I'm writing in response to the article suggesting that introducing 20mph speed limits and traffic calming might actually be worse for the environment (The Argus, January 29).

As a regular cyclist I can assure the readers of The Argus that I feel much safer on roads where there are traffic calming measures. If I'd received a pound every time someone told me they'd love to cycle but don't feel safe enough because of traffic speeds, I'd be a rich woman.

So come on, let's have some common sense. Make it safer and more pleasant for people to walk and cycle and they might actually get out of their cars - reducing emissions, saving lives and helping the environment.

  • Clare Parrish, Titian Road, Hove When we consider the impact of a 20mph speed limit on the environment, surely we should be measuring not only vehicle exhaust emissions but also noise and the relative distress caused to pedestrians by cars travelling at ten times walking speed.

Drivers themselves are also calmed by driving more slowly - despite what the het-up motor lobby would have us believe.

Perhaps their anger in fact proves the point? Really, is there any argument for the retention of the 30mph limit that would stand up to proper, sober scrutiny?

  • Nick Marks, Tarner Road, Brighton