Cyclist rode for three days to attend court hearing for riding on motorway

sodit wrote:

The bloody idiot is the thought that springs to mind its the hard shoulder not a cycle lane.

 

Saying that what a good idea if they had cyclepaths running along side motorways obviously seperated for safety but they normally are the most direct route.

i've been on a few similar paths running alongside the autoroute in France, and they are deeply unpleasant and very boring.

Beatnik69 wrote:

Balin, son of Fundin?

He looks more like Gandalf tbh.  Do you think he wears a wizard's hat when he rides?

Vehlin wrote:

His beliefs prevent him from travelling by transport that burns fossil fuels, yet rides a bike that was delivered in a container ship, then a lorry. He almost certainly eats food that at some point has been inside an internal combusion powered vehicle.

I'd take his beliefs more seriously if he'd rocked up on a home made bike made out of wood he'd sourced himself. However, judging from his interactions with the police I'd say he's just a prize twat.

all or nothing for you, is it? What are you doing to save the world?

ConcordeCX wrote:

Vehlin wrote:

His beliefs prevent him from travelling by transport that burns fossil fuels, yet rides a bike that was delivered in a container ship, then a lorry. He almost certainly eats food that at some point has been inside an internal combusion powered vehicle.

I'd take his beliefs more seriously if he'd rocked up on a home made bike made out of wood he'd sourced himself. However, judging from his interactions with the police I'd say he's just a prize twat.

all or nothing for you, is it? What are you doing to save the world?

Killing themselves?

Vehlin wrote:

His beliefs prevent him from travelling by transport that burns fossil fuels, yet rides a bike that was delivered in a container ship, then a lorry. He almost certainly eats food that at some point has been inside an internal combusion powered vehicle.

I'd take his beliefs more seriously if he'd rocked up on a home made bike made out of wood he'd sourced himself. However, judging from his interactions with the police I'd say he's just a prize twat.

I don't think you'd ever take his beliefs seriously.

And your first paragraph? Do you ever compromise or are all your actions and their externalities in exact alignment with your morals and beliefs?

ChasP wrote:

£20 victim surcharge, who was the victim?

IIRC it goes to charities who support victims of crime, rather than the victim(s) of this particular crime.

don simon wrote:

No one does eccentrics like the British.

One point, if he doesn't support the "car structure". what was he doing an a bloody road?

Roads weren't built for cars ( (C) Carlton Reid?)

(Though motorways were, so perhaps your point stands)

don simon wrote:

No one does eccentrics like the British.

One point, if he doesn't support the "car structure". what was he doing an a bloody road?

I would imagine that all the vast, green fields, hills and dales are strangled with barbed wire fences, walls and people waving shotguns shouting "gerroff moi land"

psling wrote:

Shame his beliefs regarding the motor vehicle don't extend to the superstructure that supports it, he wouldn't have been using a motorway then!

Well, they're paid for from general taxation so flippant or otherwise, that argument doesn't stand..

For that matter there are many Aroads which are motorways in all but name and have patchy cyclepath coverage over their length. Near me is the A3 in Surrey which obliterated some of a well-known cyclists route in the latter 1800s (or so) - parallel path on some parts but not all.

JonD wrote:

psling wrote:

Shame his beliefs regarding the motor vehicle don't extend to the superstructure that supports it, he wouldn't have been using a motorway then!

Well, they're paid for from general taxation so flippant or otherwise, that argument doesn't stand..

I was making an assumption that his beliefs are more to do with the relentless march of  the motor vehicle in society rather than taxation.

psling wrote:

Shame his beliefs regarding the motor vehicle don't extend to the superstructure that supports it, he wouldn't have been using a motorway then! Much nicer B road alternatives to the motorway but he may need to up his navigation by sun and stars skilz...

 

Also interesting this story comes out at the same time as the announcement to do away with new petrol and diesel cars by 2040. Maybe he's just ahead of the game.

He could do with some PR advice, but otherwise good on him!

psling wrote:

Also interesting this story comes out at the same time as the announcement to do away with new petrol and diesel cars by 2040. Maybe he's just ahead of the game.

These are still 2 tons of steel cars, moved by fossil fuel, except fuel is burnt elsewhere. Urban people just delocalize pollution, in the backcountry. Nice...And how charming is a windfarm in a lovely backcountry .

The most important is that urbanites can pretend to be ecologists !!! An e-Bentley for example.

frogg wrote:

psling wrote:

Also interesting this story comes out at the same time as the announcement to do away with new petrol and diesel cars by 2040. Maybe he's just ahead of the game.

These are still 2 tons of steel cars, moved by fossil fuel, except fuel is burnt elsewhere. Urban people just delocalize pollution, in the backcountry. Nice...And how charming is a windfarm in a lovely backcountry .

The most important is that urbanites can pretend to be ecologists !!! An e-Bentley for example.

According to .gov.uk there were 35 million vehicles in the UK in 2013. The overwhelmingly majority of these are little generators churning out pollution. The number of them is likely to grow and unless we do something about the filth they spit out we're all going to suffer fairly horribly.

By moving the power generation to a very, very much smaller number of sites you can control it, for example by capturing and recycling or otherwise treating the pollution, and as we get better it will be easier to replace the dirty generators with clean ones, without having to replace tens of millions of cars.

An example of where this has already happened is the London Underground, which used to be powered by coal-fired power stations. Those same power stations are now gas-fired and much cleaner.

Eventually we'll get it all from clean power from Norway and Iceland but nobody will notice other than the children who aren't being poisoned and the old people not dropping dead all over the place.

Congestion's still a problem though, but I suspect people will stop owning cars when it's illegal for humans to drive them, and they're banned from city centres.

ConcordeCX wrote:

frogg wrote:

psling wrote:

Also interesting this story comes out at the same time as the announcement to do away with new petrol and diesel cars by 2040. Maybe he's just ahead of the game.

These are still 2 tons of steel cars, moved by fossil fuel, except fuel is burnt elsewhere. Urban people just delocalize pollution, in the backcountry. Nice...And how charming is a windfarm in a lovely backcountry .

The most important is that urbanites can pretend to be ecologists !!! An e-Bentley for example.

According to .gov.uk there were 35 million vehicles in the UK in 2013. The overwhelmingly majority of these are little generators churning out pollution. The number of them is likely to grow and unless we do something about the filth they spit out we're all going to suffer fairly horribly.

By moving the power generation to a very, very much smaller number of sites you can control it, for example by capturing and recycling or otherwise treating the pollution, and as we get better it will be easier to replace the dirty generators with clean ones, without having to replace tens of millions of cars.

An example of where this has already happened is the London Underground, which used to be powered by coal-fired power stations. Those same power stations are now gas-fired and much cleaner.

Eventually we'll get it all from clean power from Norway and Iceland but nobody will notice other than the children who aren't being poisoned and the old people not dropping dead all over the place.

Congestion's still a problem though, but I suspect people will stop owning cars when it's illegal for humans to drive them, and they're banned from city centres.

AGW is frankly discredited now by years of still revealing fact faking (including long-term climate history) in the arguments for significant global warming and consequent warming effects, and CO2 sequestration is costly and dumb because that's what vegetation does!  This deception's real purpose is to wreck Captalism and freedom, to install global neo-feudal dictatorship and slavery, as revealed by some UN staff and other degenerate 'elites' own public words!

Solar, wind and wave power have already been documented by qualified people to not scale enough and not be reliable enough, and biofuel is an evil misuse of valuable agricultural land.

If the total end-to-end power losses, from fuel energy to the wheels, ends up greater than for an internal combustion engine, then it will be a huge, wasteful mistake to do more centalisation of power generation and the required massive transmission upgrades to the already stretched National Grid!

I very much doubt that more centralised power generation is sensible (including Coal and Uranium nuclear fission); it would probably be far better to decentralise power generation to reduce transmission/conversion power losses e.g. many factory prefrabicated, compact, pebble-bed, Thorium-salt, nuclear-fission reactor units, and to still use some (much higher power density) hydrocarbon fuels for where electric battery storage is inadequate for peak demand and longer distance road,  water, and air vehicle, travel.

urbane wrote:

ConcordeCX wrote:

frogg wrote:

psling wrote:

Also interesting this story comes out at the same time as the announcement to do away with new petrol and diesel cars by 2040. Maybe he's just ahead of the game.

These are still 2 tons of steel cars, moved by fossil fuel, except fuel is burnt elsewhere. Urban people just delocalize pollution, in the backcountry. Nice...And how charming is a windfarm in a lovely backcountry .

The most important is that urbanites can pretend to be ecologists !!! An e-Bentley for example.

According to .gov.uk there were 35 million vehicles in the UK in 2013. The overwhelmingly majority of these are little generators churning out pollution. The number of them is likely to grow and unless we do something about the filth they spit out we're all going to suffer fairly horribly.

By moving the power generation to a very, very much smaller number of sites you can control it, for example by capturing and recycling or otherwise treating the pollution, and as we get better it will be easier to replace the dirty generators with clean ones, without having to replace tens of millions of cars.

An example of where this has already happened is the London Underground, which used to be powered by coal-fired power stations. Those same power stations are now gas-fired and much cleaner.

Eventually we'll get it all from clean power from Norway and Iceland but nobody will notice other than the children who aren't being poisoned and the old people not dropping dead all over the place.

Congestion's still a problem though, but I suspect people will stop owning cars when it's illegal for humans to drive them, and they're banned from city centres.

AGW is frankly discredited now by years of still revealing fact faking (including long-term climate history) in the arguments for significant global warming and consequent warming effects, and CO2 sequestration is costly and dumb because that's what vegetation does!  This deception's real purpose is to wreck Captalism and freedom, to install global neo-feudal dictatorship and slavery, as revealed by some UN staff and other degenerate 'elites' own public words!

Solar, wind and wave power have already been documented by qualified people to not scale enough and not be reliable enough, and biofuel is an evil misuse of valuable agricultural land.

If the total end-to-end power losses, from fuel energy to the wheels, ends up greater than for an internal combustion engine, then it will be a huge, wasteful mistake to do more centalisation of power generation and the required massive transmission upgrades to the already stretched National Grid!

I very much doubt that more centralised power generation is sensible (including Coal and Uranium nuclear fission); it would probably be far better to decentralise power generation to reduce transmission/conversion power losses e.g. many factory prefrabicated, compact, pebble-bed, Thorium-salt, nuclear-fission reactor units, and to still use some (much higher power density) hydrocarbon fuels for where electric battery storage is inadequate for peak demand and longer distance road,  water, and air vehicle, travel.

all of that guff may or may not be true (probably isn't), but either way it's a non sequitur since I was talking about pollution that kills people because cars are blowing the stuff directly into children's lungs. Fuck all to do with global warming.

frogg wrote:

psling wrote:

Also interesting this story comes out at the same time as the announcement to do away with new petrol and diesel cars by 2040. Maybe he's just ahead of the game.

These are still 2 tons of steel cars, moved by fossil fuel, except fuel is burnt elsewhere. Urban people just delocalize pollution, in the backcountry. Nice...And how charming is a windfarm in a lovely backcountry .

The most important is that urbanites can pretend to be ecologists !!! An e-Bentley for example.

No, the important thing is that I won't cough and choke so much when walking and cycling around, and maybe the general health of everyone around me might improve a bit.

I don't deny that it doesn't solve all the other problems (and paradoxically might make it harder to fix them by removing one downside to car travel), but for me it will be an improvement, and nothing to do with 'pretending to be ecologists'.

As for 'delocalising pollution' - well I could say its about time the rest of you had to breath in the crap - I've had to do it my entire life! It's your turn (and what kind of logic says its better to produce the pollution in the areas where almost everyone lives, rather than the areas where hardly anyone lives?)