Drama Classes for Children and Young People in Marple

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Local Issues / Re: Marple Bridge
« Last post by jimblob on January 10, 2022, 09:23:30 AM »
And all the while, NoX emissions from vehicles is falling (despite there being more of them),
Euro standard   Date   NOx
Euro 3           January 2001           0.5
Euro 4           January 2006           0.25
Euro 5a           September 2011   0.18
Euro 6           September 2015   0.08
Since 2015, a Euro6 diesel produces less than a 5th of the NoX as a Euro3 and around half of that of  Euro5A from 2011. The number of vehicles hasn't increased by the same levels and therefore over time, the situation will ammeliorate. It's almost that the clock is ticking and governement have to get this new taxation introduced before the older vehicles all go to the scrapper and the case for ULEZ is gone. Rest assured, even if we were to all move to electric vehicles, you'll be taxed on those at some point!
You can chose a statistic to back any argument it seems.
22
Local Issues / Re: Marple Bridge
« Last post by Howard on January 09, 2022, 05:59:10 PM »
I'm with you @Belly

Personally, I'm of the opinion that the concept of "the polluter pays" is the right one. The air quality of our towns and cities is a matter for everyone. There really should be a calculation for the carbon footprint and pollution index of a vehicle which includes manufacturing, operation and recycling as well as per mile pricing depending on occupancy and weight. That's what the vehicle operator would pay for.

Unfortunately we're a long way off that and it's likely to be too intrusive for the public to buy into that. Until we get there, blunt instruments like the ULEZ are the only current answer.
23
Local Issues / Re: Marple Bridge
« Last post by GM on January 09, 2022, 05:13:14 PM »
How can I look foolish, when I've ignored the last two years data on purpose that COVID has reduced vehicle usage!.
24
Miscellaneous / Re: Covid19 Information Updates
« Last post by Malcolm Allan on January 09, 2022, 04:53:56 PM »
Update on the pandemic

Here's the usual update as at Friday 7th January. Last week’s figures in brackets.

The rate of infection in Stockport Borough has risen sharply again to 2,325 (1,952.8 ) per 100,000, which is above the national average of 1,878.2 (1,335.3).New cases per day is at 975 (839.2). This is below the national rate which is at 178,250.Stockport NHS hospitalisations in the week to 2nd January were up at 105 (54).


On vaccinations in Stockport Borough, 233,221 have had a first vaccination which is 86.8% of the 19+ population. 216,940 have had a second dose which is 84.2% of the 18+population. 169,401 have received a booster which is 66.7% (64.7%) of the 18+ population.

Note the rules on self isolation once tested positive have changed on 22nd December and will change again on 11th January.

The area data is as follows, giving rates of infection per 100,000 over the last five weeks, latest last. The “rates” are per 100,000 population, so comparable with each other. The figure in brackets is the actual number of cases. Data as at 2nd January.

Marple Bridge and Mellor: 524.5/524.5/1133.7/2182.7/1912 (113)
Marple and Hawk Green: 471.3/488.1/1060.4/1666.4/2205 (131)
Marple and Rose Hill:   576.2/589.9/1015.2/1728.6/1921 (140)
High Lane:   383.9/314.1/977.3/1500.9/2164 (124)
Romiley and Compstall: 583.0/699.6/984.6/1619.4/2539.2 (196)

 
25
Local Issues / Re: Marple Bridge
« Last post by Belly on January 09, 2022, 12:59:02 PM »
What on earth are you going on about?

As I've pointed out, 2019 / 2020 AQ and traffic information is unrepresentative of everything that went before the Pandemic. Because traffic levels during the last 2 years were artificially low due to Covid. Thats why all of the AQ monitoring stations are showing lower levels for 2020. Thats just a matter of fact. Argue with it if you want, but you just look foolish.

AQ station 7 is located right in the middle of Hazel Grove town centre on the N-S A6 corridor - why would that be affected by construction of an E-W link road 2 or 3 miles away? 

26
Local Issues / Re: Marple Bridge
« Last post by GM on January 09, 2022, 10:20:55 AM »
As per jimblob, there are only two that failed the 40 limit across the whole of greater Manchester!.

So by your brilliant deduction, you should punish the whole population just because you can't wait to get more concrete evidence to justify any scheme!.

By the same token you could blame the high readings at site 7 as a direct result of the construction of the bypass, having sat in the residual mess of roadworks in poynton getting to the bypass that wouldn't be a long stretch of the imagination.
27
Local Issues / Re: Marple Bridge
« Last post by Belly on January 09, 2022, 12:11:58 AM »
Well the Marple sensor, ie the one we as a website I would hope, would be interested in shows little change pre covid.

It’s around the 29 mark, which the limit they set was 40.
Having looked at a number of the results and ignoring the covid years, they all show a marked reduction without Andy’s let’s wring the motorists yet again scheme!.

You can’t blame covid for everything and I include the council using such excuses for saying leisure centres, library’s have seen a reduction in usage. It’s a bit like proclaiming we’ve not been buying travel money as much either!.

Of course we can blame covid for a huge reduction in car journeys in 2019 and 2020 - its an absolute proven fact. Indeed, so much so that in my job I'm not allowed to freely use traffic data collected during these key times, due to concerns with it being unrepresentative of what precdeded the pandemic. Its a nonsense to suggest otherwise.

So what if Marple is below the threshold for potentially harmful air quality - lucky us, we thankfully live in a relatively quiet suburb / town, on the edge of the green lung of the Peak District. But we don't just drive our cars around Marple, we do like to travel further afield, be it to work, shop, leisure, etc. So unlucky Hazel Grove, Bredbury, Offerton etc and large parts of the rest of GM, where our cars often pass through, and where AQ has been an issue for years, until the pandemic cut vehicle movements (for the moment).

There are actually very few monitoring stations in Stockport that provide long term data, but if we look at two that are on routes that are likley to accept significant quantities of Marple derived traffic (e.g. A6 and A626), this shows that: on the A6 through Hazel Grove, one of the AQ stations (site 7) has shown values above theshold all through the 2010's up until 2019 / 2020, whereupon it dropped by 40+% - can anyone think why? At the station at the end of A626 Offerton Road / Marple Rd just before the Stockport inner relief road, there appears to be only data for the last 2 years. This shows AQ levels at close to threshold in 2019 which would have been impacted by the pandemic and a drop in 2020. Who know's where levels were before 2019 and covid, but it would be a good guess that they were higher, based on data from other sites.

I'm not saying the current ULEZ scheme is the answer, but vehicle emission related AQ issues are definitely real in GM and it doesn't help the debate to pretend that recorded values in the last 2 years are in any way representative of typical traffic levels and that there isn't a problem, just because Marple is 'ok'.

28
Local Issues / Re: Marple Bridge
« Last post by GM on January 08, 2022, 09:32:18 PM »
Well the Marple sensor, ie the one we as a website I would hope, would be interested in shows little change pre covid.

It’s around the 29 mark, which the limit they set was 40.
Having looked at a number of the results and ignoring the covid years, they all show a marked reduction without Andy’s let’s wring the motorists yet again scheme!.

You can’t blame covid for everything and I include the council using such excuses for saying leisure centres, library’s have seen a reduction in usage. It’s a bit like proclaiming we’ve not been buying travel money as much either!.
29
Local Issues / Re: Marple Bridge
« Last post by Belly on January 08, 2022, 02:53:42 PM »
looking at https://cleanairgm.com/data-hub/diffusion-tubes and pulling some data for analysis, out of a network of 400 passive diffusion tubes, only TWO, yes two, identify as not meeting targets, Tameside 55 and Wigan 180. there is no problem to fix!

That's because, thanks to Covid, traffic levels at these locations have all dropped by a substantial level - look at all of the monitoring graphs for a wide range of locations all over GM. This means that a huge amount of locations that were above target levels are currently below - but we all know that this is temporary.

So what do we learn from that. Fewer vehicle trips = better air quality. Can't think why they are looking to implement a clean air initiative that focuses on vehicle trips? 
30
Local Issues / Re: Marple Bridge
« Last post by jimblob on January 07, 2022, 10:19:51 AM »
Well having looked at the clean air map, i don't think you can even reliably make such a wide sweeping decision on effectively 21 data locations based primarily at junctions across a 493 square mile area.

Personally speaking the current VED system is perfectly adequate, if you wanted to tweek the pricing structure that would be my starting point.

And at the same time not excluding making Tesla owners actually pay, just because they're pollution is remote does not let them off Scott free.
looking at https://cleanairgm.com/data-hub/diffusion-tubes and pulling some data for analysis, out of a network of 400 passive diffusion tubes, only TWO, yes two, identify as not meeting targets, Tameside 55 and Wigan 180. there is no problem to fix!
areas that show higher levels are generally as a result of queueing traffic... so let's build more cycle lanes or install speed humps and restrict the traffic even further so we can up the pollution levels and justify charging folks for our poor air quality!
let's try and scare the bejeesus out of folk so they don't mind paying...

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10