IF ONE plastic straw is one too many in the war against plastic pollution, why isn’t driving at 1mph above the speed limit one too many in the war against climate change?

In a recent climate change report, it was said: “All the best scientists in the world tell us that we only have 11 years to make very fundamental changes in the way we do business, and the way we generate energy.”

Eleven years: three more (men’s) World Cup football tournaments! How hot will Qatar be in 2022?

To try to make sport absolutely fair we employ VAR (video assistant referee) in football, Hawk-Eye for tennis and Hot Spot for cricket; and to stop the likes of Usain Bolt from running faster than nature intended, we employ drug testing.

So why aren’t we employing speed limiters to stop drivers breaking speed limits? That is, faster than the law intended; driving up global temperatures, and ultimately ending the human race.

If ‘fair’ drivers employ speed limiters, and ‘cheats’ don’t, how can we have fair trade? If drivers can race past cyclists when they are riding at the speed limit (which battery bikes will make possible, especially 20mph), how can we have fair play?

Further, if drivers exceed speed limits, AND use air conditioning, i.e. demand more gas to stay cool, not only will it amount to unfair/unlawful trade/play, shouldn’t it also amount to pouring petrol on the flames?

Our Lionesses lost to the USA because VAR ruled Ellen White was offside. For why? Running too fast? In short, if we don’t employ speed limiters to make for a fairer human race, it’s odds-on we’ll lose the war against climate change, whereby even self-drive cars won’t work.

Consider the words of futurist James Lovelock: “Burning fossil fuel is a crazy, daft, and very dangerous thing to do.”

Allan Ramsay

Radcliffe