keano77

Any article/news item on Chelsea Manning Pippa's forthcoming wedding, what the dress might be like etc Jean-Claude Juncker That'll do for starters

Thanks, I didn't realise that. Do councils not get a percentage of money raised in their local council grants?

The main unproven reason for Wandsworth to introduce 20 mph I suspect (no facts) is a money making racket to fine motorists

Looking at the second image plans, where the staircase seems to be in the dining room, why not consider instead of reversing the existing staircase put a spiral staircase in the bottom left-hand part of the dining room to open onto your new landling and extend bedroom 2 to 8'10x 11'10long. Should money allow you could even make part of bedroom 2 en suite as you'd be next to the bathroom. Costs? Spiral staircase, joists repositioned, gas and water pipes diverted possibly, electric wiring diverted possibly, huge gap where existing staircase removed (wall made good, floor made good). New carpet for dining room. En suite? Plus numerous other things that will crop up. My guess ?25k minimum, allow ?50k but consider added value for future. Can't think of a simple way to put in a downstairs loo from the plans

You've obviously missed my AA link above. 20mph roads and CO2 emissions Lower limits can increase fuel consumption and CO2 emissions Here's the link again http://www.theaa.com/public_affairs/news/20mph-roads-emissions.html Lower speeds do not necessarily protect the planet. 20mph limits would seem like a formula 1 race track to many a flatulent grazing cow but that doesn't stop scientists blaming them for global warming. Cow 'emissions' more damaging to planet than CO2 from cars http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/cow-emissions-more-damaging-to-planet-than-co2-from-cars-427843.html

To be seen to be politically correct? On message?

Thanks rendelh, my mistake

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > keano77 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > Motorists burning more fuel in low gears > Oh god not this rubbish again You think you know better than the AA research link I posted above dkhb? Please enlighten us with your wisdom

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > edacm wrote: > > >The point being missed here is that on any given > journey > >I'd be amazed if anyone could travel at more than > an average > >of 20 mph in London. Therefore the limit seems > reasonable. > > keano77 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Good point edcam. > > > > Before the 20mph limit was introduced I > regularly > > drove to Tower Bridge each day (ED>Peckham>Old > > Kent Rd>Bermondsey rat run) 8 miles according > to > > my mileometer. Took 30 mins on average (hold > ups, > > heavy traffic, lights etc). > > > > If my sums are correct 8 miles in 30 mins is > 16mph > > So you agree that 20MPH limits are reasonable, it > seems. Excellent. On the contrary rh. That 16mph average was on the basis of 30mph limits. Cars stuck in traffic, accelerating to 30mph when lights change or conditions allow. I don't do that route now but I'd take a guess (no facts) that the average would drop to 13 or 14mph - hardly any quicker than Victorian horse-drawn carriages. So the moral of the story appears to be stick with Southwark and the Green Party and they'll show you what progress ain't.

Good point edcam. Before the 20mph limit was introduced I regularly drove to Tower Bridge each day (ED>Peckham>Old Kent Rd>Bermondsey rat run) 8 miles according to my mileometer. Took 30 mins on average (hold ups, heavy traffic, lights etc). If my sums are correct 8 miles in 30 mins is 16mph

There's no point in saving a few deaths at 20mph if you're helping to destroy the planet. Ergo, 30mph please Southwark and other misguided councils.

From the AA Cutting the speed limit from 30 mph to 20 mph on the wrong roads can increase CO2 emissions by more than 10% with the result that well-intentioned safety schemes may backfire in environmental terms. On average, petrol car fuel consumption on longer and relatively free-flowing 20mph urban streets can worsen by 5.8 miles per gallon (1.3 miles/litre). Over a year this will significantly increase CO2 emissions ? burning 1 litre of unleaded petrol produces 2.36kg of CO2. http://www.theaa.com/public_affairs/news/20mph-roads-emissions.html The AA's fuel consumption tests were carried out at Millbrook proving ground by an independent engineer and car tester, using a fuel flow meter. In 2000, the then Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions argued against reducing the 30 mph limit for fear of increasing emissions. (See above link)

Can't think of many to be fair. However, it doesn't seem to worry Lambeth. Driving on the South Circular towards Dulwich College and realising I've left Southwark's 20mph gives me a Brexit-like feeling of freedom.

I'm looking forward to the time flying cars become the norm. No doubt Southwark Council currently has a working group looking it the matter trying to devise absurd rules and drone traffic lights in another money-making wheeze.

You miss the point of your own analysis rh. An extra 3 minutes x hundreds of journeys = more time in car burning fuel and spewing out emissions. Not good.

Yes

How many of that dodgy 7% figure died because Southwark has dropped the speed limit to 20mph? Motorists burning more fuel in low gears and pumping out gases in slower traffic.

Interesting thought from Tom Newton Dunn (Sun political editor) on Sky News paper review last night. If Labour wiped out in local elections Corbyn could be replaced two weeks before General Election. A new leader might make a big difference to Labour's fortunes. David Milliband comeback?

Outrageous behaviour

Given the replies above it would seem pressure is the key. I have an electric power shower which doesn't work off the boiler and is fine for my needs. But if you are running showers off your boiler maybe a megaflow is the way to go.

Why do you need a water tank? Get a combi boiler sufficient to allow for any further loft extension

holloway Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > a friend of mine who is Kurdish, actually > suggested that the chemical attack may not have > been the work of the assad regime at all. the > regime has the rebels well on the back foot so > such an attack would be unlikely. this was also > the view taken by peter ford the former British > ambassador to Syria in an interview on bbc > breakfast recently. I realise there is no direct evidence at the moment and so many theories will do the rounds. However, as a recent programme on the BBC about Porton Down showed, Sarin is not be be messed with. You can't exactly produce Sarin with an off-the-shelf chemistry set. It is produced using the financial and technical resources of states. The initial suggestions that it might have come about from the bombing of a rebel arms cache seems highly unlikely. How would the rebels get hold of it? So if not Syria, or Russia, who?

I'm waiting to see the contestants washing their hands and rinsing the veg before they set to.

I'm watching the United Nations Emergency meeting about the US missile strikes on the BBC at the moment. The US is being criticised for unilateral action - the matter should have been given the go-ahead by the UN. BUT (note caps) with Russia and or China exercising their vetoes all the time the UN is effectively impotent - a glorified talking shop. Meanwhile a mad-man is so desperate to hang on to power he is prepared to destroy the country he is desperate to rule. Good on you Trump. The sooner Bashar al-Assad is led in chains before the International Court of Justice for crimes against humanity the better.

The idea of the sharing economy conjures up the notion of altruism. I've got x why don't you share it. The truth though it that it is to make money, pure and simple. Personally I would never think I'm off on a European weekend break so I'll let out my home on Air b&b that weekend to help cover my costs. I know others do and good luck to them. What about the insurance on my house though, or my car if I rent it out. How will that be affected if things go wrong? It sounds great to rent out a driveway as a parking space 5 days a week for 40 weeks of the year at ?10 a day and given parking costs it might well be a bargain to a commuter. Great until the tax man comes knocking. In short, I'm not sure what the sharing economy means. I only see people making a quick buck unless we're talking of people car sharing to get to work, taking it in turns to drive and everybody contributing to petrol etc Edited to add: Uber has nothing to do with a sharing economy - it it a multi-million dollar middle man. Uber doesn't 'share' the cost of the driver's wear and tear, servicing, MOT, car insurance, car tax etc. Doesn't pay holiday pay, sick pay, provide pensions. It's a very clever business model and does provide valuable work for many on a very egalitarian basis. And a good service as testified to above. However, 'sharing' it isn't.