CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
“UK should cut vehicle use to hit zero-carbon target, say MPs”
(18 posts)-
Posted 4 years ago #
-
Phone in with Steven Jardine on Radio Scotland at moment.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Pay-per-use road charges on all trunk roads and motorways, now!
Modal filters on residential streets, now!
Posted 4 years ago # -
Pissing in the wind compared with reducing flying.
We're off to Croatia next summer, and going by train. The interrail scheme where we can have five days unlimited travel in the month is making it cheaper than flying (partly becuase kids travel free) and the CO2 difference will be huge.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“In the long term, widespread personal vehicle ownership therefore does not appear to be compatible with significant decarbonisation. The government should not aim to achieve emissions reductions simply by replacing existing vehicles with lower-emissions versions”.
Note to Scottish government: please take heed.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“Note to Scottish government: please take heed.“
Indeed.
Will be interesting to see if UK Gov does...
Posted 4 years ago # -
Yes, we've tried to do it just with carrots, need to mix a few sticks in now.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Ultimately the social experiment of licencing the general public to use high-speed heavy vehicles has been a failure on both a societal and environmental level. Time to call it a day.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Radio debate about 'letting go of your car' wasn't bad - Jardine had to juggle a queue of EV enthusiasts versus people wedded to driving around as 'no other option in rural village'.
Heard one cyclist that does a commute from Falkirk into Glasgow - energy wise that is probably too high for many.
Lorna Slater, Co-leader Scottish Greens made a decent contribution although only caught end. Pointed out that building roads is a failure as just sucks in more traffic. (Although politically very good for all larger parties. Rumour going about that HS2 is going to get cancelled with a waste of £7bn).The whole thing about transport is that with fuel duty frozen while bus and train fares go up every year we can't really expect to get real 'modal shift'. The fact that roads though are clogged with cars means that rail can pick up those that can afford. Someone said that they took two hours in express bus to Glasgow due to M8 loading.
My point would be that profligate energy use is the thing we need to eliminate.
An EV apparently has a 70Kw motor - and government want to supply free electricity. That may be ok in Norway where there is decent housing and no fuel poverty. How does subsidising EVs work with social justice in Scotland? One part of society can't afford to run electric in their homes whilst another want a free energy top up on A9 for a subsidised EV.We need to use our own human energy more and if distance or topography cannot be handled by new cyclists then E-cargo bikes can carry up to four children with a mere 250w motor. This may seem like an answer for cities only but we've sold cargo bikes in rural Scotland. Obviously there a failure to use a car may be considered more unusual but in the end lightweight e-cargo use less charge than many household appliances as opposed to heavyweight EV.
Posted 4 years ago # -
We need to use our cars less - except through Roseburn?
Posted 4 years ago # -
"government want to supply free electricity"
Yeah that's the problem right there.
Unfortunately many people have got used to sitting in the equivalent of a comfy armchair in their living room, complete with entertainment system, climate control, driver assist technology, USB charging for their portable screens which they're glued to while supposedly driving a two tonne high speed all terrain vehicle.
It has to stop.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Reports like this mean nothing as there is still a resistance to actually do anything to reduce car use - see the Roseburn cycle route thread.
Posted 4 years ago # -
BBC article on the same:
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49425402
Warning: Only carrots, no sticks
Posted 4 years ago # -
Hardly surprising there's resistance when so much of the worldview of many is seen through the windscreen of a motor vehicle.
Old habits die hard. They die even harder when they are tied into status, perceived luxury, and even identity.
Perhaps the first step towards eliminating motor vehicles will come once the industry has moved away from the ownership model. Just like mobile devices, cars will come as part of a personal mobility contract agreement - we're already part there with the proliferation of leasing rather than hire purchase for new vehicles. The agreement might also include passes for public transport, bike hire, and so on in the mix. Once a car is no longer "yours" you are possibly less attached to it?
The other thing that needs to happen is the restoration of the fuel price accelerator mechanism or similar. Factor in "externalities" to the cost of fuel such as pollution, carbon emissions, etc. When car costs per journey are more realistic then we'll find out if people are quite so keen to drive.
Posted 4 years ago # -
An EV uses more power than your home (?)
Just as there is a trend to measure your steps walked to give you a virtuous feeling we could look at energy used per household. This would include transport choice so not just smart meter data.
Or... New EVs would have energy stickers on them to show how efficient they are in watts to kilo use.
At years end those keeping below a limit would get tax rebate and those burning too much would pay a carbon tax.
Sorry - know that can't work unless majority see that living without a heavy energy draw is the norm with benefits. Transport debates seem to get into 'I do the right thing despite it being hard', when it should be 'I do the right thing 'cause it's easy and saves money'.Arts sponsors should start by boycotting 'unhealthy for the planet products'. Start with overweight cars whatever their power source.
Or make an annual award for most wasteful product.Posted 4 years ago # -
"An EV uses more power than your home (?)"
@Laidback, I'm surprised but not amazed to discover that too.
A simple conversion puts 100hp at about 75Kw which I think means the majority of motor cars are using more than that (and don't have regenerative braking).
Posted 4 years ago # -
I did a tweet to compare the energy leaness of a 250w E-trike with mum, two children in front box and one small child on rack seat.
For some reason I thought an EV was 7kw but someone corrected me and said 70kw.
In household terms a kettle is 3kw and shower can draw 9kw. So if I ran all items in house it would be lucky to get over 20kw.
Of course an EV (like a bike) only needs power to get up to speed and steep hills so will have huge peaks and troughs.
In collective energy use the electrification of railway beside A9 though is much better kilo to watt ratio. Particularly as carrying a heavy power cell uses energy.Posted 4 years ago # -
Completely agree that rail electrification will be much more efficient than electrifying the A9. For some reason there's a campaign for the latter rather than the former?
EVs somewhat more power efficient than fossil fuel cars, but still highly unsustainable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car_energy_efficiency
Posted 4 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
