Check this out!

Not too good!

http://www.sheffieldtoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=58&ArticleID=1268574

Slightly glad Im living on the northern fringes of the city in that case:)

mmm bad news,it will probably give the council an excuse to put big increases on council tax to fund better public transport ,beware car drivers i have feeling big price hikes are coming our way

Don't be fooled! The article is incomplete and misleading. The part about stroke deaths is particularly nasty.

"People may look out of their windows and see it's a nice day and they might fancy a walk - but they will probably be doing themselves more harm than good."

It isn't just people "out for a walk" at serious risk. Most drivers have their heating set to fresh air intake to prevent the windows fogging up so it would be interesting to see the polution levels inside a car stuck in a traffic jam or crawling at 5 mph on one of Sheffield's free flowing commuter routes in the morning or evening rush hours.

From where I live Sheffield is usually enveloped in a dirty yellow haze on fine and still winter days.

Cold still days are always bad for keeping pollution in the place it originates from - it's particularly nasty in Sheffield because the city centre's in a 'bowl' that keeps the air in as well.

I remember one summer's day driving down the Parkway and seeing this haze over the whole city - not pleasant. Then when I was in it I couldn't see it, and that was even worse!

Particularly bad are what are called 'temperature inversions'. Normally, hot air rises and cool air falls, but under certain conditions you get a layer of cool air above the warmer, dirtier air and the inversion keeps the pollution down at low levels where it causes harm. Most of the big London smogs were at least partially caused in this way.

Originally posted by Journeyman
Don't be fooled! The article is incomplete and misleading. The part about stroke deaths is particularly nasty.

Perhaps then you could point us to a complete and truthful report on the situation ?

I would not be at all surprised to find that official bodies are deliberately avoiding a serious look at polution from vehicle exhausts and the the health problems it causes.

The fact that any scheme undertaken by a local authority to introduce new or improved public transport systems, eg tramway systems, now has to factor in the likely cost to the treasury of lost fuel excise duty from car commuters etc. speaks volumes about the govt.'s real concern about how we use our cars :rolleyes:

Let's face it, - fuel duties are one of the govts.'s main sources of revenue, and they'll not be happy about lots of people giving up their cars and using public transport to get about.

"We have all these cars pumping out fumes and the weather has been so still recently that pollution is not being blown away

So if we don't keep it someone else cops for it!

Originally posted by Greybeard
Perhaps then you could point us to a complete and truthful report on the situation ?

Sorry, no. I'm just pointing out that the article is flawed, in that it provides little useful information and quite a lot of statistical misdirection.

However, I'm happy to go find better information for you. What would you like to know?

I would not be at all surprised to find that official bodies are deliberately avoiding a serious look at polution from vehicle exhausts and the the health problems it causes.

I doubt it. Is it not a well-established fact that pollution causes chronic health problems? Our government has already set targets for acceptable air pollution levels, as specified in the article. That implies that a "serious look" has already been taken and the recommendations implemented.

The fact that any scheme undertaken by a local authority to introduce new or improved public transport systems, eg tramway systems, now has to factor in the likely cost to the treasury of lost fuel excise duty from car commuters etc. speaks volumes about the govt.'s real concern about how we use our cars :rolleyes:

Not really. It speaks volumes about how a reduction in overall fuel excise take has a direct effect on the amount of funds distributed from central government to local authorities.

Let's face it, - fuel duties are one of the govts.'s main sources of revenue, and they'll not be happy about lots of people giving up their cars and using public transport to get about.

Absolutely. For this financial year, HM Customs and Excise are projecting a 23.3 billion pounds income from hydrocarbon oil duties. For perspective, the income tax take is 123 billion pounds and the UK is currently 435.9 billion pounds in debt.

(All figures sourced from HM Treasury and Office of National Statistics websites. I may have them wrong, of course!)

Let's say, in the extreme, that public transport became so successful that that the government lost a billion pounds of tax income. Some environmentalists would consider that to be an enormous victory but the economic effects could be disastrous.

Would you be so keen on using public transport if, overall, you became poorer as a result? That is what cost/benefit analysis is all about and why it is vital that such studies are carried out before any major public works are initiated. Environment and health are important considerations but money is what makes the world go around. :rolleyes:

Don't leave your house or you're going to die. Eat TV dinners.:thumbsup: