London SE1 community website

Is anybody using the new Bike Super Highway?

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Current: 17 of 24
Thursday 5 May 2016 2.54pm
if only they had extended it up to Morley college, it would be useful for all cycle traffic going south from Westminster bridge. There are 5 lanes there for cars (including a lane for just a few parked cars).
Thursday 5 May 2016 2.56pm
That was the aspiration, depends on new mayor to make it happen.
Thursday 5 May 2016 4.06pm
dee dee wrote:
jamesup wrote:
St georges road will be a great deal more useful once connected to Westminster Bridge

but not good for the kids who will still have to endure the increased pollution the cycle lane has caused

I'm confused - how can you possibly think a cycle lane has increased pollution?
Thursday 5 May 2016 4.57pm
instead of the traffic moving along at Georges road as it did before it now sits in a queue of traffic from St Georges Cathedral to the Elephant at a stand still or moving very slowly and that is worse for air pollution.
Thursday 5 May 2016 5.00pm
Zoe wrote:
The cars cause the pollution, not the cycle lane. Also, the traffic is worse in the area because of E&C, not the bike lanes.

no the traffic in St Georges road is worse as was 3 lanes plus bus lane now 1 lane plus bus lane-this has a knock on effect on the E&C as traffic is backing up not the other way round.
Thursday 5 May 2016 5.53pm
dee dee wrote:
instead of the traffic moving along at Georges road as it did before it now sits in a queue of traffic from St Georges Cathedral to the Elephant at a stand still or moving very slowly and that is worse for air pollution.
This is often said but rarely (never?) backed up by evidence. Do a bit of Googling and you'll see that like many things in the real world, the relationship between vehicle speed and harmful emissions is rather complicated, especially when you're considering a mass of vehicles in an urban environment rather than one vehicle on a test track.
Try for instance this way of looking at it:
Take a given stretch of road over a given period of time. Whether vehicles are moving at typically slow city centre pace or at a standstill, roughly the same number of vehicles will fit into that stretch of road. I know, a few more will fit if they are stationary, but to offset that you can consider that newer vehicles will automatically switch off their engines in that situation. (Drivers of older vehicles should also switch off their engines when stopped. Of course most of them don't but then let's put the blame for the pollution where it properly belongs.)
I don't claim that's a perfect argument (as I said, the reality is complex) but it demonstrates that it's not self-evidently obvious that slower or stationary traffic equates to worse air pollution.
What is obviously true is that a person travelling by bike creates no air pollution.
Friday 6 May 2016 1.18pm
Perhaps a future new mayor or government will reverse this inept scheme

Cotswolds 12
Friday 6 May 2016 1.53pm
Sandgrown Dave wrote:
Try for instance this way of looking at it:
Take a given stretch of road over a given period of time. Whether vehicles are moving at typically slow city centre pace or at a standstill, roughly the same number of vehicles will fit into that stretch of road. ....
....I don't claim that's a perfect argument (as I said, the reality is complex) but it demonstrates that it's not self-evidently obvious that slower or stationary traffic equates to worse air pollution.

Disingenuous. Tedious that these sorts of points always have to be expressed as a battle between motor traffic and bicycles.

It's not about the number of vehicles that can fit on a given stretch of road.

100 buses set off on their route. Old road layout means that it takes them x minutes to complete the route. New layout means that it takes them longer than x minutes to complete the route. Also means that they do more stop-start driving.

So - engines running for longer in terms of absolute time means more emissions; plus, engines working harder and less efficiently as they have to overcome the inertia of a stationary bus more often in stop-start traffic means yet more emissions.

...if you press it, they will come.
Friday 6 May 2016 2.30pm
Ivanhoe wrote:
Tedious that these sorts of points always have to be expressed as a battle between motor traffic and bicycles.
I didn't.

Ivanhoe wrote:
It's not about the number of vehicles that can fit on a given stretch of road.
100 buses set off on their route. Old road layout means ...
It's not about that either. Buses aside (and not even 100% true for them), there are not a fixed number of vehicles to traverse the stretch of road under discussion. Real traffic doesn't behave that way. Especially over a long period of time, it tends to self-regulate. Provide more capacity and traffic increases to fill it; constrain it and the opposite is observed.
Friday 6 May 2016 4.17pm
Before we get in an argument about which causes the most pollution, can someone clarify exactly when and for how long (to quote) "it now sits in a queue of traffic from St Georges Cathedral to the Elephant at a stand still or moving very slowly and that is worse for air pollution."

I've been along St George's Road several times recently by bus and on foot. Admittedly I saw only a handful of cyclists, but I didn't see the promised queue of traffic either. The traffic was moving very smoothly - and at a reasonable speed. Quite clearly the two traffic lanes are perfectly adequate at some times of day, and at those times the previous four lanes were a ludicrous waste of road space. And that's presumably one of the considerations that TfL's new design is based on.

Do all our roads have to be designed to meet the peculiar requirements of rush-hour traffic and stand half-empty for the rest of the time?
Current: 17 of 24

To post a message, please log in or register..
We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions