The Brilliant Hillary Clinton Pushes for a 55MPH Speed Limit in the US

[LittleBahamut]

You know, she could push the idea of having OBD III in the future. I learned from the instructors at my school that OBD III will have something like this. This device can stop people from passing a certain speed limit by 2 ways:

1. Slowing down your car by satellite.
2. A speeding ticket in your mailbox the next day.

OBD III also have other annoying things that will come with it that will DESTROY the aftermarket companies and limit of what things we can put on our cars. I won't get too much into detail about these since this is about how fast we are trying to go.

The problem with OBD III right now is that it violates our "privacy", delaying the future of OBD III. 👍

55MPH BLARGH!

 

[a6m5]

2. A speeding ticket in your mailbox the next day.

I don't know what "OBD III" is, but this has happened to some people already. Some rental, lease cars, etc. have blackbox type device on board that are tracked by satellite. Say you rent a car in California, but the agreement says that you can not cross state border. You cross, and get fined when returning the car. I've also read a story in a car magazine where the driver took a rented car on a trip. When the rental company found out about the "good" time he made on his trip, he was reported to the authority and received a citation in the mail(kinda like the time I went from S.F. to Portland in 9 hours, including lunch break and shopping, I think. ).

 

[LeadSlead#2]

neanderthal - not really true, let alone incontravertible. An engine lagging at 1,000rpm in 6th for 55mph is far less efficient, in terms of fuel usage and exhaust product, than the same engine at 1,350rpm in 6th for 75mph.

Actually, in my 4-banger (let alone a V-8) that's where I got my astounding milage, puttering along between 900-1100 rpm's.

And the main fact almost everybody in here is overlooking, is just how much harder the air pushes at increased speeds. yes, you're engine is running more efficiently at higher rpm's (even mine), but your car must use all that extra power and more, just to fight the air.

If you don't believe, think of this undeniable fact. How much longer does it take to accelerate, in the average vehicle, full-throttle, from 60-85 than it does from 40-65. and that's how much harder the air is to move.


@Danoff-- I'm sorry, I must have missed economics. So, are you telling me that it's smart business on their part? no ****** S***.
Or are you telling me that they ARENT, making record-profits, EVERY quarter besting the last? (thats the raping part)
Or, as a desperate hope, are you saying that it ISNT a monopoly?

 

[Famine]

He's asking you to think about where most of the price of petrol goes... Clue - it's not oil-company-profit.

 

[LeadSlead#2]

right, but at least supposedly stations such as Hess, Shell, and some others only get oil from here, in America
and regardless, they ARE making more money off it than ever. every quarter over the last. i cant just point eastward and say its all them

 

[LittleBahamut]

I don't know what "OBD III" is, but this has happened to some people already. Some rental, lease cars, etc. have blackbox type device on board that are tracked by satellite. Say you rent a car in California, but the agreement says that you can not cross state border. You cross, and get fined when returning the car. I've also read a story in a car magazine where the driver took a rented car on a trip. When the rental company found out about the "good" time he made on his trip, he was reported to the authority and received a citation in the mail(kinda like the time I went from S.F. to Portland in 9 hours, including lunch break and shopping, I think. ).

OBD stands for On Board Diagnostic. It is a computer that self checks all the car's circuit during start up. If there is a malfunction or no continuity from this or that sensor/actuater/everything else, it will throw a MIL or Check Engine light.

You bring up a something about that blackbox that I too overheard from some of my instructors. I will be going to school today and ask them about the blackbox. 👍

 

[Danoff]

@Danoff-- I'm sorry, I must have missed economics. So, are you telling me that it's smart business on their part? no ****** S***.
Or are you telling me that they ARENT, making record-profits, EVERY quarter besting the last? (thats the raping part)
Or, as a desperate hope, are you saying that it ISNT a monopoly?

I'm asking you to figure out why oil costs what it does and who sets the price of a barrel of oil (hint: it isn't the oil companies).

 

[Carl.]

He's asking you to think about where most of the price of petrol goes... Clue - it's not oil-company-profit.

Are you talking about the part taken by the government to pay for the necessary infrastructures of a public road system? At least that part remained constant in the last years. While it may be somewhat mismanaged, at least it isn't subject to abusive speculation in order to make record profits for a few corporations, year after year.

Unless you're against a public road system, the tax on fuel is one of the fairest way to pay for it, the more you use it, the more you pay for it.

 

[Danoff]

While it may be somewhat mismanaged, at least it isn't subject to abusive speculation in order to make record profits for a few corporations, year after year.

Abusive speculation? By the oil companies? Do you even know what you're talking about?

 

[Famine]

Are you talking about the part taken by the government to pay for the necessary infrastructures of a public road system?

A-hahahahahahaha! Priceless...

Unless you're against a public road system, the tax on fuel is one of the fairest way to pay for it, the more you use it, the more you pay for it.

Presumably then bioethanol users repair the road as they drive over it. In reverse.

 

[Danoff]

Presumably then bioethanol users repair the road as they drive over it. In reverse.

Nice!!

 

[YSSMAN]

OBD stands for On Board Diagnostic. It is a computer that self checks all the car's circuit during start up. If there is a malfunction or no continuity from this or that sensor/actuater/everything else, it will throw a MIL or Check Engine light.

You bring up a something about that blackbox that I too overheard from some of my instructors. I will be going to school today and ask them about the blackbox. 👍

I think the new Jaguar XK allready has something similar to what you are talking about, in which it has a button that will limit the acceleration and top-speed of the car to less than a given speed (I can't remeber if it is 60MPH or 70MPH)...

All of this crap these folks are trying to pull on us isnt going to work. If it all goes like this when the next-gen models come out, I think you will see a lot of enthusiests (sp?) going out and buying older models.

 

[vladimir]

You may burn less gas going by slower, but you will burn more gas by going for longer periods of time, do to reduced pace. The ultimate difference can't be enough to outway the massive money and effort required to enact this.

did you ever notice that consumption was measured in miles per gallon and not hours per gallon?

 

[Carl.]

Abusive speculation? By the oil companies? Do you even know what you're talking about?

Do you?

I guess you mean the prices at WTI, Brent and Dubai are purely reflecting the natural laws of the free markets, there's absolutely no gains made at all from speculation over anythings from gusts of wind in the Gulf of Mexico to tensions in the Middle-East. I guess it never happens that whoever is doing the extraction may be doing the refining and distribution. I guess it's also perfectly normal that 65% of the oil traded in the world is benchmarked against Brent, which accounts for less than 1% of global production.

You know, the last time prices where anywhere close to where they currently are (adjusted for inflation), tankers actually had to wait hours / days to be filled up because of shortages... show me where this is happening right now.

I guess Exxon didn't make 36 Billions of net income last year, too.

A-hahahahahahaha! Priceless...

Could you share with us what's so funny?

 

[Danoff]

Do you?

I guess you mean the prices at WTI, Brent and Dubai are purely reflecting the natural laws of the free markets, there's absolutely no gains made at all from speculation over anythings from gusts of wind in the Gulf of Mexico to tensions in the Middle-East. I guess it never happens that whoever is doing the extraction may be doing the refining and distribution. I guess it's also perfectly normal that 65% of the oil traded in the world is benchmarked against Brent, which accounts for less than 1% of global production.

You know, the last time prices where anywhere close to where they currently are (adjusted for inflation), tankers actually had to wait hours / days to be filled up because of shortages... show me where this is happening right now.

I guess Exxon didn't make 36 Billions of net income last year, too.

Ok, now I'm convinced that you don't know what you're talking about, AND you don't know what I'm talking about.

Let's start with the last thing you said, do you know why there was a shortage?

 

[3-Wheel Drive]

(to vladimir)

Engines still burn a certain amount per hour. Try idling your car for several hours, it will still burn fuel. If two cars travellng a the same, steady speed, the one going for one hour will use less fuel than the one going for three. You may burn less gas by travelling slower, but you will still burn that rate for the extra time it takes to get there. For many trips, the amount saved by going slower may not turn out to be very much at all. To me, it wouldn't be worth it to save a gallon (1/20 of my tank) if it costs me 3 hours.

 

[Carl.]

Go ahead, educate me.

Iran cut its oil supplies...

 

[Kylehnat]

Has anyone actually travelled at 55 mph on an interstate haighway for any length of time? It's a legal sedative, that's what.

Ah, the wise man speaketh! Today's cars are so easy to drive, 55 mph is indeed quite boring, and would probably lull people to sleep at night on a long stretch of deserted highway. 100+ mph keeps your eyes open, and your knuckles white

I dread to think how long it'd take to get from city to city in the US at 55mph

You're not kidding. The closest major city to Seattle is Portland, about 170 miles away. Most of this stretch can be done at about 80 mph (with no real traffic). Driving 55 mph would make this trip almost an hour longer (not that anyone would actually abide by this limit). And these are two cities that are "close" by American standards! I'd hate to think about how much longer it would take to go 400 or 500 miles

As danoff said, speed limits are there for safety purposes, not fuel consumption considerations. I get better fuel mileage in my car at 80 mph than any SUV does at 55 mph (or any speed for that matter).

Hillary Clinton is a cancer to the Senate. God help us if she ever becomes President (not bloody likely). She needs to keep her ugly face shut. Let's see, she's gone after video games, and now cars. Hey Hillary, why don't you make drinking, playing guitar, and wanking illegal, too? That way, you can ensure that I'll never have any fun!

 

[Danoff]

Go ahead, educate me.

Iran cut its oil supplies...

Price fixing. The easiest way to run out of supply is to sell it below market value. The government, in its infinite wisdom, stepped in and fixed the price of gas. If demand isn't curtailed by price, the supply will run out. Which is why we had gas lines back then.

So don't tell me we need to have gas lines to indicate that there's a real reason for prices to be where they are. High prices will never create shortage. Ever. They're the one way to prevent shortage.

Let me ask you another question. Do you know who participates in the commodities market?

 

[Carl.]

Price fixing. The easiest way to run out of supply is to sell it below market value. The government, in its infinite wisdom, stepped in and fixed the price of gas. If demand isn't curtailed by price, the supply will run out. Which is why we had gas lines back then.

So don't tell me we need to have gas lines to indicate that there's a real reason for prices to be where they are. High prices will never create shortage. Ever. They're the one way to prevent shortage.

Yet you were telling me that I don't know what you're talking about. You're talking about shortage at the pump on US soil while I'm talking about shortages on a worldwide level. (you know, the actual factor that drove oil prices up back then?) Of course fixing prices in the US while it wasn't self-sufficient on oil wasn't a very smart move, and caused shortages at the pump.

Let me ask you another question. Do you know who participates in the commodities market?

Traders, investors, speculators. And?

 

[Danoff]

Yet you were telling me that I don't know what you're talking about. You're talking about shortage at the pump on US soil while I'm talking about shortages on a worldwide level. (you know, the actual factor that drove oil prices up back then?) Of course fixing prices in the US while it wasn't self-sufficient on oil wasn't a very smart move, and caused shortages at the pump.

You're still missing it. There are no shortages when demand is curtailed. The reason demand wasn't curtailed (at least US demand, which is a major portion of the worldwide demand) was a refusal of the US government to allow the supply signal into the price of gasoline.

But when you allow supply signals into the price, you get reduced demand.

But supply shortages are not the only reason that prices increase - which is part of the reason you didn't see tankers waiting in line for oil. Another reason you didn't see shortages is because gas prices went up in the US and our demand growth responded accordingly, also, the shortages reported were mostly for refined gasoline. But the real reason the price of gas went up wasn't because of shortages at the refining stations, or shortages of middle eastern oil, it was because the commodities market determined that demand was strong and would remain strong.

Traders, investors, speculators. And?

That's right. The average joe. Sure it may all be brokers doing the actual trading, but it's the average guy's dollar that's in there. And the investors are trying to get the best return for their clients.

They see fluctuations in negotiations for supplies from Chile, or strong demand from China, or tensions in Iran and they see strong demand for oil globally and in the US and they invest - which drives the price of a barrel of oil companys' products up.

In every sense, worldwide demand for their product is the reason the price went up.

 

[Carl.]

You're still missing it. There are no shortages when demand is curtailed. The reason demand wasn't curtailed (at least US demand, which is a major portion of the worldwide demand) was a refusal of the US government to allow the supply signal into the price of gasoline.

But when you allow supply signals into the price, you get reduced demand.

But supply shortages are not the only reason that prices increase - which is part of the reason you didn't see tankers waiting in line for oil. Another reason you didn't see shortages is because gas prices went up in the US and our demand growth responded accordingly, also, the shortages reported were mostly for refined gasoline. But the real reason the price of gas went up wasn't because of shortages at the refining stations, or shortages of middle eastern oil, it was because the commodities market determined that demand was strong and would remain strong.

I'm not sure you speak about demand back in the 70s, but it did move. Check the hp rating of a late 70s Corvette for reference. When you look at the current situation though, it didn't seem to have affected the demand growth at all, so there's no corelation between that and the fact that we don't have any shortage. We don't have any shortage while the prices are that high because so far the speculations on [insert conflict/ disaster / depleted wells / armageddon here] turns out only to be speculation. Currently, there are no actual supply issues, as opposed to the last oil crisis.

That's right. The average joe. Sure it may all be brokers doing the actual trading, but it's the average guy's dollar that's in there. And the investors are trying to get the best return for their clients.

They see fluctuations in negotiations for supplies from Chile, or strong demand from China, or tensions in Iran and they see strong demand for oil globally and in the US and they invest - which drives the price of a barrel of oil companys' products up.

In every sense, worldwide demand for their product is the reason the price went up.

Average Joes could also trade in California's Energy market, couldn't they? (I guess somehow Enron manipulations were again the government's fault, though) And I'm sorry, but the world demand in gas certainly hasn't surge by that much in the last years. It's speculation on future shortages, conflicts or disasters that made oil prices soar.

What's happening currently is that a handful of companies are making the largest profits recorded in history while dragging down every other sector of the economy. It may have a positive side, such as giving a boost to research for alternatives, but they'll have plenty of time to enjoy screwing us until then.

 

[Danoff]

I'm not sure you speak about demand back in the 70s,

Nope, demand in the 70's was kept high.

When you look at the current situation though, it didn't seem to have affected the demand growth at all,

Now you're just lying.

We don't have any shortage while the prices are that high because so far the speculations on [insert conflict/ disaster / depleted wells / armageddon here] turns out only to be speculation. Currently, there are no actual supply issues, as opposed to the last oil crisis.

Agreed.

Average Joes could also trade in California's Energy market, couldn't they? (I guess somehow Enron manipulations were again the government's fault, though)

What the hell are you talking about? That's so completely unrelated.

And I'm sorry, but the world demand in gas certainly hasn't surge by that much in the last years. It's speculation on future shortages, conflicts or disasters that made oil prices soar.

Yup, and the fact that oil has been undervalued w.r.t. demand over the last 5+ years.

What's happening currently is that a handful of companies are making the largest profits recorded in history while dragging down every other sector of the economy.

The ones making the profit aren't the ones setting the price, so you can't claim that they're dragging down the rest of the economy.

It may have a positive side, such as giving a boost to research for alternatives, but they'll have plenty of time to enjoy screwing us until then.

They're not screwing us, we're screwing us.

 

[Carl.]

Nope, demand in the 70's was kept high.

Says who? Just look at how American car manufacturer lineups evolved in the 70s...

Now you're just lying.

Wha? Not only I'm wrong but I'm lying? I'm such a bad person...

Prove me wrong. What have you seen change? The arrival of the Honda Fit? Some people changed their habits, but nothing serious.

What the hell are you talking about? That's so completely unrelated.

You're saying that prices can't be influenced by the oil compagnies since trade is done over a commodity market. I'm giving you an example of a company manipulating prices over an energy "free market".

Yup, and the fact that oil has been undervalued w.r.t. demand over the last 5+ years.

Says who?

The ones making the profit aren't the ones setting the price, so you can't claim that they're dragging down the rest of the economy.

See above. One thing is sure though, They're getting a huge profit out of it. Profit as in "never seen before in history" profits.

They're not screwing us, we're screwing us.

Interesting. Do we really have a choice? (besides the genius who will find "the cure")

 

[Danoff]

Says who? Just look at how American car manufacturer lineups evolved in the 70s...

Vehicle demand changed, but not oil demand.

Wha? Not only I'm wrong but I'm lying? I'm such a bad person...

Prove me wrong. What have you seen change? The arrival of the Honda Fit? Some people changed their habits, but nothing serious.

http://news.tradingcharts.com/futures/1/4/78858241.html

US demand is flat - which is 2% below the trend. Oil prices have already knocked us off of our 2%/year growth pace. Given that there's lag in this market, I'd expect demand to remain flat and possibly go down depending on how high a price people really think this is.

You're saying that prices can't be influenced by the oil compagnies since trade is done over a commodity market. I'm giving you an example of a company manipulating prices over an energy "free market".

uh... no you're not. You're giving me an example of a company that broke the law (in more places than one). The power market is by no means a "free market" in America. But the biggest scandal to do with Enron was the value of the stock plummeting while the old folks their couldn't pull out with their retirement dollars - to which I say, diversity is key.

Says who?

The oil companies, today. Who are raking in record profits. It's quite clear to me that this could have happened a few years ago and the same response would have come back - general b*tching about the price, but people still feel it's worth it.

See above. One thing is sure though, They're getting a huge profit out of it. Profit as in "never seen before in history" profits.

Yup. Their product went up in value, it makes sense that they'd get big profits.

Interesting. Do we really have a choice? (besides the genius who will find "the cure")

Yup.

 

[vladimir]

(to vladimir)

Engines still burn a certain amount per hour. Try idling your car for several hours, it will still burn fuel. If two cars travellng a the same, steady speed, the one going for one hour will use less fuel than the one going for three. You may burn less gas by travelling slower, but you will still burn that rate for the extra time it takes to get there. For many trips, the amount saved by going slower may not turn out to be very much at all. To me, it wouldn't be worth it to save a gallon (1/20 of my tank) if it costs me 3 hours.

sorry, but thats what the measuring of miles per gallon is supposed to tell you. if you are doing 30mpg, you will go 30 miles on one gallon, regardless of the time it takes you. time plays no role here...you can't say a car is doing 30MPG but at 15mph it takes 2 hours and thus burns more fuel than at 30mph in an hour.

see, it does not matter how long your engine is running, because the amount of time alone does not tell you how much fuel you are using. the amount injected depends on RPM, mixture, strokes, deplacement etc.
so if you are constantly driving at 30mph for 2 hours and get 60MPG, you will have used on gallon of fuel, while at 60mph for 1 hour at 20MPG you will have used three gallons, regardless of the time it took less.


physics say:
Another interesting relation, though it is not part of the equation, is that the power needed to push an object through a fluid increases as the cube of the velocity. A car cruising on a highway at 50 mph (80 km/h) may require only 10 horsepower (7 kW) to overcome air drag, but that same car at 100 mph (160 km/h) requires 80 hp (60 kW). With a doubling of speed the drag (force) quadruples per the formula. Since power is the rate of doing work, exerting four times the force at twice the speed requires eight times the power. However, with a doubling of velocity, the time taken to cover a given distance also halves. This means that the total energy used to overcome drag over a given distance only increases with the square of velocity.

 

[Danoff]

physics say:
Another interesting relation, though it is not part of the equation, is that the power needed to push an object through a fluid increases as the cube of the velocity. A car cruising on a highway at 50 mph (80 km/h) may require only 10 horsepower (7 kW) to overcome air drag, but that same car at 100 mph (160 km/h) requires 80 hp (60 kW). With a doubling of speed the drag (force) quadruples per the formula. Since power is the rate of doing work, exerting four times the force at twice the speed requires eight times the power. However, with a doubling of velocity, the time taken to cover a given distance also halves. This means that the total energy used to overcome drag over a given distance only increases with the square of velocity.

That's where drag dominates your efficiency losses. But going slower can increase your efficiency losses as well. The speed at which efficiency was maximized would be a function of your drag coefficient in addition to number of cylinders, size of wheels, size of alternator, whether the AC was on etc. etc.

At rest, you burn gasoline to go nowhere. Similarly when you're crawling. So at some speed, efficiency increases with velocity. At others it decreases. Somewhere there is a maximum but it'll be vehicle dependent.

 

[vladimir]

of course going too slow will also cause a loss...but too slow would be really slow...most efficient usage i have seen on a bmw 330d was around 30mph. at higher speeds like 60 drag already becomes a major factor.

 

[HACKr]

of course going too slow will also cause a loss...but too slow would be really slow...most efficient usage i have seen on a bmw 330d was around 30mph. at higher speeds like 60 drag already becomes a major factor.

I think all cars should be designed to be as areodynamic as possible. When gas prices get so high, who really cares about a car that makes you look like a guy who's rich or tough? I mean, manufacturers make a lot of cars that are about as "aerodynamic as a brick." Don't aerodynamic cars look better anyway?

But about the speed limit, thats just plain EVIL!

 

[Famine]

Could you share with us what's so funny?

How much is garnered in fuel duty/tax? How much is spent on maintaining/upgrading the roads?

I can tell you that just about £1.2 billion was spent on the UK's road network last year. We pay 70p tax per litre, so the money spent on the road equates to the tax from 369 million gallons of petrol sold.

Now the average car in the UK returns about 38mpg, and travels 10,000 miles a year - so it uses 263 gallons of petrol a year. There's 30 million cars in the UK, so that's 7.9 BILLION gallons of petrol used per year.

Less than 5% of revenue garnered from tax on petrol went towards the road network.

Investigate it for your country. I doubt it'll be as bad as that, but it won't be anywhere near even a quarter.