ads36

you'd get more people using this hypothetical tram from Meadowhead, if it went down Chesterfield road, more or less directly to the City centre. the 'herdings extension' makes pragmatic sense, but would be a *much* slower route = fewer people would use it. in this future world, cars would get a nice direct route to Sheffield, Trams would have to go all the way to Manor Top before finally heading towards Sheffield. this mindset, of pushing the alternatives out the fringes, so as not to inconvenience the important car drivers, is exactly why we've become car-dependent. we're either interested in change, or we're not. (fwiw, i don't think the trams will be coming to meadowhead, ever. If they do, it will be via Herdings Park - it *is* the pragmatic choice)

i know HR Managers working for not-well-known companies earning more than that.

the problem with extending the Herdings line to Meadowhead, is that you'd be sat on the tram for 20 mins, and still be no nearer the city centre, so what's the point?

SCC have a balanced budget for the year ahead. i'm sure some will dismiss it, but they've achieved the near-impossible.

this is no argument for not improving public transport. which will reduce car use making *your* car journeys a little easier.

an estimated (?) £2billion will be added to the nation's food bill at the end of April. even the telegraph are telling us about it now Jacob Rees Mogg, of course, is moaning : "These checks are an unnecessary act of self harm that will increase prices in an era of inflation".

so more or less meaningless. 'services' ? i'll save the champagne till i hear more details if you don't mind.

i'm sure we'll never really know, but i'm increasingly wondering how much of this mess is rooted in the closure of the surestart centres.

that idea is something you've invented - so that you can complain about it. better public transport doesn't solve *all* our transport needs, but it's close. (added benefit - better public transport results in fewer people driving, easing congestion a bit)

here's the great news - more or less everything that we need to do to reduce our contribution to climate change is stuff we need to be doing anyway. better public transport, home insulation programs, more nuclear power, more renewables, etc. where's the hardship? (China are the world leader on increasing their supply of renewable power)

expected to complete a rigorous certification process later this year. it seems they already have a dozen (?) orders/reservations.

we live in a very benign climate - here in Britain. it's rarely too cold/hot/dry/wet to live and grow crops. If it gets a bit warmer/colder/wetter/drier, we could be forgiven for not really noticing. hundreds of millions (billions?) of people are living more exposed lives, in places closer to the limits of viability. yeah, sure, humans can adapt. but when the driver is climate change, that adaptation will means hundreds of millions of people moving somewhere less hostile to farming/agriculture.

these still aren't real.

which evidence is dubious - and why do you doubt it? and i'm sure you wouldn't mind sharing a few examples of these many rules and restrictions...?

there's lots of commercial sense. South Yorkshire has a strong (and growing !) reputation for high value manufacturing/engineering. An active airport would make an excellent hub for relevant businesses/activity.