[sustran] Re: Perceived railmarket in Asia + BRT in Europe

[Lee Schipper]

Todd's two cents is not unreasonable. IF going underground both avoids
moving people out of the way and reduces vehicular traffic, why not? But
what about cost? Like it or not,
sustainable transport must be economically sustainable. What are the
rules? What costs and benefits to count? What should people pay,
particularly poor people?  Will a metro or light rail OR fast BRT cause
an expansion of a city that ultimately creates car-dependent suburbs
(like those around Paris, imho)? What are the rules of accounting that
could be used for 
an honest study of alternatives? 

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 


>>> edelman at greenidea.info 2/7/2006 4:24:39 PM >>>
Hi,

This will definately not quiet the discussion about appropriate
transport for developing countries:

Tapping Into Asia's Euros 10 Billion A Year Rail Market

A STUDY of the Euros 10 billion/year Asian railway market based on
market segments speaks of considerable pent-up potential in public
transport investment in the region in the years ahead. It suggests that
even if overall economic momentum should slow down in future,
significant development potential exists in individual areas.

http://www.railjournal.com/A/xfeature1.html 

----

In case anyone cares,  I say "On the Train" because I think train makes
sense as the core of land-based transport, in a country where streets
are living spaces between buildings.  BUT depending on the country it
should either be just long-distance intercity services (unless they have
sleeper cars on buses) or in Europe the situation is certainly different
in regards to historical tram infrastructure, etc. BRT is more or less
guided transport, which is why I like it.

Also, "On the Train" is for now focused on Europe, particularly on
Eastern Europe. By the way  I imagine that in the near future - when
cheap and easy oil is gone - many of the ring roads etc all over Europe
will just be used for BRT. Unless I am missing a major technical hitch?
People might want to use rail solutions for whatever reason but unless
vehicles are light too much of the infrastructure would need to be
strengthened - in addition to laying of rails, etc - and the resulting
cost and energy use could be prohibative.

I am actually going to see if someone wants to develop some concept
BRTsolutions for future of Europe's ringroads.

Some more questions:

- There is a short item in the new Carbusters talking about how
particles from wearing-down tyres are causing health problems. Are any
BRT systems dealing with this?

- Also, if buses used for BRT could last as long as trains it would be
great. Are buyers of buses for BRT making sure they at least get
vehicles which can be recycled easily?

- Do any "BRT cities" have a unique solution for urban freight? Jaime
Lerner is correct in saying that it is natural that people want to be
above ground, but freight doesnt have eyes. 

So... whatever is appropriate, and watch out for the lobbyists! 

- T, On the (you bought it whether you liked it or not) to the Future!


------------------------------------------------------

Todd Edelman
International Coordinator
On the Train Towards the Future!

Green Idea Factory
Laubova 5
CZ-13000 Praha 3

++420 605 915 970

edelman at greenidea.info
www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain 

Green Idea Factory,
a member of World Carfree Network




================================================================
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.