Jump to content

Consultation on exhaust emissions on inland waterways


GUMPY

Featured Posts

I'm not one for conspiracy theories at all. I don't think there is any conspiracy behind the government push to electirc transport but I do think there is probably more to it than just pollution.....

 

I believe that western governments have been concerened about oil supply from the middle east for a long period of time. Until recently there has been no practical alternative to petrol & diesel and we are very heavily dependant on that supply from the middle east. The middle east has been politically unstable since time began and I think the worry is that if things go bang big time over there it could literally bring the country to a standstill. I do believe the government would love to be in a postition where they can say "screw you, we don't need you anymore".

 

Of course reducing pollution is major factor - in our towns and cities it does kill people prematurely, so anything to reduce that is a good thing. I think it is also very handy to use that as the selling point for why we should reduce or remove dependancy on oil without scaring people with talk about being held by the short and curlies by the middle east.

 

One thing I am absolutely certain of - if teh government want to push something major through, like abolishment of diesel for example, they really won't care about the relatively small number of boat owners who kick up a fuss. They'll just do it.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

I recall that over 50 decades ago, the Elephant and Castle intersection in London was restructured at considerable expense, only for the problem to be decanted a few hundred metres (probably yards in those days!) to the next nearest roundabout. As is oft remarked, the average speed i London has not improved since the horse and carriage days.

Are you sure they had roundabouts 500 years ago ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Are you sure they had roundabouts 500 years ago ?

I think Mike Todd had in mind the 2015 redesign of the Elephant and Castle roads, converting the big roundabout, which I think had only been there since about 1960 or so, into two way traffic. I cycled around it often in the 1980s and somehow survived the traffic; the big danger was the huge number of vehicles in a hurry rather than the exhaust fumes. Normal for London.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35026096

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Peter X said:

I think Mike Todd had in mind the 2015 redesign of the Elephant and Castle roads, converting the big roundabout, which I think had only been there since about 1960 or so, into two way traffic. I cycled around it often in the 1980s and somehow survived the traffic; the big danger was the huge number of vehicles in a hurry rather than the exhaust fumes. Normal for London.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35026096

I wasn't sure as he did say "50 decades ago" (that's in the 1500's)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Are you sure they had roundabouts 500 years ago ?

Typo!

4 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I wasn't sure as he did say "50 decades ago" (that's in the 1500's)

I did mean the 1960s . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/07/2019 at 09:33, StephenA said:

Which is fine unless you are in the situation that you might have to leave your house at any time during the night and drive a couple of hundred miles - which is a situation I was in moderately recently.

Me too. All these ‘the car will decide the best time to charge’ responses continue to make huge assumptions about people’s lifestyles, which are often way off the mark. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/07/2019 at 10:22, WotEver said:

That’s a CPO guidance that the force covering any particular area can follow or ignore. My missus got done for 32 in a 30 limit, so we can assume that in that area at least they allow no tolerance. It cost her a boring afternoon and eighty quid, but no points. 

You don't get prosecuted for what your speedo says, you get prosecuted for the true speed of your vehicle as recorded by the cameras. You are allowed 10% speedo error so if your misses was prosecuted for doing 32 mph in a 30 mph zone her speedo must have been reading 35 mph. Banged to rights is the term I believe ?

 

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/07/2019 at 20:49, Alan de Enfield said:

I cannot even get to my boat in an electric car.

 

320 miles - just over 5 1/2 hours non stop in the diesel engine car.

 

Real life tests tend to show the majority of EVs have a range of 150 miles but I reckon we'd be struggling to get 5 adults and all the boat supplies / gear into something like a BMW I3.

Add on lights, heaters, (or air-con) etc and the range drops.

I would need to have 2 recharges on the journey - apparently you can only do one 'rapid-charge' and then you must do a normal 'slow' (overnight) charge or you damage the batteries.

So now instead of taking 5 hours, it now takes 2 days and the cost of  hotel accommodation for 5.

 

I suppose I could pay £64,000 and get a Jaguar I pace and achieve 250 miles (real world testing)

 

I really don't see EVs as a practical option until something makes a 'step-change' in battery technology.

Alternatives:

Use public transport to get to your boat.

Live nearer your boat.

Keep the boat nearer to where you live.

 

Whether we like it or not, lifestyles are going to change just as they always have since the day of the hunter gatherer.

 

Keith

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

You are allowed 10% speedo error

 

Obviously you can't rely on that, or 32 in a 30 limit would not have been prosecuted.

 

34 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

if your misses was prosecuted for doing 32 mph in a 30 mph zone her speedo must have been reading 35 mph.

 

No, her speedo might have been reading 32mph. Accurate speedos are permitted!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

You don't get prosecuted for what your speedo says, you get prosecuted for the true speed of your vehicle as recorded by the cameras. You are allowed 10% speedo error so if your misses was prosecuted for doing 32 mph in a 30 mph zone her speedo must have been reading 35 mph. Banged to rights is the term I believe ?

 

Keith

This doesn't seem to be anything other than discretionary.  When I did my speed awareness course the guy said if the photo was taken even at 31mph action followed with the offer of either points or the slightly more expenside speed awareness course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

Alternatives:

Use public transport to get to your boat.

Live nearer your boat.

Keep the boat nearer to where you live.

 

Whether we like it or not, lifestyles are going to change just as they always have since the day of the hunter gatherer.

 

Keith

A) OK - looked at Taking a coach - Stagecoach website states "that journey is not available"

 

So looked art a combination journey :

The "TravelLine" proposes :

 

1) Walk 27 minutes (that's our nearest bus stop)

2) Take Bus to train station

3) Change to train to Sheffield

4) Change at Sheffield

5) Take Train to Plymouth

6) Walk 27 minutes to the Harbour

 

Journey time 9 hours.

Cost for 5 people ????

 

B ) Live nearer the boat :

I have a business to run.

I have a handicapped 90 year old Father who when we go away I have to make 'arrangements' for.

 

C) Move boat nearer to home

It won't fit anywhere on the East Coast (it is too wide at 23 feet. Even the Windfarm servicing Cats are only 19 feet beam)

 

 

No doubt the suggestion will now be 'sell the boat and buy a small one'.

 

Fortunately we can afford to pay any increased cost of diesel, and by the time of the total ban of ICE by 2035 / 2050 I shall be no longer boating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Steilsteven said:

You are allowed 10% speedo error so if your misses was prosecuted for doing 32 mph in a 30 mph zone her speedo must have been reading 35 mph.

I don’t follow your logic. The speedo in her car is nearasdammit spot on, so it would have been indicating 32mph.

 

Just because speedos are permitted to read up to 10% optimistic doesn’t mean that they all have to. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WotEver said:

I don’t follow your logic. The speedo in her car is nearasdammit spot on, so it would have been indicating 32mph.

 

Just because speedos are permitted to read up to 10% optimistic doesn’t mean that they all have to. 

 

 

Last time I checked (quite a long time ago) speedos were allowed to read up to 10% above true speed but not 10% less. The under-reading tolerance was zero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Last time I checked (quite a long time ago) speedos were allowed to read up to 10% above true speed but not 10% less. The under-reading tolerance was zero.

Hence my reference to 10% ‘optimistic’

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Flyboy said:

Although I note that 9 of the 33 forces that responded wouldn’t confirm (or deny) that threshold, and another 12 forces refused to even take part in the survey. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Flyboy said:

Certainly not my experience, my speedo was showing about a needle thickness over 30 and they said I was doing 32 and I opted for the speed awareness course.  Also not what the guy (ex traffic cop) who ran the course said, he said if you were clocked at 31 in a 30 limit you would be "done".

 

Admittedly this was 10 years ago so things may have changed.

41 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Although I note that 9 of the 33 forces that responded wouldn’t confirm (or deny) that threshold, and another 12 forces refused to even take part in the survey. 

So acctually only about 53% (ish) gave an answer.  I am not sure we can be certain all the others are doing what the 24 who say 10% +2 are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Also not what the guy (ex traffic cop) who ran the course said, he said if you were clocked at 31 in a 30 limit you would be "done".

 

They can't really say anything other than that can they? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.