Editorial: A simple way to reduce SoCal pollution and fuel consumption
by Sam Abuelsamid on Nov 22nd 2008 at 7:55PM 
As I spent several days in Los Angeles, CA last week I came to several realizations. First I never want to live there. While air quality has dramatically improved since the 1960s, the geography of the region means that it will never be as good as other places. Since the 1960s, California politicians and regulators have continually tightened emissions standards to the point where more than 99 percent of the pollution produced by cars and trucks in those days has been eliminated, and yet they want to go further.
Now they want to regulate CO2 which is a de facto way of limiting fuel consumption. While I am all for reducing consumption of fossil fuels, the reality is that cars and trucks last a long time. If, starting today, every car sold in California had zero emissions, it would still take more than 20 years to turn over the entire vehicle fleet. Actually given the current economic situation and rate of car sales it would probably take a lot longer than that. For the foreseeable future, people will be keeping their cars even longer, meaning that if we want to reduce emissions we have to find another way. Fortunately there is one. Read on after the jump to find out.
When you think of Los Angeles what is the first image that comes to mind? Silicone, sunshine, wild fires and traffic, right? Here at ABG we will just concern ourselves with the last one for the moment.
Clogged freeways and streets are a pox on Los Angeles. As we were being shuttled to the LA Convention Center from our hotel last week, I noticed a significant pattern on the streets of Los Angeles. Most of the time the car would go one block and then stop. Go another block and stop, rinse and repeat, ad infinitum. Cars sitting idling in traffic jams waste enormous amounts of fuel and emit millions of tons of CO2 annually. There didn't appear to be any accidents or other obstructions along the route except for one: traffic lights.
It seems that in Los Angeles all the traffic lights are timed in order to limit forward progress. Sitting in the car watching the visible lights ahead, they did not appear to be sequenced so that if you caught one green light and then proceeded to drive at or about the speed limit, each subsequent light would turn green as you approached allowing traffic to proceed more or less unimpeded. It's a simple thing. It works in other cities, but Los Angeles, which seems more desperate than most to do something about air quality, still doesn't seem to understand after 40 years of trying.
Turning over the LA vehicle fleet will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and require expensive new infrastructure to support charging or filling of emission-free vehicles. The lights already exist and may already be computerized. The investment would be minimal to adjust the timing. Why isn't this being done now? Perhaps if you live in Los Angeles you should ask this question of your mayor and city council. Why is traffic being artificially obstructed?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
gulags 8:17PM (11/22/2008)
Wow, what an insightful idea. As a citizen of Los Angeles, I hereby wholeheartedly thank you for your amazing insight on how to save us from ourselves.
In other news, they've been talking about syncing lights for years. All transit money seems to go towards useless extra carpool lanes, or mass transit that goes nowhere, the Orange Line notwithstanding.
The problem is that there are just too many people, and that should solve itself as the economy tanks.
Reply
Steven 9:06PM (11/22/2008)
Besides synching lights, which is a no-brainer, I'd also suggest that people at 2 in the morning don't want to wait 2 minutes for a red light to finally turn green -- when there's no traffic! Whats the cost of that idling x millions of drivers?
Reply
grenavitar 9:45AM (11/24/2008)
And when you hit a biker or pedestrian you didn't see...? Running red lights is bad because it ruins the predictability of the traffic and when done by cars often leads to the injury of pedestrians, cyclists, or other motorists.
Steven 11:19AM (11/24/2008)
Why wouldn't I see them? And I don't mean to run red lights I mean that the red lights should time itself to be much shorter in the middle of the night, or do you prefer that I idle my car for 2 minutes for nothing - x 1,000,000 other cars doing that all night long across the country?
Paul Sallmen 9:41PM (11/22/2008)
Roundabouts are popular in Europe and they tend to avoid traffic lights all together. Fuel is saved, because you tend to go at a constant slow speed. With traffic lights you tend to accelerate, brake, stop, accelerate, brake, stop (or horrific waste of fuel). Sadly, roundabouts are a rarity in North America. I think I've seen less than 10 of them in Canada (where I live). Each major city may have a few, but that's about it. Even ICBC (Insurance Corporation of British Columbia) admits roundabouts are better accident wise, as cars are slowed down, so collisions that do happen are minor. Contrast that to a traffic light intersection where collisions can be brutal: we've all seen that last minute car racing an early red light!
Reply
Brn 9:56AM (11/24/2008)
Roundabouts are a pain, because they can't handle significant traffic. Once one direction gets the lock, you can yield forever, waiting to get on. At least with stop lights, your turn will come.
I don't want to say that roundabouts never serve a purpose, but they're no where near as wonderful as many would have us believe.
dhofmann 10:56PM (11/22/2008)
The reason there's traffic is because people tolerate it. Nature abhors a void, so as soon as traffic starts running smoothly again, people will abandon their carpools and buses and bicycles, and start driving again. Traffic is part of the cost of living in Los Angeles, unless you bypass it on bikes, in trains or in the HOV lanes.
And there's still plenty of available capacity on the roads. You won't find it during rush hour, but it's there.
Reply
Trevor 11:03PM (11/22/2008)
I lived in Portugal for 2 years as a missionary for the LDS(Mormon) church. In Portugal they use almost exclusively roundabouts, it works great there, and its amazing! They have huge roundabouts that span multiple lanes; the traffic runs so smoothly and as they all are accustomed to the roundabouts, they actually blaze through them at quite a brisk pace. They always seemed to be driving their one liter hatch backs and turbo diesels like little race cars, their driving style is awesome! I remember one roundabout in the city of Lisbon, in which there was a beautiful statue in the center of a huge roundabout.
I miss that every time I am at a stop light wasting time and fuel... It can be done here, the only problem
is that some times people don't know how to drive through one!
Reply
Randy C. 11:24PM (11/22/2008)
That goes with some math I did a few months ago.
The normal attrition rate for cars is that it takes 10 years to replace 50% of cars on the road. Now if today the only cars that can be sold are ZEV (most notably electric) it will take 10 years to get 50% of the gas burners off the road.
But each auto maker only has 1 ZEV design that is going to be produced with in the next 2 years. And some of them aren't pure ZEV's i.e. the Volt still has a gas engine. This eats in to the time frame immensely so after 10 years we may be lucky to see 10% of the cars being ZEV.
Now you have the oil companies worried that they wont be selling gas in 10 years and they are taking steps to suppress ZEV's. The auto makers are afraid they will be out of business in 2 years if they make ZEV's. What the heck are they worried about? By the time we get 50% of the cars on the road to be ZEV they will all have died from old age.
The big problem is this turn over rate may be way to slow to save the planet. If some of the scenarios of global warming effects come true we won't have to worry, our planet wont be able to support life as we know it anyway.
All I want is the option to do my part. I've cut down on my waste, I recycle everything I can, I use reusable shopping bags and I take short low flow showers. My last contribution to the pollution solution is I want to get rid of my gas burner and drive an electric car powered by solar panels. But this is going to be an uphill battle all of the way because there are to many old cronies in power unwilling to admit that a change has to come and quick.
Reply
Pierre Lourens 12:14AM (11/23/2008)
As much as I hate to say it, you are preaching to the choir. What really needs to be discussed is how policies can actually be changed--not idealistic editorials that end with one sentence of vague instruction for the public.
I'm not insulting anyone, but I am calling for a greater emphasis on realistic solutions and realistic avenues for those solutions. (e.g. A sample e-mail for the mayor instead of just a link? etc)
Reply
Joe 12:34AM (11/23/2008)
It will take a long time for enough ZEVs to make a difference, but it seems like every new car could have stop-start with minimal design effort. Starters would need to be more robust and HVAC/ Power Braking/Steering systems would need some work in order to function while the engine is off, but it shouldn't be all that hard to put stop-start in every new car.
This would eliminate idling much faster than waiting for electrics or even lots of hybrids.
Reply
Ron Fischer 12:35AM (11/23/2008)
Los Angles already has such a system called ATSAC, but the technology is getting tired, see http://trafficinfo.lacity.org/index.html (click "About ATSAC" on the bar). Last year Caleeforneeah's governator and LA's mayor announced an upgrade program to roll out improvements. Sam: you should call the LA DOT and interview them about the system, the state of the art and why we still stop and go. Personally I'd like to see micro-hybrid start/stop tech mandated. Considering the amount of time we sit idling in LA, it would bring huge benefits here.
Reply
jharlan 1:17AM (11/23/2008)
In spite of everything I still believe California is the finest place to live in the country. I just moved to Siskyou County and the nearest traffic light is 85 miles away! You didn't know there was anyplace in California like that, did you?
Reply
Sam Abuelsamid 9:45AM (11/23/2008)
I only said I didn't want to live in LA. There are other parts of the state that I wouldn't hesitate to live in.
noz 1:16AM (11/23/2008)
As a person who lives in this filthy, wortheless POS of a city, I have come realize one thing....people here are to self-absorbed to care for change.
On top of that, the powers at be who stuff our throats with more and more consumerism have no reason to change their ways....why? Because they are making money hand over fist from our own greed, our own ego, and our own self-indulgence.
Look at the recent joke of an issue that happened with Mercedes Benz at the LA ports. There are thousands...THOUSANDS of cars that are stuck at the LA ports. The MB dealers are overloaded with cars....they have no more room. They are saturated. YET...they still send more over. And now MB is worrying NOT about if they should send more or not....oh no.
What they are concerned with instead is WHERE are they going to put the next batch that is arriving shortly.
That....folks...is our problem...not our traffic lights. We have SO MANY cars already. Yet we bring more...and more...and more...and more.
MB has been in the business of making profit for the last 50+ years...they've been making a killing in profits and money. Yet ONE YEAR of bad sales and they are lost in panic....not knowing what to do? Where did all that money they have made go? What happened to all that profit?
Instead of toning things down and accepting that things are overwhelmed and just too saturated...these companies are trying to shove this crap down our dumb throats even more.
God forbid the world takes a breather....people slow their lives down, companies make 8% profit instead of 12%....God forbid.
We're at a point where our lives are like a pipe full of crap that can't take anymore stuff...and we are shoveling more of it in there.....and there's no room left.
That's our real problem.
Reply
TopaZ 3:30AM (11/23/2008)
Many L.A. traffic lights have already been upgraded in the past 6 months. They are marked with signs that say (Traffic SYNC).
Unfortunately, there is a HUGE problem as currently configured. Instead of a "rolling" green that follows you as you move forward, it turns ALL lights green at once, which is really no help at all.
For an example, go to the government center on Van Nuys Blvd.
Reply
jharlan 11:21AM (11/23/2008)
Your editorial is right on , Sam. Half of LA would leave because of the traffic alone if they could make a good living elsewhere. LA has the economic base, and great weather, but what a pain to live there! The lost time spent in traffic is staggering.
Reply
JustZisGuy 11:22AM (11/23/2008)
Synchronizing the timing of lights (at, say, the speed limit) in one direction is wonderful for those traveling in that direction, but it of necessity makes it impossible for lights to be synchronized for those traveling in the crossing direction. Further, even if synchronization along a particular route is successful at first, it tends to attract more traffic, which increases queuing delays and results in some traffic having to stop.
So, while I agree that improved synchronization along certain routes is a good idea, it cannot be the panacea you seem to envision. It is unlikely to make more than a small improvement. What would make a much bigger improvement would be to shut your damn engine off when you're stopped at a traffic light! :-) It's not really that hard, even without "stop-start" technology. You see, there's this thing called an ignition switch, usually operated with a key...
(I only do this at lights where I know I'll be stopped for 30 seconds or more. It's not that hard - just look for the yellow light in the other direction, that gives you 5 seconds to start your car and get it into gear before your light turns green.)
I know, the argument will be "... but I have the air conditioning running, and the radio, and ...."
Reply
Ron 3:23PM (11/24/2008)
Actually the issue is wear and tear on the starter gear. Start/Stop micro-hybrids are specifically designed to handle many more cycles of operation.
stas peterson 11:58AM (11/30/2008)
Despite the howls of those convinced that the World will end next Tuesday at 3:00 o"clock, there are a few scientific facts that interfere with the distorted view of Reality.
Fact One: North America releases approximately 1,4 petagrams of Carbon into the atmosphere annually. It also sequesters around 1.7 petagrams of Carbon annually. according to published research in the Journal Science. So NA removes not only ALL its own Carbon, it removes some of the rest of the World's contribution. Simply declare Victory and please go hector someone else like the Europeans, Indians and Chinese who still generate more than they sequester, if you must..
Fact Two: In the 2008 model year CARB certified 56 models of autos to be PZEV or AT-PZEV vehicles. This designation was originally reserved only for electric cars but it seems none of these 56 models actually are. The ICE has been cleaned up. More models will be certified that way in Model Year 2009. It seems that we don't really need electric cars to produce non-polluting vehicles,but they are coming nonetheless.
Fact Three: The Electrification of Ground Transport is gathering steam, but we need NOT wait for it. In the mean time we are conquering the side effects of petroleum, except for one thing, the Pricing issue..
Fact Four: There is not enough petroleum to satisfy ALL the people on the Planet for more than another100 years or so.. So we wil have to converts sometime in the next hundred years. And we are already well on the way. Periodic price spikes in Petroleum have occurred every decade or two for almost forty years. Every time it has produced a Global Recession and this is no exception. But the source for the present downturn has ALREADY reversed and gasoline is now under $2,00 per gallon. again. So business wil once again pick up after the usual 14-18 months of downturn regardless of the pronunciation of the earnest Chicken Littles. A price spike will happen again,but next time it won't be as severe . Indeed, ten years from now, dependence on petroleum will be a lot less. IIndeed thsi price spike may have been the fatal one for the Oil
Sheiks and Comissars. Theri greed just got too big.
Say what you will, Mr. Bush has defeated the Crazies of the Muslim world. Obama can declare Victory when he wishes, but the War is over and civilization won, defearting Anrchsim..
Fact Five: Virtually every petroleum market save for Transport have stabilized and are in decline Worldwide over the past forty years. Substitution is rampant in all these markets, from electrical generation, to HVAC, to industrial chemicals.
Despite the howls of propaganda, GHG as a source of Global Warming is turning out to be VERY OVERBLOWN. There has been no GW for ten years and the World is cooling, despite rising CO2 levels.that will prove very transitory. So the window to address GHGs is getting wider and longer. Meanwhile the beneficial aspects of CO2 levels are greening the planet, from the NA forests that are responsible for sequestering increasing amounts of CO2; to to the edges of the Sahara where increased plant life is forcing the desert into retreating.
Global Warming or Climate Change is increasingly being viewed as a political scam. to elect Statists. and expand government. It has succeeded;.Obama is now President. We can cut out the political BS, and recognize that there is little real danger from GHGs, GW , CC or whatever they want to call it today. Sea levels are not rising appreciably, if it alland maybe stabililizing. Ice is piling up on Antarctica, and the interior of Greenland, and surrounding areas.
The Arctic is refreezing, and the latest scientific studies indicate that Glaciers around the world have slowed their retreats and some are advancing once again.
Reply