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.
No they aren’t. They’re saying smarter traffic systems are an improvement over what we have now. I’ve looked in the article and nowhere do they say cars aren’t a problem, or that emissions is down to traffic lights not cars.
I see so many examples on here and on Reddit of people letting perfect be the enemy of good.
Whether we like it or not, cars will be around for a while. It makes no sense to put zero effort into improving efficiency in the meantime. You don’t have to be so all-or-nothing.
Yes, and such intelligent systems can also optimize for pedestrian traffic, reducing the time waiting for a walk light, monitor bike lane usage, track dangerous intersections, improve emergency response times, prioritize buses and trams, etc. It’s good for people to be gathering this data and trying to make things better.
No they aren’t. They’re saying smarter traffic systems are an improvement over what we have now. I’ve looked in the article and nowhere do they say cars aren’t a problem, or that emissions is down to traffic lights not cars.
I see so many examples on here and on Reddit of people letting perfect be the enemy of good.
Whether we like it or not, cars will be around for a while. It makes no sense to put zero effort into improving efficiency in the meantime. You don’t have to be so all-or-nothing.
Yes, and such intelligent systems can also optimize for pedestrian traffic, reducing the time waiting for a walk light, monitor bike lane usage, track dangerous intersections, improve emergency response times, prioritize buses and trams, etc. It’s good for people to be gathering this data and trying to make things better.
In the US, these types of “intelligent” systems almost always degrade pedestrian traffic quite severely.