Sheffield Congestion Charge From Feb 27th 2023

[RollingJ]

1 minute ago, Planner1 said:

Anyone can point to the nearby sources of the monitored gases that might contribute to measured levels, but no one can say for certain what proportion comes from where. That’s the point I’ve been making.

 

The station isn’t in the CAZ ( the boundary is along Sheaf St)  so in the context of this thread, why are we discussing the nuances of where pollutants in the station may or may not have come from?

So are the pollution levels along Sheaf St. within (currently) official safety levels?

[Chekhov]

20 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

Yes, I DO believe in democracy, although it seems to be a very long long time ago that a government of ours did what I wanted so whether it is still in operation, I don't know.

Governments DO make the decisions, based on the advice they get from the scientists.  Whether they are weak or not is immaterial.

Whether you are happy or not with the scientists track record, there is no scientific opposition to their advice regarding what is happening with climate change and the urgent need to take action.

Unfortunately for your way of thinking,  they will be following the scientists advice and ignoring the fact that you don't agree with it in the same way they usually ignore my wishes too.

I think that they have all started listening, many years too late anyway,  and that we are further over the tipping point than they think. 

I also think that, as governments do, they overestimate their ability to deal with things in the time frame they originally specify.

>>there is no scientific opposition to their advice regarding what is happening with climate change<<

 

Whilst I would have to agree that the great majority of the scientific advice about Climate change is in the direction you say, not all of it is. But, the great majority of the scientific advice was in the same direction about Covid, and how wrong did that turn out to be ? The latter being part the reason I am no longer willing to accept anything most of "the scientific community predict".

 

However, you are missing the point anyway. It does not matter what the scientific advice is or how accurate it is or isn't, what matters is what do the people want ?

I am not saying this is the case or not, but if the British population said well, climate change will have winners and losers, but we do not want to spend Trillions trying to stop it, I'd rather spend Billions trying to alleviate its effects. Then that, in a democracy, is what the British government should do.

Edited December 20, 2022 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

6 hours ago, AndrewC said:

And not everyone agrees with you, so when you say "We" [the people] vote them in, and that 'they' [the government] should be doing what "we" [the people] want, that all depends on who 'you' are, doesn't it?

What does that even mean ?

And if it means that we should not always do what the people want and vote for (assuming we give them the chance....), how can they consider themselves democrats ?

 

6 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Getting the "...no more opening windows..." wrong is one thing.

Why do you keep saying this when I have proved I am right countless times ?

Edited December 20, 2022 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

6 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Advocating "...if hardly anyone is getting killed doing something why bother doing anything about it..." is plain daft.

Does the £3.2million* cost of every murder when only 1 in a 100 000  die fall into your  "...if hardly anyone is getting killed doing something why bother doing anything about it..." category?

*Daily Mail

Murder is different obviously.

My point is if people are happy to put themselves at the 1 in 240 risk of dying in a car accident (over their lifetime) why should they expect society to spend vast sums of money (or introduce ever more regulations and restrictions on everyone's lives) to reduce an already far lower risk of them dying from something else (whatever it may be) ? 

Edited December 20, 2022 by Chekhov

[Planner1]

1 hour ago, RollingJ said:

So are the pollution levels along Sheaf St. within (currently) official safety levels?

No, along with a good few other places ( which is why we’ve got a CAZ)

[Chekhov]

1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

Anyone can point to the nearby sources of the monitored gases that might contribute to measured levels, but no one can say for certain what proportion comes from where. That’s the point I’ve been making.

The station isn’t in the CAZ ( the boundary is along Sheaf St)  so in the context of this thread, why are we discussing the nuances of where pollutants in the station may or may not have come from?

I think it's more than reasonable to conclude that on the station platforms, with many diesel trains around either idling or accelerating, the levels of exhaust pollutants there is very much more likely to be from the trains than from vehicles the other side of a load of buildings and or walls. Particularly as the majority of the latter will petrol cars be fitted with catalytic converters (or electric cars), by the end of 2021 only 37% were diesel.

[Planner1]

10 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

I think it's more than reasonable to conclude that on the station platforms, with many diesel trains around either idling or accelerating, the levels of exhaust pollutants there is very much more likely to be from the trains than from vehicles the other side of a load of buildings and or walls. Particularly as the majority of the latter will petrol cars be fitted with catalytic converters (or electric cars), by the end of 2021 only 37% were diesel.

There’s a taxi rank right outside the station where there are sometimes dozens of Hackney cabs sitting idling and queuing.  They are diesel vehicles.

 

Undoubtedly the trains contribute to the levels of pollution, but we don’t know exactly how much is due to them, the cabs, traffic on Sheaf St or any other contributors.

 

[RollingJ]

43 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

No, along with a good few other places ( which is why we’ve got a CAZ)

I know you don't work for SCC (now), but you must have the details - any chance of a link?

[Planner1]

9 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

I know you don't work for SCC (now), but you must have the details - any chance of a link?

Look on this page. The diffusion tube annual results are linked on the right side of the page.

[RollingJ]

11 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Look on this page. The diffusion tube annual results are linked on the right side of the page.

Thank you. Tomorrow morning if I get a chance,