Interesting objective data
Perhaps in the mix is anger at the social class of owners as much as outrage at class of vehicle
Down with their tyres and off with their heads?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Activists (not) slashing SUV tyres
(160 posts)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
"The streets are too narrow for them."
UK roads are a minimum width. Cars sold to the UK public must be able to fit on those roads.
The roads in Edinburgh can't be too narrow as *we* argue here daily that there is plenty room for UK minimum width roads *and* segregated cycle paths to live along side each other harmoniously.
Is there no room for cycle paths all of a sudden?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Nope you are wrong @baldycyclist, the roads are too narrow for them as people also park on the pavement or there is a hole being dug.
The bike path is on the WoL Path, the Orca bollards bike paths stop at Gillespies Xroad heading west as the road is too narrow.
These cars are truly massive and the road in Juni green is very narrow and designed for small horse and cart not four tonne status symbol piece of total nonsense,
Posted 2 years ago # -
The suvs aren't really any bigger than normal cars, there are too many cars on the road expecially at that pinch point.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Was watching them today as Iwrats built my bike about fifty fifty normal cars and enormous SUVs, they are huge. Only one cinquecento.
Posted 2 years ago # -
They're not any wider or longer than their equivalent car, they are taller and styled to look bigger but they have the same footprint.
There needs to be a lot more cinquecentos on the road, not even sure what the current equivalent is.
Posted 2 years ago # -
@Baldcyclist - since 2010, streets in Scotland have purposefully been designed without reference to geometric standards. Designing Streets: A Policy Statement for Scotland states:
good street design should derive from an intelligent response to location, rather than the rigid application of standards, regardless of context. Designing Streets does not, thus, support a standards based methodology for street design but instead requires a design-led approach
There are geometric standards for higher speed major roads, set out in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, but you won't find many of these within a town or city.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"as people also park on the pavement"
That conflates the width of the car (which as pointed out is the same width as any other car) with poor parking.
I also agree the problem is the number of them on the road at any one point in time, especially at commuting times.
It makes more sense to use a bus or train at peak times.
The size of the car is irrelevant, it's more about when it is used and what for. Use it for what it's good at, which isn't commuting.
Cars, including SUVs are also much more efficient and less polluting than they were 30 years ago. As mentioned before CO2 emmisions in the UK are less than they were before cars existed, in a sense they have already been deleted.
Other things to look at like our homes, I've detected reticence to do anything there personally on the forum. Many comments about keeping gas central heating for example. Housing needs looked at as much as cars. Cars are reducing CO2 levels over time, existing houses keep emitting at same level as before. About 30% of personal emmisions (if you have a car, more if you don't)
Posted 2 years ago # -
Just not getting it @baldycyclist, you come over to me as a non cycling troll on a cyclist forum
I don’t mind
It is nice to see what the opposition think.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Total greenhouse gas emissions from Scotland's cars in 2020 were 0.5% higher than in 1990. (Carbon Account for Transport 2020)
Total UK carbon emissions in 2020 were the lowest since 1879 (Carbon Brief). That is only territorial emissions though. If you look at consumption based emissions (e.g. WWF), which include the carbon associated with imported goods and services, then things don't look so good.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"non cycling troll"
As everyone is always keen to point out when motorists tell cyclists to get a license, 70% of cyclists are drivers. I'm likely less of a minority in society in general as a left of center leaning cyclist and motorist than perhaps the far left majority which seems to frequent this forum are.
(I'm perhaps wrong on far left majority, maybe just the more frequent posters are which give the perception)
I will admit that I debate things (or at least try to) unemotionally which often rubs people up the wrong way, so although I am not deliberately trolling, there can be a trolling effect especially in person cos people seem to hate the neutral look on my face that doesn't change as they get more wound up. ;)
Posted 2 years ago # -
"which include the carbon associated with imported goods and services, then things don't look so good"
Does it even out, presumably things which we manufacture and export are included in our emmisions? (I suspect we are net importers so probably not)
Posted 2 years ago # -
@Baldcyclist - from a quick swatch at the figures in the WWF report I linked to the answer seems to be "no". There has been a huge growth in overseas emissions associated with UK consumption since 1990 (a baseline year for emissions calculations). This seems plausible to me as the UK closed most of its heavy industry and coal fired power stations and let folk in India, China etc. do the nasty work on our behalf. UK exports tend to be things like banking, education and the like - not particularly high emission.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Ah come on gembo you can't call someone a troll just because they don't agree with you.
(especially when you're factually incorrect :)
I know you don't like suvs but they're not the problem, just symptomatic of the state of things. There are too many suvs, there are too many cars full stop. Switching everyone into cinquecentos tomorrow wouldn't help the congestion. It would just be a nightmare to get two adults and a two mtbs in...
Posted 2 years ago # -
"Total greenhouse gas emissions from Scotland's cars in 2020 were 0.5% higher"
Presumably that is because the number of cars has increased, the 'per car' number will have decreased significantly?
As more cars become electric, assuming we are at 'peak car' now, that means we should see that impact start to reduce, slowly at first, but more quickly in 8 years as combustion is banned.
Existing homes will continue to emmit at the same level due to dirty gas reliance (which as we know people here don't want to give up as it's too expensive to change).
Other interesting recent research from work was that the pandemic wah possibly even increased emissions due to 'double heating', and empty trains/buses still running, the drop in car commuting seemingly not enough to reduce.
Posted 2 years ago # -
@steveo Their internal volume might be higher but doesn't effect us as cyclists and their emissions aren't significantly higher than similar sized vehicle. Even the sporty Evoque is only 20% higher than a Mondeo.
Only 20%? And is the Mondeo an example of a frugal car? From non driving perspective I'm an observer and would be happy to see city centre clear of non essential vehicles.
Posted 2 years ago # -
So the reason for bringing housing carbon into this conversation is because of the hypocricy of the far left.
If we take personal choice:
My SUV is a bad personal choice (agreed)
My House is a new build with good insulation and can be easily converted to heat pump heating. This is a good personal choice.On the flip side:
You (genreal you, not aimed at a specific person).
Don't have a car - good choice.
Live in a poorly insulated tenements which are more dificult to decarbonaise - bad personal choice (from a green perspective).Now lets look forward, the SUV owner is being forced by regulation (rightly) to decarbonise their transport. Most of them are already in their planning phase for this - will buy electric car in X years.
I personally am planning to install solar/battery/electric car, and probably heat pump within next 10 yaers. That will decarbonise both my transport and housing at great expense to myself and which at my age I will never recoup the financial outlay, but it is the right thing to do.
What I see here is a reluctance to take any personal responsibility for your poor housing choice and install green heating alternatives. The narrative I see is that it is the Governments responsibility to fix 'my' poor choice.
So lets look forward, the SUV owners you hate will have fully decarbonised probably both house and transport because it makes sense to at the same time.
The far left green advocates will still advocate for tyre deflating based on no facts and will also still be burning gas at a rate of knots while still complaining that the government has done nothing for them to fix their expensive morningside tenement because they are a victim.
Instead of blaming everyone else for everything, look at what you can do to decarbonise your flats, it's your responsibility, you chose to live in them.
Now if it were me in charge, I would take the same approach on housing as has been taken on transpoort.
I would force car owners to decarbonise at their own expense - as is already rightly happening.
I would also force house owners to decarbonise at their own expense, I would change building regs so that you could only sell a property if it was carbon neutral.
Your choice to buy a polluting car or a house, it should be you that pays the financial levy to decarbonise it.
On the +ve note you don't own cars so are in a great financial position to be able to afford the neccesary changes to your morningside flats at your own cost. :)Councils and landlords would also be forced to decarbonise through building regs, so the poor don't pay.
I'll end my rant there, maybe we should be taking direct action on morningside tenements, you know to highlight the poor choices the owner has made, maybe taping pictures of gas pipes to the windows or something?
Posted 2 years ago # -
I would personally love some mandates, or even just advice, on how to decarbonise my flat. It's already fully electric but I don't really have any clue how to go about insulating.
FWIW, when discussing SUVs in Edinburgh I'm not even thinking about climate/emissions, but about congestion/safe streets/active travel/public transport. Hence why I don't much care for the message (or at least my interpretation of the message) to just get a slightly smaller car.
Posted 2 years ago # -
@Baldcyclist - car owners are not being forced to decarbonise at their own expense. No-one has been required to change their car. It will not be illegal to own or buy/sell a ICE car after 2030. As an aside, there isn't actually legislation banning the sale of ICE cars after 2030 - it's just a commitment at present.
There are considerable taxpayer funded incentives to buy an EV, including grants towards purchase, interest free loans, exemptions from Vehicle Excise Duty, on-street EV chargers installed at taxpayer expense, free public EV charging through the ChargePlace Scotland network and grants for domestic EV chargers.
I haven't seen anyone here say they hate SUV owners, all of us are likely to be friends with a few.
I'll have a think about the housing stuff. Got to dash now though, as I have to top up the living room fire with a few more bundles of tenners that were meant for the NHS. Have to keep the heat up, as I am slightly concerned about damp affecting my signed portrait of Lenin.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"There are considerable taxpayer funded incentives to buy an EV, including grants towards purchase, interest free loans, exemptions"
There are also the same incentives for housing, solar/battery systems are eligible for 10 year interest free loans. Also on heat pumps you get 70-80% cachback on them, so effective cost of £10K heat pump system is £2K to 2.5K
Everyone is being bribed to decarbonaise by taxpayer funded incentives, you just have to go and find them....
Posted 2 years ago # -
anecdata - looking at parked cars along Polwarth and Gilmore place on the way in. every car except two was a compact sort of car. the two that weren't - rangerover and 'quester'? noticable mainly because they were parked outside the lines / intruding into carriageway.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Only 20%? And is the Mondeo an example of a frugal car? From non driving perspective I'm an observer and would be happy to see city centre clear of non essential vehicles.
Le sigh.
No its a normal car, about as average as a car as you'll find. The point I'm clearly failing to make is that suvs are objectively no worse in any metric being addressed in this thread than than the equivalent car.
The "activists" weren't deflating the tyres of any car they'd decided that suvs are some sort target but once again, suvs are no bigger than the equivalent car. Suvs are no more a problem than any car, even if all the cars in the country reverted go 1960's size the streets would still be congested, the parking would still be terrible and the drivers exactly the same people behind the wheel. Banning suvs will not bring about nirvana.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"and in America, faux work trucks"
Not only in USA (or Canada/Mexico).
A lot of self-employed builders and associated tradespeople seem to like driving these huge monsters. I have come to the conclusion it must be a status / manliness thing. Because on the face of it, a rusty old Transit or similar is much more practical, more secure, can carry more, etc. I even saw an imported USAnian pickup truck trying to get parked in Abbeyhill the other day. It was so tall the top of the radiator grille was at the same level as my head (I'm 5'10").
It's not just the New Towners driving the SUV/pickup colonisation of our streets, unfortunately...
Posted 2 years ago # -
"I'll have a think about the housing stuff"
No I didn't think anyone would be planning on decarbonising their own homes, or even completed a serious thought experiment on how they might do it, investigated the available government financial help and resources etc.
Or even start by doing the no brainer things like ensuring you have efficeient radiators / boilers, installing Hive radiator thermostats (other brands available), getting rid of gas cookers/hobs etc to reduce the amount of gas you use on a daily basis now. Putting in underfloor (or ceiling if top floor) insulation, topping up what insulation is there already. Making sure the windows are re-cualked every 2 yaers etc so there are no gaps.
Nope, none of that, Climate action here = blame other people.
Posted 2 years ago # -
From across the pond - food for thought:
https://www.thezebra.com/resources/driving/average-car-size/
Some lowlights:
"the IIHS (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) estimates that SUVs are still twice as likely as cars to kill pedestrians in an accident"
"pickups are notoriously dangerous in collisions with small cars"
"IHS Markit projects new SUV sales will continue to eat into the market share of cars, while pickup trucks will hold steady. If this pattern continues, the majority of vehicles on the road will be utility vehicles in a few years."
We might be a few years 'behind' over here, but the projected destination is grim.
Posted 2 years ago # -
In summary, the highest horse?
a low sports car, with rear-wheel drive
Can one punch balls and threaten force
yet at the highest moral ground arrive?Posted 2 years ago # -
"Can one punch balls and threaten force yet at the highest moral ground arrive?"
It's simply self defence. If someone picks a fight with you by attacking your property or your family, you are simply defending what belongs to you. It is completely moral.
*edit and in my defense on the sports car, it's hardly anything special, it's a 2009 small BMW convertible that I've owned for 6 years and done around 5000 miles in. It's hardly contributing to congestion, it goes out half a dozen times a year. :)_
Posted 2 years ago # -
Never read so much nonsense on a thread on here!
Badly insulated tenements, with everything within walking distance are far more eco than some suburban gaff with 2 cars on the paved over front garden, driving urban sprawl, poor land use and moar driving
SUVs do have a bigger footprint than “normal” cars (although normal cars have grown massively in size). And of course SUVs much heavier. People that drive SUVs will always claim everything is ok because…, just like dishwashers “use less water than handwashing” (they don’t)
If we were all driving cars the size they were in the 80s, with modern engines, they’d all be doing 100+mpg. But here we are, stuck with 40mpg ad infinitum
Oh, and I am decarbonising my home / flat. Under-floor insulation installed. Some wall insulation. Double glazing to come. Thermostat set at 16 degrees. So don’t gimmie your generalisations
Posted 2 years ago # -
"Oh, and I am decarbonising my home / flat"
Awesome, great to see a do'er even if you haven't completely managed to give up the whinger (which usually happens when you begin to do).
It takes a bit of time to get used to 16, try adding in some HIVE valves and you can make that 16 only in the room you are using, with the rest of the house off.
Though no double glazing, oft, all your heat is going out the windows, will be costing you a fortune in gas (probably more than my sprawling well insulated house), even at 16, not very efficient.
"So don’t gimmie your generalisations"
"moar driving"
generalisations.... ;)
Incidentally, I live next to the beach and countryside, everything is walking distance too, except train into work 2 days a week to the big smoke, and wee jaunts in the vert a few times a year for fun.
(wife does use car for work cos of the being disabled thing, would have to in a city or not)
"SUVs do have a bigger footprint than “normal” cars"
You are factually incorrect according to the data.
Posted 2 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
