>  Let's ask this in another way:
>
>  How long would you be ready to be stuck in traffic if it means that one
> life is saved because of the wait?

That depends on how much I value life, and how much my time is worth.  It 
will be different for every person, but if you average it over 60 million 
people you'll get a figure.  Assume I value life at $1m, and I earn $100k a 
year - that means I would be willing to wait 10 years in a jam to save a 
life.

>  Also, you assume that traffic accidents are cheaper for the government
> than having to re-pave once in a while. Do you have any hard numbers on 
> this?

No, but you can do some simple estimates.  It's going to depend on many 
factors like how often it is snowy, how many roads you have, and how much 
traffic there is.  The numbers for a country like Finland are going to be 
totally different than somewhere like the UK.  Also don't forget that 
repaving creates traffic jams just the same way that accidents do, plus they 
actually cost the government financially (accidents don't).

Post a reply to this message

47c4355b@news.povray.org...

>  Also, you assume that traffic accidents are cheaper for the government
> than having to re-pave once in a while. Do you have any hard numbers on 
> this?

Here's the ruling that banned studded tires in Ontario in 1971.
http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=111434

Basically, this is a typical case of (probabilistic) risk assessment. It's 
an entire field of research and it goes beyond than simply balancing lives 
against budget. Unless there's a specialist of this particular case here I 
don't think that any of us have the data and the skills to run the 
simulations...

G.

-- 
*****************************
http://www.oyonale.com
*****************************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray, Cinema 4D and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> to be totally different than somewhere like the UK.  Also don't forget 
> that repaving creates traffic jams just the same way that accidents do, 
> plus they actually cost the government financially (accidents don't).

Actually, they do. The place needs to get cleaned up, there's possible 
need for police and firemen and there's a big possibility to get huge 
payloads for medical staff, who repair you after your accident (if they 
can). If a life is lost, all the work that person would've been doing in 
the future is zeroed.

I'm between you as calculating this. I agree with your great lines, but 
not with all the calculation.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote:
> Also don't forget that 
> repaving creates traffic jams just the same way that accidents do, plus they 
> actually cost the government financially (accidents don't).

  I don't know which government you are talking about, but at least here
accidents always cost tax money. Health care, for instance. Also cleaning
up the mess is done by officials, not individuals, so it costs tax money
too. If someone involved got paralyzed, that will cost a lot of tax money.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure studded snow tires aren't going to make it safe to 
>> drive if you get the kind of conditions that let the car slide 
>> sideways at a sedate speed without slowing for fifty meters (like at 
>> 1:02 into the video).
> 
> You've never seen cars racing on ice then?  They have metal studs that 
> dig into the ice and create grip 

I've driven on studded snow tires. I am probably misremembering, but I 
don't know that the kinds of studs you get in the USA (at least) would 
give you enough traction to make it *safe*. Safer, sure, but not like 
you could drive normally, say.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Also, car accidents often close the *entire* road instead of closing
> just one lane.

At least around here, you get "gaper block", where the traffic going the 
other direction is hindered by all the people slowing down to look at 
the accident. :-) So it's even worse than closing one direction.

My favorite traffic report was the truck on the George Washington Bridge 
(into New York City) full of roofing nails that rolled over. The GWB is 
a two-level bridge, the top level leaving the city, the bottom level 
entering, with tolls on both levels. And the top is grill-work to make 
it weigh less.

By the time they figured out it was roofing nails that spilled, every 
lane in both directions had dozens of cars with four flat tires blocking 
the toll lanes.

The truck rolled before 8AM, and the bridge was still f'ed at evening 
rush hour.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> 
> I've driven on studded snow tires. I am probably misremembering, but I 
> don't know that the kinds of studs you get in the USA (at least) would 
> give you enough traction to make it *safe*. Safer, sure, but not like 
> you could drive normally, say.

Yes. Always, especially on slippery, the driver has to measure the 
conditions of the road to decide the safe driving speed and 
possibilities. *Always*.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Tom Austin wrote:
> Sabrina Kilian wrote:
>> Jim Charter wrote:
>>> P.S.
>>> So I am teaching a Defensive Driving course a week or so back.  We get
>>> to the topic of 'things that can cause collisions'  We are reviewing
>>> 'environmental conditions that can cause collisions'  I am asking the
>>> class about the road surface and what can make it slippery.  One guy
>>> puts up his hand and very enthusiastically suggests 'banana peels?' He
>>> was from either West Africa or West Indies. I honestly didn't know if he
>>> was serious.  I try to fudge it.  "Man you're killing me.  Banana
>>> peels?"  He got very offended.  Apparently he was serious.
>>
>> If you happen to be following a certain truck down the hill that leads
>> in to Scranton Pennsylvania, that could be a problem.
> 
>     What, having a guy from West Africa suggesting that a car can slip
> on a banana peel?
> 

No, the cars slipping on the peels. Everyone talks about the truck, no
one talks about the wrecks that must have followed it down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pZ3TTmm0n4 just in case, in all the
eclectic music tastes, no one has heard of Harry Chapin.

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:54:40 -0500, Sabrina Kilian <"ykgp at vtSPAM.edu"> wrote:

>No, the cars slipping on the peels. Everyone talks about the truck, no
>one talks about the wrecks that must have followed it down.

I've just had a thought, if Jim's student was from West Africa he might have
been talking about when the harmattan blows. Banana peels might give a little
more traction.

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Sabrina Kilian wrote:

> 
> No, the cars slipping on the peels. Everyone talks about the truck, no
> one talks about the wrecks that must have followed it down.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pZ3TTmm0n4 just in case, in all the
> eclectic music tastes, no one has heard of Harry Chapin.

Unbelievable!

And he wrote the song about the looser cab driver too.  I feel haunted.

Post a reply to this message