4 ms·

Funny anecdote about the freeway system of southern California. When they were initially planning the system in 1930s, 40s, they were planning to have the syst

by dba7dba 10y ago

Funny anecdote about the freeway system of southern California. When they were initially planning the system in 1930s, 40s, they were planning to have the system in use for next 100 years. So they built over sized roads (like 10 lane freeway, without having to stop for traffic lights, that go THROUGH center of a major city). When the system proved so car friendly, more and more people moved in and bought cars. Within in a short period of time (much shorter than 100), the system is completely jammed. Always look for unintended consequences...

rhizome 10y ago
Braess' Paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess'_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess'_paradox
- emodendroket 10y ago
  I always wonder about this. You have to reach saturation eventually, right?
- argonaut 10y ago
  This isn't an example of Braess' paradox.
ggreer 10y ago
Isn't that a good unintended consequence? They built out infrastructure which attracted lots of people & jobs. Today, SoCal is home to world-leading firms in entertainment & aerospace. They also have top-tier research and educational institutions.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  Which is why, when discussing infrastructure upgrades in our Hackerspace, I keep reminding that infrastructure is an enabler - it should not be built to support current needs, it needs a healthy margin to enable people to do more. People always find interesting ways to use up extra capacity.
  - bluGill 10y ago
    There is a limit to that. People point out all the growth that overbuilt freeways caused argue we need to build more freeways. Nobody every asks if the trend will continue. They want to bring that same growth to small middle of nowhere towns, but it isn't clear if that will happen. Also lost in the conversation is opportunity cost: sure people drove more and that drove growth to those areas. However what if the roads had not been built - what would have happened instead? We don't know, but it is fun to speculate. (maybe railroads would still be the most common mode of transport?)
- dba7dba 10y ago
  The unintended consequence I'm talking about is they expected it will take 100 years for the system to be utilized at full capacity but in reality it took just 20-30 years...
chiph 10y ago
The original designers of the interstates didn't want the roads to go through the downtown areas. The idea was for the high-speed roads to go near cities, and have spur roads (3-digit interstate numbers that start with an odd number) connect them - like the design of the original Autobahn. But there was a coalition of mayors and municipal associations that pressured Congress to have the roads pass through their towns (jobs! progress!). President Eisenhower was not amused, but he found out too late to change the design. A consequence of this was the bulldozing of historically black-owned property to make way for the new roads.
- dba7dba 10y ago
  They didn't really NEED cars to move people around because Los Angeles area already had a GREAT light rail system called the Red Line. The current walkway on Venice Beach was what's left of that line. Can you imagine? An above ground light rail system running parallel to a beach in LA? They RIPPED it out thanks to lobbying by car companies and tire companies. Yay to lobbyists. Now, it takes a billion to build a few miles of a subway/lightrail system that practically goes no where...
  - chiph 10y ago
    The Red Line is the new Metro system (which was destroyed in 1997's Volcano). The electrified light-rail from the 1930's was the LA Railway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Railway GM, Firestone, and several other companies were indicted in 1949 for attempting to form a monopoly over local transit. The semi-urban legend part (it was never definitively proved there was a plot behind it all) was the ripping out of the streetcars, replacing them with GM-made bus networks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...
- coldpie 10y ago
  > A consequence of this was the bulldozing of historically black-owned property to make way for the new roads. Indeed. A couple years ago, the city of St Paul actually formally apologized for exactly this, destroying the primarily black Rondo neighborhood with freeway I-94. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/local/2015/07/17/rondo-apologies-zelle-coleman/30328463/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/local/2015/07/17/rondo-ap...
SilasX 10y ago
Sorry for saying the same thing in two comments, but that (like the Google case) looks like a Jevons effect (where induced demand is a special case): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
dredmorbius 10y ago
Reading through some early texts on the coal and oil industry. One notes that at then-current rates of consumption, the coal reserves of the United States would supply over one million years' consumption.[1] The current North American coal proven reserve is less than 300 years of current utilisation rates: http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/coal/coal-reserves.html http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/stati... It's amazing what a constant increase in growth rate can accomplish. Also the overwhelming tendency for lowered costs to induce an increased demand -- the Jevons paradox. If you want people to use less of something, increase the cost, not the efficiency. ________________________________ Notes: 1. Henri Erni, Coal Oil and Petroleum: Their origin, history, geology, and chemistry, 1865. p. 15. https://archive.org/stream/coaloilpetroleum00erni#page/14/mode/2up https://archive.org/stream/coaloilpetroleum00erni#page/14/mo...
flukus 10y ago
This is known as induced demand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand
vorg 10y ago
One way to plan for the next 100 years when building roads but not cause people to buy cars is to have a 10-lane wide verge on one side of the road. Have a row of 30-storey buildings on one side of a 5 lanes each way road, but on the other side the buildings are all set back at least a 10-lane width which is used for car parking, 1-storey buildings, public spaces, etc. If there's ever a need to widen the road, it can be done without demolishing any tall buildings. I see this in new road layouts in China all the time. Of course, under the road will be a new subway system -- another disincentive for people to buy cars.

by dba7dba 10y ago

rhizome 10y ago

Braess' Paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess'_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess'_paradox

emodendroket 10y ago
I always wonder about this. You have to reach saturation eventually, right?
argonaut 10y ago
This isn't an example of Braess' paradox.

ggreer 10y ago

Isn't that a good unintended consequence? They built out infrastructure which attracted lots of people & jobs. Today, SoCal is home to world-leading firms in entertainment & aerospace. They also have top-tier research and educational institutions.

TeMPOraL 10y ago
Which is why, when discussing infrastructure upgrades in our Hackerspace, I keep reminding that infrastructure is an enabler - it should not be built to support current needs, it needs a healthy margin to enable people to do more. People always find interesting ways to use up extra capacity.
- bluGill 10y ago
  There is a limit to that. People point out all the growth that overbuilt freeways caused argue we need to build more freeways. Nobody every asks if the trend will continue. They want to bring that same growth to small middle of nowhere towns, but it isn't clear if that will happen. Also lost in the conversation is opportunity cost: sure people drove more and that drove growth to those areas. However what if the roads had not been built - what would have happened instead? We don't know, but it is fun to speculate. (maybe railroads would still be the most common mode of transport?)
dba7dba 10y ago
The unintended consequence I'm talking about is they expected it will take 100 years for the system to be utilized at full capacity but in reality it took just 20-30 years...

chiph 10y ago

The original designers of the interstates didn't want the roads to go through the downtown areas. The idea was for the high-speed roads to go near cities, and have spur roads (3-digit interstate numbers that start with an odd number) connect them - like the design of the original Autobahn. But there was a coalition of mayors and municipal associations that pressured Congress to have the roads pass through their towns (jobs! progress!). President Eisenhower was not amused, but he found out too late to change the design. A consequence of this was the bulldozing of historically black-owned property to make way for the new roads.

dba7dba 10y ago
They didn't really NEED cars to move people around because Los Angeles area already had a GREAT light rail system called the Red Line. The current walkway on Venice Beach was what's left of that line. Can you imagine? An above ground light rail system running parallel to a beach in LA? They RIPPED it out thanks to lobbying by car companies and tire companies. Yay to lobbyists. Now, it takes a billion to build a few miles of a subway/lightrail system that practically goes no where...
- chiph 10y ago
  The Red Line is the new Metro system (which was destroyed in 1997's Volcano). The electrified light-rail from the 1930's was the LA Railway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Railway GM, Firestone, and several other companies were indicted in 1949 for attempting to form a monopoly over local transit. The semi-urban legend part (it was never definitively proved there was a plot behind it all) was the ripping out of the streetcars, replacing them with GM-made bus networks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...
coldpie 10y ago
> A consequence of this was the bulldozing of historically black-owned property to make way for the new roads. Indeed. A couple years ago, the city of St Paul actually formally apologized for exactly this, destroying the primarily black Rondo neighborhood with freeway I-94. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/local/2015/07/17/rondo-apologies-zelle-coleman/30328463/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/local/2015/07/17/rondo-ap...

SilasX 10y ago

Sorry for saying the same thing in two comments, but that (like the Google case) looks like a Jevons effect (where induced demand is a special case): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

dredmorbius 10y ago

Reading through some early texts on the coal and oil industry. One notes that at then-current rates of consumption, the coal reserves of the United States would supply over one million years' consumption.[1] The current North American coal proven reserve is less than 300 years of current utilisation rates: http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/coal/coal-reserves.html http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/stati... It's amazing what a constant increase in growth rate can accomplish. Also the overwhelming tendency for lowered costs to induce an increased demand -- the Jevons paradox. If you want people to use less of something, increase the cost, not the efficiency. ________________________________ Notes: 1. Henri Erni, Coal Oil and Petroleum: Their origin, history, geology, and chemistry, 1865. p. 15. https://archive.org/stream/coaloilpetroleum00erni#page/14/mode/2up https://archive.org/stream/coaloilpetroleum00erni#page/14/mo...

flukus 10y ago

This is known as induced demand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

vorg 10y ago

One way to plan for the next 100 years when building roads but not cause people to buy cars is to have a 10-lane wide verge on one side of the road. Have a row of 30-storey buildings on one side of a 5 lanes each way road, but on the other side the buildings are all set back at least a 10-lane width which is used for car parking, 1-storey buildings, public spaces, etc. If there's ever a need to widen the road, it can be done without demolishing any tall buildings. I see this in new road layouts in China all the time. Of course, under the road will be a new subway system -- another disincentive for people to buy cars.