Road safety: UK set to adopt vehicle speed limiters

[editor]

Do you have a driving licence editor ? If so, do you drive regularly?

And what relevance does that have to anything?

 

[editor]

We need to discourage short trip, urban car use. For all sorts of reasons using a car for a long journey is (unfortunately) still the best option for an awful lot of people.

Sort the cities out first, that's where the pollution problem lies for now.

So sort out the cities but let people pollute even more on the country roads by increasing the speed limit? Brilliant!

 

[editor]

We took a guest back to Oban on Monday, 120 miles, a leisurely two and a half hours. By bus, she would have left us at 09:20, and got home at 17:20.

Maybe they should build a few more motorways through the countryside to get you back even quicker, eh?

 

[Sasaferrato]

You'd hope that by 2050 we'd have got round to eliminating the driver altogether.

Or even before.

Of course, had we gone down the fuel cell route, pollution from transport wouldn't be an issue. California has built 200 hydrogen stations, so fuel cell cars must be gaining some traction in the States. Hyundai make one with a 250 mile range, Toyota and Honda also make them.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

A. Why is it a good thing to make personal car driving more attractive?

Cos personal transport is essential to those not living in an area with massively subsidised public transport, such as the area where you happen to live

B. The figures are from this site - Save money and fuel by driving efficiently.. Here are their sources. They're not from the 1970s.

According to the calculator there, the difference between 50mph and 80mph in my car is 22.8%, which is worthwhile.

You do know that trains use more fuel to go faster too?

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Do you have a driving licence editor ?

Does he fuck

 

[Sasaferrato]

Maybe they should build a few more motorways through the countryside to get you back even quicker, eh?

I didn't say that, did I? I could have done it in considerably less time, but as I did say, it was a leisurely run. I was highlighting the difference in journey time between car and bus.

Do you have a driving licence?

 

[editor]

Cos personal transport is essential to those not living in an area with massively subsidised public transport, such as the area where you happen to live

Err, I'm not arguing against such car use. I'm arguing against the increased pollution that comes with a raised speed limit.

You do know that trains use more fuel to go faster too?

You're really going to try that argument?

 

[Sasaferrato]

Cos personal transport is essential to those not living in an area with massively subsidised public transport, such as the area where you happen to live



According to the calculator there, the difference between 50mph and 80mph in my car is 22.8%, which is worthwhile.

You do know that trains use more fuel to go faster too?

The 'citycentrics' tend to forget that. If I lived in London, I wouldn't have a car.

 

[keybored]

You'd hope that by 2050 we'd have got round to eliminating the driver altogether.

Speeding may be dangerous and antisocial but I feel capital punishment is a little harsh.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

So sort out the cities but let people pollute even more on the country roads by increasing the speed limit? Brilliant!

No, leave country roads as they are, there's even a good argument for dropping the current 60 limit in certain areas.

 

[editor]

I didn't say that, did I? I could have done it in considerably less time, but as I did say, it was a leisurely run. I was highlighting the difference in journey time between car and bus.

Do you have a driving licence?

Look out! Paxman in the house with a truly KILLER question! No, I don't. Now explain what that question has to do with a proposed increase in car speeds?

 

[editor]

No, leave country roads as they are, there's even a good argument for dropping the current 60 limit in certain areas.

So you just want the increased pollution from speeding cars and lorries on the motorways, yes?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

So you just want the increased pollution from speeding cars and lorries on the motorways, yes?

No, I want a realistic approach that isn't going to cause the motoring lobby to dig their heels in. Let people drive at sensible speeds on the motorways - as it is safe to do so in a modern car - and sort out the cities first.

Current motorway speed limits are based in cars from the 70's. They are woefully out of date.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Look out! Paxman in the house with a truly KILLER question! No, I don't. Now explain what that question has to do with a proposed increase in car speeds?

Well, as someone who doesn't drive, you really have little idea about the process of driving. If you did, you would realise that a device that autonomously limits the speed of a car is potentially lethal. Multi lethal if it suddenly brakes you to 30mph on the motorway. As I said, having driven half a million miles or so, in all conditions from sheet ice to beautifully smooth French tarmac, I actually do know what I'm talking about. Experience, you can't beat it. Oh, and no points on my licence either.

 

[editor]

No, I want a realistic approach that isn't going to cause the motoring lobby to dig their heels in. Let people drive at sensible speeds on the motorways - as it is safe to do so in a modern car - and sort out the cities first.

Current motorway speed limits are based in cars from the 70's. They are woefully out of date.

Is an increase in motorway speed going to increase pollution or not?

 

[editor]

Well, as someone who doesn't drive, you really have little idea about the process of driving. If you did, you would realise that a device that autonomously limits the speed of a car is potentially lethal. Multi lethal if it suddenly brakes you to 30mph on the motorway. As I said, having driven half a million miles or so, in all conditions from sheet ice to beautifully smooth French tarmac, I actually do know what I'm talking about. Experience, you can't beat it. Oh, and no points on my licence either.

That's fantastic. But what has it to do with wanting to increase pollution?

 

[8ball]

No sense putting this in my old banger.

 

[Sasaferrato]

No, I want a realistic approach that isn't going to cause the motoring lobby to dig their heels in. Let people drive at sensible speeds on the motorways - as it is safe to do so in a modern car - and sort out the cities first.

Current motorway speed limits are based in cars from the 70's. They are woefully out of date.

As a wrinkly on a limited income, I would be delighted if public transport met my needs. We can't even get a bus to the gym. (Well we could, but it would be two buses and a journey of forty minutes).

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Is an increase in motorway speed going to increase pollution or not?

No idea, who cares?

It's irrelevant on it's own. Look a the whole picture, would a large drop in urban pollution offset any increase raining the limit by 10 mph would cause? I have no idea. Focusing on one individual metric is pointless.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Err, I'm not arguing against such car use. I'm arguing against the increased pollution that comes with a raised speed limit.

This is such nonsense though, my dad's new car is 100% electric, so does that pollute more at 80 than at 70? All your ire seems to be aimed at internal combustion engined cars, something that the government has already committed to eradicating.

You're really going to try that argument?

Damn right right I am, right from the start these things have been belching fumes in to the cities and countryside, with advocates of greater speed being advocates of greater pollution.

 

[editor]

As a wrinkly on a limited income, I would be delighted if public transport met my needs. We can't even get a bus to the gym. (Well we could, but it would be two buses and a journey of forty minutes).

Could you provide some data about how a device that "autonomously limits the speed of a car is potentially lethal" in direct relation to the proposals contained in the OP please?

 

[Sasaferrato]

That's fantastic. But what has it to do with wanting to increase pollution?

Your ball I suppose, but you have moved the agenda of the thread off its initial topic, which is speed limiters and road safety, not pollution.

 

[8ball]

What do we think of this?

By the way - good call raising the thread - I didn't see it in new posts and thought maybe a thread had sank cos I thought a comment on this would appear earlier in the day.

I got the impression from an article earlier that it wouldn't be able to be switched off, so was expecting the motoring lobby to be screaming blue bloody murder all day.

 

[editor]

No idea, who cares?

It's irrelevant on it's own. Look a the whole picture, would a large drop in urban pollution offset any increase raining the limit by 10 mph would cause? I have no idea. Focusing on one individual metric is pointless.

Right. So you want to go faster on motorways and encourage more people to drive, but the increased pollution doesn't bother you because, err, other stuff pollutes somewhere else?

 

[Sasaferrato]

Could you provide some data about how a device that "autonomously limits the speed of a car is potentially lethal" in direct relation to the proposals contained in the OP please?

'Speed limiting technology looks set to become mandatory for all vehicles sold in Europe from 2022, after new rules were provisionally agreed by the EU.'.

 

[editor]

'Speed limiting technology looks set to become mandatory for all vehicles sold in Europe from 2022, after new rules were provisionally agreed by the EU.'.

And the "potentially lethal" bit? What have you got that backs that up in relation to the OP which you've pointlessly quoted?

 

[8ball]

ROSPA state that speed in itself is not the cause of accidents, inappropriate speed is. That can be 50mph on a motorway, if conditions are dreadful. The last bad Winter, we were nearly wiped out by a BMW that came out of the fog, doing about 80 in 30mph visibility. We were all fortunate that there was nothing in the middle lane, that he had no option but swerve into.

I wish people could understand this. I've had similar horrors driving in the fog when people think the speed limit is a compulsory minimum.

 

[Sasaferrato]

This is such nonsense though, my dad's new car is 100% electric, so does that pollute more at 80 than at 70? All your ire seems to be aimed at internal combustion engined cars, something that the government has already committed to eradicating.




Damn right right I am, right from the start these things have been belching fumes in to the cities and countryside, with advocates of greater speed being advocates of greater pollution.

Yes, because there is no electricity fairy. Granted, renewable energy is more prevalent than it was, but electricity generation using gas or wood is still in place. If an electric car requires more juice because it is going faster, then there is a pollution hit. Fuel cells produce nothing but water of course.

 

[8ball]

No, I want a realistic approach that isn't going to cause the motoring lobby to dig their heels in. Let people drive at sensible speeds on the motorways - as it is safe to do so in a modern car - and sort out the cities first.

Current motorway speed limits are based in cars from the 70's. They are woefully out of date.

You pay for your own private roads, then. While you're sharing a carriageway with slower vehicles (many limited by mandate), creating a larger speed differential will have a direct effect on the rate of fatalities.