Jim Al Kahlili : Revolutions

I have just watched [on iPlayer] the second episode of this excellent new series

This covers the origins, development and likely future of 'the Car'

... all the way from dog-sleds to graphene-based batteries; with much of interest between.

Highly recommended.

MichaelG.

He covered essential elements like the wheel, axle and roads but did not mention that the development of the last was driven by the cycling boom of the late 19/early 20C.

Intriguing that the inspiration for Henry Ford's assembly line was the abattoir.

.

Funny, that ... perhaps he thinks of cyclists' use of the roads as being parasitic

MichaelG.

I think you're just trotting out the tired old cliche of "parasitic cyclists" again. Why do you say cyclists are "parasitic"? Is it because they don't have to pay vehicle excise duty? Well work it out for yourself. VED is based on the amount of pollution caused by the vehicle. Electric cars pay no duty - but the carbon effect of generating the power in the first place is hardly negligible, and the road damage caused by them is no less than an IC vehicle. So as cyclists cause less pollution than electric cars, then surely then they should be paid to use the roads?

So let us assume that cyclists have to pay a proportion of that paid by petrol or diesel cars - £145 currently for a typical car. The only fair way to do that is to base it on vehicle weight as the effect of damage by the vehicle to the roads. Bikes weigh say 10kg. Cars typically weigh 1500kg. So that's 96p a year. Then you have to consider that the cyclist is barred from all motorways, so to be fair, that would further reduce it to about 60p.

Are you going to be able to instigate a viable tax system whereby you can ask cyclists for 60p a year? No, I didn't think you could.

Cyclists, pedestrians and horses have a RIGHT to be on a public highway. Cars do not - they only have permission.

I forget the exact figure, but I think it was in the 90% or so of adult cyclists who also tax and own motor vehicles.

Personally, I use my bike to keep myself fit and reduce my need for the overstressed NHS. I commuted to work when I was working because I hated being in long queues of cars when I did have to use it. And it was often quicker, and taking the canal towpath occasionally kept me off the roads altogether, thus freeing it up for nincompoops in cars.

I often find that people who moan about cyclists do because they're just too fat and idle to ride a bicycle.

Parasitic? Don't talk rubbish.

Rant over.

Nigel

I responded to a specific observation made by ega ... and my comment was good humoured [as you should be aware from my inclusion of the devilish smiley thing]

PLEASE don't get all upset about it.

MichaelG.

.

P.S. The programme is about the CAR

Re the series discussed the aeroplane program was also very good, regarding cyclists, what right do cyclists have to take over a village to run their time trials and then create when people try to drive their cars in and out of the village, thankfully they were stopped. Try driving in London and try not to knock over the suicide jockeys on two wheels as they cross red lights and ignore the rules of the road.

My rant over.

By the way I own a bike for the occasional ride around country lanes.

Martin P

Cyclists round here seem to think they are on a somewhat slower Tour de France, a cycle may be a low pollution device but the long queue of cars waiting to get past the peloton are using much more fuel than they would just cruising at a steady speed. The acceleration required to pass safely uses much more fuel than just making steady progress. The big picture is that riding a cycle on narrow roads probably uses more fuel overall than if they used a car, bicycles are probably squandering the earths resources rather than saving the planet.

Mike

Thank god for that, if they ignored the rules of the motorway like they do on all the minor roads the death toll would be beyond belief.

Think Darwin. Think Darwin.

Ron,

You haven't seen the drivers around here. Today's local paper reports the death of three folk who hit a tree on a roundabout, at the end of a dual carriageway, with a 40 mph limit for the last half mile or so.

Judging by the marks on the tree, the car was literally flying!

Another suicide jockey planted his Volvo estate in the upper floor of the flats by another roundabout.

A few journeys ago, southbound on the M6, on the northbound carriage, in broad daylight there were six cars occupying the space of five ( No 4 was on top of No 3! ) Needless to say, in lane 3.

Anti lock brakes are no good if you are doing 80 mph ten feet off the car in front; as that lot found out!

I have sympathy with cyclists, having cycled for most of my life, but none for lunatics on two or four wheels!

It's not WHAT you use for transport, it's the way that you BEHAVE with it that counts.

Howard

Edited By Howard Lewis on 01/08/2019 18:29:24

I think that the majority of roads that cyclists are likely to use are maintained by local council taxes and not from funds raised by the VED. Therefore since they are likely to pay council tax I feel they have every right to use the roads. A cyclist is an easy target for criticism which really should be directed towards planning authorities for failing to provide cycleways similar to those provided in Belgium and The Netherlands. New "relief" roads have recently been built near where I live but essentially provide access to land so more housing can be built. However none of the roads have cycleways. As the law stands at the moment cyclists are not allowed to cycle on footpaths but many main roads have associated footpaths which are rarely used by pedestrians and could be turned into cycleways making everyone lives safer. Blaming cyclists for using the roads is like blaming commuters for the trains being late.

Clive

Weston Super Mare has an enlightened policy of cycle paths which helps a lot to make cycling safer, and it also benefits motorists by lowering the numbers of bikes on the roads.

Contrary to popular opinion there is no linkage between vehicle excise duty and the budget for mending roads, and I would guess that most cyclists also have a car anyway, I certainly did when I cycled to work, it was just faster and better for me. Only gave up when I got sent to Sellafield, 120+ miles each way was a bit much.

However I do agree that cyclists ought to obey the highway code and should get fined if they don't.

.

... but there was until 1937

See the 'History' section here: **LINK**

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motoring_taxation_in_the_United_Kingdom

MichaelG.

Talking of cyclists an old college friend who retired a little early has been cycling round the world for charity - currently done 17,000 miles and raised over £20k.

Curiously apt in some ways... not least with his elephant electrocution to 'prove' Tesla's AC was more dangerous than DC.

Neil

Oh dear, just read further and seen how most of the thread has turned into cyclist bashing.

Neil

I'm sorry to see that Michael Gilligan's light-hearted response to my post was seen as an excuse for this. Howard Lewis got it right: "It's not WHAT you use for transport, it's the way that you BEHAVE with it that counts."

I understood the programme presenter's theme to be the factors leading to the advent of the motor car. Here's a link to the historical point I had in mind:

https://www.motherearthnews.com/green-transportation/bicycling/good-roads-movement-ze0z1501zdeh