I'm not sure about some of the techniques... what is pulse and glide? Doesn't sound very efficient--seems like it would be more efficient to keep a steady speed.
I have tried to analyze the effect of coasting down hills, and I think there is only a certain range of grade where it would be better mpg to shift into neutral vs staying in gear, probably not worth the trouble to me, plus I think it is a strange driving habit to not be in gear, just like not shifting down when stopping, but I will confess it is a hard point to argue so probably just my opinion.
I think it is not good for the engine, for a variety of reasons, to be starting and stopping a lot--besides issues with the turbo, starting an engine is fairly rough: less optimum lubrication, more heating/cooling cycles, starter wear, and just the jolt of getting going from a stop, etc. I'm sure these things are minimized on any modern engine, but not eliminated. Maybe virtually eliminated on a Prius or a golf cart, but not our TDIs, or any diesel. I believe this is a main reason there is no available diesel hybrid. Think of it this way... lots of things go wrong on our cars; do you think they would go wrong if the car just sat there at medium rpm at medium load for thousands of hours straight, like a tractor or generator? My point is it's the non-steady-state events (made up technical term) that cause things to wear and/or break in any well designed machine, and starting and stopping are probably the most extreme case of this. We all know cold starts are hard on an engine, well, hot starts are a lot better, but still rough. The actual degree of roughness is all that I believe is debatable, but maybe it's not enough to really matter. And of course maybe it's worth it to save gas, who knows?
I don't think it's unsafe to shut your car off. If it takes more effort to turn or stop then expend some more effort. Yes, it's surprising sometimes when the brakes don't work like you expect. Get used to surprises! It will sound like just my opinion but I truly believe that just learning to pay attention and be careful will go way further toward keeping everyone healthy than a bunch of stupid safety devices and laws which train people to rely on them and never get any good at driving. How hard should it be to just drive around and not run into anything?
In Germany you easily get people in the fast lane going twice as fast as people in the slow lane. This is not "safe", but you can bet people in the slow lane don't get in the fast lane without a bit of care, and the people in the fast lane are watching like a hawk for someone to be stupid. The point is: watch out for people who can't stop as fast as you.
Someone driving a beater with brakes that operate poorly on one of four bald tires, on ice, and steering that only keeps it between the lines with difficulty, can easily be a safer driver than someone with a new car with headlight wipers and run-flat tires... it's not about the power brakes, it's about knowing how your brakes work, and driving accordingly.
If you say, "A is safer than B, therefore A is right and B is wrong/illegal/stupid/dangerous/irresponsible/etc." then in a way you are right but maybe you should go start your own country on an island somewhere, maybe you can make a utopia. Please leave me out of it. I can understand how people get to thinking this way if someone they know and love gets injured or killed, but just because there is an error in one direction doesn't mean there isn't an error in the opposite direction--if people don't apply some sense to their safety rules, then they are "too safe". Which is what the argument really comes down to: is it possible to be too safe? Some people think so and some people don't. The "safe nuts" (lacking a better term) have an advantage though because people get killed, and the other side finds it hard to argue with that. To me it's a form of brain washing. Kids grow up not knowing that there was a time not too long ago when seat belts and helmets and gloves were completely voluntary, and everyone learned and decided themselves what was safe and what wasn't.
Thanks for reading, I think there was something relevant toward the beginning
I think the safety aspect is interesting and worthy of intelligent analysis, but it is rather complicated.