The Sustrans led rides starting at the Gascoigne Children's Centre held successfully over the summer, will continue, though at the later time of 4pm to fit in with school. Bikes can be provided for those that don't have their own, and there are some child trailers too. It is helpful to know if you want to borrow a bike/trailer. Contact
Christabel Buchanan / +44 7833 057603 for more details and to reserve your bike.
I'm not sure yet how much longer the rides will continue - perhaps until the clocks go back.
Wednesday, 5 September 2012
Tuesday, 4 September 2012
The stibasa bike?
Riding the wave of enthusiasm for cycling post olympics, I have posted details of rides and events on www.stibasa.org.uk like never before, and set up a stibasa facebook page, to be a sister to the new B&D LCC branch Facebook page.
Whilst in may be the case that people have used this information and joined the rides featured (or intend to) the information has not resulted in any contact with me. There may be many reasons for this, but from talling to an old friend in the cycling world recently, I've come to the conclusion that people who want to go on rides are already in groups whether publicised or private and there is no supressed demand for rides.
In a Sustrans meeting recently, someone observed that there are people interested in cycling, but who haven't got bikes. This led me to think of ny friends and acquaintances who don't cycle, but probably could - not on leisure rides particularly, but a bit of local pottering about.
This in turn leads to thoughts about the ideal bike and whether it exists. Mountain bikes with a low ticket price are going to be pretty poor quality and not good value for money in fact. Neither are mountain bikes particularly practical for local pottering around Barking. It seems to me that a simple folding bike is what is needed - one that has a low ticket price, but is not poor quality and therefore poor value for money.
A to B magazine, who I trust about such things, mention this Marine Compass 20" wheeled single speed bike http://www.compass24.com/web/catalog/shop/technics_comfort_bicycles/4857423# , which they say is a badged Dahon. It costs £125 + £13 delivery, and I wonder whether it could be the "stibasa bike".
Whilst in may be the case that people have used this information and joined the rides featured (or intend to) the information has not resulted in any contact with me. There may be many reasons for this, but from talling to an old friend in the cycling world recently, I've come to the conclusion that people who want to go on rides are already in groups whether publicised or private and there is no supressed demand for rides.
In a Sustrans meeting recently, someone observed that there are people interested in cycling, but who haven't got bikes. This led me to think of ny friends and acquaintances who don't cycle, but probably could - not on leisure rides particularly, but a bit of local pottering about.
This in turn leads to thoughts about the ideal bike and whether it exists. Mountain bikes with a low ticket price are going to be pretty poor quality and not good value for money in fact. Neither are mountain bikes particularly practical for local pottering around Barking. It seems to me that a simple folding bike is what is needed - one that has a low ticket price, but is not poor quality and therefore poor value for money.
A to B magazine, who I trust about such things, mention this Marine Compass 20" wheeled single speed bike http://www.compass24.com/web/catalog/shop/technics_comfort_bicycles/4857423# , which they say is a badged Dahon. It costs £125 + £13 delivery, and I wonder whether it could be the "stibasa bike".
Friday, 31 August 2012
Motoring taxes need to triple to cover externalities
From: Local Transport Today : Issue 604 31 Aug 2012
Motoring taxes need to triple to cover externalities, says IPPR
MOTORING TAXES cover at most a third of the costs imposed on society by car travel at, according to an analysis by the Institute for Public Policy Research. The IPPR says that the 5.7p/km motorists pay in fuel duty and VAT only partly accounts for the externalities of car travel, which the think-tank identifies as 15.5p/km, although it adds that even this could be an underestimate. The analysis was conducted for a report that scrutinises and rejects the claim that there is a “war on the motorist”.
The report highlights that the total costs of traffic due to excess delays, accidents, poor air quality, physical inactivity, noise impacts and greenhouse gas emissions are estimated to be £43-56bn a year. Moreover, this does not include “many costs that are difficult to estimate including severance of communities, degradation of landscape and the opportunity cost of land,” it says, urging the Government to update its accounts of the external costs.
Given these external costs, the IPPR urges the Government to “make every effort to avoid further delays in fuel duty increases,” which will cost the exchequer £13.9bn in total over the five years from 2011/12.
The think-tank acknowledges that motoring taxes are high and that fuel duty has increased in real terms by 4% since 2001 if VAT is included. However, it also points out that the proportion of the pump price that is tax has fallen from 75% to 60% in the last ten years and overall motoring costs have fallen by 5% since 1997 if the cost of buying cars, insurance and repair costs are factored in.
The IPPR rejects the AA’s “grossly misleading” claim of earlier this year that an average family spends more on petrol per week (£71.24) than on food (£70), as this assumes above average mileage or significantly below average car fuel efficiency. “Based on typical mileage and car fuel efficiency figures, the average family car requires 13.4 litres per week at a cost of £19,” it says. It also finds that motoring taxes are “broadly progressive,” although with a “higher impact on the poorest 10% of car owners”.
The report also highlights that two-thirds of the poorest ten per cent of households have no car and rely on public transport and bus fares have risen by 69% since 2001, compared to the 5% real terms decrease in motoring costs since 1997. The IPPR calls for the costs of bus travel to be brought down in order to both help these households and to continue to reduce the level of traffic following the recent downward trend.
IPPR finds “little evidence” that public transport programmes are sufficient to reduce traffic levels year-on-year and “considerable scope” for further action, given that every local authority applied for the £1bn Local Sustainable Transport Fund and that only one bid was allowed per area.
==
http://www.ippr.org/publication/55/9542/the-war-on-motorists-myth-or-reality
Motoring taxes need to triple to cover externalities, says IPPR
MOTORING TAXES cover at most a third of the costs imposed on society by car travel at, according to an analysis by the Institute for Public Policy Research. The IPPR says that the 5.7p/km motorists pay in fuel duty and VAT only partly accounts for the externalities of car travel, which the think-tank identifies as 15.5p/km, although it adds that even this could be an underestimate. The analysis was conducted for a report that scrutinises and rejects the claim that there is a “war on the motorist”.
The report highlights that the total costs of traffic due to excess delays, accidents, poor air quality, physical inactivity, noise impacts and greenhouse gas emissions are estimated to be £43-56bn a year. Moreover, this does not include “many costs that are difficult to estimate including severance of communities, degradation of landscape and the opportunity cost of land,” it says, urging the Government to update its accounts of the external costs.
Given these external costs, the IPPR urges the Government to “make every effort to avoid further delays in fuel duty increases,” which will cost the exchequer £13.9bn in total over the five years from 2011/12.
The think-tank acknowledges that motoring taxes are high and that fuel duty has increased in real terms by 4% since 2001 if VAT is included. However, it also points out that the proportion of the pump price that is tax has fallen from 75% to 60% in the last ten years and overall motoring costs have fallen by 5% since 1997 if the cost of buying cars, insurance and repair costs are factored in.
The IPPR rejects the AA’s “grossly misleading” claim of earlier this year that an average family spends more on petrol per week (£71.24) than on food (£70), as this assumes above average mileage or significantly below average car fuel efficiency. “Based on typical mileage and car fuel efficiency figures, the average family car requires 13.4 litres per week at a cost of £19,” it says. It also finds that motoring taxes are “broadly progressive,” although with a “higher impact on the poorest 10% of car owners”.
The report also highlights that two-thirds of the poorest ten per cent of households have no car and rely on public transport and bus fares have risen by 69% since 2001, compared to the 5% real terms decrease in motoring costs since 1997. The IPPR calls for the costs of bus travel to be brought down in order to both help these households and to continue to reduce the level of traffic following the recent downward trend.
IPPR finds “little evidence” that public transport programmes are sufficient to reduce traffic levels year-on-year and “considerable scope” for further action, given that every local authority applied for the £1bn Local Sustainable Transport Fund and that only one bid was allowed per area.
==
http://www.ippr.org/publication/55/9542/the-war-on-motorists-myth-or-reality
Sustrans on line mapping
www.sustrans.org.uk/map
Sustrans have their own mapping utility. You can draw a route on as with bikely - I found that quite easy to use.
Bikely uses the same base maps as Google maps, which seem to have been getting a lot more accurate lately. Paradoxically Sustrans worked with Google to produce the new facility on Google maps to calculate cycling routes, but the base maps used on their site are OS ones and one of the first things I noticed was that the footbridges over the railway lines near me aren't shown.
The Sustrans maps do show National Cycle Network routes which is useful. Sustrans tell me that they are crowd sourcing info for the maps (not just user added routes). Thus we have yet another apping utility seeking out inormation and competing with all the others.
They also use the term "train station" instead of the usual British English "railway station".
Sustrans have their own mapping utility. You can draw a route on as with bikely - I found that quite easy to use.
Bikely uses the same base maps as Google maps, which seem to have been getting a lot more accurate lately. Paradoxically Sustrans worked with Google to produce the new facility on Google maps to calculate cycling routes, but the base maps used on their site are OS ones and one of the first things I noticed was that the footbridges over the railway lines near me aren't shown.
The Sustrans maps do show National Cycle Network routes which is useful. Sustrans tell me that they are crowd sourcing info for the maps (not just user added routes). Thus we have yet another apping utility seeking out inormation and competing with all the others.
They also use the term "train station" instead of the usual British English "railway station".
Bike "M" Checks
http://www.sustrans.org.uk/assets/files/free%20range%20kids/families/frk_bikemcheck.pdf
The basic ABC check of a bike is often suggested ride organisers for quick checks of participants bike.
The M check is a more extended check regime devised by Sustrans.
The basic ABC check of a bike is often suggested ride organisers for quick checks of participants bike.
The M check is a more extended check regime devised by Sustrans.
Thursday, 16 August 2012
Cyclists don't pay to use roads
My reply to a letter published in the London Evening Standard on Wednesday 15 August:
On Wednesday’s letters page (15 August), Elizabeth Wren
opines that cyclists should not make “demands” as they do not “pay an
equivalent amount to motorists to use the roads”. The idea of paying an
equivalent amount sounds fair, but what does it actually mean? I assume Ms Wren
was not referring to Vehicle Excise Duty, commonly but inaccurately called road
tax, because VED is not a payment for using the roads. Churchill abolished Road
Tax in 1937 precisely because he feared its payers would try to assert their
right to use the roads over those of non-payers. Roads are (barring toll roads)
paid for through general taxation, not by motorists specifically. So general
tax-paying cyclists are as entitled to make “demands” as general tax-paying
motorists. (Incidentally, I would be in favour of abolishing VED, which
incentivises car use, and introducing a ‘polluter pays’ tax on fuel to cover
the revenue shortfall.)
Perhaps Ms Wren is tacitly suggesting including pedal
cycles in VED. Given that VED for the lowest CO2-emitting band is zero,
it wouldn’t raise any money as pedal cycles emit no CO2. It would,
though, cost money to introduce, enforce and operate.
Ms Wren may be hinting at some kind of usage related
charges. I agree that that could be fair in theory, but it would have to
account for the amount of wear and tear inflicted on the road by the
vehicle over time, and possibly also the amount of road space used by the
vehicle over time. Either way, this would result in motorists paying more
and cyclists paying less – and so by Ms Wren’s argument, being entitled to make
more “demands”.
Wednesday, 15 August 2012
More OTT cycling projects floated by Boris
The Mayor of [Greater] London, Boris Johnson, has - presumably as part of his bid to become leader of Britain's Conservative Party, floated the idea of installing cycle paths alongside London Overground rail tracks/routes.
Never mind whether this is technically doable - it is clearly a politicians's attention grabbing stunt, rather than any serious attempt to help cycling.
When I leave my flat to join the main road, I have to neotiate a kerb, up and down. This is because some kind soul has put a fence right across the roadway, with no gap for cycles to get through. At my nearest railway station, the steps up to the bridge where the entrance stands do not have a wheeling ramp. These are just examples from my daily experience. As in recent posts, in my local travels I find a lack of dropped kerbs, shrubs overgrowing cycle paths, blocked off roads, one way streets, no-entry points, steps without ramps and a general lack of permeability in the streets and paths of the area.
If Boris put some money into fixing these numerous glitches in the street/path network of London , he would have done something relatively quick, easy and cheap to help people cycle everywhere. But that wouldn't be bold and daring enough for him.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/mayor/stop-pussyfooting-around-cameron-boris-johnson-reveals-his-masterplan-to-boost-britains-economy-8049862.html
Never mind whether this is technically doable - it is clearly a politicians's attention grabbing stunt, rather than any serious attempt to help cycling.
When I leave my flat to join the main road, I have to neotiate a kerb, up and down. This is because some kind soul has put a fence right across the roadway, with no gap for cycles to get through. At my nearest railway station, the steps up to the bridge where the entrance stands do not have a wheeling ramp. These are just examples from my daily experience. As in recent posts, in my local travels I find a lack of dropped kerbs, shrubs overgrowing cycle paths, blocked off roads, one way streets, no-entry points, steps without ramps and a general lack of permeability in the streets and paths of the area.
If Boris put some money into fixing these numerous glitches in the street/path network of London , he would have done something relatively quick, easy and cheap to help people cycle everywhere. But that wouldn't be bold and daring enough for him.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/mayor/stop-pussyfooting-around-cameron-boris-johnson-reveals-his-masterplan-to-boost-britains-economy-8049862.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)