Why are Ontario's HOV lane rules different? | GTAMotorcycle.com

Why are Ontario's HOV lane rules different?

mototours

mototours

Member
Why is Ontario the only place in North America where motorcycles need a passenger to ride in the HOV lanes? :confused:
Does the MTO not care about motorcyclists safety?

I have ridden all over North America and everywhere I have been able to use the HOV lanes without hesitation but can we do that here? No
They are adding over 450 kms of HOV lanes but will they change the rules?
 
The provincial government doesnt have any indication to allow motorcyclists to use those lanes as there are very few of them due to high insurance rates and no one actually writes to their MP and requests that this be taken care of.

Remember we have the liberals in power, its the NDP who actually care about the people...

Also does anyone know why the speed limit is no longer 100, but 150 when people jump into the HOV lanes?
 
I have asked The Honourable Kathleen Wynne, Minister of Transportation the same question as above but I have yet to get a response.




Mototours
 
I am currently fighting a ticket for riding a bike in the HOV lane - March 15; I will let you know how it goes.
 
The NDP.... :) Yah ok....

The speed goes up as people can drive the speed they are comfortable with and there is no traffic to slow them down. Ever been in an HOV
lane and came across a person doing 100? The classic rolling road block... :)

cbr125looksfun said:
The provincial government doesnt have any indication to allow motorcyclists to use those lanes as there are very few of them due to high insurance rates and no one actually writes to their MP and requests that this be taken care of.

Remember we have the liberals in power, its the NDP who actually care about the people...

Also does anyone know why the speed limit is no longer 100, but 150 when people jump into the HOV lanes?
Click to expand...
 
cbr125looksfun said:
The provincial government doesnt have any indication to allow motorcyclists to use those lanes as there are very few of them due to high insurance rates and no one actually writes to their MP and requests that this be taken care of.

Remember we have the liberals in power, its the NDP who actually care about the people...

Also does anyone know why the speed limit is no longer 100, but 150 when people jump into the HOV lanes?
Click to expand...

The NDP, as a party, care about transfer of wealth and paternalism. Nothing more. I suspect that you aren't very old or you would have lived through the last NDP debacle, which would give you a much different outlook.

Remember; it's the Liberals, Progressive Conservatives, and NDP who gave us roadside penalties.

mototours said:
I have asked The Honourable Kathleen Wynne, Minister of Transportation the same question as above but I have yet to get a response.

Mototours
Click to expand...

I've written to several different Ministers of Transportation, on the matter, and don't look for things to change any time soon. I have received responses. They might as well have come off a photocopier.
 
HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes are designed to help move more people through congested areas. HOV lanes offer users a faster, more reliable commute, while also easing congestion in regular lanes - by moving more people in fewer vehicles.

I'm guessing the bolded area is the reason. They should change it to LCF(lessen carbon footprint) lane and allow bikes and hybrids in too.
 
rafiki911 said:
HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes are designed to help move more people through congested areas. HOV lanes offer users a faster, more reliable commute, while also easing congestion in regular lanes - by moving more people in fewer vehicles.

I'm guessing the bolded area is the reason. They should change it to LCF(lessen carbon footprint) lane and allow bikes and hybrids in too.
Click to expand...

Bikes pollute a lot more than most people think.
 
caboose483 said:
Bikes pollute a lot more than most people think.
Click to expand...

Precisely. Even new bikes don't have to meet the same emissions targets as cars, so their pollutants spewed per litre of fuel burned is higher than for a car, and older bikes and newer bikes with cats removed are several magnitudes worse than that.

On top of that, a bike with one rider in most cases uses more fuel per person carried than a car with two or more occupants, and that in turn exacerbates the pollutant effect per person carried even more.

Then there is the intent of the highway HOV lanes - to carry more people on a given lane across long distances. Once you take into account the necessary safe following distance between vehicles, a motorcycle at highway speeds uses virtually the same running lane space as a car or pick-up truck. Allowing a single passenger motorcycle in the HOV lanes defeats the very purpose of those lanes, to get more people moving efficiently in the available lane space together with lowered per-person pollutant costs.
 
rafiki911 said:
HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes are designed to help move more people through congested areas. HOV lanes offer users a faster, more reliable commute, while also easing congestion in regular lanes - by moving more people in fewer vehicles.

I'm guessing the bolded area is the reason. They should change it to LCF(lessen carbon footprint) lane and allow bikes and hybrids in too.
Click to expand...

Hybrids are already allowed on. The guidelines for hybrid cars specifically state that 1 person is ok in the HOV lanes. They should becalled politically convenient lanes.

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/vehicle/electric/ev-green-plates.shtml

As for the other discussion about pollution, my bike had lower fuel mileage than my car (which is quite sad really given that is was over 2000 lbs lighter). No idea on pullution, but that was likely worse too. If it really was about pollution, they would have a restriction based on mpg. On the highway, a hybrid is essentially a normal car and all of the batteries and motors don't change things much. My car on the highway gets better fuel mileage than most hybrids, but it not allowed because it is not politically convenient.
 
Last edited:
rafiki911 said:
Oh that wasn't mentioned here. http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/traveller/hov/
Click to expand...

Old page, created before the Ontario government implemented the special green plate for hybrid cars. In any case, hybrid cars provide fuel saving and reduced pollution benefits that fit in perfectly with some of the original goals of HOV lanes, as described on the page link you gave.

HOV Benefits to You
Conserve Fuel: Less fuel wasted sitting in traffic.

HOV Benefits to Your Community
 Air Quality Benefits: Reduced vehicle emissions and improved air quality.
Click to expand...
 
The name HOV (High Occupancy) is incorrect.

A Car which has on average 5 seats (even compacts) can use the lane with only 2 passengers i.e. 40% of max passenger load, while a bike with only 2 seats and carrying 1 rider has a 50% occupancy rate i.e. a bike should have preference to use the HOV lane given that on a % basis it is carrying more if not the same (for cars that have only 2 seats) % of occupancy as a vehicle.
 
forexman said:
The name HOV (High Occupancy) is incorrect.

A Car which has on average 5 seats (even compacts) can use the lane with only 2 passengers i.e. 40% of max passenger load, while a bike with only 2 seats and carrying 1 rider has a 50% occupancy rate i.e. a bike should have preference to use the HOV lane given that on a % basis it is carrying more if not the same (for cars that have only 2 seats) % of occupancy as a vehicle.
Click to expand...

By that rationale I should be able to use the HOV lanes in my two-seater convertible, which would be a convenient interpretation for me but that interpretation does not fit the stated goals of reducing the number of vehicle and accompanying pollutants on the highway. The term HOV has nothing to do with % of seats filled - it has to do with simple number of occupants actually carried. The goal is fewer vehicle, fewer pollutants, more efficient use of available lane space.
Benefits of High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes

Although our highways are congested with cars, vans and trucks, they can still carry thousands more people - just by increasing the number of passengers in each vehicle. Most people drive with three or four empty seats, even during the most congested periods of the day. One solution is to encourage more commuters to join carpools and take transit rather than drive alone.


High Occupancy Vehicle lanes have been created specifically for use by carpools and buses. The lanes are intended to provide fast, reliable travel for HOV users at any time of the day - particularly during peak travel periods when other lanes can be slow and congested.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
GreyGhost said:
Hybrids are already allowed on. The guidelines for hybrid cars specifically state that 1 person is ok in the HOV lanes. They should becalled politically convenient lanes.

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/vehicle/electric/ev-green-plates.shtml

As for the other discussion about pollution, my bike had lower fuel mileage than my car (which is quite sad really given that is was over 2000 lbs lighter). No idea on pullution, but that was likely worse too. If it really was about pollution, they would have a restriction based on mpg. On the highway, a hybrid is essentially a normal car and all of the batteries and motors don't change things much. My car on the highway gets better fuel mileage than most hybrids, but it not allowed because it is not politically convenient.
Click to expand...

It's not only about miles per gallon, its also about pollutants per mile driven.

Motorcycles and scooters are terrible in this regard, they simply don't have as extensive pollution control as cars. Scooters and motorcycles are not environmentally friendly. Allowing Hummer H2's in the HOV lane actually makes more environmental sense than allowing a scooter or motorcycle.
 
More bikes would cause less congestion which in turn would decrease idling vehicles.

Still a no brain move by Toronto.

Hybrid cars allowed, lol.

Which ones, half of them still belt out the same pollution as regular cars they just get better fuel mileage.
 
Englishj said:
More bikes would cause less congestion which in turn would decrease idling vehicles.
Click to expand...

Congestion on limited access highways with no intersections of traffic control devices is almost solely a function of vehicle count. That makes highway congestion a very different animal from city street congestion. The only effective way to reduce congestion on limited access highways is to reduce the number of vehicles occupying space on them, and the way to do that is to encourage people to car pool.

Running lane space required by traffic at 100 kmph, assuming 2 second headway between vehicles, and assuming only two occupants for cars/trucks and only one on the motorcycle, shows how space-inefficient a single occupant motorcycle is in an HOV lane:
55.6 m headway + 4 m vehicle length for average mid-size car = 59.6 m = 29.8 m per occupant
55.6 m headway + 6 m vehicle length for average pickup truck = 61.6 m = 30.8 m per occupant
55.6 m headway + 2 m vehicle length for single-occupant bike = 57.6 m = 57.6 m per occupant

Englishj said:
Which ones, half of them still belt out the same pollution as regular cars they just get better fuel mileage.
Click to expand...
Electric cars have no tailpipe emissions at all. Plug-in hybrids have zero tailpipe emissions until the engine has to kick in, and even then the amount of emissions is often less than a conventional car with similar engine size, especially in the latest generation of hybrids where the motor is used as a virtually constant-speed electrical gen-set and not for direct-drive propulsion.
 
Last edited:
caboose483 said:
It's not only about miles per gallon, its also about pollutants per mile driven.

Motorcycles and scooters are terrible in this regard, they simply don't have as extensive pollution control as cars. Scooters and motorcycles are not environmentally friendly. Allowing Hummer H2's in the HOV lane actually makes more environmental sense than allowing a scooter or motorcycle.
Click to expand...

A "well to wheel" analysis will probably show otherwise. Which is the correct basis for any analysis of a vehicle's environmental impact.

Motorcycles require less energy to produce, operate/maintain, and dispose vs. the typical A-B commuter car on the roads today.

In terms of mass emissions output divided by total emissions output, motorcycles represent a very small percentage. Expect to see full 3-way catalysts on motorbikes as time moves forward. Then the playing field will be level.
 
NP6000 said:
A "well to wheel" analysis will probably show otherwise. Which is the correct basis for any analysis of a vehicle's environmental impact.

Motorcycles require less energy to produce, operate/maintain, and dispose vs. the typical A-B commuter car on the roads today.

In terms of mass emissions output divided by total emissions output, motorcycles represent a very small percentage. Expect to see full 3-way catalysts on motorbikes as time moves forward. Then the playing field will be level.
Click to expand...

Your argument loses merit when one considers that a vast majority of motorcycles are owned in addition to a normal car. They are not a the sole means of transportation for the owner.

Bearing that in mind, 100% of the "well to wheel" impact of such a vehicle is superfluous. Not only do they pollute more than an ordinary car, their construction and disposition costs are on top of those for a car that the owner already owns and drives.
 
turbodish said:
Congestion on limited access highways with no intersections of traffic control devices is almost solely a function of vehicle count. That makes highway congestion a very different animal from city street congestion. The only effective way to reduce congestion on limited access highways is to reduce the number of vehicles occupying space on them, and the way to do that is to encourage people to car pool.

Running lanes space required by traffic at 100 kmph, assuming 2 second headway between vehicles, and assuming only two occupants for cars/trucks and only one on the motorcycle, shows how space-inefficient a single occupant motorcycle is in an HOV lane:
55.6 m headway + 4 m vehicle length for average mid-size car = 59.6 m = 29.8 m per occupant
55.6 m headway + 6 m vehicle length for average pickup truck = 61.6 m = 30.8 m per occupant
55.6 m headway + 2 m vehicle length for single-occupant bike = 57.6 m = 57.6 m per occupant
Click to expand...

Can't argue with all of the math, but why if we want to reduce congestion where is the consideration for legalizing lane filtering? Don't worry that one is rhetoric :p

turbodish said:
Electric cars have no tailpipe emissions at all. Plug-in hybrids have zero tailpipe emissions until the engine has to kick in, and even then the amount of emissions is often less than a conventional car with similar engine size, especially in the latest generation of hybrids where the motor is used as a virtually constant-speed electrical gen-set and not for direct-drive propulsion.
Click to expand...

Really they have no emissions? Where does this pollutant free coal fired energy come from? Do you know how energy intense the production of batteries (especially Li batteries) are? Barring that, the discussion at hand is highway HOV - where hybrids offer little to no benefit over a gasoline equivalent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom