New Minister for Transport Eamon Ryan

TrailerBob

The truth of the transport conundrum is that, despite the obsessive focus on Dublin and the M50 belt for policy making, almost 60% of our population are not city dwellers, and a significant number are not served by public transport at all. Electric is becoming an option for people, but only if you can already afford to change to a 40 grand motor. I'm not playing the poor mouth, but the reality is I have about 15 grand of a budget (from the credit union) to put to changing the other car in the house.. which itself is only worth about 2.. so not much option but another Diesel

RandomViewer

JC01 wrote: »

We don't need 98% of the things we have. Cars are a fact of modern life and I pay enough to use them that I fully intend to drive whatever the hell I want.

Why should you or anyone else get to ban me from the functionality of my own car? Even if there were actual public transport alternatives to my car I've zero interest in starting my day off dealing with people on a bus/train/whatever. So long as I continue to pay this countries extortionate charges for doing so I can't see how your argument has a left to stand on

I think that if you touch a sticky surface on a bus you should be within your rights to burn the bus

Duckjob

Lundstram wrote: »

Cyclists have no place in areas with no cycle lanes.

Want cycles lanes? Start paying for them.

Psst, I'll let you in on a little known secret. The authorities in more enlightened European countries are not only funding cycling infrastructure on a large scale,
but they're also actually paying people (via tax breaks) to cycle to work on it. I wonder why?

Maybe just let go of your irrational dislikes and open your mind a little.

AndrewJRenko

StackSteevens wrote: »

Heed to the traffic coming in both directions.

What's that got to do with taxation?

AndrewJRenko

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Why SUV’s though? Some cars have a bigger footprint than an SUV, and a bigger engine, so is it the height that gets you all riled up about them or something?

Because they are extremely dangerous for those outside the vehicle.

JC01

RandomViewer wrote: »

I think that if you touch a sticky surface on a bus you should be within your rights to burn the bus

I know a few lads that work in CIE, some of the stories they would tell you about buses would make your skin crawl.

Jizique

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Why SUV’s though? Some cars have a bigger footprint than an SUV, and a bigger engine, so is it the height that gets you all riled up about them or something?

They are more dangerous - I can dig out the data, and certainly visibility for other road users isn’t helped by higher, larger vehicles on the road.
Few large cars with a bigger footprint are sold here, so they are less of a concern.
It’s strange that as families have got smaller, cars have got bigger

AndrewJRenko

Rows Grower wrote: »

He should wear a helmet to help protect himself against head injury if he is involved in an accident while cycling.

I'm surprised I have to explain this to someone who has the ability to type.

If you know of any research that says this is not true throw it up there and educate us all.

Perhaps you should be the one to produce evidence, given that you're the one dishing out the instructions?

Do you wear a crash helmet in the car yourself given that's where the vast majority of head injuries happen?

kirving

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you wear a crash helmet in the car yourself given that's where the vast majority of head injuries happen?

Took 160 posts, but fair play you got there in the end.

AndrewJRenko

JC01 wrote: »

Just read your own sentence back there and see does it even make sense to you.

It makes perfect sense for anyone who can read basic English.

Why should his €3k running costs have any relevance for public policy around transport?

unhappys10

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Because they are extremely dangerous for those outside the vehicle.

I have news for you, if you're hit by any object travelling at 30kph+ it's going to be dangerous.

AndrewJRenko

unhappys10 wrote: »

I have news for you, if you're hit by any object travelling at 30kph+ it's going to be dangerous.

I have news for you If you're hit by an SUV, you are twice as likely to be killed as someone hit by a car.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4462-suvs-double-pedestrians-risk-of-death/

Odyssey 2005

Moragle wrote: »

The main issue with him is the problems he will cause in rural areas. For example at the moment we have 4 private bus companies that go to letterkenny, all of them are off because of coronavirus. So if you work in letterkenny hospital for example and you're expected to get to work by public transport there is absolutely none.

Same here in kilkenny. Zero public transport

Triangle

JC01 wrote: »

Ergo the need for the cars, see where I'm coming from?

Mines only a diesel because of that clown Ryan.

Man, eamon Ryan didn't come up with the data to base policies on.
The car manufacturers lied about the data and based on this, environmental groups (worldwide) decided diesel was cleaner.
But this fact won't stop the righteous fury of some.

unhappys10

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I have news for you If you're hit by an SUV, you are twice as likely to be killed as someone hit by a car.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4462-suvs-double-pedestrians-risk-of-death/

Best to watch where you're going then.

kirving

Triangle wrote: »

Man, eamon Ryan didn't come up with the data to base policies on.
The car manufacturers lied about the data and based on this, environmental groups (worldwide) decided diesel was cleaner.
But this fact won't stop the righteous fury of some.

No, the dogs on the street knew about it for years. Absolutely no secret among other OEMs who constantly benchmark one anothers products.

Governments wanted to boost the economy as the financial crash happened and this was a nice way to do while pretending to be green.

Triangle

unhappys10 wrote: »

I have news for you, if you're hit by any object travelling at 30kph+ it's going to be dangerous.

The NCAP ratings for vehicles shows that box shaped bonnets are more dangerous than sloped ones.
The BMW x5 has a 76% rating the BMW 3 series is given 86% for pedestrian impacts.
Pre 2009 the X5 had 1 out of four stars for pedestrians/cyclists.

https://www.euroncap.com

Seth Brundle

Lundstram wrote: »

That list of things don't use public roads, disrupt traffic or cause accidents.

Next time, engage your brain before replying.

I assume you're indirectly referring to cyclists then.
Just remember that people cycling on a road are part of traffic as defined in the Road Traffic Acts!
Maybe you're referring to drivers causing congestion and causing thousands of incidents weekly; some even killing people. But let's ignore the elephant in the room because it doesn't suit your daft argument.

Duckjob

unhappys10 wrote: »

Best to watch where you're going then.

Thank f**k you're not the Minister for Transport.

Seth Brundle

Lundstram wrote: »

I pay about €3000 per year to run my car. That is handsomely taxed.

Cyclists pay nothing.

Both use the same roads.

Cyclists, pay up or shut up moaning.

I pay motor tax.
I also pay income tax.
I also pay many other forms of taxation.
So as a cyclist I contribute towards the running of the country including funding roads.
So, no. I won't shut up when someone pipes up with daft ideas about public taxation and spending.

Duckjob

Duckjob wrote: »

Thank f**k you're not the Minister for Transport.

Anyone would be better than what we’ve ended up with.

Triangle

Kevin Irving wrote: »

No, the dogs on the street knew about it for years. Absolutely no secret among other OEMs who constantly benchmark one anothers products.

Governments wanted to boost the economy as the financial crash happened and this was a nice way to do while pretending to be green.

Even the EU back then was pushing diesel over petrol as better environmentally.
Just look back at the articles and data released then.

Here's a journal article saying it

https://www.thejournal.ie/diesel-worse-for-environment-than-petrol-3611217-Sep2017/#:~:text=BACK%20IN%201998%20the%20EU,to%20reduce%20greenhouse%20gas%20emissions.

Seth Brundle

Lundstram wrote: »

Cyclists have no place in areas with no cycle lanes.

Want cycles lanes? Start paying for them.

Jesus, you keep banging the same drum despite the facts being presented to you.

BorneTobyWilde

Who in their right mind wants a dirty diesel car. They only buy them as the fuel is way cheaper . Not complicated, ban diesels and drop the price of petrol to 1 euro a litre.
Diesel cars are pointless.

Rows Grower

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Perhaps you should be the one to produce evidence, given that you're the one dishing out the instructions?

Do you wear a crash helmet in the car yourself given that's where the vast majority of head injuries happen?

No I don't wear a crash helmet in my car, but I do wear a safety belt and I'm surrounded by air bags in case the unfortunate should occur.

Stay safe Andrew.

TrailerBob

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Who in their right mind wants a dirty diesel car. They only buy them as the fuel is way cheaper . Not complicated, ban diesels and drop the price of petrol to 1 euro a litre.
Diesel cars are pointless.

Another sweeping generalisation to add to the dozens already here..

A problem here is a reflection of how politics works in Ireland.. local issues take precedence over national... I'm as guilty as anyone at times, but sadly my area is one of the least represented I can think of in both a local and national context, so I don't feel my vote has much of a say in who gets into the Dail... The City vs Rural divide will always be there... Diesel has it's place, maybe not in a Polo in Rathmines, but it does out here.

Rows Grower

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I have news for you If you're hit by an SUV, you are twice as likely to be killed as someone hit by a car.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4462-suvs-double-pedestrians-risk-of-death/

I have news for you, if you're a cyclist you should wear a helmet to help prevent yourself from being killed in the case of an accident.

bazz26

TrailerBob wrote: »

Another sweeping generalisation to add to the dozens already here..

A problem here is a reflection of how politics works in Ireland.. local issues take precedence over national... I'm as guilty as anyone at times, but sadly my area is one of the least represented I can think of in both a local and national context, so I don't feel my vote has much of a say in who gets into the Dail... The City vs Rural divide will always be there... Diesel has it's place, maybe not in a Polo in Rathmines, but it does out here.

I wouldn't bother even replying to that. Its just fishing for outrage.

TrailerBob

bazz26 wrote: »

I wouldn't bother even replying to that. Its just fishing for outrage.

Not fishing, more resigned to the fact that us having the argument is pointless, as lifelong city dwellers don't understand rural life and vice versa.. I don't get city life myself.. but that's not to say there's any right or wrong.. and Ryan's policies are vehemently urban based and his ignorance of rural life had been shown before.

AndrewJRenko

unhappys10 wrote: »

Best to watch where you're going then.

Or possibly bester still to not let death traps like that out on the public road, mixing with our children, our parents, our families?

You know that the majority of road deaths are motorists killing themselves, other motorists and passengers, right?