Hybrids clog HOV lanes

[charrison]

linkage

A surge in the number of hybrid vehicles has left carpool lanes nearly as congested as the regular lanes they are intended to relieve, a Virginia transportation task force said yesterday.

A detailed study of carpool lanes on Interstate 95 found that the number of hybrids more than tripled between last spring and October. State transportation officials fear that the trend will continue as more hybrids enter the market and more commuters take advantage of the exemption allowing them to ride alone in such vehicles.

The findings reflect the sentiments of carpool-lane users, who have inundated state officials with complaints about increased delays and congestion over the past six months. Many blame hybrids.

"For every two cars, there's one hybrid," said Cora Seballos, who carpools daily from Springfield to the District. "Since September, usually the regular lanes have less traffic" than the carpool lanes. Seballos said she has to leave home a half-hour earlier because of the increased congestion.


...

Low-emission vehicles were first allowed to use HOV lanes in 1994 to lessen the region's air pollution, but few drivers took advantage until hybrids were included in 2000. That year, there were 32 cars in all of Virginia with "clean fuel" tags -- a designation necessary to use HOV lanes.

By April 2003, that number had grown to 2,500 in Northern Virginia, and by the end of 2004 the region had 6,800 hybrid vehicles registered with "clean special fuel" plates.

In March, a traffic count on the HOV lanes of I-95 revealed 480 clean fuel vehicles -- about 8 percent of the cars that used the lanes at the time. By October, that count on I-95 more than tripled, to 1,700, 18 percent of all HOV traffic and enough to fill a single highway lane for an hour.

Time to make the HOV lanes, HOV lanes again.



grouping commuters for HOV lanes.

 

[drewshin]

or they could raise the hov occupancy minimum to 3 instead of 2, if they haven't tried that already.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: drewshin
or they could raise the hov occupancy minimum to 3 instead of 2, if they haven't tried that already.

It sounds like hybrids are allowed a HOV of 1..

 

[beer]

Regular cars should have a minimum of 3.
Hybrids should have a minimum of 2,

It seems fair.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: beer
Regular cars should have a minimum of 3.
Hybrids should have a minimum of 2,

It seems fair.

Actually they should all carry 3. Highways are about moving people.

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: beer
Regular cars should have a minimum of 3.
Hybrids should have a minimum of 2,

It seems fair.

Actually they should all carry 3. Highways are about moving people.

HOV lanes are about incentives. In cities with bad pollution, it is a valid way to give people incentives to reduce the amount of pollution - by either allowing people to carpool, and an HOV lane should allow hybrids since they have much less pollution. That is why motorcycles are allowed in HOV lanes, at least in Texas.

 

[TipsyMcStagger]

the point of HOV lanes were to conserve fuel/lower pollution. Hybrids do that, so why not allow them in the HOV lane.

 

[CycloWizard]

Hybrids don't conserve really any fuel on the highway. At least in CA, they need to increase the number of HOV lanes more than anything. 1 HOV lane and 8 normal lanes is kind of silly, IMO, though about 95% of the people were driving solo while I was there so maybe they have no choice.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: beer
Regular cars should have a minimum of 3.
Hybrids should have a minimum of 2,

It seems fair.

Actually they should all carry 3. Highways are about moving people.

HOV lanes are about incentives. In cities with bad pollution, it is a valid way to give people incentives to reduce the amount of pollution - by either allowing people to carpool, and an HOV lane should allow hybrids since they have much less pollution. That is why motorcycles are allowed in HOV lanes, at least in Texas.

Driving on the highway do they really have less pollution? If I had another person in my 40mpg civic, would that produce more pollution than 2 hybrids? Not all too familiar with hybrids, but from what I understand at those speeds they are not relying on electricity, but gas. I could be wrong, so someone feel free to enlighten me.

 

[imported_tss4]

In response to both Cyclowizard and rudder,
Hybrids at highway speeds are really no better or no worse than a normal civic. The gas mileage is comparable. However, by allowing that incentive (using the HOV lane) which promotes the purchase of those cars over conventional cars you still lower the over all polution since those cars till emit less polution than conventional cars at other times. Also, I don't understand, Cyclowizard why you would say that specifically in CA they aren't any better. CA suffers from major grid lock (much like where I live in DC) on thier highways and under those condition, the stop and go traffic is what hybrids excell at. They are able to make copius use of their batteries under those conditions.

I'll agree that something needs to be done to make the HOV lanes fast lanes again, though. I like the HOV-2 for hybrids and HOV-3 for conventional cars idea.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: beer
Regular cars should have a minimum of 3.
Hybrids should have a minimum of 2,

It seems fair.

Actually they should all carry 3. Highways are about moving people.

HOV lanes are about incentives. In cities with bad pollution, it is a valid way to give people incentives to reduce the amount of pollution - by either allowing people to carpool, and an HOV lane should allow hybrids since they have much less pollution. That is why motorcycles are allowed in HOV lanes, at least in Texas.

Driving on the highway do they really have less pollution? If I had another person in my 40mpg civic, would that produce more pollution than 2 hybrids? Not all too familiar with hybrids, but from what I understand at those speeds they are not relying on electricity, but gas. I could be wrong, so someone feel free to enlighten me.

Yes, the higher the speed, the more gas a Hybrid will use but still better than an ordinary ICE only car.

 

[StageLeft]

The problem is simply that freeways in the US have negligibly grown in the past couple of decades, while traffic has doubled. There are not enough roads...not enough pavement. Something people are slow to support is the automation of traffic. If we gave our cars a greater role in driving us around we'd be going MUCH faster and MUCH safer.

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
The problem is simply that freeways in the US have negligibly grown in the past couple of decades, while traffic has doubled. There are not enough roads...not enough pavement. Something people are slow to support is the automation of traffic. If we gave our cars a greater role in driving us around we'd be going MUCH faster and MUCH safer.

There is no room to expand pavement. As LA has showed, you have have six+ lane highways and sitll have major gridlock.

What is needed is a reliable passenger rail system in these cities. Subways are cost prohibitve in all but the densest cities, NYC, Boston, Seoul, Tokyo, etc. - and a four-rail light rail system takes up the space of about two vehicle lanes and can move a ton of people.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Hybrids don't conserve really any fuel on the highway. At least in CA, they need to increase the number of HOV lanes more than anything. 1 HOV lane and 8 normal lanes is kind of silly, IMO, though about 95% of the people were driving solo while I was there so maybe they have no choice.

Not completely true - hybrids are also designed with small engines, and usually small vehicle size. Because the electric engine provides the additional accelration needed, they can get away with a very underpowered engine, significantly improving highway fuel economy (small engines working harder are more efficient than large ones barely working).

Most hybrids have too little power in the gas engine to comfortably accelerate to highway speed and around town (my 85 mustang 4-banger can attest to this!). However they make plenty of power to maintain speed without too much inefficient 'excess capacity' in the engine, and drivers don't need to keep their foot to the floor to avoid slowing down on the little uphill bits, because the auxilliary power from the electric engine is sufficient.

Hybrids show their biggest mileage gains in stop and go traffic - exactly where better fuel economy is really needed. They do however conserve significant, if not spectacular amounts of fuel in highway driving.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: charrison
linkage

A surge in the number of hybrid vehicles has left carpool lanes nearly as congested as the regular lanes they are intended to relieve, a Virginia transportation task force said yesterday.

A detailed study of carpool lanes on Interstate 95 found that the number of hybrids more than tripled between last spring and October. State transportation officials fear that the trend will continue as more hybrids enter the market and more commuters take advantage of the exemption allowing them to ride alone in such vehicles.

The findings reflect the sentiments of carpool-lane users, who have inundated state officials with complaints about increased delays and congestion over the past six months. Many blame hybrids.

"For every two cars, there's one hybrid," said Cora Seballos, who carpools daily from Springfield to the District. "Since September, usually the regular lanes have less traffic" than the carpool lanes. Seballos said she has to leave home a half-hour earlier because of the increased congestion.


...

Low-emission vehicles were first allowed to use HOV lanes in 1994 to lessen the region's air pollution, but few drivers took advantage until hybrids were included in 2000. That year, there were 32 cars in all of Virginia with "clean fuel" tags -- a designation necessary to use HOV lanes.

By April 2003, that number had grown to 2,500 in Northern Virginia, and by the end of 2004 the region had 6,800 hybrid vehicles registered with "clean special fuel" plates.

In March, a traffic count on the HOV lanes of I-95 revealed 480 clean fuel vehicles -- about 8 percent of the cars that used the lanes at the time. By October, that count on I-95 more than tripled, to 1,700, 18 percent of all HOV traffic and enough to fill a single highway lane for an hour.

Time to make the HOV lanes, HOV lanes again.



grouping commuters for HOV lanes.

No, time to make the HOV lanes REGULAR lanes again. Carpool is an ineffective method of traffic management and only serves to frustrate the problem. What's needed are MORE LANES.

Jason

 

[beer]

Carpool is a wonderful method of traffic management. One more lane each way, when you have five or six already, make no difference. By being HOV and with a minimum of 3, you reduce a great deal of cars off the road and basically provide a free incentive. Even if you move at twice the speed of gridlock, that cuts your commute time in half.

 

[SuperTool]

Carpool lanes are terrible. It's so obvious here in norcal.
6:55: lots of traffic on highway 85.
7:05: no traffic.
Is it coincidence that Carpool lane becomes general purpose lane at 7pm? I don't think so. So the more hybrids are in those lanes the better, that means they aren't in the regular lanes. Ideally those HOV lanes should be scrapped.

 

[jpeyton]

Hybrids deserve exemptions over normal cars in the HOV lanes. Anything to move more people towards lower consumption.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Hybrids don't conserve really any fuel on the highway. At least in CA, they need to increase the number of HOV lanes more than anything. 1 HOV lane and 8 normal lanes is kind of silly, IMO, though about 95% of the people were driving solo while I was there so maybe they have no choice.

I LIVE in California, and more HOV lanes is NOT hte answer. THe people of California don't carpool much AT ALL. We live and work in so many disparate places that very few people even *can* carpool. The carpool lanes end up taking away valuable space that could be used for traffic relief.

What California needs isn't more HOV lanes, what we need is more lanes-period.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: Skoorb
The problem is simply that freeways in the US have negligibly grown in the past couple of decades, while traffic has doubled. There are not enough roads...not enough pavement. Something people are slow to support is the automation of traffic. If we gave our cars a greater role in driving us around we'd be going MUCH faster and MUCH safer.

There is no room to expand pavement. As LA has showed, you have have six+ lane highways and sitll have major gridlock.

What is needed is a reliable passenger rail system in these cities. Subways are cost prohibitve in all but the densest cities, NYC, Boston, Seoul, Tokyo, etc. - and a four-rail light rail system takes up the space of about two vehicle lanes and can move a ton of people.

And in California at least, the light rail is so expensive that you can't really afford to take it to work and back every day.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: beer
Carpool is a wonderful method of traffic management. One more lane each way, when you have five or six already, make no difference. By being HOV and with a minimum of 3, you reduce a great deal of cars off the road and basically provide a free incentive. Even if you move at twice the speed of gridlock, that cuts your commute time in half.

You're right that one more lane would make little difference. What they need to do in California is DOUBLE the lanes in BOTH directions on ALL major freeways.

Jason

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: tss4
In response to both Cyclowizard and rudder,
Hybrids at highway speeds are really no better or no worse than a normal civic. The gas mileage is comparable. However, by allowing that incentive (using the HOV lane) which promotes the purchase of those cars over conventional cars you still lower the over all polution since those cars till emit less polution than conventional cars at other times. Also, I don't understand, Cyclowizard why you would say that specifically in CA they aren't any better. CA suffers from major grid lock (much like where I live in DC) on thier highways and under those condition, the stop and go traffic is what hybrids excell at. They are able to make copius use of their batteries under those conditions.

I'll agree that something needs to be done to make the HOV lanes fast lanes again, though. I like the HOV-2 for hybrids and HOV-3 for conventional cars idea.

I said in CA they should increase the number of HOV lanes, not that hybrids are less effective there. I didn't see any gridlock in LA while I was there, just bumper-to-bumper traffic going about 85-90 mph everywhere. I agree with your idea that allowing hybrids to use HOV lanes is a good promotional tool.

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
I LIVE in California, and more HOV lanes is NOT hte answer. THe people of California don't carpool much AT ALL. We live and work in so many disparate places that very few people even *can* carpool. The carpool lanes end up taking away valuable space that could be used for traffic relief.

What California needs isn't more HOV lanes, what we need is more lanes-period.

Jason

The people don't carpool because the incentive isn't that great. If you were either guaranteed quick transit when you carpooled or guaranteed gridlock if you didn't, which would you choose? Obviously this is an oversimplification, but it's not as simple as you make it out to be, either.

 

[Genx87]

These gimics never work.

Open the lanes up and people get home quicker. When they get home quicker they arent sitting on the highway burning fuel for hours on end.

 

[jpeyton]

The ideal solution to all traffic problems to be to devise a way to make traffic flow uniformly.

Gridlock is caused by non-uniform movements in traffic. Some cars slower, some cars faster, leads to large amounts of inefficiency.

Imagine how nicely traffic would flow if cars all moved at the exact same speed with the exact same amount of distance between them.

Cars need to be computer controlled. It would be akin to unkinking a hose.

 

[Genx87]

It also helps if you dont cutdown on the amount of available lanes. Cutting a 4 lane highway into 3 just lopped off 25% of its capacity for a cause nobody really cares about.

Then you have city planners who dont think ahead enough. Minneapolis for instance is the king of the 2 lane highway. They finally put 3 lanes in on 394 heading into downtown. But lop off one of the lanes for an idiotic carpool lane nobody uses.

It is amazing that in the winter traffic moves pretty good when people disregard the carpool restrictions because it is dark outside and the cops cant see. But in the summer it is gridlock.