Governed By Numbers

Ontario Transport Minister, Jim Bradley, introduced legislation on March 19 that, if passed, will cap truck speeds in that province by requiring the road speed thresholds on heavy truck engine computers are set no higher than 105 km/h.

Debate has raged in Ontario on the appropriateness of the policy ever since the Ontario Trucking Association first proposed the idea back in the summer of 2005.

Minister Bradley is pressing ahead with the legislation even though opponents of the plan appear to outnumber supporters by a margin of three to one across the industry (based on surveys conducted on-line here at Today's Trucking and highwaySTAR.)

The argument for speed limiters is twofold: safer highways and cleaner air. "It just makes sense," says OTA boss David Bradley. "Not only is there a direct relationship between speed and the severity of crashes, but there is a direct payback in improved fuel efficiency from operating at lower speeds and that in turn reduces costs and GHG emissions."

Whether or not speed limiters can deliver on those claims continues to be hotly debated within trucking circles. "They're just throwing a red herring out there," says the director of the Owner-Operator's Business Association of Canada (OBAC), Joanne Ritchie.

On the environmental front, there's evidence now that OTA's original GHG reduction predictions of more than 200,000 tons were realistic.

A yet-to-be released environmental benefits analysis by Transport Canada indicates that a universal truck speed cap of 105 km/h could save as much as 280,000 tons of GHG each year.

We were not yet able to see the latest study, but Transport Canada senior research analyst, Andrew Spoerri, claims researchers collected actual speed distribution data from weigh-in-motion sites around the country. The study isolated highway systems above 100 km/h - in other words, where speed limiters could be a factor.

"It does not include traffic on any two or four-lane highways below 100 km/h whatsoever," explains Spoerri. "The [previous] paper used limited data...the methodology here is quite sound."

Clearly, the emission reductions potential is real, but can trucking make any real impact on its own?

"This government has heard the public's concerns about speeding trucks on Ontario highways that pollute our environment and create unnecessary risk," said Minister Bradley when tabling the legislation. "The reality is that over one third of Ontario's greenhouse gas emissions come from the transportation sector; 84 percent of this comes from road transportation."

OBAC's Ritchie says the minister's comments are misleading and border on fear-mongering. "His remarks are full of half-truths and ignore the facts," she says.

Citing the Canadian Greenhouse Gas Inventory as complied by Environment Canada for the period 1990-2005, Ritchie notes that while 84 percent of GHG emissions do come from road transportation, the minister's remarks imply that heavy trucks are the culprits.

"He neglects to say that heavy-duty gasoline engines, i.e. SUVs, pick-up trucks, are responsible for over 55 percent of the growth in Canada's GHG emissions."

While transportation as a whole may represent a large percentage of total GHG growth (stationary sources spew the most emissions), after separating transport modes, breaking down sectors within road transport, and finally comparing heavy-duty diesels to all other types of on and off-road engines, capping speed limits on commercial trucks will shave no more than one percent off of the province's overall GHG output.

Safety First
But even more ambiguous are the safety arguments. On the safety side, Ontario's government is hoping to reduce the severity of injuries due to collisions by utilizing speed limiter technology. "Research shows that excessive speed is a factor in nearly 23 percent of crashes involving large vehicles," noted the Minister.

What he failed to mention, Ritchie points out, is in crashes involving large trucks and passenger cars it's the passenger car that is speeding 95 percent of the time.

"Heavy trucks are the least likely vehicles to be speeding on Ontario's highways. Over 85 percent of the crashes involving heavy trucks occur on two-lane roads where the speed-limit is 80 or 90 km/h. Speed limiters will not get "speeding trucks" off our highways; stepped-up enforcement of speed limits and reckless driving will," she counters.

Is she right or is that just some kind of anti-speed limiter bluster? Looking at the available research on speeding variations and traffic patterns, it's certainly questionable whether fast moving trucks are enough of a problem to merit a blanket regulation or that a 105 km/h-limit would have any net benefit on crash rates.

While there's some merit to the theory that slowing down trucks could reduce the severity of truck-car accidents, other studies around the world suggest that a greater speed differential between vehicles actually increases accident risk.

A report by Steven L. Johnson, Ph.D., at the Mack-Blackwell Transportation Center at the University of Arkansas for example, shows that lack of passing speed would result in "cluster congestion" and the likelihood of more rear-end collisions is very real. "Assuming speed limiters create more traffic congestion, then a portion of the purported emissions savings would be offset by increased stop-and-go traffic," says Barry Prentice, professor of supply chain management at the University of Manitoba.

OTA's Bradley counters that there's no evidence speed limiters themselves will widen the gap to unsafe levels. "We have speed differentials now, so I don't see [the] situation is going to get any worse. In fact, I see things getting better over time as we see lane discipline improve," he says.

To its credit, the province is looking to do more than just implement a speed limiter rule to combat speeding. There are plans to put 55 additional Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) officers on the road to fight extreme speeding. There's room in the budget for a new OPP aircraft with high-tech surveillance equipment. And police are already treating drivers going 50 km/h or more over the speed limit the same as street racers.

The Debate's Not Over
Transport Canada is currently putting the finishing touches on a comprehensive speed limiter study. The complex study not only looks at safety and environment issues, but also case studies, industry competitiveness, international assessment and technical considerations.

Among the concerns being examined, is whether Ontario trucks would be put at a disadvantage while operating in jurisdictions with speed limits higher than 105 km/h, or if the universality of the law would discourage foreign trucks from doing business in Ontario, thus providing a competitive advantage for Ontario-based carriers.

Ritchie says she has seen and possesses letters from Minister Bradley saying, "I would also like to clarify that the ministry's proposal is for a speed limiter that can be shut off when leaving Ontario, so as not to burden drivers operating in areas where the speed limit is higher."

That would fly in the face of the concept of a tamper-proof speed limiter, though technology exists - satellite and GPS-based tracking systems - that could be programmed to activate the speed limiters within provincial boundaries. It would be an expensive addition to a truck not already so equipped, and would be on top of the costs of adjusting road speed settings in trucks to comply with the law - touted to be in the $100 range.

"It's not appropriate for government to become involved in the business and competitive issues of a company," notes Ritchie. "And that's where things like fuel economy and all of this stuff is directly related to. Government's only role is in setting appropriate speeds and enforcing those speeds - which they aren't doing right now."

OBAC is not opposed to the idea of speed limiters, but just the idea of a government mandate. The association advocates responsible speeds and use of the devices on a volunteer basis.

In a word, Ritchie calls the law a travesty. "MTO is pandering to a handful of carriers who are either too cheap, too lazy or too greedy to compete fairly. Rather than pay their drivers a decent rate, invest in training and anti-idle technology, implement internal safety and compliance regimes, these carriers have bamboozled government into taking these responsibilities off their shoulders."

OTA's David Bradley says eventually he would like to see the rule extended to all vehicles. "The political stakes are that much higher with cars. That's not to suggest they shouldn't do it, but to say ‘lets wait until they do it for cars first' would mean we're delaying a positive measure for who knows how long. I would prefer to show some leadership, which may make it easier to move on cars down the road."

But as far he's concerned, the time for debate on this issue is pretty much over. "It's going to happen. So, it's time to move on with life and start making it work. Undoubtedly, there's going to be issues that arise from time to time, but I don't think every time there's an elephant race we should be saying ‘let's get rid of the law.' That's dumb."

Currently Online @ highwaySTAR

Our Driving Forces Truckers Pull Together Safety Blitz