It was my first trip to Wales since the 20mph speed limit was introduced. It was absolutely fine but there were plenty of people driving 30-35mph in the 20mph zones which was really noticeable. I got tail gated a fair bit.
There were some oddities where roads were lined with 20mph/30mph/40mph changes and some real strange speed limit signage positioning which you can tell from the blanket way the new signage was introduced. For one instance as you come out of the village where my in-laws lived it's 20mph for quite a while past the houses (which is fine) and then a 100m 20-30mph zone then a 40mph zone. The 40mph zone starts at a bend which has loads of accidents since there a blind get out. Why didnt them extent the 30mph zone?
Also as a road cyclist. The Welsh pot holes are terrible!
I've read that some bus services (well, one) have been cut...i don't understand why when the bus companies control the timetable - surely they can just tweak the timetable to allow an extra few minutes?
Pretty obvious a cycling forum would approve and fair enough. But real world here in Wales it's hugely unpopular, I've yet to actually speak to anyone who drives a significant amount who is in favour. If you only make a few journeys in heavy traffic you won't notice any difference, but if you drive a lot, especially in quieter areas or less busy times of the day it makes a significant difference to journey times. Once out of Cardiff it's largely ignored, driving through the valleys the vast majority of signs have been painted out along with fixed cameras.
The idiots driving past schools at 40mph will still do it along with all the rest of their dangerous driving. Social media rednecks blame cyclists in part, so anti cycling sentiments have increased. Figures used to justify the policy are increasingly being shown to be flawed (accident statistics from Spain taken during lock down restrictions). The amounts quoted on money the NHS will save are the Welsh labour parties own £350 million on the side of a bus.
Pretty obvious a cycling forum would approve and fair enough. But real world here in Wales it’s hugely unpopular, I’ve yet to actually speak to anyone who drives a significant amount who is in favour. If you only make a few journeys in heavy traffic you won’t notice any difference, but if you drive a lot, especially in quieter areas or less busy times of the day it makes a significant difference to journey times. Once out of Cardiff it’s largely ignored, driving through the valleys the vast majority of signs have been painted out along with fixed cameras.
Most of the people i know who were vehemently opposed are now "meh". The opponents make more noise than the supporters or those who don't care. It's not largely ignored outside Cardiff....god knows where you got that from.
I drove from Gower to the north of Anglesey, and it made sod all difference.
Most of the people i know who were vehemently opposed are now “meh”.
Fair enough we obviously know different people. But don't live in an echo chamber and a long distance journey on main trunk roads isn't typical of most journeys. I have my experiences which I've shared. Don't dismiss then because yours are different.
Most of the people I know who were vehemently opposed are now “meh”.
That's because they are driving round at 26mph as that's what has become known as the limit they will proscute at.
But if they had instead spent that £34.4 million on putting up more speed cameras in the pedestrian areas/accident hotspots that are now 20mph then they would actually have caught the speeding cars that are doing greater than 33mph, rather than now just having most people doing 26mph and still have the dangerous speeding cars that are unlikely to be caught withput further massive expenditure.
And I am guessing any claims on emissions are void in certain areas where you now have cars struggling to climb steep hills at slow speeds.
As a result every man and his dog now uses this as an excuse to be late or to cancel. Some are justified some probably not. But if you haven’t walked in these people shoes you won’t really know.
Taxis have been hit. Bus routes cancelled and villages left stranded. Fact.
I live in Edinburgh which has 20mph limits as default. As the research shows traffic flows do not decrease, journey times do not go up because traffic flows better, taxis and buses still run
I do 30k miles a year and, as I posted earlier, I live in fairly rural wales but drive all over and still stick to my opinion that it’s brilliant.
if you drive a lot, especially in quieter areas or less busy times of the day it makes a significant difference to journey times.
It feels like it does, but it doesn't. Because it only affects suburban streets on which your average speed was nowhere near 30mph anyway. In a typical Valleys town the through road is lined with parked cars on both sides so you spend half your time sat waiting for someone to come the other way single file - where 20 is entirely appropriate. On the more open bits where the houses are further apart and you need to get somewhere, they're 30 or 40.
Everyone says 'I don't mind 20mph where it's appropriate' well, me too - and 20mph is appropriate on residential streets.
a long distance journey on main trunk roads isn’t typical of most journeys.
No but i drive round Gower and Swansea most days and it makes sod all difference to my journey times.
And I am guessing any claims on emissions are void in certain areas where you now have cars struggling to climb steep hills at slow speeds.
Hahahaha.
You just undermined any reasonable discussion with that incorrect gem....
Happy to be corrected but it hasn't cost £30 odd million, but will cost that over the decade or so it takes to switch out and change the signage, etc.
Seeing as a single road incident involving a fatality ends up costing a million quid if you can save three lives you'll be quids in, nevermind reducing all the heartache.
Very interesting thread from a Wales Online reporter about the astroturfing around the anti-20 limit Facebook groups:
https://twitter.com/WillHayCardiff/status/1746942241950560337?t=i8hWr4l2xh-WNA9N-TSvsA&s=09
TL;DR it's English Tories who support their own 20 limits while rabble rousing in Wales. 🤣
Again – complete nonse4nse proven to be false
It's been proven that emmissions are the same no matter what gear you are in ? Please show me that research.
The only way that could be true is if the drivers are too stupid to change gear.
too stupid to attempt to drive up a hill in a gear than is going to stall the engine ?
too stupid to use the lowest gear possible in order to save fuel ? In an area of low incomes ?
Before you cuold drive up the hill in third but now you will be using second, hence higher emmisions.
Before you could drive up the hill in third but now you will be using second, hence higher emmisions.
So in your wold a car a 2000rpm in seco0nd at 20 mph creates more emissions that at 2000rpm at 30 mph in 3rd?
Slowert speeds = less fuel burnt = less emissions. the RAC tried to prove your po9int and infact proved it wrong
Happy to be corrected but it hasn’t cost £30 odd million, but will cost that over the decade or so it takes to switch out and change the signage, etc.
£34.4 million according to a BBC report, that is quoted on a parliamentary web page :
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2023-0214/
and £32 million quoted on the Welsh government web page :
https://www.gov.wales/introducing-20mph-speed-limits-frequently-asked-questions
Pretty sure most of the signage has now been changed...
Before you cuold drive up the hill in third but now you will be using second, hence higher emmisions.
Assuming travelling at the same speed. Which you said they are not.
Slowert speeds = less fuel burnt = less emissions. the RAC tried to prove your po9int and infact proved it wrong
I give you some research results that are probably more rigorous than those by the RAC :
On the one hand it can be kind of reassuring that so many of the arguments against 20mph limits are absolute made up nonsense- if that's the best people can do as a counterargument, it's a fantastic argument for switching to 20mph in general.
On the other hand, they've still proved to be really effective despite being made up nonsense, which is a problem not just for speed limits but for literally everything.
Anyway, still very happy in my 20mph town which has been 20mph for years and which literally nobody wants to turn back from being 20mph.
gravedigger - I suggest you read that - it has nothing to do with 20 mph limits - its about what revs you change gear at. Zero relevance
. CONCLUSIONS<br />Theoretical speed profiles were used to assess the impact of gear change on vehicle exhausts of two vehicle<br />types by using the VeTESS emission tool. The results clearly show that both the Euro III diesel car and the<br />EURO IV petrol car can reduce the emissions of CO2 (and fuel consumption) when shifting up gear early. <br />The same findings apply to CO and HC, but cannot be made for NOx and PM. The large uncertainty ensuing <br />from difficulties in the PM measurement can be the cause of these variations but needs to be studied<br />thoroughly before drawing conclusions.<br />Since this study dealt with theoretical, non-realistic speed profiles the real impact of an improved gear<br />changing behaviour on emissions could not be quantified. The use of real life driving cycles with information<br />on gear choice will improve these assessments offering useful information to policy makers who aim at<br />promoting an environmentally friendly driving behaviour. Future research should therefore include large<br />scale monitoring programs to gain more insight into this matter. In 2007 a travel survey will be initiated in<br />Flanders (Belgium) as a part of the research project “An activity based approach for surveying and modelling<br />travel behaviour”. The analysis of these data will hopefully provide more information on the problem of gear<br />changing behaviour and emissions.
"This will cost roughly £32.5 million between 2022-2027"
Ok, maybe not a decade then...biggest chunk spent in the first couple of years for the hardware.
gravedigger – I suggest you read that – it has nothing to do with 20 mph limits – its about what revs you change gear at. Zero relevance
"can reduce the emissions of CO2 (and fuel consumption) when shifting up gear early."
yes, shifting up early means you are out of that less efficient gear as soon as possible, into a more efficient gear which will have a better mpg and therefore you will produce less emmissions over your journey as your mpg will be better - as co2 emmisions are generally about constant per gallon of fuel.
My mpg going up that local hill at 20mph in second is a lot worse than my mpg going up that hill at 30mph in third, hence more fuel used per journey, hence more emmisions.
My average mpg now has dropped from just over 32mpg to around 28 mpg, which must mean more emmisions.
Most of the studies showing that mpg isn't meaningfully impacted by the 20mph zone are based on the fact that you are driving steadily, and it is easy to keep your mpgs up, especially if they are displayed on your car.
However the presense of significantly steep hills somewhat buggers this up.
Its actually the opposite but never mind.
So it is the opposite then, so 20mph zones are a bad thing, right?
not according to the 20 is plenty site;
Or the Welsh government:
Or the ethical choice website:
https://www.eta.co.uk/2023/05/05/myth-busters-20mph-speed-limits/
Or a German report quoted by the Guardian;
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/apr/19/ask-leo-20mph-speed-limits-pollution
(Which also quotes a report that speed bumps should be removed as they cause increased emissions).
So what are you basing your statement on ? Anything factual ?
Yeah - as above - the Will Hayward/Wales Online investigation
https://twitter.com/WillHayCardiff/status/1746942241950560337?t=i8hWr4l2xh-WNA9N-TSvsA&s=09
the social media campaign against Wales deciding it's own speed limits being organised by Tory councillors under the pretence of being a grassroots campaign is pretty grim stuff. - (CowbridgeAnalytica as some wag described it)
Real "Shut up Taffy - know your place" stuff
it does also highlight the fracture in Tory party in Wales quite dramatically too - how it's pivoted from a pro devolution centerist wing of the party - to a fairly hard right wing anti devolution party under RT's recent leadership - running campaigns from England against what Welsh tory members in Senedd were actually endorsing up until a few months ago.
Arrogant little englanders trying to lord it up over Wales and Scotland are a bigger threat to "the union" than any party or organisation in Scotland or Wales
So it is the opposite then, so 20mph zones are a bad thing, right?
No - if you pick the right car you can show higher fuel usage at 20mph than 30 mph at a constant speed. However once you take into account real drivingh conditions ie slowing and accelerating then 20mph reduces emissions
Once again do you bother to read your links? the first one backs my point and refutes yours
So, the mechanics and physics are quite clear. Smoother driving to a lower limit will always require less energy, less fuel and produce fewer emissions than repeatedly accelerating to a higher limit.
20 mph limits reduce pollution, reduces pedestrian casualties without any significant increase in journey times even reducing them sometimes as traffic flows better
And if you read the article, you get to the real reason:
This service is already operating at a low frequency and there is no funding to support increased resource going into services so we have had to amend the route with the time saved by not operating in the village.
It's lack of funding. That's what I was alluding to. You could have as many busses as you want, regardless of speed limit, if you were able to fund public transport properly. Dont let the right wing pull the wool over your eyes. And yes, I know Wales is Labour run but it gets its funding from Westminster.
MPG and emissions: the improvement in both these areas may take a while to realise but it will come due to modal shift and reduced traffic as car dominance is reduced. This will take more than speed limits but the 20mph introduction is the first step in the right direction. <br /><br />
I think that Welsh Govt stated that the change will be emissions and air quality neutral at the same volume of traffic. Any loss in fuel economy at constant driving at a lower speed will also be balanced by reduced consumption as cars don’t cycle from 0 to 30 in stop start traffic. <br /><br />
But the limits are here now so any move to remove them will seem regressive.
My average mpg now has dropped from just over 32mpg to around 28 mpg, which must mean more emmisions.
Probably because you're accelerating harder, for longer coming out of a 20 into a 40/50/60 rather than coming out of a 30. Accelerate less hard.
What car are you driving, and manual or auto?
My average mpg now has dropped from just over 32mpg to around 28 mpg, which must mean more emmisions.
I think I'd cry if I drove a vehicle with such a low mpg - combined longer journeys & thru London with plenty of 20mph zones & averaging a real world 57mpg (2015 ULEZ compliant diesel).
I give you some research results that are probably more rigorous than those by the RAC :
Might be more rigorous, but completely pointless and talking about a different subject.
As far as i can tell, it's linked to legislation called "Gear Shift Indication". Because i've read a few reports like that before.
Once you add a load in (going up hill) slower (in the optimum gear) is more efficient.
It's probably you rage accelerating out of every 20 limit. Or hitting first and WOT up every slight incline...
Drove down to Afan valley before Xmas last year, it makes sense for the limits to be 20mph because the villages have steep narrow roads with plenty of sharp bends, so you can't really go bombing it round the place even if you wanted.... However, I noticed a few places where there was a straight road, a few houses and a 20mph limit lasting for about 1km, I didn't have an issue as I wasn't in a rush and just chatting away to a mate, but I can see how places like that it would be frustrating... In city centres and villages with steep inclines, tight roads, schools etc. it makes perfect sense.aybe some common sense in places that should be 20 and places that should be 30 would help..... I live on a 20mph road, and it makes sense for it to be 20mph (it's a dead end, single width road with houses lined both sides).
Having a blanket "one size fits all" rule doesn't fit with using some common sense.
Having a blanket “one size fits all” rule doesn’t fit with using some common sense.
Its a good place to start. If there are anomalies then those individual roads can be changed pretty simply. Much easier (an safer) to do it this way than the other.
Which is exactly what the legislation lays out.
Rather than push limits down on dangerous roads (which is what historically happens, pretty much everywhere) make everywhere nominally safer, then lift limits sensibly.
Speed cameras had similar (annoying) legislation in the start, was originally written to only put cameras in accident hotspots and "dangerous existing roads". Then they started putting them on new roads. Can vaguely remember some hoo-haa about a camera on a brand new stretch of bypass in the mid 90s (Aylesbury maybe?). They had actually built the road, then decided it was dangerous (adding a camera) without any accident statistics or the road even being open... Now they add cmaeras where needed i.e. where ever idiots speed.
(FWIW, it *was* a dangerous road, long, straight, down hill, bad sightlines toon to an almost unsighted roundabout at the bottom. 60 limit. I could get to over 50 mph on my bike between the top of the hill and the camera location.)
However, I noticed a few places where there was a straight road, a few houses and a 20mph limit lasting for about 1km, I didn’t have an issue as I wasn’t in a rush and just chatting away to a mate, but I can see how places like that it would be frustrating
The issue here is that the few homes live only a km from the village and they would like to walk and cycle in more safety. So a 20mph will a) make that safer and b) encourage more folk to walk or cycle such short distances to pick up the milk and bread at the village shop
It's funny hearing about all the moaning about the 20mph speed limit, kind of like people did when the smoking ban came in. Everyone will get used to it and it won't even be a thing anymore.
Also, I was taught by my driving instructor back in 96 that you should not be going over 20mph where there is parked cars on either side pf the road or when on a narrow windy road in a built up area. Makes sense to me.
Which is exactly what the legislation lays out.
And it makes sense to use this approach if it is applied competently and consistently, but that hasn't been the case. Here in Swansea we have 20mph roads that still have 30mph signs because the paint that was sprayed over the 30 has washed away. The main road through from Killay, on the west side, is 30mph for most of it's length, while the same type of main road through Cockett is 20mph. Coming from Penclawdd you come out of a 40mph, into a few 100 metres stretch of 30mph, then turning left at a junction 20mph for 150m, back up to 30mph, then NSL about 300m later. The 20mph sign at the left turn is exactly on the 90 degree turn and positioned so that you need a sunroof to see it. A short distance away from here there is a 20mph sign on a farm track so rutted that you can't do over 10 mph in a car.
Having said that, my gripe is that the quiet roads that I've always used for commuting on the bike are now so busy and dangerous with people trying to avoid the 'slow' main roads that I have stopped riding to work this week. I've had too many incidents since Xmas.
I've found that riding a road bike in a 20mph area to still be an unpleasant thing at times. Car drivers still try to overtake for some reason despite me riding at 20mph, so I can end up passing the car back in traffic only for them to overtake again a bit further along.
It’s a good place to start. If there are anomalies then those individual roads can be changed pretty simply. Much easier (an safer) to do it this way than the other.
Could, but when did a council last raise a speed limit anywhere?
I can end up passing the car back in traffic only for them to overtake again a bit further along.
That happens all the time if you ride in traffic anyway, because even in 30mph limits the traffic isn't always doing 30mph. For the record I've had a lot more people waiting behind me, especially those who are turning off soon.
Could, but when did a council last raise a speed limit anywhere?
Well most of the main routes in Cardiff have been raised to 30 from the now default 20, but clearly the situation has changed - defaults were in the past too high so they lowered rather than raised - it's the other way round now, at least in built up areas.
Having a blanket “one size fits all” rule doesn’t fit with using some common sense.
It's not a blanket rule. It's the default. Councils can't consider every road and they can't signpost every road. Given that in towns and cities the smaller roads are by far the most numerous, it makes sense for the default to suit them and only the bigger roads need evaluating to see if the limit needs raising.
Definitely not Aylesbury then 🤣
😀 Quite probably not, just looked at a map... All i can remember is riding along the (unopened) then opened bypass probably a couple of dozen times in the space of 18 months when i used to visit the area. Then it being all over the (local) news and the cameras being covered by the operators.
