A "Go Slow" movement
 

I've been playing with values in my fuel economy spreadsheet, and come to the conclusion that one of the biggest problems we face with fuel economy is excessive speed.

For example, I save 1/4 of the fuel with my car by going 20kph slower, from 100kph to 80kph. With other driving techniques, the difference is more. e.g. P&G ICE ON, 33%, P&G ICE OFF, 37%.

I simulated it with a typical full sized sedan (Ford Falcon), and the gain was 20%, and getting roughly 4.8l/100km at that speed.

But that is really just the beginning. The fact is, most traffic consists of one person in the car. The ideal motorized vehicle for 1 person is in fact a motorcycle or a low drag VW 1 litre type commuter, capable of getting about 1l/100km or less with a ~100cc engine. Part of the reason we don't see more travel with such vehicles (motorcycles) is because the weather is inconsistent, but also because long distance travel is usually best via freeway, and freeways usually have 100+kph traffic making them dangerous.

The next logical step would be a move to a human powered transport system, especially velomobiles, most likely with electric assist/regeneration to smooth out the hills and recover most of the energy from the downhill slopes otherwise lost to braking. This would need widespread lanes with a further reduction in maximum speed. Ultimately the desired situation would be that every road must be restricted to say 40-50kph, and that all highways would have at least one such lane.

There are other advantages to limiting top speed. The slower you go, the less energy is lost when you brake. Because KE = 0.5mv^2, slowing from 100kph versus 50kph to a stop loses 4 times as much energy and hence fuel. Collisions are less dangerous for that same reason and more avoidable because of increased reaction time.

The fact is, in most countries there is a maximum speed limit but no minimum speed limit except for roads like autobahns. Thus, there is no reason why a person can't go a maximum of 80kph or even 70kph (45-50mph) on every road.

I've been doing this for a few weeks now (max of about 80kph), and in multi lane highways there have been a few tailgaters, but no one has beeped me yet. The fact is, if you are in the slow lane and they don't like your speed, they have the option of using a faster lane.

The idea of making this a movement is similar to the "Critical Mass" idea of bicycles. Except that you can do it all the time, especially if you have a car (makes you difficult to pass or intimidate). If enough people do it every day, it will effectively act as a speed limit on the whole slow lane, bringing change much sooner than a bike ride every month could possibly do. And that will be the ticket to make motorcycles, enclosed commuting type vehicles and eventually velomobiles more practical vehicle choices.

Maybe some catchy slogans and bumper stickers would help the idea spread more rapidly and the idea become a reality sooner (population density will do it eventually, regardless). I see that "ecodriving.org" is taken as a website (com as well). I see that "GoSlow.org" is taken as well.

A website could explain other seemingly crazy things we do, for example, not accelerate towards red lights. Enough people exhibiting the same behavior will reduce the rage from the hotheads, and the rationale will be understood (and perhaps embraced).

But anyway, that's the idea. Got any comments, slogans, or ideas?

No crazy ideas or slogans right now (sorry, I'm pretty tired for some reason), but this sounds like a good idea.

From an US-centric point of view we could do something about lowering the speed limit back to 55mph from 65+ nationally. I'm sure similar things could be done for various countries...

If you had a site what kind of content would you be looking to put up there? Just a main page discussing the issues surrounding the speed you drive or something more in depth?

Actually there is a minimum speed on interstates. Here's a couple of links.

DOT



Wiki.

As far as critical mass rides that would not be something to use as an example IMO. The affect and anger that goes with that last several days after they are complete.

Both. At this point, it's still not solidified obviously.

Something (probably graphs) to show immediate pocketbook benefits, the broader aim of enabling convenient, low speed and hence economical transport everywhere, some bumper stickers to buy or print out perhaps, a forum where people can perhaps organize areas that they want to "take back" perhaps, for example the logical joins between bike paths that are non-bicycle friendly, especially at peak commuting times, particular highways, etc.

There should also be reasoning based on empirical testing and physics, for those who want to know the reasons before they do something. The recommendations must be above all, correct.

Probably the first aim is to first enable low speed small displacement motorcycle type transport between every destination through highways that don't have stoplights. This will increase the number of motorcyclists, which will increase both the care that other motorists display towards them, and also their political clout.

After velomobiles approach something like the Quest and beyond (i.e. extremely low drag coefficients, good electrical assist and regen system), we can work on a 50kph (or so) speed limited road system everywhere. Something like 50kph should allow for good velomobiles and athletes while also not being too fast to endanger slower people. (Making this a secondary priority also enables a larger number of people to acquire velomobiles.)

The idea is not to eliminate the faster lanes, but for there always to be a safe choice to go slower. For example, I see no reason why a tandem velomobile (i.e same frontal area, same Cd, somewhat more rolling resistance) should not be able to cruise around 70kph or more. :D

In that case, just use the lower. Most of those are actually pretty good and far below the speed actually traveled on those roads. Also note that there will be tolerances on the low end, just as there are on the top end.
Make no mistake, this will probably generate some ire at first. It's unavoidable - there are always hotheads who will defend their god given right to waste fuel racing to the next stoplight, fuel that your children won't be able to use. To quote Gandhi:
But I agree on the basic premise - the goal is to educate, not alienate.

e.g. you do this where there is an alternative lane, which is the case on all those high speed roads. And the idea is to do it gradually. Each person can do it at the speed at which they feel comfortable.

More on catchphrases: maybe a phrase like "Do you know how to drive for economy?" would work. I suspect that economy would reach more people than environment, but I could be wrong.

Perhaps something like:

"Do you know what your fuel economy really is?"
"How much is haste costing you?"

Iono...I'll keep thinking.

I like that. But don't let it stop you thinking up more. :thumbup:

To help with the slogan. Using the speeds your talking about how much more time are we talking about for the typical 10 mile commute do you figure? 5 minutes?

Five minutes is all it takes. Go slow.com

It wouldn't even be that. I get 2.77 minutes for that distance, assuming 65mph versus 50mph.

My commute takes almost an hour, and that is combined cycle where the 100kph sections are at most half the journey. So, say 30 minutes, I'm traveling at 80kph as opposed to 100kph.

s = ut, therefore t = s/u.

So, in my commute, the difference is 37.5 minutes versus 30 minutes, or 7.5 minutes. My commute is probably a long one (in terms of highway portion), so "5 minutes is all it takes" is not a stretch of the truth.

To reiterate, all this is really doing is branding what a lot of us are already doing, enabling it to spread virally by increasing the rate of transmission and conversion.

Of course. And that's what the topic really needs. Sure, we encounter opposition at times, but it's mostly a vast sea of ignorance we're up against.

newtonsfirstlaw -

I would be verrrrry happy with a 45 MPH speed limit on LA freeways, but I don't think that'll happen any time soon. In keeping with the critical mass concept, I think you should initiate a "snail convoy" or "turtle convoy" logo. The idea is, if you see someone with this logo on the back of their car you pop in behind them, give them a snail/turtle signal, and create a "slow car convoy". The car behind you can't get mad at you because it's obviously the fault of the car in front of you, and the car in front of you is "protected" from their wrath by you.

Turtle Convoy ... Rest of world
:turtle: :turtle: ... :mad: :mad: :mad:

The ones behind you might be mad, but you would be saving them gas (if not time).

Now, if only it were that easy in the real world, ;)

CarloSW2

It doesn't have to, all there has to be is an effective limit brought about by a relatively small number of people, and the perception that it is a popular movement that has brought this about (through the bumper stickers etc.) People often assume that if a small minority of people are willing enough to act or say something, that the rest of the iceberg feels that way too.

You don't need that many people trickling along at the minimum speed limit to back it up, because a lot of people are complacent.

How would you give that signal?

That's basically the idea. Except instead of
You have
:turtle: :turtle: :confused: :mad: :cool: :( :) :mad:

Because not everyone will be mad. And the idea of the bumper sticker is that the next time you have:
:turtle: :turtle: :turtle: :confused: :mad: :p :cool: :mad: :)
etc. because someone has looked at the web address and done some reading.

The logical endpoint is
:turtle: :turtle: :turtle: :mad: :turtle: :turtle: :mad:
because eventually everyone gets the message who is receptive, and there are a few irresponsible hotheads.

In larger cars, that would almost be paid for. You could save someone with a larger car a litre of fuel for 7.5 minutes of time. And by making motorbikes more viable, you could save someone else a much larger amount of petrol if they switch from an SUV to a motorbike (best case). ~7 litres saved, probably. It's common for businessmen in Asia to use scooters and motorbikes, there's no reason why we can't too.

We are already at the point where the time costs less than the fuel in some cases.

When the US enacted the 55 mph freeway limit in the 70's there was a pretty widespread awareness of the issues involved in slowing down because it directly affected so many people's lives.

I remember reading an account of a guy from that period who had fists shaken at him and horns honked at him for speeding past slower cars on the highway.

Hillary clinton publicly mused about returning to the 55 mph limit in 2006, but I think (can anyone confirm this?) she has since backed away from the idea.

There is very little new under the sun, and oil prices aren't much different today. I don't think anyone is expecting cheaper fuel in the future. Couple receptive but ignorant people with an easy means of being informed... and effecting a massive, worldwide change is a distinct possibility.

I get the impression that you can't frame it as a single issue with a single slogan. You need to craft it as a national security issue for some people (particularly in the US), or they won't hear you / care. Others are receptive only to economic language, and others will hear an environmental message above all else.

Not trying to rain on the idea - just throwing thoughts out there. I'd love to see slower traffic speeds. I was a little disappointed when this province got rid of photo radar...

That's a very good point - there is a market for this message, and different people have different motivations. You covered every one I can think of. Maybe one slogan wrt the act of slowing down, and a generic web destination covering each of the different angles. Or separate slogans?

My leaning is towards one good slogan at a time. Or a variation on a theme?

E.g. Go(ing?) Slow For...
-the environment
-your children
-your pocketbook
-national security
-self reliance
-for safety

etc.

By selling stickers near cost, you'd get an idea of which themes resonate well with people.

newtonsfirstlaw -

At night it would be easy. Just turn on your cabin light. If the lead "turtle" turns on his/her cabin light, then you are in convoy mode. If the lead turtle turns on/off his/her cabin light in succession, then the turtle has rejected your desire to go into convoy mode (even turtles are in a rush sometimes, or might be about to exit the freeway)

By day, you could open your driver's side window and put your hand on the midpoint of the A-Pillar like so :

Attachment 51

Notice that the signal is unobtrusive. A non-turtle wouldn't notice the signal. However, if the lead turtle sees the signal, he/she can give a thumbs-up or thumbs-down.


CarloSW2

I think the other chances of meeting another "turtle" on the road are fairly minimal at first. But since you are doing nothing illegal by going slow in the slow lane, people can always pass you. In a 3 lane highway, there is no excuse not to pass. I've been going 20kph slower than the speed limit (100kph) for 2 weeks now with no one beeping me.

I've thought of a few more bumper sticker ideas:
"Why race to red lights?"/"I don't race to red lights"
"It's called the Slow Lane for a reason"
"Life's more fun at 80kph"

Then there's the FPS inspired:
"TAILGATE MOAR!"

I always laugh at the people who complain about how expensive gas is but then blow by me on the QEW doing 150 km/h in their SUV.

Hey i agree with you ramblindoug, it never ceases to amaze me, how many i work with who scream at the price of gas and in the very next sentence brag about how they just got 15 extra horsepower in their gigantomobile by adding some performance booster. Some think I'm a nut, a few have jumped on the bandwagon. One asked me to find him his own metro and one bought my last metro. S.

You know, Shultz, same thing happened to me just last week. A friend of mine asked to buy my Firefly. My brother wanted me to help him find one a year ago.

How about

"go ahead and honk
It's still my gas :D" (bumper sticker)
or
"Hop in and gain
it's the slow lane train" (Slogan)

And people like me could be in the front, like the giant wind blocking smoky gassy train engine. Smaller cars can brake to a stop faster than larger vehicles, (if the brakes are properly maintained). If I brake, you will be aware because you are ecodriving (unless your watching your scanguageII) and brake, you will slow down faster, and won't hit my vehicle.

I'd like green stickers that say Green Lane... reflective too. They could either be shaped like a turtle or triangle or both.

:turtle:

?

I have also had a few inquires if my Mazda 323 parts cars were for sale. I'm not selling them (they are in good shape and are getting more rare every day). Maybe some people are starting to wake up and notice the high cost of fuel.....

The best bumper stickers have three points. They are:
1) humorous
2) make your point
3) make the other person have sympathy for your cause.

My suggestion would be something like.

Yes I'm going slow. I'm saving gas to buy Viagra.

Only a thought, of course I don't need it yet. LOL

Way to swing the thread back on topic mapman.

Those are excellent points. I think that would make a great bumper sticker!

I think that as long as it's a voluntary movement, have fun with it. I like the Jeep guy's slogans.

The fact is that MOST people don't care too much about fuel economy, so trying to force something like speed limit reductions on them would fail. Sure, they will still complain about gas prices- most people just like to complain.

If someone wants to save money on gas, let them buy a small car and drive 30mph- that's their choice. But I REALLY am uncomfortable with making laws trying to shove fuel efficiency down others throats.

The free market will, in the end, solve everything. If oil become too expensive, people will buy methods of transportation that involve spending fewer dollars. Every man has a threshold for how much he is willing to pay to drive his big pickup, or SUV. Soon, I will be buying a Land Rover Discovery, which gets about 15mpg.

Now, since I might put on 30 miles in one week, my threshold is pretty high- I would keep my disco even if gas went up to 5 or 6 bucks per gallon. But my father drives more, and is more worried about gas mileage. Gas is barely $3/gallon, and he's already bought a small Mitzu.

I guess, what my point is, is this:

At what point does ecomodding turn from a passion and hobby, into an ideology that must be forced upon others? Perhaps the only kind of ecomodders are those whose goal in life is to see that we're all driving [the same] tiny car. Or, perhaps that's not the case at all.

I think I could better summarize it with this:

Are you ecomodding for you OWN gain, or for everyone elses?

See, I like 4x4s. But I would never imagine trying to tell everyone in the country that they aught to buy a 4x4.

See what I mean?

I'm truly interested in hearing your thoughts on the matter.

-Donny

I think the answer is: as with any group of people who share an interest, you're going to find a range of political beliefs. People pursue efficiency for any number of reasons.

We're all likely to find someone here with views that are opposite to our own. All I ask is that we stay civil when that inevitably happens.

Great advice... and I have to give you credit. You are pretty darn cool.

You guys probably have the debate every other week when someone new joins who doesn't exactly see things from your point of view.

I am not a eco enthusiast. I came here to try to understand the eco enthusiast point of view. So far, what I've learned, is that I am similar to some of you in different ways.

Some of you might push your cars to the limits for independence and security, so that you might get by for longer in times of shortage. I stock pile and stabilize gasoline for the same.

Some of you might do it so that you are prepared for emergencies. That is why I drive an SUV. That's also why I keep and bear arms, their ammunition supply, and the ability to increase that supply by many hundred.

Some of you might do it to clean up the environment. I care about the environment too. I recycle, and do what I can. Saving gasoline is simply not one of them.


Thank you, especially you, Metro. I'm impressed. I moderate a $70/year discussion forum, and I thought the civility that I see there was limited to pay-based forums. You all have proven me wrong, at least in that preconception.

Good luck to all of you in eco modding. I hope you do it to the fullest, and experience all the personal satisfaction and gain possible from such a venture. As you go about your lives, and continue making choices and decisions, and supporting causes that may effect others, please keep this in mind: Do not tread upon others, and you yourself will not be trod upon.

Please, keep an open mind, and a friendly attitude, and do not judge a man by what he drives. Ignorant, isn't the man who drives an excessive vehicle, but he who deems him ignorant for doing such.

God bless you all,

Over&Out.

-Don Easton (if that IS my real name....)

My problem with the "free market" -- solutions are reactionary and sluggish to boot.... A solution to a pollution crisis won't come until enough people are dieing and now willing to pay for a solution... The free market lacks a critical feature humans do - long term foresight...

Here's a quote from elsewhere that articulates a little better...


And as I've always said... If we care not to regulate ourselves -- nature is more than happy to do it for us - we're just not going to like that :/

I hyper mile because when I ride my bike - it stinks enough as-is....

I experienced a similar thing just yesterday. Background: much of the traffic we've had at the site recently came about due to basjoos' Aerocivic - clearly an extreme expression of ecomodding if there ever was one.

Basjoos' thread has been picked up for discussion on a couple dozen car enthusiast forums, and I'd say the majority of them simply chucked insults, made snide remarks about workmanship, argued about aesthetics, dismissed his goals, and failed to see the big picture.

One forum (free, large membership base) stood out: the commenters (Nissan Z enthusiasts) acknowledged that while saving fuel wasn't their thing, they could sure appreciate the thought & effort that basjoos put into his project car and how successful it's been. I thought that was so cool, I registered to tell them! Definitely challenged my preconceptions based on what I'd seen on other speed/performance sites.

Good luck to you too. Thanks for stopping by.

Ahhh yes, that was the thing that brought me here. Believe it or not, I think it was on a google ad from within my Gmail account.

That car got a lot of attention- as it should have. Though I do not share his or your passion on the matter, I don't believe anyone can deny the amazing ingenuity that its maker possessed. It is this ingenuity that drives innovation, and it will be that innovation that carries humanity through the ages- not, at least in my mind, futile governmental attempts to limit the amount of carbon introduced into the atmosphere. But again, that's my belief. I recognize that there are many intelligent people who disagree with me, just as there are many intelligent who agree with me.

Regardless, it was good to meet you all.

Don

Don,

I appreciate your civility. I came from a political bent very much like your own at one time. And I certainly understand survivalism, providing for myself and family is a major motivation for fuel economy.

It's not only myself I care about. I care about my kids, their kids and so on. I'd expect that you would be the same. And like it or not, there is exponential growth of people and, if not a finite amount of hydrocarbon fuel, certainly there is a cap to the rate at which such fuels regenerate, even if you subscribe to the abiotic theory of oil.

Basically oil will run out at some stage, and I would like my children to have some of the benefits of it, or at least be able to adapt slowly to life without oil instead of all at once.

Everyone has a point at which they start to worry about survival, and how they view common resources. If you were at a large freshwater dam, you would probably not have a problem with a bunch of kids horsing around with supersoakers. Your attitude about the right of people to do what they like with water would most probably change if you were stuck in an arid desert at a small watering hole sharing it with a bunch of kids horsing around with supersoakers.

Everyone has a point at which they become aware of scarcity of shared resources, and mostly it lies somewhere between those two extremes. I used to laugh at hybrid drivers and bicycling fanatics. I used to think only in terms of accelerating to 100kph and quarter mile times. I don't anymore. If I want to have those experiences, I will live vicariously through driving in Grand Theft Auto or some such.
I'm doing it for my OWN gain, and the gain of my own children and grandchildren. Irrespective of whether other people perceive being efficient with resources as a gain or not, their actions in consuming resources at a high rate WILL impinge upon the lives of my descendants in a negative way.

That's an awesome analogy - and seems very accurate :)

Being a politician Clinton and / or her campaign managers most likely threw this out as a teaser to gauge public response to the topic.

No response = no action and comments along the lines of ..."That is an important point but I think the real issue here is..."

Big response = item is now part of the political manifesto. The Obama "change" theme is now echoed by ALL politicians after the response from voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Pete.

Quite an impressive running economy.
For a comparison my Commodore (2003 V6 Acclaim auto with a/c) manages around 5.5 / 100 km ( actual not simulated ) at 90kph.
Engine speed is around 1750 RPM.

Interestingly dropping the road speed to 80 actually increases the fuel used.
I am not sure why but I think the engine is off the fuel economy "island" on the fuel map and efficiency suffers as a result.

I have been using this same technique for years both the save fuel , my licence and the engine. Big engine (3.8 litres) rev slowly = good economy.


Pete.

Do you have your A/C on at this speed? A huge sound system?

I simulated it using kerb weight 1573kg, frontal area = 2.7m^2 (couldn't find, used a recent falcon), Cd = 0.319, rpm @ 100kph = 1944rpm, Pmax = 152kW. I get 5.2l/100kph @90kph. I get lower at 80kph.

If I assume 1kW of power is used by accessories (e.g. a/c), I still get less power used at 80kph, 5 l/100kph. Although 5.5 l/100kph @90kph.

Traveling at constant speed at those sorts of speeds, almost any car, especially with a 3.8l engine, is never anywhere near the fuel economy "island". However, the low revs help a lot. A smaller engine at the same revs would of course use significantly less fuel.

Maybe there is some sort of lean burn mode triggered above 80kph, or perhaps the lockup converter drops out at 80kph?

It's just the "rev slowly" bit that does it. There is not a car on the road with an undersized engine for any Australian highway speed, at least from the point of view that switching to a larger engine at the same revs would improve fuel economy. (Assuming constant speed travel, not going up a hill of course).

Normally,

The a/c is off as is the factory sound system.

I suspect it is a combination of a small factors.
The roads are flat and the cruise is on which recirculates some of the exhaust gas as well as holding the throttle steady.
There may be a lean burn factor cutting in under these conditions as well.

Interestingly enough the previous Commodore sedan (an 89 VN V6 , a five speed manual and also 3.8) managed a best of 10.0 despite a lower weight , manual gearbox , no a/c and the same size tyres (205 / 65 / 15).

Cheers , Pete.