From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Thu Oct 6 01:57:58 2005 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:57:58 -0700 Subject: [sustran] The American way of traffic: Lessons from life Message-ID: <00bd01c5c9cd$f159ccc0$6401a8c0@Home> Warning: The new introductory page contains a very large image file (almost 1 mo.) so if you do not have a high speed link you will probably not want to try it this time. Dear Friends, I would like to invite you, to encourage you to click to the New Mobility Agenda at http://www.newmobility.org this morning to take a look at an image which just may help us somehow in mobilizing our thoughts and actions in the tough up hill struggle to more sustainable cities and better and fairer transportation arrangements. You may also have food for thought if you go to the bottom of the second short introductory page and have a look at the real time situation on the streets there. It is our intention to keep this image here for the next week or so and invite discussion, of what you see here and the thoughts that it inspires. Best/eric britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051005/0573cdad/attachment.html From thomas.cr at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 18:46:27 2005 From: thomas.cr at gmail.com (Thomas C) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 11:46:27 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: The American way of traffic: Lessons from life In-Reply-To: <00bd01c5c9cd$f159ccc0$6401a8c0@Home> References: <00bd01c5c9cd$f159ccc0$6401a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <704c1e4a0510050246i4ee88839x72d48ae3f19832a6@mail.gmail.com> nice picture! i looked it up on google earth and you know what the funniest thing is? this is _downtown_ houston! all of what we see on the picture is within the freeway loop which makes a 1km radius circle around the center. within this perimeter, 1/4 of the land is skyscrapers, 3/4 parking lots. who said americans dont walk anymore? the last ones to park get to walk through 1km of parking lot to get to their office, twice a day! unless they do use public transit or some shuttle bus service, just to travel thru parking lots? thomas On 10/5/05, Eric Britton wrote: > > *Warning: The new introductory page contains a very large image file > (almost 1 mo.) so if you do not have a high speed link you will probably not > want to try it this time.* > > Dear Friends, > > I would like to invite you, to encourage you to click to the New Mobility > Agenda at http://www.newmobility.org this morning to take a look at an > image which just may help us somehow in mobilizing our thoughts and actions > in the tough up hill struggle to more sustainable cities and better and > fairer transportation arrangements. > > You may also have food for thought if you go to the bottom of the second > short introductory page and have a look at the real time situation on the > streets there. > > It is our intention to keep this image here for the next week or so and > invite discussion, of what you see here and the thoughts that it inspires. > > Best/eric britton > > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is > on urban transport policy in Asia. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051005/1515c00f/attachment.html From sri at giaspn01.vsnl.net.in Thu Oct 6 14:49:56 2005 From: sri at giaspn01.vsnl.net.in (Prof J G Krishnayya) Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 11:19:56 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: The American way of traffic: Lessons from life In-Reply-To: <00bd01c5c9cd$f159ccc0$6401a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <00bc01c5ca39$c9e45c20$0f00a8c0@JGK> Very telling photograph. What a desolate appearance, compared with any European city. Post-automobile civic geography is terrible. Sincerely, J G Krishnayya ============== Prof J G Krishnayya Director, Systems Research Institute, 17-A Gultekdi, PUNE 411037, India www.sripune.org Tel +91-20-2426-0323 jkrishnayya@yahoo.com Res 020-2636-3930 sri@giaspn01.vsnl.net.in Fax +91-20-2444-7902 -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+sri=pn1.vsnl.net.in@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+sri=pn1.vsnl.net.in@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Eric Britton Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 10:28 PM To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Cc: Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] The American way of traffic: Lessons from life Warning: The new introductory page contains a very large image file (almost 1 mo.) so if you do not have a high speed link you will probably not want to try it this time. Dear Friends, I would like to invite you, to encourage you to click to the New Mobility Agenda at http://www.newmobility.org this morning to take a look at an image which just may help us somehow in mobilizing our thoughts and actions in the tough up hill struggle to more sustainable cities and better and fairer transportation arrangements. You may also have food for thought if you go to the bottom of the second short introductory page and have a look at the real time situation on the streets there. It is our intention to keep this image here for the next week or so and invite discussion, of what you see here and the thoughts that it inspires. Best/eric britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051006/d342b153/attachment.html From papon at inrets.fr Thu Oct 6 15:33:19 2005 From: papon at inrets.fr (Francis Papon) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 08:33:19 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Forecasting 2045 oil price Message-ID: <87b13f1ddf3cf06879740755d5514f73@inrets.fr> Dear SUSTRAN readers, I have written a paper about future oil prices. If you are interested, you can ask me to send it to you, since the list does not accept it as attached file. Here is the abstract: Here is proposed an attempt at forecasting 2045 oil prices with declining oil production. Apart from an oil production series, world population is the only available input variable. The world economy can be perfectly modelled with sustained growth in spite of oil decline. On the contrary, modelling oil price is tricky, showing poor fits, with population and economy not being significant variables. If included, time absorbs all explaining power, and jeopardizes the model. The only remaining explaining variable is oil production growth (or decline) rate. But unless economy is forced into the model as a denominator, oil price remains in moderate ranges. Even when the cost of oil as part of economy is directly considered, one baril of oil should sell between $50 and $225 in 2045 (in 2005 US dollars). Such prices surely need adaptations from all sectors to reduce fuel consumption, but should not change dramatically the picture of traffic in cities: for example, at current taxation levels in France, a $225 per baril crude oil price would mean only a doubling of current fuel prices for motorists, which should not be a sufficient deterrent for those who appreciate showing off excessively big private vehicles in crowdy cities. I should be pleased by any comment. Sincerely Yours, Francis Papon, mailto:papon@inrets.fr, tel +33 (0)1 4740 7270, ICPC,INRETS/DEST/EEM/HEGEL-PMG, Researcher at the Department of Transport Economics and Sociology at the French National Institute for Transport and Safety Research INRETS, 2, avenue du General Malleret-Joinville, 94114 Arcueil Cedex, France -------------- next part -------------- Skipped content of type text/enriched From schipper at wri.org Thu Oct 6 20:01:34 2005 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 07:01:34 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Forecasting 2045 oil price Message-ID: Surely for most of the world other sources of energy and fuels for vehicles would kick in long before we reached such a high base price (before taxes).... >>> papon@inrets.fr 10/6/2005 2:33:19 AM >>> Dear SUSTRAN readers, I have written a paper about future oil prices. If you are interested, you can ask me to send it to you, since the list does not accept it as attached file. Here is the abstract: Here is proposed an attempt at forecasting 2045 oil prices with declining oil production. Apart from an oil production series, world population is the only available input variable. The world economy can be perfectly modelled with sustained growth in spite of oil decline. On the contrary, modelling oil price is tricky, showing poor fits, with population and economy not being significant variables. If included, time absorbs all explaining power, and jeopardizes the model. The only remaining explaining variable is oil production growth (or decline) rate. But unless economy is forced into the model as a denominator, oil price remains in moderate ranges. Even when the cost of oil as part of economy is directly considered, one baril of oil should sell between $50 and $225 in 2045 (in 2005 US dollars). Such prices surely need adaptations from all sectors to reduce fuel consumption, but should not change dramatically the picture of traffic in cities: for example, at current taxation levels in France, a $225 per baril crude oil price would mean only a doubling of current fuel prices for motorists, which should not be a sufficient deterrent for those who appreciate showing off excessively big private vehicles in crowdy cities. I should be pleased by any comment. Sincerely Yours, Francis Papon, mailto:papon@inrets.fr, tel +33 (0)1 4740 7270, ICPC,INRETS/DEST/EEM/HEGEL-PMG, Researcher at the Department of Transport Economics and Sociology at the French National Institute for Transport and Safety Research INRETS, 2, avenue du General Malleret-Joinville, 94114 Arcueil Cedex, France From mpotter at gol.com Thu Oct 6 20:34:41 2005 From: mpotter at gol.com (mpotter) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 06:34:41 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: The American way of traffic: Lessons from life In-Reply-To: <00bc01c5ca39$c9e45c20$0f00a8c0@JGK> References: <00bc01c5ca39$c9e45c20$0f00a8c0@JGK> Message-ID: <7abf9e740bc6bf1cb1884b221b27b8f2@gol.com> Yes indeed, hideous. But, not to be confusing causation and correlation, can it be coincidence that every major North American city you can name with a semblance of walkable urban fabric left-- Boston, New York, Chicago, Montreal--- has a rapid transit system? Mark Potter On Oct 6, 2005, at 12:49 AM, Prof J G Krishnayya wrote: > > Very telling photograph.? What a desolate appearance, compared with > any European city. Post-automobile civic geography is terrible. > ? > Sincerely, > ? > J G Krishnayya > ============== > ? > Prof J G Krishnayya > Director, Systems Research Institute, > 17-A Gultekdi, PUNE 411037, India > www.sripune.org???????????????? Tel +91-20-2426-0323 > jkrishnayya@yahoo.com?????? Res 020-2636-3930 > sri@giaspn01.vsnl.net.in?????? Fax +91-20-2444-7902 > ? > -----Original Message----- > From: sustran-discuss-bounces+sri=pn1.vsnl.net.in@list.jca.apc.org > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+sri=pn1.vsnl.net.in@list.jca.apc.org] > On Behalf Of Eric Britton > Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 10:28 PM > To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com > Cc: Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org > Subject: [sustran] The American way of traffic: Lessons from life > ? > Warning: The new introductory page contains a very large image file > (almost 1 mo.) so if you do not have a high speed link you will > probably not want to try it this time. > ? > Dear Friends, > ? > I would like to invite you, to encourage you to click to the New > Mobility Agenda at http://www.newmobility.org this morning to take a > look at an image which just may help us somehow in mobilizing our > thoughts and actions in the tough up hill struggle to more sustainable > cities and better and fairer transportation arrangements. > ? > You may also have food for thought if you go to the bottom of the > second short introductory page and have a look at the real time > situation on the streets there. > ? > It is our intention to keep this image here for the next week or so > and invite discussion, of what you see here and the thoughts that it > inspires. > ? > Best/eric britton > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing > countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, > the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. -------------- next part -------------- Skipped content of type text/enriched From suprayitno_hita at yahoo.com Fri Oct 7 08:24:01 2005 From: suprayitno_hita at yahoo.com (hitapriya suprayitno) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 16:24:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: Forecasting 2045 oil price In-Reply-To: <87b13f1ddf3cf06879740755d5514f73@inrets.fr> Message-ID: <20051006232401.79328.qmail@web54204.mail.yahoo.com> Cher Mr Francis PAPON, Je essai de vous encrire en francais, meme si mon clavier reste toujours en version anglaise. Il me force donc de comettre des erreurs d'ortographe, sans compter des erreurs cause par ma connaissances tres limite de la langue francaise. Je m'interesse tres fortement a votre article sur le previson du prix de petrole dans le future. Il est relie a mon travail en Indonesia sur la question de subventione our taxe le petrole en Indonesie. Je vour remercie beaucoup si vous pourriez m'envoyer votre article au adresse ecrit ci-desous : Hitapriya SUPRAYITNO Jl. Teknik Lingkungan I-10 Surabaya 60111 Indonesia Finalement, je voudrais vous dire que il est tres fort possible que nous nous sommes croisse au passe a Paris a l'ENPC. Merci beaucoup de votre attention. Hitapriya SUPRAYITNO Francis Papon wrote: Dear SUSTRAN readers, I have written a paper about future oil prices. If you are interested, you can ask me to send it to you, since the list does not accept it as attached file. Here is the abstract: Here is proposed an attempt at forecasting 2045 oil prices with declining oil production. Apart from an oil production series, world population is the only available input variable. The world economy can be perfectly modelled with sustained growth in spite of oil decline. On the contrary, modelling oil price is tricky, showing poor fits, with population and economy not being significant variables. If included, time absorbs all explaining power, and jeopardizes the model. The only remaining explaining variable is oil production growth (or decline) rate. But unless economy is forced into the model as a denominator, oil price remains in moderate ranges. Even when the cost of oil as part of economy is directly considered, one baril of oil should sell between $50 and $225 in 2045 (in 2005 US dollars). Such prices surely need adaptations from all sectors to reduce fuel consumption, but should not change dramatically the picture of traffic in cities: for example, at current taxation levels in France, a $225 per baril crude oil price would mean only a doubling of current fuel prices for motorists, which should not be a sufficient deterrent for those who appreciate showing off excessively big private vehicles in crowdy cities. I should be pleased by any comment. Sincerely Yours, Francis Papon, mailto:papon@inrets.fr, tel +33 (0)1 4740 7270, ICPC,INRETS/DEST/EEM/HEGEL-PMG, Researcher at the Department of Transport Economics and Sociology at the French National Institute for Transport and Safety Research INRETS, 2, avenue du General Malleret-Joinville, 94114 Arcueil Cedex, France ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. --------------------------------- Yahoo! for Good Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051006/4dc51135/attachment.html From andi_rahmah at pelangi.or.id Fri Oct 7 16:59:12 2005 From: andi_rahmah at pelangi.or.id (Andi Rahmah) Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 14:59:12 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Forecasting 2045 oil price In-Reply-To: <20051006232401.79328.qmail@web54204.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200510070809.j9789XXc010235@server.pelangi.or.id> Dear Mr. Francis Papon, I'm very interest with your paper about future oil prices, and I'll more than happy if you send it to me. Based on your explanation, I suspect that you didn't consider about share of renewable energy in the market on your prediction. For example, the rise of oil price in Indonesia has made renewable energy price more competitive. As the result, growth of demands for biofuel (biodiesel, biokerosene, and bio gasoline) tends to incline significantly. I think this situation would be happen in other countries too. So, renewable energy would be have an important role on the future oil prices. Best, Rahmah _____ From: sustran-discuss-bounces+andi_rahmah=pelangi.or.id@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+andi_rahmah=pelangi.or.id@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of hitapriya suprayitno Sent: Jumat; 07 Oktober 2005 6:24 To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport Subject: [sustran] Re: Forecasting 2045 oil price Cher Mr Francis PAPON, Je essai de vous encrire en francais, meme si mon clavier reste toujours en version anglaise. Il me force donc de comettre des erreurs d'ortographe, sans compter des erreurs cause par ma connaissances tres limite de la langue francaise. Je m'interesse tres fortement a votre article sur le previson du prix de petrole dans le future. Il est relie a mon travail en Indonesia sur la question de subventione our taxe le petrole en Indonesie. Je vour remercie beaucoup si vous pourriez m'envoyer votre article au adresse ecrit ci-desous : Hitapriya SUPRAYITNO Jl. Teknik Lingkungan I-10 Surabaya 60111 Indonesia Finalement, je voudrais vous dire que il est tres fort possible que nous nous sommes croisse au passe a Paris a l'ENPC. Merci beaucoup de votre attention. Hitapriya SUPRAYITNO Francis Papon wrote: Dear SUSTRAN readers, I have written a paper about future oil prices. If you are interested, you can ask me to send it to you, since the list does not accept it as attached file. Here is the abstract: Here is proposed an attempt at forecasting 2045 oil prices with declining oil production. Apart from an oil production series, world population is the only available input variable. The world economy can be perfectly modelled with sustained growth in spite of oil decline. On the contrary, modelling oil price is tricky, showing poor fits, with population and economy not being significant variables. If included, time absorbs all explaining power, and jeopardizes the model. The only remaining explaining variable is oil production growth (or decline) rate. But unless economy is forced into the model as a denominator, oil price remains in moderate ranges. Even when the cost of oil as part of economy is directly considered, one baril of oil should sell between $50 and $225 in 2045 (in 2005 US dollars). Such prices surely need adaptations from all sectors to reduce fuel consumption, but should not change dramatically the picture of traffic in cities: for example, at current taxation levels in France, a $225 per baril crude oil price would mean only a doubling of current fuel prices for motorists, which should not be a sufficient deterrent for those who appreciate showing off excessively big private vehicles in crowdy cities. I should be pleased by any comment. Sincerely Yours, Francis Papon, mailto:papon@inrets.fr, tel +33 (0)1 4740 7270, ICPC,INRETS/DEST/EEM/HEGEL-PMG, Researcher at the Department of Transport Economics and Sociology at the French National Institute for Transport and Safety Research INRETS, 2, avenue du General Malleret-Joinville, 94114 Arcueil Cedex, France ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. _____ Yahoo! for Good Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051007/1b46019a/attachment-0001.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Sat Oct 8 07:01:19 2005 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 15:01:19 -0700 Subject: [sustran] TV program on CFDs (In the language of Cervantes) Message-ID: <017101c5cb8a$a70adec0$6501a8c0@Home> Dear Friends, Estimados amigos, etc. etc, To get out our message we have to learn to get away from our various comfortable towers, ivory, print and otherwise. Here is an example of our old friend the MIT prof and transport expert Mikel Murga who takes the challenges of Car Free Days and above all the citizen led path to more sustainable transport, to a general television audience in Spain on 27 September. In it he speaks with a pubic audience and a couple of other invitees in a televised discussion of the Car Free Day movement on the streets of Spanish cities and beyond. It is a good 15 minutes, including with the kinds of minimum information-based self-assigned expertise on the part of the TV presenters and some of the more furious of those sharing their best thoughts. Hmm. Ain't it ever so? Achtung. It's an 18 mo. monster wmv file, but in my view well worth the time. Food for thought. Address: http://web.mit.edu/mmurga/Public/PasaloDiaSinCoches.wmv. And a wonderful opportunity to improve your Spanish. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051007/99660feb/attachment.html From chuizenga at adb.org Fri Oct 7 23:03:48 2005 From: chuizenga at adb.org (chuizenga@adb.org) Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 22:03:48 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Cornelius Huizenga/Consultants/ADB is out of the office. Message-ID: I will be out of the office starting Thu 09/29/2005 and will not return until Wed 10/12/2005. I am traveling -- I read email from time to time. For urgent issues please contact Aga Diaz (adiaz@adb.org). From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Oct 10 15:28:57 2005 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 23:28:57 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Gender and transport network - What next? Message-ID: <000001c5cd63$eaba2010$6501a8c0@Home> Dear Friends, I would like to share the following series of exchanges with you on a topic and an activity that I believe to be of great importance to us - both for the topic in its own right but also from what we can learn for later application in many other areas of society and technology if we can only get this one right. For further background on this, I invite you to turn to the New Mobility Agenda at http://www.newmobility.org and from there click the item to the bottom of the left menu entitled ID/SD, and from there the Gender/Equality link. You'll see. My hope in this? Is that I would like not only to draw this to your attention but also hopefully recruit at least some of you to follow and perhaps participate in this group search for a supporting structure. If you share your comments here for the time being, I will make sure that they are forwarded t the GATNET group for the others to see. Kind thanks, Eric Britton Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 17:36:53 -0700 From: "Eric Britton" Subject: Gender and transport group - What next Fine start on an important issue and opportunity! And now let me see if I can build a bit on the good points just made by Margaret and Pri and perhaps which many of us have in the back of our heads. There is a broader pattern at work here and it is perhaps a good idea if we get this in our sights first. I have been observing the world of development initiatives from many sides since the late sixties (sob!), and what I have noted is that the staying power is among the weakest of their attributes. It seems as if after a few years and a project or two in the direction of something that appears to be a worthy cause, say gender and transport to take but one example of thousands, and then poof! The sun sets, the energy flags, new people come on board and the "old stuff" is considered to have had its day in the sun and on to new and surely better. "Gender and transport? Sure great stuff. Real important. We have done it." Pow! End of problem. Well the question that we appear to be asking ourselves collectively here is: will we be satisfied with more of the same in this case? I am glad to see a couple of us, but surly more of you as well, starting to dig in their heels. Which leaves us with the question, where to from here? We have to figure it out for ourselves because surely no one else is going to do it for us. I suggest not putting all our eggs into the basket with of good old World Bank, but rather that we consider probing at least a full handful of parallel tracks. To get us stated on this: 1. UNESCO 2. The European Commission's program on Information Society/Sustainable Development, and perhaps others yet 3. UNEP - but who, where? 4. The best of the bilateral aid agencies - namely those that have learned the lesson of the importance of long term, in place commitment. - GTZ, Danida, Sida and a few others come to mind 5. The regional UN Economic Commissions, Banks and then the likes of UNDP, UNCHR, Habitat, ITU . . . 6. And yes, the WB If we put our heads together on this, I am confident that we can not only come up with a fine long list to get us going, but also begin to identify some of the possible people/ways of getting through to them. Couple of quick points about how to proceed in this case some to mind: * First, to take simultaneously an inside/outside approach -- for us to locate our champions within each of these groups and to see if we can bring them on board, and then give them credible materials and ideas with which to work from the inside - all of which supported by a recognized international "expert group" (I prefer the expression invisible college) that by their qualifications and achievements in this area command attention . * The second key - and here you have just my personal prejudices - is to continue what we have started to do here and focus the efforts in terms of a varied, lively, competent and dedicated network of individuals and groups who understand in death what this is all about. (In the "old days" -- still sadly here in the minds of many - the response to this kind of need - once all the conferences had taken place and all the various reports been written on the subject - was to put the old "edifice complex" into play. IN this case this would be creating a permanent institution, fitting up a G&T building in Brussels or DC with a permanent staff, a silver haired DG (me?), and a budget and turf to be defended. Nope. That one is part of the past. Our key is the network - and that is something we are already beginning to have in hand. Finally I am copying this note to a handful of personal contacts in some of these groups, and perhaps they may have some leads for us on this. If so you have the thanks of us all. That's it from me on this today. I note with pride that I have stayed within my one page limit, and so now I have to get off and hope that some of you will do more and better with this. For my part I am ready to read, think and do what I can from here to make this work. This is far too good, far too important an initiative to let it peter out cause someone got tired or forgot to remember. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Priyanthi Fernando [mailto:priyanthi@ukonline.co.uk] Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 6:08 AM To: Gender and Transport Subject: [gatnet] RE: The gender and transport group is no longer active at the world bank I agree with Margaret, though being in Sri Lanka and seeing the scepticism with which the Bank is viewed by the different actors in the south, I often wonder if we do not spend too much effort trying to reform the World Bank - as a colleague once said, its probably easier to change the world than change the World Bank! The lack of emphasis in the World Bank for gender and transport is also the result of a lack of a champion within the World Bank (Michael Bamberger and Jerry Lebo played a very strong part in maintaining the momentum of the gender and transport thematic group) and possibly more importantly, the lack of concerted pressure from outside, pressure which in those days was exerted by the work of the IFRTD and others and without which the Bank would not have invested so much money and time on the issue. I was surprised at the high profile that the Bank's Transport and Social Responsibility is giving to disability and suspect this is very much because there is concerted pressure exerted on the Bank by disability activists, and also because mainstreaming disability has a greater appeal to infrastructure and mechanical engineers!!! So yes, members of GATNET, suggest we go for it... Priyanthi Fernando 64/1 Dharmapala Mawatha Madiwela Kotte Sri Lanka -----Original Message----- From: Margaret Sybil Grieco-Kanbur [mailto:mg294@cornell.edu] Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 1:28 AM To: Gender and Transport Subject: [gatnet] The gender and transport group is no longer active at the world bank Apologies for being off list for so long but as with us all, there were pressing matters elsewhere to handle. The world bank gender and transport group is no longer active, it has been subsumed under responsible transport with gender being listed below disability. The momentum and institutional standing that the world bank gender and transport group gave the gender and transport agenda was critical. As a University teacher, I could use the site to give authority to the subject matter. The decline of the gender and transport group at the world bank is undoubtedly the consequence of insufficient resources being allocated there to properly maintain both gender and transport activities and web site. I believe that unless we get gender and transport recognised as a key Area of transport planning then we are not only going in circles but those circles are taking us backwards. It is clear that gender and transport are important across the range of activities undertaken by the world bank: gender and transport considerations have impact from the full range of activities from health to wealth. The institutional lead given by the bank was important. The bank having moved the spotlight on elsewhere it is important that either pressure is put on the bank to regain the focus or an equally important international or governmental body meet this need. Suggestions for action? Cheers margaret grieco professor of transport and society napier university edinburgh and visiting professor, institute for african development cornell university and visiting professor department of mechanical engineering under the auspices of the centre for gender studies technical university braunschweig germany Subject: Bringing knowledge about gender issues closer to you. Dear Friends, I would like to draw your attention to the conference information and the two replies from members of our little informal distance-dispersed international team on matters of gender, governance, etc., in which they indicate that they are not going to be able to make the trip to participate for financial reasons. As your sweating moderator of the ICT sessions earlier this year, I read about these probably most useful conferences and workshops- and too the notes that come in from our well qualified colleagues who could benefit from the exchanges but who simply don't have the $$ to make the trip. This did not fell my heart with joy. May I venture the thought that given that it is after all 2005 and that since we have in hand pretty much everything that is needed to virtualize if not all, at least a great deal of these sessions it really should be given a major priority? The truth is that people who are working on gender issues, and particularly in the field which after all is the only place that all this stuff goes on, are spread out over the globe and that by and large they are at best only marginally financed. But these contacts and exchanges are important for them and their work. Well . . . What to do? Well, on the one hand - and bearing in mind that the New Delhi session is afar all taking place at this minute and that Manila is just a few short weeks away - we have to reach beyond these two projects and think about next steps in practical terms. The fact is however that we have in hand today the technologies and tools that are needed for anyone to be able to do a pretty good job at virtualizing their conference so that not only the results but also the on-going process can be shared - not only in terms of papers, etc. but also in more immediate real time (or close to it) terms. 1. To get at least a first feel for some of the tools that might be put to work to do the job, let me point you to our little www.xmobility.org site which provides a quick first summary of the cheap (often free) and effective tools that we use on a daily basis in our own international work. That is only a start of course but should at least serve to give you a feel for the sorts of things we might now be looking at together. 2. Then and quickly a bit of ancient history. Our first stab at something along these lines was something called The Zero Emissions Strategy Conference which opened its virtual doors on Friday the 1st of August, 1997 at http://ecoplan.org/zero-ems/ As you will see if you drop in to the site we ran this with the assistance, funding and inputs from the UN University in Tokyo, the French Ministry of Environment, and several others contributors and players. (Perhaps that is a formula for next steps here, with 2005 players of course). Bearing in mind that that was no less than eight generations ago according to Moore's Law (not yet repealed) it provided a pretty effective forum for discussions and exchanges. And a lot has happened since. 3. Also by way of backdrop, I can also point you to a program here at The Commons which is just now being revived, in part precisely for these purposes, which you will be able to visit in first draft from via www.xability.com . You will see the links to our work together over these last months - as well as a lot of room for progress. Stay tuned. I wonder where we might take this discussion next. For starters it would be good to hear from all of you - and perhaps your networks if you think there might be interest there. At the same time I am sharing this note with two high officials leading ICT programs at the European Commission and UNESCO, with the thought that they may have some inspiration or guidance (might we dream of support) to get the first couple of pilot projects up and going. You, I am sure will have other contacts, and it would be good, if you think it useful, if we can also bring them into this conversation. What's the message of all this? Simple really . . . We can do it if we chose to. Eric Britton ----------------------------------- Annexes: * Times Foundation & Centre For Social Research Workshop on Gender Sensitisation on October 7, 2005 in New Delhi * Training on "Making Governance Gender Responsive (MGGR)", October 23-29, 2005 at Manila, Philippines -----Original Message----- From: kyarimpa peninah [mailto:pkyarimpa@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:03 AM To: Gender and Transport Subject: [gatnet] Re: Training on "Making Governance Gender Responsive (MGGR)", October 23-29, 2005 at Manila, Philippines Thanks so much for the invitation and information. Unfortunately I have received the information a bit late and will not be able to raise the funds to attend the course. Otherwise it is a very relevant course to me and would have so much loved to attend funds permiting. Best Regards Peninah Kyarimpa Uganda -----Original Message----- From: Hassan Wunmi [mailto:reachaoh@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:24 AM To: Gender and Transport Subject: [gatnet] Training on "Making Gender Governance Responsive" Dearie, Thank you for this information it is a very useful one but unfortunately the fund for registration and travelling is a big issue and I might not be able to make it but I hope a better chance can be available for people like us to have materials on the topic in a later time. Thank you and remain blessed. Wunmi Hassan National Centre for Technology Management Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife Nigeria. +234-8034241874 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051009/11b11c53/attachment-0001.html From richmond at alum.mit.edu Mon Oct 10 10:07:24 2005 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 21:07:24 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [sustran] Book Review Message-ID: Here's a review of my book in Technology and Culture, which most of you on this list probably would not otherwise see! Best, --Jonathan Technology and culture, July 2005 Transport of Delight: The Mythical Conception of Rail Transit in Los Angeles. By Jonathan Richmond. Akron, Ohio: University of Akron Press, 2005. Pp. xix+498. $49.95. "This book is a study about the failure of thought and its causes," writes Jonathan Richmond in his introduction to Transport of Delight. "It starts with a bizarre decision: to construct a comprehensive rail passenger system in an environment where it appears incapable of providing real benefits." Richmond analyzes the decision to redeploy rail-borne public transit in a metropolitan area infamous for its congestion, smog, and sprawl, and, most importantly, where he believes that by any rational measure buses provide a superior mode of transit. He finds the explanation for this decision in the power of myth and symbol, image and metaphor, citing extensively from linguistic experts such as Susan Langer, George Lakoff, and Martin Fossand on his first page quoting a passage from Russell Ackoff's The Art of Problem Solving: "We usually try to reduce complex situations to what appear to be one or more simple solvable problems . . . sometimes referred to as 'cutting the problem down to size.' In so doing we often reduce our chances of finding a creative solution to the original problem." This is exactly what Richmond believes happened in Los Angeles beginning in the 1980s. Richmond has done his homework. His book is based in part on more than two hundred interviews with public officials. He presents a history of Henry Huntington's Pacific Electric, the storied Red Car system that once operated 1,100 miles of track radiating in all directions from Los Angeles. He evaluates the case for modern light rail and the forecasting methodology used to predict passenger demand for the first route planned for the Los Angeles area, the Blue Line connecting with the region's second-largest city, Long Beach. He reports that ridership forecasts were initially inflated. Then, just before the line opened, they were deflated in order to make the actual numbers look good. Transport of Delight devotes considerable attention to the political decision-making process that led to passage of Proposition A, the local half-cent tax that funded the return of electric railways, a process ultimately dependent on "availability of a set of symbols, images, and metaphors which come together coherently to create a myth that acts with the power of truth" (p. 6). The human body's circulation system, for example, became a powerful metaphor for transit planners. Likewise valuable was the perception among civic leaders that electric trains were "sexier" than buses, a perception Richmond addresses at length in a section titled "The Train as Symbol of Community Pride: Penis Envy in Los Angeles." Richmond notes the power of the mental image that remained after the last Red Cars disappeared in 1961, an image that gave rise to the notion that [End Page 661] the demise of a superior mode of transit was the result of a conspiracy in which General Motors played a key role. The first local railway started running between the harbor and downtown Los Angeles in 1869, the last Red Car line operated along this same corridor, and, thirty years after service ended on that line, rail-borne transit was reborn in the form of the Blue Line. This, Richmond feels certain, was a big mistake. In his view, buses are a superior mode of transit for Los Angeles, particularly in terms of their cost-effectiveness; just about everything involving an electric railway is vastly more expensive than rubber tire on paved roadway. The Blue Line was brought into existence not on the basis of any rational assessment of available choices, but to reward political acumen, particularly that of County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn (now deceased, though his son became mayor of Los Angeles), through whose Fourth District was routed not only the Blue Line but also two other new electric rail lines -- all this in the wake of devastating riots in South Central Los Angeles and repeated recommendations that improved transit would have beneficial social consequences. The problem was "cut down to size," yes, but Richmond is certain that it was the wrong size. Whatever one may happen to think about the virtues of different modes of urban transit, Transport of Delight presents an excellent case study in the power of myth, and it provides us with a compelling picture of a place where culture and technology blend seamlessly. James Smart Jim Smart is adjunct professor of journalism and public speaking at California State University Fullerton and Cal State San Bernardino. From 1981 until 1998 he served as head of media relations for the Southern California Rapid Transit District and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Permission to reprint a review published here may be obtained only from the reviewer. ----- Jonathan Richmond 182 Palfrey St. Watertown MA 02472-1835 (617) 395-4360 e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From schipper at wri.org Mon Oct 10 10:32:43 2005 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 21:32:43 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Book Review Message-ID: Thanks, this looks very interesting. It's always fun to fly in to LA and see if you can spot the Blue Line train (I usually only see one)! I am just old enough to remember the Red cars in LA in the 1950s. WE lived about 1/2 km from Venice and La Cienega, where the red car went by on an overpass. I wonder, how much longer would have the old red car light rail lasted in LA without the alleged "conspiracy"? Maybe the problem was people were not clustering homes at the stations or along the lines? Why did the French remove their rail from Paris in the 1950s? Why did the social democrat Swedes do this in Stockholm too (as well as ripping up lots of the key diesel-based rail lines connecting small towns)? Why did Hanoi rip up its light rail decades ago, only to let the French donate one last year? There seem to be a message here, GM conspiracy or not. >>> richmond@alum.mit.edu 10/9/2005 9:07:24 PM >>> Here's a review of my book in Technology and Culture, which most of you on this list probably would not otherwise see! Best, --Jonathan Technology and culture, July 2005 Transport of Delight: The Mythical Conception of Rail Transit in Los Angeles. By Jonathan Richmond. Akron, Ohio: University of Akron Press, 2005. Pp. xix+498. $49.95. "This book is a study about the failure of thought and its causes," writes Jonathan Richmond in his introduction to Transport of Delight. "It starts with a bizarre decision: to construct a comprehensive rail passenger system in an environment where it appears incapable of providing real benefits." Richmond analyzes the decision to redeploy rail-borne public transit in a metropolitan area infamous for its congestion, smog, and sprawl, and, most importantly, where he believes that by any rational measure buses provide a superior mode of transit. He finds the explanation for this decision in the power of myth and symbol, image and metaphor, citing extensively from linguistic experts such as Susan Langer, George Lakoff, and Martin Fossand on his first page quoting a passage from Russell Ackoff's The Art of Problem Solving: "We usually try to reduce complex situations to what appear to be one or more simple solvable problems . . . sometimes referred to as 'cutting the problem down to size.' In so doing we often reduce our chances of finding a creative solution to the original problem." This is exactly what Richmond believes happened in Los Angeles beginning in the 1980s. Richmond has done his homework. His book is based in part on more than two hundred interviews with public officials. He presents a history of Henry Huntington's Pacific Electric, the storied Red Car system that once operated 1,100 miles of track radiating in all directions from Los Angeles. He evaluates the case for modern light rail and the forecasting methodology used to predict passenger demand for the first route planned for the Los Angeles area, the Blue Line connecting with the region's second-largest city, Long Beach. He reports that ridership forecasts were initially inflated. Then, just before the line opened, they were deflated in order to make the actual numbers look good. Transport of Delight devotes considerable attention to the political decision-making process that led to passage of Proposition A, the local half-cent tax that funded the return of electric railways, a process ultimately dependent on "availability of a set of symbols, images, and metaphors which come together coherently to create a myth that acts with the power of truth" (p. 6). The human body's circulation system, for example, became a powerful metaphor for transit planners. Likewise valuable was the perception among civic leaders that electric trains were "sexier" than buses, a perception Richmond addresses at length in a section titled "The Train as Symbol of Community Pride: Penis Envy in Los Angeles." Richmond notes the power of the mental image that remained after the last Red Cars disappeared in 1961, an image that gave rise to the notion that [End Page 661] the demise of a superior mode of transit was the result of a conspiracy in which General Motors played a key role. The first local railway started running between the harbor and downtown Los Angeles in 1869, the last Red Car line operated along this same corridor, and, thirty years after service ended on that line, rail-borne transit was reborn in the form of the Blue Line. This, Richmond feels certain, was a big mistake. In his view, buses are a superior mode of transit for Los Angeles, particularly in terms of their cost-effectiveness; just about everything involving an electric railway is vastly more expensive than rubber tire on paved roadway. The Blue Line was brought into existence not on the basis of any rational assessment of available choices, but to reward political acumen, particularly that of County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn (now deceased, though his son became mayor of Los Angeles), through whose Fourth District was routed not only the Blue Line but also two other new electric rail lines -- all this in the wake of devastating riots in South Central Los Angeles and repeated recommendations that improved transit would have beneficial social consequences. The problem was "cut down to size," yes, but Richmond is certain that it was the wrong size. Whatever one may happen to think about the virtues of different modes of urban transit, Transport of Delight presents an excellent case study in the power of myth, and it provides us with a compelling picture of a place where culture and technology blend seamlessly. James Smart Jim Smart is adjunct professor of journalism and public speaking at California State University Fullerton and Cal State San Bernardino. From 1981 until 1998 he served as head of media relations for the Southern California Rapid Transit District and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Permission to reprint a review published here may be obtained only from the reviewer. ----- Jonathan Richmond 182 Palfrey St. Watertown MA 02472-1835 (617) 395-4360 e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. From richmond at alum.mit.edu Mon Oct 10 10:38:09 2005 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 21:38:09 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [sustran] Re: Book Review In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: All good questions. The point is that while GM did indeed want to get rid of rail lines, the demise of rail was not the result of any such conspiracy but a response to the market which had made rail uncompetitive. Rail companies were making big losses as automotive-induced decentralization became a fact of life, and trying to get out of the business. --Jonathan On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Lee Schipper wrote: > Thanks, this looks very interesting. It's always fun to fly in to LA and > see if you can spot the Blue Line train (I usually only see one)! > > I am just old enough to remember the Red cars in LA in the 1950s. WE > lived about 1/2 km from Venice and La Cienega, where the red car went by > on an overpass. I wonder, how much longer would have the old red car > light rail lasted in LA without the alleged "conspiracy"? Maybe the > problem was people were not clustering homes at the stations or along > the lines? Why did the French remove their rail from Paris in the > 1950s? Why did the social democrat Swedes do this in Stockholm too (as > well as ripping up lots of the key diesel-based rail lines connecting > small towns)? Why did Hanoi rip up its light rail decades ago, only to > let the French donate one last year? > > There seem to be a message here, GM conspiracy or not. > > >>> richmond@alum.mit.edu 10/9/2005 9:07:24 PM >>> > > > Here's a review of my book in Technology and Culture, which most of you > on > this list probably would not otherwise see! > > Best, > > --Jonathan > > > Technology and culture, July 2005 > > Transport of Delight: The Mythical Conception of Rail Transit in Los > Angeles. By Jonathan Richmond. Akron, Ohio: University of Akron Press, > 2005. Pp. xix+498. $49.95. > > "This book is a study about the failure of thought and its causes," > writes > Jonathan Richmond in his introduction to Transport of Delight. "It > starts > with a bizarre decision: to construct a comprehensive rail passenger > system in an environment where it appears incapable of providing real > benefits." Richmond analyzes the decision to redeploy rail-borne > public > transit in a metropolitan area infamous for its congestion, smog, and > sprawl, and, most importantly, where he believes that by any rational > measure buses provide a superior mode of transit. He finds the > explanation > for this decision in the power of myth and symbol, image and metaphor, > citing extensively from linguistic experts such as Susan Langer, > George > Lakoff, and Martin Fossand on his first page quoting a passage from > Russell Ackoff's The Art of Problem Solving: "We usually try to reduce > complex situations to what appear to be one or more simple solvable > problems . . . sometimes referred to as 'cutting the problem down to > size.' In so doing we often reduce our chances of finding a creative > solution to the original problem." This is exactly what Richmond > believes > happened in Los Angeles beginning in the 1980s. > > Richmond has done his homework. His book is based in part on more than > two > hundred interviews with public officials. He presents a history of > Henry > Huntington's Pacific Electric, the storied Red Car system that once > operated 1,100 miles of track radiating in all directions from Los > Angeles. He evaluates the case for modern light rail and the > forecasting > methodology used to predict passenger demand for the first route > planned > for the Los Angeles area, the Blue Line connecting with the region's > second-largest city, Long Beach. He reports that ridership forecasts > were > initially inflated. Then, just before the line opened, they were > deflated > in order to make the actual numbers look good. > > Transport of Delight devotes considerable attention to the political > decision-making process that led to passage of Proposition A, the > local > half-cent tax that funded the return of electric railways, a process > ultimately dependent on "availability of a set of symbols, images, and > metaphors which come together coherently to create a myth that acts > with > the power of truth" (p. 6). The human body's circulation system, for > example, became a powerful metaphor for transit planners. Likewise > valuable was the perception among civic leaders that electric trains > were > "sexier" than buses, a perception Richmond addresses at length in a > section titled "The Train as Symbol of Community Pride: Penis Envy in > Los > Angeles." > > Richmond notes the power of the mental image that remained after the > last > Red Cars disappeared in 1961, an image that gave rise to the notion > that > [End Page 661] the demise of a superior mode of transit was the result > of > a conspiracy in which General Motors played a key role. The first > local > railway started running between the harbor and downtown Los Angeles in > 1869, the last Red Car line operated along this same corridor, and, > thirty > years after service ended on that line, rail-borne transit was reborn > in > the form of the Blue Line. This, Richmond feels certain, was a big > mistake. In his view, buses are a superior mode of transit for Los > Angeles, particularly in terms of their cost-effectiveness; just about > everything involving an electric railway is vastly more expensive than > rubber tire on paved roadway. > > The Blue Line was brought into existence not on the basis of any > rational > assessment of available choices, but to reward political acumen, > particularly that of County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn (now deceased, > though > his son became mayor of Los Angeles), through whose Fourth District > was > routed not only the Blue Line but also two other new electric rail > lines -- all this in the wake of devastating riots in South Central > Los > Angeles and repeated recommendations that improved transit would have > beneficial social consequences. > > The problem was "cut down to size," yes, but Richmond is certain that > it > was the wrong size. Whatever one may happen to think about the virtues > of > different modes of urban transit, Transport of Delight presents an > excellent case study in the power of myth, and it provides us with a > compelling picture of a place where culture and technology blend > seamlessly. > > James Smart > Jim Smart is adjunct professor of journalism and public speaking at > California State University Fullerton and Cal State San Bernardino. > From > 1981 until 1998 he served as head of media relations for the Southern > California Rapid Transit District and the Los Angeles County > Metropolitan > Transportation Authority. > > Permission to reprint a review published here may be obtained only > from > the reviewer. > > > ----- > Jonathan Richmond > 182 Palfrey St. > Watertown MA 02472-1835 > > (617) 395-4360 > > e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus > is on urban transport policy in Asia. > ----- Jonathan Richmond 182 Palfrey St. Watertown MA 02472-1835 (617) 395-4360 e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From schipper at wri.org Mon Oct 10 10:48:40 2005 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 21:48:40 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Book Review Message-ID: And the problems light rail had stemmed from the 1920s, when their fares were too low and they started to fold. People begrudgingly got cars -- so said a UC Berkeley Geography Prof in his take on this in the late 1980s.. How about the Delhi or Bangkok metros? The LA "Metro" with the boutique stations? How about the outer parts of US systems like Metro in Washington DC or BART? >>> "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" 10/9/2005 9:38:09 PM >>> All good questions. The point is that while GM did indeed want to get rid of rail lines, the demise of rail was not the result of any such conspiracy but a response to the market which had made rail uncompetitive. Rail companies were making big losses as automotive-induced decentralization became a fact of life, and trying to get out of the business. --Jonathan On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Lee Schipper wrote: > Thanks, this looks very interesting. It's always fun to fly in to LA and > see if you can spot the Blue Line train (I usually only see one)! > > I am just old enough to remember the Red cars in LA in the 1950s. WE > lived about 1/2 km from Venice and La Cienega, where the red car went by > on an overpass. I wonder, how much longer would have the old red car > light rail lasted in LA without the alleged "conspiracy"? Maybe the > problem was people were not clustering homes at the stations or along > the lines? Why did the French remove their rail from Paris in the > 1950s? Why did the social democrat Swedes do this in Stockholm too (as > well as ripping up lots of the key diesel-based rail lines connecting > small towns)? Why did Hanoi rip up its light rail decades ago, only to > let the French donate one last year? > > There seem to be a message here, GM conspiracy or not. > > >>> richmond@alum.mit.edu 10/9/2005 9:07:24 PM >>> > > > Here's a review of my book in Technology and Culture, which most of you > on > this list probably would not otherwise see! > > Best, > > --Jonathan > > > Technology and culture, July 2005 > > Transport of Delight: The Mythical Conception of Rail Transit in Los > Angeles. By Jonathan Richmond. Akron, Ohio: University of Akron Press, > 2005. Pp. xix+498. $49.95. > > "This book is a study about the failure of thought and its causes," > writes > Jonathan Richmond in his introduction to Transport of Delight. "It > starts > with a bizarre decision: to construct a comprehensive rail passenger > system in an environment where it appears incapable of providing real > benefits." Richmond analyzes the decision to redeploy rail-borne > public > transit in a metropolitan area infamous for its congestion, smog, and > sprawl, and, most importantly, where he believes that by any rational > measure buses provide a superior mode of transit. He finds the > explanation > for this decision in the power of myth and symbol, image and metaphor, > citing extensively from linguistic experts such as Susan Langer, > George > Lakoff, and Martin Fossand on his first page quoting a passage from > Russell Ackoff's The Art of Problem Solving: "We usually try to reduce > complex situations to what appear to be one or more simple solvable > problems . . . sometimes referred to as 'cutting the problem down to > size.' In so doing we often reduce our chances of finding a creative > solution to the original problem." This is exactly what Richmond > believes > happened in Los Angeles beginning in the 1980s. > > Richmond has done his homework. His book is based in part on more than > two > hundred interviews with public officials. He presents a history of > Henry > Huntington's Pacific Electric, the storied Red Car system that once > operated 1,100 miles of track radiating in all directions from Los > Angeles. He evaluates the case for modern light rail and the > forecasting > methodology used to predict passenger demand for the first route > planned > for the Los Angeles area, the Blue Line connecting with the region's > second-largest city, Long Beach. He reports that ridership forecasts > were > initially inflated. Then, just before the line opened, they were > deflated > in order to make the actual numbers look good. > > Transport of Delight devotes considerable attention to the political > decision-making process that led to passage of Proposition A, the > local > half-cent tax that funded the return of electric railways, a process > ultimately dependent on "availability of a set of symbols, images, and > metaphors which come together coherently to create a myth that acts > with > the power of truth" (p. 6). The human body's circulation system, for > example, became a powerful metaphor for transit planners. Likewise > valuable was the perception among civic leaders that electric trains > were > "sexier" than buses, a perception Richmond addresses at length in a > section titled "The Train as Symbol of Community Pride: Penis Envy in > Los > Angeles." > > Richmond notes the power of the mental image that remained after the > last > Red Cars disappeared in 1961, an image that gave rise to the notion > that > [End Page 661] the demise of a superior mode of transit was the result > of > a conspiracy in which General Motors played a key role. The first > local > railway started running between the harbor and downtown Los Angeles in > 1869, the last Red Car line operated along this same corridor, and, > thirty > years after service ended on that line, rail-borne transit was reborn > in > the form of the Blue Line. This, Richmond feels certain, was a big > mistake. In his view, buses are a superior mode of transit for Los > Angeles, particularly in terms of their cost-effectiveness; just about > everything involving an electric railway is vastly more expensive than > rubber tire on paved roadway. > > The Blue Line was brought into existence not on the basis of any > rational > assessment of available choices, but to reward political acumen, > particularly that of County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn (now deceased, > though > his son became mayor of Los Angeles), through whose Fourth District > was > routed not only the Blue Line but also two other new electric rail > lines -- all this in the wake of devastating riots in South Central > Los > Angeles and repeated recommendations that improved transit would have > beneficial social consequences. > > The problem was "cut down to size," yes, but Richmond is certain that > it > was the wrong size. Whatever one may happen to think about the virtues > of > different modes of urban transit, Transport of Delight presents an > excellent case study in the power of myth, and it provides us with a > compelling picture of a place where culture and technology blend > seamlessly. > > James Smart > Jim Smart is adjunct professor of journalism and public speaking at > California State University Fullerton and Cal State San Bernardino. > From > 1981 until 1998 he served as head of media relations for the Southern > California Rapid Transit District and the Los Angeles County > Metropolitan > Transportation Authority. > > Permission to reprint a review published here may be obtained only > from > the reviewer. > > > ----- > Jonathan Richmond > 182 Palfrey St. > Watertown MA 02472-1835 > > (617) 395-4360 > > e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus > is on urban transport policy in Asia. > ----- Jonathan Richmond 182 Palfrey St. Watertown MA 02472-1835 (617) 395-4360 e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From richmond at alum.mit.edu Mon Oct 10 10:51:33 2005 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 21:51:33 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [sustran] Re: Book Review In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am writing a paper on Bangkok right now... Of course, there is no reason why public transport should cover its costs. It can be a worthwhile public investment to finance an alternative to the car. The problem is that rail systems are very expensive to build and, as we are seeing in certain Asian situations -- perhaps Bangkok especially -- their impacts can be regressive, with fares charged on systems built at heavy public expense beyond the reach of lower-income residents who need public transport the most. --Jonathan On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Lee Schipper wrote: > And the problems light rail had stemmed from the 1920s, when their fares > were too low and they started to fold. People begrudgingly got cars -- > so said a UC Berkeley > Geography Prof in his take on this in the late 1980s.. > > How about the Delhi or Bangkok metros? The LA "Metro" with the boutique > stations? How about the outer parts of US systems like Metro in > Washington DC or BART? > > >>> "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" 10/9/2005 9:38:09 > PM >>> > > > All good questions. > > The point is that while GM did indeed want to get rid of rail lines, > the > demise of rail was not the result of any such conspiracy but a response > to > the market which had made rail uncompetitive. Rail companies were > making > big losses as automotive-induced decentralization became a fact of > life, and trying to get out of the business. > > --Jonathan > > On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Lee Schipper wrote: > > > Thanks, this looks very interesting. It's always fun to fly in to LA > and > > see if you can spot the Blue Line train (I usually only see one)! > > > > I am just old enough to remember the Red cars in LA in the 1950s. WE > > lived about 1/2 km from Venice and La Cienega, where the red car went > by > > on an overpass. I wonder, how much longer would have the old red > car > > light rail lasted in LA without the alleged "conspiracy"? Maybe the > > problem was people were not clustering homes at the stations or > along > > the lines? Why did the French remove their rail from Paris in the > > 1950s? Why did the social democrat Swedes do this in Stockholm too > (as > > well as ripping up lots of the key diesel-based rail lines > connecting > > small towns)? Why did Hanoi rip up its light rail decades ago, only > to > > let the French donate one last year? > > > > There seem to be a message here, GM conspiracy or not. > > > > >>> richmond@alum.mit.edu 10/9/2005 9:07:24 PM >>> > > > > > > Here's a review of my book in Technology and Culture, which most of > you > > on > > this list probably would not otherwise see! > > > > Best, > > > > --Jonathan > > > > > > Technology and culture, July 2005 > > > > Transport of Delight: The Mythical Conception of Rail Transit in Los > > Angeles. By Jonathan Richmond. Akron, Ohio: University of Akron > Press, > > 2005. Pp. xix+498. $49.95. > > > > "This book is a study about the failure of thought and its causes," > > writes > > Jonathan Richmond in his introduction to Transport of Delight. "It > > starts > > with a bizarre decision: to construct a comprehensive rail passenger > > system in an environment where it appears incapable of providing > real > > benefits." Richmond analyzes the decision to redeploy rail-borne > > public > > transit in a metropolitan area infamous for its congestion, smog, > and > > sprawl, and, most importantly, where he believes that by any > rational > > measure buses provide a superior mode of transit. He finds the > > explanation > > for this decision in the power of myth and symbol, image and > metaphor, > > citing extensively from linguistic experts such as Susan Langer, > > George > > Lakoff, and Martin Fossand on his first page quoting a passage from > > Russell Ackoff's The Art of Problem Solving: "We usually try to > reduce > > complex situations to what appear to be one or more simple solvable > > problems . . . sometimes referred to as 'cutting the problem down to > > size.' In so doing we often reduce our chances of finding a creative > > solution to the original problem." This is exactly what Richmond > > believes > > happened in Los Angeles beginning in the 1980s. > > > > Richmond has done his homework. His book is based in part on more > than > > two > > hundred interviews with public officials. He presents a history of > > Henry > > Huntington's Pacific Electric, the storied Red Car system that once > > operated 1,100 miles of track radiating in all directions from Los > > Angeles. He evaluates the case for modern light rail and the > > forecasting > > methodology used to predict passenger demand for the first route > > planned > > for the Los Angeles area, the Blue Line connecting with the region's > > second-largest city, Long Beach. He reports that ridership forecasts > > were > > initially inflated. Then, just before the line opened, they were > > deflated > > in order to make the actual numbers look good. > > > > Transport of Delight devotes considerable attention to the political > > decision-making process that led to passage of Proposition A, the > > local > > half-cent tax that funded the return of electric railways, a process > > ultimately dependent on "availability of a set of symbols, images, > and > > metaphors which come together coherently to create a myth that acts > > with > > the power of truth" (p. 6). The human body's circulation system, for > > example, became a powerful metaphor for transit planners. Likewise > > valuable was the perception among civic leaders that electric trains > > were > > "sexier" than buses, a perception Richmond addresses at length in a > > section titled "The Train as Symbol of Community Pride: Penis Envy > in > > Los > > Angeles." > > > > Richmond notes the power of the mental image that remained after the > > last > > Red Cars disappeared in 1961, an image that gave rise to the notion > > that > > [End Page 661] the demise of a superior mode of transit was the > result > > of > > a conspiracy in which General Motors played a key role. The first > > local > > railway started running between the harbor and downtown Los Angeles > in > > 1869, the last Red Car line operated along this same corridor, and, > > thirty > > years after service ended on that line, rail-borne transit was > reborn > > in > > the form of the Blue Line. This, Richmond feels certain, was a big > > mistake. In his view, buses are a superior mode of transit for Los > > Angeles, particularly in terms of their cost-effectiveness; just > about > > everything involving an electric railway is vastly more expensive > than > > rubber tire on paved roadway. > > > > The Blue Line was brought into existence not on the basis of any > > rational > > assessment of available choices, but to reward political acumen, > > particularly that of County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn (now deceased, > > though > > his son became mayor of Los Angeles), through whose Fourth District > > was > > routed not only the Blue Line but also two other new electric rail > > lines -- all this in the wake of devastating riots in South Central > > Los > > Angeles and repeated recommendations that improved transit would > have > > beneficial social consequences. > > > > The problem was "cut down to size," yes, but Richmond is certain > that > > it > > was the wrong size. Whatever one may happen to think about the > virtues > > of > > different modes of urban transit, Transport of Delight presents an > > excellent case study in the power of myth, and it provides us with a > > compelling picture of a place where culture and technology blend > > seamlessly. > > > > James Smart > > Jim Smart is adjunct professor of journalism and public speaking at > > California State University Fullerton and Cal State San Bernardino. > > From > > 1981 until 1998 he served as head of media relations for the > Southern > > California Rapid Transit District and the Los Angeles County > > Metropolitan > > Transportation Authority. > > > > Permission to reprint a review published here may be obtained only > > from > > the reviewer. > > > > > > ----- > > Jonathan Richmond > > 182 Palfrey St. > > Watertown MA 02472-1835 > > > > (617) 395-4360 > > > > e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu > > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > > > > ================================================================ > > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing > countries > > (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main > focus > > is on urban transport policy in Asia. > > > > > ----- > Jonathan Richmond > 182 Palfrey St. > Watertown MA 02472-1835 > > (617) 395-4360 > > e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > ----- Jonathan Richmond 182 Palfrey St. Watertown MA 02472-1835 (617) 395-4360 e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From litman at vtpi.org Tue Oct 11 01:04:40 2005 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:04:40 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Book Review In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051010083615.058aa3f8@mail.islandnet.com> These issues can be viewed from a variety of perspectives. Rail service declined for a variety of reasons. I agree with Dr. Richmond that the GM/Standard Oil/Firestone Rubber conspiracy was a minor component, but I don't agree that the demise of rail in most U.S. cities, and sprawled land use were simply a rational response of "the market" which benefits consumers overall. A variety of market distortions (such as subsidized parking and underpricing of roads), social problems (racism in particular), and the enthusiasm with which people of diverse political ideologies embraced the vision of an automobile-dominated transportation system, creating a self-fulfilling prophesy. Dr. Richmond's analysis is based on the assumption that redeveloping rail transit in modern cities is a wasteful and misguided, based on the relatively high unit costs of rail transit service compared with alternatives such as Bus Rapid Transit (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm120.htm ) in automobile-oriented cities such as LA. But this perspective tends to overlook many of the potential benefits of rail transit (http://www.vtpi.org/railben.pdf ), particularly its ability to create more efficient and multi-modal land use patterns, which provides a variety of economic, social and environmental benefits. This perspective assumes that transportation decisions should respond to existing land use patterns rather than try to change them. It also assumes that transit has a fixed budget, so money spent on rail would otherwise be spent on buses, but in many situations money spent on rail would otherwise be spent on highway capacity expansion. The criticism that rail investment decisions are biased by federal match funding may be true, but it is even more true for highway projects, which tend to receive higher matching levels and less economic scrutiny. The argument that LA should not invest in rail because it currently has automobile-oriented land use and transportation patterns could be turned around. We could say that LA is exactly the sort of place that needs rail transit most: it has high density but a lack of mixed-use urban centers, and it has a mature highway system with high marginal costs for further expansion. People who support rail in such a city may be those who have a long-range vision for what the city could become. That sort of vision is badly needed. I suspect that many people who were skeptical of rail will learn to appreciate it over time as its positive impacts on land use development begin to take hold. There are certainly cheaper ways to encourage urban redevelopment. I would rather see road pricing and large investments in bus service improvements first, although that would likely lead to rail development as transit ridership grows. But if the choice is between urban highway expansion and rail transit development I'm pretty sure that a comprehensive, long-term analysis will favor rail. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 06:48 PM 10/9/2005, Lee Schipper wrote: >And the problems light rail had stemmed from the 1920s, when their fares >were too low and they started to fold. People begrudgingly got cars -- >so said a UC Berkeley >Geography Prof in his take on this in the late 1980s.. > >How about the Delhi or Bangkok metros? The LA "Metro" with the boutique >stations? How about the outer parts of US systems like Metro in >Washington DC or BART? > > >>> "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" 10/9/2005 9:38:09 >PM >>> > > >All good questions. > >The point is that while GM did indeed want to get rid of rail lines, >the >demise of rail was not the result of any such conspiracy but a response >to >the market which had made rail uncompetitive. Rail companies were >making >big losses as automotive-induced decentralization became a fact of >life, and trying to get out of the business. > > --Jonathan > >On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Lee Schipper wrote: > > > Thanks, this looks very interesting. It's always fun to fly in to LA >and > > see if you can spot the Blue Line train (I usually only see one)! > > > > I am just old enough to remember the Red cars in LA in the 1950s. WE > > lived about 1/2 km from Venice and La Cienega, where the red car went >by > > on an overpass. I wonder, how much longer would have the old red >car > > light rail lasted in LA without the alleged "conspiracy"? Maybe the > > problem was people were not clustering homes at the stations or >along > > the lines? Why did the French remove their rail from Paris in the > > 1950s? Why did the social democrat Swedes do this in Stockholm too >(as > > well as ripping up lots of the key diesel-based rail lines >connecting > > small towns)? Why did Hanoi rip up its light rail decades ago, only >to > > let the French donate one last year? > > > > There seem to be a message here, GM conspiracy or not. > > > > >>> richmond@alum.mit.edu 10/9/2005 9:07:24 PM >>> > > > > > > Here's a review of my book in Technology and Culture, which most of >you > > on > > this list probably would not otherwise see! > > > > Best, > > > > --Jonathan > > > > > > Technology and culture, July 2005 > > > > Transport of Delight: The Mythical Conception of Rail Transit in Los > > Angeles. By Jonathan Richmond. Akron, Ohio: University of Akron >Press, > > 2005. Pp. xix+498. $49.95. > > > > "This book is a study about the failure of thought and its causes," > > writes > > Jonathan Richmond in his introduction to Transport of Delight. "It > > starts > > with a bizarre decision: to construct a comprehensive rail passenger > > system in an environment where it appears incapable of providing >real > > benefits." Richmond analyzes the decision to redeploy rail-borne > > public > > transit in a metropolitan area infamous for its congestion, smog, >and > > sprawl, and, most importantly, where he believes that by any >rational > > measure buses provide a superior mode of transit. He finds the > > explanation > > for this decision in the power of myth and symbol, image and >metaphor, > > citing extensively from linguistic experts such as Susan Langer, > > George > > Lakoff, and Martin Fossand on his first page quoting a passage from > > Russell Ackoff's The Art of Problem Solving: "We usually try to >reduce > > complex situations to what appear to be one or more simple solvable > > problems . . . sometimes referred to as 'cutting the problem down to > > size.' In so doing we often reduce our chances of finding a creative > > solution to the original problem." This is exactly what Richmond > > believes > > happened in Los Angeles beginning in the 1980s. > > > > Richmond has done his homework. His book is based in part on more >than > > two > > hundred interviews with public officials. He presents a history of > > Henry > > Huntington's Pacific Electric, the storied Red Car system that once > > operated 1,100 miles of track radiating in all directions from Los > > Angeles. He evaluates the case for modern light rail and the > > forecasting > > methodology used to predict passenger demand for the first route > > planned > > for the Los Angeles area, the Blue Line connecting with the region's > > second-largest city, Long Beach. He reports that ridership forecasts > > were > > initially inflated. Then, just before the line opened, they were > > deflated > > in order to make the actual numbers look good. > > > > Transport of Delight devotes considerable attention to the political > > decision-making process that led to passage of Proposition A, the > > local > > half-cent tax that funded the return of electric railways, a process > > ultimately dependent on "availability of a set of symbols, images, >and > > metaphors which come together coherently to create a myth that acts > > with > > the power of truth" (p. 6). The human body's circulation system, for > > example, became a powerful metaphor for transit planners. Likewise > > valuable was the perception among civic leaders that electric trains > > were > > "sexier" than buses, a perception Richmond addresses at length in a > > section titled "The Train as Symbol of Community Pride: Penis Envy >in > > Los > > Angeles." > > > > Richmond notes the power of the mental image that remained after the > > last > > Red Cars disappeared in 1961, an image that gave rise to the notion > > that > > [End Page 661] the demise of a superior mode of transit was the >result > > of > > a conspiracy in which General Motors played a key role. The first > > local > > railway started running between the harbor and downtown Los Angeles >in > > 1869, the last Red Car line operated along this same corridor, and, > > thirty > > years after service ended on that line, rail-borne transit was >reborn > > in > > the form of the Blue Line. This, Richmond feels certain, was a big > > mistake. In his view, buses are a superior mode of transit for Los > > Angeles, particularly in terms of their cost-effectiveness; just >about > > everything involving an electric railway is vastly more expensive >than > > rubber tire on paved roadway. > > > > The Blue Line was brought into existence not on the basis of any > > rational > > assessment of available choices, but to reward political acumen, > > particularly that of County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn (now deceased, > > though > > his son became mayor of Los Angeles), through whose Fourth District > > was > > routed not only the Blue Line but also two other new electric rail > > lines -- all this in the wake of devastating riots in South Central > > Los > > Angeles and repeated recommendations that improved transit would >have > > beneficial social consequences. > > > > The problem was "cut down to size," yes, but Richmond is certain >that > > it > > was the wrong size. Whatever one may happen to think about the >virtues > > of > > different modes of urban transit, Transport of Delight presents an > > excellent case study in the power of myth, and it provides us with a > > compelling picture of a place where culture and technology blend > > seamlessly. > > > > James Smart > > Jim Smart is adjunct professor of journalism and public speaking at > > California State University Fullerton and Cal State San Bernardino. > > From > > 1981 until 1998 he served as head of media relations for the >Southern > > California Rapid Transit District and the Los Angeles County > > Metropolitan > > Transportation Authority. > > > > Permission to reprint a review published here may be obtained only > > from > > the reviewer. > > > > > > ----- > > Jonathan Richmond > > 182 Palfrey St. > > Watertown MA 02472-1835 > > > > (617) 395-4360 > > > > e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu > > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > > > > ================================================================ > > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing >countries > > (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main >focus > > is on urban transport policy in Asia. > > > > >----- >Jonathan Richmond >182 Palfrey St. >Watertown MA 02472-1835 > >(617) 395-4360 > >e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu >http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > >================================================================ >SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing >countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, >the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051010/664b35de/attachment-0001.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Oct 12 08:56:53 2005 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 16:56:53 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Book Review Technology and culture, July 2005 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <020301c5cebf$78ab3a10$6501a8c0@Home> Dear Jonathan, I very much like that review -- and more than that all the thinking that lies behind it in your book. Based on my not entirely inconsequential knowledge you have put your finger on the trigger here. That said, Todds' caveats are also well taken. In fact I tend to make a synthesis of these competing elements to arrive at my own vision of what al this means. . . and what should best happen next. What about my putting this in our Day in the Office blog for further circulation? With all good wishes, Eric Britton The New Mobility Agenda is on line at http://www.newmobility.org Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara 75006 Paris, France Tel: Europe: +331 4326 1323 North America +1 310 601-8468 Mobile: +336 73.21 58.68 F: +331 53.01 28.96 Skype: ericbritton E: eric.britton@ecoplan.org Backup: fekbritton@gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051011/5967c5ce/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Oct 12 09:22:09 2005 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 17:22:09 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Gender/Mobility Network?? Why and next steps - a proposal for discussion Message-ID: <021801c5cec2$ff7b11c0$6501a8c0@Home> Dear Friends, We seem to be making progress here. So let me see if I can build on Margaret's latest (see below) and a bit of work that I have done over the last two days to see how we might be able to be of a bit of help from here. Not to deluge you all with endless emails on our subject, but it's my firm conviction that this is a critical time for this effort, either we move ahead on this now -- or all we have done this far heads for the absolutely merciless shredder of indifference and neglect. So off we go on one last push from here, this time in the memory of my dear mother who would never have accepted that her son just sit on his hands in the face of this problem.. And to all of you who know so much more about this than I do - my sheepishly grinning hope that this is still of a bit of interest. As a first step, I have gone back to start to create a dedicated web site and supporting tool set that could make things a bit easier for us in engineering these necessary next steps. If you go to http://www.xability.com you will see our working draft - and if you have comments, suggestions, corrections or further leads I any of this, well this would be very timely and much welcome. Against this background here are three I believe important points which may be worth a bit more thought? 1. Naming: I would like to ask you to consider adjusting the name of this group effort to the Gender/Mobility Network, for reason I would now like to spell out succinctly. (An alternative or sub-title in the compact eighteenth century mold might run: "Or how people of energy and conscience might better put together their minds and efforts to create a more just society, and specifically when it comes to adjusting the asymmetries of daily life which at present disadvantage women severely disproportionately in matters relating to physical and electronic mobility".) (Let me also quote directly from the formidable Margaret who in her introduction to the Sarpin program answers this question in far better words than IU can find: "Why gender and transport?", she answers with the following telling words: "There is a relationship between mobility, power and well being. The differences between male and female travel patterns and the cultural rules and roles associated with these differences are undercharted in the policy environment. The impact of constrained mobility on bargaining also has its impact on what comes to be available as resource and service within local constraints. No better demonstration of these constraints can be found than in Africa's portrait of maternal mortality: constraints on mobility and on the resources for mobility and accessibility have devastating consequences for women's health on the African continent.") (As to the short name of the network? GAMNET is if anything uglier in the mouth and mind even that the not so pretty GATNET - but first things first and then we can get to this. And one can hope that one of us will come up with something that is far better than that. For example why not think about calling it something more like ATHENA: attractive, memorable and not entirely beside the point. And female. And a Goddess (who can argue with a goddess?). No reason to jump into this one.) 2. The Pillars These are basically three, which I would like to run though you one time as follows: (1) Gender: While this may be crystal clear to all of you here, to the outside world this word needs to be made unambiguous and resounding from the very start. It's a far richer concept than first meets the eye (to the extent that even a reasonably well informed and well intentioned guy like myself have had to be dragged up the learning curve by all of you on this in our collaboration over the last six months.). I am now fully - and here I chose my words - in awe of the power of this concept, but I fear that the rest of the world will need some early and vivid help in getting this straight. My point is this. Since we are trying to extend the outreach and participation, it would be a great idea to make sure that our most important concepts are spelled out on top and in words that make the bottom line very clear indeed. (2) Mobility: This word choice is an old friend to all of us who have labored with these issues over the past years. Why mobility and not "transport"? Well, not least because we need a defining concept which stretches to bring in from the beginning the whole concept of ICT and moving electrons as well as people, water, what have you. (3) Network: Our final key defining concept. Our goal here is - check me on this - to see if we can create a flexible easy efficient set of tools and routines that will permit all of us scattered in projects and places around the world, to 'keep in touch'. How to do this? Fax, mail, (paid) telephone, long boring expensive and environmentally destructive air trips? Or is there another way of going about this. Of course what we and the others of you have managed to do with the Gatnet and other Bank-supported linkages is a good start. But hey, it's 2005 and that is a lot m9ore out there than just this. 3. Next Steps? Let me advance a couple of ideas here for your consideration and decision. (1) Working web site: Can we work with http://www.ability.com for the time being to get started, and then when and if something better comes along we can consider about how to fold what we would have developed to then into that something better. (2) Outreach program: I propose that we need to reach well beyond the group that ewe have assembled thus far, and that perhaps one way to do this will be (a) to extend and correct the inventories of groups and programs working in these areas, as well as our print and other references. And as we identify these new potential actors, we need to get in touch personally and see how if at all that might be able to fit in and profit from all this. (3) And now on to the next stage? Here is where some of you may start to get a bit uncomfortable. Fair enough given that we all having our habits and ways of working, and that none of us much likes taking on anything new and maybe troublesome. Fair enough, so let's take it in modest steps. Specifically I would now like to put a very simple yes/n proposal before you to test our capacity as individuals and as a group to move up a significant notch in the networking technology spectrum. Specifically I propose to invite you all to join us in a Skype network. Please understand however that this is not big deal and that we and the 3,916,628 uses who are presently online when I just looked and communicating for free - are far from geniuses, but we do seem to have a need to communicate. Easily and as close to nothing (that often being the case) as we can. Is Skype perfect? Not quite but it is universally available, free, pretty well proven, plenty serviceable and has passed the day after day international litmus test for us and a number of our associates around the world over more than a year now. But what about its ability to work if you have only a dial-up connection in Addis or Dacca. No problem. Here is how the Skype people put it: "You can use Skype when you are connected with a 33.6 Kbps modem or faster. However, when you are using a modem for other types of Internet traffic, such as web surfing, file sharing or email you may experience disruptions in the voice communication. (3) And more specifically? i. I invite you to go to http://www.skype.com and download and install the program. It's a ten minute job, max. ii. Then when you have a moment, I invite you to test your new connection with me. All you have to do is pop ericbritton into the number slot, and there I will be on the other end of the line. (Bear in mind that Paris time is GMT+1. To time any eventual meeting, especially if more than two of us are involved each in our own distant pocket of the world, we use a handy distance meeting planner which you can access at http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html?p1=195 ) iii. Then once we have verified our one-on-one connections and our first handful of colleagues come on board, we can then organize the first little group call. (Note: to get this right a bit of preparation is needed, including a quick agenda, a meeting plan, and a host to make sure that the whole thing clicks along smoothly. Perhaps we can also ask one of our number each time to take a few notes so that we can share the experience with the others, including a brief comment on the mechanics of communicating with each other. In the event, our experience is that it only gets better with time.) iv. In fact the voice conferencing is the first easy step toward a more complete collaborative group work experience, but let's see if for now we can take this in easy step. For more on how this all works, I can point you to http://www.xmobility.org which does a pretty good job of introducing the various options and procedures. That's it. I'll just sit back here and wait for my Skype phone to start ringing so that we can start to get to know each other. I promise you are going to like this. And that it is indeed going to make a difference. With all good wishes, Eric The New Mobility Agenda is on line at http://www.newmobility.org Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara 75006 Paris, France Tel: Europe: +331 4326 1323 North America +1 310 601-8468 Mobile: +336 73.21 58.68 F: +331 53.01 28.96 Skype: ericbritton E: eric.britton@ecoplan.org Backup: fekbritton@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: Margaret Sybil Grieco-Kanbur [mailto:mg294@cornell.edu] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 12:28 AM To: Gender and Transport Subject: [gatnet] Re: gender and transport group is longer active at world bank The reason for focusing on the world bank is that it is tied into the rationale it already established of the importance of work on gender and transport. It was either wrong then or it is wrong now. But it put up the rationales for action on this issue in the public domain, and it should not be allowed to dismantle that action without making public its rationale for the dismantling of that action. The core of the issue is that we have not yet managed to ensure that this area gets proper professional space. There is no gender and transport journal for insistence. Is there somebody lurking out there on this list that can organise a journal where the issues can be regularly, repeatedly and routinely visited and rehearsed. Gender and transport is important to almost every possible equity goal. >From health to wealth - the importance of gender and transport is undeniable but avoidable if institutions are set up in such a way that the issue is low on the food chain. Best Margaret -----Original Message----- From: Margaret Sybil Grieco-Kanbur [mailto:mg294@cornell.edu] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 12:20 AM To: Gender and Transport Subject: [gatnet] RE: The gender and transport group is no longer active at the world bank The gender and transport group was brought into being by john flora, director for transport at the world bank (now retired). The work of Christina Malmberg Calvo on gender and transport undertaken at the world bank was fundamental to the development of the area. Christina is now res rep in the Dominican republic - so yes, some essential champions have moved on. The present director of transport is Maryvonne Plessais-Fraissard - a woman. This in itself is a sign that things do change but without champions they revert. Perhaps one approach might be for a substantial institutional request to be made of the present director of transport for a gender and thematic group to be reestablished or at the very least that the bank undertake the substantial archiving of gender and transport research and make it available on its web site. There is the need of an institutional champion to make the pressure - is there one lurking on this list. Margaret -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051011/00f984cf/attachment-0001.html From ericbruun at earthlink.net Wed Oct 12 04:43:03 2005 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:43:03 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: Litman's Book Review Message-ID: <7959260.1129059784055.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051011/33b099fe/attachment.html From schipper at wri.org Wed Oct 12 05:32:28 2005 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 16:32:28 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Litman's Book Review Message-ID: Interestingly, the red "rapid bus" runs all the way from Santa Monica to whitter on Wilshire (where I grew up) then on other streets east of so=called Downtown. HAs cut overal travel time some 20% through signal priorities. LA now has a vision for a very wide covering BRT system and I think the first line, which goes from the "end" of the boutique metro to the Valley, is running. Wish we could have that in WAshington DC. >>> Eric Bruun 10/11/2005 3:43:03 PM >>> As you can expect from me, I agree with Todd. But I just want to add a couple comments specfic to LA, not rail transit in general. 1) The GM et. al. conspiracy was only a "minor component" in most cities, but not in LA. The combined yellow and red car systems were together quite a huge network. The systems were worn out because of extremely heavy use during World War II and needed reinvestment. There was no reason to phase out absolutely everything. But first they cut back service, so when ridership disappeared, they could justify an eventual total shutdown. 2) The LA Red Line was supposed to go down Wilshire Boulevard, but Rep. Henry Waxman got it defunded when natural gas leaked into the tunnel, only one of many problems and corruption scandals during its construction. Based on the huge volume of bus riders and existing activity on this street, it would have been justified. The new route turned north along Vermont Avenue, instead of Fairfax Avenue much farther to the west, as originally planned. This affected its usefulness, but as Todd stated, there is infill potential. And there actually is some infill going on along the line. God knows LA needs somewhere to put infill, with projections of another 6 million people adding to the 14 million already in the LA Basin by 2025. In LA, if anywhere, the long view is needed. 3) Sure, cities like Copenhagen and Stockholm shut down their rail lines in the post World War II mentality. I agree that this was the trend at the time. But LA even in the 1950s was a very much bigger city with very much longer travel distances. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Todd Alexander Litman Sent: Oct 10, 2005 12:04 PM To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport Subject: [sustran] Re: Book Review These issues can be viewed from a variety of perspectives. Rail service declined for a variety of reasons. I agree with Dr. Richmond that the GM/Standard Oil/Firestone Rubber conspiracy was a minor component, but I don't agree that the demise of rail in most U.S. cities, and sprawled land use were simply a rational response of "the market" which benefits consumers overall. A variety of market distortions (such as subsidized parking and underpricing of roads), social problems (racism in particular), and the enthusiasm with which people of diverse political ideologies embraced the vision of an automobile-dominated transportation system, creating a self-fulfilling prophesy. Dr. Richmond's analysis is based on the assumption that redeveloping rail transit in modern cities is a wasteful and misguided, based on the relatively high unit costs of rail transit service compared with alternatives such as Bus Rapid Transit ( http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm120.htm ) in automobile-oriented cities such as LA. But this perspective tends to overlook many of the potential benefits of rail transit ( http://www.vtpi.org/railben.pdf ), particularly its ability to create more efficient and multi-modal land use patterns, which provides a variety of economic, social and environmental benefits. This perspective assumes that transportation decisions should respond to existing land use patterns rather than try to change them. It also assumes that transit has a fixed budget, so money spent on rail would otherwise be spent on buses, but in many situations money spent on rail would otherwise be spent on highway capacity expansion. The criticism that rail investment decisions are biased by federal match funding may be true, but it is even more true for highway projects, which tend to receive higher matching levels and less economic scrutiny. The argument that LA should not invest in rail because it currently has automobile-oriented land use and transportation patterns could be turned around. We could say that LA is exactly the sort of place that needs rail transit most: it has high density but a lack of mixed-use urban centers, and it has a mature highway system with high marginal costs for further expansion. People who support rail in such a city may be those who have a long-range vision for what the city could become. That sort of vision is badly needed. I suspect that many people who were skeptical of rail will learn to appreciate it over time as its positive impacts on land use development begin to take hold. There are certainly cheaper ways to encourage urban redevelopment. I would rather see road pricing and large investments in bus service improvements first, although that would likely lead to rail development as transit ridership grows. But if the choice is between urban highway expansion and rail transit development I'm pretty sure that a comprehensive, long-term analysis will favor rail. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 06:48 PM 10/9/2005, Lee Schipper wrote: And the problems light rail had stemmed from the 1920s, when their fares were too low and they started to fold. People begrudgingly got cars -- so said a UC Berkeley Geography Prof in his take on this in the late 1980s.. How about the Delhi or Bangkok metros? The LA "Metro" with the boutique stations? How about the outer parts of US systems like Metro in Washington DC or BART? >>> "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" 10/9/2005 9:38:09 PM >>> All good questions. The point is that while GM did indeed want to get rid of rail lines, the demise of rail was not the result of any such conspiracy but a response to the market which had made rail uncompetitive. Rail companies were making big losses as automotive-induced decentralization became a fact of life, and trying to get out of the business. --Jonathan On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Lee Schipper wrote: > Thanks, this looks very interesting. It's always fun to fly in to LA and > see if you can spot the Blue Line train (I usually only see one)! > > I am just old enough to remember the Red cars in LA in the 1950s. WE > lived about 1/2 km from Venice and La Cienega, where the red car went by > on an overpass. I wonder, how much longer would have the old red car > light rail lasted in LA without the alleged "conspiracy"? Maybe the > problem was people were not clustering homes at the stations or along > the lines? Why did the French remove their rail from Paris in the > 1950s? Why did the social democrat Swedes do this in Stockholm too (as > well as ripping up lots of the key diesel-based rail lines connecting > small towns)? Why did Hanoi rip up its light rail decades ago, only to > let the French donate one last year? > > There seem to be a message here, GM conspiracy or not. > > >>> richmond@alum.mit.edu 10/9/2005 9:07:24 PM >>> > > > Here's a review of my book in Technology and Culture, which most of you > on > this list probably would not otherwise see! > > Best, > > --Jonathan > > > Technology and culture, July 2005 > > Transport of Delight: The Mythical Conception of Rail Transit in Los > Angeles. By Jonathan Richmond. Akron, Ohio: University of Akron Press, > 2005. Pp. xix+498. $49.95. > > "This book is a study about the failure of thought and its causes," > writes > Jonathan Richmond in his introduction to Transport of Delight. "It > starts > with a bizarre decision: to construct a comprehensive rail passenger > system in an environment where it appears incapable of providing real > benefits." Richmond analyzes the decision to redeploy rail-borne > public > transit in a metropolitan area infamous for its congestion, smog, and > sprawl, and, most importantly, where he believes that by any rational > measure buses provide a superior mode of transit. He finds the > explanation > for this decision in the power of myth and symbol, image and metaphor, > citing extensively from linguistic experts such as Susan Langer, > George > Lakoff, and Martin Fossand on his first page quoting a passage from > Russell Ackoff's The Art of Problem Solving: "We usually try to reduce > complex situations to what appear to be one or more simple solvable > problems . . . sometimes referred to as 'cutting the problem down to > size.' In so doing we often reduce our chances of finding a creative > solution to the original problem." This is exactly what Richmond > believes > happened in Los Angeles beginning in the 1980s. > > Richmond has done his homework. His book is based in part on more than > two > hundred interviews with public officials. He presents a history of > Henry > Huntington's Pacific Electric, the storied Red Car system that once > operated 1,100 miles of track radiating in all directions from Los > Angeles. He evaluates the case for modern light rail and the > forecasting > methodology used to predict passenger demand for the first route > planned > for the Los Angeles area, the Blue Line connecting with the region's > second-largest city, Long Beach. He reports that ridership forecasts > were > initially inflated. Then, just before the line opened, they were > deflated > in order to make the actual numbers look good. > > Transport of Delight devotes considerable attention to the political > decision-making process that led to passage of Proposition A, the > local > half-cent tax that funded the return of electric railways, a process > ultimately dependent on "availability of a set of symbols, images, and > metaphors which come together coherently to create a myth that acts > with > the power of truth" (p. 6). The human body's circulation system, for > example, became a powerful metaphor for transit planners. Likewise > valuable was the perception among civic leaders that electric trains > were > "sexier" than buses, a perception Richmond addresses at length in a > section titled "The Train as Symbol of Community Pride: Penis Envy in > Los > Angeles." > > Richmond notes the power of the mental image that remained after the > last > Red Cars disappeared in 1961, an image that gave rise to the notion > that > [End Page 661] the demise of a superior mode of transit was the result > of > a conspiracy in which General Motors played a key role. The first > local > railway started running between the harbor and downtown Los Angeles in > 1869, the last Red Car line operated along this same corridor, and, > thirty > years after service ended on that line, rail-borne transit was reborn > in > the form of the Blue Line. This, Richmond feels certain, was a big > mistake. In his view, buses are a superior mode of transit for Los > Angeles, particularly in terms of their cost-effectiveness; just about > everything involving an electric railway is vastly more expensive than > rubber tire on paved roadway. > > The Blue Line was brought into existence not on the basis of any > rational > assessment of available choices, but to reward political acumen, > particularly that of County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn (now deceased, > though > his son became mayor of Los Angeles), through whose Fourth District > was > routed not only the Blue Line but also two other new electric rail > lines -- all this in the wake of devastating riots in South Central > Los > Angeles and repeated recommendations that improved transit would have > beneficial social consequences. > > The problem was "cut down to size," yes, but Richmond is certain that > it > was the wrong size. Whatever one may happen to think about the virtues > of > different modes of urban transit, Transport of Delight presents an > excellent case study in the power of myth, and it provides us with a > compelling picture of a place where culture and technology blend > seamlessly. > > James Smart > Jim Smart is adjunct professor of journalism and public speaking at > California State University Fullerton and Cal State San Bernardino. > From > 1981 until 1998 he served as head of media relations for the Southern > California Rapid Transit District and the Los Angeles County > Metropolitan > Transportation Authority. > > Permission to reprint a review published here may be obtained only > from > the reviewer. > > > ----- > Jonathan Richmond > 182 Palfrey St. > Watertown MA 02472-1835 > > (617) 395-4360 > > e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus > is on urban transport policy in Asia. > ----- Jonathan Richmond 182 Palfrey St. Watertown MA 02472-1835 (617) 395-4360 e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" From SCHIPPER at wri.org Fri Oct 21 05:49:46 2005 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:49:46 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra Message-ID: its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. Thanks to somone who can upload this.. Washington, we have a problem. >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> Lee, Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. -----Original Message----- From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc-uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> From: Richard Biddle Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. So what is Dallas doing? You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the operating costs. Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses and routes to save money. Of course, financially, you can see why. But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?3bn but raised land values around the stations by ?13bn! http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 &rn=316&action=show_detail http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg ] -- Richard L. Biddle, Director Henry George School of Social Science Henry George Birthplace Museum 413 South 10th Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 Web: http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com (215) 922-4278 office / voice (215) 407-9555 cell / voice SKYPE: biddlepa *********************************************************************************** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. *********************************************************************************** Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From SCHIPPER at wri.org Fri Oct 21 05:49:46 2005 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:49:46 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra Message-ID: its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. Thanks to somone who can upload this.. Washington, we have a problem. >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> Lee, Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. -----Original Message----- From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc-uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> From: Richard Biddle Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. So what is Dallas doing? You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the operating costs. Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses and routes to save money. Of course, financially, you can see why. But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?3bn but raised land values around the stations by ?13bn! http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 &rn=316&action=show_detail http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg ] -- Richard L. Biddle, Director Henry George School of Social Science Henry George Birthplace Museum 413 South 10th Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 Web: http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com (215) 922-4278 office / voice (215) 407-9555 cell / voice SKYPE: biddlepa *********************************************************************************** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. *********************************************************************************** Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From ericbruun at earthlink.net Fri Oct 21 06:19:04 2005 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 17:19:04 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] transit bus efficiency Message-ID: <2734184.1129843145264.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Lee Using average data for the US is almost meaningless. It is a gross overgeneralization. In fact, lots of "city buses" are quite crowded. Many genuine city systems are, in fact, overcrowded due to insufficient investment for decades. Try living in Philadelphia where there has been no system expansion for decades, and no plans for the next 10 years, either. I often have to stand in a crush load on the streetcar at 9pm in the evening. The services that bring the average down are buses that are being spread ever thinner, not just in the suburbs, but out to the exurbs. Also, the centers of small towns have been largely dissolved in the US, so their transit systems are also being spread ever farther as well. It is exacerbated by typical policies of prioritizing peak hour-peak direction service on the few viable routes left, so that large buses are bought for those trips and then used the remainder of the day even when demand is low. By using averages, it gives ammunition to the transit bashers who try to argue that transit is less efficient than cars. Transit is fine when you don't wreck your cities through endless sprawl. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper Sent: Oct 20, 2005 4:49 PM To: caitr04@csiro.au, Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org, UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK, pharnett@levi.com, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. Thanks to somone who can upload this.. Washington, we have a problem. >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> Lee, Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. -----Original Message----- From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc-uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> From: Richard Biddle Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. So what is Dallas doing? You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the operating costs. Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses and routes to save money. Of course, financially, you can see why. But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?3bn but raised land values around the stations by ?13bn! http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 &rn=316&action=show_detail http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg ] -- Richard L. Biddle, Director Henry George School of Social Science Henry George Birthplace Museum 413 South 10th Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 Web: http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com (215) 922-4278 office / voice (215) 407-9555 cell / voice SKYPE: biddlepa *********************************************************************************** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. *********************************************************************************** Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. From ericbruun at earthlink.net Fri Oct 21 06:19:04 2005 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 17:19:04 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] transit bus efficiency Message-ID: <2734184.1129843145264.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Lee Using average data for the US is almost meaningless. It is a gross overgeneralization. In fact, lots of "city buses" are quite crowded. Many genuine city systems are, in fact, overcrowded due to insufficient investment for decades. Try living in Philadelphia where there has been no system expansion for decades, and no plans for the next 10 years, either. I often have to stand in a crush load on the streetcar at 9pm in the evening. The services that bring the average down are buses that are being spread ever thinner, not just in the suburbs, but out to the exurbs. Also, the centers of small towns have been largely dissolved in the US, so their transit systems are also being spread ever farther as well. It is exacerbated by typical policies of prioritizing peak hour-peak direction service on the few viable routes left, so that large buses are bought for those trips and then used the remainder of the day even when demand is low. By using averages, it gives ammunition to the transit bashers who try to argue that transit is less efficient than cars. Transit is fine when you don't wreck your cities through endless sprawl. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper Sent: Oct 20, 2005 4:49 PM To: caitr04@csiro.au, Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org, UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK, pharnett@levi.com, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. Thanks to somone who can upload this.. Washington, we have a problem. >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> Lee, Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. -----Original Message----- From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc-uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> From: Richard Biddle Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. So what is Dallas doing? You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the operating costs. Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses and routes to save money. Of course, financially, you can see why. But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?3bn but raised land values around the stations by ?13bn! http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 &rn=316&action=show_detail http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg ] -- Richard L. Biddle, Director Henry George School of Social Science Henry George Birthplace Museum 413 South 10th Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 Web: http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com (215) 922-4278 office / voice (215) 407-9555 cell / voice SKYPE: biddlepa *********************************************************************************** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. *********************************************************************************** Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. From SCHIPPER at wri.org Fri Oct 21 06:39:23 2005 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 17:39:23 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency Message-ID: I have a different view. I think the compariosn shows the folly of the US subsidizing transit but NOt trying to control sprawl, having cheap fuel and vehicles and parking (as someone noted previously, etc etc. Simply making transit cheap is perhaps (but not certainly) necessary for a good transport system, but it is by no means sufficient. Since 1970 the energy and Co2 intensity of urban bus travel has risen, while that of car and air travel fell. Thnis also means greater local emissions, enen if the empty buses run on clean diesel or CNG, per passenger mile. Something is wrong. I would argue i a somewhat radical perspective we should stop sending buses to the exurbs to subsidize that commuting to work. We should lower public transport employee wages so we can afford smaller mini buses whe the load clearly is not there. Years ago Clifford Winston of Brookings, hardly a transit basher, wrote a great paper on this folly, advocating congestion pricing as well as transit. In other words, if you don't penalize car use, you can never make buses or even all but the largest rail systems in old cities make sense. Does it make sense to spend $100million/mil for heavy rail and subways that carry fewer than 5000 people /hour at peak? Does it make sense for transit authorities to buy $500 000 buses when they haven't got the !#@$$! to organize the buses into BRT and other efficient corridors. Will Metro Washington DC authorities give in to the 2 or 2 BILLION dollars a metro to the Dulles airport from one of the more outlying stations will cost? The issue is not what transit bashers say, its how to make transit work for all of us. In the US it is not working......except in a few fortunate places with lots of $$ or lots of people. PS In Stockholm and gothenburg today I noticed the buses are relativey filled. Even on a rural bus yesterday i SE Sweden, and then on a minor rural rail line, there were people everywhere. Of course it is relevant that gasoline costs $6/gallon, and large AND small swedish towns are relatively compact. If we are not going to move that way, collective transport in the US won't get very far, so to speak. >>> Eric Bruun 10/20/2005 5:19:04 PM >>> Lee Using average data for the US is almost meaningless. It is a gross overgeneralization. In fact, lots of "city buses" are quite crowded. Many genuine city systems are, in fact, overcrowded due to insufficient investment for decades. Try living in Philadelphia where there has been no system expansion for decades, and no plans for the next 10 years, either. I often have to stand in a crush load on the streetcar at 9pm in the evening. The services that bring the average down are buses that are being spread ever thinner, not just in the suburbs, but out to the exurbs. Also, the centers of small towns have been largely dissolved in the US, so their transit systems are also being spread ever farther as well. It is exacerbated by typical policies of prioritizing peak hour-peak direction service on the few viable routes left, so that large buses are bought for those trips and then used the remainder of the day even when demand is low. By using averages, it gives ammunition to the transit bashers who try to argue that transit is less efficient than cars. Transit is fine when you don't wreck your cities through endless sprawl. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper Sent: Oct 20, 2005 4:49 PM To: caitr04@csiro.au, Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org, UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK, pharnett@levi.com, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. Thanks to somone who can upload this.. Washington, we have a problem. >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> Lee, Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. -----Original Message----- From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc-uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> From: Richard Biddle Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. So what is Dallas doing? You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the operating costs. Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses and routes to save money. Of course, financially, you can see why. But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?3bn but raised land values around the stations by ?13bn! http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 &rn=316&action=show_detail http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg ] -- Richard L. Biddle, Director Henry George School of Social Science Henry George Birthplace Museum 413 South 10th Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 Web: http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com (215) 922-4278 office / voice (215) 407-9555 cell / voice SKYPE: biddlepa *********************************************************************************** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. *********************************************************************************** Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. From Lew.Fulton at unep.org Fri Oct 21 10:01:00 2005 From: Lew.Fulton at unep.org (Lew Fulton) Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 04:01:00 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Lew Fulton/UNEP/NBO/UNO is out of the office. Message-ID: I will be out of the office starting 18/10/2005 and will not return until 24/10/2005. Sorry, I will be unable to respond to your message until I return. From ericbruun at earthlink.net Fri Oct 21 10:27:29 2005 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:27:29 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency Message-ID: <18109971.1129858049686.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Lee Of course I agree that something is wrong. I don't disagree with your statement about the folly of not controlling sprawl. And you are certainly preaching to the choir about smaller buses, about congestion pricing, and about bus priority. Most transit planners I know would agree with you. But again, I think your definition of "urban" is not fair. Buses are certainly not running empty where I live. And building expensive transit in built-up areas should not be evaluated only using energy efficiency per passenger as the criterion. It is about space efficiency. It enables dense development and the use of non-motorized modes It is physically impossible to have a dense city if everyone commutes using a car. I think that reactionary and corrupted US politics are really insidious and are what prevent progress, not ignorant transit planners. There is simply no way that we can have transit only in the places where it is most efficient. The suburban politicians dominate. They want service for their constituents too, and they want less crowding than the city folk have to endure. They will not fund a system that is only for the city. I note that most new rail systems have been built primarily for the benefit of suburbanites, with any stops in city neighborhoods between the suburbs and downtown as incidental. Furthermore, if we stop serving suburbs and exurbs, then the working poor can't get jobs because there is a huge job-housing mismatch, as you know. They get hurt if we get rid of inefficient operations. Transit is a social service. We are stuck with some inefficiency. I point out that everything else about public works in the US is inefficient too. Utilities, roads and school buses also cost more than they should, too, thanks to sprawl. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper Sent: Oct 20, 2005 5:39 PM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency I have a different view. I think the compariosn shows the folly of the US subsidizing transit but NOt trying to control sprawl, having cheap fuel and vehicles and parking (as someone noted previously, etc etc. Simply making transit cheap is perhaps (but not certainly) necessary for a good transport system, but it is by no means sufficient. Since 1970 the energy and Co2 intensity of urban bus travel has risen, while that of car and air travel fell. Thnis also means greater local emissions, enen if the empty buses run on clean diesel or CNG, per passenger mile. Something is wrong. I would argue i a somewhat radical perspective we should stop sending buses to the exurbs to subsidize that commuting to work. We should lower public transport employee wages so we can afford smaller mini buses whe the load clearly is not there. Years ago Clifford Winston of Brookings, hardly a transit basher, wrote a great paper on this folly, advocating congestion pricing as well as transit. In other words, if you don't penalize car use, you can never make buses or even all but the largest rail systems in old cities make sense. Does it make sense to spend $100million/mil for heavy rail and subways that carry fewer than 5000 people /hour at peak? Does it make sense for transit authorities to buy $500 000 buses when they haven't got the !#@$$! to organize the buses into BRT and other efficient corridors. Will Metro Washington DC authorities give in to the 2 or 2 BILLION dollars a metro to the Dulles airport from one of the more outlying stations will cost? The issue is not what transit bashers say, its how to make transit work for all of us. In the US it is not working......except in a few fortunate places with lots of $$ or lots of people. PS In Stockholm and gothenburg today I noticed the buses are relativey filled. Even on a rural bus yesterday i SE Sweden, and then on a minor rural rail line, there were people everywhere. Of course it is relevant that gasoline costs $6/gallon, and large AND small swedish towns are relatively compact. If we are not going to move that way, collective transport in the US won't get very far, so to speak. >>> Eric Bruun 10/20/2005 5:19:04 PM >>> Lee Using average data for the US is almost meaningless. It is a gross overgeneralization. In fact, lots of "city buses" are quite crowded. Many genuine city systems are, in fact, overcrowded due to insufficient investment for decades. Try living in Philadelphia where there has been no system expansion for decades, and no plans for the next 10 years, either. I often have to stand in a crush load on the streetcar at 9pm in the evening. The services that bring the average down are buses that are being spread ever thinner, not just in the suburbs, but out to the exurbs. Also, the centers of small towns have been largely dissolved in the US, so their transit systems are also being spread ever farther as well. It is exacerbated by typical policies of prioritizing peak hour-peak direction service on the few viable routes left, so that large buses are bought for those trips and then used the remainder of the day even when demand is low. By using averages, it gives ammunition to the transit bashers who try to argue that transit is less efficient than cars. Transit is fine when you don't wreck your cities through endless sprawl. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper Sent: Oct 20, 2005 4:49 PM To: caitr04@csiro.au, Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org, UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK, pharnett@levi.com, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. Thanks to somone who can upload this.. Washington, we have a problem. >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> Lee, Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. -----Original Message----- From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc-uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> From: Richard Biddle Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. So what is Dallas doing? You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the operating costs. Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses and routes to save money. Of course, financially, you can see why. But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?3bn but raised land values around the stations by ?13bn! http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 &rn=316&action=show_detail http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg ] -- Richard L. Biddle, Director Henry George School of Social Science Henry George Birthplace Museum 413 South 10th Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 Web: http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com (215) 922-4278 office / voice (215) 407-9555 cell / voice SKYPE: biddlepa *********************************************************************************** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. *********************************************************************************** Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. From sulin at vectordesigns.org Fri Oct 21 12:11:53 2005 From: sulin at vectordesigns.org (Su-Lin Chee) Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 23:11:53 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency Message-ID: Hi, I would just like to give some input from a Malaysian perspective. I have been working on a public transport information system here and using public transport here for several years. First off, I dedicated my last few years to working on improving public transportation information because Kuala Lumpur (the Malaysian capital city) is choked by traffic, not least due to a national car economic policy. Sitting in a traffic jam, to me, was soul destroying, and with the introduction of light rail transit & monorail in Kuala Lumpur (KL), I thought there must be better ways of moving around than that. Ever since switching to public transport, I have noticed several major flaws with it, as Lee has pointed out. As purely anecdotal evidence, I can see that: 1) It is true that there are a lot of bus trips that are inefficient during the off peak hours. But this may be due to: i) Using huge behemoth buses. I believe bus companies like using them because they give more revenue per cost (of driver wage, bus cost and fuel perhaps). However, they obviously don't make sense during off peak periods. Yes, they should use smaller (mini) buses, and merely increase their frequencies during peak hours. Additionally, these buses would also be able to negotiate smaller roads, which are not uncommon in outer KL. ii) insufficient information on public transportation. Obviously, if people don't know about routes/times, they are not going to be sitting on these buses. 2) It would be seem to be true that buses are often greater polluters than cars in KL. Hanging around the city centre where buses congregate is poisonous. However, it could be because they are using old clapped out engines or perhaps it's because they run on diesel? In either case, there must be and should be a solution other than increasing usage of cars. 3) It is true that public transport is often not economically efficient to the company providing it. That does not mean that it is not economically efficient to the city as a whole. I believe, anecdotally again, that there are greater social benefits to the social costs of public transport. For example when it comes to the rail initiatives of KL, although they had cost a lot, they have greatly improved the efficiency and wellbeing of urbanites as a whole. Also, I have to admit that I think it's amazing that Lee suggested in order to afford buying minibuses, companies should cut employees' wages! I would think there are a myriad other ways to raise the capital, not least of which is buying less of the huge behemoths. Thanks for listening, Su-Lin Chee project manager klang valley public transportation information system vector designs 54a jalan kemuja bangsar utama 59000 kuala lumpur tel/fax +603.22826363 mobile +6016.2183363 > I have a different view. I think the compariosn shows the folly of the US subsidizing transit but NOt trying to control sprawl, having cheap fuel and vehicles and parking (as someone noted previously, etc etc. Simply making transit cheap is perhaps (but not certainly) necessary for a good transport system, but it is by no means sufficient. Since 1970 the energy and Co2 intensity of urban bus travel has risen, while that of car and air travel fell. Thnis also means greater local emissions, enen if the empty buses run on clean diesel or CNG, per passenger mile. > > Something is wrong. > > I would argue i a somewhat radical perspective we should stop sending buses to the exurbs to subsidize that commuting to work. We should lower public transport employee wages so we can afford smaller mini buses whe the load clearly is not there. > > Years ago Clifford Winston of Brookings, hardly a transit basher, wrote a great paper on this folly, advocating congestion pricing as well as transit. In other words, if you don't penalize car use, you can never make buses or even all but the largest rail systems in old cities make sense. > > Does it make sense to spend $100million/mil for heavy rail and subways that carry fewer than 5000 people /hour at peak? Does it make sense for transit authorities to buy $500 000 buses when they haven't got the !#@$$! to organize the buses into BRT and other efficient corridors. Will Metro Washington DC authorities give in to the 2 or 2 BILLION dollars a metro to the Dulles airport from one of the more outlying stations will cost? > > The issue is not what transit bashers say, its how to make transit work for all of us. In the US it is not working......except in a few fortunate places with lots of $$ or lots of people. > > PS In Stockholm and gothenburg today I noticed the buses are relativey filled. Even on a rural bus yesterday i SE Sweden, and then on a minor rural rail line, there were people everywhere. Of course it is relevant that gasoline costs $6/gallon, and large AND small swedish towns are relatively compact. If we are not going to move that way, collective transport in the US won't get very far, so to speak. > > > > >>> Eric Bruun 10/20/2005 5:19:04 PM >>> > Lee > > Using average data for the US is almost meaningless. It is a gross overgeneralization. In fact, lots of "city buses" are quite crowded. Many genuine city systems are, in fact, overcrowded due to insufficient investment for decades. Try living in Philadelphia where there has been no system expansion for decades, and no plans for the next 10 years, either. I often have to stand in a crush load on the streetcar at 9pm in the evening. > > The services that bring the average down are buses that are being spread ever thinner, not just in > the suburbs, but out to the exurbs. Also, the centers of small towns have been largely dissolved in the US, so their transit systems are also being spread ever farther as well. It is exacerbated by typical policies of prioritizing peak hour-peak direction service on the few viable routes left, so that large buses are bought for those trips and then used the remainder of the day even when demand is low. > > By using averages, it gives ammunition to the transit bashers who try to argue that transit is less efficient than > cars. Transit is fine when you don't wreck your cities through endless sprawl. > > Eric Bruun > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lee Schipper > Sent: Oct 20, 2005 4:49 PM > To: caitr04@csiro.au, Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org, UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK, pharnett@levi.com, sustran- discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra > > its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. > > Thanks to somone who can upload this.. > > Washington, we have a problem. > > >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> > Lee, > > Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. > > In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. > > -----Original Message----- > From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper > Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 > To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran- discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran- discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc- uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com > Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac > > In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? > > >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> > From: Richard Biddle > Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! > > > > Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. > > > Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. > > So what is Dallas doing? > > You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? > > Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. > > > > Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the > operating costs. > > > > Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. > > Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. > > So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses > > and routes to save money. > > Of course, financially, you can see why. > > But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas > > is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. > > Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. > > SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? > > > > > > Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. > > > > See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?3bn but raised land values around the stations by ?13bn! > > > > http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 > > &rn=316&action=show_detail > > http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg > ] > > > > -- > Richard L. Biddle, Director > Henry George School of Social Science > Henry George Birthplace Museum > 413 South 10th Street > Philadelphia, PA 19147 > Web: > http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool > Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com > (215) 922-4278 office / voice > (215) 407-9555 cell / voice > SKYPE: biddlepa > > > > *********************************************************************** ************ > The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. > > If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. > *********************************************************************** ************ > > > > > > > > Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. > World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com > To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com > Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~- -> > Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page > http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ~-> > > Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. > World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com > To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com > Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org > Yahoo! Groups Links > > <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ > > <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. > > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. > > Best wishes, From whook at itdp.org Fri Oct 21 22:33:47 2005 From: whook at itdp.org (Walter Hook) Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 09:33:47 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency In-Reply-To: <18109971.1129858049686.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <001001c5d644$11122850$c301a8c0@DFJLYL81> Lee, I can't let the comment about cutting transit workers wages stand. Having not worked on the US for many years, at this Urban Age conference, I was struck by the fact that New York City felt it could do absolutely nothing about improving transit without spending $10 billion. Each item on their 'to do' list cost at least $10 billion. Rail link to the airport,$10 billion. Linking the Grand Central and Penn Stations $10 billion. 2nd Avenue Subway, $10 billion just to think about it. The Mayor is ready to give away $600 million of MTA money for a useless Jets stadium, and you are ready to go after transit workers wages? Come on. The fundamental problem is the US has been rich enough to buy its way out of its own political cowardice. Getting anything positive done at all politically in our field is a major challenge. Congestion Charging? Are you crazy? Brooklyn and Queens would never go for it, (even though folks living in these neighborhoods are inhaling toxic fumes every morning from backed up traffic), Remove 50 parking spaces to widen sidewalks in Times Square with ped volumes at over 6000 per hour? Impossible. Remove a couple hundred parking spaces to off site locations to create a physically separated bike lane down Broadway, unthinkable! Pedestrianize a short stretch of broadway that has no traffic function? Madness. Bus Rapid Transit? Does it cost $10 billion? Then maybe we can think about it. Local advocates' key allies in these efforts? The business improvement districts (want better ped spaces), the Big Business Community (wants congestion pricing) and the Unions, yes the unions (know well that congestion charging, public space and BRT make great sense for them). The arch enemy? A mayor too distracted by pie in the sky Olympic bid and City Department of Transportation Engineers and their army of subcontractors. If you want to cut wages, why not abolish the city department of Transportation. It is completely useless as far as I can see. I've worked for the Amalgamated Transit Workers Union. Not all the unions are forward thinking, but some of them are great. ATU played a critical role in winning express bus lanes on the Verazzano Bridge and Staten Island Expressway and getting luxury express buses for Staten Island to Manhattan, both of which attracted lots of passengers back to buses and got the project leader a promotion inside the ATU. The ATU and the TWU have been strong proponents of BRT here in New York, and have quoted a lot of our materials. They helped a lot on winning free transfers. WE have regulated minibuses in New York in the outer boroughs. When the minibuses were regulated, the Unions became more tolerant of them. (free transfers and regulation together brought their numbers down significantly, and now they provide service in low frequency areas and shave the peak, so relations with the unions are better now). The US groups engaged in the daily political struggle for sustainable transport policies frequently make common cause with the Transit Unions and sometimes the machinists unions as well to suggest some win-win solutions that will improve the situation for working people and also improve environmental conditions. Sometimes the unions cause problems, but certainly in a political effort for US transport reform I would not start by picking on low wage workers. -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Eric Bruun Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 9:27 PM To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency Lee Of course I agree that something is wrong. I don't disagree with your statement about the folly of not controlling sprawl. And you are certainly preaching to the choir about smaller buses, about congestion pricing, and about bus priority. Most transit planners I know would agree with you. But again, I think your definition of "urban" is not fair. Buses are certainly not running empty where I live. And building expensive transit in built-up areas should not be evaluated only using energy efficiency per passenger as the criterion. It is about space efficiency. It enables dense development and the use of non-motorized modes It is physically impossible to have a dense city if everyone commutes using a car. I think that reactionary and corrupted US politics are really insidious and are what prevent progress, not ignorant transit planners. There is simply no way that we can have transit only in the places where it is most efficient. The suburban politicians dominate. They want service for their constituents too, and they want less crowding than the city folk have to endure. They will not fund a system that is only for the city. I note that most new rail systems have been built primarily for the benefit of suburbanites, with any stops in city neighborhoods between the suburbs and downtown as incidental. Furthermore, if we stop serving suburbs and exurbs, then the working poor can't get jobs because there is a huge job-housing mismatch, as you know. They get hurt if we get rid of inefficient operations. Transit is a social service. We are stuck with some inefficiency. I point out that everything else about public works in the US is inefficient too. Utilities, roads and school buses also cost more than they should, too, thanks to sprawl. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper Sent: Oct 20, 2005 5:39 PM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency I have a different view. I think the compariosn shows the folly of the US subsidizing transit but NOt trying to control sprawl, having cheap fuel and vehicles and parking (as someone noted previously, etc etc. Simply making transit cheap is perhaps (but not certainly) necessary for a good transport system, but it is by no means sufficient. Since 1970 the energy and Co2 intensity of urban bus travel has risen, while that of car and air travel fell. Thnis also means greater local emissions, enen if the empty buses run on clean diesel or CNG, per passenger mile. Something is wrong. I would argue i a somewhat radical perspective we should stop sending buses to the exurbs to subsidize that commuting to work. We should lower public transport employee wages so we can afford smaller mini buses whe the load clearly is not there. Years ago Clifford Winston of Brookings, hardly a transit basher, wrote a great paper on this folly, advocating congestion pricing as well as transit. In other words, if you don't penalize car use, you can never make buses or even all but the largest rail systems in old cities make sense. Does it make sense to spend $100million/mil for heavy rail and subways that carry fewer than 5000 people /hour at peak? Does it make sense for transit authorities to buy $500 000 buses when they haven't got the !#@$$! to organize the buses into BRT and other efficient corridors. Will Metro Washington DC authorities give in to the 2 or 2 BILLION dollars a metro to the Dulles airport from one of the more outlying stations will cost? The issue is not what transit bashers say, its how to make transit work for all of us. In the US it is not working......except in a few fortunate places with lots of $$ or lots of people. PS In Stockholm and gothenburg today I noticed the buses are relativey filled. Even on a rural bus yesterday i SE Sweden, and then on a minor rural rail line, there were people everywhere. Of course it is relevant that gasoline costs $6/gallon, and large AND small swedish towns are relatively compact. If we are not going to move that way, collective transport in the US won't get very far, so to speak. >>> Eric Bruun 10/20/2005 5:19:04 PM >>> Lee Using average data for the US is almost meaningless. It is a gross overgeneralization. In fact, lots of "city buses" are quite crowded. Many genuine city systems are, in fact, overcrowded due to insufficient investment for decades. Try living in Philadelphia where there has been no system expansion for decades, and no plans for the next 10 years, either. I often have to stand in a crush load on the streetcar at 9pm in the evening. The services that bring the average down are buses that are being spread ever thinner, not just in the suburbs, but out to the exurbs. Also, the centers of small towns have been largely dissolved in the US, so their transit systems are also being spread ever farther as well. It is exacerbated by typical policies of prioritizing peak hour-peak direction service on the few viable routes left, so that large buses are bought for those trips and then used the remainder of the day even when demand is low. By using averages, it gives ammunition to the transit bashers who try to argue that transit is less efficient than cars. Transit is fine when you don't wreck your cities through endless sprawl. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper Sent: Oct 20, 2005 4:49 PM To: caitr04@csiro.au, Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org, UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK, pharnett@levi.com, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. Thanks to somone who can upload this.. Washington, we have a problem. >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> Lee, Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. -----Original Message----- From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc-uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> From: Richard Biddle Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. So what is Dallas doing? You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the operating costs. Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses and routes to save money. Of course, financially, you can see why. But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?3bn but raised land values around the stations by ?13bn! http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 &rn=316&action=show_detail http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg ] -- Richard L. Biddle, Director Henry George School of Social Science Henry George Birthplace Museum 413 South 10th Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 Web: http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com (215) 922-4278 office / voice (215) 407-9555 cell / voice SKYPE: biddlepa ************************************************************************ *********** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. ************************************************************************ *********** Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. From ericbruun at earthlink.net Sat Oct 22 04:10:46 2005 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:10:46 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: Malaysian transit bus efficiency Message-ID: <17385254.1129921847213.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I don't want to use more than my fair share of time, but I will add two points since this is in my consulting domain: 1) Keeping high wages too high to make small vehicles economically attractive slows down both expansion and creation of driver employment. Other transport businesses pay lower wages commensurate with lower responsiblity with fewer passengers, so why can't transit? And if the service is expanding, it need not mean pay cuts for existing drivers. The expansion would be with smaller vehicles, and with seniority, drivers can move up to larger vehicles if they like. 2) Passenger Information Systems are reducing in price. Fairly good ones exist that don't depend on vehicles already being equipped with an expensive Computer Aided Dispatching/Automatic Vehicle Location system (but these too are coming down in price). However, if traffic gets too congested the Estimated Times of Arrival algorithms become unreliable. If traffic does not move much for long periods of time, it becomes impossible to say when the vehicle will arrive, because there is no way of knowing when traffic will start moving again. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Su-Lin Chee Sent: Oct 20, 2005 11:11 PM To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency Hi, I would just like to give some input from a Malaysian perspective. I have been working on a public transport information system here and using public transport here for several years. First off, I dedicated my last few years to working on improving public transportation information because Kuala Lumpur (the Malaysian capital city) is choked by traffic, not least due to a national car economic policy. Sitting in a traffic jam, to me, was soul destroying, and with the introduction of light rail transit & monorail in Kuala Lumpur (KL), I thought there must be better ways of moving around than that. Ever since switching to public transport, I have noticed several major flaws with it, as Lee has pointed out. As purely anecdotal evidence, I can see that: 1) It is true that there are a lot of bus trips that are inefficient during the off peak hours. But this may be due to: i) Using huge behemoth buses. I believe bus companies like using them because they give more revenue per cost (of driver wage, bus cost and fuel perhaps). However, they obviously don't make sense during off peak periods. Yes, they should use smaller (mini) buses, and merely increase their frequencies during peak hours. Additionally, these buses would also be able to negotiate smaller roads, which are not uncommon in outer KL. ii) insufficient information on public transportation. Obviously, if people don't know about routes/times, they are not going to be sitting on these buses. 2) It would be seem to be true that buses are often greater polluters than cars in KL. Hanging around the city centre where buses congregate is poisonous. However, it could be because they are using old clapped out engines or perhaps it's because they run on diesel? In either case, there must be and should be a solution other than increasing usage of cars. 3) It is true that public transport is often not economically efficient to the company providing it. That does not mean that it is not economically efficient to the city as a whole. I believe, anecdotally again, that there are greater social benefits to the social costs of public transport. For example when it comes to the rail initiatives of KL, although they had cost a lot, they have greatly improved the efficiency and wellbeing of urbanites as a whole. Also, I have to admit that I think it's amazing that Lee suggested in order to afford buying minibuses, companies should cut employees' wages! I would think there are a myriad other ways to raise the capital, not least of which is buying less of the huge behemoths. Thanks for listening, Su-Lin Chee project manager klang valley public transportation information system vector designs 54a jalan kemuja bangsar utama 59000 kuala lumpur tel/fax +603.22826363 mobile +6016.2183363 > I have a different view. I think the compariosn shows the folly of the US subsidizing transit but NOt trying to control sprawl, having cheap fuel and vehicles and parking (as someone noted previously, etc etc. Simply making transit cheap is perhaps (but not certainly) necessary for a good transport system, but it is by no means sufficient. Since 1970 the energy and Co2 intensity of urban bus travel has risen, while that of car and air travel fell. Thnis also means greater local emissions, enen if the empty buses run on clean diesel or CNG, per passenger mile. > > Something is wrong. > > I would argue i a somewhat radical perspective we should stop sending buses to the exurbs to subsidize that commuting to work. We should lower public transport employee wages so we can afford smaller mini buses whe the load clearly is not there. > > Years ago Clifford Winston of Brookings, hardly a transit basher, wrote a great paper on this folly, advocating congestion pricing as well as transit. In other words, if you don't penalize car use, you can never make buses or even all but the largest rail systems in old cities make sense. > > Does it make sense to spend $100million/mil for heavy rail and subways that carry fewer than 5000 people /hour at peak? Does it make sense for transit authorities to buy $500 000 buses when they haven't got the !#@$$! to organize the buses into BRT and other efficient corridors. Will Metro Washington DC authorities give in to the 2 or 2 BILLION dollars a metro to the Dulles airport from one of the more outlying stations will cost? > > The issue is not what transit bashers say, its how to make transit work for all of us. In the US it is not working......except in a few fortunate places with lots of $$ or lots of people. > > PS In Stockholm and gothenburg today I noticed the buses are relativey filled. Even on a rural bus yesterday i SE Sweden, and then on a minor rural rail line, there were people everywhere. Of course it is relevant that gasoline costs $6/gallon, and large AND small swedish towns are relatively compact. If we are not going to move that way, collective transport in the US won't get very far, so to speak. > > > > >>> Eric Bruun 10/20/2005 5:19:04 PM >>> > Lee > > Using average data for the US is almost meaningless. It is a gross overgeneralization. In fact, lots of "city buses" are quite crowded. Many genuine city systems are, in fact, overcrowded due to insufficient investment for decades. Try living in Philadelphia where there has been no system expansion for decades, and no plans for the next 10 years, either. I often have to stand in a crush load on the streetcar at 9pm in the evening. > > The services that bring the average down are buses that are being spread ever thinner, not just in > the suburbs, but out to the exurbs. Also, the centers of small towns have been largely dissolved in the US, so their transit systems are also being spread ever farther as well. It is exacerbated by typical policies of prioritizing peak hour-peak direction service on the few viable routes left, so that large buses are bought for those trips and then used the remainder of the day even when demand is low. > > By using averages, it gives ammunition to the transit bashers who try to argue that transit is less efficient than > cars. Transit is fine when you don't wreck your cities through endless sprawl. > > Eric Bruun > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lee Schipper > Sent: Oct 20, 2005 4:49 PM > To: caitr04@csiro.au, Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org, UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK, pharnett@levi.com, sustran- discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra > > its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. > > Thanks to somone who can upload this.. > > Washington, we have a problem. > > >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> > Lee, > > Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. > > In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. > > -----Original Message----- > From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper > Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 > To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran- discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran- discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc- uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com > Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac > > In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? > > >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> > From: Richard Biddle > Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! > > > > Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. > > > Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. > > So what is Dallas doing? > > You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? > > Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. > > > > Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the > operating costs. > > > > Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. > > Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. > > So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses > > and routes to save money. > > Of course, financially, you can see why. > > But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas > > is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. > > Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. > > SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? > > > > > > Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. > > > > See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?bn but raised land values around the stations by ?3bn! > > > > http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 > > &rn=316&action=show_detail > > http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg > ] > > > > -- > Richard L. Biddle, Director > Henry George School of Social Science > Henry George Birthplace Museum > 413 South 10th Street > Philadelphia, PA 19147 > Web: > http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool > Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com > (215) 922-4278 office / voice > (215) 407-9555 cell / voice > SKYPE: biddlepa > > > > *********************************************************************** ************ > The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. > > If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. > *********************************************************************** ************ > > > > > > > > Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. > World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com > To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com > Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~- -> > Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page > http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ~-> > > Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. > World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com > To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com > Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org > Yahoo! Groups Links > > <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ > > <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. > > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. > > Best wishes, ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. From schipper at wri.org Sat Oct 22 06:18:37 2005 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:18:37 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency Message-ID: Cant argue with walter on that, particularly our bad habit of spending billions to solve problems that should cost millions or less or even pay themselves to be fixed! Lee Schipper Director for Research, EMBARQ World Resources Institute 10 "G" St NE, Washington DC 20002 TLF 1 202 729 7735 FAX 1 202 729 7775 http://www.embarq.wri.org/en Click here to sign up for the monthly WRI Digest: http://www.wri.org/about/guestbook_joinemail.cfm >>> whook@itdp.org 10/21/05 9:33 AM >>> Lee, I can't let the comment about cutting transit workers wages stand. Having not worked on the US for many years, at this Urban Age conference, I was struck by the fact that New York City felt it could do absolutely nothing about improving transit without spending $10 billion. Each item on their 'to do' list cost at least $10 billion. Rail link to the airport,$10 billion. Linking the Grand Central and Penn Stations $10 billion. 2nd Avenue Subway, $10 billion just to think about it. The Mayor is ready to give away $600 million of MTA money for a useless Jets stadium, and you are ready to go after transit workers wages? Come on. The fundamental problem is the US has been rich enough to buy its way out of its own political cowardice. Getting anything positive done at all politically in our field is a major challenge. Congestion Charging? Are you crazy? Brooklyn and Queens would never go for it, (even though folks living in these neighborhoods are inhaling toxic fumes every morning from backed up traffic), Remove 50 parking spaces to widen sidewalks in Times Square with ped volumes at over 6000 per hour? Impossible. Remove a couple hundred parking spaces to off site locations to create a physically separated bike lane down Broadway, unthinkable! Pedestrianize a short stretch of broadway that has no traffic function? Madness. Bus Rapid Transit? Does it cost $10 billion? Then maybe we can think about it. Local advocates' key allies in these efforts? The business improvement districts (want better ped spaces), the Big Business Community (wants congestion pricing) and the Unions, yes the unions (know well that congestion charging, public space and BRT make great sense for them). The arch enemy? A mayor too distracted by pie in the sky Olympic bid and City Department of Transportation Engineers and their army of subcontractors. If you want to cut wages, why not abolish the city department of Transportation. It is completely useless as far as I can see. I've worked for the Amalgamated Transit Workers Union. Not all the unions are forward thinking, but some of them are great. ATU played a critical role in winning express bus lanes on the Verazzano Bridge and Staten Island Expressway and getting luxury express buses for Staten Island to Manhattan, both of which attracted lots of passengers back to buses and got the project leader a promotion inside the ATU. The ATU and the TWU have been strong proponents of BRT here in New York, and have quoted a lot of our materials. They helped a lot on winning free transfers. WE have regulated minibuses in New York in the outer boroughs. When the minibuses were regulated, the Unions became more tolerant of them. (free transfers and regulation together brought their numbers down significantly, and now they provide service in low frequency areas and shave the peak, so relations with the unions are better now). The US groups engaged in the daily political struggle for sustainable transport policies frequently make common cause with the Transit Unions and sometimes the machinists unions as well to suggest some win-win solutions that will improve the situation for working people and also improve environmental conditions. Sometimes the unions cause problems, but certainly in a political effort for US transport reform I would not start by picking on low wage workers. -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Eric Bruun Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 9:27 PM To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency Lee Of course I agree that something is wrong. I don't disagree with your statement about the folly of not controlling sprawl. And you are certainly preaching to the choir about smaller buses, about congestion pricing, and about bus priority. Most transit planners I know would agree with you. But again, I think your definition of "urban" is not fair. Buses are certainly not running empty where I live. And building expensive transit in built-up areas should not be evaluated only using energy efficiency per passenger as the criterion. It is about space efficiency. It enables dense development and the use of non-motorized modes It is physically impossible to have a dense city if everyone commutes using a car. I think that reactionary and corrupted US politics are really insidious and are what prevent progress, not ignorant transit planners. There is simply no way that we can have transit only in the places where it is most efficient. The suburban politicians dominate. They want service for their constituents too, and they want less crowding than the city folk have to endure. They will not fund a system that is only for the city. I note that most new rail systems have been built primarily for the benefit of suburbanites, with any stops in city neighborhoods between the suburbs and downtown as incidental. Furthermore, if we stop serving suburbs and exurbs, then the working poor can't get jobs because there is a huge job-housing mismatch, as you know. They get hurt if we get rid of inefficient operations. Transit is a social service. We are stuck with some inefficiency. I point out that everything else about public works in the US is inefficient too. Utilities, roads and school buses also cost more than they should, too, thanks to sprawl. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper Sent: Oct 20, 2005 5:39 PM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: transit bus efficiency I have a different view. I think the compariosn shows the folly of the US subsidizing transit but NOt trying to control sprawl, having cheap fuel and vehicles and parking (as someone noted previously, etc etc. Simply making transit cheap is perhaps (but not certainly) necessary for a good transport system, but it is by no means sufficient. Since 1970 the energy and Co2 intensity of urban bus travel has risen, while that of car and air travel fell. Thnis also means greater local emissions, enen if the empty buses run on clean diesel or CNG, per passenger mile. Something is wrong. I would argue i a somewhat radical perspective we should stop sending buses to the exurbs to subsidize that commuting to work. We should lower public transport employee wages so we can afford smaller mini buses whe the load clearly is not there. Years ago Clifford Winston of Brookings, hardly a transit basher, wrote a great paper on this folly, advocating congestion pricing as well as transit. In other words, if you don't penalize car use, you can never make buses or even all but the largest rail systems in old cities make sense. Does it make sense to spend $100million/mil for heavy rail and subways that carry fewer than 5000 people /hour at peak? Does it make sense for transit authorities to buy $500 000 buses when they haven't got the !#@$$! to organize the buses into BRT and other efficient corridors. Will Metro Washington DC authorities give in to the 2 or 2 BILLION dollars a metro to the Dulles airport from one of the more outlying stations will cost? The issue is not what transit bashers say, its how to make transit work for all of us. In the US it is not working......except in a few fortunate places with lots of $$ or lots of people. PS In Stockholm and gothenburg today I noticed the buses are relativey filled. Even on a rural bus yesterday i SE Sweden, and then on a minor rural rail line, there were people everywhere. Of course it is relevant that gasoline costs $6/gallon, and large AND small swedish towns are relatively compact. If we are not going to move that way, collective transport in the US won't get very far, so to speak. >>> Eric Bruun 10/20/2005 5:19:04 PM >>> Lee Using average data for the US is almost meaningless. It is a gross overgeneralization. In fact, lots of "city buses" are quite crowded. Many genuine city systems are, in fact, overcrowded due to insufficient investment for decades. Try living in Philadelphia where there has been no system expansion for decades, and no plans for the next 10 years, either. I often have to stand in a crush load on the streetcar at 9pm in the evening. The services that bring the average down are buses that are being spread ever thinner, not just in the suburbs, but out to the exurbs. Also, the centers of small towns have been largely dissolved in the US, so their transit systems are also being spread ever farther as well. It is exacerbated by typical policies of prioritizing peak hour-peak direction service on the few viable routes left, so that large buses are bought for those trips and then used the remainder of the day even when demand is low. By using averages, it gives ammunition to the transit bashers who try to argue that transit is less efficient than cars. Transit is fine when you don't wreck your cities through endless sprawl. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper Sent: Oct 20, 2005 4:49 PM To: caitr04@csiro.au, Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org, UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK, pharnett@levi.com, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Tra its very true in the US, fo rthe last 15 years. Tha'ts why I said US below. it is NOT true in any other country, even though cars are roughly 25-33% less fuel intensive, because city buses are simply not empty elsewhere. Thanks to somone who can upload this.. Washington, we have a problem. >>> pharnett@levi.com 10/20/2005 11:59:57 AM >>> Lee, Are you sure about what you say? Maybe true in the US but certainly not in most European cities. In any case I have absolutely no doubt that public transport and soft forms of transport are the future. In fact it is very obvious that the issue is that it is far too easy and cheap for car owners to drive into our cities. Motorists (commuting) should be taxed when entering our urban areas, eg congestion charging in London. This has two benefits it reduces the congestion and resulting pollution but it also provides funds that could be ploughed back into public transport. Car parking is also another major issue in town public parking should be greatly reduced and out of town increased. Private parking should be taxed - again the proceeds used for investment in the future. Road capacity leading into cities must be curbed even restricted. Efficiency of public transport should be paramount in any responsible governements policy. -----Original Message----- From: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: 18 October 2005 15:02 To: scurader@comcast.net; caitr04@csiro.au; et3@et3.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; CONS-SPST-SPRAWL-TRANS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG; Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk; info@worldcarfree.net; jpclark@wtn.net; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Envlist@yahoogroups.com; itwmc-uk@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com Cc: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [CarFreeCafe] RE: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit.Dal lasRapid Area Transit -DART - teac In ordinary times the AVERAGE US city bus, AVERAGED OVER ITS ENTIRE DAY, uses more fuel/passenger-km than a car, because the AVERAGE city bus oer the day is mostly empty. Hopefully the present buses are running fuller. But how full? >>> Wetzel Dave 10/18/2005 8:11:16 AM >>> From: Richard Biddle Subject: Get the right FUNDING STREAM in place for public transit. Dallas Rapid Area Transit -DART - teaches us a lesson. It's not a sales tax! Today there was an interesting article in Dallas Morning News. Ridership on DART (Dallas Rapid Area Transit) up by 10-15% on various routes in the Dallas area in Sept, due to high gas prices. So what is Dallas doing? You think they are increasing the number of buses and routes, right? Wrong! The Dallas DART system is running low on money. Their fuel budgets are being over extended. The fares cover only 20% of the operating costs. Their costs for fuel to run the buses is up 50% this year. Most of their revenues come from sales tax receipts. Sales tax receipts are down in Sept. So the city, in its great need for financial responsibility, is CUTTING BACK the number of buses and routes to save money. Of course, financially, you can see why. But just when folks are being urged to 'ride mass transit' and help conserve, the City of Dallas is cutting back on services - so it can stay solvent. Once you start going downhill on energy, and prices rise, strange things happen. SO when gas/diesel is really expensive, can they afford to run any mass transit? Or any school buses??? Taxing land values which are greatly enhanced by good public transit is a much better idea. See TAKEN FOR A RIDE by DON RILEY - the Jubilee Line Extension in the London Underground cost ?3bn but raised land values around the stations by ?13bn! http://www.schalkenbach.org/store.php?crn=83 &rn=316&action=show_detail http://www.schalkenbach.org/images/products/316_large_image.jpg ] -- Richard L. Biddle, Director Henry George School of Social Science Henry George Birthplace Museum 413 South 10th Street Philadelphia, PA 19147 Web: http://www.geocities.com/henrygeorgeschool Email: HGSPhila@gmail.com (215) 922-4278 office / voice (215) 407-9555 cell / voice SKYPE: biddlepa ************************************************************************ *********** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. ************************************************************************ *********** Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Kv0qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Organize a Car/Free Day: The nose of the camel. World Car/Free Days at http://worldcarfreeday.com To leave list: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com Also check out New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CarFreeCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia.