Galway traffic

McGiver

LostDuck wrote:

Yeah, but...

Yeah but...sure look it, I suppose we are where we are

Put on the green (erm...maroon) jersey and carry on.

LostDuck

I passed a couple of these new bus shelters earlier. They're going for expensive looking style over function. Not much shelter to sideways Galway rain - the seats were soaked at each.

McGiver

LostDuck wrote:

I passed a couple of these new bus shelters earlier. They're going for expensive looking style over function. Not much shelter to sideways Galway rain - the seats were soaked at each.

As I said - the council are idiots.

They have only 5 shots (a systemic issue on its own) - and they shoot them at wrong places and in a wrong way...

They didn't upgrade the most important ones and they selected a wrong design.

We enthusiasts would make a better assessment and decision, and we're not rocket (bus) scientists. Even if they let people vote for the location and design of the bus shelters it would generate a better outcome.

I really don't know what to do with this council lot. I think I will send a letter to the council at least. It would be good if multiple people did the same.

Where are the new shelters? I'll have a look and take a picture which I'll send to the council along with the letter/email.

ben.schlomo

McGiver wrote: »

As I said - the council are idiots.

They have only 5 shots (a systemic issue on its own) - and they shoot them at wrong places and in a wrong way...

They didn't upgrade the most important ones and they selected a wrong design.

We enthusiasts would make a better assessment and decision, and we're not rocket (bus) scientists. Even if they let people vote for the location and design of the bus shelters it would generate a better outcome.

I really don't know what to do with this council lot. I think I will send a letter to the council at least. It would be good if multiple people did the same.

Where are the new shelters? I'll have a look and take a picture which I'll send to the council along with the letter/email.

There's one opposite Medtronic in Mervue, down from the back gate of Thermo. Supposed to be one or two going onto Castlepark Rd but don't know if they've been done yet.

Mrs OBumble

ben.schlomo wrote: »

There's one opposite Medtronic in Mervue, down from the back gate of Thermo. Supposed to be one or two going onto Castlepark Rd but don't know if they've been done yet.

Done weeks ago.

LostDuck

McGiver wrote: »

Where are the new shelters? I'll have a look and take a picture which I'll send to the council along with the letter/email.

The ones I saw were at the bottom of the Ballymoneen Road and on the Clybaun Road near the medical centre.

Mrs OBumble

McGiver wrote: »

Essentially all modern cities (or large towns) already have systems to deal with residents parking, some of which are digital/electronic. It's a non-issue.

I know you like to use that argument a lot but there are already solutions for this. It's not a blocker and shouldn't even be mentioned, it is implicit that it will be dealt with in any comprehensive traffic overhaul. Waste of time mentioning this point.

I parking is nowhere near the most significant issue.

Street noise (drummers are the worse, buskers, in-restaurant drinks, people fighting and facing, etc) is a pretty major one. Hygiene is another.

timmyntc

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I parking is nowhere near the most significant issue.

Street noise (drummers are the worse, buskers, in-restaurant drinks, people fighting and facing, etc) is a pretty major one. Hygiene is another.

Aren't drummers and buskers with amps all banned anyways?

And people can only busk in certain areas/streets - no need to allow them on mostly the residential streets.
As for people drinking/shouting/fighting, pedestrianisation makes little difference to that really - the hours that happens that, really late at night, the streets might as well be pedestrianised for what little amount of traffic go through them.

Hygiene? What?

LostDuck

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Street noise (drummers are the worse, buskers, in-restaurant drinks, people fighting and facing, etc) is a pretty major one. Hygiene is another.

Street music, drums, lively bars and restaurants.... isnt that what makes Galway City so special?

McGiver

Mrs OBumble wrote:

Street noise (drummers are the worse, buskers, in-restaurant drinks, people fighting and facing, etc) is a pretty major one. Hygiene is another.

Do you prefer:
A) buskers, drunks, rowdies
cars with fumes etc

BTW non-pedestrianised city centre streets generate both, so what's the point in NOT pedestrianising. You at least eliminate i.e. cars and fumes.

zell12

Huge chunk of people without public transport access

25/08/20 - City Direct Bus Ltd. is currently having discussions with the NTA (National Transport Authority) about getting bus services resumed in the Knocknacarra area. We hope to have an update shortly on services between Knocknacarra and Eyre Square.

?Cee?view

McGiver wrote: »

Do you prefer:
A) buskers, drunks, rowdies
cars with fumes etc

BTW non-pedestrianised city centre streets generate both, so what's the point in NOT pedestrianising. You at least eliminate i.e. cars and fumes.

I'd definitely choose B. You're completely exaggerating the effect of fumes.

zell12

zell12 wrote: »

Huge chunk of people without public transport access

25/08/20 - City Direct Bus Ltd. is currently having discussions with the NTA (National Transport Authority) about getting bus services resumed in the Knocknacarra area. We hope to have an update shortly on services between Knocknacarra and Eyre Square.

Yeah the situation nationally with the private transport companies sucks but you have to have sympathy for the likes of City Direct who are digging their heels in, in an effort to ensure they remain viable. They will last mere weeks if they resume services without some exchequer support.

xckjoo

?Cee?view wrote: »

I'd definitely choose B. You're completely exaggerating the effect of fumes.

IMO that's a naive opinion to hold. Just because they aren't billowing out clouds of black smoke doesn't mean they aren't outputting very harmful particulates that we're all inhaling. I remember reading stuff on the harmful effects of particulates from brakepads recently. Wouldn't even have thought that was a thing

?Cee?view

xckjoo wrote: »

IMO that's a naive opinion to hold. Just because they aren't billowing out clouds of black smoke doesn't mean they aren't outputting very harmful particulates that we're all inhaling. I remember reading stuff on the harmful effects of particulates from brakepads recently. Wouldn't even have thought that was a thing

That sounds about right. I'm sure the Green Party will next consider taxing brake pads :rolleyes:

xckjoo

?Cee?view wrote: »

That sounds about right. I'm sure the Green Party will next consider taxing brake pads :rolleyes:

They should put the lead back in the petrol while we're at it! Sure we can't live forever so might as well keep it short. Think of all the money we'll save on pensions.

?Cee?view

xckjoo wrote: »

They should put the lead back in the petrol while we're at it! Sure we can't live forever so might as well keep it short. Think of all the money we'll save on pensions.

No need. They've already conned most of the country into driving filthy diesels!

?Cee?view

?Cee?view wrote: »

No need. They've already conned most of the country into driving filthy diesels!

If you are going to troll try picking a topic where you can't be proven wrong so easily.

The history of Dieselgate

I think you mean the car manufacturers conned the world by installing software that changed the emissions during an emissions test. This led to these engines appearing cleaner than petrol which caused governments globally to push towards them as they looked to be the best choice from an environmental and health perspective.

Once the con became apparent governments around the world changed again to move towards the better options in terms of the environment and the health of their people with those options being electric vehicles, increasing investment in mass transport and increasing the shift to bikes.

?Cee?view

Deleted User wrote: »

I think you mean the car manufacturers conned the world by installing software that changed the emissions during an emissions test.

No, that's not at all what I meant. Any idiot (other than the particular extreme of idiot, an Irish Green) knew that Diesel was dirtier. It's the legacy of Gormless and Co. that we are left with a road tax regime that penalises Co2 to the exclusion of any other pollutants.

?Cee?view

?Cee?view wrote: »

Any idiot knew that Diesel was dirtier.

Dieselgate is a monumental scandal because it appears that the sole purpose for fitting the cars with this software was to trick emissions inspectors. Basically, the car's computer was programmed to detect testing conditions. As soon as the engine was running and the wheels were turning, but the car was not actually moving, as is the case in a typical testing situation, the engine's performance was changed so that emissions were in line with EPA standards.

The emissions scandal was uncovered by a group of scientists at West Virginia University running very specific tests under very specific conditions which did not align with the standardized testing regimes for emissions which was why they were able to detect the differences in emissions.

This manipulation could thus only be revealed using an alternative mobile testing method, and that's where the curiosity of researchers at West Virginia University (WVU) came in. A team from the university's Center for Alternative Fuels Engines and Emissions examined the emissions of standard VW models and compared them with results from the EPA as early as this spring. They sent their study to the EPA, which did not publish these results until now.

The team had developed a device that can measure the emissions performance of an engine while the car is moving—as opposed to being on rollers—and during this testing the scientists were shocked to discover that the measured values obtained by the EPA during testing were much lower than those corresponding to normal vehicles in the street. For their measurements the scientists used a VW Jetta and a Passat, which they drove along the US west coast from Los Angeles to Seattle: In the trunk they installed a huge device connected to the exhaust pipe, measuring the emission values at different speeds.

But you knew about this all along, right?

Thargor

Deleted User wrote: »

If you are going to troll try picking a topic where you can't be proven wrong so easily.

The history of Dieselgate

I think you mean the car manufacturers conned the world by installing software that changed the emissions during an emissions test. This led to these engines appearing cleaner than petrol which caused governments globally to push towards them as they looked to be the best choice from an environmental and health perspective.

Once the con became apparent governments around the world changed again to move towards the better options in terms of the environment and the health of their people with those options being electric vehicles, increasing investment in mass transport and increasing the shift to bikes.

I wish there was a bot that would just quote this post automatically every time someone on Boards complains about the Green party making them buy diesels.

?Cee?view

Deleted User wrote: »

The emissions scandal was uncovered by a group of scientists at West Virginia University running very specific tests under very specific conditions which did not align with the standardized testing regimes for emissions which was why they were able to detect the differences in emissions.



But you knew about this all along, right?

You're not the brightest are you? The whole dieselgate thing exploded in 2015, well after the Greens had pushed their lunacy on this.

Anyone that handled diesel, worked with diesel, had seen clogged jets on diesel engines knew well that promoting diesel was nonsense. Dieselgate is a completely separate issue.

Diesel itself, without any software or additives, is dirtier than petrol. It produces more particulates than petrol yet the Greens have foisted a system on us that ignores particulates.

xckjoo

?Cee?view wrote: »

You're not the brightest are you? The whole dieselgate thing exploded in 2015, well after the Greens had pushed their lunacy on this.

Anyone that handled diesel, worked with diesel, had seen clogged jets on diesel engines knew well that promoting diesel was nonsense. Dieselgate is a completely separate issue.

Diesel itself, without any software or additives, is dirtier than petrol. It produces more particulates than petrol yet the Greens have foisted a system on us that ignores particulates.

But back to your original point, you'd rather live inhaling those fumes (and all the others that cars produce) than listen to some noise outside? One's annoying (admittedly) but the other can cause serious long-term health issues. Some of my neighbors can be rowdy enough so I get the pleasure of both . Oh and I've the lovely noise of cars flying passed all the time to enjoy too. Can't open the bedroom window at night as it's facing the road.

?Cee?view

?Cee?view wrote: »

You're not the brightest are you? The whole dieselgate thing exploded in 2015, well after the Greens had pushed their lunacy on this.

Anyone that handled diesel, worked with diesel, had seen clogged jets on diesel engines knew well that promoting diesel was nonsense. Dieselgate is a completely separate issue.

Diesel itself, without any software or additives, is dirtier than petrol. It produces more particulates than petrol yet the Greens have foisted a system on us that ignores particulates.

So if I am following you, you are mad that a dirty fuel was promoted over a different dirty fuel. Umm, ok??

Either way it matters little. ICE's are going the way of the dinos

There are a number of streams which will see usage drop of private cars drop in Galway

• Active travel promotion,
• reduced access for private vehicles into the city,
• reprioritisation of the movement of people (pedestrians first, then cyclists, then buses, then taxis, lastly private vehicles)

In addition, the following will see them soon as the least best option for someone choosing a new car

• a wave of new models
• the launch of flagship electric models with familiar names, such as the Mini, the Vauxhall Corsa and the Fiat 500
• The number of electric vehicle (EV) models available to European buyers will jump from fewer than 100 to 175 by the end of 2020, by 2025 there will be more than 330
• Better fuel efficiency
• Better milage
• Lower running costs
• Lower maintenance costs

And the final nail in the coffin, new EU rules came into force at the start of this year that will heavily penalise carmakers if average carbon dioxide emissions from the cars they sell rise above 95g per kilometre. If carmakers exceed that limit, they will have to pay a fine of €95 for every gram over the target, multiplied by the total number of cars they sell. Granted there is a caveat within the reg's that allows them to build up credits to continue polluting ICE sales without penalty, but those are gained through significant EV sales only.

The ICE is on the way out so may I suggest any anger you have towards the greens be directed into a thread on the politics forum where I will happily continue this discussion or we can take it to PM, either way I feel the last few posts have caused the thread to go off topic and it would be best to move the discussion elsewhere

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Either way it matters little. ICE's are going the way of the dinos

Not in our lifetime, ICE is going nowhere thankfully.

LostDuck

Jazmin Harsh Gold wrote: »

Not in our lifetime, ICE is going nowhere thankfully.

Because Covid?

Mrs OBumble

McGiver wrote: »

Do you prefer:
A) buskers, drunks, rowdies
cars with fumes etc

BTW non-pedestrianised city centre streets generate both, so what's the point in NOT pedestrianising. You at least eliminate i.e. cars and fumes.

I'd take cars with fumes, any day.

Even on a non-pedestrianised street, I've been at home sick when a busker set up outside my window - was torture for the day. I seriously considered going down and offering him €20 to feck off. Only thing that stopped me was the knowledge that he'd tell his mates and the next one would be along.

On a pedestrianised street, there are no cars, but the people-noise is a lot worse: they talk, sing, busk, drum, play music for entertainment etc. And the behaviour in the space at night is worse to, including yelling, fighting, fúcking (if there are park benches) etc.

The fumes thing will reduce massively as more cars switch to electric.

An interesting thing in the pedestrianisation trend: most people think that pedestrianised means bicycles are allowed. Bylaws say they aren't, but these aren't enforced, and the cycling lobbyists hate it. But the creeping electrification of cars and two-wheelers means that the line between them is blurring: there are some very powerful "bicycles" and some very gutless and inoffensive "cars" out there already. And no one knows where three-wheelers fit.

ben.schlomo

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I'd take cars with fumes, any day.

Even on a non-pedestrianised street, I've been at home sick when a busker set up outside my window - was torture for the day. I seriously considered going down and offering him €20 to feck off. Only thing that stopped me was the knowledge that he'd tell his mates and the next one would be along.

On a pedestrianised street, there are no cars, but the people-noise is a lot worse: they talk, sing, busk, drum, play music for entertainment etc. And the behaviour in the space at night is worse to, including yelling, fighting, fúcking (if there are park benches) etc.

The fumes thing will reduce massively as more cars switch to electric.

An interesting thing in the pedestrianisation trend: most people think that pedestrianised means bicycles are allowed. Bylaws say they aren't, but these aren't enforced, and the cycling lobbyists hate it. But the creeping electrification of cars and two-wheelers means that the line between them is blurring: there are some very powerful "bicycles" and some very gutless and inoffensive "cars" out there already. And no one knows where three-wheelers fit.

You had a busker outside your window on a non pedestrianised street? So he blocked the footpath? Which street was it out of interest as i can't say I've ever seen a busker on a non pedestrianised street in town. Strange it's only ever happened to you. And you couldn't resist the bike phobia story.

Bobeagleburger

Has Covid pushed more people into cars as to avoid public transport and car pooling?

McGiver

Mrs OBumble wrote:

I'd take cars with fumes, any day.

Your choice. Don't think it would be the choice of other people. So only because of potential busking we'll give up on pedestrianisation?

Traffic also generates noise and vibrations.

Mrs OBumble wrote:

On a pedestrianised street, there are no cars, but the people-noise is a lot worse: they talk, sing, busk, drum, play music for entertainment etc. And the behaviour in the space at night is worse to, including yelling, fighting, fúcking (if there are park benches) etc.

Regulate busking as required. And enforce the law. Not sure the presence of cars stops yelling and fighting. It may stop the latter

Mrs OBumble wrote:

The fumes thing will reduce massively as more cars switch to electric.

Ha ha, good joke, forget it. In Galway? That will take 20 years. I'm driving electric and my daughter plays a game "spot an EV" - that's how rare they are around here.

Mrs OBumble wrote:

An interesting thing in the pedestrianisation trend: most people think that pedestrianised means bicycles are allowed. Bylaws say they aren't, but these aren't enforced, and the cycling lobbyists hate it. But the creeping electrification of cars and two-wheelers means that the line between them is blurring: there are some very powerful "bicycles" and some very gutless and inoffensive "cars" out there already. And no one knows where three-wheelers fit.

Cycle access can be regulated as required.