[Closed] New transport secretary = idiot

No, but rather than penalising cars now they should be improving other transport. You can't penalise the car owner BEFORE ensuring there's a decent/reasonable alternative available at the same or lower cost. No party seems good at this.

The trouble is that raising taxes to improve alternative public transport makes policians very unpopular - particularly when the press says "New bus service will cost £10million and no one even uses the existing one" etc.

So instead thay have to squeeze and squeeze until drivers insist that they provide an alternative.

A nice case in point was the proposed Congestion Charge scheme in Edinburgh. They drew up budgets showing new public transport hubs, new proposals for 3 new tram routes, 6 park and ride facilites, a new train station, new bus routes and increased services, cycle routes etc.

Then said they'd fund it by charging non-residents £2 to come into the city centre by car.

Rejected by nearly 75% of votes at a referendum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_congestion_charge

TJ I think you are barking up the wrong tree.

Reliance on public transport wont help small business grow, won't help tradesman get to the site and keep their prices affordable.

Raising duty on fuel is not the answer. Yes Our infrastructure is groaning under overuse, but then if you take into consideration the population density of the UK, I don't think we're coping badly. Humanity is at its best at times of crisis. Dependance on fossil fuel for energy consumption, for what ever use is unbalancing the world at economic, geological, ecological and yes, POLITICAL levels.

I view the issues in regards to the state of our roads as endemic to the larger picture. You can treat skin complaints and ill health with vitamins and ointments, or you can wean the patient off maccy D's as their staple diet!

I think we have been suffering from too much Gov control. Too little money spread too thin is never a winning strategy. Let the potholes be resolved at their seasonal time....at the end of this financial year.

More people voted against the Edinburgh congestion charge than drive in the city. Weird,

remember that motoring is cheaper now in relation to incomes than at virtually any other time.

but we have less rich people than the old days. So raising fuel tax will hit those that are already vulnerable, the single mums and dads, the rural working and middle class, the sole trader.....

There has to be another way!

Raise fuel tax, but give tax breaks for any petrol station further than 50 miles from the nearest city?

Andy - so waht would you do then? to scarcer and more expensive and in a decade or two it will be far more expensive and scarcer than it is now. Personal transport is far too energy intensive.

We need to go back to living and working in the same locality and to use remote working where possible. We simply will not have the energy available in a generation to sustain the commuting that goes on at the moment.

So if you don't want to see more money put into alternatives to the private car how are you going to provide the energy for these cars in a generation when the oil is gone?

Too much government control? what have you been smoking? How on earth do you get a national transport policy without government control - and actually they don't have enough - the road lobby is far too influential and the government runs scared of it.

AndyRT - Member

but we have less rich people than the old days. So raising fuel tax will hit those that are already vulnerable, the single mums and dads, the rural working and middle class, the sole trader.....

There has to be another way!

rubbish - we have a greater divide between rich and poor than for generations. You point has been comprehensively disproved over the years - remember I am proposing a gradualist approach that will benefit all those groups - as those groups you mention have ( except the sole trader) are less likely to have cars, and more likely to use the improved public transport I espouse

TJ

I advocate the Hydrogen solution, which already exists, and just needs support. It would also not mean a change of social harmony, and xill use the most abundant element in the universe!

I don't have the answers, but blaming cars is not going to help. There are bigger fish to fry. Fossil fuels should not be part of our future, but resolution to change will only happen at times of crisis.

Look around, I think the world is in a bit of a mess! The balance of power will be with those that embrace new technology.

I don't think we can un-evolve(if indeed that is what we have done) or suggest cultural change that won't support our cities needs (which seemingly includes fleecing commuters on a daily basis). So we must keep moving in the same direction as the rest of the planet. Just without burning old tress and rotten dinosaurs.

Trouble with hydrogen is you need three times the amount of energy that running the car takes to create enough hydrogen. You still need to get he energy from somewhere and hydrogen use increases energy usage 3 fold.

I would rather we planned the coming transition to an economy where energy is much more expensive ( which will happen) so we can do it with the minimum pof dislocation. If we wait for the crisis it will be a lot worse

And another thing, you have started using big words.

(although hydrogen is a bigger word than espouse) and will have never been seen dead in an Alistair Maclean novel, so not in my usual vocabulary, unless I happen to glance across at the witterings of Michael Winner in my wife's sunday times.

Play fair!

[i]I don't have the answers[/i]

We can tell....

So you want cars with all the badness taken out?

ideally, yes

Too much to ask? Isn't that the role of the uneducated punter?

but we have less rich people than the old days.

😕

unless I happen to glance across at the witterings of Michael Winner in my wife's sunday times.

More of a Daily Mail man?

Actually, your viewpoint is probably an accurate representation of the way people think about transport; it's a big problem..

kieran

On the matter of the HATO's my (now ex) girlfriend had a puncture on the motorway. She had a spare and the tools with which to change it. However she did not have the strength to undo the wheel nuts. She phoned the AA but was told, even as a lone female, that she would have to wait around an hour for a patrol.
Whilst she was waiting a HATO vehicle arrived and she asked for assistance to undo the wheel nuts only to be told that they couldn't help and if the AA didn't arrive within the hour they would have her vehicle recovered at her expense. Now what on earth are we paying these jobsworths for if they cant even help when required?

not all wombles are the same!

depends on your scale. I suppose. My point was, the business world will keep on turning, writing off the costs of business, or worse, writing off the UK. If you raise the cost to conduct business in the UK, from the UK we will no longer be able to expect international firms to want to invest here.

My main argument is that although roads and transport is a mess, surely there are better places to find economic salvation for the countrys bottom line?

Actually, your viewpoint is probably an accurate representation of the way people think about transport; it's a big problem..

Most opinions I hear about transport come down to: "I want everything to be cheap and I want everyone else to stop driving".

By that standard the discussion here if pretty informed.

So much for the new caring sharing tories cutting back on excessive spending - the lazy ****er lives half an hours walk from his office but gets picked up by a driver every day. 🙄

not all wombles are the same!

No, but unfortunatly the official line is as I've said.

More people voted against the Edinburgh congestion charge than drive in the city. Weird,

That congestion charge proposal was so poorly thought out that even people who might be generally in favour of such a scheme would have voted against it. Not that it should ever have went to a vote, considering that the earlier public consultation indicated that it had no chance of success, even with the weightings given to those likely to be for such a scheme. Taking it to the vote, and starting to spend money on the implementation of the scheme, was idiocy. They'd have been better spending the money on trying to understand what might have made a charging scheme acceptable (e.g. just the inner charging zone perhaps).

@ Andy RT

If Greenpeace and friends of the earth and all those middle class pointy wagging finger type organisations supported technical development for realistic alternatives, rather than ill conceived hijacks of oil platforms and other stupidity, then we would be in a better place right now.

[\rant]

POSTED 1 HOUR AGO # REPORT-POST
AndyRT - Member
GrahamS,

You mean apart form inner London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham......

Yes I can see how inner London, Manchester, Liverpool etc. are full of those nasty middle class finger wagging types...

Do you live in a city/town?
Are you aware of the lack of alternatives outside main urban areas?

If infrastructure allowed us to use Bio-ethanol, then great, or even better, march those new hydrogen powered cars into production. I'm not tied to fossil fuels, just personal transport. Don't tax me for your selfish, urbanite point of view, otherwise known as a labour voter!

Fine, but the people I see clogging up the roads every day in Birmingham [i]do[/i] live in urban areas, and [i]do[/i] have alternatives, and the use of private cars in that environment is largely absurd. Pointing out that for some people it's different doesn't make it any less true.

Any suggestion that people use the bus and the train more is always met by someone pointing out that in some places there's only 1 bus a month and then you have to walk 10 miles to get it, but it doesn't mean reducing car use should be off the agenda.

M

. If petrol was £20 a gallon how long till we had 150mpg cars?

Physical impossibility. Motorbikes just about do this currently. It would take a step-change of about 20% in efficiency and about a 75% weight reduction to get that, it that just isnt possible. They're struggling to get 1-2% currently despite hundreds of research labs working on it.

75% weight reduction seems perfectly plausible to me. Start of the 80's, most cars weighed around 800-1000kg. Now every school run mum is dragging 1500-2000kg of 4x4 around.
I'm quite sure that with modern materials and engineering a lightweight car is not unrealistic, provided we dont insist on driving around on a leather lounge suite with electric everything double glazing aircon climate control gps guided beerfridge and heated mirrors. FFS.

exactly the point chopper. How about diesel electric? run the diesel engine at a fixed speed for high efficiency - a 250 cc engine running at park torque will provide plenty of power for a 50 mph cruise. Battery for overboost.

Of course a 150 mpg car will not have the same performance or comforts as a current car - thing 2cv for the 21st centuary or one of those French microcars.

25 bhp car will do a 50 mph cruise no trouble.

yeah, i reckon 150mpg is possible. Just check out ecomodder.com - thats just a load of nerds with no money. This guys getting 100mpg from an old civic (although it does look a bit wierd)
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/aerocivic-how-drop-your-cd-0-31-0-a-290.html

The government has to put up VED and fuel duty to control car use, its a very crude measure, but the only alternative that wouldn't penalise people not living in urban areas would be Road Pricing.

I realise that Ecomodder is a bunch of enthusiasts and anything that was mass-produced would look much smarter, but "blimey" that car you linked to is remarkably shonky-looking!

[i]Rubbish. Cameras are sited at accident blackspots and no profit is made from them - it is all returned to the road safety partnerships[/i]

And pi55ed away on paying overtime to coppers to operate the vans.

The government has to put up VED and fuel duty to control car use, its a very crude measure, but the only alternative that wouldn't penalise people not living in urban areas would be Road Pricing.

What about people like me who live in an urban area as its all I can afford and would love to cut my commute but couldnt buy a house in the country?

I hate commuting and went to loads of effort to live 5 minutes from where i work. Now the office has closed and moved 40 miles away! No trains or bus services, so forced to drive. nightmare.

anyway, if driving was much more expensive, they wouldn't have been able to do that. Not without giving everyone a massive pay rise or being forced to rehire their entire workforce.

if driving is expensive, things will change. probably.

75% weight reduction seems perfectly plausible to me. Start of the 80's, most cars weighed around 800-1000kg. Now every school run mum is dragging 1500-2000kg of 4x4 around.
I'm quite sure that with modern materials and engineering a lightweight car is not unrealistic, provided we dont insist on driving around on a leather lounge suite with electric everything double glazing aircon climate control gps guided beerfridge and heated mirrors. FFS.

Even a basic family car is 1400kg these days, that is largely due to the safety provisions that are enforced by regulations (like minimum chassis intrusion distances etc) rather than the additional gizmos. Sure you can make a very light car if you use massively expensive materials and processes and rip out most of the safety systems. Most of the electronics weigh next to nothing, the things that add weight are air con, ABS, airbags, SIPS and some luxuries like electric seats. GPS, phones, laser guided indicators add grams.

yeah, i reckon 150mpg is possible. Just check out ecomodder.com - thats just a load of nerds with no money. This guys getting 100mpg from an old civic (although it does look a bit wierd)

Yeah, 100 on a run at constant speed - that's not hard. No-one drives like that and nor would it be possible. Plus look at the size and shape of the vehicle. 100mpg on a normal commute is motorbike territory. They weigh a couple of hundred kg.

New materials (carbon/kevlar) are VASTLY expensive and planet raping. Old materials are not that light. New ways of using old materials are good but dont save that much. IC engines have been in development for christ knows how long, a 5% increase in economy in the current climate would net a manufacturer a MASSIVE percentage of the market - do you think they sit back and think "nahh, we're fine as we are"? Do you think the engineers working on it are sitting around trying not to improve? Of course not, they're working within the increasingly tighter regulations on emissions/economy and safety. They produce some vehicles with additional luxuries sure, but they always will. On average cars are much more efficient AND safer these days but there's no quick fix.

I personally don't enjoy commuting for the sake of it (I love driving, and don't even mind traffic queues) but I would love to be able to walk down the road to work, but likewise I hate living in a city, or the outskirts of a city, it really leaves me depressed and tired. I'll take the commute over permanent hatred of the place I live. Plus there's no way I could afford to live (with sufficient room for my family) near my work.

He is my MP

He lives in the same town.

My wife gets the train to London everyday her office is on Embankment near Parliment. She was getting on the train even when she was 8 months pregnant. She sometimes has to work late but it's only a 40 min train ride to Waterloo.

Philip Hammond used the maximum 2nd home allowance because he needed a 2nd home in London depsite the fact 80% of his constituents get the train in veryday to work in London.

So yes that + his motoring rant / hate cyclists = tosser!

IC engines have been in development for christ knows how long, a 5% increase in economy in the current climate would net a manufacturer a MASSIVE percentage of the market - do you think they sit back and think "nahh, we're fine as we are"? Do you think the engineers working on it are sitting around trying not to improve? Of course not

Working at imperial I've been to more lectures on improving efficiencies than on using hydrogen ! No one is talking about hydrogen anymore maybe electric cars using renewable but not hydrogen. You'd have to build a whole new infrastructure to transport it not to mention storing large quantities of hydrogen a high pressure probably isnt a good idea. On the other hand the infrastructure to deliver electricity is already there.

I still think there are things we can do to improve efficiencies. Almost all diesels use turbos now a day. Instead of using a turbo to improve power they can be used to improve efficiency as a turbo is powered by the exhaust gases and energy lost through the exhaust can be recycled. The polo TDI s currently one of the most efficient cars on the road. People are working on trying to reduce the problems with Turbos on petrol engines and they will become standard like with diesel engines once these problems have been sorted.

Also I think weight saving can be made, are we likely to be seeing any more heavy safety features in cars ? I think we've pretty much reached the end of the road on these hopefully the average weight of cars will start to reduce now.

I think the solutions to the transport problems in this country will mainly be sorted by improvements in efficiencies in standard petrol/diesel vechiles, electric vehicles for short/city driving powered by renewables(electric scooters would be ideal for London and help improve air quality).

And I think the biggest change will be working from home, once companies finally get a grasp on internet communications, they'll realise they can save massive amount of money from having much smaller offices but only have staff in a few days a week while they work from home.

Obviously this will create problems because everyone will need a home office. But if your house doesnt need to be right by the train station you can get a bigger house for your money.

Kieran - your ex girlfriend obvisously didn't have the tools to change the wheel if she couldn't get the nuts undone herself. Hardly the fault of the wombles.

I know my mrs would be in the same situation using the std kit in the car - so she has an extending wheel brace to give enough leverage to get the job done without relying on others. I think they cost a whole £4 and are available at lots of places on the high street - Wilkinsons, Tesco, Argos etc.

Anyway - back on topic-ish...

I work in auto r&d and it is true that huge amounts are spent chasing tiny efficiency improvements (especially if it is legislation driven and they have no choice but to comply if they want to keep on selling).

How about I suggest a single cheap improvement that would cut fuel use by maybe +10% overnight, remove all speed cameras, improve road safety and free up traffic cops to concentrate on bad driving? Furthermore the technology is already fitted to lots of new cars so no great introduction cost.

Interested?

Simple - automatic speed limiting appropriate to where you are driving using sat nav / mobile phone network and the existing CAN system controlling your drivetrain. Everyone bats on about weight but it is wind resistance that goes up with the square of speed (so 80mph uses waaaay more fuel than 70mph but the extra 10mph rarely gets you to the final destination much quicker unless the roads are empty - and even then what critically important thing did you do with the few minutes saved during the journey).

Still interested or is this a vicious attack on your civil liberties?(although the only thing you loose is the right to break the law as / when you see fit)

im 100% behind mick_r on his suggestion

it would be worth it just to see clarcksons head explode in a scanners stylee

but the chances of it ever happening are about as likely as scotland winning the world cup

Its not a more efficient car that is like a current one we need - its a car built to use less energy. It will not be able to be like current cars at all.

It needs to be much lighter, slower and less toys. 25 bhp not 100+. No fancy dodahs that increase weight. It is impossible to get the major improvements to energy usage from modifying conventional cars - its needs a whole new paradigm