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

How we think and talk about reducing car use in cities

Options
1234579

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,444 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    troyzer wrote: »
    it'll be possible to get in a car which drives you to work and then can park at home ready to pick you up when needed.
    this thread is about reducing car use - the scenario you posit is a doubling of it.


  • Options
    #183
    troyzer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,199 ✭✭✭troyzer


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    this thread is about reducing car use - the scenario you posit is a doubling of it.

    I doubt it would double it but it does massively reduce the negative impact of car use.


  • Options
    #184
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,444 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    but your car is making the return trip twice instead of once. your car is driving you to work and immediately driving home?

    you're suggesting that empty cars driving around the streets - to reduce the impact on parking - is a lesser evil than the parking. that's a debate to be had, sure, but i know where i'd sit on that.


  • Options
    #185
    LeChienMefiant
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    How does an autonomous car decide when I'm allowed cross the road as a pedestrian?


  • Options
    #186
    Borderfox
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    troyzer wrote: »
    It should also be said that all of this might be completely pointless once autonomous cars come along.

    Within the next 10-15 years it'll be possible to get in a car which drives you to work and then can park at home ready to pick you up when needed.

    Once that happens you can start getting rid of parking spaces in the city centre which in the case of on street parking can be turned into cycle lanes and the multi storeys turned into housing/commercial units. Autonomous cars also allow for the abolition of traffic lights which allows for free flowing junctions all the time.

    They won't solve everything, but they'd be a huge dent in the problem.

    I thought the point of driverless cars is you don't own it and when your not using it another user gets it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    LeChienMefiant
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    Borderfox wrote: »
    I thought the point of driverless cars is you don't own it and when your not using it another user gets it.

    Careful now. That might be offensive to those in extra platonic relationships with their cars. :D


  • Options
    #188
    troyzer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,199 ✭✭✭troyzer


    LeChienMefiant wrote: »
    How does an autonomous car decide when I'm allowed cross the road as a pedestrian?

    When the light is red?
    Borderfox wrote: »
    I thought the point of driverless cars is you don't own it and when your not using it another user gets it.

    Forgot to mention this aspect of it. While it's true that in theory you'd have more cars on the road, the traffic flow would be much smoother. This video sums it up really well:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHzzSao6ypE


  • Options
    #189
    El Tarangu
    Registered Users Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭El Tarangu


    troyzer wrote: »
    It should also be said that all of this might be completely pointless once autonomous cars come along...

    I think that the idea of hybrid/electric/automonous cars being a magic solution to congestion is a bit of a cod; single occupancy vehicle of any of the types above is still as inefficent a use of road space as the single occupancy vehicles that are congesting the roads now.


  • Options
    #190
    LeChienMefiant
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    troyzer wrote: »
    Autonomous cars also allow for the abolition of traffic lights which allows for free flowing junctions all the time.
    LeChienMefiant wrote: »
    How does an autonomous car decide when I'm allowed cross the road as a pedestrian?
    troyzer wrote: »
    When the light is red?
    :confused:


  • Options
    #191
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,444 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Borderfox wrote: »
    I thought the point of driverless cars is you don't own it and when your not using it another user gets it.
    they're two separate issues. i don't see the automatic link others are making that shared car ownership is part and parcel of autonomous cars - we have something similar already (e.g. go car) with normal cars, but it's at best a marginal impact based on how many you see on the street.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    LeChienMefiant
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    they're two separate issues. i don't see the automatic link others are making that shared car ownership is part and parcel of autonomous cars - we have something similar already (e.g. go car) with normal cars, but it's at best a marginal impact based on how many you see on the street.
    It's early days on car sharing. A car is a big sunk cost for people and hence difficult to get people to give up their own cars. It makes most sense now for new immigrants and possibly young drivers (not sure how the insurance works for them).


  • Options
    #193
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users Posts: 25,697 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    prinzeugen wrote: »
    And another poster suggested delivering at nights... Ridiculous suggestion. This came up before and it was clear that the majority of people are quite ignorant as to how the stuff gets into a shop or businesses or how other people go about work.

    Indeed.

    Or about how services are provided to sick, disabled or housebound people.

    Public transport or slow individual transport (ie bicycle) is fine for many people who do all their work in one site. But there are many jobs which aren't like that.


  • Options
    #194
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    troyzer wrote: »
    It should also be said that all of this might be completely pointless once autonomous cars come along.

    Within the next 10-15 years it'll be possible to get in a car which drives you to work and then can park at home ready to pick you up when needed.

    Once that happens you can start getting rid of parking spaces in the city centre which in the case of on street parking can be turned into cycle lanes and the multi storeys turned into housing/commercial units. Autonomous cars also allow for the abolition of traffic lights which allows for free flowing junctions all the time.

    They won't solve everything, but they'd be a huge dent in the problem.

    Won't happen, there'll be large scale car bans on many City Centre streets in virtually every European City before this happens. The only issue that autonomous cars 'solves' is parking. It worsens congestion and worsens the modal share and energy efficiency of transport.


  • Options
    #195
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    troyzer wrote: »
    I doubt it would double it but it does massively reduce the negative impact of car use.

    Not really, it makes car use a much more attractive commuting mode by removing the parking cost/hassle, something that we're trying to avoid. If that were the case PT users would be attracted back to the car.


  • Options
    #196
    troyzer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,199 ✭✭✭troyzer


    Apologies, you'd still have pedestrian lights in this scenario of course.

    It doesn't increase congestion actually, that's the whole point. You should watch that video.

    But basically by abolishing junction lights (except pedestrian lights) cars can freeflow across junctions all of the time bumper to bumper. It's far more efficient and reduces congestion.


  • Options
    #197
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    troyzer wrote: »
    Apologies, you'd still have pedestrian lights in this scenario of course.

    It doesn't increase congestion actually, that's the whole point. You should watch that video.

    But basically by abolishing junction lights (except pedestrian lights) cars can freeflow across junctions all of the time bumper to bumper. It's far more efficient and reduces congestion.

    It'll increase congestion because everyone currently on PT will be attracted to the autonomous car.


  • Options
    #198
    LeChienMefiant
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    Mrs OBumble wrote: »
    Indeed.

    Or about how services are provided to sick, disabled or housebound people.

    Public transport or slow individual transport (ie bicycle) is fine for many people who do all their work in one site. But there are many jobs which aren't like that.
    The name of the thread is "How we think and talk about reducing car use in cities". But I would tend to agree that you can't eliminate commercial vehicle traffic. Private cars should be the main focus IMO.


  • Options
    #199
    LeChienMefiant
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭LeChienMefiant


    troyzer wrote: »
    But basically by abolishing junction lights (except pedestrian lights) cars can freeflow across junctions all of the time bumper to bumper. It's far more efficient and reduces congestion.
    That's not suitable for cities, at least not where pedestrians and cyclists are treated like human beings. The technology is a long way off being sophisticated enough.


  • Options
    #200
    troyzer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,199 ✭✭✭troyzer


    cgcsb wrote: »
    It'll increase congestion because everyone currently on PT will be attracted to the autonomous car.

    It increases the number of cars on the road but this isn't the same as congestion.

    The M50 for example theoretically has unlimited capacity. The problem is the queues that form up at light on off ramps and the phantom traffic caused by people changing lanes or otherwise braking suddenly. This doesn't happen with autonomous cars.

    Obviously the M50 isn't the city centre but the principle is the same.
    LeChienMefiant wrote: »
    That's not suitable for cities, at least not where pedestrians and cyclists are treated like human beings. The technology is a long way off being sophisticated enough.

    Of course it's not suitable yet and it wouldn't work until you had a critical mass of autonomous cars anyway.


  • Options
    #201
    TheBoyConor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    troyzer wrote: »
    Apologies, you'd still have pedestrian lights in this scenario of course.

    It doesn't increase congestion actually, that's the whole point. You should watch that video.

    But basically by abolishing junction lights (except pedestrian lights) cars can freeflow across junctions all of the time bumper to bumper. It's far more efficient and reduces congestion.


    That's actually nonsense in the real world.

    That scenario assumes and requires that all of the vehicles on the road will be autonomous and able to operate as a hive mind. Firstly, a situation where all vehicles are autonomous will not happen for a very very long time if ever. You will still need signalled junctions because the roads will carry a huge mix of vehicles in the foreseeable future.
    - a portion of autonomous cars/vans/trucks
    - older non-autonomous cars/vans/trucks
    - utility trucks for waste collection, road maintenance etc for which AV would not be really suited for.
    - work vehicles for construction, tractors, cranes etc etc which very often have life spans much longer than domestic cars for which AV tech isn't really all that useful. So you could still have heavy machines 20 years old in regular road use.
    - cyclists and motorbikes
    - pedestrians
    - classic or vintage vehicles
    -

    To remove lights would result in absolute chaos. So it is not going to happen for many decades yet.

    There is an awful lot of Walter Mittyism when it comes to anything to due with autonomous or electric vehicles. It is not a simple subject.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    I think the thread is on a tangent now. Increasing car numbers, decreasing PT users and thus exponentially increasing the amount of energy expended per passenger per km (in a future where energy is scarce) is not going to be a policy position of any government going forward, even if the wild theory of congestion being purely a function of breaking and lane changing is correct.

    The thread is abut reducing car use in Cities, not the opposite (which will never happen).


  • Options
    #203
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,423 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Mrs OBumble wrote: »
    Public transport or slow individual transport (ie bicycle) is fine for many people who do all their work in one site. But there are many jobs which aren't like that.

    Bikes are faster than cars in most cities most of the time


  • Options
    #204
    Shefwedfan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    Mrs OBumble wrote: »
    Indeed.

    Or about how services are provided to sick, disabled or housebound people.

    Public transport or slow individual transport (ie bicycle) is fine for many people who do all their work in one site. But there are many jobs which aren't like that.


    So what services are provided to sick, disbled or housebound that

    1. Require a car
    2. Can't be provided by electric vehicle if required?


    As someone else mentioned, a bicycle is faster in city centre. So are electric scooters etc. They would be a lot faster if the roads were closed and they could use them freely



    What are these jobs? which ones don't work on a single site? 1% maybe or less?


  • Options
    #205
    Shefwedfan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    prinzeugen wrote: »
    You must not have read my post right. Environmental Health use pesticides not plumbers. I use pesticides and if I was to decant them into smaller amounts and take them on public transport or on a cycle, I would find myself getting nailed to the floor in the courts.

    Medicine is delivered by van. Only live tissue/blood is moved by bike.

    There are strict regulations on the carriage of dangerous goods. Its not rocket science!

    Electric vans for plumbers (and other trades) wont work. Its the parking that is the problem. Why have a guy spending hours walking back and forth to his van and only getting paid for one job, when he could get 3-4 other jobs done in the same amount of time elsewhere.

    Dynorod etc need access all day. Do you think a business is going to shut up shop while they slowly fill up with crap from a blocked drain? No they need the guy in the van outside asap. They cant wait until the night. Could be thousands of Euros worth of damage by that point.

    And another poster suggested delivering at nights... Ridiculous suggestion. This came up before and it was clear that the majority of people are quite ignorant as to how the stuff gets into a shop or businesses or how other people go about work.



    As I mentioned, if you go around and around in circle you can make up a job that might require someone to drive. They will be the 1%. The other 99% don't need it.



    None of the rest makes sense to be honest, if a trade person does get access to city centre why would they be walking from hours??? dynorod....:P:P:P:P


    Come on, make up some jobs. It is funny :P:P:P:P:P


    To save you time, go back to the persons suggestion about debt collectors....:P:P:P:P:P



    Also you do realize most building sites at the moment actually open at 2 or earlier in the morning. Concrete etc is poured in the middle of the night so they dont have to deal with traffic. By 7 o clock those workers go home, then painters etc arrive who dont need parking etc because they will have dropped equipment in previous days. This has been going on for years.


    Shops get deliveries in the middle of the night all the time. This happens daily. Even going back to 1998 when I worked in tesco, a member of staff was in the shop at 4 in morning to take in delivery of fresh fruit.


    I think someone is ignornat alright.....not sure who it is though........


  • Options
    #206
    howiya
    Registered Users Posts: 3,226 ✭✭✭howiya


    Shefwedfan wrote: »
    Also you do realize most building sites at the moment actually open at 2 or earlier in the morning. Concrete etc is poured in the middle of the night so they dont have to deal with traffic. By 7 o clock those workers go home, then painters etc arrive who dont need parking etc because they will have dropped equipment in previous days. This has been going on for years.

    The permissible hours of operation of a building site within Dublin City are;

    Monday to Friday 07.00 – 18.00

    Saturday 08.00 – 14.00

    Sundays and Public Holidays No noisy work on site.

    http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-water-waste-and-environment-air-quality-monitoring-and-noise-control-noise/types


  • Options
    #207
    Shefwedfan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    howiya wrote: »
    The permissible hours of operation of a building site within Dublin City are;

    Monday to Friday 07.00 – 18.00

    Saturday 08.00 – 14.00

    Sundays and Public Holidays No noisy work on site.

    http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-water-waste-and-environment-air-quality-monitoring-and-noise-control-noise/types




    Read on and it says in planning permission stage


    The sites in D4 work at nighttime(the large office buildings).....probably because the area is not residential


  • Options
    #208
    howiya
    Registered Users Posts: 3,226 ✭✭✭howiya


    Shefwedfan wrote: »
    Read on and it says in planning permission stage


    The sites in D4 work at nighttime(the large office buildings).....probably because the area is not residential

    Which specific development are you referring to?


  • Options
    #209
    Shefwedfan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    howiya wrote: »
    Which specific development are you referring to?




    http://www.thecomergroup.com/development/no-1-ballsbridge


  • Options
    #210
    howiya
    Registered Users Posts: 3,226 ✭✭✭howiya


    Shefwedfan wrote: »
    http://www.thecomergroup.com/development/no-1-ballsbridge

    Thanks, Dublin 4 is a big area.

    But we're gone from building sites to some building sites. Since we're talking about the city a lot of sites will be restricted to normal hours due to their location.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    Shefwedfan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    howiya wrote: »
    Thanks, Dublin 4 is a big area.

    But we're gone from building sites to some building sites. Since we're talking about the city a lot of sites will be restricted to normal hours due to their location.


    As I said..if there is a will there's a way


    The negative nellies on here will come up with all sorts of petty little excuses. It is already shown that some people in Ireland can actually think outside the box and come up with idea's and solution to problems.


    Not sit complaining and coming up with excuses.



    Go back over thread, all this minor little excuses have all reasonable easy answers from people. But some people will just keep on firing out excuse after excuse after excuse.


Advertisement