John Warner vs. physics.

[Diogenes]

Would You Drive 55?

By WILLIAM SCHULTZ / WASHINGTON 2 hours, 56 minutes ago

Liberals say Iraq is another Vietnam; conservatives say Barack Obama is Jimmy Carter redux. ABBA's a mega-hit and Elton John's going to be performing at Madison Square Garden. Had enough of these '70s flashbacks? Brace yourself for another: the return of the national speed limit, courtesy of one of the country's most venerable politicians.


Senator John Warner (R-VA) - elected in 1978 - recently expressed interest in the idea of a national speed limit to conserve gasoline. Warner, who is not running for re-election this year, wrote to U.S. Secretary of Energy Sam Bodman, asking "at what speed is the typical vehicle traveling on America's highways today most fuel efficient?"

Warner told TIME his concern is for "the many millions and millions [of Americans] of limited means, sitting around their kitchen table trying to figure out how to make ends meet." Unlike long-term alternative energy sources, Warner says, a speed limit would work to bring down gas prices immediately. "Maybe some guy's got a better idea," he says. "But I haven't seen it."

The National Maximum Speed Limit of 55 mph was created in 1974, when Richard Nixon signed the Emergency Energy Highway Conservation Act. Prior to that, states had been free to set their own speed limits, but the new law threatened to strip Federal highway funding from any state straying above the national standard. The ostensible purpose of this limit was to keep down gas prices, which had been driven through the roof by an OPEC embargo touched off by the 1973 Arab-Israeli war. And with gas-prices once again sky-high, Warner isn't alone in talking up a cap on speeding.

Jackie Speier, a first-term Democratic congresswoman from California, is already on the case. Earlier this month, she introduced a bill that would cap highway speed limits at 60 mph - 65 in rural areas. It's currently awaiting a hearing before the House Committee on Transportation. Warner says he hasn't contacted Speier, but adds that he'd be willing to "stroll out on the floor" in favor of a speed-limit bill. He has yet to propose a similar bill in the Senate.

The thinking behind Warner and Speier's speed-limit proposals is simple. At a certain speed, a car's gas mileage begins to drop; the faster you go, the more fuel your burn. Ergo, slow down and save gas. According to fueleconomy.gov, a website run by the Department of Energy, "each 5 mph you drive over 60 mph is like paying an additional $0.30 per gallon for gas." Warner approvingly cites a congressional study showing that "the law resulted in reduced consumption of 167,000 barrels of petroleum a day." With millions of more cars on the road now than there were in 1974, the volume saved could be even greater.

Then there's the issue of safety. Tim Castleman, founder of the pro-limit group Drive 55 Conservation Groups, notes: "When they instituted [a national speed limit] in 1974, it was a one-year deal, but after one year they found highway deaths had dropped by 4,000." This unexpected side benefit, Castleman says, led Congress to make what had been a temporary measure permanent.

Some opponents of the speed limit question the numbers tossed around by Warner, Castleman, and others. Indeed, the safety argument looks a bit flimsy on closer examination. Since the 55-mph limit was repealed in 1995, the number of fatal motor vehicle crashes has increased by little more than 1,000, while deaths per 100,000 licensed drivers dipped over the same period.

In a 1999 study for the libertarian Cato institute, economist Stephen Moore noted that the number of auto crashes actually fell by 66,000 after the 55 mph limit was lifted. Moore also points out that a lower speed limit means more time wasted idling in traffic: "The most valuable resource on this earth is not oil, its human time."

A law only works when it's obeyed - and it's an open question how many motorists would comply. The 1974 law was considered a joke by the many drivers, who violated it with impunity. "Real compliance out on the interstate was somewhere around twenty percent," says Jim Baxter, president of the National Motorists Association. "Eighty percent of the population was exceeding the 55 mile-per-hour speed limit!"

Some groups would meet the return of the speed limit with a yawn rather than a groan. Instead of waiting for the government to step in, they've chosen to self-regulate. A number of trucking companies have mandated that their fleets stay at or below 65 mph. Douglas Stotlar, CEO of Con-way Inc., says his company's decision to lower their limit to 62 was driven both by environmental concerns and because "fuel prices were going to unprecedented levels." Exactly, say foes of a national speed limit; people can be trusted to slow down and conserve gas without the government leaning over their shoulder.

But Warner insists the government has got to do something, and do it now. Though he favors drilling offshore, he also says "That's five, six, seven years out. The pain is tonight, tomorrow night, and the night after that. I'm just sensitive to people's pain. Who's got the courage to do something like this?" Warner, who arrived on the national political scene in the oil-starved '70s, thinks that era might just hold the solution to our current energy crisis. View this article on Time.com

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080727/u ... youdrive55" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Aside from being a PC bitch trying to butt the federal government's nose in another place it doesn't belong, Warner is full of shit.
Crusing along at 65 or 75 doesn't burn any more fuel than at 45, and your driving time is less. Hence better fuel efficiency.

It's the constant acceleration and braking that drives fuel efficiency down.

[huh?]

Crusing along at 65 or 75 doesn't burn any more fuel than at 45, and your driving time is less. Hence better fuel efficiency.

Really?



http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Estimates for the effect of speed on MPG are based on a study by West, B.H., R.N. McGill, J.W. Hodgson, S.S. Sluder, and D.E. Smith, Development and Verification of Light-Duty Modal Emissions and Fuel Consumption Values for Traffic Models, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, March 1999.

[Mister Bushice]

Lets say I had to travel 390 miles by car. If I avg 65 mph I'd get there in 6 hours. It would take me 30 minutes more to get there if I drove 60 mph, and 1 hour more if I drove 55 mph.

Lets say I average around 20 MPG. I will use 20 gallons, so driving 65 mph will cost me about $6 dollars extra. The curve is about the between 55 and 60, so that .30 per extra gal for every 5 miles per hour over would be fairly close.

So the question really is - is my time more valuable than $12 per hour?

Answer? You bet your ass it is.

Fuck this speed limit reduction bullshit. It doesn't even reduce traffic fatalities.

If you want to drive 55 or 60, GO AHEAD.

Just don't take away my RIGHT to do so.

[Diogenes]

Estimates for the effect of speed on MPG are based on a study by West, B.H., R.N. McGill, J.W. Hodgson, S.S. Sluder, and D.E. Smith, Development and Verification of Light-Duty Modal Emissions and Fuel Consumption Values for Traffic Models, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, March 1999.

Nice. Of course without knowing the methodology behind the study, their cute little graph is meaningless.

As opposed to the empirical results from the instantaneous MPG gauge on my Caddy.

And the obvious fact that once you are at speed, the only thing you are doing with the gas pedel is compensation, you're letting momentum keep you going. At 45 or 85. It is acceleration and decceleration that brings down your MPG, not velocity.

[The Seer]

If you want to drive 55 or 60, GO AHEAD.

Just don't take away my RIGHT to do so.

You can get ticketed for not wearing a seat belt or holding a cell phone so why shouldn't they?


bastards....

[smackaholic]

Estimates for the effect of speed on MPG are based on a study by West, B.H., R.N. McGill, J.W. Hodgson, S.S. Sluder, and D.E. Smith, Development and Verification of Light-Duty Modal Emissions and Fuel Consumption Values for Traffic Models, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, March 1999.

Nice. Of course without knowing the methodology behind the study, their cute little graph is meaningless.

As opposed to the empirical results from the instantaneous MPG gauge on my Caddy.

And the obvious fact that once you are at speed, the only thing you are doing with the gas pedel is compensation, you're letting momentum keep you going. At 45 or 85. It is acceleration and decceleration that brings down your MPG, not velocity.

Let me start by saying that I agree with you completely that the gubmint should keep it's meddling hands off the speed limit.

That being said, your statement that "momentum" keeps you going, is 100% fukking bullshit. Aerodynamic drag is constantly trying to stop you. It takes fukking horsepower to overcome this. Aerodynamic drag increases at, wtf is it, help me out here mikey, it increases at the square (I think) of speed. I'm sure dinsgoogle will fact check me on that one. It may be wrong. Anyway, whatever it is, it means that the faster you go, the more gas per mile it's gonna cost.

I think there is a better reason for leaving well enough alone. It is safety. I have had numerous close calls with being in a serious car accident. Almost every last one of these occasions was caused by me dozing off behind the wheel. Driving slowly increases the odds of this happening in two ways. First off, it increases drive times which enherently increases the chance of nodding off, second, driving 55 on an interstate is painfully boring. Things just happen too slowly. Driving in the 65-75 range feels like a more comfortable speed. Things happen a bit more quickly and you are somewhat less likely to fall asleep.

[Diogenes]

And the obvious fact that once you are at speed, the only thing you are doing with the gas pedel is compensation, you're letting momentum keep you going. At 45 or 85. It is acceleration and decceleration that brings down your MPG, not velocity.

Aerodynamic drag is constantly trying to stop you. It takes fukking horsepower to overcome this. Aerodynamic drag increases at, wtf is it, help me out here mikey, it increases at the square (I think) of speed.

That's what you're compensating for. And mechanical drag from the friction on the tires.

Like I said, back when I was driving a Caddilac I noticed no difference at 55-75 on my MPG gauge. On the other hand, the MPG at 30-45 was pure shit. Possibly it was due to the model in question, but that would just show that their cookie cutter study is flawed.

And maybe it is just me, but I am less than totally trustful of studies with unknown methodologies and unknown sponsors, which happen to come up with the exact result the government has already decided is good for you.

As far as safety, the safest speed is whatever keeps me away from the bulk of the traffic. If there's nobody driving next to, in front of or behind me, no stupid POS is going to run into me.

[Diogenes]

"Maybe some guy's got a better idea," he says. "But I haven't seen it."

Okay, Senator. I'll be your huckleberry.

As stated before, constant acceleration and braking is the prime factor in screwing your MPG to hell. Which would make urban rush hour gridlock the worst waste of fuel we have. So how about tax breaks for companies that either run 24 hour shifts, run exclusively nights and graveyards, or have non rush hour shifts (4AM-12PM say). The fewer people on the freeways, the less gridlock, the less fuel wasted.


You're welcome. I'll be expecting my check.

[Mikey]

Estimates for the effect of speed on MPG are based on a study by West, B.H., R.N. McGill, J.W. Hodgson, S.S. Sluder, and D.E. Smith, Development and Verification of Light-Duty Modal Emissions and Fuel Consumption Values for Traffic Models, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, March 1999.

Nice. Of course without knowing the methodology behind the study, their cute little graph is meaningless.

As opposed to the empirical results from the instantaneous MPG gauge on my Caddy.

And the obvious fact that once you are at speed, the only thing you are doing with the gas pedel is compensation, you're letting momentum keep you going. At 45 or 85. It is acceleration and decceleration that brings down your MPG, not velocity.

Let me start by saying that I agree with you completely that the gubmint should keep it's meddling hands off the speed limit.

That being said, your statement that "momentum" keeps you going, is 100% fukking bullshit. Aerodynamic drag is constantly trying to stop you. It takes fukking horsepower to overcome this. Aerodynamic drag increases at, wtf is it, help me out here mikey, it increases at the square (I think) of speed. I'm sure dinsgoogle will fact check me on that one. It may be wrong. Anyway, whatever it is, it means that the faster you go, the more gas per mile it's gonna cost.

I think there is a better reason for leaving well enough alone. It is safety. I have had numerous close calls with being in a serious car accident. Almost every last one of these occasions was caused by me dozing off behind the wheel. Driving slowly increases the odds of this happening in two ways. First off, it increases drive times which enherently increases the chance of nodding off, second, driving 55 on an interstate is painfully boring. Things just happen too slowly. Driving in the 65-75 range feels like a more comfortable speed. Things happen a bit more quickly and you are somewhat less likely to fall asleep.

Drag increases as the cube of the speed. Diogenes is as full of shit as his "MPG gauge". How accurate are the 1/8, 1/4 tank etc. tick marks on your gas gauge?

Funny that he would mention "physics" in the thread title, and then go on to prove beyond that shadow of a doubt, in his post, that "physics" is something that he has absolutely no clue about.

[Diogenes]

Drag increases as the cube of the speed.

Still a fucking moron.

The drag coefficient is a common metric in automotive design, where designers strive to achieve a low coefficient. Minimizing drag is done to improve fuel efficiency at highway speeds, where aerodynamic effects represent a substantial fraction of the energy needed to keep the car moving. Indeed, aerodynamic drag increases as the square of speed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile ... efficients" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Mister Bushice]

Warner told TIME his concern is for "the many millions and millions [of Americans] of limited means, sitting around their kitchen table trying to figure out how to make ends meet." Unlike long-term alternative energy sources, Warner says, a speed limit would work to bring down gas prices immediately.

Maybe tell those low income shit heads to slow down and stay the fuck out of the fast lane?

"Maybe some guy's got a better idea," he says. "But I haven't seen it."

If it hit you in the face, you'd miss it, you pandering dipshit asshole.

I wonder how many police departments have their mouths watering over this shitty idea? The only thing that will be guaranteed to happen if the speed limit is reduced will be an atmospheric rise in speeding tickets issued.

[BSmack]

I wonder how many police departments have their mouths watering over this shitty idea? The only thing that will be guaranteed to happen if the speed limit is reduced will be an atmospheric rise in speeding tickets issued.

Nope, they'll still cull the same 5-10% of the herd that doesn't know how to play the game. Tell me you knew?

[smackaholic]

Yes, they will cull the same section of the herd, but, their take will rise as they now get to write you for 30 over rather than 15-20.

There are another group of vultures that will be pleased by this. Insurance companies and traffic court lawyers.

[Mikey]

Drag increases as the cube of the speed.

Still a fucking moron.

The drag coefficient is a common metric in automotive design, where designers strive to achieve a low coefficient. Minimizing drag is done to improve fuel efficiency at highway speeds, where aerodynamic effects represent a substantial fraction of the energy needed to keep the car moving. Indeed, aerodynamic drag increases as the square of speed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile ... efficients" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yeah, OK, I misspoke.
Slightly.

The power required to overcome the drag increases as the cube of the speed.

New drag = old drag x (new speed / old speed)²
New power = old power x (new speed / old speed)³

It's called the affinity law. At least I didn't claim that your momentum is what keeps you going. Not too surprised you made that claim, though, considering your brain has taken up residence in the frictionless environment of outer space.

³

[Diogenes]

Drag increases as the cube of the speed.

Still a fucking moron.

The drag coefficient is a common metric in automotive design, where designers strive to achieve a low coefficient. Minimizing drag is done to improve fuel efficiency at highway speeds, where aerodynamic effects represent a substantial fraction of the energy needed to keep the car moving. Indeed, aerodynamic drag increases as the square of speed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile ... efficients" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yeah, OK, I misspoke.
Slightly.

Meaning you're full of shit as usual?

Noted.

[Mikey]

Real smoothe tactics there, Beaver.

Could you suck any worse if you tried?

Probably not.

[Diogenes]

Real smoothe tactics there, Beaver.

Dimsdale Alert!!!

[BSmack]

Yes, they will cull the same section of the herd, but, their take will rise as they now get to write you for 30 over rather than 15-20.

That wasn't what Bushice said. He said there would be a rise in the number of tickets issues. I agree with you that for a while there will be a spike in the number of 30+ mph over tickets.

I'm old enough to remember driving under the 55 MPH speed limit laws. As I recall, the effective speed limit (the one the cops actually enforced) was about 68 mph during the day and 63 mph after sunset. As long as you kept below those numbers, you would not get a ticket unless you fit a profile the cop was otherwise looking for.

There are another group of vultures that will be pleased by this. Insurance companies and traffic court lawyers.

IMO, I don't see the 55 speed limit coming back. It's on the garbage heap of history's failed ideas right next to prohibition. There's a reason John Warner was the one who sent up this trial balloon. He's retiring after this session ends.