Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

UK music industry, bands, work permits and Brexit

I don't think banning all trans-atlantic flights is an option, although I'd certainly like to ban all trips to Disneyland.
Some trans-atlantic flights are essential, others are pure folly, and given that we have the ability to watch bands live on TV, I see no reason for them to be travelling around the world.
We have to start somewhere, and bands have access to a platform from which to broadcast the message that so many flights are absolutely unnecessary, and they should lead by example.
So you'd like to ban bands flying to the US and stop families going for a once-in-a-lifetime holiday at Disneyland, but businessmen can keep flying over as much as they like for their jollies. Nice.
 
interesting that a diesel car with 4 in is the same as a train per head

_108485539_optimised-travel_carbon-nc.png
Interesting, but the vast majority of car and van journeys are made by a single driver with no passengers. Banning (or penalising) single occupancy vehicles* would have a far more positive impact on the environment than banning a family making one return trip to Disneyland every ten years or whatever.

*I'm not advocating banning them, btw, but it shows how great the problem is
 
I don't think banning all trans-atlantic flights is an option, although I'd certainly like to ban all trips to Disneyland.
Some trans-atlantic flights are essential, others are pure folly, and given that we have the ability to watch bands live on TV, I see no reason for them to be travelling around the world.
We have to start somewhere, and bands have access to a platform from which to broadcast the message that so many flights are absolutely unnecessary, and they should lead by example.
not to mention that buddy holly, 3 of lynyrd skynyrd, aaliyah, otis redding, mamonas assassinas and many other bands and artists have lost their lives flying
 
Interesting, but the vast majority of car and van journeys are made by a single driver with no passengers. Banning (or penalising) single occupancy vehicles* would have a far more positive impact on the environment than banning a family making one return trip to Disneyland every ten years or whatever.

*I'm not advocating banning them, btw, but it shows how great the problem is

Yeah, I walk past rush hour traffic jams sometimes and there's not a single car with more than one person in it.
You could say they're already penalising it to some extent with the tax on fuel, but I think positive encouragement like some kind of workplace incentives to take part in car sharing schemes could help too.
 
Yeah, I walk past rush hour traffic jams sometimes and there's not a single car with more than one person in it.
You could say they're already penalising it to some extent with the tax on fuel, but I think positive encouragement like some kind of workplace incentives to take part in car sharing schemes could help too.
Compulsory hitchhiking points?

May sound mad, but they have it in Cuba. Drivers with space have to stop.

It's a cultural thing as much as anything - bit like attitudes towards speeding and drink driving. You're not taking a passenger? Really? Why not? Didn't you advertise? But yeah, schemes can help - some places have lanes that you can only drive in if you have a passenger.
 
Interesting, but the vast majority of car and van journeys are made by a single driver with no passengers. Banning (or penalising) single occupancy vehicles* would have a far more positive impact on the environment than banning a family making one return trip to Disneyland every ten years or whatever.

*I'm not advocating banning them, btw, but it shows how great the problem is
i think it reinforces your point about a van full of musicians, or on a coach (which big tours do) - probably greener than all going by train according to that
 
i think it reinforces your point about a van full of musicians, or on a coach (which big tours do) - probably greener than all going by train according to that
I'm not sure how green a band van full of gear would be compared to musicians travelling on a train, but both are better than single occupancy cars and vans which are a much bigger problem than bands.
 
Yeah, I walk past rush hour traffic jams sometimes and there's not a single car with more than one person in it.
You could say they're already penalising it to some extent with the tax on fuel, but I think positive encouragement like some kind of workplace incentives to take part in car sharing schemes could help too.
Loads of businesses have company cars and I imagine some would specifically ban unauthorised passengers.
 
Compulsory hitchhiking points?

May sound mad, but they have it in Cuba. Drivers with space have to stop.

It's a cultural thing as much as anything - bit like attitudes towards speeding and drink driving. You're not taking a passenger? Really? Why not? Didn't you advertise? But yeah, schemes can help - some places have lanes that you can only drive in if you have a passenger.

I hadn't heard of this. Interesting idea.
I was never really sure what caused the strange death of hitchhiking in the UK.
 
So you'd like to ban bands flying to the US and stop families going for a once-in-a-lifetime holiday at Disneyland, but businessmen can keep flying over as much as they like for their jollies. Nice.
I said earlier that:
"I'd certainly be banning unnecessary business trips"
The vast majority of these trips could be ditched, and the same result achieved via a video conference.
Comparing a "once-in-a-lifetime holiday at Disneyland" to a band touring the world is more than a little disingenuous. The former is, as the title suggests, a once in a lifetime thing. It may be the only chance a family ever get to have a holiday together. The latter is an ongoing and pointless exercise in vanity.
 
according to that graphic a coach, at capacity i presume, is greener than a train
Is that graphic assuming capacity for each form of transport, or does it calculate via average actual operating levels? I would think that matters quite a bit. Most trains aren't full - in fact many trains run through the day mostly empty - whil coachs also are rarely totally full.
 
Loads of businesses have company cars and I imagine some would specifically ban unauthorised passengers.

I think the only thing like this is that if accepting petrol money you need to be careful with the amounts or it can be called "running an unauthorised business" and cause issues with insurance and other t&c's, but I think this is not just for company cars.

When I was a kid my Dad sometimes drove a lot of miles for work (for something that might not even be necessary now with modern IT, fortunately) and often spoke about the characters he would give lifts to. It seemed rare that he was on his own in the car for the bulk of a journey.
 
I hadn't heard of this. Interesting idea.
I was never really sure what caused the strange death of hitchhiking in the UK.
Like I say, it's compulsory (it being Cuba, they can do that - tourists are exempted), but there is also a fixed set of tariffs that the passenger is expected to pay. This was 20-odd years ago so I don't know if they still do it - was just a part of life then, Cubans just took it as the way things were.
 
according to that graphic a coach, at capacity i presume, is greener than a train
Well, yes and no. Depends on whether the train is diesel or electric, and trains aren;t going to be shoving exhaust fumes in people's faces in High Streets either.
Coaches also score well. BEIS says travelling by coach emits 27g of CO2 per person per kilometre, compared with 41g on UK rail (but only 6g on Eurostar) - though again this will vary depending on how full they are and the engine type.
This article has a different take:
The headline figures certainly suggest so. According to the European Environment Agency, rail travel accounts for 14 grams of CO2 emissions per passenger mile, which is dwarfed by the 285 grams generated by air travel, and the 158 grams per passenger miles from journeys in cars. Taking the Eurostar from London to Paris instead of a plane cuts up to 90 per cent off CO2 emissions, according to the company’s calculations.
Is holidaying by train really that much better for the environment?
It also makes a big difference whether the train is diesel-powered or electric, and – if it’s the latter – how that electricity is generated. In France, for instance, where a lot of energy comes from nuclear power and trains are mostly electric, travelling by train is greener than in the UK, which has delayed electrification plans indefinitely – although even a journey by diesel train still produces 84 per cent less carbon than flying.
 
So you think bands shouldn't play be driving up and down the M1 to ply their trade, despite the fact that this would effectively kill off a large chunk of the music industry, because live gigs are the only way many bands can now support themselves. Right. And seeing as 'everyone needs to play a part' perhaps we can get rid of football too as that involves shitloads of travel, much more than the average small band. And festivals. And any kind of community gathering that involves people travelling to one place.

Or you could perhaps find more practical solutions rather than set about depriving people of the jot of music and sport Taliban-style, and look to the actual big offenders rather than picking on an industry that creates a relatively microscopic amount of emissions?
A veritable football team of straw men.
 
Like I say, it's compulsory (it being Cuba, they can do that - tourists are exempted), but there is also a fixed set of tariffs that the passenger is expected to pay. This was 20-odd years ago so I don't know if they still do it - was just a part of life then, Cubans just took it as the way things were.
We went to Cuba 2 years ago. Drivers of government owned cars were required to pick up hitchhikers. Locals could be seen waiting for a lift in groups at junctions.
 
I think the only thing like this is that if accepting petrol money you need to be careful with the amounts or it can be called "running an unauthorised business" and cause issues with insurance and other t&c's, but I think this is not just for company cars.

When I was a kid my Dad sometimes drove a lot of miles for work (for something that might not even be necessary now with modern IT, fortunately) and often spoke about the characters he would give lifts to. It seemed rare that he was on his own in the car for the bulk of a journey.
When I was much younger, I hitched everywhere for a while. It works the other way too - you meet a range of characters who give you lifts. Certainly don't see as many people out with signs any more.
 
It takes the same amount of carbon as a family going to Disneyland. So do you want to ban all trans-atlantic flights?
Eventually these flights are going to have to be limited. Similarly private combustion engines will be banned.
Doing nothing now might lead to despotism and one child policies being imposed.
 
Eventually these flights are going to have to be limited. Similarly private combustion engines will be banned.
Doing nothing now might lead to despotism and one child policies being imposed.
Loads of short haul flights can be made by train/coach but they're priced out of reach for many people, so it needs proper thought out policies that make non air travel a practical and inviting alternative.
 
Loads of short haul flights can be made by train/coach but they're priced out of reach for many people, so it needs proper thought out policies that make non air travel a practical and inviting alternative.

Air travel is mahoosively subsidised, so there's an easy fix right there.
 
Back
Top Bottom