Motorists face new charges as number of toll roads to double

cjpm

By Paul Melia

Monday April 18 2011

THE number of tolled roads across the country will be doubled under plans that recommend new charges on eight routes.
Motorists pay some €184m a year to use existing tolled roads, but now they face the prospect of paying a raft of new charges.
A major study from the National Roads Authority (NRA) says the Exchequer could take in another €62m a year under its plans.
It suggests doubling the number of tolled roads, with new charges recommended on eight routes across the State.
They are the Dundalk bypass, the N20 at Croom in Co Limerick, the N20 at Mallow in Co Cork, the N18 Ennis bypass, the N9 Carlow bypass and the Jack Lynch Tunnel in Cork. Other roads that could be tolled in future include the N17/18 Tuam bypass and N11 Arklow bypass.
The NRA also says motorists should be charged based on the amount of motorway they use. It says so-called multi-point tolling should be introduced on motorways including the M50, where the road would be divided into sections, and a charge applied to each portion used during a journey.
The Government's Smarter Travel policy wants an extra 500,000 people to use public transport, walk or cycle to work by 2020, to help reduce car commuting. It also calls for the number of car trips per year not to increase beyond current levels up to 2020.
"Capacity of the national road network remains under significant pressure in the fringes of major urban areas, where local trips comprise a significant proportion of the volume of traffic carried," the National Roads Traffic Management Study says.
Threat
"Additional road capacity on strategically important roads remains under threat, despite the economic slowdown. Growth must now be managed using control and fiscal techniques that to date have focused on urban roads."
The introduction of multi-point tolling on the M50 would reduce congestion and accidents. Cheaper tolls could also be considered at approach roads into key built-up areas in the capital. A toll at the Jack Lynch tunnel would also be appropriate.
"You can only build so many roads, and once you reach capacity you have to manage them," NRA spokesman Sean O'Neill said.
"This is a study, and not a policy decision, which is for government to decide. To get the best out of this massive investment, it has to be managed.
"You're looking at stimulating usage of other modes of transport, or things like zipper lanes where three of more people can drive the road for free at major commuting hours. We're not reinventing the wheel. This study identifies the best way to do this."
The NRA study warns that providing roads leads to increased traffic volumes, with increases of 20pc recorded on Dublin's M50 between 2008 and 2010.
Further upgrades, particularly on parts of the network close to major towns and cities, would be "extremely costly and disruptive".
The NRA says that even if all the measures contained in the Government's Smarter Travel strategy are implemented, traffic volumes will still increase by 12pc by 2025. If none of the measures are effected, volumes will increase by 37pc.
The study says that most congestion in the future will be confined to Dublin, Cork and Galway cities with some local congestion.
- Paul Melia
Irish Independent

Sponge Bob

cjpm wrote: »

The NRA study warns that providing roads leads to increased traffic volumes, with increases of 20pc recorded on Dublin's M50 between 2008 and 2010.

Proving that the an taisce / green crap about traffic dropping is just that. Green Crap

Irish and Proud

Motorists are already paying far too much for the privilege of travelling and this study is all wrong. Here's my viewpoint:

1) Motorists already pay dearly for the amount of road they use - through the exorbitant price of petrol - a cash cow for the government! Motorists also pay way too much for their cars in this country - do we have the most expensive cars in Europe?

2) Motorists on long distance journeys should not be penalized by extra tolls - afterall, it is exactly what motorways are built for! BTW, for all the years that motorists have being paying Swedish prices for a network of potholes (one only has to go back to 1994!), I think the motorways are long overdue and the authorities would do very well to remember that!

3) Motorists should not be forced to use public transport - instead, the authorites should either invest significantly in public transport or just shut up! As the LUAS has proven, people will use the public transport if it's good enough - especially with good park-n-ride facilities. The Northern Commuter Line is also experiencing very high demand.

4) Chronic traffic conjestion is not down to "too many roads" or "too many cars", it is simply down to bad planning and economic policies which forced so many people to buy houses far from their places of work. Why can't governments, planning authorities and representatives from the industry take responsibility and stop behaving like children - I'd simply tell them to "stop whining about the lifestyles of ordinary people and do your job - it's what you paid to do"!

Enough is Enough!

Aidan1

Proving that the an taisce / green crap about traffic dropping is just that.

Actually, An Taisce and the likes of Frank McDonald (same thing) warned for years that building roads on the basis of predicted volume increases had exactly this effect (called 'provide and predict') the world over. In our case, the point was that unless you control spatial planning and choke off new clusters of residential and business developments developing at junctions, your shiny new motorways soon become congested. In effect, they were completely right, though it much pains me to admit it. At least the NRA have been very effective in the last couple of years in objecting to a lot of developments on or near the national road network, but they can't be expected to overturn the last 50 years of poor decision making.

Why can't governments, planning authorities and representatives from the industry take responsibility and stop behaving like children - I'd simply tell them to "stop whining about the lifestyles of ordinary people and do your job - it's what you paid to do"!

"Their job", in this case, is to tell ordinary Irish people to stop whinging, and to compel them to behave in a rational and reasonable way about land use and spatial planning. Elected officials, the ones that make the decisions and the policies, have proven to be remarkably reluctant to compel this type of decision making. For example, key messages would be 'no, you can't build a house in the middle of no where, and expect to be able to drive into a city centre every day in the 21st century', or "one off rural housing is no longer a sustainable model of development, in fact it never was", or even "workable public transport solutions require urban centres of scale and density".

In other words, the issue here is that 'ordinary people' have lifestyle expectations beyond those which can be catered for in the real world. Quite simply, 'everyone' can't drive - it is physically impossible to build sufficient road space for that to occur, so a means has to be found of either controlling use, or restricting access. Roads are not a 'public good' in the truest sense- they are contestable, and they are not 'non-rival', if too many people try and use the same piece of tarmac at the same time, it ceases to work effectively. (By the way, someone stuck in traffic is already paying for that lack of effectiveness - through lost time). One simple way of modulating behaviour is road charging - tolls being the simplest form of this. To be fair, of course, the toll would vary by time of day, and would be reduced for cars with more occupants, but that's difficult to implement.

The suggested tolls seem reasonable to me, well spaced, on major routes, at suitable points - the only remaining question is as to the price. If that's reasonable, then this really isn't the end of the world.

Badabing

If the goverment added 5 cent to a litre of petrol would they not make the same amount of money? And less hassle.

Danno

More b0ll0x of the highest order. Motorists in Ireland already pay too much.

kwalshe

people we cannot let this start to happen, enough is enough, we have no more money to give, if your bad planning in the cities make me have to buy a house 100k from Dublin, I would'nt have to commute for 2hrs a day.

KevR

I agree with:

• A toll for the M9
• A total of two tolls between Galway and Cork. There is already one in place - the Limerick Tunnel.
• Multi-point tolling on the M50

I disagree with:

• Tolling the Jack Lynch Tunnel
• Increasing petrol as an alternative to new tolls. I'm actually suspicious that they publicise these plans about loads of new tolls so that people will get all hysterical and start saying "just increase petrol/diesel duty instead". Then the government can increase fuel duty and people actually think they have been let off the hook. :rolleyes:

antoobrien

Badabing wrote: »

If the goverment added 5 cent to a litre of petrol would they not make the same amount of money? And less hassle.

No, because AA have indicated people intend to drive less that they would have because of the price of petrol. If this is true (not saying it is or that there is any evidence of it yet) further increases in the cost would mean that people would decrease further their travel. At best it would mean that the tax take would stabilise.

N.b. At the time of writing the cost of petrol averaged 144.5c/l, it's now 150.7c/l

Chris_5339762

They cant realistically do the Jack Lynch anymore because there is nowhere to put toll booths without jamming Dunkettle up further. They wont use an E-Flow like system I dont think.

I will assume that the N20 tolls will be put on the M20 once its built. Having a toll on the road near Mallow as-is would be so dumb as to be hilarious.

cork_south

"A toll at the Jack Lynch tunnel would also be appropriate."
I dont think so.
Its quicker to go thru town some evenings than go through the tunnel.

billyboy01

Cork needs to pay its share of tolls, like the rest of the country! Toll the tunnel now!

smokie2008

Absolute bull****,

My Sister and her husband had to move from Dublin to gorey with their 3 kids in order to buy a family home for themselves and both her and her husband have to drive for over an hour back to Dublin to work and an hour home.

They both have to use separate cars as he starts work at 7am my sister has to get the kids to school before work.

Its well known there are hundreds of people like them that use that Arklow bypass to get to work as they've no other choice.

Makes my blood boil.

Tech3

It would be an absolute disgrace if they tolled the Ennis bypass and the M17/M18 Gort to Tuam. In 110km you will hit 3 tolls! Ennis bypass toll would be pointless given nearly 60% of traffic will take the regional rd toward Claregalway and head home from there.

ardmacha

I agree with:

A toll for the M9
A total of two tolls between Galway and Cork. There is already one in place - the Limerick Tunnel.
Multi-point tolling on the M50

Agreed. An Arklow toll should be used to pay for the improvement on the N11 and a further new toll on the M7 at Newbridge should be used to pay for widening the Naas bypass and the Newlands work. This way those who pay the toll also benefit from the improvements.

Italia

I honestly believe that the NRA is smoking some really bad weed :rolleyes:

FFS Ireland has a population of around 4 million and they call this traffic 'congestion'?? Don't think they've seen what congestion (gridlock) really is. Sure the roads are busy, and in some cases REALLY busy but come on lets be realistic.
IMHO the biggest problem with traffic issues in Ireland is two fold: piss-poor planning and little or no effective / visible policing (no, I don't mean the lads in blue with a laser gun measuring excess speed).

Cape Town, South Africa, is a city with a comparable population to Dublin (about 1.5million) and has only 3 main routes into the city centre. 2 of the roads are 2 lanes wide (some sections 3 lanes) and the other is a single carriageway. No M50 like ring road. Every day approx 400 000 cars travel into the city centre. Peak traffic runs from 06:30 to 09:00 and from 16:00 to 18:00.
The rest of the day you can pretty much get around without tearing your hair out. The roads are on a par (quality wise) with Dublin's. Some are better, some are worse.

The reason why people are able to travel around fairly easily, is due to synchronised traffic light systems (do a search on SCOOT) and well designed freeflowing on and off ramps to the 2 "motorways". All this helps keep the traffic flowing. Add to this about 150 well visible Metro police officers dedicated to traffic duties, who are on hand to keep traffic flowing in the event of problems (defective traffic lights, collisions etc).

Just in case anyone asks - the road network was designed and built in the late 60's and mid 70's when there was f-all money (sanctions) and only upgraded (slightly) for the World Cup 2010. The physical layout of the land prohibits any form of additional construction of roads. So, it's really not 'suitable' for 21st century travel.

Maybe the NRA should stop sitting on their collective jacks and start earning their money and start being inventive with alternative solutions instead of thinking how to screw the motorist.

Roryhy

I have to say, i live in Carlow where the traffic lights have sensors, if yours is the only car at the junction, it turns green and lets you through. Go to Dublin and you're left sitting there while the sequence passes as normal and 2 mins later you get to move.

PseudoFamous

smokie2008 wrote: »

Its well known there are hundreds of people like them that use that Arklow bypass to get to work as they've no other choice.

I just feel I should point out that it's not definitely going to be built, that's simply speculation. However, if it was going to be tolled, I'd reckon it'd be somewhere between the Brittas and Wicklow South junctions (Along the still unbuilt new stretch of M11), as illustrated in this handy dandy picture

Which means they'll be screwing us lovely Arklow folk over, too.

Amtmann

This is thread of the day by the way!

cork_south

billyboy01 wrote: »

Cork needs to pay its share of tolls, like the rest of the country! Toll the tunnel now!

Have you every heard of the toll on the Dublin road no?

MrDerp

I thought the Jack Lynch tunnel couldn't be tolled because of the proportion of the costs paid by EU development funds?

Either way, it would only be suitable for barrier free tolling, but with a successful infrastructure in place (eflow company, contract with Abtran, debt enforcement companies, etc) they could switch it on for the tunnel with short enough notice I think.

That said, I think retrospective tolling of routes is a really bad idea. You'd be sure to get haulier blockades, public protests etc. I'm from Cork and tolling JLT would definitely be seen as Dublin extracting more taxes from Cork people, a feeling that would no doubt be replicated around the country with respect to tolling other existing routes

Toll the new schemes and build the ****ing things, but leave what's there alone.

Edit: Except the M9. Toll that road. Cheeky blas and kats with their no tolls.

hi5

Many people still drive at 100 kph on the motorways anyway,going back to sections of the old N roads which are now almost traffic free to avoid tolls wont be too much stress for lots of people.
If your unemployed then money is more important than time.

Balmed Out

Tolling the Jack Lynch tunnel! What a joke.

Unlike other cities with lots of good approach roads theres only one in Cork - the road to Dublin all others are crap. Consequently lots of development off it and its already tolled. There are only 2 choices of crossing the Lee, the city centre which since the tunnel was built has reduced its capacity or the tunnel. It already suffers terrible congestion. I never use it anyhow but stupid.

Hogzy

cork_south wrote: »

"A toll at the Jack Lynch tunnel would also be appropriate."
I dont think so.
Its quicker to go thru town some evenings than go through the tunnel.

I wonder why?:rolleyes:

cork_south

Hogzy wrote: »

I wonder why?:rolleyes:

Might have something to do with the great big signalised roundabout on the Northside of it

Hogzy

cork_south wrote: »

Might have something to do with the great big signalised roundabout on the Northside of it

Or the fact that the tunnel provides the city with an alternative route out.

Mrsbrady

billyboy01 wrote: »

Cork needs to pay its share of tolls, like the rest of the country! Toll the tunnel now!

they're not getting away with it... Cork already has toll in Fermoy...

i'm not from Cork BTW, just saying..

Paparazzo

They won't toll the jack lynch tunnel. Surely people know how the government increase taxes at this stage?
They name about 10 roads to be tolled, people are up in arms, and in the end they toll about 4. People accept it because its not as bad as they originally thought.

munchkin_utd

Paparazzo wrote: »

They won't toll the jack lynch tunnel. Surely people know how the government increase taxes at this stage?
They name about 10 roads to be tolled, people are up in arms, and in the end they toll about 4. People accept it because its not as bad as they originally thought.

see thats the thing.
As the AA said, a penny on income tax would bring in far more than a toll on a tunnel.

For the other roads yet to be built though, they are struggling to get the PPP finance as the markets dont believe the goverment will pay the shadow tolls.
If the motorist pays these tolls directly to the PPP companies, maybe the N17 and N20 can get built ASAP?????

MrDerp

munchkin_utd wrote: »

see thats the thing.
As the AA said, a penny on income tax would bring in far more than a toll on a tunnel.

I'm not sure its about revenue raising.

1. Get the toll in place
2. Rabble rabble rhubarb rabble
3. Absorb the public backlash, talk about belt-tightening etc
4. Privatise road i.e. flog for **** all as a going concern to private equity firms producing a 12% yield. Private taxation of citizens to keep IMF overlords onside.

I wish I couldn't see it all playing out before my eyes and could worry about small things like the price of petrol.

niloc1951

hi5 wrote: »

Many people still drive at 100 kph on the motorways anyway,going back to sections of the old N roads which are now almost traffic free to avoid tolls wont be too much stress for lots of people.
If your unemployed then money is more important than time.

Not alone do you save tolls, you also save on fuel cost, it takes a lot more fuel to push a vehicle through the air at 120 KmPH than at 100KmPH.
If you have plenty of time and little money it's a no-brainer.
A journey is also less boring off motorway.

Also, any vehicle >3,500 Kg GVW is subject to a speed limit of 80Kmph on both M and N routes

antoobrien

niloc1951 wrote: »

Not alone do you save tolls, you also save on fuel cost, it takes a lot more fuel to push a vehicle through the air at 120 KmPH than at 100KmPH.
If you have plenty of time and little money it's a no-brainer.
A journey is also less boring off motorway.

Also, any vehicle >3,500 Kg GVW is subject to a speed limit of 80Kmph on both M and N routes

The no brainer is the fact that you're wrong.

Having to slow down then speed up the whole time for villages, local access, vechiles that should have their speed restricted (i.e. the ones you've pointed out, plenty of whom ignore this restriction) or slow muppets (>20km/h less than the posted speed limit) is what really eats fuel. The MPG difference between 100 and 120 is not massive (I've calculated it at less than a 10% difference in my car). The road to Galway is 10KM shorter on the Motorway than the R446. That makes the toll a break even at 120km/h).

Then we get into the increase costs of wear and tear etc from having to use the brakes, gearbox etc. It really fascinates me how people can delude themselves into think the kind of rubbish you're spouting.

Bruthal

niloc1951 wrote: »

Not alone do you save tolls, you also save on fuel cost, it takes a lot more fuel to push a vehicle through the air at 120 KmPH than at 100KmPH.
If you have plenty of time and little money it's a no-brainer.

Well you might be using slightly more fuel at 120kph than at 100kph, but you will be driving for a shorter time. So it wont be as much of a difference as you think. There will be a certain speed which is most efficient, probably below 120kph. But a constant 120kph will be better than having to slow right down at times and stop too as aotoobrien said.

niloc1951

antoobrien wrote: »

The no brainer is the fact that you're wrong.

Having to slow down then speed up the whole time for villages, local access, vechiles that should have their speed restricted (i.e. the ones you've pointed out, plenty of whom ignore this restriction) or slow muppets (>20km/h less than the posted speed limit) is what really eats fuel. The MPG difference between 100 and 120 is not massive (I've calculated it at less than a 10% difference in my car). The road to Galway is 10KM shorter on the Motorway than the R446. That makes the toll a break even at 120km/h).

Then we get into the increase costs of wear and tear etc from having to use the brakes, gearbox etc. It really fascinates me how people can delude themselves into think the kind of rubbish you're spouting.

:eek::eek::eek::eek: wouldn't want to meet you, especially as you're sooooo tolerant of others when you have a different opinion, not.

Remember, what one considers to be FACT may be the result of unreliable information or untested assumptions, it's not unknown for such a FACT's to bite where it hurts, one learns this with maturity.

BTW, MY experience (tested) is that leisurely progress on non-motorway roads does use less fuel than lashing along at 120Kmph on a motorway, but hey, everyone to his own, it's a free country (still).

LostGirly

cjpm wrote: »

By Paul Melia

The Government's Smarter Travel policy wants an extra 500,000 people to use public transport, walk or cycle to work by 2020, to help reduce car commuting. It also calls for the number of car trips per year not to increase beyond current levels up to 2020.

No problem what so ever! I'll catch the Luas that passes my house every morning here in Ballygobackwards, get it into the nearest town, catch the bus then to the next village and get the train to the town I work in shall I?? :rolleyes:

niloc1951

robbie7730 wrote: »

Well you might be using slightly more fuel at 120kph than at 100kph, but you will be driving for a shorter time. So it wont be as much of a difference as you think. There will be a certain speed which is most efficient, probably below 120kph. But a constant 120kph will be better than having to slow right down at times and stop too as aotoobrien said.

Read again
Fuel consumption is measured over distance, time does not come into the equation, unless one is referring to a marine engine or plant.

See HERE for a reality check.

Bruthal

niloc1951 wrote: »

Read again
Fuel consumption is measured over distance, time does not come into the equation, unless one is referring to a marine engine or plant.

See HERE for a reality check.

Well this one would suggest that if you drive at 10mph for 12 hours would be far worse than driving at 60mph for 2 hours. Or driving 120 miles if you prefer.

Bruthal

Anyway its on a 1 way trip to €2 a litre, so either they will be raking in the taxes or no one will be driving anywhere.

invinciblePRSTV

No point dilly-dallying, the present national network cost a fortune to build, so let's make some money out of it. So to that end I'm supportive of road-pricing.

But instead of such ad hoc tolling measures like the pre-existing tolls and the mooted ones, it would be far more practical to develop an overarching solution covering all charges for use of the main M&N roads so that the "unfairness" in the spread of tolling locations would be eliminated.

Bruthal

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

No point dilly-dallying, the present national network cost a fortune to build, so let's make some money out of it. So to that end I'm supportive of road-pricing.

But instead of such ad hoc tolling measures like the pre-existing tolls and the mooted ones, it would be far more practical to develop an overarching solution covering all charges for use of the main M&N roads so that the "unfairness" in the spread of tolling locations would be eliminated.

Maybe they could call it motor tax.

invinciblePRSTV

robbie7730 wrote: »

Maybe they could call it motor tax.

Look the motor tax lament of the Irish motorist is a misconception. Motor Tax in Ireland is primarily utilised for local authority funding, not the construction and maintenance of Motorways. Private capital, public money and the EU paid for the very lovely motorway network around Ireland. Now its time to make some money out of it.

charlemont

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

No point dilly-dallying, the present national network cost a fortune to build, so let's make some money out of it. So to that end I'm supportive of road-pricing.

But instead of such ad hoc tolling measures like the pre-existing tolls and the mooted ones, it would be far more practical to develop an overarching solution covering all charges for use of the main M&N roads so that the "unfairness" in the spread of tolling locations would be eliminated.

Whats Road Tax ??
So many people in this country seem to love rules, regulations and taxes..

Cool Mo D

robbie7730 wrote: »

Well this one would suggest that if you drive at 10mph for 12 hours would be far worse than driving at 60mph for 2 hours. Or driving 120 miles if you prefer.

10 mph is hardly realistic for long distance driving though.

If you drive 100 miles at 40 mph in a VW Golf, you will use about 2/3the amount of petrol as driving 100 miles at 80 mph. That is a big difference.

antoobrien

niloc1951 wrote: »

Remember, what one considers to be FACT may be the result of unreliable information or untested assumptions, it's not unknown for such a FACT's to bite where it hurts, one learns this with maturity.

BTW, MY experience (tested) is that leisurely progress on non-motorway roads does use less fuel than lashing along at 120Kmph on a motorway, but hey, everyone to his own, it's a free country (still).

Facts
Trip Galway to Dublin & back, with some small urban runs - shops etc, fill averaging 45L.

Jan 2008 with Single Carriage way from Galway to Kilbeggan (except Athlone DC), DC/Mway to Dublin. 1 fill gets 550 km - or 12.22mkm/l. Time approx 3h 15m

April 2011 Motorway/DC to Dublin. 1 fill gets 610KM or 13.56km/l. Time 2h 10m.

So the motorways have saved me 1 hour of my life (very important to me), a lot of aggravation from not having to stay behind drivers that are incapable of doing more than 70km and won't move over to let people past (my house to the motorway at Beagh in Ballinasloe 67km, it often took >1h) and gained 60KM per trip in fuel economy.

At current prices (€1.507) and the fuel economy listed that's a saving of 4.42L = €6.66 - The 3 tolls cost 1.8 + 2.7 + 2=6.5

The high prices might be what makes the toll break even but
1) I save 1 hour of my life
2) I'm driving on roads that are considerably safer than the R446
3) the surfaces are considerably better than the R446
4) I don't have to stay behind drivers that shouldn't are inconsiderate sods
5) Less wear and tear on my tyres & brakes

royal flush can't be beaten in poker, wins this argument too.

I've also had to drive from Dublin to Cork to Rosslare last year in 1 day. I can't describe you how much of a pain in the ass the N25 (3rd leg) was, especially @ New Ross. While I don't agree with tolled bypasses because it discourages regular users to avoid it, I was very happy to use that lovely DC bypassing Waterford on this occasion because I don't know Waterford and had no business there.

niloc1951 wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek::eek: wouldn't want to meet you, especially as you're sooooo tolerant of others when you have a different opinion, not.

Slightly O.T., but you're right I'm intolerant of people whose opinions have no basis in fact, mainly because it saves my blood pressure for things that are worthy of my ire and contempt, but don't take it personally - I've responded here only so that other people won't fall into the same delusion.

Chris_5339762

My car does 35mpg at 120 and 48 at 100kmh. Its an old Toyota Yaris. Working numbers out in my head says that if I drive at 100 instead of 120 then I get my tolls free.

Slowing down and speeding up in a car is the worst thing you can do though.

antoobrien

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

My car does 35mpg at 120 and 48 at 100kmh. Its an old Toyota Yaris. Working numbers out in my head says that if I drive at 100 instead of 120 then I get my tolls free.

Slowing down and speeding up in a car is the worst thing you can do though.

Not for your benefit Chris, but it should be pointed out that doing 100km/h is often not possible where there is no motorway/dc alternative (e.g. N17/18 in Galway, N20 in Cork, N25 between Cork & Rosslare.

Bettystown runner

the idea of tolling a ring road is totally mad just look at the mess they made of Drogheda ,anybody with an sense would have put the toll in a rural area past Dunleer but no they jam up drogheda and you could have a game of football down at the toll plaza most days.

Bruthal

Cool Mo D wrote: »

10 mph is hardly realistic for long distance driving though.

If you drive 100 miles at 40 mph in a VW Golf, you will use about 2/3the amount of petrol as driving 100 miles at 80 mph. That is a big difference.

A car that uses double the petrol for a given distance when at a speed that uses twice as much petrol for the journey( say 120mph v 60mph as example), is actually burning it at 4 times the rate in reality.

kwalshe

Maybe someone can let me know when this thread gets back on topic instead all the rabble about fuel comsumption...

Bruthal

Anyway, they open the motorway to navan, put a toll on it, then reduce the limit on the old 100kph road to 80kph, in reality as a second toll road with their camera van on it.

antoobrien

kwalshe wrote: »

Maybe someone can let me know when this thread gets back on topic instead all the rabble about fuel comsumption...

Unfortunately this is what always happens when tolls are suggested.

The people that don't want to pay for anything and want to make excuses for not paying for motorways while still griping about the state of the N roads always bring this up as a (laughing while typing this) "viable" alternative to using the motorways.

IMO they need to be smacked down because they don't realize that without the motorways - no matter how they're paid for in direct tax, tolls or whatever - their figures fall apart because they can't travel at a fuel efficient speed (yes going slow is inefficient).

Anybody who has traveled along old N6 to Galway or the old N8 to Cork will remember the mayhem that was Abbeyleix (N8) and Moate (N6). Any time I had to travel through either it took a lot longer than it should have to even when traffic was good. When traffic was bad, pull a u-turn and find some side roads, you'll save 20 minutes and your petrol (which means money).

I don't mind paying tolls on the M8 because of both what I getting in terms of the road itself, and what it's saving me in terms of time not sent sitting still at Abbeyleix. The same applies for the M6, the road between Ballinasloe & Loughrea was terrible in parts.

This is going O.T. but I'm in favor of a 2 part road tax system that would mean a flat rate registration fee replacing the annual road tax, e.g. €100 per vehicle per year, with the rest going on petrol. It' designed to be revenue neutral (I don't have figures sorry), so abolish excise duty and carbon tax on petrol and diesel. Take the annual driving distance (AA roadwatch have it at 12,000 miles) and use average fuel consumption rates to calculate the amount that should be put into the "road users tax", which will be added to the cost of the petrol. This means that people that use the roads more will pay more - and tolls are a natural extension of this system. I'm not opposed to tolls on national routes, just on bypasses.