I had to laugh. Apparently some bright spark, forget who it is ( the mag is in the van and its too cold outside to go get it ), has come up with the idea of converting us to KPH, but not changing any signs which will save money. Scarily that makes it a real possibility if it wont cost much.
However, they wont be converting the current speedlimits into KPH, but instead the existing signs will simply be recognised as KPH, thus virtually halving the limit.
They said it will give us an effective national speed limit on motorway of 43 mph ( and walking pace through town ) , which will save the planet and many lives...
Its in this weeks Autoexpress mag if you wanna look it up.
As much as I dont feel the need to sit right on the speed limit, even I think thats a bit harsh!
|
|
Won't driving around town at 30kph or 20kph in some places is likely to increase polution as you wount get to use high gears?
|
|
|
Its in this weeks Autoexpress mag
Ah.
|
|
I have heard this story a few times over the last couple of years.
|
|
It's been debated here in the last few weeks some MP from South Wales (New Labourish)
|
"some MP from South Wales (New Labourish)"
Nia Griffiths MP for Llanelli. Lynne Featherstone - Lib Dem Hornsey backed this up
--
Phil
|
|
|
|
At the end of the 70's in South Africa they dropped the motorway limit to 70kph in order to save fuel following the Iran crisis.
It didn't last long as it didn't make a lot of difference to overall fuel consumption and it took an absolute age to get anywhere.
|
|
I would like to say I cant see it happening, but with the way laws get passed in the country...
|
|
great, instead of taking me 70 miles to get to london, it will only be 70km, fantastic!
|
lol
This does assume that what AE printed is true - 'spose there has to be a first time! ;)
|
|
More than 30 million drivers are also voters. Perhaps these cloud-cuckoo MPs should be reminded of that from time to time.
|
It might also help if the politicians were endowed with a brain. Anyone should be able to see that to cover 60 miles at 43mph at say 2500rpm (4th gear) is less efficient (and therefore worse for the environment) than covering 60 miles at 70mph at 2500rpm (5/6th gear). {fairly typical gear ratios used in this example, IMO}
In case one we spend 1hr 23m traveling revving the engine at 2500rpm, in case two we only spend 51 minutes with the engine revving at the same speed.
Obviously, lowering the speed limit in such a way would also increase congestion massively, because we would all spend longer getting from A-B, therefore more people on the road at any one time.
Which all goes to prove, there's only one thing worse than a busy-body politician, and that is a busy-body politician that is too thick to understand the consequences of their proposals...
|
|
All I can say re this "politician" is go onto theyworkforyou.com and look at her activities. Toady, busybody, nanny state devotee..... it's hardly surprising that she thinks this is a good idea.
|
|
Do motorways actually have "70" signs on them? I though they just had the "national speed limit" sign, in which case this wouldn't happen.
|
|
