National speed limit pushed as gas saver

[XDConvert9mm]

National speed limit pushed as gas saver

WASHINGTON (AP) -- An influential Republican senator suggested Thursday that Congress might want to consider reimposing a national speed limit to save gasoline and possibly ease fuel prices.

Sen. John Warner, R-Virginia, asked Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman to look into what speed limit would provide optimum gasoline efficiency given current technology. He said he wants to know if the administration might support efforts in Congress to require a lower speed limit.
Congress in 1974 set a national 55 mph speed limit because of energy shortages caused by the Arab oil embargo. The speed limit was repealed in 1995 when crude oil dipped to $17 a barrel and gasoline cost $1.10 a gallon.

As motorists headed on trips for this Fourth of July weekend, gasoline averaged $4.10 a gallon nationwide, with oil hovering around $145 a barrel.

Warner cited studies that showed the 55 mph speed limit saved 167,000 barrels of oil a day, or 2 percent of the country's highway fuel consumption, while avoiding up to 4,000 traffic deaths a year.

"Given the significant increase in the number of vehicles on America's highway system from 1974 to 2008, one could assume that the amount of fuel that could be conserved today is far greater," Warner wrote Bodman.

Warner asked the department to determine at what speeds vehicles would be most fuel efficient, how much fuel savings would be achieved, and whether it would be reasonable to assume there would be a reduction in prices at the pump if the speed limit were lowered.

Energy Department spokeswoman Angela Hill said the department will review Warner's letter but added, "If Congress is serious about addressing gasoline prices, they must take action on expanding domestic oil and natural gas production."

The department's Web site says that fuel efficiency decreases rapidly when traveling faster than 60 mph. Every additional 5 mph over that threshold is estimated to cost motorists "essentially an additional 30 cents per gallon in fuel costs," Warner said in his letter, citing the DOE data.

National speed limit pushed as gas saver - CNN.com

Yet another example of how out of touch these people are. My car doesn't even get in to highest gear until 60 mph. That's where the trans is set from the factory to hit overdirve. It's a 2004 Trailblazer and it's been designed around today's Speed limits. My wife's Honda Accord will not engage high gear and low revs until about 62 mph. A 55 mph limit would use much more gas due to higher RPM in mine and the wife's.

But hey, it worked in 74, why wouldn't it apply today? Good God.

[Frenchy]

I guess it depends on the vehicle. I know I get improved mileage at 55, but that's just me.

[DanTheEldest]

I don't know how many different ways I can say this without obviously repeating myself, but....

Let the market work!

How hard is this to understand? Those who wish to go slower to save money/fuel will, and those whose time is more valuable than their gas bills will go faster. Hands off, D.C.!

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by Frenchy

I guess it depends on the vehicle. I know I get improved mileage at 55, but that's just me.

True, and if anyone gets better mileage there then that's the way to go IMO.

In this case it's a manner of using even more gas to comply with 1974 standards that simply do not work with the vehicles we have today. I'd like the smart choice in the vehicles we own based around their design, not a mandate that backfires, again (Ethanol).

[AZXD]

I haven't recorded (lower speed) gas mileage ... But my Subaru will do High gear (automatic) at speeds as low as 40mph.
The computer adjusts shift speeds and engine control based on driving style. It takes a while (miles) to reprogram itself but I can be easy and get about 4mpg better than advertised, or hot rod it and have some fun.

As for changing the speed limit ... They can set whatever limit they want .... But IMO all they'll do is fill up and place an undue burden on many cities traffic courts.

Around my parts people do 70 in the 55 sections .... I doubt much will change except the ability to say we did something the public does not wish to comply with.

Oh and waste a few tax dollars trying to force conformity instead of educating people how to maximize the efficiency they have available.

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by AZXD

I haven't recorded gas mileage ... But my Subaru will do High gear (automatic) at speeds as low as 40mph.
The computer adjusts shift speeds and engine control based on driving style. It takes a while (miles) to reprogram itself but I can be easy and get about 4mpg better than advertised, or hot rod it and have some fun.

As for changing the speed limit ... They can set whatever limit they want .... But IMO all they'll do is fill up and place an undue burden on many cities traffic courts.

Around my parts people do 70 in the 55 sections .... I doubt much will change except the ability to say we did something the public does not wish to comply with.

And therein lies the issue. Not that we don't wish to comply, but that it in many situations it does not acheive the objective to comply.

As I mentioned above, this one would use more fuel in my cars and would ultimately cost more in terms of dollars and fuel usage than it would ever save. The overall national usage/savings I cannot speak to as I don't have stats for this. Just my own perspective talking here. The fact that he alludes to the 74 scenario without considering today's technology is what got me going about this story.

[AZXD]

I agree!
Mandates = You Will = Resistance
Requests & Education = You Should, Because ... = Justified conformity for those who are able to do so.

Government will NEVER forcibly change ... The will of the people.

Originally Posted by XDConvert9mm

And therein lies the issue. Not that we don't wish to comply, but that it in many situations it does not acheive the objective to comply.

As I mentioned above, this one would use more fuel in my cars and would ultimately cost more in terms of dollars and fuel usage than it would ever save. The overall national usage/savings I cannot speak to as I don't have stats for this. Just my own perspective talking here. The fact that he alludes to the 74 scenario without considering today's technology is what got me going about this story.

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by AZXD

I agree!
Mandates = You Will = Resistance
Requests & Education = You Should, Because ... = Justified conformity for those who are able to do so.

I agree with the post...if all factors are considered. I dislike the blankets involved in this Pols view. Occasionally individuals do actually know what is better for help in a given situation if...asked. Sometimes they can even give helpful input.

Why bother to ask those who might know when we have individuals like the Senator who can decide what is best for us?

[AZXD]

IMO, Senator Warner is jockeying for political position, will use the Energy Secretary as a scapegoat if things don't workout and "The speed limit was repealed in 1995 when crude oil dipped to $17 a barrel and gasoline cost $1.10 a gallon." is the biggest lie to be found within the article.

The proponents of this idea must think we have all forgotten how no one was following the mandate after everyone decided it was worth the ticket and the cops could not pull over the entire nation.

Originally Posted by XDConvert9mm

I agree with the post...if all factors are considered. I dislike the blankets involved in this Pols view. Occasionally individuals do actually know what is better for help in a given situation if...asked. Sometimes they can even give helpful input.

Why bother to ask those who might know when we have individuals like the Senator who can decide what is best for us?

[sloan1919]

Even if we lowered the demand by 2% for the US I don't think this would lower the price of gas. My understanding is that the US does not have the highest demand for oil right now so any dip in demand here will increase supply in china, who is willing to pay more.

Sloan