After a year of lockdowns, work from home, avoidance of travel and other pandemic-related constraints, many of us have put our lives back into a higher gear. While re-engaging and reopening have had many positive benefits, one of the negatives has been the speed at which we are moving.
Most of us are once again in a hurry and highway speeds and the resultant deaths have gone up. A recent article in the Monitor reported that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which monitors such things, tells us that highway deaths are up 7.2% over the last year even though the miles driven declined by more than 13%. It was the deadliest year since 2007.
Maine State Police Cpl. Doug Cropper is quoted as saying, “People are flying down the roads! It’s just ridiculous.”
So why do drivers choose to ignore speed limits and travel faster? Is it that they need to save time? Yes, if you are going 60 miles on the highway and travel at 75 mph instead of 65 mph, you will get to your destination about 7 minutes faster. If you are late for a meeting or event, that might make a difference, but generally, does it really matter?
Speed limits are not established arbitrarily. States use guidance from the Federal Highway Administration that is based on the design of the road and other site characteristics that include access road frequency, pedestrian activity, roadside hazards and crash history. In essence, the speed limit is designed to optimize safety while allowing for traffic to flow quickly.
Speed is a big safety problem and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety published a report that found that fatality rates on freeways/interstates were 8.5% higher for each increase in the maximum speed limits since 2007. NHSTA data says that nationally 26% of those killed in a vehicle crash involved at least one speeding driver. In 2017, New Hampshire had the highest percentage of traffic fatalities related to speeding in the country: 57%.
Then, in this era of increasing climate-related calamities, there’s wasted energy. Transportation is the single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., larger than electricity production. A lot of those emissions are related to speed. The U.S. Department of Energy publishes statistics that illustrate this. The optimum fuel economy for a mid-sized car is achieved at 55 mph. You can assume that for each 5 mph you drive over 50 mph is like paying an additional $0.22 per gallon for gasoline (when the base cost of gas is $3.17/gallon). In other words, if your vehicle gets 33 mpg at 40 mph, it will get around 25 mpg at 70 mph and 20 mpg at 80 mph. The lower your mpg, the more greenhouse gasses you produce.
If we were to all drive at the speed limit, we would cut our greenhouse gas emissions significantly (and save money) without anyone having to buy a new car. Surveys tell us that two-thirds of Americans are very worried about climate change, so why aren’t they slowing down?
What can we do to solve this problem? The traditional response is more law enforcement. Yes, seeing a state trooper parked in the median strip makes everyone look at the speedometer. But we can’t and probably shouldn’t assign every available policeman to speed enforcement.
One example of where enforcement should be enhanced is at that notorious merge of NH 101 and I-93 in Manchester. Driving west on 101 before the merge, the limit drops to 55mph. Same on I-93. Does anyone actually drive 55 mph? Well, maybe a few. But as you enter from 101 into the “passing lane” of I-93, you have to cross four lanes of traffic that is almost always moving at 70 or more mph to stay on 101 W.
In the decades I’ve been regularly driving that route, I have rarely seen speeding enforcement. I have never arrived at that merge when the traffic was moving at the speed limit. Depending on the amount of traffic, the process of crossing four lanes to continue on 101 W can be a traumatizing experience.
So how about employing some technology to address this problem? We already have lots of traffic cameras on our roads. Dozens of them. And those EZ pass transponders in your car provide that the toll booth is allowed to take your photo when you go through. If you are worried about being “surveilled” while driving, it’s best you stay home.
We don’t use speed cameras to enforce speed limits, but 19 states do. They have been shown to reduce crashes by 20-25%.
I’ve had some first-hand experience with this. We have family living in New Zealand and have visited there nearly annually for more than 10 years. They place speed cameras in locations where officer enforcement may not be possible due to road layout or it would not be safe for drivers and officers. The technology is proven effective and if your vehicle is captured speeding you get a summons in the mail (or email). If you have a dispute, there’s a standard process not dissimilar to getting a ticket from an officer.
I know it’s anecdotal, but the first time we travelled in New Zealand we noticed that on the rural roads a great many drivers were exceeding the limit a lot of the time. Then a few years later, speed cameras were deployed (you can get a map of their locations) and it was clear that in those areas speeds had come down. A study of crash data in the 20 months following the introduction of static cameras in New Zealand found a 23% reduction in fatal and serious crashes at urban static camera sites and an 11% reduction in fatal and serious crashes at rural static camera sites.
So, let’s all do a little logical thinking about all this. Yes, it’s great to get places more quickly, but do we really need to? And shouldn’t law enforcement have all the tools at their disposal to encourage people to drive at more reasonable speeds? Speed cameras are prohibited by New Hampshire law. It’s time to change that.
(Paul Doscher lives in Weare.)