| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 60872 | 2005-08-16 07:14:00 | Carless Days. | Elephant (599) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 381586 | 2005-08-16 07:14:00 | Now you may have heard about carless days. I am not going to walk a 15 minute car ride to get to work on a Tue Thu and Sat as it were. No objection to rationing or lowering the speed limit. What do you lot think? |
Elephant (599) | ||
| 381587 | 2005-08-16 07:21:00 | Carless days = good way for a govt to lose votes for next election. Lowering the speed limit = good idea in principle but I can see alot of fuss being kicked up by alot of people and current speed enforcement is inadequate anyway. Generally, 100k is perfectly adequate on most roads. Problem is, alot of ppl think 100 = 110. There are, of course, alot of rural roads (and many parts of SH1, for example), that 100k is way too fast for, but ppl will still insist on doing 100, because that is still the speed limit. IMO - 2 arguments for decreasing the speed limit to 90 on rural roads (keeping it at 100 on motorways etc) would be a) increased fuel efficiency (depends on the car but alot run more efficiently at lower speeds than 100) and b) ensuring people actually do 100 rather than 110. |
manicminer (4219) | ||
| 381588 | 2005-08-16 07:33:00 | Why not have an SUV-less day. Easy to police and would probably save enough fuel without having to bother the rest of us. If it was a Saturday traffic flows around the supermarkets would be much better. | PaulD (232) | ||
| 381589 | 2005-08-16 07:54:00 | Doesnt worry me, I've never had a car. | Speedy Gonzales (78) | ||
| 381590 | 2005-08-16 08:06:00 | Why not have an SUV-less day. Easy to police and would probably save enough fuel without having to bother the rest of us. If it was a Saturday traffic flows around the supermarkets would be much better. :thumbs: I'd go for rationing, but not the system proposed where coupons would be issued to everyone and be tradeable, that's lunatic. Also I'd go for a flat rate issue, so that large guzzlers would be penalised whereas small engines would come off best. No system would be perfect, and no doubt many people would try to claim exemptions. It could be a nightmare to implement if not thought out. In the UK when we had rationing in 1956, ( I was too young to drive during wartime rationing) and threatened rationing in 1973, the vehicle registration book had to be presented at the post office and the coupons were issued for the vehicle with the coupon book being stamped and marked up with the vehicle registration number. The registration book was stamped accordingly. The coupons were not supposed to be transferable, but of course they were. Petrol attendants were supposed to remove individual coupns from the book and not accept loose ones, but of course they did. However on the whole the system worked ok. For a time during the 'Suez Crisis', rationing was initially carried out by garages, and memory says you had to register at your local garage, something like that. I remember being refused 1/2 gallon for my BSA Bantam whilst watching a Jaguar being filled glug-glug-glug umpteen gallons! Still the oil is going to run out soon anyway, so we better all get used to walking and cycling :) |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 381591 | 2005-08-16 08:20:00 | Heres an idea... if even half the Auckland motorists took (at least) one of their workmates to work, you would save heaps of petrol, and kill the congestion problem in one sweep :D | Myth (110) | ||
| 381592 | 2005-08-16 08:21:00 | Carless days = good way for a govt to lose votes for next election. Lowering the speed limit = good idea in principle but I can see alot of fuss being kicked up by alot of people and current speed enforcement is inadequate anyway. Generally, 100k is perfectly adequate on most roads. Problem is, alot of ppl think 100 = 110. There are, of course, alot of rural roads (and many parts of SH1, for example), that 100k is way too fast for, but ppl will still insist on doing 100, because that is still the speed limit. IMO - 2 arguments for decreasing the speed limit to 90 on rural roads (keeping it at 100 on motorways etc) would be a) increased fuel efficiency (depends on the car but alot run more efficiently at lower speeds than 100) and b) ensuring people actually do 100 rather than 110. depends where you live. when we moved down here i noticed that they travel a lot faster, mostly because it is alot flatter and alot more straights etc, they travel basicly at a normal speed of 110-120. its the norm. and with the carless days it will also depend where it is, if its down here (and you need a car) i would be fully against it and i would rebel, but if its in Auckland for example, sure why not, you guys should use the public transportation a bit more, there is so much of it already. But something should be done about the situation though. maybe another bridge or a tunnel? |
Prescott (11) | ||
| 381593 | 2005-08-16 08:46:00 | This tune was written for the new model Ford of 1928 :) Henry's Made a Lady Out of Lizzie (www.redhotjazz.com) |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 381594 | 2005-08-16 10:45:00 | I think the speed limit should be lowered to 80k. Sick to death of all these wallies saying they need to go fast to get things done. Ah go suck, get up earlier. HTH...........m :) | mark c (247) | ||
| 381595 | 2005-08-16 13:14:00 | Limit to a complex family-size based formula (Litres per 6 months, to allow for odd months). Like, our family of four, three of whom drive (me, mum, dad) uses about 300L per month (wierd case as I don't think the car SHOULD drink that much). When I get MY car in a few months (hard saving) I will use about 90L a month. So make it a formula based on number of people using the car. Even so it's hard to make it fair. Too hard to implement I imagine. Carless days are not the way. Speed limit reduction isn't because it varies between cars. Old cars drink lots of gas in my experience, but we can't change that.... |
george12 (7) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||