We all know how frustrated Energy partisan Samuel Tenenbaum gets about his perfectly sensible suggestion that we save the country and the planet, and save ourselves some bucks, by driving 55 mph. He keeps hoping his moment will arrive — will we get sensible at $5 a gallon? Or will it be $6?
Anyway, I was reminded of all that by this letter this a.m.:
Keeping to speed limit will save on gas
Apparently the high cost of gasoline is not yet a problem for the people of South Carolina.
Every
driver knows that higher speeds reduce fuel efficiency. Yet traffic on
our interstate highways continues to roll about 10 mph over the speed
limit.STEPHEN D. KIRKLAND
This raises the question: Do you think we can summon the political will in this state to enforce the speed limits we have now? The reason traffic "continues to roll about 10 mph over the speed
limit" is that we all know that the de facto speed limit is 10 mph over — and maybe more like 15.
Maybe we can start the movement here. How about it? Can some of y’all who get SO worked up about illegal immigration "because they’re breaking the law" get worked up by speeding? After all, this isn’t just about not having the right paperwork; speed kills.
If we can tap into an emotional well like that, we can save lives, save money, flip the bird to Chavez and the House of Saud and save the planet. Sounds like a good deal.
Related Posts
FEAR:
“Speed Kills!”
FACT:
A National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) publication reports “no significant relationship between average speed and the fatality rate.” And, “states with high average speeds do not have higher fatality rates than states with low average speeds.”
FEAR:
“Fatalities are up.”
FACT:
The fatality rate has been dropping steadily for decades, and is at an all time low. Absolute fatality numbers are deceptive, since they ignore the increasing number of cars on the road. Each motorist is safer than ever. (US DOT)
FEAR:
“Everyone will drive 10 mph over the limit.”
FACT:
According to a 7-year, 1992 Federal Highway Administration (FHwA) study in which speed limits were varied at 100 locations nationwide and the resulting traffic flow analyzed, “raising posted speed limits by as much as 15 mph had little effect on motorists’ speeds,” and “contrary to public perception…the data actually indicate that accident rates were reduced at sites where speed limits were raised.”
Actual speeds rose only 1-2 mph on those interstates raising the limit to 65 mph in 1987, and the fastest 1% of drivers slowed down. (FHwA)
FEAR:
“High speed highways are unsafe.”
FACT:
Only 4% of serious or fatal accidents occur on rural interstates nationwide. These are the safest highways in the nation. (US DOT)
[For example:] Oregon fastest interstates have a fatality rate about half that of all other roads. (ODOT)
The Oregon Traffic Safety Commission’s list of eight “very dangerous” highway stretches includes no interstates or divided highways. (The Oregonian)
FEAR:
“Raising the limit to 65 mph raised fatalities.”
FACT:
Comparing the years before and after the increase in the Federal limit to 65 mph in 1987, the fatality rate dropped by 3.5% lower on all roads in the 40 states that raised freeway limits than in the 10 that didn’t. Some of the benefits came from drivers switching to faster, safer interstates from dangerous country roads. Thus, analysts who ignored the non-interstates and who used total fatalities instead of rates reached the opposite conclusion. Since limits were raised from 55 to 65, the national fatality rate has declined by 34%. (US DOT)
Sorry, Bud- wrong again. And be wary of Stephen; he did the “accounting” for a publication I know of. The aftermath (no pun intended…OK it was) was not pretty.
A National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) publication reports “no significant relationship between average speed and the fatality rate.” And, “states with high average speeds do not have higher fatality rates than states with low average speeds.”
-John
Wow. How some people can get things so wrong it is simply unbelievable. Here are just a few ACTUAL quotes from NHTSTA:
“The economic cost of speeding-related crashes is estimated to be $40.4 billion each year”.
-NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts – 2006 Data
“Speeding is one of the most prevalent factors contributing to traffic crashes.”
-NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts – 2005 data.”
In 2002, 13,713 fatalities — about a third of all fatalities that occurred in motor vehicle traffic crashes were speeding-related, i.e., at least one of the drivers involved in the crash was speeding.
-NHTSA, Analysis of Speeding-Related Fatal Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes, June 2005
Next time John when you want to make a point cite a source that actually supports your claim. NHTSA never has supported the notion that speeding is a non-factor in vehicular traffic deaths. To the contrary, NHTSA has consistently and stridently supported lower speed limits and aggressive enforcement of speed laws for the last 30 years.
We’ve lost the battle when Brad equates a person illegally entering the country, falsifying documents to obtain a job, not paying taxes, and using taxpayer funded resources with driving over the speed limit.
Unless a person has an accident at an excessive speed, I sure hope our law enforcement officers have more pressing issues to deal with.
Choosing to burn more gas is a personal decision. My time (currently) is worth more than the few ounces of gasoline dropping back from 70 to 55 would save.
Actually Doug there is probably nothing more important for our law enforcement resources that enforcing our traffic laws. That’s because nothing else we do is more dangerous. Drunk drivers kill far more people than bank robbers. And certainly more than terrorists. Yet somehow people don’t consider that a crime. Just ask Hulk Hogan’s son if this isn’t important. Or better yet ask the young man who is suffering severe brain injuries because of the foolishness of Hogan. Indeed I can’t think of a better use of our police than to enforce traffic laws.
As an aside, many criminals are apprhended as a result of sobriety check points and speed enforcement. This seems like a win-win situation.
My time is valuable enough to drive 155 mph, but I am fine with the lower stress of 70 mph. I don’t break the speed limit, so what I spend on gasoline is no business of Sam Tenenbaum, Brad Warthen, or any other stranger with a control fetish.
Here’s a game we can play: Rank the Energy Solutions. Here’s mine:
1. Tax Credits for Fuel Efficient Cars
2. Wind Credits
3. Solar Credits
4. Funding of algae and hydrogen fuels
5. Credits for home renewables (e.g. solar hot water heaters)
6. Eliminate tariffs on imported ethanol
7. Fast track nuclear
8. Invest in public transit
9. Invest in rail transport of goods.
10. Encourage car pooling, telecomuting and 4 day work weeks.
When will South Carolinians consider slowing down to save gas? Oh, probably about the same time they stop equating public transportation with welfare. Maybe sometime after 2030, or when gas hits $20 a gallon, whichever comes first.
Public transportation is welfare for the riders.
Why should I be subsidizing cheap fares for commuters riding Amtrak from their $1,000,000 homes in Connecticut to work on Wall Street?
I do slow down to save gas when it is my interest and I am not losing more money by dawdling. Only I am capable of making that decision, which is why it is no one else’s business.
1. Truly Fuel Efficient Cars don’t need tax credits
2. Wind power that needs subsidies is, by definition, inefficient.
3. Solar collectors that need tax credits are inefficient and wasteful.
4. If algae and hydrogen fuels are not competitive in the free market, then they are wasteful of resources.
5. Credits aren’t necessary for efficient water heaters and HVAC systems.
6. Eliminate tariffs on imported ethanol to let foreign taxpayers subsidize my SUV.
7. No nuclear is fast track. Engineering and construction takes 7 years. Just get the socialist pseudo greenies out of the way. Make them pay for economic damages of bogus litigation.
8. Socialist public transit is a big waste of money. That’s why busines won’t touch it.
9. Invest your own money in rail transport of goods. Buy stock in CSX, BNSF, UP, NS.
10. Encourage car pooling, telecomuting and 4 day work weeks. I already do. I helped develop a database application in 1979 to match up commuters between Greenville and Clemson. The same could be done online today for every commute.
I’ll believe Brad is serious about energy conservation when he presents an idea that impacts himself as much or more than everyone else.
When will The State come out against the growth that has choked our local roads with cars wasting gasoline? Oh, wait, we can’t stop growth because that would impact subscriptions to The State.
Which wastes more gas? A car driving for 30 minutes at 70 MPH or a car sitting in traffic for 30 minutes driving 5 mph?
Take a look at Harbison, Two Notch, and Clemson Roads and then get back to us with a plan that solves that huge energy drain.
Doug, I’m not following you there. Lord knows, folks all the time accuse ME of conflicts of interest because of something of importance to the business side of the paper, but saying that newspapers have some particular, specific interest in growth is a new one. Usually, it’s the sales tax on newspapers, or not paying city taxes or something… Those I can understand y’all going on about, even though they have nothing to do with me or what I think (my positions are that lawmakers should go after exemptions with no sacred cows, and cities in SC should have greater power to annex).
But growth? Huh? I don’t even understand how my character is being attacked on THAT one…
Oh, and Doug, I don’t equate crossing the border without a piece of paper with speeding. Speeding is a greater threat to South Carolina, especially with the condition of our roads.
And bud — I can’t rank ’em. They’re all number one to me — right along with drilling. Good topic, though.
So, Brad, you have no interest in whether The State increases its readership?
My comment was not about your character. It was related to your constant stream of solutions that always seem to be focused on making other people do what you want them to do. I’m waiting for the first solution you offer that impacts you first instead of me.
You want me to slow down. You want me to pay for your health insurance. You want me to pay more taxes than you because my house cost more than yours. You want my sons to be drafted involuntarily when yours are beyond draft age. See the pattern?
And I guess the new politically correct term for illegally entering a country is “crossing the border without a piece of paper”. How about the identity theft? What do you call that? “Copycatting?” And how about not paying taxes? “Fiscal peek-a-boo?” And getting free medical care? “Playing doctor?”
I don’t think even Lindsey Graham or John McCain would dare talk about illegal immigration with such a “no big deal” attitude.
And now some facts about highway deaths in South Carolina from SCDOT.
– 1037 people were killed on SC roads last year.
– Primary, secondary, and county roads carry 74% of the traffic. Yet, about 90% of all crashes occur on those roads, not the interstates. The secondary roads, which are the most severely under-funded, are the deadliest highways in the state.
Try and digest those facts and then estimate how many lives would be saved by ticketing more drivers going over 70 on the highways.
Come on… I know you can do it. A dozen? twenty? And at what cost? I know that’s the part Brad doesn’t like to bother with because it gets in the way of the grand solution. Would 100 extra cops and cars make a big difference in a state with 41,391 miles of roadway?
There are 830 miles of interstate running through SC. Why don’t we put a cop a mile apart, 24 x 7? Will that be enough?
The system we have in place now works fine.
“I don’t equate crossing the border without a piece of paper with speeding. Speeding is a greater threat to South Carolina, especially with the condition of our roads.”
Wow, Mr. Warthen, you’ve taken beyond the pale to the level of dumbfounding with that statement.
To think you actually lecture people around here about acting like adults.
Worse yet, they actually let you write a column in South Carolina’s largest newspaper.
So, what, would deportation be a fair punishment for speeding?
Please, write a column about how speeding is a more serious problem than illegal immigration.
Pretty please? I don’t think the community’s quite ready for that one.
I just came back from the Charlotte airport yesterday, and there weren’t very many people driving 60, so Lee’s statement about state employees is pretty misleading. I wanted to drive just under 70, but had to constantly dive in and out to do it.
At a seminar I was in a few years ago (on using Powerpoint), the facilitator asked a SC highway patrolman who was attending the class how fast he could drive back to Charlotte to catch his plane home for the weekend. The patrolman replied, “the traffic in SC moves at 10 mph over the speed limit.” So apparently that culture has been with us for awhile. My impression is that the figure is more like 20 over in Georgia.
Actually, driving too slow can get you killed, in Germany at least. Driving there last week, I was struck again how much easier it is when people follow a few simple rules (don’t pass on the right, for example, keep to the right except when passing), and when trucks are forced to drive 55 mph. Sure, they could slow down there, too, especially when driving into fog banks. . . .
If we really want to regulate speed, we’re going to have to put up some of those automatic cameras, as for example between the Dietz and Limburg exits on the A-3 (driving south between Cologne and Frankfurt). People keep to 60 mph, and trucks to 25 mph on that downhill stretch. No fudging, whether you’re in a Mazda or a BMW.
The speed limit should be at 55 on all highways, except for the interstates — 20, 26, 77, 85, 95, 126, 185, 385, 520, 526 and 585.
How does Brad feel about all the illegal aliens who are speeding, driving without licenses, driving without insurance, driving drunk?
Over dozen people in Charlotte have been killed this year by intoxicated illegal Mexican drivers.
800,000 illegal aliens are in US prisons for rape, robbery, murder, burlary, grand theft auto, and battery.
I’ll bet Brad would deport any illegal caught smoking a cigarette!
Maybe Sam can hand out some more $2000 welfare debit cards. How’d that go last time?