Downtown councillors to debate lowering residential speed limits

Shaman said:
These studies were done and are directly related to the U.S. moving to 65mph or even 85mph on some highways that were previously 55mph just a decade ago. Accident rates went DOWN.
Click to expand...

Accident rates down? Maybe, but fatality rates up.

http://dakotafreepress.com/2015/03/12/80-on-the-interstate-shows-legislature-not-pro-life/

Traffic Fatalities in States That Increased Their Speed Limits Above 65 mph
Before: 1988-1995; After: 1997-2004​
[TABLE="width: 520"]
<tbody>[TR]
[TD="align: right"][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8-Year Average, Before Change[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8-Year Average, After Change[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Total Change in Fatalities (Number)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Average Difference (Number)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Percent Difference[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Kansas[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]433[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]488[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]441[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]55[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 11%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Minnesota[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]576[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]618[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]337[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]42[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 7%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Missouri[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1049[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1160[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]887[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]111[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 10%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Nebraska[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]266[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]286[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]162[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]20[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 7%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]South Dakota[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]151[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]173[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]179[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]22[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 13%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 5, align: right"]Total Average Percentage Difference[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 9%[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]
Table 2
Traffic Fatalities in States That Did Not Increase Their Speed Limits Above 65 MPH
Before: 1988-1995; After: 1997-2004​
[TABLE="width: 520"]
<tbody>[TR]
[TD="align: right"][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8-Year Average, Before Change[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8-Year Average, After Change[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Total Change in Fatalities (Number)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Average Difference (Number)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Percent Difference[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Illinois[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1567[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1414[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-1229[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-154[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-11%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Iowa[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]491[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]442[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-390[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-49[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-11%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Wisconsin[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]752[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]774[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]176[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]22[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 5, align: right"]Total Average Percentage Difference[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-7%[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]
The numbers seem to confirm common sense: increase speed limits, increase speeds, increase deaths.
 
nobbie48 said:
Wouldn't driving at unrealistically slow speeds burn more gas and contribute to greenhouse gases?
Click to expand...

YES, and anyone with a newer vehicle that has a fancy trip-computer-display gizmo can see it.

My van has such a gizmo, and if you want minimum fuel consumption, you have to be going fast enough for the transmission to get into top gear - about 70 km/h.
 
griff2 said:
The numbers seem to confirm common sense: increase speed limits, increase speeds, increase deaths.
Click to expand...

..... maybe.

The rates do not consider whether the populace has changed (it has), weather differences etc.

However, those stats are 11 years old at best, with the original stats two years apart that are nearly 30 years old. And that, I believe, is what you call cherry-picking. The majority of the states I am talking about have increased speeds within the LAST DECADE. I don't have stats on hand as I just came back from struggling with my race bikes all day at the track. *sigh*
 
griff2 said:
Accident rates down? Maybe, but fatality rates up.

http://dakotafreepress.com/2015/03/12/80-on-the-interstate-shows-legislature-not-pro-life/

Traffic Fatalities in States That Increased Their Speed Limits Above 65 mph
Before: 1988-1995; After: 1997-2004​
[TABLE="width: 520"]
<tbody>[TR]
[TD="align: right"][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8-Year Average, Before Change[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8-Year Average, After Change[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Total Change in Fatalities (Number)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Average Difference (Number)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Percent Difference[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Kansas[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]433[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]488[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]441[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]55[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 11%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Minnesota[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]576[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]618[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]337[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]42[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 7%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Missouri[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1049[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1160[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]887[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]111[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 10%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Nebraska[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]266[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]286[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]162[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]20[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 7%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]South Dakota[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]151[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]173[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]179[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]22[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 13%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 5, align: right"]Total Average Percentage Difference[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+ 9%[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]
Table 2
Traffic Fatalities in States That Did Not Increase Their Speed Limits Above 65 MPH
Before: 1988-1995; After: 1997-2004​
[TABLE="width: 520"]
<tbody>[TR]
[TD="align: right"][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8-Year Average, Before Change[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8-Year Average, After Change[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Total Change in Fatalities (Number)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Average Difference (Number)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]Percent Difference[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Illinois[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1567[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1414[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-1229[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-154[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-11%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Iowa[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]491[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]442[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-390[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-49[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-11%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Wisconsin[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]752[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]774[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]176[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]22[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 5, align: right"]Total Average Percentage Difference[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-7%[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]
The numbers seem to confirm common sense: increase speed limits, increase speeds, increase deaths.
Click to expand...

And the numbers per 100,000 populace are......?
 
Rob MacLennan said:
And the numbers per 100,000 populace are......?
Click to expand...

Does that really make much of a difference? The comparison is to trends, not to raw numbers. Some locales saw fatalities up, others dropped. Unless there were significant variances between the listed locales in population movements into or out of those locales during those years, the trends would provide a ballpark yardstick for comparison.

Also linked to in that article was the experience of the state of Kansas after a 5 mph bump-up in speed limit. http://www.kansas.com/news/state/article4970385.html

Three years after the state raised the speed limit 5 mph to 75 on certain highways, fatalities and injuries are rocketing, according to new numbers compiled by the state Transportation Department.
The overall number of crashes is flat, but highway deaths jumped 54 percent since 2012 on the seven highways where the speed limit was raised.
Those highways, covering 804 miles, include I-135 north out of Wichita, rural stretches of I-35, I-70, U.S. 69 and I-470 near Topeka.
Overall, 48 people were killed in 38 wrecks on those seven highways in the two years before the speed limit was raised in mid-2011. In the two years after the speed limit was raised, 74 people were killed in 59 wrecks.
Injury accidents are up, too, increasing by 13 percent in the past two years compared with the two years before the speed limit went to 75.
Heavily traveled I-35 was one of the highways with the biggest increases in fatalities. Fatal wrecks doubled to 18 on I-35 in the two years after the speed limit increased compared with the two years before it was raised.
State highway officials aren’t ready to pin the blame for rising highway deaths on the higher speed limit, but national traffic safety experts think it follows a pattern seen in studies elsewhere.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/state/article4970385.html#storylink=cpy


​
That's a pretty big shift and it might just be a coincidental spike. If a few years down the road it turns out that it is not a spike but instead a trend, how would you begin to explain a 54% hike in fatalities over just three years? Are people driving 54% further now? Are there 54% more drivers and cars on the road now? Have 54% more drivers suddenly discovered texting and driving or resumed drinking and driving?

Or has that slight up-tick in travelled speed worked to overcome the ability of vehicle safety and survivability features to protect vehicle occupants in crashes which by the laws of physics become exponentially more brutal and violent as speed ticks up?
 
griff2 said:
Does that really make much of a difference? The comparison is to trends, not to raw numbers. Some locales saw fatalities up, others dropped. Unless there were significant variances between the listed locales in population movements into or out of those locales during those years, the trends would provide a ballpark yardstick for comparison.

Also linked to in that article was the experience of the state of Kansas after a 5 mph bump-up in speed limit. http://www.kansas.com/news/state/article4970385.html

Three years after the state raised the speed limit 5 mph to 75 on certain highways, fatalities and injuries are rocketing, according to new numbers compiled by the state Transportation Department.
The overall number of crashes is flat, but highway deaths jumped 54 percent since 2012 on the seven highways where the speed limit was raised.
Those highways, covering 804 miles, include I-135 north out of Wichita, rural stretches of I-35, I-70, U.S. 69 and I-470 near Topeka.
Overall, 48 people were killed in 38 wrecks on those seven highways in the two years before the speed limit was raised in mid-2011. In the two years after the speed limit was raised, 74 people were killed in 59 wrecks.
Injury accidents are up, too, increasing by 13 percent in the past two years compared with the two years before the speed limit went to 75.
Heavily traveled I-35 was one of the highways with the biggest increases in fatalities. Fatal wrecks doubled to 18 on I-35 in the two years after the speed limit increased compared with the two years before it was raised.
State highway officials aren’t ready to pin the blame for rising highway deaths on the higher speed limit, but national traffic safety experts think it follows a pattern seen in studies elsewhere.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/state/article4970385.html#storylink=cpy


​
That's a pretty big shift and it might just be a coincidental spike. If a few years down the road it turns out that it is not a spike but instead a trend, how would you begin to explain a 54% hike in fatalities over just three years? Are people driving 54% further now? Are there 54% more drivers and cars on the road now? Have 54% more drivers suddenly discovered texting and driving or resumed drinking and driving?

Or has that slight up-tick in travelled speed worked to overcome the ability of vehicle safety and survivability features to protect vehicle occupants in crashes which by the laws of physics become exponentially more brutal and violent as speed ticks up?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't explain anything. Raw numbers are completely meaningless without context. Throwing around numbers, without context, is a politician's trick.
 
http://jalopnik.com/utah-raises-some-speed-limits-to-80-mph-because-its-sa-1343843178

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regi...cle_973ef28c-313b-5933-b4cc-125983709ba1.html

Key point in the latter article ... "Utah hasn’t reported an increase in accidents since its new limits went into effect in September. It also didn’t report a surge in faster driving. Before the limits changed in Utah, the average driver drove 81 mph. Now the average is 82 mph, said John Gleason, spokesman for the Utah Department of Transportation." (In other words, the change in the speed limit didn't significantly change the actual speed that people drive ... it mostly changed the percentage of them that are complying with the law. The same issue affects the old studies that pertain to repealing the old 55 mph US speed limit ... that speed limit was widely ignored. "I can't drive 55")

And further to that point... http://www.claimsjournal.com/news/west/2015/05/12/263313.htm (this is for urban highways)

http://idahoreporter.com/35526/utahs-80-mph-speed-limit-has-actually-lowered-accident-rate/

There is good reason why motorway speed limits in most of continental Europe are 130 km/h.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom