All roads in Bristol set to become 20mph zones 'where possible' under new council

Eyes down for a full house:  

First responders, buses and pharmacy deliveries - delayed  

Drivers won't follow it (usually disguised as figures on net change in average road speed)

Exhaust fumes (a) will be made worse at 20 mph (b) are dispersed at 30 mph 

There is no evidence that accidents are reduced (optional: one line quote from a study)

Looking at my speedo/ drivers bored so more dangerous

Spend the money on something else first 

OK outside schools 

Then the childish spite towards others  - cyclists will have to obey it 

Then the conspiracy bollocks 

I've seldom seen blankets travel faster.

Seldom is still too much.

None of us are safe until the blanket menace is slowed down slightly.

This is a hot topic.

Blankets are apparently not designed to travel at 20 degrees mph or below, so forcing them to go slower isn't very restful and risks waking up the driver sleeper.

Others say there are statistics showing that even just by changing the tog rating limit - without e.g. installing sleeping policemen and beds on either side - they will slow down* somewhat.

But I think it's a cover-up.

* Or duvet?

Sriracha wrote:

I've seldom seen blankets travel faster.

Depends how fast your throw is?

mark1a wrote:

Energy from the Severn - it's always baffled me why one of the highest tidal ranges in the world can't be harnessed for a clean, predictable and reliable source of energy. 

The usual short-termism so prevalent in UK politics: a barrage would produce the power of three nuclear power stations but cost about the price of six to build. However it would last twice as long as a nuclear power station (120 years against 60), cost half as much to run and, obviously, wouldn't have the associated and still unsolved cleanup problems of nuclear. All we need is a government that prioritizes longterm thinking and care for the environment a century down the line above immediate tax-cutting popularity, which should be arriving on the 12th of never.

I think that a Severn Barrage was taken off the table because of the damage it would (might) do to the wetlands along the estuary.

brooksby wrote:

I think that a Severn Barrage was taken off the table because of the damage it would (might) do to the wetlands along the estuary.

That has been cited and I'm sure some plans might have done such damage (people have been talking about it for more than a century) but equally I've seen plans where the creation of a barrage would go alongside the creation of tidal lagoons that would actually provide increased habitat for the bird species in the area. Interested to see, looking it up just now, that the undesirability of relying on Russian energy supplies has rekindled the issue and a Severn Estuary commission has been established to look into the issues.

Are there not other, less harmful ways of harnessing tidal energy? A few years ago there was talk of siting turbines between the Llŷn peninsula and Ynys Enlli / Bardsey island due to the strong tidal currents.

Mind you, politicians don't like modest projects, they want to take the credit for implementing big, macho look-at-me money-guzzlers so everyone can be impressed. And things like micro-generation and community energy are ignored or even dismissed because the city boys in suits and HMRC can't make enough money from it. A recent project for the weir in Shrewsbury on the Severn is an example of something that would work but failed to get support.

Tidal turbines have been deployed in numerous locations (albeit as far as I know all relatively small scale deployments). I think the advantage of a barrage is the amount of energy generated - a turbine captures energy from whatever small portion of the water body is flowing through it; a barrage captures the entire water body.

There are advantages to bigger schemes (scale and efficiency).  Always pros and cons of a particular scale "solution", depending on the scheme, place and technology.

There is a positive side to your second point (which I agree with): it may be easier to get people excited, get them to contribute and to keep them motivated for bigger projects rather than smaller ones.

OTOH it also can seem the world is full of modest Ozymandiases-in-waiting, watching for their moment to erect a Wonder.  Being modest they often say they're happy just being a part of it!  Their reward - cutting the tape and perhaps being named on a small dedicatory plaque...

Anyway what's clear is the idea of "maybe just use a bit less" or even "little and often" would be risible as a political position.  Perhaps it always has been?

She had to run to a Bristol hospital from where ever that is north Somerset.

hawkinspeter wrote:

Hirsute wrote:

She had to run to a Bristol hospital from where ever that is north Somerset.

That's more like it.

Here in Bristol we're often bewildered by the way that people in surrounding areas such as North Somerset seem to keep voting Tory. Our Police and Crime Commissioner for Avon and Somerset (not that Avon exists) would have stayed Tory if it wasn't for Bristolians.

I think it's the stereotype of who votes Tory.  Once you get out into the countryside south of the A369 heading out toward Nailsea, Tickenham, etc, there are a LOT of very big houses with big fences and big electric gates.  I don't honestly imagine that the people living there vote Green or Labour, which is why we have Liam bl00dy Fox as our MP until the end of time…

Sir Liam fox.
Please show due deference to our betters.

Hirsute wrote:

Sir Liam fox. Please show due deference to our betters.

"Betters"? Liam Fox? "Betters"??

I understand he has at least watched 'Spaced'.

hawkinspeter wrote:

That doesn't look like Bristol to me. I'm pretty sure Rees-Mogg would be hounded out of the city if he ever dared to set foot in Bristol.

You're not wrong:
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/jacob-rees-mogg-chased-u...