Charge to use Blackwall Tunnel

Leroy Ambrose

Off_it said:

golfaddick said:

Radostanradical said:

golfaddick said:

stoneroses19 said:

golfaddick said:

fenlandaddick said:

Still can't believe there is a charge, bit of a scandal really considering the long history of the tunnel.

I don't mind paying a fee......we've been paying one on the Dartford crossing ever since it was built.

What I do mind is paying more for my journey than someone going in the opposite direction. In some parts of the world that is called secreterianlism and people have fought wars over it. 

You’ve peaked at complete nonsense here. 

Way over the top reaction comparing a difference in tunnel journey charges to sectarianism and war. You try too hard to get attention sometimes (and yes it’s worked as people have had to reply to your ridiculous analogy). 

So what is it then ?  What makes it right that I have to pay more at 9am to travel from Bromley to East Ham than a person in East Ham does to travel to Bromley ?

And it has nothing to do with "peak fares that commuters have always paid" as I'm not travelling into Central London.....merely travelling from South London to East London. 

Sometimes I winder if you are so dense light bends around you. It is to do with congestion and peak times, it doesnt have to be Central London. Can you not understand that peak times refers to when the volume of cars is at its greatest in a particular direction? What has central london got to do with anything? 😂

Where are all these vehicles going to from South of the river ?  With the Congestion Zone they cant all be going into Central London  ?  Are they all going through the Tunnel, along the A13 & stopping around Whitechapel  ?  And do people North of the river not travel through the Tunnel and along the A2 to Elephant & Castle ?

Perhaps there should be a charge for using the A13 & A2 that go into London, rather than a charge to simply get you across the river.  

Just to be clear, you're now advocating for more tolls?

I wish I could LOL. this more than once

Off_it

Leroy Ambrose said:

Off_it said:

golfaddick said:

Radostanradical said:

golfaddick said:

stoneroses19 said:

golfaddick said:

fenlandaddick said:

Still can't believe there is a charge, bit of a scandal really considering the long history of the tunnel.

I don't mind paying a fee......we've been paying one on the Dartford crossing ever since it was built.

What I do mind is paying more for my journey than someone going in the opposite direction. In some parts of the world that is called secreterianlism and people have fought wars over it. 

You’ve peaked at complete nonsense here. 

Way over the top reaction comparing a difference in tunnel journey charges to sectarianism and war. You try too hard to get attention sometimes (and yes it’s worked as people have had to reply to your ridiculous analogy). 

So what is it then ?  What makes it right that I have to pay more at 9am to travel from Bromley to East Ham than a person in East Ham does to travel to Bromley ?

And it has nothing to do with "peak fares that commuters have always paid" as I'm not travelling into Central London.....merely travelling from South London to East London. 

Sometimes I winder if you are so dense light bends around you. It is to do with congestion and peak times, it doesnt have to be Central London. Can you not understand that peak times refers to when the volume of cars is at its greatest in a particular direction? What has central london got to do with anything? 😂

Where are all these vehicles going to from South of the river ?  With the Congestion Zone they cant all be going into Central London  ?  Are they all going through the Tunnel, along the A13 & stopping around Whitechapel  ?  And do people North of the river not travel through the Tunnel and along the A2 to Elephant & Castle ?

Perhaps there should be a charge for using the A13 & A2 that go into London, rather than a charge to simply get you across the river.  

Just to be clear, you're now advocating for more tolls?

I wish I could LOL. this more than once

Nobody else has mate, but I'll count yours as x1000 in my own mind. ;-)

usetobunkin

cantersaddick said:

usetobunkin said:

All this talk about emissions does make me chuckle. First  we had VW and others playing fast and loose with emissions. Then when I worked for the DVSA we were tasked with finding Emulators, (Devices that overrode 
Emission warning lamps ) and engine remapping. 
We found loads, most fitted to FORS compliant trucks. It was embarrassing for the the Mayor of London /TFL and all the garbage spoken about air quality. (Some of the Monitoring Systems didn't record 24/7, some failed and the readings estimated, and the unit at Blackwall was fitted facing away from the traffic)
DVSA had a meeting with TFL at Palastra in Waterloo, and we were told to issue warning letters and desist from the detection of emissions cheats as it would  "Not be in the public interest to proceed" with Public Inquires and 
O Licence revocation. 

We say air quality has improved, I don't think so, when I look across London from my bedroom window I can see the blanket of pollution still hanging over London.

Lies, damn lies and statistics!

Yeah the bit in bold is just idiotic anti-intellectualism and shows a complete lack of basic understanding of research and the scientific method. 

To say nothing more than I don't believe multiple studies from world leading academic organisations like Imperial and King's or research bodies like the National Institute for Heath Research without actually looking into any detail is laughable. 

Visible haze isn't a reliable proxy for air quality though, and that's kind of the point. What you're seeing from a window is often weather-dependent (humidity, temperature inversions, light angle) and isn't the same thing as pollutant concentration. The improvements regulators track - PM2.5, NO2, etc - come from continuous monitoring stations measuring actual particle and gas levels, not visual impressions on a particular day.

Dismissing that data as "lies, damn lies and statistics" without engaging with the methodology is a classic move, but it's not actually a counterargument, it's a way of avoiding one. If you think the stats are wrong, the productive question is: which stations, which years, which pollutants, and what's the alternative explanation for the trend? Otherwise you're just substituting "what I can see today" for measurement, which is exactly the kind of anti-intellectual reflex that makes it harder to have honest conversations about real, remaining pollution problems (because London does still have them, particularly NO2 near major roads).

The quote "Lies, damned lies & statistics" is increasingly being used in this way by anti-intellectual arguments. Of course it again shows their ignorants as its a flagrant misuse. The quote is about the manipulation of statistics to tell a story. It is not a reason to write off the overwhelming body of scientific evidence if it doesn't agree with someone's worldview. It does not entitle someone to their own alternative "facts".

That's why we have official statistics regulated by a national statistics body, a national statistician, peer review processes and its why data professionals get paid what they do, understanding and communicating data is a skill. 

So what should the DVSA/ TFL have done with the operators who flouted the Emissions ?
They never got fed into "Official statistics " Because the result would have been too embarrassing to the powers that be. (FORS accredited fleets with them totally relying on cheat devices)
I was at the sharp end collecting the data. Roadside,  with all manor of scientific kit which largely didn't work.
Wouldn't communicate with the Engine/ Exhaust/Emissions ECUs etc, and in one case a exhaust opacity tester was run over by a  Westminster City council Advisor on Clean Air, the results for that day were to be noted as "within limits"

I also know of a local PSV Operator who claimed a grant to retrofit clean exhaust systems, and qualifiy for a generous tax rebate. 
What they did was purchase one system, then swap it to the next vehicle for test, the refit the original exhaust system . Despite our evidence TFL included this fleet as compliant at the end of year report.

A well known local tipper firm was excepted onto DVSA Earned Recognition scheme despite overwhelming evidence of emissions cheating.  FORS accredited. 

I appreciate your obvious passion, but I knew what happen at the roadside.  

Now the the METS CVU being disbanded, DVSA have 3 examiners to cover London and a commercial vehicle fleet of about 30k in London.