Sheffield Congestion Charge From Feb 27th 2023

[Chekhov]

5 hours ago, AndrewC said:

but as with all things climate change, those limits are likely to become more strict as people get used to them

No, sadly, I'd say 

 

but as with all things c̶l̶i̶m̶a̶t̶e̶ ̶c̶h̶a̶n̶g̶e̶, those limits are likely to become more strict as people get used to them

 

This is the exact reason why our lives are more regulated than they have ever been, and it will continue to get worse, and worse, and worse, forever.

[Chekhov]

6 hours ago, AndrewC said:

>>RollingJ said:
And government policy is 'always correct' of course?<<

 

No, but that doesn't matter if the council have any obligation to stay in line with said policy.

WHAT ! ! !

We vote these bozos in, they should be doing what we want.

Stop just accepting stuff, fight back. At the very minimum tell your MP or whatever you aren't going to vote for them if they support these policies.

The only problem there, of course, is that for the two biggest issues of the present time (climate change and pandemic policy) it's TINA, "there is no alternative", because, rather undemocratically, all the major parties have more or less the same soddin' policies.

And they wonder why more and more people are being attracted to splinter groups, conspiracy theories and extremism !

Idiots.

 

5 hours ago, HeHasRisen said:

Electrification will reduce it a little, assuming it ever happens.

I think it is ludicrous and totally inconsistent / hypocritical for the government to be even thinking about banning gas boilers and petrol/diesel cars whilst a major rail centre like Sheffield, for example, has no electrified routes from/to it, and rail fares (public transport) are sky high.....

Edited December 19, 2022 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

4 hours ago, RollingJ said:

the reaction by SCC was not proportionate - the costs must have been huge, for no discernable return.

More generally, about pretty much everything in life these days :

 

the reaction b̶y̶ ̶S̶C̶C̶  the developed world w̶a̶s̶  is not proportionate - the costs  ̶m̶u̶s̶t̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶b̶e̶e̶n̶  are usually huge, for no discernable return.

[Chekhov]

4 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

Technology has got nowhere near solving any of our problems and governments and scientists are now left with no choice but to take unpopular measures..

>>Technology has got nowhere near solving any of our problems<<

 

Can I quote you on that more generally ?

 

>>governments and scientists are now left with no choice but to take unpopular measures<<

 

In a democracy governments should be doing what the people want.

Or do you not believe in democracy ?

 

And governments make the decisions, or should, not the scientists. Only weak governments without the balls to take responsibility take cover behind such BS as "we must follow the science".  Particularly when the science hasn't had a  particularly good track record of late.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

>>Technology has got nowhere near solving any of our problems<<

 

Can I quote you on that more generally ?

 

>>governments and scientists are now left with no choice but to take unpopular measures<<

 

In a democracy governments should be doing what the people want.

Or do you not believe in democracy ?

 

And governments make the decisions, or should, not the scientists. Only weak governments without the balls to take responsibility take cover behind such BS as "we must follow the science".  Particularly when the science hasn't had a  particularly good track record of late.

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.

[sheffbag]

17 hours ago, Planner1 said:

 

 

We don’t know how much of the problem is from trains, so it’s pointless speculating. As others on here have said, the only way those are going to be cleaned up is by electrifying the line, which is down to the government and won’t happen anytime soon.

Really? the air around the train station which is filled with diesel trains is the most polluted in the city but you dont know how much of the problem is from trains? You're better than that Planner. Here are the results from the Councils figures for the last 5 years (2017-2021 inc) from within the train station. The EU limit is 40

 

Platform 1A South 45 43 47 38 39

Platform 1B 5 348 53 46 4 4

Footbridge 55 51 57 49 48

Platform 3A/2B North 77 65 68 53 55

Platform 2A 55 52 59 56 50

Platform 5A 51 47 51 47 45

Platform 5B Waiting room 47 52 58 50 49

Platform 6A Info stand 74 63 65 57 51

Platform 6B 59 50 57 49 44

Platform 8 South 62 51 62 56 49

Platform 8A 58 52 58 52 47

 

Now compare those results to places near the train station or traditional car bottlenecks for the last two year

Arundel Gate, Gallery 37 38

Arundel Gate/Surrey Street 31 34

Upper Hanover Street 32 33

Shoreham Street 37 39

Abbeydale Rd/Carter Knowle 31 32

Ecclesall Road 29 30

 

As you can see the area inside the train station is on average over 50% more polluted than a car hotspot like Ecclesall Road. The areas of highest pollution in the train station are the middle platforms but you still dont think that trains are causing the issue?

 

so based that the CAZ needs to be completely clean for 3 years (your comment not mine) before it could be removed would you now not agree that based on the last 5 years within the station and your comment that electrification is not going to happen "anytime soon" (again, your comment and opinion) there is no way the CAZ would be lifted but the council will refuse to challenge the train companies. Ive found the clip from Toby's show last week with the strategic co-ordinator for SCC not answering any questions then the guy from Executive coaches who tells Toby how it will impact him and what reaction the council has given him at meetings

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0dhqmss 

the feature starts 3:19 in

Edited December 20, 2022 by sheffbag

[Rockers rule]

34 minutes ago, sheffbag said:

Really? the air around the train station which is filled with diesel trains is the most polluted in the city but you dont know how much of the problem is from trains? You're better than that Planner. Here are the results from the Councils figures for the last 5 years (2017-2021 inc) from within the train station. The EU limit is 40

 

Platform 1A South 45 43 47 38 39

Platform 1B 5 348 53 46 4 4

Footbridge 55 51 57 49 48

Platform 3A/2B North 77 65 68 53 55

Platform 2A 55 52 59 56 50

Platform 5A 51 47 51 47 45

Platform 5B Waiting room 47 52 58 50 49

Platform 6A Info stand 74 63 65 57 51

Platform 6B 59 50 57 49 44

Platform 8 South 62 51 62 56 49

Platform 8A 58 52 58 52 47

 

Now compare those results to places near the train station or traditional car bottlenecks for the last two year

Arundel Gate, Gallery 37 38

Arundel Gate/Surrey Street 31 34

Upper Hanover Street 32 33

Shoreham Street 37 39

Abbeydale Rd/Carter Knowle 31 32

Ecclesall Road 29 30

 

As you can see the area inside the train station is on average over 50% more polluted than a car hotspot like Ecclesall Road. The areas of highest pollution in the train station are the middle platforms but you still dont think that trains are causing the issue?

 

so based that the CAZ needs to be completely clean for 3 years (your comment not mine) before it could be removed would you now not agree that based on the last 5 years within the station and your comment that electrification is not going to happen "anytime soon" (again, your comment and opinion) there is no way the CAZ would be lifted but the council will refuse to challenge the train companies. Ive found the clip from Toby's show last week with the strategic co-ordinator for SCC not answering any questions then the guy from Executive coaches who tells Toby how it will impact him and what reaction the council has given him at meetings

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0dhqmss 

the feature starts 3:19 in

Excellent post Sheffbag.

 

👏 👏 👏

 

The Toby's show link is a must listen to. (3.16.45)

Kyle from Executive travel's piece just about sums the nonsense up, he has vehicles that chuck out less pollutants than the vehicles that will be compliant, yet because they are 'Older' they will be susceptible to the charge  and if he wants to sell them on the resealable value and customer base is reduced as more areas introduce the same con.

 

Keep safe out there

Worlds gone daft

 

[AndrewC]

14 hours ago, Chekhov said:

WHAT ! ! !

We vote these bozos in, they should be doing what we want.

Stop just accepting stuff, fight back. At the very minimum tell your MP or whatever you aren't going to vote for them if they support these policies.

The only problem there, of course, is that for the two biggest issues of the present time (climate change and pandemic policy) it's TINA, "there is no alternative", because, rather undemocratically, all the major parties have more or less the same soddin' policies.

And they wonder why more and more people are being attracted to splinter groups, conspiracy theories and extremism !

Idiots.

 

Well, there have already been delays to this CAZ and heels have been dragged, questions asked, but there's only so much influence a council can end up having though and I'm afraid when faced with being denied funding in the future for other schemes and/or fines etc. now for not complying, the Council end up being in a tricky position.

 

I DO talk with my local councillors & MPs about other policies I don't agree with, though not on this subject specifically, because I actually agree that there should be something like a CAZ in place, and air quality standards across urban areas, so this isn't something I've personally wanted to 'fight back' about (that's not to say I agree with all the minutiae of the scheme).

(FYI, I didn't vote for the current council incumbents (I did vote for my incumbent MP), and I don't work for the council.)

 

And not everyone agrees with you, so when you say "We" vote them in, and that 'they' should be doing what "we" want, that all depends on who 'you' are, doesn't it? And also, the CAZ has been on the books for years, and as far as I'm aware the parties who have ended up being voted in/most popular over the last couple of elections in Sheffield have been supportive of the scheme in their manifestos (don't quote me on that)?

 

And - last point, and in reference to some other points made above by others - Democracy does not (and should not) stop at 'whoever is the majority gets whatever they want'.

Edited December 20, 2022 by AndrewC

[ads36]

Just now, AndrewC said:

the CAZ has been on the books for years

first talked about in 2017.

 

By the the time it's operational, we will have had six years notice.

[Planner1]

1 hour ago, sheffbag said:

Really? the air around the train station which is filled with diesel trains is the most polluted in the city but you dont know how much of the problem is from trains? You're better than that Planner. Here are the results from the Councils figures for the last 5 years (2017-2021 inc) from within the train station. The EU limit is 40

 

Platform 1A South 45 43 47 38 39

Platform 1B 5 348 53 46 4 4

Footbridge 55 51 57 49 48

Platform 3A/2B North 77 65 68 53 55

Platform 2A 55 52 59 56 50

Platform 5A 51 47 51 47 45

Platform 5B Waiting room 47 52 58 50 49

Platform 6A Info stand 74 63 65 57 51

Platform 6B 59 50 57 49 44

Platform 8 South 62 51 62 56 49

Platform 8A 58 52 58 52 47

 

Now compare those results to places near the train station or traditional car bottlenecks for the last two year

Arundel Gate, Gallery 37 38

Arundel Gate/Surrey Street 31 34

Upper Hanover Street 32 33

Shoreham Street 37 39

Abbeydale Rd/Carter Knowle 31 32

Ecclesall Road 29 30

 

As you can see the area inside the train station is on average over 50% more polluted than a car hotspot like Ecclesall Road. The areas of highest pollution in the train station are the middle platforms but you still dont think that trains are causing the issue?

 

so based that the CAZ needs to be completely clean for 3 years (your comment not mine) before it could be removed would you now not agree that based on the last 5 years within the station and your comment that electrification is not going to happen "anytime soon" (again, your comment and opinion) there is no way the CAZ would be lifted but the council will refuse to challenge the train companies. Ive found the clip from Toby's show last week with the strategic co-ordinator for SCC not answering any questions then the guy from Executive coaches who tells Toby how it will impact him and what reaction the council has given him at meetings

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0dhqmss 

the feature starts 3:19 in

Read what I wrote properly. 
 

We don’t know how much of those recordings of pollution levels are from the trains. There are other significant sources of pollution nearby, like Sheaf Street and the taxi rank outside the door, which will undoubtedly contribute to the level of pollution in the station.

The only way we will know exactly how much of it is from the other sources is when those sources are largely eliminated, which is what the situation will be within a short time of the CAZ coming into operation, because the vast majority of the vehicles covered by CAZ charges will be compliant.

 

Challenge the train companies? Be realistic. What’s needed to remove diesel trains is electrification of the line and that’s a central government issue. There’s no plan to do that anytime soon, like I said.

 

On the radio show, the chap from SCC answered the questions he was asked. Some of the stuff the coach operator was trotting out was nonsense. Lower all the speed limits to 20mph? Hmmmm. “ I can’t turn left from Glossop Rd onto the Ring Road it takes me into town, where I’ll get charged” Erm, he’ll get charged on the ring road anyway. Just go the opposite way on Glossop Road and you won’t get charged. Fairly simple. Yes the guy’s business will be affected and he needs to make some changes. There are grants available to help with vehicle upgrades.

 

Re what he’d been told at council meetings, the councillor was clearly telling him that the council can only deal with things that are within their remit. Railways are not in their remit.