-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Manslaughter charges at last? - Equality StreetsEquality Streets on Admission
- OK, Really, What About The Roads? on Priority
- The unbearable crassness of agreeing - Equality StreetsEquality Streets on War on Britain’s Roads
- Accidents at Traffic Lights – Lets End The Madness | StrikeEngine – Car Tuning on Four Thought – correction
- Albert Slawson on Contact and links
Meta
The air we breathe and state ignorance
As if we didn’t already know, the government-funded Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants has reported a definite link between exhaust emissions and the rise in dementia.
No doubt there will be calls to ban cars, and higher taxation for the worst gas-guzzlers. But the worst gas-guzzling is caused by traffic control.
Traffic lights prevent infinite low-speed, low-rev filtering opportunities. When lights fail, and we are free to use commonsense to merge more or less in turn, congestion disappears. I’ve witnessed it across central London, e.g. in November 2007 and February 2008. Never was it more pleasant to cycle along Shaftesbury Avenue and Piccadilly. Cab drivers smiled and waved you on. People rediscovered their humanity and made common cause. Above all, there was an absence of traffic. Free to disperse of its own accord, it vanished into thin air.
I emailed Dave Wetzel, then vice-chair of TfL. He checked with his officers. They said they had erected cordons to prevent traffic from entering the affected areas. I contacted a Chief Inspector contact at the Met. He investigated and replied that no such action had been taken. So TfL officers were lying. This has never been exposed before, except on the Improperganda page of this website.
As I wrote in No Idle Matter in 2007 (reprinted 2011), the stop-restart drive cycle produced by traffic control multiplies emissions by a factor of four. Since then, I found a University engineering professor who says the factor is as much as 29.
So the quick win is to switch off most traffic lights and let us filter. The immediate reduction in emissions will be at least 50%.
Kangaroo justice
Nottingham Police and crime commissioner, Caroline Henry, has received a 6-month ban and a £2450 fine after breaking the limit five times in 12 weeks.
Serves her right, you might think. After all, she had pledged to crack down on speeding.
Did she hit or hurt anyone? No. Did she cause danger or damage? No. She was driving sensibly for the conditions. All she did was breach arbitrary, artificial limits that have no relevance whatsoever to context and circumstance.
The law in this field, and traffic regulation in general, prohibits the exercise of intelligent discretion. Coercive control is illegal in the domestic sphere but rampant in the public.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-62207530
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged Caroline Henry, Equality Streets, speed limits, speeding
Leave a comment
(Rigid) rules for fools
Should Notts Crime Commissioner, Caroline Henry, resign over her 5 “speeding” offences? No. The anonymous fools who make us drive by numbers instead of context should.
And the puerile numbers rule should be changed. A US study found that drivers who drive faster than average have the fewest accidents, yet they are the primary targets of speed enforcement.
Brake! would say that driving by context is a licence to drive without due care and attention. Wrong. It’s a bluerint for driving with true care and attention.
In March and May 2021, Henry was twice clocked doing 35 in a 30mph limit, twice doing 38, and once doing 40. How many times was she driving well below the limit? No record, of course.
Full story here.
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged BRAKE!, Caroline Henry, Crime Commissioner, Equality Streets, speeding
Leave a comment
Censored again?
Last week I pitched the following to PM and Today. As usual, no response. Am I being censored, do they not read emails, or do they only respond to non-controversial material?
If as road-users, on foot or on wheels, we give way to others who are there first, i.e. if we take it in turns as in other walks of life, then, not only do we make common cause and enjoy the sociable interaction, we would be able to dispose of those weapons of mass distraction, danger and delay – traffic lights.
Do you have any idea how much that would save the public purse? Tens of billions. Annually (see this, even just the summary at the end).
Moreover, air quality would see a transformation. By making us stop when we could go, and making us continually stop and restart, traffic control extends journey times and maximises emissions.
By contrast, letting us filter at low speeds and low revs cuts exhaust emissions and equally toxic brake dust by over half, as I wrote in 2007.
So instead of squandering public fortunes on congestion charging, with its intrusion into our freedoms and our pockets, let us build on the Highway Code’s overdue change in priority in favour of the vulnerable, and wise up to the benefits that equality among all road-users can bring.
That the Code’s new hierarchy of road-users has received inadequate publicity was demonstrated when I was crossing the road yesterday and was honked at by a bus driver. I blame his ignorance less than the traffic control system which, perhaps most egregiously, puts the onus on the child to beware the driver, when it should be the other way round.
Today we heard that the Transport Select Committee wants to plug the looming £35bn tax hole from loss of vehicle tax through road charging. Still the high-cost, counterproductive ship of traffic control sails on, bizarrely ringfenced and unquestioned.
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged congestion charging, Equality Streets, PM, road pricing, Today Programme
Leave a comment
Killer Roads?
How can an investigative documentary with the pedigree of Panorama fail so dismally in its investigation? One cliché after another followed as the programme sought to account for the trending increase in road “accidents”.
The key interviewee was HM Inspector of Constabulary, Matt Parr. He thinks the increase is due to cuts in roads policing and speed cameras.
Cliché clips showed priority traffic insisting on its artificial right-of-way, as it failed to show empathy for others trying to enter or cross. At a roundabout, a driver who arrived first and filtered left was honked at and tailgated by a driver who was already in the roundabout. We were invited to tut at the left turner, because most commentators and policymakers in the traffic field are incapable of thinking outside the box marked “priority” – priority for the main road over side roads and pedestrians (creating lethal conflict when there could be gentle merging in turn); priority to the right at roundabouts (producing queues on the roads less travelled and a “need” for traffic lights). For me, the clips were noteworthy for their failure to prompt questioning or analysis by the programme.
We met a young boy whose leg was horribly broken by a driver in a Cornish village. His mother called it an accident. No. Like most “accidents”, it was an event contrived by the vicious rules of the road, which put the onus on the child to beware the motorist when it should be the other way round!
We saw volunteers manning speed cameras – as if they were the answer. Speed doesn’t kill. It’s inappropriate speed, or speed in the wrong hands that can kill. Policy always treats symptoms, never the cause.
We met shocking-pink-haired campaigner Clare Mercer, whose son Jason was killed on the hard shoulder of a “smart” motorway. Did we meet the perpetrator(s) of this act of corporate manslaughter? Not on your nelly. The programme was content to whimper, and failed to name, shame or call policymakers to account.
Next the programme discussed another old chestnut: drink driving. Along with less roads policing and fewer working speed cameras, we learned there are fewer drink driving checks. The programme claimed 240 deaths a year are due to drink. As a percentage of 2000 deaths and 23,000 serious injuries, it’s appreciable, but by contrast, Westminster City Council’s safety audit reveals that 44% – nearly half – of personal injury accidents occur at traffic lights. None of the remaining 56% is examined through the lens of priority.
There is always a blame culture at work in the field of road safety. It’s always a road-user’s fault, never the fault of the rules or design of the road, or an inadequate driving test, or, above all, the fault of the architects of the dysfunctional system which costs lives and costs the earth – in both senses.
On his trip from Land’s End to John ‘O Groats, reporter Richard Bilton led us to the A82, portentously stating that with 90 deaths a year, it’s the UK’s most dangerous road. We learned about an accident in which an entire young family died. “Who is to blame?” asked an earnest Bilton, leaning in. “No-one,” said the grandmother. “It’s the road.” Clearly the loss was appalling, but how can you blame an inert thing – a road?
John Barrell of the Road Safety Foundation blamed the lack of speed cameras for “accidents” on the A82. How about better education? How about allowing only advanced drivers on the road? How about a driving test that teaches us to drive by context instead of numbers? None of that was discussed. Brake! would claim that driving by context is a licence to drive without due care and attention. No. It’s a blueprint for driving with true care and attention.
A prerequisite for a driving licence should be cycling proficiency and a rider’s licence. Then we wouldn’t need to be told to THINK BIKE! We’d know!
“We must have targets,” said usual suspect, Edmund King of the AA. “Without targets,” he said, “road safety won’t be a priority.” Bilge! Actually, Ed isn’t a bad guy, though rather conventional in his thinking. It’s possible he said more useful things which didn’t make it into this disappointing programme, misleadingly entitled, Killer Roads.
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Increase in road accidents is due to …
Panorama tonight is to feature commentators who blame the increase in road accidents on cuts in traffic police and speed cameras. Will they mention the inadequate driving test and counterproductive traffic regulation? Doubtful.
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged cuts, Equality Streets, Panorama, road traffic accidents, speed cameras, traffic police
Leave a comment
London’s lethal air quality
The advice from Greenpeace and Sadiq Khan is to avoid wood-burning stoves and non-essential driving. They miss what is arguably the chief cause: coercive traffic control. By making us stop, idle and restart, endlessly, needlessly, the system maximises emissions, brake dust and fuel use. As I wrote in this 2007 piece, freedom to filter at low speeds and low revs would cut emissions by 75%. Could the main culprit, which costs lives and costs the earth, be the traffic control system itself?
The cult of traffic control
On File on 4 (23.11.21), Dr Alexandra Stein of the Family Survival Trust, a charity which supports victims of cults and coercive control, defined cults as having “an authoritarian leadership group, an isolating and steeply hierarchical structure, an absolute belief system, and [using] brainwashing. The outcome is that you have controllable and exploitable followers.” – The parallels with our coercive traffic control system are striking.
No surprise
As well as damaging heart, lungs, bloodstream and brain, exhaust pollution also affects mental health. Guardian coverage here. The research was led by Ioannis Bakolis of King’s College, London.
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged air pollution, Equality Streets, Ioannis Bakolis, Joanne Newbury, vehicle emissions
Leave a comment
Safety last
Safety features in cars are an admission that collisions are inevitable and conflict is the norm. But if roads were designed for coexistence instead of competition, and we had a worthwhile driving test, conflict would disappear and we’d go without fear. By making roads inherently dangerous, and toying with retrospective safety measures, the current system puts safety last.
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged Equality Streets, road safety, safety first, safety last, traffic system
Leave a comment