Drivers and their problems

Pub bike wrote:

Rachel Reeves is mulling unfreezing the fuel duty escalator which could generate £3bn annually.

Here's an idea:

Charge fuel duty not just on volume of fuel but also based on engine size and/or fuel consumption in order to encourage motorists to buy less powerful and more efficient cars, and generate tax revenue to pay for government services such as child benefit.

To achieve this, at the filling station, ANPR is used for example to capture the registration plate, which is then used to look up the amount of fuel duty payable in a similar way to other road/vehicle pricing schemes such as LTNs, ULEZ and congestion charging.  This technology is becoming ubiquitous.

Filling stations would then make a regular fuel duty return to HMRC.

I doubt this would see an end to 6.3 V8 twin turbo 4x4 supercars being used for the school run and harrassing other road users, but it would help.

That seems over complicated as putting tax on the amount of fuel would automatically provide an incentive to drive less or use more efficient vehicles.

However, I can see an issue with the poorer demographic being penalised for not being able to afford to change to a more efficient vehicle. Maybe have an amount of fuel duty reclaimable for low incomes?

Whenever I see one of those with its jaunty spare wheel I think, "there goes a 'fun' person

Yes- he will describe himself as living an 'outdoor lifestyle'

hawkinspeter wrote:

However, I can see an issue with the poorer demographic being penalised for not being able to afford to change to a more efficient vehicle. Maybe have an amount of fuel duty reclaimable for low incomes?

A reclaim procedure would also overburden time poor as well money poor drivers.  It would also require HMRC to hire a load of new people to verify the claims.  Imagine having to send in or scan all the receipts and verify them individually to claim money back, and the opportunities for fraud.  SHould there be a unique code for each transaction verified between the vendor and HMRC that can then be use to validate the claim?  Way too complicated and vulnerable to fraud.  

That is why I suggested the idea of higher fuel duty for higher consumption using a technology solution provided by the vendor that is basically using off-the-shelf components..

Fuel duty on its own is a blunt instrument and just raising it will adversely impact e.g. care workers who have to do home visits and require a car for their job but can't really afford it.  That is a big political argument for never raising the duty because the duty is too blunt an instrument.  And those wealthy enough to afford electric cars forgo this problem altogether.  If the duty is means tested in some way so that luxury vehicles are targetted then that is a different story.

Pub bike wrote:

 That is a big political argument for never raising the duty

Not really - it's an argument for paying care workers properly so that they can afford it.

tbh I doubt she is really, I suspect theyre using it abit like the Tories did pre budgets, float an idea in the press, gauge the reaction, likely to be bad, waffle on about the hard choices, such that when the budget actually comes the thing theyre really going to tax then doesnt seem so bad, and youll be left with a well the choice was this or tax fuel more, we're choosing the best for the hard workers of the country, blah blah blah, etc.

David9694 wrote:

I did an arts thing 

The North Circular has been named the most polluted road in London, but for many people, it's known as home. Louis photographed the residents of the road, curious how they ended up in such an inhospitable and polluted environment. In 1952, the great London 'pea soup' Smog led to the clean air act four years later. This inspired the project to make invisible pollution visible. By hanging the photographic prints by the roadside, the image surfaces collected dangerous road dust, which were then photographed using an electron microscope to make clear the dangerous particles that are invisible to the naked eye. This particulate matter is 2.5-10 micrometres wide, so small that it slips past our bodies' defences; you can fit a thousand on the full stop at the end of this sentence. These particles penetrate deep into our respiratory and circulatory system, damaging our bodies. 

The work draws attention to the invisible and dangerous impact of our love for fossil fuel powered motor engines.

Unfortunately, most of the particulate pollution ends up getting washed off into our waterways and certainly the tyre particulates are terrible for the health of marine life. However, there seems to be a national policy to keep polluting our waterways with the regulator being utterly toothless (e.g. if a pollution spill is reported late by a water company, then the regulator cannot measure the scale of it and won't penalise the company for it).

I'll bet the sergeant had a difficult childhood.

David9694 wrote:

How much space has to be turned over to cars? Here's an example of where the NT should stop privileging cars. The car parking it does have should be for essential (e.g. blue badge) use only. Anything else should require to be booked and be expensive. Access should be by boat, bike and bus only. 

UPDATE: planning permission refused 

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/cornwall-planning-trelis...

Uproar over National Trust Trelissick plans as locals fear 'chaos' 

King Harry Ferry and Enterprise Boats are among those concerned about plans to put a new car park on ancient woodland and the effects it will have on the river crossing

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/national-trust-car-park-...

Notable that one of the big objections was that the pedestrian crossing would inconvenience drivers, and lead to them (through no fault of their own) experiencing road rage.

The objections to that proposal are weird.

The NT are proposing an uncontrolled pedestrian crossing over a B Road, and they are all claiming it will be dangerous and clog up the traffic and damage the business of the ferry - where that road traffic goes.

The capacity of the ferry is 28 vehicles max, and it goes about twice an hour in each direction.

So the flow is maxed out at about 2 cars per minute.

They are whining about 4 minute delays for motor vehicles casued by the pedestrian crossing and how pedestrians will "make it dangerous", yet the ferry only goes every 20-30 minutes, and they charge cycles disproportionately high fares. They are also objectinkg to a bit of traffic calming, and a slightly longer 30mph limit on a narrow road.

TBF the proposdal is also strange, given that the NT is working on increasing active travel.

This one seems to work the other way, and be genuine Nimbyism - Pimlico wanting to keep its passports.

Locals suffer from turbo-carbrain.

One of the key objections was that a pedestrian crossing from the new car park across the road "would make the road dangerous".

The King Harry Ferry can carry just over 100 cars per hour, which is not exactly a lot. Capacity 34, once every 20 minutes.

The Enterprise Boats Ferry runs 4 times per day each and can carry 100 pedestrian - no cars.

They don't want to come out of 1932.

The place is in the middle of nowhere, so an instant pivot to "no more cars" is difficult, short of say a park and ride. But they need a pivot to post-1950 instead.

David9694 wrote:

"No more cars" as in no additional cars, or none at all?  No-one is saying the latter (sadly). 

Pinch-points like this where cars try to concentrate remind us how staggeringly inefficient and space/ resource hungry cars are.  Public transport (bus, boat), with its currently meagre 4 arrivals a day at Trelissick can be stepped-up and the headcount increases rapidly as you go to 6 to 8 etc. Each car brings 2-4 people, each bus 20-40.  The locals would benefit from a more frequent no 493 bus service to Truro.

The NT seems to have the capital to throw at a bigger parking "solution".  But it could reduce the on-site parking at Trelissick and instead (revenue, of course) lay on a more frequent bus service (your park & ride).  In Dartmouth/Kingswear, there's a tourist "circuit" by train and boat - there are options to develop something like this between Falmouth and Truro. 

But the NT continues to pursue a largely pro-car policy, flinging money and space at providing ever more parking, neglecting active travel alternatives. A policy that excludes many would-be visitors, and also has no future. 

"No! More cars"

One for wtjs !

Sadly, many people think LancsFilth are embarrassed by 'this sort of thing'. They're not. They have survived many years of a policy of completely ignoring road traffic offences, they survived the Nicola Bulley debacle, etc. and they have (or, possibly, had) a compliant and useless PCC and very low expectations from a public which is also anti-cyclist.

brooksby wrote:

Quote:

A man who took a picture of a ‘Welcome to Florida’ sign while driving allegedly caused a crash that killed his three nephews and niece.

Marvin Redondo-Funes, 25, reportedly slowed down to photograph the sign at the Georgia-Florida border while driving from New York with his girlfriend and the four kids.

Redondo-Funes allegedly went down to 1 to 2 mph in order to snap a clear picture of the state line and a car behind him did not see the sudden slow-down and rear-ended him at full speed, according to the Florida Highway Patrol.

https://metro.co.uk/2024/11/25/uncle-picture-welcome-sign-car-crash-kill...

To me that sounds like the following driver caused the crash by not concentrating on what the car ahead was doing. There can be any number of reasons why a car needs to suddenly slow/stop and although photographing a sign shouldn't be one, it doesn't mean that following drivers just carry on regardless.

(Not trying to excuse the Uncle as he had the children in the back seat not wearing seat belts and had a suspended/revoked license)

I am admiring the superbly unnecessary precision of

Quote:

More than  94.6% of journeys using the Dartford Crossing are paid correctly and on time

though.

hawkinspeter wrote:

To me that sounds like the following driver caused the crash by not concentrating on what the car ahead was doing. There can be any number of reasons why a car needs to suddenly slow/stop and although photographing a sign shouldn't be one, it doesn't mean that following drivers just carry on regardless.

There are a lot of people out there who seem to think exactly that.  It's like all those times that the traffic lights change as you are halfway across a crossing, and the oncoming motorists seem to be of the opinion that if you're still in the roadway then you're fair game…

David9694 wrote:

it's way off-topic, but the police for several days seemed to lose the narrative to mr self-appointed underwater search specialist. 

mr specialist 'my guys have searched the river 3 miles downstream: she is not there'

dog Walker <finds the body in some reeds a week later a mile downstream>

IIRC didn't the same guy try to get involved in the search for that British teenager who disappeared on Tenerife?

David9694 wrote:

it's way off-topic, but the police for several days seemed to lose the narrative to mr self-appointed underwater search specialist. 

mr specialist 'my guys have searched the river 3 miles downstream: she is not there'

dog Walker <finds the body in some reeds a week later a mile downstream>

TBF underwater search is incredibly challenging, and IIRC part of this river was tidal. Things can get moved around at random times.

Having said that, while this dude was presumably motivated by trying to help he didn't seem shy of airtime. There also seemed to be an extraordinary number of people inserting themselves into the story. And ultimately the initial police theory turned out to be correct (seems odd to defendLancs police! ).

Intrepid investigive journalist uses taxi to get to traffic chaos street but somehow forgets local and important mayoral elections close local schools for use as polling stations.

Hirsute wrote:

"Always leave enough room between your vehicle and the one infront so you can get out of the queue easily if you need ... half a car length of visible road, also helps lessen the domino effect in situations like this"

Which is definitely best practice, if you don't mind the motorists behind you honking their horns at you and wanting you to close up the line so that maybe one extra car will get through on a green light 

Jogle wrote:

One person's "loading bay" is another person's bus stop...

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/dangerous-bus-stop-put-u...

Here it is on Streetview:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/hUhCNxhcFtv96pwBA?g_st=ac

Looks like the loading bay signs went up between 2014 and 2021.

David9694 wrote:

Worcester News readers react to proposed blanket 20mph speed limit

...James Toghill, was also sceptical, saying: "No to 20mph, cars brake better than they ever have and are designed to hit pedestrians in a safer manner than old cars."

https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/24582729.worcester-news-readers-rea...

Can't we start designing cars to NOT hit pedestrians?

David9694 wrote:

Lord Montagu issues climate change warning at estate dinner

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/24696530.lord-montagu-issues-climate-ch...

Maybe he's about to dump the 2025 programme of car-fests.

To be fair, if we were to shove all the cars into museums and only drive them on occasional days out, then there'd be a lot less emissions.