[sustran] 31/12. Post-Tsunami rebuilding - Commentaries

EcoPlan, Paris eric.britton at ecoplan.org
Fri Dec 31 17:24:53 JST 2004


Dear Sustran Friends,

Below you will find the first three responses that have come in subsequent
to our call of Wednesday the 29th for discussion of Post-Tsunami rebuilding
in the tragically impacted areas in the Indian Ocean.  I bring this to your
attention since the discussions thus far have been mainly on the New
Mobility Agenda site at http://newmobility.org and its forum. 

I would note that thus far there have been no discussions here in Sustran,
but perhaps it is because most of us are away for this otherwise festive end
year period.

In order to take a stab at keeping these pieces of this important
discussions accessible, I am placing the incoming emails in our "Day at the
Office" section that you will see at the top of the NMA home page.

Finally, we have sprawled across all of our major web sites pleas for
contributions to the main aid and emergency relief organizations struggling
to do their best in the area. There too we all have our part to do.


**********************************************
From: A day at the office [mailto:eric.britton at ecoplan.org] 
Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 9:03 AM
To: mail at ericbrittononline.com
Subject: [A day at the office] 31/12. Post-Tsunami rebuilding - Commentaries

[http://the-commons.blogspot.com/2004/12/highest-priority-post-tsunami.html]


Three thought-provoking responses from colleagues in Scotland, Australia,
and Florida help to our call of 29 December (see below) provide further
insight into problems, choices (seen and unseen) and eventual solutions in
the face of this natural catastrophe. 

**************************************************************** 
Original Message 1: 
From: michaelm at myoffice.net.au [mailto:michaelm at myoffice.net.au] 
Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 2:43 AM 
To: worldtransport at yahoogroups.com; 
Subject: RE: [New Mobility/WorldTransport Forum] Post-Tsunami rebuilding 

Well put Dave ..! 

A similar story applies to use of the inherent efficiency of rail where
relatively very high levels of efficiency in terms of load/energy/fuel
ratios can be achieved with much lighter engines and rolling stock than the
heavy weight "unsustainable" equipment developed in the "west". 

[Like your "coal" trains, we used to have "water trains" that carried water
to replenish the tanks along the longer haul lines so that the "real" trains
did not have to carry so much weight!] 

For example, one can imagine a freight/passenger system based on light and
more frequent "eco+people-friendly" trains similar to sugar cane trains
(ours use a small diesel engine but could be any available fuel e.g.
bio-fuel) on a much narrower gauge and much lighter track and bed (i.e.
track and bed is related to and depends on weight loading per wheel). 

This image suggests the benefits of rail for loads heavier than can be
carried on bicycles (see Dave's email) ... especially in relatively flat
coastal country which also looks as if it is of a low load carrying geology.


However, the problem of emergency assistance is well described by our friend
from Florida DoT in that the emphasis will be on restoring the previous
situation ASAP rather than considering other options including whether it
might be "improved" by utilising a move to 'more sustainable" transport
solutions. 

But the destruction and removal and non-replacement of damaged freeways
after earthquakes provides a good example of not simply replacing the
previous situation although there are probably more rail tracks than roads
not replaced ...! 

So the "story" suggests yet another example of an inability to get off the
car/road/truck/bus dependency "train" ... even when catastrophic situations
AND low cost, high efficiency solutions create an opportunity to do so. 

The fact that the authorities are now relying increasingly on helicopters
(eg several being sent by air at vast expense in an Antonov freighter from
Australia) suggests that cost is NOT an issue given the enormous social
pressure. 

However as others have pointed out, this catastrophe is relatively
insignificant when compared to the ANNUAL global road toll ... 

Solutions and suggestions? 

One suggestion to raise awareness of the transport and land use links (in
this case, traditional links to the sea in low lying coastal areas) sounds 
totally unsympathetic, almost inhuman and potentially politically risky but
if it is any of these, then the reasons why must be addressed. It is 
realistic and must not be forgotten. The comparison with the annual global
road toll extended if necessary to include victims of air pollution etc 
must be emphasised and "aid" to address it contrasted. Have we become too
complacent and accepting of the annual road toll such that only 
catastrophes make news and "sustainable" modes of transport are ignored or
forgotten? Should the areas and infrastructure damaged be "restored" or
should other strategies be considered too? 

The second is to emphasise that some transport systems are inherently better
than others and that four in particular stand out. 

1. walking 
2. cycling and other HPV modes 
3. rail modes with emphasis on light rather than heavy "efficiency" 
4. boats (or traditional "low tech" methods) for moving heavy loads 

I would argue that these are the "sustainable modes". They emphasise
localness, self-sufficiency and appropriateness. Are these some indicators 
of sustainability? Perhaps. They reduce the emphasis on economic efficiency
and bulk, mass, fast or "just in time" travel for goods and/or passengers in
favour of "sustainable efficiency" and "appropriate technology" and
"localness" ... in the sense that for a trip of up to 1-5kms walking is
healthy, and cycling or HPV travel is appropriate, whereas a car is neither
esp when the load carrying capacity and fuel/cost efficiency of bicycles and
HPVs is taken into account! 

Somewhere, sometime, we have to take into account the unsustainability of
cheap air travel and global freight networks that pass on or avoid 
externality costs while excluding the vast proportion of the global
population for the benefit of a very small proportion. [In this sense, it
seems the dependency on the cheap global tourism economy could or should be
considered a major "cause" of the tsunami catastrophe.] 

We have to be careful not to lose track of the inherent efficiency and
appropriateness in a "sustainable" sense of these four "sustainable" modes
in seeking to emphasise "new" mobility. 

Unfortunately, the idea of walking or cycling rather than using a car is too
easily replaced by use of a bus or truck (or helicopters and other "new"
VTOL aircraft!) ... rather than fixed (preferably light) rail modes ...
repeating the error of dependency, flexibility and individual travel time
preferences which disguise the inappropriateness and danger and
unsustainability of modes that encourage faster travel and
other-than-localness ... ie more longer, faster and heavier trips ... 
whether for moving freight or passengers. 

The bigger problem here is that the hegemony of high speed motorized
transport dependency is so ingrained in "the west" that any suggestions that
might be worth considering can appear patronising, paternalistic and
inappropriate ... and rightly so! We don't set a good example! 

However, where there is an opportunity to demonstrate appropriate technology
in a (more) sustainable mode ie if it provides an appropriate and
sustainable solution to the real 'local' needs, then taking that opportunity
will add the weight of evidence to the argument that the west is profligate
with energy, wealth and space per capita. 

As with many of these decisions, local democracy suggests that the decisions
should be taken by the locals rather than be made by others under pressure
of assistance to restore the previous situation and this pressure includes
reluctance to refuse foreigners giving specific types of aid. 

The lessons about "appropriate and sustainable technology" in transport and
travel eg as learned in/from China and Vietnam with heavy load carrying
bicycles and HPVs and walking should not be allowed to be forgotten or
ignored by proponents of "new" modes of travel if "sustainability" is an
issue. The lessons apply in urban as well as rural and natural settings, and
as Dave points out, in all sorts of conditions, from long wars to sudden
catastrophes. 

Whether we in the west can bother to make the effort is quite another issue!


Michael Yeates 
Brisbane, Australia 

**************************************************************** 
Original Message 2: 
----------------- 
From: Tramsol at aol.com 
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:27:23 EST 
To: WorldTransport at yahoogroups.com 
Subject: [New Mobility/WorldTransport Forum] Post-Tsunami rebuilding 


A most telling feature of news coverage immediately post impact was the
speed and coverage in restoration of transport achieved by the humble
bicycle, almost as soon as the water had subsided to axle depth, bicycles
were on the streets ferrying supplies and people, and apart from their
limitations on load carrying for mass relief, in a coordinated group the
final distribution of essential supplies like water, can be achieved without
the delay of having to clear every road for motor vehicles, repair bridges,
and get fuel supplies in place. 

Those organising the aid might note that a bicycle - especially the
Phoenix/Flying Pidgeon/Dutch roadster with substantial load carrying racks,
has geometry which allows riding with no tyres, backpedal brakes allow
riding with near-round wheels, and bikes don't need fuel bunkerage and fuel
supply taking valuable space on incoming transport (nice analogy here with
the far North Highland line where steam trains required a further steam
train hauling the coal to replenish the stock of coal at the end of the line
to put provide the fuel for the return trip, including taking coal for the
engine that hauled the coal up for the engines...). Maybe some lessons to
learn here also from Vietnam - where 50,000 Tons of supplies were shipped
down from Hanoi to Da Nang on bicycles, with the riders walking down guiding
their bikes with bamboo extensions to saddle and handlebars, and each bike
carrying roughly 250Kg of supplies, along jungle trails, and going around on
very basic temporary structures where bridges and roads had been destroyed
by the US military who could not conceve that such a vast supply chain could
work without large trucks and roads. Once unloaded the bamboo extensions
were detached and the bikes returned to being ridden machines for the return
trip. 

If the relief is to get to the people then the bicycle has a major role in
reaching every remote location where there are no roads available. 

Dave Holladay 
Transportation Management Solutions 
6 Woodlands Terrace 
Glasgow G3 6DH 

0141 332 4733 Phone 
07 710 535 404 Mobile 

*************************************************************** 

Original Message 3----- 
From: tara.bartee at dot.state.fl.us 
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:15 PM 
To: WorldTransport at yahoogroups.com 
Subject: Re: [New Mobility/WorldTransport Forum] HIGHEST PRIORITY:
Post-Tsunami rebuilding - the role of sustainable mobility proponents 

Eric; 

You are correct that it will be incredibly difficult to get heard. 

I took part in the disaster response in Florida to our four hurricanes this 
year. I can attest that the hectic nature of response makes it very 
difficult to deal with the simplest of issues, much less real changes in 
infrastructure. The disparity in resources makes me think that whatever 
difficulties we had here are absolutely nothing compared to those in the 
path of the tsunami. 

The pressure to get things going again as fast as possible will be 
incredible. It will be essential to get transportation going first, or the 
rest of the relief won't be able get through. Time to rethink HOW things 
will be rebuilt will be an unbelievable luxury. What gets accomplished in 
the initial response has a serious impact on what can be accomplished in 
the ongoing recovery stage. The existing system will have to be replaced, 
perhaps with incremental improvements. 

A better strategy might be to monitor the response for sustainability 
issues. Afterwards, make cogent, specific recommendations to international 
disaster response and recovery organizations on planning in advance to 
correct "mistakes" when a disaster presents an "opportunity". For 
example, in much of the flood prone US, property owners are advised that in 
the next "event" they will not get federal disaster assistance to rebuild 
in the flood plain. Such aid will be available only for relocation and 
building anew on higher ground. Thus incremental restructuring occurs. 

The URL below takes you to an article about some of the advance planning we 
do in Florida. 
http://www.govpro.com/ASP/ViewArticle.asp?strArticleId=104275 

And this takes you to some planning for the next disaster. 
http://www.floridadisaster.org/recovery/ 

This interesting URL lists numerous international disaster relief efforts. 
http://wwww.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/vLND?OpenView&Start=1 
and their home page looks interesting as well 
http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf 


Tara Bartee 
Public Transit Office FDOT 
Voice 850-414-4520 
FAX 850-414-4508 
E-Mail tara.bartee at dot.state.fl.us 


********************************************************* 
Wednesday, December 29, 2004, Paris, France, Europe 

Dear Friends and Colleagues, 

In the wake of the current tragic events in the regions affected by 
Tsunami, and once the terrible immediate health and basic needs of these 
areas and their people have started to be met, it is going to be time to 
take a number of decisions about rebuilding in all those impacted areas. 
And at the center of this rebuilding will be the transportation sector. 
Since this is the case, and since it opens up some unique opportunities in 
terms of sustainability, I invite us to think about it together. 

My question to you all here is: might this be a unique opportunity for us 
to make the voice of sustainable transportation and social justice heard 
once and for all as it should be? There are at least three things about 
this approach that recommend it strongly in the immediate situation and the 
after-math. First, sustainability proponents are used to figuring out how 
to get the most mileage, the most sustainable mobility bang per buck, out 
of the infrastructure and related realties and constraints before them. 
Second, they are accustomed to dealing with the physical mobility issues 
and needs in a far more resource and environmentally efficient manner. And 
third, the sustainability approach to defining and meeting the needs of 
people is based on an active citizenry, surely a precondition of the rapid 
progress which is needed at this time. So for all these reasons, the 
sustainability approach should be at the center of the transport policy and 
practice debate and decisions that must now follow. 

Here's our bottom line: The proponents of sustainable development now have 
a unique opportunity to influence transportation decisions and the specific 
hands-on programs and measure that follow, not only in the affected tragic 
regions but also world wide - since anything of real value that is 
accomplished there is going to gain world wide attention. 

But are we as yet geared up really to make our voices heard at this time? 
It is my view that despite the growing body of expertise and 
accomplishment, the proponents of sustainable transportation or new 
mobility are still very much a minority and until now not able to get in 
there and really change the problematique and the practices when it comes 
to investing money and making the big decisions which shape the system. 

In this context, I would like to propose here that those of you who have 
not as yet had an opportunity to look over our proposal for sustainable 
transportation as a "Third Voice" in the coming high profile international 
project, might wish to check out the following latest draft of the proposal 
in process - with a view to seeing if anything here can be used or built on 
to create the higher profile 'voice' that is going to be needed in the 
months and several years immediately ahead to make the wise decisions that 
are going to be essential if the rebuilding efforts are to be accomplished 
with maximum speed and best overall fit into the communities and people 
directly affected. 

To conclude: It may well be that my proposal that follows here is not the 
best way for us to join voices to see what can be done now to influence 
these important decisions that are going to be make in our beloved sector. 
No problem. Toss it out the window, and come in here with your 
suggestions. The issues are so very important, the opportunity so unique, 
and the decision window likely to be open for such a short period, that we 
really need to seize this opportunity to be every bit as smart and 
responsible as we can be. 

I hope that this will set off better thoughts and a course of action that 
mobilizes as many of us as possible. 

Eric Britton 

--
Posted by Eric Britton On Line to A day at the office at 12/31/2004 08:47:28
AM




More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list