Then if and when the next financial crisis hits us, I will be calling for those politicians to be banged up alongside their banker mates.
It's a vicious circle W_Y, the reason that your village only has one bus service per day is probably due to the car industry. Before we had cars there were twice as many railway stations as there are now. This is particularly acute in Germany where they have run down their public transport systematically for many years just to stimulate their poxy car industry.
Reason is most likely to be more related to demand - even with 1 service a day it's half empty. I can see my local railway from my garden and there is a station within a couple of miles in each direction and the trains are generally packed. Problem Cologne, is that most people like their cars and the "freedom" it gives them and that is far more important to them than the environment
Bring back steam trains! Or do they pollute too much! I agree that people rely so much now on cars..... population demographics etc mean that for many it is the only convenient way to get around. When i lived in London I didn't have a car for years..... and when working in the centre of Leeds i used to walk or get the bus in. I guess a better way forward would be in hybird low emission cars etc...... and of course I have an affected 2.0 diesel Skoda at the mo.
I agree W_Y that driving is fun and it offers a sense of freedom (cycling does as well but not as quickly). However, when your rights and freedoms start to restrict those of others (ie. to live in a pleasant environment) then they stop being rights. Surely the task in the future involves a revolution in public transport - making it more attractive, safer, more punctual and offering the same freedoms. Rather than viewing it through techno fix solutions such as electro cars. Also the car has become status symbol number 1 in many countries, is associated (very strangely) with being masculine, trendy, successfull etc. etc. through clever advertizing. There are even some countries where it is assumed that if you are not a car driver you are, in some way, 'not a real man', this is particularly so in Germany - there public transport is for 'poor' people - compare the clientel on the London tube with the equivalent in Germany !
I am not sure what it means... .they will do a fix and then my car will have worse fuel economy/ performance? Incidentally this months Which report has found that up to 95% of diesel cars produce way over the lawful emission levels...
Renault factories have been raided recently by the police who are investigating what involvement, if any, that manufacturer has. So far there has been no feed back.
If I understand the issue correctly, VW added some "workaround" coding to the Engine Management Software that could detect when the engine was being tested and made adjustments to the engine settings so that the emissions, particularly the NOX emissions, were lowered and within the required legislation limits (I also think that the limit in the US is much lower than in the EU). During normal usage this code is bypassed and the emissions would not meet the limits. I think the fix applied is somewhat dependent on the car as well as the engine and will reduce the emissions as well as remove the workaround - but no clue of any impact to economy or performance. We were sold on modern diesels being more environment friendly as they produced less CO2's and their NOX and particulate emissions had been significantly reduced.
Just in case we forget that pollution is a killer on Local BBC news etc yesterday: Leeds named hotspot for air pollution deaths as epidemic costs local NHS £480m please log in to view this image Smog over Leeds city centre PIC: Ross Parry Almost 700 people in Leeds will die this year from illnesses related to air pollution, with an overall cost to the local health economy of £480m, it has been claimed. Newly released research from environmental campaign group Global Action Plan (GAP) - based on World Health Organisation and regional Public Health data - predicts there will be 2,567 premature adult deaths in Yorkshire this year from bad air quality. please log in to view this image l Leeds is the worst regional hotspot - and third nationally - with 680 predicted deaths in 2016. The projection for Wakefield is 178, Bradford 222, Sheffield 500 and York 82. The campaign group has now launched a five-point manifesto urging local authorities - which oversee public health matters - to help curb the toll of the silent killer. GAP’s research found that air pollution costs Leeds more than obesity, one of the biggest national health challenges. Air pollution costs Leeds £480m, while obesity costs £304m. Caroline Watson, partner at GAP, said: “You might imagine the deaths and illnesses that result from air pollution were consigned to the history books when Leeds was in the midst of the Industrial Revolution, but today’s research shows that at least 680 will die early this year. That is simply unacceptable. Individual people must be empowered to take steps to avoid pollution’s worst effects. “Air pollution is not just an environmental threat it is a public health risk. Our five-point manifesto shows the council that there are steps they could take to improve the lives of the people who live here.” The group has today launched its Air Quality Manifesto, setting out how the city might reduce the impact of poor air quality. Its five point plan includes practical solutions such as car free days in Leeds City Centre. One GAP initiative, the Cleaner Air Programme, has already seen the introduction of Clean Air Zones around hospitals in other parts of the UK. The group is now looking to bring the idea to Leeds. Simon Bowens, Yorkshire campaign lead for Friends of the Earth, said: “Air pollution is the second biggest cause of premature death after smoking in Leeds and across Yorkshire and yet many of the thousands of these deaths are avoidable. “The proposals within the Air Quality Manifesto are welcome and a Clean Air Zone is needed to get the dirtiest vehicles off our roads, but ambitious action needs to be taken to reduce traffic in the worst affected areas. “Local action by councils and central Government to promote public transport and active travel such as walking and cycling is essential.” “Devolved transport spending needs to be targeted at reducing traffic and pollution and not on building roads which will just stimulate traffic growth.” A spokesman for Leeds City Council said: “The council has been working on a number of initiatives to help tackle air pollution in the city, including working to improve our own fleet, for example seeking to use Compressed Natural Gas for our council refuse collection vehicles, fitting solar panels to our own buildings and more than 1,000 council homes and encouraging people to use sustainable transport and seeing where we can influence others or help the transport industry to make positive changes. “We are also encouraging businesses, communities and individuals to think about ways they may be able to contribute to cutting pollution with the aim of improving both air quality and public health in the city. “We are always keen to work with groups and organisations who may be able to help and will look very closely at any proposals to see if they will help us achieve these goals.” As previously reported, Leeds is one of seven cities in England at risk of missing European targets on air quality - which come into force in 2020 - and could face financial penalties. Public Health England has previously estimated that long term exposure to pollution contributed to 5.5 per cent of all adult deaths in the city in 2010. Nitrogen Dioxide is estimated to be responsible for 23,500 deaths in the UK each year, while a further 29,000 are killed by particulates - which are tiny particles of soot. Read more: http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co....-costs-local-nhs-480m-1-7698344#ixzz3yWyhPfvQ We dont expect this in 21st century UK eh......
Problem is Yorkie that the report is from an Environmental Campaign Group i.e. this is the whole reason to be, it's their business and anything report that pertains to be factual but is full of:- Claimed Predicted Projection So none of the consequences predicted have any basis in fact, just on predicted data. If these groups did not produce these reports, they have no reason to be - I wonder who pays their salaries?
The report is based in information received from the World Health Organization and from public health data - the same studies are being done in most European Cities to see if they conform to internationally agreed clean air standards. Cologne has the same problem because of its high population density, high traffic levels and lack of wind - that cases of asthma and croup are higher amongst children growing up in the worst areas is self evident - rates of chronic rhinosinusitis are also measurably higher . W_Y will you also suggest that the smog picture is not real ?
As WY says its always claimed predicted projected and these pollution based cost estimates are a joke! Take result of into account the cost savings to health costs as a result of non cross contamination of disease resulting from use of mass transit, safety and health benefits of using a car with particle and pollen filters etc... One can make stats prove any theory, i just look at life expectancy which is much improved now as a result of fossil fuel use (improvement correlates with the industrial revolution). The problem now is that we outlive our minds in most cases with massive issues in Alzheimers and in terms of our bodies cancer as a result of extended lifespans. I love my cats and have done since I was 11 when I had my first one and way before when my interest was awakened as I spent many a night underneath my fathers cars helping with restoration. 3.0 twin turbo petrol fun at 10 mpg, 2.2 litre turbo diesel, 3.0 normally aspirated, 2.7 litre normally aspirated, 1.6 normaly aspirated,2.0 normally aspirated all are fun and I have every right to enjoy them as I enjoy the flight of an eagle in the countryside. Trying to push public transport to replace cars is ridiculous. I love to use my bicycles as well but only when safe to do so and in the winter sometimes the weather beats me. I use trains instead of planes when better to do so also. One should always be allowed to use the most effective transport system and often that is the car. I'm in favor though of removing the car from the city equation as it's blatantly impractical, last week in Cairo the ultimate example for me.... Loads of cars and no car parks in a city that with 40 odd million people would be better off with a mix of trams and bikes.....
I suggest that the "research" by GAP and claimed above is just a prediction based on the WHO data, it is not based on any data specific to Leeds or West Yorkshire - so the headline grabbing numbers such as nearly 900 deaths and a cost of £480m are just made up numbers - thus that is why they use words like Claimed, Predicted etc. For someone who has smoked 20 ***s a day all their lives, if they have lung problems and live in the centre of Leeds and die young - what is the root cause? I am not arguing that there are not issues with air pollution, particularly in some cities - my argument is that these "research" claims by these groups are overstated and inaccurate. These groups have an interest to overstate the problems as it is their business - this group is another one of my pet hates, they claim to be a "charity". Interesting reading who funds them and that they "share" some of their revenues with a funding partner - how is that a charity? When one of my sons was a little boy he suffered from mild asthma, the doctor at the time put it down to the dust and Rape Seed pollen and as we live in a small village with a road that is only busy during rush hour Monday - Friday, it's not likely to be car pollution.
Electric cars can't come soon enough. This country is so far behind already... The Jeremy Clarkson wannabes are going to have to deal with it. Fossil fuel engines have had their time and done their damage, time to embrace the future. Our island is too small for everyone to be driving around constantly, especially all the stupid trips round the corner or to the shop that most people could just walk. The public transport system at the moment is a joke (thanks Tories), but with a bit of investment and better planning it could actually work. There will always be a few exceptions, not everyone can live on a bus route or carry their shopping home, but as a nation we need to stop being so lazy and embrace 21st century technologies/solutions.
Interesting that you throw doubt on this study because of its supposed vested interests yet believe those studies paid for by the oil industry on the theme of global warming. Interesting also that you quote the subject of life expectancy - this must be a sore point for England, why ? The average life expectancy of boys at birth in Kensington and Chelsea is 83.3 - for Blackpool it is 74.7 (nearly 9 years difference). For baby girls we have Chiltern at the top with 86.7 and Middlesbrough with 79.8 (nearly 7 years difference). These inequalities have risen over the last 2 decades. For men already aged 65, well they can expect to live for another 21.6 years in Kensington and Chelsea - in Manchester they can expect 15.9 years. These differences are bigger than in other western countries. For the sake of reference at birth the men in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (In the old East Germany) can expect to live to 75.86 and in Baden Württemberg to 79.15 (just over 3 years difference) and for baby girls at the bottom is Saarland with 81.71 years and at the top Baden Württemberg with 83.64. I am sure that you will blame the much larger differences in England on the sticky bun consumption up norf ! On diet, smoking, health care differences etc. but still the large differences need further explanation. Is it healthier to live in some parts of England than others and, if so, why ?
Don't your numbers rather contradict the claims that pollution in inner cities is causing people to die young? Surely if this was the case then people in Blackpool with it's fresh sea air would live longer then those in inner city West London? Whilst the delta is not as great in Germany, the age of the lowest life expectancy examples is very similar between the 2 countries (just over 1 year difference), so the majority of the difference is because the male life expectancy in West London is nearly 4 years more then in your German example - why is Germany not as high? Do you have the numbers for East London or posh parts of Cheshire? Life expectancy demographics is a complex subject that is not explained in easy generalisations - but poverty, poor education and family influences have significant impacts.
