101–110 of 196 posts
Yes! This will save at least 3 lives a year! Even one life counts!
When it’s your life it makes a world of difference. Public space is shared space, the car lobby has tricked you into believing it’s primarily for cars, but it’s wrong. Free up your mind, drive slowly, be kind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not surprisingly, the socialism is blatantly obvious. Seeing as the social democratic[0] PvdA is currently the largest political party in the Amsterdam city council[1], with the greens a close second, that's all in line with what the people of Amsterdam want. This is Europe. Socialism isn't a scare word here. If anything, it's a rallying cry. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy 1. https://en.wikipedia…
Maybe you should ask some older eastern Europeans what they think about socialism, before haughtily speaking for everyone who lives in Europe. Socialism and its national variant wrecked Europe in the 20th century. People celebrated when it ended. To call it a rallying cry given that history is quite gross.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also surprising how much safer that little speed change is for pedestrians/cyclists if they were to get hit. https://www.nullvisjonen-agder.no/images/grafikk/dodsrisiko-... Speed in km/h vs death rate. From about 10% death (90% survival) at 30 km/h (~18mph) to about 80% death (only 20% survival!) at 50 km/h (~31 mph)
I think this is by far the biggest reason for the preference for 30 km/h. Reduced noise and pollution are certainly nice, but killing far less people is huge.
Also, no, ICE cars generally don't pollute less at 30km/h, compared to 50km/h. Engine does the same work, just at lower gear.
Yes! This will save at least 3 lives a year! Even one life counts!
Yes! This will save at least 3 lives a year! Even one life counts!
Someone else commented here that when hit by a car at 50 kph, there's a 20% chance of survival, and at 30%, there's a 90% chance of survival. So in the best case, this might save 35 lives per year. Not to mention the reduction in noise, pollution, and damage to vehicles. I think that's easily worth it.
Wales (UK) did this about a week ago. Setting 20mph as a limit in urban areas. I was there yesterday and now the problem is that it's very unclear where exactly it applies and if it will be enforced. Also satnavs such as Apple and Google maps have not been updated for the new speeds leading to further confusion. There are some areas where this makes sense, but a blanket change seems political. Hopefully it will cause…
Less pollution not so much, everyone will be in 2nd gear, less deaths perhaps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
5000 signs at once is not slowly, but this isn't new. It wouldn't surprise me if Amsterdam already had 5000 30 km signs before this (I'm trying to find data but I can't find anything). The street I live in is a 30 km zone, as are most other residential streets in the city. They're not starting something new; they're expanding it even further. Probably because of the experience they have acquired with slower speeds ov…
It wouldn't surprise me either about the 5000 signs already there. Except you are presenting this new 5000 signs as something incremental while at the same time arguing it might be a doubling.
And consistency is also important. Having some streets 30 km/h while similar streets in other places are 50 km/h can be confusing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm fan of the concept of superblocks. You can drive inside them, but not between them. Want to go from block A to D? Can't drive through B and C. Need to drive out to the ring road, then follow it and into block D. Makes it so that no through traffic at speed goes through the areas where people live and stay.
The mere suggestion of this in Oxford has caused people to go completely mental and invoke all sorts of WEF conspiracy theories. It might work but the public transport alternatives need to be the working default first.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is by far the biggest reason for the preference for 30 km/h. Reduced noise and pollution are certainly nice, but killing far less people is huge.
Why not reduce speed to 10km/h then? Even fewer people will be killed! This is the covid logic all over again. Let's lock everyone in their homes, we can't afford to have old people dying! Also, no, ICE cars generally don't pollute less at 30km/h, compared to 50km/h. Engine does the same work, just at lower gear.
It depends on how the street is used. There are places where maximum speed is 10 km/h. I grew up in the street like that: a "woonerf", a residential area where the street is explicitly meant for playing children, and cars have to go at pedestrian speeds of 5 or 10 km/h. The goal these is to not lock up kids in their homes, but encourage them to play outside, which is great. These were fairly new but popular in the 1980s and late 1970s, but not so common anymore, sadly.
30 km/h is roughly the speed bicycle of bicycles and similar vehicles. Not suitable for playing kids, but more suitable for mixed through traffic. Driving through an entire city at 10 km/h would be as tedious as walking that entire distance, but 30 km/h is very doable.