Change Speed Limit?

[SuperTrooper]

Going back to 2004 (the last year that the Federal Highway Administration has completed statistical analysis for) I found this interesting tidbit:

"Of the total number of speeding-related fatalities in 2004, 5,769 occurred on roads with posted speed limits between 55 and 65 mph, and 938 occurred on roads with speed limits above 65 mph."

Safety-wise, interstate highways are not the problem.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by SuperTrooper

Going back to 2004 (the last year that the Federal Highway Administration has completed statistical analysis for) I found this interesting tidbit:

"Of the total number of speeding-related fatalities in 2004, 5,769 occurred on roads with posted speed limits between 55 and 65 mph, and 938 occurred on roads with speed limits above 65 mph."

Safety-wise, interstate highways are not the problem.

Two problems with that:

1. It doesn't correct to a common stat, like "per passenger mile." If the majority of roads are at the lower speed limit, then of course the number will be higher.

2. These are "speeding-related." On the slower roads, the speed differential between the regular traffic and "speeding traffic" is probably higher.

At any rate, I would say that 65 is probably the "sweet spot" for interstates. It's a good compromise between fuel economy and getting there in a reasonable amount of time, and if the EPA were forced to do the highway driving cycle at that speed, manufacturers would have incentive to add a 6th gear, change rear-end ratios, etc. to make that the most fuel-efficient speed for highway cruising.

[whitevette]

Originally Posted by aerohead

...perhaps we could educate the American public in 60-days about mpg and speed.It would be an interesting experiment.

How do you keep John Q. awake while you teach him about momentum, tire "footprints", fuel consumption rates, even ice is slippery? Naw...a lost cause, Aero.... We live in a world of "Turn the key...and go!" The ditches begin to fill with cars when the flakes (of snow...not the drivers) begin to fall. You've seen it; I've seen it ... I just keep watching for the sheeple that might come sliding towards me....As long as a driver's license is so easy to get...we'll have problems. 60 days? They'll reproduce in this time frame!

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by whitevette

How do you keep John Q. awake while you teach him about momentum, tire "footprints", fuel consumption rates, even ice is slippery? Naw...a lost cause, Aero.... We live in a world of "Turn the key...and go!" The ditches begin to fill with cars when the flakes (of snow...not the drivers) begin to fall. You've seen it; I've seen it ... I just keep watching for the sheeple that might come sliding towards me....As long as a driver's license is so easy to get...we'll have problems. 60 days? They'll reproduce in this time frame!

whitevette,it's a big challenge and I'm thinking Supa will open a real hornets nest in class,as soon as "the persuasive argument" begins.---------------- As to how we might change things,that kinda dovetails into the national elections.---------------------When Sen.McCain announced Gov.Palin as his running-mate,she was virtually unknown,and the Republican political machinery has a reasonable degree of confidence,that within only 60-days,from the time or her name being dropped,they can get her in the White House.--------------- That's remarkable to me,as to become ,potentially,the leader of the free-world should be a grander task than instituting a speed limit.----------------------- So my twisted thoughts begin to to digest the apparent agreement among manipulators of the public mind,that given two months,they could probably get the American public to do pretty much anything they wanted.---------------------- Sure,everyone would have to be on the same page,but if,whoever it is that decides whats going to be,enlists the full force of mass-media,they could pull off a new national speed limit,and everyone would be waving the flag and feeling very patriotic about the whole thing.That's my twisted analysis.

[aerohead]

Supa,here are a few more references:---------------"The Car Economy BOOK,The Energy Of Our Resources,The Power Of Our Ideas",Energy,Mines and Resources Canada,1991,Minister of Supply and Services Canada,ISBN 0-662-18245-6,page 18,"Test show that most cars use about 10 percent less fuel when driven at 90 km/h instead of 100 km/h.--------------------------------------- P.W.G.Newman,J.R.Kenworthy and T.J.Lyons,"Does Free-flowing Traffic Save Energy and Lower Emissions in Cities?" 1988,pp 267-271,Journal ANZASS. The research show that energy use and emissions are both lowest at 45 mph,however,free-flowing traffic attracts more cars,resulting in higher consumption and pollution.------------------------------------- FACTS & FIGURES,by American Automobile Manufacturers Association,1620 Eye Street,N.W.,Suite 1000,Washington D.C.20006 (202-775-2710).Published each year,the booklet is packed with many useful statistics,especially revenues to govts,from the transportation sector( you can calculate the economic impact of reduced consumption).Motor vehicle deaths and accident data go back to 1913,and you may be able to compare numbers as a function of speed limits,etc..----------------------- The WORLD ALMANAC And Book Of Facts,published each year.A virtual treasure-trove of tables,charts and statistics,Insurance data,energy,trade,etc.Truly unbelievable resource for under $9 (US).---------------------------- "THE GOING RATE: What It Really Costs To Drive,"by MacKenzie,Dower,and Chen,World Resources Institute,June 1992.This may be attacked as "leftist propaganda",however some of your classmates may argue points about"externalities" mentioned in the book which are presently becoming part of US policy objectives.------------- Good luck on the project!

[SuperTrooper]

It's one thing to introduce a person or idea to the people. It's another thing entirely to get them to agree if it's right or wrong for them. Remember, the government here doesn't control the media like in other contries. Maybe back in the '60s with 3 TV networks you could put out a united message, but today less than 20% of Americans watch a major network nightly news show. Even fewer read a newspaper. Without a genuine "crisis" to unite the varied populace of this great nation there is no hope of getting a consensus on almost any subject.

[whitevette]

Originally Posted by aerohead

whitevette,it's a big challenge and I'm thinking Supa will open a real hornets nest in class,as soon as "the persuasive argument" begins.---------------- As to how we might change things,that kinda dovetails into the national elections.

...they could pull off a new national speed limit,and everyone would be waving the flag and feeling very patriotic about the whole thing.That's my twisted analysis.

Hmmm.... Two sentences...and you jump into the murky waters of politics! And, you close with another sentence on politics...plus a critique of yourself.
Take John Wayne's advice..."Don't jump in until you know how deep the water is." (sic)
I must say I don't care one bit for politics / politicians. So, your harangue was wasted on me. Virtually all politicians are lawyers...what does this say about "the law"? I rest my case.

[CobraBall]

Originally Posted by DifferentPointofView

What I don't get is how large cities don't pull people over.

You go any speed over 5 over here... you get a ticket and its always over 100 bucks.

Population of largest city in the county: 8000
Population of my village in the county: 550

I do get why people don't get pulled over on highways like Indy or St. Louis... 1 thing.. No place for cops to hide

theres no place for a cop to park his car to scan people because when you have a concrete devider on one side and another on the other side, its kinda hard to catch people off guard with the radar gun.

Here, every half mile there's a country road for a cop to sit and hide behind the trees to get people's speeds. You don't have that in big city highways.

My cousin got pulled over for doing 67 in a 55. which comparing to large cities no where near as fast as they travel

Safety here with speeds isn't an issue, you have a greater chance of hitting a deer than another car.

Its just the cops trying to meet their stations expectations, not that you were endangering other drivers.

The biggest traffic jam we have is when I'm driving 45 in a 55, and when its clear for other drivers to pass, I just use the rear wiper to signal its clear. I Think its catching on

Small communities and speeding tickets!!! Follow the money! Safety is not the motivation. It $$ in the local government coffers. Selma, TX just north of San Antonio on I-35 in history past had the worst reputation in the state as a speed trap. Difficult to speed on I-35 now with all the semi-trucks heading to and from Mexico.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by SuperTrooper

It's one thing to introduce a person or idea to the people. It's another thing entirely to get them to agree if it's right or wrong for them. Remember, the government here doesn't control the media like in other contries. Maybe back in the '60s with 3 TV networks you could put out a united message, but today less than 20% of Americans watch a major network nightly news show. Even fewer read a newspaper. Without a genuine "crisis" to unite the varied populace of this great nation there is no hope of getting a consensus on almost any subject.

SuperTrooper,I don't know if its a "control" issue,however in the past the media has" cooperated" with the US Govt.by withholding information to the US public.An example would be the successful Japanese Balloon bombing of the US west coast and Mexico.-------------- The thing about Palin,or a new national speed limit,if the White House and every other influential party began to bombard the airways,wire services,print media,and internet,etc.,with a unified message,and you couldn't escape from exposure to the message,a compelling message,regardless of content,could quite literally change the landscape of the country.--------------------- Come November,we'll see how many people engaged themselves with the media and turn out at the polls.-------------------------- Careful word crafting can create the "crisis".And if the people who currently influence citizen behavior all come together in a unified front and promote the same message,wrap it in the flag,Mom's apple pie,and Chevrolet,I believe people would jump at it.-------------------- That may sound Pollyanish,but it's all we have going for us.-----------------------------When they instituted the 55-limit,I was happy to go along.The premise of it was convincing enough,and it sounded plausible that if the fallout from "supply interruptions",as we'd experienced in 1973 could be eliminated,it was a worthwhile goal.------------------------ I'm not saying that we can get a "united" message,I am saying,that if we did,there'd be no stopping it.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by whitevette

Hmmm.... Two sentences...and you jump into the murky waters of politics! And, you close with another sentence on politics...plus a critique of yourself.
Take John Wayne's advice..."Don't jump in until you know how deep the water is." (sic)
I must say I don't care one bit for politics / politicians. So, your harangue was wasted on me. Virtually all politicians are lawyers...what does this say about "the law"? I rest my case.

Point well taken.Family friend,U.S.Congressman from Texas,Graham Purcell.My dad grew up with him in Archer City,TX.Dad and I had dinner with the Grahams in there home in Alexandria,Va. after I got out of the service.------------ Graham,a trained attorney,said his aides would bring in legislation all the time,which ran into the thousands of pages.He couldn't make heads or tails of it,and relied on his staff for recommendations and interpretations before he was willing to put his Johnny Handcock on any of it.--------- What a mess!----------------- Also,he said that any bright,aspiring new Congressman,ready to set the world on fire upon arrival to Capitol Hill,would be assigned to committee after committee,with no time to even think about their constituents back home,and unless they woke up and smelled the coffee and learned to "play ball",their political career would be relegated to the backwaters of Washington,with no hope of advancement.------------------------------- So your right! Politics suck big-time! There's probably universal agreement on that one.But its what we have,short of anarchy.----------------And as a fan of John Wayne myself,I think his advice very sage.Since his life has had such a profound impact on so many Americans,and how they view their world,it may be the John Waynes of the world, who help deliver us out of some of this mess we're in.----------- Perhaps a Gene Hackman,who actually wore the uniform of the US,and distinguished himself in combat, might play a role in influencing how Americans feel about what they do everyday.Don't know. It would be one hell of an experiment though!