CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 15years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
"
Colin Howden, Director of Transform Scotland, said: "The Government needs to put its money where its mouth is on climate change policy.
It has been very quick to pronounce its legislation as "world-leading" -- but not so swift at bringing forward the funding for emission-saving measures which would see its climate targets met.
"
http://www.transformscotland.org.uk/key-tests-for-transport.aspx
I do like the last bullet point;
the Government should be looking at the introduction of... workplace parking levy schemes (as highlighted in earlier drafts of the RPP) which would reduce congestion and provide health and community regeneration benefits. Any income raised by these schemes should be invested back into improving local sustainable transport options.
Difficult to argue with most of this, However, I disagree with the suggestion that the "Greener bus fund" should be extended - why should the taxpayer fund fleet renewals at First and Stagecoach. Given the high cost/benefit ratio of most cycle/walking schemes I'm pretty sure you get a better return (carbon and financial) from investing the money in them rather than "green buses".
The greener bus fund does have an interesting deal which could be exploited on a quid pro quo premise. Essentially the new technology presents an initial capital cost hurdle to buying buses that use up to 30% less fuel by using smaller engines (read light diesel van 2-3 litres vice HGV 6-12 litre) and running more efficiency at the optimum speed and load. Longer term of course the operators may well save money and perhaps any future capital assistance to get a more efficient operation (not just of buses but say of solar panel arrays) might include a pay-back arrangement on savings made.
Many potentially beneficial initiatives are held back by initial capital costs and I'm told that the end of year report for the Leeds Cyclepoint should show that in trading terms it is a viable business (they increased the hire bike fleet by 50% before a year of operation was completed), but it only got built because the capital cost was delivered by the Adonis Fund for cycle-rail projects, clearing that initial barrier.
Here's a quick plug too - on 29th September there is a conference and awards event in Leeds organised by ATOC and ACT-Travelwise at which the first year of Cyclepoint will be celebrated and reviewed.
For those in Glasgow it's worth noting that a walk-up return fare (valid for 1 month) via Appleby has a train connection to Leeds (dep 04.28 arr 08.37) and return at 17.56 for £47.60 rather than £88.90 for all other routes (some off-peak restrictions)
PS for Glasgow to Edinburgh - Hourly service - check out the amazing advance (and walk-up) fares with Cross Country Trains
Scottish Budget fails sustainable transport
Spending on road-building up 25%; Spending on the most sustainable modes down 25%
Transform Scotland [1] today slammed the Scottish Government's Spending Review as failing the future prospects for sustainable transport. The Spending Review sees large increases for spending on road-building at the expense of the most sustainable modes. [2]
Colin Howden, Director of Transform Scotland, said:
"This budget fails sustainable transport and the prospects for hitting our climate targets. The Government has reneged on their climate plans and has slashed investment in active travel. Transport is the basket case of climate policy -- and yet the Government has cut funding for the areas which would deliver emissions cuts.
"While the large trunk roads budget sees a further increase of 25%, the already modest budget for sustainable and active travel has been cut by 25%. The Government has also made no attempt to fund its own Report on Proposals and Policies (RPP) in order to meet its climate change targets. It is perverse for the Government to draw up plans to tackle climate change and then not to fund and implement them.
"One ray of hope is that the 'Cycling, Walking and Safer Routes' fund remains in the budget, albeit at an undecided level. It is vital that this is funded to at least the level of previous years, and more if the Government is serious about meeting its own targets as set out in the Cycling Action Plan for Scotland and the RPP. The 'Future Transport Fund' could also make a useful contribution. But again the Government has given no specifics."
http://www.transformscotland.org.uk/scottish-budget-fails-sustainable-transport.aspx
I might add that this seems to typical behaviour from the SNP government.
Clearly they only signed up to the Climate Change Bill in return for the Greens supporting them in the votes to appoint wee Eck and his chums to government posts. Once the bill was enacted, only lip service was paid to its ambitious targets.
We've seen similar behaviour with the trams too. Unless they believe in the idea whole heartedly, this government just about grudgingly accepts some tokenistic measures to address important issues.
What a contrast with the approach to the second Forth road bridge, where the SNP are moving heaven and earth to ensure this unnecessary structure gets built.
Full budget document here:
"
TransformScot:
Spending Review fails sustainable transport: spend on roads up 25%, spend on most sustainable modes down 25%. http://t.co/etBVClv8 #sr11
Original Tweet: http://twitter.com/TransformScot/status/116561559949553665
"
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts