The absurdity of the proposal is already in the title, and shows how motonormativity is spread all over the world.

Berlin has a very good public transit system, and a few 30 km/h zones cannot be that bad.

I would love to hear opinions from someone who lives there!

crossposted from: https://mastodon.uno/users/rivoluzioneurbanamobilita/statuses/114732266280428499

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -1 points 1 year ago (17 children)
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The evidence of studies says that you are wrong.

    Here are some key points from a study summary that was made for London: 20mph zones do not appear to worsen air quality and they dramatically reduce road danger. They also support a shift to walking and cycling, generate less traffic noise and reduce community severance. In 20mph zones vehicles move more smoothly with fewer accelerations and decelerations. This driving style produces fewer particulate emissions.

    https://content.tfl.gov.uk/speed-emissions-and-health.pdf

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    The article/slideshow I linked is not a specific scientific study that was done in London, it's a summary/aggregate of other studies that are referenced at the end of the slideshow. It was a study summary made for London, but the science behind it is a lot more general.

    I'm from Belgium and from my own personal experience, I find that well done low speed zones really do improve the flow of traffic. Cities in the Netherlands have been at it for probably over 2 decades, Antwerp has followed their example since about a decade and now other cities in Flanders are copying Antwerp's homework. When done well, it works really well and almost noone wants to go back to how it used to be. You're right in that coordinated traffic lights are a big part of why the traffic flows much better, but in congested streets, a lower speed is needed to keep that flow going.

    In Belgium we also have a big example of how to not do street renewal/traffic improvement programs: Brussels.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Tire and brake particulate is a real air quality impact that is either worse with EVs (for tire particulate because they are heavier) or mitigated, but still present for EVs (for brake particulate because regenerative braking reduces but does not eliminate the use of physical brake pads). For ICE cars (which are still the dominant form of car when looking at what's on the road today), efficiency might go up in terms of fuel consumed per mile at a steady speed of 90 kph, but urban driving involves a lot of stopping and going, and reducing the speed limit reduces the amount and intensity of acceleration being done, which is where emissions are going to be worst. Also, the existence of 30 kph zones encourages alternatives to driving, whether that is low-no emission modes like walking, biking, or transit, or moving car trips away from the 30 kph zones to other areas (there's a potential negative externality to the latter, but if done well, this can move car airborne emissions away from where a lot of people live and play and towards corridors and areas that are designed with uses that are more tolerant to poor outdoor air quality (e.g.: industrial parks, generally lower density areas, etc.)). That's not to mention road vehicle noise pollution (sometimes considered part of air pollution, but most times not) and safety benefits that come alongside the air quality benefits discussed in this article from having fewer and slower cars

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    in general, efficiency goes up till ~90km/h.

    Are you talking about fuel efficiency or total emission though? The efficiency might go up but the emission might still go up, it might be less emission per km/h but maybe not per km.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    Are you saying that going to 90km/h emit less than going 30km/h?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    In Berlin, only 3% of all registered cars are pure electric cars (numbers from 2024).

    Speeds of 30 km/h lower the emissions of nitrogen oxide from cars with combustion engines. This happens because of significant reduction of pollutant-laden acceleration processes.

    The reduction of emissions from such a speed limit is based on more uniform traffic flows.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Lower speeds reduce road danger

    Are extra casualties and reduced freedom for people who aren't driving worth the few minutes saved for a minority of people?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Slow speeds make public transit a little more attractive to people on a time budget.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    This is not necessarily the case - it has been shown that slower car speeds in cities leads to better traffic flows and thus can lead to more efficiency of car travel, less traffic jams. So everyone driving slower can lead to more reliability and less average travel duration of cars.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment