Mastodawn

Christine Burns MBE 🏳️‍⚧️📚⧖Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 And yesterday there was the news that London's ULEZ (which really affected only a small number of the worst polluting vehicles) has reduced air pollution in ways that were once pronounced to be impossible for decades. Cycle use is booming too because of LTNs. Imagine if we'd taken these approaches to the motor car from the outset and we'd all grown up to view 20mph as the universal urban speed limit rather than breed selfish culture warriors who think 30mph is a right.

Sue Archer Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6

I've long thought that if we reported road deaths in the same way we report stabbings or shootings, or, yes deaths in train or plane crashes, people would take more notice. If the national news reported every road death. As it is, people just don't think about it, until it affects them.

Paul Lockett Mar 22, 2025

@suearcher @ChrisMayLA6 It's a good point. I don't think most people are even consciously aware that road deaths are reported in a manner that is equivalent to "man dies after collision with bullet."

Indyzign 🏳️‍⚧️ 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 “not unpopular” I’d argue is a moot point. In my experience, aside from areas around schools and housing estates etc, I’d estimate that <10% of drivers stick to 20mph, this also includes every single police vehicle I’ve followed in 20mph zones.

Bruno Girin Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 they're not the only ones, the town of Lorient in Brittany shows the same, 50% fewer serious accidents (in French): https://www.letelegramme.fr/morbihan/lorient-56100/a-lorient-pionniere-du-passage-a-30-kmh-le-nombre-daccidents-graves-a-ete-divise-par-deux-6778297.php

À Lorient, pionnière du passage à 30 km/h, « le nombre d’accidents graves a été divisé par deux »

Les villes à 30 km/h fleurissent en France. La Bretagne en compte une cinquantaine. Lorient a montré la voie, en 2007. Près de 100 % de ses rues sont bridées à 30 km/h, voire 20. Avec quels choix et quels premiers effets ? Reportage.

Le Télégramme

Ken M Sweeney Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 Ireland is terrible as well and we need to permanently limit the speed of vehicles. Being capable of reaching speeds up to the 200 kph in some vehicles is outrageous and murderous. If drivers won't adhere and manufacturers won't drop the speed then legislation needs to take over.

Younes Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6
20m/h I'd take 4 hours to get to work

Leia Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 That's one of the most striking arguments I've heard, pointing it the normalisation of road traffic deaths.

Tim Ward ⭐🇪🇺🔶 #FBPE Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 How many covid deaths per year does Wales "find acceptable"?

Orrock LXXXVI XLVII Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 this passage describes my hometown of Betkekey to a T.

A study he led, based in the UK, US and the Netherlands, found that two-thirds of people believed they personally supported non-car travel more than the public at large. This is an example of a social-psychological phenomenon called pluralistic ignorance, where people automatically assume the consensus must differ from their own views.

In this case, it seemingly happens “because people rarely see changes to the car-first status quo being seriously discussed or supported, let alone implemented”, Walker argues. As such, he says, consultations on 20mph zones tend to be dominated by dissent, with supporters silent as they assume they are in the minority.

There is, perhaps, a lesson here for politicians, although not an easy one: sometimes it can be best to ignore the noisiest voices, and take the evidence-based course.

Winter Trabex Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6

How is that working out over there?

In America, people regularly ignore the speed limit, pay no attention to cyclists, scooters, etc. There's a bit of a car fetish, especially in the spring, where people just do what they want to do.

It's a good time for municipalities to see an influx of fine payments, at least.

Danny James McDonogh Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 Yeah, but surely there’s a tipping point where we save so many lives that people just start dying of boredom instead. I mean, sure—we all live longer, but we spend those extra years behind the wheel doing 20mph.

bewilderbeast23 Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 The Jeremies must be horrified

https://www.barcelona.cat/mobilitat/en/barcelona-30-city

Chuckles Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 another reason why IMPERIAL MEASURES KILL PEOPLE.

But seriously, Barcelona went from 50 to 30km/h and became a much, much safer and *cleaner* place to live.

"Reducing the speed limit from 50 to 30 kph reduces the number of deaths due to being run over from 45% to 5%."

Barcelona 30 City | Mobility and transport | Barcelona City Council

Barcelona has already had 30 kph speed limits for several years, in 30 Zones and on streets with only one traffic lane (or one lane in each direction on two-way streets). This means that over half the city streets where traffic is permitted already have a 30 kph speed limit.

Mobility and transport

DoomsdaysCW Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 A town back home in Massachusetts (Amesbury) did something similar. I think 30mph, but it made a big difference in safety!

derptron Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 I thought only we Americans were silly enough to be STILL refusing to use the metric system :p

Epistatacadam Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 I suspect increasing taxation on those earning over £100k per year would be very popular, perhaps bring back the very high rate for those with incomes from all sources over£250k.oh and lift capital gains to the same as your top income tax rate.

Emeritus Prof Christopher May Mar 22, 2025

@epistatacadam

the last point is the key one..... makes such sense, its hard to believe its not been done.... oh, wait a minuet

AntJBro Mar 22, 2025

@ChrisMayLA6 I drive through Wales regularly (visiting children studying at two excellent universities, both at different ends of the country) where it’s in place the 20mph limit is not actually a problem.
Also just been driving through France - most towns/villages have 30kph zones for safety - not actually a problem.

@ChrisMayLA6

It's the other way around, I think.

It's every bit as obvious as it is irrelevant that a slower speed reduces the overall chance of collision and mitigates its effects.

Never heard of a crash involving snails, after all.

And yet, there are a few places in the world, usually called a FIA grade 1 track, where a few elite athletes can push state-of-the-art machinery to 250+mph on a daily basis with no consequences.

This seems to suggest that
- the performance of vehicle and tires
- the training and fitness of the driver
- the type and condition of the road
- road rules
- the time of the day
- etc

might have something to do what a "safe speed" is.

In fact, unless the road is perfectly straight this speed will at the very least vary along it ("slow in, fast out" is how you navigate a bend, never the other way around).

The speed differential between object is also part of the equation (an object traveling at 300mph and hitting a still object is different than hitting an object traveling 299mph in the same direction and verse).

I'm an extremely conservative driver and rider (I've been called "boring" before), and I do think we are not doing nearly enough about safety.

Yet I'm extremely irked by the "speed limit crusaders": reducing speed or banning powered vehicles altogether is a certain way of reducing harm, but... in the same way in which starving is a great remedy for obesity.

- How many people drive around with shitty, dangerous and entirely random lines?

- How many people have no driving technique at all, and routinely unsettle the chassis when going into a bend?

- How many people can't brake at all and will slam the brakes without even trying to preload the front?

- How many people drive at a steady 1000rpm, with no control of their speed (whatever the idle + 5th gear is, really) and no engine brake available to them?

- How many people drive around casually chatting with and looking at their passenger instead of the road?

- How many people skip maintenance on their vehicles?

- How many people are driving around with ancient tires?

- How many people are trained to deal to navigate ice or gravel, the way every boring Scandinavian mum can?

- How many people DRIVE DRUNK?

Of course it's not an unpopular policy.
People like shortcuts.

But what if we could actually teach motorists to drive instead?

What if we could reduce antisocial behaviour at the wheel (texting, chatting, etc)?

What if we could have regular, mandatory training on lines, grip, maintenance, emergency maneuvers, etc?

Maybe we could (gasp) use powered vehicles to quickly, pleasurably and safely go from A to B, without everybody having to halt to a standstill because your drunk Uncle Grady or Aunt Karen just has to text while driving a 2500kg truck with 10 year old tires and no idea of what a proper line is or how to progressively brake.

@somedude @ChrisMayLA6

all right. But, still:

@amigaunicorn @ChrisMayLA6 Are you perhaps suggesting that making low speeds even lower isn't as beneficial as slowing down extreme outliers? :-)

@somedude @ChrisMayLA6

no. I am stating your own body has a mass. Speeding, it grows some kinetic energy. Once you stop suddenly, regardless of what everything else does or not all around, this energy will do some “work” on your body. That's it.

@amigaunicorn @ChrisMayLA6 Well, yeah.

Which is why having to stop suddenly amounts to a defeat for the sane motorist.

Stopping 30cm from a pedestrian or hitting the pedestrian is virtually the same.

You'd want to progressively shed speed as you get closer to a pedestrian crossing, a side road, a blind curve or whatever impairs your line of sight.

Alas, most motorists can't do a limo stop (i.e. going from 1mph to 0mph smoothly).

@somedude @ChrisMayLA6 pedestrian or not, changes nothing. This is the amount if kinetic energy your body hosts. Even if you crash alone, with no pedestrian or anyone else involved, this is the energy which will work in your body.

@amigaunicorn @ChrisMayLA6 I could have said "stopping 30cm from a tree amounts to hitting the tree", of course, but pedestrians crossing "out of nowhere" (yeah, my ass) seem to be the main challenge for distracted drivers, aka LBFTS or SMIDSY.

Sudden stops are bad.

Sudden stops are essentially crashes but for one small, random, epsilon of luck, as I said you want to have zero.

If you're having sudden stops of any kind you want to reconsider your driving.

The silver lining is that the G forces experienced by occupants of an ordinary vehicle in almost all controlled or semi-controlled (aka "ABS") stops can't do serious damage... unless we're talking Formula 1, where the drivers have huge necks to withstand the insane Gs.

@somedude @ChrisMayLA6 a teacher once told me "you can't talk physics". The point is, this is the amount of energy trying to do bad things to your body, you can't get rid of it, and it grows with the square of the speed.

Why should I add something? You can't talk physics.

@amigaunicorn @ChrisMayLA6

The point is, this is the amount of energy trying to do bad things to your body, you can't get rid of it, and it grows with the square of the speed. Entirely right.

Therefore, avoid shedding that energy all at once, because you can't talk physics :-)

Or do you propose getting rid of the Shinkansen just because there happens to be a whole lot of energy in that thing? :-)

@somedude @ChrisMayLA6

no. Nevertheless, I won't put millions of them on the streets.

somedude May 27, 2025

Eh, they're already there, that's the problem.
And they're crossed with oiler ships.

Horsepower in the 100s, weight in the double thousands (so you get a big m as well, although constant), wheelbase over three metres.

We can distractedly drive them at cycling speeds, thus engineering traffic jams everywhere, or demand that those who want to go slightly (slightly!) faster than cycling speeds approach them as the technical tools they are.

It would sadden me if we decided we'd rather have fat mums driving 3 metre-wide beasts at cycling speeds while tiktoking rather than just pedaling and shedding some of their massive weight, that's all.

I have a thought for you: if you think about it, civilisation can be characterised as the amount of energy (kinetic, chemical...) humans can safely handle.

Sometimes you have to accept that humans can't handle that much energy, because the human brain is limited in size; sometimes you have to strive for learning to handle it.

Where to draw the line?
No clear-cut answer, of course.

Uriel Fanelli May 27, 2025

@somedude

millions of hi-speed japanese trains on the streets?

uhm.