Reply to: The EU making sense?

[SueEllen]

Blah blah contradict myself

It's taught to everyone who does physics higher than GCSE level.

I forget, but I think AtW won again this year. He tries so hard. But maybe try registering next year.

No you definitely won.

[OwlHoot]

.. not sure if you've noticed ... the real world doesn't work like in that way. That's why we get traffic jams on motorways quite often even though there is no obstruction ... the concertina effect having a ripple through the traffic ...

Not sure if you noticed, but I mentioned that very thing, although I called it "bunching"

Anyway, it seems surprisingly hard to find online studies on congestion vs static (constant) speed limits, but here's one:

Congestion Modelling, by C R Lindsey & E T Verhoef; 1999-11-05

Haven't read the whole paper carefully, but I did notice the following:

.. Broadly speaking, traffic congestion occurs when the cost of travel is increased by the presence of other vehicles, either because speeds fall or because greater attention is required to drive safely. ..

Where do I register my vote for COTY .... or has Owly already won?

I forget, but I think AtW won again this year. He tries so hard. But maybe try registering next year.

[NotAllThere]

Maybe in some situations, but it's hard to be sure. My intuition, FWIW...

Your intuition isn't worth much on this topic I'm afraid. Maybe go and read some papers on fluid dynamics, traffic simulations etc.

[Whorty]

Maybe in some situations, but it's hard to be sure. My intuition, FWIW, is that slower speeds and thus longer journey times (even without traffic jams) mean more cars on the road at any given time, hence a greater tendency to build up jams at traffic lights and roundabouts, and worsen the bunching effect elsewhere due to slow reaction times.

So your made up bollox then on zero facts?

Another way of looking at it is a fictitious (and ridiculous I know) thought experiment - Suppose every vehicle travelled at 10000 MPH, and stopped and started almost instantly. Then the roads would be pretty much empty all the time, with flashes every few seconds as a vehicle zipped past too fast for the eye to follow. So in that extreme situation, there would be no traffic jams, or queues at traffic lights if these changed fast as well, I wouldn't have thought.

Let's try a different experiment .. every vehicle travels at at 10mph, stopped and started instantly, then there would be zero traffic jams and congestion too.

But ... not sure if you've noticed ... the real world doesn't work like in that way. That's why we get traffic jams on motorways quite often even though there is no obstruction ... the concertina effect having a ripple through the traffic and causing tail backs when all the happened is 3 miles ahead someone changed lane suddenly, someone slammed their brakes on and the ripple of that flowed through the traffic.

FFS ..... I despair at some people's posts on here sometimes.

Where do I register my vote for COTY .... or has Owly already won?

[Whorty]

Not only that, but in typical town, which is pretty congested with traffic anyway, reducing speed limits would simply increase the incidence and severity of traffic jams.

Do you make up everything you say in the real world too, or just on here?

[Whorty]

Falling shop takings?
Working from home may mean that Starbucks, etc have a reduction in takings, but people still need to buy food to eat - whether it's from the shop near their office or the shop near their home.

Not my local Costa ... since WFH sales have gone through the roof ....

[OwlHoot]

It's not clear, but the evidence that there is leans towards the opposite. Lower congestion through fewer bottlenecks, less idling, little impact on point to point journey times and lower pollution (due to less idling and lower congestion). There's also a benefit in fewer accidents and few fatal accidents.

Maybe in some situations, but it's hard to be sure. My intuition, FWIW, is that slower speeds and thus longer journey times (even without traffic jams) mean more cars on the road at any given time, hence a greater tendency to build up jams at traffic lights and roundabouts, and worsen the bunching effect elsewhere due to slow reaction times.

Another way of looking at it is a fictitious (and ridiculous I know) thought experiment - Suppose every vehicle travelled at 10000 MPH, and stopped and started almost instantly. Then the roads would be pretty much empty all the time, with flashes every few seconds as a vehicle zipped past too fast for the eye to follow. So in that extreme situation, there would be no traffic jams, or queues at traffic lights if these changed fast as well, I wouldn't have thought.

[NotAllThere]

Not only that, but in typical town, which is pretty congested with traffic anyway, reducing speed limits would simply increase the incidence and severity of traffic jams.

So vehicles would be using just as much fuel and producing even more pollution idling, and productivity (such as it is) would reduce due to longer journey times.

It's not clear, but the evidence that there is leans towards the opposite. Lower congestion through fewer bottlenecks, less idling, little impact on point to point journey times and lower pollution (due to less idling and lower congestion). There's also a benefit in fewer accidents and few fatal accidents.

[OwlHoot]

^Not sure that would make much difference. Like a lot of people I'm driving slower and more economically recently and it's only reduced consumption from 61 to 65 MPG.

Not only that, but in typical town, which is pretty congested with traffic anyway, reducing speed limits would simply increase the incidence and severity of traffic jams.

So vehicles would be using just as much fuel and producing even more pollution idling, and productivity (such as it is) would reduce due to longer journey times.

[Mordac]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...n-oil-gas.html

That works if they can burn (hopefully non-Russian) coal at home. Or wood, but that means cutting down trees, so politically iffy. I'm not seeing how they plan to generate electricity, or put petrol and diesel into peoples' cars, but that's probably not the point.

[SueEllen]

Maybe they will stop moving the entire parliament 12 times a year if they are serious about removing waste.

Don't be stupid they are politicians.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Maybe they will stop moving the entire parliament 12 times a year if they are serious about removing waste.

[_V_]

The EU making sense?

The EU makes sense in everything and every way you leaver thicko!

[vetran]

Falling shop takings?
Working from home may mean that Starbucks, etc have a reduction in takings, but people still need to buy food to eat - whether it's from the shop near their office or the shop near their home.

With rising inflation and stationary wages discretionary spending WILL fall.
During the pandemic all sorts of hospitality business saw massive reductions in business that have not recovered.

If its heating or eating Tesco will sell a lot fewer steaks.

[darmstadt]

I saw Branson on the news yesterday backing a plan to reduce the speed limits as another easy way to reduce oil use.

You probably didn't get this in the UK: https://www.iea.org/news/energy-savi...-million-homes