[sustran] Motorcycles summarised

[K. Tsourlakis]

At 04:09 ìì 4/6/2004 +0300, you wrote:

>Date Fri, 4 Jun 2004 105259 +0700 (SE Asia Standard Time)
>From "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" <richmond at alum.mit.edu>
>Subject [sustran] Re Motorcycles summarised
>To Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport
>	<sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
>Message-ID <Pine.WNT.4.53.0406041036150.4032 at Jonathan>
>Content-Type TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>
>I really question the value of generalized policy statements which
>render extremely complex situations into simple advocacy ones without
>supplying evidence.
>
>It would be useful to see some statistics on the environmental impacts of
>motorcycles as against cars. Does anyone have the data? Also, are there
>prospects for an electric or other low or no emission model of motorcycle
>that would provide personal mobility with less environmental consequences?

I agree with you, motorcycle use needs more research. More particularly, there is a need for research of extended motorcycle use under different circumstances and income levels (not only North America-like situations). I used what evidence I had in hand. If you have more please let me know, I would be extremely interested in.

>Even if the motorcycle does cause significant pollution we have to also
>consider the political issue of whether we should restrict the mobility of
>low-income people who can afford only motorcycles but not that of
>wealthier car owners. Surely, we should control both (which might in fact
>be a good idea) or neither.

I vote for the former (I am not in favour of car use either). 

>As regards bus systems being "most economical and easiest to improve,"
>there are a variety of factors which will vary from city to city. We
>cannot make generalizations. Bus services are indeed worthy of development
>in many situations, but there are also situations where issues such as
>high subsidy cost, dispersed demands, or even inadequate institutional
>structures makes this difficult (note that there is no bus service at all
>in a national capital such as Phnom Penh despite years of discussion of
>the subject). Even when bus services are improved, there will remain
>demands for personal mobility to fill in for those occasions where public
>transport leaves gaps, and we need to see how that can be accommodated in
>the most environmentally-friendly way.

"Situations" are actually formed and not given "a priori". There is no perfect free-market intermodal competition in urban space, because of the externalities of the necessary arrangements. These arrangements (road building, urban planning, facilities placing and pricing etc) affect transport modes and people will choose whatever happens to be cheaper in terms of time and money in each particular place, whether this is car, motorcycle, train, bicycle, donkey or sky rocket. M/c (instead of car) promotion to overcome income shortage is equal to condemn lower classes in an intrinsically unsafe mode of transport. Correctly working administrations take over the responsibility to create a proper public transit network able to serve better and in an egalitarian way the society, and favour mild transport modes (walking - biking). This way they can achieve efficiency (less congestion - better mobility), more equity and better environment for their citizens and the whole planet.

>For now, I have to tell you I use motorcycle taxis in Bangkok as they are
>the only way to cut through the traffic!!!

I would do the same if I were in your place, as, I suppose, locals also do. The real problem is WHY this is the only way to move around in an efficient way in Bangkok (as well as elsewhere)

>
>                                               --Jonathan
>
>
>On Fri, 4 Jun 2004, Sujit Patwardhan wrote
>
>> 3 June 2004
>>
>>
>> Dear K. Tsourlakis,
>>
>> Thank you for your message. I agree with you that Motorcycles (along with
>> their cousins the scooters)  being less environmentally damaging than motor
>> cars is a myth that will be exposed if proper studies are carried out in
>> how they are flooding the streets in the third world, particularly in India
>> and South East Asia. They are certainly not less polluting, safer nor more
>> sustainable than cars. If anything, due to their exploding numbers they
>> pose a greater threat to sustainable transport in these countries.
>>
>> For making the transport system sustainable there is no shortcut to giving
>> the highest priority to public transport, starting with the bus based
>> systems which are the most economical and easiest to improve, given the
>> financial constrains of poorer nations.
>>
>> --
>> Sujit Patwardhan
>> Parisar,
>> Pune, India
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> At 0157 AM 6/2/2004, you wrote
>>
>>
>> >Perhaps motorcycles is another case where the problem of inappropriate
>> >technology transfer from north to south emerge (because traffic
>> >engineering is certainly a form of technology). The fact that motorcycle
>> >use is limited (if not marginal) compared to car traffic in most of the
>> >technologically influential countries (e.g. in 1990 only 0.2% of commuting
>> >trips in US were done by motorcycle -
>> >http//www.census.gov/population/socdemo/journey/usmode90.txt - since then
>> >m/c use has been declining further) results to a limited interest for
>> >relevant research. For people living in these countries it is often
>> >difficult to realise the complexities of extended motorcycle use, and it
>> >is very easy to miss the point and e.g. to confuse the market view with
>> >the sustainability prospect. For instance is low price an advantage from a
>> >sustainability viewpoint? Then why congestion charge, toll roads and other
>> >ways to internalise the external cost are considered sustainable? If cars
>> >were free, wou!
>> >  ld this considered as an advantage?
>> >
>> >It seems that the issue of motorcycle-car comparison can be reduced into
>> >two questions
>> >1. Are motorcycles a more preferable encumbrance on the streets than cars?
>> >2. Do motorcycles really substitute cars on the street?
>> >My personal answer to both questions is a clear NO - my arguments follow.
>> >
>> >1. The dominant (and unfounded) opinion, that it is better to use
>> >motorcycles than cars, is based in a series of myths, which I will try to
>> >debunk
>> >
>> >* motorcycles pollute less than cars do
>> >
>> >This is one of the most often as well as the most big myths about
>> >motorcycles. It is mostly caused from m/cs having usually smaller engines
>> >than cars do, hence they consume less fuel. Although engine size isn't

.............................................................................




_____________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.mailbox.gr ÁðïêôÞóôå äùñåÜí ôï ìïíáäéêü óáò e-mail.
http://www.thesuperweb.gr Website ìå ÁóöáëÝò Controlpanel áðü 6 Euro êáé äþñï ôï domain óáò!