LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[fottos]

Sure, we can all do our bit to reduce carbon emissions. So let's start by reducing imports of Chinese made goods. China is by far the biggest producer of CO2 and they are doing nothing about reducing CO2 levels. They build one massive new coal powered power station every 10 days. China's strategy has resulted in destruction of swathes of production capacity here in the UK - partially due to their use of cheap polluting power generation. The UK cannot compete because of the high cost of electricity here and other restrictions related to CO2 reduction.

The world's biggest CO2 producers...

China (28%)

Rest of the World (21%)

United States (15%)

India (7%)

Russia (5%)

Japan (3%)

Germany (2%)

Iran (2%)

South Korea (2%)

Saudi Arabia (2%)

Indonesia (2%)

Canada (2%)

Mexico (1%)

South Africa (1%)

Brazil (1%)

Turkey (1%)

Australia (1%)

United Kingdom (1%)

Poland (1%)

Italy (1%)

France (1%)

Here in the UK we our meagre 1% output and being made to meet all manner targets by means of many ill-thought out plans - such as heat pumps which grossly inefficient and impractical in a city environment.

[first mate]

I think that is the point some of us were making, let's not narrow the focus exclusively to car usage.

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> Nigello Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Maybe the person who criss-crossed the globe on

> > aeroplanes has no or only one child, is

> vegetarian

> > or vegan, doesn't have a car, cycles most

> places,

> > gives to charity and meticulously recycles or

> > reuses stuff? It isn't a good idea to demonise

> one

> > single thing when, in fact, air travel isn't

> > anywhere near as big as a bad-boy as others

> are,

> > and is making headway in lighter aircraft,

> greener

> > fuels, more efficient use of aircrat, etc.

>

> Agreed. It probably is wise for us to pursue

> policies that generally reduce air travel, cut car

> usage etc though.

[first mate]

Wasn't Southwark Council buying a lot of its paving from China?

fottos Wrote:

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

> Sure, we can all do our bit to reduce carbon

> emissions. So let's start by reducing imports of

> Chinese made goods. China is by far the biggest

> producer of CO2 and they are doing nothing about

> reducing CO2 levels. They build one massive new

> coal powered power station every 10 days. China's

> strategy has resulted in destruction of swathes of

> production capacity here in the UK - partially due

> to their use of cheap polluting power generation.

> The UK cannot compete because of the high cost of

> electricity here and other restrictions related to

> CO2 reduction.

>

> The world's biggest CO2 producers...

> China (28%)

> Rest of the World (21%)

> United States (15%)

> India (7%)

> Russia (5%)

> Japan (3%)

> Germany (2%)

> Iran (2%)

> South Korea (2%)

> Saudi Arabia (2%)

> Indonesia (2%)

> Canada (2%)

> Mexico (1%)

> South Africa (1%)

> Brazil (1%)

> Turkey (1%)

> Australia (1%)

> United Kingdom (1%)

> Poland (1%)

> Italy (1%)

> France (1%)

>

> Here in the UK we our meagre 1% output and being

> made to meet all manner targets by means of many

> ill-thought out plans - such as heat pumps which

> grossly inefficient and impractical in a city

> environment.

[Earl Aelfheah]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> Nigello Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Maybe the person who criss-crossed the globe on

> > aeroplanes has no or only one child, is

> vegetarian

> > or vegan, doesn't have a car, cycles most

> places,

> > gives to charity and meticulously recycles or

> > reuses stuff? It isn't a good idea to demonise

> one

> > single thing when, in fact, air travel isn't

> > anywhere near as big as a bad-boy as others

> are,

> > and is making headway in lighter aircraft,

> greener

> > fuels, more efficient use of aircrat, etc.

>

> Agreed. It probably is wise for us to pursue

> policies that generally reduce air travel, cut car

> usage etc though.

...or simply not campaign to reverse policies that reduce car use and increase active travel.

[DuncanW]

Let's not forget, the number one reason that local government would like to reduce private car travel is to reduce localised pollution to improve the quality of the air we all breathe.

Climate change is obviously a factor too, but the driver (scuse the pun) is air quality in our neighbourhood(s)

This is from TFL:

Air quality myth #2

Myth: Road vehicles aren't the main cause of London's air pollution

FACT: Driving polluting vehicles is the single biggest cause, contributing to around half of the air pollution in

London

https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/air-quality

So I would respectfully suggest that arguments about gas boilers and coal fired power stations in China are red herrings when it comes to this debate. Important topics though they may be in their own right.

[first mate]

In fact, now fottos has reminded us of the central position China has as the world's prime polluter, is it not fairly important to find out to what extent Southwark and its pet contractors use China to source materials?

first mate Wrote:

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

> Wasn't Southwark Council buying a lot of its

> paving from China?

>

> fottos Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Sure, we can all do our bit to reduce carbon

> > emissions. So let's start by reducing imports

> of

> > Chinese made goods. China is by far the biggest

> > producer of CO2 and they are doing nothing

> about

> > reducing CO2 levels. They build one massive

> new

> > coal powered power station every 10 days.

> China's

> > strategy has resulted in destruction of swathes

> of

> > production capacity here in the UK - partially

> due

> > to their use of cheap polluting power

> generation.

> > The UK cannot compete because of the high cost

> of

> > electricity here and other restrictions related

> to

> > CO2 reduction.

> >

> > The world's biggest CO2 producers...

> > China (28%)

> > Rest of the World (21%)

> > United States (15%)

> > India (7%)

> > Russia (5%)

> > Japan (3%)

> > Germany (2%)

> > Iran (2%)

> > South Korea (2%)

> > Saudi Arabia (2%)

> > Indonesia (2%)

> > Canada (2%)

> > Mexico (1%)

> > South Africa (1%)

> > Brazil (1%)

> > Turkey (1%)

> > Australia (1%)

> > United Kingdom (1%)

> > Poland (1%)

> > Italy (1%)

> > France (1%)

> >

> > Here in the UK we our meagre 1% output and

> being

> > made to meet all manner targets by means of

> many

> > ill-thought out plans - such as heat pumps

> which

> > grossly inefficient and impractical in a city

> > environment.

[hpsaucey]

DuncanW Wrote:

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

> Let's not forget, the number one reason that local

> government would like to reduce private car travel

> is to reduce localised pollution to improve the

> quality of the air we all breathe.

> Climate change is obviously a factor too, but the

> driver (scuse the pun) is air quality in our

> neighbourhood(s)

>

> This is from TFL:

> Air quality myth #2

> Myth: Road vehicles aren't the main cause of

> London's air pollution

>

> FACT: Driving polluting vehicles is the single

> biggest cause, contributing to around half of the

> air pollution in

> London

> https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/air-quality

>

>

>

> So I would respectfully suggest that arguments

> about gas boilers and coal fired power stations in

> China are red herrings when it comes to this

> debate. Important topics though they may be in

> their own right.

Re: gas boilers: hence legalalien's suggestion/offer of a new thread ...

HP

[DuncanW]

Fair!

[Penguin68]

We should probably ignore the contribution local car journeys make to the climate crisis as they?re not the *only* contributor.

No no, we must focus only on the use of private vehicles locally, solve that and climate change is history.

Driving polluting vehicles is the single biggest cause, contributing to around half of the air pollution in London

And of course we all know that it is private vehicles (which must all now meet the ULEZ, or at least in autumn) driving locally which are the aforesaid polluting vehicles, not the vast number of commercial diesel vehicles, including still a very significant part of the bus fleet.

[hpsaucey]

first mate Wrote:

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

> In fact, now fottos has reminded us of the central

> position China has as the world's prime polluter,

> is it not fairly important to find out to what

> extent Southwark and its pet contractors use China

> to source materials?

>

> first mate Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Wasn't Southwark Council buying a lot of its

> > paving from China?

> >

> > fottos Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Sure, we can all do our bit to reduce carbon

> > > emissions. So let's start by reducing imports

> > of

> > > Chinese made goods. China is by far the

> biggest

> > > producer of CO2 and they are doing nothing

> > about

> > > reducing CO2 levels. They build one massive

> > new

> > > coal powered power station every 10 days.

> > China's

> > > strategy has resulted in destruction of

> swathes

> > of

> > > production capacity here in the UK -

> partially

> > due

> > > to their use of cheap polluting power

> > generation.

> > > The UK cannot compete because of the high

> cost

> > of

> > > electricity here and other restrictions

> related

> > to

> > > CO2 reduction.

> > >

> > > The world's biggest CO2 producers...

> > > China (28%)

> > > Rest of the World (21%)

> > > United States (15%)

> > > India (7%)

> > > Russia (5%)

> > > Japan (3%)

> > > Germany (2%)

> > > Iran (2%)

> > > South Korea (2%)

> > > Saudi Arabia (2%)

> > > Indonesia (2%)

> > > Canada (2%)

> > > Mexico (1%)

> > > South Africa (1%)

> > > Brazil (1%)

> > > Turkey (1%)

> > > Australia (1%)

> > > United Kingdom (1%)

> > > Poland (1%)

> > > Italy (1%)

> > > France (1%)

> > >

> > > Here in the UK we our meagre 1% output and

> > being

> > > made to meet all manner targets by means of

> > many

> > > ill-thought out plans - such as heat pumps

> > which

> > > grossly inefficient and impractical in a city

> > > environment.

firstmate - that would make for a great FOI.

HP

[ab29]

Good point Penguin, although with this level of overzealousness - which usually means the reason has already departed - you are unlikely to get a sensible reply...

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> We should probably ignore the contribution local

> car journeys make to the climate crisis as they?re

> not the *only* contributor.

>

> No no, we must focus only on the use of private

> vehicles locally, solve that and climate change is

> history.

>

> Driving polluting vehicles is the single biggest

> cause, contributing to around half of the air

> pollution in London

>

> And of course we all know that it is private

> vehicles (which must all now meet the ULEZ, or at

> least in autumn) driving locally which are the

> aforesaid polluting vehicles, not the vast number

> of commercial diesel vehicles, including still a

> very significant part of the bus fleet.

[DuncanW]

Commercial diesel vehicles are included, I thought.

Buses emit more pollution per vehicle than cars, but way less per journey taken. But then you already knew that... :(

[Penguin68]

Buses emit more pollution per vehicle than cars, but way less per journey taken.

Generally true for buses running in rush hour at full capacity (which, with Covid rules they don't at the moment) - but less so when running out of the rush hours and much emptier. And even where the roads are quite clear, they stop and start off again more frequently, so this does add to pollution - although when things are congested of course all vehicles do stop and start a lot. If you compare a clean running modern car (particularly electric) against an old(er) bus things look even worse.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> We should probably ignore the contribution local

> car journeys make to the climate crisis as they?re

> not the *only* contributor.

>

> No no, we must focus only on the use of private

> vehicles locally, solve that and climate change is

> history.

>

This is a thread about LTNs. They don?t have any impact on boilers or planes. They do reduce the number of cars driving around. But we mustn?t make small, positive steps forward unless we can 100% solve the problem of climate change. In fact, best to reverse policies that help the environment.

[Earl Aelfheah]

The idea that because any one thing doesn?t make ?climate change history?, it?s not worth doing, is a manifesto of inaction and dispair.

May as well burn tyres as to stop doing so doesn?t ?solve? climate change.

[Earl Aelfheah]

hpsaucey Wrote:

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

> 'Improving significantly' re: the UK's carbon

> position is still not improving fast or far

> enough.

>

> Yes plenty of other greenhouse gasses of concern

> and improved modelling is needed wrt them as well;

> and also the unintended (toxic) consequences to

> the atmosphere of potential moves to a hydrogen

> economy etc.

>

> This is one thread on LTNs which are about the

> impact of having/not having them, air pollution,

> vehicle use, CO2 and climate change (relative

> importance of which depends on your personal

> viewpoint perhaps). Perhaps we need others on

> reducing carbon in other areas of (local) lives

> if people think there's a risk of sidelining other

> major CO2 contributors?

>

> HP

Quite. Happy to discuss gas boilers and overseas travel, but not sure they?re relevant to a thread on LTNs. A cynic might feel there is some deflection going on

[Rockets]

This is welcome news and about time.

BBC News - Walking and biking prioritised in new Highway Code

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58021450

[Nigello]

Yeah - but not into "biking" - sounds like motorbiking to most ears. It says cycling in the body of the text so probably an editor's attempt to either save space or ape American English. GOod that pedestrians are at the top of the tree!

[DuncanW]

Indeed -- something we all can all agree on?

[sally buying]

With regard to the Dulwich LTN, could someone answer this question. I do not want to make a costly mistake.

With regard to passing thru the Village. If I were to turn right out of Dulwich Park heading north after 10.00 could I head straight through to EDG and Red Post Hill.

I spotted while walking yesterday the signs that said no entry 8-10 a.m, so took it as being ok to turn right but I cannot remember the afternoon times.

I have not been using the park because not being able to turn right adds a great deal of time to my home journey.

I would appreciate an answer from those that know.

Many thanks

[AylwardS]

sally buying the afternoon times are 3pm - 6pm so you can turn right out of the park between 10 and 3

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Yes I do wonder how many people who wage war on

> cars sit in houses with gas fueled boilers

> churning out all sorts of nasties...

Your arguments seem to centre a lot on personal attacks on pro LTN people. Even better you're just sort of inventing a pro LTN persona and attacking that instead.

The thing is road transport is still responsible for more nasties than domestic heating:

https://trustforlondon.fra1.digitaloceanspaces.com/media/documents/up-in-the-air_USKOnej.pdf

So if you want to campaign for cleaner heating, be my guest, not only will I not stop you, I will cheer you on. However if you cared about pollution, you'd also acknowledge the even bigger source. It seems like you simply want to be able to drive places and are using pollution based red herrings to distract from the core of your arguments.

> It would be refreshing to see people put as much

> energy into tackling all climate change

> contributors not just focussing on one of them.

This is classic whataboutism. Oh! Woe! Why is someone concentrating on making the world a better place when I think there's a more deserving cause (which I don't care about) just over there?

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

sally buying Wrote:

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

> With regard to the Dulwich LTN, could someone

> answer this question. I do not want to make a

> costly mistake.

>

> With regard to passing thru the Village. If I were

> to turn right out of Dulwich Park heading north

> after 10.00 could I head straight through to EDG

> and Red Post Hill.

>

> I spotted while walking yesterday the signs that

> said no entry 8-10 a.m, so took it as being ok to

> turn right but I cannot remember the afternoon

> times.

Yes it is OK.

I think they end at 6. Either start at 3 or 4. I think 3.

> I have not been using the park because not being

> able to turn right adds a great deal of time to my

> home journey.

Where are you getting to the park from, more or less?

[sally buying]

AylwardS Wrote:

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

> sally buying the afternoon times are 3pm - 6pm so

> you can turn right out of the park between 10 and

> 3

Thank you

[Earl Aelfheah]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> This is welcome news and about time.

>

> BBC News - Walking and biking prioritised in new

> Highway Code

> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58021450

Agreed. Kinda surprised it wasn?t already the case tbh