Councillor admits "large wagons" keep hitting cycle lane wands... then claims painted segregation works "extremely well"; Baffled local questions where Clean Air Zone will go "when the wind blows"?; Lefevere's €100m Remco price tag + more on the live blog

chrisonatrike wrote:

That lad with ladder - looks like a rung'un.  With balance, strength (aluminium there, not carbon fiber) and tolerance of discomfort like that though surely a future in cycling sport beckons?  EDIT - looking at that again I think he'd steal it as a climber.

In his profession he'll work hard, and he'll never stop, he'll climb his blinking ladder till he gets right to the top.

hirsute wrote:

"These cycle lanes are a woke scheme, wasting tax payers money and will hardly be used.

I find it interesting the way that "woke" has been appropriated as a term of abuse.  It actually means that you're aware of discrimination and abuse and oppose them, but it now seems to be an insult of some kind.

Sure, like Progressive or Liberal, who are really in fact bedwetters calling for all sorts of harsh laws, banishment by cancel culture, Social media bans for any opposing opinions or "disinformation", enforcement of Lockdowns and punitive measures for wearing masks, police resourcing to attend to people who post memes on Facebook, etc.

You must be the last one who thinks that is what Woke means now. 

Harsh laws like abortion laws.

Yes, #FakeNews by bedwetters / banishment by cancel culture, enforcing lockdowns and wearing masks...

What did woke originally mean, could you remind us?

Is this Godwin's law in 2 steps? 

Not at all unexpected, leaping to being labelled as KKK by one of the several Extreme Left posters who seek to dominate on this site. 

What Fake News are you talking about anyway? 

I use and support more bike lanes and infrastructure etc. btw. 
 

Roulereo wrote:

You must be the last one who thinks that is what Woke means now. 

I know what it means, and I'm interested in why you think differently, and define it as completely the opposite of its actual meaning.  Would you care to explain your lack of comprehension?

Like

.

your spelling and

.

formatting,

.

perchance?

.

Same with his misspelled swears he used to do. At least we know the "boy" in his username is actually related to his mentality. 

1) Yes I know there are other unethical cycling teams, but this is the British one that constantly gets coverage on road.cc and elsewhere.

2) No, individual choices, 'there's no such thing as society', Loadsamoney won't solve global heating.

3) We are either at or past the point of doing irreparable damage to the Earth's climate.

4) Apologies for wanging on about this.

17 months old now but gives the basics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvD0TgE34HA

No apologies required - thank you for raising awareness. 

Feel free to wang away. 

Sponsoring a cycling team is just basic attempted green washing for this lot

To be fair, there's a lot of it about.  It seems to be a growth industry in itself, from Persil banging on about 'saving the planet' by using their washing tabs to Amazon having the odd solar panel on a warehouse whilst Bezos blasts into space on a vanity project, etc., etc.

My own pet peev is the companies who like to appear to be an on trend green champion whilst selling their products wrapped in film that goes in the bin or in pouches that need to be sent around the country by mail in order to be recycled.

Clem Fandango wrote:

Feel free to wang away. 

Sponsoring a cycling team is just basic attempted green washing for this lot

I don't agree that INEOS are paricularly interested in green washing.  Jim has so much money now he just pursues what he is intested in.

He likes running - sponsor Kipchoge and the Daily Mile

He likes F1 - Mercedes AMG

He likes cycling - Buy Brailsford's team

He likes football - that will be Nice

He iikes Land Rovers - build a car.

He likes sailing - America's cup.  Got him into NZ when we were all locked down.  Likes NZ that will be the All Blacks then.

'Sports washing' for UAE and Bahrain, almost certainly.  You don't need to like him or his company, but it is lazy thinking that he is doing it for 'green' credentials.

I don't think he cares what society thinks of him.  He is happy to be unpopular.

It's the 'wanging on' without suggesting any alternatives that is the issue.

What is your suggestion for replacing all the products that are manufactured at Grangemouth?

Even under current Net Zero targets we'll still be using those products in 30 years when/if we eventually reach Net Zero.

What's "Other" - that seems to be an important one?  I'm guessing that's where squirrels hamsters in wheels are grouped?

The entire funding model of the sport is flawed and until that's changed, teams will be 100% dependent on sponsorship to function. Unless they're lucky enough to have a flooring company or supermarket, the alternative is dodgy nation sovereign wealth funds, petrochemical giants, or oligarchs that just want to ride in the team car at Paris-Roubaix. 

Many other sports' teams have income from gate receipts, stadium events, share of broadcast rights distribution and so on. With the TdF as an example, the ASO get the TV money, sponsorship for leader jerseys, the publicity caravan, town hosting fees, etc, the teams don't see a penny of it. 
 

mark1a wrote:

With the TdF as an example, the ASO get the TV money, sponsorship for leader jerseys, the publicity caravan, town hosting fees, etc, the teams don't see a penny of it. 

To be fair, out of the monies received ASO have to pay for all the organisation, security, prize money, TV crews etc for the race. Last time I looked they made about £10M in profit from the TdF, not small potatoes but even if they took no profit at all and gave it all to the teams that would be less than £500K each, hardly enough to pay a star rider's salary for the duration of the race, certainly not a whole team's. Sadly cycling just isn't popular enough globally to attract the big TV money, e.g. NBC only pay $8M for exclusive USA rights to the Tour. I can't see a time when World Tour teams are not primarily funded by sponsorship, nor a way it could be achieved.

Indeed - reducing its effectvness to pretty much zero...

I can only assume this is some kind of box ticking excersise....

HarrogateSpa wrote:

Excluding private cars from the Clear Air Zone in Bradford reduces its effectiveness.

Well, excluding private cars from the area would work well, but allowing them to continue using it with no penalty does seem self-defeating. Personally, it makes little difference to me if I'm breathing in private or business vehicle exhaust fumes.

Only Birmingham have introduced class D CAZ. True, this Class C+ won't make a big difference to improving air quality but it should at least see any polluting taxis removed from the roads and hopefully make freight companies think about how they cost effectively arrange drops in the area, which might have knock on benefits.

At £50 a pop, I wonder how many independent hauliers will accept loads in to the Zone.. which will lead to small business going under.
It will also be an additional tax on anyone that lives in the Zone as it will get added on to the delivery charge ...
It's likely to have far reaching unintended consequences.

When I was driving for a living, I'd refuse to take the Seven Bridge / Dartford (either way) / Forth Road / Skye because the toll was eye-watering for a C+E.
And that toll came out of my pocket and I then had to claim it back... and wait a month to get it back.
At £50 a pop, I'd certainly refuse to take a load in the Zone if I had to pay and claim back.