TfL to slap 20mph limit on 65km more of London roads in Sept

TfL to slap 20mph limit on 65km more of London roads in Sept

Author
Discussion

pocketspring

2,389 posts

8 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
oyster said:
Unreal said:
pocketspring said:
My car uses more fuel at 20mph in third than 30mph in fourth. So the woman on TV yesterday for the Green party didn't really have much of a clue when she said about the environmental aspect.
You can't have a discussion with those people. They do have a clue. The problem is that their objective is to drive all cars off the road and make driving as inconvenient and expensive as possible but they aren't honest enough to say that.
The fuel burn of accelerating up to 30 and back to zero is almost certainly more than accelerating to 20 and back to zero for the same piece of road.
In the same context, you're only assuming stop start traffic. The time I go to work, 18 miles away, I stop less than 8 times max.

twister

1,374 posts

223 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
oyster said:
Before jumping in to support someone for idealogical reasons, first check you are factually correct.

Whilst true that a car cruising at a steady 30mph in 4th will burn less fuel by distance than the same car in 3rd at 20mph, that only assumes a steady cruise. And there sure isn’t much of that in a city.

The fuel burn of accelerating up to 30 and back to zero is almost certainly more than accelerating to 20 and back to zero for the same piece of road.

There’s also more likelihood with a vmax of 20 that you won’t need to always drop to zero so often.
Indeed, and given this seems to be the belief held by some in City Hall (Will Norman, our walking and cycling czar, tweeted about it not that long ago) with the ear of our dear leader, then I'm sure it's *entirely* coincidental that TfL are proposing to have these limits in place just a few weeks after the ULEZ expansion goes live, and that Khan would *never* dream of using the beneficial effects of the lower limits as proof that ULEZ has worked and he was right all along and should be praised from here to eternity for having the vision, tenacity and bravery to push it through despite so much opposition...

aceofspades1

Original Poster:

176 posts

8 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
oyster said:
RSTurboPaul said:
Travelling after midnight is 'an extreme case'?
By definition it must be - the roads are empty aren’t they?

RSTurboPaul said:
Those evening and night workers better be careful or they'll get branded 'extremists' at this rate.
Err no, that’s a very poor extrapolation and devalues the debate.
London main roads being virtually empty to the point that an 20mph limit is completely unnecessary are not an ‘extreme case.’

oyster

11,878 posts

235 months

Yesterday (00:11)
quotequote all
pocketspring said:
oyster said:
Unreal said:
pocketspring said:
My car uses more fuel at 20mph in third than 30mph in fourth. So the woman on TV yesterday for the Green party didn't really have much of a clue when she said about the environmental aspect.
You can't have a discussion with those people. They do have a clue. The problem is that their objective is to drive all cars off the road and make driving as inconvenient and expensive as possible but they aren't honest enough to say that.
The fuel burn of accelerating up to 30 and back to zero is almost certainly more than accelerating to 20 and back to zero for the same piece of road.
In the same context, you're only assuming stop start traffic. The time I go to work, 18 miles away, I stop less than 8 times max.
In London? On roads where 20mph limits are going to be applied?

oyster

11,878 posts

235 months

Yesterday (00:13)
quotequote all
twister said:
oyster said:
Before jumping in to support someone for idealogical reasons, first check you are factually correct.

Whilst true that a car cruising at a steady 30mph in 4th will burn less fuel by distance than the same car in 3rd at 20mph, that only assumes a steady cruise. And there sure isn’t much of that in a city.

The fuel burn of accelerating up to 30 and back to zero is almost certainly more than accelerating to 20 and back to zero for the same piece of road.

There’s also more likelihood with a vmax of 20 that you won’t need to always drop to zero so often.
Indeed, and given this seems to be the belief held by some in City Hall (Will Norman, our walking and cycling czar, tweeted about it not that long ago) with the ear of our dear leader, then I'm sure it's *entirely* coincidental that TfL are proposing to have these limits in place just a few weeks after the ULEZ expansion goes live, and that Khan would *never* dream of using the beneficial effects of the lower limits as proof that ULEZ has worked and he was right all along and should be praised from here to eternity for having the vision, tenacity and bravery to push it through despite so much opposition...
You could be onto something there.

oyster

11,878 posts

235 months

Yesterday (00:20)
quotequote all
aceofspades1 said:
oyster said:
RSTurboPaul said:
Travelling after midnight is 'an extreme case'?
By definition it must be - the roads are empty aren’t they?

RSTurboPaul said:
Those evening and night workers better be careful or they'll get branded 'extremists' at this rate.
Err no, that’s a very poor extrapolation and devalues the debate.
London main roads being virtually empty to the point that an 20mph limit is completely unnecessary are not an ‘extreme case.’
You can’t have it both ways. If a road is so quiet that a 20mph limit being applied seems inappropriate, then by definition it must be a rare/extreme/edge case (call it whatever word). If it was very common then the road wouldn’t be virtually empty!

vikingaero

8,591 posts

156 months

Yesterday (07:27)
quotequote all
Unreal said:
pocketspring said:
My car uses more fuel at 20mph in third than 30mph in fourth. So the woman on TV yesterday for the Green party didn't really have much of a clue when she said about the environmental aspect.
You can't have a discussion with those people. They do have a clue. The problem is that their objective is to drive all cars off the road and make driving as inconvenient and expensive as possible but they aren't honest enough to say that.
I bet if you found out where she lived, you would find she's driving a Discovery or other fuel guzzling 4x4 as she drives to Waitrose.

The lady who does my next door neighbours nails, eyebrows and minge waxing, drives a BMW X7 M60i as she visits her clients on our housing estate.

QBee

19,754 posts

131 months

Yesterday (07:51)
quotequote all
You would have thought that a lady gardening strimmer would have fitted in the boot of a Gee Wizz, even with a brush cutter attachment for those difficult bits? confused

RS_MAN_CHILD

140 posts

256 months

Yesterday (08:05)
quotequote all
TwigtheWonderkid said:
The moped fast food delivery drivers in London are a massive problem, but the problem is easily solved.

It should be the law that no one on a provisional licence, be it car or bike, can drive for business. Pleasure use only until you've passed your test.

Thus no one insuring a moped on a provisional licence could get business use cover as it wouldn't be available to provisional licence holders, and as soon as the police saw a pizza box on the back of a moped with L plates, they could pull them for no insurance.

I fail to see a down side to this plan. Who the hell wants provisional licence holders in any kind of vehicle driving for business?
None of them are legally insured but plod turn a blind eye to that!

Yertis

17,251 posts

253 months

Yesterday (08:49)
quotequote all
RECr said:
TFL, certain London boroughs, Oxford and Bristol. FWIW I think it is opposition to cars in particular rather than personal transport per se. Some of it I suspect is driven by a "not everyone is able to drive but (nearly) everyone can walk/bus/cycle, therefore no one should drive" type mindset.

Personally I think they should cut to the chase and ban cars full stop from the areas they control. Then we can see if people flock to live in the glorious car free cities having lived under the yoke of enforced car dependency. Or if these cities empty out we can write it off as an experiment that didn't work out, and that people quite like the flexibility that a car can give them.
Cars have been effectively banned from parts of central Bristol, and the city has in effect been more or less cut in two. We now have ULEZ charges as well as the 20mph limit, and bus lanes being introduced on roads to further cut lanes (Long Ashton Bypass for example).

It’s increasingly difficult to find contractors prepared to come in to the centre to maintain my building, and I personally now rarely go into the city for any reason other than work.

Bristol is to all intents and purposes becoming a zombie city, with an urban economy based entirely on a transient, largely student population. There’s no incentive to run any kind of business in the city unless it caters for that market (which is anyway very largely credit-driven - different argument). Soon the city will have nothing but clean air to its benefit.

I used to love Bristol, but now I hate it and can’t wait to to sell up and move my business elsewhere.



Edited by Yertis on Thursday 23 March 10:51

swisstoni

14,529 posts

266 months

Yesterday (08:57)
quotequote all
Ultimately, these centre’s are slowly killing themselves.

Cumulatively the various, taxes, charges, penalties, zones, call them what you will, tell people ‘don’t bother coming here. It’s not worth the bother’.


gt_12345

689 posts

22 months

Yesterday (16:08)
quotequote all
swisstoni said:
Ultimately, these centre’s are slowly killing themselves.

Cumulatively the various, taxes, charges, penalties, zones, call them what you will, tell people ‘don’t bother coming here. It’s not worth the bother’.
I was wondering this. London must be losing a LOT of money, what with more people wfh etc.

aceofspades1

Original Poster:

176 posts

8 months

Yesterday (16:47)
quotequote all
oyster said:
You can’t have it both ways. If a road is so quiet that a 20mph limit being applied seems inappropriate, then by definition it must be a rare/extreme/edge case (call it whatever word). If it was very common then the road wouldn’t be virtually empty!
Just because something's not 'very common' doesn't make it 'extreme.' There are situations in between the two it's not automatically one or the other

The very fact that there's the same speed limit on a wide empty main road in the evening as a small street next to a school at 3pm tells you all you need to know about safety.

James6112

1,989 posts

15 months

Yesterday (17:43)
quotequote all
QBee said:
Thank you guys. You have reminded me what a st place London is and confirmed the wisdom of my decision 20 years ago.

I have never lived in London and indeed never lived in a major city since 1971.
20 years ago I was asked to move to London for work and seriously considered living in central London, for a job in Finsbury Park. I considered it for 5 days, but then on day 6 a new employee from New Zealand was mugged and quite badly injured on his first day in London, and I beat a hasty retreat.

Since then I have lived in rural aeras and currently am 130 miles from London, yet only 75 minutes from Kings Cross. I have no neighbours, fields all around, and only have to pay to park if I go to Nottingham.

My nearest neighbours. It’s a car forum, so they are Limousins

No need to be offensive.
Millions would disagree & could think of nothing worse than living at the back of beyond. But that doesn’t mean your place is a st place. It’s just not to everybody’s taste.
It’s a free country
PS
“ Motorists and pedestrians in Nottingham have welcomed the introduction of 'sensible' new 20mph speed limits throughout the city centre. New 20mph signs are visible on a number of roads in the area, such as the southern section of Mansfield Road and streets surrounding Nottingham Trent University”

TwigtheWonderkid

40,853 posts

137 months

Yesterday (17:49)
quotequote all
gt_12345 said:
swisstoni said:
Ultimately, these centre’s are slowly killing themselves.

Cumulatively the various, taxes, charges, penalties, zones, call them what you will, tell people ‘don’t bother coming here. It’s not worth the bother’.
I was wondering this. London must be losing a LOT of money, what with more people wfh etc.
No one in their right mind travels into C. London by car anyway, and hasn't done for years. I live in the 'burbs and last time I drove into C London was December 2018, and that was to pick my wife up from hospital. Only because she was too unwell to brave the tube.

swisstoni

14,529 posts

266 months

Yesterday (18:05)
quotequote all
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No one in their right mind travels into C. London by car anyway, and hasn't done for years. I live in the 'burbs and last time I drove into C London was December 2018, and that was to pick my wife up from hospital. Only because she was too unwell to brave the tube.
And a plumber or electrician turns up on a bike with a screwdriver in their top pocket, do they?

grumbledoak

30,929 posts

220 months

Yesterday (18:28)
quotequote all
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No one in their right mind travels into C. London by car anyway, and hasn't done for years. I live in the 'burbs and last time I drove into C London was December 2018, and that was to pick my wife up from hospital. Only because she was too unwell to brave the tube.
Plenty of people live within C. London and don't need to travel into it at all. They are already there. They have all the same car needs as anyone else - anything from daily to never.


Yertis

17,251 posts

253 months

Yesterday (20:54)
quotequote all
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No one in their right mind travels into C. London by car anyway, and hasn't done for years. I live in the 'burbs and last time I drove into C London was December 2018, and that was to pick my wife up from hospital. Only because she was too unwell to brave the tube.
So if you had to bring a team of four people in, together with all their luggage, and kit for a conference, you’d do that using public transport?

B'stard Child

26,353 posts

233 months

Yesterday (22:43)
quotequote all
gt_12345 said:
POIDH said:
I really like the 20mph limits in Scotland - and feel that the majority of drivers have slowed down (albeit not down to the 20mph), benefitting us all with safer, healthier and more sustainable lives.

For those looking to maintain 30mph, what makes you think that is an appropriate speed in a built up area?
What makes you think 30mph is bad?

What's next, 10mph?

Then 5?

Then no cars?
Man with a flag walking in front comes after 5 biggrin

Then no cars wink

survivalist

5,231 posts

177 months

Yesterday (22:50)
quotequote all
aceofspades1 said:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/20mph-speed...

Another 1 of 1 million reasons to stay away from the dump London has become.
It’s a shocking revelation that a large city isn’t much fun to drive around as the NC500 or the Evo Triangle. On the other hand it’s a much more interesting place to live than the hellish new build estates and business parks that make up a lot of England.

No doubt there some towns that combine the best of both worlds, but in my experience they are few and far between .