Proposed 60 mph speed limit, Will it REALLY cut pollution? Options

[Blake]

Are you American?

Rather than that you need to tackle things GLOBALLY. We are just a drop in the ocean. China is by far the worst country for pollution. Cows pollute more than cars. We can make beef without the need for cows anymore. Can we kill all the cows and the Chinese?

Yes, climate change needs international action to solve but we have our part to play and we should set a good example here and now.

We need to be in the vanguard!

[motormad]

People would ignore the limits.
Average speed cameras would infuriate the motorist and cause more road rage incidents I'm sure of it.
We already as part of the EU have cut C02 emissions from petrol and diesel powered vehicles MASSIVELY in the last 4 or 5 years - 80-100g/km drop in some cases, I'd say people are generally using cars less or downsizing their cars.

I can drive along at 50 in 2nd gear doing a lot more "damage" than would be done doing 50 in 6th...

[Blake]

People would ignore the limits.
Average speed cameras would infuriate the motorist and cause more road rage incidents I'm sure of it.
We already as part of the EU have cut C02 emissions from petrol and diesel powered vehicles MASSIVELY in the last 4 or 5 years - 80-100g/km drop in some cases, I'd say people are generally using cars less or downsizing their cars.

I can drive along at 50 in 2nd gear doing a lot more "damage" than would be done doing 50 in 6th...

Well the law is the law, irrespective of what people think of it. We are all duty-bound to obey it and it's as simple as that.

Those that speed and break the law will have to take the consequences.

[motormad]

Well the law is the law, irrespective of what people think of it. We are all duty-bound to obey it and it's as simple as that.

Those that speed and break the law will have to take the consequences.

[Andy Capp]

Our world will save itself no matter what we do. We might not be here to see it though, just like the Dinosaurs.

Agreed, perhaps it would do the world good to be rid of us.

[gel]

The most efficient speed of an engine is at it's peak torque RPM - the point at which the engine needs makes the most efficient use of it's power.
This is very car dependant but generally around 50-60mph in 5th or 6th gear.
My TDI was pretty much equal at 60 or 80, not really much in it. Where as my GTI is much more economical at 70 than it is at 80.
So it is very dependant.

If the Prius article was discredited then that's fine haha. Irrespective of my hate of the cars and the people who buy them, thinking they do the world a favour. I could get a genuine 65 to the gallon out of my old TDI, I doubt you'd get that from a Prius the way I drove my TDI.
And my Golf was not shipped twice around the world and heavily mined for the batteries.. Although I think they've changed to Li-ion now away from the Nickel and Cadmium ones they used in the earlier cars?

LITHIUM CAN BE VERY VOLATILE; even a local battery manufacturer at Abingdon had a devastating fire 10 years back; fire fighters must be concerned at coming across Lithium powered vehicles. Spraying water on it, makes it burn even more.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/archive/2004/0..._blaze/?ref=arc

[JeffG]

Are you American?

Yes, I was wondering how a speed limit would affect people's use of central heating

Yes, climate change needs international action to solve but we have our part to play and we should set a good example here and now.

You honestly think that what a tiny nation like ours does will have any effect on the main polluters like the US and China, without international agreement? American commercial interests would never allow it, regardless of the overwhelming evidence of climate change.

[Simon Kirby]

Yes, climate change needs international action to solve but we have our part to play and we should set a good example here and now.

We need to be in the vanguard!

The speed limit proposal is not intended to reduce greenhouses gasses so climate change is not an issue here. The intention is to reduce NO₂ locally because it is a respiratory irritant and it mostly comes from local traffic.

[MontyPython]

The speed limit proposal is not intended to reduce greenhouses gasses so climate change is not an issue here. The intention is to reduce NO₂ locally because it is a respiratory irritant and it mostly comes from local traffic.

How is the NO² output differ from CO²? I presume both will be effect by RPM/Load rather than physical speed.

I would imagine that both are affected more by driving style, and therefore driving smoothly is far better than sharp acceleration/braking. The solution is therefore more about trying to improve peoples driving style! I have found the variable speed limits on the M25 good at this - but you still get some who accelerate to the car in front and then brake heavily.

[Simon Kirby]

How is the NO² output differ from CO²? I presume both will be effect by RPM/Load rather than physical speed.

I would imagine that both are affected more by driving style, and therefore driving smoothly is far better than sharp acceleration/braking. The solution is therefore more about trying to improve peoples driving style! I have found the variable speed limits on the M25 good at this - but you still get some who accelerate to the car in front and then brake heavily.

The formation of NO₂ ( and other oxides of nitrogen) depends on the engine temperature, and their emission depends on the performance of the exhaust and catalytic converter, so I'm guessing that there might possibly be some correlation between those factors and the speed, though what that might be I have no idea. I'm not saying the idea makes sense, just saying what the idea behind the proposal is. It's lamentable that the press coverage did nothing to inform the debate and leant only on the motorist's frustration at having to go slower, though in practice that does appear to be the only thing that matters to people.

[Simon Kirby]

For example, here's the Torygraph hurumphing-on about how awful it will be for the economy if we can't drive at 70mph, without presenting a single piece of evidence to engage with the argument that a 60mph limit will cut emissions. The man from the RAC says "This very powerfully demonstrates the impact that speed has on emissions and many will be surprised to hear that a reduction of just 10mph can have such a significant effect on improving air quality." but as far as I can see there is no demonstration in the article, powerful or otherwise, that shines any light whatsoever on the question of whether a 10mph reduction in speed will have any effect at all.

[MontyPython]

The formation of NO₂ ( and other oxides of nitrogen) depends on the engine temperature, and their emission depends on the performance of the exhaust and catalytic converter, so I'm guessing that there might possibly be some correlation between those factors and the speed, though what that might be I have no idea. I'm not saying the idea makes sense, just saying what the idea behind the proposal is. It's lamentable that the press coverage did nothing to inform the debate and leant only on the motorist's frustration at having to go slower, though in practice that does appear to be the only thing that matters to people.

Thanks Simon! as I am sure you guessed I wasn't questioning you, rather the facts!

[motormad]

Most engines are cleaner burning under high loads and high RPMS.
Particulate matter will not really change.

[Simon Kirby]

Thanks Simon! as I am sure you guessed I wasn't questioning you, rather the facts!

[Turin Machine]

Yes, climate change needs international action to solve but we have our part to play and we should set a good example here and now.

We need to be in the vanguard!

No we don't!

[Andy Capp]

The formation of NO₂ ( and other oxides of nitrogen) depends on the engine temperature, and their emission depends on the performance of the exhaust and catalytic converter, so I'm guessing that there might possibly be some correlation between those factors and the speed, though what that might be I have no idea. I'm not saying the idea makes sense, just saying what the idea behind the proposal is. It's lamentable that the press coverage did nothing to inform the debate and leant only on the motorist's frustration at having to go slower, though in practice that does appear to be the only thing that matters to people.

From my experience, I would imagine people would like to be able to reach 60mph on the M1! I have heard about studies that suggests slowing down traffic actually increases flow on a motorway. or at least that was the argument proposed.

[Biker1]

Agreed, perhaps it would do the world good to be rid of us.

We agree on that one then.
You first!!

[Andy Capp]

We agree on that one then.
You first!!

That's not very nice!!!

[Biker1]

That's not very nice!!!

I'll follow you then it's only 69,999,999,998 to go!

[Andy Capp]

I'll follow you then it's only 69,999,999,998 to go!

Well since you put it like that!