Speed limit 30: Climate protection costs public transport dearly
There are more and more 30 km/h zones in cities. The concept of reducing traffic is popular both in terms of climate protection and road safety. Cities are also supposed to become more pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly. The problem: public transport, an important component of sustainable mobility concepts, suffers from speed reduction!
Speed limit zones are springing up all over Europe. The concept is popular because of its advantages in terms of fuel savings and, accordingly, climate protection, but also in terms of the safety of road users. Moreover, in many large cities, traffic only travels between 20 and 30 km/h on average anyway. A reduction in combination with a clever traffic light and traffic guidance system should therefore actually not lead to a loss of time for road users, but merely to a more relaxed drive through the city with less stop-and-go.
In Switzerland, public transport has now spoken out on the subject of 30 km/h speed limits. They say that reducing the speed would lead to a significant increase in costs. This is because if the speed limit is reduced to 30 km/h, all vehicles must comply with it, with the exception of emergency services and the police. This also affects local public transport. In Zurich, the local company VBZ assumes that the planned reduction in commercial speed will have to be compensated by additional connections. The plan is to buy six trams and 21 buses and to hire additional staff. The company estimates the bill at about 20 million euros.
The Public Transport Union (UTP), the industry's umbrella organisation, has taken a stand in a position paper, noting that generalising 30 km/h leads to a "loss of time that adds up". Maintaining the speed could then only be ensured "by hiring more buses or trams and driving staff". "Extended travel times reduce the attractiveness of public transport for customers and also make it more expensive," she warns.
In the course of traffic calming in urban areas, it is not only about speed per se, but also about accompanying measures: general reduction of lane width and selective narrowing or the installation of speed bumps. While these measures are appropriate for individual traffic in order to maintain low speeds, they are pure harassment for bus traffic.
There should therefore be a differentiation of speeds. Not only representatives of public transport, but also most people in Switzerland do not support a holistic 30 km/h speed limit in cities. A survey by the TCS (Touring Club Switzerland) shows that 70 % are in favour of a speed reduction, but only in side streets and neighbourhood streets. Like the UTP, the TCS stresses that generalising 30 km/h "in all places and without exception" risks making collective mobility less attractive.
It is clear that a balance must be found between safety, environmental friendliness and efficiency of public transport. As is so often the case, a solution adapted to local conditions is needed, which should look different from city to city. As long as the transport system cannot give priority to buses and trams in public spaces and they can get their customers to their destinations quickly and safely through clever traffic management and traffic lights, a general speed limit probably does not seem like a good idea.