Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dublin ranks 3rd in terms of the amount of time spent in cars due to congestion

Options
1235717

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    grahambo wrote: »
    You've give an example country, where 300,000 people brought the capital (and other major cities) to a halt because of service cuts and extra taxes, less than 6 months ago.
    Which is exactly what will happen here if everyone were to stop using there cars and create a massive hole in the Exchequer OR if we started taxing motorists even more to drive their cars.

    France is not a good example for anything like that.

    In any case the bike to work scheme has been very successful.
    Basically €510 back every 5 years which isn't bad.

    You've made a lot of claims here. How about some facts ?


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,530 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    grahambo wrote: »
    It'd be to much of a loss to the Exchequer in terms of amount of money spent on Cars.
    again, though, the money people don't spend on cars does not disappear into a black hole.

    importing and burning petrol and diesel is not the same as importing another commodity like steel; the steel is turned into another product and generates value-added income and contributes to the economy.
    burning petrol to get someone to work does very little to add to the economy if there's a usable alternative which allows them to commute in a different manner - the main effect of driving to work compared to another form of transport (in this context) is that we're pumping a lot of money abroad for the benefit of about 5% of the actual usable energy out of the petrol or diesel.


  • Registered Users Posts: 28,994 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    grahambo wrote: »
    I guess the countries that are paying cyclists to cycle might have a different view

    Public health benefits, reduced emissions, reduced traffic - what's not to like?
    https://www.welovecycling.com/wide/2015/10/16/its-official-french-will-get-paid-for-cycling-to-work/

    You've give an example country, where 300,000 people brought the capital (and other major cities) to a halt because of service cuts and extra taxes, less than 6 months ago.
    Which is exactly what will happen here if everyone were to stop using there cars and create a massive hole in the Exchequer OR if we started taxing motorists even more to drive their cars.

    France is not a good example for anything like that.

    In any case the bike to work scheme has been very successful.
    Basically €510 back every 5 years which isn't bad.
    If you like, I can post similar examples from Belgium, Netherlands and Italy. The "beer for cycling" scheme in Bologna is particularly interesting. Do they meet your standards?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,216 ✭✭✭sharper


    grahambo wrote: »
    Cycling is more of a lifestyle choice rather than a commuting choice, you gain the ability to commute via cycling if you make that lifestyle choice, not the other way around, as it's not sustainable. IE if you don't like cycling then commuting is gonna be hell for you.

    I gave the cycling thing a bash for a year, I had to admit it was enjoyable for me as I'm fairly into fitness. But I can understand why a hell of a a lot of people would not do it.
    I ended up moving to right beside that DART which is why I stopped.

    That's where e-bikes comes in, they allow people to get at least some of the advantages of cycling without it having to be a lifestyle or be particularly fit. It also means can people likely get to work without needing to shower and change

    https://cleantechnica.com/2018/07/08/my-month-commuting-with-an-ebike-cleantechnica-exclusive/
    I’m not a strong biker, and the first ebike I reviewed, the Gazelle Easyflow, gave me the confidence I needed to head out to make that commute the first few times. There is a a strong side wind that blows in from the ocean along the majority of the commute both ways and a headwind for part of it. The ebike doesn’t do all the work for me, but it does allow me to get where I’m going faster.

    I can choose to ride in an easier gear, with no assist from the electric motor, all the way up to high assist. I typically ride with the high assist when I’m commuting and still end up sweating a bit by the time I get to the coffee shop. I could take it easier and take a few extra minutes but I like the workout. It’s half the point, after all.

    The m50 is looking more like a car park every day, there's just no way to keep things going and have everyone take their private car to work.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭cdaly_


    grahambo wrote: »
    I'm also talking about the fact that Bus only areas in Town such as College Green are at capacity, they've had to re route buses from there as the traffic (which is only Buses) at rush hour is so bad.

    I think that's because taxis are allowed use it also.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,643 ✭✭✭Beta Ray Bill


    again, though, the money people don't spend on cars does not disappear into a black hole.

    importing and burning petrol and diesel is not the same as importing another commodity like steel; the steel is turned into another product and generates value-added income and contributes to the economy.
    burning petrol to get someone to work does very little to add to the economy if there's a usable alternative which allows them to commute in a different manner - the main effect of driving to work compared to another form of transport (in this context) is that we're pumping a lot of money abroad for the benefit of about 5% of the actual usable energy out of the petrol or diesel.

    I agree with you in that we are pumping money abroad, however over half the money you spend on fuel is Tax.
    So it will hit the exchequer one way of the other.

    EG:
    If I spend €100 on fuel the exchequer gets around €60
    If I spend €100 on clothes, electronic equipment, etc they'll get less than €25
    If I spend €100 on whole foods they'll get less than €5

    So in each case the money was spent, but the Tax taken differ greatly

    As I've already mentioned this is coming whether we like it or not with the introduction of electric cars.
    I'd imagine the price of electricity will increase rapidly over the next few years as more and more cars come onto the grid.
    If you like, I can post similar examples from Belgium, Netherlands and Italy. The "beer for cycling" scheme in Bologna is particularly interesting. Do they meet your standards?

    I wasn't trying to be smart with you, merely making a point that France wasn't a good example.
    In fact having read a bit about your post it's the employer, not the government that will pay for people to cycle to work.

    I get that most western EU countries have a cycle to work scheme, and that's a good thing.
    We have one here in Ireland which I said was good.

    But cycling isn't going to solve the problems related to congestion in Dublin.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    grahambo wrote: »
    I agree with you in that we are pumping money abroad, however over half the money you spend on fuel is Tax.
    So it will hit the exchequer one way of the other.

    EG:
    If I spend €100 on fuel the exchequer gets around €60
    If I spend €100 on clothes, electronic equipment, etc they'll get less than €25
    If I spend €100 on whole foods they'll get less than €5

    So in each case the money was spent, but the Tax taken differ greatly


    The money spent clothes, food electronic equipment is being used to employ more people than the money spent on diesel/petro (directly anyway) who in turn will spend their money in local shops etc - so it's not as simple as saying the tax take will be down.

    Total benefits to the economy could be higher.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    grahambo wrote: »

    But cycling isn't going to solve the problems related to congestion in Dublin.

    How do you think Dublin would fair without Luas and Dart?


    https://irishcycle.com/2017/07/30/more-residents-commute-by-bicycle-than-by-luas-and-dart-in-dublin-city-and-suburbs/


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,643 ✭✭✭Beta Ray Bill



    Badly.
    That article is before the Green line extension.
    Dart and Luas "Catchment Area" is vastly smaller than the area of greater Dublin.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    grahambo wrote: »
    Badly.
    That article is before the Green line extension.
    Dart and Luas "Catchment Area" is vastly smaller than the area of greater Dublin.

    So Dublin would fair badly with no Luas or Dart but the equivalent number of cyclist do nothing to ease congestion?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    sharper wrote: »
    I don't think we would be proposing someone with mobility issues should be commuting to work on foot anyway.
    Everyone needs to use footpaths at some stage of their commute. People with mobility issues and those with buggies should be free to use footpaths if they wish. I can confirm that provision for pedestrians is atrocious and way too much space is given over to private cars.


  • Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    grahambo wrote: »
    You could tax the crap out of them similar to the M50 but people will still use their cars.
    2,000 cars a day were using the port tunnel when it first opened
    Today, 20,000 Vehicles use it per day, there is only around 85,000 HGV's entitled to use it for free in the whole of Ireland... you do the maths.
    They're was no reduced rate for the DPT when it opened if I recall correctly. It is now only 3 euro off peak.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,643 ✭✭✭Beta Ray Bill


    They're was no reduced rate for the DPT when it opened if I recall correctly. It is now only 3 euro off peak.

    Aye, and 2000 cars a day still went through it.
    So Dublin would fair badly with no Luas or Dart but the equivalent number of cyclist do nothing to ease congestion?

    You are clearly a keen cyclist, and that's great.
    We are at capacity though, in that those who would choose to cycle into town are cycling into town.
    Getting people to cycle that don't want to, is not going to work.

    For example, if in the next year you introduced car bans from the canals north and south and told people they have to use public transport or cycle.

    I'd be fine, as I use public transport.
    You'd be fine, as you cycle.

    The person who has used their car to get in and out of town for the last 10 years is not going to be fine.
    There are a few things that could happen:
    1) They'll live in town
    2) They might cycle if they can get somewhere to live just outside the car exclusion zone.
    3) They'll avoid travelling into town altogether
    4) They'll use public transport

    In the case of 1 and 2, property prices will rocket.
    You'll be fine, you have your house, but your kids will be commuting in from the likes of Mullingar. As only the exceptionally wealthy will be afford to live in Dublin (this is happening right now in Dublin)

    3 is the worst case scenario, people avoid coming into Dublin altogether, Retail business will be devastated. (This is why retailers in Cork are fighting against this so hard, and no, it's not the same as Henry St/Grafton St)
    I myself fall into this bracket, If I could get a Job in an Industrial Estate/Business Park close to where I live I'd be laughing! :)
    My next Job will not be in Dublin City.

    4 wont last for people that have used their cars to get into town for year in the long term. They'll revert to 1, 2 or 3.

    Ultimately:
    You cannot force people to do something that they really don't want to do.
    There are HEAPs of lazy fu*kers out there that don't want to cycle and don't want to be waiting at bus stops or standing on a Luas/DART.

    There is no way you're gonna force them to use public transport or cycle unless it's easier than what they're currently doing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭cdaly_


    grahambo wrote: »
    For example, if in the next year you introduced car bans from the canals north and south and told people they have to use public transport or cycle.

    The person who has used their car to get in and out of town for the last 10 years is not going to be fine.
    There are a few things that could happen:
    1) They'll live in town
    2) They might cycle if they can get somewhere to live just outside the car exclusion zone.
    3) They'll avoid travelling into town altogether
    4) They'll use public transport

    5) They'll find the city much more pleasant to cycle in because it's not so 'dangerous'.

    How many parents do you know who wouldn't let their children cycle to school because it's 'too dangerous'? Mostly it's 'too dangerous' because of all the parents driving their big cars to and from the schools...


  • Registered Users Posts: 28,994 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    grahambo wrote: »
    again, though, the money people don't spend on cars does not disappear into a black hole.

    importing and burning petrol and diesel is not the same as importing another commodity like steel; the steel is turned into another product and generates value-added income and contributes to the economy.
    burning petrol to get someone to work does very little to add to the economy if there's a usable alternative which allows them to commute in a different manner - the main effect of driving to work compared to another form of transport (in this context) is that we're pumping a lot of money abroad for the benefit of about 5% of the actual usable energy out of the petrol or diesel.

    I agree with you in that we are pumping money abroad, however over half the money you spend on fuel is Tax.
    So it will hit the exchequer one way of the other.

    EG:
    If I spend €100 on fuel the exchequer gets around €60
    If I spend €100 on clothes, electronic equipment, etc they'll get less than €25
    If I spend €100 on whole foods they'll get less than €5

    So in each case the money was spent, but the Tax taken differ greatly

    As I've already mentioned this is coming whether we like it or not with the introduction of electric cars.
    I'd imagine the price of electricity will increase rapidly over the next few years as more and more cars come onto the grid.
    If you like, I can post similar examples from Belgium, Netherlands and Italy. The "beer for cycling" scheme in Bologna is particularly interesting. Do they meet your standards?

    I wasn't trying to be smart with you, merely making a point that France wasn't a good example.
    In fact having read a bit about your post it's the employer, not the government that will pay for people to cycle to work.

    I get that most western EU countries

    But cycling isn't going to solve the problems related to congestion in Dublin.
    In fairness, these go a bit further than the bike purchase schemes. They really do encourage people to cycle.

    You're right to say that cycling on it's own is not the solution. But it certainly can be front and centre at the heart of the solution, including better public transport and restrictions on private cars.


  • Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    It's not high tech, but walking could be playing a much bigger part in the modal mix. Particularly for kids going to school.

    https://twitter.com/20splentyforus/status/1091737332259188736?s=19


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,530 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    amcalester wrote: »
    The money spent clothes, food electronic equipment is being used to employ more people than the money spent on diesel/petro (directly anyway) who in turn will spend their money in local shops etc - so it's not as simple as saying the tax take will be down.

    Total benefits to the economy could be higher.
    yep, i think the argument is that spending money in locally owned shop has seven times the benefits to the local community than spending it in a multinational.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,794 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    They're was no reduced rate for the DPT when it opened if I recall correctly. It is now only 3 euro off peak.

    Was 3/6/9/12 at different times I think - price was cut after analysing whether the road network at that port end could take extra traffic. can dig up for definite later


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,049 ✭✭✭downtheroad


    grahambo wrote: »

    Ultimately:
    You cannot force people to do something that they really don't want to do.
    There are HEAPs of lazy fu*kers out there that don't want to cycle and don't want to be waiting at bus stops or standing on a Luas/DART.

    I cycle into city centre from Dublin 5 and cannot get over the amount of single occupied cars that I pass every day on my commute. This is an area that is serviced by DART and bus, and I am passing these cars at 8.30am so I can't imagine they are all travelling through the city centre to the southside if they are aiming for a 9am start. It would be fascinating to survey these people as they sit in traffic going nowhere to ask where is their final destination and why they choose to travel by car.

    Congestion charges inside the canals are badly needed. As another poster has mentioned there were many people using the port tunnel at peak prices when it came in. Charge drivers who drive into the city centre and give the proceeds to the NTA to subsidise public transport and improve cycling infrastructure, and maybe attitudes might just change.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,643 ✭✭✭Beta Ray Bill


    I cycle into city centre from Dublin 5 and cannot get over the amount of single occupied cars that I pass every day on my commute. This is an area that is serviced by DART and bus, and I am passing these cars at 8.30am so I can't imagine they are all travelling through the city centre to the southside if they are aiming for a 9am start. It would be fascinating to survey these people as they sit in traffic going nowhere to ask where is their final destination and why they choose to travel by car.

    I think this was done albeit a number of years ago.
    The reasons the choose car include:
    1) they're paying for a car to be on the road, so they're going to use it
    2) they don't want to use public transport because they've to stand or wait or walk to the bus stop and it doesn't go to exactly where they want to go or have to use 2 mode of public transport.
    3) They don't want to cycle.
    4) They need to make multiple stops
    Congestion charges inside the canals are badly needed. As another poster has mentioned there were many people using the port tunnel at peak prices when it came in. Charge drivers who drive into the city centre and give the proceeds to the NTA to subsidise public transport and improve cycling infrastructure, and maybe attitudes might just change.

    All this will do is make people poorer, people will cut back on other things before they give up the car.
    In fact that Car will be the last thing they'll give up on.
    cdaly_ wrote: »
    5) They'll find the city much more pleasant to cycle in because it's not so 'dangerous'.

    How many parents do you know who wouldn't let their children cycle to school because it's 'too dangerous'? Mostly it's 'too dangerous' because of all the parents driving their big cars to and from the schools...

    The City isn't dangerous because of Cars.
    The City is dangerous because of all the little scumbags and skobes knocking about.

    I used to walk home from School on my own from 3rd class in primary school.
    It was a 10 min walk through Kilbarrack (where the Snapper and the Van was filmed)
    I was 8 or 9 years old at the time, people weren't aware of the dangers for kids at that time AND it was a hell of a lot safer back then.

    Sure on the weekends you'd go out at 10am and wouldn't come back til 6pm for your dinner
    Bare in mind there were no phones or anything around then.

    People bring their kids to school in cars because it's a knock on effect from having to bring their kids to creche in cars as both parents work.
    Creche wasn't really a thing 30 years ago as it was rare for both parents to work full time jobs. People were poorer then and only had one car, which the Dad used to go to work, which meant Mam walked with the kids in a buggy.

    Everyone seems to think that this problem is easy to fix (Ban Cars, Tax the Hell out of Motorists, Everyone should cycle)
    But the reality is that this problem has been festering about 30 years at this point (Start of the 90's Boom)

    There is no quick fix!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    grahambo wrote: »

    There is no quick fix!

    There is a quick fix. Removing cars in the fix


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,638 ✭✭✭Qrt


    grahambo wrote: »
    The City isn't dangerous because of Cars.
    The City is dangerous because of all the little scumbags and skobes knocking about.

    Sorry but this doesn’t stack up. I live in probably the worst area of Dublin, and I’ve never met anyone who’s more afraid of their kids walking home from school than their kids cycling home.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭The Enbalmer


    There is a quick fix. Removing cars in the fix

    That's not going to happen.

    You can't MAKE people cycle

    You can't MAKE people take the bus

    You can't MAKE people carshare

    You can't MAKE people walk to work.

    The people calling for a ban on cars are usually people who cannot afford a car,it's begrudgery masquerading as social conscience.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    That's not going to happen.

    You can't MAKE people cycle

    You can't MAKE people take the bus

    You can't MAKE people carshare

    You can't MAKE people walk to work.

    The people calling for a ban on cars are usually people who cannot afford a car,it's begrudgery masquerading as social conscience.

    You can and we already have Grafton Street , Henry Street etc etc.

    People will have two options , use alternative means of travel or find new places to drive too. Begrudgery please. what nonsense.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,677 ✭✭✭John_Rambo


    That's not going to happen..

    It's already happening. Getting more and more difficult to drive in to Dublin city centre every year. Removal of car parking, car lanes being turned in to bus and bike lanes or pedestrianised areas.
    You can't MAKE people cycle

    You can't MAKE people take the bus

    You can't MAKE people carshare

    You can't MAKE people walk to work.

    No, but they'll do it anyway when it's too much hassle and too expensive to drive in to the city. Thousands have done it already, thousands more will do it too.
    The people calling for a ban on cars are usually people who cannot afford a car,it's begrudgery masquerading as social conscience.

    Who told you that??! I have three cars and would be very keen to remove cars from the city centre, increase room for pedestrians, public transport and cyclists. I'd also fully support a congestion charge.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭The Enbalmer


    You can and we already have Grafton Street , Henry Street etc etc.

    .


    That's the best examples you can think of? Two tiny streets that are pedestrianized?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭The Enbalmer


    John_Rambo wrote: »

    Who told you that??! I have three cars and would be very keen to remove cars from the city centre, increase room for pedestrians, public transport and cyclists. I'd also fully support a congestion charge.


    Of course you do,Big Shot :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    The people calling for a ban on cars are usually people who cannot afford a car,it's begrudgery masquerading as social conscience.
    I don't believe that, wealthy families are moving back into the city centre from the suburbs. A lot of them seem to bring the Chelsea tractors with them, but there is no need when everything is so close by. It defeats the purpose of living in the city if you drive everywhere. It will take time to shift behaviour but it will happen.

    It's the less well off who cannot afford to live in the city centre that are really dependent on cars.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,530 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    That's not going to happen.

    You can't MAKE people cycle

    You can't MAKE people take the bus

    You can't MAKE people carshare

    You can't MAKE people walk to work.
    no, but you can prioritise the efficient modes of transport - often at the expense of private car drivers - that they soon become the logical choice.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,677 ✭✭✭John_Rambo


    Of course you do,Big Shot :rolleyes:

    I do, not very expensive ones, but good, working cars, a small petrol car, 4x4 for beach sports & Family stuff and something nice for the weekend. why would I lie? PM me of you want further evidence.

    Most of my friends that cycle or get public transport have cars at home. The ones that don't live in the city centre and can certainly afford cars, they just don't have them and tend to use Gocar instead.

    Your silly, small town minded, outdated 1970's notion that people on bikes, buses and trains are poor and can't afford cars just shows how clueless you are on the subject.


Advertisement