Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Stuck in July 4th Traffic? Maybe You Should Pay More.

Creative toll strategies might make more of an impact on traffic congestion than new technologies, says a transportation researcher.

By David Talbot

Friday, June 30, 2006

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

Fifty years ago the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 created the Interstate Highway System, the extensive network of roadways that helped bring prosperity and development to many areas of the country. This weekend, millions of drivers will celebrate the anniversary by sitting in traffic on many of those same roadways. Traffic is enormously costly: in U.S. urban areas alone, it causes almost 4 billion hours of delay and wastes more than 2 billion gallons of fuel per year, according to the Texas Transportation Institute in College Station, TX.

(Courtesy of Kara Kockelman.)

Can't technology help? Technology Review asked Kara Kockelman, associate professor of transportation engineering at the University of Texas, Austin, why 50 years after "Ike's Autobahns" were built, we're still stuck in traffic.

Technology Review: We've seen traffic detectors like cameras and roadway loops for years. How well are these kinds of basic traffic technologies working?

Kara Kockelman: Freeway cameras are largely used for surveillance of traffic back-ups and to guide emergency response. Detectors are primarily for counting vehicles, including limited metering of on-ramp traffic. Some of the resulting travel-time information is being provided to travelers in places like Seattle, Minneapolis, and Los Angeles. But while information is helpful to those seeking to avoid some congestion, these basic technologies are not moving traffic much, if any, faster because travelers receiving the information already are on the road. Right now, radio-broadcast traffic reports may be just as effective for relaying news of such events to drivers.

TR: What about those separate high-occupancy or HOV lanes, for drivers who have two or three or more people in the car? Are they working?

KK: Pravin Varaiya's team's study [at the University of California, Berkeley] of detector data along California highways indicated that HOV lanes actually worsen traffic flow by reducing lane-choice flexibility and allowing slower HOV vehicles to determine the HOV lane's speed. And cars seeking to enter left-side HOV lanes create traffic-weaving, another source of delays. To me, this suggests that pricing is needed, so that people can decide how much they are willing to pay to get somewhere faster.

TR: Would it help to have cars "talking" to one another, relaying traffic information, and making more efficient use of the roadway space?

KK: In terms of the highway system, most people don't see inter-vehicle communication for more efficient road space use taking off anytime soon. Most people feel that the liability issues are too serious. However, some of the associated technology is being put to use in other, often safety-related applications, such as adaptive cruise control, in which a car with cruise control senses a car ahead and can slow down. And automated vehicle guidance systems may result in caravans of driverless trucks, all following a single driver.

Comments

  • Pay more!
    I pay enough for gas, let alone pay even more just to use the road. It just goes to show that people with more money, run the road! They are not getting another dime from me, I pay my taxes! I refuse to give more money to a broken system of buracrats, who turn around give my money to lazy people. Enough is enough.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Matthew Kent)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
    • gas prices
      non of u americans pay enough for gas, gas prices in outher parts of the world including uk pay atleast 50% more.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (non-american)
      06/30/2006
      Posts:1
      • gas prices
        or maybe the rest of the world pays too much!
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (Yakee Bruce)
        06/30/2006
        Posts:1
        • gas prices are too low worldwide
          No one in the world pays enough for gas.  There are too many externalities that are not priced into the cost of fuel.  Europe inadvertently did better than most of the world with their high taxes on almost everything, including gas.

          We are using an effectively non-renewable resource too fast.  And I won't argue global warming is happening or not.  But we are in the middle of a worldwide climate experiment we don't yet understand and without a lifeboat.

          Carbon based fuel consumption must reduce now, if not yesterday.
          Rate this comment: 12345
          Guest (colin g)
          07/01/2006
          Posts:1
  • Whos demand are we trying to supply?!?!
    How will charging more money for the tolls when traffic is worse make the traffic situation any better?  People will still need to get to where the are going and we will only see a marginal decrease in casual drivers.  The only demand we would be supplying with a relative toll price is the demand for more money by the government - not the demand for less traffic.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Shammai Ellman)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
  • Recurrent Congestion
    "such policies can eliminate recurrent forms of congestion"

    You're not going to get charged more because of an accident, but you will if you keep driving at rush hour(s).  This type of structure might encourage more employees and their employers to implement more flexible schedules or else absorb more of the cost of commuting.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Phil)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
  • Dems and their 'gotta tax more ' mindset
    The Govco mentality solves all problems with more taxes.  Unfortunately their 'solutions' never work, they just create more taxes, waste more money, increase bureaucracy and enforcement, and enhance job security for more bureaucrats.  Ala New Orleans!!!   Marxism...Democrats...yea right--let's tax drivetime!!!!  Beam me up!
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Menoch)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
    • got it backwards
      If you are going to rant, and least get your political spectrum correct.  User fees and market based solutions are about as right-leaning Republican as you can get.  The leftist solution would be to tax the population to make roads free for all. 
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Joel Margolese)
      06/30/2006
      Posts:1
      • Rant this Joel
        You mean like the empty and leftist "educational" system...?  Always more tax money, bigger bureacracy and progressively lower performance...I got it right.  Taxing capitalism is a leftist banana...
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (Menoch)
        06/30/2006
        Posts:1
        • No, you didn't get it right
          Menoch is right. As for bigger bureacracy and lower performance, I am reminded of our heckuva-job-brownie administration.

          Joel, your rants don't convince any reasoning adult. Please read, think , go to the bathroom once, and then post.
          Rate this comment: 12345
          Guest (Harish)
          06/30/2006
          Posts:1
  • Stuck in traffic? Ha!
    Somehow making people pay for using cities for their own monetary benefit, without giving anything back, makes a lot of sense. Perhaps companies and workers will relocate to work places that have better travel congestion rates. And maybe they will utilize the other seats in their hog-like vehicles to help defray the taxes and fuel costs. It just goes back to that old saying…There’s no such thing as a free lunch! Let’s not continue to subsidize those people who want to use our cities and roads for nothing!
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Dave MacDonald)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
    • who doesn't pay?
      Local, state and federal taxes build roads that we can all use...maybe you want to tax the poor for using the roads?...or the military?  Who do you want to re-tax?
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Menoch)
      06/30/2006
      Posts:1
      • who doesn't pay
        Menoch, If you could get your ideological blinders off for a second, you might see that what's being proposed here is not a "tax".  It is is a fee levied on those responsible for congestion.  If you want to cause congestion, you pay for the damage you do.  If you don't want to pay, drive off peak.  This is about people being responsible for their own messes, something a real conservative would agree with.
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (Mic)
        06/30/2006
        Posts:1
  • Neo-Conservative Rant
    Why do they give such drivel readership?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Joel)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
  • Back to technology...
    The interesting part of this article is the use of GPS to reduce the administration of usage fees, NOT the political wrangling and wallet-watching of other commenters. 

    The one flaw in the proposal is introduction of a NEW cost to everyone, and no discussion of how that translates to a benefit to the payer.  TR missed the real story here, and would have done better to send an economist to do the interview.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Bob)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
  • privacy anyone?
    Let's put GPS in all our vehicles and allow the Government to read the data out in real time. Then King George can know where we are at all times. Think of how much this will help the war on terror!
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (ms)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
    • Privacy & The Left
      When it comes to eaves dropping on terrorist the left is up in arms at the possible invasion of privacy,  but they have no trouble making everyone drive around with a GPS transmitter as long as long as it is for a cause they endorse.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (ESabre)
      07/03/2006
      Posts:1
  • increased capacity?
    Surely there's a tradeoff between the increase in capacity caused by higher speeds (over 20% is quoted) and the probability of an accident, which might reduce that capacity to zero). Any research on that topic?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (ms)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
  • Reducing trafic
    We shouldn't just focus on finding the right technology to solve congestion. In stead, more effort should be put to reduce the creation of extra trafic.

    I strongly support raising gas price through extra tax to encourage (force?) people to live closer to their main activities. And at the same time, we should make sure the government will return the extra gas taxes to all citizens.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (John Davis)
    06/30/2006
    Posts:1
  • What About Cooperative Transportation Efforts?
    It is simple to manipulate traffic jams by 2 lanes and 3 lanes in some cases.  The game strategies are based on cooperation and sheer blockage of arrogant apportunisty drinving jerks.  7knolls@charter.net
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Allen Knoll)
    07/01/2006
    Posts:1
  • peak hours
    If you had to pay more to drive at peak hours, just as many people would drive as now. The reason we have peak hours, is most companies and businesses close around 5. To cut down on the congestion, companies would have to change their hours. People would still have to get to work, rather its peak hours or not!
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Dustin)
    07/03/2006
    Posts:1
  • Want to end traffic? Privatize the roads.
    Auction off all the roads and let private companies charge what the market will bear. No more road pork from government, no more abuse of emminent domain, and no more traffic jams. It would discourage suburban sprawl, and encourage old-style pre-WWII building patterns (ie classical town planning, ie new urbanism). It would also encourage mass transit. Bus companies could pay the road company to reserve a lane during rush hour, getting you to work fast and consistantly. Basically like a train, except without the high costs of tracks. Busses are no good now, because they get stuck in traffic just like cars.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Frank Rizzo)
    07/04/2006
    Posts:1
  • rant at home
    Mic: I love to bash democrats pushing more taxes on have-to-drive-to-work rat racers.  So work at home and eliminate the need for driving to work...maybe we should invent computers and an internet.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Menoch)
    07/04/2006
    Posts:1
  • your all a bunch of experts!
    It certainly is enlightening to read such in depth analysis to a problem that should have been addressed 20 years ago. And as usual it's the Tweedle Dums and Tweedle Dees of American armchair politics who are at each others throats.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (william eady)
    07/11/2006
    Posts:1

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Malleable Maps, Artistic Robots and Bubble Interfaces
Technology Review January/February 2010

Current Issue

Security in the Ether
Information technology's next grand challenge will be to secure the cloud--and prove we can trust it.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2010 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.