4 ms·

According to the bill, money for construction of two new lanes on each side of I-5 and CA-99 would be drawn from California's Greenhouse Gas Reduction

According to the bill, money for construction of two new lanes on each side of I-5 and CA-99 would be drawn from California's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. Moorlach doesn't give an estimated cost for the project, but says the state already owns the right of way necessary for the lanes. The bill is being pitched as a way to cut idling in traffic and therefore reduce greenhouse gases, The irony of making a lane unlimited speed when 1) Driving over certain speeds (60?) significantly increases fuel consumption and 2) It's pretty constly, environmentally speaking, to replace cars and people when they inevitably crash at 100MPH

maxxxxx 8y ago
" when they inevitably crash at 100MPH" Why would they crash? 100 is not difficult to do.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  Accidents seem to happen at all speeds.
- huebomont 8y ago
  because they're driven by people.
- maerF0x0 8y ago
  this was more to emphasize that accidents do happen and that at 100MPH the magnitude of the crash has increased (its more catastrophic)
soheil 8y ago
This is why if we listened to people like you we would still be riding horses and buggies. Look at Germany are they inevitably crashing constantly at 100MPH or has the Autobahn maybe to some small extent has contributed to German cars being some of the most efficient and desirable cars in the world and pushed the envelope on what is engineeringly possible.
- deathanatos 8y ago
  Perhaps Germay's safety record has nothing to do with their speed limits, or rather, perhaps any detriment to safety caused by higher/unlimited speed limits is offset by > Germany's more rigorous driver-education system makes acquiring a license more difficult and costly than is typical in the United States. The requirements in the US for getting a license are incredibly low in some jurisdictions.
  - soheil 8y ago
    Again if we were riding horses and buggies we would not need to even go to driving school and get a driver's license. Only when something is a necessary condition it happens, to have the same level driver-education here as in Germany first you need higher speed limits.
    - semi-extrinsic 8y ago
      Compared to e.g. Finnish or Norwegian driver education, the US system still looks like an absolute joke. Those countries have top speed limits of 75 mph and 70 mph, respectively. It's not got anything to do with Autobahn, per se.
      - Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
        > Compared to e.g. Finnish or Norwegian driver education, the US system still looks like an absolute joke. Don't even need to compare the US system to anything to know how much of a joke it is. I don't know how much things have since I got my license in 2001, but in Oregon, driver's ed classes weren't even required. At 15 1/2 years old, you take a 30-question, multiple-choice written test to get a learner's permit that allows you to drive on public roads with a licensed driver in the passenger seat. Then at 16, you can take a 15-minute behind-the-wheel test to get your license. That's all. Your parents would teach you to drive, who would often end up leaving large gaps in your knowledge or even teach things that are flat-out incorrect. A friend of mine was taught specifically to camp the left lane if he's going to be on the highway for more than 5 miles. Driver's ed should be a requirement. The courses should include practical lessons including emergency maneuvers on wet pavement and how to recover from a slide. Being told "steer into/out of the skid" isn't helpful. Everyone should have practiced recovery after loss of traction. Everyone should have had to do emergency stops on both wet and dry pavement so they can actually appreciate the difference in stopping distance. Instead, you get morons that drive 60+ mph on a snowy highway in dense fog because nobody told them you should slow down for that, and somehow it isn't common sense. Videos like this [0] need to be required viewing to get a license. This pileup was 100% preventable. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9fI5M6_XVk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9fI5M6_XVk
leetcrew 8y ago
on most ICE cars, the most fuel efficient speed is the minimum speed where you can get into the highest gear without lugging the engine. frictional losses from spinning the engine at a higher rpm tend to be larger than losses from air resistance. on most modern cars, this is around 50mph, which is very slow to drive on the interstate. my car can get well over 40mpg at this speed, which drops down to the mid 30s when I travel at 80mph. on most EVs, there are no gears, so efficiency increases asymptotically as speed approaches zero. what I'm getting at is that fuel efficiency for an individual car should not be the only optimization target for traffic laws. we are willing to make at least some tradeoffs in efficiency to get where we are going faster. most speed limits in the US have not been increased since the 60s, and since then cars have become much more efficient, capable, and survivable in the case of a crash. I'd say at least a modest increase in speed limits is warranted. plus, a bunch of ICEs crawling in stop-and-go traffic is pretty much the worst case scenario for fuel efficiency. if this new policy can actually reduce gridlock, it is likely to have net gains in emission reduction.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  Does removing the speed limit actually prevent gridlock?
  - leetcrew 8y ago
    I actually have no idea. car traffic has a lot of properties that are counterintuitive. I will reword that sentence to make it more clearly a conditional.
  - Spartan-S63 8y ago
    They likely don’t. In most cases, congestion and gridlock are caused by “traffic snakes” and other phantom traffic jams. These are mostly predicated on drivers braking too hard because they were following the car in front too closely. In order to avoid stop-and-go traffic, you should try to balance the distance to the car in front of you with the distance to the car behind you. Allowing enough distance lets you slow down to avoid an accident without coming to a complete stop (as long as the person in front of you is doing the same). A lot of driver behavior is at fault for gridlock and traffic issues. It really comes down to poor enforcement and counterintuitive game theory that makes it more advantageous to disregard the rules.

maxxxxx 8y ago

" when they inevitably crash at 100MPH" Why would they crash? 100 is not difficult to do.

SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
Accidents seem to happen at all speeds.
huebomont 8y ago
because they're driven by people.
maerF0x0 8y ago
this was more to emphasize that accidents do happen and that at 100MPH the magnitude of the crash has increased (its more catastrophic)

soheil 8y ago

This is why if we listened to people like you we would still be riding horses and buggies. Look at Germany are they inevitably crashing constantly at 100MPH or has the Autobahn maybe to some small extent has contributed to German cars being some of the most efficient and desirable cars in the world and pushed the envelope on what is engineeringly possible.

deathanatos 8y ago
Perhaps Germay's safety record has nothing to do with their speed limits, or rather, perhaps any detriment to safety caused by higher/unlimited speed limits is offset by > Germany's more rigorous driver-education system makes acquiring a license more difficult and costly than is typical in the United States. The requirements in the US for getting a license are incredibly low in some jurisdictions.
- soheil 8y ago
  Again if we were riding horses and buggies we would not need to even go to driving school and get a driver's license. Only when something is a necessary condition it happens, to have the same level driver-education here as in Germany first you need higher speed limits.
  - semi-extrinsic 8y ago
    Compared to e.g. Finnish or Norwegian driver education, the US system still looks like an absolute joke. Those countries have top speed limits of 75 mph and 70 mph, respectively. It's not got anything to do with Autobahn, per se.
    - Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
      > Compared to e.g. Finnish or Norwegian driver education, the US system still looks like an absolute joke. Don't even need to compare the US system to anything to know how much of a joke it is. I don't know how much things have since I got my license in 2001, but in Oregon, driver's ed classes weren't even required. At 15 1/2 years old, you take a 30-question, multiple-choice written test to get a learner's permit that allows you to drive on public roads with a licensed driver in the passenger seat. Then at 16, you can take a 15-minute behind-the-wheel test to get your license. That's all. Your parents would teach you to drive, who would often end up leaving large gaps in your knowledge or even teach things that are flat-out incorrect. A friend of mine was taught specifically to camp the left lane if he's going to be on the highway for more than 5 miles. Driver's ed should be a requirement. The courses should include practical lessons including emergency maneuvers on wet pavement and how to recover from a slide. Being told "steer into/out of the skid" isn't helpful. Everyone should have practiced recovery after loss of traction. Everyone should have had to do emergency stops on both wet and dry pavement so they can actually appreciate the difference in stopping distance. Instead, you get morons that drive 60+ mph on a snowy highway in dense fog because nobody told them you should slow down for that, and somehow it isn't common sense. Videos like this [0] need to be required viewing to get a license. This pileup was 100% preventable. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9fI5M6_XVk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9fI5M6_XVk

leetcrew 8y ago

on most ICE cars, the most fuel efficient speed is the minimum speed where you can get into the highest gear without lugging the engine. frictional losses from spinning the engine at a higher rpm tend to be larger than losses from air resistance. on most modern cars, this is around 50mph, which is very slow to drive on the interstate. my car can get well over 40mpg at this speed, which drops down to the mid 30s when I travel at 80mph. on most EVs, there are no gears, so efficiency increases asymptotically as speed approaches zero. what I'm getting at is that fuel efficiency for an individual car should not be the only optimization target for traffic laws. we are willing to make at least some tradeoffs in efficiency to get where we are going faster. most speed limits in the US have not been increased since the 60s, and since then cars have become much more efficient, capable, and survivable in the case of a crash. I'd say at least a modest increase in speed limits is warranted. plus, a bunch of ICEs crawling in stop-and-go traffic is pretty much the worst case scenario for fuel efficiency. if this new policy can actually reduce gridlock, it is likely to have net gains in emission reduction.

saagarjha 8y ago
Does removing the speed limit actually prevent gridlock?
- leetcrew 8y ago
  I actually have no idea. car traffic has a lot of properties that are counterintuitive. I will reword that sentence to make it more clearly a conditional.
- Spartan-S63 8y ago
  They likely don’t. In most cases, congestion and gridlock are caused by “traffic snakes” and other phantom traffic jams. These are mostly predicated on drivers braking too hard because they were following the car in front too closely. In order to avoid stop-and-go traffic, you should try to balance the distance to the car in front of you with the distance to the car behind you. Allowing enough distance lets you slow down to avoid an accident without coming to a complete stop (as long as the person in front of you is doing the same). A lot of driver behavior is at fault for gridlock and traffic issues. It really comes down to poor enforcement and counterintuitive game theory that makes it more advantageous to disregard the rules.