Tory peer blames “ludicrous” London Cycle Superhighways for capital’s air pollution

Air pollution is mainly caused by members of the house of lords talking.

Dear God! Reading this article leaves me seriously worried; that these people have the power to influence our lives. Please spare us!

It is proposed by some that the age after which people are allowed to drive on the road (without a retest) be limited. Did those in charge of our nation ought to have their powers of reasoning assessed after a certain age?

This is the sort of f*ckwittery we're up against:

"We don't want ambulances delayed so 10 cyclists/day can pootle up and down at a cost of £3m/mile" (https://twitter.com/SaveGreenLanes/status/857982734169513984)

"We support parallel routes. If only @TfL had done the same in #Enfield to prevent chaos" (https://twitter.com/SaveGreenLanes/status/855318800677224448)

"Almost no cyclists in evening, which is when central businesses take deliveries etc. Underused cycle lanes cause congestion" (https://twitter.com/SaveGreenLanes/status/852908526255132673)

"Cycle lanes should be given up to majority in their off peak" (https://twitter.com/SaveGreenLanes/status/852806062159781889)

I really wish those were parodies, but they're the actual thoughts of an actual adult.

Correction:

Ludicrous Tory peer blames London Cycle Superhighways for capital’s air pollution.

Quote:

He then turned to what he described as “the ludicrous way in which Transport for London has been building bicycle lanes,” claiming that “There is enormous congestion as a result of this, not only when they are being constructed but in the longer term.” 

Always worth mentioning that on the Embankment where the current cycle super is use to be Coach parking, which reduced the westbound to one lane (the same as it is now). On Blackfriars bridge the cycle superhighway was previously a extra-wide bus lane.

Quote:

“It is an appalling policy,” he added. “I spend much of my time in Holland, where they do not have any problem with bicycle lanes operating properly without being blanked off in a way that prevents them being used in off-peak periods.” 

Very strange as almost all the Dutch cycle lanes are segreagted and can't be used by cars.

It isn't such a problem what this guy says. The real problem is that there are many out there who believe this guy. Should you ever meet one of these, try to explain him nicely with argunuments that such things are BS.

Cars are the problem. Jesus Christ you old fossil.

I despair.

Is being a complete mentalist a requirement for being a Tory peer?  

These people are retards.

If only he and the rest of the cronies had forced the old bill sitting government to make the naughty motorists act in a way that meant people on bikes felt safe then there would be no need for seperated infra, it then wouldn't have needed building at X cost and the net effect would have being far better, for people on bikes and everyone including him.

As it is, they didn't and now we have war, so he and other nobbers can sit in their tossermobiles and put up with the shit sandwich the motorist brought upon themselves, that is until they are forced off the road either through financial penalty or via pollution limit of vehicle.

See how you like them apples twat features.

I might accept the proposal but not the underlying arguements reguarding polution. Provided  the law is change to assume motorist guilt it any accident involving a cyclist. A simple trade off that should do much to improve the safety of cyclists and deture motorists from taking risks were they share the highway with cyclists.

It's an easy trap to fall into, being stuck on Embankment in a 3 mile long queue adjacent to an empty cycle lane and thinking that you'd be going faster if you could either drive on it, or better still, get rid of it.  

I cycle this route every day and have done for over a decade: there's always been congestion.  If it reverted to a dual carriageway it would just attract more traffic immediately - and the said Lord would be looking wistfully at the river wishing he had a boat... 

But the real issue here is pollution and it's great to see that the focus has finally come on the damage caused by diesel engines: so, come on TfL and Government - a prohibitive congestion charge would limit cars;  legislation should target taxis that do 18mpg trawling the streets; and commerical deliveries should be limited to a 10pm - 6am time window.  

Lord Higgins: You're a pompous, irrelevant arse. Shut up please.

Silly old c*nt.

To be fair, it must be chuffing annoying being held up in traffic in the back of your chauffer driven Daimler on the way to your daycare centre.

Just imagine: It's almost 10am and the subsidised bar is about to open at the House of Lords. There's a delicious taxpayer funded lunch to look forward to and you need to make arrangements about who you are going to sit with. You also have the hassle of signing in just to get your £350 day allowance. Would you not also be agrieved that some oik on a bicycle with one of those squalid job things is going faster than you in a special road space?

I think what he was doing was questioning the logic of the highly segregated type of cyle lane that by design prevents use by other types of vehicle, perhaps suggesting that there are better ways to use the available space.

Cycle superhighways are not some type of Holy Grail. In part they exist because the authorities have failed to make roads safe enough for cyclists.

What effing benefit would it be to allow cars to use cycleways (and buslanes for that matter) "off peak" when there's less effing cars around? hell, cycleways are needed MORE then as congestion means the cars are moving faster. Motists really hate the idea of there being tarmac they're not allowed to use don't they?

Quote:

lanes provided for people on bikes cannot be given over to motorists during quieter periods.

If his noble lordship can find a motor vehicle which fits in any of the 90cm painted cycle lanes near where I live, then good luck to him!