5 ms·
Your solutions are proportional reductions, a % reduction in the number of drivers. The problem of traffic rises with the ~2nd power of population because not
by hwillis 9y ago
Your solutions are proportional reductions, a % reduction in the number of drivers. The problem of traffic rises with the ~2nd power of population because not only are there more people, there are more intersections.
Intersections can only be solved with 3d roads, by eliminating overlaps. The bigger the city, the more artery roads you need with uninterrupted flow, and they eventually choke each other. Build tunnels and you can have point-to-point connections without choking off local flow.
Reducing the number of drivers can't fully solve gridlock because at some point you have to hit a long light when you try to move from a high flow to low flow area. The only way to avoid that is with onramps and elevated freeways, but you can't build enough of those.
- legulere 9y agoPublic transport is at least an order of magnitude more efficient: http://p5.focus.de/img/fotos/origs3844236/5854568718-w630-h299-o-q75-p5/fahrradtage-bus-autos-raede.jpg http://p5.focus.de/img/fotos/origs3844236/5854568718-w630-h2... (note that car sizes have increased significantly since then) Every point you brought forward is also true for subways, but it's again at least an order of magnitude more space-efficient than sending cars through tunnels.
- hwillis 9y agoThen think of this as a first-class and/or freight subway, I suppose. An extension of public transport to a new sector.