On the street
Are you driving slower to save gas?
Probably, just a little. : I try to not rush into a stop sign, stuff like that. I don’t drive the speed limit hardly ever; 60 miles an hour is fast enough for me.
Topeka — State officials on Wednesday rejected a proposal to reduce the speed limit from 70 mph to 65 mph on Kansas highways.
The Kansas Energy Council voted 19-1 against the proposal, which was made by a subcommittee of the council as a way to decrease carbon dioxide emissions through reduced gas usage.
Bruce Snead, who was chairman of that subcommittee, was the lone vote in favor of the measure.
"The science behind it is solid," he said, although adding, "I understand the public's opposition to it."
The proposal generated 138 comments from the public. It was opposed by a nearly 3 to 1 ratio.
The Energy Council also voted against recommendations that would have increased fines for speeding and enforcement of speed limits.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
bombshell (anonymous) says…
I drive to KC everyday and I would have hated to have K-10 reduced to 65mph. Go across the western border, and i-70 jumps to 75mph in Colorado. I'm with bumping it up to 75mph. I don't have an emission-crazy gas-guzzler, either.
KUweatherman (Curtis Lange) says…
Woo! A win for everyone that drives!
SettingTheRecordStraight (anonymous) says…
This is great news. Bump it up to 75 mph.
packs_of_wild_dogzz (anonymous) says…
good.
AjiDeGallina (anonymous) says…
zd40, you are right, for about 10 years, and then what?sheesh, people. Oil is a limited resource and even with some limited options still left domesticly, it wont last forever.
blue73harley (anonymous) says…
Great news!
Confrontation (anonymous) says…
waka1: You're homeless, using a library computer, and begging for other people's money. You don't have a car. Why is this your business?
kmat (anonymous) says…
I'm happy they didn't reduce the speed limit.Can't believe someone is already doing the drill baby drill rhetoric though.We use 25% of the world's oil. We have 3% of the world's oil in American territory. So just how are we going to continue to use oil as we do, but not be dependent on the middle east and Venezuela????? Basic math people! But I guess republicans think we should just keep invading oil rich countries, huh?
OonlyBonly (anonymous) says…
To paraphrase Leonard Cohen, "First we take Iraq then we take Cuba."(huge new reserves found offshore in case you haven't heard)
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
The science behind a 65mph limit may be "solid," but there are plenty of other scientifically-solid ways to get more efficient automobiles. Toyota, Honda, Nissan etc. have been doing it for decades.Gas is down to $2/gallon now. It was also about $2/gallon during the first half of 2005. And then...?ANWAR is not the solution itself. It may be part of an overall strategy, but it is not the solution itself.--Ag
jason2007 (anonymous) says…
@Agnostick: ...and then, the futures market speculators went nuts and drove the price up to get rich, that's what happened.Any economist will tell you that the prices at $4.00 a gallon did not reflect supply and demand. Ultimately we need to get an energy strategy but in the near term, we need to reign these speculators.Personally, I'd like to see regulations that say anyone purchasing oil futures must take physical delivery of 50% of the purchased supply. That would kill the greedy speculators and leave those that are actually going to use the oil for refinement.
jayhawklawrence (anonymous) says…
They got it right. Yeh!!
KansasVoter (anonymous) says…
I can't believe that a government committee actually agreed to do the right thing! Also, I agree that the limit on I-70 needs to be bumped up to 75 mph once you get west of Topeka...although if I had my way it'd be 80 mph.
KUweatherman (Curtis Lange) says…
It is already basically 80 mph with the 10mph non-moving violation buffer. The state needs to just make it officially 75-80 mph to stop wasting the Highway Patrol's time.
merrill (anonymous) says…
The oil cartels took christmas spending money away earlierin the year.... bad boys and girls....yet consumers cannot hardly wait to give more of their hard earned money to the cartels. Exxon Mobil wants you to know that it cares about poor African children. Several are featured in a recent TV ad touting Exxon's donations to a charitable effort in Africa to fight malaria. Chevron wants you to know that it's a caring corporation, too. It's running a TV ad touting its concern about alternative energy, featuring a touching tagline that says: "This isn't just about oil companies. This is about you and me."Why the push to show Big Oil's gentle side? Because new profit figures show yet another quarter of the ongoing money grab by these giants. Exxon's take for the three summer months, for example, was nearly $15 billion the most profit of any corporation in history. So the money grabbers are putting on masks of altruism, hoping we won't notice their pockets bulging with our dollars and hoping we won't demand that Congress take away the billions of dollars they get each year in tax subsidies.To see the true heart of the oil barons, however, don't look at their ads look at their production numbers. While prices rose in the past year, pinching consumers hard, the big refiners deliberately cut back on gasoline production to hold prices up. While diesel shortages were squeezing the economic life out of U.S. truckers, the refiners ignored domestic need because they could get a higher price by shipping American diesel to Europe, South Africa, and Australia.Worse, though, is Big Oil's failure to use its windfall profits for development of new oil supplies. The corporations claim that they need enormous profits in order to explore for oil yet last year the Big Five spent only $10 billion on exploration, while dumping $55 billion into the pockets of their top executives and major investors.Oil company image ads aren't fooling anyone. Their attempts to appear touchie-feelie are as hopeless as hanging an air freshener on the tail of a hog." Exxon's $14.83 billion income in quarter sets U.S. record," Austin American Statesman, October 31, 2008."Chevron Gifts Top $37 Million," Austin American Statesman, October 31, 2008."Oil companies ad blitz strives to polish image," Austin American Statesman, October 30, 2008.
Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…
Good legislative response to a dumb idea.
persevering_gal (anonymous) says…
As if no one already goes 75 mph...
gr (anonymous) says…
"I wonder if they regret their decision when gas agains gets $4 and $5 this Spring:"Why would the "price" of gas have anything to do with lowering the speed limit? This was to do with the fantasy of man-made CO2 causing problems. That would be the same no matter what the price was. However, we know the ones in control don't seriously think lowering energy use affects global warming. Otherwise, they would not have us go off daylight savings time.
jrlii (anonymous) says…
A speed limit of 70 is really lower than optimum in most of the state.The lunatics who advocate for lower speed limits fail to take into account the additional risk of extending the time on the highway required to get from A to B. In most of this state it is a LONG way from A to B. Maybe not as bad as New Mexico, but bad enough.I hate to think about the number of times I nearly went in the ditch when I was dating my now ex in Manhattan back before they raised the speed limit. That extra 15 miles an hour makes about a 20 minute difference in the length of the trip, and it was usually the last 15 or 20 minutes that staying awake was the hardest. At 70 I'd have been home already.
proudmom06 (anonymous) says…
WOW. Who would actually propose this? All that means is more speeding tickets!
chocolateplease (anonymous) says…
The outcomes of this vote will be:1. The state won't lose fuel taxes as a result of people driving slower which increases fuel efficiency. 2. There will be more injury accidents.3. Of the accidents which do occur, the injuries will be more severe.4. More greenhouse emissions will be released.