Environmentally sustainable model railway exhibitions

[Nearholmer]

7 minutes ago, Willie Whizz said:

Consequently I feel I have to ask: why should we even be worrying about it on any serious basis?

I knew when I posted it that someone would say: but, it’s a really, really tiny contributor to un-sustainability, so why bother?

 

9 minutes ago, Willie Whizz said:

Anyone who feels really strongly about these issues should consider participating in a lawful demonstration outside the Embassies of those countries which are currently the biggest and worst polluters

And, I knew someone would say something to that effect too, because they’re both extremely common reactions.

 

(If you doubt me foresight, go and have a look in the GETS thread, where I predicted both)

 

I went ahead and posted the propositions partly because I think that this makes a cracking example of the general problem we have facing up to the challenges of human-made climate alteration.
 

For attendees (and I accept it’s different for those who earn a living in “the model railway trade”), whether we go to a model railway exhibition a long way from home, and if we do then how we decide to get there, is about as optional as anything gets in life. It’s something we can individually decide to change, and the very worst immediate consequence of any choice is trivial: missing a show altogether, or having a more tedious/costly journey to reach the show  …,,……. so, if we can’t conceive of changing our habits/behaviours in this arena, because it’s “impractical”, it bodes very ill indeed for us making more significant changes that might actually make bigger differences, in which case: how the dickens can we expect anything to turn out differently from worst-case predictions in respect of climate change?

 

As regards looking at other countries that now have smokestack industries pumping out most pollution: go round your home, look at everything you’ve bought in the past quarter century, and check the “Made in …….” labels. In short, our consumption drives the problem as much as anyone else’s. The fact that the factory is in Wuhan rather that Walsall, or Kassel rather than Coventry doesn’t alter the fact that our decisions to buy things are what sets the factories in motion, and the smokestacks pouring (not that any of that has much directly to do with travel to exhibition venues).

 

 

 

[AY Mod]

How we live and eat, what we wear and where we work and holiday are more damaging above non-essential discretionary minor activities in environmental terms. If you feel the responses are predictable it doesn't mean others can't comprehend the big issues when encountered with preaching over little issues.

[Nearholmer]

What I find really interesting, Andy, is that everyone responds to this in terms of two currencies: money; and, convenience/time.

 

We seem not to use the currency of environmental sustainability yet, we seem not to have got our heads around the idea that it is a factor, and TBH I’m as guilty as the next person n many occassions.

[AY Mod]

8 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

everyone responds to this in terms of two currencies: money; and, convenience/time.

 

Wallets and watches don't measure carbon footprints.

[john new]

The potential sea change regarding shows not yet mentioned is the impact of YouTube on attendance/non-attendance when shows are distant from home.

 

I know that for several shows I could have visited that were at marginal travel distance for a yes/no decision (Thornbury earlier this year is just one example) I didn't go to it because I knew there would be loads of YT coverage afterwards.  The upcoming Taunton show is similar, public transport awkward and around four hours driving in the day. A very different type of day to the SWAG event (also in Taunton). We were partially converted to virtual exhibitions during lockdown time will tell how that impacts things. How you would police it is an issue but should filming be banned without a paid for permit OR does it encourage more visitors the following year? I add the last as YouTube coverage of Making Tracks 3 led to my wife and I adding Chester and an overnight stay into our return route from summer holiday. I guess others may have done the same with MK3 aiding the Chester tourism figures. 

 

[Legend]

I used to visit the Dundee show, which was on this weekend regularly when it was in the Caird Halls in central Dundee . I could get the train to Dundee , which is obviously of interest anyway .  However the exhibition has since moved out of town to a Sports Centre. I travelled once by car , but generally it was just too much hassle for someone coming just west of Glasgow . So I’d certainly vote for locations easily accessible by public transport . Another one was Falkirk which you could do by train and then walk to college. However it’s now in Grangemouth ,so it’s the car again , with not too much parking , so I don’t think I’ll bother .  Cathcart, Greenock and Paisley, on the other hand all easily accessible by public transport with plenty parking too if you decide to go that way . Big pluses in my opinion .

Edited October 15, 2023 by Legend

[Willie Whizz]

39 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

…

 

For attendees (and I accept it’s different for those who earn a living in “the model railway trade”), whether we go to a model railway exhibition a long way from home, and if we do then how we decide to get there, is about as optional as anything gets in life. It’s something we can individually decide to change, and the very worst immediate consequence of any choice is trivial: missing a show altogether, or having a more tedious/costly journey to reach the show  …,,……. so, if we can’t conceive of changing our habits/behaviours in this arena, because it’s “impractical”, it bodes very ill indeed for us making more significant changes that might actually make bigger differences, in which case: how the dickens can we expect anything to turn out differently from worst-case predictions in respect of climate change?

 

As regards looking at other countries that now have smokestack industries pumping out most pollution: go round your home, look at everything you’ve bought in the past quarter century, and check the “Made in …….” labels. In short, our consumption drives the problem as much as anyone else’s. The fact that the factory is in Wuhan rather that Walsall, or Kassel rather than Coventry doesn’t alter the fact that our decisions to buy things are what sets the factories in motion, and the smokestacks pouring (not that any of that has much directly to do with travel to exhibition venues).

 

 

 

I can perfectly well conceive of changing my behaviour; indeed to an extent I have done so. My point here is that I see next to zero merit in the entire UK opting to wear “hair shirts” about all this, and claiming “we” are setting an example for the World to follow, when actually the World seems to be taking very little notice and all we are doing is putting ourselves at a disadvantage for a minimal practical effect upon the worldwide issue. “Virtue-signalling”, in fact. 
 

As regards “our” consumption (of model railways or anything else) driving the problem - offer me a home-produced alternative of comparable or better quality at a comparable or better price and in principle at least I will take it. For that to happen, though, would require not just radical changes to our behaviour patterns, but to the World’s whole system of international trade and finance - and I don’t see that happening any time soon or without grave consequences if people  try to ‘force’ change. 
 

Nobody ever said this was going to be easy. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try, of course it doesn’t. But when large parts of the developed World, and those who are very nearly ‘developed’ now and are accelerating, why should Britain feel a compulsion to be a “World Leader” - a role that fell away from during the years after WWII - and voluntarily subject ourselves (and our railway modellers!) to a greater pain than others are willing to undergo. 
 

As regards my final point, by the way,

the best advice in situations like these is “follow the money”. We should perhaps be asking where the organisations who demand the British Government make us accept disproportionate sacrifices compared to the ‘major polluters’, and will make no

challenge to the latter, get their funding from. 

[ikcdab]

To be honest all this is absolute hogwash. We may well need to protect our climate, but far far too many people see it as just a way of making money. As far as I can see, IN EVERY CASE, the sustainable option for anything is more expensive.

If the government really wanted to promote public transport, they would slash rail fares, put on more trains and pay for it by far higher taxes on petrol, cars, junk food, cigarettes etc. They would close out of town shopping centres and support local bus services. 

We will be going to Warley next month. The return train fare is £95.  Two of us going so £190. And that's on cross-country who insist on running 4-coach Voyager units that that overcrowded and uncomfortable. By driving, I have a far more convenient journey with petrol costs of about £30 plus the parking fee.  So better than 25% of the train fare and means I can spend more at the exhibition and thus provide better support to the niche traders.

Edited October 15, 2023 by ikcdab

[Nearholmer]

24 minutes ago, Willie Whizz said:

claiming “we” are setting an example for the World to follow, when actually the World

Which I personally haven’t.

 

24 minutes ago, Willie Whizz said:

offer me a home-produced alternative of comparable

The short-cut through that, since there rarely are any, comparable or otherwise, these days, is just to buy/use less of whatever, make it last longer etc, or in the case of a huge number of things in the shops, just don’t buy it all, because nobody actually needs one of whatever it is.

 

24 minutes ago, Willie Whizz said:

make us accept disproportionate sacrifices

I for one am not asking that. I’m simply asking whether we ought to be sustainability conscious in one tiny area of optional activity (OK, to be fair, I’m cheekily asking that as a proxy for a bigger question about our ability to alter our habits to recognise sustainability as an issue in a wider sense).

 

 

Edited October 15, 2023 by Nearholmer

[Michael Hodgson]

3 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

How many travel to the NEC by car vs public transport?

I usually use both.  I drive to Milton Keynes or Canley, where they don't have rip-off parking and catch a train which gets a lot nearer the venue than the venue's own car parks.

[Nearholmer]

15 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

To be honest all this is absolute hogwash

Well, human-made climate alteration isn’t hogwash, is it?

 

 

[BrakeCoach]

23 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

We may well need to protect our climate, but far far too many people see it as just a way of making money.

 

23 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

IN EVERY CASE, the sustainable option for anything is more expensive.

If it is too expensive, why would "too many people" see it as a way of making money? If people see it as a way to earn money, wouldn't that mean the market is shifting toward environmentally friendly solutions? hmm.

It is ironic and sad that many cases in the UK and North America, railway enthusiasts have to travel by car to go enjoy their hobby, no?
Especially because these nations all grew with the rapid expansion of dense rail networks, all for it to be torn apart/dominated by freight during the coming decades after WWII.

And it seems like railway enthusiasm for these countries is also aging. Folks say correlation =/= causation, but I don't know about this one! Railway enthusiasm is still young and thriving in Japan, where public transport networks are extensive and well maintained.

Of course, people in the 1800s and the 1900s didn't build railways thinking it would be environmentally friendly, even the electric railways weren't built for that purpose then! But nowadays the rhetoric is starting to shift: compared to the cost of car infrastructure, the cost of owning a car, car insurance, ... public transport is a cheaper method to be desired, and electric trains are already an age-old proven concept compared to electric cars!

...unless the respective country still thinks cars as the only way to go forward...

P.S. Of course railway enthusiasm by car isn't the biggest issue threatening climate change. However, I'm just pointing out how it all connects in one way or the other.

Edited October 15, 2023 by BrakeCoach

[john new]

Things are changing but far too slowly. Over twenty years ago (probably nearer 25) my team ran the local refuse collections - the three Rs then were Reduce, reuse, recycle. Only the latter has truly caught on in the years since and that is patchy with still far too many places (offices etc.,) only having one waste bin so recyclables can't easily be separated out unless you take it home.

 

We can all change things a little bit where we can, example many of my trips can't be by public transport as the bus doesn't go where I need to be but when I can use it I do especially now that with a pass I can go free after 9:30.am. Same with shopping, we might pay a smidgeon more at the local mini-Co-op that is 25yds from the house but no petrol used, no pollution caused.  One main shop per week for the things the Co-op doesn't have.

[Colin_McLeod]

38 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

We will be going to Warley next month. The return train fare is £95

 

The last time I went to Warley I used public transport, i.e. flying from Dublin.  

 

If I were to do that again this year, the plane fare is less than your train fare. 

 

[ikcdab]

14 minutes ago, BrakeCoach said:

 

If it is too expensive, why would "too many people" see it as a way of making money? If people see it as a way to earn money, wouldn't that mean the market is shifting toward environmentally friendly solutions? hmm.

It is ironic and sad that many cases in the UK and North America, railway enthusiasts have to travel by car to go enjoy their hobby, no?
Especially because these nations all grew with the rapid expansion of dense rail networks, all for it to be torn apart/dominated by freight during the coming decades after WWII.

And it seems like railway enthusiasm for these countries is also aging. Folks say correlation =/= causation, but I don't know about this one! Railway enthusiasm is still young and thriving in Japan, where public transport networks are extensive and well maintained.

Of course, people in the 1800s and the 1900s didn't build railways thinking it would be environmentally friendly, even the electric railways weren't built for that purpose then! But nowadays the rhetoric is starting to shift: compared to the cost of car infrastructure, the cost of owning a car, car insurance, ... public transport is a cheaper method to be desired, and electric trains are already an age-old proven concept compared to electric cars!

...unless the respective country still thinks cars as the only way to go forward...

P.S. Of course railway enthusiasm by car isn't the biggest issue threatening climate change. However, I'm just pointing out how it all connects in one way or the other.

Ok, so give me an example of where a sustainable option is cheaper than the hitherto traditional option.  Whether it's food, cars, energy, travel, white goods, toys etc. Only this week I went to buy new carpets.  I was offered a new sustainable option made with some form of material grown in India versus the traditional polyester/wool mix.  And, guess what, the new sustainable one was twice the price of the traditional one. I mentioned energy.  My supplier is EonNext who claim "100% renewable electricity". Yet during the recent energy price crisis, their prices still went through the roof, despite no conceivable link to gas at all and their profits skyrocketed.  

Air source heat pumps start at £10,000 but a gas boiler is £1500 and there is no obvious reason for such a huge differential apart from it being fashionable and so we can hike the prices.

As I said in my original post, if governments really wanted this, they could easily reprice and retax items to make sustainable stuff cheaper. Why not double the tax on gas boilers and rate heat pumps at 0% vat?  But they don't do that, do they?

 

[ikcdab]

8 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

 

The last time I went to Warley I used public transport, i.e. flying from Dublin.  

 

If I were to do that again this year, the plane fare is less than your train fare. 

 

That's great for you, but you can't really drive from Dublin to Birmingham can you? Public transport is the only option. 

[Rivercider]

Being of good health I have always preferred to walk rather than drive the one mile distance to station/work for the last 45 years. It keeps me fit, saves money, saves pollution, save hassle looking for parking.

I am probably not a typical exhibition visitor.

As a former railwayman I have railway travel concessions, so can get cheap travel, but even though I can drive I almost always get to shows by public transport (and walk if needed).

 

Living in Weston-super-Mare I attend 10 or so exhibitions a year, most of these are/were regular, others one-off:-

 

Nailsea & District at Nailsea - train and walk.

Burnham & District at Highbridge - train (or bus) and walk

Taunton - train and walk

Minehead - Train, bus, steam train

Exeter - train and walk (shorter walk from new Marsh Barton station).

Culm Valley at Willand - train and walk

Barnstaple - train and walk

Salisbury at Wilton - train and walk

RailWells at Wells - bus and walk

Bristol at Thornbury  - train /shuttle bus. Since no shuttle bus I drove once - never again.

Melksham - train / shuttle bus

Warley - train (so crowded at New Street I felt it dangerous, and crowded at Bham Int - I have not been since)

DEMU Burton-on Trent - train and walk  

Cheltenham - train and walk

Cardiff Small Show - train and walk

Barry & Penarth at Cogan - train and walk

LarkRail at Bath - train and walk.

EDIT - must not forget

RMweb Taunton Staplegrove - train and walk.

 

And using my car

Weston-super-Mare my local show - car(!) 3 miles from home.

Note in the recent Weston show, at the changed venue, parking was so crowded, with cars parked on curbs and pavements all around that I drove back home then walked there! 

Edington - car

 

 

cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 15, 2023 by Rivercider
Add RMweb show at Taunton

[BrakeCoach]

17 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

Ok, so give me an example of where a sustainable option is cheaper than the hitherto traditional option.  Whether it's food, cars, energy, travel, white goods, toys etc.

 

Well maintained public transport is cheaper than owning a car, actually. Everyone in the aforementioned countries likes to scrutinize at paying for public transportation infrastructure, but doesn't seem to bat an eye on having to fill up their gas tanks every now and then, or the car tax, or the initial cost of the vehicle, etc... Which I think is a bit paradoxical. But I guess not having to worry about paying every time you get on is sort of a mental trick.

 

Of course theres a long way to go for sustainability. That doesn't mean we should altogether discard it! Just because one thing isn't always environmentally sustainable doesn't mean we should give up on everything.

 

If I was to advocate for total zero-carbon solutions, I would advocate for everyone to hand-craft their models in wood! Not even that, because simply living and existing is not zero-carbon at all! Does that mean we shouldn't try it anyway? Don't think so.

 

17 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

As I said in my original post, if governments really wanted this, they could easily reprice and retax items to make sustainable stuff cheaper. Why not double the tax on gas boilers and rate heat pumps at 0% vat?  But they don't do that, do they?

Not a lot of people like governments raising taxes on a product, don't they. Not the most knowledgable on British politics but its also true that oil conglomerates do lobby governments...

 

Most we can do other than showing support or trying to be more carbon-neutral is to wait for the market to change...and they seem to change, as while the intent isn't the best, companies do start to acknowledge that green money is also money!

Edited October 15, 2023 by BrakeCoach

[Not Jeremy]

I find Freecycle very good myself, for both giving and receiving - amen(!)

 

Of course, they don't do train shows...

[Nearholmer]

21 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

if governments really wanted this

My, perhaps overly cynical, reading is that governments, certainly politicians of any stamp who want to get elected/re-elected do what they think will make them popular - they try to work out what we want, then promise, if not always deliver, it.

 

If I’m right about that, the reason they don’t pursue “greener” policies is because they think we don’t want them to; they think “greenness” will make them unpopular.

 

 

[009 micro modeller]

33 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

That's great for you, but you can't really drive from Dublin to Birmingham can you? Public transport is the only option. 

Also how relevant are short-haul flights to a discussion about sustainability, given that they’re often given as an example of polluting transport? Of course in this example it’s the only realistic option because the ferry plus train journey is much longer and the airport is virtually in the NEC, but the more general point is still relevant.

[Willie Whizz]

There is something in that, but I suspect in many cases it is not because people “don’t want them to”, as such, but that they see it as making them bear a disproportionate and earlier burden compared to what most other countries’ populations are being asked to bear, so far. I have to ask again: I agree we must do something, but why do WE have to purport to be “leaders”? Who do we expect among the worst polluters to follow?  Because if they won’t, we are just punishing ourselves. 

Edited October 15, 2023 by Willie Whizz

[Not Jeremy]

Not quite answering the point, but it seems to me that a lot of the "nice" venues from the past may well have been more "green", as in being more accessible by public transport and better supported ar complemented by surrounding businesses, cafes, pubs etc.

 

Bu they were trickier to get in and out of, which is one reason, I suspect, that we have seen the growth of the "out of town show".

 

Perhaps another way to look at/think about this, is to try to put on a show that is "in town" and which is an attractive venue that it is enjoyable to be in? In other words, change things by enticing people into jollier circumstances that might be "you know what" - just don't give your name, Pike.

 

My own (and now with Jerry Clifford) little effort in this regard is "Larkrail", which sort of does offer this combination, but to be fair wouldn't support a large show. We do have to contend with steps or a long slope to get in and out and parking is a bit of a pain, bur with goodwill and a bit of creative thought we get by.

 

There must be other (nice) venues in the UK that would be do-able and "different"?

 

None of which is to detract from any existing show, of course.

 

Simon

 

 

 

 

Edited October 15, 2023 by Not Jeremy
Pikey

[PMP]

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

What I find really interesting, Andy, is that everyone responds to this in terms of two currencies: money; and, convenience/time.

 

That’s because those are two significant factors in attending an event, be it an exhibition or match or concert. 
I live in a rural location in the East Midlands. Next weekend I want to go to Uckfield exhibition, roughly 190 miles away.

Those are the cheapest prices. There’s also the matter of the rail journey time being 3hrs 44min out bound and 4hrs 11min inbound. Then I have to get to/from the station, I’ve chosen the one with the more frequent services which is 14 miles away. 45 minutes by bus. Thing is though, no outbound/return bus service  that will meet these times to make attending the show viable. Or I can get in my car, fill it with fuel for around £70 and get 600 miles out of the tank. So I can get there and back, 3hrs each way, and still have two days commuting left in the tank. Yep I have a daily round trip commute of 100 miles, four or five times a week. So time and cost make the car the only sensible option, or not going.
 

It’s very easy for those with access to good transport to assume that others have those same opportunities, we don’t. Going to Warley next month is almost as torturous a journey using public transport. As usual I’ll be going by car. 

[Nearholmer]

37 minutes ago, Willie Whizz said:

agree we must do something, but why do WE have to purport to be “leaders”?

Who here said that we have to be leaders? In fact, if you look in plenty of places you’ll find countries doing a bit of this, and a bit of that which we haven’t done yet, or are lagging on. We’re fairly far down the league in terms of sustainability in transport compared with several European countries, and not exactly ‘top dogs’ when it comes to recycling, for instance. Even our energy policy, which has come on a long way, still looks a bit iffy in terms of CO2 emissions, mainly because our nuclear capacity is so low that we’re burning gas to support base-load.

 

And, at risk of repetition, the big polluting countries are the ones that are currently ‘the workshops of the world’ (I guess we were the biggest polluters in about 1850 when we were the workshop) and the best we can offer there is a difficult combination of nagging them, buying less stuff from them, or m

Us putting off the evil day of doing very much about sustainability won’t make the people we buy stuff from stop producing pollution. It seems more likely to me that they’ll simply rip ahead of us, and swiftly move on to selling us the technology with which to get greener.

 

I don’t pretend to have a brilliant answer to it all, I just have a strong sense that things aren’t going well so far, and that we haven’t yet internalised the need to change the way we do things.