20mph in Wales…..

So how was everyone’s commute this morning?

Much the same I suspect as most will be ignoring the new speed limit (pure guess).

I see Mr Drakeford is saying that the lower limit is going to increase the average trip by 1 minute – really? I’m sure a lot of trips are much longer than 3 minutes.

Nice to see that they have actually admitted that exhaust emission’s/particulates are going to rise because of this – apparently this will not change until everyone is driving an electric vehicle!

Hmm.

I don’t see an issue with in some places, but doing it blanket for all roads is just daft and justifies the ‘its just a moneymaking thing’ outlook. There’s plenty round my way that should stay at 30, but haven’t, so they’ll just chuck speed vans everywhere to rinse people. Wide roads with set back houses on one side and plenty of passing space for cars, buses and bikes and thye’re setting it down to 20. These are arterial roads that are used every day by people trying to get from A>B. 20 in those cramped streets in the valleys – perfect. Makes sense. Uneforceable, because you can’t get a speed van anywhere because everyones triple parked, but a nice idea.

And that’s the core of it – if your nice idea to improve safety in residential areas isn’t actually workable in practice and serves only to generate speeding fines and make people irate, then it’s not a good idea. It’s a cynical excercise that you’re doing for PR that doesn’t actually impact those areas where it would be most effective.

@chrismac – well, it’s a World Health Organisation campaign to have 30km/h/20mph limits where there are people because it reduces deaths so much. They don’t tend to just fart out advice on a whim.

https://www.who.int/news/item/22-03-2021-campaign-launched-to-make-30-km-h-streets-the-norm-for-cities-worldwide#:~:text=30%20km%2Fh%20(20%20mph,people%20walk%2C%20live%20and%20play.

This document has some facts and figures-

https://fevr.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/30-FEVR-2013.pdf

“The first widespread evaluation of 20mph ( miles per hour) zones in the UK was carried out by TRL in 1996xi. It found that injury accidents were reduced by 60%, and child injury accidents were reduced by 67%. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties fell by 74%.”

TRL is the Transport Research Laboratory, and they’re not there to prove a point either way, just interpret the data they gather.

I see Mr Drakeford is saying that the lower limit is going to increase the average trip by 1 minute – really? I’m sure a lot of trips are much longer than 3 minutes.

However, in the urban environment average speeds are lower than 30 no matter what the limit says. Plus remember this is only *some* roads – there are still 30/40/50/60 limits on many roads.

My commute if I drive is 7 miles. It has a couple of 20 zones – my house out of the town I live onto A9 and through the main street of the next town. I cannot say I miss it being 30, or indeed the extra few seconds as I pass by the primary, the secondary and the main route to the university in a morning so full of pedal and walking commuters.

I’m still waiting to see some independent evidence to support the claims of 20mph speed limits. As far as I can tell they are just a money making scheme. If the powers that be were interested in safety then widen footpaths. Stop cars parking on footpaths so pedestrians can use them as intended. The problem is that there is no roi on there so we will just make vehicles go slower and call it done

Come up to Scotland for a few days. I can show you how good they are, how even though many cars are faster than 20mph, they are now significantly slower than when they all ignored the 30mph limits. I can show you the average commute and driving around Stirling and area. It. Just. Works.
No-one gives it any thought any more as it has been here a couple of years now.

And I see police enforcing it maybe twice or three times a year – and I understand that they warn as many as they actually prosecute (according to a riding buddy who was Police Scotland’s most senior traffic officer up until retirement in December)

I am interested @chrismac- how much longer is your commute, and how much of an inconvenience is that for you in the overall scheme of things?

……. and what about the increased emissions (and therefore particulates I would imagine)?

I think Winston Churchill put it best

“Never before in the field of transport, have so many people lost their minds, over so small a change”

My favourite claim by the antis, was that improved road safety is a bad thing because it will decrease the number of organ donors. If those are the straws you are grasping you don’t have much of an argument.

I don’t really get it, just drive a bit slower, its really not hard.

Nice to see that they have actually admitted that exhaust emission’s/particulates are going to rise because of this – apparently this will not change until everyone is driving an electric vehicle!

The alternative research says that most emissions are produced in accelaration (CO2, soot, NOx) and deceleration (brake dust and tyre dust), far more than during constant running at either 20 or 30. Limiting the acccelerations reduces emissions by more than marginal efficency increases when up to the speed limit. The shorter the gaps between junctions the more fuel is saved and the more emissions are reduced by the lower limit. The traffic also flows better which reduces idling time and changes of speed due to congestion.

……. and what about the increased emissions (and therefore particulates I would imagine)?

They are reduced at slower traffic speeds – emissions go up disproportionately when you accelerate up to to speed. Lower that top speed and you do not accelerate as much and traffic flows more smoothly, so further reducing acceleration time.

My favourite claim by the antis, was that improved road safety is a bad thing because it will decrease the number of organ donors. If those are the straws you are grasping you don’t have much of an argument.

Really? We have people arguing to drive faster so they can create more organ donors by a killing a few more?

20 is being rolled out across my city, southampton.  I had to leave the local nextdoor because of the level of twattery about it, the excuses being rolled out are absolutley ridiculous.  I live on one of the main routes into town, its residential, has a large park next to it, 3 schools, 1 colleague and 2 pubs.  Several crossings, 2 roundabouts and a couple of sets of traffic lights –  cycle lane was added in lockdown which makes it quite tight in places.  It absolutley should be a 20, and tbh during peak times you would be lucky to do much more on average anyway.  But people want to accelerate as fast as they can to 30+ ready to brake at the next junction or crossing.  I just don’t get it.  The level of frothing you would think some is removing their right to use a car completely

The 20 signs have been defaced, and I’ve seen 2 cars (one a learner) being overtaken in the 20 zone already.  Very few are abiding by the 20, that said, very few were abiding by the 30 before, so I would say the average ‘top’ speed if that makes sense is getting slower.  I hope it will be something that improves as people get over themselves.

And I really don’t mind if the police make some revenue out of it.  If you can’t stick to a speed limit, you deserve to be fined.

The alternative research says that most emissions are produced in accelaration (CO2, soot, NOx) and deceleration (brake dust and tyre dust), far more than during constant running at either 20 or 30. Limiting the acccelerations reduces emissions by more than marginal efficency increases when up to the speed limit. The shorter the gaps between junctions the more fuel is saved and the more emissions are reduced by the lower limit. The traffic also flows better which reduces idling time and changes of speed due to congestion.

I’ve read much the same. Less time spent accelerating means less emissions, this cancels out the increased emissions from driving at a lower speed.

Particle emissions are brakes and tyres, lower braking efforts on the brake pads and less time accelerating and braking with the tyres would mean lower particle emissions.

Particle emissions are brakes and tyres

I meant diesel particulates… sorry.

The alternative research says that most emissions are produced in accelaration (CO2, soot, NOx) and deceleration

Absolutely agree – so they are reducing the speed limit so cars have to decelerate and accelerate more to/from 55/60??

The shorter the gaps between junctions the more fuel is saved and the more emissions are reduced by the lower limit.

Does this make sense?  The shorter the gap between junctions means more acceleration/deceleration doesn’t it?

I have no skin in this game – I do have a house in Wales but I don’t use the car much there and that is mostly one short trip through a village that I always go through at 20 anyway (because the road is only wide enough for one car so stops are frequent).
But my takeaway from this trip is that my car changes down a gear to travel at this speed and the rpm are higher than they are when at 30mph.

I’m sure the pedestrian deaths figures will be scrutinised in the coming years.

I think in 20 years nobody will care and it’ll be a bit nuts to think about people driving around residential neighbourhoods at 30mph.

I don’t really understand why it seems to wind people up so much.  There’s way more important things to think about.

I have to say its confusing round my way (Gower)…the council hadn’t got round to changing any signs as of yesterday, so theoretically, all 30s are now 20. Except I know of 3 local roads which are being left at 30….how is anyone supposed to know? I guess it would be hard to prosecute someone until the signage is done….maybe?

It does make sense unless you are hard of thinking or hard of reading, Sharkbait. ;) Try reading again with your thinking cap on and read the posts from rich and Matt which make the same points I am.

To answer your second point the distance between junctions is as it is, not a thing that can be changed like the speed limit. If you have two traffic lights at 300m apart the saving in fuel/emissions from a lower speed limit will be greater than if there are 500m between the junctions. If the junctions are several miles apart then the savings from more efficient running at higher speed might eventually overcome the high emission during acceleration and braking – unlikely on a typical urban journey. In a typical urban environment with frequent junctions and changes in speed where 20 limits are applied the lower speed saves fuel and lowers emissions by reducing the highly polluting acceleratin and deceleration phases.

Signs all changed in N Wales yesterday – noticed whilst out on the bike that all the ‘3’s were removeable. Drove about 60 miles in and out of the zones yesterday. Certainly feels very slow, but there are lots of national speed limit to 20 mph sections which probably needs speeds dropping to 40 or 50 else where. Didn’t get chance to get out on the bike on Sunday, so we’ll see – I can see myself getting held up a lot, especially when out on the road bikes or CX bike.

But my takeaway from this trip is that my car changes down a gear to travel at this speed and the rpm are higher than they are when at 30mph.

And?
Do you think emissions are linked to engine rpm or something?
Lower speed/ratio and higher rpm will (very very very slightly) increase pumping and frictional losses and significantly reduce total load. Because you’ll use a lot less fuel. (And if whoever designed your engine knows what the score is, you’ll probably be burning it more cleanly with slightly higher rpm.)

I’m still waiting to see some independent evidence to support the claims of 20mph speed limits.

You shouldn’t *really* need to look that hard, seeing as 30kph limits have been rolled out all over Europe over the last couple of decades. You might need to learn half a dozen foreign languages though.

I see Mr Drakeford is saying that the lower limit is going to increase the average trip by 1 minute – really? I’m sure a lot of trips are much longer than 3 minutes.

Your average speed won’t drop by 50%. I’ll give you an example. To town from my house is 5.2 miles and is showing now as 16 mins on Google. The first bit is residential streets with parked cars so clearly 30mph is never reached. Then there’s a little bit of 40mph then a long dual carriageway bit of 50. The last 1.9 miles was 30, and is now 20. Call it 2 miles – that would have taken 4 mins at a constant 30mph, but would now take 6 mins. So a 2 min gain. However last night at 8pm Google was showing 10 mins for that section – now 8 mins. So how is it possible that a previously 4 min trip is taking 8 or 10 mins? Because you spend most of your time on that bit of road waiting at lights or roundabouts. That will still be the case.

It’s not going to change most urban journeys.

There’s plenty round my way that should stay at 30, but haven’t, so they’ll just chuck speed vans everywhere to rinse people

Then contact your local council to get them to change it to a 30. They are the ones who have the power to change it. Once again, the WG is ONLY CHANGING THE DEFAULT LIMIT, not all the limits.

serves only to generate speeding fines

I’m trying to stay calm here but FOR ****’S SAKE! The only person responsible for getting a speeding fine is the driver! End of debate! We have always had speed limits, you’ve always been obliged to stick to them. If you can’t drive properly this is absolutely 100% not the WG’s fault!

I live in 20 limit neighbourhood, There’s lots of housing and four schools within a 1 mile radius, it’s been 20 for about the last 5 years.
The sky hasn’t fallen, the council even enforced the no-parking on verges rule too for a bit. There’s 3 speed cameras in the area, none of which I believe have actually been dialled down to 20, but do most drivers really want to test that theory? I don’t know anyone locally who’s managed to get a ticket from the speed cameras.

(Anecdotally) I have observed the following:

The standard sort of pricks still boot it through the area, but it seems that where they were comfortable pushing 40 in a 30 they now tend to aim for 30 in a 20 somehow it’s dampened their instincts a bit.

Driving through the estate seems to be a more relaxed affair, there’s still too many parked cars in several places, kids randomly lurch out on e-scooters etc, but everyone has that bit more time to react and negotiate things, and angry interactions seem to be less frequent (IMO/IME). I feel pretty relaxed driving the last mile to/from my home.

There actually seem to be fewer people using it as a rat-run, I think those 20 signs must be like kryptonite to ‘progress makers’ who would previously have caused frequent long queues at a couple of busy junctions, now they stay on the 30 limit road (still in a queue full of similarly progress focussed dickheads), don’t tell them but they’d probably now save time cutting through our neighbourhood.

My journey times and fuel consumption appear pretty much unchanged (not that I’ve really studied and plotted them). the single mile I have to drive observing a 20 limit is probably covered at about the same average speed as it ever was with the typical stops and starts, it’s a busy populated area you can’t drive all the way through it at the posted limit.

Cycling in the area doesn’t feel much different, but the really aggressive drivers (must pass at all costs, leaning on the horn) are fewer and further between.

Overall if they were to widen the 20 limit to cover the adjacent housing/busier areas, it would maybe add another mile of 20 limit travel to my commute and again I can’t see it hugely impacting my local travel either by car or bicycle.

I think we’ll just have to wait and see how the Welsh implementation of 20 limits goes, no doubt there will be studies galore from it, some with and others without bias. But I find it telling that nobody really seems to be studying or reporting on areas like the one I live in to understand potential impacts/benefits. Do people maybe not really want to hear the answers?

Stop cars parking on footpaths so pedestrians can use them as intended. The problem is that there is no roi on there

Never heard of parking tickets? FFS.

doing it blanket for all roads is just daft

YET AGAIN they have not done it for all roads.

I can see myself getting held up a lot, especially when out on the road bikes or CX bike.

This, there are plenty of residential roads that are fast on a bike and I will have to slow down.

@chrismac

I’m still waiting to see some independent evidence to support the claims of 20mph speed limits. As far as I can tell they are just a money making scheme. If the powers that be were interested in safety then widen footpaths. Stop cars parking on footpaths so pedestrians can use them as intended. The problem is that there is no roi on there so we will just make vehicles go slower and call it done

Are you seriously saying that you don’t believe driving more slowly is safer than driving faster? I mean, surely you don’t need to see evidence for that? All the other crap you have mentioned would also be safer if drivers were not driving as fast.

I assume I’m just feeding the troll now though….

I saw this elsewhere, and it seems appropriate to paste it here…

Imagine a child throwing a tantrum because their parents won’t let them ride their bike as fast as they want.

That’s what I see grown adults do every day.

They’ll throw little tantrums because the car in front is sticking to the speed limit.

Especially in a 20mph zone.

Actual tantrums.

By actual adults.

(If you ask them about it, they actually try to justify it, the same way a child would!)

So if you’re learning to drive, and there’s an ‘adult’ behind you throwing a tantrum, try not to let them affect you too much.

Imagine them rolling around on the floor screaming in ASDA because the queue is too long.

That’s basically what they’re doing.

and serves only to generate speeding fines and make people irate

Only thing that generates speeding fines is not driving to the terms of your licence and the rules of the road.
And if that makes people irate, maybe they shouldn’t drive?

that would have taken 4 mins at a constant 30mph, but would now take 6 mins. So a 2 min gain

Let’s be honest, a week’s worth of commuting with time added on for 20mph zones is approx 1/50th of the time spent on STW. I’d look at one less thread per day, if saving time somewhere else really mattered that much.

In a typical urban environment with frequent junctions and changes in speed where 20 limits are applied the lower speed saves fuel and lowers emissions by reducing the highly polluting acceleratin and deceleration phases.

100% agree and that makes sense in a typical urban environment – i.e. town or city.

(the vast majority of Wales is not your typical urban environment. ;) )

Oh, are we playing pedantry bingo now?

Ok – all roads that are not explicitly designated as 30 with lamposts every however many meters. Interestingly, most people on the speed awareness course I did some years back didn’t even know this was a thing (hardly surprising).

One of the unintended consequences of this legislation is that people are now doing 20 in roads signposted 30, which is hugely annoying.

I’m not sure there’s a point debating this if people are not going tom acknowledge the difference that exists between things written on a page and what actually happens in the real world and pretending that there isn’t an element of revenue generation in not re-designating certain roads as 30 when the local authority know that people will continue to exceed that speed because ‘big wide road’. Now, I’m sure you’re going to say something about ignorance being no excuse, but the council know it’s going to happen, so they could signpost it, but they’d rather just rake the cash in, which rather spoils the message that it’s about safety.

One of the unintended consequences of this legislation is that people are now doing 20 in roads signposted 30, which is hugely annoying.

It’s a speed limit, not a target. HTH.

I was rather upset to find Rover way, lamby way and wentloog avenue were still 40/30 mph. Was looking forward to maybe cycle-commuting to work.

The only fairly minor negatives I have with driving in 20mph zones (in London in my case) are firstly being tail gated by locals who presumably know where the speed camera’s are and try to force you to drive quicker. It adds a bit of stress to driving in London and the answer for my circumstances is simple – don’t drive in London (except where you have no alternative) where the public transport infrastructure is excellent.

The other minor thing is the blanket nature of the 20mph zones. Occasionally you are on a dual carriageway (with no pavements) and 20mph feels incredibly slow. I do appreciate that you are causing less pollution though at this speed.

This, there are plenty of residential roads that are fast on a bike and I will have to slow down.

Might have to be careful/sensible about risking a charge of “riding furiously” or whatever its called.

If the speed limit in a built up area has been reduced for safety, I’m just putting it out there that Rule#1 might apply for people cycling through it.

I drive through a few stretches of new 20mph limits in Oxfordshire on the way to and from work. It’s all quite relaxing tbh. 20 on the dial does feel slow but you get used to it.

If people always stuck to below 30 in 30 zones maybe it wouldn’t have been needed but a 30 zone w/o cameras means a lot of drivers doing more like 40 and some at 50-odd. Families live in those houses and kids should be safe on or around the minor roads by their homes. If drivers have to slow down, be ticketed, whatever, to make that the case so be it. I don’t see what there is to complain about? Take a different route if you don’t like it.

Once everyone is used to it it will not even be remembered.  I have driven 45,000 in my car since new and have never reset the overall average speed.  I drive on a lot of A and B roads where average speed is between 40 and 60 but also drive through towns and get caught up in rush hour and weekend traffic.

My average over that 45,000 miles – 26mph.

I would guess that if that had been with 20mph limits in place of 30mph that would be about 25.9mph…

people must have very content and happy lives, in the grand scheme of things, if this is the thing they are going to waste their energy on getting irate about.

Here in Cambridgeshire there are a couple of 20mph limits near my village. So far I have managed to evade being caught/fleeced by sneakily driving at 20mph. It has not killed me, nor has my car exploded. If I can do it, anyone can.

Might have to be careful/sensible about risking a charge of “riding furiously”

A lot of people are driving furiously, at the moment, but not perhaps in the same way :)

the vast majority of Wales is not your typical urban environment

And that’s why the vast majority of Wales is still not 20mph.

I’m not sure there’s a point debating this if people are not going tom acknowledge the difference that exists between things written on a page and what actually happens in the real world

you could just leave it as this for every STW driving (or cycling on the roads) thread ever

I don’t really get it, just drive a bit slower, its really not hard.

Yeah me too – it is odd that anyone finds it an issue. I live near a 20mph zone and the amount of people that actually stick to the limit is alarmingly low. I have been overtaken more than once when driving at the speed limit.