[sustran] Re: transport is politics in bombay

PREMA/ BRITTO premag at bom5.vsnl.net.in
Mon Jan 24 07:52:09 JST 2000


Meant to send a note on the Bombay's exciting efforts by citizens to move
courts and the govt? on vehicle pollution, flyovers and hawkers TRANSPORT IS
POLITICS  in Bombay today.
Three events have sharpened citizen awareness in Bombay.
# ANTI POLLUTION DRIVE  2,00,000 vehicles ( all except pvt cars) were off
Bombay's roads for 4 days.We could breathe easy.Pollution levels were down
by 25 to 40 %.and public transport -trains and buses flourished.
An ordinary doctor of the Smoke Free Forum had filed a public interest
litigation to enforce the ban on old and polluting taxis.The govt supported
this move, encouraged by a positive court verdict.But people are confused.Is
it the powerful car lobby trying to get taxis off the street(55000 at
that)The taxis and pvt operators blame the car lobby and the govt. for
allowing adulterated fuel to be sold.They cheekily remark --why not get old
cars of the road too? I would love to hear if we can feed the
politicians/govt with solutions to cut down pollution levels .
Is Eric from ecoplan listening? He I believe is privy to major ideas on
this.And other friends?

## FLYOVERS - can make or break a govt? Inaugurating a flyover yesterday
(the 44th ??) in Bombay the minister said," A flyover is like wearing 20
coats when you do not have a shirt to wear".The new govt is 100 days new.The
state coffers are empty.and they are saddled with completing 55 flyovers a
legacy from the previous govt. ( whose life depended on flyovers ).At least
two flyovers have been stopped due to courts. And now, the new govt ( to
spite the old  govt) will carry out an expert study --will flyovers actually
reduce pollution and ease traffic in Bombay??Again a major chance to
lobby.The World Bank too has opposed flyovers as part of the urban transport
planAnd the bottomline is  --no money, no flyovers??
### HAWKER ZONES--Again an ordinary citizen filed a PIL (public interest
litigation) against the city govt for allowing enterprise to encroach
pavements and roads.The attempt to divorce people from livelihoods has not
been as successful.They keep coming back.The stick doesn't work.and there is
no carrot.Hawker associations have fought this move while well heeled
citizens have opposed hawker zones in their area.The battle is on.Meanwhile
some activists are exploring new ways of accommodating this.Any similar
battles?


> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 23:24:15 +0800
> From: SUSTRAN Resource Centre <sustran at po.jaring.my>
> Subject: [sustran] Re: sustran-discuss V1 #545
>
> Dear Prema and Britto,
>
> You sent a message to sustran-discuss today but there was no message from
> you... just a copy of the recent digest message that you had received.
>
> I think perhaps you meant to do something else... perhaps change your
> subscription?? Is there anything I can do to help?
THANKS FOR THE CONCERN -- PREMA
> Best wishes,
>
> Paul.
>
>
>
> At 12:57 22/01/00 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: sustran-discuss <owner-sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org>
> >To: <sustran-discuss-digest at jca.apc.org>
> >Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2000 12:00 PM
> >Subject: sustran-discuss V1 #545
> >
> >
> >> * To leave, send the message UNSUBSCRIBE sustran-discuss-digest
> >> * to majordomo at mail.jca.ax.apc.org
> >>
> >> sustran-discuss        Friday, January 21 2000        Volume 01 :
Number
> >545
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> In this issue:
> >>
> >>     [sustran] Air Pollution - Delhi, Etc.
> >>     [sustran] Re: Air Pollution - Delhi, Etc.
> >>     [sustran] Re: Air Pollution - Delhi, Etc.
> >>     [sustran] car free day in Manila? Dream on
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 15:30:57 -0600
> >> From: "Wendell Cox" <wcox at publicpurpose.com>
> >> Subject: [sustran] Air Pollution - Delhi, Etc.
> >>
> >> Within the last week there has been some discussion of the level of air
> >> pollution in Delhi. The following chart is republished from the London
> >Times
> >> 2000-01-17, with comparative evaluations of air pollution in urban
areas
> >> over 10m --- Delhi ranks fourth, with cleaner air only in Mumbai, New
York
> >> and London, according to this source. The rankings in this chart do not
> >> reflect my experience, or what I hear. Does anyone know what is going
on.
> >>
> >> http://www.publicpurpose.com/who-arip.gif
> >>
> >> Chart was in an article that I found searching the site, so I cannot
give
> >a
> >> url... Headline was "Traffic Fumes do not Harm London's Health."
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Wendell Cox
> >>
> >> - --
> >> WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY: International Public Policy, Economics, Labor,
> >> Transport & Strategic Planning
> >>
> >> THE PUBLIC PURPOSE: Internet Public Policy Resource:
> >> http://www.publicpurpose.com
> >>      Transport Policy Discussion Group:
> >> http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-group.htm
> >>
> >> DEMOGRAPHIA: http://www.demographia.com
> >>      Urban Policy Discussion Group:
> >http://www.demographia.com/db-group.htm
> >>
> >> Telephone +1 618 632 8507; Fax  +1 618 632 8538 - P.O. Box 841-
> >Belleville,
> >> Illinois 62222 USA
> >>
> >> "To facilitate the ideal of government as the servant  of the people by
> >> identifying and implementing strategies to achieve public purposes at a
> >> cost that is no higher than necessary."
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 12:55:43 +0800
> >> From: SUSTRAN Resource Centre <sustran at po.jaring.my>
> >> Subject: [sustran] Re: Air Pollution - Delhi, Etc.
> >>
> >> Dear Wendell,
> >>
> >> I am puzzled too by the graph on air pollution in cities that you
> >> mentioned.  The graph gives its source as the Atmospheric Research and
> >> Information Centre. Here are their contact details. I am also cc'ing
this
> >> message to them.
> >>
> >> Sue Hare / Joe Buchdahl - Coordinators
> >> Atmospheric Research and Information Centre
> >> Dept. of Environmental & Geographical Sciences
> >> Manchester Metropolitan University
> >> Chester Street
> >> Manchester M1 5GD
> >> Tel: 0161 247 1590/3, Fax: 0161 247 6332
> >> E-mail: aric at mmu.ac.uk
> >> Internet: http://www.doc.mmu.ac.uk/aric/arichome.html
> >>
> >> At 15:30 19/01/00 -0600, you wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Within the last week there has been some discussion of the level of
air
> >> >pollution in Delhi. The following chart is republished from the London
> >Times
> >> >2000-01-17, with comparative evaluations of air pollution in urban
areas
> >> >over 10m --- Delhi ranks fourth, with cleaner air only in Mumbai, New
> >York
> >> >and London, according to this source. The rankings in this chart do
not
> >> >reflect my experience, or what I hear. Does anyone know what is going
on.
> >> >
> >> >http://www.publicpurpose.com/who-arip.gif
> >> >
> >> >Chart was in an article that I found searching the site, so I cannot
give
> >a
> >> >url... Headline was "Traffic Fumes do not Harm London's Health."
> >> >
> >> >Best regards,
> >> >Wendell Cox
> >>
> >> PLEASE NOTE NEW 8 DIGIT TELEPHONE/FAX NUMBER
> >>
> >> A. Rahman Paul BARTER
> >> Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia
> >> and the Pacific (the SUSTRAN Network)
> >> P.O. Box 11501,  Kuala Lumpur 50748, Malaysia.
> >> TEL/FAX: +60 3 2274 2590
> >> E-mail: sustran at po.jaring.my
> >> SUSTRAN:  http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/
> >>
> >> The SUSTRAN Network promotes and popularises
> >> people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport
> >> with a focus on Asia and the Pacific.
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 09:37:31 +0100
> >> From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org
> >> Subject: [sustran] Re: Air Pollution - Delhi, Etc.
> >>
> >> Headline was "Traffic Fumes do not Harm London's Health."
> >>
> >> That's really terrific. What a thoughtful and competent conclusion on
the
> >> part of the media.  Just cause they see London up there as the "best
> >> performer" on the world list of eco-horrors, they feel safe to conclude
> >that
> >> there's no problem.  And so it ever goes.
> >>
> >> I detest conspiracy theories (as much as anything else because they put
> >you
> >> in such awful company), but in this case one is justified in wondering
> >> if....
> >>
> >> Of course there is a conspiracy.  And of course it is one of banality
and
> >> complacency, in good part made possible because the people who should
know
> >> better (that's you and me my friends) simply do not seem to know how to
> >grab
> >> and hold the stage.  By being "intellectually responsible", by being
> >> "specialized", by agreeing to do yet more studies (which either
implicitly
> >> accept the inertial premises of an environmentally reactionary
political
> >> establishment or, if we don't, by not making too much of a fuss about
it),
> >> by conferring and incessantly talking to each other all the time about
> >> matters of common professional interest .... Hey, there are only 24
hours
> >in
> >> the day, and if we spend all our time doing this, no wonder that
"Traffic
> >> Fumes do not Harm London's Health."
> >>
> >> Your servant is of course as guilty as the rest.  One more little white
> >> mouse nibbling harmlessly in his corner of the warm cage.
> >>
> >>
> >> Here's a piece of more hopeful news.
> >>
> >> Peter Wiederkehr of the OECD's EST (Environmentally Sustainable
> >> Transportation) program mentioned to me en passant yesterday that their
> >> global analysis of pollution factors has revealed something quite
> >> surprising.  Namely that it would not take an awful lot of rejiggling
of
> >the
> >> transport system, at least within the OECD region, in order to achieve
> >some
> >> MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS in air quality. This is great news if true. As I
> >> understand it, he is not talking about Factor of Ten (or whatever)
stuff,
> >> but rather has concluded that if we can only find a way to package the
> >> solution set (which in turn consists of a number of very specific, low
> >cost,
> >> trend-busting "sustainability triggers"), it is something that we
should
> >be
> >> able to sell to the politicians (that is those who are not yet in jail
or
> >> under investigation) and the public.
> >>
> >> I am going to ask him to put some of this in our forum here (for which
I
> >am
> >> ever grateful to good Paul) for your information and consideration.
And
> >> hopefully your ideas and feedback, both to Peter and to the rest of us.
> >>
> >> Eric Britton
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 22:21:23 +0800
> >> From: "Heckler" <heckler at quickweb.com.ph>
> >> Subject: [sustran] car free day in Manila? Dream on
> >>
> >> For those of you who remember the letter that the Philippine NGO
> >Sustainable
> >> Transport Network sent to Metro Manila Development Authority Chairman
> >> Jejomar Binay endorsing his proposal for a carfree day in Metro Manila,
> >> hereunder is his verbatim reply (and uncommented as well).
> >>
> >> Dear Mr. Fernan:
> >>
> >> Thank you so much for your very encouraging letter of October 18, 1999.
It
> >> was such a welcome respite from the barrage of criticism we received,
ever
> >> since the plan to hold car-less days in Metro Manila saw print in
several
> >> newspapers.
> >>
> >> I do not want to dampen your enthusiasm, but lest you be led to
> >prematurely
> >> entertain expectations on the proximity of the plan's implementation, I
> >> would like to inform you that it is still under study.
> >>
> >> Allow me just the same to clarify that this was not primarily intended
as
> >a
> >> traffic management scheme. It was born out of our concern for the
> >> improvemenet of Metro Manila's air shed. As you and your group may well
> >> know, Metro Manila, with a vehicle density of 435 vehicles per
kilometer
> >of
> >> road is already the 9th most polluted metropolis among the 40 best
cities
> >in
> >> Asia and 70 percent of its air pollutants is accounted to vehicular
> >> emissions.
> >>
> >> Admittedly, it will take sometime before the plan can be implemented as
> >this
> >> is dependent on the existence of an efficient mass transport system.
And
> >if
> >> it is any positive sign, this requirement has already been started to
be
> >put
> >> in place by the government.
> >>
> >> Again, thank you very much and we look forward to your continued
support.
> >>
> >> Very truly yours,
> >>
> >> Jejomar C. Binay
> >> Chairman
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> End of sustran-discuss V1 #545
> >> ******************************
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of sustran-discuss V1 #547
> ******************************
>
>



More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list