Just Stop Oil has staged its first ‘slow cycle’ through London today, as part of the group’s plans to “evolve” its tactics in the face of what it claims is the government’s attempt to “restrict our legitimate rights to protest”.
The environmentalist group has staged slow marches on the streets of London for the last seven weeks in a bid to draw attention to their demand that the British government puts a stop to “all licences and consents for new oil, gas, and coal projects”.
Until now, all of these protests have been on foot, but this morning at 8am, nine Just Stop Oil activists slowly rode their bikes in London’s West End, as two other groups of supporters marched at Chiswick roundabout and Blackheath.
? BREAKING: 9 Slow Cycle for No New Oil and Gas in West End
? At 8am, 9 supporters began slow cycling down Park Lane to demand an end to new fossil fuels. At the same time, another 2 groups of supporters began slow marching on the A2 at Blackheath and at Chiswick roundabout. pic.twitter.com/0E0ERdbsvU
— Just Stop Oil (@JustStop_Oil) June 9, 2023
An hour and a half after the demonstration began on Park Lane, the Metropolitan Police tweeted that they had issued the group with a section 12 order for causing disruption to traffic, and moved the protesting cyclists onto the pavement.
The decision to usher the bike riding activists off the road and onto the footpath, however, provoked a bemused response on Twitter.
“The same pavement where it’s illegal to cycle by any chance?” wrote one user. “Hi Essex Police, remember when you told me I’d be fined if caught cycling on the pavement in Wickford to avoid getting killed by lorries? I’m taking a leaf out of the Met’s book and using the pavement from now on.”
The very same…https://t.co/xxD9RR9oou
— David (@TwoWheelsGoodOK) June 9, 2023
A spokesperson from Just Stop Oil told road.cc today that the move to riding bikes slowly across the road is a response to the government’s attempts to clamp down on the disruption caused by the marching activists in recent weeks.
“This criminal government is quietly signing off on over 100 new oil and gas projects that will hasten climate collapse and destroy the conditions that make human life possible. It is an act of war against the young and millions of people in the global south,” the spokesperson said.
“At the same time, they are enacting laws to ensure that no-one can stop them. They are restricting our legitimate rights to protest and to march in the road as people have done throughout history to express dissent. So, our tactics will continue to evolve.
“We are happy to show solidarity with cyclists everywhere and ask them to join us in civil resistance. Whether marching or cycling we will continue to do whatever is non-violently possible to end new oil and gas.”
The call for cyclists to join Just Stop Oil’s campaign of civil resistance comes just over a week after a man on a bike made headlines for confronting the protesters during a slow march and claiming that they were “harming the green cause”.
The cyclist approached the activists as they slowly walked down Holloway Road in north London, blocking traffic, as part of a series of Bank Holiday demonstrations. The rider – who pointed out to the protesters that he was “a liberal and a cyclist” – told them: “Everyone is just trying to go about their business, go about their day, and you are f***ing it all up for all of them.
“You might feel better about yourselves, but all you are doing is harming the cause because everyone hates you. I’m a liberal, and a cyclist, and I live in north London – and I hate you.”

99 thoughts on “Just Stop Oil begin slow cycling protests”
Great, so now I have to throw
Great, so now I have to throw my orange cycling jacket away to avoid the brain dead mongrels in corsas and transit vans believing they are rightously mowing me down in support of ‘hard working man’ thinking I’m part of a JSO protest
Have to agree my rides are
Have to agree my rides are bad enough now, these muppets are stirring up more bad feelings with motorists especially as i live on the new Eulez border
How long until Braverman
How long until Braverman decides to ban bicycles “just in case”…?
Don’t give her ideas.
Don’t give her ideas.
brooksby wrote:
It’s already in effect impossible to cycle to a protest, as they’ll nick you for having a bike lock.
Hi Viz tick
Hi Viz tick
Helmets tick
What are people complaining about?
So what do road.cc mean by
So what do road.cc mean by JSO “begin slow cycling protests” ??
I’ve always wondered what the anti cycling culture warriors were on about – 5 abreast, doing 3 mph mile after mile – I’ve not experienced that once in decades behind the wheel.
It all makes sense now.
Excellent news.
Excellent news.
Personally I don’t feel that there is enough animosity towards cyclists.
It’s nice of JSO to try and rectify that.
I’m not sure. You might also
I’m not sure. You might also say that there’s so much animosity towards cyclists, so what difference does it make?
It’s interesting that we don
It’s interesting that we don’t for a moment think that slow marches would increase animosity towards pedestrians.
AidanR wrote:
Not really: pedestrians aren’t an ‘out group’ and don’t tend to do things drivers find annoying.
Pedestrians don’t do annoying
Pedestrians don’t do annoying things? Clearly you’re never been along Tooley Street in rush hour.
AidanR wrote:
My office is on Tooley Street.
Are you one of the annoying
Are you one of the annoying pedestrians or one of the annoying cyclists? ?
I’d have thought that an even
I’d have thought that an even more effective protest would have been to cycle at, say, 10 – 15 mph. This is just above the average speed for London traffic, would achieve the point of the protest and it would mean that the protesters couldn’t be ‘moved along’ for holding up the traffic as they’d be marginally quicker than the petrol heads. It would also show that the ‘umble bike is better suited to urban environment than the infernal combination engine.
I was thinking this too.
I was thinking this too.
I’m not the fastest cyclist by any means, but my average speed during rush hour traffic is a bit faster than drivers so they can’t say we hold them up.
It would be nice… but
It would be nice… but “average” and of course with motor vehicles it’s “accellerate to the minimum speed limit then crack on until the next queue / red light”. So cyclists will always be IN THE WAY.
*sigh*
*sigh*
Re; Holloway Road – “Everyone
Re; Holloway Road – “Everyone is just trying to go about their business, go about their day”
The same Holloway Road that had roughly one death per year back when I lived in the area? And having a ten second check of headlines it looks like 2019: 2 deaths, 2020: 1 death, 2022: 1 death. The road is long overdue for some serious changes.
Why don’t JSO use the tools
Why don’t JSO use the tools of the oppressor, i.e some old cars, to “break down” at key locations? Not their fault if the electrics pack up including the electric controlled handbrake or a wheel needs changing and the bolts get sheared. Make suitable arrangments to have the vehicle recovered and you could probably get a good couple of hours of disruption. As for minor collisions? It can take ages to swap details for even the slightest scuff.
And the obvious effect of
And the obvious effect of this disruption to the public would be to encourage the government to halt oil and gas exploration?
would anyone even notice.
would anyone even notice.
remember delays due to protests or (worse) cyclists are insufferable
but delays due to too many cars, bad parking, break downs or crashes are just one of those things and not something to get worked up about even though group 1 costs people at most an hour a year, while group 2 is probably costing at least a couple of hours a month.
I wish JSO would JFO.
I wish JSO would JFO.
I admire their passion, I think their confrontational and attention seeking stance is more likely to alienate people than garner support.
Secret_squirrel wrote:
If they didn’t demand attention, they’d be ignored like all the other environmental protesters over the last sixty years or so.
Time for a bad analogy – imagine a large house that was starting to catch on fire and the fire brigade turn up and attempt to get people to evacuate. Some of the residents complain that the fire brigade are making too much noise and they’re not going to get people on their side with such attention seeking behaviour. Thus the residents sit smugly knowing that they’re right to dismiss the fire brigade as they’re not going about the evacuation in the “correct” manner with all their shouting and bell ringing etc. Of course, they dismissed all about the more gentle warnings that the fire brigade gave during their last inspection – “don’t store those newspapers next to that oil heater or they could catch fire”. One resident responded to the warning with “don’t worry, we’ve got a plan to move those newspapers away from the fire during the next twenty to thirty years, so stop being so alarmist”.
You’re right about it being a
You’re right about it being a bad anology.
Beat me to it! My immediate reaction too!
.
If environmental protestors
If environmental protestors have been “ignored” why do we have laws obliging the government to work towards net zero?
Why have we almost eradicated coal fired electricity generation?
Why have we spent billions subsidising renewable energy?
I could go on but the evidence is pretty clear that far from being “ignored” environmental activists have achieved fantastic success not just in the UK but globally.
If JSO’s aims were actually achievable in a significantly different timescale to the current legally mandated one I’d support their cause if not their methods. As it is I support neither.
“If JSO’s aims were actually
“If JSO’s aims were actually achievable in a significantly different timescale to the current legally mandated one I’d support their cause”
What do you think JSO’s aims actually are? I think that their name may be misleading, as their declared aim is for the government to halt new licences for the expolration of oil and other fossil fuels in the UK. It sounds like something that the PM could sign off this afternoon, if he cared to.
They are not protesting beacuse of what is happening already, even if they may have a right to. They are protesting the govenment’s apparent willingness to ‘add more fuel to the (climate) fire’.
If we stopped North Sea oil
If we stopped North Sea oil and gas exploration then we’d simply import more gas and oil. This would worsen our balance of trade and weaken our economy.
The increase in imports would mean more production in areas with terrible environmental records. Look up Niger Delta oil spills (and the associated child mortality) or Tajikistan gas flaring as examples.
OPEC+ have the capacity to increase or decrease production in order to achieve target global prices so even if JSO achieved a complete halt on North Sea operations we wouldn’t even get a decrease in fossil fuel use driven by a higher price as, post Ukraine, gas prices are already set by LNG import prices.
In short, stopping North Sea extraction would lead to a weaker economy, a lower tax take and more environmental harm globally. It would have little or no impact on overall fossil fuel use.
Where do I sign up…
“This would worsen our
“This would worsen our balance of trade and weaken our economy.”
Awwww…
It’s not like the economy
It’s not like the economy funds anything which we value…
We wouldn’t need to increase
We wouldn’t need to increase our imports of fossil fuels unless a.) our current UK provided FFs were running out, and/or b.) we were increasing our reliance on FFs.
The answer to a.) is unclear. According to media sources were only had 15 years of fuel left for the last 30 years, and only 5 years left for the last 10, but worldwide oil reserves are so plentiful that even using just a fraction of them would likley lead to a 2 degree rise in global annual mean temperature.
for b.), I sincerely hope that is not the case.
I think that mass immigration for areas of the planet that become unlivable, and food shortages caused by droughts/floods/fires may have more of an impact on our economy than the alternative.
All oil and gas fields have a
All oil and gas fields have a finite lifespan.
“The UK Oil and Gas Authority projected in September 2021 that UK production of natural gas would decline from 34.9 bcm in 2020 to 8.9 bcm in 2035.”
We’re using far fewer FFs than we were but we’re going to be using them for a long time yet. We can either use our own and keep some of the monetary benefit or we can use someone else’s and send the money abroad.
Rich_cb wrote:
Yes, governments are making noises about transitioning to net zero out of one side of their mouths and also increasing tax breaks for investing more money into drilling the North Sea so that we can burn even more oil. From my bad analogy, it’s the residents saying that yes, they’re slowly moving paper away from the fire, so they’re not ignoring the fire brigade, but in fact they’re making deals to put even more paper next to the fire.
You may be happy with the current state of the world’s climate and what’s going to happen, but the writing’s on the wall and leaders don’t care as they’re just desperately trying to wring as much money out of oil as they can for their mates. JSO are making a stand and declaring that we have to stop this climate destroying money grab.
As an example of how corrupt our system is when dealing with climate issues: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/07/uae-oil-firm-cop28-climate-summit-emails-sultan-al-jaber-adnoc
Oh look, another example of renewables being ignored in favour of oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/09/from-north-sea-revival-to-renewables-aberdeen-sees-corporate-interests-triumph
and
For an update on how well we are managing CO2 levels: https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/15/2295/2023/
Has the UK’s record on
Has the UK’s record on decarbonisation been perfect? No.
Has it been amongst the best in the world (for similar economies)? Yes.
Perfection is the enemy of good.
We’re decarbonising rapidly in the UK and that’s projected to continue, why rock the boat by making Net Zero a partisan political issue? JSO are pushing Net Zero into the culture wars arena, that’s not going to help.
Rich_cb wrote:
The issue that JSO are protesting is that the UK is planning an increase in oil exploration and drilling. That oil won’t be for the exclusive use of the UK, but sold in global markets – that’ll likely reduce oil prices and induce demand for oil.
Do you not see why people consider that to be a problem and moving in the wrong direction?
It seems that you believe that they have no valid reason to protest as well as disagreeing with their tactics.
Humans need to move away from petty local issues and adress the global issue of climate catastrophe. Just because we’re not directly suffering from floods and fires doesn’t mean that we can clap ourselves on our backs and declare it job done.
It’s likely to have little
It’s likely to have little impact on global prices.
OPEC+ manipulate their output to keep oil prices in a sweet spot (for them). Saudi Arabia alone recently announced a 1m barrel per day reduction in their oil output to keep prices high. UK production in total is usually less than that. If our oil production disappeared overnight and that pushed up prices too much the Saudis could entirely replace it at the stroke of a pen.
If we’re going to use the oil (we are) and it will be produced by somebody else if we don’t produce it ourselves (it will) then what exactly is the benefit of not producing it ourselves?
Idealism is great but some issues actually need a pragmatic approach.
OPEC is one of the few legal
OPEC is one of the few legal cartels (capitalist gangsters) and with the power that they have to set prices and production, there’s not really a lot that can be done… Hey, unless we let a petrodollar state host COP28 and give their state oil company access to all of the emails etc, that’ll work just fine…
That was sort of my point. We
That was sort of my point. We can cut our production to nothing and OPEC will just adjust their output accordingly.
JSO’s ultimate goal will have precisely zero effect on anything except the UK’s tax take.
Not really worth all the grief if you ask me.
The optics of that COP meeting are not going to be great but I’m reserving judgement until I see what they come up with.
Rich_cb wrote:
The pragmatic approach is to not start drilling for new oil supplies and instead put that investment into alternative energy sources. It’s not idealism to want to keep our planet as habitable as possible, but we’re already seeing upheavals begin.
£10bn less in tax take is
£10bn less in tax take is £10bn less to spend on decarbonisation schemes.
Oil drilling is profitable, if we keep the profits in the UK we can use the money raised to subsidise insulation/heat pumps/active travel schemes etc.
Otherwise that profit just goes abroad.
Rich_cb wrote:
I’m sceptical that the money is ring-fenced. It’s a very short term view as continuing to destroy the planet’s habitats (for humans, anyhow) is going to cost everyone in the longer term.
The point is that North Sea
The point is that North Sea or no North Sea we’re going to need (actually need) fossils fuels for a very long time yet.
The money isn’t ring fenced for environmental stuff but the government does spend a lot of money on it and, as recent cuts to active travel budget have shown, when tax take is insufficient it’s likely to get a significant hair cut.
£10bn less tax revenue per year will mean a lot more cuts.
Rich_cb wrote:
sounds wonderful! this would look great as a slogan on the side of a big red bus….
Rich_cb wrote:
s
JSO are demanding no NEW gas/oil exploration in the UK. They are not demanding a complete halt on North Sea operations. They may refer to Net Zero, but their demand is clear, and I think that most of the UK population would agree with that demand, even if they may disagree with their actions. The main reason that people may disgaree with JSO’s aims are the number of media and social media people who strawman them.
Why do you think most people
Why do you think most people would be happy to let North Sea production peter out to nothing?
We’d lose £10bn+ a year in taxes and global oil production would simply adjust to replace.it.
No carbon benefit but worse public services.
Sounds like a winner to me…
David W wrote:
It is clear if you go looking, and I’m open to it (while acknowledging Rich_cb’s argument that if we don’t produce it we’ll just import it (unless, of course, we reduce demand – which we are doing but should do faster and in a way that inspires others to follow suit)).
I’d hazard a guess that most people don’t know JSO’s specific demand (it would be helpful if their name wasn’t misleading, FFS!) and are less likely to be interested or sympathetic as a result of their tactics. You can blame the media but their response is hardly unpredictable. They just haven’t thought it through.
They seem more interested in juvenile virtue signalling than actually achieving impact – which is why plenty people here don’t support their approach, even if sympathetic to their objectives.
Perhaps they should take
Perhaps they should take their inspiration from the sufragettes and american civil rights movements who famousely enacted change with no disruption at all during their protests?
wycombewheeler wrote:
I agree with you. I’d happily see JSO chained to railings or throwing themselves under a racehorse or going on hunger strike. Those acts would probably piss less people off and get them more sympathy. TBF I quite like the gluing themselves to Oil Co HQs.
The misunderstanding here is
The misunderstanding here is that we need people to have sympathy with JSO.
We’re in deep trouble. For all the talk of cutting emissions, they are higher than ever before. We need severe GHG cuts this decade, starting now, but it is not happening.
400 wildfires are burning in Canada, and that is just one symptom of a climate that is rapidly spiralling out of control.
HarrogateSpa wrote:
Your misunderstanding is that if JSO continue with their alienating stunts they’ll get anything from the average person in the street apart from despite and derision.
Best thing they can do is rebrand.
My approach is to be part of
My approach is to be part of the local cycle campaign and engage with the council.
I have to tell you it is incredibly ineffective.
Of course, we could stand by
Of course, we could stand by and do nothing, then in 10 or 20 years time when there’s tens of thousands trying to cross the channel due to the harsh climate many in Africa and soon to be southern Europe have to live in, moan that nobody forewarened us of the fate that awaited us by burying our heads in the sand.
Its weird how the lefties on here want everything to change until it doesn’t suit them.
Shame on you.
I tend to agree. Climate
I tend to agree. Climate change will result in the rich turning up their air conditioning but the poor will not just be happy to die in place. A couple of weeks of 50C temperatures across large areas of sub Saharan Africa might see widescale crop failures and livestock deaths, enough to see a few million desperate people head towards Europe. That will not end well, regardless of how much you can afford to run your A/C.
Owd Big ‘Ead wrote:
What, like the notorious site resident Trotskyite Rich_cb?
I’m definitely one of the “lefties” on here and proud of it, I’m deeply concerned about the environment and try to effect change in whatever small ways I can, whether in my lifestyle, my use of my vote or by participating in such actions and protests as I believe will be effective. I think JSO are a bunch of well-meaning fools who are doing far more to alienate people and make the chances of change happening where it needs to, at governmental level, far lower. Not everyone objects to JSO just because change “doesn’t suit them”; some of us object because we think they’re retarding the chances of such change taking place.
For once I disagree with you.
For once I disagree with you.
What are the chances of change taking place without JSO? It’s not as if we were on course to decarbonise transport and the wider economy, then along came the people in orange and ruined it all.
HarrogateSpa wrote:
British people use 2.4 times
British people use 2.4 times the ecological resource provided by the British Isles.
Don’t expect to argue with a
Don’t expect to argue with a rightwinger based on facts.
And how does that figure
And how does that figure compare to 10 years ago?
Good question. Ecological
Good question. Ecological footprint is being squeezed from both directions: (1) the ecological resource is declining as our waste builds up, and (2) we are producing more waste (both per capita and more people). Globally, the trend is here. Country data are here. Climate action failure is identified by the WEF as the most severe economic risk over the next decade.
It seems we’re heading in the
It seems we’re heading in the right direction but with a long way left to go.
Will be interesting to see how the date develops over the next few years. The UK’s carbon footprint should decrease significantly over the next decade so I’d expect the date to respond.
Unfortunately the effects of
Unfortunately the effects of greenhouse gases do not stop at our borders. I like the natty rejoinder but you’d also want to include the trends across the world and show that none of the increases in places like China and India etc have to do with energy and products going back to the UK.
Otherwise it’s just “out of sight, out of mind”.
Thing is, in our new cold war
Thing is, in our new cold war with China, we and the US, to end our reliance on the global manufactory that is the people’s Republic, are meant to be making more of the general crap we all voraciously consume. So dragging back our global heating numbers. Won’t happen mind, our stuff won’t be much better, definitely not enough to justify the hugely increased end price to our price savvy consumer.
Weirdly looking at the bike, I like Hope, Exposure, Middlebury, Rohloff and Jones’s, but I have always liked stuff that lasts and can be repaired.
Yes. It’s why I’ve still got
Yes. It’s why I’ve still got an old Galaxy.
Rohloff at least seem to emphasise longevity with care and maintenance. Stripping one wouldn’t be a home workshop job for me though.
“Maintenance and repair”
“Maintenance and repair” being two of the less sexy technology and industry sisters. Much less so than making and selling new stuff. Plenty of innovation and creativity there though, and potentially far more economic activity…
Currently we seem to be on a general path of exponentially increasing tech levels – with plummeting economic viability (or even possibility) for maintenance and repair by users or for third-party firms.
At least bikes started simple…
ktache wrote:
But China’s adding more Net New Renewables than a big chunk of the rest of the world put together. (3xUS solar additions for example) plus most of the worlds Panels are made there. There is a real possibility that China will have a less carbon dependent grid much faster than anyone realises.
Secret_squirrel wrote:
I’d like to see figures on percentage of fossil fuel/green energy in China over the last 10 years to be convinced of that. It doesn’t matter if the are being more renewable capacity than others if the are also building more carbon fueld capacity than others at the same time.
Until this data show a
Until this data show a reducing trend we are not doing enough about climate warming. There are then all the other planetary boundaries to deal with. Alternatively do nothing and sit back and wait for it.
I’d certainly prefer to make
I’d certainly prefer to make a dignified exit myself – try not to leave the place in a mess.
Taking a longer view though – life’s feedback loops include running out of resources. Bad for the individuals – and possibly the consequences of a species’ actions might radically reduce its own numbers if not make itself extinct.
However a crisis for some can be opportunity for others. Bacteria and other organisms have been found living on all kinds of human by-products – concrete, metal (e.g. the Titanic). Not aware of anything which eats a wide range of human-generated polymers yet though.
The history of life on earth contains examples of some organism / collection of organisms coming along and dramatically changing the environment (Great oxidation event, Cambrian substrate revolution etc).
Of course given the human abilities of foresight, cooperation, self-regulation and trophic and environmental flexiblity we might be able to avoid this for a bit. However it’s entirely possible that it might require societies to change in ways which many would be uncomfortable with and may then not be stable against outside influences.
Ask and ye shall receive.
Ask and ye shall receive.
“In 2020 total greenhouse gas emissions associated with UK consumption directly by households were 21 per cent lower than in 1996”.
Offshoring actually increased our carbon emissions until 2007 when a nice big recession and (later) some decent policies combined to start decreasing them. They’ve been falling reasonably consistently since 2012 despite a population that is growing quite quickly.
Interesting! Thanks – we love
Interesting! Thanks – we love a graph here! (Mostly…) Where are those from, out of interest?
Couple of notable points there. A recession or pandemic appears to help a lot! It is interesting the UK-produced goods totals have come down but overseas have not increased. A common pattern in human resource use is that as one thing becomes less “expensive” in some way (maybe a process becomes more efficient) there is increased use (“what our ancestors considered luxuries we consider necessities”) and overall there’s not much change.
Otherwise – a picture of little change since 1996!
We do keep hearing that heating and transport are still on the possible “to do” list though.
https://www.gov.uk/government
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uks-carbon-footprint/carbon-footprint-for-the-uk-and-england-to-2019
I’d hardly call a 21% drop “little change” especially considering the increase in population.
Heating will be the big one. Electrification is relatively easy for transport and progressing well. For heating it’s going to be a big challenge.
Rich_cb wrote:
I was specifically referring to all the parts *apart* from the “UK produced goods / services” which haven’t changed much at all. The reduction in the UK- produced goods part is probably positive of course.
Apologies.
Apologies.
I’ve been reading that China will hit peak carbon emissions in the next few years and as the source of much of our stuff that can only be good for global efforts to reduce emissions.
We could just buy less stuff of course…
Internet; I should have been
Internet; I should have been clearer!
What are you, some kind of Cynic?
The simplest, most obvious solutions can be the hardest or most difficult to implement it seems.
Owd Big ‘Ead wrote:
This seems like a strawman. I don’t think anyone here is suggesting we do that.
Again, I don’t think that’s what people are arguing.
Objections to JSO’s tactics (here, not everywhere, of course) seem to be more about their means, not their ends. If something has little, no, or even the opposite effect to its stated objectives, should it be supported?
What is your strategy and how
What is your strategy and how have you implemented it?
HarrogateSpa wrote:
All my professional roles of the last 20 years have included a large element of seeking to reduce climate change emissions from transport, energy generation and heating.
Owd Big ‘Ead wrote:
Lefties? Aren’t Lefties supposed to be the ones that want change, to make things better for everyone and the ones who are protesting and cycling slowly, glueing themselves to things and making a fuss?
I thought it was the Righties/Conservatives/conservatives that only do things that suit them? Perhaps I’m wrong here.
Proud to be a Woke Lefty member of The Blob.
MattieKempy wrote:
Do you eat tofu and read the Grauniad?
“… the Metropolitan Police
“… the Metropolitan Police tweeted that they had issued the group with a section 12 order for causing disruption to traffic… “
Wait… they can issue orders for causing disruption to traffic like this?
When the speed of the people cycling (or walking) is faster than standstill queues of motor vehicles?
Isn’t there some sort of irony here…?
Someone call Alanis…
Seems to me that the Met are
Seems to me that the Met are missing a trick. Issue section 12 orders to all the traffic holding up other traffic, and they could solve London’s congestion problem!
Exactly.
Exactly.
I don’t agree with JSO’s
I don’t agree with JSO’s tactics but it’s telling that the police never (as far as I know) have imposed such orders on the numerous “fair fuel” trucker go slow protests of recent years, nor on the mass blocking of central London cab drivers get up to every time they feel they’ve got a grievance.
In fairness to the police,
In fairness to the police, section 12 did not cover such protests until this time last year, with the introduction of the awful Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022.
Rendel Harris wrote:
What are you doing that’s more efficient than JSO?
marmotte27 wrote:
What are you doing that’s more efficient than JSO?
— Rendel Harris
Firstly it would be a strange old world, and definitely a quiet old internet, if we could only disagree with or criticise people if we were doing better than them: “I don’t think Pogacar’s tactics were correct yesterday” “What place did you get on the stage? Shut up then.”
Secondly what I’m not doing is needling the people we need on side to make meaningful change, making the issue of climate change seem the province of a handful of zealots and making it easy for the press and politicians to demonise anyone who wants meaningful action as enemies of working people. By all means disagree (I could easily be wrong and their action might spur a great advance in climate change measures; time will tell but I don’t believe it will) but “what are you doing better?” isn’t really a winning argument in favour of something.
On a personal level I’ve been a vegan for twenty-five years and vegetarian for fifteen before that (there’s some ammunition for the haters on here!), I don’t have a car, I’ve taken two shorthaul flights in the last twenty-five years and will probably never fly again, I try to buy local products whenever possible, I buy all my “toys” (bikes, guitars et cetera) secondhand and I volunteer for an organisation that works with (amongst others) many ecological groups, recruiting volunteers for them and providing them with technical and legal advice. So although I would be the first to admit I don’t do enough, I do try and do something.
I should rephrase my question
I should rephrase my question, what is your idea of a better tactic?
At this stage I agree with everyone who is doing anything to “raise awareness” i.e. rub people’s noses in their own shit, and forces people, politicians, whoever to respond… Even if it is by forcing them into becoming ever more violent and repressive. Because where we’re at, we need a revolution, nothing less.
marmotte27 wrote:
marmotte27 wrote:
I would like to see more Greenpeace-style action demonstrating at refineries, car manufacturers, events sponsored by oil companies etc. Randomly disrupting the snooker, people’s commutes etc simply reinforces the impression in the public mind, rightly or wrongly, that JSO are a group of misguided egotists more interested in disruption and notoriety than making any positive change. “Rubbing people’s noses in their own shit” sounds all very radical but all it actually does is harden attitudes and make change less, not more, likely. Lobbying, campaigning and explaining to people why cleaning up their shit will benefit them (as, for example, with LTNs) is much more likely to produce tangible results. Disruptive action sounds all very dashing when you’re young: I was at Greenham Common and Molesworth cutting the wires and playing hide and seek with the MoD police with the best of ’em, did it make a pennorth’s of difference? Did it bollocks.
For me the only chance for
For me the only chance for humanity now would be a fast breakdown of civilisation.
End of civilisation = end of massive CO2 emissions + possibility to come to our senses and rebuild a life within the limits of this planet.
Any positive scenarios are now so totally unlikely we needn’t consider them. Other negative scenarios, like drawn-out crises and wars for ressources and habitable territories, with the disappearance of the latter leading to our final demise, are obviously quite possible and certainly more likely.
marmotte27 wrote:
Don’t worry – we’ve got all sorts of things to look forward to: the next viral pandemic (when bird flu finally jumps to humans); general AI going all Skynet; plastic eating nanotech or bacteria deciding humans taste better (although in consideration, just something escaping from a lab and eating all the plastic would cause enough problems…).
I don’t think you got quite
I don’t think you got quite the right end of the stick.
Wearing orange and riding
Wearing orange and riding bikes, you say?
Where were the Dutch at the time of the protests?
Oh wait – helmets. Stand down!
I’d sooner prefer JSO team up
I’d sooner prefer JSO team up with the Extinguishers than further trash cycling opinions among the ignorant.
Let’s see if we can dessicate the landscape with flat tyres and red lentils. ACTION!
From: https://twitter.com
From: https://twitter.com/pkedrosky/status/1668047658269790211
Looks like it’s going to be a hot one
… and let’s have an XKCD
… and let’s have an XKCD for a bit of perspective: https://xkcd.com/1732/
hawkinspeter wrote:
Some discussion of these graphs: https://climatecasino.net/2023/06/wtf-is-happening-an-overview/
He finishes with: