 |
 |
In a message dated 9/6/02 8:32:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time, [log in to unmask] writes: > I agree with Peter that highway deaths are a major issue in America. We lose around 41,000 people per year in highway fatalities, the equivalent of about 14 world trade center attacks per year. I can't believe there isn't a rebellion considering this fact. Americans value their freedom, however, and they consider the ability to drive a basic freedom that is worth the risk of being involved in a fatal accident. I have been looking for things that we could do as engineers in order to lower these numbers, and Peter's solution of building more "motorways" seems like a very reasonable solution. We have achieved significant reductions from the historical high of about 58,000 fatalities per year primarily due to tougher laws on drinking and driving..... but those laws seem to have reached their point of maximum impact, and fatalities are now beginning to show a slight increase. We have improved highway geometric designs, improved guard rails, and certainly improved the vehicles themselves. Until I read Peter's post, I thought the only solution was increasing the requirements for driver education, particularly for those involved in their first accident. As insurance rates prove, once you are involved in one accident, you are much more likely to be involved in a second (or more.) I still think this is a good idea. I'm sorry to have to question Peter's number about only 30% of the traffic being on motorways. As I looked at the national highway statistics a few years ago. I recall more like 70% of VMT is on the interstates and arterials, with about 30% on local roads. This was the opposite of the total mileage -- 70% local miles, and 30% arterial and interstate. (I used these numbers to support the need for better pavement management on local roads.) Because of this, I also have to question the impact Peter stated of 5,000 lives saved. My friend, even if we only save 1 life, we've done good! (to quote an environmentalist who was willing to spend an extra five billion $ to guarantee a perfectly safe emission level of a rare pollutant.) I will side with Peter and others on the issue of DRL, however. I use my lights when necessary to see or to be seen. I just purchased a new car last month, and the headlights will come on automatically if the lighting conditions warrant (as long as the switch is in the automatic position.) Don't the drivers have some responsibility in this? Isn't this part of improved driver education? Isn't this a more effective solution? Best Regards, Steve Mueller Denver, Colorado, USA