Road humps were brought in with the claim they would save lives. But instead they cost lives. Last week the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) said “smooth” driving would cut air pollution, linked to 25,000 deaths a year in England.”
The NICE report follows an earlier one from Imperial College which “found that in one north London street with a speed limit of 20mph and fitted with road humps, a petrol driven car produced 64 per cent more Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) than in a similar 20mph street fitted with road cushions. It also produced 47 per cent more Particulate Matter (PM) and nearly 60 per cent more Carbon Monoxide (CO2) emissions.”
Another report from the University of York said humps should be removed from outside schools and playgrounds.
Yet the Council refuses to even allow residents a choice about removing humps when roads are resurfaced.
Nick Boyle, the Council’s Chief Transport Planner tells me:
“We shall be reviewing the published NICE consultation guidelines in due course, with colleagues.
1. No humps have been installed or removed in the last two years.
2. No consultation to remove humps is currently undertaken during resurfacing.”
Here is the link to the NICE report so people can read what it actually says rather than the “spin” applied by some reporting.
Note that what is actually says is about road humps is “The evidence is weak”.
Evidence on using lower speed limits encouraging smoother driving and providing real-time information showed that reducing stop–go driving could help reduce emissions of pollutants [ES6.4, ES11.1]
This was supported by the committee’s understanding of air pollution and the effect of accelerations and deceleration. The evidence was weak so this was a ‘consider’ recommendation.
Evidence on traffic-calming measures such as speed bumps suggested that these may increase emissions by adding to decelerations and accelerations [ES5.2].
Evidence from area-wide schemes does not show increases [ES5.3]. So where physical
measures are needed to reduce road injuries they should be designed to minimise
their impact on air pollution
The evidence was weak so this was a ‘consider’ recommendation.
Just to add, I look forward to support for creation of more roads with separated cycle lanes in the borough,because unlike road humps, this was a ‘strong’ recommendation by NICE.
Not sure why you want cycle lanes – isn’t that what pavements are ?