Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How we can reduce traffic congestion

research.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 373 posts

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#81

Post by cucumber3732842 »

netsharc wrote: post #26
bob1029 wrote: post #14

If we could copy the traffic laws of a country like Germany to the US, I think that would have the biggest + cheapest effect. I am OK with automated/elevated enforcement if it means stop & go traffic evaporates into free flowing conditions. We should also take the idea from Finland where the traffic fines scale with each person's ability to pay. $100 for camping the passing lane or failing to maintain a reasonable fo…

I wish there was more police presence to spot lane-camping and fine them in Germany, too many idiots do it and get away with it. If I ran Google Maps, I'd ask to route stupid drivers away from my routes. The GPS and phone accelerometer should be able to tell us who they are -- "Oh you have Google Maps actively navigating, GPS says you're going 50mph, and the app in focus is WhatsApp and you're using the phone keyboar…

Ticket everyone who deviates from the mean speed too much. You wanna stop at the end of the ramp instead of merge then fine, but it'll cost you the same as the guy who's going 100 in the same stretch.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#82

Post by thakoppno »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #44
thomastjeffery wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A random factoid that will always stick in my brain is that the damage a vehicle does to a road is proportional to the weight on an axel...to the fourth power. I suspect rerouting semis to the roadway is by far the greatest factor.

Another random fact is that Norman Mailer coined ‘factoid’ to refer to a fabrication presented as fact, but now means the opposite (as in, a fact presented as a fact, not a fact presented as fabrication). So it’s now one of those words like ‘literally’ which can be its own antonym.

One factoid about Norman Mailer: he stabbed his wife.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#83

Post by nostrademons »

I've noticed that Google Maps has started sucking a lot lately, routing us onto routes that take 2-4 minutes longer when a faster route is clearly available or taking us on nonsensical detours, and I wonder if this experiment is a reason why.

There's a hidden cost to this, and that's trust in the mapping app. I've stopped using Google Navigation for routine trips where I know how to get to the destination. It used to be worth it for the traffic information, but now that there's a good chance that it'll take you on a slower route for reasons that may be beneficial to Google but detrimental to you, it's not worth it. My brother-in-law switched to Apple Maps for similar reasons: he's finding it simply gives better results nowadays.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#84

Post by cucumber3732842 »

cyberax wrote: post #73
financetechbro wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have stats to support your statement?

Sure. Pedestrian deaths are above the 2015 levels in all the large West Coast cities that went full-on with the Zero Vision project. Numbers are for 2015 and 2025. Seattle: 7/18 Portland: 11/20 LA: 130/150 SF is unchanged at 24 (they had a HUGE drop from 2024, luckily). And no, the following excuses do not apply: COVID - deaths started growing _before_ COVID. Car size increase - cars did not increase significantly du…

This tracks with what's happened in my non-grid east coast city that adopted the same. Everyone has a path planner in their pocket that they mindlessly follow which takes them right around all the Vision Zero'd (TM) main roads and through everyone's neighborhood.

The assholes who sell the big plastic speed bumps they've had to put on the residential streets to slow down all the traffic they diverted onto them are making out like bandits though.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#85

Post by Gigachad »

gustavus wrote: post #57
zip1234 wrote: post #24

Congestion can be solved by charging more for driving. Even a modest amount would start affecting how much people drive. The money could be used for better roads and improving other transit options that aren't so space-inefficient. That said, this would likely be unpopular to implement until the effects were visible. See congestion pricing in NYC as an example.

Won't that just unfairly displace the impact onto the economically disadvanteged as they are the least likely to have the flexibility in their schedule, inadvertently forcing more of the maintenance burden onto those who are int be least place to bear it?

You wouldn't just charge more for driving. You do it in combination with funding public transport, building safer cycling routes, and removing roadblocks from building cheap housing near PT hubs.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#86

Post by Iggyhopper »

jawns wrote: post #6

One of the things this type of intervention doesn't take into account is that different roads are built with different levels of hardiness based on the amount of traffic they are expected to receive. For instance, a few years ago, a segment of I-495 in Delaware needed to be unexpectedly shut down for emergency repairs. Drivers were rerouted. But because of the increase in traffic on the less-hardy detour route, that…

People just want to get to their next destination faster.

Long story short: More public transport sounds like a good idea to prevent more situations like you posted.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#87

Post by cindyllm »

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #84
cyberax wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. Pedestrian deaths are above the 2015 levels in all the large West Coast cities that went full-on with the Zero Vision project. Numbers are for 2015 and 2025. Seattle: 7/18 Portland: 11/20 LA: 130/150 SF is unchanged at 24 (they had a HUGE drop from 2024, luckily). And no, the following excuses do not apply: COVID - deaths started growing _before_ COVID. Car size increase - cars did not increase significantly du…

This tracks with what's happened in my non-grid east coast city that adopted the same. Everyone has a path planner in their pocket that they mindlessly follow which takes them right around all the Vision Zero'd (TM) main roads and through everyone's neighborhood. The assholes who sell the big plastic speed bumps they've had to put on the residential streets to slow down all the traffic they diverted onto them are mak…

[dead]

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#88

Post by Gigachad »

ceroxylon wrote: post #48

Happy that research time is being put towards this, however a fuel use decrease of ~0.75% is a bit underwhelming for this particular endeavor, even when consumer cars/vans are 10% of CO2 emissions.

I doubt there would be any improvement. What we have seen is traffic is a constant. If you make make the road network higher capacity or faster, people just move further out or drive to further away stores.

People have an amount of time they will tolerate driving for, and adjust everything else around that.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#89

Post by clickety_clack »

baggy_trough wrote: post #53
ctkhn wrote: post #52

Surely the top way to avoid traffic congestion would be communities where it's possible to live near where you work, shop, go out, etc. and not doing everything else exactly the same but taking a slightly different highway in your car

If you don't have a community like that, then the best way is congestion pricing.

This sounds simple, but many people are already living further away because they can’t afford to live downtown near where they work. Add kids into the equation, and many people who could live there without them are also forced out.

Congestion pricing is a regressive tax.

Re: How we can reduce traffic congestion

#90

Post by ryan_lane »

gustavus wrote: post #57
zip1234 wrote: post #24

Congestion can be solved by charging more for driving. Even a modest amount would start affecting how much people drive. The money could be used for better roads and improving other transit options that aren't so space-inefficient. That said, this would likely be unpopular to implement until the effects were visible. See congestion pricing in NYC as an example.

Won't that just unfairly displace the impact onto the economically disadvanteged as they are the least likely to have the flexibility in their schedule, inadvertently forcing more of the maintenance burden onto those who are int be least place to bear it?

Take the revenue generated from congestion pricing, and put it into public transportation. Make public transportation free to use. That would be far more impactful to the folks least able to bear an increase in driving fees.

In most of the US, people are forced to own cars because they don't have public transit available, or the available public transit is too infrequent, or there aren't dense enough routes. The reason behind this is funding.

Additionally, buses are less efficient because they need to sit in the same traffic as everyone else. Reduced traffic makes buses more efficient. Reducing car traffic is a win for basically everyone, and increasing public transit is additionally a win for basically everyone.

Car infrastructure is heavily subsidized, and congestion pricing is one way to make car owners pay for part of the cost. Why is it fair for public transit riders to have to pay per ride, when car owners get to use the infrastructure for free?

Post reply on HN