changes you could drive from Redcliffe and simply go across the roundabout and up Temple Way. Now you are directed away from this to join all the traffic coming in from Bath. I'm no expert (and would question the planners are!) but forcing more traffic onto the same road can't be the answer. And it's a similar story driving into Bristol.

And then there's the Centre itself. Closing roads and stopping traffic make turns into perfectly useable roads just lengthens people's journeys.

Then add to this the 24 hour bus lanes, numerous pedestrian crossings, traffic lights, closing Prince St bridge etc. all just restricts the flow of traffic which must add to the congestion and pollution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Probably too many cars on the road as well tbh- not just in Bristol but outright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, spudski said:

Perhaps the answer is to ban diesel cars to those living within the City boundary.

As the article above showed, it's people doing short journeys within the City that's the main problem...as well as banning wood burning fires within the City boundary. These equate to 18 diesel cars running per hour.

Those driving into the City from outside in Diesels are either delivering..in/out...or parking up in a car park and not using the car once in the centre.

I live on the outskirts of Paris and enjoy an open, woodburning fire - in fact, I am just about to light it.

Whilst I have fields to the back of my house, I am conscious of the smell of smoke, especially in heavy, damp conditions.

Are your figures accurate, though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
4 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

There was never a European law that meant diesel had to be promoted, but after the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 the UK government, along with some other EU governments, took the  decision to do so based on what was then considered best scientific advice for reducing CO2 emissions.

The  UK government, not the EU, sets fuel duty levels. If you drive abroad a lot, you'll notice they significantly vary throughout Europe.

Much of the work on the harm of particulates and NOx derives from a large-scale study carried out in the US in 2010, and a study undertaken in this country by Kings College, London, in 2011.

So, while it might be tempting to "blame" someone for making diesel artificially price competitive until recently, the politicians were only being guided by the scientific advice they were given.

If Bristol does impose the diesel exclusion zone, it won't be the first place to do so. You already cannot drive a diesel car into central Paris and I think several German cities have similar zones.

A diesel made before 2006 - Paris hasn’t got a total ban.

Edit:  Just seen Phi in France has already responded.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maesknoll Red said:

A diesel made before 2006 - Paris hasn’t got a total ban.

Edit:  Just seen Phi in France has already responded.

 

Indeed. I should have said, it's a partial ban. We drove through in Mrs Robbo's old banger in May, because it's an 09 plate.

A phased approach is I think what the City Council should, and probably will eventually, aim for. No point scrapping new cars. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
13 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

Indeed. I should have said, it's a partial ban. We drove through in Mrs Robbo's old banger in May, because it's an 09 plate.

A phased approach is I think what the City Council should, and probably will eventually, aim for. No point scrapping new cars. 

No doubt something needs to be done, but a draconian unfeasible policy isn’t the way to win favour with the hard pressed who won’t be able to afford to change vehicle - at least not for a modern clean engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
19 hours ago, redsquirrel said:

so far I think this is the best post on this thread so far, nibor and kitr had a good go.

I cant believe the number of people who still believe their throat burning,eye stinging diesels are cleaner. I work in a garage with an mot bay. try feeling the effects of a day testing diesels, even with more than adequate ventilation. they stink.

You will only just be seeing Euro 6 compliant vehicles in an MOT station, as they didn’t come in until 2016

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

I live on the outskirts of Paris and enjoy an open, woodburning fire - in fact, I am just about to light it.

Whilst I have fields to the back of my house, I am conscious of the smell of smoke, especially in heavy, damp conditions.

Are your figures accurate, though?

I'm going by the figures in the article above specific to Bristol.

I can't see any problem in woodburners in the Countryside, where there is open spaces to disperse.

Isn't France nearly 3 times bigger than England with roughly the same population? It seemed so unpopulated when I worked there. Even more so when taking a month off and driving around it. Endless fields and small villages.

Can understand why you would live there... it's getting unsustainable here. Too many people on a sinking island.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

There was never a European law that meant diesel had to be promoted, but after the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 the UK government, along with some other EU governments, took the  decision to do so based on what was then considered best scientific advice for reducing CO2 emissions.

The  UK government, not the EU, sets fuel duty levels. If you drive abroad a lot, you'll notice they significantly vary throughout Europe.

Much of the work on the harm of particulates and NOx derives from a large-scale study carried out in the US in 2010, and a study undertaken in this country by Kings College, London, in 2011.

So, while it might be tempting to "blame" someone for making diesel artificially price competitive until recently, the politicians were only being guided by the scientific advice they were given.

If Bristol does impose the diesel exclusion zone, it won't be the first place to do so. You already cannot drive a diesel car into central Paris and I think several German cities have similar zones.

I wasn’t referring to the price of diesel itself Robbo ( although the EC would have pressured governments to keep duty low) more the promotion of diesel powered vehicles in the UK and throughout Europe when the incentive should have been hybrid and electric. Everyone always knew that diesel was the dirtier fuel, up until VW’s atrocities anyway. The European Commission ignoring the dangers of NOx levels was a very happy coincidence for the German car manufacturers. 

So the big petroleum companies and giant car manufacturers sell us cancer causing monsters, then the big pharmaceutical companies sell us drugs to battle the illnesses. Oh, and the government tax us for the pleasure. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Gakoe said:

I wasn’t referring to the price of diesel itself Robbo ( although the EC would have pressured governments to keep duty low) more the promotion of diesel powered vehicles in the UK and throughout Europe when the incentive should have been hybrid and electric. Everyone always knew that diesel was the dirtier fuel, up until VW’s atrocities anyway. The European Commission ignoring the dangers of NOx levels was a very happy coincidence for the German car manufacturers. 

So the big petroleum companies and giant car manufacturers sell us cancer causing monsters, then the big pharmaceutical companies sell us drugs to battle the illnesses. Oh, and the government tax us for the pleasure. ?

The EC can't pressure fuel duties one way or the other. That's just another Daily Express myth. It doesn't get involved in "promoting" certain cars either.

After Kyoto, many Western governments- including several non-EU states - dropped duty on diesel relative to petrol, because CO2 was seen as a bigger problem than NOx. It was only subsequent scientific research that proved quite how harmful diesel was.

Most car manufacturers make diesel models, not just German ones, so British, French and Czech diesel models etc would've benefited in this period as well.

You're trying to shoehorn the 00s push for diesel into an anti-EU thing, and it just doesn't stand scrutiny. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, spudski said:

I'm going by the figures in the article above specific to Bristol.

I can't see any problem in woodburners in the Countryside, where there is open spaces to disperse.

Isn't France nearly 3 times bigger than England with roughly the same population? It seemed so unpopulated when I worked there. Even more so when taking a month off and driving around it. Endless fields and small villages.

Can understand why you would live there... it's getting unsustainable here. Too many people on a sinking island.

Just over 4 times bigger than England, although more than twice the size of the UK.

The populations (UK and France) are similar, but mainland France (66M) has only 10M more inhabitants than England.

A major difference, though, is that the French population is heavily concentrated in Paris and its banlieus (suburbs) and just a few major towns (Marseille, Lyon, Toulouse etc.), all of which have populations of less than 1M, compared to our major cities such as Manchester and Birmingham, both of which have populations in excess of 1M, with other large cities such as Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool almost as densely populated.

As you say, though, once you leave the main towns in France, you can drive for miles with just fields and small villages (and their homely restaurants).   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...