| Topic: | Re:Reply | |
| Posted by: | Paul James | |
| Date/Time: | 15/04/21 12:30:00 |
| >>The problem from your perspective is that most of the rest of us lack your virtue and, if only we could be persuaded to recognise the error of our ways, things would get better." This is a pretty bad misinterpretation of my position on this, intended to belittle me. >>I would further argue that my short trip to the supermarket in my ULEZ compliant car is better for the environment than the refrigerated diesel van that will bring groceries to your doorstep. Only thinking about yourself and your own perspective is quite common. That van (which could be electric) drops off groceries for 20 households. That's better than 20 households driving to the supermarket and back I think >>you would be wrong to view as some sort of moral crusade Again with the assertions, made to belittle. >>This is not to say that we don't need to act Yes we do. >> is by better more accessible public transport. One of the problems with local public transport, i.e. buses, is that they are messed up by congestion caused by, too many cars! We also need more stuff closer to homes, not further way in big car parks.. >>Even if they achieve that the situation at Gunnersbury Park looks problematic. It is, but you won't see the problem! A huge multi story car park, would that fix it? In Gunnersbury Park>? |