Sunday Times: "Motormouth: Jams today, jams tomorrow"
Discussion
Nice article here on congestion in the Times: http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_styl...
Note that it's not a driving article. It's a financial one. That's how much of an issue we now have in UK. The last paragraph is just the icing on the cake.
Note that it's not a driving article. It's a financial one. That's how much of an issue we now have in UK. The last paragraph is just the icing on the cake.
Times Online said:
Motormouth
David Smith
Every weekday morning in London, a transport disaster takes place. Thousands of vehicles are caught in a daily gridlock whose tentacles spread across southeast London and into Kent. Tons of greenhouse gases are belched into the atmosphere. Meetings are missed, deliveries are late, tempers are frayed and blood pressure rises.
I am referring, of course, to the Blackwall tunnel, one of London’s most important north-south arteries and the motoring equivalent of the Black Hole of Calcutta. Why should you care if you live in Manchester or Edinburgh or Cardiff? Because the tunnel is a microcosm of a problem that is suffocating Britain and squeezing the life out of its economy.
The Blackwall tunnel is actually two tunnels. The northbound one was opened by the Prince of Wales – later Edward VII – in 1897. The newer, southbound tunnel came into service in 1967. Twiggy was 17; the BBC tested its first colour broadcast. And that, readers, was the last Thames road crossing to be built in London (discounting the rebuilt London Bridge).
The Victorians gave us magnificent bridges and tunnels. Margaret Thatcher gave us the M25, the QE2 bridge and the rejuvenated London Docklands. In the 40 years that have elapsed since the “new” Blackwall tunnel opened, road traffic has jumped from 12.7m vehicles to 33m vehicles. Imagine if no new hospitals had been built in 40 years, or we were still all using black rotary-dial phones.
Not content with standing back and doing nothing while jams grew longer, traffic officials recently made things worse. A clever tidal flow system that allowed more traffic to travel from south to north in the mornings was scrapped after three decades earlier this year. Fear of litigation, the last refuge of the public-sector jobsworth, had reared its head: police say they feared being sued by anybody involved in an accident in the tidal flow. Thousands have signed petitions calling for the decision to be reversed, but to no avail.
After years of driving through the tunnel, I now often resort to expensive, dirty and unreliable commuter trains (fares about to rise by up to 14%) or the overcrowded Tube, thus adding to the congestion nightmare on London’s public transport.
This, you might say, is the genius of Ken Livingstone, London’s anticar mayor. Make the roads bad enough, and people will use public transport, however terrible. That is why the capital has a congestion charge – you pay the charge but you still get the congestion – and it is why average traffic speeds in the capital are a generously estimated 10mph, slower than in the hansom cab era.
All this matters because London matters. The Blackwall tunnel is close to Canary Wharf, which generates huge amounts of wealth. The more transport in London grinds to a halt, the more the bankers will choose to go elsewhere. It matters because of the Olympics. By the time 2012 comes round, even worse gridlock will greet Olympic contestants and spectators.
But it matters most because what happens daily at the Blackwall tunnel is coming to a road near you. Disdain for the road user is requisite for those who manage the road network. That is why we have phantom roadworks on our motorways – spot the worker – and it is why, as Jeremy Clarkson has noted, motorways are closed for hours after an accident. In France they take pride in getting the road open quickly. Not here.
Britain has the worst motorway congestion in the European Union. Roads and Reality, a new RAC Foundation report from a team headed by Professor Stephen Glaister of Imperial College London, says unless the government builds more than 370 miles of new road lanes each year, the situation will become intolerable, even with road pricing. Will these lanes be built? We have a prime minister who doesn’t drive and who presided over low levels of road-building when chancellor, so don’t bank on it.
As for the Blackwall tunnel, I can report that they’re planning to introduce new state of the art speed cameras. You really couldn’t make it up.
— David Smith is Economics Editor of The Sunday Times
David Smith
Every weekday morning in London, a transport disaster takes place. Thousands of vehicles are caught in a daily gridlock whose tentacles spread across southeast London and into Kent. Tons of greenhouse gases are belched into the atmosphere. Meetings are missed, deliveries are late, tempers are frayed and blood pressure rises.
I am referring, of course, to the Blackwall tunnel, one of London’s most important north-south arteries and the motoring equivalent of the Black Hole of Calcutta. Why should you care if you live in Manchester or Edinburgh or Cardiff? Because the tunnel is a microcosm of a problem that is suffocating Britain and squeezing the life out of its economy.
The Blackwall tunnel is actually two tunnels. The northbound one was opened by the Prince of Wales – later Edward VII – in 1897. The newer, southbound tunnel came into service in 1967. Twiggy was 17; the BBC tested its first colour broadcast. And that, readers, was the last Thames road crossing to be built in London (discounting the rebuilt London Bridge).
The Victorians gave us magnificent bridges and tunnels. Margaret Thatcher gave us the M25, the QE2 bridge and the rejuvenated London Docklands. In the 40 years that have elapsed since the “new” Blackwall tunnel opened, road traffic has jumped from 12.7m vehicles to 33m vehicles. Imagine if no new hospitals had been built in 40 years, or we were still all using black rotary-dial phones.
Not content with standing back and doing nothing while jams grew longer, traffic officials recently made things worse. A clever tidal flow system that allowed more traffic to travel from south to north in the mornings was scrapped after three decades earlier this year. Fear of litigation, the last refuge of the public-sector jobsworth, had reared its head: police say they feared being sued by anybody involved in an accident in the tidal flow. Thousands have signed petitions calling for the decision to be reversed, but to no avail.
After years of driving through the tunnel, I now often resort to expensive, dirty and unreliable commuter trains (fares about to rise by up to 14%) or the overcrowded Tube, thus adding to the congestion nightmare on London’s public transport.
This, you might say, is the genius of Ken Livingstone, London’s anticar mayor. Make the roads bad enough, and people will use public transport, however terrible. That is why the capital has a congestion charge – you pay the charge but you still get the congestion – and it is why average traffic speeds in the capital are a generously estimated 10mph, slower than in the hansom cab era.
All this matters because London matters. The Blackwall tunnel is close to Canary Wharf, which generates huge amounts of wealth. The more transport in London grinds to a halt, the more the bankers will choose to go elsewhere. It matters because of the Olympics. By the time 2012 comes round, even worse gridlock will greet Olympic contestants and spectators.
But it matters most because what happens daily at the Blackwall tunnel is coming to a road near you. Disdain for the road user is requisite for those who manage the road network. That is why we have phantom roadworks on our motorways – spot the worker – and it is why, as Jeremy Clarkson has noted, motorways are closed for hours after an accident. In France they take pride in getting the road open quickly. Not here.
Britain has the worst motorway congestion in the European Union. Roads and Reality, a new RAC Foundation report from a team headed by Professor Stephen Glaister of Imperial College London, says unless the government builds more than 370 miles of new road lanes each year, the situation will become intolerable, even with road pricing. Will these lanes be built? We have a prime minister who doesn’t drive and who presided over low levels of road-building when chancellor, so don’t bank on it.
As for the Blackwall tunnel, I can report that they’re planning to introduce new state of the art speed cameras. You really couldn’t make it up.
— David Smith is Economics Editor of The Sunday Times
As an ex manufacturer with deliveries to schedule I know only too well the impact congestion has on the economy.
All the downgrading of roads from 60mph to 50mph only goes to inflict more financial damage to the business community who are responsible for keeping this country solvent.
I mentioned on another thread something as simple as lowering a speed limit from 60mph to 50mph would have made the difference to me wether one vehicle could fit in two round trips a day or one.
The idiots in charge don't even consider what action their policies or lack of have on the economy.
Far from oiling the wheels of business this government replaces oil with seawater and adds hamstrings and handcuffs to boot
All the downgrading of roads from 60mph to 50mph only goes to inflict more financial damage to the business community who are responsible for keeping this country solvent.
I mentioned on another thread something as simple as lowering a speed limit from 60mph to 50mph would have made the difference to me wether one vehicle could fit in two round trips a day or one.
The idiots in charge don't even consider what action their policies or lack of have on the economy.
Far from oiling the wheels of business this government replaces oil with seawater and adds hamstrings and handcuffs to boot
A good article from motormouth as well as the Rac foundation Roads and Reality, but lost in one newspaper and a press release.
Why dont the Rac and AA support the members that feed them, by getting all of their 10 million+ customers to campaign for better roads Now, not tomorrow.All letters sent to members should be franked "Road improvments Now" use website-------.and send protests to your incompetant MP,s.
Why havent the road haulage associations put up posters on their lorries/Vans with the same message, and getting drivers to do the downing street protest.
30 million drivers who vote can change the country, or change the present MP.s for those that will.
Why dont the Rac and AA support the members that feed them, by getting all of their 10 million+ customers to campaign for better roads Now, not tomorrow.All letters sent to members should be franked "Road improvments Now" use website-------.and send protests to your incompetant MP,s.
Why havent the road haulage associations put up posters on their lorries/Vans with the same message, and getting drivers to do the downing street protest.
30 million drivers who vote can change the country, or change the present MP.s for those that will.
I still see trucks with "fair play on fuel" stickers on them. I wonder whether that campaign was successful?
I also see many HGVs carrying adverts for the M6 toll. How sad that they mortgage their rear ends to sell something which should have been provided at no additional charge in return for our road tax billions.
I also see many HGVs carrying adverts for the M6 toll. How sad that they mortgage their rear ends to sell something which should have been provided at no additional charge in return for our road tax billions.
An excellent critique, summarising the madness of our predicament.
Earlier today, I bobbed over to Leeds from Manc. M62, no incidents, took about 40 minutes.
Alas, the return journey would have been a stationary purgatory, interminable miles of three laned immobility.
I came back the old way and whilst moving all the time, it took two and a half hours.
Last Friday night, I went to Silverstone from the Manc area. I kid ye not, from the M62 westbound, down the M6 and finishing at the entrance to the M6 Toll, the choking traffic proceeded at about 45 mph.
It took me over four hours.
By far the biggest factor in reducing the quality of life in Britain for so many whilst ensuring the maximum damage to our economy, this ongoing lunacy could be sorted and in a matter of years: our history of monumental, civil engineering feats prove this beyond doubt.
The political dam which has curiously sprung up in recent times needs blowing wide open: there should be no debate on this, just a determination to build wider, burrow deeper and erect taller highways.
Anything else is communism. Anything else - which is what we have - is Livingslimian.
I'm not sure how any of the millions suffering daily could fail to vote for a party which promised this?
Earlier today, I bobbed over to Leeds from Manc. M62, no incidents, took about 40 minutes.
Alas, the return journey would have been a stationary purgatory, interminable miles of three laned immobility.
I came back the old way and whilst moving all the time, it took two and a half hours.
Last Friday night, I went to Silverstone from the Manc area. I kid ye not, from the M62 westbound, down the M6 and finishing at the entrance to the M6 Toll, the choking traffic proceeded at about 45 mph.
It took me over four hours.
By far the biggest factor in reducing the quality of life in Britain for so many whilst ensuring the maximum damage to our economy, this ongoing lunacy could be sorted and in a matter of years: our history of monumental, civil engineering feats prove this beyond doubt.
The political dam which has curiously sprung up in recent times needs blowing wide open: there should be no debate on this, just a determination to build wider, burrow deeper and erect taller highways.
Anything else is communism. Anything else - which is what we have - is Livingslimian.
I'm not sure how any of the millions suffering daily could fail to vote for a party which promised this?
You cannot build new roads indefinitely. There has to come a point where someone says, “no more” for a variety of reasons. Firstly, and it doesn’t need me to say this, the more roads you build the more cars that appear to fill the gaps. This is basic stuff. You have two towns 25-miles apart that are joined by a single track “B” road, and the journey at rush hour takes an hour. Alternatively, there is a train line joining the two towns and it takes half an hour. The train is expensive, but it gets you there in half the time. Then, the local authority bows to local pressure and puts in a new dual carriageway to alleviate the congestion on the old “B” road. Hey presto! 25-miles of new, shiny road for all those poor road users!
What happens next?
Loads of people desert the train and buy a car, thereby putting pressure on the road that has just been built. The journey times gradually increase as the new road fills up, and people start complaining that the new road “ought to have been built with three lanes each way”.
Secondly, where do you build new roads? Would you allow your back garden to be bulldozed to make way for a new road? Of course not. With space for housing already at a premium, there’s no way large-scale road building programs are going to be given the time of day, particularly in the south east.
The sooner we realise that the future of transport lies in high-speed, frequent, integrated and clean rail transport (that is inexpensive) then the better we’ll be.
What happens next?
Loads of people desert the train and buy a car, thereby putting pressure on the road that has just been built. The journey times gradually increase as the new road fills up, and people start complaining that the new road “ought to have been built with three lanes each way”.
Secondly, where do you build new roads? Would you allow your back garden to be bulldozed to make way for a new road? Of course not. With space for housing already at a premium, there’s no way large-scale road building programs are going to be given the time of day, particularly in the south east.
The sooner we realise that the future of transport lies in high-speed, frequent, integrated and clean rail transport (that is inexpensive) then the better we’ll be.
esselte said:
DeMolay said:
The sooner we realise that the future of transport lies in high-speed, frequent, integrated and clean rail transport (that is inexpensive) then the better we’ll be.
That'll be never then....Realistically, there's no space on the current rail network for any more passengers anyway. If roads are filling and nearly full, and if rail is likewise, the only alternative is to travel less. Unless you want to fly, which seems to be the government's preference for us all.
So they should be reducing barriers to flexible working, giving incentives for home-working, and generally encouraging people not to travel for work. They could also encourage multimodal (oooh, big word!) transport for goods including a mixture of rail, canal, sea and road and subsidise things so that the overall cost is no greater than road-only. The cost/benefit analysis of multimodal freight vs. building more roads must be a good one, only undermined by there being no plan to build any more roads.....
DeMolay said:
You cannot build new roads indefinitely. There has to come a point where someone says, “no more” for a variety of reasons. Firstly, and it doesn’t need me to say this, the more roads you build the more cars that appear to fill the gaps. This is basic stuff. You have two towns 25-miles apart that are joined by a single track “B” road, and the journey at rush hour takes an hour. Alternatively, there is a train line joining the two towns and it takes half an hour. The train is expensive, but it gets you there in half the time. Then, the local authority bows to local pressure and puts in a new dual carriageway to alleviate the congestion on the old “B” road. Hey presto! 25-miles of new, shiny road for all those poor road users!
What happens next?
Loads of people desert the train and buy a car, thereby putting pressure on the road that has just been built. The journey times gradually increase as the new road fills up, and people start complaining that the new road “ought to have been built with three lanes each way”.
Secondly, where do you build new roads? Would you allow your back garden to be bulldozed to make way for a new road? Of course not. With space for housing already at a premium, there’s no way large-scale road building programs are going to be given the time of day, particularly in the south east.
The sooner we realise that the future of transport lies in high-speed, frequent, integrated and clean rail transport (that is inexpensive) then the better we’ll be.
In reality.What happens next?
Loads of people desert the train and buy a car, thereby putting pressure on the road that has just been built. The journey times gradually increase as the new road fills up, and people start complaining that the new road “ought to have been built with three lanes each way”.
Secondly, where do you build new roads? Would you allow your back garden to be bulldozed to make way for a new road? Of course not. With space for housing already at a premium, there’s no way large-scale road building programs are going to be given the time of day, particularly in the south east.
The sooner we realise that the future of transport lies in high-speed, frequent, integrated and clean rail transport (that is inexpensive) then the better we’ll be.
Town A and B get more populated (more business etc.) putting further strain on the roads. The trains take 30 minutes more due to inefficiency, break down a lot, overcrowded and twice the cost of the car. In the end both train travellers and car drivers could decide to leave for a place with better transport (public and private, i.e. roads) leaving both towns either dead if people leave or overcrowded if they don't.
What's needed is a combination of things (public transport is not the answer, nor is private transport but a combination of many factors)
1 - more/better roads
2 - cheaper, cleaner, reliable and efficient public transport
3 - moving businesses out of already congested cities
4 - more homeworking
and so on.
Ultimately a lot of the transport issue comes down to whether you prefer carrot method or stick method. The incumbent govt. prefer the stick method and end up making everything far more expensive. The carrot method would be cheap, quick efficient public transport, tax breaks for those that don't use cars or public transport (i.e. walk, cycle, homework etc.).
good article & cant argue with any of it.
they (the good old 'they') need to stop building congestion on the roads we alrady have. why oh why do they insist on making two lane roads single lane, changing juctions that used to flow into ones you have to stop at because the layout means you cant see & so on?
they (the good old 'they') need to stop building congestion on the roads we alrady have. why oh why do they insist on making two lane roads single lane, changing juctions that used to flow into ones you have to stop at because the layout means you cant see & so on?
DeMolay said:
You cannot build new roads indefinitely. There has to come a point where someone says, “no more” for a variety of reasons. Firstly, and it doesn’t need me to say this, the more roads you build the more cars that appear to fill the gaps. This is basic stuff.
Sorry but thats just plain incorrect. There are not an infinite number of cars, nor are there an infinite number of people to drive them.Most cars are parked up most of the day, while their owners are busy walking around doing other stuff.
Using your rationale the motorways would never have been constructed to begin with. We need a huge investment in more roads, and better management of traffic flow on them.
DeMolay said:
You cannot build new roads indefinitely. There has to come a point where someone says, “no more” for a variety of reasons. Firstly, and it doesn’t need me to say this, the more roads you build the more cars that appear to fill the gaps. This is basic stuff.
I can't remember where I read it, but I recall a great article on congestion. It used the metaphor of someone strangling John Prescott.It was something like this: if you have a stranglehold on JP's neck and then back off a few percent, he'll be able to breathe better but not fully. It therefore appears that slackening your grip on him a little just increases the amount of air he breathes. It's not until you fully release your grip and let him breathe normally (shame!) that the link between more space and more air ends.
Similarly with roads. If you have a stranglehold on the roads then any little increase may simply increase traffic flow. It's not until there's *enough* roadspace that that link is broken. Could we get there? Who knows, because we've never tried. All the arguments are based on actions at the "point in the curve" where we're only giving JP a small amount more space and naturally he just uses it immediately to get more air.
The thing is, by my experience of the SE and London, the whole system is at capacity; sure the roads are jammed, but if you get on a train that's rammed to the roof too, the tube is the same story and bits of it (District Line most noticeably) are one bit of gaffer tape from total collapse, the buses share the same abused road network with the cars and while there are a few long-distance trains that aren't overcrowded, that's because they're so hideously expensive everyone has decided to Easyjet the journey instead.
That's just what you see on the surface, but when you start hearing about things like the empty Waterloo Eurostar platforms ("Oh yes, we just stuck our heads in the sand in the hope it'd go away." ) you wonder how much of a mess it really all is under there.
I wouldn't hold out much hope either, 3m new houses promised from Gordon, but he's keeping pretty tight-lipped about the infrastructure you'd hope would go with them.
That's just what you see on the surface, but when you start hearing about things like the empty Waterloo Eurostar platforms ("Oh yes, we just stuck our heads in the sand in the hope it'd go away." ) you wonder how much of a mess it really all is under there.
I wouldn't hold out much hope either, 3m new houses promised from Gordon, but he's keeping pretty tight-lipped about the infrastructure you'd hope would go with them.
Edited by Timberwolf on Wednesday 5th December 15:51
DeMolay said:
You cannot build new roads indefinitely. There has to come a point where someone says, “no more” for a variety of reasons. Firstly, and it doesn’t need me to say this, the more roads you build the more cars that appear to fill the gaps.
You don't have to build indefinitely, you just need to build enough space for the potential driving populace - no-one drives more than one car at a time...Parrot of Doom said:
DeMolay said:
You cannot build new roads indefinitely. There has to come a point where someone says, “no more” for a variety of reasons. Firstly, and it doesn’t need me to say this, the more roads you build the more cars that appear to fill the gaps. This is basic stuff.
Sorry but thats just plain incorrect. There are not an infinite number of cars, nor are there an infinite number of people to drive them.There is a demand for roads, so the government supplies them. The demand grows, the government supplies more roads. The demand grows, the government says, "that's enough - we'll have to think of another way of doing it!".
Quite right, too.
DeMolay said:
Parrot of Doom said:
DeMolay said:
You cannot build new roads indefinitely. There has to come a point where someone says, “no more” for a variety of reasons. Firstly, and it doesn’t need me to say this, the more roads you build the more cars that appear to fill the gaps. This is basic stuff.
Sorry but thats just plain incorrect. There are not an infinite number of cars, nor are there an infinite number of people to drive them.There is a demand for roads, so the government supplies them. The demand grows, the government supplies more roads. The demand grows, the government says, "that's enough - we'll have to think of another way of doing it!".
Quite right, too.
I'm sorry but you are plain wrong on this point. Not building more road capacity is a recipe for disaster - hence why Labour are now spending money widening a great many motorways. You didn't even bother responding to my point about better use of road space.
steviex said:
Most of the UK is useless farmland and crap boring countryside. We pay subsidies to farmers to grow plants we don't need, diseased animals we can't eat, etc. Why not pay them to grow something useful - like roads?
Plenty of room for more roads if we build them on redundant farmland. Our ancestors did this - if they hadn't, we'd not have any cities or towns today. It is called progress.
Even in existing cities, you could build enough new roads without knocking down anything too important - clearing a few rancid council slums to build new roads between nicer areas or business centres that actually add value to the economy would be an improvement. Again, it's called progress.
My goodness, I didn't think that people like you really existed. I thought you had all died out in the 19th century? Useless farmland and crap boring countryside? Are you for real?Plenty of room for more roads if we build them on redundant farmland. Our ancestors did this - if they hadn't, we'd not have any cities or towns today. It is called progress.
Even in existing cities, you could build enough new roads without knocking down anything too important - clearing a few rancid council slums to build new roads between nicer areas or business centres that actually add value to the economy would be an improvement. Again, it's called progress.
Edited by steviex on Wednesday 5th December 22:36
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff