Update: Welcome to readers from Consumerist.com!
OK, several commenters didn't buy my plea to shut off your car radio to save gas. (Which is fine. The laws of physics are on my side here.)
This new development won't help you save money on gas, but it can be a big expense for Virginia residents, of which I am one. The General Assembly of Virginia passed House Bill 3202 (Chapter 896) designed to raise revenue for various transportation needs within the commonwealth. A summarized explanation of this bill is provided by the staff of the Office of the Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court, the administrative office of the Virginia court system also has a convenient listing of the “civil fees” assessed for the affected moving violations.
The fees listed in the table starting on page 5 of the summarized explanation are one-third of the total civil fee. The amounts listed are but one of three annual payments for the violation. So the total civil fees for many misdemeanors of this type are between $750 and $2,250, with the upper amount reserved for alcohol-related misdemeanors. For the felony offenses listed, the total civil fees are $3,000.
One that caught my eye was related to section 46.2-860 of article 6 which describes this form of reckless driving:
Failing to give proper signals – A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who fails to give adequate and timely signals of intention to turn, partly turn, slow down, or stop, as required by Article 6 (§ 46.2-848 et seq.) of this chapter.
I take this to read that if you turn without signaling properly, you're guilty of reckless driving, which as of July 1st, 2007, carries a civil fee of $350 per year for three years, or $1,050.
So if you're a Virginia resident, please peruse this document and drive carefully! The life — and paycheck — you save could be your own.
What about those people that have their right turn signal on and actually don't turn right?
Wouldn't failure to signal intention to stop fall under failure to maintain vehicle? You don't signal to stop; either your brake lights work or they don't! Can they cite you for both if your taillights are burned out?
OK, you invoked the Laws of Physics, so I have to chime in (because I have a degree in physics).
What I think everyone can agree on is the fact that turning off your car radio saves a negligible amount of gas. The debate is really whether or not it does any good at all. And the answer to THAT QUESTION is:
Not at all clear.
When we plug a radio into a wall outlet we draw (and pay for) energy that we are consuming. The electrons were already moving back and forth but were doing no real work — the energy of the oscillations isn't used (though of course there *is* some loss due to resistance in the wires) until you plug your radio in. In a case like this, you are saving energy and money. The power company reduces the amount of power they are actually generating with changes in demand from the customers.
A different way of powering your house would be a generator attached to a waterwheel. The falling water turns the wheel at a constant rate. The generator turns at a constant rate and produces a constant amount of power. If you plug in your radio, you pull from that supply. If you don't, the energy is lost as waste heat. Law of physics — energy is conserved! The water wheel/generator can't reduce production when demand falls, so the energy gets wasted.
So which scenario matches a car? Does the car generate electrical power proportionally to the amount consumed (like the power company does) or does it generate a constant amount of available electrical power (like the water wheel does)?
The alternator provides power to the charge the battery and to power the electrical components of the car. Since the alternator is simply driven by a belt I suspect that energy you don't use is still generated, but then just dissipates as heat. In that case, turning off your radio has no benefit whatsoever. If, however, the alternator does have some mechanism for throttling back production you could save a tiny bit of gas by turning off the radio.
More likely than not, though, the alternator just makes energy at a more or less constant rate. If you don't use, you are still using gas to generate it — you're just converting it to waste heat rather than sound (as music). Any automotive engineers here that can chime in on alternator design?
The alternator runs off the drive belt, which unlike the AC compressor does not have a clutch to disconnect it, so it is always running and thus producing current whether electrical components are on or not. The belt is powered by a wheel connected to the camshaft. The belt will spin faster and generate more power to the alternator with higher RPMs but there is a regulator that keeps the voltage the same and the amperage that the alternator can output is limited to its rating. Whether you are drawing from the electrical system or not, the torque required to run the alternator does not change, so your gas mileage is completely unaffected.
Kevin,
In cars, the alternator constantly produces electricity as long as the engine runs since it has no clutch mechanism, like AC compressor has, that it can use to disassociate itself from the engine when it does not have to produce electricity.
The total energy output of an alternator depends on the engine RPM. The higher the RPM, the higher the energy produced. That makes sense.
However, all automobile alternators have a voltage regulator that strives to maintain a 12-14V output over the changing electricity load by increasing/decreasing the current.
Any unconsumed electricity is simply lost as heat. Considering that alternator is designed so that it produces enough current to charge battery when the engine is at idle RPM, you can imagine that at driving RPM (anything above idle), it will produce so much excess energy such that any electricity consumed by turning on radio when the engine is off is insignificant.
Several states have been going to the annual fines for infractions. It's a huge moneymaker for them, and a huge pain for those who have to pay.
$1000+ dollars for not signaling? I think that is way over the top.
$1000+ dollars for going 75 mph in 15 mph school zone… that I would understand.
But apparently, both would be reckless driving. A good lawyer should get the turn signal dropped, but it would cost a few hundred to secure representation.
I think I will continue my stellar and responsible driving habits. 😀
Wish we had this over in good old TX. 1,000+ is a lil' excessive, but hey.
this is a racket. bulbs burn out, flasher modules fail..
very cheap parts to replace, would be a fix-it ticket.
-failure to signal, is discourteous to other drivers MAYBE..
depending on traffic/location/situation.
-branding it a moving violation is ridiculous.
-attaching such a high fine to it also ridiculous.
-and the declaration of it being a moving violation will
also be counted as points against you're auto insurance policy rates.. so not only will you be paying the ticket, you may end up paying higher rates to the insurance corporation for years.
add that to the price of the ticket. this is a SCAM to steal youre money, part of youre LIFE/TIME/LABOR/WAGES.
police state SLAVERY.
this "law" WILL be abused to generate revenue from the people.
try to fight it in court, the judge will give all credibility to the cop, his boy, because theres money in it for THEM, and for their corporate "bosses".. the insurance industry.
FACE IT, police lawyers and judges are NON-PRODUCTIVE. they are parasitic to the productive working class of people. our government gives corporate welfare grants to companies that are 3-4x what 'We The People' ever receive, and they use the grant (courtesy of the taxpayer) to leave the USA, leaving 'We The People' unemployed. the whole plan is all about making us BROKE and in trouble with the "LAW", or both.
-sorry, on a rant here…
the other factor with this is GUN CONTROL LAWS.
-recent passage of law to prevent anyone with a psychiatric diagnosis from purchasing a weapon can be affected by this.
-get a ticket for jaywalking or speeding, and now 'reckless driving' for failing to use a turn signal, can be interpreted as "a danger to himself or others".
"law enforcement", the AMA, the insurance industry, ALL share information to each other. this is the way the beast operates.
C'mon Sees Things, why pussy foot around the issue. You know this is just another way to take away all assetts from the middle class before escorting them into the Halliburton/Cheney Concentration Camps. Why tease these guys with the shallow stuff?
C'mon Sees Things, why pussy foot around the issue. You know this is just another way to take away all assetts from the middle class before escorting them into the Halliburton/Cheney Concentration Camps.
Why tease these guys with the shallow stuff?
to the posters commenting on whether or not electrical power from a car's alternator is wasted as heat if it's not used, you're not thinking in modern terms. A GENERATOR (like that driven by a water wheel cited by one of the posters) produces power as a fairly simple function of the design of that generator and the RPM at which it's operating. An alternator, however, has a variable field that's managed by the regulation system. An alternator can't produce any power unless it has some electrical power when it begins spinning to set up the field, it doesn't have the permanent magnets that a generator does. The field strength at a particular RPM determines how much power is produced. Most cars will drop a few RPM when you turn on the headlights, for example, because it's harder for the car to turn the alternator when it's producing enough power to heat the filaments in the bulbs.
As to the Virginia fine crap, well, you Virginians elected those people. Kick them out. Get their hands out of your pockets.
Failure to signal is such a horribly ambiguous offense, as well – note that it says "A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who fails to give adequate and timely signals of intention to turn." You could use your turn signal and still get ticketed if the officer determined that you didn't signal soon enough, for example. It's the kind of law that's just asking to be abused.
a) Yes. The more load that's on the alternator, the harder it is for the engine to turn it.
b) It is the drivers responsibility to maintain their vehicle. It might be a $1 lightbulb, but it is an important safety feature.
c) In my state, and probably all the other ones, the law says how many feet from an intersection or lane change you are supposed to signal your intent. Not vague at all.
d) Don't want Virginia to "steal" your money? Operate your vehicle in a lawful manner.
I think it's clear why this bill was passed. The fellow that introduced it is a senior partner in a TRAFFIC LAW FIRM. Interesting that he was so eager for this bill, considering he will get buckets of customers who want to avoid the fees by fighting it in court. It's totally shady, not to mention exploitative of the poor. I hope virginians wake up to this and never elect this guy again.
Here's Radley Balko's take: http://www.theagitator.com/archives/027900.php#02…
The debate about the radio is absolutely silly. Let's assume that there is some additional fuel used, how much could that even be? Pennies per year maybe? Meanwhile, people pay $.99 on iTunes per song, subscribe to satilite radio at $12 per month, and buy CDs that contain more plastic in the packaging than used to make the actual CD. Don't forget the folks that sit in their running, air conditioned cars in the parking lot for an extra few minutes in order to hear how a bit on Howard Stern will end. You know who you are.
If you want to listen to music while you drive, do it. If not, then don't.
Hey, maybe people should have less sex to reduce CO2 production and slow global warming. Don't believe me? Chemistry is no my side.
And, oh yes, use your turn signal. If the bulb blows, use hand signals until it's fixed.
Actually failure to signal has always been against the law, but I didn't know it was reckless driving. I had a buddy who was pulled over for an illegal lane change because his wheels touched the lane division line and he didn't signal. He had been drinking, the cop knew it (saw him pull out of a bar parking lot,) but he wasn't driving bad enough to pull over until he drifted into the line.
Also, these civil penalties were passed to raise revenue for road construction and repair, which is badly needed in Virginia. My only gripe with them is that they won't apply to out-of-state drivers that get ticketed in Virginia. We have a lot of non-residents that drive here (military with cars registered in other states, commuters from NC, and tourists) and they are the worst offenders.
The other problem I have is with the state Dept. of Transportation in general, and that is they are just now trying to fund work that needed to be done 15 years ago. I think traffic, at least in the Hampton Roads region, is beyond fixing.
And while we're tacking on fines and penalties, could we please add a hefty fine for folks who ride their brake pedal? How do I know if you're stopping or slowing down if your bloody brake light is always on?
I don't have as much of a problem with people failing to signal to turn as I do with people who abruptly swerve from one lane to another without using turn signals to advertise their reckless driving in advance. Does this law apply to them, since technically they aren't "turning" but merely changing lanes?
I'm also a bit behind the times in learning about the new fines regarding the turn signal law, since TV news in Virginia was far more concerned with letting us know that under-18 drivers can't be using cell phones while driving. TV seemed to completely ignore the law that affects ALL drivers, regardless of age.
WAKE UP AMERICAN DRIVERS
Every State has a law that requires drivers to turn on their turn signal before changing lanes. If these laws are obeyed, the number of unintended lane change crashes and road run-offs would be greatly reduced.
The NHTSA and the insurance industry have reported that unintended lane change crashes have been the direct cause of 23,000 annual fatalities on U.S. roadways. When drivers signal before making a lane change they give others on the road an extra split second of reaction time to adjust their driving. An extra split second is all that is needed to avoid the swerve that very frequently causes crashes and road run-offs. A person's life can either be saved or lost in just a split second.
Please join our National Campaign for increased awareness and stronger enforcement of Turn Signal use!
Not using Turn Signals is at the root of over 1/2 the motor vehicle accidents that take place. IF we were to have a National Campaign like Click-it-or-Ticket, Turn Signal use would drastically decrease the number of accidents, Road Rage, Injuries, and Deaths.
Seat belts only help when an accident occurs, Turn Signals actually prevent accidents.
Come on people connect the dots, I know you have the capacity to understand what the root cause of most motor vehicle accidents.