GasBuddy Blog

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: Fuel Economy > Topics	Add to favorite topics Post New Topic

Author	Topic: Why the government won’t enforce the 55 mph speed limit.	Post a Reply Back to Topics

SCubedSound Rookie Author Michigan Posts:24 Points:18,500 Joined:Jun 2005	Message Posted: Apr 15, 2011 2:27:57 PM Ignore SCubedSound Report Abuse Let’s use the following numbers for our example. Keep in mind that if you drive faster than 70 mph and / or your vehicle gets less than 25 mph highway then you are paying more tax to the government. Also understand that the fuel economy stickers on vehicles are generated at a driving speed of 55 mph. If your car gets 25 mpg on the highway (CAFE 2012 standard) and gas costs $4.00 per gallon including the average tax per gallon of 15% (2008 rates) and you drive 25 miles straight highway driving. Driving 70 mph you will pay $0.63 in taxes for that trip. Driving 55 mph you will pay $0.52 in taxes for that trip. That is $0.11 / gallon less for the government funding from this tax. In 2008 the US used 19,600,000 barrels of crude oil per day. In 2004 it was determined that from each barrel of crude you can produce anywhere from 20 to 42 gallons of gas depending on the refining process. We will go toward the lower number and say 21 gallons to make room for the other items we use daily that come from that same barrel. So we removed 50% of that barrel off the top putting us at 9,800,000 barrels of crude each day for gas. That would be 21 gallons of gas per barrel equaling 205,800,000 gallons of gas each day consumed in the US. With the time I’ve spent on the highway in the last XX years (and for ease of calculations) I would estimate that 50% of the total highway drivers drive at 70 mph, 25% over the speed limit (they passed me), and 25% under the speed limit (I passed them). So we average it out to 70 mph. If everyone started driving 55 mph then we would deny the government $0.11 tax on every gallon of gas. 205,800,000 gallons used per day multiplied by the $0.11 / gallon savings in our pocket would equal $22,638,000 per day that the government would be short. My personal belief as to why we haven’t moved into alternative fuel sources is because the government cannot find a way to hide their taxes in such things as water, wind, and solar. Please don't quote my numbers as I only performed a quick online search so as not to spend my entire day calculating and writing this. You get the general idea as written. [Edited by: SCubedSound at 4/15/2011 3:33:27 PM EST]

SCubedSound

Rookie Author
Michigan

Posts:24
Points:18,500
Joined:Jun 2005

Message Posted: Apr 15, 2011 2:27:57 PM

Ignore SCubedSound Report Abuse

Let’s use the following numbers for our example. Keep in mind that if you drive faster than 70 mph and / or your vehicle gets less than 25 mph highway then you are paying more tax to the government. Also understand that the fuel economy stickers on vehicles are generated at a driving speed of 55 mph. If your car gets 25 mpg on the highway (CAFE 2012 standard) and gas costs $4.00 per gallon including the average tax per gallon of 15% (2008 rates) and you drive 25 miles straight highway driving. Driving 70 mph you will pay $0.63 in taxes for that trip. Driving 55 mph you will pay $0.52 in taxes for that trip. That is $0.11 / gallon less for the government funding from this tax.

In 2008 the US used 19,600,000 barrels of crude oil per day. In 2004 it was determined that from each barrel of crude you can produce anywhere from 20 to 42 gallons of gas depending on the refining process. We will go toward the lower number and say 21 gallons to make room for the other items we use daily that come from that same barrel. So we removed 50% of that barrel off the top putting us at 9,800,000 barrels of crude each day for gas. That would be 21 gallons of gas per barrel equaling 205,800,000 gallons of gas each day consumed in the US. With the time I’ve spent on the highway in the last XX years (and for ease of calculations) I would estimate that 50% of the total highway drivers drive at 70 mph, 25% over the speed limit (they passed me), and 25% under the speed limit (I passed them). So we average it out to 70 mph. If everyone started driving 55 mph then we would deny the government $0.11 tax on every gallon of gas. 205,800,000 gallons used per day multiplied by the $0.11 / gallon savings in our pocket would equal $22,638,000 per day that the government would be short.

My personal belief as to why we haven’t moved into alternative fuel sources is because the government cannot find a way to hide their taxes in such things as water, wind, and solar.

Please don't quote my numbers as I only performed a quick online search so as not to spend my entire day calculating and writing this. You get the general idea as written.

[Edited by: SCubedSound at 4/15/2011 3:33:27 PM EST]

REPLIES (newest first)Ignore Short Messages

Gypsy_tech All-Star Author Minnesota Posts:538 Points:15,675 Joined:May 2008	Message Posted: Jun 2, 2011 3:31:55 PM Ignore Gypsy_tech Report Abuse I can't Drive, 55 - - - Couldn't stand it in the late 70's and can't stand going that slow now on the highway anyway so I just get a more fuel efficient car and drive 70.
Sophie53 All-Star Author Indiana Posts:501 Points:35,065 Joined:Aug 2008	Message Posted: Jun 1, 2011 7:35:29 AM Ignore Sophie53 Report Abuse Guess what happens if you drive 55? Everyone passes you, but you can rest assured that you are getting better gas milage!
NateHoy Champion Author Maine Posts:1,246 Points:815,000 Joined:Sep 2003	Message Posted: Jun 1, 2011 7:30:53 AM Ignore NateHoy Report Abuse @MertieMan: You can improve 70MPH fuel mileage, but you can never, ever make it match 55MPH mileage. There's a lot more than the RPM of the engine at play. At highway speeds, wind resistance is the biggest efficiency killer (which is why efficient cars all look sleek, because they are fighting the wind-resistance monster. It might be worth the extra expense in fuel to get where you are going earlier - time is money, after all. But you'll never get a car to manage the same fuel efficiency at 70 that you can at 55. So, if you're desperately trying to make ends meet and every quart of that expensive fluid we all depend on is precious, leave a few minutes early and drop 5 or 10 miles an hour off your speed. If you're in a hurry and aren't worried about saving a buck or two a day, then you're free to make that choice, too.
StrangeLuv Champion Author Kansas City Posts:3,815 Points:925,925 Joined:Jul 2008	Message Posted: Jun 1, 2011 6:58:37 AM Ignore StrangeLuv Report Abuse If you want to drive 55 do it. Take's too long to get places.
JEB86 Rookie Author Massachusetts Posts:51 Points:74,295 Joined:May 2011	Message Posted: May 31, 2011 6:40:49 PM Ignore JEB86 Report Abuse I recently drove from Amherst to Boston on Route 2 and got 33 mpg at 54mph. This compared to 28mpg on I90 at 70mph the week before. 2009 Subaru Forester.
hnofer17 Champion Author Austin Posts:5,498 Points:1,029,115 Joined:Feb 2010	Message Posted: May 30, 2011 8:29:23 AM Ignore hnofer17 Report Abuse And because they don't want me to spend 3 hours getting to work
MertieMan Champion Author Lexington Posts:14,923 Points:2,922,335 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: May 30, 2011 8:25:39 AM Ignore MertieMan Report Abuse The 55 mph speed limit will not be reentered because of several reasons, one being they don't want massive carnage on the highways and with cruise control and overdrive most vehicles now get just as good milage driving 70 mph because the vehicles kick into a higher gear thereby causing the vehicle to use less rpms to do the same job.
calypso93 Champion Author Scranton Posts:11,339 Points:1,299,910 Joined:Mar 2004	Message Posted: May 29, 2011 6:20:30 PM Ignore calypso93 Report Abuse Everybody wants somebody elses dollar.
Bodiney Champion Author Detroit Posts:1,006 Points:196,050 Joined:Jan 2009	Message Posted: May 29, 2011 5:01:55 PM Ignore Bodiney Report Abuse When you're traveling short distances 55 is fine. But for long trips it sucks.
kabirkhanna Rookie Author Portland Posts:10 Points:100,225 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: May 29, 2011 1:41:41 PM Ignore kabirkhanna Report Abuse And what about people's individual choices? Why can't we all just choose to drive slower? Because it takes too much conscious effort, huh? We do need government to tell us what is good for us after all.
srqmale67 Champion Author Sarasota Posts:1,163 Points:237,585 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: May 29, 2011 9:05:05 AM Ignore srqmale67 Report Abuse dont know...
Houckster Champion Author Atlanta Posts:9,407 Points:695,200 Joined:Sep 2003	Message Posted: May 29, 2011 6:46:31 AM Ignore Houckster Report Abuse MERTIEMAN writes: The 55 mpg solves nothing. It doesn't save that much gas because most cars have cruise control and overdrive which saves gas. _____ Compare the fuel consumption of a car at 55 vs 70 and there is going to be quite a difference. Usually it will be somewhere in the area of 17% less in MPG. (MPGForSpeed.com) On a daily basis, this translates into at least a million barrels of oil a day. It all adds up both for the individual and the country saving the individual hundreds of dollars a year (for someone who puts in about 30 miles a day on the freeways) and the country billions of dollars less in oil imports. The increase in fuel efficiency by driving slower is more than half of the fuel efficiency increases mandated by the government (CAFE) by 2020.
the1roadhog Champion Author Atlanta Posts:9,949 Points:2,080,630 Joined:Jun 2007	Message Posted: May 29, 2011 5:45:18 AM Ignore the1roadhog Report Abuse No doubt, 55 would save but be abused as it was back in '74.
kabirkhanna Rookie Author Portland Posts:10 Points:100,225 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: May 29, 2011 12:47:43 AM Ignore kabirkhanna Report Abuse There's SO much that car makers, government regulators, and the general public themselves can do. No one really thinks about fuel economy when it comes down to it, though. They all want cheaper, more powerful cars at the end of the day. Fuel economy always gets deprioritized. So as far as I see it, it's a matter of want versus need on the part of us consumers.
MertieMan Champion Author Lexington Posts:14,923 Points:2,922,335 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: May 28, 2011 11:55:18 PM Ignore MertieMan Report Abuse The 55 mpg solves nothing. It doesn't save that much gas because most cars have cruise control and overdrive which saves gas.
ValleyoftheSun Sophomore Author Milwaukee Posts:114 Points:130,770 Joined:Apr 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2011 10:58:15 PM Ignore ValleyoftheSun Report Abuse Previous generations to include myself would not have bought them. Simply put, look at the size and weight of the car's from the 50's to date.
the1roadhog Champion Author Atlanta Posts:9,949 Points:2,080,630 Joined:Jun 2007	Message Posted: May 2, 2011 12:38:13 PM Ignore the1roadhog Report Abuse Old slogan: "In '74, it's 55" Time to revive that.
jimmy544 Champion Author Boston Posts:4,373 Points:680,580 Joined:Feb 2011	Message Posted: May 2, 2011 9:53:32 AM Ignore jimmy544 Report Abuse The real reason is that most state and local police are also cash strapped and under-manned. In California there was a decrease in State Patrol officers between 1969 and 2004 despite the fact that there was a huge increase in highway mileage and population. The officers have to respond to accidents and there is not much time for anything else.
kslgas Champion Author Calgary Posts:2,413 Points:1,626,105 Joined:Apr 2007	Message Posted: May 2, 2011 9:29:41 AM Ignore kslgas Report Abuse government will get less tax from gas, not a good idea
reb4 Champion Author Chicago Posts:19,355 Points:1,848,850 Joined:Sep 2004	Message Posted: May 2, 2011 9:12:22 AM Ignore reb4 Report Abuse In most large cities the speed limit is 55. More people are starting to obey them... I rarely travel outside of metropolitan area so most of my driving on expressway / toll ways is 55. I see that more people are starting to throttle down to 60 from 70... amazing what gas over 4.00 will do...
Glasman Champion Author South Carolina Posts:6,188 Points:750,000 Joined:Nov 2006	Message Posted: Apr 30, 2011 3:35:25 PM Ignore Glasman Report Abuse nrthycivic- thanks, didn't know the old 55MPH was still around, back when it was the law of the land they did try hard to hold the motoring public down, don't remember why it failed
nrthbycivic All-Star Author Ontario Posts:906 Points:129,155 Joined:Feb 2011	Message Posted: Apr 30, 2011 8:26:42 AM Ignore nrthbycivic Report Abuse Glasman - in many parts of NY state there are sections of interstate that are still 55 mph but they are generally around urban areas and areas where there is a need for gradual increase/decrease of speed for safety reasons such as busy interchanges. These areas are generally short in distance.
SophiaCA Champion Author San Jose Posts:1,727 Points:283,635 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: Apr 28, 2011 1:18:29 PM Ignore SophiaCA Report Abuse it's true if you drive higher 55 mph speed limit
reenman Sophomore Author California Posts:190 Points:41,190 Joined:Nov 2010	Message Posted: Apr 28, 2011 10:23:20 AM Ignore reenman Report Abuse Raise the speed limit to 70. Tell those standing in unemployment lines that if they want a check they must work with road construction companies widening and improving existing thoroughfares.
Dennis783 Champion Author Des Moines Posts:13,730 Points:2,729,860 Joined:Sep 2005	Message Posted: Apr 28, 2011 10:00:07 AM Ignore Dennis783 Report Abuse I doubt police are not ticketing because of the gas tax revenue. In fact in our state anyway, the more tickets they write the more $ goes into local govt budget.
Jmkinsey1984 Champion Author Fort Wayne Posts:1,439 Points:346,510 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: Apr 28, 2011 7:01:10 AM Ignore Jmkinsey1984 Report Abuse Simple the reason the government won't enforce the 55 speed limit is because when people drive faster they make more money.
Sevreth Sophomore Author Philadelphia Posts:210 Points:31,115 Joined:Jan 2011	Message Posted: Apr 27, 2011 10:03:11 AM Ignore Sevreth Report Abuse I find it hilarious that you say "My personal belief as to why we haven’t moved into alternative fuel sources is because the government cannot find a way to hide their taxes in such things as water, wind, and solar.". We haven't moved to that because big oil doesn't want to lose their revenue and our politicians (all of them) wont invenst in new technologies.....like high speed rail, solar and wind......like they should be. I did not realize they were "hiding" taxes in the gasoline! Those capitalist pigs! I'm glad they are the only ones hiding such fees in prices. I couldn't take it if the rest of my money was somehow "taxed" away by other capitalists. The fact is simple. You want roads to drive on, you pay taxes. . If Americans would give up the "me first" attitude, I bet people would drive slower and not give the government more money. But as long as people want to get somewhere faster, they will have to suck it up and pay uncle Sam!!! Cheers, -Sev [Edited by: Sevreth at 4/27/2011 11:03:27 AM EST]
Glasman Champion Author South Carolina Posts:6,188 Points:750,000 Joined:Nov 2006	Message Posted: Apr 27, 2011 6:13:06 AM Ignore Glasman Report Abuse where is 55 MPH the posted speed ?
Houckster Champion Author Atlanta Posts:9,407 Points:695,200 Joined:Sep 2003	Message Posted: Apr 21, 2011 10:44:51 PM Ignore Houckster Report Abuse You really should read what you write. Example 1: I wrote that "I hope the Hard Right doesn't get hold of this because tomorrow they'll be screaming it to everyone." You (SCUBEDSOUND) then responded: Speaking of government affiliation. I am a Conservative. Calling me Hard Right is like saying all Christians are Southern Baptists. You should read more closely. I never said you were on the Hard Right, just that they would find this theory you expound interesting. Your assumption that I'm a liberal is misplaced as well. I'm in the middle and I stay there. If I sound "liberal", consider your real position. You may deny that you're on the Hard Right but I wonder just what is the difference between where you are and where they are. Example 2: I disputed your point about the gasoline yield of a barrel of oil. Then you brought up diesel which is irrelevant as the subject was gasoline. Example 3: You wrote "Most people hate taxes, so I was showing the connection between how much money goes into taxes from every gallon of gas purchased, in hopes that this may cause some people to slow down driving. Not because they want to save money but because they don’t want the government to have more than they deserve." Then you write: "Government is big business out to make money." _____ Honestly, what is this stuff about the governments getting more they deserve? This is pure silliness. The federal government gets 19 cents a gallon of gasoline and the states get more, sometimes a lot more because they NEED it. Revenues from the fuel tax don't cover the costs of road and bridge maintenance and these costs are increasing as roads and bridges needing work increase not only as a function of road use but also of environmental conditions. These taxes went through legislative processes. By what possible rationale do you say they get taxes they don't deserve? If you want to cut fuel usage go ahead but to do so to penalize the government is more than a bit ridiculous because the government really wants you to cut back on driving to reduce imports. And you seem to have completely missed my discussion of the increased CAFE standards to reduce fuel use further. _____ Example 4: I also asked for people posting to not quote my words, as I have not done an in-depth study on the subject. I was writing what my mind was thinking at the time. I am not expected to be considered an expert in the field and don't understand the desire of people in this world to have to be the only one who is right all the time. This comment really redlines my silly meter. Do you mean to tell me that you just wrote a a bunch of stuff that you don't accept responsibility for to stimulate people's thinking? Here's a better idea: Write something that's well thought-out and with consistent logic. If you want to get people thinking, that's what will do it. Silly stuff simply stimulates people to ignore you. OTOH, I do have a desire to be right all the time. I certainly fail either in whole or in part lots of times but I try to give people the best thoughts I have on a subject. Otherwise you're just wasting people's time. Your comment is a total cop-out.
SCubedSound Rookie Author Michigan Posts:24 Points:18,500 Joined:Jun 2005	Message Posted: Apr 21, 2011 2:42:18 PM Ignore SCubedSound Report Abuse Thanks for the input Houckster. I followed the link you had posted for us to be educated on. Good stuff there. I stand (sit) corrected. I meant to explain that cars are tuned to get their best performance at 55 MPG. I’m glad to hear that they are now testing and stickering vehicles with today’s driving habits. I found that the 2001 Toyota Prius gets it best MPG at 45. My point was not if the sticker was true or not but what kind of mileage you get between the different speeds. This post is here to spark some ideas, not cause a government conspiracy theory. But my words do make a compelling statement to slow down to save gas. I also asked for people posting to not quote my words, as I have not done an in-depth study on the subject. I was writing what my mind was thinking at the time. I am not expected to be considered an expert in the field and don't understand the desire of people in this world to have to be the only one who is right all the time. Then eventually turning a post that was meant to help people save gas on a daily basis into a Right vs. Left debate. If I were an expert in this field I wouldn't be posting on a free site as this one. Most people hate taxes, so I was showing the connection between how much money goes into taxes from every gallon of gas purchased, in hopes that this may cause some people to slow down driving. Not because they want to save money but because they don’t want the government to have more than they deserve. I had also hoped to spark an interest in alternative sources and possibly get some feedback that I could use. Speaking of government affiliation. I am a Conservative. Calling me Hard Right is like saying all Christians are Southern Baptists. Denying that government is hard pressed for money is going through life with a blindfold on. Government is big business out to make money. Capitalism is a great way of life. Each person should make as much money as they desire but only as much money equal to their effort they are willing to put forth to achieve their goals. I only made a connection that some people might not know about. Took an idea and expanded on it just to get people thinking. Speaking of Left vs. Right. Prime example of it here. You quoted my post then tried to blow holes in it. And did a very bad job at it. I would hope that things in the refining process would get better in the last 7 years but I don’t know. This is not my expertise. That’s why I stated the date of my findings. The Left should try helping fix the problems instead of always complaining about what is wrong then telling everyone else they are wrong or asking for proof of what was said. Instead you only took what I said and reinforced what I said. You took out common sense and opened your mouth. This post is not about the refining process and how much gas can be produced from a barrel of crude. It’s not about how the EPA tests the efficiency of a vehicle either. QUOTE SCUBEDSOUND writes: In 2008 the US used 19,600,000 barrels of crude oil per day. In 2004 it was determined that from each barrel of crude you can produce anywhere from 20 to 42 gallons of gas depending on the refining process. ME: Estimates I've seen indicate that we get about 28 gallons of gasoline from a barrel containing 42 gallons of crude. To get a higher yield of gasoline would require substantial additional refining and a greater cost per gallon. A link to support the claim that up to 42 gallons of gasoline can be obtained would be helpful. END QUOTE If you notice, I said, "depending on the refining process." Common sense dictates that the more you refine something the more it costs. Not true in all cases. Diesel is a byproduct of refining for gas yet it costs more. Possibly a punishment for me getting better mileage and therefore not having to use as much. But back to the conversation at hand. Certain polymers can be added (AT EXTRA COST) to convert 42 gallons of crude into 42 gallons of gas. I explained what years I was getting my data from and I also explained that I didn’t want to spend all day researching this topic. I was being conservative on my estimates. If I use the 28 gallons that you have suggested then my numbers would increase. The figure you gave would also increase the tax dollars to the government. If your company made a “change” and you lost $22,638,000 per day, would that be a smart decision? Not if you want to stay in business. Unless you are a Liberal. Then you would find an excuse for losing billions of dollars a day and figure out a way to blame the EPA for putting the sticker on the wrong side of the car. Thanks for playing. [Edited by: SCubedSound at 4/21/2011 3:44:12 PM EST]
Bangoo Rookie Author Los Angeles Posts:24 Points:12,480 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: Apr 20, 2011 7:42:05 PM Ignore Bangoo Report Abuse interesting comments here
Houckster Champion Author Atlanta Posts:9,407 Points:695,200 Joined:Sep 2003	Message Posted: Apr 20, 2011 6:22:11 PM Ignore Houckster Report Abuse SCUBEDSOUND writes: Let’s use the following numbers for our example. Keep in mind that if you drive faster than 70 mph and / or your vehicle gets less than 25 mph highway then you are paying more tax to the government. ME: OK. Tax is a function of fuel use. The more gallons the more you pay in taxes. SCUBEDSOUND writes: Also understand that the fuel economy stickers on vehicles are generated at a driving speed of 55 mph. ME: Not true. Updated 2008 standards include important changes in the process [to] include higher speeds of up to 80 miles per hour to reflect the kind of driving actually being done on the highway. The tests also include the use of air-conditioning and hard accelerations. See the link below. SCUBEDSOUND writes: In 2008 the US used 19,600,000 barrels of crude oil per day. In 2004 it was determined that from each barrel of crude you can produce anywhere from 20 to 42 gallons of gas depending on the refining process. ME: Estimates I've seen indicate that we get about 28 gallons of gasoline from a barrel containing 42 gallons of crude. To get a higher yield of gasoline would require substantial additional refining and a greater cost per gallon. A link to support the claim that up to 42 gallons of gasoline can be obtained would be helpful. This really isn't germane to the discussion but I thought I'd throw this in. And what does the information that SCUBEDSOUND provides mean? Why it's a government plot to increase taxes by allowing people to speed. OK! Why didn't I think of that? Probably because I get out a lot more often. That's something that SCUBEDSOUND should do too. At first I thought this is a typical rookie post but then I realized we've got people with thousands of posts behind them who'd just as likely come up with this silliness. If the government was serious about raising revenues by encouraging increased consumption of gas, why would we have aggressive increases in the CAFE standard written into law. Why would every OEM be scrambling to increase fuel efficiency? And the huge outlay for fuel we have each month is almost entirely responsible for our trade deficit. And there's no question the costs associated with the trade deficit are astronomical to both the public and the private sector costing us hundreds of thousands of jobs. The loss of tax receipts from those jobs dwarfs whatever loss of revenue would be realized from Americans driving more slowly. I hope the Hard Right doesn't get hold of this because tomorrow they'll be screaming it to everyone. 5 Things You Need to Know about EPA Fuel Economy Estimates [Edited by: Houckster at 4/20/2011 7:26:31 PM EST]