Move to reduce air pollution in York (From York Press)

Wait for it.....cars are less polluting when they are moving quickly, so remove all the traffic lights and let the traffic flow.....blah blah.

pedalling paul wrote:
Wait for it.....cars are less polluting when they are moving quickly, so remove all the traffic lights and let the traffic flow.....blah blah.

On yer bike!

sheps lad wrote:

pedalling paul wrote:
Wait for it.....cars are less polluting when they are moving quickly, so remove all the traffic lights and let the traffic flow.....blah blah.

On yer bike!

You're up early today mon ami!

I've got a quick fix, get rid of the politicians - immediate reduction in hot air and noxious gasses....

pedalling paul wrote:
Wait for it.....cars are less polluting when they are moving quickly, so remove all the traffic lights and let the traffic flow.....blah blah.

Or perhaps less smokie polluting tour buses driving around at 15mph eh Paul. Oh sorry forgot they're helping so much with the air quality.

A noble cause, but instead of trying to encourage the use of "electric and hybrid vehicles" which is something a council has no real influence over and is in reality dictated by the range and cost of buying such vehicles which is of course in the hands of the people who make them. They could always try changing something that they do have control over which will reduce "air pollution" inmeasusuably ie traffic lights.

I've done a list below, see if anyone can regognise these places.


Two big roundabouts where lights are operational 24hrs a day instead of just when they'd help.

A set of lights just outside York on a big road letting cars out from a small road which change stopping hundreds of cars to let one out causing a "butterfly effect" tailback of one and a half miles which then blocks a major roundabout.

Lights near a newish supermarket which are able to sense a single cyclist who can't see the expensive cycling provision to his left which bypasses them, change in his favour stopping a dozen cars for two minutes.

Lights near a posh school with one lane approaching them where most people turn left with a right filter light which changes first.

Two sets of lights near a pile of rubble which used to be a sorts facility which lack any sort of sensory equipment between them, so often leave a dozen cars sat at the first set at red with 300 yards of empty space between them and a green traffic light to which no other vehicle has ever travelled towards or is ever likely to from the green phase at the first set as they would have to be intentionally driving round in circles to do so.

An "improved" set of lights turning into a street named after an English king where the left filter light which only ever needs to be red against its right fltering counterpart and a hardly used pelican instead has a fobia about being green.

There isn't a prize for guessing any of these but maybe the council could do similar puzzle for its city engineers to achieve theit goal and save them a few hundred thousand punds compiling a report about things they have no real influence over?

Or perhaps York council could take some cues from Tallin?

free public transport within the city.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/world-europe-1
7517106

pedalling paul wrote:
Wait for it.....cars are less polluting when they are moving quickly, so remove all the traffic lights and let the traffic flow.....blah blah.

Thanks for posting the truth for once...! The traffic lights were out in various busy parts of York yesterday and guess what? Traffic was moving freely and therefore causing less pollution!

Its easy really. A few weeks ago the lights at Monk Bar failed and guess what? Traffic flowed easily and people walked across the road without being run over. Pollution was reduced! Imagine that! I suggest switching off alternate traffic lights and seeing what happens. Ad in the savings of not maintaining lights which is about £10,000 a year per set and you could save a £1m in no time!

Yet again I see that peddling paul is attempting to comment on a subject that we have demonstrated in the recent past that his comments and advice are totally illogical and his ramblings if implemented would contribute negatively to any traffic/pollution issue.

It is truly scary that he is a spokesperson for a cycling group that expects the council and others to listen and take action!

I implore each and every one of you to ignore anything he states.
1. Because it is intended to wind people up to respond.
2. Do not stroke his already overinflated ego.
3. It is dribble that enimates from his keyboard and indeed mouth.

Amoco Caditz wrote:
Yet again I see that peddling paul is attempting to comment on a subject that we have demonstrated in the recent past that his comments and advice are totally illogical and his ramblings if implemented would contribute negatively to any traffic/pollution issue.

It is truly scary that he is a spokesperson for a cycling group that expects the council and others to listen and take action!

I implore each and every one of you to ignore anything he states.
1. Because it is intended to wind people up to respond.
2. Do not stroke his already overinflated ego.
3. It is dribble that enimates from his keyboard and indeed mouth.

Spot on Amoco....I couldn't have put it better myself. The man is indeed a peddling pratt..!

During the 105 minute power cut yesterday, when the traffic lights were out at Bootham and Lord Mayors Walk, traffic flowed along Gillygate like a dream. Perhaps LESS regulation is the answer to the congestion and the pollution it causes...?

Pete the Brickie wrote:
A noble cause, but instead of trying to encourage the use of "electric and hybrid vehicles" which is something a council has no real influence over and is in reality dictated by the range and cost of buying such vehicles which is of course in the hands of the people who make them. They could always try changing something that they do have control over which will reduce "air pollution" inmeasusuably ie traffic lights. I've done a list below, see if anyone can regognise these places. Two big roundabouts where lights are operational 24hrs a day instead of just when they'd help. A set of lights just outside York on a big road letting cars out from a small road which change stopping hundreds of cars to let one out causing a "butterfly effect" tailback of one and a half miles which then blocks a major roundabout. Lights near a newish supermarket which are able to sense a single cyclist who can't see the expensive cycling provision to his left which bypasses them, change in his favour stopping a dozen cars for two minutes. Lights near a posh school with one lane approaching them where most people turn left with a right filter light which changes first. Two sets of lights near a pile of rubble which used to be a sorts facility which lack any sort of sensory equipment between them, so often leave a dozen cars sat at the first set at red with 300 yards of empty space between them and a green traffic light to which no other vehicle has ever travelled towards or is ever likely to from the green phase at the first set as they would have to be intentionally driving round in circles to do so. An "improved" set of lights turning into a street named after an English king where the left filter light which only ever needs to be red against its right fltering counterpart and a hardly used pelican instead has a fobia about being green. There isn't a prize for guessing any of these but maybe the council could do similar puzzle for its city engineers to achieve theit goal and save them a few hundred thousand punds compiling a report about things they have no real influence over?

Spot on Pete, add to that a set of lights near our Cycling friends house, two lanes of traffic held up for a couple of minutes every sequence so that one car every couple of hours can turn right across them.
And people think there's a conspiracy to hold traffic flow up in York, seriously?

Ignatius Lumpopo wrote:
During the 105 minute power cut yesterday, when the traffic lights were out at Bootham and Lord Mayors Walk, traffic flowed along Gillygate like a dream. Perhaps LESS regulation is the answer to the congestion and the pollution it causes...?

Spot on.

At 6-6.30 on Monday traffic was stacked from the station past the lights at the top of Bootham.

Yesterday, same time, same place, absolutely clear. It made everyone actually pay attention when going through the junction too!

Pointless while we have chemtrails poisoning us from the sky's above.
If you don't see them, then get your eyes checked.
ChemTrails are not the same as normal, everyday aerial contrails; there is a definite observable difference in both the formation and behavior of these two similar phenomena, which clearly distinguishes one from the other.
Normal contrails are composed of fragile ice crystals formed by aircraft flying at altitudes of 31,000 feet or greater. At altitudes below 31,000 feet, these normal vapor condensation trails are simply not able to form behind an aircraft, regardless of its type or design. Above 31,000 feet, normal contrails appear pencil-thin in construction when observed from ground level, and in nearly all instances, tend to totally evaporate within a minute or so, rarely extending for any appreciable distance behind the emitting aircraft.

ChemTrails on the other hand, have been observed being generated by aircraft flying at altitudes as high as 33,000 feet and as low as 8,000 feet—but generally, below 30,000 feet. Since normal contrails can not form at these low altitudes, any contrail formation that is observed at these elevations is probably not a contrail at all, but a genuine ChemTrail.

These normally manifest as billowy smoke trails when viewed from the ground, and tend to always become broader and denser over time. They generally do not evaporate, nor do they dissipate at all. Over a period of several hours, parallel ChemTrail formations will eventually spread out to meet one another and join together to form a continuous, banded, cirrus-like cloud formation in the sky. Often a fish-spine configuration will be observed after a given ChemTrail has had sufficient time to mature. Shortly after this joining-up phase, what just hours earlier was a perfectly clear blue sky, will now appear as a structured, milky-haze overcast, unnatural in all respects.

Check them out, do your homework, make your own mind up.

sane121 wrote:
Pointless while we have chemtrails poisoning us from the sky's above.
If you don't see them, then get your eyes checked.
ChemTrails are not the same as normal, everyday aerial contrails; there is a definite observable difference in both the formation and behavior of these two similar phenomena, which clearly distinguishes one from the other.
Normal contrails are composed of fragile ice crystals formed by aircraft flying at altitudes of 31,000 feet or greater. At altitudes below 31,000 feet, these normal vapor condensation trails are simply not able to form behind an aircraft, regardless of its type or design. Above 31,000 feet, normal contrails appear pencil-thin in construction when observed from ground level, and in nearly all instances, tend to totally evaporate within a minute or so, rarely extending for any appreciable distance behind the emitting aircraft.

ChemTrails on the other hand, have been observed being generated by aircraft flying at altitudes as high as 33,000 feet and as low as 8,000 feet—but generally, below 30,000 feet. Since normal contrails can not form at these low altitudes, any contrail formation that is observed at these elevations is probably not a contrail at all, but a genuine ChemTrail.

These normally manifest as billowy smoke trails when viewed from the ground, and tend to always become broader and denser over time. They generally do not evaporate, nor do they dissipate at all. Over a period of several hours, parallel ChemTrail formations will eventually spread out to meet one another and join together to form a continuous, banded, cirrus-like cloud formation in the sky. Often a fish-spine configuration will be observed after a given ChemTrail has had sufficient time to mature. Shortly after this joining-up phase, what just hours earlier was a perfectly clear blue sky, will now appear as a structured, milky-haze overcast, unnatural in all respects.

Check them out, do your homework, make your own mind up.

Oh dear, I think you need to construct another tin foil beanie to wear. The Venusians are obviously transmitting a lot of nonsense from their secret bases directly into your brain.

Check them out, do your homework, make your own mind up.

We don't all read websites for nutters, then plagiarise them!

http://www.ufos-alie
ns.co.uk/cosmicchems
.html

I seem to have attracted a little criticism.......! Ok so if traffic flows freely with no lights, how do pedestrians cross roads safely, especially if they have sensory or mobility restriction?

pedalling paul wrote:
I seem to have attracted a little criticism.......! Ok so if traffic flows freely with no lights, how do pedestrians cross roads safely, especially if they have sensory or mobility restriction?

The same way they do when the lights are faulty. Pay attention and take care. There were no crowds of wheelchair and walking stick users stranded at the Bootham junction when the lights were out. As others noticed, there were no traffic queues on any approach either.

pedalling paul wrote:
I seem to have attracted a little criticism.......! Ok so if traffic flows freely with no lights, how do pedestrians cross roads safely, especially if they have sensory or mobility restriction?

You do realise there's a difference between traffic lights and pedestrian crossings, right?

Out of interest, have you found any actual evidence for all that unmet demand for driving that suddenly manifests when roads are made bigger? I did ask you about a month ago and nothing was forthcoming...

I agree, its about time they had the courage to try some radical solutions in York. Lets switch all the city centre traffic lights out one Sunday - advertise it well in advance, maybe get Francis Maude to warn everybody about the likely gridlock in York that day and guess what? The traffic will flow beautifully, drivers will be looking out especially carefully for old ladies waiting to cross the road, dogs, children, even cyclists perhaps.... Next we could close off routes across the city centre (make everyone accessing the central streets return along the next street whatever time of day) so they cant short cut across the centre like the taxis do at breakneck speed in the evenings.Then we could have a two month trial of making Gillygate access and emergency vehicles only (those who need to get to the hospital have a longer drive round the centre or get a bus if they can find one going that way). Result - gridlock for a day or two, then, like when we have roadworks on Blossom St people choose another route or time of day to avoid the queues. Air quality gets worse for a few days, but long term we actually try to change things rather than shrug shoulders and say 'too bad- I need my car, its everyone else that causes the problem'. Ah well... we can but dream of a city for people rather than their expensive metal boxes!

‘pedalling paul says... 8:52pm Wed 28 Mar 12
I seem to have attracted a little criticism’

I also asked you a direct question a few weeks ago that you failed to answer again!

Do you have a valid driving licence?