NationStates Jolt Archive

NOTE: I hate driving 55 miles an hour on freeways, parkways and interstates! If this ever gets passed, I'm doomed to a lifetime of speeding tickets! ;)


Unmentioned Energy Fix: A 55 M.P.H. Speed Limit (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/business/01oil.html?th&emc=th)

By JAD MOUAWAD and SIMON ROMERO
Published: May 1, 2005

President Bush made it clear last week that he sees no quick fixes to the nation's energy woes. The problem has been long in coming, the argument goes, and so will the solutions. But if history is any guide, there is one thing he could do immediately: bring back the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit.

It has been done before. Along with record oil and gasoline prices, improvements in fuel efficiency and a lasting economic recession, speed limits helped curb fuel consumption for the first time in American postwar history between 1974 and 1984.

BUSH IS A LOSER OMGWTFBBQ! :eek: :mad: :headbang: :sniper: :mp5:
WTF does that have to do with this thread, you loser?

How would going slower help ease fuel consumption?

BUSH IS A LOSER OMGWTFBBQ! :eek: :mad: :headbang: :sniper: :mp5:When are you leaving?

NOTE: I hate driving 55 miles an hour on freeways, parkways and interstates! If this ever gets passed, I'm doomed to a lifetime of speeding tickets! ;)


Unmentioned Energy Fix: A 55 M.P.H. Speed Limit (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/business/01oil.html?th&emc=th)

By JAD MOUAWAD and SIMON ROMERO
Published: May 1, 2005

President Bush made it clear last week that he sees no quick fixes to the nation's energy woes. The problem has been long in coming, the argument goes, and so will the solutions. But if history is any guide, there is one thing he could do immediately: bring back the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit.

It has been done before. Along with record oil and gasoline prices, improvements in fuel efficiency and a lasting economic recession, speed limits helped curb fuel consumption for the first time in American postwar history between 1974 and 1984.Then your state will thank you for helping to Fund their Law Enforcement Departments with your fines... :p

Seriously tho. there are areas to feed the need for speed.... Raceparks are one. (don't know if all states have em or if they're open to the public.)

88km/h

Woh shit thats slow.

driving faster uses more gas. reducing the speed limit will lessen gas consumption. it seems crazy but isnt. Also, G.W. doesnt see any quick solutions to anything because he isnt looking for solutions. he is looking for a way to provide more money for wealthy coorperation owners at the expence of the rest of the country.

How would going slower help ease fuel consumption?

Because the amount of energy required to move an object increases with the square of the speed. i.e. to go twice as fast requires four times as much energy.

How would going slower help ease fuel consumption?

Christ on a bike.....I think you should be on th 'Are Americans ignorant' forum Sdaeriji !!!

Its called Fuel Efficiency.........the optimum spedd to travel at over distance for amximum fuel efficiency is 56MPH

How would going slower help ease fuel consumption?


Supposedly engines are designed to achieve the best fuel efficiency between certain speeds. I dont know exactly what they are with the current engines vs what they had say pre 1985, and it depends on the engine. 4 cyl, V-6,V-8 Diesel, etc...but soemwhere between 55-65 is supposed to be the best speed for fuel efficiency. Speeds greater than or less than that can use fuel at a greater rate.

But still.....can you say speeding tickets??? Try driving 55 in Atlanta and you will get clobbered. I do 75 and people pass by me like I'm standing still. Its crazy.

Christ on a bike.....I think you should be on th 'Are Americans ignorant' forum Sdaeriji !!!

Its called Fuel Efficiency.........the optimum spedd to travel at over distance for amximum fuel efficiency is 56MPH


dude-there is no need to insult people on the forum like that. Sd is far from ignorant and you could have as easily responded to him in the manner in which I did and said the very same thing. Dont be a tosser.

driving faster uses more gas. reducing the speed limit will lessen gas consumption. it seems crazy but isnt. Also, G.W. doesnt see any quick solutions to anything because he isnt looking for solutions. he is looking for a way to provide more money for wealthy coorperation owners at the expence of the rest of the country.

No, accelerating uses more gas. If your gear ratio is set up well, driving at a constant speed, no matter how high, uses minimal gas. City driving, with the constant starting and stopping, is where most of the gas consumption comes from.

NOOOOOOO

they can take my license but they will never take my FREEDOM (to drive 75)

i live in new mexico, there are no short distances here. i would vote out anyone who voted for a nationwide 55 limit no matter where s/he stood on any other issue!.

I live in America :)

How would going slower help ease fuel consumption?
The higher the RPMs, the greater the fuel consumption.

dude-there is no need to insult people on the forum like that. Sd is far from ignorant and you could have as easily responded to him in the manner in which I did and said the very same thing. Dont be a tosser.

Lol...yeah, but my way was funnier.....and now who's being insulting?? Sticks & stones etc....

Supposedly engines are designed to achieve the best fuel efficiency between certain speeds. I dont know exactly what they are with the current engines vs what they had say pre 1985, and it depends on the engine. 4 cyl, V-6,V-8 Diesel, etc...but soemwhere between 55-65 is supposed to be the best speed for fuel efficiency. Speeds greater than or less than that can use fuel at a greater rate.

But still.....can you say speeding tickets??? Try driving 55 in Atlanta and you will get clobbered. I do 75 and people pass by me like I'm standing still. Its crazy.

Yes, I understand that, in practice, it takes more fuel to achieve higher rates of speed. But that is not where the majority of the United States' fuel consumption comes from. Lowering the speed limit from 65 mph to 55 mph will have a minimal effect on gas use.

One foot on the brake and one on the gas, hey!
Well, there's too much traffic, I can't pass, no!
So I tried my best illegal move
to think black and white come and touched my groove again!

Gonna write me up a warnt 25
Post my face wanted dead or alive
Take my license, all that jive
I can't drive 55! Oh No!
Uh!

So I signed my name on number 24
Yeah the judge said, "Boy, just one more
We're gonna throw your ass in the city joint"
Looked me in the eye, said, "You get my point?"
I said Yea!, Oh yea!

Write me up a 125
Post my face wanted dead or alive
Take my license, all that jive
I can't drive 55!

Oh, yea!

I can't drive 55!
I can't drive 55!
I can't drive 55!
I can't drive 55!
Uh!

(Solo)

When I drive that slow, you know it's hard to steer.
And I can't get get my car out of second gear.
What used to take two hours now takes all day. Huh!
It took me 16 hours to get to L.A.

Gonna write me up a warnt 25
Post my face wanted dead or alive
Take my license, all that jive
I can't drive 55!

No, no no,
I can't drive...
(I can't drive 55!)
I can't drive...
(I can't drive 55!)
I can't drive 55!
LOL! That's it! :D

Lol...yeah, but my way was funnier.....and now who's being insulting?? Sticks & stones etc....


No you will know it when I insult you. And it wasnt funny. I'm just trying to save your NS career at the early age of post count 3. If you want to be an arse -be my guest. But what you said about SD was uncalled for.

The higher the RPMs, the greater the fuel consumption.

Well, unless you're driving 55 mph in second gear, your RPMs shouldn't be that high. Acceleration is the problem, not constant high rates of speed.

88km/h

Woh shit thats slow.
No shit! I feel not unlike a snail when I drive 55! Heh!

NOOOOOOO

they can take my license but they will never take my FREEDOM (to drive 75)

i live in new mexico, there are no short distances here. i would vote out anyone who voted for a nationwide 55 limit no matter where s/he stood on any other issue!.Yeah, it would take 7 hours to get from Albuquerque to Las Cruces. 2 hours to get from Sante Fe to Albuquerque. It would just be faster to take the frontage roads primarily because those don't have a speed limit.

Yes, I understand that, in practice, it takes more fuel to achieve higher rates of speed. But that is not where the majority of the United States' fuel consumption comes from. Lowering the speed limit from 65 mph to 55 mph will have a minimal effect on gas use.


I agree.....very minimal. Like you said, its the stop and go that uses up more fuel. City vs Highway miles and all that. Surely Bush wont make such a silly move as that. Then again.......

dude-there is no need to insult people on the forum like that. Sd is far from ignorant and you could have as easily responded to him in the manner in which I did and said the very same thing. Dont be a tosser.
"Tosser?" Whut dat? :)

No, accelerating uses more gas. If your gear ratio is set up well, driving at a constant speed, no matter how high, uses minimal gas. City driving, with the constant starting and stopping, is where most of the gas consumption comes from.
It depends to a large degree to the rear axel ratios. Most American autos are a compromise between the gear ratios used in urban driving and what would be best for high speed, interstate driving. Personally, I would like to see six speeds forward become standard on sedans, with a rather wide ratio between 4th and 5th, and even wider between 5th and 6th. That would help.

I heard that gas use doesn't increase significantly before you reach 120 km/h (75 mph). :rolleyes:

But maybe that's different in North America, where cars are built for long distances rather than high speed and low gas use...

"Tosser?" Whut dat? :)

Tosser.....aka.......w*nker

It depends to a large degree to the rear axel ratios. Most American autos are a compromise between the gear ratios used in urban driving and what would be best for high speed, interstate driving. Personally, I would like to see six speeds forward become standard on sedans, with a rather wide ratio between 4th and 5th, and even wider between 5th and 6th. That would help.

That is what I'm saying. If your gear ratio is set up properly (and not even optimally), then your fuel consumption in 5th gear going 65 mph is going to be negligibly higher than your fuel consumption in 5th gear going 55 mph.

Because the amount of energy required to move an object increases with the square of the speed. i.e. to go twice as fast requires four times as much energy.

True, but we're driving a car here, not launching Sputnik.

Yes, I understand that, in practice, it takes more fuel to achieve higher rates of speed. But that is not where the majority of the United States' fuel consumption comes from. Lowering the speed limit from 65 mph to 55 mph will have a minimal effect on gas use.
Per vehicle, yes. But when you consider the millions of vehicles on the road, lowering the speed limit to 55 would result in a considerable decrease in gas consumption.

But ... I still can't drive 55! Heh!

I agree.....very minimal. Like you said, its the stop and go that uses up more fuel. City vs Highway miles and all that. Surely Bush wont make such a silly move as that. Then again.......why wouldnt he make such a silly move? he spent the entire surplus on "tax cuts" and now has the highest defficite in US history. so im not totally doubting that he will push the nationwide 55mph speed limit through congress...

I'm quivering!! Go on....I'm intrigued now.....give it your best shot!! :sniper: ;)
:rolleyes: quiet you

Tosser.....aka.......w*nker
Heh! Ok. What ... EVER! :D

Per vehicle, yes. But when you consider the millions of vehicles on the road, lowering the speed limit to 55 would result in a considerable decrease in gas consumption.

But ... I still can't drive 55! Heh!

Maybe, but it would result in the loss of millions of dollars worth of people's time, and that would have an adverse effect on our economy. Americans are whores with time.

The higher the RPMs, the greater the fuel consumption.
aye, but 55 in 3rd gear is going to use more fuel that 75 in 5th

Maybe, but it would result in the loss of millions of dollars worth of people's time, and that would have an adverse effect on our economy. Americans are whores with time.
[ Checks the amount of time he's spent on NS General ] Hmmm. ;)

Czechoslovakia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Czechoslovakia (Czech: Československo, Slovak: Česko-Slovensko/before 1990 Československo) was a country in Central Europe that existed from 1918 until 1992 (except for the World War II period). On January 1, 1993, it peacefully split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia, in what was known as the Velvet Divorce, by analogy with the Velvet Revolution.
You are spamming. Stop it.

I can drive 55.. but I find my car drives more smoothly at 75 - 85

I can drive 55.. but I find my car drives more smoothly at 75 - 85
:D

Also.. I've never gotten a ticket for speeding when exceeding the limits on interstate highways.

Also.. I've never gotten a ticket for speeding when exceeding the limits on interstate highways.
but surely youve seen people getting speeding tickets on the highway

and the extra 20mph over the limit would make getting ONE ticket very damaging to your finances.

LOL! That's it! :D


I love Sammy Hagar!

Thank you, Mr. Myrth! :D

People could collectively save a significant amount of fuel if they simply made sure their tire pressure was correct on a regular basis.

President Bush made it clear last week that he sees no quick fixes to the nation's energy woes. The problem has been long in coming, the argument goes, and so will the solutions. But if history is any guide, there is one thing he could do immediately: bring back the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit.

It has been done before. Along with record oil and gasoline prices, improvements in fuel efficiency and a lasting economic recession, speed limits helped curb fuel consumption for the first time in American postwar history between 1974 and 1984.

No they didn't, gas rationing and gas prices did. All lower speed limits did was increase the number of tickets.

I remember this article from an Economics text book about the 55mph speed limit in the US after the oil crises. I said that although the increased fuel efficiency and lower speed limit saved on both cost of fuel and cost of life, the opportunity cost of the man hours (or woman hours, I suppose ;) ) lost to spending more time in the car actually outweighed the benefits. So, in reality, the reduction of speed limit had a negative effect on the US economy. Of course, it had a positive effect on the environment, so...

I'd prefer that US 'gas' prices got hiked up to around UK levels in a short period - that would stop car use pretty damn quickly.

I'd prefer that US 'gas' prices got hiked up to around UK levels in a short period - that would stop car use pretty damn quickly.

So true... It would also stop the needs people have to buy these freaking big 4x4 SUV.

Oh shove it, modabee. :rolleyes:
ok first of all, i would advise against this kind of animosity in general, let alone when the mods have been coming down on you. having to replace your permanently forumbanned nation is a pain in the ass.
secondly, damn, myrth has got to be workin up a sweat! excellent.

NOTE: I hate driving 55 miles an hour on freeways, parkways and interstates! If this ever gets passed, I'm doomed to a lifetime of speeding tickets! ;)


Unmentioned Energy Fix: A 55 M.P.H. Speed Limit (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/business/01oil.html?th&emc=th)

By JAD MOUAWAD and SIMON ROMERO
Published: May 1, 2005

President Bush made it clear last week that he sees no quick fixes to the nation's energy woes. The problem has been long in coming, the argument goes, and so will the solutions. But if history is any guide, there is one thing he could do immediately: bring back the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit.

It has been done before. Along with record oil and gasoline prices, improvements in fuel efficiency and a lasting economic recession, speed limits helped curb fuel consumption for the first time in American postwar history between 1974 and 1984.

I love this because the State of Indiana is considering a law in the state legislature to increase the speed limit to 75 on most all limited access highways, the Interstates already are there. There is some provision to decrease back down in a city's limits.

Ah, Eutrusca, see? We can get along some times...

Average increase in travel speeds of 1 mph, on the various roadway sections in the 65 MPH zones, with the exception of the Turnpike which increased 3-4 mph, on various segments. The "after" speeds on the Turnpike ranged from 63 to 68 MPH, falling in line with the "after" speeds on the other state highways.

Environmental impacts regarding air quality and noise were only nominally affected due to the nominal change in the travel speeds.
(basicly saying that with the increase in speed limits and the increase in fines for going 10 mph over the speed limit resulted in an average increase in speed of 3-4 mph. It also notes a decline in fatal accidents, but thats not the reason given for lowering the speed limit right now)

From http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/press/2000releases/65mpg/, an 18 month study of the 65 mph speed limit in New Jersey.

The study didn't mention fuel consumption.

While my car uses considerably more gas to go 65 (it's a four speed from the 60's) most cars today are built with the tall final drive.

There are other options up for Bush to choose from-bio-diesel, that thermodepolermisation-or whatever it was that that dude brought up here not to long ago where they where getting oil from turkey plant waste, incentives to the car companies to build more efficient cars. Bio-diesel is my favorite, because if just the trucking industry used it (like Biowillie (http://www.wnbiodiesel.com/), Thanks Willie Nelson!) our shipping costs would not only be no longer determined by oil prices but that money would feed back to american farmers. Kinda win win really. Imagine the consumption change if just the trucking industry moved to bio-diesel. That alone would be worth it.

And you all could continue to whip past me on the freeway. (I drive a VW Bus, so I can't drive 65 unless it's down hill and I'm drafting a semi...I guess I could be selfish and say "I don't care, doesn't effect me" but thats not my style)

Another Bush half ass.

It's not like the crazy just-turned-drivers a few years older than me need to speed down the road at 120mph...55 is a perfectly acceptable limit.

It's not like the crazy just-turned-drivers a few years older than me need to speed down the road at 120mph...55 is a perfectly acceptable limit.

Awwwww man your the guy I'm stuck behind all the time. :p

How would going slower help ease fuel consumption?
Less wind resistance. Most cars reach their peak fuel efficiency at 80 km/h. I don't think that's 55 mph though, I'm pretty sure it's less.

driving faster uses more gas. reducing the speed limit will lessen gas consumption. it seems crazy but isnt. Also, G.W. doesnt see any quick solutions to anything because he isnt looking for solutions. he is looking for a way to provide more money for wealthy coorperation owners at the expence of the rest of the country.


WTF are you talking about... first of all, bush is the president, of course he's looking for solutions, thats his job... he doesnt provide more for wealthy corporation owners.. he uses trickle down economics that feeds corporations money so they can hire more ppl and expand business therefore more ppl make more money... and this has nothing to do with gas in the mile...

WTF[sic] are you talking about[sic]... first of all, bush[sic] is the president, of course he's looking for solutions, thats[sic] his job... he doesnt[sic] provide more for wealthy corporation owners.. he uses trickle down economics that feeds corporations money so they can hire more ppl[sic] and expand business therefore more ppl[sic] make more money... and this has nothing to do with gas in the mile...

That's why he virtually gives out infamous gas-guzzling H2s and other large SUVs for free to businesses? And guess what, Reagan tried trickle down, and it sucked ass. It works in theory, but do you really expect corporations to give the tax breaks to their employees? I don't. Trickle down economics is a piece of shit, just like communism, but like you said, that has nothing to do with mpg so I don't know why you brought it up. While we're on the topic, exactly how is Bush looking for solutions? He says he is, but in reality, he's not. If you knew more about him and his family, maybe you could see his real agenda.

Ban H2s and other large SUVs and encourage sale of hybrid vehicles and you won't have to drive slower.

That's why he virtually gives out infamous gas-guzzling H2s and other large SUVs for free to businesses? And guess what, Reagan tried trickle down, and it sucked ass. It works in theory, but do you really expect corporations to give the tax breaks to their employees? I don't. Trickle down economics is a piece of shit, just like communism, but like you said, that has nothing to do with mpg so I don't know why you brought it up. While we're on the topic, exactly how is Bush looking for solutions? He says he is, but in reality, he's not. If you knew more about him and his family, maybe you could see his real agenda.

Ban H2s and other large SUVs and encourage sale of hybrid vehicles and you won't have to drive slower.

Maybe if gas prices go up a bit more people won't drive them, making government regulation unessescary.

But anyway, screw this law, I have a radar detector for a reason.

...Ban H2s and other large SUVs and encourage sale of hybrid vehicles and you won't have to drive slower.

I don't think banning any vehicle would work. What might work best is to tax the owner of these large vehicles to the point they will think twice before purchasing a gas guzzler,kind of a sin tax... BUT, I don't think that will ever happen...

My belief is that any republican led government is for big business by big business so any solution that may make sense to you or I isn't going to happen. If big business isn't going to profit from an idea they will do what they can to quash it. As long as individuals whom are elected have the back ground and the connections to big business regardless of party affiliation we will see big business prosper and the individual man lose. Why else do you see a reversal on issues like the environment and land management?

Encourage hybrids? Hah! car pooling and taking mass transportation aren't even encouraged let alone supported...

This just makes me appreciate flying to where I need to go so much more. Even in the skysnail ( Cessna Skyhawk) I get a airspeed of 120 mph. Groundspeeds can vary between 90 MPH or up to 150MPH. :D

well, if they do that, they're going to have to not make cars that go so stinkin' fast, cause if my car can do, i will do it. :headbang:

I don't think banning any vehicle would work. What might work best is to tax the owner of these large vehicles to the point they will think twice before purchasing a gas guzzler,kind of a sin tax... BUT, I don't think that will ever happen...
I agree in principle, but there are people who really do need the brusers-it's finding the wording that doesn't punish the people who need thier trucks because of those who insist on the trucks. It's a difficult neddle to thread.


Encourage hybrids? Hah! car pooling and taking mass transportation aren't even encouraged let alone supported...
'Round here car-poolers get thier own lane and public transportation is made as accesable as possible (I even get to ride it for free, while paying out the nose just to have a car present)-but you're right, could be better.

NOTE: I hate driving 55 miles an hour on freeways, parkways and interstates! If this ever gets passed, I'm doomed to a lifetime of speeding tickets! ;)


You, me and Sammy. As it is I generally travel a good 10 over the limit most of the time, unless there are circumstances that might endanger others by so doing...

This just makes me appreciate flying to where I need to go so much more. Even in the skysnail ( Cessna Skyhawk) I get a airspeed of 120 mph. Groundspeeds can vary between 90 MPH or up to 150MPH. :D

:p Oh, yah!!, that reminds me, in the sixties we were told we'd have flying cars by 2000, where are they??? Hunh!!! :p

Also.. I've never gotten a ticket for speeding when exceeding the limits on interstate highways.

You've obviously never driven in Utah or eastern Oregon. I get tickets in broad daylight with no traffic around trying to get out of the bleeding desert, while jackasses abound in Seattle-area traffic who are weaving in and out, mercilessly tailgating, running red lights, and all manner of actually dangerous behaviors go scot-free. How is it serving and protecting to pull me over on a bright summer day near Madras, when I hadn't seen another car in 20 minutes? It isn't serving -- it's revenue enhancement. Call it a speed tax.

I just drove a car from Dallas back to Seattle for my cousin on the USS Lincoln who bought it online. The cop in Utah who nabbed me for 80 in a 70 (the limit had been 75 in Wyoming minutes earlier), ACTUALLY ADMITTED TO BEING BORED. This isn't service and protection, this is bullying for lunch money writ large. The real pisser is that their revenue gets enhanced and my driving record and thus my insurance rates get screwed. I don't mind paying a speed tax, but why the flying fuck does it have to affect my insurance?

Sorry. Pet peeve.

The most immediate answer to the fuel crisis is increasing fuel costs. It should make some of these idiots in the gas-guzzler SUVs reconsider their purchase, and perhaps turn it in for something a bit more sane.

SUV drivers make me insane and crack me up at the same time. The ads are ludicrous, because almost none of these vehicles ever leave the asphalt. They're family vehicles, driven by soccer moms, no matter what the advertisers want you to believe. The only reason the auto makers started putting family cars on truck frames is because of a loophole in Clinton's 1994 standard on air emissions, which granted an exemption to trucks.

Every time I see an SUV drive around a tiny puddle or pothole, it cracks me up. Every time I see an SUV taking up two parking spots, it drives me insane.

-----------

On the topic of speeding tickets... I only got nabbed once, for doing 85 in a 65. The cop got three of us all at once, so that tells you what traffic was doing. It was a special condition, too, because we were driving on a brand-new stretch of freeway that was not yet being heavily utilized, and the CHP had recently reported that people were regularly going in excess of 100mph as a result. I got caught up in a crack-down because the CHP wanted to make a point.

I was given the option of taking traffic school for the offense, so I wasted 8 hours one Saturday. The offense was stricken from my driving record, and my insurance company never needed to know about it. Overall, it was no big whoop. You guys are making a big deal out of nothing.

Electromagnetic hovercars.
Using magnetic levetation means zero friction between the vehicle and the road, thus greatly reducing fuel consumption.

Electromagnetic hovercars.
Using magnetic levetation means zero friction between the vehicle and the road, thus greatly reducing fuel consumption.

That's what I'm talking about...

Here's George Jetson... :p

Honestly, is there anyone here that actually goes the speed limit?

They did a survey back when they raised the speed to 65. Before the switch, when it was 55, the average speed on this particular highway was 71.2. Afterwards? 71.4