When will the penny drop that we cannot keep building large roads?

PhilOssophy

A major obstacle with any new rail line has to be the problems we have fitting it into the likes of Dublin.
Its grand to have a high-speed rail line but then if it sits waiting to get in to Heuston Station, what is the point?
I would however still think that we should be looking at more orbital Luas style routes, and a pressing need is for one to run similar to the M50. These could link with railway links at a few key points which also gives somebody living in Portlaoise and working in Tallaght an option other than driving.

Isambard

Isambard wrote: »

Building a new car park suggests they think the new measures are a success, whereas by your post it seems they're a nail in the coffin. Fares need to be reduced dramatically, even down to zero.

Their fare system is completely out of whack, and has been for years. Someone touched on it earlier with the post about Sallins being included in the short hop zone. If you travel from Balbriggan to Gormanstown, it costs about €6 each way, even though the stops are next to each other and only 5 mins apart. Go the other direction, however, Balbriggan to Greystones takes nearly 2 hrs and costs even less than the first fare.

I realise they have to draw the arbitrary line somewhere, but it doesn't seem to make any sense.

cgcsb

PhilOssophy wrote: »

A major obstacle with any new rail line has to be the problems we have fitting it into the likes of Dublin.

The DART+ plan includes an extra track into Heuston.

monument

Mayo_fan wrote: »

@monument I’m really confused, what are you actually giving out about? Is it all and any roads that you want an end to or just within cities? It’s very hard to follow your meandering posts.

I see you refused to engage or address the points I raised in my post and instead went with another one of your silly pictures because it didn’t suit your agenda. There is a name for that type of posting which I won’t use

Autonomous cars zooming around from Mayo to Kerry are currently in the realm of Hyperloop — a big fecking distraction to the action we need to decarbonise our transport system quickly.

Climate change inaction is worse than climate change dental.

frozenfrozen

GT89 wrote: »

And I don't think anyone disputes that. All people are saying us that instead of investing large sums of money on building new roads we should put that money into public transport instead.

I understand that point but is this not "fcuk you I've got mine" by people in dublin with motorways coming out their ears wanting high speed trains instead of a Cork to Limerick motorway?

not putting words in your mouth or a straw man but when I hear stop building big roads to me that is just ludicrous when I think of going through buttevant at 15km/h on the route galway - limerick - cork

PhilOssophy

cgcsb wrote: »

The DART+ plan includes an extra track into Heuston.

That's good to hear - I didn't know that. But at the same time, there is probably need for more than 1 track if we are to avoid issues with congestion at the station. I can't imagine Heuston having capacity for many more platforms, does it?

the_syco

Zebra3 wrote: »

Maybe the car park wouldn’t be so full of people didn’t drive their cars such short distances to the train station.

Or try to live such unsustainable lives.

Leixlip has a large(est?) accessible carpark on the Sligo line.

And how is using public transport unsustainable? I see many people use the train or bus use teh carpark; if you want people to use public transport, facilitate them! True, they could goto Celbrige, but traffic getting there is probably not worth their while.

Deleted User wrote: »

Stopping one-off builds would be a good start.

Its fairly hard to build away from the masses, although many people try, as estate living is not for everyone.

the_syco

the_syco wrote: »

many people try, as estate living is not for everyone.

Estate living has little to do with it

- McMansions
- Celtic Tiger/vanity
- Cheap land
- etc

Its possible to have all of the above without living out in the sticks with no access to public transport.

By encouraging consolidation of building stock within 500m-1km of a village center, you start to build a critical mass. This leads to businesses opening, viable PT routes etc etc etc.

That some struggle to understand that you cant have ribbon development and good public services is beyond me. Unless, of course, you fancy paying 70% tax to pay for it all

monument

monument wrote: »

Autonomous cars zooming around from Mayo to Kerry are currently in the realm of Hyperloop — a big fecking distraction to the action we need to decarbonise our transport system quickly.

Climate change inaction is worse than climate change dental.

There you go again meandering your argument trying to be funny by claiming some wants a “Large road from mayo to Kerry”, nobody mentioned such a silly thing.

Why not address my point about a high speed rail link from Belfast to cork being dam all good to anyone not living in Belfast, Dublin or cork. Are the people of Tralee(just a random town) who want to go to Dublin supposed to drive to cork?

You need to open your eyes to next generation electric travel. It’s well accepted that they will lead to safer transport, lower car ownership, more efficient use of infrastructure, faster journeys.

You haven’t given any indication of what these “large roads” that you object to are. Looking at TII I see mainly projects that will improve safety and link up towns of Ireland that haven’t a hope getting a rail link, I don’t see the glamourise white elephants that you seem to claim are 10 a penny. Unless you think the biggest one which is Limerick to cork shouldn’t go ahead?

I’m wondering if you are even serious about the generic topic you posted or are you just looking for ye another rail v road arguments(which you clearly have gotten) to generate traffic to your forum?

Banana Republic 1

monument wrote: »

It seems the penny isn’t dropping with a lot of people that continuing to build an unsustainable transport system isn’t compatible with acting on climate change — car use alone amounts to ~13% of Ireland’s carbon emissions, then there’s build and maintenance, poor land use etc.

Meanwhile, it's said off-line and on boards.ie etc that anything to do with rail is a white elephant -- it's like an echo of that Sunday Independent article from before the Dart opened calling the Dart a white elephant and saying it would be cheaper to pay for taxis for everybody.

EDITED: I should stress that I think rail is only a part of the sustainable transport mix -- my point about is how jarring it is that people have no problem with laods of dual carriageways to towns start calling rail in city a white elephant.

The building of roads will only stop when people stop voting for the politicians that push such projects.

cgcsb

Mayo_fan wrote: »

Why not address my point about a high speed rail link from Belfast to cork being dam all good to anyone not living in Belfast, Dublin or cork.

Well not really, it would benefit everyone in Ireland who lives near a railway. About 5 million people in all.

Mayo_fan wrote: »

Are the people of Tralee(just a random town) who want to go to Dublin supposed to drive to cork?

Conventional speed train from Tralee to Mallow and high speed to Dublin. The Tralee-Dublin Journey time would be almost an hour shorter and much more frequent so it would be of great benefit to Kerry in general.

Cookiemunster

cgcsb wrote: »

Well not really, it would benefit everyone in Ireland who lives near a railway. About 5 million people in all.

About 5 million people is about 100% of the population. Seeing as 30% of the population is rural, that number is total and utter BS. And that 30% doesn't even include those living in towns and villages that are nowhere near railway lines.

cgcsb

Cookiemunster wrote: »

About 5 million people is about 100% of the population. Seeing as 30% of the population is rural, that number is total and utter BS. And that 30% doesn't even include those living in towns and villages that are nowhere near railway lines.

The rail system is all-Ireland. There are 7 million people in all-Ireland.

Cookiemunster

cgcsb wrote: »

The rail system is all-Ireland. There are 7 million people in all-Ireland.

The discussion of the building of roads by the Irish government is not relevant what happens in NI, where they have no say in what goes on. To that point rail is not all island as CIE/IE does not control rail in NI.

Zebra3

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Right on. they should be whipped for even daring to breathe and breed.

Imagine them taking responsibility.

Zebra3

the_syco wrote: »

Leixlip has a large(est?) accessible carpark on the Sligo line.

And how is using public transport unsustainable? I see many people use the train or bus use teh carpark; if you want people to use public transport, facilitate them! True, they could goto Celbrige, but traffic getting there is probably not worth their while.

People living in one off houses aren’t living sustainable lives even if they get a train the odd time. People driving 1km and then using valuable land to store their car for a few hours instead of walking aren’t living sustainable lives.

The traffic in Maynooth is horrendous. What do Irish Rail do? Extend their car park to bring in more traffic around the town. More traffic for buses to get delayed behind.

Zebra3

Zebra3 wrote: »

People living in one off houses aren’t living sustainable lives even if they get a train the odd time. People driving 1km and then using valuable land to store their car for a few hours instead of walking aren’t living sustainable lives.

The traffic in Maynooth is horrendous. What do Irish Rail do? Extend their car park to bring in more traffic around the town. More traffic for buses to get delayed behind.

Tell me that someone living in a rural house off-grid consuming internet over wireless, with their own water supply well with added effluent treatment system on site aren't living more sustainably that someone in town.
The house I grew up in a rural location was much more sustainable than anything in the local town.
You need to re-adjust your perspective on what is sustainable and what is not.

cgcsb

Cookiemunster wrote: »

The discussion of the building of roads by the Irish government is not relevant what happens in NI, where they have no say in what goes on. To that point rail is not all island as CIE/IE does not control rail in NI.

The particular conversation was about rail from Belfast to Cork, clearly the discussion is in an all island context, and the conversation is also in the future tense, by which time NI probably wont exist. Anyway, that's enough knit picking.

cgcsb

Deleted User wrote: »

Tell me that someone living in a rural house off-grid consuming internet over wireless, with their own water supply well with added effluent treatment system on site aren't living more sustainably that someone in town.
The house I grew up in a rural location was much more sustainable than anything in the local town.
You need to re-adjust your perspective on what is sustainable and what is not.

If you have a top of the range effluent treatment system (comparable to the service offered by WWT plants) that is well maintained, grand. The vast majority do not.

Assuming no natural gas connection, if you heat your home with geothermal or air source heat pump, fine. The vast majority do not.

If you're travelling to your village or town by bike for all journeys, fine. The vast majority do not.

If you are consuming broadband and electricity from the national grid then you have consumed a many kms more copper wire than a person in a urban area.

If you are using paved roads (on bike, foot or car), you are consuming many more km of paving than an urban dweller is to accommodate your travel.

So in short, no the urban dweller is almost all the time the more sustainably living person.

cgcsb

cgcsb wrote: »

If you have a top of the range effluent treatment system (comparable to the service offered by WWT plants) that is well maintained, grand. The vast majority do not.

Assuming no natural gas connection, if you heat your home with geothermal or air source heat pump, fine. The vast majority do not.

If you're travelling to your village or town by bike for all journeys, fine. The vast majority do not.

If you are consuming broadband and electricity from the national grid then you have consumed a many kms more copper wire than a person in a urban area.

If you are using paved roads (on bike, foot or car), you are consuming many more km of paving than an urban dweller is to accommodate your travel.

So in short, no the urban dweller is almost all the time the more sustainably living person.

You have fascistic tendencies and I'm glad you are not in power and have no influence over anything.
In spite of evidence to the contrary you persist with maintaining your authoritarian views of how others should live their lives despite your beliefs having no grounding in fact.
If you have no services connected to your home and your local road hasn't been resurfaced in the last number of decades then you are living a sustainable life in a rural environment.
You are the anti-Pol Pot that is intolerant of everyone and anyone who doesn't subscribe to your outlook on life.
Nothing less than forced resettlement in chicken coops in large cities will satisfy you.

cgcsb

Deleted User wrote: »

You have fascistic tendencies and I'm glad you are not in power and have no influence over anything.
In spite of evidence to the contrary you persist with maintaining your authoritarian views of how others should live their lives despite your beliefs having no grounding in fact.
If you have no services connected to your home and your local road hasn't been resurfaced in the last number of decades then you are living a sustainable life in a rural environment.
You are the anti-Pol Pot that is intolerant of everyone and anyone who doesn't subscribe to your outlook on life.
Nothing less than forced resettlement in chicken coops in large cities will satisfy you.

Oh no, the toys are out the pram. :pac:

My views aren't authoritarian, I'm merely pointing out how incorrect you are in your theory of rural living being more sustainable than urban living. It is not, fact. I'm sorry if you cannot handle that fact and have to resort to name calling and accusations of khmer rouge membership. :rolleyes:

Are you this aggressive in real life or is it an in internet warrior sort of a set up?

Who says I'm not in power or have no influence over anything?

I think we need to define the word sustainable.

timmyntc

cgcsb wrote: »

Oh no, the toys are out the pram. :pac:

My views aren't authoritarian, I'm merely pointing out how incorrect you are in your theory of rural living being more sustainable than urban living. It is not, fact. I'm sorry if you cannot handle that fact and have to resort to name calling and accusations of khmer rouge membership. :rolleyes:

Are you this aggressive in real life or is it an in internet warrior sort of a set up?

Who says I'm not in power or have no influence over anything?

Rural living absolutely can be more sustainable than urban living.
There are no absolutes for this though - some urban dwellers burn coal fires, others have heat pumps. Same goes for rural people.

Some rural farm, forest, and feed themselves off their own land. Is that not more sustainable than an urban dweller driving to the supermarket to buy food that has travelled 1000s of air miles in refrigerated storage?

Your blanket claim is just a form of stereotyping.

cgcsb

timmyntc wrote: »

Rural living absolutely can be more sustainable than urban living.
There are no absolutes for this though - some urban dwellers burn coal fires, others have heat pumps. Same goes for rural people.

Some rural farm, forest, and feed themselves off their own land. Is that not more sustainable than an urban dweller driving to the supermarket to buy food that has travelled 1000s of air miles in refrigerated storage?

Your blanket claim is just a form of stereotyping.

'Can be'. Yes you could generate all your power onsite, not go anywhere and live off the land etc. but obviously people don't do that, so that's only theoretical.

As things stand rural dwellers in general are leading less sustainable lives than urban dwellers, with many more kms traveled by private car, many more emissions generated by home heating, many more untreated pollutants generated by waste water effluent and much more resources consumed to provide services. Trying to deny these facts by pointing out that one could theoretically live a more sustainable life in a remote area is counter productive because as things stand, that is simply not the case.

CGCSB comes across as one of those dreary types who has no real life experience and insists on expounding on their view of a topic they haven't the first clue about.
I will admit it is absurd to me that someone is lecturing me on living sustainably when I experienced sustainable living from an early age.
Imagine someone like them forcing self-sufficient people who quietly go about their business providing for their own needs, drawing their own water, arranging their own waste water treatment, harvesting their own kitchen garden being upended by People like them who know nothing but dogma without insight and being forcibly displaced in to Urban centres because it is the "right thing to do".

My advice to CGCSB would be to whist and let the Adults talk.

PhilOssophy

This thread was great about 10 pages ago.

timmyntc

cgcsb wrote: »

'Can be'. Yes you could generate all your power onsite, not go anywhere and live off the land etc. but obviously people don't do that, so that's only theoretical.

As things stand rural dwellers in general are leading less sustainable lives than urban dwellers, with many more kms traveled by private car, many more emissions generated by home heating, many more untreated pollutants generated by waste water effluent and much more resources consumed to provide services. Trying to deny these facts by pointing out that one could theoretically live a more sustainable life in a remote area is counter productive because as things stand, that is simply not the case.

But some people do most of those things. Plenty of rural dwellers live far more sustainably than their urban counterparts.

When it comes to generalisations then yes, in general the rural dweller drivers more and probably has a solid fuel fire/stove. There are also a hell of a lot more A1 rated houses built in urban areas than rural areas so that of course will be a factor.

I agree that one-off houses should be stopped - they are a blight on the landscape and are killing small villages and towns. But its untrue to say that all rural dwellers are less sustainable than urban.

frozenfrozen

there needs to be a myfitness pal app for co2 emissions.

drive 30km in X type of car

8 minute electric shower

order tesco home delivery

then you get your daily / weekly / monthly /yearly co2

give people a target to stay under such a number.

Reach that number by having a V8 and being vegan or cycling everywhere so you can go on a foreign holiday...

ExoPolitic

frozenfrozen wrote: »

there needs to be a myfitness pal app for co2 emissions.

drive 30km in X type of car

8 minute electric shower

order tesco home delivery

then you get your daily / weekly / monthly /yearly co2

give people a target to stay under such a number.

Reach that number by having a V8 and being vegan or cycling everywhere so you can go on a foreign holiday...

Nope.

cgcsb

Deleted User wrote: »

CGCSB comes across as one of those dreary types who has no real life experience and insists on expounding on their view of a topic they haven't the first clue about.
I will admit it is absurd to me that someone is lecturing me on living sustainably when I experienced sustainable living from an early age.
Imagine someone like them forcing self-sufficient people who quietly go about their business providing for their own needs, drawing their own water, arranging their own waste water treatment, harvesting their own kitchen garden being upended by People like them who know nothing but dogma without insight and being forcibly displaced in to Urban centres because it is the "right thing to do".

My advice to CGCSB would be to whist and let the Adults talk.

Again, I'm not forcing anything on anyone, merely pointing out the fallacy of your supposition. I've reported your post, a pointless, 3rd person, personal attack.