Donate SIGN UP

Is this plausible anyway?

Avatar Image
Red_John | 22:46 Mon 28th Mar 2011 | News
20 Answers
Delighted as I am that we now seem to have the gumption to tell the EU where to go, surely this is not plausible anyway.
Can you imagine all the cities of Europe adhering to this? I can just see the politicians making themselves exempt! Is this further evidence that the EU is building what amounts to a new Soviet Union with an elite set of rulers lording it over the masses who are getting ever more skint paying for workshy scum, immigrants and of course all the snout in trough politicians and leviathan public sectors? At what point do we throw in the towel and sign on ourselves?


1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Red_John. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
you do not think planning to reduce our reliance on oil is a good idea? How many more wars for the stuff do we have to fight before 2050?
Question Author
yes I do Gromit but burning fossil fuels to make electricity is 400% worse than using it directly in a car. Electric vehicles do far more environmental damage than is often realised. Also in reality there'll be exemptions for officials etc that'll defeat the object. We will be reliant on oil until it runs out or some other source of energy becomes viable. Tinkering about makes little difference.
"an elite set of rulers lording it over the masses who are getting ever more skint paying for workshy scum, immigrants and of course all the snout in trough politicians and leviathan public sectors?"

Ah, changed the name but still have the highly sophisticated political debating skills, I see...
Question Author
well I notice you took a pop at the messenger rather than refuting the points.
The commission says the objective is to lower emissions from transport by 60%, not reduce powerstation emissions.

This is presumably on health grounds. Hundreds of thousands of people live in cities, breathing in pollution from cars that has a detrimental affect on their health. If the emissions are far away from the city from a power station in a low populated area, then less people will be affected.

It is claimed 50,000 people die prematurely in the UK due to air pollution. Are we to do nothing and accept that annual death toll? Banning highly polluting vehicles from densely populated areas is worth a try.

Enacting legislation that will come in to effect in 39 years time is an exercise in wishful thinking. No one can possibly predict the technological innovations over this sort of time-frame, nor can they predict the geopolitical situation. It's entirely possible that the entity known as the EU will not exist in 2050.
Thinking about energy usage is a long term strategy. Which is why we are currently served by Nuclear Power Stations commissioned 40 years ago.
Legislation is not the same as long-term strategy.

I can see the need to strive and strategically plan to make our cities cleaner but to legislate 39 years into the future shows a quite remarkable foresight. The people who make these laws must be truly gifted. Maybe they could tell me next week's Euro lottery numbers?
Strategically planning for the future is sensible, rational and welcome. Making laws that will come into effect 40 years from now is arrogant, stupid and self-aggrandising.
The 'laws' are not drafted for 2050, they are drafted for now. The objective, is to make cities cleaner, and the target, or measure to see if this has been successful, is set for 2050.

Are we to get data that tells us 50,000 people die prematurely from the affects of pollution, and conclude we cannot, or don't want to do anything about it?

Maybe a solution which won't impede your access to Marks & Spencer's would be to issue those unfortunate to be pedestrians and old with face masks like we see in Tokyo.
By 2050 it is highly unlikely that fossil fuel driven car will be around so this debate is rather academic.
As an asthma sufferer I cant wait for it to happen. I love my cars and motorbike but there are down sides. We need to shift the anti car lobby, accept that personal cars are here to stay and work out a way to get on with it.
An additional benefit of course will be to stick the Arabs back in theri tents. Should be much more peaceful for all.
As for Bruxelles doing this = its highly unlikely. It is still a perk to have a company car here, most are. You even get your fuel paid for (40K km) and no heavy tax burden.
All new buses have low entrances, kneeling suspension, wheelchair spaces and visual/audible stopping signs. Such improvemnts are expensive and bus companies would not voluntarily pay extra money. It took laws from the EU, 20 years ago, to make all new buses accessible. And the improvemnts benefit all passengers, and partonage went up.
Odd that busses here dont seem to do that.

I think even in the UK it is very hit and miss as is the additional take up you claim. May well be true in some Cities but not everywhere. It is quite4 possible that money was diverted from the country servixes to pay for what you claim aer EU benefits.
The Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000, which specified that ALL NEW public service vehicles over 22 seats should be low floor from 31 December 2000.

The Regulations were not retrospective, so buses manufactures before 2000 did not have to be low floor. If the buses where you are, are not low floor, they are running a very old fleet.
Why did those measures take "EU Laws" to make them happen, Gromit?

There is a strong likliehood that such measures would have originated from Westminster anyway. The difference would have been that only the people whom the UK electorate voted for would have had a say. Of course EU laws are conceived and implemented by unelected EU Commissioners, as has this scheme.
Seems to me that achieving emission free city centres by 2050 is a worthy aim, but would be better to shoot for 2030. Don't think the EU should drive this, should be down to individual places as has partially happened with London Low Emission Zone.
I'm sat in Bruxelles. Not one has kneeling suspension, even the bendy buses. They are not all11 years old either. And I have just been out to check.

It would appear it is one rule for us and one rule for our lords and masters. No surprise there I suppose.
They do not kneel all the time. If a mum with a baby buggy or someone on a wheelchair is waiting, then the buses suspension lowers to Kerb height. But for most passengers, they will just pull up as normal. But the bus will have wide entrances and no steps.
"well I notice you took a pop at the messenger rather than refuting the points."

Did Red_John just completely fail to deny that he's R1Geezer?
He did.
He is.
But R1geezer has been reinstated so expect normal service to resume forthwith....

1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Is this plausible anyway?

Answer Question >>