Forum Topic

Cycling, Climate change and Cop 26

Much to the disappointment of the Cycling lobby, cycling just seems to get one small mention at Cop26 - at one session on day 10 out of  Apparenty those leading the battle to save the planet don't seem to rate it as that important.  You can find it if you look hard enough on https://ukcop26.orgIs it time for our great leaders in Hounslow and Ealing to "smell the coffee" and start focussing on rather more significant areas for saving our planet. As has been pointed out, our own C9 is highly unlikely to improve air quality and in many areas is making it worse. its is a very expensive distraction.  There are plenty of our fearless leaders be doing that would improve air quality and reduce carbon emissions in our Borough?

Susan Engel ● 901d44 Comments

If it wasn't difficult enough and expensive enough to travel from and to some of these countries, many delegates have been thwarted by changing Covid restrictions.  Years ago it was a day to cross the by jet to the US (if you went that way around the world) to Fiji to catch the once a week prop plane taking another day to some of the islands.  Now there are Covid restrictions and quarantines  - especially Australia and New Zealand - making all the travel arrangements and itineraries far more difficult and expensivehttps://www.wired.co.uk/article/cop26-pacific-island-nations

Philippa Bond ● 889d

Interviewed by Andrew Marrhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0b1d89vA lesson to us all.

Philippa Bond ● 890d

Tuvalu

Philippa Bond ● 892d

John, during lockdown we were buying more and more from the supermarket things we would never have bought there and paid much less for them.

Janice Evans ● 894d

Many people can't, including me.  One reason is I don't have a car. Other is I have a severe back problem so can't lift anything that weighs more than 2lbs.  This stupid attitude ignores people without cars, the elderly, disabled and those who fall into more than one of those categories.  Go figure.

Claire Moran ● 894d

Hi Lorraine,No problem. There are approximately 1.25m regular cyclists in London - those who cycle at least once a week. You can type a basic sum into Google, so if you want to know what 13.9% is as a number, you multiply it by 9 million which is the population of London:13.9% * 9 = 1.251 To help put that into context, there are 1.1m people aged over 65 living in London. So when I challenged Maggie’s point that cyclists are a tiny minority, it was on two main points:1. They’re not a tiny minority. 2. We shouldn’t actually discriminate against minorities even if a majority would prefer that we did. For example, older people, especially those who are more vulnerable (eg the 130,000 over 85s in London), should not just be encouraged to use the transport system, but be given special consideration as a result of their vulnerability. Large numbers of this group should not be seriously injured or killed in London even if protecting them comes at a financial cost or at minor inconvenience to driving journey times during busy periods. Cyclists deserve the same consideration as older people - but not because there are more cyclists than older people, but because injuring anyone vulnerable on the road when they’re just trying to get from A to B is not a good thing.

Ed Saper ● 894d

Janice, strangely enough, the Govt has found that people are doing their own shopping again since the easing of lockdown and home deliveries of other items are being made more difficult as there are too many of them. So doing the large weekly shop yourself helps the environment.

Mandy Waters ● 894d

Janice you appear to be describing the opposite of what has happened in UK retail since the 1990s?

John Hall ● 894d

Janice you appear to be describing the opposite of what has happened in UK retail since the 1990s?

John Hall ● 894d

EdPlease actual numbers not percentages which are irrelevant without the numbers.Thank you

Loraine Pemberton ● 894d

Changes in retail with small shops closing and supermarkets sellingalmost everything made us change our shopping habits and we now buyin bulk which means a car is necessary unless you have home delivery,I much prefer this way of shopping, it's cheaper and means only one visita week.

Janice Evans ● 894d

I was just reading an interesting article about how one of the biggest obstacles wrt fighting climate change is people being unwilling to make even the slightest changes to their daily habits, or deal with the slightest inconvenience, meanwhile hoping other people will solve the problem.Might as well have been writing about motorists in Chiswick.

Simon Pedley ● 894d

Nora, I'm not shouting.  The written word can come across badly.  I am fed up though.  Can you explain where the figures around short journeys are collected?

Maggie Dodge ● 894d

https://www.climatechangenews.com/2021/11/10/cop26-car-pledge-underwhelms-delegates-ask-bikes/You can see that the motor lobby is very well funded can't you!

Philippa Bond ● 894d

"We’re all doing the same things but because I don’t cycle I’m somehow causing climate change."If that were the case, why are you the one opposing any restriction on your ability to drive anywhere? Could it be because your preferred travel mode, driving your car, has been more impacted by the current transport restrictions?There measures have been introduced in good part because "preaching" to people about climate change and pollution has little actual effect. We tend to agree that we should do better, but don't then shift our behaviour appreciably - that's our real hypocrisy.But if it actually becomes easier for us to walk and cycle, and more inconvenient to drive, we take the path of least resistance. There's little point in arguing about whether you should be in your car or not, but the overall effect of these measures means more people will be using their cars less, maybe even you.

Tom Pike ● 899d

Then you aren't the problem,  but the figures around short journeys imply that not everyone takes that attitude.  There are a lot of climate change sceptics out there and I worry for the next generation if we do nothing.  I wish we could discuss it rather than shouting at each other.

Nora Watkins ● 899d

There is nothing to say cycling and driving can’t go hand in hand. It’s just the hypocrisy. Cyclists telling us to get out of our cars.  When I don’t drive I walk or get a bus or train. When a cyclist doesn’t drive they do the same as me but also might cycle. Why are they the ones preaching that I shouldn’t be in my car. They talk about short journeys, single  occupancy. Bet your life the reasons they drive is to collect something heavy locally, go to the tip, locally. Do they get a neighbour to sit in the car so they’re not single occupancy . We’re all doing the same things but because I don’t cycle I’m somehow causing climate change.

Maggie Dodge ● 899d

Justin, you are right that the location of the monitor makes slight difference, but unfortunately pollution levels fall off rather slowly away from the source, with decay distances of between 50 and 200 m. A 2 m change is going to cause at most a 4% decrease in levels. We've seen much larger drops after C9 opened. In fact the traffic was first moved away from the monitoring station 3 months before C9 opened, but the marked improvement in air quality was only seen after it opened. Bus times along South Parade have been improving this year even as passenger levels have increased, so there is no reason to think that we are seeing a compensating effect from reduced stop times. INRIX trip-time data also showed that there was no sign of congestion on South Parade.There is therefore scant evidence that the improvements in air quality along the High Road have come at the expense of other areas, but rather the data suggests we have seen an overall reduction in traffic in Chiswick, and that's compared to the rest of the Borough. The explanation that the traffic measures overall have led to more of us walking and cycling and less of us driving is certainly consistent with the evidence we have so far.

Tom Pike ● 899d

Who exactly is the majority? Most trips are not made by car in London and most of us don't own cars - it's about 1 in 3 in Chiswick, and falling. Car use is lower with age, with disability, and with reduced income. Car use is also lower amongst those who achieve the recommended 150 minutes of physical activity a week. I'm not sure what "nonsense" you are referring to, but certainly there is no reason to prioritise the ability to driving short distances above active modes of transport, and the health costs of the resulting inactivity have to be paid by us all. Of course we should support the travel needs of those with long-term health conditions, but we should also support efforts to boost active transport and reduce the risk of such conditions emerging in the first place.  You might not see it, but traffic counts along the High Road are now being continuously monitored. Bike counts are now 25% of the total with cars, taxis and LGVs, still a minority but it's growing and it's neither tiny nor even small.

Tom Pike ● 899d

"Cycling infrastructure is there to act as both a carrot (to encourage more people to use active transport) and a stick (to make motoring less optimal for short journeys)." Now that i completely agree with,especially the first part,and that applies for or against when the weather is bad

Julian Pavey ● 899d

"Ed, let's not disagree over tiny or small. I see 1-2% quoted."Maggie - please don't listen to me when I tell you the number of cyclists who cycle regularly in London is around 14%, having grown 2000% in 5 years.You should distrust my motives and absolutely get your information from a source you trust.  I would suggest this is a good place to start:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/walking-and-cycling-statistics-england-2020When you say that "Drivers freedoms are definitely being eroded", I would agree with you.It is true that drivers are being asked not to drive down minor residential roads, we are being asked to give up road space in favour of cyclists, buses and pedestrians and we've lost parking spaces in front of our shops - our freedom to drive where we want and park where we want is being curtailed.However, while you see drivers as the victims of an overmighty cycling lobby, many of us see the problem as being down to us and other drivers.That problem is too many cars, too many journeys done by cars when they could easily be done by other modes, too much congestion slowing everything down, too much pollution creating health issues for everyone, but especially vulnerable groups, and too much CO2 being produced by transport.In the last 10 years, traffic on minor residential roads in London has almost doubled - that's what's impacting your freedom to drive where you want at a convenient speed, not cyclists.If I was to say the solution to the problem of congestion and pollution is more cars - that's laughably absurd. The consensus is that fewer car journeys and more bikes would solve these issues - freeing up space for those who need to use their vehicles for work or other reasons.Yes, your freedom to drive where you want is being curtailed.  But then your freedom, combined with the other 4m+ daily car trips in London is causing oppression for everyone....including you.

Ed Saper ● 899d

The thinking that cycling infrastructure is provided to satisfy a small number of existing cyclists is completely wrong. It is there to encourage more cyclists.Cycling infrastructure is there to act as both a carrot (to encourage more people to use active transport) and a stick (to make motoring less optimal for short journeys).If Maggie's perception (she does not like actual data) is that not many people are using it then the tendency should be to provide more and better cycling infrastructure to move us in the right direction climate-wise.

Will Watson ● 899d

I don't understand why you would think cycling and car ownership are incompatible Maggie Dodge.  Isn't climate change about considering your climate impact and trying to reduce it?  Driving less is part of that but people who also cycle might have reasons why they need access to a car.  And "not liking stats" means you are are judging things by your own view rather than the reality.  Social media is pretty polarizing and tends to push people into assuming that others views are wrong.  It also leads to some unpleasant threads.  Such a shame when we're all so privileged to live in this lovely part of London.   

Nora Watkins ● 899d

Ed, let's not disagree over tiny or small. I see 1-2% quoted. As I say mostly I don't  actually like stats.  I go by what I see. The expense and many attempts to make the Chiswick High Road cycle lane work seems to be where cyclists needs are being put above others. The elderly cyclists, who don't feel able to cope with current road conditions, could think about stopping cycling? Drivers freedoms are definitely being eroded so is that unfair to suggest. Maybe worth considering rather than disadvantage what we agree is the majority.  You mention prioritising the majority, I don't see it can be more sensible to prioritise the minority. Just not seeing the argument.  Let's come back to why people use their car and stop this nonsense about short journeys, lone occupants.  Can there be greater need for the elderly to cycle than a sole trader workman, needing his car?  The elderly and the floating bus stop, what about these elderly people, who aren't dreaded motorists, do they count ? Political power you say.  That is definitely in the hands of the cyclists at the moment and the elderly and disabled have definitely been abandoned.  The workers too, make their working day difficult or expensive - so cyclists can go wherever they like. I just don't get it. Climate change is in the hands of the big companies, they are finally starting to make changes, leave the little man alone and don't assume because we drive we aren't doing our bit.

Maggie Dodge ● 899d

Maggie - I am happy that we can find some common ground.I will agree with you that the vast majority of adult cyclists also hold driving licenses (I think that's the 87% stat you mention). I will also agree with you that cyclists are a minority in London.I take it you accept that cyclists aren't a "tiny" minority in London, but about 14% of the adult population having grown about 2000% in 5 years. You do make an interesting point about how far we should go to accommodate this minority:"Perhaps when cyclist become a majority they should have a majority say and the world can then justly revolve around them"If we only the prioritise the needs of the majority, that can have some unintended consequences.No-one currently disputes that older people's safety should be prioritised - protected from being hit by cars or bikes.However, in London those over 65 make up 10% in Inner London and just under 14% in Outer London.Older people are a minority - no-one seriously argues that they shouldn't be protected on the roads because they aren't a majority.In fact, the argument is that because some of them  (e.g. the over 85s who make up circa 5%) are much more vulnerable on the roads, we should design a transport system that keeps this minority as safe as possible, even if that means compromises that may slow down car journeys.  I think it is a sign of a healthy democracy that we don't have a majority rules approach to everything, but instead go out of our way to grant legal rights to minorities with less political power (whether that's elderly people, the disabled, children etc.) to protect their interests and safety.

Ed Saper ● 899d

Here’s another stat for you:As research by British Cycling found, 87 per cent of cyclists also regularly drive cars.

Maggie Dodge ● 899d

Perhaps when cyclist become a majority they should have a majority say and the world can then justly revolve around them. For the time. Ring the actual stat isn’t worth mentioning because it is indeed tiny

Maggie Dodge ● 899d

"When, where, how does it ever make sense to prioritise a tiny minority ? When a cycle lobby says so? Friends in high places will never change the fact that cyclists are a tiny minority."Quoting Maggie Dodge above.  She's used a 1.23% of the population are cyclists statistic in the past which is substantially more than the 0.1% Councillor Hearn used to put cyclists on.Walking and cycling statistics, England 2020:* 16.1% of the population (England) cycle monthly and 11.6% weekly.* In London it is 18.3% monthly, 13.9% once per week, 7.1% 3 times per week and 4.2% 5 times or more per week.* In Hackney, 37% cycle monthly and 33% weekly.  * In Hounslow it is much lower - 15.7% and 10%.  * In the neighbouring boroughs of Richmond: 32% monthly, 24% weekly and in Hammersmith it is 28% and 23%.* In 5 years, the proportion of adults cycling weekly in London has increased by nearly 2,000% and in Hounslow it has nearly tripled.Cyclists are not a "tiny minority", but a a substantial and growing minority travel mode used by many people who don't think of themselves as cyclists (or "zealots" for that matter), just normal people going from A to B via a convenient option.Given the substantial benefits for everyone, including those who currently rely on cars, gained from increasing the modal share of cycling, it does make sense to prioritise making cycling safer and more accessible.

Ed Saper ● 899d

Tom: using the air quality data from CHR is misleading because the effect of C9 is to move the traffic which produces pollution c.6' further away from the air quality monitor.  So you are no longer comparing like with like.  It is the equivalent of saying temperature has dropped when you move the thermometer partly into shade.As for bus times improving on South Parade some, potentially all, of that improvement  is down to the fact that far fewer people are using the buses so the buses spend far less time at the stops taking on or dropping off passengers.  If that was taken into account we might even see an increase in bus times.But I do agree people should, as and when finance permits, better insulate their homes and move to electric transport and well designed and locally supported active transport policies are good for your health

Justin Stephenson ● 900d

We don't always know what lobbying is going on out of sight!

Philippa Bond ● 900d

Various changes are being made at junctions including moving C9T onto the pavement in front of the Best Western hotel in the approach to Chiswick Lane; road markings and signage changes at TGT and other junctions; at Devonshire Road C9T moves inwards and upwards to make cyclists more visible. More details are on the series of maps at the link below showing the scheme that was approved by Hounslow's cabinet on 20th July this year.  Planning work is being done currently - as indicated by marks on pavements.  https://democraticservices.hounslow.gov.uk/documents/s170163/CEX545%20C9%20-%20Appendix%20B%20-%20Proposed%20Design%20submitted%20for%20publication%2013.07.21.pdf

Joanna Biddolph ● 901d

"C9 is being improved and extended as we speak." Should read; C9 is being dug up and rerouted to partly correct the obvious mistakes in its slap dash 'design'. More road works, more expence, more disruption to both motorist and cyclists.Who pays? You do.

Adrian Irving ● 901d

Yes I agree, the car lobby is indeed well funded. I have just renewed my car insurance.  I envy the people who work in that industry. They do well.

Susan Engel ● 901d

Well done Susan. You have spotted that the car lobby is better funded and more powerful than the cycle lobby. Along with the other dirty industries that are sponsoring at COP 26. Wait till you discover how much is spent by government on active travel vs infrastructure for cars.The many different groups that campaign for measures to address pollution, road safety, public health and climate change do so on very small budgets and are the perennial underdogs. Hence their persistence and attention to detail.

Paul Campbell ● 901d

How is C9T being improved and extended? Yet another accident reported yesterday, and Jeremy Vine's video, shared extensively on twitter, of a child cycling on it, included (at 24 seconds in) a scene which appears to show the police attending another cycling accident at the end of his road. There is a major issue with this bi-directional cycle route as it stands, which is probably why they do not recommend them in built up areas on the continent.

Mandy Waters ● 901d

Like a lot of cycle zealots, Boris Johnson flew back by private jet from COP26 for a dinner with his friend at the Garrick Club. Perhaps Will Norman could have a word and ask him to at least pretend he cares about climate change!

Maggie Dodge ● 901d

Pollution monitoring stations that give reliable, real-time measurements are both expensive and intrusive. Detailed street-level mapping is however possible by combining station data with traffic data. We have traffic data along the length of C9, and it shows a drop in the overall number of motor vehicles on the High Road. Combined with the monitoring data this shows that pollution has fallen along C9's length. In fact the traffic data shows that the share of cyclists compared to cars, LGV's and taxis has risen from 17% to 25% between April 2018 and April 2021.C9 is being improved and extended as we speak. Councillors could spend their efforts (and they do get an £11k allowance) trying to reverse it or find other, maybe more effective ways, to support their constituents.

Tom Pike ● 901d

When, where, how does it ever make sense to prioritise a tiny minority ? When a cycle lobby says so? Friends in high places will never change the fact that cyclists are a tiny minority. If the push that’s been made and the obscene amount of money that’s been thrown at it, the use of a pandemic hasn’t achieved the huge surge in cycling, nothing ever will. Time to accept that

Maggie Dodge ● 901d

If the Council really cared about air pollution and delivered on their original promises they would have put far more air pollution monitors in the the area - including at the particular pressure points - the bus gate, Goldhawk road - etc.  Why haven't they? They keep going about it and they have been given so much money and all that lovely PCN money. No excuses.

Susan Engel ● 901d

So you can offer no evidence that air quality has deteriorated. In the wider area, as I said, overall traffic has fallen compared to the rest of the Borough, and in particular bus times show an improvement along South Parade, what would be the main parallel route to the High Road. So you propose no measures to improve infrastructure for pedestrians and cycling, despite that being prioritised for action by local authorities by the Committee for Climate Change?  In comparison the measures you do propose are either minimal (the vast majority of recycling is already collected from our homes) or very much more expensive (retrofitting insulation, or electrification of road transport). That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be done, but prioritising active transport produces much more significant benefits for the costs in terms of not just emissions but pollution and health as well.

Tom Pike ● 901d

"Given the air quality monitor on the High Road shows that pollution levels have fallen since C9 opened"If you are referring to the monitor near the defunct police station them maybe so however if you were able to monitor levels between and including Goldhawk Road and Chiswick Lane then I feel sure the results would be very different.

Adrian Irving ● 901d

Well for a start they could measure, as they promised, they would the air quality on other roads - Acton Lane and South Parade for a start and all the surrounding roads. Then we would actually know what was going on. You can't just base it on the High Road - especially that bit of the High Road when the traffic bit is nearer Chiswick Roundabout.Make sure they do more on sustainable buildings in the Borough, ensure that people in Chiswick have easier access to a recycling centre that they don't have to drive miles to, more and cheaper charging points for electric cars.

Susan Engel ● 901d

Given the air quality monitor on the High Road shows that pollution levels have fallen since C9 opened, and independent traffic monitoring showed reduced and more direct trips compared to the rest of the Borough, what is the basis for your claim that the traffic measures have made air quality worse?The Committee on Climate Change has stated that local authorities should be prioritising walking and cycling, and the national government has provided funding to do just that. You might claim this is a distraction, but what exactly are you proposing instead?Opposing every measure to encourage active transport, including the very north-south cycling route that the councillors themselves urged to be prioritised, does not offer much confidence that they are serious about anything other than maintaining traffic access irrespective of the effect on emissions and pollution. .

Tom Pike ● 901d

It seems these local leaders are indeed possibly flogging a dead horse. Most of what they are both doing is unwanted by the majority, LTNS, cycle lanes and tower blocks.  Very doubtful if anything they pursue is for the benefit of most of us and I think for that reason they both need to go. They’ve lost their way, that’s the kindest thing I can find to say. They’ve forgotten they’re supposed to be in charge of keeping our roads clean , getting our rubbish removed, managing a budget, and other mundane things that are important to us.  Not fleecing us and looking after the whims of a tiny minority of loud mouthed bullies. The job description says to SERVE the local residents. They’re both in the wrong job.

Maggie Dodge ● 901d