![Power Power](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/power_64.png)
![Transportation Transportation](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/transportation_64.png)
![Technology Technology](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/technology_64.png)
Traffic-Flow Algorithm Can Reduce Fuel Consumption 328
thecarchik writes "New projects from German automakers Audi and BMW promise to ease congestion simply by looking at traffic signals and driving style, in an effort to smooth the flow of traffic. Through a test course in Munich, vehicles were able to post phenomenal fuel efficiency gains simply by adjusting the timing of traffic lights depending on traffic volume — to whatever speed provides a so-called 'green wave' of four or more synchronized signals."
It astounds me (Score:5, Insightful)
That this isn't done everywhere. With all the red light cameras everywhere (for safety), you'd think they could put a few out there that would make it so I don't spend 3 minutes every morning staring at an empty intersection.
Re:It astounds me (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It astounds me (Score:5, Interesting)
Which inductive sensors suck hard for cyclists. I frequently go grocery shopping early in the morning or late at night when there's practically no traffic -- wanna make a left turn? Your choice: sit there for upwards of 5 minutes waiting for a cager to come trip the light (and then they have to wait for you to get through the intersection, a delay I'm sure they appreciate), or disregard the signal (yep, that's an infraction -- being on a bicycle gives me no immunity to laws, just to sensord) and turn when it's safe, without causing grief for others. I always come to a full stop, then turn left when there's no traffic, just to demonstrate a level of caution should that light be under observation, but I'd almost invariably be clear blowing straight through.
Fortunately, one light along the way has cameras, NOT to ticket unwary marks for racing a short yellow, but to control the intersection. Car pulls up? you get a green in a few seconds, just like the loop sensors. Bike pulls up? you ALSO get a green, although the same delay means it'll be green before you get there, and you get just enough time to make it through before yellow. I wish more lights were set up this way.
Besides, for the purpose of maintaining a green wave at traffic speed, I suspect cameras are the better oiption, as you can use the camera of the intersection you're controlling, whereas the induction sensors are usually too close (won't show the wave until the lead vehicles are practically stopped), and you'd need to use the sensors from the previous intersection.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It astounds me (Score:5, Funny)
U-Turns aren't legal here, but I frequently turn right, then turn around in a driveway or parking lot, and still get back to the intersection in plenty of time to beat the light change.
However, this is the driving equivalent of a programming kludge and doesn't fix the actual problem that the lights are set up stupidly.
Did I just make a computer analogy to better explain something about cars?
Re:It astounds me (Score:5, Interesting)
U-Turns aren't legal here, but I frequently turn right, then turn around in a driveway or parking lot, and still get back to the intersection in plenty of time to beat the light change.
You have to love Australia. That particular manoeuvre is illegal there. Also illegal is exiting a roundabout from the same road you entered.
Truth is everybody in Australia is a criminal. You just have to wait until some prosecuting authority thinks it's your turn and they find the rule to nail you with.
Re:It astounds me (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It astounds me (Score:4, Insightful)
On my way home from work, There is one intersection I always have to wait at all the time for about 3 minutes even though its empty. Rights on reds are prohibited, no sensors, just a timer, and it is a 5 way intersection, So even if right hand turns were allowed on red I would need to do right - U turn, Hard Right (Which is actually completely prohibited at that intersection) U turn, Right. It is very odd because every single other traffic light on the road except for that one has sensors, some even having approach sensors changing the light before the cars even reach them.
... You know that if you're biking you can become a pedestrian and cross using the cross walks by pushing your bicycle, and then start biking again, right? :)
that's what I always do when I can't make turns to get where I need to go.
Re:It astounds me (Score:5, Informative)
As a motorcyclist, I run into this some as well, though they have improved greatly (or it's because I have a bigger bike now). I have been pulled over once in my hometown for running a red. I explained to the nice officer (she was hot too, BTW) that I had waited through three cycles of the lights and never was given a green for my left turn, so, when it was clearly safe, I went. She let me go. Now, I hear rumor this is legal, but don't depend on it. It might not be for your jurisdiction (or even mine). However, it might be legal simply based on the idea that the signal is malfunctioning and you must therefore take matters into your own hands. You can solve your problem with a rare-earth magnet stuck to the bottom bracket of your bicycle. I know some bikers who use it and it has helped them.
Re:It astounds me (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:It astounds me (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't complain at slashdot, complain at the city council. It is possible to detect cyclists with inductive sensors, but they are not installed 99% of the time due to the extra costs. I work at a company that supplies traffic-lights, and I found out recently that one of the lights I used to cycle past as a kid was produced by us. And it had no problems detecting me, giving me green light without stopping.
Also, you don't get a lot of green as a cyclist because cyclist green is 'expensive' in time. They have to set the clearance time to the slowest cyclist. So all that time they cannot give green to any lights that would cross your cycle route, which impacts the flow of traffic a lot. But don't fear yellow lights if you have enough speed, you have plenty time. And if you know the intersection a bit then the beginning of red can also be safe for you. But you might need to do some explaining to the local cop from time to time.
And as last, green waves are not controlled by cameras or induction sensors but by strict timing and communication between the intersections. The first intersection just signals the rest that a group of cars is coming so the rest can prepare for that. Or, in cheap cases, the intersections just run on fixed programs designed so that the green wave always happens (totally sucks for low traffic situations, like at night)
Green waves for fuel is nothing new, we've been doing so for quite some time already. What's new here is the communication between the vehicles and the intersections (which is pretty much still in heavy research state, and involves a lot more partners then just Audi and BMW)
Re:It astounds me (Score:4, Funny)
So what happened? Did the light ever change?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It astounds me (Score:4, Insightful)
most of the inductive sensors I have experienced are at the intersection, so you have stopped before they work, thus saving no fuel. They also pick up a single car and only optimize for that one car, and usually only on the lessor used roads, paying no heed to what they are stopping, and for how many. IE the ones I use see a single car (wanting to make a right turn 90% of the time) from a 30 mph lane turning on to a 65 mph highway, and the light will stop a string of a dozen cars going 70. With A very smart camera it would be possible to picking up how many cars, trucks, and where is the next opening. Need dozens of loop sensors to do that.
It would be a huge fuel savings if the lights know for example we have 3 loaded semi-trucks and 5 cars going 70 wait for them to pass and make the slow moving car wait longer. It would also be extremely helpful if we could get info sharing on light timing into something like the google map android phone applications, so that it could tell me to adjust speeds to hit lights, or to create a gap, or turn earlier to avoid a string of bad lights (or join a small group of cars...)
Re: (Score:2)
Most traffic signals that I know of are either timer based, or combine timers with inductive loops. If there's a vehicle (except motorcycles and bicycles, apparently), it should trigger the light sooner. When I rode motorcycles, I never had an inductive loop pick it up. Even in my car, I usually have to rev the engine slightly (like to 2,000 rpm for about 5 seconds) for it to see me. (larger magnetic field, better impression for the loop to see). Here's some info [advrider.com] for bikers on tripping th
Poorly designed vehicle detectors (Score:5, Informative)
With all the red light cameras everywhere (for safety), you'd think they could put a few out there that would make it so I don't spend 3 minutes every morning staring at an empty intersection.
A lot of traffic signals are on a fixed cycle because the sensors buried in the street often fail to reliably detect a bicycle waiting to turn left (US; mirror in UK/AU/JP), even when the bicycle's wheels are directly over the edge of the loop.
they have video traffic detection cameras at some (Score:2)
they have video traffic detection cameras at some light as well sensors at others.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Glue a rare-earth magnet to the underside or insole of your shoe or boot. That should trip the induction coil, or whatever the sensor is made of.
Re:Poorly designed vehicle detectors (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What in the fuck does Optimus Prime have to do with vehicle detectors?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There's a web page that explains it in gory, but still somewhat EE-oriented, detail: http://humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/signals/detection.htm [humantransport.org]
What you need to imagine is that there is a big stream of something flowing out of the top of the loop, around, and back in the bottom. Position your bicycle so that you put a closed conducting arc around the largest possible amount of that flow. For example, position a wheel on a wire, in the plane of the wire or
Re: (Score:2)
They don't detect weight. Metal bicycle rims can be easily detected provided they are placed directly over the wire. For the figure-8 loops the middle section has two wires providing effectively twice the sensitivity and is more reliable. If the road has been repaved and the loop cuts are no longer visible this task can be challenging to futile. The same applies for motorcycles. You can't just stop in the general area and expect it to work like with a car.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of traffic signals are on a fixed cycle because the sensors buried in the street often fail to reliably detect a bicycle waiting to turn left (US; mirror in UK/AU/JP), even when the bicycle's wheels are directly over the edge of the loop.
Is there some reason I can't think of why they can't do both?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In Austin, you can call 311 (the non-emergency line) and report an intersection where it doesn't work and they'll fix it in a few days.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The city I live in has made it illegal to rid bicycles on the sidewalk in the downtown area near the college campus. I am forced to ride in the street in the most heavily trafficked area of town.
I hate it, but it's the law.
Re:Poorly designed vehicle detectors (Score:5, Insightful)
Roads are for road users. I ride a bike, I obey the laws (ALL of them - way better than ANY car I ever see on the road) and I pay at least as many taxes to pay for the roads as anyone else on the road. If the road isn't designed for my use, it's because the designers screwed up. Bikes were here before cars and they'll be here after cars.
Re: (Score:2)
Roads are for road users. I ride a bike, I obey the laws (ALL of them - way better than ANY car I ever see on the road)
I would like to personally applaud you, since you are a better biker than virtually all the ones here in Boston. Our bikers pay no to stop signs or red lights, swerve between lanes, cut cars off, dodge back and forth from the sidewalks and generally make an unsafe nuisance of themselves.
Perhaps where you live, those people are a minority and most of the bikers are like you. Until we all get to that level, please excuse the more rabid anti-bike folks (the GP) because they what they are really angry about is
Re:Poorly designed vehicle detectors (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not going to argue with your point of view (since you're more or less correct), but I would like to point out that offensive (as opposed to defensive) riding is unfortunately essential in a large urban environment. Getting out in front of traffic at a stop light, riding two abreast, moving from sidewalk to road and back again, and splitting lanes are all part of not being hit. For every asshole bunny-hopping the curb or cube-gleaming your fender, there's another who's totally oblivious to the fact that they're behind two tons of metal.
It's a lose-lose scenario, yet for some reason blame is passed between various forms of commuters instead of placed on urban planners where it so rightfully belongs. We need one lane for transit/commerce/utility, one lane for personal motorized transport, one for muscle powered, and one for pedestrians. Crying that it's difficult is begging the point.
((Critical Mass doesn't fit into this picture. It's a protest, and you know full well when and where it will occur. Getting your side mirror bashed or your windshield krypto'd is your own damn fault))
Re: (Score:2)
You are right, the blame lies with the urban planners but also with the fact that we have historically narrow roads that cannot just be arbitrarily widened. No amount of urban planning can will a bike lane into a spot where there is no room for it.
More importantly, however, there is no excuse for endangering everyone around you by breaking the traffic rules. Despite your lame protests they do, in fact, apply to everyone (the PD here has no remorse ticketing cyclists either) even if, in your opinion, it woul
Critical Mass (Score:2)
Critical Mass is different things to different people, and people ride for different reasons. A few do ride to screw with motorists -- but they're typically the minority, and their fellow riders get them to cut that crap out or not come back.
As for cars getting their mirrors bashed or other similar acts of vandalism, that's pretty rare. Most riders are just out there to ride and have a good time. Red lights are often run, yes, "no more than two abreast" is flaunted (as it should be with hundreds of
Re: (Score:2)
That's all well and good till you discover that the laws of physics do not yield to the laws of the land.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
if you dont drive a car, you dont pay NEARLY as much as anyone else on the road. gas taxes are the primary source for road funding. you dont buy gas, ergo you dont pay to maintain the roads.
Re: (Score:2)
every study I have seen shows that less than 50%, more like 20-30% of road maintenance is paid for by gas taxes (at least in the US.) The other 70-80% is from other taxes that bicyclists certainly pay. Since cars are so much harder on roads, every mile driven by car definitely creates a deficit. IE for every 100 miles we drive a car, we now need to do ~$3 more maintenance on the roads, we pay ~$1 in gasoline taxes over those same miles; net cost to other tax payers caused by our driving = $2/mile. Eve
Re:Poorly designed vehicle detectors (Score:5, Insightful)
The argument that cyclists don't pay their way is absurd - the reality is the opposite; public funding of roads is a massive subsidy from those who don't drive a car to those who do. As a cyclist I'd love a system of user-pays for roads.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, gas taxes typically only pay for the highway system, and only a fraction of that, like 50% or so overall?
City roads that aren't part of the highway system -- the ones cyclists use the most, are mostly paid for by sales and property taxes. In Texas (where I'm the most familiar with the situation), not a single penny of the gasoline tax pays for these roads!
Of course, this varies from place to place, but I'm talking about most states in the US. I'm not aware of any states that are differe
Re:It astounds me (Score:5, Interesting)
Not only is it astounding that this isn't done, it's old hat. Where I grew up, the main arteries were all set up so that if you traveled at the speed limit, you'd hit all green lights in one direction in the morning, and all green lights going the other direction in the evening. It saved gas, dramatically reduced average travel times and kept everyone going at the speed limit.
Instead, the main arteries where I live now are all set up to turn red when a car triggers a sensor on a cross street. The end result of that is that a 5 lane thoroughfare stops 15 cars every 50-100 yards because one care on a tiny side street is making a right turn onto the thoroughfare. A 2 mile drive can easily take 5-10 minutes with no traffic, just because the lights are setup so stupidly. And god help us if there's traffic (like, say on Black Friday or something like that): going half a mile to get on the freeway easily takes me 15 minutes, just because there's a light every 50 yards, they're not coordinated, and only 2-3 cars are actually able to cross the intersection at a time.
I'm always wondering if I should go to the city council meeting and ask why they're supporting terrorists with this inane system. The loss in gas mileage is atrocious, and the reason for it is just plain stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
The end result of that is that a 5 lane thoroughfare stops 15 cars every 50-100 yards because one care on a tiny side street is making a right turn onto the thoroughfare.
Would you rather have the light remain red for ten minutes at a time while you wait to turn onto the thoroughfare? There's an intersection [google.com] where this has happened to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Turn right, make a U-turn, either straight on the road or by entering any one's parking space. Either will get town council notified and the light fixed much faster :)
Re: (Score:2)
In most states, a non-functioning traffic light should be treated as a stop sign.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
going half a mile to get on the freeway easily takes me 15 minutes, just because there's a light every 50 yards,
Your freeways have lights?
Here in houston, Mayor Bill white put down an edict that said all the lights in downtown in each direction(e/w, n/s) would be green at the same time. This lasted about 2 months because people threw a fit, Basically with the timed wave approach you can get All the way across downtown without hitting a red light, I'm suprised
Re: (Score:2)
They said "going half a mile TO GET on the freeway.."
Re: (Score:2)
all the lights in downtown in each direction(e/w, n/s) would be green at the same time.
at times that is the best approach, because then half of all cars can move at once. At rush hour major streets become completely full, and thus if you don't turn all the lights in the same direction at the same time, then only a small group of cars get to move (having a green light does you no good if the cars have not cleared in front of you.) I think that is why they try to make it smarter, timing all the lights to allow cars going 30 to never stop does no good when none of the cars can go 30. So you o
Re:It astounds me (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm always wondering if I should go to the city council meeting and ask why they're supporting terrorists with this inane system. The loss in gas mileage is atrocious, and the reason for it is just plain stupidity.
Seems to me the reasons for stupidly-timed lights is threefold:
1) Lowball bids from traffic light installers. To keep their bids low, a simple timer is way cheaper than a smart computer.
2) Politicians who pull strings so their development's side-road gets priority over the main thoroughfare.
3) Citizens like you and me who are too busy to attend council meetings and object.
Re:It astounds me (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd add a fourth possible reason, though: I think traffic control may be a little more complicated than we give it credit for. When there's one main road and everybody's on it, it makes sense to try to get long synchronized trains of traffic flowing through green lights. But as soon as you start to get more than one big road, you have to also think about how much traffic you're allowing into different parts of the city at once. If you look at traffic management as a big picture, then giving people green lights doesn't get them off your plate, it just moves them to another part of your grid. If you're stuck at a red light for 30 seconds too long and nobody seems to be going, consider that it may be because 3 miles up the road, that bubble is intended to absorb some traffic from another busy intersection.
Or, as you say, it could just be cheap systems.
Re: (Score:2)
Then you're talking about the actual timing itself, adju
Re:It astounds me (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not only is it astounding that this isn't done, it's old hat.
What isn't old hat is that many drivers now have GPS systems and increasingly they are receive real-time feedback on road conditions. But is this really the best thing?
Consider the stock market. You have a large number of people all trying to "beat the system" (much like drivers trying to avoid road blocks). When the price goes up, people try to sell, when the price goes down, people try to buy, but most importantly everybody is trying to out-guess everybody else.
From a systems and control (engineering)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. This. THIS!
I hit every single red light on the way home from work. Every. Single. Day. Sometimes twice, as one green light is too short to get through (allowing maybe 3 cars each time). People frequently run that light. I'm only 8 or so miles from work (just slightly too far to drive), and leaving late - or early - doesn't seem to help one damn bit. The drive regularly takes over half an hour.
The only time I'm able to take this route and not hit every light is when there is absolutely no traffic (IE I'
Re: (Score:2)
They aren't for safety as much as they are revenue generation.
Re: (Score:2)
This is done pretty much throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth area, to the point we're so used to properly timed lights that it's almost rage inducing when you come to a light that's out of sync with all the others. Most of the main artery roads here are 3 lanes in each direction and 40-55mph. Even in the thick of rush hour on a friday afternoon before a three day weekend, Preston Road out of downtown Dallas flows ~45mph all the way to northern Frisco, crossing four major highways. Most roads aren't that good,
Re: (Score:2)
That this isn't done everywhere. With all the red light cameras everywhere (for revenue), you'd think they could put a few out there that would make it so I don't spend 3 minutes every morning staring at an empty intersection.
There, fixed that for you. Now the rest of your question is self answering.
Obligatory XKCD (Score:4, Funny)
I'd like to smack the idiot who designed this intersection [xkcd.com].
(Also happens to be my favourite xkcd ever, finally I get to use it)
Red Wave (Score:2, Interesting)
British Local Authorities used to have a policy of halting the green wave, and trying to set up traffic lights to catch everyone on every light. This raised fuel consumption and brought in more tax for the government because of the increase in the purchase of fuel. Most lights still seem to be set up like this, at least in my experiences.
Re: (Score:2)
Governments all over seem intent on breaking windows to make money...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This policy was changed in 2009 when the Department for Transport realised the error of its ways. It now encourages more of a 'green wave' approach where possible.
Source [bbc.co.uk]
Too Bad It Won't Happen in US (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
do you know of any Wal-Marts that don't have a red light?
This one in Fort Wayne, Indiana [google.com]. It's between a strip mall to the south and some other department stores to the north. The closest traffic signals are two blocks away in each direction.
Re:Too Bad It Won't Happen in US (Score:5, Funny)
Fucking google street view, passively shooting holes in my arguments.
But this isn't first time I've been lied to my a marketing person.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow now that I think about it I personally Can't think of a walmart without a light. Sure there's probably a few where local laws prohibit a light (i.e. they have to be so far apart in most states), but I'd be willing to bet 95% of walmarts have a light.
Re: (Score:2)
You can tell because they're talking.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A Photo of our local traffic circle [dcourier.com]
Uphill battle (Score:4, Insightful)
Traffic signal timing is nothing new, we've known about it a long time. Unfortunately, there is much money to be made fleecing motorists for traffic violations. As a result, our road systems are tweaked to generate revenue, not expedite traffic. Good luck getting these algorithms used in anywhere but a handful of places without a fight.
Where the money is (Score:2, Insightful)
This is somewhat old hat. Companies that depend on urban transportation efficiency for a profit (FedEx and UPS) have long ago implemented systems that recommend routes to drivers. UPS for example uses technology to help reduce/eliminate left turns (usually involve sitting at an intersection idling and waiting, wasting gas and time): http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/ups-driving-cost-savings-by-eliminating-left-hand-turns/2190 [zdnet.com] (2005 article). True it hasn't been done on such a scale or for specifically this e
Interesting perspective... (Score:5, Insightful)
The perspective taken for this bit of problem solving is interesting, because it is stepping above the usual street engineering up to city planning - maximizing the number of people able to use shared resources, while minimizing resources used. This is decidedly NOT a perspective that is common in the US, as our cities tend to 'sprawl' at the whim of investors and politicians with 'complicated' priorities rather than anything as idealized as proper engineering to make best use of resources.
Greater use of mass transit to maximize available road where possible, waves of greens with appropriate buffers to keep congestion manageable to even extreme capacities, traffic system that work to inform the driver and minimize late decision making - these are good moves.
I would hope we could use some of these moves to create a road system that would allow for us to approach automated driving systems - where you would decide where you needed to be, and an appropriate vehicle would pick you up within a few minutes, using the minimum amount of fuel for the entire city worth of people using the system, and giving non-automated drivers plenty of road space as they go. Nobody limited in choices - but maximizing efficiency and convenience for everyone.
It probably won't happen here in the US (different priorities, as mentioned), but I hope such a system could be established in my lifetime.
Ryan Fenton
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Bullshit. You can design 'sprawl' intelligently, or stupidly. There is no planning in the US, no matter who's doing it or when. NYC is not sprawled, and wasn't well planned. Same with Boston. Dallas is relatively new, and was planned better than many of t
Of course, any driver knows this (Score:2)
40 cars standing motionless at an intersection are getting exactly 0.0 mpg. With the added benefit of all that extra pollution that zero mpg brings.
Re: (Score:2)
Some cars burn much less gas while waiting for a light. It is true even in a Prius that the electricity consumed sitting does amount to fuel wasted at a light, even if the engine is off at that time. In a Hybrid, the loss is less.
HEADLINE NEWS (Score:3, Insightful)
Through a test course in Munich, vehicles were able to post phenomenal fuel efficiency gains simply by adjusting the timing of traffic lights depending on traffic volume — to whatever speed provides a so-called 'green wave' of four or more synchronized signals."
This just in! Stopping and idling at each of four consecutive lights uses much more gas than driving straight through them without stopping!
Re: (Score:2)
It's not even the idling that's the biggest problem... Accelerating once the light turns green uses far more fuel than either idling or cruising through a green light. When you step on the brakes to stop at a red light, you're converting your car's kinetic energy into waste heat via friction between the brake pads/shoes and the brake disks/drums. That wasted energy has to be replaced once the light turns green, or the car won't move. The faster the traffic flow, the greater the kinetic energy of each car
It figures the Germans would do this (Score:2)
Here in the US, you have an on-ramp, and you have a traffic jam next to the on-ramp. It happens every day. Every day drivers get fucked.
Then they have electric signs that tell you when the next traffic jam is coming up. The signs say (basically), "Traffic jam at next on-ramp."
I realize that past a certain point in the day, there's enough cars that the traffic flow becomes unmanageable. But when you have traffic jams at 6am (60mph to gridlock and back to 60 again), it just says to me that voters, politic
Dangerous? (Score:2)
"Likewise, if the light is about to change to yellow, the system prompts the driver and momentarily cuts power."
Am I the only one who thinks that could end badly?
Re: (Score:2)
Since I accelerate into lane changes to clear my blind spot, yes, that does look like a beautiful mix for an accident. I signal, I check to see if I can see anyone. I didn't see the car in my blindspot, but I accelerated and wouldn't have hit him. But instead, as I start accelerating and moving over, the light turns yellow, so now I just barely got in front and slowed down. That's a great plan, if you're in the body repair business too.
Wrote People in Charge of Highways (Score:2)
They have two lights rigged up with cameras so far. The weird thing about these cameras is that they actually judge the speed of the last car and get him to run a yellow so that the light is green
Hybrid or electric (Score:3, Informative)
Hybrid or eletric cars don't use any fuel while stopped or even during normal in city acceleration.
UK Governmint did the converse for the fuel tax.. (Score:2)
Seriously, with the combination of North Sea oil and high fuel taxes, making the motorists stop and go at every set of lights by making sure they were deliberately out of sync seemed like an easy and inoffensive way to bring in tax revenue without hurting anyone.
Only recently have they permitted traffic regulators to synchronize the lights for the benefit of motorists, society, the environment, and utlimately the tax coffers too.
Systems thinking.. meh, they haven't even heard of it.
Drawbacks of bikes and buses (Score:4, Insightful)
You want green, invest in buses, trains, bikes, etc.
Being car-free, I know the limitations of bikes and buses. Bikes can't carry a week of groceries for a family of four at a time, and they're uncomfortable in a thunderstorm or the freezing season. Buses in many cities don't run at night, on Sundays, or on national holidays, due to low ridership.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually manage quite well without a car.
I gave it up when I moved to a metropolitan area. I can pretty much get anywhere I need to go and the same goes for most of my co-workers. The guys with larger families tend to have what equates to a part time use vehicle.
For groceries I prefer a delivery service which charges a very nominal fee for the savings and time. However, if I want to drive some distance there is always zip car for quick trips.
That said for me being vehicle-less is more or less an experimen
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
With the number of people who currently drive a car to work every day, and clearly have no plan to stop that any time soon, it is absurd to suggest that nobody should invest in improving the fuel efficiency of cars.
Re:The green light is "half empty" (Score:3, Insightful)
BMW makes cars, which are not "green" by any standard. You want green, invest in buses, trains, bikes, etc. Not more cars.
This is pretty clearly a greenwashing attempt by BMW.
Yes, and I am OK with that...you see they do not make trains, bikes, (or even buses?),...
When a coal company stops mountain-top removal, we acknowledge this and do not disapprove. You do not have to agree with their actions, but even a feeble attempt at smart fuel consumption should be welcomed.
I can see that we need more mass transit "smart solutions", but complaining about some speculation/proposal for improved traffic signals...well cheer up man!
Such a method sounds ripe for deployment on U.S.-style boulevards, where obsolete signals, each running on their own cycle, can bring light traffic to a congested snarl.
That is a true statement, my city fixed its lights, lowe
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
BMW makes cars, which are not "green" by any standard. You want green, invest in buses, trains, bikes, etc. Not more cars.
This is pretty clearly a greenwashing attempt by BMW.
Yes, and I am OK with that...you see they do not make trains, bikes, (or even buses?)
I know BMW makes "bikes" in a sense [bmwmotorcycles.com], and another German car company makes buses and sold them in the USA until the 1964 chicken tax.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha nice...doubt my friend who rides would ever be caught on one of those, that and a Harley. Nice link though
Re: (Score:2)
BMW makes cars, which are not "green" by any standard.
The MPG of even the most efficient vehicle is at zero when it is stopped by a red light. Vehicle manufactures are expected to do all this work to improve gasoline efficiency, but it is put to waste by inefficiency in traffic light patterns. If we are really serious about better MPG in passenger vehicles, than cities will have to do their part, rather than simply passing the blame on to car makers.
I can also guess with some confidence that the current BMW 335d [mpgomatic.com] is more efficient than whatever you happen to
Re: (Score:2)
>The MPG of even the most efficient vehicle is at zero when it is stopped by a red light.
Nope. Not if the engine is turned off. Now you've got 0/0, is that zero or infinity?
Re: (Score:2)
>The MPG of even the most efficient vehicle is at zero when it is stopped by a red light.
Nope. Not if the engine is turned off. Now you've got 0/0, is that zero or infinity?
As soon as it has to start moving again, that falls apart.
Re: (Score:2)
In your pedantry, you miss the forest for the trees. I'm sure you understand the physics of repeatedly starting and stopping a car use way more energy than allow it to continue at a steady pace.
Having engines that shut off is good, but it's a bit like putting a band-aid on a bullet wound.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, an idling engine usually takes very little fuel. It's when it's trying to move it that it burns up a lot of fuel.
Try driving for an hour, and see how much fuel you burn. Then leave the car idling in your driveway for an hour.
I moved cross country once, in the middle of the summer. We had a U-haul, and the car on a trailer behind us. We had 3 cats to transport, which simply couldn't fit in the cab of the U-haul. We left them in the car, with it idli
Re: (Score:2)
>This is pretty clearly a greenwashing attempt by BMW.
It would still be nice if roads were designed better. Of course this takes more than timing the lights.
Re:Greenwashing (Score:5, Insightful)
Cars aren't going away any time soon. So we can:
A. Do nothing.
B. Fix the traffic lights for minimal cost and offer some improvement on things.
But I guess since B doesn't remove cars entirely, we should do nothing right? That's pretty fucked logic you've got there. If doing this saves only 10% on urban fuel consumption, it will have the same effect as 1 out of 10 people stopping driving entirely. Seems like a net positive to me, and a lot more feasible than hoping 10% of people to give up their cars and start walking everywhere.
My route to work is horrible. I hit nearly every light, every day, even when coming home in the middle of the night. I'd like to send the city a bill for 20%+ of my gas, and half the cost of replacing brakes & clutch when the time comes, as this could have been easily saved by fixing the fucking lights. The rage induced by hitting every light probably knocked a few years off my life too.
No left turn (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
yes i would like that very much
Re:So can making only right turns !! (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Traffic Calming" is how they euphemistically describe things such as lane narrowing and speed humps
Then I've got an even better euphemism: "keeping the crosswalk safer for pedestrians". That's what politicians call it when they want votes.
Re:Another reason it's not done in the US... (Score:4, Insightful)
The leading cause of death for people between 15 and 35 in the US is automobiles.
You sound like a big part of the problem.
The leading cause of death is not automobiles, just like the leading cause of homicides is not guns.
Every single automobile death is caused by either someone not paying sufficient attention (which includes driving faster than you can plan ahead for any given set of road conditions), or mechanical failure (usually coupled with some degree of someone not paying attention). The idiot who pulled out "right in front of me" today might have caused an accident -- he certainly wasn't paying attention, but I was. I saw the potential for him to make a stupid choice about four seconds ahead of time (as soon as he approached the intersection*) and by the time he actually did it two seconds later, I had already dealt with the situation.**
The point is this: most accidents require two parties not paying attention: the one who is making the active mistake and does something stupid like pulling into traffic, or driving faster than he can react; and the one who should have seen the possibility for the event to occur, and reacted to avoid it. Obviously this doesn't apply in all cases - but I suspect it does in most. (Heck - even getting t-boned when crossing a protected intersection ... why did you assume you didn't have to look first, just because your light was green?)
* what is with those people who will pull up to an intersection, sit and STARE at oncoming traffic for several seconds, THEN pull into it, causing much swerving and slamming on of brakes? Are they just spaced out while they watch a few dozen tons of metal bearing down on them, or perhaps they know they *should* look left -- so they do it for form's sake though they've already made up their minds to go?
** no, "dealt with" does not mean slamming on the brake and potentially causing more incidents behind me. With so many more controls than the horizontally long pedal in the middle (or left), WHY is that so often a person's first reaction?
As far as GP goes - I feel his frustration, and it's nothing to do with wanting to speed. Driving in a residential area I only drive as fast as I can comfortably react to the unexpected - often given the potential for kids and animals coming onto the scene from hidden places, it's at or only slightly over the speed limit. But when I hit six lights in a row, and the timing of the lights causes yet more delays and backups because of volume... i can't help but get frustrated at what a waste of time and gas it is. Those lights *could* be sequenced together, but they're simply not -- usually in order to either raise ticket revenue for the city, or because some politician who doesn't know anything about traffic management decides something must be "done" about how unsafe it is in the city.