Your headline isn't what the article says, it says local authorities will do that "where appropriate", i.e. not by default.

That works very well in Wales already, and its saved dozens of lives. Also, as a driver you get to see a bit more off the town as you go through because you are travelling slowly. I'm happy with that.

Meanwhile where I live the state makes it illegal for the city to set a speed limit below 25 mph (40 km/h). 😭

Nice

Germany could never :(

Makes sense in context. Some of their two lane roads are narrower than a single lane in other places. Dealing with oncoming traffic is a game of chicken where someone will be going off road.

Works well here in Japan (though the police could enforce it better. Got passed by some jackass in a 30 no passing zone the other day in an area with poor visibility)

I was in a Canadian school zone today and thought that the posted speed, 40 km/h, should simply be referred to as "fast." It's 1.6× the speed of a four-munute mile and 10× walking speed. It's fast.

Stroads would be fast-and-a-half.

Intercity highways, ie. "back roads," would be double-fast.

Expressways, 2.5 fast. Triple-fast and beyond is certainly too fast.

The point is: anything that is fast is doable on a bike. Faster than that should be on rails or have a professional, full-time operator — not anyone who can pass an eye exam, and hold a No.2 pencil or click a mouse 40 times.

Fast is fast enough. If you need to go fast, go alone. If you need to go far, or faster than fast, go together.

If only. The amount of times I've been cycling at 30km/h on a 30km/h street and still have cars pass me.