HOV Myths
It's been my hobby to debunk pro HOV arguments. Here is a collection of the most popular ones:
MYTH 1 - "Removing the HOV is short-sighted" or "We could open the HOV tomorrow and 5 years from now the lanes would be filled again" (DOT, FHWA, all pro-HOVers), implying some kind of mysterious long term benefits.
Fact - Rt. 80 got worse over the 4 years the HOV was in effect.
I guess the "long term" myth is popular because you can't prove it. But how long does it take for people to form carpools? It has gotten worse even with the HOV, and would certainly continue to do so. The only time it got better is when the restrictions were removed. And if it got better now, why wouldn't it be better in 5 years too?
No, a given traffic condition will always be worse with HOV restrictions because they artificially lower road capacity. Honestly, does anyone think the HOV can inspire enough carpools to make it as free flowing as Rt. 80 & 287 got just by removing the restrictions? The DOT seems to imply that the HOV screws up traffic the equivalent of 5 years worth of normal traffic growth.
MYTH 2 - "You can't build your way out of congestion" (FHWA, NJDOT).
True, this is a problem which should be dealt with. But it is not an argument for the HOV.
MYTH 3 - "Instead of 3 lanes of stuck traffic and 1 HOV lane, we'll have 4 lanes of stuck traffic" (Sierra Club of NJ).
I love this argument. For some reason if people see a lane that hasn't reached capacity, they think there isn't a problem. I've got news for you sunshine - artificially keeping a lane empty does not solve the problem. It makes it worse. Using this logic, making all the lanes HOV would solve the problem - "look Ma, no congestion"!
MYTH 4 - "The HOV isn't half empty - the cars are twice as full" or "The HOV moves more people" (pro-HOV argument).
It is absolutely essential that the HOV increase carpooling to offset the decreased capacity of the highway (i.e. the empty space in the HOV being reserved for the incentive to carpool). If it does not, the highway will move more cars AND people without restrictions.
How much does the HOV have to increase carpooling to gain benefits? Let's use typical DOT numbers from Rt. 80 with the assumption that the HOV does not increase carpooling (i.e. overall AVO stays at 1.15) as an example:
*Typical vehicle capacity (per hour) of a highway lane
**Typical vehicle count (per hour) for the Rt. 80 HOV
Simply put, without HOV restrictions, Rt. 80 would move about 1,000 more vehicles AND people per hour. If you want to argue that the HOV has any benefits, you would have to prove that it inspires enough carpools to offset this decreased capacity (...actually, that would be the break-even point; any benefits would only come if it surpassed that). But, it 1) almost certainly doesn't, 2) probably never could, 3) probably doesn't matter because cars are being added to our highways faster than the HOV can even hope to remove them.
MYTH 5 - "HOV could work when combined with other techniques, like employer incentives, reduced parking fees, etc." or "without incentives and education, the HOV won't work" (EPA, NJ Environmental Lobby).
I thought the HOV was the incentive! Great, bury it under as many programs as possible so it never can be proven which is working. Very fuzzy thinking (...or lack of). No, the HOV does not get people to carpool. If something else does, fine, but don't give the credit to the HOV.
MYTH 6 - "The HOV didn't work because people refused to carpool" or "we did not let the HOV work" (popular pro-HOV argument).
If we held a gun to everyone's head and forced them to carpool, would you consider the HOV to be working? Hell no, it's the gun stupid. The HOV is what was supposed to get people to carpool. It did not AND IT SCREWED UP TRAFFIC IN THE ATTEMPT. Let's abandon it and try something else (...preferably something that doesn't screw up traffic).
MYTH 7 - "Carpooling has an air quality benefit, reduces vehicle miles traveled and frees up highway capacity for other motorists" (FHWA).
It's a catch 22 - HOV lanes try to increase people capacity by reducing vehicle capacity (i.e. the incentive to carpool is an empty lane). I am very pro HOV's. It's just HOV LANES I'm against. The FHWA never bridges the gap between how HOV lanes affect the number of carpools, and doesn't attempt to calculate the amount of increased congestion from the decreased capacity.
MYTH 8 - "Carpools mean fewer cold starts, which is responsible for more pollution than stalled traffic" (NJDOT), arguing that even if the HOV slow down traffic, it cuts down on the number of cars being started, which is when cars are the most polluting.
...thus, the HOV gives us the worst of both worlds - it stall traffic and people still start their cars! Besides, if this were the case, public transportation wouldn't cut pollution because people usually drive to the train or bus stations or park & rides.
MYTH 9 - "Prove to me that HOV lanes DON'T work" (pro-HOV argument). This is good, since it's difficult to prove HOV lanes are doing anything, people use this argument for the lanes.
But after you tell them this, they usually fall back to "long term benefits" myth. The government spends hundreds of millions of our dollars on these things and call them a pollution solution. Shouldn't they have some proof before they can say that?
What proof would make you believe? Name it. How about temporarily suspending ANY HOV and see if traffic improves. I'll bet you it the highway moves more cars AND people faster, safer, and cleaner without restrictions.
MYTH 10 - "Save 10 minutes by carpooling" (the incentive promised by the HOV).
Just ask Dagwood Bumstead's carpool. It costs me more time to arrange the carpool than any I save in the HOV. The running joke at work when I'm waiting for my carpool is "if you didn't carpool, you would have been home by now". Plus, I still carpool now that the HOV has been abandoned.
Historically, people carpooled for whatever reasons, peaking during the 70's gas shortage (...well before HOV lanes). But saving a few minutes was never one of them.
Conclusion
Stop kidding yourself that the HOV works or even has the potential of working. It's a myth. Let's move on to something, ANYTHING that has a remote chance of working.
