You can drive but you can't speed
Speeding is killing 12,000+ Americans every year. Is it time for vehicles to come equipped with speed governors?
Speeding is a factor in more than 12,000 crash deaths per year in the US. The European Union reports almost a third of traffic fatalities are speed-related. Starting next year, all new vehicles sold in the EU must have Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA).
The primary means to detect the posted speed limit of any roadway is to use the vehicle's outward-facing cameras. However, the regulations also call for ISA to utilize map data and "deep learning" in case the speed limit cannot be determined from a sign.
ISA regulations say that if a vehicle speeds on any road, the system—when activated—must warn the driver or even automatically slow down the vehicle until it reaches the posted speed limit.
I haven’t followed the EU debates, but speed governors are a touchy subject in the US. I’d guess the most common dinner party response would be “I don’t like the idea of someone tracking me or being able to take control of my car.” That is real.
Mobility-as-a-Service skeptics were concerned about that a few years ago when integrated mobility ideas were gaining traction. There was a chorus of concern that bad actors could take over fleets of autonomous vehicles (buses, trash trucks, robo-taxis, etc.). There was also the concern about police overreach, especially during the 2020 protests.
One digital platform to plan/book/pay for all sorts of trips
But I don’t think nefarious government control or app tracking is what really bothers the average American deep down. The continued growth in TikTok usage should be plenty of evidence that something else is giving Americans pause. I think most people want to speed and they’re afraid to admit it.
I realize it's a hard sell to say "trust us, we'll decide if you should be able to drive a certain speed." But the fact remains drivers aren’t driving safely.
It’s been almost 10 years since this study was published:
This paper presents the overall results of the research focusing on the pros and cons of the use of ISA as a restrictive measure for serious speed offenders, and on the preconditions for deployment. The results showed that the ISA systems tested have a huge effect on driver behavior and have the potential to improve road safety by reducing the level of speeding, mean speed, as well as the standard deviation of speed. However, there are also cons: the behavioral change in driving behavior was only temporary. In addition the tested technology proved too easy to override, raised issues of equity, and a substantial back office is required when implementing the system for serious speed offenders.
This stuff is complicated, but what's not complicated is observing human beings are killing each other in traffic, and speed is a major reason for it. It could well be that now's the time for a parental intervention: "you had 100 years to use this tool wisely, but you aren't changing your behavior. We're geofencing streets and limiting your speed for you."
The tracking of pedestrians proposed by automakers and the constant tracking by most apps on our phones is far more invasive than speed governors. Without placing a right/wrong judgment on the mandatory ISA idea, I’ll leave you with one of my favorite quotes:
"There are no solutions, only trade-offs." —Thomas Sowell
How about making it mandatory only for repeat speeding offenders (a legitimate use of government force to protect the innocent and a condition for the speeder to keep driving)--but otherwise provide incentives for voluntary participation?
I’d happily sign up to lower my insurance rate and keep my term drivers safer!
It is important to note that the system approved in the EU after years of fighting was significantly watered down to the point that it is almost meaningless. It was originally supposed to limit speed but the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC) says "The most basic system allowed simply features an audible warning that starts a few moments after the vehicle exceeds the speed limit and continues to sound for a maximum of five seconds. ETSC says research shows audible warnings are annoying to drivers, and therefore more likely to be switched off. A system that is deactivated has no safety benefit."