RE: Double m'ways or road pricing?
Monday 12th March 2007
Double m'ways or road pricing?
The cost is the same, says Safe Speed
 Your preference: tolls or more motorways? |
The cost of installing road pricing is the same as the cost of doubling our entire motorway network, according to recent figures.
An article in the Telegraph reported that DfT costs to create the roads pricing infrastructure have been estimated at £62 billion.
Meanwhile, the Prime Minister's response to the road pricing petition warned that motorways cost up to £30m per mile. Department for Transport reports that we have 2,199 total miles of motorway network.
So a simple calculation reveals that the total installation costs of roads pricing are about the same as the cost of our entire motorway network.
Paul Smith, founder of the road safety campaign Safe Speed, said: "It is hard to believe that anyone is stupid enough to believe that fantastically expensive road pricing would be anywhere near as effective at managing traffic as a doubling of our entire motorway network.
"The Prime Minister warned of the costs of building motorways while glossing over the costs of roads pricing. How barking is that?
"The 'Toll Tax' is a crazy grand design beloved of no one except politicians and technology suppliers. All roads users should get along to the Travel Tax site today."
Discussion
Shouldn't the link to the Travel Tax website be www.traveltax.org.uk?
I'm astounded at this remark:
"It is hard to believe that anyone is stupid enough to believe that fantastically expensive road pricing would be anywhere near as effective at managing traffic as a doubling of our entire motorway network."
Just how will that possibly address issues in urban areas, that is unless Paul thinks that he can add an M2475 near to my house?
Whilst I would also prefer to not have road charging, I've yet to see any credible alternative suggested.
My personal opinion is that the only way we'll be improving things is to do a better job of encouraging people to use alternative forms of transport.
So, who here is going to tell their missus not to use the SUV to drive the kids to school?
"It is hard to believe that anyone is stupid enough to believe that fantastically expensive road pricing would be anywhere near as effective at managing traffic as a doubling of our entire motorway network."
Just how will that possibly address issues in urban areas, that is unless Paul thinks that he can add an M2475 near to my house?
Whilst I would also prefer to not have road charging, I've yet to see any credible alternative suggested.
My personal opinion is that the only way we'll be improving things is to do a better job of encouraging people to use alternative forms of transport.
So, who here is going to tell their missus not to use the SUV to drive the kids to school?
Exactly, this will not have any effect on roads that are not motorways. Road charging must be inevitable really, how are they going to charge everyone who runs their cars on elecricity from their mains etc (eventually)?
I think the congestion problems would be solved if we all ditched the cars and got on motorbikes! (assuming nobody crashed) That would go down a treat on the school run wouldnt it!
I think the congestion problems would be solved if we all ditched the cars and got on motorbikes! (assuming nobody crashed) That would go down a treat on the school run wouldnt it!
Thought Bubble…
I have just listened to George Osborne, Shadow Chancellor (and general busy idiot) telling Jeremy Vine that by 2050, 25% of carbon emissions will come from aircraft, yet the stern report say’s it will contribute less than 5%. So who’s telling the truth?.
We need a truth and justice commission for this country, a body of people with no direct political associations to audit the requirements and decide on matters of national domestic importance. Such as Green taxes, Education, NHS, Policing, etc. Our politicians can no longer be trusted to tell us the truth. They lie and spin their way around our interests to further the interests of themselves and their party. If a group of private individuals can effectively run our economy by setting rates for doing business, can we not have similar bodies of people to decide on these key issues?. It’s either that, or we carry on allowing these idiots to finally finish us off as a nation by legislating what is left of our so called ‘industries’ to become so uncompetitive that we literally cannot afford to sustain ourselves. It’s like some kind of perverse economic arms race against nations that have an endless supply of cannon fodder in the shape of cost effective workers paying low taxes, while we buy the most expensive missiles we can.
I have just listened to George Osborne, Shadow Chancellor (and general busy idiot) telling Jeremy Vine that by 2050, 25% of carbon emissions will come from aircraft, yet the stern report say’s it will contribute less than 5%. So who’s telling the truth?.
We need a truth and justice commission for this country, a body of people with no direct political associations to audit the requirements and decide on matters of national domestic importance. Such as Green taxes, Education, NHS, Policing, etc. Our politicians can no longer be trusted to tell us the truth. They lie and spin their way around our interests to further the interests of themselves and their party. If a group of private individuals can effectively run our economy by setting rates for doing business, can we not have similar bodies of people to decide on these key issues?. It’s either that, or we carry on allowing these idiots to finally finish us off as a nation by legislating what is left of our so called ‘industries’ to become so uncompetitive that we literally cannot afford to sustain ourselves. It’s like some kind of perverse economic arms race against nations that have an endless supply of cannon fodder in the shape of cost effective workers paying low taxes, while we buy the most expensive missiles we can.
Mr_Sukebe said:
So, who here is going to tell their missus not to use the SUV to drive the kids to school?
I haven't got any kids so I should be exempt. Tax all the people who drive their kids to school. In fact, just tax kids instead of handing out benefits, that should sort the problem out a bit.
vladd said:
... In fact, just tax kids instead of handing out benefits, that should sort the problem out a bit.
Interesting, not got a pension yet? Need more kids so someone can pay my pension one day. All those with SUV, fill them up. make them worth something. Bloody annoying seeing an SUV with mom and 1 junior.
Think they wil be able to link ID cards to you cars GPS to eradicate car theft?
If they want to cut congestion on motorways why don't they just build more "off ramps" than "on ramps", some of the distances between motorway exits are ridiculously long, putting more off ramps on will allow commuters to turn off nearer to their desitination, allow accident queues to be re-directed more easily and help prevent bottle necks at the major junctions.
Simple maths demonstrates that putting more "off ramps" in than "on ramps" will allow more cars off the motorways than on, so reducing the amount of perceived traffic on the roads. It's simple, it's cheap and won't take long to acheive and if it doesn't work then at least we can all turn off nearer to home!!
Simple maths demonstrates that putting more "off ramps" in than "on ramps" will allow more cars off the motorways than on, so reducing the amount of perceived traffic on the roads. It's simple, it's cheap and won't take long to acheive and if it doesn't work then at least we can all turn off nearer to home!!
Congestion in urban areas will only be solved when the road network as it is gets optimised, rather than un-optimised, and secondly when viable alternatives exist!
My main problem solving solution is to simply use flexitime. 10-12 2-4 core hours, x hours per week, rush hour becomes rush two or three hours...
I don't see road charging as viable at all to start with. Double my costs, I decide to use bus maybe, bus is over-subscribed, so fares go up. I still need a car, so higher costs. Who bares the real cost? Me? No, my employer and the economy from increased product costs and reduced spending!
It just won't work. Make me pay £50 more a month it's £50 more I just won't spend on goods and services.
Good move for economic growth, make everything cost more AND make people have less money to spend, while not actually solving the issue of having too many people all wanting to be at the same place at the same TIME!
Dave
My main problem solving solution is to simply use flexitime. 10-12 2-4 core hours, x hours per week, rush hour becomes rush two or three hours...
I don't see road charging as viable at all to start with. Double my costs, I decide to use bus maybe, bus is over-subscribed, so fares go up. I still need a car, so higher costs. Who bares the real cost? Me? No, my employer and the economy from increased product costs and reduced spending!
It just won't work. Make me pay £50 more a month it's £50 more I just won't spend on goods and services.
Good move for economic growth, make everything cost more AND make people have less money to spend, while not actually solving the issue of having too many people all wanting to be at the same place at the same TIME!
Dave
what we need is an intergrated transport system. Many people drive because there are no trains, try going south to north from say tiny towns such as portsmouth to Newbury. There are NO trains (unless you go into London and back out and change etc), so everyone drives. We need more roads where they dont exist today (M4 - south and back) trains you can get on to and get a seat, places to park cars etc.
If you dont have alternatives you have to stick to cars. If there was a SAFE and cheap way to transport kids to schools - that would help etc. There is no ONE answer. How many train stations are there at M25 junctions? (or any motorway junctions?)
If you dont have alternatives you have to stick to cars. If there was a SAFE and cheap way to transport kids to schools - that would help etc. There is no ONE answer. How many train stations are there at M25 junctions? (or any motorway junctions?)
zzr said:
If they want to cut congestion on motorways why don't they just build more "off ramps" than "on ramps", some of the distances between motorway exits are ridiculously long, putting more off ramps on will allow commuters to turn off nearer to their desitination, allow accident queues to be re-directed more easily and help prevent bottle necks at the major junctions.
Simple maths demonstrates that putting more "off ramps" in than "on ramps" will allow more cars off the motorways than on, so reducing the amount of perceived traffic on the roads. It's simple, it's cheap and won't take long to acheive and if it doesn't work then at least we can all turn off nearer to home!!
Simple maths demonstrates that putting more "off ramps" in than "on ramps" will allow more cars off the motorways than on, so reducing the amount of perceived traffic on the roads. It's simple, it's cheap and won't take long to acheive and if it doesn't work then at least we can all turn off nearer to home!!
And then how do you get back onto the motorway the following day? Drive distances on the normal roads to get there which means you're deferring the problem elsewhere.
The oft quoted mantra that we'll fill up whatever roads are laid is used as an excuse to do nothing, and this is something I find quite incredible. If we had stopped making aeroplanes after the Wrighties had flown on the basis that "We'll only use them if we make more", where would be be today?
OF COURSE we'll use them but with a (nearly) static population (increased only recently to over 60 mil thanks in part to recent immigration which I have no problem with) we can only drive so many cars and an equilibrium will form eventually.
There are certainly places where there is no land left to route new roads and congestion in those places needs to be tackled in other ways (move people away from London and South East for a start) but there are often reasons why certain roads are over-used and more bypasses and motorways to circumvent certain towns could potentially help. Ignoring London and the SE for now, if you take a map of the whole of the country and concentrate only on the blue motorways, you can see where there are huge tracts of land with no way of getting around other than roads. There's virtually no blue lines in the East for example, and an entire wedge of land to the South Midlands bordered by the M40 and M5 with no "blue" between them until the M4, and then again nothing after the M3 until the areas around Southampton and Portsmouth.
Wales too has feeds only East/West on the Northern and Southern coastlines. It desperately needs a motorway to run North/South, connecting these up (and I don't mean the M5 and M6 - it needs to be much further West).
There's an obvious flaw in the traffic plan around the M6/M5 junction too. They built the M6 toll to allieviate traffic thinking people connect only with the M40 from the M6 but many people use the M5 too so why not take a semi-circular route to the West from the point where the (Staffs part of the) M6 toll Routes East. Route this new motorway section across the M54 and then round towards the M5 where the M43 joins it. This would give people wanting to connect with the M5 an alternative to waiting in the queues of cars wanting to drive through Birmingham. It might even remove the queues altogether.
Vote me for roads minister. I have lots of ideas... and don't get me started on traffic management. Traffic lights on roundabouts? Who the Hell thought of that? I've never seen so many queues since these stupidities were introduced. I've written to the highways agency (who sent me a nice and polite answer) and the local councils (who ignored me altogether) but the end result is always more and more of the same.
One roundabout (in Redditch, Midlands) has been improved immensely by the painting of white division lines on it. It's now clearly marked which lane you should use to go off in which direction. It's a pity that many motorists are incapable of staying within those white lines but it has definitely helped, so I believe that thee *is* some intelligence within whatever authorities exists that make these decisions.
Edited by mars on Monday 12th March 13:37
Mr Whippy said:
Congestion in urban areas will only be solved when the road network as it is gets optimised, rather than un-optimised, and secondly when viable alternatives exist!
My main problem solving solution is to simply use flexitime. 10-12 2-4 core hours, x hours per week, rush hour becomes rush two or three hours...
I don't see road charging as viable at all to start with. Double my costs, I decide to use bus maybe, bus is over-subscribed, so fares go up. I still need a car, so higher costs. Who bares the real cost? Me? No, my employer and the economy from increased product costs and reduced spending!
It just won't work. Make me pay £50 more a month it's £50 more I just won't spend on goods and services.
Good move for economic growth, make everything cost more AND make people have less money to spend, while not actually solving the issue of having too many people all wanting to be at the same place at the same TIME!
Dave
My main problem solving solution is to simply use flexitime. 10-12 2-4 core hours, x hours per week, rush hour becomes rush two or three hours...
I don't see road charging as viable at all to start with. Double my costs, I decide to use bus maybe, bus is over-subscribed, so fares go up. I still need a car, so higher costs. Who bares the real cost? Me? No, my employer and the economy from increased product costs and reduced spending!
It just won't work. Make me pay £50 more a month it's £50 more I just won't spend on goods and services.
Good move for economic growth, make everything cost more AND make people have less money to spend, while not actually solving the issue of having too many people all wanting to be at the same place at the same TIME!
Dave
Excellent post. Attack the *real* causes of congestion.
shithotfast said:
what we need is an intergrated transport system. Many people drive because there are no trains, try going south to north from say tiny towns such as portsmouth to Newbury. There are NO trains (unless you go into London and back out and change etc), so everyone drives. We need more roads where they dont exist today (M4 - south and back) trains you can get on to and get a seat, places to park cars etc.
If you dont have alternatives you have to stick to cars. If there was a SAFE and cheap way to transport kids to schools - that would help etc. There is no ONE answer. How many train stations are there at M25 junctions? (or any motorway junctions?)
If you dont have alternatives you have to stick to cars. If there was a SAFE and cheap way to transport kids to schools - that would help etc. There is no ONE answer. How many train stations are there at M25 junctions? (or any motorway junctions?)
I believe many people drive because they prefer it. No public transport system will ever be as convenient as driving your own car. Why must public transport be the answer at all? Time and again the public has shown that they're not interested unless there is no alternative (London) so why try and make it so? Spread out the public by spreading out the jobs and the housing. Take the loading off the water companies to supply to areas like the SE as well as the road networks. Make it easier for the REAL service people to live near to where they work (firemen, police, nurses, teachers - all of whom are paid too little to live within reasonable distances of their place of work) and they won't have to commute. Get companies out of London. It's easy to achieve if only the councils and govt would will it so.
Edited by mars on Monday 12th March 13:45
I reckon that if 90% of drivers applied basic lane discipline (as opposed to roughly 0.9% now) and stopped braking every 3 seconds when there is no need to brake at all then a big chunck of congestion would be solved at very little cost.
But obviously, this would not generate as much kick back as the amounts that the IT industry will possibly generate for the labour party if congestion charging plans are implemented.
But obviously, this would not generate as much kick back as the amounts that the IT industry will possibly generate for the labour party if congestion charging plans are implemented.
zzr said:
Simple maths demonstrates that putting more "off ramps" in than "on ramps" will allow more cars off the motorways than on
No it doesn't. It simply means more cars will use any given on "ramp", than off ones.
However, I sort of agree with the idea of building more junctions, but then we know that junctions cause traffic slowdowns when they get busy (hence you get lights on them sometimes, to help the main motorway clear the backlog).
Personally I think that road congestion is largely because people work so far away from where they live these days. 35+ miles away from home seems pretty much the norm. Even 10 years ago that would have seemed extreme. Road congestion can easily be caused by having the same amount of drivers double their journeys. It's tricky, but tax breaks should be given to those people or companies that try to employ home workers and people who live in the immediate area.
nickfrog said:
I reckon that if 90% of drivers applied basic lane discipline (as opposed to roughly 0.9% now) and stopped braking every 3 seconds when there is no need to brake at all then a big chunck of congestion would be solved at very little cost.
I agree. I have long since held the theory that if everyone drove at 70mph on the motorway, no-one tried to change lanes or overtake and everyone just cruised along, there'd be less congestion. When traffic gets heavy, every maneuver causes 'ripples' of effect behind you, which can often increase with each ripple. You brake a little or change lane so that the guy behind you brakes a little, then the guy behind him will brake a little later but harder. Unless there's significant gap to 'soak' up the ripple, then it just gets worse until ultimately you get one of those stop/start moments where everyone slows to a crawl for a moment for no apparent reason.
shithotfast said:
what we need is an intergrated transport system. Many people drive because there are no trains, try going south to north from say tiny towns such as portsmouth to Newbury. There are NO trains (unless you go into London and back out and change etc), so everyone drives. We need more roads where they dont exist today (M4 - south and back) trains you can get on to and get a seat, places to park cars etc.
If you dont have alternatives you have to stick to cars. If there was a SAFE and cheap way to transport kids to schools - that would help etc. There is no ONE answer. How many train stations are there at M25 junctions? (or any motorway junctions?)
If you dont have alternatives you have to stick to cars. If there was a SAFE and cheap way to transport kids to schools - that would help etc. There is no ONE answer. How many train stations are there at M25 junctions? (or any motorway junctions?)
Not just that, but how many trains alwasy run on time, and how much would it cost to go say from birmingham to london on the train? £30 isn't an unusual figure for a train ticket such as that, and I would use the car to do so because, not only would it cost less in my case, but also I can get to exactly where I want to be.
Do do the same journey on public transport would be prohibitively expensive, and in many cases impractical with the kind of equipment I often have to transport.
And then by increasing the cost of motoring it would make my job almost impossible, as it would for many other people. It will kill the economy if they fully go ahead with it, and they are idiots if they try.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff