Cutting the speed limit from 70mph to 60mph would make a "huge difference" in reducing carbon emissions, MSPs have been told.
The proposal is among a raft of recommendations made by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) in its annual evaluation of the Scottish Government's progress towards climate targets.
The committee praised Scotland for leading the UK in reducing greenhouse gas emissions but said fresh policies would be needed if ambitious new targets are to be met, particularly in relation to emissions from transport, housing and agriculture.
Read more: Thieves use sellotape on East Dunbartonshire homes 'to see if people are in'
SNP ministers have committed to introducing a new Climate Change Act, with the aim of reducing emissions by more than 50% by 2020.
The CCC said its analysis suggested that reducing the speed limit from 70mph to 60mph could cut car emissions by around 8% on average, as driving at higher speeds can reduce fuel efficiency.
The report said that a model had been designed to estimate carbon savings from speed limit changes on trunk roads and motorways in Scotland.
"It has not been developed into a full appraisal but it is a tool that has been tested," it said.
CCC chairman Lord Deben told Holyrood's Environment Committee: "I don't think it is for us to say, 'you ought to cut the speed limit to 60mph', but what we have to do is to remind people of the realities of having it at 70mph.
"We have to say, 'if you don't do this then if you want to meet the requirements you've got to do other things', and you've got to decide which are the politically acceptable things.
Read more: Thieves use sellotape on East Dunbartonshire homes 'to see if people are in'
"What you can't say is that we we will do neither, and that's the issue and that's why it's worth highlighting something which we know is politically very controversial, to say that would make a huge difference, so if you don't do that where does that 8% come from elsewhere?"
The Scottish Government has set out plans to cut air passenger duty by 50%, a policy criticised by environmental campaigners.
Lord Deben told the committee: "If you make a choice of that kind, you need to look and see what you have to do in other areas to balance that up, and it may well be that you say for social reasons that you want to do something which is more difficult as far as emissions are concerned but ... If you do that you have to say at the same time what the total effect is on your budgets for carbon and what you're going to do to cover that off."
He added: "Part of that political decision is never avoiding the fact that any decision costs something, so what does it cost and what do you intend to do to offset that cost?"
Read more: Thieves use sellotape on East Dunbartonshire homes 'to see if people are in'
Commenting on whether he thought there was a place for fracking in relation to climate change as a transition fuel, he said: "We don't have a philosophic opposition to fracking but we do have a very clear statement about what what you have to do to make sure that it would be within the budgets which we've laid out."
A Scottish Government spokesman said: "The Scottish Government is committed, through Scotland's Road Safety Framework to 2020, to achieving safer road travel in Scotland.
"The framework includes a commitment to provide information on the benefits of lower speed driving in relation to fuel efficiency, health impacts and road safety.
"A recent review of the framework identified dealing with inappropriate speed, rather than speed limits themselves, as a key priority focus area for activity and therefore there are no current plans to change speed limits on Scotland's roads."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel