Jump to content

Sheffield council reshuffle

Recommended Posts

On 07/05/2019 at 23:29, hackey lad said:

No let me explain . When has climate change  been a big influencer on local elections in Sheffield ?  People in Sheffield are more concerned about the running of the City , climate change would be way down the list of concerns to  local people .  Still , you carry on voting for amateur politicians . Honestly don't you see the irony in this latest policy ?

Do you speak for all local people or know their priorities?

 

Climate change and the policies it affects are very high on my list of concerns. For example, better provision of cycling routes is important to me, hence my Green Party vote at the recent elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bargepole23 said:

Do you speak for all local people or know their priorities?

 

Climate change and the policies it affects are very high on my list of concerns. For example, better provision of cycling routes is important to me, hence my Green Party vote at the recent elections.

There's plenty of cycling routes. They are called roads. The carbon footprint of installing more/better cycle routes would be staggering. Before long roads will be safer for cyclists anyway when cars start piloting themselves,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, lil-minx92 said:

There's plenty of cycling routes. They are called roads. The carbon footprint of installing more/better cycle routes would be staggering. Before long roads will be safer for cyclists anyway when cars start piloting themselves,

Hugely misguided sentiment.

Roads are perceived by many would be cyclists as dangerous (for good reason).  The environmental cost of installing cycling safety features (like segregated cycle paths) is recouped quickly from the increase in cycling and the reduction in motor transport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cyclone said:

Hugely misguided sentiment.

Roads are perceived by many would be cyclists as dangerous (for good reason).  The environmental cost of installing cycling safety features (like segregated cycle paths) is recouped quickly from the increase in cycling and the reduction in motor transport.

But we prove time and again that reducing congestion on roads actually leads to an increase in driving., which in turn increases congestion again.  Cycle routes are an excellent thing to invest in, but they won’t reduce motor transport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Pettytom said:

Cycle routes are an excellent thing to invest in, but they won’t reduce motor transport.

we've never really tried.

 

and it works in countries where they have.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ads36 said:

we've never really tried.

 

and it works in countries where they have.

 

If cycling increases then by definition those people aren't using other forms of transport...  It's unlikely they're switching from walking right.  So it might be switching from public transport, but some proportion will be switching from driving.  And even switching from public transport ultimately reduces the number of vehicles needed, just not quite as directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ads36 said:

we've never really tried.

 

and it works in countries where they have.

 

Experience from road building and road widening suggests that increasing capacity just creates increased demand. It isn’t a reason to not build cycle infrastructure. I just think it likely that new traffic will replace the old when it becomes apparent that the roads are less congested.

 

The trouble is that there is an almost unlimited demand for road travel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Pettytom said:

I just think it likely that new traffic will replace the old when it becomes apparent that the roads are less congested.

i'll confess i largely agree with you, cars are just a terribly inefficient way of moving large numbers of people.

 

but the benefits of giving people not-car options become more pressing by the day.

 

example :

2 hours ago, Pettytom said:

The trouble is that there is an almost unlimited demand for road travel.

California spent 1.6billion dollars widening a freeway (the 405?), and only a few years later, traffic is worse than ever.

Edited by ads36

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the question is though whether road use increases regardless, or increases because the capacity was increased.  If it's increasing regardless (higher population, further to travel to work, cars get relatively cheaper), then creating cycling infrastructure will help to cope with that increase (plus all the other benefits of getting people cycling and making them safer when they do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/05/2019 at 08:01, Halibut said:

The expression you are trying to use is 'beggars belief'.

Pedant or peasant? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/05/2019 at 22:37, taxman said:

What would you prefer them to do with it.. Landfill or send it to Malaysia so some children can sort it instead of Veolia? 

Recycle it. 

On 09/05/2019 at 00:34, Pettytom said:

If we all stop making it, I’m sure they will stop burning it.

 

That’s you as well.

It's a filthy, toxic practice, that must be stopped. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Bargepole23 said:

Do you speak for all local people or know their priorities?

 

Climate change and the policies it affects are very high on my list of concerns. For example, better provision of cycling routes is important to me, hence my Green Party vote at the recent elections.

Not necessarily climate change, but the Greens did well on the Wirral because of the Labour councils plans to build on greenfield sites (with nice large council tax generating 4,5,6 bedroom houses on estates called things like "The Spinney" or "The Villas"), leaving huge areas of brownfield sites untouched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.