Re: cycling in Los Angeles and cycling in Melbourne

Discussion in 'Australia and New Zealand' started by John Doe, Sep 23, 2003.

  1. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    : should write to their mp and request anual smog checks for cars in aus.
    Its
    : about time we had this.
    :
    : andy
    :


    In NSW there was talk of this a few years back. I don't know what happened
    but there are problems. Maybe there was successful lobbying by the
    mechanics over the tooling required. I know they bitched about tooling when
    they brought in that braking analyser. This is not really an excuse because
    RTA checking stations could do it and maybe limit it to once each 5 years.

    You have to remember that it would render a lot of older cars non-compliant.
    This would create an unfair burden on people that could not afford modern
    cars. You could suggest a national old car buy-back? Don't know if that
    one would win votes.

    Pete
     
    Tags:


  2. PC

    PC Guest

    On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:35:04 GMT, "John Doe"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >: should write to their mp and request anual smog checks for cars in aus.
    >: Its about time we had this.


    -snip-

    >You have to remember that it would render a lot of older cars non-compliant.
    >This would create an unfair burden on people that could not afford modern
    >cars. You could suggest a national old car buy-back? Don't know if that
    >one would win votes.


    I thought NSW did have an old car buy back..

    Anyway, remember that emissions generated during the production of a
    mdoern, fuel efficient car can easily outweigh those generated from
    the tailpipe of an old car.. That steel doesn't mine or refine
    itself, all those rare minerals requied for fuel cells or other
    gadgetry, those minute technical specifications that need to be
    painstakingly designed and expensively retooled to implement, and lots
    more emissions that I haven't read up on yet, all need to be accounted
    for..

    While the new cars are probably imported from overseas, or worse
    still, South Australia *laughs*, it doesn't mean much as far as local
    pollution is concerned, but we're certainly not helping global
    pollution by constantly buying entire new cars.. Wouldn't a new
    engine, new muffler, replacing a few other components, and maybe a new
    coat of paint for good measure, do the trick? It would certainly save
    on the pollution generated mining and producing the new frame and all
    the other stuff there's no need to replace..


    PC
     
  3. Theo Bekkers

    Theo Bekkers Guest

    "PC" wrote
    > Anyway, remember that emissions generated during the production of a
    > mdoern, fuel efficient car can easily outweigh those generated from
    > the tailpipe of an old car.. That steel doesn't mine or refine
    > itself,


    A couple of years ago I saw some stats that suggested that
    manufacturing a new car generates about the same amount of pollutants
    as will come out of the tailpipe in nine or ten years.

    I would love the gov't to make me an offer on my 1980 1800cc Ford
    Courier ute. But would any of you taxpayers want to contribute to it?
    :)

    There was a proposal to the Fed parliament about 5 or so years ago
    that the gov't pay $1000 each to buy back every car at age 20. I'd be
    happy to get that for my ute, but my dad would be very upset if they
    offered him that for his 1927 Model T, or his 1929 Plymouth, or even
    his 1943 Ford Jeep.

    Theo
     
  4. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    That steel doesn't mine or refine
    : itself, all those rare minerals requied for fuel cells or other
    : gadgetry,


    Not to mention a good beverage holder.
     
  5. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    : its always this battler thing that people go on about with this-if these
    : cars are
    : well tuned it makes a huge difference-just because someone is poor doesn't
    : give them the right to pollute the environment and make life crap for
    : cyclists-

    I don't see what cyclists have to do with it. Pollution makes life crap for
    everyone - cyclists, motorists pedetrians alike. That said. You have to be
    socially responsible. Sometimes ideas look good on the surface but making
    cars only available to the rich just reinforces the poverty cycle.
    You cannot blame one part of the population for this. If we had a cheap,
    reliable, and convenient public transport system then yes... take the cars
    off those that cannot afford to have them maintained. Unfortunately it
    seems that buses and trains don't win votes... sadly roads do.

    Pete
     
  6. PC

    PC Guest

    On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:24:03 GMT, "John Doe"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >: its always this battler thing that people go on about with this-if these
    >: cars are
    >: well tuned it makes a huge difference-just because someone is poor doesn't
    >: give them the right to pollute the environment and make life crap for
    >: cyclists-


    >I don't see what cyclists have to do with it. Pollution makes life crap for
    >everyone - cyclists, motorists pedetrians alike. That said. You have to be
    >socially responsible. Sometimes ideas look good on the surface but making
    >cars only available to the rich just reinforces the poverty cycle.
    >You cannot blame one part of the population for this. If we had a cheap,
    >reliable, and convenient public transport system then yes... take the cars
    >off those that cannot afford to have them maintained. Unfortunately it
    >seems that buses and trains don't win votes... sadly roads do.


    That's a bit of a furphy - especially given recent publicity about the
    fact that people care more about public transport than they do about
    child abuse..

    --
    http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7214753^1702,00.html
    The community rates child abuse really low, it rates it after problems
    with public transport and council rates.
    --

    Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
    right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
    effort. Meanwhile, there are enough brains around the roads
    department to build successful freeways and tollways without said
    politician having to make much effort.

    Oh, one other thing - pollies may not feel like making an effort to
    improve PT, but any talk about cutting services is a political, well,
    to borrow from YM, a bed of nails. One vote gained, ten lost. Just
    look at the debacle that Costa is stirring up in NSW with his idiotic
    suggestions. It's a shame that the election is 3 1/2 years off.


    PC
     
  7. Paul J

    Paul J Guest

    I wonder how many car owners actually weigh up the true expense of
    owning a car, new or old, and decide that the added financial burden
    would outstrip the convenience of owning a car. This would have to
    include a commitment to regular maintenance of an older vehicle.

    I see far to many old bombs on the road. No brakes, no lights, smokey
    exhaust. This is socially irresponsible. I think the fact that you see
    so many older cars in tip top shape in the United States not only points
    to their strict laws regarding maintenance but is also indicative of
    their passion for their motor cars. The Aussie public just do not have
    that sort of passion for their cars. Even though we feel that owning a
    car is our right and is the norm. So often the bomb is just regarded as
    a necessity.

    I believe that a lot of people only own cars because it's "the norm".
    No thought actually goes into it. Especially with ease of finance, the
    hard sell from car companies, and the oversupply of new vehicles on
    the market.



    --
    >--------------------------<

    Posted via cyclingforums.com
    http://www.cyclingforums.com
     
  8. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    : That's a bit of a furphy - especially given recent publicity about the
    : fact that people care more about public transport than they do about
    : child abuse..

    This maybe a little misleading though. So where do they rate roads and
    traffic - was that included? I think you have to look at it from the
    individuals POV. They are probably not giving much weight to child abuse
    because it does not affect them directly and only affects a small percentage
    of the population. There are sympathetic people out there as you seem to be
    one (which is a good thing) but most people are only interested in their lot
    in life.

    Governments are not doing their poling correctly (Especially in Sydney -
    with the constant splurge on freeways and link roads) if it is true that
    people would prefer a good public transport system over using their car to
    get around.

    : Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
    : right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
    : effort.

    Not really... The sort of PT investment we need will take longer than a term
    of government. Most voters can only see what happened in the last couple of
    months.

    Meanwhile, there are enough brains around the roads
    : department to build successful freeways and tollways without said
    : politician having to make much effort.

    Apart from funding.

    : One vote gained, ten lost. Just
    : look at the debacle that Costa is stirring up in NSW with his idiotic
    : suggestions.
    :
    :

    You would find that most of the NSW population don't care about PT.. In fact
    he is probably gaining votes because most of NSW don't use PT and don't want
    to. When people cost using a car they often only include the cost of fuel.
    Costa himself is using the figures that only a small percentage use PT but
    everyone is paying. Even with those idiotic comments I still fail to hear
    the media ask the obvious questions about road users being advantaged by PT
    users. It keeps them off the roads. The government has to build less roads
    if it has a cheap PT system. Hell I reckon PT should be free. You would
    see a sharp drop in the use of cars... Followed by a sharp drop in the use
    of Petrol... Followed by a sharp drop in petrol tax revenue... They
    wouldn't want that now. They would have to find another way to raise
    revenue and that is never popular. People get used to paying a type of tax.
    They never like new taxes whether or not its replacing a different one.

    :It's a shame that the election is 3 1/2 years off.

    Costa is not going to make a difference to the election but he will piss off
    most of us PT users. I don't own a car personally. I ride and catch PT 90%
    of the time. I love PT and wish that it was better to get people off the
    roads.
     
  9. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    : so many older cars in tip top shape in the United States not only points
    : to their strict laws regarding maintenance but is also indicative of
    : their passion for their motor cars.

    You obviously have not spent much time in the US. They may not blow as much
    smoke but their cars are much much bigger. Our largest passenger car would
    be classed as a compact in their eyes. One of my colleagues that lives in
    Chicago told me that you just get used to it. As I only travel over their
    several times a year I still shake my head at the monsters.

    Pete
     
  10. Andy White

    Andy White Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] says...
    > : Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
    > : right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
    > : effort.
    >
    > Not really... The sort of PT investment we need will take longer than a term
    > of government. Most voters can only see what happened in the last couple of
    > months.


    I think that's an easy excuse to dish out, and doesn't really give
    respect to voters. Take Kennett as an example. During his initial
    election campaign he said under his g'ment things were going to get bad
    in the short term, but to stick with him and in the long run they'd be
    better. He's still there. Just goes to show people are smarter than
    you think.
     
  11. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    : I think that's an easy excuse to dish out, and doesn't really give
    : respect to voters.

    No... I don't give much respect to most voters. Having "most voters" win
    elections. Some voters are very astute and can see long term advantage.
    However a lot are won or lost in campaigns at the end of the day. Weather
    plays a part... Whether we have won the world cup in xxx sport the last
    month plays a part.

    This is my opinion BTW but I still respect yours.

    Take Kennett as an example. During his initial
    : election campaign he said under his g'ment things were going to get bad
    : in the short term, but to stick with him and in the long run they'd be

    : better. He's still there.

    No he is not. We are talking about past victorian premier Jeff Kennet?
    Just goes to show people are smarter than

    : you think.

    IMHO No there not. Not in general. There was probably many reasons why he
    stayed in power. You cannot say to me that Howard is still in power because
    he took some tough decisions on tax and waterfront reform. You cannot say
    Kennet did not give sweeteners to the voters to get him over the line at the
    end of the day.

    In that its all about a juggling act. They have to sweeten but they also
    must deliver quality.

    I cannot agree with your POV at this point. I know I sound cynical but with
    reason.

    Anyway... Keep cycling.

    Pete
     
  12. Tim Jones

    Tim Jones Guest

    <Andy White> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > [email protected] says...
    > > : Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
    > > : right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
    > > : effort.
    > >
    > > Not really... The sort of PT investment we need will take longer than a

    term
    > > of government. Most voters can only see what happened in the last

    couple of
    > > months.

    >
    > I think that's an easy excuse to dish out, and doesn't really give
    > respect to voters. Take Kennett as an example. During his initial
    > election campaign he said under his g'ment things were going to get bad
    > in the short term, but to stick with him and in the long run they'd be
    > better. He's still there. Just goes to show people are smarter than
    > you think.


    ???

    He was kicked out two terms ago on a protest vote.

    Tim
     
  13. Andrew Swan

    Andrew Swan Guest

    Paul J wrote:
    > I wonder how many car owners actually weigh up the true expense of
    > owning a car, new or old, and decide that the added financial burden
    > would outstrip the convenience of owning a car. This would have to
    > include a commitment to regular maintenance of an older vehicle.
    >
    > I see far to many old bombs on the road. No brakes, no lights, smokey
    > exhaust. This is socially irresponsible. <snip>


    Agreed - in NSW you can report smokey vehicles to the RTA on 131555.
    They will ask your name, where you saw the car, it's rego/model/colour,
    and what type of smoke it was blowing and for how long (they want to
    catch the chronic smoke-blowers, not people starting their cars on a
    cold morning).

    I think if a petrol car gets reported twice, they send the owner a
    notice, and if it's a diesel, it only takes one report (something to do
    with different expected levels of smoke, I dunno).

    &roo
     
  14. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    : catch the chronic smoke-blowers, not people starting their cars on a
    : cold morning).

    Thats right. Most cars blow steam on a cold morning.

    :
    : I think if a petrol car gets reported twice, they send the owner a
    : notice, and if it's a diesel, it only takes one report

    I never knew you could report cars. Or if you did anything would be done.
    I have seen some shockers.
     
  15. sean

    sean Guest

    Andy White <> wrote in message
    > Take Kennett as an example. During his initial
    > election campaign he said under his g'ment things were going to get bad
    > in the short term, but to stick with him and in the long run they'd be
    > better. He's still there. Just goes to show people are smarter than
    > you think.


    That really is quite funny seeing as he's long gone. Apparently people
    ARE smarter than you think...
     
  16. Andy White

    Andy White Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] says...
    > Andy White <> wrote in message
    > > Take Kennett as an example. During his initial
    > > election campaign he said under his g'ment things were going to get bad
    > > in the short term, but to stick with him and in the long run they'd be
    > > better. He's still there. Just goes to show people are smarter than
    > > you think.

    >
    > That really is quite funny seeing as he's long gone. Apparently people
    > ARE smarter than you think...
    >

    Doh! Ok, bad example. But I'm sure there is one somewhere ;-)
     
  17. Paul J

    Paul J Guest

    John Doe wrote:
    > so many older cars in tip top shape in the United States not only points
    > : to their strict laws regarding maintenance but is also indicative of
    > : their passion for their motor cars.
    > >You obviously have not spent much time in the US. They may not blow as
    > >>much smoke but their cars are much much bigger. Our largest passenger

    > >car would be classed as a >compact in their eyes. One of my colleagues
    > >that lives in Chicago told me that you just get used to it. As I >only
    > >travel over their several times a year I still shake my head at the
    > >monsters.

    > Pete




    Notice that I mentioned that people in the US are much more passionate
    about their motor cars than we are here in Oz. I made no mention about
    the size of their cars. But since you mentioned it, the size of their
    cars may indicate how passionately they "believe" in the almighty
    automobile. In fact, in the eyes of many of their citizens the
    automobile is an inaleinable right to be protected with religious zeal.



    --
    >--------------------------<

    Posted via cyclingforums.com
    http://www.cyclingforums.com
     
  18. gescom

    gescom Guest

    wrote:
    > "trains are the second most efficient way of shifting matter around the
    > surface of the planet - after the bicycle".
    > and
    > You might remember the movie, Who Framed Roger Rabbit? On the surface,
    > it's a jokey story about a 1920s world where humans live side-by-side
    > with "toons" - indestructible cartoon characters. But the subplot is
    > about a "toon" who wanted to destroy public transport in the town of Los
    > Angeles. His plan was to buy up all the public transport, and then close
    > it down, so that he could build strange things called "freeways" that
    > would carry huge numbers of cars. Now this might seem like an outrageous
    > conspiracy theory - but this subplot is based on an accusation aimed at
    > General Motors back in the 1920s.
    > Back then, Los Angeles had a very efficient, clean and rapid system of
    > public transport - of electric trolley cars. The conspiracy theory
    > claims that General Motors, via a series of dummy companies, gradually
    > bought up all the efficient city public transport systems across the
    > USA. They replaced the fast, silent and clean electric trolley cars
    > with slow, noisy and very smelly diesel buses. The passengers and
    > townspeople complained about the stinky buses, and so the public
    > transport systems closed themselves down - leaving the commuters with
    > no option but to buy a car.


    I think the idea that we would be better off with 'newer' cars on the
    road is false. The manufacturing process is just as polluting and
    wastefull to the environment as is driving an old car.


    Anyway to quote the great
    http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/trek/s268283.htmDr Karl :)




    --
    >--------------------------<

    Posted via cyclingforums.com
    http://www.cyclingforums.com
     
  19. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    : I think the idea that we would be better off with 'newer' cars on the
    : road is false. The manufacturing process is just as polluting and
    : wastefull to the environment as is driving an old car.

    If it was an equivalent situation then the newer cars would be better for
    cyclists. However there are many other social downfalls to making everyone
    have modern cars.

    : Anyway to quote the great
    : http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/trek/s268283.htmDr Karl :)

    Thanks for this. That was a good read. I like Dr Karl. I like it because
    I cycle to the rail 21km's then catch the train to work. Ditto in the
    afternoon. So I am using the 2 most efficient forms of transport.

    Pete
     
Loading...
Loading...