header image
The world according to David Graham


acva bili chpc columns committee conferences elections environment essays ethi faae foreign foss guelph hansard highways history indu internet leadership legal military money musings newsletter oggo pacp parlchmbr parlcmte politics presentations proc qp radio reform regs rnnr satire secu smem statements tran transit tributes tv unity

Recent entries

  1. Why do lockdowns and pandemic restrictions continue to exist?
  2. Parliamentary privilege: an arcane concept that can prevent coups
  3. It's not over yet
  4. Trump will win in 2020 (and keep an eye on 2024)
  5. A podcast with Michael Geist on technology and politics
  6. Next steps
  7. On what electoral reform reforms
  8. 2019 Fall campaign newsletter / infolettre campagne d'automne 2019
  9. 2019 Summer newsletter / infolettre été 2019
  10. 2019-07-15 SECU 171
  11. 2019-06-20 RNNR 140
  12. 2019-06-17 14:14 House intervention / intervention en chambre
  13. 2019-06-17 SECU 169
  14. 2019-06-13 PROC 162
  15. 2019-06-10 SECU 167
  16. 2019-06-06 PROC 160
  17. 2019-06-06 INDU 167
  18. 2019-06-05 23:27 House intervention / intervention en chambre
  19. 2019-06-05 15:11 House intervention / intervention en chambre
  20. 2019-06-04 INDU 166
  21. 2019-06-03 SECU 166
  22. 2019 June newsletter / infolettre juin 2019
  23. 2019-05-30 RNNR 137
  24. 2019-05-30 PROC 158
  25. 2019-05-30 INDU 165
  26. 2019-05-29 SECU 165
  27. 2019-05-29 ETHI 155
  28. 2019-05-28 ETHI 154
  29. 2019-05-28 ETHI 153
  30. 2019-05-27 ETHI 151
  31. older entries...

Policy alternatives: Strict Main Highway Traffic Laws

In a world where cars are king, roads dominate the landscape, and our air is so polluted we spend one day in eight hidden indoors under smog alerts, I would like to propose an expanded set of traffic laws for our major highways.

When operating a vehicle on a divided, limited access highway, cdlu's alternative Main Highway Traffic Laws state the following:

All vehicle traffic shall be limited to the lane representing the number of human occupants of the vehicle, counted from the rightmost lane, including commercial freight and passenger vehicles. For example, a car occupied by three people may use the rightmost three lanes, while a car occupied by only one person is strictly limited to the right lane, and a bus with 26 passengers on it is free to use any lane up to a maximum of the 26th.

Hybrid and low emissions vehicles shall receive a one lane bonus, and zero-emission vehicles shall receive a two lane bonus, and may operate in lanes to the left of where they would normally be allowed to operate appropriate to their bonus.

The speed limit for each lane shall be 10 km/h higher than the lane to its right, starting at a minimum of 110km/h in most cases.

Speed limits shall be limits, not recommendations, and shall be reasonable for the roads. Speed limit signs may be posted as Min/Recommended/Max.

The result would be:

Would this cost any jobs?

Probably not, but it would require a seismic shift in careers as a whole. Truckers would be in lower demand, but bus drivers and train crews would be in higher demand.

Would our auto industry hurt?

No. They would simply need to start manufacturing vehicles they are already capable of manufacturing, such as GM's EV1 electric cars and Toyota's hybrids, to meet the new demand.

Would the oil industry hurt?

Not really, but I wouldn't shed any tears if they did. This would only really affect major urban areas, particularly large metropolises such as Montreal and Toronto with punishing rush hour traffic. Inter-city traffic would also be affected, driving people to find alternatives such as passenger rail, whose prices would need to come down to compete with cars rather than with planes.

Would commuters lose their jobs because they can longer get to work on time?

Not unless they are too stubborn to use public transportation. Odd-hour commutes would not be significantly different from what they are today, and on-peak commutes would be forced to car pool or use public transportation, which would in turn need to be expanded, though the highway maintenance and expansion savings from this scheme would easily pay for an expanded public transportation infrastructure in many cases.

This is the first in a possible series of half-serious policy ideas to get people thinking about the issues at their roots.

Posted at 16:59 on October 04, 2006

This entry has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.

Question period today | transit | Bring GO train service to K-W/Guelph/Cambridge!

(RSS) Website generating code and content © 2001-2020 David Graham <david@davidgraham.ca>, unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved. Comments are © their respective authors.