Ja@Vision
Member
Registered: 27th Jan 05
Location: Gerrards Cross
User status: Offline
|
From the Transport 2000 website (no it's not April 1st) they are serious
******************************************************
Here is a chance to make a concerted effort to send the BBC`s Top Gear programme, that mouthpiece for car fanatics presented by chief petrolhead Jeremy Clarkson, to the scrapheap.
The BBC is inviting viewers to have their say on the future of the BBC. Although the consultation is ostensibly about commenting on the Green Paper and future options for the role and governance of the BBC, it provides an opportunity to comment on programme content, for example:
... To call for more balanced reporting on transport, ie putting the environmental/social angle, and for the BBC to play a higher profile role in educating the public about sustainability issues, for example the contribution of transport to climate change.
... To call for `motormania` programmes such as Top Gear to be scrapped on the grounds that they glamorise speed and the use of vehicles with high fuel consumption.
The on-line questionnaire can be filled in at:
www.bbccharterreview.org.uk/have_your_say/green_paper/BBC_Greenpaper_Questionnaire.doc
Alternatively, email your comments to
bbccharterreview@culture.gsi.gov.uk
The deadline is 31 May 2005.
******************************************************
Bloody green people who wear crap cordroy trousers and want 2 drive stupid electric cars 
|
CorsAsh
Member
Registered: 19th Apr 02
Location: Munich
User status: Offline
|
I don't care if I'm killing foxes and squirrels with my nasty petrol fumes. Do gooder bastards, should just fuck off and hug a tree
|
CorsAsh
Member
Registered: 19th Apr 02
Location: Munich
User status: Offline
|
Whilst theyre at it, why not ban Wacky Races, that advertises fast cars and high fuel consumption... Dick Dhastardly is a menace. 
|
Ryan L
Member
Registered: 4th Mar 03
Location: Essex
User status: Offline
|
surely then they should campaign for a ban on all car advertising as well
what a load of twats
|
Rob H
Member
Registered: 28th Oct 00
Location: Staffordshire Drives: Astra SRi
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ja@Vision
... To call for `motormania` programmes such as Top Gear to be scrapped on the grounds that they glamorise speed and the use of vehicles with high fuel consumption.
Damn, so thats pretty much every type of motorsport banned aswell then. Something tells me this arguments going nowhere  .
|
RKS
Member
Registered: 2nd Mar 04
Location: Gloucestershire UK
User status: Offline
|
F*ckin tree huggers, why wont they jsut go out and get a normal job like the rest of us, instead of all this protesting? GRRR really winds me up
|
Colin
Member
Registered: 4th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
What a load of shite....do the honestly think people will watch if there basing shows on cars environmental/social aspects Wonder what they would call it - Top MPG
|
Colin
Member
Registered: 4th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by --Rikki--
F*ckin tree huggers, why wont they jsut go out and get a normal job like the rest of us, instead of all this protesting? GRRR really winds me up
Yeah bunch of usless morons with nothing better to do - same with the anti fox hunting supporters they can all fuck off!!!
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
Top Gear seem to have reviews on sensible cars every week though, they look at small cars, dual fuel cars e.t.c... And anyway, if that was all the show was about no-one would watch it. These guys don't have a leg to stand on if those are the arguments.
Oh yea, and what about televised motorsport, surely the BBC would then be obliged to stop broadcasting F1 racing, motorcycle GP and WRC
|
Carr
Member
Registered: 1st Oct 04
Location: Leicestershire (Home) Ambleside, Lakes (Uni)
User status: Offline
|
In summary why are they trying to ban it?
|
python
Member
Registered: 11th Mar 05
User status: Offline
|
why doesnt everyone send really nice emails to them lol!!!!!
|
CorsAsh
Member
Registered: 19th Apr 02
Location: Munich
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by 1800ed
Top Gear seem to have reviews on sensible cars every week though, they look at small cars, dual fuel cars e.t.c...
Yeah, remember when Jezza did the london to edinburgh and back again on one tank of fuel in the big VW? If thats not a good fuel econmy piece I dunno what is...
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
Id love to see what they are going to do about aircraft travel then, you want to reduce emissions, fuck cars, a plane crossing the atlantic produces more harmfull shite than what was it, 1million cars ina day or something?  i foget the statistic but its incredible.
People like this have forgotten that Speed doesnt kill. They tried that, with speed cameras and road traffic accidents and deaths being UP in the last 3 years
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
... To call for `motormania` programmes such as Top Gear to be scrapped on the grounds that they glamorise speed and the use of vehicles with high fuel consumption.
I didn't think a Suzuki Liana was neither glamourous nor particularly bad on fuel. Do they watch the programme?
|
drunkenfool
Member
Registered: 7th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Drives: Audi R8 V8
User status: Offline
|
Banning top gear, what a load of wankers!
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jambo
Id love to see what they are going to do about aircraft travel then, you want to reduce emissions, fuck cars, a plane crossing the atlantic produces more harmfull shite than what was it, 1million cars ina day or something? i foget the statistic but its incredible.
People like this have forgotten that Speed doesnt kill. They tried that, with speed cameras and road traffic accidents and deaths being UP in the last 3 years
actually modern aircraft produce lower emissions that cars when comparing emissions per mile per head  So if you drove to scotland from london on your own, you would be polluting the air more than if you were sitting in a seat on an Easyjet 737-700
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
You sure?
Does it not take loads of effort to get a plane airbourne which for a domestic flight wouldn't average well when you consider how long the plane is actually up.
You got any maths on it?
[Edited on 08-04-2005 by Ian]
|
Skinz
Member
Registered: 15th May 03
User status: Offline
|
yes a jet engine is far far more efficient than a motorvehicle engine, it takes bugger all fuel for a plane to fly a mile, however if you were comparing a plane just cruising up and down a runway all day it would be a different story
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
Ian, its actually common fact now that the latest Bombardiers, Avros, Boeing 737NG's, use considerably less effort to get into the air, mainly down to massive advances in aero efficiency and engine design. A fully loaded 737-800 with winglets needs only 78% thrust to take off using 5--6000ft runway. Cruising altitudes are generally higher now too for domestic flights, i remember flying to Scotland on a 737NG, and reaching an altitude of 40,000ft Up there, much less thrust is needed, fuel load is minimal
On the most recent 777-200LR, which has yet to fly a revenue service, will be the longest range airliner in the world, and will be able to fly non-stop from Heathrow to Sydney. Although this is not profitable for an airline, it is going to be undertaken by Singapore Airlines some time this year. It will use less fuel per mile per head than any other aircraft, mainly down to its ultra efficient Engine Alliance engines. Until the A380 comes along that is
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
I stand corrected
But i cant see how Oh well
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
ok here is some stats for you.
a 737-800 with CFM56-7B26 engines between heathrow and edinburgh will burn 36.4 litres/passenger. that works out at 0.068 litres/per km.
all figures for potential emissions per passenger are around the 0.xx/kg mark
|
Marc
Member
Registered: 11th Aug 02
Location: York
User status: Offline
|
Whens Low Gear start then?
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
A 767-300ER with PW4060 engines will burn 300.3 litres/passenger between heathrow and new york. not bad considering thats a distance of nearly 5500km's.
[Edited on 08-04-2005 by Cybermonkey24]
|
russb
Member
Registered: 30th Oct 04
Location: chester-ish
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cybermonkey24
A 767-300ER with PW4060 engines will burn 300.3 litres/passenger between heathrow and new york. not bad considering thats a distance of nearly 5500km's.
[Edited on 08-04-2005 by Cybermonkey24]
but you cant drive to new york silly!!!!
and you cant all have a personal 767-300ER's there wouldnt be enough room in the sky......
how hard is an engine conversion to do on these boeings.....thats an idea for LM!
|
Mikorsa16v
Member
Registered: 2nd Sep 02
Location: Burgess Hill, West Sussex
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Marc
Whens Low Gear start then?
or maybe "Top Milkfloat"
twats
|
