# is Boris Johnson on glue?



## dellzeqq (23 Sep 2011)

Jenny Jones heroically attempting to get some kind of sensible answer out of our 'mayor'. One wonders if the white lines down the centre of the road have him confused.......


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_BJ4eT9Bdc



'exceedances'. Tell me again, which school did this muppet go to?

The back-story is that London is going to have to pay three hundred million euros in fines if particulate levels round monitoring stations don't drop. Johnson is out and about gluing the particulates to the road, where they stay for a short while. Wouldn't it be cheaper to pay for filters on exhausts? Or even.......get rid of diesel taxis?

http://www.businessg...llution-streets 'Dastardly'. Now I remember who he reminds me of........(the dog that is)


----------



## LosingFocus (23 Sep 2011)

WTF?

John Robertson goal for Forest.

Exceedances is a perfectly fine word too. Just coz Micro$oft Word dont gone go know it, dont mean it aint a real word, innit.


----------



## dellzeqq (23 Sep 2011)

LosingFocus said:


> WTF?
> 
> John Robertson goal for Forest.
> 
> Exceedances is a perfectly fine word too. Just coz Micro$oft Word dont gone go know it, dont mean it aint a real word, innit.


it's a word. But not a fine one. Excess is better.


----------



## srw (23 Sep 2011)

Not if you're talkimg about a probablity distribution. which, to be fair, Bozo probably isn't (I can't see the vid).


----------



## Aperitif (23 Sep 2011)

Herman Millar Aeron's eh? BJ makes it look uncomfortable to sit upon! 
More crap on the roads... but I would rather Jenny Jones dealt with exhaust positioning on motorbikes and also got them OUT FOREVER of bus lanes, thanks Jenny. Ta.


----------



## dellzeqq (23 Sep 2011)

she would if she could, but motorbikes in bus lanes is Boris returning a political favour


----------



## albion (23 Sep 2011)

But London voted to support the car culture at the last mayoral election so if it is £300 million that is the price to be paid. Of course it won't be the full 300 but the scrapping of the western extension means it could be quite a whopper.


----------



## dellzeqq (23 Sep 2011)

albion said:


> But London voted to support the car culture at the last mayoral election so if it is £300 million that is the price to be paid. Of course it won't be the full 300 but the scrapping of the western extension means it could be quite a whopper.


it could be, and, as someone who will be paying it, I've no quarrel with the glue thing......but, as you say, scrapping the WEZ, putting the kibosh on new bus lanes, letting motorbikes in bus lanes, and prioritising the car at Vauxhall and Blackfriars is all bad news


----------



## Telemark (24 Sep 2011)

"Exceedance" of an air pollution limit is the correct technical term I am afraid ...
He must have listened to SOMETHING he has been told!

T


----------



## superbadger (24 Sep 2011)

In answer to the original Q i would have to say the 'old boza' is on more than glue!!! The guys a nut! but i love to watch him on tv when he acts like this..... The guys a legend.


----------



## Lurker (24 Sep 2011)

Legend he may be, but as Mayor of London many of Boris Johnson's decisions are adversely affecting my (and many others') experience of moving around and simply living in my/our city.


----------



## superbadger (24 Sep 2011)

Lurker said:


> Legend he may be, but as Mayor of London many of Boris Johnson's decisions are adversely affecting my (and many others') experience of moving around and simply living in my/our city.



Sorry for being flippant.... Yes he does seem to make a lot of 'dubious' decisions  Thank god i am in the wet and windy north


----------



## superbadger (24 Sep 2011)

1555832 said:


> That's OK, you enjoy the act from the safety of distance and leave us to live with the consequences.



boris--you. If you see him i would imagine that would be the thing 2 do....


----------



## BluesDave (25 Sep 2011)

Not wishing to further politicise this political post but as a Londoner who pays council tax I certainly refuse point blank to have so much as one penny of the money I pay going to EU for fines or otherwise. 
Put simply everyone should refuse to pay any more of their tax money into the EU it is all highly corrupt and take take take. 
Anyway what would they do if Britain had the backbone to refuse to pay their thefty fines. Stage a sit in in our high street banks. Invade us, look where it got them the last time. Mind you go onto any building site and you'd think we had been.
I'm thinking of starting a petition along these lines so I am.


----------



## Lurker (25 Sep 2011)

Hang on, the fine's a secondary issue. The main issue is that air quality in London is disgracefully and avoidably bad, and that as a result thousands of people in London every year are needlessly dying prematurely.


----------



## BluesDave (26 Sep 2011)

Yes perhaps it is but if you consider that in the last 50 years engines have been invented that can run on everything from alcohol to cooking oil there have been viable alternatives to petrol driven vehicles. In the 1950's the clean air act got rid of most of the pollutants. People had to give up their coal and log fires, factories had to spend millions on smoke dampeners, power stations closed etc etc.
The only way to stop or significantly reduce pollution carbon based or otherwise would be to ban petroleum based and oil based driven vehicles.
The trouble is that they make far too much money for the government in terms of tax revenues which they then give to Eu that it'll never happen.
As for thousands of people dying from traffic pollution every year I doubt that there are death certificates with that as the COD. Meanwhile governments will come up with the rhetoric about reducing pollution, catalytic converters and the like which do not remove the problem of the pollution merely create a different kind. Put quite simply they don't care it's just political rhetoric to win votes to keep them in the jobs that pay them upwards of 68k a year. 
Also additives, steroids, drugs & chemicals in food have caused more deaths from cancer in the last 50 years than that anyway not to mention the current obesity problem. 
Some ingredients read like an A-level chemistry text book.
So the question is do we ban petroleum based product driven vehicles and will any Gov't ever do it. The answer is quite simply "NO".


----------



## dellzeqq (26 Sep 2011)

DavidDecorator said:


> So the question is do we ban petroleum based product driven vehicles and will any Gov't ever do it. The answer is quite simply "NO".


that's one question. Another question is whether Mayors, of whatever stripe, should go further and faster in reducing particle emissions in London. And to that the answer can only be 'yes'. More bus lanes, stringent standards for taxis, bringing back the WEZ, car space taxes are all do-able in the short term (and, to be fair, Johnson is moving in a small way on taxis while failing on the other three counts)


----------



## jonesy (26 Sep 2011)

DavidDecorator said:


> Yes perhaps it is but if you consider that in the last *50 years engines have been invented that can run on everything from alcohol to cooking oil* there have been viable alternatives to petrol driven vehicles. In the 1950's the clean air act got rid of most of the pollutants. People had to give up their coal and log fires, factories had to spend millions on smoke dampeners, power stations closed etc etc.
> The only way to stop or significantly reduce pollution carbon based or otherwise would be to ban petroleum based and oil based driven vehicles.
> The trouble is that they make far too much money for the government in terms of tax revenues which they then give to Eu that it'll never happen.
> As for thousands of people dying from traffic pollution every year I doubt that there are death certificates with that as the COD. Meanwhile governments will come up with the rhetoric about reducing pollution, catalytic converters and the like which do not remove the problem of the pollution merely create a different kind. Put quite simply they don't care it's just political rhetoric to win votes to keep them in the jobs that pay them upwards of 68k a year.
> ...



And these also produce emissions of their own. There is a myth that biofuels don't pollute because they are 'natural'. They also have to be produced from somewhere, which means land being used that could otherwise feed people, or provide natural habitat. They also need fertilser and lots of energy to produce etc...

A source for the second claim would be helpful.


----------



## BluesDave (26 Sep 2011)

Well it would be nice to go back to horse and cart but

a. Horses emit methane when they fart (another greenhouse gas) everything emits something.
b. Where would someone living in London put a horse and cart (applies to other cities)

As for the other question heres the links.

http://www.healthyea...-additives.html

http://fooddemocracy...-avoid-and-why/

As for food additives I can't find the ingredients for any products of the three main supermarkets (ready meals, tinned etc) publicised anywhere. I wonder why. Neither can I find a list of the steroids, drugs, antibiotics and growth hormones they pump, cattle, sheep, chickens and pigs full of these days.
The same goes for a list of permitted pesticides and herbicides that can be used on crops and fruit in Europe. And the effects they have on the human body and the environment, waterways, oceans, fish animals etc. Again I wonder why this information is so hidden.
I respectfully suggest that either you look at the labels on things next time you shop or that someone with more experience in internet searches and time on their hands finds and posts the links on this thread.

Naturally I also fully expect someone with a vested interest to post something saying exactly the opposite as well. 

After all we have not evolved in such a short time that the ingestion of so many chemicals into our bodies would not have a deleterious effect have we.


----------



## jonesy (26 Sep 2011)

I fail to see the relevance of horses here. The point is that burning alcohol or biodiesel as you advocated also produces NOx and PM. 

The key thing missing from your list is a reference to a reputable medical study into the links between food additives and cancer.


----------



## Jezston (26 Sep 2011)

What kind of nutter choses to get themselves around central london by driving anyway? Public transport around London is more than adequate. Increase the congestion charge to £20 and use the money to stick security on buses to stop the antisocial teenagers and I can't see any reason to take your own car.

Then we can get rid of Addison Lee.


----------



## Red Light (26 Sep 2011)

*Time to bite the dust: A new way to cut pollution is being tested in London*
_The capital is nearing the legal limit for the quantity of lung-clogging emissions in its atmosphere._

_By Alice-Azania Jarvis
__Friday, 28 January 2011_

_If you've done much running, cycling – even walking – around the capital, it is a problem with which you will be all too familiar: dust. It infuses the air like incense, leaving it hot, heavy, and uncomfortable to breathe. It comes from car emissions, tyre and brake wear, and it is one reason why London is nearing the European Union's legal limits on particulate matter (PM10). _

_Last November, in what was billed as a landmark pollution-reduction programme, the Mayor's office announced its intention to trial a new dust suppressant. Made from calcium magnesium acetate, it had already been trailed in Sweden, Norway, Austria, Italy and Germany. The practice sees the streets swept and washed, before a biodegradable saline solution is sprayed. The result is a surface which keeps dust stuck to it, so even once the particulate matter has been emitted, it doesn't circulate in the air. City Hall hopes that it will be successful in reducing PM10 levels by 10 to 20 per cent in the areas affected. _

_"Those are the sorts of results we saw on the Continent and that's the example we are following," explains a spokesman. "Our specialist vehicle has been brought in from Sweden and we fully expect it to work." _

_Not everyone is as confident. Professor Frank Kelly is Director of Kings College London's Environmental Research Group, and has been monitoring the progress of dust suppressant technology closely: "The European trials produced very mixed results. As a solution, it is unproven. In an experiment like this it is very important to understand all the issues. Air pollution varies day to day, so the six-month comparison period isn't really appropriate. There's been no information released on how they are going to conduct the comparison. And what benefits are produced are likely to be only temporary. You have to ask why they are doing this." _

_Certainly, one incentive is the likelihood of a European fine. At the moment the technique is limited to two of London's worst-affected areas: the Victoria Embankment, and the network of roads around King's Cross station. With these cleared up, London is far less likely to be penalised. _

_"The source of London's pollution is traffic," says Kelly. "If a long-term solution is to be found, that's what we need to look at." It is to this end that a further scheme to remove the city's oldest, most-polluting, taxis by 2012 has come into force. Similarly, London's first zero-emissions bus route should begin service later in the year, with the help of eight hydrogen-fuelled buses. For many, this is doesn't go nearly far enough; more radical action may be needed. _

_It's too early say what progress had been made with the calcium magnesium acetate; tests won't be conducted for a couple of months. If successful, the plans are to roll out the scheme. But with the trial costing £300,000, it won't be cheap._
​Independent



​ CMA has been used in the US since the 70's as a much less corrosive and more vegetation and concrete friendly alternative to salt in road de-icing.
​


----------



## Red Light (26 Sep 2011)

DavidDecorator said:


> Well it would be nice to go back to horse and cart but
> 
> a. Horses emit methane when they fart (another greenhouse gas) everything emits something.
> b. Where would someone living in London put a horse and cart (applies to other cities)



When traffic in cities was horse based there were major pollution problems from both the horseshit on the road which was either a slurry or dried into a dust that blew everywhere as well as the problem of dead horses left to rot in the street. There used to be people employed as crossing sweepers to part the slurry to allow people to cross the road without having to wade through it. And then there were all the flies feeding off it that caused widespread "summer diarrhoea" It was very far removed from utoptia.


----------



## the snail (26 Sep 2011)

1555832 said:


> That's OK, you enjoy the act from the safety of distance and leave us to live with the consequences.



Don't blame us provincials, you lot voted him in


----------



## Jezston (26 Sep 2011)

I voted for Paddick.

Although I don't even live in London.


----------



## orbiter (28 Sep 2011)

DavidDecorator said:


> Not wishing to further politicise this political post ....."


But you just did - and it wasn't political before you chipped in. It was about Boris (whoever he is).


----------



## albion (15 Oct 2015)

http://sports.yahoo.com/video/boris-knocks-over-young-boy-100352064.html

A reborn thread, interesting for its past comments pre VW. 
Love the video of Boris on a mission.


----------



## Ticktockmy (16 Oct 2015)

The answer to London's pollution which is far from the devil it was back last century is simple, remove the people, its the people that live and work there that cause the pollution:-)


----------



## dan_bo (16 Oct 2015)

I used to think he was amusing. Now I just think he's a dangerous daffodil.


----------



## albion (17 May 2016)

Quite obviously, he has been eating too many bananas.


----------



## Karlt (18 May 2016)

Telemark said:


> "Exceedance" of an air pollution limit is the correct technical term I am afraid ...
> He must have listened to SOMETHING he has been told!
> 
> T



I'll add that to my collection of data points that English is heading towards being a agglutinative language,


----------



## bozmandb9 (18 May 2016)

[QUOTE="dellzeqq, post: 1555819, Johnson is out and about gluing the particulates to the road, where they stay for a short while. Wouldn't it be cheaper to pay for filters on exhausts? Or even.......*get rid of diesel taxis?*

http://www.businessg...llution-streets 'Dastardly'. Now I remember who he reminds me of........(the dog that is)[/QUOTE]

They are, or at least up to Euro 5 or something like that. I know because a mate of mine has the contract for converting thousands of taxis to LPG (have to stick a petrol engine in and make it run on gas). I'd say if Boris has a plan to ensure that we don't pay €300 million in fines to the EU, then that's a good thing, clearly not as good as reducing particulates, but that can't be done overnight. Paying lots of money in fines won't make it happen any quicker.


----------

