Walking beneath the waters of the River Thames

IT IS NOT NECESSARY to be able to hold your breath for a long time or to carry a snorkel or even air cylinders to be able to stroll leisurely deep below the surface of London’s River Thames. If you fancy a walk beneath the water, the Greenwich Foot Tunnel is the place to be. It can be entered by stairs or using a wood panel-lined lift from one of its two entrances – the southern one near the Cutty Sark in Greenwich, and the northern one at Island Gardens.

The tunnel, which is circular in cross-section, is 405 yards in length, and 50 feet beneath the river at its deepest point. For most of its length it is 3 yards (9 feet) in diameter, and it slopes downwards at both ends. Its construction began in 1899 and was completed in 1902. Therefore, building the tunnel happened during the entire time that the 2nd Anglo-Boer War was being fought in South Africa. The lifts that are housed beneath domed structures at each end of the tunnel were ready for use in 1904. Judging by the appearance of the wood panelling within the lift carriages, it looks as if these were installed many years ago. Despite their vintage appearance the lifts have been modernised and work without needing an operator.

Although there many notices forbidding cycling in the tunnel, there is no shortage of cyclists disobeying this rule. This makes walking in the tunnel slightly hazardous as the cyclists speed along the narrow walkway in the long, straight tunnel. Using the tunnel is a convenient way of traversing the Thames and gives one the opportunity to walk under water.

Climate, cycles, and trees

cycle

 

Undoubtedly, there is much concern about the future of planet Earth’s climate. So much so that children are missing school to go on protest marches because they are worried that they might never complete their lives because of catastrophic flooding or abnormally high ambient temperatures. Whether or not the dire predictions will turn out to be fulfilled remains to be seen, but there is no harm in trying to do something to address and then ameliorate or extinguish the perceived causes of the predicted ultimate disaster(s).

One of many measures being taken in London to reduce the output of gases toxic to the environment is to encourage the use of bicycles instead of motor vehicles. At present, cycling in London is fraught with dangers. There have been many collisions between cyclists and motor vehicles with quite a few fatalities amongst the cyclists. Many attempts are being made to segregate cyclists from other road traffic by constructing dedicated cycle lanes. Countries like the Netherlands have demonstrated very successfully that cycling can be made both safe and enjoyable by means of a comprehensive network of cycle lanes. 

Recently, there was a plan to construct a cycle lane along the tree-lined Holland Park Avenue in west London. From my frequent observations of this thoroughfare, there is only heavy cycle traffic in the morning and evening rush hours. Outside these busy times, there are few cyclists using this stretch of road. I felt that because of this a cycle lane was of questionable value.

To build the proposed cycle lane, planners faced a problem, which they might not have anticipated. In order to construct the cycle lane, twenty mature leafy trees would have had to be removed from Holland Park Avenue. This prospect aroused the anger of protestors in the area, who felt it was wrong to chop down trees to make way for a cycle lane. In a way they were correct.

Trees, as most people now know, help to protect the climate, which motorists (in cars powered by fuels other than electricity) are destroying. One need only look at the recent international protests against cutting down the rainforests in Brazil to understand the perceived importance of trees. Granted, Holland Park Avenue is hardly a rain forest, but chopping down trees does not seem like a good thing. In Bangalore (India), many trees have been removed to accomodate the needs of a rapidly growing metropolis, and the city’s climate and water supply are being adversely affected by factors such as this.

So, we have a conundrum: cyclists or trees? Rather than sit on the fence, let me give you my answer. The object of encouraging cycling and preserving trees is to save the future of human existence. If that is accepted, then saving cyclists’ lives and protecting them from harm has to take preference over saving twenty undoubtedly attractive trees.

All I ask of the cyclists is to protect themselves and pedestrians by obeying traffic signals.

For more about the Holland Park cycle lane, see:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48635369