Speed humps 'bad for environment'

January 25, 2008

| Submit Comments | Comments (26) | Previous | Next

THEY may be popular with residents wanting to slow traffic in their street, but research has shown speed humps are bad for the environment.

The traffic calming measure, widely used in residential areas, can increase fuel consumption by 47% on 30mph roads, a study commissioned by the AA has found.

The study, carried out by an independent engineer and car tester, found that the average car achieves 58.15 miles per gallon (mpg) at a steady speed of 30mph.

But when going over humps, it will reach only 30.85mpg.

The results were calculated by averaging the results of two cars.

It also found that cutting the speed limit from 30mph to 20mph pumps up CO2 emissions by 10%.

The research is the first in the AA's new Fuel for Thought campaign.

The motoring organisation said that it accepted that 20mph speed limits in residential areas are popular and improve safety.

But while a 20mph limit along shorter roads with junctions and roundabouts can reduce fuel consumption, a 30mph limit on local distributor roads may be more environmentally friendly.

Edmund King, the AA's president, said: "Transport and highways planners have little or no official guidance on the environmental impact of 20 mph speed limits.

"It would be a bitter and unpalatable irony if local authorities, that have targeted owners of larger vehicles with environmental charges, are found guilty of pumping up CO2 emissions through indiscriminate use of 20 mph restrictions."

What do you think? Have your say.

| Submit Comments | Comments (26) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

ace, manchester (25/01/2008 at 11:28)

Speed humps dont do what they are designed to do "Slow traffic" All that these do is cause more road noise and damage cars they also add to accidents where people try and guide their cars around these speed cushions.

They also slow emergency services which in effect cost lives. These speed calming measures are badly thought out kneejerk ideas so that the authority can save money on policing our roads....

Blue Chris, On The Blue Moon (25/01/2008 at 12:01)

This is what I have said all along -it's a no brainer really !!
Driver's still speed on roads with speed bumps, they just slow down for the bump then put their foot down churning out more emissions and creating more wear and tare on the car, increasing the need for more replacement parts, therefore even more waste !!

Snare Drum (Manchester Against Road Tolls), Ashton-under-Lyne (25/01/2008 at 12:13)

It has been common knowledge for some time about the CO2 emissions from cars going at 20mph and should have been clamped down on, years ago. Far to many roads have been made into 24hr 20mph zones for no apparent reason. If they are there for schools, then they should only be 20mph at school in and out times and then set back to 30mph. On top of this, they also contribute to congestion, by slowing down traffic, in particular, during rush hour. For some insane reason, the owness has been taken off children to learn the highway code, and to put it all onto the motorist, yet again.

The Bobelesque (25/01/2008 at 12:27)

I drive a leased car so I don't worry about speed bumps - I just crash over them. I firmly belive that failing to reduce my speed is minimising my carbon footprint. Am I right?

Leo B (25/01/2008 at 12:34)

....and the sun will rise topmorrow morning. Fact of Life: we all know it - except those whose jobs depend upon the creation presence and repair of speed humps.
BREAKING NEWS...they increase noise pollution as well: do you want one outside your bedroom window when you're trying to sleep at night?

Bill, Kiriat Motzkin (25/01/2008 at 12:55)

It should be possible to drive in any way you see fit and then call all resulting death and injury "an accident"

j the el, mancunia (25/01/2008 at 13:01)

if you've gottem on the road outside your house - they also reduce your house value...dig 'em up..

Chris, Irlam (25/01/2008 at 13:10)

Tell us something we don't know?

What next - 'Al Gore & the Greens overstate MMCC fears' perhaps?

alvinlwh (25/01/2008 at 13:20)

And if the anti speed gang have it their way, we will see speed humps on the M60 too!

Timberman, MANCHESTER (25/01/2008 at 14:21)

If "transport and highways planners have little or no guidance on the environmental
impact of 20mph speed limits"

Who then authorised there construction in the first place, was it that junior who seems to get the blame when things go wrong. Come on, own up who started it.

The Thunderer (25/01/2008 at 14:26)

So the true nature of many of the regular contributors to comments is exposed! We even know their favourite TV programme - Top Gear. We even know their motto - Go anywhere, drive everywhere, drive anyway I like, so the consequences to the rest of you!

The evidence for traffic calming is overwhelming - it does cut average speeds and as a result the risk to pedestrians is greatly reduced. It is established that travelling at 20 mph only causes minor injuries to pedestrians, 30 mph causes serious injury and death, and above even more serious impacts.

Reducing speed limits to 20 mph without any physical measures does not work. It reduces the average speed of vehicles by 1 mph! So it is an area or a road with speeding already reducing speed limits will not work.

I am glad to see that the selfishness of the Top Gear personalities emerges through these columns. There is no care for other people only their own convenience and car. And what is your response when your child or elderly relative is knocked over. Using the environment as an excuse for their own bad driving behaviour is wrong and should be condemned.

Bring on 20 mph speed restrictions in all our urban areas.

PS I do own a car and have had a driven for 37 years!

Blue Chris, On The Blue Moon (25/01/2008 at 15:41)

The thunderer- the speed bumps outside my house do not slow people down, if anything the cars go faster -They were built becase my road is a short cut, but volume of traffic has not reduced and driver's don't slow down- it just creates much more noises and damage to the roads than before (Plus it seems that all VWs, Audis and Skodas can not clear these bumps and scrape over them - the oil sump gaurd is very low on these cars), so considering most Taxis round my way are Skodas this causes a lot of noise!! Not to mention when wagons go over them!!
In summary - they do not slow people down, they cause more noise, they damage the road, they damage the vehicles, they are bad for the environment !!

Chris, Irlam (25/01/2008 at 16:12)

Go away Kurt, your comments have been duly noted & ignored - as per usual.

Iain Monks (25/01/2008 at 17:27)

Its true that an accident at 20mph is less likely to result in a pedestrian being killed.

Unfortunatly, each speed hump increases the journey time of an ambulance or fire engine by 10 seconds.

A study done in Colorado showed that for every life saved by speed bumps 85 are lost through delays to emergency services.

David, Manchester (25/01/2008 at 18:04)

I want 20 mph speed limits on my housing estate and traffic calming speed bumps and chicanes to make it safe for children. Cars have to take second place to other road users because children are more important and we need to encourage people to walk and cycle by making, it safe. This emphasis on cars is causing the obesity epidemic.

Timberman, MANCHESTER (25/01/2008 at 18:21)

David, Manchester:-
Wake up and stop looking at the world through rose tinted glasses. This is the real world, so stop stamping your feet and yelling " I want 20mph speed limits etc.................". You can put your dummy back in now.

Snare Drum (Manchester Against Road Tolls), Ashton-under-Lyne (25/01/2008 at 18:31)

Surely teaching children that it's safe to play on roads is counterproductive. As I said earlier in this post, the highway code has been abandoned and this cannot be a good thing. I taught my kids safety, that way they look before walking out into the road, they are responsible for their own safety. Pavements for pedestrians, roads for cars, not to difficult to understand.

Ed Prestwich, Manchester (25/01/2008 at 19:31)

Snare Drum I am glad you brought up the subject of the Highway Code! I suggest most of you have not read a copy for a number of years judging by the driving. As for Pavements for walking I suggest next time you are out driving YOU COUNT EVERY CAR PARKED ON THE PAVEMENT AND TELL THE OWNERS SUCH !!!!!

Snare Drum (Manchester Against Road Tolls), Ashton-under-Lyne (25/01/2008 at 20:11)

Ed, I have reported such to the police, who don't care to take any action. As for me driving, this is not possible due to having MND which has stopped me driving but not taken away my common sense. Bring back the highway code for kids.

Bill, Kiriat Motzkin (26/01/2008 at 07:38)

Good point raised about speed bumps slowing down emergency response vehicles, drivers totally influenced by top gear. What alternatives are there to the speed bumps? I have seen two. The first is air filled bumps that deflate for vehicles with the correct signal. Expensive, and surely there would be a wild trade in the transmitters. The other one is to make all the road look like it is a pavement - parking spaces sticking out into the roadway, similar road surface, no clear kerbs, etc. Drivers are so unsure of where they are that they drive much more slowly.

ace, manchester (26/01/2008 at 12:55)

We keep hearing about new laws for motorists but where are the ones for pedestrians?
Like jay walking laws or the crackdown on children playing football on the pavements and roads? its always the motorist who has to pay the price never the pedestrian or the cyclists? how about charging some of the pedestrians for causing accidents etc.

alvinlwh (26/01/2008 at 12:56)

Actually have any realized that children are really bad for the environment?

p.s. I am talking about over population and the earth cannot sustain this many people anymore.

Ed Prestwich, Manchester (26/01/2008 at 23:26)

Ace we all know that the pedestrian has no rights at all in the eyes of the motorist. In fact reading some of the comments on this site the only vehicle to travel on our roads is the car. We such do away with bicycles and their lanes, get rid of buses and their lanes, move the 40 foot vehicles to the railways etc.
As far as pedestrians go most motorists have no respect for the pedestrian and the few laws that are there to protect them. When it comes to the point where you have to physically cross the road and walk on the other side because some brainless idiot has parked his car fully on the pavement then what do you expect us to do? We end up jaywalking yes. Why not give the pedestrian the right to cross the road at designated places ie traffic lights and give us sufficient time to cross the road at pelican crossings instead of the lights changing half way across. Perhaps if this could be implemented then there may be fewer people jaywalking. Here's another thing to consider I would guess that most of the pedestrians you speak about are in fact drivers themselves.

Snare Drum (Manchester Against Road Tolls), Ashton-under-Lyne (27/01/2008 at 13:11)

It is up to the police to sort out those that park on pavements, but that doesn't mean that kids should play on roads meanwhile. Pedestrians have rights, but they like everyone else must be responsible for their own safety and not depend on the motorist looking out them. I have to cross the road in a powered wheelchair, so I look and make sure the road is clear before crossing. My safety is in my hands. What about pedestrians that get hit while crossing the motorway, they know the rules. As an ex motorist, I know there are a lot of signs telling us this that and the other, speed cameras, traffic lights, road calming obstacles and we even try to avoid pedestrians when they walk out into the road without looking.

Chris, Irlam (28/01/2008 at 09:24)

alvinlwh, excellent comments & exactly right. Just as more traffic increases CO2 emissions so does the unthinking proliferation of children in modern society. The time when we needed to procreated to ensure the survival of the species has long passed. Having children isn't the 'right' thing to do if you are environmentally concious!

()

Report

News