Skip to main content

Another reason why 20's plenty

As I have argued in several previous posts, 20mph limits in residential
areas [which is Green Party policy] would _reduce_ carbon emissions,
because they would incentivise walking and cycling, the main barrier to
increases in which is fears over safety.
Furthermore, however, there is an additional crucial argument in favour
of 20mph limits:
Most cars hitting 30mph in residential areas will be doing so through
fast acceleration and deceleration, which is highly inefficient
fuel-wise. The argument in favour of 30mph rather than 20mph limits is
predicated upon tests of fuel-consumption WHEN DRIVING AT A CONSTANT
SPEED. But constant driving at 30mph in residential areas is very rare
[and when it happens, is rarely safe!]. Constant driving at 20mph is far
more plausible – and less fuel-inefficient than rapid acceleration and
braking.
--
Rupert Read
Green Party Councillor, Norwich, and Lead Candidate for Eastern Region for the Greens in the 2009 Euro-elections. Why not try my new BLOG, 'Rupert's Read': http://rupertsread.blogspot.com

See also www.oneworldcolumn.org [for my regular op-ed journalism]
I TWITTER. DO YOU? Check out my new frequently-updated, mobile-phone-based MICRO-BLOG, at http://twitter.com/RupertRead

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Medialens under the lens, over Syria and Libya: Becoming the new Dave Sparts?

I have long been an active supporter of Medialens ( http://www.medialens.org/ ). Like many others, I have supported them with money, time, tips, and I have been proud to have done so. For they have done very important groundbreaking work over the years challenging the inanities and distortions of the 'mainstream' media. They have for example written important critiques of mainstream media coverage of dangerous climate change, of Iraq Body Count, of the corporate nature of most of our media, and much more besides. They have held the corporate media to account time and again. They ought to be saluted for all of that. It is therefore with a sense of deep regret (as well as of some foreboding) that I have finally to write to address the ways in which, lately, some of the wheels seem to be coming off their wagon. An early warning sign perhaps was their long-running spat with George Monbiot, over the Rwandan genocide and the terrible atr...

'Scandal' over hacked climate-science emails at UEA: Don't believe the hype

The 'scandal' of the hacked emails from Environmental Science at UEA ( http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/nov/homepagenews/CRU-update - this includes a direct rebuttal of the single seemingly most-damaging email, the 'trick' email), my University, has been gotten out of all proportion in some of the right-wing media, old and new. I have now read a good number of the 'worst' of the hacked emails. I also know a few of the protagonists personally, and for human-interest value the hacked emails certainly do offer some tidbits. But: When the dust settles, I predict that the climate-deniers will be left holding onto hardly anything, here. There is so far as I can tell at this (still-admittedly-early) stage no significant scientific scandal, and most importantly absolutely no reason to doubt any of the fundamentals of the science of manmade climate change here, just a few unpleasant or silly or (at worst) unwise and bad-practice emails. Scient...