Previous   Next

Are you in favor of reducing the speed limit to lower greenhouse gas emissions?

Asked at Massachusetts Street on October 6, 2008

Browse the archives

Photo of Mary Gorski

“I would be in favor of that. I think it’s a small thing to do to make a big difference. What’s the hurry, anyway?”

Photo of An Cao

“I’m definitely in favor of lowering emissions to help the environment, but I think there are more practical solutions than lowering the speed limit. I would have to see the facts and know that it was greatly reducing them before I would be in favor of it.”

Photo of Joey Gipson

“I think they should lower it. It would probably make driving a lot more safe as well.”

Photo of Ashley Serrano

“No. I think that the speed limits are already too slow. I have a hard time staying under 70 as it is.”

Related story


looza 7 years, 1 month ago

when I eat alot of vegtables at home my house is full of greenhouse gases. I'm all for eliminating veggies!

71_Hawk 7 years, 1 month ago

I'm more in favor of reducing greenhouses, they keep too much oxygen in a confined area instead of letting it out in the atmosphere. Makes about as much sense as lowering the speed limit.

Flap Doodle 7 years, 1 month ago

I'd drive slower while I was enjoying a Klondike bar.

Tony Kisner 7 years, 1 month ago

Lowering the speed limit will even the playing field for those who can't afford to buy gas. Do we really want an America where only those who exploit the labor of poor people can drive their cars at high rates of speed? Power to the people!

tonythetiger 7 years, 1 month ago

I haven't heard too much about my horse and buggy. The horse poop isn't anything I have heard any complaints about by other people and it doesn't cost me anything in gasoline so I don't know how fuel efficient it is. Grass doesn't cost anything.My Bethany Alvarez special doesn't use any gasoline either. In fact I don't have to drive the buggy very far to find out.

BuffyloGal 7 years, 1 month ago

Gotta go with more fuel-efficient cars as being part of the answer. If 36 mpg is the best we can do, we have a long way to go!

average 7 years, 1 month ago

I'm going to have to agree with the no contingent.And, that's not because I drive fast or am opposed to lowering greenhouse gas emissions. I prefer 55-mph 2-lane roads and drive the most efficient car made in the US. But, I accept that I am a rare bird.Ultimately, what I'd like to see is a set of high-speed highways at a Darwinistic free-for-all. Then, I'd like to see a fully-connected grid of the secondary routes, friendly for cyclists, underpowered electric vehicles, farm equipment, animal teams, and hypermiling dawdlers restricted to, say, 45mph and STRICTLY enforced. Speed cameras, etc. I'd pick the latter much of the time.

nobody1793 7 years, 1 month ago

No, I'm in favor of lower speed limits because life already moves too fast, and people need to generally chill out.Ahonui. Aloha.

SMe 7 years, 1 month ago

Ahhhhhhhh. For the good ol' days when the Turnpike speed limit was 80.

janeyb 7 years, 1 month ago

I like the way Illinois does it's I-70 speed limit using a slower speed for Semi-trucks. Leave the speed limit in Kansas 70 mph, but drop the trucks to 60 and enforce it. It would do wonders for I-70 and I-44 in Missouri. I just drove to Indianapolis and back--at 68 mph--because Dad was with me and is on the save energy kick. His car perfoms best at 68 mph.

Mixolydian 7 years, 1 month ago

How does driving slower reduce emissions? I can see that it would save gas, but not reduce emissions.Didn't they already ask this question a month ago?

oldvet 7 years, 1 month ago

Yes, definitely lower the speed limit... lower it to 80mph on interstates/turnpike and to 70mph on other rural highways...

Flap Doodle 7 years, 1 month ago

TOB, if you have ammo, you can get booze.

badger 7 years, 1 month ago

So, if I drive 65 instead of 70, I gain perhaps an extra mile per gallon.If I have properly inflated tires, a tuned-up engine, a current oil change, a clean air filter, steady non-aggressive driving habits, cruise control on the long stretches, windows closed at speeds higher than 50 with the AC on 'recirculate', and proper alignment, I can gain four or five miles to the gallon.Instead of mandating tiny, incremental change with speed limits that doesn't do anything to address vehicle maintenance or aggressive/wasteful driving habits, why not mandate regular maintenance (easy to enforce as speed limits, frankly) and teach more efficient driving habits in Driver's Ed?Better yet, let's mount an aggressive campaign to tell people about more environmentally friendly driving habits, and let the cost of gas sort it out Darwin-style? I save probably a couple hundred bucks a year in gas with a three-dollar tire gauge.

ms_canada 7 years, 1 month ago

Nowhere in Alberta is the speed limit above 110KPH (65MPH) and we seem to be able to get to our destination quite nicely, thank you. On secondary highways it is only 60MPH. And since there are not too many freeways (where the speed is 110), we are mostly driving at 100KPH. I would wonder if our rate of highway deaths is less than south of the border. I don't think lowering the speed rate would lower emissions that much, so why bother, except for lower death rate, that is.

Trobs 7 years, 1 month ago

I love driving K-10 everyday and having those driving 80 pass me. It's even better when I pull up next to them at the Harper stoplight in Lawrence. Good thing you rushed!

RedwoodCoast 7 years, 1 month ago

I think reducing the speed limit is the wrong way to go about it. What we need are mandated fuel efficient vehicles that can still go 65. I think I would go insane if I had to drive 55 everywhere.

TheYetiSpeaks 7 years, 1 month ago

Why stop there? Let's go after the two biggest dumpers of carbon into our atmosphere. That's why I am spearheading the charge to lower the incidents of volcanoes and earthquakes. If we work together, maybe we can eliminate these mega polluters. Oh....and cows. Cows passing gas pumps a lot of carbon into the atmosphere too. Sincerely, the Chairman of the Stop Volcanoes and Earthquakes....oh, and cows Society.

TheYetiSpeaks 7 years, 1 month ago

The Stop the Volcanoes and Earthquakes...oh, and cows, Society has claimed their first victory. Even though I knew he was not the single biggest producer of carbon, I was well aware of my Uncle Frank's evil deeds (usually done in a 12 year old Lazy Boy in his living room). That's why I hid in his house until he got home from work and then whaled on his fat ass. I then removed all beer, cauliflower, and bratwurst from his lair. Victory! from the Stop Volcanoes and Earthquakes and Cows...and my Uncle Frank Society.

Puff_Dragon 7 years, 1 month ago

I agree. B*utt plugs for all cows in captivity.

nobody1793 7 years, 1 month ago

"Hey, Nobody 1793, I'm a former kamaaina Hawaii resident, but I forget what Ahonui means. Could you please re-inform me? Much Mahalos!!"Means patience.

Dixie Jones 7 years, 1 month ago

as long as im still allowed to QUAILFY im good.

Godot 7 years, 1 month ago

No. We tried it in the 70's and it turned out it was a total crock.NO.

Godot 7 years, 1 month ago

I am so mad at my generation who are/were the teachers of this generation for turning out two generations of lemmings.If you went to college in the 60's and 70's, and you are a teacher or, worse, a college professor, I hold you, you, all you you NEA members and tenured professors, personally, really, really, personally, responsible for the mess we are in.Your mantra in the 60's was "fck the estalbishment." Congratulations. You have just fcked yourselves and your children and their children.

notajayhawk 7 years, 1 month ago

ms_canada (Anonymous) says: "I would wonder if our rate of highway deaths is less than south of the border."I wonder if your highways are as congested as ours. (Congestion which would be made worse by lowering the speed limits, and congestion which leads to more accidents.)

Commenting has been disabled for this item.