Pretty interesting.
3 Likes
As environmental laws in acted in the UK resulted in less pollution over time, there is less fog in London.
2 Likes
It used to be called a pea souper and it was lethal to many in the 50’s. A clean white collar would at the end of the day would be black in the 60’s.
2 Likes
Not to mention the drains:-
1 Like
That gives me an idea.
That annoying relative who lives reasonable distance away needs a shake up to tell him the big boss is watching him.
First, I’ll eat a whole lot of cabbage before my next visit …
I hear low sulpher fuels lower the risk of pregnancy too.
What rubbish
Stop watching Fox News!!! 
1 Like
Hope it is not for a candle light dinner. 
1 Like
Maybe we will get the same result in all big European cities:
Why Europe is going ‘car-free’
While New York City and the Trump administration battle over a congestion pricing program, vehicle restrictions in Europe are fast becoming the norm.
https://wapo.st/3XTXgIc (Gift article. No paywall)
PS> Singapore was the first big city in the world to have a congestion charge, already in 1975. But they didn’t just pass a law and hope for the best. Before it was implemented there were parking lots built outside the downtown area and special bus routes arranged from there to all areas of the city (Before MRT)
The London fog in 1952 that killed around ten thousand people in a week catalyzed the beginning of the environmental movement.
2 Likes
There was a similar cathartic event near where I grew up back in the day…
1 Like
its a money maker now, you pay extra to be parked in traffic
PS was chatting to an insurance executive a few weeks ago, the industry says more lightning strikes in more places on the world and the increase is greater than the expanding man made objects being hit.
Having lived in NYC years ago, when things were not as bad as they are now, why would anyone risk their car in that city? We joked that you could tell when a taxi was brand-new, the first day on the street. It didn’t have a dent. Two days old? Dents. But then, when you consider how many people that work in “big cities” but live in the “suburbs”, is the infrastructure in place to provide transportation? Washington, DC would be a good example. DC, where everyone wants to work but no one wants to live. Also, with the US being so much bigger than many European countries, how do you get people from “out in the country” (Like me. 
) into the city? No way you can supply mass-transit to so many people. No easy, or cheap answer I fear. Look at California, $11 BILLION spent on high-speed rails resulting in 57 MILES of track.?? Final cost is estimated to be between $88 billion and $128 billion.
" California high-speed rail current status
As of January 2025, 119 miles (192 km) of the 171 miles (275 km) were under active construction. 22 miles (35 km) of contiguous guideway were declared complete, making that section ready for track-laying. The remainder of the 119 miles (192 km) is expected to complete their guideway by the end of 2026."
Good. My source may have been a bit dated. It sounds like California decided to “pull it’s thumb out” and get to work. Appreciate the update.