Homework

I am a non-believer.  Have been since I think I worked it out in an RE Lesson when I was in the Sixth Form.

But this Coronavirus has had me questioning my lack of faith.

Only a bit though.

The World is in a mess.  We have morons in charge of the US and Brazil.  We have evil people in charge of China and Russia.  We have a habitual liar in charge of the UK.  We have pollution.  We have plastics in the food chain.  We have climate change - ice-caps melting.  We have chaos in The Middle East.  The Amazon Rainforest is being destroyed - that's the lungs of the Earth! 

Nobody in power has taken any notice of Greta.

Even the supposedly good guys like Justin Trudeau have disappointed us:

So what would God do?

 

Invent something to shut down industry and get people to stop using their cars.  Invent something that Trump and Bolsonaro will badly mishandle in a vain attempt to protect their economies.

Invent something to kill off the Gammons?

 

Coronavirus is having an effect - I alluded to it last month.

 

Here is what my exit from the motorway on my way home looks a bit like now: 

Except there are more traffic cones and less Hillman Avengers today than in that 1977 photo I found on Google Images.  Thanks to whoever added that credit to it - I feel slightly less guilty about using it when there are credits.  Is that a motorbike in the exit lane? - I guess it must be but it's very hard to work out.

Anyway, I've digressed.  This whole Blog-Post is inspired by this BBC story about how the AA say "Coronavirus will transform UK work and travel."

They predict "a permanent reduction in the demand for travel because people have learned during the crisis to use home-working technology."

Don't forget videoconferencing.  I would travel to the local hospital for a specific meeting once a month.  For me, it was a 10 to 15 minute drive which isn't a biggie - other attendees had to come in from all over the county - but the parking was a nightmare and as our employers would recompense us for fuel - that recompense would come from NHS budgets.  We used Zoom this time - the only disadvantage was no chocolate hobnobs - we'll probably continue doing it this way.

"The chancellor currently plans to spend £27bn to curb congestion on roads and £100bn on HS2 – but if demand falls, that may not be needed."

Indeed, especially as his magic money trees will have other priorities.  AA President Edmund King agrees, "anecdotal evidence from people lucky enough to be working during the coronavirus-enforced lockdown suggests that infrastructure funds might be better spent on broadband to support home working."

AND - IT ALL HELPS TO SLOW DOWN ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE!

"Other experts are calling for the roads programme and HS2 rail project to be put on hold for a decade so ministers can be sure they’re not wasting money.

They say if commuters spend just one day a week working from home after the crisis - or commuting later - the roads will be as empty as they are in the school holidays."

Now, I know Michael Gove believes we have had enough of experts, but our government does seem to have started quoting them so maybe that's another effect of the virus.

As for HS2, this Jonathan Pie video is an excellent argument for cancelling it - maybe a postponement for a decade would be a step in the right direction - don't watch it if you're easily offended by sweary language:

So, what is going to happen?  God knows.

Traffic News

The Coronavirus Saga continues.

Audi have a logo change:

That is from this Car+Driver story.

 

As opposed to this other Car+Driver story...

 

...which is about traffic.

 

And the effect that Coronavirus and the associated lockdowns are having on it.

 

For instance, average speeds in Los Angeles are 48 percent higher because there's so much less traffic on the roads while up in Seattle,

 

"on the key I-5 corridor, heading north-south into and out of downtown, traffic on March 18 was moving at speeds 100 percent faster than typical during the morning and afternoon commutes."

 

I've noticed a small but significant decrease in traffic on my commute.  On the key M53 corridor, heading north-south into and out of Chester, traffic on March 24 was moving at speeds 1 percent faster than typical during the morning and afternoon commutes.

 

But that's a guess.

 

There is certainly a notable reduction in worldwide pollution levels.

 

Which is nice.

 

The C+D piece also comments on air travel and subway travel.  Apparently,

 

"New York City, which features the nation’s lowest incidence of car ownership and the current highest number of COVID-19 cases, has (as of March 12) seen subway, commuter train, and bus ridership decline massively, with double-digit drops."

 

The two things I take from that are:

1. I feel sorry for New-Yorkers for two reasons in the first sentence.
2. "Ridership" can't be a real word can it?

What do my readership think?

Breathing Queasy

Here's a piece from the BBC about school-runs and pollution.

It asks the question about which method of transport causes least toxin inhalation in our primary school-age children - walking, cycling, or car-ing.

If I hadn't seen a similar experiment on another programme I'd have said the bikes would be the worst because you are physically on the road and doing serious exercise.

However, I had seen that programme so knew that the car is worst.  The bad air gets sucked in through the grille and trapped in the car for the occupants to enjoy.

Now my car has a nice AM button which doesn't change the radio from FM but instead allows me to choose between Automatic, Manual or no air recirculation:

A sensor detects pollutants in the outside air and controls the shut-off automatically if in A Mode (which mine always is) - I don't know if this would be enough to protect me and my passengers if I was asked to participate in a school-run.

Looks like I need to get the Mr.Sheen out though.

Maybe we all need the help of Veolia - a company who state on their Website that "We're innovators committed to focusing on carbon reduction by preventing pollution, preserving natural resources, protecting biodiversity, combating climate change and raising environmental awareness."

Or maybe not:

Flat Out

...which is something you can't be when there are sleeping policemen around.

And when I say "sleeping policemen" - I mean speed humps and speed bumps.

This is the type I encounter the most:

 

Having a decent sized car, I can generally straddle the bump with minimal disturbance.

So I don't tend to slow down so I don't cause extra pollution.

Aren't I a good citizen?

The BBC are carrying this story today about how Councils are being urged to redesign their humps and bumps to reduce the extra pollution they are causing.

Nobody is actually saying how though.  Surely the pollution problem is due to people driving slower then quicker then slower again?

But isn't the whole point of the speed bumps to get people driving slower?

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) said "smooth" driving would cut air pollution, linked to 25,000 deaths a year in England. 507 pedestrians or cyclists were killed in the whole of Britain's roads in 2013 so the removal of speed bumps must be a no-brainer!  Amazing what you can prove with statistics.

I'd rather that the Councils spent their speed bump budgets on fixing pot-holes - that way, money would be going on preventing further damage to car suspension rather than causing it.

Meanwhile, I don't believe that this is an undoctored picture:

That Idle Lot in Westminster

And that's just the ones that turn up:

Actually this isn't a political story - it is one of two unrelated motoring stories that caught my eye on the BBC News Website this week - the newly revamped BBC News website.

Which I don't like.

It's not as good as the one it replaced.

Which I didn't like when that came about because it wasn't as good as the one it replaced.

And so it goes on - but then you get used the latest one and everything is good again.

Anyway back to the story - it appeared yesterday.  It's about how motorists sitting in their vehicles in Westminster will be liable for £20 fines if they leave their engines running if they aren't actually going anywhere.  I think I'm in favour of this - it is irratating to see exhaust fumes belching out of a parked car and the thought of fuel being wasted.  I don't see how they could police this rule though.

The taxi drivers aren't happy.  The article quotes Steve McNamara, general secretary of the LTDA saying that the fines were "absolute tosh" and a public relations and money raising exercise from the council. He went on: "It is not going to do anything constructive to tackle the pollution crisis in London. When was the last time you saw someone idling in the city? It doesn't happen."

OK then, if it doesn't happen you've got nothing to worry about, have you Steve?


The other BBC story that grabbed my attention today was this one.  It is about how a group of descendents of Confederate soldiers wanted to have the following design on their Texas State licence plates:

This request was declined as it was deemed offensive to a large number of people affected by or ashamed of Slavery.

So the battle was taken to the US Supreme Court with advocates saying that banning it was in contravention of the First Amendment because it restricted their right to free speech.  The State argued back that licence plates are Government property and therefore not subject to the First Amendment.

I was intrigued to see how Fox News was covering this - expecting a lot of right-wing bile against the ban but after searching using the American spelling license, I was pleasantly surprised to just find a sensible article putting both sides of the argument.

I had always liked the Confederate Flag and didn't realise its associations until I saw The Dukes Of Hazzard movie.  The movie just didn't live with the TV series which was my favourite show as a child of the '70s & '80s but the real reason I mention it is an excuse to show this picture of the flag on the roof of the car:

Now, there are plenty of better pictures showing more of the flag - but they show less of Daisy Duke.

Appently, a decision on the confederates' licence plate is due at the end of June.  Meanwhile, a quick Google Images search for funny licence plates caused me to put together this little collage:

Diesel Do Nicely

No dey won't.

(Works best in a Scouse accent)

I don't often do serious articles.  One of my earliest was my second ever post in November 2009 in which I sort of looked at how lean-burn engines were a better, cleaner bet than catalytic converters.

Also around that time, the Government was trying to encourage people to buy diesel cars since better fuel economy meant less Carbon Monoxide & Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere.

Yes - diesel.

Things have changed a bit since then.

People are suddenly more interested in NOx (Nitrogen Monoxide & Nitrogen Dioxide) - these are dangerous gases now linked to respiratory illnesses, stroke and even diabetes.  Scary.

Last night, Channel 4's documentary strand, Dispatches, reported on the situation - fronted by their reporter, Morland Sanders:

Here's a link to the official blurb.

Basically, lots of people were convinced to buy diesel cars on the grounds of fuel efficiency and ecological advantage and they are now being told that it was a bad move and NOx levels are a serious problem, especially in certain urban areas such as East London.

A few people don't come out of this very well at all.  This is Mike Hawes, boss of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders who didn't think that it was cheating for manufacturers to tape up shutlines of their cars when performing official fuel-efficiency tests.

Then there's this guy - Barry Gardiner MP.  I was going to use the first picture, then I spotted the second, then the third - choose which one you like the most:

He is Shadow Minister for The Environment and he was Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department of Trade & Industry when the then-Labour Government decided to encourage diesel take-up.  He admits, "Hands up, can I say there’s absolutely no question that the decision we took was the wrong decision" - but he says that with a big grin on his face and then adds in lots of what he believes to be mitigating factors.

If I thought he was genuinely sorry, I've had accepted that.

He went on to try and make it more party-political with his statement, "Certainly the impact of that decision has been a massive problem for public health in this country. The real tragedy is after we set up the committee on the medical effects of air pollution and it reported back in 2010 we’ve had five years that this government has done nothing about it."

The Tories response is just as bad, “We’ve acted on the Committee’s findings through providing effective health advice to the public. Air quality has improved significantly in recent decades and we are investing heavily"

Recent decades!?  so they are trying to take credit for what happened before they were in power?

And what health advice are they talking about?  I've not noticed any and I'm a member of the public.

I did feel a bit educated by the programme last night though when they did an experiment on NOx exposure to a pedestrian, a cyclist, a bus passenger and a motorist.

You would expect the cyclist to inhale the most, followed by the walker then the bus passenger and finally the motorist cocooned in his car.

It was actually the reverse that was true.  Must remember to put by heating system onto re-circ.

No mention was made of this man:

 

 Rudolf Diesel.

Now to lighten the mood, here is an American cop joining in with Taylor Swift:

The Mayor of London is a Buffoon

But a very likeable one.

Again, I can't agree with his politics but the people of London seem to appreciate them - unless they have just fallen for his personality - but that's their business.

He was always very funny on Have I Got News For You? and suitably amusing as the celebrity guest on Top Gear and he is always good value for money when interviewed by Jeremy Paxman - but then Jeremy Paxman loves to interview an idiot.

The reason I am discussing Boris today, after discussing his old school-chum yesterday, is this story about him using glue to catch pollution on the streets of London. It seems a bit expensive and far-fetched to me but they claim it is producing results. I'm not scientifically qualified to comment (not that that usually stops me) so read the article and draw your own conclusions.

I suppose that I'm only really mentioning it at all because it is a good excuse to print a picture of Boris. That can be a bit of a problem choosing because there is never a picture of Boris that doesn't make you smile - check these out.

Sometimes you just see a picture and want to publish it...which relates to this story. Check out the video on that too - it is brilliant!

Mrs. Thatch Wasn't a Complete Nutter After All!

As anyone who knows me will testify, I believe Mrs.T to be the Devil Incarnate - guilty of many varied crimes against humanity. The most serious being leading us into a War that could have been prevented by letting the Argies know we were actually intereseted in the Falklands after all. This was at a time in 1982 when her economic policies were not working and her Government was actually quite unpopular so she needed something to distract the general public and make everyone feel good about her. Yes, I know Tony Blair also led us into a pointless and unnecessary war - I haven't a clue why, but he did it with the knowledge that it may well make him very unpopular - and it did!

On a more motoringy front, Mrs.T was pivotal in the demise of British Leyland deciding to sell it off at a bargain price to her chum Roland Smith, or, more precisely, BAe, the Company he led. There were certain "protections" and "guarantees" in place such as BAe had to be committed to BL for at least five years and, sure enough, as soon as five years had passed, BAe disposed of it to BMW for a very nice profit thank you very much. BMW were not geared up to deal with a then mass-market car manufacturer and subsequently had to dispose of it themselves and the rest is history.

All of this made me very worried by Saint Jeremy Clarkson's column in the latest issue of Top Gear Magazine. I'll not reproduce what he wrote because it's not my place and I'd probably get sued by someone anyway but the gist of what interested me is that Mrs.T was a seemingly lone voice at the start of her tenure in speaking up for lean-burn engines rather than catalytic converters as a way of cleaning up exhaust gases. This would have dramatically reduced the amount of carbon dioxide emitted but nobody apart from Chemistry Grad Mrs.T was too worried about CO2 then. I must admit that I do remember Ford and a few other companies dropped/postponed development of lean-burn around that time because World Governments were not interested.

I have an awful lot of time for Jeremy's views, despite him being further to the right than Tory Central, he does put over his views in an intelligent and amusing way so if he's right on this one, and I've no reason to doubt it, then Mrs.T did actually speak some sense once and nobody was prepared to listen.

Maybe because she came over as a complete nutter.