Good news from auto insurance

Business Review reports:

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), automakers cited cutting-edge, lifesaving auto technologies as a primary factor in 2009's record low traffic fatality rate. The administration's Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) showed a 10 percent drop in road fatalities from 2008 to 2009 and also showed the lowest fatality and injury rates in U.S. history: 1.13 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 2009.
"What we are seeing now is the payoff from years of manufacturer-driven safety improvements, like anti-lock brakes and electronic stability control systems coupled with high visibility enforcement safety efforts by law enforcement," said Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers President and CEO Dave McCurdy. "For years, automakers have been focused on adding safety technologies that have the biggest impact on the most people, and we're seeing the results in the actual numbers and statistics. Cynics have said that declining traffic deaths were caused by the recession. So we are particularly gratified to see these record reductions continue, even as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) rose again in 2009. There's never been a safer time on our roads.

Driver automation saves the consumer money.

Slipstreaming?

Traffic technology has this report:

A Japanese team that includes Nissan Motor Co. says that it has successfully tested a system that enables three trucks to be driven automatically in single file, while maintaining a set distance between them. The ‘road-train’ test is part of a project at the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization. The team also includes the Japan Automobile Research Institute, Nihon University, NEC Corp., Mitsubishi Electric Corp., Denso Corp. and the University of Tokyo.
By driving in single file and taking advantage of slipstreams, trucks can reduce air resistance and drag and improve fuel efficiency. In the test, three 25-ton trucks traveled on an 8km test road at an average speed of 80km/h (50mph), keeping the distance between them at 15m. The system, which includes antennas for measuring vehicle distances, control devices for ensuring safe driving, compact cameras for tracking the center line, and laser radars, managed to keep the fluctuation in the distances separating the trucks within 1m.
The team aims to refine the system and realize 4m slipstream driving in around two years, with an eye toward utilizing the technologies for developing a safe and fuel-efficient intelligent transportation system and other applications. The group estimates that keeping the vehicle distance at 4m would cut the three trucks’ fuel usage by 15%, compared with when they are driven separately. The project is also developing a method for estimating carbon dioxide emissions from traffic patterns and the way in which vehicles are driven, as a tool for fighting global warming.
 

A better idea is to get a bigger diesel electric tractor and connect all the trailers into a single train with electric drive and steering.

 Like this, except the trailers need steering by wire so the total rig can travel on normal roads.

Supply, Demand and prices

The price of something is a ratio of the availability of the thing relative to availability of money.

In July 2008, the availability of oil was dropping relative to the availability of money, and oil price shot up. Today the economy has learned better of this relationship, that oil is scarce. Now if the availability of oil decreases then we contract first and settle money accounts later.

I get my ratio mixed up in this all the time. When money variances rise, we spend less and build up money reserves. Prices drop.

My objection to Brad's argument is that this is not 2008 anymore, we have bumped against the constraint twice since the crash. Money is keeping up with oil at $75-$80/barrel. But we now bump up against the top of the range at $81.60, the economy will see-saw a bit as we settle in the range.

Nice reporting on wait times in transit

Casey Miner good analysis:

A huge inspiration for new transportation projects – and the Bay Area has a lot of big ones in the works right now – is efficiency. How much more efficient is the Oakland Airport Connector, the BRT or High Speed Rail going to be than what we have now? As it turns out, the answer to that question isn’t as straightforward as you might think. When calculating travel times, planners don’t just calculate how long it actually takes to get from point A to point B. They calculate how long people think it takes. And people think it takes more than twice as long as it actually does.

A recent study by researchers in the Netherlands put a number on it: when asked about how they get around, people perceived transit to take 2.3 times as long as driving a car. Interestingly, that number fell when the people surveyed habitually took transit in addition to driving – they were more familiar with what was involved and planned accordingly.

The perception principle also holds true for time people spend waiting for transit as opposed to being on it: a continuous ride will be perceived as taking less time than one that involves transfers and waiting, even if the second trip is actually shorter. Federal transit planners estimate that penalty to be somewhere between two and three times the actual time – so, a wait time of 10 minutes is perceived as 20-30 minutes. A 2009 report from the University of California’s Institute of Transportation Studies found that a number of factors influence this perception: uncertainty about when the next bus or train will arrive, weather conditions and familiarity with the stop all factor in.

In the Bay Area, we’ve seen this play out in a number of projects as planners try and figure out whether, say, a trip to downtown San Francisco on the planned Central Subway is faster than one on the bus. It’s not logical, but it’s reality. And when you’re trying to convince people to change their habits, especially to use a system that hasn’t been built yet, you have to account for it.

Las Vegas Casinos will rise again

Sin City here we come

The Super BRT constellations bring 200-300 passengers to the very doorstep of casino strip. They bring the vast population of Los Angeles two and a half hours away, they arrive with no change over, a simple ride in the sleek articulated transport, at 130 MPH; along the I-15 corridor.

Google and the Transportation Revolution

That out to get a few more keywords into the webosphere.

But, really, what should Google do?
Answer: Define the standard architecture for land traffic control. Stuff like XML definitions of traffic maps and light control, open software kernel for the vehicles, integration support with communications, development of computer vision standards. Then Google could be the traffic integrator, the IBM of open source traffic management.

On the Newswire

The Split Government Party announced its support today for the Nonpartisan Party. Both parties planned to party.

Revenue backed transportation bonds

How much revenue can the Superhighway generate?
Using my technology architecture, (or others too!) the meridian of the I-15 lane should generate a billion a year in just local LA - LV traffic. We could ramp up to that in five years, the architecture is that simple and flexible. Start building the meridian along flat desert corridors where space supports multiple lanes. Make connects with a single lane if need be, the traffic control will be flexible and optimum. Get with the park and ride to ramp revenue even before it is fully extended.

So, ramp up to a billion in revenue in five years, difficult but the five year rate is very low when these cheap technologies increase density and speed along the right of way.

The trade here is to support a fund the buys meridian and shoulder right of way, create the wholesale traffic space market. There is another market, for traffic light priority, a gift from the technology. Like a virtual Superhighway lane, traffic priority gives you delay protection for a while.

For the tenth time

Pentagon blows an addition $6 billion on a $12 billion software purchase. Have them call me, I know a high school kid who can do this stuff on the Internet. Note the companies below who ride this gravy train:

Pentagon contractors that manage enterprise resource planning contracts include International Business Machines Corp., based in Armonk, New York; Computer Sciences Corp., of Falls Church, Virginia; Northrop Grumman Corp., of Los Angeles; and Falls Church-based General Dynamics Corp.’s Information Technologies unit. The GAO’s testimony didn’t identify which contractors were working on the projects experiencing rising costs and delays.

The Pentagon should completely outsource that function, they are simply incapable of spending wisely.

I have worked for the defense industry. They rarely give a damn and the normal defense contract calls for $20 billion in vu grafs until Congress finds out.

Every Congressman and woman knows this shit is going to happen, yet they continue to vote for these appropriations. Remove all incumbents.

Eric Schmidt spills his guts on the transportation revolution

ZDNet reporter Sam Diaz has the story:

c Schmidt suggested that that’s the way it really should be. During his presentation, he said:

Your car should drive itself. It’s amazing to me that we let humans drive cars. It’s a bug that cars were invented before computers.

Schmidt's comments generated far more interest than Gino, the nonpartisan Nevada governor candidate who suggest pay for speed pricing. Schmidt is no doubt getting all sorts of feel good vibes from his engineers about the amount of software sales that intelligent transportation generates.