Argument Mapping

May 3, 2015
PAD 520
Professor S. Taylor
The U.S. should return to the 55-mph speed limit in order to conserve fuel and save lives. The law was a response to the 1973 oil embargo, and its intent was to reduce fuel consumption. In the year after the National Maximum Speed Law was enacted, road fatalities declined 16.4%, from 54052 in 1973 to 45196 in 1974 (Friedman & Hedeker, 2009). In 1974, the federal government passed the National Maximum Speed Law, which restricted the maximum permissible vehicle speed limit to 55 miles per hour (mph) on all interstate roads in the United States. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, you can assume that each 5 mph you drive over 50 mph is like paying an additional $0.25 per gallon for gas, in additional; driving each vehicle reaches its optimal fuel economy at a different speed; gas mileage usually decreases rapidly at speeds above 50 mph. Aggressive driving to incudes; speeding, rapid acceleration and braking wastes gas. Sensible driving can lower your gas mileage and also safer for you and others, so you may save more than gas money. Some studies show that drivers are changing their habits or lifestyle in a number of ways to offset gas prices. According to an AAA national survey of 1,011 adults in March, consumers reported changing their habits in the following ways: 86% driving less, 54% driving a more fuel-efficient cars, 33% carpooling, and 15% using public transportation.
U.S. gasoline demand has been relatively low at about 8.3 million barrels a day recently, compared with a more typical 9 million barrels per day, said John Zehler Jr., president of Virginia Fuels Inc. of Mechanicsville, a fuels distributor. One expert says reducing highway speeds from 70 mph to 60 mph would reduce gasoline consumption between 2% and 3%. That could translate into a price reduction of as much as 10%; at today's price, almost 38 cents a gallon. But on the other hand, James Baxter is opposing such. Mrs. Baxter is currently the president of the National Motorists Association, which lobbies to preserve the rights of drivers. According to him, Cars going 55 mph get noticeably better mileage than cars going 75 mph. With arbitrary, low, speed limits, that advantage is reduced by interrupted traffic flow, darting, weaving, braking, and accelerating as faster traffic beats its way through slower traffic scattered across all lanes of the highway (Friedman & Hedeker, 2009).
Compare this with a highway with a more reasonable and accommodating speed limit where the traffic moves more in sync and there is less breaking and accelerating and the slower traffic stays out of the left-most passing lane.
The main reason a lower speed limit cannot have a material effect on fuel consumption, besides being ignored by motorists, is that the preponderance of motor fuels is consumed on streets, roads, and highways that already have lower speed limits and, more importantly, lower speeds.
Only 20 to 25 percent of all traffic volume is on highways with speed limits above 55 mph, and this traffic is already achieving superior fuel economy to that of traffic plodding along in urban and suburban areas. (Only 1.2 percent of the nation's 3.8 million roadway miles are interstate highway.) (Friedman & Hedeker, 2009)
Add in conditions like congestion and bad weather where speed limits become even more irrelevant and it should become obvious that changing numbers on speed limit signs on roads where perhaps 15 percent of all fuel is consumed will not yield the nirvana of "energy independence.
If this country was serious about significantly reducing motor fuel consumption, it could start by redeploying the money being wasted on ticket-writing campaigns, laser guns, stealth cruisers, ticket cameras, and related wages and invest the savings in strategies to better move traffic in urban and suburban environments, where most fuel consumption actually occurs.
There are huge savings to be realized by simply synchronizing and coordinating traffic signal systems. Cities that have started this process are not only reaping benefits like reduced fuel use, they are also realizing improved air quality, significantly faster commute times, far less congestion, and less wear and tear on vehicles (Friedman & Hedeker, 2009). Removing obstacles to smooth traffic flow, including most stop signs and traffic "calming" devices, and scrapping other strategies intended to interrupt and disrupt traffic would dramatically improve fuel economy for the entire vehicle fleet.
I want to add that these strategies can be applied in a manner that actually improves the environment for pedestrians, bicyclists, and residential neighborhoods. We just need to get our collective heads out of the sand and rationally appraise our situation. Putting up arbitrary, irrational speed limit signs simply emulates the failures of the past.

Works Cited
Friedman, L.S., Hedeker, D. & Richter, E.D. 2009. Long-term effects of repealing the national maximum speed limit in the United States. Research and practice. American Journal of
Public Health. 99(9):1626-31.