Subject: Elephants Cave - by: Barbiroli
2 hours ago
Email us at llandudnoandcolwyn.local@googlemail.com
Old style sixth form: same subjects as ordinary school, just harder. Free periods (yippee!) and the chance to become a prefect. Went home early at the start of the Xmas holiday. Took exams at the end of a two-year stint and - on the basis of the results - went on to University, Poly or teacher training college.
Present day sixth form: burgeoning range of subjects including exotic names such as Psychology, Sociology, Law, Nuclear engineering, Build-Your-Own collider, NVQs, BTECs, IBs, et al. Study periods but no prefects at most schools. Sometimes go home early, but not often. Take exams in bite-sized chunks, leading to a system in which some students know they've gained an 'A' grade at 'A' level in the lower sixth. On the basis of their results, everyone goes to University, because some are crying out for students and will offer places to almost anyone.
There's one really interesting thing about living on the edge of a Mountainous region, and that's the weather. We gets lots of it. In fact, as I write this, our clear blue sunny sky is obscured temporarily by thick, continuous nimbo-stratus, being blown along by winds that sound capable of bending the odd skyscraper. Having said that, this would clearly be an excellent time to buy shares in a Gopher wood mill. "Transport is an energy intensive activity, heavily dependent on oil (99.97%) and a significant emitter of carbon dioxide (30% of UK total). Exhortation and education can reduce car dependency but in the absence of draconian powers to force people to change travel modes, people freely choosing sustainable alternatives is surely the best way? Market research and behavioural studies demonstrate that for short journeys, under 2 miles (50% UK car trips) walking and cycling are acceptable options, when there are safe and attractive routes. For longer urban journeys ( < 5 miles = 75% of UK car trips) public transport should be the alternative to car. In the UK most urban public transport is by bus (80% of trips). Car users however are not willing to use buses. Studies by the US Transportation Research Board shows that on a like for like basis of frequency, travel speed, fares etc, buses attract 40% less car users than even old rail services.
Getting car people to use public transport means rail services. The speed at which new tram systems have been opened in the UK over the last 20 years, one every 4 years, means that it will take 150 years to catch up with Germany.
Compared to buses, trams operating along the same route, at the same maximum speed carrying the same passenger loadings will use less than 25% of the energy, which will be electricity, not oil. Indeed there are several projects where new tramways will be powered by renewable generation, therefore in energy terms totally sustainable, and almost carbon emissions free, once the embedded energy to build the trams and track have been depreciated, usually a couple of years of operation. Indeed bus operators with routes having a peak frequency of ten buses or more per hour, could already make financial savings in converting to trams. This excludes any carbon emission considerations, and if the new tram service only carried former bus passengers there would only be the energy ( and carbon) savings of trams compared to buses. The real carbon savings come from diverting urban car trips.
New tram systems in France, have attracted 30% more patronage (all car diverted) than the bus services replaced. This is in line with the earlier US study. Car travel is energy intensive, and for short urban trips highly polluting. By suitable park and ride, as well as walk and ride, about 50% of car trips in the tram corridor will be attracted. Getting urban car trips down from 70% to 50% would save about 5% of UK carbon emissions.
New regulations set to come into force later this month will see motorists forced to cough up court costs - even if they're found not guilty or acquitted of motoring offences.If this goes through unimpeded, one has to think about the consequences for the accused in all future legislation. British Justice is founded on the principle of 'Innocent until proven guilty', however tarnished that particular aphorism has become. But with the innocent having to stand the costs of prosecution, what chance the rest of us in the future if the government thinks we should be punished, anyway?
The government-inspired change to the current set-up - where drivers get costs refunded if they're innocent - is being implemented to save cash, in spite of fierce opposition from legal and motoring groups who were nominally 'consulted' before the new policy was drawn up.
According to the Ministry of Justice, the age old principle of 'the loser pays' has been costing the government too much money. As a result the new rules make it clear that in future drivers will have to foot the bill for clearing their name. According to The Taxpayers Alliance, that equates to 400,000 people, or one in four of those who challenge a ticket.
"The agreed price of the winning tender (Dawnus Construction Ltd) is actually £2.3 Million.
Now I know the local authority is coming under close scrutiny on this and I know this information will add fuel to the arguments. But this information is important and will have been announced at some point. The fact it came out on Tuesday evening, means that it is public information and I know at least 1 of the businesses would have passed this information further afield. I know this will give officers more grief but it is something that needs to be said, and now I know the information is in the public domain then I have to post on it.
So the projected overspend is projected to be £738k, This has to be found from within the Capital Expenditure budget. As you can imagine this was one of a few quotes and the adjudication was split between cost and quality of the tender. So you can imagine what the values of other tenders would have been.
As you can imagine this was one of a few quotes and the adjudication was split between cost and quality of the tender, so you can imagine what the values of other tenders would have been.But this seems rather odd. When bids are invited, they are done so in full cognisance of the specifications of the building or project. Thus, the company bidding would have known what they were required to do. It would, therefore, have been appropriate to select the lowest tender based on the builder being aware of the requirements.