60mph limit of the M1
unsurprisingly the Torygraph are reporting that its all being dictated to us by the EU
Well it kind of is. But we are part of the EU so had a say in setting the rules.
What the torygraph is guility of is painting these EU rules in a bad light. But when you think about it having a european wide regulation on air quality is quite good for all of us.Posted 4 years agowrightysonMember
Surely the worse offenders pollution wise are lorries/buses/vans etc of which a huge amount are already restricted to 56mph?Posted 4 years ago
Can’t see it reducing accidents as mr angry man will drive even closer to your bumper of you’re not at 59.2 mph.
Limit needs increasing to 80 if anything.aracerSubscribermolgrips wrote:
Yes, the worst offenders are already restricted. So now we restrict the next worse offenders. Seems fine to me.
Reducing the speed of traffic decreases pollution. The traffic which causes most of the pollution won’t have it’s speed reduced. You reckon that seems fine?Posted 4 years ago
aracer – Member
The traffic which causes most of the pollution won’t have it’s speed reduced…
assuming you mean trucks and stuff, how do you know they cause most* of the pollution?
there’s an awful lot of diesel cars particulating/noxing their way along the M1…
(*even if it’s true, doing something significant is better than doing nothing, no?)Posted 4 years agowrightysonMember
That was my point, but put betterer!Posted 4 years ago
I just have visions of people tailgaiting in both the middle and outer lanes constantly looking for “that gap” to (sorry molgrips) overtake. It’s the same in the restricted 50 mph roadworks areas.
I hate driving in those areas as i just set cruise to 50 and leave it, but always get some twunt tailgating, which is my number one gripe on the roads!
They aren’t bastards, they’re the police,
The money collected from fines by Her Majesty’s Court and Tribunal Service is sent directly to the Government, so the rozzers don’t a get a penny directly. Every time you speed you give money to Cameron and he loves you for it.Posted 4 years agobailsSubscriber
In 2009, road transport accounted for 93% of all domestic transport GHG emissions, with 58% for car & taxis, 17% for heavy goods vehicles, 12% for light vans and 4% for buses & coaches
page 7Posted 4 years agokimbersSubscriber
I though that councils/police were turning off cameras because they cost more money to run than they made though finesPosted 4 years ago
tazzymtb – Member
Approx 90 million a year from speeding fines/traffic enforcemnt last time I looked which is going back a couple of years….so yep the government wouldn’t even notice it ahwiles
£100million in fines.
£20million in ‘profit’ for the treasury (there are costs to cover – those dead bugs don’t wipe themselves of the camera lenses…)
a drop in the ocean.Posted 4 years agokonagirlMember
Surely the worse offenders pollution wise are lorries/buses/vans etc
As ahwiles has implied, I think actually modern diesels are probably the worst offenders for NO2, which the consultation document says is the primary pollutant of concern for that stretch of road.
(The NAEI figures for 2011/2012 imply EURO 4/5 diesel cars contribute around 0.3 g/km of motorway travel versus around 0.4 g/km for HGVs, but there are probably 4-5 times as many diesel cars travelling on that stretch of the M1 on average; so the NO2 contribution is much larger from diesel cars.)
Reducing the average speed from 70mph to 60mph would reduce NO2 emissions by over 20% for/from the 2012 average UK diesel car fleet. For petrol it’s more like a 10% reduction in NOx/NO2. (Citing the UK EFT v5.1)Posted 4 years agobailsSubscriber
Except there are loads more diesels than LPG conversions. And it would be difficult (impossible?) to apply a speed limit on a fuel type basis.
So, as per the document I linked to, go for groups that can be seperately identified, and start with the biggest contributor first. Especially as there are numerous gases, not just NO2Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘60mph limit of the M1’ is closed to new replies.