Monday 21st May 2012
80mph limit will cost £1bn say campaigners
Charities rally to fight proposals for 80mph motorway limit, counting the cost in money and lives
Plans to increase the speed limits on motorways to 80mph will cost the country up to £1bn a year, including counting the cost of potential extra injuries and deaths, according to safety campaigners.
Road safety charity Brake is spearheading a coalition of like-minded organisations that has launched a campaign to protest against the government's plans to increase motorway speed limits. You can read the official press release here.
The move is a reaction to a Government consultation on proposals to raise the motorway speed limit from 70mph to 80mph.
The plan to raise speed limits was originally announced by former transport secretary Phillip Hammond and, should it come to fruition, would start with a trial period on selected parts of the motorways network.
But the Brake-led coalition vehemently opposes the idea, saying that costs will "exceed £1 billion annually in economic terms, mean more families needlessly suffering from motorway crashes and casualties, millions of tonnes more carbon pumped into the atmosphere each year and further damage to tranquillity in the countryside".
Brake reckons, specifically, that the costs to health and emergency services could hit £62.4m, carbon costs would total £180.4m, and £766.6m in fuel costs.
AA President Edmund King was perhaps more sanguine when he spoke to the Telegraph on the subject last week: "Some stretches of motorway are more suitable for 80mph than others," he said. "If you don't have adequate central reservation barriers, a hard shoulder and variable speed limit message signs then the road is not safe for 80mph."
Roads Minister Mike Penning said: "The Department is carrying out work to assess the potential economic, safety and environmental impacts of trialling 80mph speed limits on motorways where variable limits are currently in place.
"This work is ongoing and no final decisions have yet been taken about which stretches of motorway would be included in any proposed trial. We plan to bring forward detailed proposals and start consultation during the next few months."
|
TheRoadWarrior
Original Poster
1,087 posts
47 months
|
180 million in Carbon costs?
What exactly are 'Carbon costs'?
|
|
|
Al 450
1,298 posts
90 months
|
|
|
TrevorH
1,343 posts
153 months
|
Do these people actually travel on our motorways and see how fast a free-running motorway moves?
BTW, it won't change my standard motorway speed (SMS), it'll just be legal.
Edited to add - Brake are pulling numbers out of thin air.
|
|
|
mrmr96
11,923 posts
73 months
|
Seems most of the extra cost is "£766.6m in fuel costs." but that's down to the drivers, as there's nothing stopping people carrying on at 70mph if they want to save fuel. The drivers who will do 80mph are, dare I say, probably already driving at 80mph with the existing limit in place.
|
|
|
VR6 Turbo
1,357 posts
23 months
|
Dear Brake
please could you explain how Germany hasn't imploded?
thanks VR
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
odyssey2200
17,432 posts
78 months
|
Utter alarmist feckwittery.
Do it now.
If these people had their way we would all be living in caves and be hoping that one day someone might invent a round thing.
If Darwin was allowed to have his way we would be allowed to kill these people to cleanse the gene pool.
The reference to "carbon" shows that they have no concept of how an engine works in reality.
|
|
|
TroubledSoul
1,278 posts
63 months
|
Article says said: Brake reckons, specifically, that the costs to health and emergency services could hit £62.4m, carbon costs would total £180.4m, and £766.6m in fuel costs. What a load of crap. Surely an extra £766.6m of fuel spend is great news for the economy? Bog off Brake, you self righteous numpties. Is there a more annoying group out there? And did anybody expect them NOT to kick off over this? Bloody idiots. More fatalities? ps off idiots. Modern cars are fantastic at keeping their occupants alive in a crash situation, and I would suggest the onus should be on driver behaviour before blaming the speed limit for accidents!!!
|
|
|
Rollcage
9,172 posts
61 months
|
A couple of Million to change all the signs, job done.
People will, I imagine, carry on driving at the same speed they already do.
|
|
|
vinnie83
2,139 posts
62 months
|
Forgive me if I'm missing the obvious, but surely the increase in fuel costs would result in further revenue to the treasury rather than a cost?
And as mentioned above, if it's a matter of concern of more cost to poorer families in increased fuel consumption - drive slower!
I often drive at 60mph if I'm early to see a client to save fuel!
|
|
|
Monty Python
872 posts
66 months
|
mrmr96 said: Seems most of the extra cost is "£766.6m in fuel costs." but that's down to the drivers, as there's nothing stopping people carrying on at 70mph if they want to save fuel. The drivers who will do 80mph are, dare I say, probably already driving at 80mph with the existing limit in place. How dare you apply common sense to the issue?
|
|
|
350Matt
3,252 posts
148 months
|
You do have to wonder if the hysterical members of brake do actaully drive on Motorways
90% of the the traffic is already travelling at 80 mph now....
|
|
|
Aeroresh
1,035 posts
101 months
|
It'll be the end of the world I tells ya!
Seriously, these people need to get out more if they honestly think this is what will happen......
|
|
|
Sam1990
344 posts
36 months
|
f  k off Brake!
|
|
|
MagicalTrevor
4,781 posts
98 months
|
Ok, so ~60% of the fuel price is duty and tax, that's £459.96 million. If the cost to the emergency services is £62.4 million and this 'cost' for carbon is £180 million then the government is ultimately £217.56 million up on the deal. Presumably there is a economical benefit to people spending more on fuel as well?
As somebody else said, people who can't afford the additional fuel can still travel at 60 or 70mph
|
|
|
Al 450
1,298 posts
90 months
|
Depends on engine torque/aerodynamics/gearing, increasing your motorway cruising speed to 80mph might actually save fuel if you drive the right car...
|
|
|
matt-hill
347 posts
51 months
|
Are these the same people who say it costs the nations economy billions every time some one has a day off?
|
|
|
Sussex2
9 posts
12 months
|
I live in sunny (well, sometimes)Sussex and also in Catalunya.
The city of Barcelona imposed a 80kph limit on all its many motorways, belt roads etc. The stated object was to reduced collisions and pollution.
Serious collisions increased by 40 percent and pollution was hardly changed.
The plan has now been dropped in favour of variable limits depending on traffic.
In Spain the national speed limit was reduced to 110kph during the last energy 'crisis'; all the signage countrywide was changed.
It has now reverted back to the original 120kph with all the signs changed back. I don't know what the cost was but cannot imagine it could be anything like that mentioned in the article.
I know the figures are from a pressure group with their own agenda but get it at least a little realistic surely?
|
|
|
odyssey2200
17,432 posts
78 months
|
Rollcage said: A couple of Million to change all the signs, job done.
People will, I imagine, carry on driving at the same speed they already do. A. What signs? I can't recall the last time I saw a painted sign that said 70 on it and as most new signs are Matrix signs, I would argue that there is almost Zero extra cost. B. Exactly. people already drive at more than 70 anyway so it will make absolutely no difference at all.
|
|
|
VR6 Turbo
1,357 posts
23 months
|
can we launch a DNS attack on their website? or perhaps PH should release there own press release that under minds all the points raise by Brake?
I am no were near intelligent enough for this though.
VR
|
|
|
Egbert Nobacon
2,763 posts
112 months
|
The bigger question is why is Brake allowed to classify itself as a charity and reap the tax benefits associated with that status - when in reality it's just a political pressure group trying to assert the warped views of a few onto the majority ?
|
|
