Autoblog

Eric Horvitz is the president of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, as well as being an AI researcher at Microsoft. When stuck in traffic one day in Seattle, he asked his nav system to reroute him via side streets, and the result was worse than being stuck on the highway. That incident turned into four years of research and data collection on traffic patterns to create the Clearflow traffic avoidance system for Microsoft's web portal-based Live Search Maps.

The point of Clearflow is to provide accurate route information that gives you the best chance to avoid traffic on highways and on the side streets. By logging data from 16,500 trips over 125,000 miles, Microsoft engineers came up with algorithms to predict traffic flow on highways and adjacent streets, the latter of which can be even more crowded than the main arteries.

Using the data collected in Seattle, along with the results from highway sensors, the system works for 72 cities, and can "predict congestion based on time of day, weather and other variables like sporting events." Clearflow went live Thursday, April 10, with the choice to "Choose route based on traffic".

[Source: New York Times]

Manhattan's latest attempt at disguised taxation has ground to a halt in the most trivial fashion. Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed congestion charge for cars and trucks headed into the city below 60th street was summarily ignored by lawmakers. Rather than a contentious fight in the state assembly, the clock was simply run out and the bill died without being put to a vote. The failure of Bloomberg's plan means that New York City will also miss out on 350 million federally earmarked dollars for mass transit, and other ways to improve air quality and decrease gridlock must be sought. Even if it had passed, Manhattan's fee of $8 for cars and $21 for trucks would have been lower than what Red Ken charges for entry to London proper. While the goal of decreasing gridlock and improving air quality is admirable, we can see how the congestion charge would further squeeze those who can least afford it. To be sure, an alternative to Manhattan's current traffic would be welcome, and embracing change isn't always easy, but lets see what they come up with next. Thanks for the tip, RxMadness!

[Source: AFP, Photo by Mario Tama/Getty]

There is a nice discussion going on over at AutoblogGreen regarding the act of lane splitting, which is when a motorcycle rides the dotted line in-between lanes. Lane splitting is a common practice in much of Europe, but here in the States it's only legal in California. Golden State law dictates that a motorcycle is only allowed to split lanes when traffic is moving very slowly or stopped and "must be done in a safe and prudent manner." NBC San Diego ran a little news piece on lane splitting and found that some drivers in California weren't even aware that it was legal, and others dislike the practice.

According to the video, the practice of lane splitting was initially allowed for safety reasons, and while many doubt that the practice is safe, data suggests that lane splitting reduces rear-end collisions involving motorcycles. So, what do you think? Is lane splitting a good idea? If so, should it be made legal in all s
States?

[Source: AutoblogGreen, NBC San Diego]

In light of the "backwards-travelling wave" that researchers recently discovered as a cause of congestion, another study has pinpointed a possible major contributor. The University of Utah's Traffic Lab uncovered that drivers paying more attention to yapping on their phone – hands free or not – add to the suffering of us all. Talking while driving leads to drivers who take considerably longer to change lanes when following slow-moving vehicles, drive slower overall, and take longer to arrive at their destination.

Any benefits from slower speeds and more deliberate movements are mitigated by the distraction of a conversation. Thinking along the lines of chaos theory, even the small slowdowns created by poky drivers can grow into exponentially larger traffic problems quickly. Then, when we're all stuck in the stop and go, we call someone else and bitch about how bad the traffic is. Sounds like what they've really discovered in Utah is the fuel for a perpetual motion machine. Car stops, jaw continually flaps.

[Source: Reuters, Photo: hotrodscustomstuff.com]

Here's a news flash: traffic is a huge waste of time for commuters mired in rush hour gridlock. A recent study by the Texas Travel Institute unearthed some startling statistics concerning traffic, and everybody, including state and local governments, is paying huge.

On average, drivers spend 38 hours per year in traffic, which translates into 2.9 billion gallons of wasted fuel. If you live in L.A., 72 hours per year are thrown out the window as a result of congestion. Due to the strain that 2.9 billion additional gallons of gasoline puts on the volatile refinery market and all the lost revenue caused by the delays, about $78 billion goes down the drain each year.

The study puts much of the blame on an infrastructure that hasn't grown much over 50 years, even as the amount of drivers on the road has exploded. Commuters are also putting more distance between themselves and their typical destination. It'd be a welcome sight for our government to spend as much energy increasing the bandwidth of our roads as it does imposing challenging fuel economy standards on automakers. The economy could use the extra jobs created by the needed construction work, and our environment could use a break from all the carbon coming from drivers with their foot on their brake.

[Source: CNN Money]

The city of London, England must just not like us enthusiasts. In an effort to reduce congestion and emissions in the city, the government will impose a tax to enter the city. The cost will be based on the level of emissions a vehicle emits, in bands of A through G.

The dollar amounts seem preposterous to most drivers, but UK Mayor Ken Livingstone feels that the drivers of sports and luxury cars can afford it, and will have no choice beginning in 2009 if they want to drive their beloved cars in the city of London.

The driver of a Porsche 911 or even most SUV's would have to pay a tax of £25 (US $47) every time he or she enters the city. So if you work in the city or have to take your kids to school 5 days per week, that works out to a staggering £6500 (US $12,220) per year! For that you could lease another 911 or even buy a vacation home in the country.

Let's hope that someone comes to his or her senses before 2009, or you may never see a sports car in London again.

Thanks to Richard for the tip!

[Source: thenewspaper.com]

The growth in automotive sales in China is unlike anything the world has previously experienced, and as a result, Chinese government officials continue to have difficulty determining the role that motor vehicles should play. Beijing, for example, recently lifted most regulations on car usage, but the congestion and pollution are bad enough to make the city's mayor consider putting strict regulations back in place before the 2008 Summer Olympics come to town.

In general, China's central planners have to walk a tightrope, carefully balancing the economic boom caused by car sales against the dramatically increased pollution, traffic congestion, and oil demand that has come with them. And the problem is not going to get any easier to solve as time goes on; there is only 1 car for every 50 people in China right now, and the total number of vehicles on the road is expected to grow by 400% in the next 15 years.

Coming soon will be air-quality rules expected to be comparable to those in Western countries (if not even more strict), and higher gas prices, road-use fines, and improved mass transit systems are being suggested as ways to minimize traffic slowdowns.

[Source: Pittsburg Post-Gazette]

A new study of San Francisco's high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes has revealed something disturbing: more congestion. According to researchers at UC Berkeley and Cal State University, East Bay, in a 100 mile sample section of freeway, HOV lanes have counter-intuitively led to an increase in traffic congestion.

The study utilized data collected from sensors embedded in the pavement over 4.5 years between 2001 and 2005. As San Francisco's HOV lanes are only active for 8-10 hours per day, traffic could be measured both with and without the restriction in place, allowing for the comparison.

What they found was that not only was there no increase in carpooling, but that that when HOV lanes were 'active',  traffic capacity decreased by 20-percent by increasing congestion on other lanes. A report from 2005 also noted that  in areas where HOV lanes are not separated from general traffic, accident rates increase by some 50-percent.

[Sources: TheNewspaper.com, CalAcademy.org]