Posted on 07/12/2008 12:37:30 PM PDT by The Duke
Please pardon this "original material" vanity posting, however all the talk this Saturday morning (and previously) of re-imposing a nationwide 55 MPH speed limit has motivied me to take up the keyboard to make an important point that seems to be being missed in this debate. That point is that imposing such a limit inherently places a value on peoples' time.
Let's do the math. Since both sides have been claiming that this speed limit will result in fuel savings of 2% from traveling at 70 MPH, then let's do the math using those numbers. We'll also use a vehicle that gets 25 miles per gallon, and consider a trip of 100 miles.
If I'm traveling 100 miles at 70 miles per hour, then I'm going to arrive at my destination in 1.43 hours (100/70). If I travel the same distance at 55 MPH then I'm going to get there in 1.82 hours (100/55). The additoinal time to arrive at my destination is 1.82 - 1.43 hours = 24 minutes.
Now, if I'm paying $4/gallon for fuel and getting 25 miles per gallon, then the trip is going to cost me $16 dollars. A two percent savings of that is exactly thirty-two cents.
So, if I'm in favor of reducing the speed limit from 70 MPH to 55 MPH then I'm saying I would be willing to lose right at a third of an hour in exchange for right at a third of a dollar. In other words, my time is worth no more to me than a dollar an hour!
The reality is that this ridiculous 55 MPH speed limit idea isn't about saving fuel or money - it's about asserting control. There are those in our society - mainly those who have gravitated towards politics - who derive their sense of fulfillment by seeing others obey their dictates.
Several years ago when Al (never-met-a-tree-he-didn't-hug) Gore had the floodgates for a river opened just so he could have his picture taken in a canoe, he wasted an amount of water equal to the savings realized by the entire nation's use of low-flow toilets for TWO YEARS. Do you think this clown really cared about the environment? Of course not, the perfumed prince simply got off on the thought that he could force an entire nation to start flushing twice.
The next time you're on the Interstate conduct a little test and slow down to 55, and just get a preview of what the liberal clowns have in store for us all. While you're at it, you might as well bump up the thermostat in your home by a few degrees. Maybe, just maybe, you'll then be motivated to make your own feelings heard by our poltiical "leaders".
No particular evidence to back this up. When the odious 55 was dropped the highway death rate continues to drop. Sorry Charlie try sticking to facts.
2) There ARE other forms of transportation. You have heard of trains, planes, buses and the like, right?
Once again dunno what you're smoking, and I'm not sure I want to try any. But I don't live near an airport, train station, or bus line. I could drive 6 miles one way to the nearest marta rail station, take the train in the transfer point and take the other train out to the station nearest work, and then walk a mile and a half one way taking about 1 1/2 hours each way. OR I could just drive the 12 miles one way taking 20 minutes each way.
) We yadda yadda , well that's democracy for you
Wow dude, you sound like Obama with his sacrifice stuff. The purpose of this nation is (or at least it used to be) to provide everyone the freedom to life liberty and the pursuit of happpiness, not to provide resources for our masters (but not betters) in Wash DC to squander on moronic central planning ideas right out of the former soviet union.
It has probably escaped your notice, but we don't live in a democracy. We theoreticlly live in a constitutional republic where there are limitations on the tyranny of the majority. For example if a majority of the posters on this thread voted that "congressman Billybob" should buy everyone on the thread steak dinner with champaign, you would of course feel absolutely no moral obligation to do so because it is contrary to your interests. There are limits to democracy.
No particular evidence to back this up. When the odious 55 was dropped the highway death rate continues to drop. Sorry Charlie try sticking to facts.
2) There ARE other forms of transportation. You have heard of trains, planes, buses and the like, right?
Once again dunno what you're smoking, and I'm not sure I want to try any. But I don't live near an airport, train station, or bus line. I could drive 6 miles one way to the nearest marta rail station, take the train in the transfer point and take the other train out to the station nearest work, and then walk a mile and a half one way taking about 1 1/2 hours each way. OR I could just drive the 12 miles one way taking 20 minutes each way.
) We yadda yadda , well that's democracy for you
Wow dude, you sound like Obama with his sacrifice stuff. The purpose of this nation is (or at least it used to be) to provide everyone the freedom to life liberty and the pursuit of happpiness, not to provide resources for our masters (but not betters) in Wash DC to squander on moronic central planning ideas right out of the former soviet union.
It has probably escaped your notice, but we don't live in a democracy. We theoreticlly live in a constitutional republic where there are limitations on the tyranny of the majority. For example if a majority of the posters on this thread voted that "congressman Billybob" should buy everyone on the thread steak dinner with champaign, you would of course feel absolutely no moral obligation to do so because it is contrary to your interests. There are limits to democracy.
I think Krauthammer advocates that about once a year......
Up to this point Billybob I had an ounce or two of respect for your position, but unless I missed the /sarcasm in this one, you lost me completely. Time is money, and a 55 limit previously imposed did absolutely nothing but convince thinking folks of the inanity of such a law/rule.
The real hypocrisy lies in not banning aircraft passenger flights which exceed 55 and suck up a whole lot of fuel. Same with any transportation means exceeding said 55.
An automobile trip across country at 55 vs 75 unfortunately it can’t yet be legally done because of various state speed restriction, but if it were possible, would cost you another day of travel the expense of which would exceed the fuel saving by some degree.
The big 5 5 scam is nothing more than window dressing, smoke and mirrors, and pc feel good. The Congress needs to get on with providing real solutions to the foreign oil purchases by not standing in the way of drilling, refining, our own, instead of someone else’s, and providing incentives for development of energy sources like nuclear etc.
Wind and solar are pipe dreams until the distribution network, and storage problems can be overcome, not to mention 30% efficiency at best.
There are at least a dozen more realities related to safe travel in America, none of which relate in any way to the five five. The formula for time speed and distance says the faster you go the faster you get there. Airplanes other than ultralights, do not fly well at 55. They do get improved fuel mileage by slowing down, to a point, but when you are invested in getting people where they need to go, speed is more important than economy.
We have the safest roads generally, and automobiles are far faster safer and reliable than in the past, everything from a technological standpoint says to me we ought to be able to go at least ten miles an hour faster in any speed zone, than we do now, and do it safely.
An effort that I believe would pay far greater dividends in the long run is develop a traffic system that keeps people moving, vice the daily view I get at numerous intersections, where no one is moving.
Watch and see, for example yesterday at one there were forty five cars and trucks stopped with no one going anywhere, and when they got a light one lane moved to turn left, five cars got through forty were still stopped.
I’m quite sure large cities are much worse, and all stopped except perhaps Prius owners had their engines running, that is zero miles per gallon while stopped.
Wonder how long the stupidity of 55 will last this time if it comes to pass. We can only hope that sanity prevails. I’m not holding my breath.
yup. i came to the same conclusion, sorry, posting before thinking. Similarly with non-motorist fatalities.
I deal in facts. And when I run across people who let their politics get in the way of the facts, I speak up. Liberals do that constantly. But conservatives do it occasionally, as witness some of the responses to me on this thread.
John / Billybob
B.S. It takes more energy to go a faster speed on average. Try peddling your bike at 20 and then 30 mph to see what I mean. However, mainly because of the non-linearities involved in the transmission of the vehicle, as well as programmed changes to timing and injection, and dynamic changes to load, it is likely the efficiency curve is also non-linear with some spikes and transitions. Therefore you could probably find two adjacent speeds, say 56 and 57 mph, where the higher speed actually has lower fuel use. But between 60 and 75, no way. An inline fuel flow meter would make that very clear.
I have a lot of respect for you but I must chime in on this one.
Since the 55 was dropped the death rate has steadily decreased and that is with a HUGE increase in miles driven per year.
Other forms of transportation:
Trains do not go where most people need to go and then they must rent a car if they need to get around. Many, including myself, cannot afford to rent cars all the time when they travel.
The cost of fuel is making airlines increase their ticket prices and then many, including myself, will not subject themselves to the degradation encountered while being strip searched at the airports by near brain dead government employees and then being treated like cattle and criminals by flight attendants. Plus you must get to the car rental thing again.
Buses? No way! Bus trips takes so long that almost nobody can afford the time it takes to stop at every little village to pick up riders. Plus the car rental thingy comes up again.
Sure, we are at war and quite a bit of the cash goes to our enemies but most people know it and are willing to trade that for now. Too bad Congress didn't do the right thing about drilling on our soil and off the coasts.
As an aside: AAA sponsored a 25 year long (If I remember) study that concluded speed limits were not the factor in accidents but “speed differential” between vehicles.
When the differential exceeded ten miles per hour the risk of accidents became much greater.
This study was published sometime in the 1990’s and was promptly buried by the media and AAA itself.
Highways were, and still are, designed for safety at the 80th percentile speed (the speed that 80 percent of vehicles travel) and are designed for 80 miles per hour. Remember that the designs were implemented when cars were not designed as well and did not have the great suspensions and tires they have now.
Studies have been published (I do not have time to find them but they are there) showing that 70 MPH was a comfortable speed for most drivers.
In the hundreds of thousands of miles I have driven on the interstates I can put in my anecdotal evidence that 65-70 is very comfortable for me and it seems that most of the people on the roads around me agree as I pass very few cars and get passed by few.
At 55 MPH I remember cars flying by at very large differential speeds and I still do not consider the speeders as criminals deserving of a ticket. They were law abiding citizens traveling at a comfortable and DESIGNED rate of speed and the limits were jacked down to promote a supposed savings but really became a huge source of income for governments and to let them chip away at our liberties.
55 MPH is not a comfortable speed. It makes for great extra income for Government though.
It may take a few years but cut the 55 talk and drill here, drill now. We will walk the razors edge until we can run on mostly our own oil.
Take care and thank you, sir.
Screw this, this isn't sacrifice for war, this is sacrifice for polar bears.
You are too good to be making this kind of emotional appeal. What's happened?
With today's vehicles and highways if you dropped the speed limit to 55 the death rate would drop further still.
As an aside: AAA sponsored a 25 year long (If I remember) study that concluded speed limits were not the factor in accidents but “speed differential” between vehicles.
As well as speed differential between vehicles and immovable objects. Running into a bridge abutment at 90, say, will demonstrate this.
That being the case, I have a bold proposition for Senator Warner: Lower all freeway speed limits to 15 MPH. Millions, heck hundreds of millions lives saved. Problem solved. I’ll take my Nobel peace prize now...
And this is a republic not a democracy.
BTW, I heard of it. I speak of it often with my father, who served in the Pacific Theater. OK? My wife's father also served. We have four nephews who served in Iraq. I am close to being back to not respecting you again.
...if everybody drove it. You are on crack if you think they will. I've suggested this: reduce the speed limit to 15 MPH.
Do you favor government control or don't you? The government is controlling mineral exploration. Lifting those restrictions would be loosening control. Lowering speed limits would be increasing restrictions. Your analogy is not consistent.
More people will travel at a higher speed than 55 just like in the 70's and 80's. Thus the speed differential will increase because of sheer numbers of people going faster than 55.
Any government can make a law that makes you a criminal for just stepping outside of your home, so do not use the tired reply of "well then, everyone that goes over 55 is a criminal." Government control of our lives for our own good is NOT for our own good.
Do not get into the same static thinking that allows our politicians to say increased taxes cause increased government income.
Yes, it is a good analogy because applying linear mathematics to human actions does not work, ever.
As well as speed differential between vehicles and immovable objects. Running into a bridge abutment at 90, say, will demonstrate this.
Hitting a bridge abutment at 55 will kill you just the same as at 65-70. We are talking the current speed limits, not 90 MPH, which is ten MPH over the designed safety. Throwing this in is a dodge.
Who the hell really cares how much fuel is consumed driving "X" mph vs. "y" mph? Thats just a clever re-run of the Carter Admin. tellin you that your govt. will fine you if you consume too much gasoline by driving too fast.
It was bogus legislation then and it's still bogus today...........
As usual, it's OUR fault isn't it? Almost 30 years has passed since that debacle and nothing was learned from those days was it? No new refineries, still sanctions on offshore drilling, still fighting the F'n lawsuits prohibiting us from additional natural gas and oil drilling..............
DON'T PREACH TO ME ABOUT 55 MPH GAS CONSUMPTION VS. 70 MPH GAS CONSUMPTION! I'VE HEARD IT ALL BEFORE AND IT WAS BULLSHIT THEN JUST AS ITS BULLSHIT NOW..........
IF it is in the world’s interest, then why not have the world contribute to it, instead of running up TRILLIONS of dollars in debt and devaluing the dollar?
I cannot believe the pro-statist views I am seeing on this thread. It makes me glad I did not waste any money on somebody (a RINO) running for Congress in North Carolina.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.