OV9

RIP. they’re talking about dropping the limit to 60mph to try and reduce pollution

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-54130862

Wankers

Naturally EVs are exempt.

Wouldn't make sense otherwise.

Worth a try.

Does anyone stick to the limit now?

They’ve been doing it years already. Those smart motorway gantries displaying 50 round the M25 at midday when there’s no traffic

Rich B wrote: Sat Sep 12, 2020 7:42 pm Does anyone stick to the limit now?

Given the 20 limit across most of London I think the number of people who habitually obey all speed limits around these parts is probably under 20/30% at a guess.

I'm all for reducing co2 but iirc transport accounts for 15%~ total. Isn't it like pissing in the wind.

Until we stop relying on, or help high co2 contributors e.g China who account for most nothing will change.

Yep - same as the plastic bag nonsense. 80% or all the plastic in the oceans comes from 5 rivers - all in China, Africa and India. 10p plaggy bags makes precisely zero difference but is simply a virtue signalling irrelevance.

The interesting question is who these days feels any compunction to obey the limit? Not to get too John Finnis about the moral underpinning of law, but clearly speed limits are so arbitrary as to elicit no feeling of shame in breaking them.

Rich B wrote: Sat Sep 12, 2020 7:42 pm Does anyone stick to the limit now?

They seem to in the smart motorway sections, yes. Enforcement by cameras means speeding isn’t really an option.

Really? It’s more like everyone continues at 80-90 and then panic brakes under every gantry

Mito Man wrote: Sun Sep 13, 2020 9:30 am Really? It’s more like everyone continues at 80-90 and then panic brakes under every gantry

I bet that brake-accelerate-brake-accelerate pattern produces more emissions than just cruising at one set speed

GG. wrote: Sat Sep 12, 2020 11:11 pm Yep - same as the plastic bag nonsense. 80% or all the plastic in the oceans comes from 5 rivers - all in China, Africa and India. 10p plaggy bags makes precisely zero difference but is simply a virtue signalling irrelevance.

A "fact" so wrong that even the daily mail posted a correction in 2017.

Based on misunderstanding this research

Summary of the wrongedness

But yeah, lets totally confound the issues at hand with "virtue signalling".

Point still stands unless you can show me research that the non-river based plastic pollution materially differs in geographic origin. Somehow I would bet that China, India and Africa will still feature highly for the same reasons that their rivers are the most polluted.

As noted above, same as carbon emissions. All we are doing in the UK counts for little as it is offset in multiples by China. We are in effect a rounding error for both plastic pollution and CO2.

Setting a good example is fine but worthless unless you put pressure on others to follow suit. The best way to do that is tarrifs on products from the countries that have low environmental standards / emissions regulations - it is a form of unfair advantage just in the same way as state aid or dumping.

I think that many people often miss the point that being environmentally conscious is a luxury and a pretty exclusive one at that. Countries have to get past the phase of just surviving before being able to have a stable economy where they can educate and start to focus on other issues.

Developed countries with a high per capita income can absorb costs to help better the environment but you go to a third world dump or a developing economy and tell the average family that they need to spend x amount more on plastic bags, x amount more on green energy, x amount more on greener transport and you’d soon be hung, drawn and quartered.
For that reason I can’t really hate on the chaps in the amazon burning down the forests to make £2 a day to feed their families etc - all developed countries did the same to get where they are today.