4 ms·

Roads like the ones in Sweden will never be common place in the US. We value speed, convenience, and cheap over a "couple" of dead people.

bmj 12y ago
I think this is part of it, but there are also issues of infrastructure as well. Many aging eastern cities, with their challenging (read: hilly) topography, make it prohibitively expensive to radically redesign roads.[0] Additionally, I think it would be "federalize" such efforts, as it would be easier gradually redesign roads in a city, or even a part of a city, rather than attempt to broadly dictate policy for the entire country. [0] That said, it is possible to make the streets safer, even when geography and economics are obstacles. My own town has been doing this, though often it is piecemeal.
- Spooky23 12y ago
  Great point. It's made more complex by artifacts of state law and home rule for political subdivisions. For example, in New York, state and US highways (ie. State Route 5, US Route 20) are maintained by the State DOT -- unless you're in a "city". Areas that are organized as towns (think Hempstead, NY on Long Island with 300k+ people) get state services, areas organized as cities (Albany, NY with 90k people) typically do a lousy job at it. The Federal government has been able to update things like street signals, etc. But fundamental things like road conceptual design, breaking out bike lanes, etc are going to be very difficult issues to handle without local control. There are more people in NYC than Sweden, so the size and scope of the problem in the US is several orders of magnitude more complex.
- nawitus 12y ago
  Hilly topography doesn't really make it prohibitively expensive to make 2+1 roads, or at least they're relatively common in Finland. (Although 2+1 roads are rarely separated by fence here). Even hilly roads tend to have straight sections that can serve as the 2+1 area.
codeflo 12y ago
To state my European prejudices, you also seem to value being allowed to drive without proper training, and driving around in bulky vehicles that are basically designed to use the other car as their crumple zone. Those two things are possibly related.
- hueving 12y ago
  Well it sounds like they are pretty baseless prejudices. You must pass a skills test, even if not as rigorous as some countries. Additionally, the idea that the other car is the crumple zone was valid maybe 50 years ago. Safety tests are conducted by smashing cars into walls that don't crumple. Everyone I know who has been in a crash hasn't been due to improper training, it been because of ignoring rules that they knew very well (speeding, texting and driving, etc). I don't know anyone that has crashed because they didn't know how a stop sign worked.
  - jbrooksuk 12y ago
    > Everyone I know who has been in a crash hasn't been due to improper training, it been because of ignoring rules that they knew very well (speeding, texting and driving, etc) How can anybody not know that texting and driving is a bad idea? That's just stupid.
    - bkmartin 12y ago
      But people do stupid things every day. Smoking is stupid, binge drinking is stupid, not wearing your seat belt is stupid... all have consequences. The point still remains, it is a choice people make to not follow the rules that causes most of the problems. Now, how do we get people to follow the rules better?
    - bkmartin 12y ago
      But people do stupid things every day. Smoking is stupid, binge drinking is stupid, not wearing your seat belt is stupid... all have consequences. The point still remains, it is a choice people make to not follow the rules that causes most of the problems. Now, how do we get people to follow the rules better?
Tuna-Fish 12y ago
Some of the designs are advantageous even for speed and convenience. Modern roundabouts reduce intersection fatalities by 90% and increase throughput in most traffic conditions. They were much maligned as complicated and hard to understand when they started being built in the USA, but the rate of their construction is going up and eventually they will probably be as common in the USA as they are in Europe.
matwood 12y ago
Parts of Highway 17 in South Carolina were recently upgraded to exactly this type of road. I've noticed many other highways (not Interstates) using this exact design. Admittedly, they do not always have a steel barrier. Traffic circles are another thing going in all around where I currently live. Unfortunately many people still do not know how to use them, but they are learning.
darklajid 12y ago
This is the third time I'm commenting on the same issue in this thread. Speed? What's the limit? What are you actually driving, if you're ignoring the limit? Because Sweden allows 110-120km/h and other places in Europe might even allow more (France w/ 130km/h, and .. I'm from Germany). You are NOT going fast in the US. You might drive a lot. You might commute more than anyone else. I don't know about these things. But fast? I don't buy it.
- lttlrck 12y ago
  Around Boston for my 15 mile commute on the Interstate the fast lane is nominally at 110-120km/h. No it's not as fast as the autobahn but it's on a par with Europe and far from slow. (I'm British, lived in Germany for 10 years, US for 5 years)
  - emp_zealoth 12y ago
    I'm sorry, 110-120 in the fast lane isn't "on par with Europe". If you look at Germany, 270 is more like it... If you look at Austria/Italy, the fast lane rarely ever goes as low as the speed limit and going as fast as 145 kph usually meant we had to go out of the lane to let others through. Whoever is driving 110kph on an European highway is more or less a deadly road hazard. At such low speed it is nearly impossible to overtake lorries without having somebody nearly ram you from the back and it is guaranteed to cause a massive pileup of angry cars behind. Source - I've been traveling Europe both on motorbike and by car

bmj 12y ago

I think this is part of it, but there are also issues of infrastructure as well. Many aging eastern cities, with their challenging (read: hilly) topography, make it prohibitively expensive to radically redesign roads.[0] Additionally, I think it would be "federalize" such efforts, as it would be easier gradually redesign roads in a city, or even a part of a city, rather than attempt to broadly dictate policy for the entire country. [0] That said, it is possible to make the streets safer, even when geography and economics are obstacles. My own town has been doing this, though often it is piecemeal.

Spooky23 12y ago
Great point. It's made more complex by artifacts of state law and home rule for political subdivisions. For example, in New York, state and US highways (ie. State Route 5, US Route 20) are maintained by the State DOT -- unless you're in a "city". Areas that are organized as towns (think Hempstead, NY on Long Island with 300k+ people) get state services, areas organized as cities (Albany, NY with 90k people) typically do a lousy job at it. The Federal government has been able to update things like street signals, etc. But fundamental things like road conceptual design, breaking out bike lanes, etc are going to be very difficult issues to handle without local control. There are more people in NYC than Sweden, so the size and scope of the problem in the US is several orders of magnitude more complex.
nawitus 12y ago
Hilly topography doesn't really make it prohibitively expensive to make 2+1 roads, or at least they're relatively common in Finland. (Although 2+1 roads are rarely separated by fence here). Even hilly roads tend to have straight sections that can serve as the 2+1 area.

codeflo 12y ago

To state my European prejudices, you also seem to value being allowed to drive without proper training, and driving around in bulky vehicles that are basically designed to use the other car as their crumple zone. Those two things are possibly related.

hueving 12y ago
Well it sounds like they are pretty baseless prejudices. You must pass a skills test, even if not as rigorous as some countries. Additionally, the idea that the other car is the crumple zone was valid maybe 50 years ago. Safety tests are conducted by smashing cars into walls that don't crumple. Everyone I know who has been in a crash hasn't been due to improper training, it been because of ignoring rules that they knew very well (speeding, texting and driving, etc). I don't know anyone that has crashed because they didn't know how a stop sign worked.
- jbrooksuk 12y ago
  > Everyone I know who has been in a crash hasn't been due to improper training, it been because of ignoring rules that they knew very well (speeding, texting and driving, etc) How can anybody not know that texting and driving is a bad idea? That's just stupid.
  - bkmartin 12y ago
    But people do stupid things every day. Smoking is stupid, binge drinking is stupid, not wearing your seat belt is stupid... all have consequences. The point still remains, it is a choice people make to not follow the rules that causes most of the problems. Now, how do we get people to follow the rules better?
  - bkmartin 12y ago
    But people do stupid things every day. Smoking is stupid, binge drinking is stupid, not wearing your seat belt is stupid... all have consequences. The point still remains, it is a choice people make to not follow the rules that causes most of the problems. Now, how do we get people to follow the rules better?

Tuna-Fish 12y ago

Some of the designs are advantageous even for speed and convenience. Modern roundabouts reduce intersection fatalities by 90% and increase throughput in most traffic conditions. They were much maligned as complicated and hard to understand when they started being built in the USA, but the rate of their construction is going up and eventually they will probably be as common in the USA as they are in Europe.

matwood 12y ago

Parts of Highway 17 in South Carolina were recently upgraded to exactly this type of road. I've noticed many other highways (not Interstates) using this exact design. Admittedly, they do not always have a steel barrier. Traffic circles are another thing going in all around where I currently live. Unfortunately many people still do not know how to use them, but they are learning.

darklajid 12y ago

This is the third time I'm commenting on the same issue in this thread. Speed? What's the limit? What are you actually driving, if you're ignoring the limit? Because Sweden allows 110-120km/h and other places in Europe might even allow more (France w/ 130km/h, and .. I'm from Germany). You are NOT going fast in the US. You might drive a lot. You might commute more than anyone else. I don't know about these things. But fast? I don't buy it.

lttlrck 12y ago
Around Boston for my 15 mile commute on the Interstate the fast lane is nominally at 110-120km/h. No it's not as fast as the autobahn but it's on a par with Europe and far from slow. (I'm British, lived in Germany for 10 years, US for 5 years)
- emp_zealoth 12y ago
  I'm sorry, 110-120 in the fast lane isn't "on par with Europe". If you look at Germany, 270 is more like it... If you look at Austria/Italy, the fast lane rarely ever goes as low as the speed limit and going as fast as 145 kph usually meant we had to go out of the lane to let others through. Whoever is driving 110kph on an European highway is more or less a deadly road hazard. At such low speed it is nearly impossible to overtake lorries without having somebody nearly ram you from the back and it is guaranteed to cause a massive pileup of angry cars behind. Source - I've been traveling Europe both on motorbike and by car