|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 11, 2023 12:21:52 GMT
At the root of all the negativity concerning electric vehicles in the UK is the absence of a national charging infrastructure and the apparent disinterest on the part of the government in creating one.
The obvious and glaring mismatch between the government’s stated aim of replacing ICE vehicles by Year X (2040 has been mooted) and the inability to create the necessary infrastructure generation and charging must surely prompt a re-evaluation of ‘The Plan’. Perhaps it’s time the country focused instead on a joined-up public transport network instead of the patchwork quilt of barely functional private and public service providers who try their best in their own little patch but have little relevance in the overall scheme of things.
With over 33 million cars on the road, as well as seven million other vehicles the most sensible strategy, rather than attempting and failing to install a system to cater for 40+ million electric vehicles, must surely be to wean as many road-users off their private cars and onto public transport?
The advantages are many and obvious: less pollution, less competition for scarce road and off-road resources, fewer accidents and fatalities, a healthier population, an improved balance of payments, less stress and road rage and, even, the retrieval of millions of suburban and urban front gardens from their present role as off-street parking lot.
But will anyone grasp the nettle?
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 11, 2023 12:38:47 GMT
One route might to be ignore passenger traffic for now and concentrate on moving freight from the motorways onto rail.
I can't believe the government has decided it is going to inconvenience everyone to this degree to practically no benefit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 11, 2023 12:52:13 GMT
Perhaps the original strategic blunder was to encourage an aspiration for American or Australian styles of mobility in a country so small, crowded and devoid of physical resources.
The Singapore model, which combines tight restrictions on private vehicle ownership with a highly-efficient public transport infrastructure would have been a better option, even allowing for difference in scale.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 11, 2023 13:01:01 GMT
Perhaps the original strategic blunder was to encourage an aspiration for American or Australian styles of mobility in a country so small, crowded and devoid of physical resources. The Singapore model, which combines tight restrictions on private vehicle ownership with a highly-efficient public transport infrastructure would have been a better option, even allowing for difference in scale. I think you do what you can afford. If people want private travel, so be it. I have to say, the notion of regularly using public transport in our modern 'fallout 3 uk' scenario is somewhat unappetizing Perhaps, if the government is seriously considering this option, it should also allow private citizens without convictions to carry guns. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 11, 2023 13:21:08 GMT
I'm not sure I see the connection between restrictions on private vehicle ownership and the right to carry a gun. It's not one that the Singaporeans have ever made.
Can you elaborate?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 11, 2023 17:04:31 GMT
With over 33 million cars on the road, as well as seven million other vehicles the most sensible strategy, rather than attempting and failing to install a system to cater for 40+ million electric vehicles, must surely be to wean as many road-users off their private cars and onto public transport? That might be feasible in large cities but in the rest of the country its totally unrealistic - a viable public transport network just does not exist. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 11, 2023 17:36:41 GMT
The UK and England in particular are highly urbanised. According to a report from HMG 83% of the population of England is urbanised, and the process of urbanisation is continuing.  The first priority should of course be a coherent transport network in and between major urban areas which would facilitate significant reductions in private vehicle ownership (per the Singapore model). |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 11, 2023 17:40:29 GMT
A public transport system that provides a decent service to all parts of the kingdom is simply unaffordable. I can see the argument for using road pricing to force cars off the streets in the large urban areas but in the countryside cars are an essential part of life and cannot be replaced.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Jul 12, 2023 6:53:19 GMT
At the root of all the negativity concerning electric vehicles in the UK is the absence of a national charging infrastructure and the apparent disinterest on the part of the government in creating one. The obvious and glaring mismatch between the government’s stated aim of replacing ICE vehicles by Year X (2040 has been mooted) and the inability to create the necessary infrastructure generation and charging must surely prompt a re-evaluation of ‘The Plan’. Perhaps it’s time the country focused instead on a joined-up public transport network instead of the patchwork quilt of barely functional private and public service providers who try their best in their own little patch but have little relevance in the overall scheme of things. With over 33 million cars on the road, as well as seven million other vehicles the most sensible strategy, rather than attempting and failing to install a system to cater for 40+ million electric vehicles, must surely be to wean as many road-users off their private cars and onto public transport? The advantages are many and obvious: less pollution, less competition for scarce road and off-road resources, fewer accidents and fatalities, a healthier population, an improved balance of payments, less stress and road rage and, even, the retrieval of millions of suburban and urban front gardens from their present role as off-street parking lot. But will anyone grasp the nettle? You do realise is the aim is to destroy movement altogether and imprison you in your 15 minute neighbourhood as if a mediaeval serf ? |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Jul 12, 2023 7:03:01 GMT
On the specific subject of public transport
There isn’t any
Our labour, of course, council regularly does ‘free bus’ months and spouts its arse off at how wonderful their electric bus fleet is and how these free journeys mean there is no need to own a car
The issue, which the arse in question had no answer to when i challenged him on this utter bullshit, is that for seven years now i have been the owner of a free bus pass which unlike any season ticketing arrangement available to the PAYING customer is valid across EVERY privatised bus operator, But this rolls royce of travel permits is utterly, utterly pointless as there are no damn buses
If i wanted to get a bus to work i would need to take four and i would have to walk home as two stop running at 5pm. The arseholes in Cardiff deliberately deleted the routes that go past my Cardiff Head Office which means a two mile walk from the nearest bus stop, and last month the ‘renovations’ to Cardiff meant i had to run three miles with heart failure to find a bus stop marked as in use for my ride back to Newport, the others from the centre of town being out of use
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 12, 2023 8:39:49 GMT
@john of Gwent: wrt to your post on public transport I believe I already made a similar point earlier.
Wrt the one prior, I don't believe there is any conspiracy to reduce us to the status of feudal serfs rather what we are witnessing and participating is the natural endgame of a society that has consistently lived beyond its means and the start of a process which will drag us screaming and shouting into a more sustainable future.
In the UK that involve the choice between twenty million fewer cars or twenty million fewer people. Take your pick.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 12, 2023 8:48:38 GMT
Perhaps the original strategic blunder was to encourage an aspiration for American or Australian styles of mobility in a country so small, crowded and devoid of physical resources. The Singapore model, which combines tight restrictions on private vehicle ownership with a highly-efficient public transport infrastructure would have been a better option, even allowing for difference in scale. This all great but i do feel my point about freight has been painted over and ignored. Concentrating on passenger transport first is (imho) doing the hard bit first |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 12, 2023 8:54:39 GMT
I didn't pick up on it because there relatively very few HGVs (0.5 million) compared to cars (33+ million) and vans/light trucks (4 million). But your general point is taken, as much freight as possible should be diverted to the railways.It is possible to do this but requires particularly heavy investment. In Switzerland almost no freight crosses the Alps by road anymore, it all travels by rail via the new base tunnels the Swiss have opened in the last twenty years or so. The same will apply in Austria when the Brenner base tunnel opens (in 2025 iirc).
This sort of change requires heaps of money but, even more important in my view, governments with vision.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 12, 2023 9:03:24 GMT
I didn't pick up on it because there relatively very few HGVs (0.5 million) compared to cars (33+ million) and vans/light trucks (4 million). But your general point is taken, as much freight as possible should be diverted to the railways.It is possible to do this but requires particularly heavy investment. In Switzerland almost no freight crosses the Alps by road anymore, it all travels by rail via the new base tunnels the Swiss have opened in the last twenty years or so. The same will apply in Austria when the Brenner base tunnel opens (in 2025 iirc).
This sort of change requires heaps of money but, even more important in my view, governments with vision.
I don't think your comparison between the two is fair. A freight transport likely has five to ten times the fuel consumption of a car (guessing) and is driven (say) 8 hours every day vs. a private car that spends 95% of its time sitting parked. I think the heavy investment / vision thing is part of the political problem. Massively Inconveniencing people to no end is relatively cheap |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 12, 2023 9:20:58 GMT
People need not be massively inconvenienced, at least great masses need not be, if a coherent public transport system in in place. I as in Brussels two weeks ago and saw (and traveled on) just such a system so they can exist. I don't believe the people of Singapore consider themselves massively inconvenienced because they can't just walk into a car dealership, sign up on the never-never and drive off in the gas guzzler of their dreams. You don't seem to have noticed that I agreed with your point about the need to divert freight to rail.
I also agree that it is a political issue and any question concerning the allocation of resources will always be.
|
|
