Cutting speed limits for cleaner air?
Discussion
Willy Nilly said:
bloomen said:
a 20 mph drop in speed presumably results in 1000 rpm less ish. That's 1000 less explosions per minute which I would assume results in less filth being spewed out the back.
The same number of explosions per unit of distance would be occuringEvanivitch said:
Tail winds, terrain, road conditions, air conditioning usage, vehicle load, vehicle maintenance, tyre pressure...
Your point would be valid if I mentioned only one journey, but in factit's averaged over about 70,000 miles and six years.
Yes, fuel consumption does usually does increase with speed, but depending on
the car, it can be by not much.
My car does 155 mph sometimes. Worst case, if its doing even 10mpg then and maybe
30 mpg at 80 mph, that still implies only 0.267 mpg for each mph faster.
Using linear interpolation, this implies that sitting at 90 mph will only cost me 2.67 mpg.
Still looks a complete bargain to me.
I don't look at the fuel consumption when going that fast, but a more realistic
estimate of 20 mpg at 155 mph would make the numbers look even better.
fatboy b said:
TheDrBrian said:
fatboy b said:
dcb said:
davepoth said:
Driving at 50 rather than 70 uses 25% less fuel,
Nonsense. At very least it depends on the car. Different cars have different efficienciesat different speeds.
Saving 50p or a pound on fuel is a small saving, compared to the cost of the time saved.
An hour shorter car journey could easily save anywhere from £20 to £100 or more,
depending on the driver and the number of passengers.
ks. Aero drag goes up with the square of speed so a slight increase in speed will add a lot of extra drag. 80/50 = 1.6 square that to give a 2.56 times increase in drag.
Previous said:
Well, reducing the limit reduces emissions as fuel efficiency rises... But capacity rises also and as thats taken up surely the extra vehicles will collectively produce more....
(I keep being told by planner types if they build more roads then those roads are then filled...(which ironically is actually the point...))
Suspect its really about capacity improvements ro hide the lack of infrastructure investment - M4 past port talbot has no room for fancy fandango managed / smart mway.
For the same reason there is no point in building new houses. If you do, pesky people just insist on living in them and you are back to where you started. No spare houses. (I keep being told by planner types if they build more roads then those roads are then filled...(which ironically is actually the point...))
Suspect its really about capacity improvements ro hide the lack of infrastructure investment - M4 past port talbot has no room for fancy fandango managed / smart mway.
Why oh why does that cretinous argument only get applied to roads and nothing else.
Coolbanana said:
As usual, it is all about the selfish. Me me me, what about me you cry, like little ignorant babies 
As a Society we do need to deal with an ever-increasing number of vehicles on the road but we also need to deal with air and noise pollution that fossil-fuelled vehicles produce.
To those who cite buses, HGV's, ships etc - grow up, get an education and stop being blatantly stupid! Those will be dealt with when technology permits at a cost that can be economically viable; they are not being forgotten, indeed, only a small amount of research will educate you on the subject.
As for cars, the tech at an economically viable cost for both use and infrastructure is already here and being introduced at a pace that will allow it to become the norm. Good. Over time, petrol and diesel will be phased out as we can all see. EV and Hybrids have arrived and are set to replace the rest. They will set the new benchmark and perhaps other fuel-types equally clean but more cost-effective and efficient may arise in the Future. But petrol and diesel only powered cars need to go as soon as possible.
In the meantime, other measures such as the one proposed concerning cutting speed limits will surface so as to help speed up the end result: less air and noise pollution. The effectiveness of such remains to be seen but anything that helps during the transition from fossil-fuel only to EV and Hybrid is welcome.
I like cars too, I love the sound of a powerful V8 petrol Mustang, the immense 12 cylinder growl of an Aston Martin. But I also totally agree that it is unsustainable to continue with seeing our residential neighbourhoods, workplaces and cities increasingly suffer the dirty, smelly, noise-infested plague that is petrol and diesel exhaust emissions.
It is a tiny price to pay for the minority that is us car enthusiasts to lose our cherished engines in favour of more socially acceptable solutions.
Of course, the selfish and those who struggle to adapt to change will always scream and cry and have to be forcibly dragged into the future. Happily, they will be.
The usual sanctimonious 'contribution' from you Coolbanana As a Society we do need to deal with an ever-increasing number of vehicles on the road but we also need to deal with air and noise pollution that fossil-fuelled vehicles produce.
To those who cite buses, HGV's, ships etc - grow up, get an education and stop being blatantly stupid! Those will be dealt with when technology permits at a cost that can be economically viable; they are not being forgotten, indeed, only a small amount of research will educate you on the subject.
As for cars, the tech at an economically viable cost for both use and infrastructure is already here and being introduced at a pace that will allow it to become the norm. Good. Over time, petrol and diesel will be phased out as we can all see. EV and Hybrids have arrived and are set to replace the rest. They will set the new benchmark and perhaps other fuel-types equally clean but more cost-effective and efficient may arise in the Future. But petrol and diesel only powered cars need to go as soon as possible.
In the meantime, other measures such as the one proposed concerning cutting speed limits will surface so as to help speed up the end result: less air and noise pollution. The effectiveness of such remains to be seen but anything that helps during the transition from fossil-fuel only to EV and Hybrid is welcome.
I like cars too, I love the sound of a powerful V8 petrol Mustang, the immense 12 cylinder growl of an Aston Martin. But I also totally agree that it is unsustainable to continue with seeing our residential neighbourhoods, workplaces and cities increasingly suffer the dirty, smelly, noise-infested plague that is petrol and diesel exhaust emissions.
It is a tiny price to pay for the minority that is us car enthusiasts to lose our cherished engines in favour of more socially acceptable solutions.
Of course, the selfish and those who struggle to adapt to change will always scream and cry and have to be forcibly dragged into the future. Happily, they will be.
. The charmless crass MO doesn't change; drop in and call people stupid, selfish and in need of education. When did your epiphany happen regarding "the dirty, smelly, noise-infested plague that is petrol and diesel exhaust emissions." ?. Your dirty & noisy car and bike history suggests rank hypocrisy or that you are trolling again.
dci said:
Who comes up with this crap?
The A470 upper boat to Abercynon stretch is empty for large parts of the day. At the worst affected times which is when I assume that the pollution is at its worst you’d be lucky to reach 50 MPH.
Will there be a public consultation or has this already been signed, sealed and the 50 signs ordered?
How quaint. You actually think councils take any notice of the results of consultations?The A470 upper boat to Abercynon stretch is empty for large parts of the day. At the worst affected times which is when I assume that the pollution is at its worst you’d be lucky to reach 50 MPH.
Will there be a public consultation or has this already been signed, sealed and the 50 signs ordered?
Pothole said:
dci said:
Who comes up with this crap?
The A470 upper boat to Abercynon stretch is empty for large parts of the day. At the worst affected times which is when I assume that the pollution is at its worst you’d be lucky to reach 50 MPH.
Will there be a public consultation or has this already been signed, sealed and the 50 signs ordered?
How quaint. You actually think councils take any notice of the results of consultations?The A470 upper boat to Abercynon stretch is empty for large parts of the day. At the worst affected times which is when I assume that the pollution is at its worst you’d be lucky to reach 50 MPH.
Will there be a public consultation or has this already been signed, sealed and the 50 signs ordered?
It's still crap and consultation either doesn't happen or too often it's a sham. Sadly you both make excellent points.
devnull said:
Having driven on that section of the M4 thousands of times over the course of my life, I can't think of anything worse than extending the 50 limit. The two lane section of the M4 is already a massive bottleneck.
The new bypass road is a nice quiet drive on a sunny day, however.
Agreed. The traffic opens up quite nicely at the end of the 50mph section.The new bypass road is a nice quiet drive on a sunny day, however.
They could certainly argue on similar grounds for 50mph limit all the way to J44 due to how close they insist on building to the M4.
Pothole said:
dci said:
Who comes up with this crap?
The A470 upper boat to Abercynon stretch is empty for large parts of the day. At the worst affected times which is when I assume that the pollution is at its worst you’d be lucky to reach 50 MPH.
Will there be a public consultation or has this already been signed, sealed and the 50 signs ordered?
How quaint. You actually think councils take any notice of the results of consultations?The A470 upper boat to Abercynon stretch is empty for large parts of the day. At the worst affected times which is when I assume that the pollution is at its worst you’d be lucky to reach 50 MPH.
Will there be a public consultation or has this already been signed, sealed and the 50 signs ordered?
However, as our gubbmint are as they are, I expect they get on their high horse and this will get worse.
Evanivitch said:
devnull said:
Having driven on that section of the M4 thousands of times over the course of my life, I can't think of anything worse than extending the 50 limit. The two lane section of the M4 is already a massive bottleneck.
The new bypass road is a nice quiet drive on a sunny day, however.
Agreed. The traffic opens up quite nicely at the end of the 50mph section.The new bypass road is a nice quiet drive on a sunny day, however.
They could certainly argue on similar grounds for 50mph limit all the way to J44 due to how close they insist on building to the M4.
Hol said:
Are the Welsh decision makers elected officials, or civil service career types?
Elected. However there is a lot of squabbling and the major players at times remind me of tin pot dictators. No side covers themselves in glory and Labour are a majority. We have several UKIP AM's. Neil Hamilton has a seat here for gods sake.
eccles said:
It was a bad idea to start and even worse in practice.But, the Hafod Bypass is a good stretch of road and more people should be using it. Driving through Hafod always seemed a chore (busy terraced streets, crowded mini roundabouts, parked cars).
Stopped working in the area now but it appeared to be a worse solution however it was a few times a month not everyday so probably hit it when it was bad either way. 4603 over the years (15 or so) turned from a great short cut to a slow crawl.
Edit. Thinking about it, not hitting that road everyday, maybe it is easier for me to see the changes?
Either way, not likely to go that way often anymore.
Edit. Thinking about it, not hitting that road everyday, maybe it is easier for me to see the changes?
Either way, not likely to go that way often anymore.
Edited by jmorgan on Friday 27th April 09:42
Crackie said:
Coolbanana said:
As usual, it is all about the selfish. Me me me, what about me you cry, like little ignorant babies
As a Society we do need to deal with an ever-increasing number of vehicles on the road but we also need to deal with air and noise pollution that fossil-fuelled vehicles produce.
To those who cite buses, HGV's, ships etc - grow up, get an education and stop being blatantly stupid! Those will be dealt with when technology permits at a cost that can be economically viable; they are not being forgotten, indeed, only a small amount of research will educate you on the subject.
As for cars, the tech at an economically viable cost for both use and infrastructure is already here and being introduced at a pace that will allow it to become the norm. Good. Over time, petrol and diesel will be phased out as we can all see. EV and Hybrids have arrived and are set to replace the rest. They will set the new benchmark and perhaps other fuel-types equally clean but more cost-effective and efficient may arise in the Future. But petrol and diesel only powered cars need to go as soon as possible.
In the meantime, other measures such as the one proposed concerning cutting speed limits will surface so as to help speed up the end result: less air and noise pollution. The effectiveness of such remains to be seen but anything that helps during the transition from fossil-fuel only to EV and Hybrid is welcome.
I like cars too, I love the sound of a powerful V8 petrol Mustang, the immense 12 cylinder growl of an Aston Martin. But I also totally agree that it is unsustainable to continue with seeing our residential neighbourhoods, workplaces and cities increasingly suffer the dirty, smelly, noise-infested plague that is petrol and diesel exhaust emissions.
It is a tiny price to pay for the minority that is us car enthusiasts to lose our cherished engines in favour of more socially acceptable solutions.
Of course, the selfish and those who struggle to adapt to change will always scream and cry and have to be forcibly dragged into the future. Happily, they will be.
The usual sanctimonious 'contribution' from you Coolbanana As a Society we do need to deal with an ever-increasing number of vehicles on the road but we also need to deal with air and noise pollution that fossil-fuelled vehicles produce.
To those who cite buses, HGV's, ships etc - grow up, get an education and stop being blatantly stupid! Those will be dealt with when technology permits at a cost that can be economically viable; they are not being forgotten, indeed, only a small amount of research will educate you on the subject.
As for cars, the tech at an economically viable cost for both use and infrastructure is already here and being introduced at a pace that will allow it to become the norm. Good. Over time, petrol and diesel will be phased out as we can all see. EV and Hybrids have arrived and are set to replace the rest. They will set the new benchmark and perhaps other fuel-types equally clean but more cost-effective and efficient may arise in the Future. But petrol and diesel only powered cars need to go as soon as possible.
In the meantime, other measures such as the one proposed concerning cutting speed limits will surface so as to help speed up the end result: less air and noise pollution. The effectiveness of such remains to be seen but anything that helps during the transition from fossil-fuel only to EV and Hybrid is welcome.
I like cars too, I love the sound of a powerful V8 petrol Mustang, the immense 12 cylinder growl of an Aston Martin. But I also totally agree that it is unsustainable to continue with seeing our residential neighbourhoods, workplaces and cities increasingly suffer the dirty, smelly, noise-infested plague that is petrol and diesel exhaust emissions.
It is a tiny price to pay for the minority that is us car enthusiasts to lose our cherished engines in favour of more socially acceptable solutions.
Of course, the selfish and those who struggle to adapt to change will always scream and cry and have to be forcibly dragged into the future. Happily, they will be.
. The charmless crass MO doesn't change; drop in and call people stupid, selfish and in need of education. When did your epiphany happen regarding "the dirty, smelly, noise-infested plague that is petrol and diesel exhaust emissions." ?. Your dirty & noisy car and bike history suggests rank hypocrisy or that you are trolling again.
k about any of my motoring activities being "socially acceptable". air in the uk is cleaner than at any point in the past. any ordinary punter sub 40 doesn't know what the fk they are talking about when they use the phrase air pollution. just parroting the utter dross from politicians who themselves are parroting a load of sad human loathing greens that cannot accept human evolution is a part of the natural world.i have no doubt he is correct in terms of the switch to electric vehicles on a large scale. it won't be in my driving/riding lifetime if current stats from the states are anything to go by.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff