QuotePeople switch from cars to alternative transport if cars are expensive. Which is an unfortunate event, shouldn't really be the end goal of any administration, because it only means that they are creating a failed society.
In most developed European countries the goal is to reduce dependance on private car usage. New motorways are now considered bad planning and commuter rail is preferred.Again: this has been tried to death in the NL already and failed missarably. Nowadays they are catching up on building new and more roads over here. On top of that people may receive a higher allowance for work related car travel. The NL government has given up chasing what is a pipe dream.
The problem is that public transport goes from one hub to another. I have worked at various companies that are located in large industrial areas that had no public transport connection at all. IOW: if your home is close to a train station and your work is close to a train station, public transport works. Otherwise it just doesn't. Making owning a car more expensive doesn't change the situation. It just makes working more expensive for many people. I've seen various good engineers leaving companies due to travel time and costs. A real loss for the company involved but completely understandable.
The fact that it tried and possibly failed in NL is more a specific failure of NL governance than a general statement that such public policy cannot work elsewhere. In other countries better progress towards a less car centric living is making progress and social change is occurring to support that with both planning changes altering the built environment and societal changes to people’s attitudes leading away from a “ car centric. “ solution
In my country offices are now built near public transport hubs. ( seee Google’s European HQ for example ) this is what attracts high quality employees not car parking spaces.
By that argument all people with disabilities are "edge cases", and their requirements can be ignored.
We already have provision for disabled people. Those on blue badges are exempt from paying the congestion charge and can park in many areas of central London, for instance, free of charge. There's no reason a future system couldn't consider disability/accessibility too. I know a 65 year old woman in south London who refuses to drive, she hates it, takes the bus and train every day using her walking stick. Is it a bit of hard work - yes, of course - but just because you are old does not mean you are unable to use public transport. She actually gets upset when people offer her a seat, funny character.
Hence th “pregnant housewife” will have a range of options even if it’s s typical BS edge case argument . Used by people who have no thought out counter argument and resort to picking edge cases out of thin air
By that argument all people with disabilities are "edge cases", and their requirements can be ignored.
We can infer that you are able bodied and young, and probably have not been involved in ensuring an eldely relative can continue to live independently.Just build a "special area" for disabled people and move them there. They will have all services and surely will live there happily ever after.
And won't sully bright future.
It was already tried many times at various places.
But yes, it can be solved by for example with taxi credit or a similar solution. Just like they have now incentives for cars and free parking.
Hence th “pregnant housewife” will have a range of options even if it’s s typical BS edge case argument . Used by people who have no thought out counter argument and resort to picking edge cases out of thin air
By that argument all people with disabilities are "edge cases", and their requirements can be ignored.
We can infer that you are able bodied and young, and probably have not been involved in ensuring an eldely relative can continue to live independently.Just build a "special area" for disabled people and move them there. They will have all services and surely will live there happily ever after.
And won't sully bright future.
It was already tried many times at various places.
But yes, it can be solved by for example with taxi credit or a similar solution. Just like they have now incentives for cars and free parking.
Taxis frequently refuse to take people with wheelchairs.
Taxis aren't relevant where vehicles have to be modified.
Hence th “pregnant housewife” will have a range of options even if it’s s typical BS edge case argument . Used by people who have no thought out counter argument and resort to picking edge cases out of thin air
By that argument all people with disabilities are "edge cases", and their requirements can be ignored.
We can infer that you are able bodied and young, and probably have not been involved in ensuring an eldely relative can continue to live independently.Just build a "special area" for disabled people and move them there. They will have all services and surely will live there happily ever after.
And won't sully bright future.
It was already tried many times at various places.
But yes, it can be solved by for example with taxi credit or a similar solution. Just like they have now incentives for cars and free parking.
Taxis frequently refuse to take people with wheelchairs.
Taxis aren't relevant where vehicles have to be modified.
Then your law needs changing. Here a certain percentages of issued licences must be wheelchair compatible. Hehce it’s no issue to hail a compatible one.
Your objections are a failure of government not a basic fundamental problem
New Buses are all wheelchair compatible as are all new buildings including new private homes.
None of these issues are any impediment to a less car dense future or a Bev based private car environment.
Wheelchair and disabled access is now a huge factor in modern design
People are just “ inventing “ edge cases as if it justifies retaining ICE . Nothing justifies retaining ICE. hopefully by about 30 years private ice usage will have ended. Included 2nd hand ice too. In my view the transistion will be quicker as people see the benefits and change voluntarily.
The point is none of these “ edge “ arguments changes the timescales and transistion to a BEV future certainly for private motoring initially. Specific sectors may take more time and or newer Bev technology
One thing is certain the day of the 19th century bag of bolts that is an ice car is drawing to a close
The world is full of bullshitters and idealistic futurists who live in a fantasy world of their imaginations.
The point is none of these “ edge “ arguments changes the timescales and transistion to a BEV future certainly for private motoring initially. Specific sectors may take more time and or newer Bev technology
One thing is certain the day of the 19th century bag of bolts that is an ice car is drawing to a close
The transition will take as long as it did to replace horses and dogs[1]: about half a century.
Deal with that, and provide workable paths from here to there.
[1] From around WW1, possibly France or Belgium
The world is full of bullshitters and idealistic futurists who live in a fantasy world of their imaginations.
Such as your status quo bias.
Putler, Poo and the Ayotollah don't really give a shit about your faith in that nothing can change ... don't believe the propaganda. History is littered with utter irrational actions on a world scale, this time will be no different. You can try to give them a finger because of your faith, then they will try to take your hand and your status quo will still collapse. Without Russia and Iran peak oil would hit like a ton of bricks, a transition to electricity and hydrogen would be forced regardless.
Meanwhile in 30 years the demographics especially in Eastern EU will be so catastrophically bad that much of current society simply can't function as is.
One way or another this is the end of the end of history, things will change, the metastable state we entered into in the 80s is ending.
The point is none of these “ edge “ arguments changes the timescales and transistion to a BEV future certainly for private motoring initially. Specific sectors may take more time and or newer Bev technology
One thing is certain the day of the 19th century bag of bolts that is an ice car is drawing to a close
The transition will take as long as it did to replace horses and dogs[1]: about half a century.
Deal with that. Provide workable paths from here to there, and the world will make you very rich.
The point is none of these “ edge “ arguments changes the timescales and transistion to a BEV future certainly for private motoring initially. Specific sectors may take more time and or newer Bev technology
One thing is certain the day of the 19th century bag of bolts that is an ice car is drawing to a close
The transition will take as long as it did to replace horses and dogs[1]: about half a century.
Deal with that, and provide workable paths from here to there.
[1] From around WW1, possibly France or Belgium
I think any intelligent commentator will agree that the complete transistion will take 50 years not withstanding that events may change time scales. “ events dear boy events dear boy as a famous PM said “
I do think we underestimate the role technology will play in speeding change , we are only at the start of this effect.
What is clear that the transition is underway even if it’s progresses in fits and starts.
For the first 40 years of my life EVs were visible on every road
Despite this forum having lots of members, it’s time to put these opinions into perspective:
# You are electronics people, ergo have a higher than average probability of being biased towards electric or electronic systems. Fact.
# You are one miniscule fraction of an already tiny, tiny fraction of a fraction of the populous of the countries planning these schemes. You are likely 0.00000000000000000000000001% of the population of your country, and even if a million of you got together and lobbied all day every day for EVs, that’s still a tiny fraction of your overall population that say they want it.
That doesn’t change the fact that logic, physics, economics and plain old fashioned day to day practicality en mass are not always able to be overcome by the words “Road map”, “eco” or “policy”.
This is an echo chamber. Never forget that. Also never forget that almost no one online will admit to wanting to always be “right”. I’m in no way saying I’m right nor will be, but good old fashioned (very UN)common sense is a distant memory, and as much as you may have utopian fantasies A La “Buck Rogers”… as much as you, your govt and your EV fanatics want to force your childhood sci-fi fantasies to come to pass, nothing stops logic in the end. Logic is the overruling power of sanity.
The world is full of bullshitters and idealistic futurists who live in a fantasy world of their imaginations. It ain’t gonna happen. Watch and see - and no need to reply to “prove you wrong” - one who is secure in the absolute knowledge that the sun will rise and set, has no need to “prove it” to people - it’s a given. EVs, sadly for you, are very much NOT a given - as much as you desperately want them to be. They are exist in minority quantities, they’re toys, and that’s the end of it.
Bev are better cars than ice. Quieter
QuoteBev are better cars than ice. QuieterThey maybe should consider a minimum noise level,especially for those with sight problems
Or hearing problems.
Or reading mobile phone "problems".
Or blocked (with earbuds) problems.
There are always ”naysayers” like you , that largely for personal vested interests simply refuse to acknowledge the pace of change. People like you missed the computer revolution, the internet and mobile comms.
Predictions of a quick and certain demise for the ICE seem to be rather silly to me.
I didn't realise the blue badge scheme included modifications to vehicles to allow for disabilities. I thought is was just related to where you could and couldn't park a vehicle. Could you please let us know where that is stated.
Thanks for correcting our misapprehensions.
When railways were introduced one person commented that they would be a failure as the human body was not designed to be transported at speeds in excess of a running horse !!
In the age that that was written there was no seatbelts nor any safety equipment to speak of so technically its true for the technical time period in which it was said.
When was the last time you wore a seatbelt on a train? It wasn't true then and it isn't now, it was nothing but ignorant fear.
When was the last time you wore a seatbelt on a train? It wasn't true then and it isn't now, it was nothing but ignorant fear.
Train fatalities per billion km: 2.1 (UK)
Passenger car fatalities per billion km: 3.8 (UK, 2010)
It's surprisingly close. But it's arguable the typical type of collision in a train wouldn't benefit from a seatbelt, as derailment isn't exactly something you survive if only you had a 3 point belt.
I didn't realise the blue badge scheme included modifications to vehicles to allow for disabilities. I thought is was just related to where you could and couldn't park a vehicle. Could you please let us know where that is stated.
Thanks for correcting our misapprehensions.
I don't even know what point you're arguing for now.
But you can, if you're on a low income, get modifications done to your private vehicle at the taxpayer's expense. This would be covered under PIP, DLA or Motability (which covers leasing an adapted vehicle) if you're eligible for those kinds of things.
As for taxis, it is definitely illegal for a Hackney cab to refuse a fare from a disabled person, and it is *usually* illegal for minicabs to do the same (though they can 'reasonably refuse' if they couldn't fit the wheelchair in the car, for instance). It is also not allowed to refuse assistance dogs and the like without a medical certificate of allergy. But these vehicles are driven by people, and people are free agents who can break the law. None of that has anything to do with maintaining private vehicle access to city centres, the vast, vast majority of which are driven by perfectly able bodied people.