Motorway speed limits set the drop EVEN LOWER in Ireland

Commotion Ocean

Fuck this shit. Speed limits are already low enough as it is with most of Europe having speed limits between 130 and 140 and Germany with dynamic speed limits (up to and including limitless stretches at certain times under certain conditions).

This is being disguised as a "carbon-reducing measure". It's bollocks. I bet you a week's wages you'll see more "speed" cameras along our motorways if / when this limit comes in. Sometimes, I hate this country.

Here is the linky

A briefing note prepared for Government sets out a range of options which could be brought in to reduce use of fossil fuels and move to a 'green' economy.
They include reducing the maximum speed limit on motorways from 120kmh to 110kmh to help reduce transport emissions by more than 100,000 tonnes a year

vicwatson

What a load of shíte spend a fortune on big wide open roads and now we have to slow down. This country, aarrgghhh

ThisRegard

dfeo wrote: »

Fuck this shit. Speed limits are already low enough as it is with most of Europe having speed limits between 130 and 140

Most actually don't, most have the same or below what we have, according to the AA anyway.

frozenfrozen

Oh would they ever get ****ed

judeboy101

Lads, we need to think of what our driving is doing to the poor polar bears.

oppenheimer1

dfeo wrote: »

Fuck this shit. Speed limits are already low enough as it is with most of Europe having speed limits between 130 and 140 and Germany with dynamic speed limits (up to and including limitless stretches at certain times under certain conditions).

This is being disguised as a "carbon-reducing measure". It's bollocks. I bet you a week's wages you'll see more "speed" cameras along our motorways if / when this limit comes in. Sometimes, I hate this country.

Here is the linky

During the oil crisis in the 70's the speed limit on US highways was cut to 50mph.

Anyway, this is a briefing note on policy options. Much more likely tbh is an increase in excise.

Charles Babbage

If this is carbon related, then the obvious solution is to allow people with efficient engines still drive at 120Kmh, but limit those with 1.8L + engines to 110Kmh.

Atlantic Dawn

Slowing down by 10kmh will increase traffic and congestion which means additional pollution, this government really don't have a clue.

beertons

But sure who is enforcing the current speed limits? Ha

The Rape of Lucretia

Between a cleaner environment, greater fuel efficiency, and the lives that will be saved, it is an utterly splendid move. People need to look at their lives and learn to slow down in general. They will get there. Relax. Everything is not a competition, or a challenge to cram as much into the day as you can. Average speed interval cameras should really cover the full motorway network to ensure compliance. Measurement recorders at every entry/exit in the country would not really cost that much and delivery so much good.

The Specialist

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Between a cleaner environment, greater fuel efficiency, and the lives that will be saved, it is an utterly splendid move. People need to look at their lives and learn to slow down in general. They will get there. Relax. Everything is not a competition, or a challenge to cram as much into the day as you can. Average speed interval cameras should really cover the full motorway network to ensure compliance. Measurement recorders at every entry/exit in the country would not really cost that much and delivery so much good.

Spot the cyclist.

redcup342

Charles Babbage wrote: »

If this is carbon related, then the obvious solution is to allow people with efficient engines still drive at 120Kmh, but limit those with 1.8L + engines to 110Kmh.

That would completely negate the saving as everyone has to drive at the same speed otherwise you end up with a traffic jam.

http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/transport/speed-limits#_ftn2

Based on a simulation, cutting motorway speed limits from 120 to 110 km/h could deliver fuel savings for current technology passenger cars of 12–18 %, assuming smooth driving and 100 % compliance with speed limits. However, relaxing these assumptions to a more realistic setting implies a saving of just 2–3 %.

Significant fuel savings can be achieved by encouraging drivers to maintain a consistent speed and restrict their speed (eco-driving), including through effective enforcement of speed limits.

What a load of shíte though.

doolox

Most punters tip along at 90 or more and up to 130 on the M4 etc.

Only one I see being observed is people doing 100kph south of the Stillorgan exit where IF YOU OPEN YOUR EYES... you can actually do 120 kph. But a lot of people do not realise this.

Also the number of people who do 70 to 80 in the middle lane of most three laners with an empty left lane is astonishing.

billie1b

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Between a cleaner environment, greater fuel efficiency, and the lives that will be saved, it is an utterly splendid move. People need to look at their lives and learn to slow down in general. They will get there. Relax. Everything is not a competition, or a challenge to cram as much into the day as you can. Average speed interval cameras should really cover the full motorway network to ensure compliance. Measurement recorders at every entry/exit in the country would not really cost that much and delivery so much good.

Lives will never be saved, unfortunately there will always be road deaths, it will never be zero, human and machine will always create accidents. Most road deaths are not caused by speed anyways and the least amount of fatal accidents are on motorways.

Skatedude

vicwatson wrote: »

What a load of shíte spend a fortune on big wide open roads and now we have to slow down. This country, aarrgghhh

I heard they have a 100kph limit on the m50 in places because they made the road to narrow?

But facts?

Alkers

Atlantic Dawn wrote:

Slowing down by 10kmh will increase traffic and congestion which means additional pollution, this government really don't have a clue.

It actually does the opposite, slower speeds means you can safely have smaller gaps between cars, less incidents and fit more cars on the road - lowering congestion

FishOnABike

Ludicrous! Does this mean that if I have a Tesla Model S P85D I can drive it at 249Kmh ?

billie1b

Skatedude wrote: »

I heard they have a 100kph limit on the m50 in places because they made the road to narrow?

But facts?

J1-J2 is 80km

J3-J14 is 100km

J15 onwards is 120km

Special Circumstances

Charles Babbage wrote: »

If this is carbon related, then the obvious solution is to allow people with efficient engines still drive at 120Kmh, but limit those with 1.8L + engines to 110Kmh.

Imagine a country where a "green" party put more duty on the fuel with LESS CO2 produced per litre.

Imagine a country where a "green" party encouraged everyone to buy more polluting cars.


I'll give you a clue... you live there.

old_aussie

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

During the oil crisis in the 70's the speed limit on US highways was cut to 50mph.

Anyway, this is a briefing note on policy options. Much more likely tbh is an increase in excise.

Come on, it wasn't that severe, it was 55 MPH

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Speed_Law

In Ireland the speed limit could be pushed lower by raising a "Green Tax" on fuel.

Force the cost of fuel to be even more expensive, to cause people to drive less and at a more fuel efficient speed.

Less cars on the road, less pollution.

Montgolfier

France motorway speed limits are 130kmph but 110kph in the rain and it's always raining in Ireland. I guess that's not the point there's feck all traffic or accidents on our motorways so just an exercise in bull**** for Europe fake emissions savings buys time as saves fines for Ireland not the people.

Autosport

They can feck off :mad:

listermint

Serious about green?

Promote EVs more and fix the network and extend the network of charging stations.

Easiest way to start hitting emuisons targets.

Oh and follow that up with a capital nationwide infrastructure plan on clean energies all types stimulating jobs in construction and research.

Ireland has an opportunity here as an island to lead this field.we should grasp it hard.

bazz26

I'm outraged at the outrage of this.

CiniO

Another crazy idea...
Anyway - only country where I obey speed limits on motorway is Germany.
Seems they are only ones that have it right.

Limiting speed to 110km/h is utterly stupid.
Should be rised up to at least 160km/h.

newacc2015

It is funny this is supposed to be for environmental purposes, yet Ross and Civil servant asked for taxes on diesel to be equalised with petrol one of the reasons being diesel is so dirty. Yet Noonan refused to do it

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/noonans-snub-to-ross-after-plea-to-hike-tax-on-diesel-35326912.html

There is no logic to most things in this country

galwaytt

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Between a cleaner environment, greater fuel efficiency, and the lives that will be saved, it is an utterly splendid move. People need to look at their lives and learn to slow down in general. They will get there. Relax. Everything is not a competition, or a challenge to cram as much into the day as you can. Average speed interval cameras should really cover the full motorway network to ensure compliance. Measurement recorders at every entry/exit in the country would not really cost that much and delivery so much good.

Garbage. My 911 uses less juice at 140 than at 120. Speed doesn't kill. Motorways are the safest of all. 'Clean' diesels are the dirtiest cars of all.

Mantis Toboggan

Shane Ross certainly trying to make a name for himself. Unfortunately for him he's turned his position into a circus act, completely incompetent.

The Rape of Lucretia

galwaytt wrote: »

Garbage. My 911 uses less juice at 140 than at 120. Speed doesn't kill. Motorways are the safest of all. 'Clean' diesels are the dirtiest cars of all.

It doesnt suit a lot of people to drive a 911.

Terrlock

I this the best they can come up with.

All this carbon tax nonsense is just a big fat con to milk money from countries and five it to the fat cats.

There is greed behind it all, and we are gullible enough to by into it.

It's not going to do anything to help the environment

oppenheimer1

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Imagine a country where a "green" party put more duty on the fuel with LESS CO2 produced per litre.

Imagine a country where a "green" party encouraged everyone to buy more polluting cars.


I'll give you a clue... you live there.

You are conveniently omitting that diesel is more efficient and produces less CO2 per Km, which is the key metric.

Diesel produces less global pollution but more local pollution than petrol. You may be one of those fellas that has a hard on for petrol (but but it's a more refined drive...:rolleyes:) But you can at least be honest.

ted1

Please do list the countries where a 140 limit applies

Steve

Typical FG búllshít.

"If it moves, tax it."



Maybe the fines will help pay for water... it's not as if it falls out of the sky.

Arcade_Tryer

CiniO wrote: »

Another crazy idea...
Anyway - only country where I obey speed limits on motorway is Germany.
Seems they are only ones that have it right.

Limiting speed to 110km/h is utterly stupid.
Should be rised up to at least 160km/h.

An equally stupid suggestion.

Reducing the speed limit on motorways really is absurd however. If they are so concerned with carbon emissions, they should start by introducing congestion charges in Dublin centre, punishing instead some of those who choose to clog up the streets and the air for their own selfish convenience. People who drive on motorways mainly do so out of absolute necessity, whether for commuting reasons or due to lack of alternative transport.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

judeboy101 wrote: »

Lads, we need to think of what our driving is doing to the poor polar bears.

In 15 years I've yet to see a polar bear driving a car.

Sick of this ****.

Special Circumstances

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

You are conveniently omitting that diesel is more efficient and produces less CO2 per Km, which is the key metric.

Diesel produces less global pollution but more local pollution than petrol. You may be one of those fellas that has a hard on for petrol (but but it's a more refined drive...:rolleyes:) But you can at least be honest.

Stop being dishonest.


Less global but more local. What... does all the local stuff disappear before it becomes global?


530d v prius

Who pollutes more.... who is punished every single litre.

Why?

Why not use an actual SCIENCE based approach rather than pseudo science.... wait don't tell me.... you have a hard on for pseudo science right? But but it justifies chape tax, yeah?

Polluter pays is the only fair and sensible way to implement an "environmental" policy. Anything else is pseudo science (redefining what constitutes emissions so that diesel can be classed as "low emissions") or just plain following orders from industry.

At least you could be honest, correct and scientific like.



Oh, I forgot to put in any rolleyes.

mb1725

Looks to me like we need to keep cows away from the motorways:



Ireland's emissions

newacc2015

Tyson Fury wrote: »

Shane Ross certainly trying to make a name for himself. Unfortunately for him he's turned his position into a circus act, completely incompetent.

So do you think all the unnamed independent civil servants were trying to make a name for themselves too? We have too many diesel cars in this country, which are so bad for the environment. Cycling in the traffic can be rotten at times when you are stuck in some of the traffic

road_high

The nanny state grows even bigger...

Jimmy Garlic

Thousands of signs will need to be changed. This country is run by power tripping simpletons, morons. All this carbon bolloxology is one giant scam designed to extract more money from people and gain more control over their lives, that's it, there is nothing more to it than that.

CiniO

ted1 wrote: »

Please do list the countries where a 140 limit applies

Poland, Bulgaria, United Arab Emirates, and some motorways in Texas.

Cantona's Collars

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Thousands of signs will need to be changed. This country is run by power tripping simpletons, morons. All this carbon bolloxology is one giant scam designed to extract more money from people and gain more control over their lives, that's it, there is nothing more to it than that.

At a cost of thousands per sign.It's just a load of bollix thought up by civil servants with no clue of the real world and judge things by figures on a sheet.
This is Ireland where the green party managed to help make smokeless coal increase in price.
Tax rebates for diesel for business yet nothing for those who might want to use EV's or hybrids.
Wasn't there a study that speed bumps caused even more pollution from vehicles as people tended to brake hard at them then accelerate suddenly after them,rinse and repeat,more fuel burned and more fumes.Cruising along at 120kph wouldn't be as bad.

CiniO

I was driving through Austria this winter, and between Wien and Klagenfurt there were good few stretches where speed limit was reduced from 130km/h to 100km/h because of the pollution/smog...
What's important however, those speed limits were in places where motorways was going through or near bigger cities. I assume as quality of air was already bad, they have system for limiting speed on motorway in those spots, so people don't add to local pollution by driving fast.

No limits on stretches of motorway further from the bigger cities.


Now - from article it looks like they want to introduce in on all motorways in Ireland, out of which pretty much none goes through any bigger city.
None of the regions where Irish motorways go through are city or polluted regions.
So surely this is not to prevent creation of smog.

Can't see any point it that.

Esel

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Between a cleaner environment, greater fuel efficiency, and the lives that will be saved, it is an utterly splendid move.

Also, braking distances for those driving on cheap Chinese tyres will be reduced, thus increasing safety for all road users.





















That's a whoosh, btw.

Jimmy Garlic

From the article linked -

This could yield savings of more than one million tonnes of carbon between 2017 and 2030. Ireland currently emits almost 60 million tonnes a year, and they are rising. Unless emissions are reduced, Ireland can expect to endure more extreme weather events and increased risk of new pests and diseases.

Such a load of bollox, bunkum, balderdash. So slapping on more carbon taxes and reducing speed limits will stop extreme weather events etc? Pure nonsense. People better start looking into all this Co2 BS that this and the previous government have signed us up for. Jack up the price of everything, tax tax and more tax upon tax.

Commotion Ocean

Seeing as this will be a carbon issue and not a safety one, will penalty points still apply for driving >110 km/h but <120km/h? Or will it just be a nominal fine?

DopeTech

Slowing down just means it'll take me longer to get from a to b. Do they not realise that this will mean I'll have the engine kicking out fumes for longer now as a result?

Vicxas

This looks like a really dumb, short sighted move.

tossy

Charles Babbage wrote: »

If this is carbon related, then the obvious solution is to allow people with efficient engines still drive at 120Kmh, but limit those with 1.8L + engines to 110Kmh.

Which is more efficient doing 110kmph? a 1.0 engine wrung to within an inch of it's life or a 6 cylinder barely breaking a sweat.

demanufactured

eejits.
Should be increased to 160 kph.
The bigger problem is idiots with no road disipline.

ironclaw

Surprised no one has mentioned the time cost of moving everything slower around the country. If your rep goes fom Dublin to Cork, and has to stick to a lower speed limit, they're day is going to get longer as they'll have a fixed period to do business but it will take them more time to get around. This means more time in the car and time more inefficiently spent. This has a knock on effect of increasing costs for someone down the line.

Switching to safety, if we now take that same rep, they're under more time pressure which has the knock on effect of pushing them harder. We've all been there, no matter how hard we try, you're late and you want to make up some time. This is the cause of an immense swathe of accidents. Of course, the pundits will cry 'leave earlier', true, but someone has to pay for that 'earlier' leaving time that has been imposed by a government, not the business. If my employee needs to be somewhere at 9am, I'll pay for them to be there and factor it into my costs. I'm not willing to pay extra for my employee to be there at 9am because some unqualified official in office thought knocking a few km's off the speed limit would save us some Co2.