Nonsense. The boiler isn’t even lit at 16
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Activists (not) slashing SUV tyres
(160 posts)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
Great. :)
We have the 'house' set to 7 (basically no freeze mode), and the livingroom set to 16, or the office instead if I am wah (sometimes 17 if it is really cold out).
Or we use fleecy blankets if needed, space ship one for me, dinosuars for the boy, and animals for Mrs B.Our combined energy cost for our 4 bed house is £84 per month, of course will go up to around £100 with the new tarrifs, maybe a bit more. Everyone is complaining about having to pay £3K a year on energy, I can't see how they can use that much.
We put the livingrom and diningroom on at 18 if we have guests, inlaws complain of being cold otherwise.
Posted 2 years ago # -
@steveo - we might agree then that more cars (of all shapes & sizes) should be more like the Mondeo in energy use and emissions. Energy use could be posted on sticker like a fridge as legal requirement.
@baldcyclist - EST loans have helped us put in secondary glazing. Perth company did the work. First winter with and big improvement.
@jss - you had a Morris Minor once on a commuter challenge. Exempt from LEZ I think as pre 1970?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Oh, the commuter challenge, they were fun. I did it twice I think from Ferrytoll, once in a car, and once on my fancy 'fast' bike. @DaveC beat me both times.
I was convinced I'd got him on the car run as we got a pretty free run in that day, was lovely weather too I seem to recall, wish I'd had the vert then. Kudos to him though.
I still wear the green freebie t shirt on occasion, and thank you again for the free coffee, went down a treat both times. :)
Think this non cycling troll is even in some of the pictures too, in 'cycling' attire.
Cue, I must be one of the *bad* cyclists for wearing lycra, bad as a dog walker.
(Taking roids for my chest infection at night thinking I best get the first dose in not my wisest decision. Awake after 2 hours sleep like I've drank 4 cups of coffee, MORNING.
going to pay for that later)
Posted 2 years ago # -
@baldcyclist - yes - very grateful for your commutes on the CC. Particularly doing a car journey in as everyone wanted to cycle. @DaveC is 'not normal'(!)
@algo and @iratesheep did non sport rides but shorter. Once a ride is over 10 miles then it's a 'sport commute' for most. No e-bikes - or maybe we had one from memory.
We had a Mitsubishi EV from Napier.
No SUVs!Posted 2 years ago # -
@baldcyclist it's been good seeing an alternate viewpoint on these things. If everyone had the same point of view/opinion that would encourage groupthink and challenging things is good for forcing all parties to re-evaluate their thoughts/opinions. Basically polite debate is good IMO :-)
My primary dislike of SUVs is that as well as their heft they seem to encourage a particular brand of bad driving and if cars are like dogs (and indeed bikes) and are a reflection of one's personality what does a big lardy Range Rover say about you? :) EDIT I should say this is the generic "you" not anyone in particular!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Range Rover not really an SUV, different class of 'proper' off road vehicle (I accept they are rarely used for that purpose), and are a very small proportion of what are more widsely classed as SUVs.
SUV's are typically 'normal cars' on stilts, so Qashquui, volvo XC40 more popular now, Ford Kuga etc. They are all of comparible footprint to their shorter bretherin. Most of them aren't even 4X4 these days. There are of course larger BMW, Merc, and Audi variants, but again those are typically just estate cars on stilts. They share the same platforms as their estate bretherin really with the exception of suspension, and some weighting to stop them tipping over. These SUVs all have the same 'footprint' as their car relatives, and account for probably 95% of the SUV market.
A Volvo S60 saloon is the same size as a V60 estate is the same size as a XC60 SUV, which incidentaly are the same size as a Ford Mondeo, and a Ford Kuga, and a Mazda 6 because they were all originally designed on the same platform, they just have different 'skins' (Volvo moving platform away now since Ford sold them, but still essentially the same). Just in the same way that many bikes, although branded differently are built in the same factory and are exactly the same bikes with maybe slightly differing components."alternate viewpoint"
Honestly, it's here that has an alternative viewpoint, at least compared to the general population.
Some comments on the non cyclist acusation...
I've been a member of the forum since 2009 I think, though job role and family/child means I lurk more than post these days. I've engaged in far too much frivolity over the last few days and really need to catch up. Some of you know me in person.
I've participated as above in a couple of the commuter challeges.
I've attended cce events in the past, not many but have.
I've personally organised 2 PoP feeder rides, and helped to organise/advertise at least another 2. With the boy being old enough to go now we tend to just attend on the train as a family as 'participants'.
I currently have 4 and a 1/2 bikes, a Pashley Parabike which is utterly rubbish, but my favourite bike, a Planet X Kaffenback which is scuffed and bruised from >20K miles of commuting, a Planet X Pro Carbon (with fancy deep dish carbon wheels) which I am currently too heavy to ride for fear of the wheels. And a Decathlon Spin bike (which fair enough isn't really a bike).
I also have a 2009 Cerverlo Soloist which is my favourite posetion in the whole world (do you know Carlos Sastre won the 2008 TdF on the same frame). It doesn't ride as the carbon frame broke after 15K commuting miles, but it now hangs pride of place polished up to high heaven on my office wall at home.I once set up a local cyling group (call it a mini cce), pulled together local cycling groups/advocates, and councilors and managed to enable some local change, got signage for my local town etc, advocated for segregated cycle routes to the council locally - was told it couldn't be done and that I was a far left nut job for suggesting such things basically. Now those segregated routes exist - I can't take credit for them as I wasn't involved in any of the recent conversations, but I do take a little bit of personal credit for some of the early 'nibbling' and planting of seeds and being a basic nuisance for a few years (again role and child now prohibit being such a nuisance).
Best to make the council think it was their idea.
As an observation, I see our glorious leader is a nibbler (he/others may disagree).
Some observations on where cycling advocacy is now...
In all the years I cycled there was never a cyclist/motorist haterid, or at least not that I detected until probably the last 20 years or so, we seemed to be able to co-exist amicably.
Both parties seem to me to be as bad as each other on this, I'm not sure where the 'blame' lies, or wheather it's just an extension of society in gereral, Brexit division, Indy division, left/right division, bike/car division etc, actualy I'm convinced it's that.
Not going to get too much into politcs, but to me it seems society starts to fall appart as left and right widen, we seem to be much happier, less agreived and more content in the centre.Back to the 'advocacy', we need more cyle lanes to make it easier for people to cycle *if/when* they want to - we don't need to force the entire population out of their cars.
We need politically to come back to the centre so people stop hating each other, drivers will treat cyclists better, and cyclists will stop poking drivers for no reason.Now on the matter at hand, the hatred of cars in general and SUVs in particular. The horse has bolted, it's really a red herring.
Housing and transport account for 66% of our poersonal CO2 ouput.
Nobody would suggest that we knock down all of the houses because they are a scar on the land, and a waste of space and it would be better if we all lived in the woods. It would be great though, 1/3 of the CO2 emmissions gone... Of course thats a silly idea, housing has enabled us to live much longer, suffer less disease etc etc.
If there had been no industrial revolution, and the combustion engine was never invented, we would *all* be poorer today. Edinburgh wouldn't be the sprawling vibrant city you all love, there would be no shopping, no entertainment, no culture, at least not on the scale that attracts most of you to the city now, and for most you certainly wouldn't be living in your posh morningside flats. You just wouldn't.
So, cars/suvs will become carbon neutral over time, the 'first' generation of electric cars will overuse scarce minerals. Cars and mobile phones have done more to shrink batteries over the last 20 years than anything before them. Car batteries will become more efficent than you could ever imagine, and very quickly too. The battery tech of today will be antiquated by 2030. We may not even use batteries in 2030.
We do not need less cars, we need cars out of our cities at commuting times creating congestion. As I've said before a congestion chanrge for Edin will sort that.
Cars are awesome tools which allow me to take my son to Judo in Dunfermline on a Saturday morning, visit the National museum of flight in the afternoon, and have a meal in South Queensferry in the evening, truly wonderful.As stated we need a hell of a lot more cycling infrastructure so people can cycle *if/when* they like, not forced to.
E-Bikes are awesome - one may re-enable this fat 50 year old to commute the 21 miles to Edin again.
Drivers are cyclists are people.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Now we have the Trumps of CCE telling us that a Range Rover or Volvo XC90 have the same footprint as a normal family car like a VW Polo*; that suburban detached houses are more eco than medium density city housing; 2 + 2 = 5; black is white; and a Range Rover isn’t even an SUV at all!
Positively Trumpian.
Is this where Johnson and Trump have led us? That it's OK to lie and mislead? And if you say it enough times it’ll become true? Or are people so hoodwinked and blinkered by the marketing departments of motor manufacturers that they can’t even see that cars are getting ever bigger, ever faster, ever more violent?
*A VW Polo is perfectly adequate transport for a family of 4, and is probably equivalent in size now to something like a Ford Grenada (large car) of the 70s
Posted 2 years ago # -
"Now we have the Trumps of CCE telling us that a Range Rover or Volvo XC90 have the same footprint as a normal family car"
No, you've misread, or misundertood, or not taken the care to distil what I said.
"Positively Trumpian"
Again, you've misread, or misundertood, or not taken the care to distil what I said.
"Not going to get too much into politcs, but to me it seems society starts to fall appart as left and right widen, we seem to be much happier, less agreived and more content in the centre."
Posted 2 years ago # -
Here's a picture of Morningside Road. Look how wide it is. Enough space for 6 lanes of traffic.
Oh wait, it isn't any wider today. It's just that modern cars are now so wide that you can barely fit 3 lanes of traffic. As a consequence it looks like a narrow road.
Even the gargantuan Volvo on the right-hand side looks tiny by comparison to modern cars
Posted 2 years ago # -
"It's just that modern cars are now so wide that you can barely fit 3 lanes of traffic"
Look, the bus seems to be able to squeeze past the massive parked Volvo 240 without issue (Dimensions: Overall length 490 cm,wheelbase 264 cm.https://www.volvocars.com/intl/v/discover/heritage-car-models#244), presume (the now wider) buses are still doing so today, and cars so far are still narrower than buses.
There is the same 2 lanes of traffic (and some parking) that there are now. The flats haven't been pushed appart to make room.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The suvs aren't really any bigger than normal cars
SUV owners trying to justify their own purchase.
Certainly, the SUVs I've looked at aren't any bigger on the inside (aside from the wider centre-console) but they are enormous on the outside - incredible space-wasting inefficiency.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"but they are enormous on the outside"
Me:
"A Volvo S60 saloon is the same size as a V60 estate is the same size as a XC60 SUV, which incidentaly are the same size as a Ford Mondeo, and a Ford Kuga, and a Mazda 6 because they were all originally designed on the same platform at the same time and in the same office, they just have different 'skins'"Posted 2 years ago # -
BTW, I had the misfortune to hire a Nissan Qashqai (not through choice).
It was awkward to drive, tinny, rattly, had poor throttle progression and just felt really cheaply put together. Even the auto-handbrake was clunky. It's easy to see why motor manufacturers are creaming huge profits off these types of vehicle. What a con!
Posted 2 years ago # -
I agree with your assesment of the Nissan Qashqai, much better off with a Volvo, though there is a cost premium.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Excluding previous bizarre comparisons with racist violence against the person (?), the argument Baldcyclist appears to advancing is that one giant car is as big as another giant car?
Cool (if tautological).
Smaller cars are of course widely available but presumably the vulgarians of the New Town (and elsewhere) can't be flexin' with those*.
Were SUV/pickups genuinely only used by those with a need for their capabilities and the streets were instead overwhelmed by estate cars, I daresay the Tyre Extinguishers would be targeting them. As it is, the SUV is the perfect symbol of much that is wrong with the car-brained.
* A plea: should flexin' be psychologically necessary, please choose a flex that does not clutter the streets so (or total the planet to the same degree). May I suggest instead: ostentatious jewellery, product of Italian fashion houses and gold-plated bathroom fittings? Thankyou.
Otherwise where does it end up? MAN 8x8s? Caiman MRAPs for the school run?
ADMIN EDIT: Asterisks on their own are OK, just not in square brackets unless doing a unordered list.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I seem to have broken the forum
Posted 2 years ago # -
previous bizarre comparisons with racist ce against the person (?), the argument Baldcyclist appears to advancing is that one giant car is as big as another giant car?
So I'll ask you for the list of people we're allowed to discrimate against, or are okay if we're only letting down the tyres of people who are different from us?
Smaller cars are available but it wasn't all cars being targeted just suvs because people belive they are worse for the environment or "too big" when the objective facts show they are no bigger than their equivalent normal car, the juke was singled out but is in fact smaller than a golf.
The argument wahh wahh wahh suvs are bad is no better than Sue Webber whining about spaces for people.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Indeed, where does it end?
I note that Audi have produced something even bigger than an XC90 / BMW X7 / Range Rover - the Q8(?). Also Merc have something bigger
Truly behemoth
I saw one of those Mercs outside the cottages just off Colinton Rd in the old part of Colinton village - its length took up the width of two houses.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Again, just to distil further and get to the basis of my position.
Fixation on SUV/car hatred is a red herring, in the same way fixation on helmets, and bike insurance are.
Do fixate on more / better cycle infrastructure.
Do fixate on encouraging more people to cycle - hint you won't do that by hating them and calling them allsorts.
Do fixate on E bikes.
Posted 2 years ago # -
@MediumDave Re the broken site, I suspect there is an open un/ordered list. Try deleting the asterisk in square brackets.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Regrettably I can no longer edit my original post and didn't see I'd created an issue as I tend to browse the forum in a reader mode (yay greasemonkey). Oops!
My apologies, we'll have to wait for Mighty Chdot (or another admin) to fix my error. ADMIN EDIT: Done.
To return to the argument: delegitimising car culture is absolutely necessary to allow alternatives we may promote to flourish. The choices of vehicle owners directly impact all of us. Whether anyone chooses to have a (helmet/bike insurance/whatever) by and large impacts only them.
SUVs encapsulate many of the problems with car culture. The pejorative "W<rule2>panzer" neatly expresses this: my definition is "an aggressively styled, impractical vehicle purchased and displayed for reasons of status. When used, the use is often unnecessary and inconsiderate."
Were vehicles purchased purely on the basis of practical need, you would not see so many SUVs. Nor private vehicles, for that matter.
Meanwhile it's a target rich environment for the Tyre Extinguishers.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"To return to the argument: delegitimising car culture is absolutely necessary to allow alternatives we may promote to flourish. The choices of vehicle owners directly impact all of us."
Vehicle owners are making legal choices, buying legal highly regulated cars in regulated showrooms. They aren't engaging in any criminality.
You can't blame people for choosing what is available to them when they go to the showroom. Some people buy wasteful expensive bikes (me), and some cheaper more practical bikes (me too), they are also engaging in their legal right to buy what they see fit with their hard earned.
If there was a real and legitimate demonstrable problem with SUVs, they would be illegal. If you think the law on car sales is wrong, and you have data to prove that then aim your anger there, not at law abiding citizens going about their daily.
The objective data suggests that SUVs and their equivalent cars are the same in terms of size, and broadly the same in terms of emmissisons. Again, not to rain on the parade, the typical XC40 now has a 1.5 petrol engine, compared to my old XC60 which has a 2.4 deisel engine, they are far less polluting, and have better economy than before. This will improve even more with electrification (hybrid is a waste of time).
"Do fixate on encouraging more people to cycle - hint you won't do that by hating them and calling them allsorts."
Posted 2 years ago # -
You appear to think that mere legality places a behaviour beyond criticism. I guess all protest movements better pack up shop then?
People can certainly buy legally SUVs or other obnoxious items. Just don't expect doing so to be a an uncontroversial choice without consequence.
Rooting out car culture requires bottom up action (for example by placing certain individual purchasing choices beyond the pale as I attempt to do here) and by top down methods (excluding vehicles from certain places or at certain times for instance).
Both are in my view necessary and legitimate. The selection of SUVs as a target for protest is astute as their practical drawbacks are well known.
Recalling a thread that previously touched on these issues: tossing the Colston statue into the water achieved more on that issue in a few minutes than 20 years of asking nicely for the statue to be removed or contextualised.
The spectacle of direct action has power and salience beyond all proportion to the actual events in question.
To return to cycling, look what Stop de Kindermoord achieved. One of the tactics was to target law abiding folks going around their legitimate motorized business by pretending to lie dead in the middle of the road.
Oh, and this:
https://bicycledutch.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/protest.jpg
Posted 2 years ago # -
Look what has been acheived in London, and also begining to happen in Manchester with top down advocacy.
Getting government on board, and putting in place mass infrastructure for mass travel along side a congestion charge is a far more powerful tool for change than agrivating people who are making legal choices.
.Or nibble (previous post).
"Do fixate on more / better cycle infrastructure.
Do fixate on encouraging more people to cycle - hint you won't do that by hating them and calling them allsorts."
Posted 2 years ago # -
@steveo the question of "why target SUVs" is already answered in my post and by the tyre extinguishers leaflet
http://www.tyreextinguishers.com/leaflet
The fact that other cars as big or bigger exist is not a get out. SUVs are illustrative of the problems with wider (in both senses of the word) car culture. If another type of vehicle were so totemic, I suspect the Tyre Extinguishers would target those vehicles instead.
BTW I have nothing to do with the Tyre Extinguishers. But jolly well done to them for such an effective action
Posted 2 years ago # -
Also re Netherlands, car ownership rates are pretty average when compared to other EU countries.
They will be buying the same cars that are available to us - unless of course they have micro super enviro friendly car brands I'm not aware of.
They will be buying Fords and Volvos and Hondas too:
https://longreads.cbs.nl/european-scale-2019/car-ownership/They just use them when they are useful, ie not commuting which is what I am suggesting (and personally do).
Netherlands is the cycling panacea we all want, they own suvs too. Do they deflate tyres there?
"Fixation on SUV/car hatred is a red herring, in the same way fixation on helmets, and bike insurance are.
Do fixate on more / better cycle infrastructure.
Do fixate on encouraging more people to cycle - hint you won't do that by hating them and calling them allsorts."
Posted 2 years ago # -
On the basis that somewhere around 1 billion tyres a year* wear out and end up as microplastic pollution, if you're going to target cars, spread the net a little wider and target them all. EVs aren't going to help much, smaller cars might run smaller tyres but really it's an enormous problem regardless of your type of vehicle. I don't see many people discussing the plastic pollution we are inflicting on the planet through tyre wear. Nor the toxic dust from brake pad wear.
*based on my fag packet maths of there being over a billion vehicles on the world's roads, and most drivers will probably change their tyres once every four years at least.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"I don't see many people discussing the plastic pollution we are inflicting on the planet through tyre wear"
Once we stop using oil, there will be no plastic. Have no idea what 'eco' plastic will be made of in future. Probably there will still be some oil extraction for plastics, clothing, toothpase etc?
Posted 2 years ago # -
[blockquote]Do the tyre extinguishers deflate tyres in the Netherlands[/blockquote]
Yes:
The Dutch would be the first to admit that car culture is not done in their country. However as you point out, they perhaps have a more nuanced attitude than we do.
As for the other achievements, do you really think that protest and direct action played no part whatsoever in obtaining them? If so that is astonishing.
As a tactic direct action is frequently effective though individual actions may fail or be mistargeted. For example XR gluing themselves to trains. They did not do that again, focusing instead on other targets. Whether the Tyre Extinguishers is in this category remains to be seen.
Posted 2 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
