The government plan to spend millions of pounds widening the M1,
generating traffic, polluting local communities with traffic fumes, and
contibuting to climate chaos. How can all the fine words about cutting
CO2 emissions be tallied with decisions like this?

FACTS :

The widening announcement was made by Roads Minister Stephen Ladyman on
8/1/07 here:
http://www.gnn. gov.uk/Content/ Detail.asp?

The £340 million contract was awarded to MVM, a joint venture groups
made up of Vinci, Sir Robert McAlpine, Morgan Est, Gifford and WSP.

The £340 million widening of the 23 mile stretch works out at just
under £15 million a mile for just one extra lane.

The M1 widening from junction 6-13, and 21-42 is opposed by the No
Widening M1 Alliance.

See http://www.nowideningm1.org. uk/ . The full total of all the M1
widening contracts is over £33.7 billion.

ADDITIONAL FACT : We will resist this widening, and all the other
widenings from Luton to Leeds....polar bears not traffic jams!

In message <1168367725.403092.272500@k58g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
iiiiDougiiii zing.icom43.net> writes

And the extra emissions come from>

"iiiiDougiiii" zing.icom43.net> wrote in message
news:1168367725.403092.272500@k58g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
The government plan to spend millions of pounds widening the M1,
generating traffic, polluting local communities with traffic fumes, and
contibuting to climate chaos. How can all the fine words about cutting
CO2 emissions be tallied with decisions like this?

Because free-flowing traffic produces less emissions than slow moving /
stop-start traffic.

You forget that as long as people breed and the economy grows, traffic of
all forms of transport will grow producing evil emissions.

It sounds like a good idea to me to widen the M1.

No it doesn't.

What the widening provides is three to four years of absolute chaos
whilst the work is carried out and by the time it's finished traffic
will have grown such that the new lane provides, at best, two to three
years relief before you're back to square one.

Whether you provide alternatives or whether you provide new roads this
is neither. It's the absolute cheap (well cheaper) and nasty solution
and amounts to 'do the least we can get away with' as we would rather
spend the money on our Guardian reading friends in NHS Management
Consultancy because we all know they make the World go round.

On 09 Jan 2007 20:10:21 GMT, Adrian wrote:

Well, maybe. Of course as soon as its finished the new tarmac will be
ripped out and the cones will come back out so they can fit the new
dunstable junction.

Put the junction in while they are widening, god no, this is a government
project! Why do things right when you can waste £10M by doing things in
the wrong order.

Steve

Conor wrote:

Well, I don't live near it, and rarely use it, but I agree that we
shouldn't cause years of chaos widening it.

We should be building a whole new motorway nearby, perhaps an express
one of some sort

In message <1168500286.586832.30680@p59g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
iiiiDougiiii zing.icom43.net> writes

What about you tell us about your four computers, I've told you all
about mine, what are you hiding, what sort of heating do you have and
who do you buy your electricity and gas from?

In message <1168513493.071419.176040@77g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
iiiiDougiiii zing.icom43.net> writes

And you would know a lot about this?

Clive Coleman. wrote:

If he's got four computers then all he needs do is keep them running and
he won't need separate heating :-)

iiiiDougiiii wrote: