Proposal to lower motorway limits to 110.

bear1 · 19-07-2017 11:01AM #1

Well fook this:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/motorists-may-have-to-drive-slower-on-motorways-under-climate-plan-1.3159387

Billions spent on motorways and now we may well end up having to drive just slightly over an N-road limit.
Instead of reducing the speed limit, how about actually sorting out public transport.
Limerick/Galway/Cork, what sort of adequate public transport have they? Never mind those that live rurally.
Gob****es of the highest order.
They mention the eletrification of the Balbriggan line, why not then explore the options of electrifying all rail lines connecting major cities.

OldMrBrennan83 · 19-07-2017 11:03AM

This post has been deleted.

Atlantic Dawn · 19-07-2017 11:05AM

I think it's a crazy idea, it will cost millions to update all the speed signs. Would be better instead to have a public awareness campaign to tell people that driving at 100kmh or so will save 20% of fuel compared to driving at 120kmh.

The Balbriggan line is competing with the mainline to Belfast, there's not the capacity to add additional DART lines to. In addition everyone living in Malahide, Portmarnock and Clongriffin can kiss goodbye to getting space on the DART in the morning if it happens.

bear1 · 19-07-2017 11:11AM

You could also argue that the planners refusal to start building up instead of outwards forces people into cars which then leads to tailbacks stretching for miles whereas the higher they build the less people would need cars as they already within the city.
Mind boggles at the suggestions thrown around sometimes.

Atlantic Dawn · 19-07-2017 11:15AM

bear1 wrote: »

You could also argue that the planners refusal to start building up instead of outwards forces people into cars which then leads to tailbacks stretching for miles whereas the higher they build the less people would need cars as they already within the city.
Mind boggles at the suggestions thrown around sometimes.

Yes and you have developers hoarding lands within the city where the transport infrastructure already exists and no penalties on them.

testicles · 19-07-2017 11:16AM

This post has been deleted.

OldMrBrennan83 · 19-07-2017 11:19AM

This post has been deleted.

bear1 · 19-07-2017 11:20AM

testicles wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The money to pay for this will have to come from somewhere and where better than the cash cow which is the fellow motorist.

gammygils · 19-07-2017 11:21AM

Should increase N-road limit to 110

ba_barabus · 19-07-2017 11:22AM

Phew, not gonna make much difference without enforcement.

Move along, nothing to see here

Atlantic Dawn · 19-07-2017 11:24AM

In other news Santiago had snow for the first time in decades, global cooling, we should zero rate the motor tax on the V8's to warm the place up...

About two inches of snow was most common in the city, but up to 16 inches fell in parts of the region, according to the Associated Press. “Chile’s Meteorological Office said it was the biggest snowfall in the capital in 46 years,”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/07/17/photos-santiago-chile-sees-most-snow-in-decades/

TherapyBoy · 19-07-2017 11:27AM

Global warming doesn't mean warmer weather, just more extreme weather. Both hot & cold.

Atlantic Dawn · 19-07-2017 11:29AM

TherapyBoy wrote: »

Global warming doesn't mean warmer weather, just more extreme weather. Both hot & cold.

It can mean whatever you want it to mean when you bankroll the scientists telling you what you want to hear.

OldMrBrennan83 · 19-07-2017 11:30AM

This post has been deleted.

TherapyBoy · 19-07-2017 11:31AM

I have a bankroll? Screw you guys, I'm off to buy a v8!! :cool:

Atlantic Dawn · 19-07-2017 11:31AM

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well with the government promotion of diesel a lot of us won't be

fancy pigeon · 19-07-2017 12:22PM

Marginally slower than the pre 2005 limits, but that's not the point; I can see this as being a money making exercise.

Why don't they consider staggering school times even further? I'm getting to work and back in plenty of time without having to hurry, come end of August panic starts again and we're back to gridlock... Leaving extra early/alternative routes make negligible differences in that instance

Or maybe a proper public transport system for rural commuters? Like the plans to update the Navan rail link shelved due to lack of GAA matches funds?

Or maybe educate drivers on how to save fuel/drive more efficiently when driving normally?

You're right. What would we know.

SSr0 · 19-07-2017 01:21PM

fancy pigeon wrote: »

Or maybe educate drivers on how to save fuel/drive more efficiently when driving normally?

But I thought that the vast majority of Irish drivers do this? They all seem to love slowing down and speeding up on perfectly straight roads, for no apparent reason other than to save fuel surely?

The Rape of Lucretia · 19-07-2017 01:29PM

fancy pigeon wrote: »

Marginally slower than the pre 2005 limits, but that's not the point; I can see this as being a money making exercise.

Money making exercise ? How so that ?

Its a money saving exercise, and a planet saving exercise. Drive more efficiently, costs you less in fuel. Purchase less fuel, govt takes less of your money in tax. Emit less carbon, the who planet's a winner.

Some people just wanna bitch, but this move is a winner all round for the consumer. He will probably still whine, though. It what he does. Just because de gubbernmint is behind it. Even if something is good for him.

bazz26 · 19-07-2017 01:33PM

grogi · 19-07-2017 01:44PM

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

I think it's a crazy idea, it will cost millions to update all the speed signs. Would be better instead to have a public awareness campaign to tell people that driving at 100kmh or so will save 20% of fuel compared to driving at 120kmh.

Millions could buy and maintain a decent electric charging network...
The effect would be much more profound that this joke of a proposition.

fancy pigeon · 19-07-2017 02:11PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Money making exercise ? How so that ?

Its a money saving exercise, and a planet saving exercise. Drive more efficiently, costs you less in fuel. Purchase less fuel, govt takes less of your money in tax. Emit less carbon, the who planet's a winner.

Some people just wanna bitch, but this move is a winner all round for the consumer. He will probably still whine, though. It what he does. Just because de gubbernmint is behind it. Even if something is good for him.

Well, allow me to share my thoughts. Bearing in mind, this is just thought and not forced opinion like a lot of people like to assume

Speed limit goes down, everyone who keeps well above the limit will be penalized more so... Yes?

Slower limits may also entice those to go on single carriage roads in the view it will be quicker, thus policing it more and more people caught. The M3/R147 is a prime example... Possibly yes?

What if someone want's to drive 110kmh in 3rd gear? Hows that good for the consumer, the greater good? Granted highly unlikely but possible isn't it? I just thought I'd throw that in there, not that it has much to do with the main scope

I've already hinted at other aspects to look at that can't be ignored. Staggering school runs and better driver education is where I'd start personally. It's amazing what a bit more conscience to the right foot/anticipation will do under normal circumstances and with a bit of planning fuel costs on journeys come cown

But no. Lets revert to pre 2005 motorway limits without actually addressing driver behavior and traffic management. That will work, on paper it always does!

Some people just wanna patronize others, because they see themselves as do-gooders for the greater good: the consumer, the pillar of society, the smug "I told you so". Even if it's complete, utter nonsense

Cabaal · 19-07-2017 02:17PM

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

In other news Santiago had snow for the first time in decades, global cooling, we should zero rate the motor tax on the V8's to warm the place up...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/07/17/photos-santiago-chile-sees-most-snow-in-decades/

It's evident you don't understand climate change,

Wibbs · 19-07-2017 02:21PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Some people just wanna bitch, but this move is a winner all round for the consumer. He will probably still whine, though. It what he does. Just because de gubbernmint is behind it. Even if something is good for him.

For me the "consumer" is the biggest word there. Consumerism is what is buggering the environment more and more. Actually want to affect the environment in a big way? Ban all new car production except for EV's. Encourage owners to hang onto their older cars for much longer. As I've said before driver A who has owned and maintained a twenty year old Toyota Corolla is being kinder to the environment than Owner B who has "upgraded" to a new car every three years in the same time period. The cost to the environment of six odd new cars is much larger. OH and he'll have saved significantly more money into the bargain. Dropping the speed limit is time and motion thinking at work and in real terms about as much use as sticking a bandaid on a shotgun wound. But it'll never happen. Too much is invested in our throwaway consumer culture with only lip service to being "green".

bear1 · 19-07-2017 02:31PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Money making exercise ? How so that ?

Its a money saving exercise, and a planet saving exercise. Drive more efficiently, costs you less in fuel. Purchase less fuel, govt takes less of your money in tax. Emit less carbon, the who planet's a winner.

Some people just wanna bitch, but this move is a winner all round for the consumer. He will probably still whine, though. It what he does. Just because de gubbernmint is behind it. Even if something is good for him.

People can drive slower than the limit anyway so what difference does it make on that front?
If someone wants to drive at 120/130 then it's going to the be that person who will pay marginally more.
It's the government turning more and more into a nanny state - instead of making life harder for those that are completely reliant on the car how about improving public transport?
If rural areas or even cities were provided with much better transport options then you'd see car use would drop.

Diemos · 19-07-2017 02:45PM

Nearly nobody pays attention to the 120 limit, why do you think anything wll change?

stesaurus · 19-07-2017 03:28PM

As long as EVs are allowed to drive at more than 110 then I'm happy!

DaveyDave · 19-07-2017 03:57PM

In my limited experience of driving on motorways outside of Dublin, nobody sticks to 120 anyway. 130-150 seems very common and in my opinion is safe. I prefer driving on two lane motorways outside of Dublin than the likes of the M50 or the N3.

The speed limits are low enough as it. Too many roads are 50kph that should be 60. The road from Woodies in Lucan to Griffeen is 50kph, everyone including the Gardai do 60-65.

One thing I miss about driving in Orlando was doing 45mph/72kph everywhere.

If they want to make money on fines without spending money on new rules and signs how about actually enforce the 30kph limit on the Dublin north quays? Everyone doing 50-60kph, even morning rush hour if I'm cycling at 35kph a taxi will fly past...

Special Circumstances · 19-07-2017 04:02PM

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Well with the government promotion of diesel a lot of us won't be

SSSHHH! Don't bring him in here too!

challengemaster · 19-07-2017 05:15PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Money making exercise ? How so that ?

Its a money saving exercise, and a planet saving exercise.

In the same way that Gardaí having regular speed checks at 11pm on 3 mile long motorway stretches with unnecessary "road works" speed limit is definitely for safety purposes and not a money making exercise either.

The Rape of Lucretia · 19-07-2017 07:13PM

challengemaster wrote: »

In the same way that Gardaí having regular speed checks at 11pm on 3 mile long motorway stretches with unnecessary "road works" speed limit is definitely for safety purposes and not a money making exercise either.

Agree with you fully. The money making jibe some like to make is really just a conspiracy theory of the simple minded to gripe about why they arent being allowed to break the law unpenalised. The cling to the myth though, without out a shred of evidence to support it.

Proposal to lower motorway limits to 110.

Comments