Earl Aelfheah

Annual concentrations of roadside nitrogen dioxide (NO2) almost halved in London between 2016 and 2023. And preliminary figures indicate London’s annual NO2 levels were lowest on record in 2023 – lower even than first year of COVID-19 lockdowns. So it's fairly clear that the mayors policies are having a significant impact on air quality.

I popped in there the other day. It was fairly chaotic and the staff were rude. Never used to be like that. I appreciate it's a difficult job, but still..

Is this the 'West Dulwich action group' action, you're referring to? Or is there some sort of challenge to LTNs in South London generally? Assuming it's the former, as the WD LTN is only a trial, I can't really see that their action has any prospect of success, but I maybe I'm missing something. Best thing that could be done to speed up buses down lordship lane would be 24 hour bus lanes (most of the time there are cars parked in them at the moment). Also removing some of the free parking so that buses can pass each other without having to constantly pull over would help. So they do reduce pollution, just on side roads? The combination of policies introduced by TFL over the last few years (including ULEZ), do appear to be improving air quality in London As already pointed out, lot's of new and successful businesses have actually opened on that section of MG.

.

Thames water and the whole system of privatised water is a disaster.

Thames water seem to be slow at responding to a number of these types of leaks locally.

Yep, the bit of road around the junction of Lordship Lane and Heber fails and is redone every few months. They've just finished the latest repairs a week or two ago and you can already see the cracks appearing. It'll be getting dug up again in a month or two.

The lack of self awareness in this sentence 🙄

I saw this on Sunday. Unfortunately this type of thing is fairly common place (although the car being balanced on top of a wall is pretty stark). Really hope no one was seriously hurt.

So what’s your point? Are you suggesting that bicycles should be regulated as if they are electric mopeds / illegal e-bikes?

Still avoiding answering the question. You say a push bike and a 70mph electric motor driven bike are the same, so do you think they should be regulated in the same way? Because if not, and if you don’t agree with my calls for mod kits to be banned and existing rules to be more strictly enforced, I’ve no idea what your point is.

They are illegal mopeds. This is a matter of legal fact, not opinion. Nope, you’re just refusing to answer a straightforward question

So just to be clear @rockets (let’s pretend you haven’t deliberately ignored a very simple question several times and genuinely struggle with comprehension).. in a discussion about regulating bicycles, after you suggest illegal mopeds that travel at 70mph and push bikes are the same ‘walks like a duck etc’, I asked the question: “Are you're seriously suggesting that a push bike is the same as an electric moped capable of travelling at 70 mph, and that they should be regulated in the same way?” You responded: “A pushbike with an electric motor that takes it to 70mph is still a pushbike - it's just a pushbike with an electric motor. Do you agree or not?” (Great bit of deflection) Were you suggesting that they are the same, but not that they should be regulated in the same way? Because it doesn’t read like that. I answered your question btw, and repeated my own several times. And as usual you ran away from it and then feigned incomprehension. We see what you’re doing. The corollary of your argument (that you think the two are in the same category), is that they should be regulated in the same way. You refuse to answer a straightforward question, because if the answer is no, they shouldn’t be treated the same, it exposes the false equivalence you have drawn. If it’s yes, then it implies regulation of push bikes in ways you understand to be ridiculous.

A pushbike with an electric motor that takes it to 70mph is still a pushbike - it's just a pushbike with an electric motor. Do you agree or not?

Earl - you're meandering and losing me again.....what I was arguing about was that push bikes with an electric conversion kit are not identified as mopeds by those pedestrians that they are causing huge problems for Nope you’re try trying to deflect, by ducking a question long enough that you can pretend it’s related to something else you’ve said since it was asked. You very clearly stated that a moped capable of travelling at 70mph was still a bicycle and strongly implied that they should therefore be regulated in the same way. If you’re saying that they shouldn’t be treated the same, then what exactly are you arguing for? And we’re talking about your comparison between a moped and a bicycle to be clear.

Oh that old tactic. Repeatedly ducking the question and then pretending you don’t you don’t understand 🙄

This isn't the argument being made by @Rockets though; He'd not suggested that pedal assist e-bikes and illegal mopeds should be treated the same. He has argued that illegal mopeds and push bikes should be treated the same. He has ducked the question of what that means for regulation (clearly we know what it would mean, which is why he's walking the argument right up to the line and then refusing to take it the extra millimetre to it's logical conclusion).

I've answered that question already. The specific example you gave, of a throttle driven bike able to travel at 70mph, is not a bicycle (not my opinion, but a legal fact). And yet it's notable that you still haven't answered. You've repeatedly claimed that a motorbike and a bicycle should be placed in the same vehicle class. The corollary of that argument is that they should be regulated in the same way; which would mean all bicycles would have to be registered and taxed, you would require a valid driving licence to ride one, would have to wear a motorcycle helmet that meets British safety standards and insure your bicycle. If this isn't your argument, then please do elaborate.

Again you duck the question. You say that bicycles and motorbikes are the same. So I assume you're arguing that they should be regulated in the same way?

Exactly. A bike with an electric motor and a throttle that can travel at 70mph is very clearly classed as a moped or motorcycle. Riding an electric bike: the rules - GOV.UK The fact that the motor is electric makes no difference. So @Rockets is arguing that bicycles should be treated the same as motorbikes.

I wasn't aiming that at you - I'm aware that's not what you were saying. I was clarifying Rockets position. He's confirmed that he considers a e-moped capable of doing 70mph to be the same as a push bike (bizarrely) Obviously I don't agree, and neither does the law. Because it's clearly ridiculous. But you didn't answer the second part of my question. Are you're suggesting that a push bike should be regulated in the same way as a moped / motorbike capable of travelling at 70 mph?

It doesn't 'walk like a duck' though does it. A push bike doesn't have a throttle and cannot travel at 70mph powered by a motor. Are you're seriously suggesting that a push bike is the same as a electric moped capable of travelling at 70 mph, and that they should be regulated in the same way? So for bicycles to have the same regulations applied as motorbikes?

A vehicle has hit an object on the pavement. A heavy / high powered vehicle, that shouldn’t be on the pavement. It’s applied enough force to pull up a concrete block The block hasn’t subsided and no one seriously believes that it has. None of which we shouldn’t be concerned about Well that’s ok then. 🙄 The rush of those ‘concerned’ by dangerous driving, to justify / minimise a high powered vehicle being on the pavement, or (ridiculously) insinuating a cyclist or pedestrian might be to ‘blame’, is just beyond ridiculous.

😆 Are you actually a made up character / parody account?

I accept that it's an assumption, but a fairly water tight one no? I mean that block has almost certainly been damaged by a motor vehicle that had crossed on to the pavement.