Urban congestion is a pressing challenge, driving up emissions and compromising transport efficiency. Advances in big-data collection and processing now enable adaptive traffic signals, offering a promising strategy for congestion mitigation. In our study of China’s 100 most congested cities, big-data empowered adaptive traffic signals reduced peak-hour trip times by 11% and off-peak by 8%, yielding an estimated annual CO₂ reduction of 31.73 million tonnes. Despite an annual implementation cost of US$1.48 billion, societal benefits—including CO₂ reduction, time savings, and fuel efficiency—amount to US$31.82 billion. Widespread adoption will require enhanced data collection and processing systems, underscoring the need for policy and technological development. Our findings highlight the transformative potential of big-data-driven adaptive systems to alleviate congestion and promote urban sustainability. Big-data empowered traffic signal control in China can reduce vehicle trip times, creating potential reduction of 31.73 million tonnes (Mt) of CO2 emissions annually and US$31.8 billion benefits per year.
Yes, if the induced demand results in similar levels of congestion - which it very often does - there would be more emissions in the end.
And you’re right, cars will exist for the forseeable future. I do not however want the government subsidizing car dependency since it is destructive to the environment and to everyone’s health and safety.
A couple of possibilities to drastically reduce traffic:
turn all multi-lane streets within cities into single-lane streets for cars with exclusive bus and bike lanes to treat all forms of traffic equally
reduce all inner-city speed limits to 30 km/h to reduce car noise, emissions and increase pedestrian safety
traffic lights should prefer public transit, pedestrians and bicyclists instead of cars
stop subsidizing parking spaces for cars with city money and drastically reduce on-street parking as cars take away massive amounts of space
put toll roads onto highways as their cost is massively higher compared to fuel taxes. After all, trains have to pay a costly fee to use train tracks already - why should cars have this privilege?
There’s a lot more I could write here but you get the gist. Making car traffic more efficient does not reduce emissions in the long term in the slightest. Making car traffic less efficient reduces emissions instead because people will not use cars as frequently.
And keep in mind, I’m not talking about Bumfuck Nowhere (population: 725) when mentioning public transit. Cities have insane amounts of car traffic which can be massively reduced with just a couple of decisions. This would make car traffic less efficient as right now it enjoys many privileges over other forms of transportation.
Yes, if the induced demand results in similar levels of congestion - which it very often does - there would be more emissions in the end.
And you’re right, cars will exist for the forseeable future. I do not however want the government subsidizing car dependency since it is destructive to the environment and to everyone’s health and safety.
A couple of possibilities to drastically reduce traffic:
There’s a lot more I could write here but you get the gist. Making car traffic more efficient does not reduce emissions in the long term in the slightest. Making car traffic less efficient reduces emissions instead because people will not use cars as frequently.
And keep in mind, I’m not talking about Bumfuck Nowhere (population: 725) when mentioning public transit. Cities have insane amounts of car traffic which can be massively reduced with just a couple of decisions. This would make car traffic less efficient as right now it enjoys many privileges over other forms of transportation.