While electric cars are more sustainable than their fossil fuel alternatives, they create air pollution through particulate emissions from tyres and lack the health advantages of walking and cycling, said Imperial academics Professor Robert Shorten of the Dyson School of Design Engineering and Dr Audrey de Nazelle of the Centre for Environmental Policy.The academics were speaking at a Sustainability Week event on urban mobility last Friday alongside George O’Connor from the world’s largest private mobility provider, Enterprise Holdings, Justin Abbott from Better Streets for Kensington and Chelsea, and chair Professor Mary Ryan, Imperial’s Vice-Dean for the Faculty of Engineering. The panellists said they would like to see cities transformed to better support walking and cycling and shared vehicle solutions.

By Amy Woodfield

BBC News, East Midlands
An army veteran is planning to cycle more than 300 miles (483km) on a penny farthing to raise money for charity.
Dean Williams, from Hinckley, Leicestershire, is doing the double coast-to-coast ride along the border of England and Scotland in June.
Mr Williams was due to ride the bicycle in the 350-mile (563km) Battlefield Bike Ride in France and Belgium but it was postponed due to coronavirus.
He said the unusual bike is “very comfortable” to ride.

The UK has “systematically and persistently” broken legal limits on toxic air pollution for a decade, the court of justice of the EU (CJEU) has ruled.
Levels of nitrogen dioxide, mostly from diesel vehicles, remain illegally high in 75% of urban areas and on Thursday the court said the UK had failed to tackle the problem in the shortest possible time, as required by law.
The case began before the UK left the EU and the legal limits remain in UK law. The UK could face financial penalties if it still fails to take action to comply. The court also ordered the UK to pay the legal costs incurred by the European commission. UK ministers had already been defeated three times in British courts by environmental lawyers ClientEarth.

In December, RBKC removed the protected bike lanes that had been in for just seven weeks, citing opposition from businesses and residents. Yet the survey by market research company ICM Unlimited found 56 per cent of surveyed residents back the tracks, compared to just 30 per cent who oppose them.

All lorries entering London from 1 March will need to avoid having the most dangerous blindspots and restricted vision, or show evidence of specified “safe system” mitigating measures including video camera and audio alert warning systems. Because of Covid, operators who have ordered new safety equipment and applied for DVS permits will be allowed 90 days grace after 1 March to install it.

The number of speeding drivers on Upper Shoreham Road in West Sussex has risen dramatically since plastic wands protecting a ‘pop-up’ cycle lane were removed by the council in January. 
According to West Sussex County Council’s own traffic monitors the number of drivers exceeding 35mph on the road, which has a 30mph speed limit, has increased from 1176 per week, or 3.9% of vehicles, to 1908, or 5.71% of vehicles since the week of 11 January when the plastic wands protecting cyclists were removed.
Local cycling campaign, Shoreham-by-Cycle, who identified the rise in speeding, express concerns the road was a collision hotspot and a matter of concern for some time. They point out even the Google Streetview images of the street show the aftermath of a crash.
A spokesperson for Shoreham-By-Cycle said: “Upper Shoreham Road is a key route for many people living in Shoreham – particular children on their way to school. People deserve to be able to choose cycling for their local journeys without being placed at risk from dangerous driving.” 
West Sussex County Council faces a judicial review brought by Cycling UK, after removing the lane two months into a six month trial period. Cycling UK argues the decision to remove the lane was ‘irrational and unlawful’ and failed to take into account the needs of children who cycled on the roads when the wands were installed.

Peter Walker Tue 2 Mar 2021
Low-traffic neighbourhoods, which use filters to try to reduce motor traffic on residential streets, do not disproportionately benefit more privileged communities, the most comprehensive study of their rollout so far has concluded.
The research, which examined about 400 filters created in London last year, seemingly demolishes the main argument by opponents of such schemes: that they tend to shunt vehicles from richer residential areas on to roads lived in by more deprived people.
One media report last month used an analysis of house prices to support this objection, saying homes tended to be more expensive in streets that benefited from low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs). Controversy over the neighbourhoods, created in cities across the UK by using planters or bollards to prevent through-traffic while leaving the route open for cyclists and walkers, has led to several being scrapped.
But the new study, led by Rachel Aldred, a professor of transport at Westminster University in London, uses detailed and sophisticated data to compare streets, including occupants’ age, ethnicity, disability, employment and car ownership, and the government’s index of multiple deprivation, down to micro-areas of about 300 residents.