Mattchaps Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 ...to cut air and noise pollution at peak times Ok, so it's only between Jct's 6-8 and only during peak times, but it's yet another plan to be put in action with the reasons being to "cut pollution"... Soon we won't be able to have private cars at all. BBC story here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuprabob Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 I seen an advert on TV the other night that was asking you to name and shame anyone who left their car idling when stationary and gave a phone number. God help anyone who cuts me up on my commute now, their number plate is going to be called in What on earth is this country coming to? You will soon be fined if you fart in a public place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A3Floyd Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 50mph on the M20? surely that will cause accidents! i mean, its a race-track, that road and pretty much everyone does between 70 and 100. Luckily for me, i come off at j4 so no silly 50mph nonsense for me but if you know the road you'll know that ALL of the accidents happen at the points where the traffic slows down, usually where the m26 joins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ari Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 [ QUOTE ] I seen an advert on TV the other night that was asking you to name and shame anyone who left their car idling when stationary and gave a phone number. [/ QUOTE ] And what are they going to do with that information? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuprabob Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 I don't know how they can do it without proof but I guess they would want to issue a warning letter and possibly a fine. Around here they have wardens who allegedly watch out for drivers who park up and leave there cars idling and can issue fixed penalty notices. We even have litter wardens who can issue fines, don'tknow how many times "Mickey Mouse" has been caught dropping litter. It really is the lunatics have taken over the asylum. In 10 or 20 years we're all going to be looking back and saying "how come we let that happen?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patently Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 Come come .... these are serious issues of moment. I mean, it's not as if our Government has anything better to do, is it? They way TSN moans about all these pointless pettifogging intrusions into the life of reasonable people, you'd think there were more pressing issues around, like, oh I don't know, two wars, an international credit crunch, our prisons full to bursting and crime still rising or something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuprabob Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mook Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 [ QUOTE ] ...to cut air and noise pollution at peak times [/ QUOTE ] It works without any problems in Germany on the Autobahns, where they're de-restricted most of the time, but between X and Y in the morning and A and B in the evening, there's a limit. What's the problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byron13 Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] ...to cut air and noise pollution at peak times [/ QUOTE ] It works without any problems in Germany on the Autobahns, where they're de-restricted most of the time, but between X and Y in the morning and A and B in the evening, there's a limit. What's the problem? [/ QUOTE ] Conversely "What's the point?" Have to admit if I came across that I would then feel obliged to catch up the average time lost on my journey. Any forced variance in natural traffic flow has a concertina effect 20 miles back down the road which will probably cause more pollution anyway with all the stop start motoring!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruiser647 Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] ...to cut air and noise pollution at peak times [/ QUOTE ] It works without any problems in Germany on the Autobahns, where they're de-restricted most of the time, but between X and Y in the morning and A and B in the evening, there's a limit. What's the problem? [/ QUOTE ] Conversely "What's the point?" Have to admit if I came across that I would then feel obliged to catch up the average time lost on my journey. Any forced variance in natural traffic flow has a concertina effect 20 miles back down the road which will probably cause more pollution anyway with all the stop start motoring!! [/ QUOTE ] Does that part of the M20 flow at 50mph anyway? Constant flow rate is better. It will stop the stop/start effect of people braking for everything at the last minute. Hence less pollution with cars not accelerating so much, less noise (same as before) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mook Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 Depends whether you live next to the motorway I guess. Isn't there two sides to every story? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byron13 Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 Agree but in most cases if you buy a house next to a major Road you have to expect it really - same goes for all the houses I see every morning on the edges of the train line, god knows why someone would buy these !! Must be a nightmare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattchaps Posted March 18, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] ...to cut air and noise pollution at peak times [/ QUOTE ] It works without any problems in Germany on the Autobahns, where they're de-restricted most of the time, but between X and Y in the morning and A and B in the evening, there's a limit. What's the problem? [/ QUOTE ] I guess I'm more annoyed about the fact that they give the reasons for it to be pollution related rather than congestion related.. At peak times I'd say that this part of the motorway flows well at around 60mph anyway,so why enforce 50mph? During off peak.. well as someone suggested it's not unusual for most of the traffic to be flowing at 90+ It just seems to me it's another "green" plan that's completely pointless and going to make feck all difference in the "real world" apart from p!ss everyone off because (IMO) there is no need for it. If they want to cut pollution why not just make the whole fecking motorway 50mph at all times. What a bunch of buttwipes Sorry, I'm not having a good day and need to let of steam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mook Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 I would suggest that the pollution bit is to get buy-in from people who support green stuff, but the main reason is for noise pollution. They've spent an absolute mint installing high fences and greenery on the M3 to absorb and stop noise - the option on the M20 is obviously a lot cheaper to implement... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byron13 Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 Have to admit it reminds me of one of the anti airport expansion arguments - of course it's bloody noisy at airports what did you expect when they bought the house, airports are likely to expand and have more flights, engine noise is actually better these days but you get more of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruiser647 Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 [ QUOTE ] I would suggest that the pollution bit is to get buy-in from people who support green stuff, but the main reason is for noise pollution. They've spent an absolute mint installing high fences and greenery on the M3 to absorb and stop noise - the option on the M20 is obviously a lot cheaper to implement... [/ QUOTE ] Cheaper - consideringthey are butt reaming motorists on tax, surely they can spend a bit on extra greenery around the motorways to help absorb a token amount of CO2 and a lot of noise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanG Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 They would be better off resurfacing it to reduce noise, its a Concrete road - not even Tarmac. And as a result it makes a hell of a racket. Also, it's mostly coaches of Polish workers on that section.... so once the UK government starts the Work Visa scheme, it should solve the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techieboy Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 They'd certainly be better off rebuilding the whole thing. It's got to be the worst bit of motorway in the country. Concrete surface, HGV ruts, edges along the expansion joints breaking up, piss poor drainage and fleets of Eastern European trucks racing each other along all 3 lanes and diving off onto the M25 at the last second. What a welcome to the UK motorway system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuprabob Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 [ QUOTE ] It's got to be the worst bit of motorway in the country. [/ QUOTE ] I think you'll find that accolade goes to the M8 that runs between Glasgow and Edinburgh. In fact there is still few miles of it that still arn't classed as motorway. The road is full of potholes and uffers from subsidence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S3_Scot Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 A woman reported me loading my car outside my flat at the end of pelican crossin zig-zags on a sunday, so they gave me 3 points & £60 fine wWile i spent a lovely twenty minutes in the back of the police car (also on zig zags) being called a criminal, warning me not to use my mobile when driving, explaining that if I receive 12 points they will crush my car and so on, another woman knocked on the window to report people parked in the bust stop up the road. 3rd party reporting is not the sign of a trusting and respectful society!! ps. Having used the M20 and now the M8 regularly, the M8 is much worse overall. Poor road surfacing, crazy lane system, mad junctions and lots and lots of random flooding. Pleased with 4WD!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 God don't we all complain. I went to Switzerland what must have been 15 years ago now and they had similar to what is being proposed in the UK today. In the summer speed limits were dropped to reduce pollution as it stayed in the valleys with the lack of wind also if I think if you were the 3rd person in the queue at a set of lights or later you had to switch off your engine when you came to a stop. If you didn't it was on the spot fine no questions asked. They all pretty much copied this religiously and taxi drivers et al didn't just sit there with their cars idling either, in fact I even saw them push them forward rather than start them to move them forward a few feet. I think for both the environment AND for congestion I can see it working, its certainly very effective on the M42 around Birmingham now. Gone are the stupidly long tailbacks at rush hour instead you have a steady flow of traffic and a shorter journey time, surely thats what we all want from a journey in busy conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruiser647 Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 [ QUOTE ] I think if you were the 3rd person in the queue at a set of lights or later you had to switch off your engine when you came to a stop. If you didn't it was on the spot fine no questions asked. They all pretty much copied this religiously and taxi drivers et al didn't just sit there with their cars idling either, in fact I even saw them push them forward rather than start them to move them forward a few feet. I think for both the environment AND for congestion I can see it working, its certainly very effective on the M42 around Birmingham now. Gone are the stupidly long tailbacks at rush hour instead you have a steady flow of traffic and a shorter journey time, surely thats what we all want from a journey in busy conditions. [/ QUOTE ] That is one helluva lot of extra wear and tear on the starter and battery. The extra batteries probably negates any 'environmental' benefit gained from turning off/on. How many cars would breakdown in those queues. It's bad enough on the M1 in the roadworks. Everyday, some-one breaks down and it causes havoc. They'll also need damn good ANPR and heat seeking cameras to find those idling in the traffic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I think if you were the 3rd person in the queue at a set of lights or later you had to switch off your engine when you came to a stop. If you didn't it was on the spot fine no questions asked. They all pretty much copied this religiously and taxi drivers et al didn't just sit there with their cars idling either, in fact I even saw them push them forward rather than start them to move them forward a few feet. I think for both the environment AND for congestion I can see it working, its certainly very effective on the M42 around Birmingham now. Gone are the stupidly long tailbacks at rush hour instead you have a steady flow of traffic and a shorter journey time, surely thats what we all want from a journey in busy conditions. [/ QUOTE ] That is one helluva lot of extra wear and tear on the starter and battery. The extra batteries probably negates any 'environmental' benefit gained from turning off/on. How many cars would breakdown in those queues. It's bad enough on the M1 in the roadworks. Everyday, some-one breaks down and it causes havoc. They'll also need damn good ANPR and heat seeking cameras to find those idling in the traffic! [/ QUOTE ] Well they have been doing it for 15 years plus all summer each year so I guess someone should go and ask them. They do it to keep the air clear due to no diesel etc. pushing out lots of soot that lingers rather than a pure environmental view per say. But it sure was nice and clear and fresh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biscuits Posted April 4, 2008 Report Share Posted April 4, 2008 I bet these moaning feckin barstewards didn't moan about the house price being lower due to being near the motorway... These kind of ignorant selfish toasters need to be shot. GGGGRRRRRRR ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon magnifique Posted April 4, 2008 Report Share Posted April 4, 2008 I'm a bit late into this thread so forgive me if I'm repeating anyone. Surely the main 'culprits' of noise pollution are all the goods vehicles going to and from the docks? Given the vast najority of them are limited 56mph anyway, I really can't see how enforcing a 50mph limit for everyone would make much difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now