eder@ssc-vax.UUCP (Dani Eder) (09/04/84)
[4 September 1984]
The 55 mph speed limit kills as many lives as it saves. The
calculation goes as follows:
The fatality rate was quoted to decrease from 3.5 to 2.9 per
100 million vehicle miles from 1975 to 1982, presumably due to the
55 mph speed limit. This is 0.6 deaths avoided. Assume the average
age at death is 35 (weights toward the lower age drivers, who have
higher accident rates), and the average lifespan is 80 years.
The number of person-years saved = 0.6 x (80-35) = 27 person years.
The 55 mph speed limit also wastes the lives of everyone who is
forced to take longer to get where they are going. Assume 50% of
driving miles is at the speed limit, and that the limit was lowered
from a national average of 67 mph to 55 mph.
50 million miles/ 67 mph = 746 268 hours
50 million miles/ 55 mph = 909 091 hours
an increase of 162 822 hours = 18.6 years
Since each hour driving requires 1/2 hour sleep, the total time
wasted driving slower = 27.9 person years.
I have used a number of assumptions in the above calculations,
but the conclusion is that the 55 mph wastes roughly as many lives
as it saves. The waste is distributed differently. The point is
never just look at the benefit of an activity, look at the associated
costs also.
Dani Eder / ssc-vax!eder / Boeing Aerospace Company / (206)773-4545brian@digi-g.UUCP (09/05/84)
<argument "proving" that 55 MPH speed limit costs as many lives as it saves has been omitted for clarity> Eh? HellooOOoo! Anybody home? Hmm, Time Wasted Driving Slow == Time Being Dead (?) Gee, it seems to me that driving slower and reducing the number of deaths is not equivalent to driving faster, killing more people, but saving a few hours of driving for the survivors. Here is a better proof: Women graduates of Harvard had an average of 2.1 children Men graduates of Harvard had an average of 2.6 children Therefore, men have more children than women. QED Merlyn Leroy (If Ghod had meant Man to go 55, He would have given him brains)
jackh@zehntel.UUCP (jack hagerty) (09/05/84)
One does not need to use esoteric units like "man-years/year wasted driving
55 vs 67" to show that an artificially low limit is dangerous; all it takes
is the good ole' human guilt reflex. Allow me to illustrate.
I commute daily on Interstate 680 between Pleasanton and Walnut Creek which,
for those of you not in the Bay Area, is a modern 6 lane freeway, built in
the late '60s with full interchanges, decreasing radius turns and everything.
When it opened, in 1968, the speed limit was 70, the higest allowed in Calif.
The traffic volume has been increasing steadily due to all of the new business
parks springing up, but the traffic still flows with no stoppages.
Recently, I was coming to work in normal traffic which reporters like to
characterize as "heavy, but moving at the limit", i.e. the fast lane was
moving about 70, the middle lane about 65 and the slow lane around 60. There
was little crowding as most folks were leaving decent spaces. Suddenly, the
road in front of me became a sea of brake lights as cars dived for the pavement,
tires smoked and there were lots of panicky last instant lane changes to
avoid rear-enders. The cause of this near-massive fender bender? A CHP
cruiser had pulled onto the freeway about a quarter mile ahead!
From a victim's standpoint, we were doing just fine until the artifice was
lowered. I also have a simple, but airtght, argument against the "fuel
saving" aspects of the NMSL, but I'll save that for another time.
-- Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Inc.
!ihnp4!zehntel!jackhplb1@houxu.UUCP (P.BARTMAN) (09/05/84)
At least you have the time to waste. The deadman doesn't
2141smh@aluxe.UUCP (henning) (09/06/84)
**** **** From the keys of Steve Henning, AT&T Bell Labs, Reading, PA aluxe!2141smh The main article claimed that the 55 mph limit wasted as many lives as it saved. The fallacy is that I can waste 1/2 day per year and save someone elses life, maybe even my own. That is a very good investment. I would rather waste a fraction of a lifetime rather than kill one complete life any day.
toma@tekchips.UUCP (Tom Almy) (09/06/84)
----------- The assumption made by the author was that time lost because of being killed in a car crash is equivalent to time driving. Personally, I would rather spend time in a car than dead! Tom Almy
terryl@tekchips.UUCP (Terry Laskodi) (09/07/84)
Not only that, but he says "1/2 hour of sleep for every hour of driving." Am I supposed to sleep for 2 1/2 hours after a 5 hour drive???? Gee, maybe if I were 90 years old, I might need to.
kitten@pertec.UUCP (karen hettinger) (09/08/84)
Steve, I think what people mean when they say 55 mph kills, is the
affect that the extra time has on people's attention span (drowsiness),
etc. I have driven the route from below Los Angeles to Sacramento
many times since I've moved down here, and I can tell you from first
hand experience. I always make sure I have enough cash for a hotel
room, but I never stop. Only 40 more miles...you'd propbably do it,
to.
What I'd like to see here in California is only certain freeways have
their speed increased over 60, while the rest are 60mph. I-5 between
the Grapevine and Sacramento is an excellent example of one that should
have a 70mph speed limit. Few should, however, go over 65. Unfortunately,
the 55 speed limit was imposed right after I started driving, but I believe
the design speed for the 80 from Sacramento to San Francisco was 65, as
was the 50, until you got into the Sierras.
As for Orange and Los Angeles Counties, most of the freeways should
probably be 60 through the metropolitan areas, increasing to 65 when
they get into 'long distance' mode, i.e. areas that have traffic
patterns of mostly long distance as opposed to local.
Having never driven out of the state, I can only say I've heard of
certain turnpikes, etc, that were designed for high speeds, and
should return to them...with maybe a 5mph compromise. Places like
Nevada should probably return to maximum speeds, as most of it is
desert, not a safe place to hang out going at a snail's pace.
Well, sorry this is so long. I'd welcome mail, particularly from
those more well-traveled than I. (No flames, please, just sensible
adult discussion :-) ).
--
kitten~
{ucbvax!unisoft | scgvaxd | trwrb | felix}!pertec!kittenhawk@oliven.UUCP (09/10/84)
I've been told (although I won't bet on its accuracy) that 680 (and a lot more of the coastal x80's) were heavily funded by DOD, for coastal defense, and were designed to handle tanks at 70mph. Anyone know how/want to check up on this? -- rick (Rick Hawkins @ Olivetti ATC) [hplabs|zehntel|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix]!oliveb!oliven!hawk
dw@rocksvax.UUCP (Don Wegeng) (09/11/84)
Has anyone ever heard of any attempts to relate the number of highway
deaths with the number of miles driven by the entire population during
an entire year? I have a theory that the number of miles driven has
decreased since the speed limit was lowered to 55 MPH. It's not clear
to me why this may have occured (maybe the price of gas, I don't know).
If this is true then it would stand to reason that the lower speed limit
directly resulted in the lower death rate.
I don't doubt that the 55 MPH speed limit has saved lives - I just
doubt that it's the only factor in the equation. I've had too much
experience with statistics to believe that it's as simple as that.
There are usually many factors which influence real world events,
many of which are indirect.
--
/Don
"This morning,
I shot six holes in my freezer.
I think I've got cabin fever,
Somebody sound the alarm."
arpa: Wegeng.Henr@Xerox.ARPA
uucp: {allegra,princeton,decvax!rochester,amd,sunybcs}!rocksvax!dw
|| ihnp4!tropix!ritcv!rocksvax!dwhawk@oliven.UUCP (09/18/84)
>Last week a well known pop singer by the name of Mandrell was involved >in a head-on collision. Both cars were totalled. Mandrell and >her daughter were wearing seat belts. Mandrell received a fracture >as well as some superficial injuries. The driver of the other >car was not wearing belts and was killed. Pop singer? Country, my friend, country. This is nit-picking (sort of), but there is an additional issue here. A handful of very talented country singers (Hank Williams, Patsy Cline, and more) have been lost to traffic accidents over the last thirty years. This one was wearing a belt. Perhaps this contrast can save a few lives. rick -- [hplabs|zehntel|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix]!oliveb!oliven!hawk
kitten@pertec.UUCP (karen hettinger) (09/21/84)
The point that us other folks are trying to make is not so much a time
factor (ex going 60 over 55 for a 100 mile trip saves 10 minutes), but
one's ability to maintain concentration (stay awake & alert) over a long
trip. Also, there is the factor of everyone going the same speed. If
this were so, the roads would be much safer for everyone.
--
kitten~
{ucbvax!unisoft | scgvaxd | trwrb | felix}!pertec!kitten