LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[Metallic]

Rockets Wrote

>

> Everyone should lobby their local councillor to

> ensure the review is an area-wide review and data

> is collected and presented from all the roads that

> are being impacted - that is the only way a proper

> decision can be made and ensures the LTNs are fair

> to all.

Fat chance of our councillors doing anything at all to help. They are imbedded in the council line and wouldn't know how to help people who actually disagree with them or their plans. They are councillors to a few people, most of the people they support probably don't live in the ward anyway.

[ed_pete]

Slightly off topic but still related to air quality is this recent study of PM10 and PM2.5 particulates and the fact that domestic combustions (primarily one imagines wood burning stoves) account for 38% PM2.5 particulates whereas road transport is 12%, a difference that will become more marked over the next 10 years as more and more people switch to electric vehicles.

I know the legislation has tightened around these but one wonder's of they should be banned completely, especially in urban areas. I have this vision of parents taking umbridge at the volume of traffic near schools contributing to the poor air quality then taking their children home and chucking another log on the wood burner.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/emissions-of-air-pollutants/emissions-of-air-pollutants-in-the-uk-1970-to-2018-particulate-matter-pm10-and-pm25

[malumbu]

This is relevant and I have posted before. Road vehicles lead to local pollution hot spots but overall PM emissions very down. Most should be pretty clean nowadays and when you smell pollution it tends to be older diesels or those where the filters have failed or illegally removed - the MoT has been tightened for the latter (but it pees me off when I see the occasional van or car spewing black smoke). The ULEZ will get the old more polluting diesels off the road. The latest diesels are very clean, following dieselgate/VW standards were tightened.

[Abe_froeman]

I take it from that that you use a woodburner at home Malumbu

[legalalien]

I would agree with a ban, at least in cities for those with alternative heating - there was an article in the Times about this a couple of days ago - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wood-burning-stoves-are-biggest-source-of-dangerous-air-pollution-in-cities-dxqxbtk8n. Most people in cities using wood burners are well off and have an alternative.

[malumbu]

Another point, picking up on other threads, when you are stuck in traffic (this is general advice) turn your engine off. And don't disable your stop start technology, which most modern vehicles have. Simple. But for some reason most ignore.

https://idlingaction.london/

Enforcement is difficult and few receive FPN although this makes a good read https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=10&t=1705944

[Rockets]

Actually a lot of cars disable start/stop functionality automatically when the car isn't able to sufficiently charge the battery as it needs to be moving to charge. So, paradoxically, the increased congestion caused by the LTNs has a double-whammy negative impact as start/stop becomes less effective.

[redpost]

Stop/start equipped cars have a bigger battery, special alternator and will disable the feature if the battery is too low. The feature may also be disabled if aircon is working hard, the engine isn't warmed up sufficiently or for a diesel the particulate trap is going through a cleaning cycle.

So, if your stop/start isn't working then perhaps the LTN may not be the blame. However, most of the time it will be working and saving you money and peoples health.

To support stop/start in a heavy SUV the battery is around 20kg heavier, yet another reason not to buy one.

[DulwichCentral]

slarti b Wrote:

> No idea whether they are tree hugging but the

> authors are pretty biased activists and

> propogandists for LTN's, far from objective

> academics.

Hmmmm when it comes to evidence - who would I trust more?

A Professor of Transport at the University of Westminster, who teaches on Westminster?s MSc Transport Planning and Management.

OR an anonymous member of One Dulwich who analyses a commonplace feedback site with no access to actual data.

God that's a tough one ;)

[malumbu]

Article here about stop start from a fairly authoritative source (RAC) https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/road-safety/stop-start-engines-and-engine-idling-the-law/ Although I did like one of the comments - stop start will bugga up my EGR (Exhaust Gas Recirculation) - which the answer is: don't buy a diesel if all you ever do is drive in an urban environment. The article was very positive on reduced pollution.

There's always a danger of quoting newspaper articles as they essentially pander to their readership - I expect the Torygraph and Grauniad are as diametrically opposed oj this issue as they were on Brexit. Having worked loosely in public affairs it's quite frightening when you have some expertise in a subject to find out how inaccurate they can be, and when I have dealt directly with journos how lazy too. "I can't give you the answer but there is very good book which gives you examples of enforcement action, I can even photocopy and highlight the lines for you". "No can't be bothered".

I always loved the Grauniad's view on buy to let - alternating between great way of investing your inheritance, to all landlords are scumbags.

My fave is of course looking at the headlines in the Express whilst queuing to pay at Lidl - everything this government does is wonderful, we (the UK) are the best. Personally prefer expert view such as academics, particularly where articles are peer reviewed.

[Bicknell]

you know what would be great @dulwichcentral Maybe Southwark could publish its data for all to see. then anyone could analyze it. eg. how many emails objecting to the Duwlich road closures have they recieved? it would be good to know.

[DulwichCentral]

Bicknell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> you know what would be great @dulwichcentral Maybe

> Southwark could publish its data for all to see.

> then anyone could analyze it. eg. how many emails

> objecting to the Duwlich road closures have they

> recieved? it would be good to know.

Well yes that would be interesting - and what evidence the objections are based on.

[Rockets]

Ha ha - the irony of a pro-closure lobbyist questioning what evidence objections might be based on.....;-) I think we can now officially state we have come full-circle on this one! ;-)

[eastdulwichhenry]

Bicknell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> you know what would be great @dulwichcentral Maybe

> Southwark could publish its data for all to see.

> then anyone could analyze it. eg. how many emails

> objecting to the Duwlich road closures have they

> recieved? it would be good to know.

Who cares how many emails they've received? Decisions are not made based on the number of angry people that write in. There's going to be a proper study done towards the end of the year, and we'll see what happens then. My sense is that more people are in favour of the LTN than against it, particularly now that the early teething problems have largely gone away, but who knows.

[march46]

eastdulwichhenry Wrote:

>

> Who cares how many emails they've received?

> Decisions are not made based on the number of

> angry people that write in. There's going to be a

> proper study done towards the end of the year, and

> we'll see what happens then. My sense is that more

> people are in favour of the LTN than against it,

> particularly now that the early teething problems

> have largely gone away, but who knows.

Well said. It shouldn't be a case of the loudest voice etc, although this forum is that all over. It's no wonder many choose not to engage here.

[mockingbird]

worth a read

https://www.onlondon.co.uk/paul-wheeler-why-londons-road-wars-are-tearing-labour-apart/

and in the context of increasing evidence that Southwark consultations are not worth the Commonplace (or other media of choice consultation method of the moment) they are written on

[Spartacus]

march46 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> eastdulwichhenry Wrote:

> >

> > Who cares how many emails they've received?

> > Decisions are not made based on the number of

> > angry people that write in. There's going to be

> a

> > proper study done towards the end of the year,

> and

> > we'll see what happens then. My sense is that

> more

> > people are in favour of the LTN than against

> it,

> > particularly now that the early teething

> problems

> > have largely gone away, but who knows.

>

> Well said. It shouldn't be a case of the loudest

> voice etc, although this forum is that all over.

> It's no wonder many choose not to engage here.

I assume Henry and yourself are aware of Soutwark's Commonplace site that was set up to collect feedback on the road closures and other measures ss the part of the Council's Covid Streetspace scheme

And the summation of the data https://dulwichalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Dulwich-has-Spoken.pdf

It's where southwark asked us to tell them our views and the majority said there are problems and want the scheme removed.

[slarti b]

DulwichCentral Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hmmmm when it comes to evidence - who would I trust more? A Professor of Transport at the University of

> Westminster, who teaches on Westminster?s MSc Transport Planning and Management.

Just because an author is an academic doesn't mean they are unbiased. And these studies on traffic seem highly susceptible to bias because of the judgement used in selecting what data to include, what comparisons to use, how wide to draw the cordon etc etc. Remember Andrew Wakefield, Senior lecturer at UCL?

Added to this is it seems to be a very small circle of people producing these traffic reports and the authors often seem linked to campaigns; for example Dr Anna Goodman is involved with many reports and author of the risible study on cycling on Calton Avenue. Is she any relation to the "Anna" who appears as a supporter of the DV closure on teh Clean Air for Dulwich Fb page on 20 June 2020?

Given the incestuous nature of these report authors it would be good to see a proper objective analysis.

>OR an anonymous member of One Dulwich who analyses a commonplace feedback site with no access to actual data.

The One Dulwich report was based on publicly available data from the the site that Southwark council, Councillors and our local MP had directed residents to use for feedback. Just because you don't like the results doesn't mean they should be ignored. You can carry out your own analysis if you wish.

And you are underestimating what intelligent, "non academic" analysts can achieve by investigating and reviewing open source data; ever heard of Bellingcat?

[DulwichCentral]

slarti b Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

>

> Just because you

> don't like the results doesn't mean they should be

> ignored.

>

>

Pot calling kettle black :)

[DulwichCentral]

@slarti

Why does the person who wrote the One Dulwich report want to be anonymous?

The academics you mistrust so deeply are accountable for their work and can be openly challenged.

One Dulwich pump our their theories dressed up as 'News reports' and 'facts' in a nice glossy format. But who are they?

They clearly have the time and money to spend on this - are they a group of wealthy retirees in the heart of Dulwich Village? I don't know, I'm just speculating. But their anonymity doesn't inspire confidence in me.

[march46]

This is an interesting analysis and investigation of commonplace data. Thousands of fake accounts submitting responses, operated by a single overseas server. The lengths some people go to to oppose active travel measures is astonishing!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2021/02/18/consultation-rigging-trolls-get-councils-goat-over-bridge-closures/?__twitter_impression=true&sh=6d28e5802b93

The publicly available data used by One Dulwich/Dulwich Alliance presumably doesn?t show individual accounts, so how do they know if one person submitted multiple responses? This seems to be a major flaw in their report.

[heartblock]

This does some up how clean air campaigners who believe LTNs add to pollution on high density residential roads feel https://www.onlondon.co.uk/paul-wheeler-why-londons-road-wars-are-tearing-labour-apart/

Maybe instead of insulting Ella?s Mum and LittleNinja, people should read the real experience of people living on these roads and educate themselves.

[legalalien]

Did anyone catch Ella?s mum and Little Ninja on TalkRadio last night (think they were discussing LTNs and the Simon Still/ LCC Twitter thing? I missed it. Can?t seem to find it online, just wondered how it went.

[Spartacus]

march46 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This is an interesting analysis and investigation

> of commonplace data. Thousands of fake accounts

> submitting responses, operated by a single

> overseas server. The lengths some people go to to

> oppose active travel measures is astonishing!

>

> https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2021/02/1

> 8/consultation-rigging-trolls-get-councils-goat-ov

> er-bridge-closures/?__twitter_impression=true&sh=6

> d28e5802b93

>

> The publicly available data used by One

> Dulwich/Dulwich Alliance presumably doesn?t show

> individual accounts, so how do they know if one

> person submitted multiple responses? This seems to

> be a major flaw in their report.

That's something you need to take up with the council as the site was created, maintained and promoted by the council

The one Dulwich report just used the same data that the council would have access to.

If you believe there is something underhand about the data and site then discuss it with the council who can put your mind at rest or confirm the situation

[Rockets]

DulwichCentral Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> @slarti

>

> Why does the person who wrote the One Dulwich

> report want to be anonymous?

> The academics you mistrust so deeply are

> accountable for their work and can be openly

> challenged.

>

> One Dulwich pump our their theories dressed up as

> 'News reports' and 'facts' in a nice glossy

> format. But who are they?

> They clearly have the time and money to spend on

> this - are they a group of wealthy retirees in the

> heart of Dulwich Village? I don't know, I'm just

> speculating. But their anonymity doesn't inspire

> confidence in me.

OneDulwich are a group of 1,800 local (predominantly) local residents (check out their website if you want to see where the members live) who have concerns about the way the council has implemented these schemes and the way the council repeatedly puts the interests of pro-closure lobbyists and groups ahead of the wider community. I suspect the majority of OneDulwich members are dismayed at the utter disregard shown by the council and the pro-closure lobbyists for the negative impact these closures are having on the wider Dulwich community.

The fact they are agitating the council and the pro-closure lobbysits so much suggests to me they are doing a fantastic job!