Green Council Members - Need to take a basic Maths course

[GreersElbow]

What gets me with all these governments they want us to use public transport but then stick prices up a journey I took a week ago is now 60p more expensive not a great deal but it adds up also the service is not getting any better if anything it's going the other way. If these governments want us to be more green and use car less and public transport more then they need to look at cost and service they provide

Agreed, because of new charges and inflation, bus prices have gone up. So people are less likely to take a bus and take a car.

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

You do know the Groans want a 55 mph max on motorways, don't you?

Isn't that the same in the States and seems to work very well when put in place on our Motorways around road works, everything seems to move and I always get to my work quicker, good idea

 

[Worthing exile]

It does amuse me when people start having a go at Councillors. After all they were voted on by Joe Public. If more people took an active interest in at least voting rather than the few who actually turn up at Polling Stations then you might get true representation.

I accept that people do vote for losing candidates and they are really the only ones with a right to criticise those in power. Too many people can't be bothered to miss Eastenders, Corrie or your pint at the local once in a blue moon and you get what you deserve.

 

[Franks Wild Years]

What gets me with all these governments they want us to use public transport but then stick prices up a journey I took a week ago is now 60p more expensive not a great deal but it adds up also the service is not getting any better if anything it's going the other way. If these governments want us to be more green and use car less and public transport more then they need to look at cost and service they provide

Problem is governments don't provide the services anymore. It's hard to have a joined up transport policy when one of the cornerstones of such a policy is privately owned and profit led.

 

[Scampi]

How many times do you see drivers accelarate from traffic lights as quickly as possible only to wait at the next juction as you potter up behind them. They make absolutley no progress relative to you, but are more dangerous to other road users and more polluting.
I'd bet that a reduced speed limit will actually improve traffic flow, reduce accidents and improve air quality.

 

[Earth Rod]

To answer Greerselbow .
If you travel 30 miles at 30 mph it takes you 1 hour.
If you travel 30 miles at 20 miles an hour it takes you an hour and a half.
That increases your travel time by 50%.
Not just you - everyone.
Are the greens seriously saying they want to increase the traffic in Brighton by up to 50%.
This is the basic maths . If every one could complete their journey twice as fast as they do now there would be half the traffic on the roads.
Now as a cyclist (as well as a car driver) that gets my vote- granted there must be some safety contstraints but I want to improve the quality of life in Brighton not degenerate it.

 

[Diego Napier]

To answer Greerselbow .
If you travel 30 miles at 30 mph it takes you 1 hour.
If you travel 30 miles at 20 miles an hour it takes you an hour and a half.
That increases your travel time by 50%.
Not just you - everyone.
Are the greens seriously saying they want to increase the traffic in Brighton by up to 50%.
This is the basic maths . If every one could complete their journey twice as fast as they do now there would be half the traffic on the roads.
Now as a cyclist (as well as a car driver) that gets my vote- granted there must be some safety contstraints but I want to improve the quality of life in Brighton not degenerate it.

Your "logic" assumes that everyone travels in an urban area at a constant speed.

That is facile.

In the real world there are traffic lights, people crossing the road, cars turning, road works, rush hour, schools, junctions, deliveries, bad drivers, animals, break downs, dropping people off, drivers looking for an address, slower vehicles, speeding accidents........

Constant speeds are only feasible on a motorway. That's why the speed restriction signs show 60 or 50 or 40 mph when there's congestion, as a greater throughput of cars can be achieved than 70mph stop-start.

Most urban 30 mph journeys are stop-start. Reduction to 20 mph may well improve that, it will certainly save pedestrians lives

 

[The Large One]

To answer Greerselbow .
If you travel 30 miles at 30 mph it takes you 1 hour.
If you travel 30 miles at 20 miles an hour it takes you an hour and a half.
That increases your travel time by 50%.
Not just you - everyone.
Are the greens seriously saying they want to increase the traffic in Brighton by up to 50%.
This is the basic maths . If every one could complete their journey twice as fast as they do now there would be half the traffic on the roads.
Now as a cyclist (as well as a car driver) that gets my vote- granted there must be some safety contstraints but I want to improve the quality of life in Brighton not degenerate it.

It might be basic maths, but the science of traffic flow is not basic maths.

Your logic is fatally flawed from start to finish.

 

[Earth Rod]

Your logic is fatally flawed from start to finish.

Just lke journeys around Brighton will be then !

 

[Comedy Steve]

Is that the Greens transport policy? Some of that is actually quite good (quite like the purchase tax on cars but how would that work when most people buy second hand), some a little far fetched (localising the economy?)....

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. I think getting rid of car tax full stop and just taxing fuel is the way ahead; if your car/van/truck uses more, then you drive more and use the roads more and pollute more, so you pay more. This also stops people using cars registered overseas on our roads without paying tax.

I might have a slight impartiality here as I own a classic car that costs £200 in car tax yet does 200 miles a year... :|

 

[The Large One]

Your logic is fatally flawed from start to finish.

Just lke journeys around Brighton will be then !

Oh dear. You've been told that your logic doesn't make sense. You can leave it there if you wish...

I assume you do know that it's not obligatory to drive on residential streets at 30mph, and indeed, most don't. Similarly, when you get to a road junction, I assume you stop, rather than carry on driving at 30mph?

 

[Earth Rod]

Please do not start me on motorway traffic flows . I have worked in a city traffic planning dept, and could bore the pants off you more than I am doing now.
All your points about traffic lights cars turning etc are totally valid in the real world but the principle of doubling the speed and halving the tradffic holds true , yes in reality you do not get anywhere near 100% of that because of all the imperfections you list.
I am not averse to banning cars altogether but constantly dropping the speed limit on arterial roads is not the answer.
Boredom setting in now but it has kept me focused away from the matter of losing Vicente. Thank god the Greens did not want to reduce his speed.

 

[The Large One]

Please do not start me on motorway traffic flows . I have worked in a city traffic planning dept, and could bore the pants off you more than I am doing now.
All your points about traffic lights cars turning etc are totally valid in the real world but the principle of doubling the speed and halving the tradffic holds true , yes in reality you do not get anywhere near 100% of that because of all the imperfections you list.
I am not averse to banning cars altogether but constantly dropping the speed limit on arterial roads is not the answer.
Boredom setting in now but it has kept me focused away from the matter of losing Vicente. Thank god the Greens did not want to reduce his speed.

So you don't know what this is about at all, do you?

 

[perseus]

Cyclists know that drivers get careless at slow speeds and collisions actually increase by quite a lot, perhaps by double. But the consequences of a collision are much less, minor injuries or bicycle damage that often goes often goes unreported. It is better though, because hit by a car at 30 mph and the cyclist gets injured and the bike damaged. Hit at 20 mph and under and the damage is likely to be less. Lots of side roads (used by cyclists) the speed of vehicles is only about 20 mph any way by choice. There are always idiots that go faster. Collisions occur 75% at junctions where speed is not the important issue, or are caused by a distraction in the blink of the eye, and the vehicle driver does not even see the cyclist. It is just luck that separates the ordinary distracted driver from the killer driver.

Brighton is rotten for cyclists, too many hills, too many buses (a menace), too many pedestrians (second worst), too many cars, and too many other cyclists.

 

[Acker79]

Are the greens seriously saying they want to increase the traffic in Brighton by up to 50%.
This is the basic maths . If every one could complete their journey twice as fast as they do now there would be half the traffic on the roads.

I get that 30mph to 20mph makes a 50% increase in travel time (in theory, though as others have pointed out junctions and lights etc affect journey time and should be taken into consideration).

But how does making traffic slower increase it? If 100 people drive to work at 30mph, they don't become 150 people just because it's slower. It's still 100 people. The traffic doesn't increase.

 

[Earth Rod]

Because instead of arriving at their destination and no longer being on the roads they are still on the roads when the others are starting their journeys.

 

[Acker79]

Because instead of arriving at their destination and no longer being on the roads they are still on the roads when the others are starting their journeys.

Their destination location and time doesn't change. Anyone who has to be at work at 9am will still be at work at 9am, they will just start their journey earlier. It will extend rush hour but it won't make more traffic. Some who currently lives an hour away, will have to start 90mins before, someone who currently lives 30mins away will have to start 45 minutes, but that would still be two cars. Before, both would be on the road for 30min, now both for 45. That's the same amount of traffic, just on the road a little longer.

 

[Pevenseagull]

If you try to get up to 30 mph in most built up areas at every legal opportunity you will f*** up your gearbox

 

[Pevenseagull]

Their destination location and time doesn't change. Anyone who has to be at work at 9am will still be at work at 9am, they will just start their journey earlier. It will extend rush hour but it won't make more traffic. Some who currently lives an hour away, will have to start 90mins before, someone who currently lives 30mins away will have to start 45 minutes, but that would still be two cars. Before, both would be on the road for 30min, now both for 45. That's the same amount of traffic, just on the road a little longer.

you can get more cars on the road if drivers are going 20mph

 

[tedebear]

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. I think getting rid of car tax full stop and just taxing fuel is the way ahead; if your car/van/truck uses more, then you drive more and use the roads more and pollute more, so you pay more. This also stops people using cars registered overseas on our roads without paying tax.

I might have a slight impartiality here as I own a classic car that costs £200 in car tax yet does 200 miles a year... :|

Exactly why I questioned it - most of what I/we drive is at least 40 - 50 years old!