Writing.- In an article published in the journal Traffic and Road Safety, the DGT debunks the false myths and more spread among the drivers about the speed. Since the 29th of January came into force the reduction of speed on rural roads 90 km/h, have reappeared with force opinions and information that, in many cases, have nothing to do with reality, being half-truths and/or “fake news”
A half-truth. “The speed does not influence the result of the accident, because cars of today are more safe”
Cars today are safer than those of a few years. In fact, its ability to absorb energy in case of impact, multiplied by a lot of vehicle ten years ago. However, in a collision the energy to dissipate by the structures of the cars involved would be the sum of the kinetic energies of both, that depend on their masses and the square of the speed. For example, the kinetic energy that accumulates in a vehicle to 100 km/h is 23% higher than that which accumulates if you are driving at 90 km/h.
False. “The measure of reducing the speed only has a desire collection”
The reduction of the speed limit on rural roads to 90 km/h responds only to criteria of safety and is supported by recommendations of the major institutions dedicated to road safety in Europe. For example, the report “Speed and Accident Risk, conducted in 2.018 by the OECD and the International Forum of Transport (ITF) says textually that “with higher driving speeds, the number of accidents and their severity grow disproportionately,” and, in addition, the accepted model Nilsson, explains that a rise of 1% in the average speed involves a 2% growth in the frequency of accidents with victims, 3% in serious accidents and a 4% in fatal accidents. Also, the report confirms that a reduction of the average speed of 5 km/h on roads reduces 28% of the fatal accidents.
In fact, the same report recommends a limit of 70 km/h for roads without separation of the senses. In addition, according to data from the department of Transport of the United Kingdom, with real accidents, while 48 km/h there is a 3% risk of dying at 80 km/h the irrigation goes up to 65% and 96 km/h, 92%.
False. “The DGT manipulates the figures to make it appear that the speed influences more”
According to Álvaro Gómez, director of the National Observatory of Road Safety, the DGT uses two types of figures to analyze the impact of speed on accidents: the speed as a factor contributory in accidents and data from scientific studies impartial. The information about the presence of excessive speed or inappropriate in accidents is obtained “directly from statistical reports transmitted by the traffic cops”.
False. “By reducing the speed limit there will be more density of traffic and more danger in the overtaking”
The traffic intensity depends on the number of vehicles attempting to access a pathway per unit time. A change in the speed would only have influence on the intensity to the extent that a number of users can base their decision to use that route, or take an alternative, for the speed limit. A reduction as small as 100 km/h to 90 km/h –that only adds 12 minutes of travel in a journey of 200 miles– does not seem to justify such a change.
False. “If I’m alone and the road is straight, there is no risk for going faster”
According to data from the DGT, in 2017, 39% of the deceased persons (398) on rural roads were involved in accidents with no other vehicle or pedestrian. And most of these accidents were due to the outputs of the pathway (367 deaths).
Without proof. “Less speed, more distractions”
Although it is a common place that, when you are driving at a lower speed increases the number of distractions due to the monotony of the trip, there is no evidence to support this claim. Yes, there is, however, evidence scientific that circulate at excessive speeds cause, as he showed Luis Montoro in 1993, changes in psycho-physiological) which lead to the potentiation of fatigue and increase the chances of distraction.
False perception. “I’m tired of traveling miles on the road and I have not suffered any accident”
We all tend to judge reality by what is happening in our environment and that, at times, leads to wrong conclusions. In this sense, the statistics, which keeps track of all the data available, it offers a vision that is more cold, but more real. For example, as a good driver that we have not experienced ever in an accident we can think that there is no difference in risk between circular 100 km/h or 90 km/h. But when we add the hundreds of thousands of millions of kilometers that are traveled each year in Spain, and add to that the risk of all the drivers, the difference of circular to one or the other speed entails dozens of lives… Remember that the risk of dying to 96 km/h is 92%, according to a study on real accidents performed by the Department of Transportation of the United Kingdom, and only 65% to 80 km/h, almost 30% lower.
Reviews – Journal of Transport are not responsible for the particular comment