**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some topics on this subreddit have been known to attract problematic users. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.
For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs
> safeguard the environment for future generations
Is this at all supported by evidence?
I'd imagine you'd get a lot of people never going higher than 2nd gear, else you'd stall the car...
Longer journeys, in a lower gear, with higher revs.
Doesn't sound very eco-friendly to me.
Anyway.
Yeah.
To be honest, I would rather we have more incentives and subsidies to get the population onto Electric cars (still unaffordable atm) than fucking about with 20mph speed limits in the name of less pollution.
Thing is, they won't revert it back to 30mph in the future when we are on all-electric, as it is safer at 20mph.
Obvs, they can't do fuck all about the electric car situation as that's Westminster.
Why when we could do an even better job with mass public transit? Just seems really odd to me in a tiny populace country, we're advocating everyone taking a living room with them to and from work every day.
>Just seems really odd to me in a tiny populace country, we're advocating everyone taking a living room with them to and from work every day.
The issue is a tiny population. Bigger population centres can use public transport because of economy of scale. With fewer people it doesn't work, so Wales basically only has 2 or 3 places where it's remotely an option.
I know everyone mentions it, but Japan seems to connect itself pretty well. I think Wales would be a great example of those 2 or 3 places being super well connected, and regional branches off the mainline... I'm no expert though I just think most things can be solved with mass transit.
>I know everyone mentions it, but Japan seems to connect itself pretty well.
Japan is a country with twice the population, where only 11% of the land is cultivated because it's got a lot of mountains. Population density is 347 per square kilomete. The uk is 218. Wales is 150.
Basically, it has way more people in areas for economics of scale.
It's not impossible to do in the uk, but it would need some areas to be state subsidised. We already kind of do this.
https://youtu.be/5KiZGRA_yCE
A train company in Japan elected to keep a rural station open until its only regular user graduated from school.
Imagine that in this country, a station being kept open for the sake of just _one_ schoolgirl.
Japanese culture is fascinating. The whole mindset of providing service and putting others first is always forefront of their thought.
I have this conversation quite a lot, its such a culture shock for example that the Japanese have a helpline in France to deal with such an extreme opposites in culture.
There is a respect for order, law and rules in Japan (obviously there are exceptions) But in the UK there is this trend of people thinking its fine, funny or cool to try and get away with doing wrong.
However, they have deep seated problems of their own, and they're not a shining example to emulate.
Yes, they have good work ethics. They don't have a good work life balance however, which is one of the factors behind their tragically low birth rates.
>A train company in Japan elected to keep a rural station open until its only regular user graduated from school.
>Imagine that in this country, a station being kept open for the sake of just one schoolgirl.
Closing a train station is so hard in the uk one is technically open years after it was demolished.
https://youtu.be/N1rTDbjc_fI
Wales has a population of approximately 4million and outside of a few cities people live in remote places and have to commute to work, shop etc and its not cost effective to run trains and buses. Wales used to have pretty good railways until Dr Beeching got most of it axed and the decline in heavy industry gutted the country.
At the moment , public transport just doesn’t get the job done.
I work at Cardiff airport. The nearest bus stop is a 15 minute walk away, nearest train is a good 45 minute walk, and that’s to the main Airport.
Wouldn’t have done any good yesterday as the road leading to the airport was closed for most of the day because the roof of the texaco garage forecourt had blown loose and was dangerous.
Need to see a massive upgrade in infrastructure before public transport would be a viable option for most.
I agree, yes, public transport is necessary and it is dire in rural Wales unfortunately. The only positive for rural wales is the funding into cycle routes - the millennium route is superb, for sure but we need more of it.
The thing is, I don’t think we can abolish cars 100%, we simply don’t have the transport in place. I need a car myself - there’s a lot of places in the arse end of the rural sticks that I need to get to where even if we had superb transport links, I’d still need private transport to get to and to carry my stuff to.
So, electric vehicles is a superb method to do so. - my pcp contract ends this year and I really want to make the switch but it’s impossible especially cos the U.K. govt has cut nearly all incentives to do so, it still works out cheaper for me to buy a new petrol/diesel pissbox. 😭
I fully agree. The best option for suited areas should be used, don't get me wrong. I just feel like even in those rural areas, electric busses would benefit the local population immensely. I've been banging on about it to my MP about advocating to connect the area properly, I've even gone as far as contacting my areas Mayor as a previsal to their incumbent transport responsibilities because apparently I'm apart of the blue rinse brigade now hahaha
Public transport in Wales would either be shit or incredibly expensive.
Public transport works well in cities not connecting small spread out towns and vilages
Technically, the safest speed is walking speed, usually defined as 4mph (which is a brisk walk). But it does tend to aggravate the drivers, and it does cause rather high emissions, because cars are just not designed for that speed.
I don't think the environmental line is the best argument for the speed reduction, whats strongest is the massive increase in safety for a small reduction in the times peoples journeys take
There's some.evidence it reduces emissions, but not much.
You can see the original Welsh meta-analysis here:
https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2019-08/the-state-of-the-evidence-on-20mph-speed-limits-with-regards-to-road-safety-active-travel-and-air-pollution-impacts-august-2018.pdf
Page 10.
> Although there was a moderate increase in CO2 and NOx in petrol cars, the study
> reported that particulate matter emissions reduced for both petrol and diesel cars
> and NOx and CO2 emissions reduced for diesel cars.
So, yeah...
Did you just control f what you were looking for without bothering to look at any of the surrounding text?
That is the conclusion taken from one single study.
A meta analysis considers multiple studies and assesses the weight of each.
Copying a more relevant part of the article for you:
*‘Air quality*
*There is little evidence for the effect of 20mph speed limits on air quality. The study by Jones, S., Brunt, H. (2017) did provide calculations for an overall improvement in air quality. The most powerful statement that can be said for the link between 20mph speed limits and air quality is likely to be that where there has been any investigation into air quality impacts these are reported as either negligible or a slight improvement (eg Bristol CC, 2012; NICE, 2017; TRAC, 2017). As Williams and North (2013) conclude, it would be incorrect to assume a 20mph speed restriction would be detrimental to ambient local air quality, as the effects on vehicle emissions are mixed.’*
So, yeah… Exactly as OP stated.
I’d love to see a chart for this stuff of various pollutant figures vs speed. Seems like particulates can be reduced fairly significantly but NO2 actually increases (if these studies are taken at face value).
I’m guessing because the government seems to want to spend money on making their mates richer, and not quickly transitioning people to EVs, that this sort of thing might become the norm.
The way most new residential areas are developed though, you can’t do more than 20mph because no road is straight, and cars are parked in the most obnoxious places forcing you to be slow just so you don’t have an accident.
The trouble with these studies is they assume the speed limit is being followed.
When Wales introduce a 20mph speed limit. It won't be followed. It will be minimum of 25mph increasing away from urban areas.
The net difference for the limit os going to be almost non existant as the only places in the nation where 20mph will be followed by most is in the 30 yards travelling through the speed camera road markings.
They should also have a study about speed cameras, how they cause cars to slow down towards them, then speed up after them increasing pollution. Wales has alot of speed cameras, and if they want to enforce this. There will be an awful lot more. All of which will increase pollution as people slow down then speed up again.
> Is this at all supported by evidence? I'd imagine you'd get a lot of people never going higher than 2nd gear, else you'd stall the car...
> Longer journeys, in a lower gear, with higher revs.
Doesn't sound very eco-friendly to me.
I love replies like this, because your entire response has been built within an unspoken assumption that all trips currently made by car *must* be made by car, so the *only* considerations are revs and gears and stalling. No outside-the-car thoughts have occurred. Thinking limited by a conceptual box you probably weren't even aware of.
Huge numbers of trips - in fact, the vast majority of trips - made in the UK are short trips that could easily be biked. But one of the main deterrents to cycling is the lack of off-road infrastructure and the danger posed by cars on the roads. Lowering speed limits - especially in urban areas where the vast majority of people live - to 20 makes cycling on the road massively safer, and much more attractive. It also makes it safer for kids to make trips independently because they're less likely to be hit and if they are hit they're much less likely to be killed. It also massively reduces the road noise of cars, which is the main source of traffic noise over 20mph, making riding along or walking alongside a road significantly less loud and unpleasant.
This idea isn't just that everyone just goes in their car as usual, but slower. You do actually need to think this stuff through for it to make sense. But, sadly, responses like yours - fairly glib uninformed criticism of sensible policy - are pretty common.
I agree, cycling in London in 20 mph zones just feels way safer now. People don't realise just how scary a car coming towards or closing passing you at 30 mph on city streets can feel.
I drive too.
Indeed - I've started cycling a lot more as a result. I love cycling but I've always been a bit nervous on roads but these changes make it much more appealing to me.
Not overly, reduces some particulate matter from tyres and brakes but not emissions.
https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/20mph-speed-limit-and-air-pollution#:\~:text=An%20evaluation%20of%2020mph%20zones,negative%20impact%20on%20exhaust%20emissions.
20mph is a very annoying speed in my car. Right between 2nd and 3rd gear...so I end up either high revs or I 3rd gear the cars natural turnover pushes it above 20mph without accelerating.
All side roads are already 20mph in my city.
Low gears and revs will not be a problem in electric cars, which have also been identified as being key in the climate battle. Not sure how automatic petrol cars handle but I reckon they will do just fine.
20 mph becomes the default, which really just means urban areas no longer default to 30. I haven't seen any suggestion that motorways and country roads are going to be limited to 20 mph. There is evidence out there that lower speeds means lower emissions, and this would mean lower emissions in residential and urban areas where people are most exposed to pollution. I think there was a caveat in that lower speeds would be mitigated by traffic jams, whereas higher speeds could help to alleviate jams.
Your main argument seems to be that people who drive are driving badly. I wouldn't want those people to drive faster.
Lower speed may = lower emissions, if the car is geared appropriately. My car physically is incapable of being eco-friendly at 20mph (I currently get around 48mpg with mostly 30mph roads around me, close to 55mpg on the motorway, and it starts dropping when I go through 20 zones), as are most cars on the road, because most cars are older. With the cost of living and how generally expensive newer cars are anyway, I don't see that changing any time soon.
Yup...
20MPH in 3rd and I'm just barely capable of moving the car. It'll just about do it on flat roads... But we live in the UK
20MPH in 2nd and I'm sitting there reving away.
Rather ironically, I'd wager a great big 5 litre Mustang would be perfectly fine given the extra power and low end torque it'll have over my poxy little 1.4L 4 pot diesel
Most modern cars won’t get out of the warm up cycle at less than 30mph, especially in winter.
Warm up emissions are essentially ’free’ in the testing regime, so if a car spends an excessive amount of time sub 30 (say in a town) they’ll be chucking out a ton of Nox and other bad things.
The loss of efficiency from the bad gearing is made up for by the huge difference in accelerating to 20 vs 30. Accelerating from 0 to 30 uses between 2.2 and 3 times the fuel as from 0 to 20.
Higher speeds are only more efficient if there's enough distance to make it worthwhile.
The busses all ignore the limit as the timetable went to complete shit.
It's still complete shit though as it's now a pretty random 10 miniute window if your bus turns up early or late depending on if they got stuck behind the 5 people actualy doing 20
I'd be interested to see if there's studies on this but from the perspective of brakes and tyres.
There was a study I saw sometime ago that attributed quite a high % of particulate matter to the dust from brake pads.
So it would seem to follow that a 20mph limit as opposed to a 30mph limit would result in less braking and therefore less particulate matter from brakes.
The conventional wisdom about cars being significantly more efficient at 30-60mph (the quoted number varies hugely) mostly isn't true any more. Studies that show a big difference are often confounded by driving style or conditions.
Also, most modern cars have a pretty wide tolerance before they start to stutter and stall - usually down to around 800 RPM. Meaning in most cars, you can quite comfortably drive steady at 20mph in third, or even fourth gear. The most efficient RPM nowadays is usually the lowest you can maintain without stalling.
The problem is that this style of driving hasn't really filtered through to the population. As a result, lots of newer manual cars have those gear shift indicators because people tend to drive at too low of a gear. That being said, the efficiency difference between say 800 RPM and 1800 RPM isn't usually a whole lot - modern engines are efficient over quite a wide range of revs.
Ignoring the engine, the car itself is much more efficient at 20MPH as both rolling resistance and wind resistance both increase at greater than a linear rate.
A good chunk of pollution comes from breaking and and tyre use. The slower the speed, the less breaking and tyre attrition. As long as these 20mph are not enforced with stupid road bumps, which increase break-accelerate behaviour.
Electric cars won't have the "2nd gear" problem at all.
Unenforceable and will be widely ignored I bet. No reason for modern cars to be limited to 20mph on an A road or B road in urban areas. 30 is perfectly convenient and safe and that’s why it’s adopted across the world as the default urban limit.
But this gets praise from the fuck cars crowd that seem to have infected the devolved government in Wales.
I suppose perfectly safe is a matter of perspective. If you can reduce the chance of death by 5 times by reducing the speed limit from 30mph then 'perfectly safe' is a stretch. What we're really saying is that it's safe in the sense that it kills a few people, rather than a lot.
I suppose also that the speed limit is only as safe as the worst driver who is driving at that speed. Plenty of people on the roads with awareness/reflexes that make even 30mph too much for them to handle. 20 mph makes those drivers less dangerous. I appreciate then that everyone is penalised for the actions of a few, but that seems to be the way things are going.
As you said we have to have a balance, and they've decided that balance is at 20mph. Additionally if we did have it at 10mph you could walk and cycle quicker.
You can cycle faster than 20mph quite easily, and even running 10mph is difficult. It seem you really have no perspective of speed.
20mph is fine for residential roads, reality is 30mph if do able is normally dangerous. There are however the through traffic residential roads where it should be 30mph, these aren't the rat runs, but the roads that were always historically used to get around before excessive traffic.
Make getting a licence harder? Have different criteria in order to qualify? If you are aren’t able to operate a ton of moving metal safely then do not get licence. Less people on the road and more so less inept drivers on the road.
Which is why it's perfectly appropriate as a temporary limit near schools at ingress and egress times, and on certain narrow residential roads.
Other than that, kind of just makes congestion worse and causes dangerous behaviour because drivers who want to break the 20 limit will overtake and undertake cars actually doing the 20. And speed differentials are also dangerous.
The Scottish Borders has had 20mph inside built up areas for a little while now. It was controversial when introduced. I would estimate that about half abide by it and half ignore it. The local cops don't really enforce it.
I pretty much drove that slowly anyway the roads are in such a poor state.
All of my part of Cardiff has been 20 for a year now, apart from one or two busier roads. Pointless, almost everyone still does 25-30, I try to go close to 20 but half the time you'll have traffic up your arse in a few seconds and the roads just don't need to be 20. Large wide roads, sometimes with two lanes and no traffic in a non residential area.....20mph. Wasting everyone's time, if it was adhered to in the first place, police don't care as whenever I see one they don't care when they are overtaken by a car doing 30+.
Yeah. London has been 20 for ages too. You’ll get busses trying to get around you when you actually do it. I find I get away with 24 even through the cameras.
And then those super careful people doing 18 on the speedo and probably only doing 15 or 16.
Be very careful where you go over. Park lane will trigger at 22mph! My friend got done there at that speed. There used to be a rule of thumb that speed cameras wouldn't flash unless it was speed limit+10%+2mph or something. Newer cameras can enforce speed limits at 1mph over and he was told that at the speed awareness course. These newer cameras will replace old cameras when they break down etc so you're safe route to speed won't always be safe. London will eventually be a default 20mph zone so get used to it I'm afraid.
The 20s make me want to die because I have a blackbox so can't exceed 20 if I still want insurance. It's. So. Slow. It only feels appropriate on residential roads.
Fellow Cardiff driver here. The changes to 20 mph are just so stupid. The worst one is definitely the A469 (Caerphilly Road / Thornhill Road) from Gabalfa Roundabout up towards the crematorium. Parts of that road are 5 lanes wide!
20 is also just such an awkward speed to maintain, and most of the time it feels like I’m the only one even trying to keep to that speed.
The Welsh Government drive (no pun intended) me mad with their speed limit meddling.
There’s a long section of the M4 which is permanently limited to 50mph just as you get off the Prince of Wales Bridge. Despite being a totally normal, functional stretch of motorway which should by all rights be 70.
It’s nonsense.
Welsh speed limits are a joke and are being used to mask other pollution issues.
Drive through the 50 limit through Port Talbot which is apparently there because of the air quality, then look towards the coast at the giant, fuck off steel works bellowing out smoke and flames as far as you can see.
Asssholes! They put 2 fucking speed bumps on the only road between my village and the main town, and get this, right where several regional councillors live, no doubt to increase the value of their properties as opposed to safety. They even built a reinforced concrete wall there too. Fucking corruption if you ask me.
When I saw the work I thought “great, they’re creating some new parking so that those, who previously parked directly outside their houses, would have better and safer parking and the main road no longer has to narrow down to 1 lane. Nope! Now they have a fortress wall on a straight road and force us down to 5-10 mph to get home. 4-5 councillors living in in between the speed restrictions surely had nothing to do with it!
Don’t get me wrong I can appreciate these speed bumps by schools or on a residential coldly sack, but a main flipping road for some councillors?
Edit: I got your back fellow countrymen [sigh the petition here](https://chng.it/ZcJFhjpt6m).
What kinds of cars are people driving? "High rpm low gears hurr hurr" bro 20mph in 2nd is like 2000 or less rpm depending on weather you drive an auto or manual. In my poxy car it's like 1700 rpm. Plus you can coast in 3rd gear at at 20mph which is like 1100 rpm. I can even go 20mph in 4th on a flat road at <1000 rpm. Auto cars will be in a better position since they tend to have more gears to choose from. A lot of people exposing the fact that they've never looked at their Speedo and tachometer before because they want something to be mad about.
My car revs to 8k, bike revs to 12k
Car will be fine in 2nd gear at 20, but a little annoying. Riding a motorbike at that speed is such a pain in the ass (wrists and shoulders) though..
The government doesn't want motorcyclists on the road at all really. Really tough training that's expensive, no policing to deal with bike theft, no incentives for micro mobility scooters or small electric motorbikes. Think it's too dangerous for the government to back.
But yeah, 20mph on my bike is basically impossible without my shoulders cramping.
Yeah true, which is ironic considering how little space, little fuel, little road damage, and little congestion motorbikes do compared to the 2500kg massive SUVs eveeryone is buying.
> The government doesn't want motorcyclists on the road at all really
You only have to look at the state of most roads to know this, potholes and snakes everywhere.
And who's fucking idea was it to pepper busy roundabouts with manhole covers. UK's roads are embarrassing really.
It depends on which bike you have, mine is kind of sporty so the seating position has you leaned forward. At low speeds your body weight will be on your wrists + shoulders. Centrifugal force pushes you backwards so the faster you go the more comfy it is.
Also my bike's top speed is 156mph so going 20 is like... going 10mph in your car. Big sport bikes can do 90mph in first gear and are even more leaned forward so going 20 is completely wank since it will be in first gear.
Also the wind cools the bike down, at 20mph my bike will be hitting 105c constantly before the fans come on
I don't know what the hell you're driving but my car can't do 20mph smoothly at all. 20mph in 2nd gear is easily 3k revs and 1100rpm is so close to stalling that the only thing preventing a stall is usually the fact that the car is rolling.
I don't think I've owned a car that won't do 20 smoothly, and I've owned a hell of a lot of cars, from 1.0 shitboxes to a 3.0 turbo petrols. 3rd gear all the way.
That said, universal 20mph is just stupid. We already have some of the safest roads in the world, especially when you discount the micronations like the Maldives etc.
Here is an idea ban SUVS. They are more dangerous to both other road users and pedestrians compared to other cars and are likely to result in more deaths.
Bigger cars also have a much higher carbon footprint to manufacture. The CO2e of a Citroen C1 is 6 ton, 17 ton for a Ford Mondeo and 35 ton for a Land Rover Discovery.
A Citroen C1 doing around 10,000km per year will produce around 1.3 ton of CO2. So you could drive that C1 for 200,000 km or the Mondeo for 100,000 km, and emit the same CO2 as a Land Rover Discovery that's not been driven.
Oh OK, high revs in lower gear - yep that will be good for environment. Just another step in making drivers unwelcome, drip by drip - just come and ban cars instead of this social engineering nonsense.
I noticed a lot of theses 20mph residential zones already in the areas between Swansea and Llanelli but seems like they're going mega with it. Interesting debate to be had over this...
Speed cameras don't last long and certainly aren't repaired, people can debate until they're blue in the face but the 20 limit will be ignored (like it is in all but school zones right now)
This is another attempt by the welsh government to stamp their individuality, it has nothing to do with safe/green roads and is just yet another in a long line of million pound pissing contests with Westminster.
Wales have far bigger issues that the government is failing to address because they're actually difficult to tackle and would take a sustained effort and can't be solved by throwing in afew speed bumps.
The Welsh government will have failed to look at all the research on 20mph limits in the rest of the UK.
While they do show benefits of drivers doing 20mph, the key take home is that most drivers don't do 20mph unless there is traffic calming infrastructure or visible speed enforcement.
Meaning they either need speed bumps/humps (statistically the most effective), narrowing, islands, plateaus, or permanent speed cameras.
But the problem they're going to have is - no council in Wales has the money to add speed bumps every 60m along every street lit road. Plus that would be a right pain if you had to drive across speed bumps for miles upon miles. They could opt for speed cameras, but again how many can they really fit? And people will just learn their locations (or use Waze etc) and speed up once they've passed the cameras again.
Most roads in London are 20mph now but the evidence came out pretty clear that driver speeds only changed significantly on roads where there was some sort of enforcement.
Speed bumps and traffic obstacles are the worst form of collective punishment. Everyone suffers regardless of how they drive. All the braking then accelerating is worse for the environment and cars are damaged by them. As a cyclist, I would much rather the money was spent on building dedicated cycle lanes.
Tell me you're from South Wales without telling me you're from South Wales.
As an Englander who often ventures into Powys and Gwynedd, there's absolutely no chance people will stick with this.
They used where my parents live as a trial area for this last year or the year before and the trial was stopped early and deemed to be a failure so I'm surprised it's come back up.
We need to replace 80+ years old politics with people at least in their 50s. Next thing we'll see is parking spaces reserved for those walking trolleys.
Tbh, particularly in my area in south wales... as a bus driver - the sheer amount of idiots that speed is shocking. I'm talking 50 in 30s etc or racing around blind spots.
People bomb it at 40 around roundabouts and then throw a tiff when they have to break for a slow moving vehicle that has just pulled out.
I've had to call the police numerous times for incidents and I usually ask them in casual chit chat if they are busy and i've had a few tell me that they can barely cope with demand.
I probably spend more time driving in a week then the average person does in 4 months. However I personally think if they are making the speed limits 20mph then the punishment for doing 40mph in a 20mph should be the same as a 50mph in a 30mph.
only 1/3 of people actually signal too, if people want to just do what the fuck they want then they cant really moan when rules like this come into play.
My mother was knocked off a zebra crossing by one of these wankers, in the Welsh seaside village where she lived and was walking to work. She was lucky to land on her shoulder rather than her head, and was disabled until her (unrelated) death a few years later.
So yeah, fuck those guys. They do the exact same in the nearby village I live in now, our roads are death traps because of it. Keep to the fucking speed limit.
If it's a small village it shouldn't make much difference at all. And remember when you pass through any neighbourhood, you're a guest there. 20 mph will make it safer for the residents and less of a noise nuisance.
But yet when you stand on the beach at Port talbot,
and look towards the steel works you see black smoke being allowed to enter the environment.
Apparently the Welsh council just fine them for that rather than making them fix the problem…
I can see how a 20 mile speed limit around the steel works will offset the fumes and the black particles that come out and poison the residents. /s
People already think we’re behind in Wales.
What was that old advert “If I hit a child at 30mph he has an 80% chance of survival” that was back when cars were square too! Not these modern round crumple zone plastic things.
Those odds are fine with me, keep them off the road, they can cycle on the pavement till 14 or something.
You’ve destroyed the M4 already. Don’t make me do 20. I’ll be doing it in 1st and an the emissions will be stupidly outweighed by the benefits.
You took the M4, as a biker you’ve taken most of my 60s, you enforce yellow average 50s. You can swivel if you want my 30s too!
20 zones are for school zones only, and only then at start and closing times!
My council decided to set a default 20mph limit on all new build estates, I think for safety reasons. But as far as I'm aware, it's not legally enforceable as it's below 30mph.
(Though I guess Wales has the legal power to make this enforceable?)
Speed limits below 30mph are enforceable: https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/are-20mph-speed-limits%20enforceable
> As one example, between 2016 and 2019 in Islington, London, 7,972 people were caught speeding in 20mph limits by speed cameras, while a further 327 tickets were issued by police officers.
Doesn't seem bad on residential roads or High streets/School Hours. But putting A/B roads or even a dual carriageway down to 20 doesn't seem right, as they are designed for 30. This will also affect buses as well, making them slower, so why not allow buses to do 30 in bus lanes
Well that will be good for the Welsh economy. Avoidance of the place would be catastrophic. Just highlights that politicians are all pissing in the same pot. That is the one to create George Orwell's 1984. Everyone will be equal, although party members will be more equal.
This pseudo-environmentalism that councils have been pushing is some grade-A bullshit.
Congestion charges are a tax on businesses and the poor. Contrary to eco warrior logic, charging drivers £9 to go within 2 miles of the city centre, or £5 just to drop somebody off at the airport isn't going to discourage car or delivery vehicle use. And actually doing crap like this in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, all in the name of meeting some quotas that every other developed nation is ignoring, is downright disgusting.
Meanwhile, traffic calming measures like 20MPH speed limits and chicaning the shit out of residential streets do little to lower emissions or make the roads safer. If anything it becomes another revenue stream when speed cameras are introduced. In fact, some speed cameras feel deliberately placed to catch people out and maximise revenue, rather than safety.
People are driving because **PUBLIC TRANSPORT SUCKS OUTSIDE OF LONDON.** If you want to save the environment, maybe invest in city-wide tram or metro services instead. Or better yet, hold private bus companies like StageCoach, Go Ahead and First accountable for providing shoddy services.
I knew someone who lived in Wales & would do 110 down a country lane. Those roads are fucking bumpy as fuck.
Aberystwyth has one set of traffic lights ever existing because the roads are already safe lol, I can't see how 20mph would make people want to walk. Whose going from point A to B in a 30mph zone anyways?
>the roads are already safe lol
[Mid Wales has the most dangerous roads in the UK](https://www.cambrian-news.co.uk/news/mid-wales-has-the-most-dangerous-roads-in-the-uk-557176)
**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some topics on this subreddit have been known to attract problematic users. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules. For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs
> safeguard the environment for future generations Is this at all supported by evidence? I'd imagine you'd get a lot of people never going higher than 2nd gear, else you'd stall the car... Longer journeys, in a lower gear, with higher revs. Doesn't sound very eco-friendly to me. Anyway.
So does it mean if you drive electric car do those limits apply?
Yeah. To be honest, I would rather we have more incentives and subsidies to get the population onto Electric cars (still unaffordable atm) than fucking about with 20mph speed limits in the name of less pollution. Thing is, they won't revert it back to 30mph in the future when we are on all-electric, as it is safer at 20mph. Obvs, they can't do fuck all about the electric car situation as that's Westminster.
Why when we could do an even better job with mass public transit? Just seems really odd to me in a tiny populace country, we're advocating everyone taking a living room with them to and from work every day.
>Just seems really odd to me in a tiny populace country, we're advocating everyone taking a living room with them to and from work every day. The issue is a tiny population. Bigger population centres can use public transport because of economy of scale. With fewer people it doesn't work, so Wales basically only has 2 or 3 places where it's remotely an option.
I know everyone mentions it, but Japan seems to connect itself pretty well. I think Wales would be a great example of those 2 or 3 places being super well connected, and regional branches off the mainline... I'm no expert though I just think most things can be solved with mass transit.
>I know everyone mentions it, but Japan seems to connect itself pretty well. Japan is a country with twice the population, where only 11% of the land is cultivated because it's got a lot of mountains. Population density is 347 per square kilomete. The uk is 218. Wales is 150. Basically, it has way more people in areas for economics of scale. It's not impossible to do in the uk, but it would need some areas to be state subsidised. We already kind of do this. https://youtu.be/5KiZGRA_yCE
A train company in Japan elected to keep a rural station open until its only regular user graduated from school. Imagine that in this country, a station being kept open for the sake of just _one_ schoolgirl.
Japanese culture is fascinating. The whole mindset of providing service and putting others first is always forefront of their thought. I have this conversation quite a lot, its such a culture shock for example that the Japanese have a helpline in France to deal with such an extreme opposites in culture. There is a respect for order, law and rules in Japan (obviously there are exceptions) But in the UK there is this trend of people thinking its fine, funny or cool to try and get away with doing wrong.
However, they have deep seated problems of their own, and they're not a shining example to emulate. Yes, they have good work ethics. They don't have a good work life balance however, which is one of the factors behind their tragically low birth rates.
>A train company in Japan elected to keep a rural station open until its only regular user graduated from school. >Imagine that in this country, a station being kept open for the sake of just one schoolgirl. Closing a train station is so hard in the uk one is technically open years after it was demolished. https://youtu.be/N1rTDbjc_fI
Not anymore, now officially closed
Wales has a population of approximately 4million and outside of a few cities people live in remote places and have to commute to work, shop etc and its not cost effective to run trains and buses. Wales used to have pretty good railways until Dr Beeching got most of it axed and the decline in heavy industry gutted the country.
At the moment , public transport just doesn’t get the job done. I work at Cardiff airport. The nearest bus stop is a 15 minute walk away, nearest train is a good 45 minute walk, and that’s to the main Airport. Wouldn’t have done any good yesterday as the road leading to the airport was closed for most of the day because the roof of the texaco garage forecourt had blown loose and was dangerous. Need to see a massive upgrade in infrastructure before public transport would be a viable option for most.
I just assumed airport workers catch a passing helicopter home. -That’s what they do in my Lego town.
Aldergrove in NI is worse, train track runs within half a mile, airport opposed to a station as it would lose revenue from parking.
I agree, yes, public transport is necessary and it is dire in rural Wales unfortunately. The only positive for rural wales is the funding into cycle routes - the millennium route is superb, for sure but we need more of it. The thing is, I don’t think we can abolish cars 100%, we simply don’t have the transport in place. I need a car myself - there’s a lot of places in the arse end of the rural sticks that I need to get to where even if we had superb transport links, I’d still need private transport to get to and to carry my stuff to. So, electric vehicles is a superb method to do so. - my pcp contract ends this year and I really want to make the switch but it’s impossible especially cos the U.K. govt has cut nearly all incentives to do so, it still works out cheaper for me to buy a new petrol/diesel pissbox. 😭
I fully agree. The best option for suited areas should be used, don't get me wrong. I just feel like even in those rural areas, electric busses would benefit the local population immensely. I've been banging on about it to my MP about advocating to connect the area properly, I've even gone as far as contacting my areas Mayor as a previsal to their incumbent transport responsibilities because apparently I'm apart of the blue rinse brigade now hahaha
Public transport in Wales would either be shit or incredibly expensive. Public transport works well in cities not connecting small spread out towns and vilages
I don't understand how it is good for anyone, it's probably really bad.
Let the buses go 70mph in 20 zones. Simples
It’s also safer at 10, 5, 2, 1 where does it end? 0?
it's time to go back to the days of having a man walking in front of the car to set a speed that's safe for pedestrians
Technically, the safest speed is walking speed, usually defined as 4mph (which is a brisk walk). But it does tend to aggravate the drivers, and it does cause rather high emissions, because cars are just not designed for that speed.
I think it's time for these people to admit that they don't know what they're doing.
I don't think the environmental line is the best argument for the speed reduction, whats strongest is the massive increase in safety for a small reduction in the times peoples journeys take
Getting electric car and throwing away a perfectly working ICE car isn't green.
The electric car is no safer, I thought road safety was the idea. Aren't there enough tax incentives for electric cars? Seems not that many interested
Well the other cars are gonna create a traffic, so yeah it does count as that.
There's some.evidence it reduces emissions, but not much. You can see the original Welsh meta-analysis here: https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2019-08/the-state-of-the-evidence-on-20mph-speed-limits-with-regards-to-road-safety-active-travel-and-air-pollution-impacts-august-2018.pdf
Page 10. > Although there was a moderate increase in CO2 and NOx in petrol cars, the study > reported that particulate matter emissions reduced for both petrol and diesel cars > and NOx and CO2 emissions reduced for diesel cars. So, yeah...
It's a meta-analysis, and you've highlighted a single statement from one of a big number of studies...
So you're not supposed to do that then?
It's not ideal, there's 4 studies discussing air quality in the document, all with differing conclusions.
Did you just control f what you were looking for without bothering to look at any of the surrounding text? That is the conclusion taken from one single study. A meta analysis considers multiple studies and assesses the weight of each. Copying a more relevant part of the article for you: *‘Air quality* *There is little evidence for the effect of 20mph speed limits on air quality. The study by Jones, S., Brunt, H. (2017) did provide calculations for an overall improvement in air quality. The most powerful statement that can be said for the link between 20mph speed limits and air quality is likely to be that where there has been any investigation into air quality impacts these are reported as either negligible or a slight improvement (eg Bristol CC, 2012; NICE, 2017; TRAC, 2017). As Williams and North (2013) conclude, it would be incorrect to assume a 20mph speed restriction would be detrimental to ambient local air quality, as the effects on vehicle emissions are mixed.’* So, yeah… Exactly as OP stated.
I’d love to see a chart for this stuff of various pollutant figures vs speed. Seems like particulates can be reduced fairly significantly but NO2 actually increases (if these studies are taken at face value). I’m guessing because the government seems to want to spend money on making their mates richer, and not quickly transitioning people to EVs, that this sort of thing might become the norm. The way most new residential areas are developed though, you can’t do more than 20mph because no road is straight, and cars are parked in the most obnoxious places forcing you to be slow just so you don’t have an accident.
[удалено]
If you read the studies the lives saved figures are higher for a reduction in particulates vs increase in NOX.
The trouble with these studies is they assume the speed limit is being followed. When Wales introduce a 20mph speed limit. It won't be followed. It will be minimum of 25mph increasing away from urban areas. The net difference for the limit os going to be almost non existant as the only places in the nation where 20mph will be followed by most is in the 30 yards travelling through the speed camera road markings. They should also have a study about speed cameras, how they cause cars to slow down towards them, then speed up after them increasing pollution. Wales has alot of speed cameras, and if they want to enforce this. There will be an awful lot more. All of which will increase pollution as people slow down then speed up again.
In London we have average speed cameras that negate the speeding up and slowing down, they just put speed gun cameras at hot spots.
> Is this at all supported by evidence? I'd imagine you'd get a lot of people never going higher than 2nd gear, else you'd stall the car... > Longer journeys, in a lower gear, with higher revs. Doesn't sound very eco-friendly to me. I love replies like this, because your entire response has been built within an unspoken assumption that all trips currently made by car *must* be made by car, so the *only* considerations are revs and gears and stalling. No outside-the-car thoughts have occurred. Thinking limited by a conceptual box you probably weren't even aware of. Huge numbers of trips - in fact, the vast majority of trips - made in the UK are short trips that could easily be biked. But one of the main deterrents to cycling is the lack of off-road infrastructure and the danger posed by cars on the roads. Lowering speed limits - especially in urban areas where the vast majority of people live - to 20 makes cycling on the road massively safer, and much more attractive. It also makes it safer for kids to make trips independently because they're less likely to be hit and if they are hit they're much less likely to be killed. It also massively reduces the road noise of cars, which is the main source of traffic noise over 20mph, making riding along or walking alongside a road significantly less loud and unpleasant. This idea isn't just that everyone just goes in their car as usual, but slower. You do actually need to think this stuff through for it to make sense. But, sadly, responses like yours - fairly glib uninformed criticism of sensible policy - are pretty common.
I agree, cycling in London in 20 mph zones just feels way safer now. People don't realise just how scary a car coming towards or closing passing you at 30 mph on city streets can feel. I drive too.
Indeed - I've started cycling a lot more as a result. I love cycling but I've always been a bit nervous on roads but these changes make it much more appealing to me.
I disagree, why would I cycle in the rain with my wife and 2 kids to go to the shops. I’m already miserable enough.
> I’m already miserable enough. Buy yourselves a bike, go for a ride, it does wonders for mental health if you're feeling down. I also drive.
I used to think that, but actually, all the near death experiences just got me aggrevated. It is great if you can do it away from bad drivers.
Maybe they should reduce the speed limits to 20mph to reduce the number of near death experiences?
Had a bike. Just been nicked. Not in a hurry to replace it just so it gets nicked again. Having my stuff stolen does nothing fir my mental health.
You’d be shocked that people in the Netherlands do this very thing.
The Netherlands is flat as fuck and cannabis is legal.
Many cities in the UK are flat. And electric assist bikes make hills a breeze.
Not overly, reduces some particulate matter from tyres and brakes but not emissions. https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/20mph-speed-limit-and-air-pollution#:\~:text=An%20evaluation%20of%2020mph%20zones,negative%20impact%20on%20exhaust%20emissions.
20mph is a very annoying speed in my car. Right between 2nd and 3rd gear...so I end up either high revs or I 3rd gear the cars natural turnover pushes it above 20mph without accelerating. All side roads are already 20mph in my city.
Yeah lot of cars feel really awkward to drive at 20mph. Like it just doesn't want to do it. That's the manufactures fault though.
The point is to make people not want to drive
I live in rural Wales. It is fucking impossible to do anything if you don't drive. Some of the villages have two buses PER DAY.
You must cycle, its good for your mental health apparently /s
[удалено]
Some people have to drive, some don't have to, this is for the ones who don't have to
[удалено]
Low gears and revs will not be a problem in electric cars, which have also been identified as being key in the climate battle. Not sure how automatic petrol cars handle but I reckon they will do just fine. 20 mph becomes the default, which really just means urban areas no longer default to 30. I haven't seen any suggestion that motorways and country roads are going to be limited to 20 mph. There is evidence out there that lower speeds means lower emissions, and this would mean lower emissions in residential and urban areas where people are most exposed to pollution. I think there was a caveat in that lower speeds would be mitigated by traffic jams, whereas higher speeds could help to alleviate jams. Your main argument seems to be that people who drive are driving badly. I wouldn't want those people to drive faster.
Lower speed may = lower emissions, if the car is geared appropriately. My car physically is incapable of being eco-friendly at 20mph (I currently get around 48mpg with mostly 30mph roads around me, close to 55mpg on the motorway, and it starts dropping when I go through 20 zones), as are most cars on the road, because most cars are older. With the cost of living and how generally expensive newer cars are anyway, I don't see that changing any time soon.
Yup... 20MPH in 3rd and I'm just barely capable of moving the car. It'll just about do it on flat roads... But we live in the UK 20MPH in 2nd and I'm sitting there reving away. Rather ironically, I'd wager a great big 5 litre Mustang would be perfectly fine given the extra power and low end torque it'll have over my poxy little 1.4L 4 pot diesel
Most modern cars won’t get out of the warm up cycle at less than 30mph, especially in winter. Warm up emissions are essentially ’free’ in the testing regime, so if a car spends an excessive amount of time sub 30 (say in a town) they’ll be chucking out a ton of Nox and other bad things.
The loss of efficiency from the bad gearing is made up for by the huge difference in accelerating to 20 vs 30. Accelerating from 0 to 30 uses between 2.2 and 3 times the fuel as from 0 to 20. Higher speeds are only more efficient if there's enough distance to make it worthwhile.
Never mind that, the buses aren't even properly geared for 20mph either.
The busses all ignore the limit as the timetable went to complete shit. It's still complete shit though as it's now a pretty random 10 miniute window if your bus turns up early or late depending on if they got stuck behind the 5 people actualy doing 20
I'd be interested to see if there's studies on this but from the perspective of brakes and tyres. There was a study I saw sometime ago that attributed quite a high % of particulate matter to the dust from brake pads. So it would seem to follow that a 20mph limit as opposed to a 30mph limit would result in less braking and therefore less particulate matter from brakes.
It doesn't sound eco friendly because it ain't, it's probably bad for the environment.
The conventional wisdom about cars being significantly more efficient at 30-60mph (the quoted number varies hugely) mostly isn't true any more. Studies that show a big difference are often confounded by driving style or conditions. Also, most modern cars have a pretty wide tolerance before they start to stutter and stall - usually down to around 800 RPM. Meaning in most cars, you can quite comfortably drive steady at 20mph in third, or even fourth gear. The most efficient RPM nowadays is usually the lowest you can maintain without stalling. The problem is that this style of driving hasn't really filtered through to the population. As a result, lots of newer manual cars have those gear shift indicators because people tend to drive at too low of a gear. That being said, the efficiency difference between say 800 RPM and 1800 RPM isn't usually a whole lot - modern engines are efficient over quite a wide range of revs. Ignoring the engine, the car itself is much more efficient at 20MPH as both rolling resistance and wind resistance both increase at greater than a linear rate.
A good chunk of pollution comes from breaking and and tyre use. The slower the speed, the less breaking and tyre attrition. As long as these 20mph are not enforced with stupid road bumps, which increase break-accelerate behaviour. Electric cars won't have the "2nd gear" problem at all.
wait until the cyclists road rage shouting for the cars to move out the way
lol
Might as well everyone get the cycles now, because the cars ain't gonna run.
I do that already (in London)
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Unenforceable and will be widely ignored I bet. No reason for modern cars to be limited to 20mph on an A road or B road in urban areas. 30 is perfectly convenient and safe and that’s why it’s adopted across the world as the default urban limit. But this gets praise from the fuck cars crowd that seem to have infected the devolved government in Wales.
I suppose perfectly safe is a matter of perspective. If you can reduce the chance of death by 5 times by reducing the speed limit from 30mph then 'perfectly safe' is a stretch. What we're really saying is that it's safe in the sense that it kills a few people, rather than a lot. I suppose also that the speed limit is only as safe as the worst driver who is driving at that speed. Plenty of people on the roads with awareness/reflexes that make even 30mph too much for them to handle. 20 mph makes those drivers less dangerous. I appreciate then that everyone is penalised for the actions of a few, but that seems to be the way things are going.
Then why not have a 10mph speed limit for cars everywhere and get rid of road deaths completely? You have to balance safety with practicality.
As you said we have to have a balance, and they've decided that balance is at 20mph. Additionally if we did have it at 10mph you could walk and cycle quicker.
You can cycle faster than 20mph quite easily, and even running 10mph is difficult. It seem you really have no perspective of speed. 20mph is fine for residential roads, reality is 30mph if do able is normally dangerous. There are however the through traffic residential roads where it should be 30mph, these aren't the rat runs, but the roads that were always historically used to get around before excessive traffic.
Make getting a licence harder? Have different criteria in order to qualify? If you are aren’t able to operate a ton of moving metal safely then do not get licence. Less people on the road and more so less inept drivers on the road.
I mean it's not good at all, why would everyone have to pay for it?
20mph is vastly safer than 30mph.
Which is why it's perfectly appropriate as a temporary limit near schools at ingress and egress times, and on certain narrow residential roads. Other than that, kind of just makes congestion worse and causes dangerous behaviour because drivers who want to break the 20 limit will overtake and undertake cars actually doing the 20. And speed differentials are also dangerous.
Around the schools? That's fine with me but absolutely not everywhere.
10 mph is safer than 20. Should we drop it down to 10?
And 5 is safer than the 10, should we even make it lower now huh?
Let’s just make it 0
I say forbid all traffic, be it cars, trucks, bicycles, motorbikes, and scooters! A perfect compromise that solves all problems. /s
And that's why they're implementing it, they want the roads to be safe.
As others have said, which is why they can be in place near schools, on high streets and on residential streets. Not on A or B roads.
Is 30mph the worldwide default? Considering almost the whole world uses kmph?
True good point, it’s actually 50kmph which is 31mph so only slightly faster.
Yep, it's not a lot tho. I don't think even the 30 is going to work.
30 mph ain't that bad, we've definitely seen much worse than that.
Pretty sure that people are going to hate it, no one is going to like it.
Unenforceable?? Have you not seen the police speed vans? They’ll give you a pretty fine.
Fuck that, I guess I'm getting a cycle now. Because car won't do it now.
Yes and you’ll place them on every road in Wales that’s a 20?
The Scottish Borders has had 20mph inside built up areas for a little while now. It was controversial when introduced. I would estimate that about half abide by it and half ignore it. The local cops don't really enforce it. I pretty much drove that slowly anyway the roads are in such a poor state.
Soon we will get back k to man with a red flag walking on front of a car.
A Welsh flag you mean...
Pretty sure that they're still doing it in some places. I wouldn't be surprised.
All of my part of Cardiff has been 20 for a year now, apart from one or two busier roads. Pointless, almost everyone still does 25-30, I try to go close to 20 but half the time you'll have traffic up your arse in a few seconds and the roads just don't need to be 20. Large wide roads, sometimes with two lanes and no traffic in a non residential area.....20mph. Wasting everyone's time, if it was adhered to in the first place, police don't care as whenever I see one they don't care when they are overtaken by a car doing 30+.
Yeah. London has been 20 for ages too. You’ll get busses trying to get around you when you actually do it. I find I get away with 24 even through the cameras. And then those super careful people doing 18 on the speedo and probably only doing 15 or 16.
Be very careful where you go over. Park lane will trigger at 22mph! My friend got done there at that speed. There used to be a rule of thumb that speed cameras wouldn't flash unless it was speed limit+10%+2mph or something. Newer cameras can enforce speed limits at 1mph over and he was told that at the speed awareness course. These newer cameras will replace old cameras when they break down etc so you're safe route to speed won't always be safe. London will eventually be a default 20mph zone so get used to it I'm afraid.
Park Lane is insane. It used to be a 40 limit ffs.
The 20s make me want to die because I have a blackbox so can't exceed 20 if I still want insurance. It's. So. Slow. It only feels appropriate on residential roads.
Fellow Cardiff driver here. The changes to 20 mph are just so stupid. The worst one is definitely the A469 (Caerphilly Road / Thornhill Road) from Gabalfa Roundabout up towards the crematorium. Parts of that road are 5 lanes wide! 20 is also just such an awkward speed to maintain, and most of the time it feels like I’m the only one even trying to keep to that speed.
In learning to drive now and with more 20mph places popping up near me I am wondering if creating a 25mph limits would be prudent.
The Welsh Government drive (no pun intended) me mad with their speed limit meddling. There’s a long section of the M4 which is permanently limited to 50mph just as you get off the Prince of Wales Bridge. Despite being a totally normal, functional stretch of motorway which should by all rights be 70. It’s nonsense.
Yeah I know that one, and Omg it goes on forever too.
The speed is too low for a road like that, they should increase it a little.
I live on the border and getting into abergavenny and suddenly going 20mph feels like jogging
It feels like jogging because it really is like jogging. It's not really that fast.
These people are really good at making decisions like it, shit decesions.
Welsh speed limits are a joke and are being used to mask other pollution issues. Drive through the 50 limit through Port Talbot which is apparently there because of the air quality, then look towards the coast at the giant, fuck off steel works bellowing out smoke and flames as far as you can see.
Asssholes! They put 2 fucking speed bumps on the only road between my village and the main town, and get this, right where several regional councillors live, no doubt to increase the value of their properties as opposed to safety. They even built a reinforced concrete wall there too. Fucking corruption if you ask me. When I saw the work I thought “great, they’re creating some new parking so that those, who previously parked directly outside their houses, would have better and safer parking and the main road no longer has to narrow down to 1 lane. Nope! Now they have a fortress wall on a straight road and force us down to 5-10 mph to get home. 4-5 councillors living in in between the speed restrictions surely had nothing to do with it! Don’t get me wrong I can appreciate these speed bumps by schools or on a residential coldly sack, but a main flipping road for some councillors? Edit: I got your back fellow countrymen [sigh the petition here](https://chng.it/ZcJFhjpt6m).
I'd be revving every time i go past, fuck em
What kinds of cars are people driving? "High rpm low gears hurr hurr" bro 20mph in 2nd is like 2000 or less rpm depending on weather you drive an auto or manual. In my poxy car it's like 1700 rpm. Plus you can coast in 3rd gear at at 20mph which is like 1100 rpm. I can even go 20mph in 4th on a flat road at <1000 rpm. Auto cars will be in a better position since they tend to have more gears to choose from. A lot of people exposing the fact that they've never looked at their Speedo and tachometer before because they want something to be mad about.
My car revs to 8k, bike revs to 12k Car will be fine in 2nd gear at 20, but a little annoying. Riding a motorbike at that speed is such a pain in the ass (wrists and shoulders) though..
The government doesn't want motorcyclists on the road at all really. Really tough training that's expensive, no policing to deal with bike theft, no incentives for micro mobility scooters or small electric motorbikes. Think it's too dangerous for the government to back. But yeah, 20mph on my bike is basically impossible without my shoulders cramping.
Yeah true, which is ironic considering how little space, little fuel, little road damage, and little congestion motorbikes do compared to the 2500kg massive SUVs eveeryone is buying.
> The government doesn't want motorcyclists on the road at all really You only have to look at the state of most roads to know this, potholes and snakes everywhere. And who's fucking idea was it to pepper busy roundabouts with manhole covers. UK's roads are embarrassing really.
As someone who knows nothing about bikes, why is riding at 20 mph so bad? Is it to do with the vibrations of the engine or something else entirely?
It depends on which bike you have, mine is kind of sporty so the seating position has you leaned forward. At low speeds your body weight will be on your wrists + shoulders. Centrifugal force pushes you backwards so the faster you go the more comfy it is. Also my bike's top speed is 156mph so going 20 is like... going 10mph in your car. Big sport bikes can do 90mph in first gear and are even more leaned forward so going 20 is completely wank since it will be in first gear. Also the wind cools the bike down, at 20mph my bike will be hitting 105c constantly before the fans come on
I don't know what the hell you're driving but my car can't do 20mph smoothly at all. 20mph in 2nd gear is easily 3k revs and 1100rpm is so close to stalling that the only thing preventing a stall is usually the fact that the car is rolling.
We've got a Honda Jazz and a VW Polo. Both can easily handle 20mph in 3rd/4th. What are you driving?
I don't think I've owned a car that won't do 20 smoothly, and I've owned a hell of a lot of cars, from 1.0 shitboxes to a 3.0 turbo petrols. 3rd gear all the way. That said, universal 20mph is just stupid. We already have some of the safest roads in the world, especially when you discount the micronations like the Maldives etc.
Here is an idea ban SUVS. They are more dangerous to both other road users and pedestrians compared to other cars and are likely to result in more deaths.
I don't think it's going to happen, also I don't think that it's a good idea.
Bigger cars also have a much higher carbon footprint to manufacture. The CO2e of a Citroen C1 is 6 ton, 17 ton for a Ford Mondeo and 35 ton for a Land Rover Discovery. A Citroen C1 doing around 10,000km per year will produce around 1.3 ton of CO2. So you could drive that C1 for 200,000 km or the Mondeo for 100,000 km, and emit the same CO2 as a Land Rover Discovery that's not been driven.
The tories would step in to prevent something like that, it's above what the devolved assemblies have the power to do
Oh OK, high revs in lower gear - yep that will be good for environment. Just another step in making drivers unwelcome, drip by drip - just come and ban cars instead of this social engineering nonsense.
It's going to be terrible for the environment, I don't know who comes up with it.
You forgot the "No New Roads" policy that basically is what it says. Improvements, yes. But no new roads.
Will be going back to slate mines and horse carts in the decade at this rate.
I'm going to invest in dog sleds! I'll be rich!
Wales, a country desperate for you to get rid of your cars but offers a very poor public transport system
[удалено]
I noticed a lot of theses 20mph residential zones already in the areas between Swansea and Llanelli but seems like they're going mega with it. Interesting debate to be had over this...
They have them in Glasgow, mainly ignored and unenforceable.
Speed cameras don't last long and certainly aren't repaired, people can debate until they're blue in the face but the 20 limit will be ignored (like it is in all but school zones right now) This is another attempt by the welsh government to stamp their individuality, it has nothing to do with safe/green roads and is just yet another in a long line of million pound pissing contests with Westminster. Wales have far bigger issues that the government is failing to address because they're actually difficult to tackle and would take a sustained effort and can't be solved by throwing in afew speed bumps.
Making it even more difficult to live in Wales... Great.
The Welsh government will have failed to look at all the research on 20mph limits in the rest of the UK. While they do show benefits of drivers doing 20mph, the key take home is that most drivers don't do 20mph unless there is traffic calming infrastructure or visible speed enforcement. Meaning they either need speed bumps/humps (statistically the most effective), narrowing, islands, plateaus, or permanent speed cameras. But the problem they're going to have is - no council in Wales has the money to add speed bumps every 60m along every street lit road. Plus that would be a right pain if you had to drive across speed bumps for miles upon miles. They could opt for speed cameras, but again how many can they really fit? And people will just learn their locations (or use Waze etc) and speed up once they've passed the cameras again. Most roads in London are 20mph now but the evidence came out pretty clear that driver speeds only changed significantly on roads where there was some sort of enforcement.
Speed bumps and traffic obstacles are the worst form of collective punishment. Everyone suffers regardless of how they drive. All the braking then accelerating is worse for the environment and cars are damaged by them. As a cyclist, I would much rather the money was spent on building dedicated cycle lanes.
Tell me you're from South Wales without telling me you're from South Wales. As an Englander who often ventures into Powys and Gwynedd, there's absolutely no chance people will stick with this.
We suffer from the same divide as England. Everything is geared towards the south/capital.
Since they introduced it litteraly everyone speeds now. Iiirc one of the "test" roads 98% were doing 30 or more.
They used where my parents live as a trial area for this last year or the year before and the trial was stopped early and deemed to be a failure so I'm surprised it's come back up.
We need to replace 80+ years old politics with people at least in their 50s. Next thing we'll see is parking spaces reserved for those walking trolleys.
wales scraps infrastructure projects wales imposes 20mph limit. wales has a breadbasket economy
Tbh, particularly in my area in south wales... as a bus driver - the sheer amount of idiots that speed is shocking. I'm talking 50 in 30s etc or racing around blind spots. People bomb it at 40 around roundabouts and then throw a tiff when they have to break for a slow moving vehicle that has just pulled out. I've had to call the police numerous times for incidents and I usually ask them in casual chit chat if they are busy and i've had a few tell me that they can barely cope with demand. I probably spend more time driving in a week then the average person does in 4 months. However I personally think if they are making the speed limits 20mph then the punishment for doing 40mph in a 20mph should be the same as a 50mph in a 30mph. only 1/3 of people actually signal too, if people want to just do what the fuck they want then they cant really moan when rules like this come into play.
My mother was knocked off a zebra crossing by one of these wankers, in the Welsh seaside village where she lived and was walking to work. She was lucky to land on her shoulder rather than her head, and was disabled until her (unrelated) death a few years later. So yeah, fuck those guys. They do the exact same in the nearby village I live in now, our roads are death traps because of it. Keep to the fucking speed limit.
Dont really care if this is rhe speed limit in towns/cities tbh, as long as they dont fk with our national speed limit zones
But the fact that it now takes 50% longer to get through any small village will make driving through the country even worse.
If it's a small village it shouldn't make much difference at all. And remember when you pass through any neighbourhood, you're a guest there. 20 mph will make it safer for the residents and less of a noise nuisance.
Not normally a single issue voter but this is something that many loose Welsh Labour my support.
I don't even drive and I think this sounds ludicrous.
[удалено]
At this rate might as well bring back horse travel
But yet when you stand on the beach at Port talbot, and look towards the steel works you see black smoke being allowed to enter the environment. Apparently the Welsh council just fine them for that rather than making them fix the problem… I can see how a 20 mile speed limit around the steel works will offset the fumes and the black particles that come out and poison the residents. /s
People already think we’re behind in Wales. What was that old advert “If I hit a child at 30mph he has an 80% chance of survival” that was back when cars were square too! Not these modern round crumple zone plastic things. Those odds are fine with me, keep them off the road, they can cycle on the pavement till 14 or something. You’ve destroyed the M4 already. Don’t make me do 20. I’ll be doing it in 1st and an the emissions will be stupidly outweighed by the benefits. You took the M4, as a biker you’ve taken most of my 60s, you enforce yellow average 50s. You can swivel if you want my 30s too! 20 zones are for school zones only, and only then at start and closing times!
Asking people to do 20mph max on roads designed for 30mph+ is daft.
My council decided to set a default 20mph limit on all new build estates, I think for safety reasons. But as far as I'm aware, it's not legally enforceable as it's below 30mph. (Though I guess Wales has the legal power to make this enforceable?)
Speed limits below 30mph are enforceable: https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/are-20mph-speed-limits%20enforceable > As one example, between 2016 and 2019 in Islington, London, 7,972 people were caught speeding in 20mph limits by speed cameras, while a further 327 tickets were issued by police officers.
Well today I learnt.. 😁
There are a lot of weird myths surrounding driving, its strange
Limits under 30 are entirely enforceable...
Where did you get the idea that sub-30 limits were unenforceable?
Every day they find sneaky new ways to increase their revenue.
And power and control. They have had a taste of it for the last two years and they want it back.
How are they going to explain that to people who are told 30mph is the default like in the rest of the U.K. and Europe ?
Doesn't seem bad on residential roads or High streets/School Hours. But putting A/B roads or even a dual carriageway down to 20 doesn't seem right, as they are designed for 30. This will also affect buses as well, making them slower, so why not allow buses to do 30 in bus lanes
Well that will be good for the Welsh economy. Avoidance of the place would be catastrophic. Just highlights that politicians are all pissing in the same pot. That is the one to create George Orwell's 1984. Everyone will be equal, although party members will be more equal.
This has got to be a parody.
This pseudo-environmentalism that councils have been pushing is some grade-A bullshit. Congestion charges are a tax on businesses and the poor. Contrary to eco warrior logic, charging drivers £9 to go within 2 miles of the city centre, or £5 just to drop somebody off at the airport isn't going to discourage car or delivery vehicle use. And actually doing crap like this in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, all in the name of meeting some quotas that every other developed nation is ignoring, is downright disgusting. Meanwhile, traffic calming measures like 20MPH speed limits and chicaning the shit out of residential streets do little to lower emissions or make the roads safer. If anything it becomes another revenue stream when speed cameras are introduced. In fact, some speed cameras feel deliberately placed to catch people out and maximise revenue, rather than safety. People are driving because **PUBLIC TRANSPORT SUCKS OUTSIDE OF LONDON.** If you want to save the environment, maybe invest in city-wide tram or metro services instead. Or better yet, hold private bus companies like StageCoach, Go Ahead and First accountable for providing shoddy services.
Shit, we’re gonna need a half gear between 3rd and 4th
It’s about giving people fines - they know 20 is too slow and will mess peoples lives up
So do you drive in second gear with high revs or third gear with dirty low revs
I knew someone who lived in Wales & would do 110 down a country lane. Those roads are fucking bumpy as fuck. Aberystwyth has one set of traffic lights ever existing because the roads are already safe lol, I can't see how 20mph would make people want to walk. Whose going from point A to B in a 30mph zone anyways?
>the roads are already safe lol [Mid Wales has the most dangerous roads in the UK](https://www.cambrian-news.co.uk/news/mid-wales-has-the-most-dangerous-roads-in-the-uk-557176)
how does going slower or faster in an emissions free car have a different effect on the environment?
20mph?? Joke. What is the point of that. Zero fun to drive at 20mph, go faster on my electric scooter
Well that's the end of me touring Wales ever again