Antidiots screen

On my way to work this Tuesday and on the M4, I saw no less than three minor accidents, merely some bumper to bumper action probably caused by bored distracted people and others who forgot to fill their petrol tanks? mechanical failures. That's life on a congested motorway, but more annoying are the rubbernecks kind.

They slow right down to check, ohhh nice flashing lights, ohhh creased bumper, ohhh woman standing behind safety barrier in the rain. And the re-accelerate, slowly, only to brake when they have caught up with preceding vehicles.

Nothing To Do With Arbroath "reports" that the Highways Agency is considering Giant screens at crash sites to end 'rubbernecking' danger. See the picture -doesn't need many more words.

Just that... by the time they've arrived, erected their 70 metres screen, etc... they'd have plenty of time to actually remove most, OK maybe not all, but most of the sources of distraction.

So I think this is another ill conceived idea from our DfT. What we need is not more powerless traffic wombles in their checkered green 4x4 but a fleet of rapid response plaform lorries, strategically placed along the motorway. They'd get rid of any hard-shoulder mishaps in minutes.

But that won't happen because it would be a far too sensible plan for the Department of Transport whose idea of transport is just about bulldozing houses to create more airport runways.

traffic, transportation, DfT, BAA, roads, automobile, richmondtransits.blog

Earth day: NOx, electric cars and diesel

I was listening to Robert Evans from Cenex, a company developping fuel-cell and "low carbon" (whatever that really means) technologies in this podcast on guardian.co.uk.

He suggests electric cars are THE solution (he would says that, would he not?) as they cut pullution. The interviewer doesn't buy this and questions if it's not just moving the pollution to coal fired plants (in the UK between 60% and 33% of the electricity is generated from coal and the 74% from fossil (can't seem to cross-reference 2 sources), 49% of electricity is made burning coal in the US, while in France 78.1% comes from nuclear in 2006).

Evans answered that moving the CO2 emission from tailpipes up to a power station chimney reduces NOx emissions. Which brings the whole issue I've been raising about diesel.

The goverment has been focussing solely on CO2 emissions, via car tax bands linked to emissions for instance (note that airlines and ships are exempt of fuel duty), which had the effect to favour diesel cars: oil burners registrations have grown from 13.8% in 1999 to 43.6% in 2008!

The problem is while diesel engines emit less CO2 (about 20-30%), they emit much more NOx and particulates, about 24 times more according to this source. While CO2 is not an actual pollutant, NOX and particulates are and are harmful to anyone in the vincinity of traffic -in particular children in urban environments.

Just another proof that the government is using CO2 as an excuse to tax with no proven ecological reasons.

UK, pollution, environment, diesel, automobile, globalwarming, richmondtransits.blog

Comment on new cars vs. old cars

Interesting post here:
Re*Move: New Cars vs Old Cars II

And my comment:

Interesting conundrum.

1. Yes, rewarding for failure is wrong.
Let's just however point out that rescuing banks was not optional to start with and then that Western Governments have lent money to those failed banks. It's a bet of course, but the tax payer should, hopefully, get some return when they cash in those shares in a few years.
Note that some govermments have been smarter than others (UK, USA) by getting some right-to-say instead of just buying non-preferential shares.

2. The car industry has come a long way, people won't give up individual mobility easily.
While US regulators did not do anything to force their national manufacturers to reform, the story is different in Europe where there's some pressure to reduce emissions. This has resulted in quite some considerable technological advances, but ultimately it's down to economics: when oil will be rare, people will switch to electric because it will be economically viable.
On the other hand, public transportation offerings vary from poor (USA) to excellent (Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark). You can't expect people to switch in a nation like the UK where there's been virtually no investment in rail for the like of 30 years, no high-speed lines between regions, etc...

3. Cash for new cars, it's not about ecology stupid.
It would be carbon-efficient to let every industrial job go on the dole. People would watch their plasma screen but won't have the money to have cars. The whole economy may collapse and some will cheer at the decrease in CO2 emissions. Riots will ensure, and we'll need to develop tear-gas that don't contribute to global warming.

Petrol rip off?

I subscribed a while back to PetrolPrices.com to try minimise my petrol bill. It's a great service that tells you where petrol is cheaper. Except that the petrol industry seems to be very good at making sure prices are in line in a given neighboorhood.

As you can see below, there's a huge difference between prices in Reading and in Richmond but with those areas prices are very similar... Looks like a scam to me...

5 cheapest stations in Reading for Unleaded...
---------------------------------------------
Station : Shell/sainsburys Shinfield
Address : Shinfield Road, Reading, RG2 8HA
Brand : Shell
Distance: 2.22 miles
Price : 91.9p
Updated : 23-09-2007
---------------------------
Station : Asda Lower Earley, Price : 91.9p
---------------------------
Station : Shell Fairfield, Price : 91.9p
---------------------------
Station : Tesco Reading Extra, Price : 92.9p
---------------------------
Station : Morrisons Reading, Price : 92.9p


5 cheapest stations in Richmond Unleaded...
---------------------------------------------
Station : Shell Oak Lane, Price : 93.9p
---------------------------
Station : Studley Grange Service Station, Price : 94.5p
---------------------------
Station : Sainsburys Richmond, Price : 94.9p
---------------------------
Station : Brentford Filling Station, Price : 94.9p
---------------------------
Station : Chiswick Flyover Service Station, Price : 94.9p



Tags: automobile, cars, petrol, richmondtransits.blog, transportation

Read today's Time

The Times has a great article on Richmond council barking against motorists:
Drivers under siege from the council that hates cars - Times Online

Personally, my issue is not that much that they're againsts car but rather that they don't provide any other solution. I could go on for ever, but it's like Red Ken charging people to go to London: a) it's not a new idea, it's even medieval, b) it's expensive to administer, c) a private company makes a lot of dosh, d) only rich can now enter London (not nurses or teachers) and f) there's no alternative as the trains and tubes are over-crowded and not reliable and the cycling network is just a joke.

If Richmond council provided secure bike parking in all train stations, enough places to lock your bike when you shop and a proper cycling network we could speak again about taxing car. But not before.

Tags: richmondtransits.blog, Richmond, transportation, automotive

No will for carbon friendly transportation strategy

While binge flying relentlessly puts pressure to expand airports thanks to the fact aviation fuel is not taxed, the government has just released details of its rail strategy: Rail fares to soar as government slashes funding - Times Online

Or rather the lack of:
"Ministers intend to shift the burden of paying for the railway much more heavily to passengers, who paid 50 per cent of the cost this year but will pay 75 per cent by 2014. "

This is appalling and hypocritical.

On one hand, the government is encouraging motorists stealth tax pretexting carbon emission and on the other it simply does not invest enough in non-polluting public transport. Trains are over-crowded and little improvement is to come. It took over 10 years to get the Eurostar connected with a proper high-speed line to London -with a great result: over 60% market share against airlines on the London-Paris route. This represents many many planes not buzzing in Richmond skies....

Commuters are often criticised for preferring their cars. This is in fact a perfectly rational choice. For instance, a Richmond resident working in Thames Valley Park in Reading, like many thousands of other employees, can travel by car of train. From North Sheen it takes about one hour and half although TVP is right between the Reading line and the Thames. This is because the station that was planned when TVP was developped has never been completed and one has to take a shuttle from Reading station.
So it's adding 30 mn each way, which is £8 if you have to pay childcare, plus £11 in rail faires, versus less than £10 by car and one hour.

Why can't we have continental-grade infrastructures? Why indeed...

PS: read also Mike Rutherford's column on Autoexpress: More rail inefficiency and more rate increases – and more investment from the Government

Tags: richmondtransits.blog, transportation, automobile, environment, UK, politics

Speed cameras: all for the money, litte for safety

Here are a few important facts about speed cameras:

1. Accidents on the motorways account for less than 10% of the total. So why diverting resources to putting speed cameras on motorways, like in France? One could say it's idiotic, but in fact speed cameras have little to do with safety, in particular on motorways. They can actually cause accidents (French news article, Le Nouvel Obs, 18/07/05, explaining that before speed cameras were installed on the A12 between Montigny-le-Bretonneux et Rocquencourt, 30 accidents were registered and 60 after!!!)
2. In fact, Less than 4% of accidents are caused by exceeding the speed limit
3. Again according to Speedcameras.org.uk, £120 million was generated in speeding fines in 2003. That's in the IUK. In France, they plan no less than EUR 375 revenue in 2006!!!

STOP THE HYPOCRISY!

Links:

www.radars-auto.com

www.speedcameras.org

"Pentecôte"

The French government is probably one of the most prolific when it comes to creating new taxes. The last trick from those ENA boffins is to abolish a bank holiday (they picked a Catholic celebration called "lundi de Pentecôte" (aka Withmonday in English), make employees work for free (guess what, unions are not happy and will call strikes for a change) and allocate the taxes for that day to a fund aimed at providing benefits to poor pensioners. This is in fact a knee-jerk reaction to the 2003 "canicule", when 11.400 people, most of them pensioner were killed in a heat wave that scorched Europe. They just have won the the gold medal for stealth tax creativity! The greatest irony, is that in 2000 the socialist governement abolished the car tax that was initially first levied in 1956 tomeant to fund... the pensions! Check also this link on the subject: libres.org