The first 100 people to sign up using the link in the description get three free delicious,

前100名報名者使用 在描述中的鏈接得到三個免費的美味。

fresh meals from Blue Apron.

Blue Apron的新鮮餐點。

In 2004 the American Highway Users Alliance published an article claiming that the Katy

2004年，美國公路使用者聯盟 發表文章稱，《凱蒂

freeway in Houston, Texas was the second most congested road in America.

德克薩斯州休斯敦市的高速公路是第二多的。 美國擁堵的道路。

Drivers spent a combined 25.4 million hours every year sitting in traffic on that road.

司機總共花費了2540萬小時 每年都在那條路上堵車

That’s 36 lifetimes worth.

這可是三十六生有幸啊。

It was an absolute embarrassment of a road for Texas so they decided to spend $2.8 billion

這絕對是一條尷尬的道路。 為德克薩斯州，所以他們決定花費28億美元。

to expand it to 28 lanes making it the widest highway in the world.

擴建至28條車道，使其成為最寬的車道。 世界上的高速公路。

All this extra capacity would surely fix the problem—more lanes means more room for more

所有這些額外的能力肯定會解決 更多的車道意味著有更多的空間來容納更多的人。

cars which means shorter travel times... right?

汽車，這意味著更短的旅行時間... ... 對嗎？

Unfortunately not.

可惜不是。

Between 2011 and 2014 alone, travel times on the Katy freeway increased by up to 55%.

僅在2011年至2014年期間，旅行時間 在凱蒂高速公路上的增幅高達55%。

It now takes an average of 64 minutes to drive the 28 miles between downtown Houston and

現在平均需要64分鐘的車程 在休斯頓市中心和

Katyland during the afternoon rush hour.

下午高峰時段的卡特蘭。

That’s up from 41 minutes in 2011.

這比2011年的41分鐘有所增加。

The problem with this project was that the solution violated the fundamental law of road

這個項目的問題是 解決辦法違反了道路的基本規律

congestion—more lanes mean more traffic.

擁堵--更多的車道意味著更多的交通。

This probably seems counterintuitive.

這可能看起來有悖常理。

The more lanes there are the higher the capacity a road has so cars should be able to drive

車道越多，容量越大。 路有路，車要能開

faster... but that’s a very narrow analysis of the problem.

更快... ...但這是一個非常狹隘的分析。 的問題。

You can’t just think about how this would work on one road, you have to think about

你不能只想著這樣做會怎樣 在一條路上工作，你必須考慮到。

it in the context of a whole city.

它在整個城市的範圍內。

Many people choose not to drive places because of how long it takes.

許多人選擇不開車的地方，因為 的需要多長時間。

If the traffic is bad, they can take public transit or wait until a less busy time, or

如果交通不暢，他們可以採取公共的。 中轉或等到不那麼繁忙的時候，或

just not travel at all.

只是不出行而已。

When a road is expanded, travel times initially decrease so all those people who chose not

當一條道路擴建時，行駛時間最初 減少，所以所有選擇不

to drive or to take an alternate route or whatever decide to switch to using that newly

開車或改道，或 不管是什麼決定改用那個新的

expanded road.

擴建的道路。

What’s fascinating about roads is that this happens at a perfect 1 to 1 ratio.

道路的迷人之處在於，這種 以1比1的完美比例發生。

If the capacity of a road doubles, the amount of people using that road will also double.

如果一條道路的通行能力增加一倍，則其數量為 使用該道路的人數也將增加一倍。

If it doubles again, the amount will again double.

如果它再次翻倍，金額將再次。 雙。

Of course if you kept doing this over and over again you would eventually build a big

當然，如果你一直這樣做，並 你最終會建立一個大

enough road that there wouldn’t be any more cars to fill the road, but in the real world

足夠的道路，不會有更多的。 車來補路，但在現實世界中

where demand for roads far outstrips supply, drivers will adjust to any change in road

在道路需求遠遠超過供應的地方。 司機會根據道路的任何變化進行調整

capacity.

的能力。

So does that mean that it’s hopeless?

那是不是意味著沒救了？

Is there no way to solve traffic?

難道沒有辦法解決交通問題嗎？

No way to make our roads better and safer and more efficient?

沒有辦法讓我們的道路變得更好、更安全。 並且效率更高？

Well... no.

那...不

There’s plenty we can do.

我們可以做的事情很多。

Here’s the thing about traffic—it slows down exponentially.

這就是關於交通的事情--它減緩了。 成倍下降。

The 20,000 car on the road slows down traffic overall significantly more than the 5,000

路上的2萬輛車讓交通變慢了 總體上大大超過5,000

car.

車。

This is a major driver for a lot of jams—a small addition of cars leads to a large addition

這也是很多果醬的主要驅動力------。 積少成多

in congestion—but it also makes solving traffic a bit easier since you only need to

在擁堵的情況下，但它也使解決。 由於您只需要

remove a small amount of cars from the road and that’s just what ramp meters do.

疏導 而這正是坡道儀的作用。

Ramp meters are set up on the on-ramps of highways to restrict the amount of people

匝道上設置了匝道計價器。 高速公路，以限制人口數量

getting on the highway.

上了高速公路。

They usually let one car on every five or six seconds.

他們通常讓每五輛車或每一輛車上 六秒鐘。

Since the amount of cars actually on the highway is kept down, the highway stays at its most

由於高速公路上的實際車輛數量 抑制，高速公路就會保持在其最

efficient speed.

高效的速度。

Minnesota did an experiment where they shut down their long-used ramp meters for eight

明尼蘇達州做了一個實驗，他們關閉 在他們長期使用的坡道計價器下，8個月的時間裡。

weeks in order to see if they actually worked and they found that the highway capacity decreased

周，以瞭解它們是否真的有效 他們發現，高速公路的通行能力下降

by 9%, travel times increased by 22%, speeds dropped by 7%, and crashes increased by 26%.

9%，行車時間增加22%，車速 下降了7%，車禍增加了26%。

Stockholm, Sweden used that exponential nature of traffic to decrease travel times by up

瑞典斯德哥爾摩利用這種指數性質 縮短行車時間

to 40% in 2006.

2006年增至40%。

Stockholm as a city lies across 14 islands which means that all the bridges act as huge

斯德哥爾摩作為一個城市，橫跨14個島嶼 這意味著，所有的橋都像一個巨大的

chokepoints.

窒息點；

Traffic, therefore, was historically horrible for the relatively small city.

是以，交通在歷史上是可怕的 對於相對較小的城市來說。

On January 3rd, 2006, Stockholm started to charge drivers who entered this central perimeter—the

2006年1月3日，斯德哥爾摩開始 向進入這一中心區域的司機收費------。

busiest area.

最繁忙的地區。

The charge wasn’t much—between 10 and 20 krona, the equivalent of 1 and 2 US dollars—

收費不多，在10元和10元之間。 20克朗，相當於1美元和2美元

but it was enough to persuade 20% of drivers to not enter the central perimeter.

但它足以說服20%的司機 以免進入中央周邊。

They either went downtown on public transport or walked or didn’t go at all.

他們要不就是坐公車去市區 或走或根本沒走。

These are the amounts of daily drivers in the perimeter in the years leading up to the

這些都是每天駕駛者的數量，在 前的幾年裡，在周邊地區進行的活動。

charge.

控。

As soon as the charge was implemented in 2006, the daily amount dropped down to here.

2006年一實施收費。 每天的金額下降到這裡。

It wasn’t a fluke.

這不是僥倖。

After the 6 month initial trial period driving in the central core became free again and

在6個月的初始試用期後，駕駛 在中央的核心地帶又變得自由自在

the amount of daily drivers increased to nearly the level it was before.

每天的司機數量增加到近 之前的水準。

When the charge became permanent in 2007, daily numbers once again plummeted.

2007年，當這項指控成為永久性的。 日數再次大幅下降。

Even though the charge was minuscule, it was enough to dissuade 10s of thousands of people

雖然收費是微不足道的，但它是 擋得住萬夫所指

from using those roads.

從使用這些道路。

There are really two costs of driving—the money and the time.

開車其實有兩個成本 錢和時間。

When the time it takes to drive isn’t enough of a cost to prevent people from driving,

當開車的時間不夠用的時候 的一種成本，以防止人們開車。

these charges increase the overall cost to a level where some people will decide not

這些收費增加了政府的總體成本。 有人會決定不

to drive.

來駕駛。

But what about safety?

但安全問題呢？

Roads are still unbelievably dangerous.

道路還是無比的危險。

In any given year, 1 out of every 10,000 people in the US die in a car accident.

在任何一年中，每10,000人中就有1人。 在美國死於車禍。

Just think about how high of a proportion that is.

你想想看，這個比例有多高 就是說

If you go to a Redskins game at FedEx field near Washington, DC, eight of the people sitting

如果你去聯邦快遞球場看紅皮隊的比賽 在華盛頓特區附近，8個坐在那裡的人

in the stands with you will die in the next year in a car accident.

和你一起看臺上的人都會在下一次死掉。 年的車禍中。

It turns out one of the best ways to prevent accidents is with something you’ve almost

原來預防的最好方法之一是 意外是與你幾乎

certainly already seen or used—the roundabout.

肯定已經看到或使用--環島。

There’s a reason you see these more and more.

這是有原因的，你看到這些更多的和 更多。

Roundabouts reduce deaths and serious injuries by 90%.

繞行減少死亡和嚴重傷害 90%。

That is not an error.

這不是一個錯誤。

With roundabouts, there’s almost no opportunity for the worst type of collision—the head

有了環島，幾乎就沒有機會了。 最嚴重的碰撞類型--頭部

on full speed crash.

在全速撞擊。

In a traditional intersection, cars come within feet of each other while going at a relative

在傳統的十字路口，汽車進入 相向而行

speed of up to 100 mph.

時速可達100英里。

A head-on crash at that speed is undoubtedly catastrophic.

在這種速度下，迎面撞上無疑是 災難性的。

With roundabouts, cars naturally slow down to about 15-25 miles per hour since they’re

有了環島，車速自然會慢下來 到大約15-25英里每小時，因為他們是。

going around a curve.

繞著彎子走。

Also, if there were to be a collision, it would either be a side-impact collision if

此外，如果發生碰撞，它 要麼是側面碰撞，如果

a car failed to turn into the circle or a side-to-side collision if a car misjudged

車子沒能轉入圓圈或者是 側撞

the curve.

的曲線。

Both of these collisions happen at a low relative speed so fatalities are low.

這兩種碰撞都是在一個低的相對溫度下發生的。 速度，所以死亡率很低。

But what about capacity?

但是能力呢？

Surely the lower-speed roundabouts cause horrible traffic problems.

當然，低速環島造成可怕的。 交通問題。

Well... they don’t.

嗯... 他們沒有

A single lane roundabout can handle a maximum of 1800 vehicles per hour which is exactly

一個單車道環島可以處理最大限度的安全問題。 每小時1800輛，正好是

the same as a traditional two-lane signaled intersection.

與傳統的雙車道信號燈相同 交叉口。

While cars will move through a signaled intersection at a much higher speed, they have to wait

當車輛通過有信號燈的十字路口時。 在更高的速度下，他們必須等待。

both for the light to change and left-turning cars.

既要變燈，又要左轉。 汽車。

With roundabouts, you have a smooth, consistent, albeit slower, flow.

有了環島，你就有了一個平穩、一致的。 儘管速度較慢，但流。

So what’s the problem?

那麼問題出在哪裡？

Why haven’t we replaced every intersection with a roundabout?

為什麼我們不把每個路口都換掉 與環島？

Well there are disadvantages—they’re more difficult for pedestrians, especially those

嗯，也有缺點--他們更多的是 困難的行人，特別是那些

who are deaf or blind, they require a larger footprint, they’re more expensive to maintain—but

聾啞或失明的人，他們需要更大的空間。 佔地面積大，維護成本高，但也有可能會出現一些問題。

the real reason roundabouts are not ubiquitous nowadays is because of the biggest fallacy

迂迴曲折的真諦 現今最大的謬誤就是因為

in road design—that drivers need rules.

在道路設計中，司機需要規則。

Poynton, just outside of Manchester, UK, used to have a typical, rather dreary intersection

波因頓，就在英國曼徹斯特郊外，用 有一個典型的，相當沉悶的十字路口。

and nobody really liked it.

而沒有人真正喜歡它。

Cars would back up for miles, pedestrians had to wait forever for the light to change,

車子會倒退幾英里，行人會倒退幾英里 不得不永遠等著光線的變化。

and it essentially split the town apart.

而且基本上把這個鎮子分割開來了。

So someone had the idea to remove the traffic lights, remove the zebra crossings, the curbs,

於是有人想出了去除流量的辦法 燈，拆除斑馬線、路邊。

remove almost every safety device in the intersection and just set up two adjoining roundabouts.

拆除路口的幾乎所有安全裝置 而只是設置了兩個相鄰的環島。

Surely this would wreak havoc, but it didn’t.

當然，這將會造成巨大的破壞，但它沒有。

Turns out, when people are uncomfortable, when people aren’t really sure what’s

原來，當人們感到不舒服的時候。 當人們不知道什麼是真正的

going on, they pay more attention.

的事情，他們會更加關注。

The green light was a signal to people that the road was clear, that it was safe to speed,

綠燈是給人們的一個信號 道路暢通，可以安全行駛。

that they could let their guard down, but after the change the cars were able to flow

他們可以放鬆警惕，但 變化後，汽車能夠流動

freely, albeit at a slow pace, instead of waiting for the lights to change.

縱橫捭闔 等待燈光的變化。

Pedestrian incidents went down, collisions went down, traffic flowed faster, and the

行人事件下降，碰撞事件 下去了，車流速度加快了，而且。

city center finally had some character.

市中心終於有了一些特色。

So, all around the world cities are replicating what Poynton did.

是以，世界各地的城市都在複製 波因頓所做的事情。

They’re removing curbs, traffic lights, and pedestrian crossings to make one shared

他們在拆除路邊，交通燈。 和人行橫道，使之成為一個共享的

space.

空間：

All around the world, these streets are resulting in fewer accidents and more pedestrian space.

在世界各地，這些街道導致 以減少事故，增加行人空間。

Discomfort is saving lives.

不舒服就是救人。

On a larger scale, there’s one more innovative intersection design that’s beginning to

在更大的範圍內，還有一種創新的做法 交叉口設計，開始

save lives—the diverging diamond interchange.

This interchange is designed as a way to get more cars on and off highways faster.

這個換乘站的設計，是為了讓人們能夠在這裡獲得更多的便利。 更多的車更快的上、下高速。

After the on-ramp to the right side, the road crosses over so cars never have to traverse

過了右邊的匝道後，路 交叉口，使車輛不必橫穿

active lanes to get onto the highway.

主動車道上高速。

A car heading north can effortlessly join the on-ramp without crossing traffic, and

向北行駛的汽車可以毫不費力地加入 匝道而不橫穿交通，以及

a car heading south will cross over so it drives on the left side and can effortlessly

南方的車會過馬路，所以它 在左側行駛，可以毫不費力地進行。

join the on-ramp to head south.

進入匝道向南行駛。

Not only is this easier for drivers, it improves safety.

這不僅方便了司機，還提高了 安全。

The dangerousness of an intersection is often rated by determining the number of conflict

一個十字路口的危險性往往是 通過確定衝突數量來評定

points—possible points where accidents could happen under normal circumstances.

點--可能發生事故的點 在正常情況下發生。

With a traditional on-ramp intersection there are 26.

在傳統的匝道交叉口，有 是26個。

With a diverging diamond intersection, only 14.

有了分歧的鑽石交點，只有 14.

And they’re faster too.

而且他們的速度也更快。

The US Department of Transportation found in a study that universally, whether the traffic

美國交通部發現 在一項研究中，普遍認為，無論是交通的

was light or heavy, diverging diamond interchanges let more cars through faster.

是輕是重，分歧的鑽石互易 讓更多的車更快的通過。

It costs less too.

它的成本也更低。

A traditional on-ramp intersection requires $11.3 million to build; a diverging diamond

傳統的匝道交叉口需要 1,130萬美元建造；分叉的金剛石

intersection, only $5.7 million.

交叉口，只有570萬美元。

There are really no major disadvantages to this intersection so nearly 100 of them have

真的沒有什麼大的缺點 這個路口，所以其中近100個有

been built to date and more and more are being installed each month.

迄今為止，已經建成了越來越多的。 每月安裝。

As good as these solutions sound, there’s no one way to solve traffic.

儘管這些解決方案聽起來很好，但還有 沒有一種方法可以解決交通問題。

The difference between cities with chronic traffic problems and those without is a combination

城市之間的差異與長期 交通問題和沒有交通問題的人是一個組合

of smart policies and designs that mitigate the effects of having more road demand than

的智能政策和設計，以減輕 道路需求量超過了預期的效果。

supply.

供應。

But traffic won’t just fix itself so until cities at least experiment with solutions

但流量不會就這麼自己解決，所以直到 城市至少試驗性地提出解決方案

we’re all condemned to traffic, forever.

我們都被判為交通，永遠。

This video was made possible by Blue Apron.

這個視頻是由Blue Apron製作的。

Fixing traffic is all about saving time and improving the environment and so is Blue Apron.

修理交通就是為了節省時間和 改善環境，藍杏也是如此。

They ship pre-apportioned meals strait to your doorstep sourced directly from sustainable

他們把預先分配好的飯菜直接運到... 在您的家門口直接從可持續發展的國家和地區採購。

farms and fisheries.

農場和漁業；

Blue Apron sent me a box to try out and it was a fantastic meal.

Blue Apron給我寄了一盒，讓我試一試。 是一個夢幻般的餐點。

You’re shipped the exact amount of everything you need so you don’t have do any measuring.

你會被運到所有東西的確切數量。 你需要，所以你不必做任何測量。

Not only does this save time, it also minimizes food waste.

這不僅節省了時間，還最大限度地減少了 浪費糧食；

They give you these clear, concise instructions so even the least experienced chefs can work

他們給了你這些清晰、簡潔的訓示 是以，即使是最沒有經驗的廚師也可以工作

with their recipes.

與他們的食譜。

So here’s the meal I made.

所以這是我做的飯菜。

It was healthy, quick, filling, and delicious and the good news is that you can get a meal

很健康，很快速，很充實，也很好吃。 好消息是，你可以得到一頓飯。

just like this for free.

就像這樣的免費。

Blue Apron is offering the first 100 Wendover Productions viewers that sign up with the

Blue Apron提供首批100個Wendover 產品的觀眾，註冊了

link in the description three free meals so you can try Blue Apron.

在描述中的鏈接三免費餐，所以 你可以試試藍杏。

Not only will signing up support Wendover Productions, you’ll also get a chance to

簽約不僅可以支持溫多弗 製作，你也將有機會獲得。

try these truly delicious meals.

試試這些真正的美味佳餚。

Aside from that, please be sure to check out my podcast Showmakers and subscribe to this

除此以外，請一定要檢查一下 我的播客Showmakers和訂閱這個

channel to get all my future videos right when they come out.

頻道，讓我未來所有的視頻權利 當他們出來。

Thanks again for watching and I’ll see you in two weeks for another Wendover Productions

再次感謝你的觀看，我會看到你。 在兩週內為另一個Wendover製作的

video.

視頻：