The saying goes that everything is bigger in Texas. This fall that will apply to speed, too.
The Texas Transportation Commission has approved an 85-mph speed limit for a new toll road between Austin and San Antonio. It will be the highest speed limit in the United States, according to local news reports.
The toll road is a 41-mile stretch of Texas State Highway 130 known as Segments 5 and 6, running from Mustang Ridge near Austin to Seguin outside of San Antonio. If motorists drive at the speed limit, they'll cover the 41 miles in less than a half hour.
The 85-mph limit surpasses the current high in the United States, set on portions of Interstate 15 in Utah and sections of I-10 and I-20 in west Texas, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
But are the higher speeds safe?
The Insurance Institute says the higher the speed, the more dangerous for the motorists. Higher speeds limit reaction times, increases braking distances and put stresses on safety equipment in cars and on roads, the institute says.
"There are limits to the amount of crash energy that can be managed by vehicles, restraint systems and roadway hardware such as barriers and crash cushions. The higher the speed, the higher the likelihood that these limits will be exceeded in crashes, limiting the protection available for vehicle occupants," according to the institute's website.
Texas officials say safety won't be compromised by the higher speeds.
"Safety is our top priority and tests have shown the designated speed is a safe one," Mark Cross, a spokesman for the Texas Department of Transportation, is quoted as saying by the Texas Tribune.
The SH 130 Concession Co. which built and will operate the toll road, says motorists bear responsibility for safety.
"We are committed to operating a safe, reliable highway for our customers. On any road, drivers hold the key to safety based on traffic, travel conditions and the capabilities of their own vehicles," the company said in a statement, according to the Houston Chronicle.
Tolls have yet to be set, but whatever they are drivers won't have to slow down to pay them.
"There will be no toll plazas on segments 5 & 6 of SH 130. Tolls will be collected electronically at certain points along the roadway, meaning motorists will not have to slow down or stop. Traffic will be 100% free flowing," according to The SH 130 Concession Co., which was formed by the Spanish construction company Cintra and the Texas company Zachary American Infrastructure.
Officials hope drivers will use the highway to avoid and alleviate congestion on Interstate 35, which the toll road operators say is more congested in the area than at any part in its entire length, from Canada to Mexico.
"We look forward to opening this segment of SH 130, which will help reduce congestion for the Austin-San Antonio corridor by providing Texas drivers and others with an alternate route for traveling through our great state," Cross told the Texas Tribune.
The toll road is required to open by November 11 but may open sooner.
"We are confident we will be open ahead of schedule,” Chris Lippincott, spokesman for the SH 130 Concession Company, told Texas Weekly.
While the higher speed promises quicker trips for drivers, it also means more money into state coffers. The concession company will pay the Texas Department of Transportation a $100 million bonus for the 85-mph limits, the Texas Tribune reported. If the limit had been set at 80 mph, the bonus would have been only $67 million, according to the report.
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
It looks as if the consumers are doing too well reducing their consumption of fossil fuels(gas). I have a theory that this is one of the reasons the price of a barrel of oil goes up. People driving at 85 will definately burn more gas that driving at 75,65 or 55. Oil companies would absolutely love it if all the highways/interstates had this speed. They would then have another excuse to raise the price of a gallon of gas. This is a great country but the consumers can be real suckers.
Not to mention that for the 41-mile stretch they're talking about, the difference between 65 and 85 mph is a savings of only 9 minutes (saves 15 minutes for 55 vs 85).
If you compare the mpg difference, you'll end up spending $8 more on that 41-mile stretch for going 85 mph vs 65 mph (you save $12 for going 55 vs 85!)
Lets burn more fuel, and increase human population
Just wondering, on 65 limit, I do 75/80/85/90 even 100 at times .. what speed will ppl be driving when limit is 85 .. 100?
We need more people, more cars and more roads. Then more people more cars and more roads. Then more people cars and roads. Then lets just increase the speed limit and gas consumption so we can have more people cars and roads. What stupid morons!!!!
You can drive 85 in Ohio, too! Not legal...but it still happens!
It's about time. I just moved back to the States from Germany, and it really is an eye opening experience. To add to what "cD" said above, it really is all about road conditions and driver responsibility. 85 really is not that fast with the right vehicle and approach to driving, in fact, it is quite a nice cruising speed. If however you have drivers with cars that don't have a chance of passing inspection, or motorists that even think about texting while driving, then yes 85 mph does become deadly. Germany can have such high speed limits because they hold drivers, and their equipment to a higher standard, and there is a higher expectation that the you, and the drivers next to you are a skilled driver. A German liscence isn't a right of passage, it actually has to be earned, and it isn't cheap. The U.S. would do well to follow their example, we'd all be much safer at any speed.
Speed limits are outdated in this day and age. Frankly, you need to go the speed of traffic. If you don't you're only a danger to everyone, and that includes if you are going under the speed of traffic. Traffic should have a maximum speed, but everyone needs to be required to go the same speed, and if you go over or under you are given a ticket. As far as I'm concerned, someone going under the speed limit is just as, if not more hazardous than someone going over.
"Safety is our top priority and tests have shown the designated speed is a safe one,"
There is absolutely no way this is true. But surprise! The higher, more dangerous speed limit will put money in the hands of the politicians. So just make stuff up and the people will believe it.
When they get to San Antonio, all these cars that get there quicker will likely result in a backup on San Antonio roads
once they have to slow down to 55....
And not a word about how much gasoline this will waste.
A single 41 mile stretch of highway? The amount of additional gasoline expended is hardly worth mentioning.
In any case, the people who buy the gasoline get to decide what to do with it. If they're comfortable using it to travel at 85 mph, that's their business. Just like it's the business of the purchasers of high mileage cars to make that decision and spend their own money on it.
I lived in Naples, Italy for 5 years where people drive 80-90 mph everyday to work and I saw far less accidents than I do since my return back to San Diego. On the average I might have seen a single accident car wreck once every 2 weeks in Italy compared to the multiple car accidents I pass evrey day. Its not the speed that kills, its the drivers awareness, changing lanes at every opportunity because the drivers see traffic moving in the other lane for just a moment so they have to get in that lane until it stops and then yhey start looking again. People don't use turn signals, and then the obvious cell phones are a major distractor. People take driving serious overseas, not in the United States.
Here is how bad our driver's training is in America. My Daughter can get a permit to drive at 15 and has never spent a hour in a car on the road with a trained instructor. Go to Europe and you find the process much more involved. We have many accidents in the US because drivers simply are inattentive, un educated, un prepared. Raising speed limits just reduces reaction times and for skilled drivers that may not be as bad. But all it takes is a few un skilled to hurt people.
I totally agree with your observation. When I got my first US driving license, I was in CT. The driver's manual said something I remember even today. It said that every time I change lanes, the chances of accident increase. I wish the drivers in US would remember that.
When I drive from PA to Boston, passing through NJ, NY, CT and MA, it seems like drivers have a death wish. They are like kamikaze drivers. There have to be stricter driving tests. When my son got his driver's license, the DOT inspector rode with him for less than a mile. I could not believe it.
Huh? Look, I am pretty aware of the environmental issue and both mine and my wife's cars are hybrid. But I re-read your post and it just makes little sense. I originally thought that you may have more knowledge about how much more gas would be burnt when a car is driven in higher speed, but then I did some math and found that you merely take the difference b/w the speed and divide it by 85 to reach the number. Do you even know that while your math is correct, it has no meaning? That's because when you drive at 85mph, it will take you LESS time to reach the destination, which in turn negate the effect of higher fuel consumption.
However, you are not completely wrong - generally speaking, higher speed will end up using more fuel, but it comes from wasted fuel. For example, assuming 2 cars are driving at 85mph and 50mph constantly, along the same path. If both drivers step on the brake at the same location, the car at 50mph will waste less gas than the one at 85mph (of course, there will be a little bit of difference of where the 2 cars will stop at after the brake is stepped on, but the difference probably won't be too big to affect the comparison.)
It's not how long it takes you to get there that dictates how much gas your vehicle consumes. You can drive 10 miles in 5 min (120mph) and burn much more fuel than you would driving the same distance in 10 min (60mph). Fuel consumption is measured in miles per gallon, which decreases exponentially with increased speed. So if your hybrid gets 30 mpg at 60 mph, and 20 mpg at 90 mph, you're going to burn twice as much fuel, regardless of the amount of time your journey takes. You'll get there much more quickly, but you'll burn more fuel, as you are travelling less distance for every gallon of gas consumed.
Well, no. The amount of energy required to push all that air out of the way increases with the square of speed, not linearly; it takes almost 50% more energy to travel at 85 mph versus 70 mph. And time to cover a given distance doesn't enter into the equation at all; it's simply a matter of how much air you push out of the way, how fast; the only variable is the speed.
Very basic physics. Personally, I don't think it matters much over this one small stretch of highway, but the fact is that drag increases with the square of velocity, and you'll use a LOT more gasoline traveling the same distance at a higher speed than at a lower one.
85 doesn't sound that fast, The highway from Big Spring to Midland has the speed limit set at 75 and its not even a very big road.
My old Citroen did 192kmh = 120MPH, no sweet- mind you I was in Germany between Hamburg and Lubeck- had company with several Audies.
This is just another example of the ignorance that many Texas officials have. The added pollution alone would be cause for NOT allowing higher speeds. Also if state and federal monies were used to construct and maintain it, why is a private company collecting the fees instead of the state? Using state workers would mean that the state would get ALL of the monies instead of a set amount. If a private company can afford to pay workers and agree to give the state 100 million dollars, you bet that they will be raking in enough to pay overhead and offset the meager amount they are paying the state.