From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon May 1 01:32:55 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton (Paris)) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 18:32:55 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Bicycles as environmental goods - Fair Transport Labeling? Message-ID: <003f01c66c73$be0efd10$6401a8c0@Home> Carlos Felipe Pardo wrote this group on Sat 4/29/2006 (see below for full text and article) about how if at all we might support the "labeling" of bicycles as "environment goods". Indeed this is a matter which has been getting more general attention around here, including the possibility of some kind of eco-labeling of carshare vehicles. More than that, the somewhat purposefully copycat link between Fair Transport and Fair Trade suggests that once we have some kind of credible base for Fair Transport (and indeed the New Mobility Agenda may be a good enough start to get us going, especially if we can get the right kind of credible partner support for something along these lines), there is no reason for us to not at least consider the concept of Fair Trade Labeling. Here are some first thoughts on that: Fair Transport A New Mobility Agenda for a Changing World (Note to reader/friends: This is a quick thinking exercise for a concept which may be worth pursuing. I would be grateful to have your comments and suggestions, for any of what follows as well as your ideas on the concept and eventual next steps more generally. And since this is so very rough and incomplete, I thank you for keeping this at this early point between us. Ericbritton) Fair Transport Labeling: Fair transport is similar to the now old and often confusing concept of sustainable transport, but it is more focused and less general. Specifically, it gives us the base for a kind of eco-labeling concept that has certain similarities with Fairtrade labeling (see below for a short definition), but it is entirely focused on the identification and support of concepts and programs that are able to meet or show meaningful progress in terms of a certain number of specific performance and other social, economic and technical parameters. Fairtrade labelling (usually simply fairtrade, fair trade, Fair Trade or fair trade certified) is a brand designed to allow consumers to identify goods (especially agricultural products such as coffee) which meet agreed standards. The system involves independent auditing of producers to ensure standards are met. Companies offering products that meet the fair trade standards are licensed to use the fair trade label. Standards are set by the independent NGO Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International (FLO on behalf of a number of national bodies (such as the Fairtrade Foundation in the UK) for each type of product. Typically standards cover labor standards, environmental standards, and stable pricing. >From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairtrade (with some slight rearrangement): Who/what qualifies eventually for Fair Transport labeling: * Types of vehicles (For example, maybe bikes yes. Segway probably no. Electric bikes ??) * Specific vehicles * Power and fuel sources * Transportation systems (such as LRT, BRT, etc.) * Types of services (ex. Carsharing) * Production systems * Innovative Programs that advance the Fair Transport agenda? International, national, local, NGOs. Examples? Criteria: * Current availability * Favor human contact (as opposed to machine contact) * Low cost to users * Low or at least competitive support costs to collectivity * Low resource consumption * Low environmental impacts * Social impacts * Impact analysis * Impact positively on city structures, neighborhoods * Labor, job creation, skill building * Ease of recycling at end of product life Funding: * Organizational costs (slim) * Eventual prizes? First rounds of prizes:?? (maybe we need to figure out 10 or so year for critical media mass) * Monderman concept * Bike program (Lyons?) * Other? * Some historical prize (example Amsterdam White Bike?) Some Fair Transport Label credibility questions: 1. How meaningful would a Fair Transport label be? 2. How do we verify that the label standards are met? 3. Is the meaning of the label consistent? 4. Are the label standards publicly available? 5. Is information about the organization publicly available? 6. Is the organization behind the label free from conflict of interest? 7. Was the label developed with broad public and unbiased expert input? Some notes, points, possibilities for comment: * Should there be "levels of qualification (to encourage processes)? * Re-verification process (i.e., label will need periodic updating?) * Who pays the cost of making this happen? * When, where to give the prizes? * Where to start? * Sponsors? * International Advisory Council??- http://www.ecoplan.org/kyoto/challenge/panel.htm * The New Mobility Agenda?? the international organization responsible for Fair Transport labeling world-wide. http://www.fairtransport.org -----Original Message----- From: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Carlos F. Pardo SUTP Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 12:15 AM To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: [NewMobilityCafe] Bicycles as environmental goods Nice info, maybe we could find a way to support? Letters signed by many parties, etc. Source: http://itdp.org/STe/ste21/wto.html WTO Negotiations Open Possibility of Defining Bicycles as Environmental Goods By Matthew Sholler Current efforts to designate bikes as "environmentally preferable products" free of tariffs and other trade barriers have gone largely unnoticed by the international bicycling community. Organizations promoting bicycle use at the international level may have a new avenue to do so -- through the liberalization of trade in bicycles, bicycle parts and components, and bicycle accessories that could result from the World Trade Organization's (WTO) current negotiations on environmental goods and services. The mandate for these negotiations comes from the so-called Doha Development Agenda (DDA), issued by trade ministers at the WTO Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar, in November 2002. Paragraph 31(iii) of the DDA calls for the reduction or elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to environmental goods and services. WTO ministers did not, however, define what constitutes an "environmental good", so the negotiations have moved forward largely on the basis of lists of suggested goods by WTO member economies. One sub-category of products is referred to as "environmentally preferable products", or EPPs, deemed superior to close substitutes because of the way they are produced, used or disposed of. At the end of 2004, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) was asked by its member countries to prepare a study of EPPs, concentrating on products whose liberalization would benefit developing countries, either through improved environmental outcomes or increased trade in the product. The bicycle emerged as one of the three EPPs the OECD Secretariat chose to study in depth. (A copy of the report may be found here: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/45/19/35841725.pdf) In mid-2005, Switzerland, an OECD member country, submitted its own list of proposed environmental goods to the WTO, which included bicycles, bicycle parts and components, and certain accessories. The Swiss proposal has been met with mixed reactions by other member countries, many of which are represented in WTO negotiations by representatives from trade ministries who do not grasp the bicycle's environmental relevance. Others, usually from environment ministries, have generally been more supportive of the idea. As of this writing, no definitive common list of environmentally goods has been agreed by WTO negotiators. There may still be an opportunity for bicycle advocates to tell their countries' WTO delegates just how important it is to grant "environmental good" status to bicycles, parts and accessories. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060430/518c83bc/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon May 1 04:44:11 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton (Paris)) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:44:11 +0200 Subject: [sustran] World Technology Environment Prize for 2006 Message-ID: <001201c66c8e$75308df0$6401a8c0@Home> -----Original Message----- From: J.I. Monderman [mailto:j.i.monderman@wanadoo.nl] Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 6:02 AM To: Eric Britton Hello Eric, After reading your call for nominees for the WTN, the first person I thought of was prof Jan Gehl from the Copenhagen school of architecture. For more then 20 years I know of his work and find it an enormous support in designing space for people. What he did was basic research on pedestrian movement and use of space, related to the design of the public realm. He also related that design quality to the economic development of streets. At present he is working on a more methodological approach on that field. The reason that I think his work is so important, is because of the fact that all traffic movement is meant to facilitate us in visiting some public space. It is that space where a society finds its roots and where people learn what it means to live in a free country and take responsibily towards others users. With this design knowledge we can show the importance of the public space and make clear what the present traffic system is destroying in terms of spatial and social quality. In that way automatically faciltating other means of transport because then its great to be in that space. For instance in Copenhagen in November people still are sitting in the streets on the terraces of Copenhagen, with blankets crawled around them, just because it is fun just seeing other people and being there and it is his design quality that calls for that. Even though I knew his books for years, I met him in January and we both had the idea that our developments even though starting from different points, where meeting in a mutual futural perspective where the traffic system is brought back to where it should facilitate our society again. Kind regards Hans Monderman. From ktsourl at mailbox.gr Mon May 1 07:52:47 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 1 May 2006 01:52:47 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Re: On vs off street parking or simply reducing on street parking Message-ID: <20060430225247.10707.qmail@mailbox.gr> The question whether on- or off-street parking is better from a sustainability viewpoint is a difficult one to answer and depends (as many other similar problems) on many localy defined parameters. My hypothesis is that perhaps where land is cheap and sprawl pressures an imminent danger (like in N. America) on-street parking is better, while in other cases (like Knoflacher's Vienna) off-street parking brings about better results. However i think there is one more parameter that still evades from the so far presented analysis, and this is the general public mentality. On street parking gives to the average and unquestioned layman the impression that it is normal for motorised traffic to have priority over other uses on public spaces, and cars (or at least motorcycles) the default transport medium in the cities. Payment for the used space offers little help to alleviate this mentality (if not deteriorating it) - this is one reason i don't consider congestion charge a so good idea (for a more thorough discussion on this topic look at http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/LCC.htm). If we don't target at this distorted mentality, both of the public opinion and the bureaucrats, which leads to the adaptation of the cities and the human lives to the needs of cars (instead of the opposite), i doubt if we shall ever reach to a sustainable future. > >Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:33:47 -0700 >From: Todd Alexander Litman >Subject: [sustran] Re: On vs off street parking or simply reducing on > street parking. >To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > , Asia and the Pacific sustainable > transport >Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060426194947.05dfa6c0@mail.islandnet.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > >There is no doubt that shifting from free to priced parking can >reduce vehicle ownership and use. Underpriced parking is the largest >subsidy of automobile travel - for each dollar a motorist spends >directly on their vehicle, somebody spends about $0.50 to subsidize >its parking. In typical situations, shifting from free to >cost-recovery priced parking (parking priced to cover its facility >and operating costs) reduces automobile ownership by 5-15% if applied >to residential parking, and reduces vehicle trips by 10-30% if >applied at destinations such as worksite and other commercial >destinations. This implies that about 20% of our traffic problems, >road and parking costs, traffic accidents, fuel consumption and >pollution emissions can be "explained" by vehicle parking >underpricing, or described more positively, correcting parking >underpricing can significantly improve transportation system >efficiency and address problems such as excessive traffic risk and >energy consumption. > >Pricing can even be revenue neutral, for example, by "unbundling" >residential parking (parking is sold and rented separately from >building space, so for example, rather than renting an apartment for >$1,000 per month with two "free" parking spaces, the apartment rents >for $800 per month, and each parking space is a separate $100 per >month) and "cashing out" subsidized employee parking (commuters can >choose between a subsidized parking space or its cash equivalent, >such as $100 per month). > >To be effective parking pricing must be correctly implemented. This >means appropriate price structures (preferably hourly and daily fees, >with higher rates during peak periods, and minimal exemptions and >discounts), effective enforcement, and good travel options (walking >and cycling conditions, good ridesharing and public transit services, >etc.). To effect vehicle ownership and use (rather than just parking >location) pricing must be implemented over an area, so motorists >cannot simply park for free nearby. > >Business people often demand parking subsidies to attract customers, >but their efforts are often misdirected. After all, people spend >money, not cars. While its true that if two businesses are otherwise >equally attractive, the one that offers free parking will tend to >attract more customers, there are other more important attributes, >and areas which focus only on cheap parking to attract customers >often fail. For example, if charging for parking reduces taxes and >prices, increases parking turnover, or funds transit services and >local street improvements, many people while choose an area where >they must pay for parking (see Douglas Kolozsvari and Donald Shoup, >"Turning Small Change Into Big Changes," Access 23, University of >California Transportation Center >(www.uctc.net), Fall 2003, pp. 2-7; >www.sppsr.ucla.edu/up/webfiles/SmallChange.pdf >). Similarly, many areas with limited and priced parking are >attractive places to live and work, because they have better >livability. Described differently, charging for parking improves the >quality of customers by weeding out the cheepskates who won't pay a >few cents to park, leaving better spenders. > >This is not anti-car. It recognizes that some trips will be made by >automobile and that we need to accommodate their need to park. But >charging for parking and using shared, public parking facilities >(including on-street and for-profit commercial parking) is far more >equitable and efficient, and significantly reduces the total amount >of parking supply needed compared with conventional parking planning >practices which result in generous amounts of parking at each destination. > >For more information see: > >Todd Litman, Parking Management: Strategies, Evaluation and Planning, >Victoria Transport Policy Institute >(www.vtpi.org/park_man.pdf), 2006. > >MRSC, Downtown Parking Solutions, Municipal Research and Service >Center of Washington >(www.mrsc.org/Subjects/Transpo/Tpark/transsolut.aspx), >2005. > >Nelson/Nygaard Consulting, Housing Shortage / Parking Surplus, >Transportation and Land Use Coalition >(www.transcoalition.org/southbay/housing_study/index.html), >July 2002. > >Oregon Downtown Development Association, Parking Management Made >Easy: A Guide to Taming the Downtown Parking Beast, Transportation >and Growth Management Program, Oregon DOT and Dept. of Environmental >Quality >(www.lcd.state.or.us/tgm/publications.htm), >2001. > >Ryan Russo, Planning for Residential Parking: A Guide For Housing >Developers and Planners, Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern >California >(www.nonprofithousing.org) and the >Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy >(http://urbanpolicy.berkeley.edu), 2001. > >USEPA, Parking Spaces / Community Places: Finding the Balance Through >Smart Growth Solutions, Development, Community, and Environment >Division (DCED); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency >(www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/parking.htm), >2006. > > >At 11:14 AM 4/26/2006, Sunny wrote: > >>I really like Todd's idea of pricing the parking but implementing the >>same is a bit difficult in the developing cities as there is a >>increasing trend of vehicle ownership. In my opinion initially focussing >>on limiting the available parking spaces and then going with the pricing >>would be better as this firstly might control the ridership and then the >>pricing would have the economic effect. >> >>On the other hand I doubt if parking pricing will really reduce the >>ridership because I presume that parking pricing would make the car user >>aware of the fact that they are being metered for the time they are >>spending for shopping and thereby reduce their shopping time which can >>tend to decrease the sales, yes they might shift to other modes but what >>if the other modes are not as developed as driving a car like in >>Bangkok. Secondly, providing priced or timed parking would allow the >>other car driver to feel that they might get a place to park their car >>and hence avoid them from shifting to other means. Correct me if I am wrong. >> >>Off street parking is the worst case especially when it is free/very >>very cheap like here in Bangkok and when the price is reducing with time >>rather than increasing. but even here i have the same doubts mentioned >>above. I would be glad if someone could clarify me. >> >>Sunny > > > >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/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060426/8a260e4b/attachment-0001.html > _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon May 1 15:27:45 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 08:27:45 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Fair Transport - comments Message-ID: <002d01c66ce8$5cf65da0$6401a8c0@Home> -----Original Message----- From: Ann Hackett [mailto:aha@pacific.net] Sent: Friday, April 30, 1999 11:22 PM To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org Cc: Main Identity Subject: Fair Transport and other thoughts Dear Eric, I'm glad to see the concept of Fair Transport because it's a crucial factor. My primary objection to Congestion Charging is that it has an inherent economic bias that favors those who can afford to pay the charges. There're also the installation charges and the addictive revenue that makes officials reluctant to look for a better way. Other thoughts: 1. When looking at the stakeholders for full and equitable treatment (existence) include the earth and future generations. 2. I think that parking is the key. Eliminating on-street parking and providing commercial replacement vehicles i.e., xTransit, allows space for safe and secure bicycle lanes. Dedicated one-way streets help make this possible. The other side of the street could be arranged by alternating color-coded blocks for passengers, delivery and service vehicles. 3. Bicycle racks can fill the role of the protective barrier for pedestrians. 4. Businesses' interests are tied to customer traffic, not parking. If sufficient levels of customer activity were to be maintained with public transportation and xTransit, then parking could become an obsolete issue and business would not flee to the suburbs. 5. Parking elimination does not generate revenue like Congestion Charging but it does generate positive by-products that are cost reducing such as environmental and health benefits and reduced lost productivity due to congestion. 6. xTransit vehicles do not generally deliver passengers door to door. Rather they take them close enough to their destinations so that they can walk the remainder. This facilitates the flow of the vehicles. Exceptions can always be made. 7. The above conversion fits the near term criteria and is inexpensive to implement, i.e. paint, signs, and new businesses . People in major metropolitan centers could maintain the same level of mobility for the same amount of money that they currently pay to own and operate a car. 8. I suggest that Al Gore would be a good nominee for the prize. He has become the spokesperson for global warming and the emergency we are all experiencing. 9. The high and unstable oil prices are opening a window for change. 10. They say there are no short term solutions but that is looking at the problem with the old way of thinking of what is and not of what could be. Thank you, Ann Hackett -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060501/19ab71a0/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon May 1 23:39:42 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 16:39:42 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Fair transport - comments Message-ID: <003f01c66d2d$1750b940$6401a8c0@Home> -----Original Message----- From: Alice Maynard [mailto:alice@futureinclusion.com] Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 3:07 PM To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org Subject: Fair transport Hello Eric I will like the concept of fair transport a great deal if it does what 'sustainable transport' never quite managed to do - i.e. incorporate the notion of accessibility - not in the jargonistic transport sense, but in the sense that we mere mortals use it. I don't want to use the term 'disabled access' although that's one distinction I make when talking to transport professionals. It's about more than that - it's dignified, socially enhancing access for everyone. You touch on it in mentioning gender issues, but I'd like it to be a little broader, and perhaps more explicit. In my experience, if it isn't mentioned explicitly it isn't addressed - it just gets lost, despite everyone's best intentions. Alice -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060501/51ed27d7/attachment.html From whook at itdp.org Tue May 2 00:10:03 2006 From: whook at itdp.org (Walter Hook) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 11:10:03 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: On vs off street parking or simply reducing on streetparking In-Reply-To: <20060430225247.10707.qmail@mailbox.gr> Message-ID: <001601c66d31$538a1060$c301a8c0@DFJLYL81> Todd, Eric, and Eric, If we assume a fixed number of parking spaces and we assume that those parking spaces are charged at the full market rate and pricing is optimized, and the only two options for the use of the roadway is a)parking and b)facilities for non-motorized travel (sidewalks or bikeways) is it better for the parking to be on the street or in garages? I vote for the garages. -----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 K. Tsourlakis Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 6:53 PM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Re: On vs off street parking or simply reducing on streetparking The question whether on- or off-street parking is better from a sustainability viewpoint is a difficult one to answer and depends (as many other similar problems) on many localy defined parameters. My hypothesis is that perhaps where land is cheap and sprawl pressures an imminent danger (like in N. America) on-street parking is better, while in other cases (like Knoflacher's Vienna) off-street parking brings about better results. However i think there is one more parameter that still evades from the so far presented analysis, and this is the general public mentality. On street parking gives to the average and unquestioned layman the impression that it is normal for motorised traffic to have priority over other uses on public spaces, and cars (or at least motorcycles) the default transport medium in the cities. Payment for the used space offers little help to alleviate this mentality (if not deteriorating it) - this is one reason i don't consider congestion charge a so good idea (for a more thorough discussion on this topic look at http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/LCC.htm). If we don't target at this distorted mentality, both of the public opinion and the bureaucrats, which leads to the adaptation of the cities and the human lives to the needs of cars (instead of the opposite), i doubt if we shall ever reach to a sustainable future. > >Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:33:47 -0700 >From: Todd Alexander Litman >Subject: [sustran] Re: On vs off street parking or simply reducing on > street parking. >To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > , Asia and the Pacific sustainable > transport >Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060426194947.05dfa6c0@mail.islandnet.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > >There is no doubt that shifting from free to priced parking can >reduce vehicle ownership and use. Underpriced parking is the largest >subsidy of automobile travel - for each dollar a motorist spends >directly on their vehicle, somebody spends about $0.50 to subsidize >its parking. In typical situations, shifting from free to >cost-recovery priced parking (parking priced to cover its facility >and operating costs) reduces automobile ownership by 5-15% if applied >to residential parking, and reduces vehicle trips by 10-30% if >applied at destinations such as worksite and other commercial >destinations. This implies that about 20% of our traffic problems, >road and parking costs, traffic accidents, fuel consumption and >pollution emissions can be "explained" by vehicle parking >underpricing, or described more positively, correcting parking >underpricing can significantly improve transportation system >efficiency and address problems such as excessive traffic risk and >energy consumption. > >Pricing can even be revenue neutral, for example, by "unbundling" >residential parking (parking is sold and rented separately from >building space, so for example, rather than renting an apartment for >$1,000 per month with two "free" parking spaces, the apartment rents >for $800 per month, and each parking space is a separate $100 per >month) and "cashing out" subsidized employee parking (commuters can >choose between a subsidized parking space or its cash equivalent, >such as $100 per month). > >To be effective parking pricing must be correctly implemented. This >means appropriate price structures (preferably hourly and daily fees, >with higher rates during peak periods, and minimal exemptions and >discounts), effective enforcement, and good travel options (walking >and cycling conditions, good ridesharing and public transit services, >etc.). To effect vehicle ownership and use (rather than just parking >location) pricing must be implemented over an area, so motorists >cannot simply park for free nearby. > >Business people often demand parking subsidies to attract customers, >but their efforts are often misdirected. After all, people spend >money, not cars. While its true that if two businesses are otherwise >equally attractive, the one that offers free parking will tend to >attract more customers, there are other more important attributes, >and areas which focus only on cheap parking to attract customers >often fail. For example, if charging for parking reduces taxes and >prices, increases parking turnover, or funds transit services and >local street improvements, many people while choose an area where >they must pay for parking (see Douglas Kolozsvari and Donald Shoup, >"Turning Small Change Into Big Changes," Access 23, University of >California Transportation Center >(www.uctc.net), Fall 2003, pp. 2-7; >www.sppsr.ucla.edu/u p/webfiles/SmallChange.pdf >). Similarly, many areas with limited and priced parking are >attractive places to live and work, because they have better >livability. Described differently, charging for parking improves the >quality of customers by weeding out the cheepskates who won't pay a >few cents to park, leaving better spenders. > >This is not anti-car. It recognizes that some trips will be made by >automobile and that we need to accommodate their need to park. But >charging for parking and using shared, public parking facilities >(including on-street and for-profit commercial parking) is far more >equitable and efficient, and significantly reduces the total amount >of parking supply needed compared with conventional parking planning >practices which result in generous amounts of parking at each destination. > >For more information see: > >Todd Litman, Parking Management: Strategies, Evaluation and Planning, >Victoria Transport Policy Institute >(www.vtpi.org/park_man.pdf), 2006. > >MRSC, Downtown Parking Solutions, Municipal Research and Service >Center of Washington >(www.mrsc.org/S ubjects/Transpo/Tpark/transsolut.aspx), >2005. > >Nelson/Nygaard Consulting, Housing Shortage / Parking Surplus, >Transportation and Land Use Coalition >(www.trans coalition.org/southbay/housing_study/index.html), >July 2002. > >Oregon Downtown Development Association, Parking Management Made >Easy: A Guide to Taming the Downtown Parking Beast, Transportation >and Growth Management Program, Oregon DOT and Dept. of Environmental >Quality >(www.lcd.state.or.us/tgm/p ublications.htm), >2001. > >Ryan Russo, Planning for Residential Parking: A Guide For Housing >Developers and Planners, Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern >California >(www.nonprofithousing.org) and the >Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy >(http://urbanpolicy.berkeley.edu), 2001. > >USEPA, Parking Spaces / Community Places: Finding the Balance Through >Smart Growth Solutions, Development, Community, and Environment >Division (DCED); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency >(www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/parkin g.htm), >2006. > > >At 11:14 AM 4/26/2006, Sunny wrote: > >>I really like Todd's idea of pricing the parking but implementing the >>same is a bit difficult in the developing cities as there is a >>increasing trend of vehicle ownership. In my opinion initially focussing >>on limiting the available parking spaces and then going with the pricing >>would be better as this firstly might control the ridership and then the >>pricing would have the economic effect. >> >>On the other hand I doubt if parking pricing will really reduce the >>ridership because I presume that parking pricing would make the car user >>aware of the fact that they are being metered for the time they are >>spending for shopping and thereby reduce their shopping time which can >>tend to decrease the sales, yes they might shift to other modes but what >>if the other modes are not as developed as driving a car like in >>Bangkok. Secondly, providing priced or timed parking would allow the >>other car driver to feel that they might get a place to park their car >>and hence avoid them from shifting to other means. Correct me if I am wrong. >> >>Off street parking is the worst case especially when it is free/very >>very cheap like here in Bangkok and when the price is reducing with time >>rather than increasing. but even here i have the same doubts mentioned >>above. I would be glad if someone could clarify me. >> >>Sunny > > > >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/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060426/8a260e4b /attachment-0001.html > ____________________________________________________________________________ _________ http://www.mailbox.gr ????????? ?????? ?? ???????? ??? e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr ?????????? ??? ????????? ?????? web hosting ?? ??????? ???????? controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr ?? ????? ??? ??? internet ???? ?? 10 ????. From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 2 00:44:09 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 17:44:09 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: On vs off street parking or simply reducing on streetparking In-Reply-To: <001601c66d31$538a1060$c301a8c0@DFJLYL81> References: <20060430225247.10707.qmail@mailbox.gr> <001601c66d31$538a1060$c301a8c0@DFJLYL81> Message-ID: <1147.62.245.95.24.1146498249.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Hi, > Todd, Eric, and Eric, > > If we assume a fixed number of parking spaces and we assume that those > parking spaces are charged at the full market rate and pricing is > optimized, > and the only two options for the use of the roadway is a)parking and > b)facilities for non-motorized travel ???? Why does "only two options" come into this? Even in the real world of politics, people with limited imaginations and inability to divorce their cars there are more than two options, and... I just think someone is playing a joke on us. We are in cul-de-sac of ideas, which is full of cars because we agreed that cars could go off street but then people got more cars.. and guess where they have to be parked? Can we at least not talk about this anymore, unless someone pulls a spreadsheet out of their ear and tell us what is more sustainable? Todd, no, not that Todd, this Todd ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From zvi at inro.ca Tue May 2 01:02:17 2006 From: zvi at inro.ca (Zvi Leve) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 12:02:17 -0400 Subject: [sustran] and what about bicycle parking?! In-Reply-To: <1147.62.245.95.24.1146498249.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> References: <20060430225247.10707.qmail@mailbox.gr> <001601c66d31$538a1060$c301a8c0@DFJLYL81> <1147.62.245.95.24.1146498249.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Message-ID: <44563109.1000809@inro.ca> How is this for 'sustainable' on-street parking? Zvi From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue May 2 01:44:20 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 18:44:20 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Fair Transport - comments Message-ID: <000e01c66d3e$7f9be180$6401a8c0@Home> -----Original Message----- From: Peter Zimmer [mailto:pzimmer@eastlink.ca] Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 4:27 PM FAIR TRANSPORT? I like this proposed semantic shift from "sustainable transport". It opens explicitly questions of inclusion, cross-generational impacts, ... and moves it beyond "mere" ecology (which is a boring guilt trip to many). "Is it fair that traffic engineers and highway designers impute a value for motorists' time lost in traffic jams at $15 an hour, and never even bother to calculate the time losses imposed on pedestrians, the disabled and transit users, much less give them a fair, equal monetary value as they calculate costs and benefits?" .... I like it. Let's think about adopting this in Ecology Action Centre and our Transportation Issues Committee. Peter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060501/c2e32463/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 2 04:00:17 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 21:00:17 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: and what about bicycle parking?! In-Reply-To: <44563109.1000809@inro.ca> References: <20060430225247.10707.qmail@mailbox.gr> <001601c66d31$538a1060$c301a8c0@DFJLYL81> <1147.62.245.95.24.1146498249.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> <44563109.1000809@inro.ca> Message-ID: <1332.62.245.95.24.1146510017.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> > How is this > > for 'sustainable' on-street parking? > > Zvi WOW! What great photos these are! (Everybody, check out the stuff besides the bikeparking photo-which I dont think is a great example but still better of course than all of the car examples). These views of Montreal show how utterly stupid cars are in a city, no matter where they are parked. Yeah, yeah... stupidity can never be fixed so easily. T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue May 2 16:57:48 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 09:57:48 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Fair Transport - comments Message-ID: <006201c66dbe$1b758be0$6401a8c0@Home> Fair - "Characterized by honesty and justice : Free from fraud, injustice, prejudice, or favoritism : Open, frank, honest; hence equal, just, equitable, impartial., unprejudiced, ' (Webster's Unabridged, 2nd edition) (Dear Friends. We are getting some fine, very challenging comments, challenges and even some support for this idea coming in over the transom this week, some of which is reaching you here directly but all food for thought - which you will shortly have here in more comprehensive form with comments, along with an entirely redrafted set of background notes on our strange new term (for poof of its strangeness or at least unfamiliarity in this context, I propose you check it out on Google, stripping it away of course from all (that is most off it) which has nothing to do with our topic). In the meantime, I am pleased to share with you the following note from my esteemed colleague Professor Richard Allsop, who makes a point that I for one am not going to let slip. "Fair Transport" may in time perhaps serve to extend and fine tune the phrase sustainable transport, but let me not kid myself. It is not about to wipe it out. But more on that shortly. ericbritton. And oh yes, PS. One of the ideas behind this new phrase is to create a base for some form of high profile Fair Transport Labeling. But that too in due course.) -----Original Message----- From: Richard Allsop Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 11:08 PM To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org Subject: Fair Transport Dear Eric I've read only your message and none of the broadcast responses, and am replying only briefly to wish you well in this venture. I think the idea is great, but do not see it as a substitute for "sustainable transport", which to the extent that it means anything as generally used (which I think is doubtful) it does not mean the same as fair. Seeking sustainability can be done fairly or unfairly, but there is nothing about seeking sustainability that is inherently fair (except perhaps between generations). The fairness, if it is to be part of the process at all, has to be imposed as a constraint, just as in pursuit of other societal objectives. As for "sustainable transport" as it has generally been used, it is a misnomer for which in my own writing and speaking I have tried to substitute "less unsustainable transport", which is at least achievable within our lifetimes, unlike "sustainable transport" in any sense of the word that I recognise. So as a bonus additional to the massive importance of promoting equity in transport, you efforts may have the beneficial side-effect of reducing use of the term "sustainable transport". Whether this will increase the proportion of sense written by many of its misusers is another matter! All the best Richard Richard Allsop Centre for Transport Studies University College London Gower Street London WC1E 6BT Phone +44 20 7679 1555 Fax +44 20 7679 1567 email rea@transport.ucl.ac.uk www.cts.ucl.ac.uk ________________________________________________________________________ _ ISTTT 17 London 2007 For details of the 17th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory in London visit www.isttt.org ________________________________________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060502/cd3f9b8a/attachment.html From whook at itdp.org Tue May 2 22:51:55 2006 From: whook at itdp.org (Walter Hook) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 09:51:55 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Fair Transport - comments In-Reply-To: <006201c66dbe$1b758be0$6401a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <005801c66def$94e05920$c301a8c0@DFJLYL81> Dear eric, Itdp will be submitting its own comments, so we would not want to be a party to any group comments. By the way, i agree the draft document doesn't clearly lay out any vision of what role the world bank might play, but overall i didn't see the document as anything to get worked up over. Some good language in there. Best Walter -----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.Britton Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 3:58 AM To: sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; Kyoto2020@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Fair Transport - comments Fair - "Characterized by honesty and justice : Free from fraud, injustice, prejudice, or favoritism : Open, frank, honest; hence equal, just, equitable, impartial., unprejudiced, ' (Webster's Unabridged, 2nd edition) (Dear Friends. We are getting some fine, very challenging comments, challenges and even some support for this idea coming in over the transom this week, some of which is reaching you here directly but all food for thought - which you will shortly have here in more comprehensive form with comments, along with an entirely redrafted set of background notes on our strange new term (for poof of its strangeness or at least unfamiliarity in this context, I propose you check it out on Google, stripping it away of course from all (that is most off it) which has nothing to do with our topic). In the meantime, I am pleased to share with you the following note from my esteemed colleague Professor Richard Allsop, who makes a point that I for one am not going to let slip. "Fair Transport" may in time perhaps serve to extend and fine tune the phrase sustainable transport, but let me not kid myself. It is not about to wipe it out. But more on that shortly. ericbritton. And oh yes, PS. One of the ideas behind this new phrase is to create a base for some form of high profile Fair Transport Labeling. But that too in due course.) -----Original Message----- From: Richard Allsop Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 11:08 PM To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org Subject: Fair Transport Dear Eric I've read only your message and none of the broadcast responses, and am replying only briefly to wish you well in this venture. I think the idea is great, but do not see it as a substitute for "sustainable transport", which to the extent that it means anything as generally used (which I think is doubtful) it does not mean the same as fair. Seeking sustainability can be done fairly or unfairly, but there is nothing about seeking sustainability that is inherently fair (except perhaps between generations). The fairness, if it is to be part of the process at all, has to be imposed as a constraint, just as in pursuit of other societal objectives. As for "sustainable transport" as it has generally been used, it is a misnomer for which in my own writing and speaking I have tried to substitute "less unsustainable transport", which is at least achievable within our lifetimes, unlike "sustainable transport" in any sense of the word that I recognise. So as a bonus additional to the massive importance of promoting equity in transport, you efforts may have the beneficial side-effect of reducing use of the term "sustainable transport". Whether this will increase the proportion of sense written by many of its misusers is another matter! All the best Richard Richard Allsop Centre for Transport Studies University College London Gower Street London WC1E 6BT Phone +44 20 7679 1555 Fax +44 20 7679 1567 email rea@transport.ucl.ac.uk www.cts.ucl.ac.uk _________________________________________________________________________ ISTTT 17 London 2007 For details of the 17th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory in London visit www.isttt.org ________________________________________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060502/a579f7b0/attachment.html From whook at itdp.org Tue May 2 22:51:55 2006 From: whook at itdp.org (Walter Hook) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 09:51:55 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Fair Transport - comments In-Reply-To: <006201c66dbe$1b758be0$6401a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <005801c66def$94e05920$c301a8c0@DFJLYL81> Dear eric, Itdp will be submitting its own comments, so we would not want to be a party to any group comments. By the way, i agree the draft document doesn't clearly lay out any vision of what role the world bank might play, but overall i didn't see the document as anything to get worked up over. Some good language in there. Best Walter -----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.Britton Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 3:58 AM To: sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; Kyoto2020@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Fair Transport - comments Fair - "Characterized by honesty and justice : Free from fraud, injustice, prejudice, or favoritism : Open, frank, honest; hence equal, just, equitable, impartial., unprejudiced, ' (Webster's Unabridged, 2nd edition) (Dear Friends. We are getting some fine, very challenging comments, challenges and even some support for this idea coming in over the transom this week, some of which is reaching you here directly but all food for thought - which you will shortly have here in more comprehensive form with comments, along with an entirely redrafted set of background notes on our strange new term (for poof of its strangeness or at least unfamiliarity in this context, I propose you check it out on Google, stripping it away of course from all (that is most off it) which has nothing to do with our topic). In the meantime, I am pleased to share with you the following note from my esteemed colleague Professor Richard Allsop, who makes a point that I for one am not going to let slip. "Fair Transport" may in time perhaps serve to extend and fine tune the phrase sustainable transport, but let me not kid myself. It is not about to wipe it out. But more on that shortly. ericbritton. And oh yes, PS. One of the ideas behind this new phrase is to create a base for some form of high profile Fair Transport Labeling. But that too in due course.) -----Original Message----- From: Richard Allsop Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 11:08 PM To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org Subject: Fair Transport Dear Eric I've read only your message and none of the broadcast responses, and am replying only briefly to wish you well in this venture. I think the idea is great, but do not see it as a substitute for "sustainable transport", which to the extent that it means anything as generally used (which I think is doubtful) it does not mean the same as fair. Seeking sustainability can be done fairly or unfairly, but there is nothing about seeking sustainability that is inherently fair (except perhaps between generations). The fairness, if it is to be part of the process at all, has to be imposed as a constraint, just as in pursuit of other societal objectives. As for "sustainable transport" as it has generally been used, it is a misnomer for which in my own writing and speaking I have tried to substitute "less unsustainable transport", which is at least achievable within our lifetimes, unlike "sustainable transport" in any sense of the word that I recognise. So as a bonus additional to the massive importance of promoting equity in transport, you efforts may have the beneficial side-effect of reducing use of the term "sustainable transport". Whether this will increase the proportion of sense written by many of its misusers is another matter! All the best Richard Richard Allsop Centre for Transport Studies University College London Gower Street London WC1E 6BT Phone +44 20 7679 1555 Fax +44 20 7679 1567 email rea@transport.ucl.ac.uk www.cts.ucl.ac.uk _________________________________________________________________________ ISTTT 17 London 2007 For details of the 17th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory in London visit www.isttt.org ________________________________________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060502/a579f7b0/attachment-0001.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed May 3 01:20:24 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 18:20:24 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Guardian article Message-ID: <014e01c66e04$537c08c0$6401a8c0@Home> -----Original Message----- From: Simon Norton [mailto:S.Norton@dpmms.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 5:58 PM To: newmobilitycafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: Guardian article Any Indians on this group care to comment on the article "India is on the road to a transport revolution" in today's (UK) Guardian ? This has a link from the web page http://www.guardian.co.uk/india Simon Norton From sksunny at gmail.com Wed May 3 02:14:58 2006 From: sksunny at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 00:14:58 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Guardian article In-Reply-To: <014e01c66e04$537c08c0$6401a8c0@Home> References: <014e01c66e04$537c08c0$6401a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <44579392.6020103@gmail.com> Thank You very much Eric and Simon for allowing us to see this news. On the whole, the edition was very interesting. Coming to the "Transport Revolution" I would not call this a revolution or an evolution but rather a degradation. The article cites the experience of a rich person who could afford a Rolls Royce and stay 180 kms away from Bombay/Mumbai, a home for more than a 12 million people. The rich gentleman complains of the cows and the people on the roads but forgets that they are the basic components for his industry to run. I understand from this article that my country, India, plans to focus more on building express ways to connect major cities of the country but at the same time forgetting about the access for the poor and needy. Many people living in the villages do not have proper access to many health care facilities and improper transportation is also a cause for many deaths on the other hand express ways are also causes for many fatalities personally experiencing losing a friend in a car accident on the National Highway 9 while he along with 3 other friends were driving their car at a very high speed. In India what we need are not fast express ways which provoke the people to drive on road at a high speed and also cause many people to shift from rail to road travel. All we need is a safe and affordable travel like we have on the trains, not all of them though. I would like to mention even the Bus accident news in the same link mentioned, and also the news on the high speed train to Taj Mahal (Good news for tourists here) this clearly shows the efficiency of road travel in my country. I have learnt from Sujit, Lee and some others in this list that effort is going on in Pune in creating a Sustainable Transport and I appreciate it but the same initiative is required in many metropolitan cities where there is an indication of high motor vehicle growth like bangalore and chennai. In my opinion as i understand from WB, poverty is not just lack of money but it is the social exclusion, untreated diseases, hunger, the lack of access to basic utilities and service, and inability to send children to school and make them work, it can also mean as a fear of an uncertain future. Hence, I feel that India should first think of trying to feed its people first and bring the poverty levels down and then worry about China. More car industries might not mean more jobs if the industries are robotised. I will be very happy if anyone comment on the above and correct my idea. Sunny From ranjithsd at sltnet.lk Wed May 3 12:54:52 2006 From: ranjithsd at sltnet.lk (Ranjith de Silva) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 09:54:52 +0600 Subject: [sustran] Re: Guardian article In-Reply-To: <44579392.6020103@gmail.com> Message-ID: <000001c66e65$5557d690$0265a8c0@rangith74aab7d> Dear Sunny I read your comments with interest. I have been involved in a few workshops organised by IFRTD India National Forum Group in Rajasthan to influence the PMGSY (Prime Minister's Rural Road development Programme) on the inclusion of community participation and consultation, use of appropriate technology and safety. I still have some concerns over the PMGSY (perhaps the largest rural road development programme in the world???)methodology but the concept of this programme to make the isolated villages connected to services and markets looks great. Ranjith Ranjith de Silva Asia Regional Coordinator International Forum for Rural Transport and Development (IFRTD) From schipper at wri.org Wed May 3 13:03:02 2006 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 00:03:02 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Guardian article Message-ID: I was unable to access. Could someone send me the text of the article, off line. thanks lee Lee Schipper, Ph.D., Director of Research EMBARQ, the WRI Center for Transport and Environment World Resources Institute 10 G St NW, Washington DC 20002 USA Phone +1 202 729 7735; Fax +1 202 729 7775 http://www.embarq.wri.org >>> ranjithsd@sltnet.lk 05/02/06 11:54 PM >>> Dear Sunny I read your comments with interest. I have been involved in a few workshops organised by IFRTD India National Forum Group in Rajasthan to influence the PMGSY (Prime Minister's Rural Road development Programme) on the inclusion of community participation and consultation, use of appropriate technology and safety. I still have some concerns over the PMGSY (perhaps the largest rural road development programme in the world???)methodology but the concept of this programme to make the isolated villages connected to services and markets looks great. Ranjith Ranjith de Silva Asia Regional Coordinator International Forum for Rural Transport and Development (IFRTD) ================================================================ 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 sksunny at gmail.com Wed May 3 13:51:18 2006 From: sksunny at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 11:51:18 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Text of Guardian Article In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <445836C6.6080802@gmail.com> Dear Lee and Friends, I learnt from Lee's mail that he could not access the link, so please find the news below Sunny *India** is on the road to a transport revolution* Huge efforts are being made to improve the country's infrastructure *Randeep Ramesh in Pune Tuesday May 2, 2006 The Guardian * When Yohan Poonawalla took delivery of the first Rolls-Royce Phantom sold in India last year, the car was everything that he was promised. Inside the 2.5-tonne, 20ft vehicle was a hand-crafted walnut dashboard featuring a humidor. The tinted windows had electronically controlled curtains. Open the doors and out popped a silver-handled umbrella. But the ?500,000 vehicle's first miles in the country were traumatic for Mr Poonawalla. Picking it up from Mumbai, the 34-year-old scion of a wealthy industrial family had to drive the car to his home in Pune, 180km away. Despite its immense power - the Phantom zooms from 0 to 62mph in under six seconds - the car slowly picked its way through the maze of Mumbai's decrepit backstreets and gridlocked intersections. "Taking it out [of Mumbai] was not easy. You had cows; people on the streets. There was no other way to get the car home. All I could think about was just watch out for the car," Mr Poonawalla recalls. "It was the longest hour I have ever spent behind the wheel." It was not until he made it out of the city that Mr Poonawalla finally found a road decent enough to drive his Rolls on. "The expressway is as good as any road in Europe. It was my first chance to really see how the car handles and travels." What Mr Poonawalla experienced are the first fruits of India's roads revolution, which has helped propel the country's economic annual growth past 8%. The six lanes running from Mumbai to Pune are part of the 3,650-mile Golden Quadrilateral highway, which is the largest infrastructure project undertaken since the country became independent in 1947. The expressways form a diamond linking Delhi with the country's three other largest cities: Mumbai, Chennai and Calcutta. On schedule to be completed this year and within its ?4bn budget, the Golden Quadrilateral marks the beginning of more than ?35bn of road projects. For anyone accustomed to India and the haphazard way things happen, the country's new motorways are nothing short of a miracle. *Dramatic shift* "We had to link the country up. This was a mission of the greatest importance for the economy," said BC Khanduri, who was minister of roads from 2000 to 2004. A retired major general in the Indian army engineering corps, he cracked down on corruption and delay. "Look we gave deadlines and made sure people met them. There were penalties for poor performance and bonuses for those who delivered on time," said Mr Khanduri. "My idea was to say good infrastructure could be built in India too." Many point out that the initiative to create a high-speed road network was sorely needed as the nation's antiquated transport links were cutting deep into profits and slowing economic growth. The comparison with China is a poor one. India's northern neighbour focused early on building up its infrastructure, especially its network of arterial routes. During the 1990s Beijing spent ?18bn a year on expanding its expressways - 10 times the amount Delhi managed. The result is that highways, which move four-fifths of all goods transported in India, account for only about 2% of the country's roads. Ports, too, are a problem. On average it takes 85 hours to unload and reload a ship at India's major ports, 10 times longer than in east Asia. "Historically speaking, roads in India have been starved of funds and, even worse, their maintenance has been sorely neglected," says NK Singh, a former government adviser. But Mr Singh says there has been a dramatic shift in thinking since 2000, with spending on infrastructure this year rising by 24%. The arrival of smoother, wider roads in India has had an immediate, visible effect: the start of the Indian public's love affair with the motor car. The potential has barely been tapped, say analysts, who point out that though 40 million Indians can afford a car there are only 7.5m cars on the country's roads. Motor manufacturers have begun to take notice. Sales of Ford cars in the country are rising at more than 30% a year, leading the company's chief executive, William Clay Ford, to remark that India was now a "top priority". Local carmakers have also moved to ramp up production. The Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers recently released figures showing India's vehicle production jumped 13% last year. By 2009 the country will account for 8% of global motor industry growth. While China's rise is scaring India into upgrading its roads network, it is Japan's companies that provide an inspiration for India's nascent car industry. Maruti began life as an Indian government firm, but is now majority owned by Japan's Suzuki. It is also India's biggest motor manufacturer. Every morning at just before 7am in the Maruti car plant in Gurgaon, an hour's drive out of Delhi, hundreds of workers wearing identical green shirts and trousers line up for exercises and sing the company song. Maruti has adopted specific practices - individual production targets, company slogans and uniform - to emulate the Japanese commitment to quality. The Indian managers take trips to Suzuki's headquarters and pepper their conversation with Japanese management speak. *Natural advantage* The Gurgaon plant now produces more than 500,000 cars a year and another ?750m factory is being built in nearby Manesar. Suzuki's Indian sales will soon exceed Japan's. The abundance of cheap labour in India means Gurgaon's assembly lines are not fully "robotised". "Whereas in Japan we would look at 95% robotisation, in India we manage with 70 to 75%. Our wage base is cheaper," said Shankar Sanyal, a Maruti manager. However, this is changing. Rolling off Gurgaon's assembly line is a new car, a hatchback called the Swift, which is built in the same way as in Japan. In a marked shift, Indian engineers did much of the research and development. The Swift highlights another trend: the emergence of India as a small car hub. With government handing out tax incentives, India is now the third largest maker of small cars in the world. Sales of hatchbacks in India topped 650,000 this year. The increased activity has given rise to world-class auto-components firms, kickstarting a new wave of outsourcing that had Kamal Nath, India's trade minister, recently pointing out that while General Motors was losing workers in Detroit it was recruiting in India. The auto-parts industry, too, has sought to emulate Japanese competitors. Rane Group, based in Chennai, has sales of ?165m and is growing at more than 10% a year with exports rising at a faster pace. Yet only five years ago the company could not take on foreign competitors, scaring away customers with shoddy brakes and valves. "Our natural advantage is in wage costs. In the past the gap was the quality of our products. So we hired Japanese consultants and got them to show us where we went wrong," says Babu Laxman, the company chairman. These are the first signs that the country may be experiencing a boom in manufacturing to rival the Chinese. "We do not see Chinese competition as our rivals," says Mr Laxman. "It's the Japanese we want to match and beat." *_____________________* *47 bodies found after bus plunges into lake Associated Press in Gauhati Friday April 21, 2006 The Guardian * At least 47 people died after their bus veered off a road near Sarupeta, in Assam, northern India, and plunged into a lake, police said yesterday. Another 27 passengers from the bus, which reportedly had 80 people on board, were injured. The driver, taking the group to a wedding in Goumura, 100 miles west of Gauhati, Assam's capital, appeared to lose control of the vehicle, which then swerved off the road, said Bipin Bargohain, a police official. "The bus was pulled out by a crane and all 47 bodies found were trapped inside the bus." The lake was searched for more bodies. *__________________________* *High-speed train cuts travel time to Taj Mahal* *Associated Press in New Delhi Thursday February 16, 2006 The Guardian * Tourists can now travel to Agra, site of the Taj Mahal, from the Indian capital in less than two hours with the introduction yesterday of a 95mph-train. Until now, the fastest Indian train reached 75mph. The train cuts the travel time by 40 minutes on the 125-mile New Delhi-to-Agra stretch of rail, said Rajiv Saxena, spokesman for Northern Railways. The trip takes more than four hours by road. The Shatabdi Express will run between New Delhi and Bhopal, stopping in Agra. Walls have been built by the track to stop people and stray cattle from trespassing, Press Trust of India news agency said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060503/d2f16538/attachment.html From SCHIPPER at wri.org Wed May 3 18:14:18 2006 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 05:14:18 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Text of Guardian Article on "modern" transport in India Message-ID: Thanks Sunny. Er um, I failed to see a single mention of the NMT users cut off by these roads, of the many who will be killed by heavy vehicles running them off the roads (oops, the government forgot to build parallel roads between Delhi and Agra for normal speed transport)....and of the way this focus on commerce without social impacts may cost more than its obvious economic benefits. or, when will they ever learn? >>> sksunny@gmail.com 5/3/2006 12:51:18 AM >>> Dear Lee and Friends, I learnt from Lee's mail that he could not access the link, so please find the news below Sunny *India** is on the road to a transport revolution* Huge efforts are being made to improve the country's infrastructure *Randeep Ramesh in Pune Tuesday May 2, 2006 The Guardian * When Yohan Poonawalla took delivery of the first Rolls-Royce Phantom sold in India last year, the car was everything that he was promised. Inside the 2.5-tonne, 20ft vehicle was a hand-crafted walnut dashboard featuring a humidor. The tinted windows had electronically controlled curtains. Open the doors and out popped a silver-handled umbrella. But the ?500,000 vehicle's first miles in the country were traumatic for Mr Poonawalla. Picking it up from Mumbai, the 34-year-old scion of a wealthy industrial family had to drive the car to his home in Pune, 180km away. Despite its immense power - the Phantom zooms from 0 to 62mph in under six seconds - the car slowly picked its way through the maze of Mumbai's decrepit backstreets and gridlocked intersections. "Taking it out [of Mumbai] was not easy. You had cows; people on the streets. There was no other way to get the car home. All I could think about was just watch out for the car," Mr Poonawalla recalls. "It was the longest hour I have ever spent behind the wheel." It was not until he made it out of the city that Mr Poonawalla finally found a road decent enough to drive his Rolls on. "The expressway is as good as any road in Europe. It was my first chance to really see how the car handles and travels." What Mr Poonawalla experienced are the first fruits of India's roads revolution, which has helped propel the country's economic annual growth past 8%. The six lanes running from Mumbai to Pune are part of the 3,650-mile Golden Quadrilateral highway, which is the largest infrastructure project undertaken since the country became independent in 1947. The expressways form a diamond linking Delhi with the country's three other largest cities: Mumbai, Chennai and Calcutta. On schedule to be completed this year and within its ?4bn budget, the Golden Quadrilateral marks the beginning of more than ?35bn of road projects. For anyone accustomed to India and the haphazard way things happen, the country's new motorways are nothing short of a miracle. *Dramatic shift* "We had to link the country up. This was a mission of the greatest importance for the economy," said BC Khanduri, who was minister of roads from 2000 to 2004. A retired major general in the Indian army engineering corps, he cracked down on corruption and delay. "Look we gave deadlines and made sure people met them. There were penalties for poor performance and bonuses for those who delivered on time," said Mr Khanduri. "My idea was to say good infrastructure could be built in India too." Many point out that the initiative to create a high-speed road network was sorely needed as the nation's antiquated transport links were cutting deep into profits and slowing economic growth. The comparison with China is a poor one. India's northern neighbour focused early on building up its infrastructure, especially its network of arterial routes. During the 1990s Beijing spent ?18bn a year on expanding its expressways - 10 times the amount Delhi managed. The result is that highways, which move four-fifths of all goods transported in India, account for only about 2% of the country's roads. Ports, too, are a problem. On average it takes 85 hours to unload and reload a ship at India's major ports, 10 times longer than in east Asia. "Historically speaking, roads in India have been starved of funds and, even worse, their maintenance has been sorely neglected," says NK Singh, a former government adviser. But Mr Singh says there has been a dramatic shift in thinking since 2000, with spending on infrastructure this year rising by 24%. The arrival of smoother, wider roads in India has had an immediate, visible effect: the start of the Indian public's love affair with the motor car. The potential has barely been tapped, say analysts, who point out that though 40 million Indians can afford a car there are only 7.5m cars on the country's roads. Motor manufacturers have begun to take notice. Sales of Ford cars in the country are rising at more than 30% a year, leading the company's chief executive, William Clay Ford, to remark that India was now a "top priority". Local carmakers have also moved to ramp up production. The Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers recently released figures showing India's vehicle production jumped 13% last year. By 2009 the country will account for 8% of global motor industry growth. While China's rise is scaring India into upgrading its roads network, it is Japan's companies that provide an inspiration for India's nascent car industry. Maruti began life as an Indian government firm, but is now majority owned by Japan's Suzuki. It is also India's biggest motor manufacturer. Every morning at just before 7am in the Maruti car plant in Gurgaon, an hour's drive out of Delhi, hundreds of workers wearing identical green shirts and trousers line up for exercises and sing the company song. Maruti has adopted specific practices - individual production targets, company slogans and uniform - to emulate the Japanese commitment to quality. The Indian managers take trips to Suzuki's headquarters and pepper their conversation with Japanese management speak. *Natural advantage* The Gurgaon plant now produces more than 500,000 cars a year and another ?750m factory is being built in nearby Manesar. Suzuki's Indian sales will soon exceed Japan's. The abundance of cheap labour in India means Gurgaon's assembly lines are not fully "robotised". "Whereas in Japan we would look at 95% robotisation, in India we manage with 70 to 75%. Our wage base is cheaper," said Shankar Sanyal, a Maruti manager. However, this is changing. Rolling off Gurgaon's assembly line is a new car, a hatchback called the Swift, which is built in the same way as in Japan. In a marked shift, Indian engineers did much of the research and development. The Swift highlights another trend: the emergence of India as a small car hub. With government handing out tax incentives, India is now the third largest maker of small cars in the world. Sales of hatchbacks in India topped 650,000 this year. The increased activity has given rise to world-class auto-components firms, kickstarting a new wave of outsourcing that had Kamal Nath, India's trade minister, recently pointing out that while General Motors was losing workers in Detroit it was recruiting in India. The auto-parts industry, too, has sought to emulate Japanese competitors. Rane Group, based in Chennai, has sales of ?165m and is growing at more than 10% a year with exports rising at a faster pace. Yet only five years ago the company could not take on foreign competitors, scaring away customers with shoddy brakes and valves. "Our natural advantage is in wage costs. In the past the gap was the quality of our products. So we hired Japanese consultants and got them to show us where we went wrong," says Babu Laxman, the company chairman. These are the first signs that the country may be experiencing a boom in manufacturing to rival the Chinese. "We do not see Chinese competition as our rivals," says Mr Laxman. "It's the Japanese we want to match and beat." *_____________________* *47 bodies found after bus plunges into lake Associated Press in Gauhati Friday April 21, 2006 The Guardian * At least 47 people died after their bus veered off a road near Sarupeta, in Assam, northern India, and plunged into a lake, police said yesterday. Another 27 passengers from the bus, which reportedly had 80 people on board, were injured. The driver, taking the group to a wedding in Goumura, 100 miles west of Gauhati, Assam's capital, appeared to lose control of the vehicle, which then swerved off the road, said Bipin Bargohain, a police official. "The bus was pulled out by a crane and all 47 bodies found were trapped inside the bus." The lake was searched for more bodies. *__________________________* *High-speed train cuts travel time to Taj Mahal* *Associated Press in New Delhi Thursday February 16, 2006 The Guardian * Tourists can now travel to Agra, site of the Taj Mahal, from the Indian capital in less than two hours with the introduction yesterday of a 95mph-train. Until now, the fastest Indian train reached 75mph. The train cuts the travel time by 40 minutes on the 125-mile New Delhi-to-Agra stretch of rail, said Rajiv Saxena, spokesman for Northern Railways. The trip takes more than four hours by road. The Shatabdi Express will run between New Delhi and Bhopal, stopping in Agra. Walls have been built by the track to stop people and stray cattle from trespassing, Press Trust of India news agency said. From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed May 3 18:28:46 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 11:28:46 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Fair Transport - The Jane Jacobs Rules Message-ID: <007e01c66e93$fb3796d0$6401a8c0@Home> Comments and suggestions are still coming in on this. But I thought that you might like to see and comment on the basic "pillars" which are intended to help us all understand what this ides of Fair or Equitable Transport is all about. As you will note, I propose that we use this opportunity to honor the work and memory of Jane Jacobs, 1916-2006. (I have known Mrs. Jacobs long enough and well enough to be quite sure that she would nod her head as we go down this list and say, "yes Eric, you can go ahead with that.") Fair Transport - The Jane Jacobs Rules [1] 1. Sustainable transport: Fair Transport does not by any means turn its back on the now well established concerns, priorities and solutions brought forward by the sustainable transport movement over the last two decades. All the precious values associated with sustainable development are incorporated within the concept of Fair Transport, but which stretches beyond them in the ways indicated here 2. Human and social impacts: Requires as the very first priority a detailed and mature understanding of how the proposed new, improved or restructured transport investment or policy is going to impact on "we ordinary people step by step in our daily lives". 3. Non-Transport Solutions: Recognizes that at least a good half of the solutions needed to deal with problems or insufficiencies that in a first instance are identified with 'transport shortcomings' must in fact involve non-transport solutions (typical examples being locational and land use changes, TDM, time management, mobility substitutes, etc.) 4. Balanced Modes: Provides full and equal treatment of all forms of mobility (human-powered, public transport, intermediate/shared transport forms, motorized private transport) in the areas of planning, financing and infrastructure provision, maintenance and operation. Given the act that the majority of people are not car owner/drivers non own-car solutions should be heavily favored. 5. Full Access for All: Provides full, fair and safe access to people of all ages, conditions of health, economic situation and in terms of where they live and work. Convenient rural accessibility to all services and functions is critical. 6. Women and children: Gives full consideration to critical (and heretofore generally neglected) gender differences and needs at all stages of the discussion, planning, and decision process. This can only be assured through full representation and participation of female leaders and active participants. 7. Cost effectiveness: (a) Represents the cheapest way to get the (full) job done to the key targeted specifications (those being human) while (b) also fully serving non-drivers and lower income groups. 8. Large projects: Suggests that any large project (say more than $100k) be carefully inspected to ensure that its most important human and social (this includes economic and environmental) objectives cannot be better met by one or a set of smaller projects or policies. 9. Small project strategies and management: On the understanding that what is needed is large numbers of small projects each doing their own job, requires that at least 50% of the total investment budget be allocated to small projects (criteria?). These projects should be generated through local actions and participation. 10. Near term improvements: Places heavy emphasis on innovative and measurable near term improvements (say less than 2-4 years from conception to achievement), while fully aligning them with the underlying principles set out here. 11. Public spaces and community: Serves to improve the quantity, quality, and social usefulness of public spaces, and thereby reinforcing human contacts, sense of community, local and regional culture 12. New Tools: The toolset of the planners and policy makers in the sector need to be dramatically expanded. A very incomplete list would include direct involvement in all project stages from the outset of behavioral psychologists, gender specialists, public space experts, and new forms of pubic participation, group work and interactive communications. (This list is incomplete and intended here only for the purposes of giving a first indication.) _____ [1] I propose that we use this opportunity to honor the work and memory of Jane Jacobs, 1916-2006. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060503/9c9cd902/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.info Wed May 3 18:51:07 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 11:51:07 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Fair Transport - The Jane Jacobs Rules In-Reply-To: <007e01c66e93$fb3796d0$6401a8c0@Home> References: <007e01c66e93$fb3796d0$6401a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <1096.62.245.95.24.1146649867.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Hi, I have a BIG problem with the following: > 4. Balanced Modes: Provides full and equal treatment of all forms > of mobility (human-powered, public transport, intermediate/shared > transport forms, motorized private transport) in the areas of planning, > financing and infrastructure provision, maintenance and operation. > Given the act that the majority of people are not car owner/drivers non > own-car solutions should be heavily favored. > 5. Full Access for All: Provides full, fair and safe access to > people of all ages, conditions of health, economic situation and in > terms of where they live and work. Convenient rural accessibility to all > services and functions is critical. FIRST comes "full and equal", then a little later "heavily favoured" then in the next section "full, fair, safe to people of all ages, etc" Can we please make up our minds? Isnt this populist transport talk? A street for cars needs more space, and even a couple cars per hour destroys most other opportunities on the street. "Share the road" sounds nice but is ulimately just a bunch of nonsense. Climate change is happening, people! The little Dutch boy cant get to the dike to put his finger in the hole because there is too much traffic. Why start in a compromised position? Anyway, perhaps I should apologize, as this discussion seems to be just not for me: The issue, in my view, should be "Fair Cities", with transport just being a part of it. The closest, easiest, most pleasant and least energy-using access to things, not access to transport means. Best thing to do might be to stop teaching urban planning, architecture and transport as separate subjects. Bye, t ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed May 3 19:07:23 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 12:07:23 +0200 Subject: [sustran] "India is on the road to a transport revolution" Message-ID: <00a001c66e99$60a86c60$6401a8c0@Home> Dear Sunny, This is a satire, isn't it? The sort of multi-layered complex big fish Indian tale that we of the West are not expected to be able ever to penetrate. A rich private yarn, is it? If so, it's a real good one. I especially liked the name choice for the "34-year-old scion", Yohan Poonawalla, of Pune nonetheless. And you know the stuff about Mumbai, cows and "people", well that is very refined. As indeed is all the rest. Keep it coming Guardian. Har har har. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060503/b1e8325b/attachment.html From SCHIPPER at wri.org Wed May 3 19:21:55 2006 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 06:21:55 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" Message-ID: If Eric liked that he'd LOVE a presentation by the guru of the Delhi Metro. Made up numbers and all! >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 5/3/2006 6:07:23 AM >>> Dear Sunny, This is a satire, isn't it? The sort of multi-layered complex big fish Indian tale that we of the West are not expected to be able ever to penetrate. A rich private yarn, is it? If so, it's a real good one. I especially liked the name choice for the "34-year-old scion", Yohan Poonawalla, of Pune nonetheless. And you know the stuff about Mumbai, cows and "people", well that is very refined. As indeed is all the rest. Keep it coming Guardian. Har har har. From itdpasia at adelphia.net Wed May 3 22:25:54 2006 From: itdpasia at adelphia.net (John Ernst) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 07:25:54 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060503070847.01b9cf08@adelphia.net> On the serious side -- and, sorry to say, the article was not on the satire page, Eric -- the problems with India building expressways that induce further private motor vehicle use over longer commuting distances are, I think, clear to all. But here's an anecdote to consider in regards to these highways and freight shipment: Last year, on a flight from Delhi to Bangkok, I sat next to an American man who was setting up greenhouses in India to grow massive quantities of vegetables for large discount stores that were coming in (the "big box" stores, e.g., Walmart, Lotus, Carrefour). His biggest problem was the trucking. To make his plan work, he needed to reduce the shipping cost and time. This meant changing from India's existing trucks to big semi-trucks with multi-speed gearboxes, trained drivers to operate them,... and better roads to accommodate them. He said the roads were coming. I'm not prepared to comment on the global economic considerations here, but I think it provides an interesting window into the kind of political pressures behind these expressways. It's not just the Yohan Poonawallas in their Rolls Royces. Best, John At 04:21 AM 5/3/2006, Lee Schipper wrote: >If Eric liked that he'd LOVE a presentation by the guru of the Delhi >Metro. Made up numbers and all! > > >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 5/3/2006 6:07:23 AM >>> >Dear Sunny, > > > >This is a satire, isn't it? The sort of multi-layered complex big fish >Indian tale that we of the West are not expected to be able ever to >penetrate. A rich private yarn, is it? > > > >If so, it's a real good one. I especially liked the name choice for >the >"34-year-old scion", Yohan Poonawalla, of Pune nonetheless. And you >know >the stuff about Mumbai, cows and "people", well that is very refined. >As >indeed is all the rest. > > > >Keep it coming Guardian. Har har har. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - John Ernst - Director, Asia Region ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide Visit http://www.itdp.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From sksunny at gmail.com Wed May 3 23:04:24 2006 From: sksunny at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 21:04:24 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20060503070847.01b9cf08@adelphia.net> References: <7.0.0.16.0.20060503070847.01b9cf08@adelphia.net> Message-ID: <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> Dear John, In my opinion if the problem is shipment then it can be fulfilled with out building new road and by efficiently using the existing railway network or by adding new goods/cargo trains, this can even generate income and jobs thereby benefiting the jobless both at the source and the destination, expanding our highways and bringing more larger and multi-speed gear boxes will only be a burden as they have to be imported and their number will be very small for an investment like increasing the overall highway structure for which the large truck users might not legally contribute anything. On comparison to Bangkok I have recently been on road to Chiang Rai, the north of Thailand and to my surprise I have not seen even one toll post charging the cars which I am familiar with in India and my friend was driving never less than 100 kmph. Using the railway as I said earlier will reduce the unemployment and also the travel time as there will be a pressure for quality on the railways, better roads might be a good answer but roads built solely for freight will not be a good answer, if anyone is familiar with HIV in India it can be found that the HIV cases are more among the lorry drivers. I would be thankful if anyone can throw more light on this issue, I think Eric would be the one as I have seen him as a moderator on GATNET. Sunny John Ernst wrote: > On the serious side -- and, sorry to say, the article was not on the > satire page, Eric -- the problems with India building expressways > that induce further private motor vehicle use over longer commuting > distances are, I think, clear to all. > > But here's an anecdote to consider in regards to these highways and > freight shipment: > > Last year, on a flight from Delhi to Bangkok, I sat next to an > American man who was setting up greenhouses in India to grow massive > quantities of vegetables for large discount stores that were coming > in (the "big box" stores, e.g., Walmart, Lotus, Carrefour). His > biggest problem was the trucking. To make his plan work, he needed to > reduce the shipping cost and time. This meant changing from India's > existing trucks to big semi-trucks with multi-speed gearboxes, > trained drivers to operate them,... and better roads to accommodate > them. He said the roads were coming. > > I'm not prepared to comment on the global economic considerations > here, but I think it provides an interesting window into the kind of > political pressures behind these expressways. It's not just the > Yohan Poonawallas in their Rolls Royces. > > Best, > John > > At 04:21 AM 5/3/2006, Lee Schipper wrote: > >> If Eric liked that he'd LOVE a presentation by the guru of the Delhi >> Metro. Made up numbers and all! >> >> >>>>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 5/3/2006 6:07:23 AM >>> >>>>> >> Dear Sunny, >> >> >> >> This is a satire, isn't it? The sort of multi-layered complex big fish >> Indian tale that we of the West are not expected to be able ever to >> penetrate. A rich private yarn, is it? >> >> >> >> If so, it's a real good one. I especially liked the name choice for >> the >> "34-year-old scion", Yohan Poonawalla, of Pune nonetheless. And you >> know >> the stuff about Mumbai, cows and "people", well that is very refined. >> As >> indeed is all the rest. >> >> >> >> Keep it coming Guardian. Har har har. >> > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > John Ernst - Director, Asia Region > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy > Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide > Visit http://www.itdp.org > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > ================================================================ > 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 edelman at greenidea.info Thu May 4 02:00:36 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 19:00:36 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuum on Climate Change In-Reply-To: <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> References: <7.0.0.16.0.20060503070847.01b9cf08@adelphia.net> <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1184.62.245.95.24.1146675636.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Hey! Check this out! My only (predictable) comment: Just imagine if Seattle actually did retire 148,000 cars a year and all the positive effects that would have besides just less carbon emissions: + More space for no parking + More quiet places to sit next to un-cars + Better visibility of ground because of no cars + Save concrete for other things + Active people instantly created + PT moves easier ... and so on. Eco-Economy Update 2006-3 For Immediate Release May 3, 2006 U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuum on Climate Change http://www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2006/Update53.htm Janet Larsen Recognizing that global warming may fast be approaching the point of no return and that the world cannot wait for the U.S. government to act, hundreds of U.S. city mayors have pledged to cut emissions of greenhouse gases. By signing the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, these mayors�representing some 44 million Americans�have committed their cities to meet or beat the U.S. emissions reduction target in the Kyoto Protocol, despite the federal government�s refusal to ratify that treaty. This grassroots political revolution, spearheaded by Greg Nickels, Mayor of Seattle, Washington, and endorsed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, responds to the mounting concerns of the American people. It calls for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. As Burlington, Vermont, Mayor Peter Clavelle noted: �We can't wait for this vacuum of leadership to fill.� Since February 16, 2005, the date the Kyoto Protocol came into effect for the 141 countries that ratified it, 227 U.S. cities have joined the mayors� agreement, including New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago, the three largest cities. The Northeast, the Great Lakes Region, and the West Coast are particularly well represented, and the list keeps growing. (See map and additional data at www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2006/Update53_data.htm.) The group includes both communities with an eye on global problems and those concerned about climate-related impacts closer to home. For example, a dozen coastal Florida cities that risk destruction from storms and rising seas have signed on. Mayor Ray Nagin noted a similar concern when adding New Orleans to the agreement, stating that �the rise of the Earth's temperature, causing sea level increases that could add up to one foot [30.5 centimeters] over the next 30 years, threatens the very existence of New Orleans��and this was before Hurricane Katrina. The cities� action plans vary in both content and completeness, but the common refrains include increasing automobile efficiency, improving public transportation systems, curbing sprawl, and encouraging walking and cycling. The plans emphasize using and generating electricity more efficiently, with renewable energy sources playing a prominent role. Seattle�s pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions translates into an annual cut of 683,000 tons, the equivalent of retiring some 148,000 cars each year. In March 2006, the Mayor�s Green Ribbon Commission made numerous recommendations on how to achieve this goal. The local role model is the municipal government, which has already slashed carbon emissions from city operations to more than 60 percent below 1990 levels. This was achieved in part by switching a share of the government fleet to hybrid-electric vehicles. By cutting fleet fuel use by 7 percent between 1999 and 2005, the city saved at least $300,000 a year. Seattle City Light became the nation�s first major electric utility to achieve zero net greenhouse gas emissions in 2005 through a combination of energy conservation, renewable energy (principally hydropower), and offsets for the remaining emissions. To capitalize on this success, the Green Ribbon Commission recommends improving energy efficiency in buildings and requiring new housing to be energy-efficient. For Seattle as a whole, the city�s 400,000 registered vehicles are the number one local producer of greenhouse gases. The commission suggests a number of ways to reduce automobile dependence: Broaden the availability of �frequent, reliable, and convenient public transportation,� which could be funded in part by new regional toll roads and a new commercial parking tax. Encourage car sharing. Add bike lanes and trails, improve sidewalks and crossings, and develop �compact, green, urban neighborhoods� built for people, not cars. With the average Seattleite spending more than one work week sitting in traffic each year, such measures have the benefit of greatly enhancing residents� quality of life. To reduce carbon emissions from vehicles still on the road, the commission supports tailpipe limits on car pollution (as now required under the California �clean car standards� adopted by Washington State in 2005) and greater use of biofuels. Cutting emissions from diesel trucks, trains, and ships also improves local air quality, leading to fewer cases of asthma and respiratory disease. Suggestions to move beyond the Kyoto goals include using rooftop solar energy systems and heat pump water heaters. Other innovations that make the Seattle commission�s list are pay-as-you-drive insurance to discourage unnecessary driving, and plug-in hybrid-electric vehicles that for short trips can run on electricity, preferably produced by renewable sources�virtually an 80+ mile-per-gallon car. Of the other cities signed on to the Mayors Agreement, Portland, Oregon, has one of the most advanced plans for change. In 1993 Portland became the first U.S. city to develop a global warming action plan. Now, together with the rest of Multnomah County, Portland aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions to 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2010. Had Multnomah County continued with business as usual, today it would be emitting more than 12 million tons of carbon dioxide; because of its deliberate action to reduce greenhouse gases, however, the latest tally shows emissions have fallen to 9.7 million tons�just 1 percent above 1990 levels. Portland has managed to increase public transit use by 75 percent since 1990. This was aided in part by the addition of new major light rail lines and the 2001 reinstatement of a central city streetcar, a throwback to the old trolley system that had been supplanted by polluting diesel buses and personal automobiles. City workers receive monthly bus passes or free car pool parking, and businesses that subsidize employee parking are encouraged to subsidize public transit commutes as well. Portland also has 267 miles (430 kilometers) of bikeways, which it hopes to double within 10 years. In 2002, Multnomah County established energy efficiency standards for �lighting, heating and cooling, appliances, and personal computers.� Throughout Portland, traffic signals have been converted to LED (light-emitting diode) bulbs that cut energy use by a whopping 80 percent, saving the city more than $500,000 each year in energy and maintenance costs. And the city is investigating the possibility of powering all its facilities completely with wind energy. Elsewhere, city and county office buildings in Salt Lake City, Utah, have removed inefficient incandescent light bulbs in favor of compact fluorescents that use a third of the energy and last up to 10 times longer. In chilly St. Paul, Minnesota, an efficient combined heat and power system warms most downtown buildings. In Washington, DC, 414 diesel buses have been replaced with ones that burn cleaner compressed natural gas. And Austin, Texas, is quickly turning to wind and solar power to reach its goal of meeting 20 percent of its energy needs from renewable sources and 15 percent through energy efficiency improvements by 2020. Response to the Washington climate action void is not limited to cities. States and businesses also are taking part. The challenge now is to multiply these initiatives and take them farther. With the U.S. making up 5 percent of the global population but responsible for a quarter of the world�s greenhouse gas emissions, there is no substitute for leadership from the top. # # # Additional data and information sources at www.earthpolicy.org or contact jlarsen (at) earthpolicy.org For reprint permission contact rjkauffman (at) earthpolicy.org ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From ericbruun at earthlink.net Thu May 4 02:57:12 2006 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 13:57:12 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: [ On vs off street parking or simply reducing on streetparking Message-ID: <16949036.1146679032736.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Todd E I don't understand your point. ON the one hand you are saying there are many options, on the other hand you complain that people submit options to the list. What are you looking for, a majic solutoin complete with perfect accouting system? Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: Todd Edelman >Sent: May 1, 2006 11:44 AM >To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >Subject: [sustran] Re: On vs off street parking or simply reducing on streetparking > >Hi, >> Todd, Eric, and Eric, >> >> If we assume a fixed number of parking spaces and we assume that those >> parking spaces are charged at the full market rate and pricing is >> optimized, >> and the only two options for the use of the roadway is a)parking and >> b)facilities for non-motorized travel > >???? Why does "only two options" come into this? Even in the real world of >politics, people with limited imaginations and inability to divorce their >cars there are more than two options, and... I just think someone is >playing a joke on us. We are in cul-de-sac of ideas, which is full of cars >because we agreed that cars could go off street but then people got more >cars.. and guess where they have to be parked? Can we at least not talk >about this anymore, unless someone pulls a spreadsheet out of their ear >and tell us what is more sustainable? > >Todd, no, not that Todd, this Todd >------------------------------------------------------ > >Todd Edelman >International Coordinator >On the Train Towards the Future! > >Green Idea Factory >Laubova 5 >CZ-13000 Praha 3 > >++420 605 915 970 > >edelman@greenidea.info >http://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. From intlbike at ibike.org Thu May 4 02:49:49 2006 From: intlbike at ibike.org (David Mozer) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 10:49:49 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Bicycle advocacy on Taiwan? In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20060503070847.01b9cf08@adelphia.net> Message-ID: <003401c66ed9$fb0b05c0$0400a8c0@domain.actdsltmp> I would be interested in contact information for people or organizations doing bicycle advocacy on Taiwan. Thank you, David Mozer International Bicycle Fund - www.ibike.org Promoting sustainable transport and understanding worldwide. A non-profit organization. Donations are welcome. From edelman at greenidea.info Thu May 4 03:22:20 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 20:22:20 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Off again, on again park...ing In-Reply-To: <16949036.1146679032736.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.n et> References: <16949036.1146679032736.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <1379.62.245.95.24.1146680540.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Eric Bruun wrote: ... What > are you looking for, > a majic solutoin complete with perfect accouting system? YES, everyone loves magic and good accounting. My point is that if you build streets, etc to let in cars to on-street OR off-street parking it just enables more or continuing automobilism. An "optically carfree" project with hidden parking still has cars which move to other places where the parking is not so "progressive" and of course there is the in-between as well. So enabling a car in one spot makes the car "happen" in many other spots, causing danger, wasting space, polluting. Reduce your parking spaces, yes... but make it the first step in a... ten year plan to eliminate the spaces and the in-between spaces (wider roads than necessary, etc) will not be necessary. Dont lie about it,just figure out a way that people will accept it. T >>Todd, no, not that Todd, this Todd >>------------------------------------------------------ >>Todd Edelman >>International Coordinator >>On the Train Towards the Future! >>Green Idea Factory >>Laubova 5 >>CZ-13000 Praha 3 >>++420 605 915 970 >>edelman@greenidea.info >>http://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. > > > > ================================================================ 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. > ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From ericbruun at earthlink.net Thu May 4 03:37:19 2006 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 14:37:19 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuum on Climate Change Message-ID: <13290452.1146681439562.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Todd E As a Seattle native and one who has been following developments there closely, allow me to express my skepticism. Seattle is a faux green city. Lots of talk. little action. The car remains king with few places that bus transit gets preferential treatment. Bus headways are also longer than average for a city of its size and density due to excessive use of articulated buses in a misguided attempt to save money. The corridor that actually needed rail transit the most - University District to Downtown -- is still many years from completion. Politicians insisted on an extremely expensive, deep, and long tunnel instead of street running because they didn't want to take any lanes from cars. I note that there have been numerous struggles for years to improve transit there, with anti-tax groups, futurists who claim rail transit is obsolete, and the state's own gag laws against public officials in the runup to elections all helping torpedo almost every important proposal. The futurists and anti-tax people said to improve buses instead, but this was probably insincere. They knew that bus lanes were very unlikely given the car-is-king attitude of most politicians. Support for transit from these "environmentalist" politicians in the face of these groups has been lukewarm, but efforts by the same politicians to reopen the one pedestrian area in downtown to cars and to build two expensive stadiums has been strong. The transit investment package that would actually have made a dent in the transportation problems of the three county region and that the public ultimately voted on in 1995 won in King County where Seattle is located. It lost by small margins in the counties to the north and south, so the politicians decided to not build any of it. Meanwhile most politicians didn't want people to vote on the stadiums. One of them got forced on to the ballot and it got voted down. It was built anyway. Meanwhile the City and State claim poverty when it comes to keeping school buildings in good repair. (The truncated project approved in 1996 is nothing but a minor start on a huge, utterly unsustainable transportation mess involving horrendous automobile traffic, huge volumes of trucks, and a congested freight railroad network due to the huge container port. It is also taking a pathetic 13 years to be completed.) One more thing. Paul Allen, the third richest person in the world got his new football stadium at public expense. He could have built it with pocket change. He bought a personal yacht for $200 Million! Can it be coincidence that most polticians are actually enthusiastic about one particular transit project? It is a streetcar that will connect downtown with Paul Allen's new real estate developments. The only green that most politicians in Washington State are concerned about is the paper that is died green. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: Todd Edelman >Sent: May 3, 2006 1:00 PM >To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport >Subject: [sustran] U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuum on Climate Change > >Hey! Check this out! > >My only (predictable) comment: Just imagine if Seattle actually did retire >148,000 cars a year and all the positive effects that would have besides >just less carbon emissions: >+ More space for no parking >+ More quiet places to sit next to un-cars >+ Better visibility of ground because of no cars >+ Save concrete for other things >+ Active people instantly created >+ PT moves easier >... and so on. > > >Eco-Economy Update 2006-3 >For Immediate Release >May 3, 2006 > > >U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuum on Climate Change > >http://www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2006/Update53.htm > > >Janet Larsen > > >Recognizing that global warming may fast be approaching the point of no >return and that the world cannot wait for the U.S. government to act, >hundreds of U.S. city mayors have pledged to cut emissions of greenhouse >gases. By signing the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, these >mayors�representing some 44 million Americans�have committed >their cities >to meet or beat the U.S. emissions reduction target in the Kyoto Protocol, >despite the federal government�s refusal to ratify that treaty. > >This grassroots political revolution, spearheaded by Greg Nickels, Mayor >of Seattle, Washington, and endorsed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, >responds to the mounting concerns of the American people. It calls for >reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. >As Burlington, Vermont, Mayor Peter Clavelle noted: �We can't wait for >this vacuum of leadership to fill.� > >Since February 16, 2005, the date the Kyoto Protocol came into effect for >the 141 countries that ratified it, 227 U.S. cities have joined the >mayors� agreement, including New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago, >the three >largest cities. The Northeast, the Great Lakes Region, and the West Coast >are particularly well represented, and the list keeps growing. (See map >and additional data at >www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2006/Update53_data.htm.) > >The group includes both communities with an eye on global problems and >those concerned about climate-related impacts closer to home. For example, >a dozen coastal Florida cities that risk destruction from storms and >rising seas have signed on. Mayor Ray Nagin noted a similar concern when >adding New Orleans to the agreement, stating that �the rise of the >Earth's >temperature, causing sea level increases that could add up to one foot >[30.5 centimeters] over the next 30 years, threatens the very existence of >New Orleans��and this was before Hurricane Katrina. > >The cities� action plans vary in both content and completeness, but >the >common refrains include increasing automobile efficiency, improving public >transportation systems, curbing sprawl, and encouraging walking and >cycling. The plans emphasize using and generating electricity more >efficiently, with renewable energy sources playing a prominent role. > >Seattle�s pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions translates into an >annual cut of 683,000 tons, the equivalent of retiring some 148,000 cars >each year. In March 2006, the Mayor�s Green Ribbon Commission made >numerous recommendations on how to achieve this goal. The local role model >is the municipal government, which has already slashed carbon emissions >from city operations to more than 60 percent below 1990 levels. This was >achieved in part by switching a share of the government fleet to >hybrid-electric vehicles. By cutting fleet fuel use by 7 percent between >1999 and 2005, the city saved at least $300,000 a year. > >Seattle City Light became the nation�s first major electric utility to >achieve zero net greenhouse gas emissions in 2005 through a combination of >energy conservation, renewable energy (principally hydropower), and >offsets for the remaining emissions. To capitalize on this success, the >Green Ribbon Commission recommends improving energy efficiency in >buildings and requiring new housing to be energy-efficient. > >For Seattle as a whole, the city�s 400,000 registered vehicles are the >number one local producer of greenhouse gases. The commission suggests a >number of ways to reduce automobile dependence: Broaden the availability >of �frequent, reliable, and convenient public >transportation,� which could >be funded in part by new regional toll roads and a new commercial parking >tax. Encourage car sharing. Add bike lanes and trails, improve sidewalks >and crossings, and develop �compact, green, urban >neighborhoods� built for >people, not cars. With the average Seattleite spending more than one work >week sitting in traffic each year, such measures have the benefit of >greatly enhancing residents� quality of life. > >To reduce carbon emissions from vehicles still on the road, the commission >supports tailpipe limits on car pollution (as now required under the >California �clean car standards� adopted by Washington State >in 2005) and >greater use of biofuels. Cutting emissions from diesel trucks, trains, and >ships also improves local air quality, leading to fewer cases of asthma >and respiratory disease. > >Suggestions to move beyond the Kyoto goals include using rooftop solar >energy systems and heat pump water heaters. Other innovations that make >the Seattle commission�s list are pay-as-you-drive insurance to >discourage >unnecessary driving, and plug-in hybrid-electric vehicles that for short >trips can run on electricity, preferably produced by renewable >sources�virtually an 80+ mile-per-gallon car. > >Of the other cities signed on to the Mayors Agreement, Portland, Oregon, >has one of the most advanced plans for change. In 1993 Portland became the >first U.S. city to develop a global warming action plan. Now, together >with the rest of Multnomah County, Portland aims to cut greenhouse gas >emissions to 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2010. Had Multnomah County >continued with business as usual, today it would be emitting more than 12 >million tons of carbon dioxide; because of its deliberate action to reduce >greenhouse gases, however, the latest tally shows emissions have fallen to >9.7 million tons�just 1 percent above 1990 levels. > >Portland has managed to increase public transit use by 75 percent since >1990. This was aided in part by the addition of new major light rail lines >and the 2001 reinstatement of a central city streetcar, a throwback to the >old trolley system that had been supplanted by polluting diesel buses and >personal automobiles. City workers receive monthly bus passes or free car >pool parking, and businesses that subsidize employee parking are >encouraged to subsidize public transit commutes as well. Portland also has >267 miles (430 kilometers) of bikeways, which it hopes to double within 10 >years. > >In 2002, Multnomah County established energy efficiency standards for >�lighting, heating and cooling, appliances, and personal >computers.� >Throughout Portland, traffic signals have been converted to LED >(light-emitting diode) bulbs that cut energy use by a whopping 80 percent, >saving the city more than $500,000 each year in energy and maintenance >costs. And the city is investigating the possibility of powering all its >facilities completely with wind energy. > >Elsewhere, city and county office buildings in Salt Lake City, Utah, have >removed inefficient incandescent light bulbs in favor of compact >fluorescents that use a third of the energy and last up to 10 times >longer. In chilly St. Paul, Minnesota, an efficient combined heat and >power system warms most downtown buildings. In Washington, DC, 414 diesel >buses have been replaced with ones that burn cleaner compressed natural >gas. And Austin, Texas, is quickly turning to wind and solar power to >reach its goal of meeting 20 percent of its energy needs from renewable >sources and 15 percent through energy efficiency improvements by 2020. > >Response to the Washington climate action void is not limited to cities. >States and businesses also are taking part. The challenge now is to >multiply these initiatives and take them farther. With the U.S. making up >5 percent of the global population but responsible for a quarter of the >world�s greenhouse gas emissions, there is no substitute for >leadership >from the top. > > ># # # > >Additional data and information sources at www.earthpolicy.org or contact >jlarsen (at) earthpolicy.org > >For reprint permission contact rjkauffman (at) earthpolicy.org > > >------------------------------------------------------ > >Todd Edelman >International Coordinator >On the Train Towards the Future! > >Green Idea Factory >Laubova 5 >CZ-13000 Praha 3 > >++420 605 915 970 > >edelman@greenidea.info >http://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. From edelman at greenidea.info Thu May 4 04:56:10 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 21:56:10 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuum on Climate Change In-Reply-To: <13290452.1146681439562.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.n et> References: <13290452.1146681439562.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <1607.62.245.95.24.1146686170.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Eric Bruun wrote: > > As a Seattle native and one who has been following developments there > closely, allow me to express > my skepticism... > Wow, thanks for the insider story! I am going to forward what you said to that Earth whatever organisation, they need to not believe the hype (sometimes)! --- My secondary point was indeed that the source of whatever carbon emissions you are removing is also very, very important AND the positive knock-on effects of removing all those cars - or other things - can be quite significant, or not such a big deal. And 168,000 (or whatever) "carbon-free cars" present many of the same problems as 168,000 normal ones. It would be interesting to see a compare-and-contrast on this--two similar cities which took two entirely different strategies to reduce carbon emissions, and WHAT ELSE happened differently in these places... T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From SCHIPPER at wri.org Thu May 4 05:05:51 2006 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 16:05:51 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuumon Climate Change Message-ID: Well put, Eric. And not to mention the monorail boondoggle in Seattle. >>> Eric Bruun 5/3/2006 2:37:19 PM >>> Todd E As a Seattle native and one who has been following developments there closely, allow me to express my skepticism. Seattle is a faux green city. Lots of talk. little action. The car remains king with few places that bus transit gets preferential treatment. Bus headways are also longer than average for a city of its size and density due to excessive use of articulated buses in a misguided attempt to save money. The corridor that actually needed rail transit the most - University District to Downtown -- is still many years from completion. Politicians insisted on an extremely expensive, deep, and long tunnel instead of street running because they didn't want to take any lanes from cars. I note that there have been numerous struggles for years to improve transit there, with anti-tax groups, futurists who claim rail transit is obsolete, and the state's own gag laws against public officials in the runup to elections all helping torpedo almost every important proposal. The futurists and anti-tax people said to improve buses instead, but this was probably insincere. They knew that bus lanes were very unlikely given the car-is-king attitude of most politicians. Support for transit from these "environmentalist" politicians in the face of these groups has been lukewarm, but efforts by the same politicians to reopen the one pedestrian area in downtown to cars and to build two expensive stadiums has been strong. The transit investment package that would actually have made a dent in the transportation problems of the three county region and that the public ultimately voted on in 1995 won in King County where Seattle is located. It lost by small margins in the counties to the north and south, so the politicians decided to not build any of it. Meanwhile most politicians didn't want people to vote on the stadiums. One of them got forced on to the ballot and it got voted down. It was built anyway. Meanwhile the City and State claim poverty when it comes to keeping school buildings in good repair. (The truncated project approved in 1996 is nothing but a minor start on a huge, utterly unsustainable transportation mess involving horrendous automobile traffic, huge volumes of trucks, and a congested freight railroad network due to the huge container port. It is also taking a pathetic 13 years to be completed.) One more thing. Paul Allen, the third richest person in the world got his new football stadium at public expense. He could have built it with pocket change. He bought a personal yacht for $200 Million! Can it be coincidence that most polticians are actually enthusiastic about one particular transit project? It is a streetcar that will connect downtown with Paul Allen's new real estate developments. The only green that most politicians in Washington State are concerned about is the paper that is died green. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: Todd Edelman >Sent: May 3, 2006 1:00 PM >To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport >Subject: [sustran] U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuum on Climate Change > >Hey! Check this out! > >My only (predictable) comment: Just imagine if Seattle actually did retire >148,000 cars a year and all the positive effects that would have besides >just less carbon emissions: >+ More space for no parking >+ More quiet places to sit next to un-cars >+ Better visibility of ground because of no cars >+ Save concrete for other things >+ Active people instantly created >+ PT moves easier >... and so on. > > >Eco-Economy Update 2006-3 >For Immediate Release >May 3, 2006 > > >U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuum on Climate Change > >http://www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2006/Update53.htm > > >Janet Larsen > > >Recognizing that global warming may fast be approaching the point of no >return and that the world cannot wait for the U.S. government to act, >hundreds of U.S. city mayors have pledged to cut emissions of greenhouse >gases. By signing the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, these >mayors�representing some 44 million Americans�have committed >their cities >to meet or beat the U.S. emissions reduction target in the Kyoto Protocol, >despite the federal government�s refusal to ratify that treaty. > >This grassroots political revolution, spearheaded by Greg Nickels, Mayor >of Seattle, Washington, and endorsed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, >responds to the mounting concerns of the American people. It calls for >reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. >As Burlington, Vermont, Mayor Peter Clavelle noted: �We can't wait for >this vacuum of leadership to fill.� > >Since February 16, 2005, the date the Kyoto Protocol came into effect for >the 141 countries that ratified it, 227 U.S. cities have joined the >mayors� agreement, including New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago, >the three >largest cities. The Northeast, the Great Lakes Region, and the West Coast >are particularly well represented, and the list keeps growing. (See map >and additional data at >www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2006/Update53_data.htm.) > >The group includes both communities with an eye on global problems and >those concerned about climate-related impacts closer to home. For example, >a dozen coastal Florida cities that risk destruction from storms and >rising seas have signed on. Mayor Ray Nagin noted a similar concern when >adding New Orleans to the agreement, stating that �the rise of the >Earth's >temperature, causing sea level increases that could add up to one foot >[30.5 centimeters] over the next 30 years, threatens the very existence of >New Orleans��and this was before Hurricane Katrina. > >The cities� action plans vary in both content and completeness, but >the >common refrains include increasing automobile efficiency, improving public >transportation systems, curbing sprawl, and encouraging walking and >cycling. The plans emphasize using and generating electricity more >efficiently, with renewable energy sources playing a prominent role. > >Seattle�s pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions translates into an >annual cut of 683,000 tons, the equivalent of retiring some 148,000 cars >each year. In March 2006, the Mayor�s Green Ribbon Commission made >numerous recommendations on how to achieve this goal. The local role model >is the municipal government, which has already slashed carbon emissions >from city operations to more than 60 percent below 1990 levels. This was >achieved in part by switching a share of the government fleet to >hybrid-electric vehicles. By cutting fleet fuel use by 7 percent between >1999 and 2005, the city saved at least $300,000 a year. > >Seattle City Light became the nation�s first major electric utility to >achieve zero net greenhouse gas emissions in 2005 through a combination of >energy conservation, renewable energy (principally hydropower), and >offsets for the remaining emissions. To capitalize on this success, the >Green Ribbon Commission recommends improving energy efficiency in >buildings and requiring new housing to be energy-efficient. > >For Seattle as a whole, the city�s 400,000 registered vehicles are the >number one local producer of greenhouse gases. The commission suggests a >number of ways to reduce automobile dependence: Broaden the availability >of �frequent, reliable, and convenient public >transportation,� which could >be funded in part by new regional toll roads and a new commercial parking >tax. Encourage car sharing. Add bike lanes and trails, improve sidewalks >and crossings, and develop �compact, green, urban >neighborhoods� built for >people, not cars. With the average Seattleite spending more than one work >week sitting in traffic each year, such measures have the benefit of >greatly enhancing residents� quality of life. > >To reduce carbon emissions from vehicles still on the road, the commission >supports tailpipe limits on car pollution (as now required under the >California �clean car standards� adopted by Washington State >in 2005) and >greater use of biofuels. Cutting emissions from diesel trucks, trains, and >ships also improves local air quality, leading to fewer cases of asthma >and respiratory disease. > >Suggestions to move beyond the Kyoto goals include using rooftop solar >energy systems and heat pump water heaters. Other innovations that make >the Seattle commission�s list are pay-as-you-drive insurance to >discourage >unnecessary driving, and plug-in hybrid-electric vehicles that for short >trips can run on electricity, preferably produced by renewable >sources�virtually an 80+ mile-per-gallon car. > >Of the other cities signed on to the Mayors Agreement, Portland, Oregon, >has one of the most advanced plans for change. In 1993 Portland became the >first U.S. city to develop a global warming action plan. Now, together >with the rest of Multnomah County, Portland aims to cut greenhouse gas >emissions to 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2010. Had Multnomah County >continued with business as usual, today it would be emitting more than 12 >million tons of carbon dioxide; because of its deliberate action to reduce >greenhouse gases, however, the latest tally shows emissions have fallen to >9.7 million tons�just 1 percent above 1990 levels. > >Portland has managed to increase public transit use by 75 percent since >1990. This was aided in part by the addition of new major light rail lines >and the 2001 reinstatement of a central city streetcar, a throwback to the >old trolley system that had been supplanted by polluting diesel buses and >personal automobiles. City workers receive monthly bus passes or free car >pool parking, and businesses that subsidize employee parking are >encouraged to subsidize public transit commutes as well. Portland also has >267 miles (430 kilometers) of bikeways, which it hopes to double within 10 >years. > >In 2002, Multnomah County established energy efficiency standards for >�lighting, heating and cooling, appliances, and personal >computers.� >Throughout Portland, traffic signals have been converted to LED >(light-emitting diode) bulbs that cut energy use by a whopping 80 percent, >saving the city more than $500,000 each year in energy and maintenance >costs. And the city is investigating the possibility of powering all its >facilities completely with wind energy. > >Elsewhere, city and county office buildings in Salt Lake City, Utah, have >removed inefficient incandescent light bulbs in favor of compact >fluorescents that use a third of the energy and last up to 10 times >longer. In chilly St. Paul, Minnesota, an efficient combined heat and >power system warms most downtown buildings. In Washington, DC, 414 diesel >buses have been replaced with ones that burn cleaner compressed natural >gas. And Austin, Texas, is quickly turning to wind and solar power to >reach its goal of meeting 20 percent of its energy needs from renewable >sources and 15 percent through energy efficiency improvements by 2020. > >Response to the Washington climate action void is not limited to cities. >States and businesses also are taking part. The challenge now is to >multiply these initiatives and take them farther. With the U.S. making up >5 percent of the global population but responsible for a quarter of the >world�s greenhouse gas emissions, there is no substitute for >leadership >from the top. > > ># # # > >Additional data and information sources at www.earthpolicy.org or contact >jlarsen (at) earthpolicy.org > >For reprint permission contact rjkauffman (at) earthpolicy.org > > >------------------------------------------------------ > >Todd Edelman >International Coordinator >On the Train Towards the Future! > >Green Idea Factory >Laubova 5 >CZ-13000 Praha 3 > >++420 605 915 970 > >edelman@greenidea.info >http://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. ================================================================ 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 Alan.Howes at cbuchanan.co.uk Thu May 4 05:42:03 2006 From: Alan.Howes at cbuchanan.co.uk (Alan Howes) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 21:42:03 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" References: <7.0.0.16.0.20060503070847.01b9cf08@adelphia.net> <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> Message-ID: <324DCD7680954F468CF306EE5404F00102136EAC@mail01.cbuchanan.co.uk> The problem is balance - or lack of it. India almost certainly does need new transport infrastructure, but investment in road needs to be balanced with investment in rail (though there is of course the new Konakan railway that I know of). And the existing system needs to be properly managed. There seems to be a decided disjoint between building these new roads and the new National Urban Transport Policy (on which there seems to have been surprisingly little comment on this list - not a single follow-up to my comments). NUTP seems quite clear about the need for sustainability, whereas the policy described in the Guardian article pays no regard at all to sustainability. Regards, Alan -- Alan Howes Associate Transport Planner Colin Buchanan 4 St Colme Street, Edinburgh, EH3 6AA Tel: +44 131 226 4693 Mobile: +44 7952 464335 email: alan.howes@cbuchanan.co.uk www: http:/www.cbuchanan.co.uk/ ________________________________ From: sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk@list.jca.apc.org on behalf of Sunny Sent: Wed 03/05/2006 15:04 To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" Dear John, In my opinion if the problem is shipment then it can be fulfilled with out building new road and by efficiently using the existing railway network or by adding new goods/cargo trains, this can even generate income and jobs thereby benefiting the jobless both at the source and the destination, expanding our highways and bringing more larger and multi-speed gear boxes will only be a burden as they have to be imported and their number will be very small for an investment like increasing the overall highway structure for which the large truck users might not legally contribute anything. On comparison to Bangkok I have recently been on road to Chiang Rai, the north of Thailand and to my surprise I have not seen even one toll post charging the cars which I am familiar with in India and my friend was driving never less than 100 kmph. Using the railway as I said earlier will reduce the unemployment and also the travel time as there will be a pressure for quality on the railways, better roads might be a good answer but roads built solely for freight will not be a good answer, if anyone is familiar with HIV in India it can be found that the HIV cases are more among the lorry drivers. I would be thankful if anyone can throw more light on this issue, I think Eric would be the one as I have seen him as a moderator on GATNET. Sunny John Ernst wrote: > On the serious side -- and, sorry to say, the article was not on the > satire page, Eric -- the problems with India building expressways > that induce further private motor vehicle use over longer commuting > distances are, I think, clear to all. > > But here's an anecdote to consider in regards to these highways and > freight shipment: > > Last year, on a flight from Delhi to Bangkok, I sat next to an > American man who was setting up greenhouses in India to grow massive > quantities of vegetables for large discount stores that were coming > in (the "big box" stores, e.g., Walmart, Lotus, Carrefour). His > biggest problem was the trucking. To make his plan work, he needed to > reduce the shipping cost and time. This meant changing from India's > existing trucks to big semi-trucks with multi-speed gearboxes, > trained drivers to operate them,... and better roads to accommodate > them. He said the roads were coming. > > I'm not prepared to comment on the global economic considerations > here, but I think it provides an interesting window into the kind of > political pressures behind these expressways. It's not just the > Yohan Poonawallas in their Rolls Royces. > > Best, > John > > At 04:21 AM 5/3/2006, Lee Schipper wrote: > >> If Eric liked that he'd LOVE a presentation by the guru of the Delhi >> Metro. Made up numbers and all! >> >> >>>>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 5/3/2006 6:07:23 AM >>> >>>>> >> Dear Sunny, >> >> >> >> This is a satire, isn't it? The sort of multi-layered complex big fish >> Indian tale that we of the West are not expected to be able ever to >> penetrate. A rich private yarn, is it? >> >> >> >> If so, it's a real good one. I especially liked the name choice for >> the >> "34-year-old scion", Yohan Poonawalla, of Pune nonetheless. And you >> know >> the stuff about Mumbai, cows and "people", well that is very refined. >> As >> indeed is all the rest. >> >> >> >> Keep it coming Guardian. Har har har. >> > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > John Ernst - Director, Asia Region > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy > Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide > Visit http://www.itdp.org > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > ================================================================ > 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. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ DISCLAIMER This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. Unless you are the named addressee, or authorised to receive it for the addressee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender by replying to this email. Any views expressed by an individual within this email which do not constitute or record professional advice relating to the business of Colin Buchanan, do not necessarily reflect the views of the company. Any professional advice or opinion contained within this email is subject to our terms and conditions of business. We have taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses. We do not accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 10152 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060503/50704560/attachment.bin From zvi at inro.ca Thu May 4 06:05:42 2006 From: zvi at inro.ca (Zvi Leve) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 17:05:42 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: U.S. Mayors Respond to Washington Leadership Vacuum on Climate Change In-Reply-To: <13290452.1146681439562.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <13290452.1146681439562.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <44591B26.6020105@inro.ca> Yes Seattle does have an interesting mix of civic activism and wealthy libertarians, combined with a general appreciation of the "active outdoor lifestyle" so common in the Pacific Northwest. This results in populist transportation decisions being made by public referendums (a ban on tolls in general, limiting transit investment to a fixed percentage of the overall transportation budget - which includes infrastructure projects - ie roads, etc.). The planners are stuck coming up with development scenarios which consider /*less*/ public transit options in the future and the rich fill their Mercedes SUV's with bio-diesel! At least they are discussing these issues though, as opposed to just leaving their heads in the sand.... ZVi Eric Bruun wrote: >Todd E > >As a Seattle native and one who has been following developments there closely, allow me to express >my skepticism. > > > From et3 at et3.com Thu May 4 09:08:05 2006 From: et3 at et3.com (Daryl Oster) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 20:08:05 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" In-Reply-To: <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200605040008.k44088Lt002027@njbrsmtp1.vzwmail.net> Sunny, Railroads were designed (optimized) to haul massive loads between two locations. Their efficiency goes down considerably when they are called upon to service a high number of access points(nodes). It is well documented in network theory that the usefulness of a network is proportional to the number of nodes squared. The cost of servicing a transportation access point (node) with rail is more than ten times the cost of servicing it with a road; therefore the cost of accessibility of roads is more than a hundred times better than the cost of accessibility of rail. Of course, the proof of this is ancient history in the US and most of Europe; trains had a 95% share of the value of cargo transport in 1910 in the US, and now they have less than a 20% share, and even airplanes carry more cargo value than trains do. The very high node access cost of train access (both money and time) is the main reason. There are many well intended do-gooders who mistakenly promote rail as having accessibility advantages over cars/roads - this view is proven false upon technical analysis AND in the vast majority of the many markets where it has been tested. The false view that trains offer better accessibility is carefully fostered by the rail industry that has a huge vested interest in maintaining the grip on the mammary of government funding. The truth is that cars on roads provide much better access to transportation than trains, and those who seek equity for the poor would be better advised to build roads and provide cars than to provide trains. This is why trains have been displaced to niche markets by the car in developed countries. Passenger trains only survive by firmly latching onto the mammary of government to prevent the birth and nurture of more sustainable transportation technology. This is why most people in developing countries aspire to use motorcycles and or cars. Virtually all societies frown on a toothless grandpa or grandma nursing from their daughters mammary while the new born baby grandchild goes unfed. Why is it that the rail industry is not admonished for doing the same thing?? It is obvious that there are problems associated with the adoption of the car, and that a better form of transportation is needed. Grandpa rail would have us believe that rail is better than cars, and with self serving lies railroaders promote government funded train transportation projects, and government funded rail operating subsidies. What IS needed to solve the energy and environmental sustainability limitations of cars is to implement transportation technologies like ETT that offer at least a ten-fold improvement in transportation value. Compared to trains, planes, and automobiles; ETT requires less than 1/50th as much fuel, and creates 1/50th as much pollution per passenger kilometer. The cost of providing ETT accessibility is about 1/4th the cost of providing freeway accessibility; and less than a tenth the cost of providing rail accessibility. For the task that trains were optimized for (moving tons of coal from mine to points of major use) ETT can be implemented and operated for about the same cost, leaving the ONLY advantage of trains to move loads that cannot be reduced to weighing more than the 400kg payload of an optimally sized ETT capsule. Such loads represent less than 5% of cargo transported by rail. Daryl Oster (c) 2006? all rights reserved.? ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc.? For licensing information contact:?POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423? (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com > -----Original Message----- > From: sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of > Sunny > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 10:04 AM > To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" > > Dear John, > > In my opinion if the problem is shipment then it can be fulfilled with > out building new road and by efficiently using the existing railway > network or by adding new goods/cargo trains, this can even generate > income and jobs thereby benefiting the jobless both at the source and > the destination, expanding our highways and bringing more larger and > multi-speed gear boxes will only be a burden as they have to be imported > and their number will be very small for an investment like increasing > the overall highway structure for which the large truck users might not > legally contribute anything. On comparison to Bangkok I have recently > been on road to Chiang Rai, the north of Thailand and to my surprise I > have not seen even one toll post charging the cars which I am familiar > with in India and my friend was driving never less than 100 kmph. > > Using the railway as I said earlier will reduce the unemployment and > also the travel time as there will be a pressure for quality on the > railways, better roads might be a good answer but roads built solely for > freight will not be a good answer, if anyone is familiar with HIV in > India it can be found that the HIV cases are more among the lorry > drivers. I would be thankful if anyone can throw more light on this > issue, I think Eric would be the one as I have seen him as a moderator > on GATNET. > > Sunny > > John Ernst wrote: > > On the serious side -- and, sorry to say, the article was not on the > > satire page, Eric -- the problems with India building expressways > > that induce further private motor vehicle use over longer commuting > > distances are, I think, clear to all. > > > > But here's an anecdote to consider in regards to these highways and > > freight shipment: > > > > Last year, on a flight from Delhi to Bangkok, I sat next to an > > American man who was setting up greenhouses in India to grow massive > > quantities of vegetables for large discount stores that were coming > > in (the "big box" stores, e.g., Walmart, Lotus, Carrefour). His > > biggest problem was the trucking. To make his plan work, he needed to > > reduce the shipping cost and time. This meant changing from India's > > existing trucks to big semi-trucks with multi-speed gearboxes, > > trained drivers to operate them,... and better roads to accommodate > > them. He said the roads were coming. > > > > I'm not prepared to comment on the global economic considerations > > here, but I think it provides an interesting window into the kind of > > political pressures behind these expressways. It's not just the > > Yohan Poonawallas in their Rolls Royces. > > > > Best, > > John > > > > At 04:21 AM 5/3/2006, Lee Schipper wrote: > > > >> If Eric liked that he'd LOVE a presentation by the guru of the Delhi > >> Metro. Made up numbers and all! > >> > >> > >>>>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 5/3/2006 6:07:23 AM >>> > >>>>> > >> Dear Sunny, > >> > >> > >> > >> This is a satire, isn't it? The sort of multi-layered complex big fish > >> Indian tale that we of the West are not expected to be able ever to > >> penetrate. A rich private yarn, is it? > >> > >> > >> > >> If so, it's a real good one. I especially liked the name choice for > >> the > >> "34-year-old scion", Yohan Poonawalla, of Pune nonetheless. And you > >> know > >> the stuff about Mumbai, cows and "people", well that is very refined. > >> As > >> indeed is all the rest. > >> > >> > >> > >> Keep it coming Guardian. Har har har. > >> > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > John Ernst - Director, Asia Region > > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy > > Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation > worldwide > > Visit http://www.itdp.org > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > > > > > ================================================================ > > 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 litman at vtpi.org Thu May 4 09:59:02 2006 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 17:59:02 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" In-Reply-To: <200605040008.k44088Lt002027@njbrsmtp1.vzwmail.net> References: <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> <200605040008.k44088Lt002027@njbrsmtp1.vzwmail.net> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060503173436.05631790@mail.islandnet.com> Dear Mr. Oster, I find your comments inappropriate. Nobody has ridiculed you or your ideas and it harms our discourse when you insult others. There is no reason to compare rail and highway investments with a simple mathematical formula - it is an economic problem. People are not randomly distributed over the landscape, we tend to congregate in certain area. On high-density corridors it costs less per passenger-mile in total (taking into account vehicles, vehicle operation, rights-of-way, and parking or terminals) to transport by rail than by automobile. Developing country cities have the density, financial limitations and other attributes that make it infeasible for a major portion of the population to rely on automobile transportation. In such conditions rail investments are likely to be more cost effective and equitable than highway investments. I think you are quite wrong to imply that railroads are receiving excessive public subsidy. Here in North America rail bear cost burdens, such as paying rent and taxes on rights-of-way, that automobiles do not, and railroads maintain their own terminals while automobiles rely on subsidized parking at most destinations. Similarly, a typical urban transit user receives less total per capita subsidy (including public expenditures on transit services, roads and parking facilities) than a typical motorist (see http://www.vtpi.org/railcrit.pdf ). I realize that you are an advocate of a new transportation technology (I suggest in future you spell out ETT, most readers have no idea what it means) which you believe is superior to alternatives. That's fine. If it proves to be as good as you say it will find its role in the overall transport network. But please don't think that deriding alternatives is an effective way of promoting your ideas. Simply show us independently-verified proof. -Todd Litman At 05:08 PM 5/3/2006, Daryl Oster wrote: >Railroads were designed (optimized) to haul massive loads between two >locations. Their efficiency goes down considerably when they are called >upon to service a high number of access points(nodes). > >It is well documented in network theory that the usefulness of a network is >proportional to the number of nodes squared. > >The cost of servicing a transportation access point (node) with rail is more >than ten times the cost of servicing it with a road; therefore the cost of >accessibility of roads is more than a hundred times better than the cost of >accessibility of rail. > >Of course, the proof of this is ancient history in the US and most of >Europe; trains had a 95% share of the value of cargo transport in 1910 in >the US, and now they have less than a 20% share, and even airplanes carry >more cargo value than trains do. The very high node access cost of train >access (both money and time) is the main reason. > >There are many well intended do-gooders who mistakenly promote rail as >having accessibility advantages over cars/roads - this view is proven false >upon technical analysis AND in the vast majority of the many markets where >it has been tested. The false view that trains offer better accessibility >is carefully fostered by the rail industry that has a huge vested interest >in maintaining the grip on the mammary of government funding. > >The truth is that cars on roads provide much better access to transportation >than trains, and those who seek equity for the poor would be better advised >to build roads and provide cars than to provide trains. This is why trains >have been displaced to niche markets by the car in developed countries. >Passenger trains only survive by firmly latching onto the mammary of >government to prevent the birth and nurture of more sustainable >transportation technology. This is why most people in developing countries >aspire to use motorcycles and or cars. > >Virtually all societies frown on a toothless grandpa or grandma nursing from >their daughters mammary while the new born baby grandchild goes unfed. Why >is it that the rail industry is not admonished for doing the same thing?? > >It is obvious that there are problems associated with the adoption of the >car, and that a better form of transportation is needed. Grandpa rail would >have us believe that rail is better than cars, and with self serving lies >railroaders promote government funded train transportation projects, and >government funded rail operating subsidies. > >What IS needed to solve the energy and environmental sustainability >limitations of cars is to implement transportation technologies like ETT >that offer at least a ten-fold improvement in transportation value. > >Compared to trains, planes, and automobiles; ETT requires less than 1/50th >as much fuel, and creates 1/50th as much pollution per passenger kilometer. >The cost of providing ETT accessibility is about 1/4th the cost of providing >freeway accessibility; and less than a tenth the cost of providing rail >accessibility. > >For the task that trains were optimized for (moving tons of coal from mine >to points of major use) ETT can be implemented and operated for about the >same cost, leaving the ONLY advantage of trains to move loads that cannot be >reduced to weighing more than the 400kg payload of an optimally sized ETT >capsule. Such loads represent less than 5% of cargo transported by rail. > > >Daryl Oster >(c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" >e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks >of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River >FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org > > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of > > Sunny > > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 10:04 AM > > To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > > Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" > > > > Dear John, > > > > In my opinion if the problem is shipment then it can be fulfilled with > > out building new road and by efficiently using the existing railway > > network or by adding new goods/cargo trains, this can even generate > > income and jobs thereby benefiting the jobless both at the source and > > the destination, expanding our highways and bringing more larger and > > multi-speed gear boxes will only be a burden as they have to be imported > > and their number will be very small for an investment like increasing > > the overall highway structure for which the large truck users might not > > legally contribute anything. On comparison to Bangkok I have recently > > been on road to Chiang Rai, the north of Thailand and to my surprise I > > have not seen even one toll post charging the cars which I am familiar > > with in India and my friend was driving never less than 100 kmph. > > > > Using the railway as I said earlier will reduce the unemployment and > > also the travel time as there will be a pressure for quality on the > > railways, better roads might be a good answer but roads built solely for > > freight will not be a good answer, if anyone is familiar with HIV in > > India it can be found that the HIV cases are more among the lorry > > drivers. I would be thankful if anyone can throw more light on this > > issue, I think Eric would be the one as I have seen him as a moderator > > on GATNET. 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/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060503/19dc0f25/attachment.html From Alan.Howes at cbuchanan.co.uk Thu May 4 17:32:08 2006 From: Alan.Howes at cbuchanan.co.uk (Alan Howes) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 09:32:08 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" Message-ID: <324DCD7680954F468CF306EE5404F001021401DE@mail01.cbuchanan.co.uk> Thanks Todd. I do rather feel that if Daryl spent as much time promoting ETT as he does rubbishing rail that the former would be more advanced by now. Just one or two quick points - US Railfreight is growing rapidly at present (and US railroad stocks are on the up and up). Over long distances (the sort of distance we are talking about in India) rail's modal share of TONS is high - I don't have the figures to hand but I would guess something like 80% or more. And it's the tons that need the infrastructure, not the dollars. Who would even think of trucking coal from Wyoming to the Mississippi (let alone airfreight!)? But US rail is also making inroads in markets such as contracting to UPS, fruit and veg, etc. Not to mention the huge flow of containers from West Coast ports. In the UK at least, many inter-urban passenger rail services are now genuinely profitable - a positive result of the involvement of the private sector in operation (and again numbers are rising rapidly). And that's despite excessive track access charges under the UK's decidedly messy "privatised" rail regime. I claim limited expertise on Indian urban transport, and hardly any on inter-urban and rural. But I suspect that what is needed is a re-invigoration of the rail system, which is government owned and run, heavily subsidised, and I'll bet it takes a LONG time to get a box-car (or the Indian equivalent) from (say) Mumbai to Chennai. But what do Indians have to say on this? Alan -- Alan Howes Associate Transport Planner Colin Buchanan 4 St Colme Street Edinburgh EH3 6AA Scotland email: alan.howes@cbuchanan.co.uk tel: (0)131 226 4693 (switchboard) (0)7952 464335 (mobile) fax: (0)131 220 0232 www: http:/www.cbuchanan.co.uk/ _______________________________ ________________________________ From: sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk@list.jca.apc. org] On Behalf Of Todd Alexander Litman Sent: 04 May 2006 01:59 To: et3@et3.com; Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" Dear Mr. Oster, I find your comments inappropriate. Nobody has ridiculed you or your ideas and it harms our discourse when you insult others. There is no reason to compare rail and highway investments with a simple mathematical formula - it is an economic problem. People are not randomly distributed over the landscape, we tend to congregate in certain area. On high-density corridors it costs less per passenger-mile in total (taking into account vehicles, vehicle operation, rights-of-way, and parking or terminals) to transport by rail than by automobile. Developing country cities have the density, financial limitations and other attributes that make it infeasible for a major portion of the population to rely on automobile transportation. In such conditions rail investments are likely to be more cost effective and equitable than highway investments. I think you are quite wrong to imply that railroads are receiving excessive public subsidy. Here in North America rail bear cost burdens, such as paying rent and taxes on rights-of-way, that automobiles do not, and railroads maintain their own terminals while automobiles rely on subsidized parking at most destinations. Similarly, a typical urban transit user receives less total per capita subsidy (including public expenditures on transit services, roads and parking facilities) than a typical motorist (see http://www.vtpi.org/railcrit.pdf ). I realize that you are an advocate of a new transportation technology (I suggest in future you spell out ETT, most readers have no idea what it means) which you believe is superior to alternatives. That's fine. If it proves to be as good as you say it will find its role in the overall transport network. But please don't think that deriding alternatives is an effective way of promoting your ideas. Simply show us independently-verified proof. -Todd Litman At 05:08 PM 5/3/2006, Daryl Oster wrote: Railroads were designed (optimized) to haul massive loads between two locations. Their efficiency goes down considerably when they are called upon to service a high number of access points(nodes). It is well documented in network theory that the usefulness of a network is proportional to the number of nodes squared. The cost of servicing a transportation access point (node) with rail is more than ten times the cost of servicing it with a road; therefore the cost of accessibility of roads is more than a hundred times better than the cost of accessibility of rail. Of course, the proof of this is ancient history in the US and most of Europe; trains had a 95% share of the value of cargo transport in 1910 in the US, and now they have less than a 20% share, and even airplanes carry more cargo value than trains do. The very high node access cost of train access (both money and time) is the main reason. There are many well intended do-gooders who mistakenly promote rail as having accessibility advantages over cars/roads - this view is proven false upon technical analysis AND in the vast majority of the many markets where it has been tested. The false view that trains offer better accessibility is carefully fostered by the rail industry that has a huge vested interest in maintaining the grip on the mammary of government funding. The truth is that cars on roads provide much better access to transportation than trains, and those who seek equity for the poor would be better advised to build roads and provide cars than to provide trains. This is why trains have been displaced to niche markets by the car in developed countries. Passenger trains only survive by firmly latching onto the mammary of government to prevent the birth and nurture of more sustainable transportation technology. This is why most people in developing countries aspire to use motorcycles and or cars. Virtually all societies frown on a toothless grandpa or grandma nursing from their daughters mammary while the new born baby grandchild goes unfed. Why is it that the rail industry is not admonished for doing the same thing?? It is obvious that there are problems associated with the adoption of the car, and that a better form of transportation is needed. Grandpa rail would have us believe that rail is better than cars, and with self serving lies railroaders promote government funded train transportation projects, and government funded rail operating subsidies. What IS needed to solve the energy and environmental sustainability limitations of cars is to implement transportation technologies like ETT that offer at least a ten-fold improvement in transportation value. Compared to trains, planes, and automobiles; ETT requires less than 1/50th as much fuel, and creates 1/50th as much pollution per passenger kilometer. The cost of providing ETT accessibility is about 1/4th the cost of providing freeway accessibility; and less than a tenth the cost of providing rail accessibility. For the task that trains were optimized for (moving tons of coal from mine to points of major use) ETT can be implemented and operated for about the same cost, leaving the ONLY advantage of trains to move loads that cannot be reduced to weighing more than the 400kg payload of an optimally sized ETT capsule. Such loads represent less than 5% of cargo transported by rail. Daryl Oster (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com > -----Original Message----- > From: sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org > [ mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org ] On Behalf Of > Sunny > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 10:04 AM > To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" > > Dear John, > > In my opinion if the problem is shipment then it can be fulfilled with > out building new road and by efficiently using the existing railway > network or by adding new goods/cargo trains, this can even generate > income and jobs thereby benefiting the jobless both at the source and > the destination, expanding our highways and bringing more larger and > multi-speed gear boxes will only be a burden as they have to be imported > and their number will be very small for an investment like increasing > the overall highway structure for which the large truck users might not > legally contribute anything. On comparison to Bangkok I have recently > been on road to Chiang Rai, the north of Thailand and to my surprise I > have not seen even one toll post charging the cars which I am familiar > with in India and my friend was driving never less than 100 kmph. > > Using the railway as I said earlier will reduce the unemployment and > also the travel time as there will be a pressure for quality on the > railways, better roads might be a good answer but roads built solely for > freight will not be a good answer, if anyone is familiar with HIV in > India it can be found that the HIV cases are more among the lorry > drivers. I would be thankful if anyone can throw more light on this > issue, I think Eric would be the one as I have seen him as a moderator > on GATNET. 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 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ DISCLAIMER This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. Unless you are the named addressee, or authorised to receive it for the addressee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender by replying to this email. Any views expressed by an individual within this email which do not constitute or record professional advice relating to the business of Colin Buchanan, do not necessarily reflect the views of the company. Any professional advice or opinion contained within this email is subject to our terms and conditions of business. We have taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses. We do not accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060504/12cb186b/attachment.html From scott at pedalsong.net Thu May 4 17:43:35 2006 From: scott at pedalsong.net (D. Scott TenBrink) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 02:43:35 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060503173436.05631790@mail.islandnet.com> References: <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> <200605040008.k44088Lt002027@njbrsmtp1.vzwmail.net> <6.2.3.4.2.20060503173436.05631790@mail.islandnet.com> Message-ID: <20060504024335.pl84v08r2qwo0k48@www.pedalsong.net> Todd makes good points here regarding rail vs road subsidy. I also agree that a basic network formula does not reflect the distribution patterns of nodes of use and production, the responsive change of nodes and network to one another as well as other forces, or the potential for production and consumption nodes to be one in the same. Yet I do notice a tendency on this list to say that rail will simply replace road as a freight distribution system without considering the difference between the two networks, and the impact of these differences on distribution. Stripping the main point from Oster's argument (and disregarding the somewhat unsettling breast-feeding obsession), he points out that rail has fewer nodes than road and that this results in roads being more effective medium for transport for the produce farmer. I see two reasons that it is better for the farmer: he can ship on his own schedule instead of timing his shipments with the train and making reservations for space, and the road goes right from his farm to the market with no need to transfer goods. Todd makes the point that people are not randomly distributed, but clumped into urban areas. However, farms are quite widely dispersed and supermarkets tend to be (somewhat) evenly distributed across an urban area. Thus, it seems quite obvious why the farmer would choose to support road over rail, and I think that was the point of the original message. Are people arguing that rail can accommodate the farmer better, or that the farmer should not have such a large voice in the decision (or something else completely)? I do agree with Oster that Sunny overlooks the difficulties of switching from road to rail shipping, particularly for payloads that have widespread production/consumption locations. I also found the reference to HIV and lorry drivers to be a bit off. Certainly HIV is a concern that desperately needs to be addressed regardless of profession. Eliminating freight transport by road would be quite a round-about and isolationist way to address it. I don?t think our goal is to limit opportunities for human interaction. I would advocate education and condom distribution over lorry elimination. -Scott TenBrink Quoting Todd Alexander Litman : > > Dear Mr. Oster, > > I find your comments inappropriate. Nobody has ridiculed you or your > ideas and it harms our discourse when you insult others. There is no > reason to compare rail and highway investments with a simple > mathematical formula - it is an economic problem. People are not > randomly distributed over the landscape, we tend to congregate in > certain area. On high-density corridors it costs less per > passenger-mile in total (taking into account vehicles, vehicle > operation, rights-of-way, and parking or terminals) to transport by > rail than by automobile. Developing country cities have the density, > financial limitations and other attributes that make it infeasible > for a major portion of the population to rely on automobile > transportation. In such conditions rail investments are likely to be > more cost effective and equitable than highway investments. > > I think you are quite wrong to imply that railroads are receiving > excessive public subsidy. Here in North America rail bear cost > burdens, such as paying rent and taxes on rights-of-way, that > automobiles do not, and railroads maintain their own terminals while > automobiles rely on subsidized parking at most destinations. > Similarly, a typical urban transit user receives less total per > capita subsidy (including public expenditures on transit services, > roads and parking facilities) than a typical motorist (see > http://www.vtpi.org/railcrit.pdf ). > > I realize that you are an advocate of a new transportation technology > (I suggest in future you spell out ETT, most readers have no idea > what it means) which you believe is superior to alternatives. That's > fine. If it proves to be as good as you say it will find its role in > the overall transport network. But please don't think that deriding > alternatives is an effective way of promoting your ideas. Simply show > us independently-verified proof. > > > -Todd Litman > > > At 05:08 PM 5/3/2006, Daryl Oster wrote: >> Railroads were designed (optimized) to haul massive loads between two >> locations. Their efficiency goes down considerably when they are called >> upon to service a high number of access points(nodes). >> >> It is well documented in network theory that the usefulness of a network is >> proportional to the number of nodes squared. >> >> The cost of servicing a transportation access point (node) with rail is more >> than ten times the cost of servicing it with a road; therefore the cost of >> accessibility of roads is more than a hundred times better than the cost of >> accessibility of rail. >> >> Of course, the proof of this is ancient history in the US and most of >> Europe; trains had a 95% share of the value of cargo transport in 1910 in >> the US, and now they have less than a 20% share, and even airplanes carry >> more cargo value than trains do. The very high node access cost of train >> access (both money and time) is the main reason. >> >> There are many well intended do-gooders who mistakenly promote rail as >> having accessibility advantages over cars/roads - this view is proven false >> upon technical analysis AND in the vast majority of the many markets where >> it has been tested. The false view that trains offer better accessibility >> is carefully fostered by the rail industry that has a huge vested interest >> in maintaining the grip on the mammary of government funding. >> >> The truth is that cars on roads provide much better access to transportation >> than trains, and those who seek equity for the poor would be better advised >> to build roads and provide cars than to provide trains. This is why trains >> have been displaced to niche markets by the car in developed countries. >> Passenger trains only survive by firmly latching onto the mammary of >> government to prevent the birth and nurture of more sustainable >> transportation technology. This is why most people in developing countries >> aspire to use motorcycles and or cars. >> >> Virtually all societies frown on a toothless grandpa or grandma nursing from >> their daughters mammary while the new born baby grandchild goes unfed. Why >> is it that the rail industry is not admonished for doing the same thing?? >> >> It is obvious that there are problems associated with the adoption of the >> car, and that a better form of transportation is needed. Grandpa rail would >> have us believe that rail is better than cars, and with self serving lies >> railroaders promote government funded train transportation projects, and >> government funded rail operating subsidies. >> >> What IS needed to solve the energy and environmental sustainability >> limitations of cars is to implement transportation technologies like ETT >> that offer at least a ten-fold improvement in transportation value. >> >> Compared to trains, planes, and automobiles; ETT requires less than 1/50th >> as much fuel, and creates 1/50th as much pollution per passenger kilometer. >> The cost of providing ETT accessibility is about 1/4th the cost of providing >> freeway accessibility; and less than a tenth the cost of providing rail >> accessibility. >> >> For the task that trains were optimized for (moving tons of coal from mine >> to points of major use) ETT can be implemented and operated for about the >> same cost, leaving the ONLY advantage of trains to move loads that cannot be >> reduced to weighing more than the 400kg payload of an optimally sized ETT >> capsule. Such loads represent less than 5% of cargo transported by rail. >> >> >> Daryl Oster >> (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" >> e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks >> of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River >> FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org >> > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of >> > Sunny >> > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 10:04 AM >> > To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport >> > Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" >> > >> > Dear John, >> > >> > In my opinion if the problem is shipment then it can be fulfilled with >> > out building new road and by efficiently using the existing railway >> > network or by adding new goods/cargo trains, this can even generate >> > income and jobs thereby benefiting the jobless both at the source and >> > the destination, expanding our highways and bringing more larger and >> > multi-speed gear boxes will only be a burden as they have to be imported >> > and their number will be very small for an investment like increasing >> > the overall highway structure for which the large truck users might not >> > legally contribute anything. On comparison to Bangkok I have recently >> > been on road to Chiang Rai, the north of Thailand and to my surprise I >> > have not seen even one toll post charging the cars which I am familiar >> > with in India and my friend was driving never less than 100 kmph. >> > >> > Using the railway as I said earlier will reduce the unemployment and >> > also the travel time as there will be a pressure for quality on the >> > railways, better roads might be a good answer but roads built solely for >> > freight will not be a good answer, if anyone is familiar with HIV in >> > India it can be found that the HIV cases are more among the lorry >> > drivers. I would be thankful if anyone can throw more light on this >> > issue, I think Eric would be the one as I have seen him as a moderator >> > on GATNET. > > > 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 scott at pedalsong.net Thu May 4 20:25:20 2006 From: scott at pedalsong.net (D. Scott TenBrink) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 05:25:20 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Bangkok bike parking In-Reply-To: <20060504024335.pl84v08r2qwo0k48@www.pedalsong.net> References: <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> <200605040008.k44088Lt002027@njbrsmtp1.vzwmail.net> <6.2.3.4.2.20060503173436.05631790@mail.islandnet.com> <20060504024335.pl84v08r2qwo0k48@www.pedalsong.net> Message-ID: <20060504052520.ft99y7qquyw44ow8@www.pedalsong.net> From today's Bangkok Post: Bicycle parking at BMA offices Parking areas are being set aside for bicycles at all Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) offices. The move, prompted by the soaring price of fuel, is to cater for employees who cycle to work and to encourage more people to follow their example and at the same time help reduce air pollution. Bangkok Governor Apirak Kosayodhin said yesterday the move is part of the BMA's energy-saving campaign. As a first step, bicycle parking has been provided at the BMA's headquarters on Dinso road and its second office in Din Daeng district. As well, the 50 district offices and all BMA-run agencies have been instructed to designate parking areas for bicycles. Mr Apirak said the city is urging people to use public transport instead of private cars and, with this in mind, is expediting the extension of the skytrain route. ------------------------------- While it is always nice to see the word "bicycle" show up in the Thai press, this article does more to confuse than to promote cycling. The program was set up to "reduce air pollution" as part of an "energy-saving plan". As I understand it, he energy-saving plan was initiated to reduce fuel consumption in order to limit the expense of fuel subsidies (as opposed to just eliminating the subsidies). The program had nothing to do with clean air. The bike parking is a perfect addition to the city's spuratic bike trail system that is completely unconnected and goes nowhere. (I've got to post some pictures of those "bike lanes" some time) This token effort thrown out in hopes that people will feel an obligation to leave their cars, has defined Bangkok NMT policy for a long time. The trend of "urging" a reduction in fuel consumption instead of encouraging a reduction via pricing seems to be continuing with the city's plea for people to use public transport like the Skytrain. If the BMA was serious about managing fuel consumption, improving air quality, or promoting NMT, there are many more effective programs, which they have previously turned down (many from people on this list!), that they may want to reconsider. -Scott From carlos.pardo at sutp.org Thu May 4 21:24:03 2006 From: carlos.pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 07:24:03 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking In-Reply-To: <20060504052520.ft99y7qquyw44ow8@www.pedalsong.net> Message-ID: <200605041224.k44CO60d030202@ns-omrbm1.netsolmail.com> I sometimes have the hope that Bangkok has taken some of our suggestions seriously, and that they will use the bike park designs we've given them, as well as all other aspects we've pointed out in various meetings (and the countless documents and presentations!). If they really start riding bicycles and building facilities, we can take credit! The Thai government also had a regulation effective in 2005 which made all government offices turn off their A/C systems or keep it above a certain temperature. Interestingly, I was once in a meeting and saw a deputy mayor stand up and change the temperature to the one being "enforced". I hope the same starts happening with transport, but it will take a bit more than turning a dial. Best regards, Carlos F. Pardo Project Coordinator GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP) Room 0942, Transport Division, UN-ESCAP ESCAP UN Building Rajadamnern Nok Rd. Bangkok 10200, Thailand Tel: ?+66 (0) 2 - 288 ?2576 Fax: +66 (0) 2 - 280 ?6042 Mobile: +66 (0) 1 - 772 4727 e-mail: carlos.pardo@sutp.org Website: www.sutp.org -----Mensaje original----- De: sustran-discuss-bounces+carlos.pardo=sutp.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+carlos.pardo=sutp.org@list.jca.apc.org] En nombre de D. Scott TenBrink Enviado el: Jueves, 04 de Mayo de 2006 06:25 a.m. Para: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Asunto: [sustran] Bangkok bike parking From today's Bangkok Post: Bicycle parking at BMA offices Parking areas are being set aside for bicycles at all Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) offices. The move, prompted by the soaring price of fuel, is to cater for employees who cycle to work and to encourage more people to follow their example and at the same time help reduce air pollution. Bangkok Governor Apirak Kosayodhin said yesterday the move is part of the BMA's energy-saving campaign. As a first step, bicycle parking has been provided at the BMA's headquarters on Dinso road and its second office in Din Daeng district. As well, the 50 district offices and all BMA-run agencies have been instructed to designate parking areas for bicycles. Mr Apirak said the city is urging people to use public transport instead of private cars and, with this in mind, is expediting the extension of the skytrain route. ------------------------------- While it is always nice to see the word "bicycle" show up in the Thai press, this article does more to confuse than to promote cycling. The program was set up to "reduce air pollution" as part of an "energy-saving plan". As I understand it, he energy-saving plan was initiated to reduce fuel consumption in order to limit the expense of fuel subsidies (as opposed to just eliminating the subsidies). The program had nothing to do with clean air. The bike parking is a perfect addition to the city's spuratic bike trail system that is completely unconnected and goes nowhere. (I've got to post some pictures of those "bike lanes" some time) This token effort thrown out in hopes that people will feel an obligation to leave their cars, has defined Bangkok NMT policy for a long time. The trend of "urging" a reduction in fuel consumption instead of encouraging a reduction via pricing seems to be continuing with the city's plea for people to use public transport like the Skytrain. If the BMA was serious about managing fuel consumption, improving air quality, or promoting NMT, there are many more effective programs, which they have previously turned down (many from people on this list!), that they may want to reconsider. -Scott ================================================================ 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 litman at vtpi.org Thu May 4 22:33:34 2006 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 06:33:34 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <20060504024335.pl84v08r2qwo0k48@www.pedalsong.net> References: <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> <200605040008.k44088Lt002027@njbrsmtp1.vzwmail.net> <6.2.3.4.2.20060503173436.05631790@mail.islandnet.com> <20060504024335.pl84v08r2qwo0k48@www.pedalsong.net> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060504061226.05616d80@mail.islandnet.com> Rail is often the most cost effective way of shipping farm products. Here in North America many farm groups have fought hard to maintain rail service in their areas. For that reason some rural communities have purchased rail lines that were scheduled for abandonment in order to maintain service. Researchers Kenneth Casavant and Jerry Lenzi ("Rail Line Abandonment and Public Acquisition Impacts on Economic Development," Transportation Research Record 1274, 1989, pp. 241-251) found that it is often cost effective for transportation agencies to subsidize rail lines than to have rural freight (such as farm products) travel by heavy trucks, which cause significant damage to roadways. An efficient transportation system would charge trucks the full costs of the road damage they impose, which would give shippers a rational reason to use rail when it is most cost effective overall, but currently most jurisdictions undercharge heavy trucks (i.e., they impose significant economic externalities) making trucking appear cheaper than it really is to society. Of course, this is not to suggest that all freight should travel by rail, but with improved logistics (i.e., more containerization and more efficient terminal operations) and as fuel costs increase and communities become more concerned about external impacts such as road damage, congestion, accident risk and pollution, the role of rail increases. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 01:43 AM 5/4/2006, D. Scott TenBrink wrote: >Todd makes the point that people are not randomly distributed, but >clumped into >urban areas. However, farms are quite widely dispersed and supermarkets tend >to be (somewhat) evenly distributed across an urban area. Thus, it >seems quite >obvious why the farmer would choose to support road over rail, and I >think that >was the point of the original message. 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/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060504/e384b410/attachment.html From sksunny at gmail.com Fri May 5 00:25:38 2006 From: sksunny at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 22:25:38 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking In-Reply-To: <200605041224.k44CO60d030202@ns-omrbm1.netsolmail.com> References: <200605041224.k44CO60d030202@ns-omrbm1.netsolmail.com> Message-ID: <445A1CF2.8010704@gmail.com> it is a very nice example tht Carlos has cited on the energy saving I guess that the bangkok officials should not urge but instead take the lead and cut the power themselves for 45min as they planned....mere words will not provide a solution for the energy savings and the same rule applies to the transportation....requesting the people to shift to public transport will no do the job as there is a need for a total PT reform.....with the existing condition of the buses I doubt if people would shift..instead if the quality and service is improved then surely people would shift for the PT. As Carlos suggested there is a strong need of "ENFORCEMENT" rather than urging. Sunny Carlos F. Pardo SUTP wrote: > I sometimes have the hope that Bangkok has taken some of our suggestions > seriously, and that they will use the bike park designs we've given them, as > well as all other aspects we've pointed out in various meetings (and the > countless documents and presentations!). If they really start riding > bicycles and building facilities, we can take credit! > > The Thai government also had a regulation effective in 2005 which made all > government offices turn off their A/C systems or keep it above a certain > temperature. Interestingly, I was once in a meeting and saw a deputy mayor > stand up and change the temperature to the one being "enforced". I hope the > same starts happening with transport, but it will take a bit more than > turning a dial. > > Best regards, > > Carlos F. Pardo > Project Coordinator > GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP) > Room 0942, Transport Division, UN-ESCAP > ESCAP UN Building > Rajadamnern Nok Rd. > Bangkok 10200, Thailand > Tel: +66 (0) 2 - 288 2576 > Fax: +66 (0) 2 - 280 6042 > Mobile: +66 (0) 1 - 772 4727 > e-mail: carlos.pardo@sutp.org > Website: www.sutp.org From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri May 5 03:03:12 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 20:03:12 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Fair Transport - comments Message-ID: <000601c66fa5$051929e0$6501a8c0@Home> Thanks Anzir, As always your comments are first rate and challenging. What I have done just below is that I have stripped our the FT Labeling section in the latest Jacobs Rule draft - you can see the full thing, today's version, if you click the Open Blog link on the top menu of http://www.newmobility.org - which may show a few advances over the earlier draft notes on this. I hope that what follows and indeed the whole schmear will be worthy of further comments and suggestions. This is collective intelligence at work and that, I am convinced, is our only way out. Eric Britton From: Fair Transport -Jacobs' Rules (http://newmobilityagenda.blogspot.com/2006/05/fair-transport-jacobs-rul es-tribute.html) Fair Transport Labeling This is a proposal concerning which we would be grateful to have your comments: Specifically, it presents a kind of eco-labeling concept that has certain similarities with Fairtrade labeling (see below for a short definition), but it is entirely focused on the identification and support of concepts and programs that are able to meet or show meaningful progress in terms of a certain number of specific performance and other social, economic and technical parameters. Fairtrade labelling is a brand designed to allow consumers to identify goods which meet agreed standards. The system involves independent auditing of producers to ensure standards are met. Companies offering products that meet the standards are licensed to use the fair trade label. Standards are set by the independent NGO Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International on behalf of a number of national bodies for each type of product. Typically standards cover labor standards, environmental standards, and stable pricing. >From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairtrade (with some slight rearrangement) Who/what qualifies: * Types of vehicles * Specific vehicles * Power and fuel sources * Transportation systems (such as LRT, BRT, paratransit, carsharing, shared taxi implementation, etc.) * Public space and interface projects * Towns, cities, neighborhoods * Production systems * Innovative programs (Local, regional, etc.) * Noteworthy individual contributions * Media/productions Criteria: * Jacobs' Rules (and that's all!) Organization and delivery: * Process? * Funding? * Evaluation/verification? * Prizes? * International Advisory Council - http://www.ecoplan.org/kyoto/challenge/panel.htm Fair Transport Label credibility: 1. How meaningful is the Fair Transport label? 2. How do we verify that the label standards are met? 3. Is the meaning of the label consistent? 4. Are the label standards publicly available? 5. Is information about the organization publicly available? 6. Is the organization behind the label free from conflict of interest? 7. Was the label developed with broad public and unbiased expert input? Interim Comment: The idea as I see it will not be to try to hand a Fair Transport label on every half decent project or implementation all over the place, but rather to begin to create a kind of 'honor role' of places and ways of doing things that the world needs to know more bout. Now I am aware that there are plenty of Best Practices et al projects all over the place, but what may make the Fair Transport Label a meaningful addition, is that it lends itself to a more explicit, agreed, respected set of criteria and process. * * * On Behalf Of Anzir Boodoo Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 12:24 PM To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: Fair Transport - comments Eric, If you are thinking of a "Fair Transport" mark akin to the "Fair Trade" mark, there are several additional comments to make which relate solely to the mark itself. In the UK, there has been some backlash against the Fairtrade Foundation, who administer the mark, with a number of coffee and chocolate producers particularly arguing that it is all very well to say the trading of a product is done fairly, but that gives no guarantee of the quality of the product (for proof of this, see some of the lower end Fair Trade products such as some supermarket own brands). In addition, the business ethics of the retailer can be seen in some eyes to negate buying Fair Trade products from, say, Wal- Mart, on an ethical perspective. What this means from the perspective of "Fair Transport" is that in theory there are two planes of conflict: 1. Are the people in charge of the accreditation trusted? 2. Is "Fair" always "Fair" regardless of who is operating the system? Are there political or other reasons why something that might otherwise be "fair" can justifiably be called "unfair"? Perhaps I am overstating the problem here, but I think it's potentially very serious. We could lose a lot of credibility very early on if we (perhaps accidentally) upset the bees some people have in their bonnets (I don't know how well that lot will translate). To start off with, what I understand that you, Eric, propose here is an overarching concept that can be quantified, at least in a way in which it is possible to provide an accreditation that will be recognised the world over. May I suggest that instead of going down the potentially very complicated route of deciding whether this bus service or that cycleway package in fairer than the other, that we follow another Fairtrade strand that is becoming popular in the UK at least by accrediting "Fair Transport Towns" (and cities) where policies and the implementation of plans have favoured a people centric approach to transport. This would be awarded to the municipality and recognise a complete integrated package and "attitude" towards urban transport. Thanks -- Anzir Boodoo MRes MILT Aff. IRO transcience, 72 Staplehurst, BRACKNELL RG12 8DD -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060504/a9c8a6a7/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 15768 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060504/a9c8a6a7/attachment.jpe From ericbruun at earthlink.net Fri May 5 03:37:07 2006 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 14:37:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution Message-ID: <7396496.1146767828190.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rustique.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Daryl makes a lot of overgeneralizations and assumptions. First, what is agriculture? Carrying grain and corn is one thing and highly suitable for trains. Local fruits and vegetables is another. Here trucks make sense, but even here the distances can be minimized by good land use planning. Second, we don't all take current land use as a given. Sure, freight destinations have dispersed and have become harder to serve by rail. But it is in our power to do something to begin to reverse it. We can also promote intermodal truck/rail. Over time, we can shorten the breakeven distance. Third, it seems to be assumed that space is not an issue. It is physically impossible to base large cities entirely on the automobile. In China or India or other extremely densely populated countries, already at low levels of automobile use, cities start to become dysfunctional. Smaller cities might function when based 100 percent on autos, but they are certainly not very appealing. Have a look at small town America -- boarded up downtowns with big box stores on the periphery surrounded by oceans of parking and without sidewalks. Even these smaller cities have lots of hidden pathology -- such as people stranded in their homes and totally dependent upon others if they don't drive. I agree with Todd L. Show us what you have and most of us will try to see how it fits in with the existing choices. But we don't automatically accept that it solves many problems. Eric -----Original Message----- >From: "D. Scott TenBrink" >Sent: May 4, 2006 4:43 AM >To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution > > >Todd makes good points here regarding rail vs road subsidy. I also >agree that a >basic network formula does not reflect the distribution patterns of >nodes of use >and production, the responsive change of nodes and network to one another as >well as other forces, or the potential for production and consumption nodes to >be one in the same. Yet I do notice a tendency on this list to say that rail >will simply replace road as a freight distribution system without considering >the difference between the two networks, and the impact of these >differences on >distribution. > >Stripping the main point from Oster's argument (and disregarding the somewhat >unsettling breast-feeding obsession), he points out that rail has fewer nodes >than road and that this results in roads being more effective medium for >transport for the produce farmer. I see two reasons that it is better for the >farmer: he can ship on his own schedule instead of timing his shipments with >the train and making reservations for space, and the road goes right from his >farm to the market with no need to transfer goods. > >Todd makes the point that people are not randomly distributed, but >clumped into >urban areas. However, farms are quite widely dispersed and supermarkets tend >to be (somewhat) evenly distributed across an urban area. Thus, it >seems quite >obvious why the farmer would choose to support road over rail, and I >think that >was the point of the original message. > >Are people arguing that rail can accommodate the farmer better, or that the >farmer should not have such a large voice in the decision (or something else >completely)? I do agree with Oster that Sunny overlooks the difficulties of >switching from road to rail shipping, particularly for payloads that have >widespread production/consumption locations. > >I also found the reference to HIV and lorry drivers to be a bit off. >Certainly >HIV is a concern that desperately needs to be addressed regardless of >profession. Eliminating freight transport by road would be quite a >round-about >and isolationist way to address it. I don?t think our goal is to limit >opportunities for human interaction. I would advocate education and condom >distribution over lorry elimination. > > >-Scott TenBrink > >Quoting Todd Alexander Litman : > >> >> Dear Mr. Oster, >> >> I find your comments inappropriate. Nobody has ridiculed you or your >> ideas and it harms our discourse when you insult others. There is no >> reason to compare rail and highway investments with a simple >> mathematical formula - it is an economic problem. People are not >> randomly distributed over the landscape, we tend to congregate in >> certain area. On high-density corridors it costs less per >> passenger-mile in total (taking into account vehicles, vehicle >> operation, rights-of-way, and parking or terminals) to transport by >> rail than by automobile. Developing country cities have the density, >> financial limitations and other attributes that make it infeasible >> for a major portion of the population to rely on automobile >> transportation. In such conditions rail investments are likely to be >> more cost effective and equitable than highway investments. >> >> I think you are quite wrong to imply that railroads are receiving >> excessive public subsidy. Here in North America rail bear cost >> burdens, such as paying rent and taxes on rights-of-way, that >> automobiles do not, and railroads maintain their own terminals while >> automobiles rely on subsidized parking at most destinations. >> Similarly, a typical urban transit user receives less total per >> capita subsidy (including public expenditures on transit services, >> roads and parking facilities) than a typical motorist (see >> http://www.vtpi.org/railcrit.pdf ). >> >> I realize that you are an advocate of a new transportation technology >> (I suggest in future you spell out ETT, most readers have no idea >> what it means) which you believe is superior to alternatives. That's >> fine. If it proves to be as good as you say it will find its role in >> the overall transport network. But please don't think that deriding >> alternatives is an effective way of promoting your ideas. Simply show >> us independently-verified proof. >> >> >> -Todd Litman >> >> >> At 05:08 PM 5/3/2006, Daryl Oster wrote: >>> Railroads were designed (optimized) to haul massive loads between two >>> locations. Their efficiency goes down considerably when they are called >>> upon to service a high number of access points(nodes). >>> >>> It is well documented in network theory that the usefulness of a network is >>> proportional to the number of nodes squared. >>> >>> The cost of servicing a transportation access point (node) with rail is more >>> than ten times the cost of servicing it with a road; therefore the cost of >>> accessibility of roads is more than a hundred times better than the cost of >>> accessibility of rail. >>> >>> Of course, the proof of this is ancient history in the US and most of >>> Europe; trains had a 95% share of the value of cargo transport in 1910 in >>> the US, and now they have less than a 20% share, and even airplanes carry >>> more cargo value than trains do. The very high node access cost of train >>> access (both money and time) is the main reason. >>> >>> There are many well intended do-gooders who mistakenly promote rail as >>> having accessibility advantages over cars/roads - this view is proven false >>> upon technical analysis AND in the vast majority of the many markets where >>> it has been tested. The false view that trains offer better accessibility >>> is carefully fostered by the rail industry that has a huge vested interest >>> in maintaining the grip on the mammary of government funding. >>> >>> The truth is that cars on roads provide much better access to transportation >>> than trains, and those who seek equity for the poor would be better advised >>> to build roads and provide cars than to provide trains. This is why trains >>> have been displaced to niche markets by the car in developed countries. >>> Passenger trains only survive by firmly latching onto the mammary of >>> government to prevent the birth and nurture of more sustainable >>> transportation technology. This is why most people in developing countries >>> aspire to use motorcycles and or cars. >>> >>> Virtually all societies frown on a toothless grandpa or grandma nursing from >>> their daughters mammary while the new born baby grandchild goes unfed. Why >>> is it that the rail industry is not admonished for doing the same thing?? >>> >>> It is obvious that there are problems associated with the adoption of the >>> car, and that a better form of transportation is needed. Grandpa rail would >>> have us believe that rail is better than cars, and with self serving lies >>> railroaders promote government funded train transportation projects, and >>> government funded rail operating subsidies. >>> >>> What IS needed to solve the energy and environmental sustainability >>> limitations of cars is to implement transportation technologies like ETT >>> that offer at least a ten-fold improvement in transportation value. >>> >>> Compared to trains, planes, and automobiles; ETT requires less than 1/50th >>> as much fuel, and creates 1/50th as much pollution per passenger kilometer. >>> The cost of providing ETT accessibility is about 1/4th the cost of providing >>> freeway accessibility; and less than a tenth the cost of providing rail >>> accessibility. >>> >>> For the task that trains were optimized for (moving tons of coal from mine >>> to points of major use) ETT can be implemented and operated for about the >>> same cost, leaving the ONLY advantage of trains to move loads that cannot be >>> reduced to weighing more than the 400kg payload of an optimally sized ETT >>> capsule. Such loads represent less than 5% of cargo transported by rail. >>> >>> >>> Daryl Oster >>> (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" >>> e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks >>> of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River >>> FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com >>> >>> >>> > -----Original Message----- >>> > From: sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org >>> > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of >>> > Sunny >>> > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 10:04 AM >>> > To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport >>> > Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" >>> > >>> > Dear John, >>> > >>> > In my opinion if the problem is shipment then it can be fulfilled with >>> > out building new road and by efficiently using the existing railway >>> > network or by adding new goods/cargo trains, this can even generate >>> > income and jobs thereby benefiting the jobless both at the source and >>> > the destination, expanding our highways and bringing more larger and >>> > multi-speed gear boxes will only be a burden as they have to be imported >>> > and their number will be very small for an investment like increasing >>> > the overall highway structure for which the large truck users might not >>> > legally contribute anything. On comparison to Bangkok I have recently >>> > been on road to Chiang Rai, the north of Thailand and to my surprise I >>> > have not seen even one toll post charging the cars which I am familiar >>> > with in India and my friend was driving never less than 100 kmph. >>> > >>> > Using the railway as I said earlier will reduce the unemployment and >>> > also the travel time as there will be a pressure for quality on the >>> > railways, better roads might be a good answer but roads built solely for >>> > freight will not be a good answer, if anyone is familiar with HIV in >>> > India it can be found that the HIV cases are more among the lorry >>> > drivers. I would be thankful if anyone can throw more light on this >>> > issue, I think Eric would be the one as I have seen him as a moderator >>> > on GATNET. >> >> >> 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" >> >> > > > > > >================================================================ >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 sujit at vsnl.com Fri May 5 03:46:49 2006 From: sujit at vsnl.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 00:16:49 +0530 Subject: [sustran] "India is on the road to a transport revolution" Message-ID: <4cfd20aa0605041146w7991dcdg66464adb5ed9782c@mail.gmail.com> 5 May 2006 Dear Simon, Eric, Sunny and all friends in Sustran, I was so surprised and disappointed by this article in the Guardian (a paper I associate with far greater sensibility and sensitiveness) that I passed it on to my list of friends inviting their comments. I'm passing them on to the Sustran community with the hope that it will show how overwhelming has been the negative response to this shallow article. Is there any way this can be communicated to the people who run the paper? I love to read George Monbiot in the Guardian as well as many other correspondents of this paper. It was a shock therefore to see such that a crass article being publiched by them. We are certainly not impressed by a transport revolution that makes it easier for Mr Poonawalla to drive merrily from Mumbai to Pune on the Expressway (major portions of the top layer of which came unstuck during the heavy monssons a couple of years back) as we are not impressed by the dozens of flyovers being built with peoples funds in most growing cities in the country. We have been opposing them with some success in Pune, but haven't been able to kill them completely! The kind of transport revolution we need in our cities is the total and radical transformation of Public Transport system to provide adequate, reliable and excellent service to majority of the travcelling public at affordable cost. That is what we have been pressing for through our advocacy efforts in Pune and we see some good coming out of it as some BRT routes are now being planned in the city. We've also been able to turn one major road into a Pedestrian Plaza for each Saturday and Sunday with the possibility of more car-free days added in future. So if the Guardian wanted to write about the real revolution in transport, they should have mentioned efforts such as these instead of writing about the Rolls... -- Sujit Here are the comments (sorry for the long mail): -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- from Sujit Patwardhan What do you think of this article? Does it accurately describe the transport situation in our country? India is on the road to a transport revolution http://www.guardian.co.uk/india/story/0,,1765590,00.html -- Sujit ------------------------------------------- Dear Sujit, It probably makes good reading for the "India Shining" and "Feel-good" types, but as journalism I find it poor, especially coming from a newspaper which I have highly respected. OK, the Quadrilaterals and the Corridors may put us on par with China as far as long-distance inter-city movement goes, but what about intra-city traffic and transport infrastructure? And I would like to know something about the fate of the tens of thousands of farmers whose land must have been acquired to make way for these grand projects. Did they have any say in the matter? How and where were they rehabilitated? What about their livelihoods (compensations don't go very far, as we all know). And does the Guardian really expect us to believe there has no corruption? What about the young IIT engineer who was murdered for blowing the whistle? Mr. Poonawala's urban elite outpourings about cows and people in the street sound as if he has never really lived in India. His Rolls may be good for his ego, but it does not belong here unless he intends to spend all his driving life on the expressways. I still have memories of how Mr. S. L. Kirloskar's Lincoln Continental, even in days when there were far fewer cars on the roads, looked an incongruous joke on the streets of Pune. And those subplots about Ford-India's increased output, and Maruti-Suzuki's Japanese work culture -- how are they relevant to the main story? Maybe it is not the job of a newspaper report to cover all these (and many more) issues. But there must be a forum somewhere to address them. The Highways project is a fait accompli, but it raises a number of questions regarding equity and economic and social justice, appropriate technologies for infrastructure, and several others, which we need to place centrestage in development dialogue. Thinking and acting big is fine, but not at the cost of the small people who still are a majority of our population. Vivek Vivek Khadpekar from Ahmedabad, Gujarat ----------------------------------------------------------------- This article might have had more credibility if it had started by accurately describing the state of the roads today - full of potholes, rubble, and patchwork. This state of affairs is directly linked to the mental make-up of the govt, both local and central, that anyone who has a car is a scheming so-and-so who deserves to be blindsided. (and doesn't deserve anything resembling a decent road !) And what's with the Rolls Royce and silver handled umbrella ? Why does everything have to be reported in an extreme manner ? It just takes away from the substance of the article As for the Golden Quadrilateral, what's been reported in the press is that construction has slowed down considerably and its running behind schedule and above cost estimates. So, I'm left wondering. Veena Singhal Mumbai ---------------------------------------------------------------- I feel so bad for Mr. Poonawala! I think that we should have (and still should) invest in our rail network instead. It is already extensive. No reason why it shouldn't be absolutely world class. Plus avoids over motorization and investment in air network, both heavily dependent on fossil fuel. We should just have excellent rail service for inter-city travel (convenient, comfortable, affordable) with some high-speed rail links for inter-metro travel. - Ranjit Ranjit Gadgil from Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- And I thought the Guardian had more sense. Isn't there some way we can reply and point out how idiotic the piece is? --- Sherna Sherna Gandhy Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- I think the article looks at developing the CAR culture by building roads. While every body likes good roads, the issue of MORE roads is serious in cultivating an unimaginable spiral of more CARS and MORE ROADS ?. Ajay Ajay Phatak Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- I tend to partially disagree with Ajay, and also somewhat with Ranjit's earlier mail. I think building a good road network across the country (not just connecting the metros) will spur economic development and bring markets closer to producers. So, I am in favour of a good road network that supports quick and efficient freight transport, backed by a rail network that can carry passengers and cargo. I think (though I don't have numbers) there is enough evidence that laying a good road through a region has helped progress in the region. I also think the road network in India is woefully inadequate across the country (as against within cities like Pune). The reason I prefer roads supporting rail networks and not have rail networks all the way is the same reason why many of us believe a bus-based system for Pune may be better than a rail-based system: cost and flexibility. But of course, the reality of our GQ project is unfortunately very different and the implementation (in spite of the Guardian article) is nowhere near what it is supposed to be. And, of course, these highways should not encourage you to take your car when you want to visit the neighbouring city. I suppose that can be ensured through appropriate tolls and such. Ashok Ashok Sreenivas Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- By the way I agree with Ashok, in that I did not mean (although I may not have made that clear) that I am opposed to roads! In fact, smaller towns and villages will be better connected by way of roads, and certainly not rail, which Ashok is right in pointing out is very expensive. I also do not mean that the air network should not be developed. I only meant that I think we should turn our rail network into a fabulous underlying structure, over which a complementary road network can be laid down, either to fill in gaps or to provide extra carrying capacity. Each serves a purpose of its own. But rail, once developed, is FAR cheaper to carry cargo and passengers. In that sense I like the European model better than the American one, where rail has died a slow death. Incidentally, it was the rail that brought incredible prosperity to American towns on the frontier. Just as the British used rail strategically to be able to both rule and exploit India. In the end its about deciding a comprehensive strategy that caters to the strengths that we possess. The GQ sadly is just a fancy project. - Ranjit Ranjit Gadgil Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- I have a slightly stronger view when it comes to moving goods thousands of miles for consumption! I believe that we should look at the best local options for consumption. The lesser we move goods ? the better we are on overall environmental impact. I am certainly not against good roads, I am against increasing this infrastructure to support "UNNECESSARY" and this could be argued quite a bit ? movement of goods?. E,g many fruits travel from New Zealand to the UK ?. Is this movement justified? Regards, Ajay Ajay Phatak, Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujit@vsnl.com sujitjp@gmail.com -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujit@vsnl.com sujitjp@gmail.com "Yamuna", ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India Tel: 25537955 ----------------------------------------------------- Hon. Secretary: Parisar www.parisar.org ------------------------------------------------------ Founder Member: PTTF (Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum) www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060505/3a94dbd7/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.info Fri May 5 04:24:05 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 21:24:05 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" In-Reply-To: <4cfd20aa0605041146w7991dcdg66464adb5ed9782c@mail.gmail.com> References: <4cfd20aa0605041146w7991dcdg66464adb5ed9782c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1239.62.245.95.24.1146770645.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> > 5 May 2006 Sujit wrote: > Dear Simon, Eric, Sunny and all friends in Sustran, > I'm passing them on to > the > Sustran community with the hope that it will show how overwhelming has > been > the negative response to this shallow article. Is there any way this can > be > communicated to the people who run the paper? I love to read George > Monbiot > in the Guardian as well as many other correspondents of this paper. It was > a > shock therefore to see such that a crass article being publiched by them. I AM not sure what is happening in the letters section of the Guardian now BUT probably the best thing to do would be to copy all of the comments we have made to the relevant editor and then have one or a few of us nominate themselves to write an opposing comment of some sort and pitch this idea to the editor. - T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From SCHIPPER at wri.org Fri May 5 05:13:58 2006 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 16:13:58 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" Message-ID: I will try to dig out a similar (series) from the New York Times several months back Someone in Indian road building has a good PR Agent. >>> sujit@vsnl.com 05/04/06 2:46 PM >>> 5 May 2006 Dear Simon, Eric, Sunny and all friends in Sustran, I was so surprised and disappointed by this article in the Guardian (a paper I associate with far greater sensibility and sensitiveness) that I passed it on to my list of friends inviting their comments. I'm passing them on to the Sustran community with the hope that it will show how overwhelming has been the negative response to this shallow article. Is there any way this can be communicated to the people who run the paper? I love to read George Monbiot in the Guardian as well as many other correspondents of this paper. It was a shock therefore to see such that a crass article being publiched by them. We are certainly not impressed by a transport revolution that makes it easier for Mr Poonawalla to drive merrily from Mumbai to Pune on the Expressway (major portions of the top layer of which came unstuck during the heavy monssons a couple of years back) as we are not impressed by the dozens of flyovers being built with peoples funds in most growing cities in the country. We have been opposing them with some success in Pune, but haven't been able to kill them completely! The kind of transport revolution we need in our cities is the total and radical transformation of Public Transport system to provide adequate, reliable and excellent service to majority of the travcelling public at affordable cost. That is what we have been pressing for through our advocacy efforts in Pune and we see some good coming out of it as some BRT routes are now being planned in the city. We've also been able to turn one major road into a Pedestrian Plaza for each Saturday and Sunday with the possibility of more car-free days added in future. So if the Guardian wanted to write about the real revolution in transport, they should have mentioned efforts such as these instead of writing about the Rolls... -- Sujit Here are the comments (sorry for the long mail): -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- from Sujit Patwardhan What do you think of this article? Does it accurately describe the transport situation in our country? India is on the road to a transport revolution http://www.guardian.co.uk/india/story/0,,1765590,00.html -- Sujit ------------------------------------------- Dear Sujit, It probably makes good reading for the "India Shining" and "Feel-good" types, but as journalism I find it poor, especially coming from a newspaper which I have highly respected. OK, the Quadrilaterals and the Corridors may put us on par with China as far as long-distance inter-city movement goes, but what about intra-city traffic and transport infrastructure? And I would like to know something about the fate of the tens of thousands of farmers whose land must have been acquired to make way for these grand projects. Did they have any say in the matter? How and where were they rehabilitated? What about their livelihoods (compensations don't go very far, as we all know). And does the Guardian really expect us to believe there has no corruption? What about the young IIT engineer who was murdered for blowing the whistle? Mr. Poonawala's urban elite outpourings about cows and people in the street sound as if he has never really lived in India. His Rolls may be good for his ego, but it does not belong here unless he intends to spend all his driving life on the expressways. I still have memories of how Mr. S. L. Kirloskar's Lincoln Continental, even in days when there were far fewer cars on the roads, looked an incongruous joke on the streets of Pune. And those subplots about Ford-India's increased output, and Maruti-Suzuki's Japanese work culture -- how are they relevant to the main story? Maybe it is not the job of a newspaper report to cover all these (and many more) issues. But there must be a forum somewhere to address them. The Highways project is a fait accompli, but it raises a number of questions regarding equity and economic and social justice, appropriate technologies for infrastructure, and several others, which we need to place centrestage in development dialogue. Thinking and acting big is fine, but not at the cost of the small people who still are a majority of our population. Vivek Vivek Khadpekar from Ahmedabad, Gujarat ----------------------------------------------------------------- This article might have had more credibility if it had started by accurately describing the state of the roads today - full of potholes, rubble, and patchwork. This state of affairs is directly linked to the mental make-up of the govt, both local and central, that anyone who has a car is a scheming so-and-so who deserves to be blindsided. (and doesn't deserve anything resembling a decent road !) And what's with the Rolls Royce and silver handled umbrella ? Why does everything have to be reported in an extreme manner ? It just takes away from the substance of the article As for the Golden Quadrilateral, what's been reported in the press is that construction has slowed down considerably and its running behind schedule and above cost estimates. So, I'm left wondering. Veena Singhal Mumbai ---------------------------------------------------------------- I feel so bad for Mr. Poonawala! I think that we should have (and still should) invest in our rail network instead. It is already extensive. No reason why it shouldn't be absolutely world class. Plus avoids over motorization and investment in air network, both heavily dependent on fossil fuel. We should just have excellent rail service for inter-city travel (convenient, comfortable, affordable) with some high-speed rail links for inter-metro travel. - Ranjit Ranjit Gadgil from Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- And I thought the Guardian had more sense. Isn't there some way we can reply and point out how idiotic the piece is? --- Sherna Sherna Gandhy Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- I think the article looks at developing the CAR culture by building roads. While every body likes good roads, the issue of MORE roads is serious in cultivating an unimaginable spiral of more CARS and MORE ROADS *. Ajay Ajay Phatak Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- I tend to partially disagree with Ajay, and also somewhat with Ranjit's earlier mail. I think building a good road network across the country (not just connecting the metros) will spur economic development and bring markets closer to producers. So, I am in favour of a good road network that supports quick and efficient freight transport, backed by a rail network that can carry passengers and cargo. I think (though I don't have numbers) there is enough evidence that laying a good road through a region has helped progress in the region. I also think the road network in India is woefully inadequate across the country (as against within cities like Pune). The reason I prefer roads supporting rail networks and not have rail networks all the way is the same reason why many of us believe a bus-based system for Pune may be better than a rail-based system: cost and flexibility. But of course, the reality of our GQ project is unfortunately very different and the implementation (in spite of the Guardian article) is nowhere near what it is supposed to be. And, of course, these highways should not encourage you to take your car when you want to visit the neighbouring city. I suppose that can be ensured through appropriate tolls and such. Ashok Ashok Sreenivas Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- By the way I agree with Ashok, in that I did not mean (although I may not have made that clear) that I am opposed to roads! In fact, smaller towns and villages will be better connected by way of roads, and certainly not rail, which Ashok is right in pointing out is very expensive. I also do not mean that the air network should not be developed. I only meant that I think we should turn our rail network into a fabulous underlying structure, over which a complementary road network can be laid down, either to fill in gaps or to provide extra carrying capacity. Each serves a purpose of its own. But rail, once developed, is FAR cheaper to carry cargo and passengers. In that sense I like the European model better than the American one, where rail has died a slow death. Incidentally, it was the rail that brought incredible prosperity to American towns on the frontier. Just as the British used rail strategically to be able to both rule and exploit India. In the end its about deciding a comprehensive strategy that caters to the strengths that we possess. The GQ sadly is just a fancy project. - Ranjit Ranjit Gadgil Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- I have a slightly stronger view when it comes to moving goods thousands of miles for consumption! I believe that we should look at the best local options for consumption. The lesser we move goods * the better we are on overall environmental impact. I am certainly not against good roads, I am against increasing this infrastructure to support "UNNECESSARY" and this could be argued quite a bit * movement of goods*. E,g many fruits travel from New Zealand to the UK *. Is this movement justified? Regards, Ajay Ajay Phatak, Pune ---------------------------------------------------------- -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujit@vsnl.com sujitjp@gmail.com -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujit@vsnl.com sujitjp@gmail.com "Yamuna", ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India Tel: 25537955 ----------------------------------------------------- Hon. Secretary: Parisar www.parisar.org ------------------------------------------------------ Founder Member: PTTF (Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum) www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------ From linda.fullerton at tiscali.co.uk Fri May 5 07:30:48 2006 From: linda.fullerton at tiscali.co.uk (Linda Fullerton) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 23:30:48 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking References: <200605041224.k44CO60d030202@ns-omrbm1.netsolmail.com> <445A1CF2.8010704@gmail.com> Message-ID: <005b01c66fca$64b2bc70$0100a8c0@STUDY> Re: As Carlos suggested there is a strong need of "ENFORCEMENT" rather than urging) Enforcement in Bangkok? When 200 Baht or if you're lucky 100 Baht will get you off any traffic offence? Re: and that they will use the bike park designs we've given them Bikes are ridden by those who can't afford motorbikes. It will take a lot more than Bike parks to change a population aspiring to the level of private transport available to most in the west. The average Thai is quite content to sit in a traffic jam... Sorry to appear negative.... Linda. ----- Original Message ----- From: Sunny To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:25 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking it is a very nice example tht Carlos has cited on the energy saving I guess that the bangkok officials should not urge but instead take the lead and cut the power themselves for 45min as they planned....mere words will not provide a solution for the energy savings and the same rule applies to the transportation....requesting the people to shift to public transport will no do the job as there is a need for a total PT reform.....with the existing condition of the buses I doubt if people would shift..instead if the quality and service is improved then surely people would shift for the PT. As Carlos suggested there is a strong need of "ENFORCEMENT" rather than urging. Sunny Carlos F. Pardo SUTP wrote: > I sometimes have the hope that Bangkok has taken some of our suggestions > seriously, and that they will use the bike park designs we've given them, as > well as all other aspects we've pointed out in various meetings (and the > countless documents and presentations!). If they really start riding > bicycles and building facilities, we can take credit! > > The Thai government also had a regulation effective in 2005 which made all > government offices turn off their A/C systems or keep it above a certain > temperature. Interestingly, I was once in a meeting and saw a deputy mayor > stand up and change the temperature to the one being "enforced". I hope the > same starts happening with transport, but it will take a bit more than > turning a dial. > > Best regards, > > Carlos F. Pardo > Project Coordinator > GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP) > Room 0942, Transport Division, UN-ESCAP > ESCAP UN Building > Rajadamnern Nok Rd. > Bangkok 10200, Thailand > Tel: +66 (0) 2 - 288 2576 > Fax: +66 (0) 2 - 280 6042 > Mobile: +66 (0) 1 - 772 4727 > e-mail: carlos.pardo@sutp.org > Website: www.sutp.org ================================================================ 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/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060504/3be7b586/attachment.html From sksunny at gmail.com Fri May 5 10:16:52 2006 From: sksunny at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 08:16:52 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking In-Reply-To: <005b01c66fca$64b2bc70$0100a8c0@STUDY> References: <200605041224.k44CO60d030202@ns-omrbm1.netsolmail.com> <445A1CF2 .8010704@gmail.com> <005b01c66fca$64b2bc70$0100a8c0@STUDY> Message-ID: <445AA784.4040305@gmail.com> Dear Linda, Yes, that appears very negative but indeed it is not that Thais like to sit in a traffic jam or breath the dirty air, there are many Thais who want to shift to other means if given an opportunity this can been seen by over crowded PT and good use of their railway systems, but the only thing lacking is the efficiency and quality in PT. If I am right even Bogot? had lot of traffic jams before the BRT was introduced, all that is required is spicing up the PT so that people feel it is good to travel and is comfortable and affordable. I have to agree with your comment on the 200 or 100 baht fines/bribes (in India) but have you heard of a fine of 100 baht if you cross the road without using a pedestrian overpass?.....this sort of thinking needs a change and the change should be behavioural. Providing bike parks and reducing car parks will give an opportunity for people to realise tht they can use a bike for a short travel...many people say tht bike travel is not safe thts the reason they don't use bikes....if it is made safer then we can expect an increase in bike usage...the other day I read a news on creating motorbike lanes but in stead if these lanes are made into bicycle lanes it would be more better. Sunny Linda Fullerton wrote: > Re: As Carlos suggested there is a strong need of "ENFORCEMENT" rather > than urging) > > Enforcement in Bangkok? When 200 Baht or if you're lucky 100 Baht will > get you off any traffic offence? > > Re: and that they will use the bike park designs we've given them > > Bikes are ridden by those who can't afford motorbikes. It will take a > lot more than Bike parks to change a population aspiring to the level > of private transport available to most in the west. The average Thai > is quite content to sit in a traffic jam... > > Sorry to appear negative.... > > Linda. From richmond at alum.mit.edu Fri May 5 11:36:45 2006 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:36:45 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking In-Reply-To: <005b01c66fca$64b2bc70$0100a8c0@STUDY> References: <200605041224.k44CO60d030202@ns-omrbm1.netsolmail.com> <445A1CF2.8010704@gmail.com> <005b01c66fca$64b2bc70$0100a8c0@STUDY> Message-ID: The police bribe depends on circumstances, but everyone regards it as preferable to enforcement! Except I did have one really bad incident with the police. I had rented three minibuses for a student trip. The operator had not told me he wasn't allowed out of Bangkok. Worse, he had not told me we were following the route of a rival bus line which actually had a license to operate on it. Everyone pays the police protection money. That is a basic. Every motorbike taxi, tuk-tuk, you name it, will pay off the police in their area so they are left alone. And the payment does indeed also afford some protection, and profits to the police. So, we got stopped. And the police wanted 1000 baht per minibus. A little hesitation, and handcuffs were produced. The unhappy drivers paid 1000 baht each, but we were allowed to go on our illegal way. In fact, when stopped again later, one of the drivers simply pointed out that a bribe had already been paid, and that seemed to serve as the permit for the rest of the day. Police are paid very little -- they start on 7000 baht a month, so bribes are regarded as a necessary part of their income. This is a key to the traffic problem in Bangkok. Unfortunately, no matter what plans -- grand or modest -- are produced, progress cannot be made until corruption is faced head on. --Jonathan On Thu, 4 May 2006, Linda Fullerton wrote: > Re: As Carlos suggested there is a strong need of "ENFORCEMENT" rather than urging) > > Enforcement in Bangkok? When 200 Baht or if you're lucky 100 Baht will get you off any traffic offence? > > Re: and that they will use the bike park designs we've given them > > Bikes are ridden by those who can't afford motorbikes. It will take a lot more than Bike parks to change a population aspiring to the level of private transport available to most in the west. The average Thai is quite content to sit in a traffic jam... > > Sorry to appear negative.... > > Linda. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Sunny > To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:25 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking > > > it is a very nice example tht Carlos has cited on the energy saving I > guess that the bangkok officials should not urge but instead take the > lead and cut the power themselves for 45min as they planned....mere > words will not provide a solution for the energy savings and the same > rule applies to the transportation....requesting the people to shift to > public transport will no do the job as there is a need for a total PT > reform.....with the existing condition of the buses I doubt if people > would shift..instead if the quality and service is improved then surely > people would shift for the PT. As Carlos suggested there is a strong > need of "ENFORCEMENT" rather than urging. > > Sunny > > Carlos F. Pardo SUTP wrote: > > I sometimes have the hope that Bangkok has taken some of our suggestions > > seriously, and that they will use the bike park designs we've given them, as > > well as all other aspects we've pointed out in various meetings (and the > > countless documents and presentations!). If they really start riding > > bicycles and building facilities, we can take credit! > > > > The Thai government also had a regulation effective in 2005 which made all > > government offices turn off their A/C systems or keep it above a certain > > temperature. Interestingly, I was once in a meeting and saw a deputy mayor > > stand up and change the temperature to the one being "enforced". I hope the > > same starts happening with transport, but it will take a bit more than > > turning a dial. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Carlos F. Pardo > > Project Coordinator > > GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP) > > Room 0942, Transport Division, UN-ESCAP > > ESCAP UN Building > > Rajadamnern Nok Rd. > > Bangkok 10200, Thailand > > Tel: +66 (0) 2 - 288 2576 > > Fax: +66 (0) 2 - 280 6042 > > Mobile: +66 (0) 1 - 772 4727 > > e-mail: carlos.pardo@sutp.org > > Website: www.sutp.org > > > ================================================================ > 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 Visiting Scholar Department of Urban Planning and Design Graduate School of Design Harvard University 312 George Gund Hall 48 Quincy St. Cambridge MA 02138-3000 Mailing address: 182 Palfrey St. Watertown MA 02472-1835 (617) 395-4360 e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From sksunny at gmail.com Fri May 5 13:21:30 2006 From: sksunny at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 11:21:30 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <20060504024335.pl84v08r2qwo0k48@www.pedalsong.net> References: <4458B868.9040504@gmail.com> <200605040008.k44088Lt002027@njbrsm tp1.vzwmail.net> <6.2.3.4.2.20060503173436.05631790@mail.islandnet.com> <20060504024335.pl84v08r2qwo0k48@www.pedalsong.net> Message-ID: <445AD2CA.3080304@gmail.com> Dear Scott, Thank you for your comments. In my opinion Indian railway system mostly connects every nook and corner of the country including the small villages. This is the only reason why the railways are the most used means of transport in India and especially by the poor. Secondly coming to the point of giving options for the farmers, the scene in India as far as I know and experienced is that the farmers do not directly do the sales but rather the middle persons do it. They buy the yield from the farmers and take them to the nearby cities, as agriculture is the major occupation of the country most of the states produce their food and where there is need of shipment it is done usually by a goods train. What I intended to say from my post is that building new roads would encourage the middle men to use their own lorries which they feel would reduce the travel time but on the other hand there will be an increased ownership of lorries. But on the other hand this would be a negative impact to the society as there is an increased risk of accidents and the lorry travel has its own economic impacts as Todd has cited in his latest reply. Coming to HIV and relation to lorry drivers is important as there was not much improvement among some social groups on creating an awareness on condom usage. Some groups have opposed the idea of providing condom vending machines in public places saying that it is a shame on the society. I don't advocate lorry removal but suggest to increase the rail usage for freight purposes. Sunny D. Scott TenBrink wrote: > Todd makes good points here regarding rail vs road subsidy. I also > agree that a > basic network formula does not reflect the distribution patterns of > nodes of use > and production, the responsive change of nodes and network to one another as > well as other forces, or the potential for production and consumption nodes to > be one in the same. Yet I do notice a tendency on this list to say that rail > will simply replace road as a freight distribution system without considering > the difference between the two networks, and the impact of these > differences on > distribution. > > Stripping the main point from Oster's argument (and disregarding the somewhat > unsettling breast-feeding obsession), he points out that rail has fewer nodes > than road and that this results in roads being more effective medium for > transport for the produce farmer. I see two reasons that it is better for the > farmer: he can ship on his own schedule instead of timing his shipments with > the train and making reservations for space, and the road goes right from his > farm to the market with no need to transfer goods. > > Todd makes the point that people are not randomly distributed, but > clumped into > urban areas. However, farms are quite widely dispersed and supermarkets tend > to be (somewhat) evenly distributed across an urban area. Thus, it > seems quite > obvious why the farmer would choose to support road over rail, and I > think that > was the point of the original message. > > Are people arguing that rail can accommodate the farmer better, or that the > farmer should not have such a large voice in the decision (or something else > completely)? I do agree with Oster that Sunny overlooks the difficulties of > switching from road to rail shipping, particularly for payloads that have > widespread production/consumption locations. > > I also found the reference to HIV and lorry drivers to be a bit off. > Certainly > HIV is a concern that desperately needs to be addressed regardless of > profession. Eliminating freight transport by road would be quite a > round-about > and isolationist way to address it. I don?t think our goal is to limit > opportunities for human interaction. I would advocate education and condom > distribution over lorry elimination. > > > -Scott TenBrink From anjali.mahendra at gmail.com Fri May 5 19:45:36 2006 From: anjali.mahendra at gmail.com (Anjali Mahendra) Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 06:45:36 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Guardian article--more thoughts Message-ID: <79767a540605050345t5d5a2ec7m4e6e8049ce25670a@mail.gmail.com> Thanks to Sujit for sending those comments from others in India. The New York Times Series by Amy Waldman came to my mind too. But it was definitely a far more balanced 4-part series that captured many of the issues people raised against the Guardian article. I have them saved up (unfortunately they are only available on TimesSelect now) but am not sure if there's a way to send attachments to the list. I could cut and paste them if required. BTW, I'm surprised that the Guardian article doesn't mention one big change likely to happen in the next couple of years--the development of The Tata Group's "one-lakh rupee car" (that's about $2200)! The car that's supposed to change the way the middle class travels in India and get them out of those lowly two-wheelers. I've pasted a small excerpt from Ratan Tata's interview with the McKinsey Quarterly. But given the fact that he is the Chairman of the Government of India's (autonomous) Investment Commission and his old established business group has the one-lakh rupee car as their main goal in the near future, is it a surprise that the highway projects are the country's priority?? And not rail? The Tata group is known to be one of India's biggest and smartest business comglomerates--quite respected too I would add, so the PR also is not a surprise. "The *Quarterly*: Turning to your plans for the Indian market, the most intriguing is perhaps the development of a people's car that would sell for 100,000 rupees.What's the thinking behind it? Ratan Tata: It is propelled by the opportunity, but there is also a social or dreamy side to it. Today in India, you often see four people on a scooter: a man driving, his little kid in front, and his wife on the back holding a baby between them. It's a dangerous form of transportation, and it leads to accidents and hospitalizations and deaths. If we can make something available on four wheels?all-weather and safe?then I think we will have done something for that mass of young Indians. If you could position an all-weather car that was not a glorified scooter or a stripped-down car, then I believe there would be a market potential of one million cars a year." One million cars a year! And Tata's doing his little bit to make sure that it's smooth sailing when they hit the road. Best, Anjali ------------------------- Anjali Mahendra Doctoral candidate Regional Economics and Transportation Policy Department of Urban Studies and Planning MIT Office: Room 24-423 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 ---------------------------------------------------------- Message: 11 Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 16:13:58 -0400 From: "Lee Schipper" Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" To: "SUSTRAN Asia and Pacific Sustainable Transport" , Cc: Eric Britton , S.Norton@dpmms.cam.ac.uk Message-ID: < s45a2853.040@hermes.wri.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I will try to dig out a similar (series) from the New York Times several months back Someone in Indian road building has a good PR Agent. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060505/d87c5df1/attachment.html From zvi at inro.ca Sat May 6 01:33:45 2006 From: zvi at inro.ca (Zvi Leve) Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 12:33:45 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Guardian article--more thoughts In-Reply-To: <79767a540605050345t5d5a2ec7m4e6e8049ce25670a@mail.gmail.com> References: <79767a540605050345t5d5a2ec7m4e6e8049ce25670a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <445B7E69.3000805@inro.ca> I had posted the text of Amy Waldmans NY Times series on Transportation in India to a chat-board some time ago. The original forum was corrupted and had to be completely reinstalled, with many threads being vaporized, but this link seems to work. It was a very interesting series.... Best regards, Zvi Anjali Mahendra wrote: > Thanks to Sujit for sending those comments from others in India. > > The New York Times Series by Amy Waldman came to my mind too. But it > was definitely a far more balanced 4-part series that captured many of > the issues people raised against the Guardian article. I have them > saved up (unfortunately they are only available on TimesSelect now) > but am not sure if there's a way to send attachments to the list. I > could cut and paste them if required. > From SCHIPPER at wri.org Sat May 6 05:08:47 2006 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 16:08:47 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Guardian article--more thoughts Message-ID: Than ks Zvi .Eric can you post this link on the other fora. This article by Waldman started showing a woman bearing a large jar on her head walking near a superhiway, a perfect emblem of the dangers of building fast roads for a few without regard for the many. >>> zvi@inro.ca 05/05/06 12:33 PM >>> I had posted the text of Amy Waldmans NY Times series on Transportation in India to a chat-board some time ago. The original forum was corrupted and had to be completely reinstalled, with many threads being vaporized, but this link seems to work. It was a very interesting series.... Best regards, Zvi Anjali Mahendra wrote: > Thanks to Sujit for sending those comments from others in India. > > The New York Times Series by Amy Waldman came to my mind too. But it > was definitely a far more balanced 4-part series that captured many of > the issues people raised against the Guardian article. I have them > saved up (unfortunately they are only available on TimesSelect now) > but am not sure if there's a way to send attachments to the list. I > could cut and paste them if required. > ================================================================ 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 carlos.pardo at sutp.org Sat May 6 14:35:58 2006 From: carlos.pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 00:35:58 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Bush is "a bike guy"...? Message-ID: <200605060536.k465a3rk026173@ns-omrbm5.netsolmail.com> Is this real? They still have sprawl, so how do they expect to have everyone use a bicycle in their 20-mile commutte? The next we?ll hear from Bush will be that he?s a ?smart growth guy?! Let?s see what happens Bicycle is king of the road as gas costs rise By Rick Smith International Herald Tribune FRIDAY, MAY 5, 2006 Original source: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/05/05/business/wbbike.php Look no further than to the leader of the free world to find a serious promoter of the bicycle. Referring to his newfound passion, President George W. Bush has praised cycling as a way to "chase that fountain of youth" and called himself "Bike Guy." This spring he spent 35 minutes in the Oval Office with half a dozen U.S. cycling advocates, more time than he gives to some government leaders. But even though Bush is scrambling to find ways to cut U.S. oil consumption, it is not clear whether he sees the bicycle as much more than a virtuous hobby. He would not be alone. Although an engineer designing from scratch could hardly concoct a better device to unclog modern roads - cheap, nonpolluting, small and silent - the bicycle after nearly a century of mass ownership is still more apt to raise quizzical eyebrows than budget allotments. "There is a warm and fuzzy feel for cyclists, but it's a different thing when you talk about practical policy," said Tim Blumenthal, director of Bikes Belong, an industry association based in Boulder, Colorado. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development says that only five of the countries that it follows have comprehensive national cycle campaigns at the moment - Britain, Germany, Finland, the Czech Republic and Latvia. Poland and Spain were singled out as particular laggards. And, most ominously for a warming globe, China and India seem to be using their new wealth to pave the way for the automobile rather than to preserve long traditions of mass cycling. So it may seem odd that many cycling advocates are getting optimistic of late. They acknowledge that progress may be slow at the national level, but many see a wave of action swelling up from below - at the city level, where exasperated mayors are connecting the dots. London, Paris, Chicago, Bogot? and Seoul have embarked on major campaigns to incorporate the bicycle into traffic grids. The results have led to substantial shifts in fuel consumption, commuting times and even real estate values. "A mayor or a deputy mayor can make things happen the fastest," said Andy Clarke, executive director of the League of American Bicyclists in Washington. "They are in a unique position and have all the levers to get results quickly." Consider the case of Enrique Pe?alosa, the mayor of Bogot? from 1998 to 2000. In that city of seven million, he set in motion a transformation of the transport grid with measures like peak-hour restrictions on cars and about 300 kilometers, or 185 miles, of bicycle paths. He said that cycling has become a primary mode of transport for 5 percent of the population, up from 0.1 percent when he started. The share using the car as primary mode, by contrast, has fallen to 13 percent of the population from 17 percent. "It was a war to get car owners off the sidewalks where they used to park and I was almost impeached," he said. "But in the end people loved the new city and the new way of life, and we have saved many hundreds of millions of dollars on road building and maintenance." Pe?alosa, who was prevented by law from running for another term, has been teaching, writing and serving as a consultant to Mexico City, Jakarta, Dar es Salaam in Tanzania and the South Bronx in New York City on cycling grids and other transport innovations. He sees the issue as one of democracy - economic as well as political. "If all citizens are equal, urban policy should be democratic and not everyone has access to a motor car," he said. "In Bogot?, even bus use can take from 13 percent to 26 percent of a minimum wage earner's income and bicycle use over 20 years generates enough savings to buy a house." London may be the greatest success story in the new wave. When Mayor Ken Livingstone introduced a congestion charge in 2003 on vehicles entering the city center, a surprising side effect was a 28 percent surge in cycling in the first year. The city says overall cycling mileage has doubled in the last five years and it aims to achieve another doubling. In some cases, merchants who were initially nervous actually saw sales rising as the population of more fluid bus and cycle lanes fed them more customers. What has also been discovered worldwide is that accident rates have dropped wherever cycling has gained momentum, as cars are forced to slow down and as they become more accustomed to sharing the road. "We're seeing a lot of people willing to try this and now it's getting safer as we get critical mass," said Silka Kennedy-Todd, an official in London's transport office. "The number of accidents has roughly fallen in half as the number of cyclists has doubled." In Chicago, Richard Daley, another charismatic mayor who is an avid cyclist, has given that city the most active cycling program among major U.S. cities. Daley, who has been mayor for five terms, started a "Bike 2015 Plan" and wants emergency medical services and the police to put more of their forces on two wheels. In Seoul, Mayor Myung Bak Lee defied local lobbies and replaced a six-kilometer elevated highway that once covered the Cheonggyecheon River in the city center with parks, walkways and cycle routes. What planners generally have discovered is that a little money spent on cycling infrastructure can go a long way, even though it may take time to produce results and they are not often easy to track statistically. Roelof Wittink, director of Interface for Cycling Expertise, a research organization in Utrecht, the Netherlands, said that Bogot?'s investments in cycling infrastructure eventually produced savings roughly seven times greater. Largely, this resulted from better utilization of urban space and from savings stemming from a slowdown in traffic flow. Viewed from another perspective, his organization cited studies showing that about 6 percent of funds spent in the Netherlands on road infrastructure were devoted to the bicycle, although it accounted for more than 25 percent of all journeys. In Kenya and Tanzania, it is estimated that 60 percent of spending is devoted to the car, which accounts for only about 5 percent of journeys. Such ratios make it clear why many mayors are recasting their budgets. "We have to start from scratch and retrain city engineers and administrators," Wittink said. "Most still have a mind-set that makes the car the priority and it's a major shift to go to any mixed solution." One of the easiest and quickest investments is the simple bicycle rack, either randomly scattered in small units, as in Paris, or centralized in large parking lots, as in many Dutch, German and Chinese cities. The standard formula is that one automobile parking space can hold 10 bicycles. When such facilities are coordinated with rail systems, the volumes become impressive. Nearly 30 percent of Dutch rail passengers cycle to the station, and 12 percent then get on cycles again to reach their final destinations. Cycle paths are so much cheaper to build and maintain that some cities have gone to extremes to encourage them. Copenhagen finally resorted to providing a fleet of free bicycles. Of course, the global effect of all this ingenuity and experimentation in the rich West pales compared with the opportunity at risk of being squandered in the developing world. Poverty long has consigned the bulk of humanity to foot or to human- powered transport, and it means that China, India and Indonesia are far ahead of wealthy nations on this environmental score, even if it is not by choice. Whether they will improve on the pattern of richer countries is uncertain: Eight years ago roughly 60 percent of Beijing's work force cycled to work but that percentage has dropped below 20 percent. "A monoculture is dangerous and that is almost what we've created in the United States with the automobile," said Clarke, of the League of American Bicyclists. "We need to own up to that as an example to others." America, of course, does not have a unique predilection for the comfort and status of the automobile. "Even in the Netherlands, there were politicians in the 1960s who complained about the nuisance of cyclists," Wittink said. Total kilometers cycled in the Netherlands fell roughly 70 percent as car ownership rose between 1960 and 1980. Similarly, Copenhagen has seen cycling increase steadily for 30 years, but it still is below the levels of the 1950s, said Thomas Krag, a consultant in Copenhagen who has advised the city and the Danish government. But the Netherlands and Denmark, the undisputed champions of cycle use, have come closest to restoring the bicycle to its pre-auto role. Perhaps it is no coincidence that they share one concept: Dutch and Danish cyclists are protected by an extensive legal framework and are fully recognized users of the road. "It surprised us that neither country has a national bicycle program as such any more," said Mary Crass, a transport policy analyst at the OECD in Paris. "It just wasn't necessary." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060506/3e886d7d/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 73 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060506/3e886d7d/attachment.gif From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Sat May 6 15:42:17 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 08:42:17 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Guardian article--more thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <004c01c670d8$3875f820$6501a8c0@Home> >> This article by Waldman started showing a woman bearing a large jar on her head walking near a superhiway, a perfect emblem of the dangers of building fast roads for a few without regard for the many.<< Lee. Can you help me get that image? I would like to see if ew can use it for the cover of the Weolrd Bank stratgy report for the sectot that we are currently working on at http://www.gatnet.net/. Thanks and Shabath Shalom. The Infedel From sguttikunda at gmail.com Sat May 6 22:53:23 2006 From: sguttikunda at gmail.com (Sarath Guttikunda) Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 09:53:23 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Guardian article--more thoughts In-Reply-To: <004c01c670d8$3875f820$6501a8c0@Home> References: <004c01c670d8$3875f820$6501a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <683ba1ca0605060653gc6ebc32l2a2adf232617c52f@mail.gmail.com> Eric, Picture you are looking for is here.. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/india/index.html?query=TRANSPORTATION&field=des&match=exact Sarath -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060506/8899bc22/attachment.html From schipper at wri.org Sat May 6 23:02:27 2006 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 10:02:27 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Guardian article--more thoughts Message-ID: Thanks Sarath, that's the picture I sought....if no urn on the head. >>> sguttikunda@gmail.com 05/06/06 9:53 AM >>> Eric, Picture you are looking for is here.. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/india/index.html?query=TRANSPORTATION&field=des&match=exact Sarath From sksunny at gmail.com Mon May 8 00:42:27 2006 From: sksunny at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 22:42:27 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Incident on the National Highway of India In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <445E1563.4050008@gmail.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060507/ebe81ab4/attachment.html From sguttikunda at gmail.com Mon May 8 01:03:36 2006 From: sguttikunda at gmail.com (Sarath Guttikunda) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 12:03:36 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Incident on the National Highway of India In-Reply-To: <445E1563.4050008@gmail.com> References: <445E1563.4050008@gmail.com> Message-ID: <683ba1ca0605070903l6d363815h9fc03f7f299b6d9@mail.gmail.com> I am from the UPPAL area and it is an everyday affair that drivers (not just lorries and not just UPPAL) drive with one hand on the steering wheel and one hand on the horn, whic makes controling the vehicles problematic and I won't be surprised if it is the case here again. As Corlos mentioned earlier, this could very well be an issue of discipline, driving patterns, and drivers behaviour. Besides construction of NHs we need more communications and awareness on safety and safe driving. Here is an article on CNN principal voices today by Prof. Geetam Tiwari at IIT Delhi. ** * http://www.principalvoices.com/2006/urbanization/geetam.tiwari.white.paper.html * Sarath On 5/7/06, Sunny wrote: > > Dear All, > > The following news is abt an incident (accident) that took place on a > National highway (NH-9) which I mentioned earlier in my mail and also a part > of the "Golden Quadrilateral Project" that is in discussion on our list. > > Sunny > > *Three burnt alive in road accident in A.P. * > > Staff Reporter > > CHOWTUPPAL: Three persons, including a two-year-old boy and his mother, > were killed in a road accident when a speeding lorry ran over two > motorcycles near Khaitapuram village in Chowtuppal mandal on the National > Highway No. 9 on Saturday morning. Two others were also critically injured > in the accident. > > The lorry carrying a load of onions from Hyderabad to Vijayawada was > totally destroyed in the fire that erupted after it hit the motorcycles and > dragged them along for over a distance of 70 feet. The impact was such that > sparks flew as the motorcycles were dragged and the petrol tanks burst and > soon fire engulfed the lorry. > > As the morning traffic on the busy highway screeched to a halt and the > passengers watched in horror, bodies of three motorcyclists caught fire. The > lorry crew have fled. Fire engines brought the fire under control. > > Source: http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/07/stories/2006050704360600.htm > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060507/4dcaef75/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon May 8 05:05:42 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 22:05:42 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Incident on the National Highway of India In-Reply-To: <683ba1ca0605070903l6d363815h9fc03f7f299b6d9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00f101c67211$a053ba10$6501a8c0@Home> We were talking about images of the reality of the road of India just the other day, and as I result I went into out Gender, Equity and Transport site at http://www.gatnet.net/ to take the first small steps to build up photographic evidence. Here you have image number 4 in this collection. Sadly. Three burnt alive in road accident in A.P. Staff Reporter CHOWTUPPAL: Three persons, including a two-year-old boy and his mother, were killed in a road accident when a speeding lorry ran over two motorcycles near Khaitapuram village in Chowtuppal mandal on the National Highway No. 9 on Saturday morning. Two others were also critically injured in the accident. The lorry carrying a load of onions from Hyderabad to Vijayawada was totally destroyed in the fire that erupted after it hit the motorcycles and dragged them along for over a distance of 70 feet. The impact was such that sparks flew as the motorcycles were dragged and the petrol tanks burst and soon fire engulfed the lorry. As the morning traffic on the busy highway screeched to a halt and the passengers watched in horror, bodies of three motorcyclists caught fire. The lorry crew have fled. Fire engines brought the fire under control. Source: http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/07/stories/2006050704360600.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060507/8c83f76c/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 24874 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060507/8c83f76c/attachment.jpe From schipper at wri.org Mon May 8 05:49:39 2006 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 16:49:39 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Incident on the National Highway of India Message-ID: whoops. Why are they driving on the US Side? That aside, this is EXACTLY what Mayor Penalosa and I observed in Dec. 2004 driving from Delhi to Agra. People running across the road, 18 wheelers running camel drivers across the road, etc. >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 05/07/06 4:05 PM >>> We were talking about images of the reality of the road of India just the other day, and as I result I went into out Gender, Equity and Transport site at http://www.gatnet.net/ to take the first small steps to build up photographic evidence. Here you have image number 4 in this collection. Sadly. Three burnt alive in road accident in A.P. Staff Reporter CHOWTUPPAL: Three persons, including a two-year-old boy and his mother, were killed in a road accident when a speeding lorry ran over two motorcycles near Khaitapuram village in Chowtuppal mandal on the National Highway No. 9 on Saturday morning. Two others were also critically injured in the accident. The lorry carrying a load of onions from Hyderabad to Vijayawada was totally destroyed in the fire that erupted after it hit the motorcycles and dragged them along for over a distance of 70 feet. The impact was such that sparks flew as the motorcycles were dragged and the petrol tanks burst and soon fire engulfed the lorry. As the morning traffic on the busy highway screeched to a halt and the passengers watched in horror, bodies of three motorcyclists caught fire. The lorry crew have fled. Fire engines brought the fire under control. Source: http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/07/stories/2006050704360600.htm From schipper at wri.org Mon May 8 05:49:39 2006 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 16:49:39 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Incident on the National Highway of India Message-ID: whoops. Why are they driving on the US Side? That aside, this is EXACTLY what Mayor Penalosa and I observed in Dec. 2004 driving from Delhi to Agra. People running across the road, 18 wheelers running camel drivers across the road, etc. >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 05/07/06 4:05 PM >>> We were talking about images of the reality of the road of India just the other day, and as I result I went into out Gender, Equity and Transport site at http://www.gatnet.net/ to take the first small steps to build up photographic evidence. Here you have image number 4 in this collection. Sadly. Three burnt alive in road accident in A.P. Staff Reporter CHOWTUPPAL: Three persons, including a two-year-old boy and his mother, were killed in a road accident when a speeding lorry ran over two motorcycles near Khaitapuram village in Chowtuppal mandal on the National Highway No. 9 on Saturday morning. Two others were also critically injured in the accident. The lorry carrying a load of onions from Hyderabad to Vijayawada was totally destroyed in the fire that erupted after it hit the motorcycles and dragged them along for over a distance of 70 feet. The impact was such that sparks flew as the motorcycles were dragged and the petrol tanks burst and soon fire engulfed the lorry. As the morning traffic on the busy highway screeched to a halt and the passengers watched in horror, bodies of three motorcyclists caught fire. The lorry crew have fled. Fire engines brought the fire under control. Source: http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/07/stories/2006050704360600.htm From ktsourl at mailbox.gr Mon May 8 06:10:43 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 8 May 2006 00:10:43 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution Message-ID: <20060507211043.21989.qmail@mailbox.gr> A little scrutiny can prove that motorways are an oxymoron per se. Indeed, road transport has advantage over rail transport where there are scattered movements (many sources and destinations with low loads). But motorways are always built along corridors with concentrated movements (few sources and destinations with high loads). So motorways are NEVER a good solution. Agricultural products are rarely transported directly from fields to shops. Usually they are concentrated in warehouses near production areas, afterwards distributed to warehouses near consumption centres (i.e. cities) and from there distributed to the final consumption (stores). The central movement (between warehouses - the long one) is a concentrated movement, hence better implemented by rail. _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From et3 at et3.com Mon May 8 06:08:45 2006 From: et3 at et3.com (Daryl Oster) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 17:08:45 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" In-Reply-To: <324DCD7680954F468CF306EE5404F001021401DE@mail01.cbuchanan.co.uk> Message-ID: <200605072108.k47L8jLt014129@njbrsmtp1.vzwmail.net> > Original Message From: Alan Howes > Thanks Todd. I do rather feel that if Daryl spent as much time promoting > ETT as he does rubbishing rail that the former would be more advanced by > now. Alan, The vast majority of my time IS spent promoting ETT (Evacuated Tube Transport). You accuse me of "rubbishing rail", yet if you look back over my posts on this group, you will see the only time I state rail FACTS are to counter rail lies. Rail is touted by the rail industry as a more sustainable way to move people than cars, history has proven this to be false except for in ultra high population density locations such as Tokyo, and NYC. More than 90% of the worlds population do NOT live in the densely populated areas that are favorable to rail economics -- so the rail industry is promoting the creation of such unsustainable population density! > Just one or two quick points - > > US Railfreight is growing rapidly at present (and US railroad stocks are > on the up and up). Over long distances (the sort of distance we are > talking about in India) rail's modal share of TONS is high - I don't have > the figures to hand but I would guess something like 80% or more. I fully agree, rail was designed and optimized to move heavy loads at slow speed for very low ton-mile cost. Rail is still very good at this, and low cost commodities that are not perishable are overwhelmingly moved by rail as it is presently the best mode for such need. > it's the tons that need the infrastructure, not the dollars. Who would > even think of trucking coal from Wyoming to the Mississippi (let alone > airfreight!)? Alan, you admonishment for not promoting ETT indicates to me that you think I should supply more information. This is a recent estimate of ETT for hauling 200 mega tons per year of coal from Wyoming 1200 miles to the east coast. It is not available on the et3 website, so I am supplying it to the group to indicate that ETT can also do what heavy rail is capable of. The double track through Nebraska that hauls coal from the powder basin in Wyoming has a frequency of 4 trains per hour, each train with about 100 cars of 100ton each. That is almost a million ton per day, or about 50% more than the 200MT/year stated as the need. For your comparison, the following rough estimates for using ETT to move coal: The cost of capacity for ETT is according to the cost of the tubes, the airlocks, and the capsules, and the energy. Tube cost = $2M / mile for 1200 mile = $2.4B The capacity of one capsule is about 0.45 ton. The cost of one airlock and branching switch is about $1M/airlock (assumes 30 airlocks per branch). The capacity of one airlock is two capsules per minute, or 0.9 ton / min = 54 ton / hour. Assuming 350 days of operation per year, and 20 hours per day, the annual capacity per airlock is 54*20*350= 378kT / year. 200MT/0.378MT= 529 airlocks One airlock is needed at each end, so the airlock cost is about $1.06B The minimum capsule is one capsule every 30 foot (2:1safety factor), and we have 1,058 capsules per min = 17.63 capsules per second, so the minimum design speed for one tube would be 17.63*30'= 529ft/sec = 361mph. One trip for a capsule to cover 1200 miles would take 3.34 hours, = 6.68 hours per round trip, plus a 15min dwell at each end, would take 7.18 hours. The number of capsules needed would be 1 capsule every 30' for 2400miles, plus 30 capsules dwelling at each airlock = ((2,400*5,280)/30)+(30*1058) = 422,400 + 31,740 = 454,140 capsules. Each capsule will cost about $20,000, so the cost is about $9.083B Total cost for a design speed of 361mph = $12.5B Assuming the cost at 10%/year for capital and maintenance = $1.25B/year Each trip (0.45T) will take about 2kWh for acceleration, and about 5Wh/mile = 6kWh, for a total energy per load of 8kWh. (assumes no elevation change) So the annual energy cost @10cents per kWh = (200M/0.45)*8kWh * 10cents = $356M energy cost, Total cost of 200MT*1200mile = 240BT mile/year at a cost of $1.606B/year = 0.67 cents per ton mile. The cost of the capsules is much higher than the cost of the tube, so the design speed is not optimum, but considering energy cost is necessary too. Increasing the design speed to 722mph will cut the number of capsules needed by 211,200 (the spacing goes up to one capsule every 60' and the safety factor increases to 4:1). This will increase the tube cost by about $0.6B, and the airlock cost by $0.503B but decrease the capsule cost by $4.224B Total cost for a design speed of 722mph is likely to be $9.38B At 10%/year = $938M/year. Each trip (0.45T) will take about 8kWh for acceleration, and about 10Wh/mile = 12kWh, for a total energy per load of 20kWh. So the annual energy cost @10cents per kWh = (200M/0.45)*20kWh * 10cents = $889M energy cost, for a total of $1.827B/year. 240BT/yr @ $1.827B/yr = 0.76 cents per ton mile. NOTES: This is a very rough cost estimate using the detailed estimates for passenger / general cargo ETT. The present ETT design is optimized for passenger use, and consumer cargo that is mostly moved by truck and aircraft. No profit or route specific costs (like ROW, and geographical related expenses) are included. The energy required to return capsules was not considered, as there may be some other uses that would recover this cost, AND the value of energy recovery during capsule braking was not considered, this will tend to reduce energy cost. Further optimizing ETT for low value bulk cargo would be a major study. If we get a request and funding from a licensee to do this, I will devote the time to do it. My crude guess is that it is likely that the cost could be optimized to be as low as a half cent per ton-mile, (ideal conditions, flat route, no obstacles); but this would give a configuration that would not be as useful for passenger or other cargo needs. Generally: ETT capsule cost is very sensitive to capsule loading per foot of length. Tube cost is very sensitive to tube diameter (double the diameter increases cost by 8X), and somewhat sensitive to design speed. Increasing the capsule loading would reduce the number of airlocks, and the number of capsules needed, but the cost per capsule would increase almost enough to offset the reduction in numbers of capsules. The tube cost assumes no tunneling. The cost of underground tube guideway in a tunnel is triple the cost of elevated tube guideway. If the route with a design speed of 361mph has 10% additional cost for tunneling, and if the design speed were increased to 722mph, the tunneling cost would likely increase to about 40%. A design speed of about 2,000mph and over would most likely require full underground structure. The maximum practical speed for ETT is about 4,000mph, and this is appropriate for very long intercontinental trips, the cost estimate for underground ETT at 4,000mph is a minimum of $10M/mile in ideal circumstance, and the airlock / branch cost will be increased by about the same factor. NOTE: using ETT to haul coal from the 4,000' to 5,000' altitude of the powder basin to sealevel would produce a significant amount of energy through energy recovery, and the energy cost would likely be zero if only empty capsules were returned. > But US rail is also making inroads in markets such as > contracting to UPS, fruit and veg, etc. Not to mention the huge flow of > containers from West Coast ports. As you can see from the above example, ETT ton-mile cost (even considering recovery of infrastructure cost) is favorable compared to rail. One big advantage of ETT is that the access points can be distributed according to demand with a much finer granularity than rail. AND the speed is 361/14= 25.8 times greater. This is especially important in moving perishable items such as fruit. The cost of trucking a ton-mile is 3 times greater than using rail, AND the speed is 3 times faster, so trucks are used more for moving time sensitive loads, and higher value items. ETT combines the energy and labor efficiency of trains, with the time efficiency of aircraft! > In the UK at least, many inter-urban passenger rail services are now > genuinely profitable - a positive result of the involvement of the private > sector in operation (and again numbers are rising rapidly). And that's > despite excessive track access charges under the UK's decidedly messy > "privatised" rail regime. I agree that existing railroad, if fully paid for, and if fully utilized (high use factor) is capable of recovering a little more than operating and renewal costs; AND it is also well proven that new rail expansion is incapable of recovering it's capital cost as well -- so the claim of profitability is false, as it ignores the extremely high route development and infrastructure capitalization costs. > I claim limited expertise on Indian urban transport, and hardly any on > inter-urban and rural. But I suspect that what is needed is a re- > invigoration of the rail system, which is government owned and run, > heavily subsidised, and I'll bet it takes a LONG time to get a box-car (or > the Indian equivalent) from (say) Mumbai to Chennai. > But what do Indians have to say on this? > Alan It is already proven that trucks and cars on roads are more than capable of marginalizing rail investment to just barely being capable of breaking even, and in most case, operating only through subsidy (paying people to use them). If new infrastructure is to be built, it only makes sense to build using technology that is capable of the greatest benefit for the minimum cost (highest possible VALUE -- as is available with ETT. ETT is capable of providing an order of magnitude improvement in transportation value over cars. Trucks, and aircraft, while retaining most of the advantages of rail. Daryl Oster (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com> From et3 at et3.com Mon May 8 06:57:51 2006 From: et3 at et3.com (Daryl Oster) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 17:57:51 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <20060504024335.pl84v08r2qwo0k48@www.pedalsong.net> Message-ID: <200605072157.k47LvrLt014879@njbrsmtp1.vzwmail.net> > Original Message From: D. Scott TenBrink > > Todd makes good points here regarding rail vs road subsidy. This depends on the definition of subsidy: If you consider a transportation subsidy to be government expenditures on transportation mode, in the US, the government expends about 40 times more per passenger mile of rail transportation than is expended on a passenger mile of road transportation. If you define subsidy as a gift (negative rate of return on investment), then roads are NOT subsidized, and passenger trains are subsidized, as road expenditures are more than recovered by fees and taxes collected directly from the users. Passenger rail expenditures in the US have always been incapable of recovering the direct costs. > I also agree that a basic network formula does not reflect the > distribution patterns of nodes of use and production, the responsive > change of nodes and network to one another as well as other forces, or the > potential for production and consumption nodes to be one in the same. Yet > I do notice a tendency on this list to say that rail will simply replace > road as a freight distribution system without considering > the difference between the two networks, and the impact of these > differences on distribution. Well stated! The network theory of (N-1)^2 has been experimentally verified with empirical data. It holds only for nodes that are optimally placed to exploit their full share of capacity. In the case of a real network, only the initial nodes are optimally placed, and the "last mile" must be subsidized by the profits of the initial most profitable nodes, to the point of optimizing total system value. In the case of rail in the US, the government provided the incentive to add enough value (land grants) to expand the network for greater value beyond the simple limits of profitability. Now that network theory is much better understood, the extents of optimal network expansion are better planned from the onset. > Stripping the main point from Oster's argument (and disregarding the > somewhat unsettling breast-feeding obsession), he points out that rail has > fewer nodes than road and that this results in roads being more effective > medium for transport for the produce farmer. I see two reasons that it is > better for the farmer: he can ship on his own schedule instead of timing > his shipments with the train and making reservations for space, and the > road goes right from his farm to the market with no need to transfer > goods. Having grown up on a farm, I can attest to the fact that most grain in the US is initially moved by truck. Even though the US has the most extensive rail network in the world, less than 5% of farms in the US have rail access. Almost all produce is hauled from the fields by truck. And the farmer usually sells to produce companies that have a node (on rail or water) to effectively ship great distances to large markets. In my opinion, building rail will not benefit the local farmer, but it will provide opportunity for middle men to take advantage of their inability to effectively reach the market over a good road with a community owned truck! > Todd makes the point that people are not randomly distributed, but > clumped into urban areas. However, farms are quite widely dispersed and > supermarkets tend to be (somewhat) evenly distributed across an urban > area. Thus, it seems quite obvious why the farmer would choose to support > road over rail, and I think that was the point of the original message. Correctly deduced, and well stated. Those who grow up in a train dominated city do not understand, and are prone to believe the lies of those who would profit by rail expansion. > Are people arguing that rail can accommodate the farmer better, or that > the farmer should not have such a large voice in the decision (or > something else completely)? I do agree with Oster that Sunny overlooks > the difficulties of switching from road to rail shipping, particularly for > payloads that have widespread production/consumption locations. History is rich with examples of produce transporters taking unfair advantage of a farmers inability to access a market. That is why most own a truck, even though it is only uses 3 or 4 weeks out of the year!! Survey most farmers in the US, and you will find most of them hate the railroads. > I also found the reference to HIV and lorry drivers to be a bit off. > Certainly HIV is a concern that desperately needs to be addressed > regardless of profession. Eliminating freight transport by road would be > quite a round-about and isolationist way to address it. I don?t think our > goal is to limit opportunities for human interaction. I would advocate > education and condom distribution over lorry elimination. > -Scott TenBrink Scott, I fully agree. It is far more powerful to build bridges to enhance human interaction, than to build walls to stifle it. Transportation should never take the blame for education failings. AND transportation is perhaps the best tool to accomplish equity and education with. The developing countries deserve the highest value transportation, not hand-me-down systems that will tend to perpetuate the lack of development and equity. Evil has many masks, and the most dangerous is virtue. Those who claim that rail offers the poor equity, (while flying around to elitist conferences via jets and limousines), are robbing those who can least afford to defend them selves. So the elite of developing countries grow stronger, while the value producers remain dependant. Daryl Oster (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com From et3 at et3.com Mon May 8 07:17:45 2006 From: et3 at et3.com (Daryl Oster) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 18:17:45 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060504061226.05616d80@mail.islandnet.com> Message-ID: <200605072217.k47MHkZX005463@njbrsmtp2.vzwmail.net> > Original Message From: Todd Alexander Litman > > Rail is often the most cost effective way of shipping farm products. Here > in North America many farm groups have fought hard to maintain rail > service in their areas. For that reason some rural communities have > purchased rail lines that were scheduled for abandonment in order to > maintain service. Todd, If you look at my posts, you will see that I always qualify the difference in passenger and freight rail. Most cargo rail in the US is not subsidized, and is profitable and efficient. I have no complaint or issue with private rail investment. On the average rail is 1/3 the cost of truck, and takes three times longer. There are many incidences where railroad freight rates are so high that is lower cost for a farmer to buy a truck for only 3 or 4 weeks use per year, along with the labor cost, and higher operating cost than to contract with a rail shipper. There have been several coops formed by farmers to harness the efficiency of rail, while some are successful in achieving better value for farmers, many instead grow top-heavy with general and administrative costs (and perhaps even some corruption). > Researchers Kenneth Casavant and Jerry Lenzi ("Rail Line Abandonment and > Public Acquisition Impacts on Economic Development," Transportation > Research Record 1274, 1989, pp. 241-251) found that it is often cost > effective for transportation agencies to subsidize rail lines than to have > rural freight (such as farm products) travel by heavy trucks, which cause > significant damage to roadways. An efficient transportation system would > charge trucks the full costs of the road damage they impose, which would > give shippers a rational reason to use rail when it is most cost effective > overall, but currently most jurisdictions undercharge heavy trucks (i.e., > they impose significant economic externalities) making trucking appear > cheaper than it really is to society. > > Of course, this is not to suggest that all freight should travel by rail, > but with improved logistics (i.e., more containerization and more > efficient terminal operations) and as fuel costs increase and communities > become more concerned about external impacts such as road damage, > congestion, accident risk and pollution, the role of rail increases. > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman I fully agree that trucks must be charged for the road damage they cause, and I agree that rail is often the best present method to move freight with. For new transportation infrastructure, please consider that ETT offers: low cost cargo ability, low cost infrastructure, distributed access, AND very high speed. Daryl Oster (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com> From et3 at et3.com Mon May 8 07:55:01 2006 From: et3 at et3.com (Daryl Oster) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 18:55:01 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <20060507211043.21989.qmail@mailbox.gr> Message-ID: <200605072255.k47Mt4tK020831@txslsmtp1.vzwmail.net> > Original Message From: K. Tsourlakis > > A little scrutiny can prove that motorways are an oxymoron per se. Indeed, > road transport has advantage over rail transport where there are scattered > movements (many sources and destinations with low loads). But motorways > are always built along corridors with concentrated movements (few sources > and destinations with high loads). So motorways are NEVER a good solution. I have presented ample data that shows that motorways have marginalized passenger rail to the point of having a 90% market share in 1910, to a less than a 2% market share today. This fact appears to contradict the absolute terms of your supposition. Please support you thesis with fact and historical data that proves your point. > Agricultural products are rarely transported directly from fields to > shops. Usually they are concentrated in warehouses near production areas, > afterwards distributed to warehouses near consumption centres (i.e. > cities) and from there distributed to the final consumption (stores). The > central movement (between warehouses - the long one) is a concentrated > movement, hence better implemented by rail. K. Tsourlakis, Good points about rail use for freight. It is true that most produce is moved using the most economical methods, and this is often a combination of truck and rail. Please consider that a fully developed ETT network could transport produce a pallet at a time directly from the producer to retailer, -- without all the logistic gymnastics of trucks, containers, warehouses, distribution centers, trains, ships, etc. ETT (Evacuated Tube Transport) can achieve as high of a transport flux as rail, with less than a tenth of the per mile infrastructure cost. ETT is also virtually silent (sound cannot be transported in a vacuum), and ETT is faster than jets. With all the benefits available with ETT, why would anyone promote rail infrastructure for new development, especially since cars/roads have displaced passenger rail to ultra high density niche markets in developed countries. Daryl Oster (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Sat May 6 19:55:21 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 12:55:21 +0200 Subject: [sustran] India images Message-ID: <009901c670fb$93077700$6501a8c0@Home> Great idea Karl. Than you so much. eric -----Original Message----- From: Karl Fjellstrom [mailto:karl@itdp.org] Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 12:19 PM To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org Cc: 'Paul Barter' Subject: india images Dear Eric, Outstanding pics! But they are too large to send to the sustran list. I've taken the liberty of downsizing them (results attached) so they will be easier to send. Perhaps you could send an email with these mini versions attached to sustran, with a note offering people interested in the full pic to contact you, or a link to the full pics which you post somewhere. Or Paul may have another suggestion. Thanks, Karl -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 4.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45932 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060506/8d4a3020/4-0001.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1.gif Type: image/gif Size: 42342 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060506/8d4a3020/1-0001.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2.gif Type: image/gif Size: 42892 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060506/8d4a3020/2-0001.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 3.gif Type: image/gif Size: 41526 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060506/8d4a3020/3-0001.gif From scott at pedalsong.net Mon May 8 12:30:02 2006 From: scott at pedalsong.net (D. Scott TenBrink) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 21:30:02 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <200605072255.k47Mt4tK020831@txslsmtp1.vzwmail.net> References: <200605072255.k47Mt4tK020831@txslsmtp1.vzwmail.net> Message-ID: <20060507213002.zu5hjka2t1k4gkow@www.pedalsong.net> Daryl Oster said: "With all the benefits available with ETT, why would anyone promote rail infrastructure for new development, especially since cars/roads have displaced passenger rail to ultra high density niche markets in developed countries." For me, this statement leads to another question. Considering the extensive evidence that you have presented, why hasn't ETT made any progress in acquiring funding or producing a test model? I would be interested to hear what Mr. Oster sees as the obstacles to implementation. From your previous posts is seems that you place significant blame on rail advocates, which I think is misdirected. Whether rail is subsidized or not, I can't imagine that rail advocacy efforts can afford to put many resources into actively obstructing ETT funding. Do you see rail advocacy as the major obstacle to ETT implementation? -Scott Quoting Daryl Oster : > >> Original Message From: K. Tsourlakis >> >> A little scrutiny can prove that motorways are an oxymoron per se. Indeed, >> road transport has advantage over rail transport where there are scattered >> movements (many sources and destinations with low loads). But motorways >> are always built along corridors with concentrated movements (few sources >> and destinations with high loads). So motorways are NEVER a good solution. > > I have presented ample data that shows that motorways have marginalized > passenger rail to the point of having a 90% market share in 1910, to a less > than a 2% market share today. This fact appears to contradict the absolute > terms of your supposition. Please support you thesis with fact and > historical data that proves your point. > > >> Agricultural products are rarely transported directly from fields to >> shops. Usually they are concentrated in warehouses near production areas, >> afterwards distributed to warehouses near consumption centres (i.e. >> cities) and from there distributed to the final consumption (stores). The >> central movement (between warehouses - the long one) is a concentrated >> movement, hence better implemented by rail. > K. Tsourlakis, > > Good points about rail use for freight. It is true that most produce is > moved using the most economical methods, and this is often a combination of > truck and rail. Please consider that a fully developed ETT network could > transport produce a pallet at a time directly from the producer to retailer, > -- without all the logistic gymnastics of trucks, containers, warehouses, > distribution centers, trains, ships, etc. > > ETT (Evacuated Tube Transport) can achieve as high of a transport flux as > rail, with less than a tenth of the per mile infrastructure cost. ETT is > also virtually silent (sound cannot be transported in a vacuum), and ETT is > faster than jets. With all the benefits available with ETT, why would > anyone promote rail infrastructure for new development, especially since > cars/roads have displaced passenger rail to ultra high density niche markets > in developed countries. > > Daryl Oster > (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" > e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks > of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River > FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com > > > > ================================================================ > 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 sujit at vsnl.com Mon May 8 13:17:33 2006 From: sujit at vsnl.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 09:47:33 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Incident on the National Highway of India In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4cfd20aa0605072117s59c519b6m4511a561685a40c2@mail.gmail.com> 8 May 2006 Lee, I thought as a regular visitor to India you know why! Numerous highways are either under construction or repairs. When this is happening, one side of the road is closed to traffic and vehicles from both direction use half of the full width. This need not be a problem if people take extra care while using this stretch by avoiding overtaking, stopping and over speeding. But unfortunately the reality is quite different. They not only over-speed, overtake and stop as and when they feel like it, but some drivers also continue driving along the half that is under repairs. Poor signage, poor enforcement (highway police are never around) and badly constructed edges makes the roads even more dangerous. The poor pedestrian or the cyclist (near villages) is not even in the picture when these grand highway schemes are planned and although big promises are made about environmental factors, there's hardly a highway one can name, that didn't massacre hundreds of grand old roadside trees. A slight realignment of the road could save many trees (by bringing them in alignment with the road dividers) but roads and high profile expressways are designed in air conditioned officices in Delhi or Mumbai by engineers who don't understand nor care for silly things like birds and the trees that environmentalists seem to worry about more than human lives. It is precisely these kind of articles (like the one published by Guardian) that help to worsen the situation because they are written from the point of view of Mr Poonawalla's brand new Rolls Royce rather than the majority who have to use the highways out of compulsion of getting from point A to point B, preferably alive and in one piece. Exactly the same attitude prevails in cities where flyovers and roadwidening (for the personal auto vehicle) always gets priority over the needs of Public Transport buses, pedestrian paths and safe cycle tracks. - Sujit stuck in traffic On 5/8/06, Lee Schipper wrote: > > whoops. Why are they driving on the US Side? That aside, this is EXACTLY > what Mayor Penalosa and I observed in Dec. 2004 driving from Delhi to > Agra. People running > across the road, 18 wheelers running camel drivers across the road, > etc. > > >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 05/07/06 4:05 PM >>> > We were talking about images of the reality of the road of India just > the other day, and as I result I went into out Gender, Equity and > Transport site at http://www.gatnet.net/ to take the first small steps > to build up photographic evidence. Here you have image number 4 in > this > collection. Sadly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Three burnt alive in road accident in A.P. > > Staff Reporter > > CHOWTUPPAL: Three persons, including a two-year-old boy and his > mother, > were killed in a road accident when a speeding lorry ran over two > motorcycles near Khaitapuram village in Chowtuppal mandal on the > National Highway No. 9 on Saturday morning. Two others were also > critically injured in the accident. > > The lorry carrying a load of onions from Hyderabad to Vijayawada was > totally destroyed in the fire that erupted after it hit the > motorcycles > and dragged them along for over a distance of 70 feet. The impact was > such that sparks flew as the motorcycles were dragged and the petrol > tanks burst and soon fire engulfed the lorry. > > As the morning traffic on the busy highway screeched to a halt and the > passengers watched in horror, bodies of three motorcyclists caught > fire. > The lorry crew have fled. Fire engines brought the fire under control. > > > Source: > > http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/07/stories/2006050704360600.htm > > > > > > ================================================================ > 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. > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujit@vsnl.com sujitjp@gmail.com "Yamuna", ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India Tel: 25537955 ----------------------------------------------------- Hon. Secretary: Parisar www.parisar.org ------------------------------------------------------ Founder Member: PTTF (Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum) www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060508/a7b4af0c/attachment.html From sujit at vsnl.com Mon May 8 13:17:33 2006 From: sujit at vsnl.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 09:47:33 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Incident on the National Highway of India In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4cfd20aa0605072117s59c519b6m4511a561685a40c2@mail.gmail.com> 8 May 2006 Lee, I thought as a regular visitor to India you know why! Numerous highways are either under construction or repairs. When this is happening, one side of the road is closed to traffic and vehicles from both direction use half of the full width. This need not be a problem if people take extra care while using this stretch by avoiding overtaking, stopping and over speeding. But unfortunately the reality is quite different. They not only over-speed, overtake and stop as and when they feel like it, but some drivers also continue driving along the half that is under repairs. Poor signage, poor enforcement (highway police are never around) and badly constructed edges makes the roads even more dangerous. The poor pedestrian or the cyclist (near villages) is not even in the picture when these grand highway schemes are planned and although big promises are made about environmental factors, there's hardly a highway one can name, that didn't massacre hundreds of grand old roadside trees. A slight realignment of the road could save many trees (by bringing them in alignment with the road dividers) but roads and high profile expressways are designed in air conditioned officices in Delhi or Mumbai by engineers who don't understand nor care for silly things like birds and the trees that environmentalists seem to worry about more than human lives. It is precisely these kind of articles (like the one published by Guardian) that help to worsen the situation because they are written from the point of view of Mr Poonawalla's brand new Rolls Royce rather than the majority who have to use the highways out of compulsion of getting from point A to point B, preferably alive and in one piece. Exactly the same attitude prevails in cities where flyovers and roadwidening (for the personal auto vehicle) always gets priority over the needs of Public Transport buses, pedestrian paths and safe cycle tracks. - Sujit stuck in traffic On 5/8/06, Lee Schipper wrote: > > whoops. Why are they driving on the US Side? That aside, this is EXACTLY > what Mayor Penalosa and I observed in Dec. 2004 driving from Delhi to > Agra. People running > across the road, 18 wheelers running camel drivers across the road, > etc. > > >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 05/07/06 4:05 PM >>> > We were talking about images of the reality of the road of India just > the other day, and as I result I went into out Gender, Equity and > Transport site at http://www.gatnet.net/ to take the first small steps > to build up photographic evidence. Here you have image number 4 in > this > collection. Sadly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Three burnt alive in road accident in A.P. > > Staff Reporter > > CHOWTUPPAL: Three persons, including a two-year-old boy and his > mother, > were killed in a road accident when a speeding lorry ran over two > motorcycles near Khaitapuram village in Chowtuppal mandal on the > National Highway No. 9 on Saturday morning. Two others were also > critically injured in the accident. > > The lorry carrying a load of onions from Hyderabad to Vijayawada was > totally destroyed in the fire that erupted after it hit the > motorcycles > and dragged them along for over a distance of 70 feet. The impact was > such that sparks flew as the motorcycles were dragged and the petrol > tanks burst and soon fire engulfed the lorry. > > As the morning traffic on the busy highway screeched to a halt and the > passengers watched in horror, bodies of three motorcyclists caught > fire. > The lorry crew have fled. Fire engines brought the fire under control. > > > Source: > > http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/07/stories/2006050704360600.htm > > > > > > ================================================================ > 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. > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujit@vsnl.com sujitjp@gmail.com "Yamuna", ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India Tel: 25537955 ----------------------------------------------------- Hon. Secretary: Parisar www.parisar.org ------------------------------------------------------ Founder Member: PTTF (Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum) www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060508/a7b4af0c/attachment-0001.html From et3 at et3.com Mon May 8 14:55:59 2006 From: et3 at et3.com (Daryl Oster) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 01:55:59 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <20060507213002.zu5hjka2t1k4gkow@www.pedalsong.net> Message-ID: <200605080556.k485u2tK015512@txslsmtp1.vzwmail.net> > Original Message From: D. Scott TenBrink > > Daryl Oster said: > >> "With all the benefits available with ETT, why would anyone promote rail >> infrastructure for new development, especially since cars/roads have >> displaced passenger rail to ultra high density niche markets in developed >> countries." > > For me, this statement leads to another question. Considering the > extensive evidence that you have presented, why hasn't ETT made any > progress in acquiring funding or producing a test model? I would be > interested to hear what Mr. Oster sees as the obstacles to implementation. > The company et3.com Inc. and the dozens of licensees around the world are making significant progress toward implementation. Models have been built, as have virtual prototypes. Quote from "The Prince" by Machiavelli 1513: *************START QUOTE******************* And it ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them. Thus it happens that whenever those who are hostile have the opportunity to attack they do it like partisans, whilst the others defend lukewarmly, in such wise that the [innovator] is endangered along with them. It is necessary, therefore, if we desire to discuss this matter thoroughly, to inquire whether these innovators can rely on themselves or have to depend on others: that is to say, whether, to consummate their enterprise, have they to use prayers or can they use force? In the first instance they always succeed badly, and never compass anything; but when they can rely on themselves and use force, then they are rarely endangered. Hence it is that all armed prophets have conquered, and the unarmed ones have been destroyed. Besides the reasons mentioned, the nature of the people is variable, and whilst it is easy to persuade them, it is difficult to fix them in that persuasion. And thus it is necessary to take such measures that, when they believe no longer, it may be possible to make them believe by force. *************END QUOTE******************* Many (most) innovators view political barriers as the main obstacles to implementation, I believe this is because they are content to "pray" or beg for government to implement their innovation. If one recognizes that begging is a mostly ineffective way to truly advance, one must resign to forcing the implementation of innovation. To do this is a matter of education and leverage through networking with potential allies who may have a vested interest in the implementation. Therefore (assuming sufficiently great potential value of the innovation) the real barrier is one of educating prospective alleys to the merits they might enjoy to the extent they join in the collaboration to bring the innovation to implementation. > From your previous posts is seems that you place significant blame on > rail advocates, which I think is misdirected. Whether rail is subsidized > or not, I can't imagine that rail advocacy efforts can afford to put many > resources into actively obstructing ETT funding. Do you see rail advocacy > as the major obstacle to ETT implementation? > -Scott I accept full responsibility for the fact that ETT is not yet implemented. I place no blame on rail advocates. The rail advocates who work directly for rail interests have a fiduciary obligation to seek sales of their product for the benefit (profit) of the owners (shareholders), this loyalty I understand and respect, though I believe many use dishonest methods to secure rail system construction subsidies from governments. I also place no blame on those who have believed the lies and/or half truths of the rail industry "experts", and thereby also advocate rail, as they are likely just ignorant. AND I will continue to point out from time to time, some of the misrepresentations of rail advocates that I am perceive to be in conflict with the findings of my research on the topic of transportation sustainability. Daryl Oster (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com From roelof.wittink at cycling.nl Mon May 8 16:20:30 2006 From: roelof.wittink at cycling.nl (Roelof Wittink) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 09:20:30 +0200 Subject: [sustran] article in Herald Tribune Message-ID: I like to bring an article in the Herald Tribune, from 5 May, to your attention See: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/05/05/business/wbbike.php Roelof Wittink From edelman at greenidea.info Mon May 8 20:10:32 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 13:10:32 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] This is what the streets were made for Message-ID: <1189.62.245.95.24.1147086632.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> This is sooo the opposite of everything from the dirtiest Diesel trucks to the hippest hybrids. And reminds us that cars parked on the sides of roads just block the view for little kids and people in wheelchairs... And dont worry!: Proper surface public transport has big windows for people to see the street, and if they "lose" some time on the way to work etc I am sure their happiness as a result of being part of things like this will compensate, even in increased productivity. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/4977870.stm T, Division of Not Rocket Science, Dept of Re-redefining Streets, Green Idea Factory ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From ericbruun at earthlink.net Tue May 9 00:05:27 2006 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 11:05:27 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" Message-ID: <19444454.1147100728115.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Daryl What was this about stating only "facts"? Cities far less dense than NYC and Tokyo that have high uses of public transportation have far lower energy and land consumption than primarily auto-based cities. Yet you keep trying to say that auto is more "sustainable" -- Maybe to you this is a fact, but then you have some non-environmental definition in mind that is not shared by most on this listserve. Also, the idea that the "rail industry" is winning the developmental battle against the automotive industry and forcing places to get rail instead of what they want, is ridiculous. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: Daryl Oster >Sent: May 7, 2006 5:08 PM >To: 'Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport' >Subject: [sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution" > > > >> Original Message From: Alan Howes >> Thanks Todd. I do rather feel that if Daryl spent as much time promoting >> ETT as he does rubbishing rail that the former would be more advanced by >> now. > >Alan, >The vast majority of my time IS spent promoting ETT (Evacuated Tube >Transport). You accuse me of "rubbishing rail", yet if you look back over >my posts on this group, you will see the only time I state rail FACTS are to >counter rail lies. > >Rail is touted by the rail industry as a more sustainable way to move people >than cars, history has proven this to be false except for in ultra high >population density locations such as Tokyo, and NYC. More than 90% of the >worlds population do NOT live in the densely populated areas that are >favorable to rail economics -- so the rail industry is promoting the >creation of such unsustainable population density! > > >> Just one or two quick points - >> >> US Railfreight is growing rapidly at present (and US railroad stocks are >> on the up and up). Over long distances (the sort of distance we are >> talking about in India) rail's modal share of TONS is high - I don't have >> the figures to hand but I would guess something like 80% or more. > >I fully agree, rail was designed and optimized to move heavy loads at slow >speed for very low ton-mile cost. Rail is still very good at this, and low >cost commodities that are not perishable are overwhelmingly moved by rail as >it is presently the best mode for such need. > > >> it's the tons that need the infrastructure, not the dollars. Who would >> even think of trucking coal from Wyoming to the Mississippi (let alone >> airfreight!)? > >Alan, you admonishment for not promoting ETT indicates to me that you think >I should supply more information. This is a recent estimate of ETT for >hauling 200 mega tons per year of coal from Wyoming 1200 miles to the east >coast. It is not available on the et3 website, so I am supplying it to the >group to indicate that ETT can also do what heavy rail is capable of. > >The double track through Nebraska that hauls coal from the powder basin in >Wyoming has a frequency of 4 trains per hour, each train with about 100 cars >of 100ton each. That is almost a million ton per day, or about 50% more >than the 200MT/year stated as the need. > >For your comparison, the following rough estimates for using ETT to move >coal: > >The cost of capacity for ETT is according to the cost of the tubes, the >airlocks, and the capsules, and the energy. > >Tube cost = $2M / mile for 1200 mile = $2.4B > >The capacity of one capsule is about 0.45 ton. > >The cost of one airlock and branching switch is about $1M/airlock (assumes >30 airlocks per branch). The capacity of one airlock is two capsules per >minute, or 0.9 ton / min = 54 ton / hour. Assuming 350 days of operation >per year, and 20 hours per day, the annual capacity per airlock is >54*20*350= 378kT / year. 200MT/0.378MT= 529 airlocks One airlock is needed >at each end, so the airlock cost is about $1.06B > >The minimum capsule is one capsule every 30 foot (2:1safety factor), and we >have 1,058 capsules per min = 17.63 capsules per second, so the minimum >design speed for one tube would be 17.63*30'= 529ft/sec = 361mph. > >One trip for a capsule to cover 1200 miles would take 3.34 hours, = 6.68 >hours per round trip, plus a 15min dwell at each end, would take 7.18 hours. > > >The number of capsules needed would be 1 capsule every 30' for 2400miles, >plus 30 capsules dwelling at each airlock = ((2,400*5,280)/30)+(30*1058) = >422,400 + 31,740 = 454,140 capsules. Each capsule will cost about $20,000, >so the cost is about $9.083B > >Total cost for a design speed of 361mph = $12.5B >Assuming the cost at 10%/year for capital and maintenance = $1.25B/year > >Each trip (0.45T) will take about 2kWh for acceleration, and about 5Wh/mile >= 6kWh, for a total energy per load of 8kWh. (assumes no elevation change) >So the annual energy cost @10cents per kWh = (200M/0.45)*8kWh * 10cents = >$356M energy cost, > >Total cost of 200MT*1200mile = 240BT mile/year at a cost of $1.606B/year = >0.67 cents per ton mile. > >The cost of the capsules is much higher than the cost of the tube, so the >design speed is not optimum, but considering energy cost is necessary too. > >Increasing the design speed to 722mph will cut the number of capsules needed >by 211,200 (the spacing goes up to one capsule every 60' and the safety >factor increases to 4:1). This will increase the tube cost by about $0.6B, >and the airlock cost by $0.503B but decrease the capsule cost by $4.224B > >Total cost for a design speed of 722mph is likely to be $9.38B >At 10%/year = $938M/year. > >Each trip (0.45T) will take about 8kWh for acceleration, and about 10Wh/mile >= 12kWh, for a total energy per load of 20kWh. So the annual energy cost >@10cents per kWh = (200M/0.45)*20kWh * 10cents = $889M energy cost, for a >total of $1.827B/year. > >240BT/yr @ $1.827B/yr = 0.76 cents per ton mile. > > > >NOTES: > >This is a very rough cost estimate using the detailed estimates for >passenger / general cargo ETT. The present ETT design is optimized for >passenger use, and consumer cargo that is mostly moved by truck and >aircraft. No profit or route specific costs (like ROW, and geographical >related expenses) are included. > >The energy required to return capsules was not considered, as there may be >some other uses that would recover this cost, AND the value of energy >recovery during capsule braking was not considered, this will tend to reduce >energy cost. > >Further optimizing ETT for low value bulk cargo would be a major study. If >we get a request and funding from a licensee to do this, I will devote the >time to do it. My crude guess is that it is likely that the cost could be >optimized to be as low as a half cent per ton-mile, (ideal conditions, flat >route, no obstacles); but this would give a configuration that would not be >as useful for passenger or other cargo needs. > >Generally: >ETT capsule cost is very sensitive to capsule loading per foot of length. >Tube cost is very sensitive to tube diameter (double the diameter increases >cost by 8X), and somewhat sensitive to design speed. Increasing the capsule >loading would reduce the number of airlocks, and the number of capsules >needed, but the cost per capsule would increase almost enough to offset the >reduction in numbers of capsules. > >The tube cost assumes no tunneling. The cost of underground tube guideway >in a tunnel is triple the cost of elevated tube guideway. If the route with >a design speed of 361mph has 10% additional cost for tunneling, and if the >design speed were increased to 722mph, the tunneling cost would likely >increase to about 40%. A design speed of about 2,000mph and over would most >likely require full underground structure. The maximum practical speed for >ETT is about 4,000mph, and this is appropriate for very long >intercontinental trips, the cost estimate for underground ETT at 4,000mph is >a minimum of $10M/mile in ideal circumstance, and the airlock / branch cost >will be increased by about the same factor. > >NOTE: using ETT to haul coal from the 4,000' to 5,000' altitude of the >powder basin to sealevel would produce a significant amount of energy >through energy recovery, and the energy cost would likely be zero if only >empty capsules were returned. > > >> But US rail is also making inroads in markets such as >> contracting to UPS, fruit and veg, etc. Not to mention the huge flow of >> containers from West Coast ports. > >As you can see from the above example, ETT ton-mile cost (even considering >recovery of infrastructure cost) is favorable compared to rail. One big >advantage of ETT is that the access points can be distributed according to >demand with a much finer granularity than rail. AND the speed is 361/14= >25.8 times greater. This is especially important in moving perishable items >such as fruit. > >The cost of trucking a ton-mile is 3 times greater than using rail, AND the >speed is 3 times faster, so trucks are used more for moving time sensitive >loads, and higher value items. > >ETT combines the energy and labor efficiency of trains, with the time >efficiency of aircraft! > >> In the UK at least, many inter-urban passenger rail services are now >> genuinely profitable - a positive result of the involvement of the private >> sector in operation (and again numbers are rising rapidly). And that's >> despite excessive track access charges under the UK's decidedly messy >> "privatised" rail regime. > >I agree that existing railroad, if fully paid for, and if fully utilized >(high use factor) is capable of recovering a little more than operating and >renewal costs; AND it is also well proven that new rail expansion is >incapable of recovering it's capital cost as well -- so the claim of >profitability is false, as it ignores the extremely high route development >and infrastructure capitalization costs. > > >> I claim limited expertise on Indian urban transport, and hardly any on >> inter-urban and rural. But I suspect that what is needed is a re- >> invigoration of the rail system, which is government owned and run, >> heavily subsidised, and I'll bet it takes a LONG time to get a box-car (or >> the Indian equivalent) from (say) Mumbai to Chennai. >> But what do Indians have to say on this? >> Alan > >It is already proven that trucks and cars on roads are more than capable of >marginalizing rail investment to just barely being capable of breaking even, >and in most case, operating only through subsidy (paying people to use >them). If new infrastructure is to be built, it only makes sense to build >using technology that is capable of the greatest benefit for the minimum >cost (highest possible VALUE -- as is available with ETT. ETT is capable of >providing an order of magnitude improvement in transportation value over >cars. Trucks, and aircraft, while retaining most of the advantages of rail. > > >Daryl Oster >(c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" >e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks >of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River >FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com> > > > >================================================================ >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 carlos.pardo at sutp.org Tue May 9 00:23:08 2006 From: carlos.pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 10:23:08 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <200605080556.k485u2tK015512@txslsmtp1.vzwmail.net> Message-ID: <200605081523.k48FN9VD006054@ns-omrbm3.netsolmail.com> Mr Oster quotes: "but when they can rely on themselves and use force, then they are rarely endangered." This could have some relevance regarding transportation equity... I would think that a quote from Machiavelli (and justifying the use of force!) is difficult to apply to sustainability. But maybe that's just me. Carlos F. Pardo -----Mensaje original----- De: sustran-discuss-bounces+carlos.pardo=sutp.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+carlos.pardo=sutp.org@list.jca.apc.org] En nombre de Daryl Oster Enviado el: Lunes, 08 de Mayo de 2006 12:56 a.m. Para: 'Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport' Asunto: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution > Original Message From: D. Scott TenBrink > > Daryl Oster said: > >> "With all the benefits available with ETT, why would anyone promote rail >> infrastructure for new development, especially since cars/roads have >> displaced passenger rail to ultra high density niche markets in developed >> countries." > > For me, this statement leads to another question. Considering the > extensive evidence that you have presented, why hasn't ETT made any > progress in acquiring funding or producing a test model? I would be > interested to hear what Mr. Oster sees as the obstacles to implementation. > The company et3.com Inc. and the dozens of licensees around the world are making significant progress toward implementation. Models have been built, as have virtual prototypes. Quote from "The Prince" by Machiavelli 1513: *************START QUOTE******************* And it ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them. Thus it happens that whenever those who are hostile have the opportunity to attack they do it like partisans, whilst the others defend lukewarmly, in such wise that the [innovator] is endangered along with them. It is necessary, therefore, if we desire to discuss this matter thoroughly, to inquire whether these innovators can rely on themselves or have to depend on others: that is to say, whether, to consummate their enterprise, have they to use prayers or can they use force? In the first instance they always succeed badly, and never compass anything; but when they can rely on themselves and use force, then they are rarely endangered. Hence it is that all armed prophets have conquered, and the unarmed ones have been destroyed. Besides the reasons mentioned, the nature of the people is variable, and whilst it is easy to persuade them, it is difficult to fix them in that persuasion. And thus it is necessary to take such measures that, when they believe no longer, it may be possible to make them believe by force. *************END QUOTE******************* Many (most) innovators view political barriers as the main obstacles to implementation, I believe this is because they are content to "pray" or beg for government to implement their innovation. If one recognizes that begging is a mostly ineffective way to truly advance, one must resign to forcing the implementation of innovation. To do this is a matter of education and leverage through networking with potential allies who may have a vested interest in the implementation. Therefore (assuming sufficiently great potential value of the innovation) the real barrier is one of educating prospective alleys to the merits they might enjoy to the extent they join in the collaboration to bring the innovation to implementation. > From your previous posts is seems that you place significant blame on > rail advocates, which I think is misdirected. Whether rail is subsidized > or not, I can't imagine that rail advocacy efforts can afford to put many > resources into actively obstructing ETT funding. Do you see rail advocacy > as the major obstacle to ETT implementation? > -Scott I accept full responsibility for the fact that ETT is not yet implemented. I place no blame on rail advocates. The rail advocates who work directly for rail interests have a fiduciary obligation to seek sales of their product for the benefit (profit) of the owners (shareholders), this loyalty I understand and respect, though I believe many use dishonest methods to secure rail system construction subsidies from governments. I also place no blame on those who have believed the lies and/or half truths of the rail industry "experts", and thereby also advocate rail, as they are likely just ignorant. AND I will continue to point out from time to time, some of the misrepresentations of rail advocates that I am perceive to be in conflict with the findings of my research on the topic of transportation sustainability. Daryl Oster (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com ================================================================ 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 linda.fullerton at tiscali.co.uk Tue May 9 07:10:58 2006 From: linda.fullerton at tiscali.co.uk (Linda Fullerton) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 23:10:58 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking Message-ID: <00ba01c672ec$4993f740$0100a8c0@STUDY> Dear Sunny, I agree with you that if public transport was improved more people would use it. But one needs to recognise that in Thailand the car is a highly valued status symbol. In the public eye success is determined by the number of expensive cars in the carport. Those who can afford to do so have more cars than the number of drivers in the house. Those who do so are very often high ranking police or army officials. You said: many people say tht bike travel is not safe thts the reason they don't use bikes....if it is made safer then we can expect an increase in bike usage... I seriously doubt it. The climate for most of the year doesn't lend itself to bike usage and - as was the case in the west a few generations ago - the bicycle is regarded as the lowest form of transport. With increased wealth one buys a motorbike - which is not only a status symbol, it's quicker, more comfortable in the heat and easier to carry more passengers/luggage. I think it would be more productive and realistic to forget about bicycles and invest more energy into improving the public transport system. The skytrain desperately needs to be extended both in its reach and in its accessibility. But of perhaps more importance, as its improvement would benefit far higher numbers, is to focus some attention on the neglected bus system. The buses are probably the most polluting vehicles on the road network, are badly driven and are on the whole unsafe or perceived as being so. They are also cramped, hot and unpleasant. Like the bicycle they are viewed as being the lowest form of public transport. But these of course require government policy decisions which it is difficult to influence. At development level one could encourage developers to promote public transport usage by providing a decent minibus service to pick up employees from key locations such as the nearest skytrain station if too far to walk, together with discouragement of car use by restrictions on company cars as part of a salary package and restricted parking provision. Re: I have to agree with your comment on the 200 or 100 baht fines/bribes (in India) but have you heard of a fine of 100 baht if you cross the road without using a pedestrian overpass? I meant bribes. I would love to see a survey of the number of bribes taken compared to the number of tickets issued. I estimate a ratio of perhaps 20 to 1. But that is only the visible form of corruption. Far worse is that which goes on at the higher levels which influences what infrastructure is built, when and by whom. It is a sad fact that corruption governs Thailand. Until corruption is seriously tackled the transport system will not improve. I'm sure the government would enjoy being encouraged to fine a pedestrian for crossing a road instead of providing adequate pedestrian crossing facilities. Imposing fines would achieve nothing other than further alienating the ordinary person and further lining the pockets of the police. Count the number of footbridges along Bangna-Trad Road, for instance, and you will understand why people prop ladders against the barriers in the central reserve to help them cross - often a total of 10 busy traffic lanes with dual 3 lane carriageway plus 2 lanes of service road each side - instead of walking five miles to the nearest footbridge. The effects on transport at local level do not seem to be considered as part of highway schemes. Regards, Linda. . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060508/9559d4ae/attachment.html From sksunny at gmail.com Tue May 9 13:20:41 2006 From: sksunny at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 11:20:41 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking In-Reply-To: <00ba01c672ec$4993f740$0100a8c0@STUDY> References: <00ba01c672ec$4993f740$0100a8c0@STUDY> Message-ID: <44601899.7030901@gmail.com> Dear Linda, I understand from your reply that climate influences the car ridership in cities like Bangkok. In my opinion climate and wealth are not exactly the causes for excessive auto dependency, I feel that as you said in your mail the policies are a factor coupled with the car friendly infrastructure. Please find enclosed a paper by Peter Newman and Jeff Kenworthy on the 10 common factor we think are a reason for automobile dependency but actually these 10 factors are myths. I fully agree with you on the issue of bribes. Sunny Linda Fullerton wrote: > Dear Sunny, > > I agree with you that if public transport was improved more people > would use it. But one needs to recognise that in Thailand the car is a > highly valued status symbol. In the public eye success is determined > by the number of expensive cars in the carport. Those who can afford > to do so have more cars than the number of drivers in the house. Those > who do so are very often high ranking police or army officials. > > You said: many people say tht bike travel is not safe thts the reason > they don't use bikes....if it is made safer then we can expect an > increase in bike usage... > > I seriously doubt it. The climate for most of the year doesn't lend > itself to bike usage and - as was the case in the west a few > generations ago - the bicycle is regarded as the lowest form > of transport. With increased wealth one buys a motorbike - which is > not only a status symbol, it's quicker, more comfortable in the heat > and easier to carry more passengers/luggage. > > I think it would be more productive and realistic to forget about > bicycles and invest more energy into improving the public transport > system. The skytrain desperately needs to be extended both in its > reach and in its accessibility. But of perhaps more importance, as its > improvement would benefit far higher numbers, is to focus some > attention on the neglected bus system. The buses are probably the most > polluting vehicles on the road network, are badly driven and are on > the whole unsafe or perceived as being so. They are also cramped, hot > and unpleasant. Like the bicycle they are viewed as being the lowest > form of public transport. > > But these of course require government policy decisions which it is > difficult to influence. At development level one could encourage > developers to promote public transport usage by providing a decent > minibus service to pick up employees from key locations such as the > nearest skytrain station if too far to walk, together with > discouragement of car use by restrictions on company cars as part of a > salary package and restricted parking provision. > > Re: I have to agree with your comment on the 200 or 100 baht fines/bribes > (in India) but have you heard of a fine of 100 baht if you cross the > road without using a pedestrian overpass? > > I meant bribes. I would love to see a survey of the number of bribes > taken compared to the number of tickets issued. I estimate a ratio of > perhaps 20 to 1. But that is only the visible form of corruption. Far > worse is that which goes on at the higher levels which influences what > infrastructure is built, when and by whom. It is a sad fact that > corruption governs Thailand. Until corruption is seriously tackled the > transport system will not improve. > > I'm sure the government would enjoy being encouraged to fine a > pedestrian for crossing a road instead of providing adequate > pedestrian crossing facilities. Imposing fines would achieve nothing > other than further alienating the ordinary person and further lining > the pockets of the police. Count the number of footbridges along > Bangna-Trad Road, for instance, and you will understand why people > prop ladders against the barriers in the central reserve to help them > cross - often a total of 10 busy traffic lanes with dual 3 lane > carriageway plus 2 lanes of service road each side - instead of > walking five miles to the nearest footbridge. The effects on transport > at local level do not seem to be considered as part of highway schemes. > > Regards, > Linda. > > . > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > ================================================================ > 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ADmyths_PeterandJeff.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 51859 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060509/e9c58760/ADmyths_PeterandJeff.pdf From scott at pedalsong.net Tue May 9 16:08:53 2006 From: scott at pedalsong.net (D. Scott TenBrink) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 01:08:53 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking In-Reply-To: <44601899.7030901@gmail.com> References: <00ba01c672ec$4993f740$0100a8c0@STUDY> <44601899.7030901@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060509010853.in2abr2n82pwgw04@www.pedalsong.net> I found that the Newman and Kenworthy article, which Sunny distributed, is vague and unconvincing in regards to the impact of wealth and climate on auto-dependency. Regarding wealth, they switch between density and vehicle miles as the measure of auto-dependency as it suits their argument. They are refuting the claim that ?As soon as people get enough money they will buy a car and move to the suburbs?, but they do not ackowledge that these are two seperate decisions. Instead they equate low density development, vehicle ownership, and vehicle miles as measures of the same thing- auto-dependency. Perhaps they should have better defined this term from the start. Also, they argue that the variation between income level and vehicle miles across continents indicates that wealth is not indicative of auto-dependency. But they do not address the possibility that there are other factors that vary across continents that may account for the variation while wealth generally follows car ownership. They accurately point out that levels of of car use and ownership are lower in dense areas across all levels of wealth. But this does not imply that wealth is not a factor in car use and ownership- just that it is not the ONLY factor. I found the argument against the impact of climate to be simply odd. The bulk of the argument is against a theory that certain climates encourage large-lot housing. I have never heard such an argument but would be willing to agree that climate has little direct impact on lot size. However, they present a confused argument on the impact of weather on mode choice. Thay state that "Detroit and Denver have few supposed car-enhancing climate features for much of the year, but are totally dominated by the automobile and extensive, low density suburban land use." But I would think it is the BAD weather that encourages those who can afford it to own a private vehicle. I don't know what type of weather would be considered "car-enhancing", but rain, snow, wind and cold are all common arguments by people from northern climates as to why they do not want to wait for the bus or ride a bike to work. Further, they completely ignore the possibility that it may be too hot to ride a bike or walk long distances. What I consider a short (2 mile), early morning bike commute to work in Bangkok leaves me drenched in sweat. Without shower and changing facilities, this would not be an option for me. They do make a point that the impact of wealth, climate, and the other factors on auto-dependency are interrelated and dependent on context. And it is encouraging to see the exceptions to the general rule. But claiming that these assertions are "myths" is taking the argument a step too far. In relation to the original article on Bangkok bike parking, it is important to recognize that there are solutions to managing wealth, climate and weather impacts on NMT, but it is foolish to deny that they have an impact on mode choice. I agree with Linda that there are more productive initial paths to take than promoting cycling (especially in such a half-assed way). Of course, it is a lot cheaper to install a bike rack than a BRT system. If the goal is only to get good press, I'd go with the bike rack, too! -Scott TenBrink -also, I should note that I find cycling in Bangkok to be much safer than most cities that I've ridden in mixed traffic because drivers are aware of "non-car" users. I've found that this is the great benefit to having taxis, buses, motorbikes, pedestrians, push-carts, pedal-carts, and elephants share the road. Quoting Sunny : > Dear Linda, > > I understand from your reply that climate influences the car > ridership in cities like Bangkok. In my opinion climate and wealth > are not exactly the causes for excessive auto dependency, I feel that > as you said in your mail the policies are a factor coupled with the > car friendly infrastructure. Please find enclosed a paper by Peter > Newman and Jeff Kenworthy on the 10 common factor we think are a > reason for automobile dependency but actually these 10 factors are > myths. > > I fully agree with you on the issue of bribes. > > Sunny > > Linda Fullerton wrote: >> Dear Sunny, >> >> I agree with you that if public transport was improved more people >> would use it. But one needs to recognise that in Thailand the car is >> a highly valued status symbol. In the public eye success is >> determined by the number of expensive cars in the carport. Those who >> can afford to do so have more cars than the number of drivers in the >> house. Those who do so are very often high ranking police or army >> officials. >> >> You said: many people say tht bike travel is not safe thts the >> reason they don't use bikes....if it is made safer then we can >> expect an increase in bike usage... >> >> I seriously doubt it. The climate for most of the year doesn't lend >> itself to bike usage and - as was the case in the west a few >> generations ago - the bicycle is regarded as the lowest form of >> transport. With increased wealth one buys a motorbike - which is not >> only a status symbol, it's quicker, more comfortable in the heat and >> easier to carry more passengers/luggage. >> >> I think it would be more productive and realistic to forget about >> bicycles and invest more energy into improving the public transport >> system. The skytrain desperately needs to be extended both in its >> reach and in its accessibility. But of perhaps more importance, as >> its improvement would benefit far higher numbers, is to focus some >> attention on the neglected bus system. The buses are probably the >> most polluting vehicles on the road network, are badly driven and >> are on the whole unsafe or perceived as being so. They are also >> cramped, hot and unpleasant. Like the bicycle they are viewed as >> being the lowest form of public transport. >> >> But these of course require government policy decisions which it is >> difficult to influence. At development level one could encourage >> developers to promote public transport usage by providing a decent >> minibus service to pick up employees from key locations such as the >> nearest skytrain station if too far to walk, together with >> discouragement of car use by restrictions on company cars as part of >> a salary package and restricted parking provision. >> >> Re: I have to agree with your comment on the 200 or 100 baht fines/bribes >> (in India) but have you heard of a fine of 100 baht if you cross the >> road without using a pedestrian overpass? >> >> I meant bribes. I would love to see a survey of the number of bribes >> taken compared to the number of tickets issued. I estimate a ratio >> of perhaps 20 to 1. But that is only the visible form of corruption. >> Far worse is that which goes on at the higher levels which >> influences what infrastructure is built, when and by whom. It is a >> sad fact that corruption governs Thailand. Until corruption is >> seriously tackled the transport system will not improve. >> >> I'm sure the government would enjoy being encouraged to fine a >> pedestrian for crossing a road instead of providing adequate >> pedestrian crossing facilities. Imposing fines would achieve nothing >> other than further alienating the ordinary person and further lining >> the pockets of the police. Count the number of footbridges along >> Bangna-Trad Road, for instance, and you will understand why people >> prop ladders against the barriers in the central reserve to help >> them cross - often a total of 10 busy traffic lanes with dual 3 lane >> carriageway plus 2 lanes of service road each side - instead of >> walking five miles to the nearest footbridge. The effects on >> transport at local level do not seem to be considered as part of >> highway schemes. >> >> Regards, >> Linda. >> >> . >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> ================================================================ >> 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 ktsourl at mailbox.gr Tue May 9 21:23:57 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 9 May 2006 15:23:57 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution Message-ID: <20060509122357.15410.qmail@mailbox.gr> It seems you imply that informed consumers decide for rail or road transport prevalence. However this is a collective decision of the society mediated through politicians choices and actually shaped by lobbying (often a euphemism for corruption) and advertisement (i.e. mass brainwashing). I have of course many historical data of how this happened in my country (as you, I suppose, can find for yours - and everybody else for his/hers), but being on this listserv I find more proper to concentrate on what is happening in India concerning this process. Having seen these pictures from "Golden Quadrilateral Project" motorway, I was impressed of how empty it looked (as far as I know, as a rule of thumb, a motorway has to have at least an average daily traffic of 10.000 cars to justify its expenses - does this happen in stretches far from the cities?). I also wonder if feasibility studies are carried out, and, if so, what cost was assigned to the crossing pedestrians danger and delay, the pollution, noise and other externalities, whether tolls are collected (and how much) etc. For the brainwashing my questions are less - the NYtimes article document well this point. I am not sure if ETT (Evacuated Tube Transport) is a feasible solution, and I think we will never be sure until it is tried in practice. Things in real world can be quite different than in papers - consider the experience of Maglev. But I am sure that if it has any merit, companies looking after profit will make some attempts to experiment on it (even if use of "lobbying" and "advertisement" is required to promote it). > >>> Original Message From: K. Tsourlakis >>> >>> A little scrutiny can prove that motorways are an oxymoron per se. Indeed, >>> road transport has advantage over rail transport where there are scattered >>> movements (many sources and destinations with low loads). But motorways >>> are always built along corridors with concentrated movements (few sources >>> and destinations with high loads). So motorways are NEVER a good solution. > > >I have presented ample data that shows that motorways have marginalized >passenger rail to the point of having a 90% market share in 1910, to a less >than a 2% market share today. This fact appears to contradict the absolute >terms of your supposition. Please support you thesis with fact and >historical data that proves your point. > > > >>> Agricultural products are rarely transported directly from fields to >>> shops. Usually they are concentrated in warehouses near production areas, >>> afterwards distributed to warehouses near consumption centres (i.e. >>> cities) and from there distributed to the final consumption (stores). The >>> central movement (between warehouses - the long one) is a concentrated >>> movement, hence better implemented by rail. > >K. Tsourlakis, > >Good points about rail use for freight. It is true that most produce is >moved using the most economical methods, and this is often a combination of >truck and rail. Please consider that a fully developed ETT network could >transport produce a pallet at a time directly from the producer to retailer, >-- without all the logistic gymnastics of trucks, containers, warehouses, >distribution centers, trains, ships, etc. > >ETT (Evacuated Tube Transport) can achieve as high of a transport flux as >rail, with less than a tenth of the per mile infrastructure cost. ETT is >also virtually silent (sound cannot be transported in a vacuum), and ETT is >faster than jets. With all the benefits available with ETT, why would >anyone promote rail infrastructure for new development, especially since >cars/roads have displaced passenger rail to ultra high density niche markets >in developed countries. > >Daryl Oster >(c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" >e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks >of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River >FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com > _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From ericbruun at earthlink.net Wed May 10 04:37:23 2006 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 15:37:23 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking Message-ID: <5277328.1147203443675.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Scott I haven't read the attached article yet, but I have read other articles by Kenworthy and Newman. I don't have any position about climate's role, but I have some idea about wealth, car ownership and car use. First, US cities with very high ownership have far lower regional GDPs than western European cities that have far lower car ownership. (700-800 per 1000 in US Cities, 400-600 in European cities, if I recall correctly.) Also, just because people own cars doesn't mean they automatically start using them for every trip. I think the point that Newman and Kenworthy made was that if you live in an auto-dependent place with no realistic options, you will spend the money and you will drive a lot. If you need a car to go to work, for example, you will buy one even if it is a hardship. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: "D. Scott TenBrink" >Sent: May 9, 2006 3:08 AM >To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok bike parking > > >I found that the Newman and Kenworthy article, which Sunny distributed, >is vague >and unconvincing in regards to the impact of wealth and climate on >auto-dependency. > >Regarding wealth, they switch between density and vehicle miles as the measure >of auto-dependency as it suits their argument. They are refuting the >claim that >?As soon as people get enough money they will buy a car and move to the >suburbs?, but they do not ackowledge that these are two seperate decisions. >Instead they equate low density development, vehicle ownership, and vehicle >miles as measures of the same thing- auto-dependency. Perhaps they should have >better defined this term from the start. > >Also, they argue that the variation between income level and vehicle miles >across continents indicates that wealth is not indicative of auto-dependency. >But they do not address the possibility that there are other factors that vary >across continents that may account for the variation while wealth generally >follows car ownership. > >They accurately point out that levels of of car use and ownership are lower in >dense areas across all levels of wealth. But this does not imply that >wealth is >not a factor in car use and ownership- just that it is not the ONLY factor. > >I found the argument against the impact of climate to be simply odd. >The bulk of >the argument is against a theory that certain climates encourage large-lot >housing. I have never heard such an argument but would be willing to >agree that >climate has little direct impact on lot size. > >However, they present a confused argument on the impact of weather on mode >choice. Thay state that "Detroit and Denver have few supposed car-enhancing >climate features for much of the year, but are totally dominated by the >automobile and extensive, low density suburban land use." But I would think it >is the BAD weather that encourages those who can afford it to own a private >vehicle. I don't know what type of weather would be considered >"car-enhancing", >but rain, snow, wind and cold are all common arguments by people from northern >climates as to why they do not want to wait for the bus or ride a bike >to work. > >Further, they completely ignore the possibility that it may be too hot >to ride a >bike or walk long distances. What I consider a short (2 mile), early morning >bike commute to work in Bangkok leaves me drenched in sweat. Without >shower and >changing facilities, this would not be an option for me. > >They do make a point that the impact of wealth, climate, and the other factors >on auto-dependency are interrelated and dependent on context. And it is >encouraging to see the exceptions to the general rule. But claiming that these >assertions are "myths" is taking the argument a step too far. > >In relation to the original article on Bangkok bike parking, it is >important to >recognize that there are solutions to managing wealth, climate and weather >impacts on NMT, but it is foolish to deny that they have an impact on mode >choice. I agree with Linda that there are more productive initial paths >to take >than promoting cycling (especially in such a half-assed way). Of >course, it is a >lot cheaper to install a bike rack than a BRT system. If the goal is >only to get >good press, I'd go with the bike rack, too! > >-Scott TenBrink > >-also, I should note that I find cycling in Bangkok to be much safer than most >cities that I've ridden in mixed traffic because drivers are aware of >"non-car" >users. I've found that this is the great benefit to having taxis, buses, >motorbikes, pedestrians, push-carts, pedal-carts, and elephants share >the road. > > > >Quoting Sunny : > >> Dear Linda, >> >> I understand from your reply that climate influences the car >> ridership in cities like Bangkok. In my opinion climate and wealth >> are not exactly the causes for excessive auto dependency, I feel that >> as you said in your mail the policies are a factor coupled with the >> car friendly infrastructure. Please find enclosed a paper by Peter >> Newman and Jeff Kenworthy on the 10 common factor we think are a >> reason for automobile dependency but actually these 10 factors are >> myths. >> >> I fully agree with you on the issue of bribes. >> >> Sunny >> >> Linda Fullerton wrote: >>> Dear Sunny, >>> >>> I agree with you that if public transport was improved more people >>> would use it. But one needs to recognise that in Thailand the car is >>> a highly valued status symbol. In the public eye success is >>> determined by the number of expensive cars in the carport. Those who >>> can afford to do so have more cars than the number of drivers in the >>> house. Those who do so are very often high ranking police or army >>> officials. >>> >>> You said: many people say tht bike travel is not safe thts the >>> reason they don't use bikes....if it is made safer then we can >>> expect an increase in bike usage... >>> >>> I seriously doubt it. The climate for most of the year doesn't lend >>> itself to bike usage and - as was the case in the west a few >>> generations ago - the bicycle is regarded as the lowest form of >>> transport. With increased wealth one buys a motorbike - which is not >>> only a status symbol, it's quicker, more comfortable in the heat and >>> easier to carry more passengers/luggage. >>> >>> I think it would be more productive and realistic to forget about >>> bicycles and invest more energy into improving the public transport >>> system. The skytrain desperately needs to be extended both in its >>> reach and in its accessibility. But of perhaps more importance, as >>> its improvement would benefit far higher numbers, is to focus some >>> attention on the neglected bus system. The buses are probably the >>> most polluting vehicles on the road network, are badly driven and >>> are on the whole unsafe or perceived as being so. They are also >>> cramped, hot and unpleasant. Like the bicycle they are viewed as >>> being the lowest form of public transport. >>> >>> But these of course require government policy decisions which it is >>> difficult to influence. At development level one could encourage >>> developers to promote public transport usage by providing a decent >>> minibus service to pick up employees from key locations such as the >>> nearest skytrain station if too far to walk, together with >>> discouragement of car use by restrictions on company cars as part of >>> a salary package and restricted parking provision. >>> >>> Re: I have to agree with your comment on the 200 or 100 baht fines/bribes >>> (in India) but have you heard of a fine of 100 baht if you cross the >>> road without using a pedestrian overpass? >>> >>> I meant bribes. I would love to see a survey of the number of bribes >>> taken compared to the number of tickets issued. I estimate a ratio >>> of perhaps 20 to 1. But that is only the visible form of corruption. >>> Far worse is that which goes on at the higher levels which >>> influences what infrastructure is built, when and by whom. It is a >>> sad fact that corruption governs Thailand. Until corruption is >>> seriously tackled the transport system will not improve. >>> >>> I'm sure the government would enjoy being encouraged to fine a >>> pedestrian for crossing a road instead of providing adequate >>> pedestrian crossing facilities. Imposing fines would achieve nothing >>> other than further alienating the ordinary person and further lining >>> the pockets of the police. Count the number of footbridges along >>> Bangna-Trad Road, for instance, and you will understand why people >>> prop ladders against the barriers in the central reserve to help >>> them cross - often a total of 10 busy traffic lanes with dual 3 lane >>> carriageway plus 2 lanes of service road each side - instead of >>> walking five miles to the nearest footbridge. The effects on >>> transport at local level do not seem to be considered as part of >>> highway schemes. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Linda. >>> >>> . >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> >>> ================================================================ >>> 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 edelman at greenidea.info Wed May 10 19:03:37 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 12:03:37 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] [Fwd: Asian Sustainable Energy Events] Message-ID: <1364.62.245.95.24.1147255417.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> From: Greenpowerconferences... Do Not Miss Asia's Sustainable Energy Events Biofuels Markets Asia, Bangkok June 5-6 Biorefineries Seminar, Bangkok June 7 Energy for People, Not for Parking, Saigon June 8* Carbon Markets Asia, Hong Kong June 13-14 Asia Cleantech Investment, Hong Kong June 14 Carfree Beijing, Peking June 15* Renewable Energy Finance Asia, Hong Kong June 15-16 Sustainable Fuels for Dangerous Vehicles, Darwin June 19* Putting the Stereo into Monorail, Singapore July 1-3* http://www.GreenPowerConferences.com Fax:+44-207-900-1853 * Added by forwarder, not responsible for incomplete information or factuality _______________________________________________________________________ Powered by Microsoft Small Business To unsubscribe follow the link: http://lb.bcentral.com/ex/sp?c=46314&s=EFCA6F638E2D6FFF&m=117 ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060510/e5595e96/untitled-2.html From litman at vtpi.org Wed May 10 21:52:25 2006 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 05:52:25 -0700 Subject: [sustran] VTPI News, Spring 2006 Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060510054728.06357278@mail.islandnet.com> ----------- VTPI NEWS ----------- Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" ------------------------------------ Spring 2006 Vol. 9, No. 2 ---------------------------------- The Victoria Transport Policy Institute is an independent research organization dedicated to developing innovative solutions to transportation problems. The VTPI website (http://www.vtpi.org ) has many resources addressing a wide range of transport planning and policy issues. VTPI also provides consulting services. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ONLINE TDM ENCYCLOPEDIA ======================== The VTPI "Online TDM Encyclopedia" (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm ) is a comprehensive information resource to help identify and evaluate innovative management solutions to transport problems, available for free on our website. We continually update and expand the Encyclopedia. We recently added the following chapter: "Transport Model Improvements: Improving Methods for Evaluating The Effects and Value of Transportation System Changes" (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm125.htm ). As always, we appreciate feedback. Please let us know if you have suggestions for improving the Encyclopedia or our other resources. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NEW DOCUMENTS ============== "Evaluating New Start Transit Program Performance: Comparing Rail And Bus" (http://www.vtpi.org/bus_rail.pdf ). This study by Lyndon Henry and Todd Litman compares public transit performance between U.S. cities that expanded rail systems and those that expanded bus systems. "Planning Principles and Practices" (http://www.vtpi.org/planning.pdf ) This paper summarizes key principles and practices for effective land use and transportation planning. Originally written as a subject overview for an introduction to land use planning university course. "Parking Taxes: Evaluating Options and Impacts" (http://www.vtpi.org/parking_tax.pdf ). This report describes and evaluates various types of parking taxes, including commercial parking taxes (a special tax on parking rental transactions), per-space parking levies (a special property tax applied to parking facilities), and pricing of more publicly-owned parking facilities. "Parking Management: Strategies, Evaluation and Planning" (http://www.vtpi.org/park_man.pdf ). This report summarizes the book "Parking Management Best Practices." It describes various strategies that result in more efficient use of parking resources, and explains how they can be applied to help solve parking problems. Gina Filosa, "Carsharing: Establishing Its Role in the Parking Demand Management Toolbox," (http://vtpi.org/filosa_carsharing.pdf ), Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning, Tufts University. This masters thesis explores the concept of using carsharing as a parking demand management strategy, based on information gathered from three case studies. It provides recommendations for developing carsharing services and using them to reduce parking requirements. (Posted courtesy of the author.) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ UPDATED DOCUMENTS ============== We recently updated the following documents: "Evaluating Public Transit Benefits and Costs " (http://www.vtpi.org/tranben.pdf ) "Evaluating Transportation Equity" (http://www.vtpi.org/equity.pdf ) "Evaluating Research Quality" (http://www.vtpi.org/resqual.pdf ). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE Below are recently published books and articles. "Parking Management Best Practices" Planners Press (http://www.planning.org/bookservice/description.htm?BCODE=APMB ), 2006; summarized at http://www.vtpi.org/park_man.pdf ). This comprehensive new book written by VTPI Executive Director Todd Litman will change the way people think about and solve parking problems. It describes more than two-dozen strategies that result in more efficient use of parking resources, and explains how to assemble them into an effective parking management program. Lawrence Frank, Sarah Kavage and Todd Litman, "Promoting Public Health Through Smart Growth: Building Healthier Communities Through Transportation And Land Use Policies," Smart Growth BC (www.smartgrowth.bc.ca), 2006; available at http://www.smartgrowth.bc.ca/downloads/SGBC_Health%20Report%20Final.pdf. This report explains how our built environment shapes our transportation choices, and in turn, human health. It identifies specific transportation and land use reforms that can help create healthier and more livable communities. "Parking Management: Innovative Solutions To Vehicle Parking Problems" (http://www.planetizen.com/node/19149 ). This Planetizen editorial discusses parking management strategies and how they can be used to improve cities. Todd Litman, "Impacts of Rail Transit on the Performance of a Transportation System," Transportation Research Record 1930, Transit: Intermodal Transfer Facilities, Rail, Commuter Rail, Light Rail, and Major Activity Center Circulation Systems, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org), 2005, pp. 23-29. This is a summary of our previous report, "Rail Transit In America: Comprehensive Evaluation of Benefits," available at http:www.vtpi.org/railben.pdf . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ UPCOMING EVENTS ================ "Land Use Impacts on Transportation" workshop, June 14, 8:30am-4:30pm, by Todd Litman, sponsored by the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC (http://www.apeg.bc.ca/prodev/events/transportation_land_use.html ). This professional development workshop will explore how transport planning decisions (such as roadway design and parking supply) affect land use in the context of concerns about the costs of sprawl and the potential of smart growth development policies. It references the report "Evaluating Transportation Land Use Impacts" (http://www.vtpi.org/landuse.pdf ). "Using Parking Strategies to Manage Traffic in Transit Oriented Developments" (Session 16, Tuesday, Aug. 8) and "Parking Management Best Practices" (session 37, Aug. 9), Institute of Transportation Engineers Annual Meeting, Milwaukee, WI (http://www.ite.org/AnnualMeeting ) "Transportation Demand Management Strategies," by Todd Litman, First International Congress on Citizens and Mobility Management, 25 Sept. 2006, Madrid, Spain (http://www.congresomovilidad.com ). This major international conference will explore ways to integrate transport, environment, energy and spatial planning issues. Note to European colleagues: we would be happy to arrange other speaking engagements for Mr. Litman in Europe during the week prior to this conference, Sept. 18-22. The World Conference on Transportation Research (WCTR), which will be held June 24-28, 2007 (Next year) at the University of California, Berkeley - the first time for a WCTR in the US. Information can be found at www.uctc.net/wctrs. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ USEFUL RESOURCES ================= Below are some new information resources that you may find useful. Vukan Vuchic, "Urban Transit: Operations, Planning and Economics," John Wiley & Sons (http://ca.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0471632651.html ), 2005. This textbook and technical reference covers all aspects of urban transit operations, planning, and economics. It is the most comprehensive book we have seen on the subject. It thoroughly examines the technical fundamentals and management principles of public transit planning, operations and economic analysis, including extensive tables and graphs to help compare the performance and operating costs of various types of transit. It provides a comprehensive single-volume text and reference for students and transit professionals. The book includes dozens of worked problems and end-of-chapter exercises help familiarize the reader with the formulae and analytical techniques presented in the book. BIKESAFE (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/BIKESAFE and www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikesafe ) BIKESAFE is an expert system that assists practitioners with the selection of countermeasures to address bicyclist safety and mobility problems. It includes several interactive tools to: ? Provide information on countermeasures available for prevention of bicyclist crashes. ? Highlight the purposes, considerations and cost estimates associated with each countermeasure. ? Provide a decision process to aid in selecting the most applicable countermeasures in a specific situatin. ? Provide links to case studies. ? Provide easy access to resources such as statistics, implementation guidance, and reference materials." "The Housing and Transportation Affordability Index: Understanding What Makes Housing Truly Affordable," developed by the Center for Transit-Oriented Development (http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/html/TOD ) and the Center for Neighborhood Technology, and produced by the Brookings Institute (http://www.brookings.edu/metro/umi/pubs/20060127_affindex.htm ), 2006. The Housing and Transportation Affordability Index quantifies the trade-offs that households make between housing and transportation costs and the savings that derive from more accessible housing locations. It shows that total housing and transportation costs are often lowest in urban communities and highest in sprawled location due to differences in automobile transportation costs. The tool is based on data sets available in most urban areas. The PATH (Planning for Active Transportation and Health) project (www.nrsrcaa.org/path/Documents.htm) includes a new set of design tools to decisionmakers to plan for safer, more functional and more equitable access to goods, services and employment. PATH involves the expertise of social service, health, and economic development professionals to assist transportation planners by better integrating the changing patterns of community life with the spectrum of vital transportation needs. Peter Nelson, Andrew Baglino, Winston Harrington, Elena Safirova and Abram Lipman, "Transit in Washington, D.C.: Current Benefits and Optimal Level of Provision," Resources for the Future (www.rff.org/rff/Documents/RFF-DP-06-21.pdf ), 2006. Researchers estimated the benefits of local transit service to transit users and congestion-reduction benefits to motorists. They found that rail transit generates congestion-reduction benefits that exceed rail subsidies, the combined benefits of rail and bus transit easily exceed local transit subsidies generally, and the lowest-income group receives a disproportionately low share of the transit benefits, both in absolute terms and as a share of total income. Strategic Policy Options for Sustainable Development Database (www.iges.or.jp/cgi-bin/rispo/index_spo.cgi ), Research on Innovative and Strategic Policy Options (RISPO) by the Institute for Global Environmental Studies provides information, recommended best practices and case studies on a wide range of sustainable policies and strategies. Northwest Environment Watch has changed its name to Sightline Institute (http://www.sightline.org ). This organization engages in a variety of research focusing on sustainable transportation and land use in the Cascadia region (Washington, Oregon, Idaho and British Columbia). We?ve particularly enjoyed their webloging covering a variety of issues and perspectives. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please let us know if you have comments or questions about any information in this newsletter, or if you would like to be removed from our email list. And please pass this newsletter on to others who may find it useful. 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/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060510/8301fa08/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Sat May 13 17:53:29 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 10:53:29 +0200 Subject: [sustran] "Highjacking sustainable transport" In-Reply-To: <20060512105254.4083.qmail@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001401c6766a$b6172960$6501a8c0@Home> "Highjacking sustainable transport" - What a great and useful phrase! One that we will do well to keep in our sights as proposals and propositions that try to associate with the label step forth. Thanks Rory. Which gets me back to Fair Transport and our idea for a set of Jacobs Rules "tests" for sustainability and fairness, on which up to now we have had no concrete feedback and commentary. So I wonder if I might encourage those of you who care about these things enough to take the time to work your way down this provisional short list, and then to share your comments and suggestions with me and us with a view to turning it into a more bullet proof and practically useful working tool. I must say that I have been trying to make it shorter, but at the same time I think it is important that we make sure there are no huge loopholes here. So there you have our latest on this. And thanks for giving this your time and thought. Your reward? Well you know that. org Fair Transport -- and Jacobs Rules "Fair Transport" targets is a new policy model for the sector, which seeks to build on and extend the somewhat abstract and often ambiguous concept of sustainable transport or sustainable mobility. The specific idea behind Fair Transport is to move beyond generalities and instead come up with a number of specific criteria, sign posts and tests to guide investments, decisions and actions in the transport field, and in particular those that are funded through taxpayer contributions or which require public support or authorization. The shortlist that follows, while still provisional and subject to review and comment, is our present best-stab at providing such a check list. We are convinced that no public or publicly supported projects should be carried out without these tests being applied and the results made openly and publicly available in time to make, support or eventually block or modify the go-ahead decisions that traditionally have been made more or less in isolation in central places. 1. Human and social impacts: Requires as the very first priority a detailed and mature understanding of how the proposed new, improved or restructured transport investment, policy or action is going to impact on "we, ordinary people, step by step in our daily lives". Low income groups need as a priority excellent walking, cycling and bus service provision and the means to get rural produce to market. 2. Near term improvements: The Fair Transport approach places heavy emphasis on projects and policies which lead to measurable near term improvements within the electoral cycle of the decision makers in place. (say less than 2-4 years to achievement). All such targeted improvements must, however, be within the broader strategic (that is long term) policy frame as set out here and mandated by the concepts of sustainable development.. 3. Non-Transport Solutions: Recognizes that at least a good half of the solutions needed to deal with problems or insufficiencies that in a first instance are identified with 'transport shortcomings' must in fact involve non-transport solutions . This means that the policy and decision makers need to have full knowledge of these parts of the solution set as well (typical examples being locational and land use changes, public spaces, TDM, time management, mobility substitutes, etc.) 4. Full Access for All: All projects much provide or lead to full, fair and safe access to people of all ages, conditions of health, economic situation and in terms of where they live and work. Convenient rural accessibility to all services and functions is critical. 5. Modal choice: Provides full and fair consideration of all forms of mobility (human-powered, public transport, intermediate/shared transport forms, motorized private transport) in the areas of planning, financing and infrastructure provision, maintenance and operation - but subjecting them to strict consideration of lowest life-cycle CO2 emissions, least polluting, most equitable, most cost effective, and most resource economical. Given the fact that the majority of people are not car owner/drivers (or should not be), non "own-car" solutions should be heavily favored 6. Cost effectiveness: (a) Represents the cheapest way to get the (full) job done to the key targeted specifications (those being human) while (b) also fully serving non-drivers and lower income groups. 7. Gender, Women and Children: Gives full consideration to critical (and heretofore generally neglected) gender differences and needs at all stages of the discussion, planning, and decision process. This can only be assured through full representation and participation of female leaders and active participants. Thus no project should be allowed to go ahead unless there is a strong plurality at least of female participation and leadership in the decision stage. 8. Packages of Measures: the Fair Transport paradigm will be distinguished from the old ways of planning and making investments by the fact that it will in most places be characterized by very large numbers of often quite small projects and initiatives. And by many more actors and participants. One of the main challenges of an effective Fair Transport policy will be to find ways to see these various measures as interactive synergistic and mutually supporting projects within a unified greater whole. This is a significant challenge to our planners at all levels. 9. New Actors/Entrepreneurship: The transport sector has traditionally been heavily regulated in ways in which new approaches and new actors are more or less actively discouraged or blocked. A Fair Transport policy will create a much more open attitude and support structure for innovation, from the private and public sectors and from volunteer and community groups. 10. Small project strategies and management: On the understanding that what is needed is large numbers of small projects each doing their own job, requires that at least 50% of the total investment budget be allocated to small projects (criteria?). These projects should be generated through local actions and participation. 11. Large projects: Suggests that any large project (say more than $100k) be carefully inspected to ensure that its most important human and social (this includes economic and environmental) objectives cannot be better met by one or a set of smaller projects or policies. 12. Public spaces and community: Serves to improve quantity, quality, and social usefulness of public spaces, thereby reinforcing human contacts, sense of community, local and regional culture 13. New Tools: The traditional toolset (and mindset) of the planners and policy makers in the sector need to be dramatically expanded and more fully integrated in all project stages. A very incomplete list would include direct involvement of behavioral psychologists gender specialists, public space experts, and new forms of pubic participation and interactive communications. (This list is incomplete and intended here only for the purposes of giving a first indication.) 14. Open public reporting: All planning and project information, technical analysis, cost information, key parameters, etc. should be publicly available in a convenient transparent form which is make available both locally and nationally and to the international community with expertise and longer term interests in these areas. -----Original Message----- Behalf Of Rory McMullan Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 12:53 PM To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Paris at slower speeds with cleaner exhaust, Fair? Perhaps this is part of the fair transport debate. Although cleaner fuels are a great advance and should be applauded and promoted, I do have the feeling that the auto, green fuel, and auto accessory companies are highjacking the sustainable transport and environmentally friendly transport issues. I believe demand management should be the priority for the movement, combined with the issues of smart growth and accessibility. One aim of sustainable transport must be to reduce the overall need for travel by powered vehicles, in the interest not only of reduced emissions and cleaner air, but also for safer streets and more livable equitable cities. Rory McMullan, - http://www.urbangreenfair.org.uk/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060513/4a3d9c90/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.info Sat May 13 22:27:31 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:27:31 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: "Highjacking sustainable transport" In-Reply-To: <001401c6766a$b6172960$6501a8c0@Home> References: <20060512105254.4083.qmail@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <001401c6766a$b6172960$6501a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <2245.62.245.95.24.1147526851.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> > "Highjacking sustainable transport" - What a great and useful phrase! > One that we will do well to keep in our sights as proposals and > propositions that try to associate with the label step forth. Thanks > Rory. YES, great.. and I would argue that it is of course hijacking "sustainability" as well. > > > Which gets me back to Fair Transport and our idea for a set of Jacobs > Rules "tests" for sustainability and fairness, on which up to now we > have had no concrete feedback and commentary. So I wonder if I might > encourage those of you who care about these things enough to take the > time to work your way down this provisional short list, and then to > share your comments and suggestions with me and us with a view to > turning it into a more bullet proof and practically useful working tool. > I must say that I have been trying to make it shorter, but at the same > time I think it is important that we make sure there are no huge > loopholes here. > > > > So there you have our latest on this. And thanks for giving this your > time and thought. Your reward? Well you know that. > > org > > > > > > Fair Transport -- and Jacobs Rules ERIC, in general there is lots of good stuff here. It seems like you are trying to fill a box for "transport" so it is like apples to my oranges which is "access", with transport being a tool for access. We simply have different philosophies, or perhaps partly overlapping ones, and if you are doing the Jacobs Fairness thing to fill in a box that is on a World Bank form, so to speak... or a shelf in a mindset (forgive me, my metaphor programme is not working) of the World Bank, then I understand, but starting with "transport" is not a sustainable starting point. Indeed, you take note of it in "Non-transport solutions" and isnt this really the starting point? So, a flow-chart has question: Access? First options are non-transport, really meaning "real proximity" via urban design and "magic proximity" via electronic things. Transport is needed if non-transport does not provide access. > > > "Fair Transport" targets is a new policy model for the sector, which > seeks to build on and extend the somewhat abstract and often ambiguous > concept of sustainable transport or sustainable mobility. The specific > idea behind Fair Transport is to move beyond generalities and instead > come up with a number of specific criteria, sign posts and tests to > guide investments, decisions and actions in the transport field, and in > particular those that are funded through taxpayer contributions or which > require public support or authorization. > > > > The shortlist THERE needs to be some kind of priority hierarchy here, a "pyramid" of some sort, which is much better than "pillars" which tends to say that all supports for a system are not just necessary but equally important. In the pyramid of urban transport walking is at the top, and I would say carshare is at the bottom, though it is not the foundation. Individual car use and ownership is not part of this pyramid (Egyptians knew what they were doing). In the pillar metaphor for urban transport bikes, carshare, PT etc all are pillars holding up the roof. See, the reality is different. the that follows, while still provisional and subject to > review and comment, is our present best-stab at providing such a check > list. We are convinced that no public or publicly supported projects > should be carried out without these tests being applied and the results > made openly and publicly available in time to make, support or > eventually block or modify the go-ahead decisions that traditionally > have been made more or less in isolation in central places. > > > > 1. Human and social impacts: Requires as the very first priority a > detailed and mature understanding of how the proposed new, improved or > restructured transport investment, policy or action is going to impact > on "we, ordinary people, step by step in our daily lives". THIS is good priority philosophy, not a technical thing, which goes along with 2, 13 and 14,below. Low income > groups need as a priority excellent walking, cycling and bus service > provision and the means to get rural produce to market. THESE are simply examples for no. 1. > 2. Near term improvements: The Fair Transport approach places heavy > emphasis on projects and policies which lead to measurable near term > improvements within the electoral cycle of the decision makers in place. > (say less than 2-4 years to achievement). All such targeted > improvements must, however, be within the broader strategic (that is > long term) policy frame as set out here and mandated by the concepts of > sustainable development.. > 3. Non-Transport Solutions: Recognizes that at least a good half of > the solutions needed to deal with problems or insufficiencies that in a > first instance are identified with 'transport shortcomings' must in fact > involve non-transport solutions . This means that the policy and > decision makers need to have full knowledge of these parts of the > solution set as well (typical examples being locational and land use > changes, public spaces, TDM, time management, mobility substitutes, > etc.) > 4. Full Access for All: All projects much provide or lead to full, > fair and safe access to people of all ages, conditions of health, > economic situation and in terms of where they live and work. Convenient > rural accessibility to all services and functions is critical. THIS would just allow people in suburbs to demand roads to their front doors. Again, I think it is about access to places, not access to transport means. "Full Access" is so vague it is not workable. UITP has "Mobility for All" which is nice but should just be interpreted as a statement about democracy and fairness rather than a design philosophy. Someone who has a great personal economic situation might think it is fair for them to have a big car and drive around in isolation. This might be the thing: My transport means is good as long as it doesnt infringe on your transport means. (There would be compromises, e.g. you have to wait for the bus to pass by, etc) > 5. Modal choice: Provides full and fair consideration of all forms > of mobility (human-powered, public transport, intermediate/shared > transport forms, motorized private transport) in the areas of planning, > financing and infrastructure provision, maintenance and operation - but > subjecting them to strict consideration of lowest life-cycle CO2 > emissions, least polluting, most equitable, most cost effective, and > most resource economical. Given the fact that the majority of people are > not car owner/drivers (or should not be), non "own-car" solutions should > be heavily favored DOES "equitable" include safety? IF a carshare car operating on biogas and filled with five people goes down a street at 50km/h, it still makes life unequitable for pedestrians, in my opinion. > 6. Cost effectiveness: (a) Represents the cheapest way to get the > (full) job done to the key targeted specifications (those being human) > while (b) also fully serving non-drivers and lower income groups. > 7. Gender, Women and Children: Gives full consideration to critical > (and heretofore generally neglected) gender differences and needs at all > stages of the discussion, planning, and decision process. This can only > be assured through full representation and participation of female > leaders and active participants. Thus no project should be allowed to go > ahead unless there is a strong plurality at least of female > participation and leadership in the decision stage. > 8. Packages of Measures: the Fair Transport paradigm will be > distinguished from the old ways of planning and making investments by > the fact that it will in most places be characterized by very large > numbers of often quite small projects and initiatives. And by many more > actors and participants. One of the main challenges of an effective Fair > Transport policy will be to find ways to see these various measures as > interactive synergistic and mutually supporting projects within a > unified greater whole. This is a significant challenge to our planners > at all levels. > 9. New Actors/Entrepreneurship: The transport sector has > traditionally been heavily regulated in ways in which new approaches and > new actors are more or less actively discouraged or blocked. A Fair > Transport policy will create a much more open attitude and support > structure for innovation, from the private and public sectors and from > volunteer and community groups. > 10. Small project strategies and management: On the understanding > that what is needed is large numbers of small projects each doing their > own job, requires that at least 50% of the total investment budget be > allocated to small projects (criteria?). These projects should be > generated through local actions and participation. > 11. Large projects: Suggests that any large project (say more than > $100k) THIS amount should be based on percentage, so it is relative to the ecomomy of the locality. be carefully inspected to ensure that its most important human > and social (this includes economic and environmental) objectives cannot > be better met by one or a set of smaller projects or policies. > 12. Public spaces and community: Serves to improve quantity, > quality, and social usefulness of public spaces, thereby reinforcing > human contacts, sense of community, local and regional culture > 13. New Tools: The traditional toolset (and mindset) of the > planners and policy makers in the sector need to be dramatically > expanded and more fully integrated in all project stages. A very > incomplete list would include direct involvement of behavioral > psychologists gender specialists, public space experts, and new forms of > pubic participation and interactive communications. (This list is > incomplete and intended here only for the purposes of giving a first > indication.) THIS IS good, but is kind of a separate though essential thing... I mean it is part of the process, the form, rather than the content. > 14. Open public reporting: All planning and project information, > technical analysis, cost information, key parameters, etc. should be > publicly available in a convenient transparent form which is make > available both locally and nationally and to the international community > with expertise and longer term interests in these areas. AS with 13, good good goodie gumdrops --- !!! I would also somehow add "full internalisation of costs" complemented by reduction in income tax. ---- - The non-Canadian Todd ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From edelman at greenidea.info Sun May 14 02:25:11 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:25:11 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] EU laws to put brake on bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT Message-ID: <3006.62.245.95.24.1147541111.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> EU laws to put brake on bikers http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329473814-103630,00.html Relevant excerpts to our discussion: "...The first, which comes into force in two years, will see riders who want to obtain a full licence complete a new 'break and swerve' course in which they perform high-speed manoeuvres, including an emergency stop at 50mph..." "...A second directive - due to come into force by 2012 - will deal the industry another blow. The directive, which has yet to be rubber-stamped by the EU, proposes to raise the minimum age for riding motorcycles over 125cc from 17 to 19. Novices who want a licence to ride any bike will have to be over 24..." *** How come an 18 year-old new driver is allowed to drive any normal car with an engine far exceeding 125cc in size? I imagine motorcyclists are involved in crashes and collisions in higher proportion to their kilometres driven than car drivers... but isnt most of the damage to the motorcyclists themselves? Of course motorcycles are noisy, polluting and create road chaos - as opposed to pedestrians, bicycles and guided-vehicles (rail and BRT) - but these new laws are part of a trend to go after the "little guy", when it is private cars that doing the most damage and killing the most people over all: In the Czech Republic a law was passed recently to require helmets for bicyclists up to age 18. The law was formerly for up to age 15. This will probably turn away some from riding at all, keeping in mind how "uncool" helmets might be for teenagers. (Another interesting aside is that a 15 year-old is allowed to have sex with anyone their age or older than them here, so... a 15 year-old needs to put on a helmet to to visit their adult boyfriend or girlfriend, etc.) At the same time children and adults are being encouraged to wear things like reflective vests and bright clothing, which are not required by law. Children are given vests by their parents. To take this another step... EU would probably like it to be the law that European children have flourescent skin, huh? In the Czech Republic there are some new laws coming into effect regarding enforcement (point penalty system, etc) BUT nothing about reducing 50km/h speed limit to 30km/h in built-up areas, which is the standard in many European cities. It seems to me logical to reduce car use with tougher restictions for drivers, just as is being done for motorcylists. THAT is the very least Brussels can do. (EU wants to reduce road deaths by 50% by 2010... BUT Czechia wont meet the goal (not close) and if you tell me that only one of my friends died rather than two... I wont exactly be happy! I admit I am a little confused about what EU can regulate and what it cant. Licenses for motorcyclists: YES, maybe because motorcyclists can go everywhere in the EU. BUT 30km/h speedlimits in built-up areas? No. Why not? Because the built-up areas themselves cant cross borders? Dont EU citizens deserve as similar traffic conditions as possible in all the countries of the EU they visit or reside in? If governments (and people) REALLY want to reduce road deaths, they need to: * Remove as many cars as possible from the streets * Slow down as much as possible many cars as possible which are still allowed * Start teaching drivers that they are problematic guests in shared public space between buildings.... ... in addition to increasing public transport and railway funding (in Germany funds for regional rail are being cut even as fuel prices go up: This is the wrong way to decrease mobility.)... ... and of course ALSO setting a goal of perhaps 50% more carfree urban areas (hectares) by 2010!!! - T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From et3 at et3.com Wed May 17 08:03:29 2006 From: et3 at et3.com (Daryl Oster) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 19:03:29 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution In-Reply-To: <20060509122357.15410.qmail@mailbox.gr> Message-ID: <200605162303.k4GN3XtK021227@txslsmtp1.vzwmail.net> > Original Message From: K. Tsourlakis > > It seems you imply that informed consumers decide for rail or road > transport prevalence. However this is a collective decision of the society > mediated through politicians choices and actually shaped by lobbying > (often a euphemism for corruption) and advertisement (i.e. mass > brainwashing). This may be true in a country that is not yet developed, however in the US where cars were developed, cars displaced rail IN SPITE OF a very powerful rail lobby, and a non-existent car lobby. So, in the case of the first 14 years or so (from about 1907 to about 1921) Cars had no significant lobby power compared to the lobby power of rail; AND cars won the US market anyway biased on their relative merits and without any brainwashing needed. This also occurred in Europe, and then Japan. > I have of course many historical data of how this happened in my country > (as you, I suppose, can find for yours - and everybody else for his/hers), > but being on this listserv I find more proper to concentrate on what is > happening in India concerning this process. It is clear that there is a fierce lobby battle for transportation mode in developing countries. Since the global car market is now mature, and has displaced rail, they are starting to copy the sophisticated lobby efforts the rail industry has been following for 50 years or more. Unfortunately, the lobby focus is not about safety or ecology, but only about market share and doing things to generate sales. The developing countries are actually in a position of power, for since they are unencumbered by existing infrastructure, and many advances have been made since the invention of trains and cars, they could choose to adopt the best leading edge transportation technology and avoid the costly technology progression and market share transitions that developed countries have had to pay for. (China is doing this under their "National 863 Program".) > Having seen these pictures from "Golden Quadrilateral Project" motorway, I > was impressed of how empty it looked (as far as I know, as a rule of > thumb, a motorway has to have at least an average daily traffic of 10.000 > cars to justify its expenses -does this happen in stretches far from the > cities?). Since ETT can be built for 1/4th the cost of a freeway, AND the operating cost about 1/10th the minimum daily volume to justify construction is also much less. > I also wonder if feasibility studies are carried out, and, if so, what > cost was assigned to the crossing pedestrians danger and delay, the > pollution, noise and other externalities, whether tolls are collected (and > how much) etc. For the brainwashing my questions are less - the NYtimes > article document well this point. Such studies are always carries out in the US. The government conducted a study comparing the demand and cost prediction accuracy of road with rail, and found that railroad consultants lie much more frequently, and to a much greater degree than freeway consultants do. > I am not sure if ETT (Evacuated Tube Transport) is a feasible solution, > and I think we will never be sure until it is tried in practice. > Things in real world can be quite different than in papers - consider the > experience of Maglev. Wheel operation is not observed in nature, wheels for transportation were invented without natural example. Even though bird flight was readily observable, human flight was not manifest until thousands of years after wheels were invented. Several forms of maglev have been built and proven in the last 40 years. In my opinion, one reason that maglev experiments have always followed predictions made in papers is that initial maglev development had no natural analog to form the basis of the science, for magnetic levitation had NEVER been observed in nature. More than 4 types of Maglev are now well understood, and very predictable, and there will likely be many more future developments as predicted in current papers. ETT is not reliant on proposed or unproven forms of maglev or other sciences. Unlike initial maglev development, the main principals of ETT ARE observable to everyone: * The perpetual motion of the moon around the earth, and the earth around the sun, in the evacuated environment of space has been observed as long as recorded human history. * Spacecraft in orbit produce the same perpetual motion as the moon and earth do. ETT is just "space travel on earth". * Pipeline transportation of liquids and gasses have been proven for more than 1000 years, pneumatic (air propelled) tube transport of capsules has been proven for 150 years. The costs and practicalities are well known. * The forces of aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance of wheels are well known, and accurately predictable. * Vacuum technology far more advanced than required for ETT is in use all over the world for more than 100 years. * Several Maglev technologies are well proven. * Linear electric motors and generators are in use in many industries, including transportation. * Automation of transportation is well known, E.G. elevators and manufacturing. > But I am sure that if it has any merit, companies looking after > profit will make some attempts to experiment on it (even if use of > "lobbying" and "advertisement" is required to promote it). Automobiles and aircraft did not use or focus on lobby efforts to brainwash policy makers in the early days of innovation. The advantages of cars and planes were immediately discernable to the market, and they were able to quickly displace rail by offering more transportation value (a higher benefit to cost ratio). ETT implementation will not need government funding or subsidy to be implemented, for ETT offers far more transportation value than do the present value leaders (cars and aircraft). We focus less than 1% of our meager recourses on lobby of government and on advertising. Our efforts are mostly focused on private implementation of ETT, and we do make information on ETT available to governments that are considering transportation infrastructure, as we believe that eventually some public officials may actually insist on the highest possible transportation value for the public they represent. Daryl Oster (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com> > From goyotech at yahoo.es Wed May 17 12:29:27 2006 From: goyotech at yahoo.es (Gregorio Villacorta Alegria) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 05:29:27 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Mototaxis - Research Message-ID: <20060517032927.27212.qmail@web27003.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hallo Group I would like if somebody could help me with information and resources about three wheels vehicles. I have got the paper from GTZ that is excelente , I will pleased if I could get more information. I am based in Peru ( and our cities now looks like Asia with vehicles of three wheels leading the public transport ) The research is part of some researchs in urban transport at the University of Engineering in Peru. Regards Gregorio ------------------------------------------------------------ Gregorio Villacorta Alegr?a, B.Sc Research Assistant for Schorrell Analysis www.schorrell-analysis.de ------------------------------------------------------------ M?vil : 0051429670008 Skype: goyotech Email : goyotech@yahoo.es Jr. Libertad 263 - Tarapoto Per?. ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------- LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo. Llamadas a fijos y m?viles desde 1 c?ntimo por minuto. http://es.voice.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060517/7f942342/attachment.html From litman at vtpi.org Wed May 17 12:33:47 2006 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 20:33:47 -0700 Subject: [sustran] New Article Compares Canadian & US Cycling Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060516203335.05be8488@mail.islandnet.com> We have just posted a new article on our website. John Pucher and Ralph Buehler, 'Why Canadians Cycle More Than Americans: A Comparative Analysis Of Bicycling Trends And Policies,' published in "Transport Policy," Vol. 13, May 2006, pp. 265?279; available at www.vtpi.org/pucher_canbike.pdf. This article indicates that, despite a colder climate, Canadians cycle about three times more than Americans. Reasons for this difference include Canada?s higher urban densities and mixed-use development, shorter trip distances, lower incomes, higher costs of owning, driving and parking a car, safer cycling conditions, and more extensive cycling infrastructure and training programs. Most of these factors result from differences between Canada and the United States in their transport and land-use policies, and not from intrinsic differences in history, culture or resource availability. That suggests that it is possible to significantly increase cycling levels in the United States by adopting Canadian policies that have promoted cycling and enhanced its safety. 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/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060516/66019a32/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed May 17 15:45:15 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 08:45:15 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Beijing Seeks Monthly Car-Free Day Message-ID: <002a01c6797d$752527c0$6501a8c0@Home> Beijing Seeks Monthly Car-Free Day to Ease Air Pollution Tuesday, May 16, 2006 BEIJING - Beijing is asking residents to leave their cars at home for one day a month to help improve air quality, the city environmental agency said Tuesday. The voluntary campaign, targeting more than 200,000 members of Beijing's driving associations, aims to boost the number of days with 'fairly good' air quality in the capital to 238, five more than last year, said the statement from the Beijing Municipal Environmental Protection Bureau. Beijing added new vehicles at the rate of about 1,000 a day last year, giving the city a total of 2.6 million vehicles, half of them private cars, officials with city transportation agencies said earlier this year. Vehicle emissions are the leading cause of Beijing's air pollution, with vehicles spewing out 3,600 tons of pollution each day, it said. Beijing launched a program to reduce air pollution in 1998, when the city had only 100 days with fairly good air quality each year, it said. The president of the Friends of Nature environmental group, a co-sponsor of the initiative, told The Associated Press the request was symbolic but better than nothing. "We don't keep so much hope on this," said Liang Congjie. "But we think it will make a little difference." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060517/6132420a/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 495 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060517/6132420a/attachment.gif From ktsourl at mailbox.gr Wed May 17 18:54:54 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 17 May 2006 12:54:54 +0300 Subject: [sustran] EU laws to put brake on bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT Message-ID: <20060517095454.5213.qmail@mailbox.gr> Motorcycles may be "little guy" in Czechia, but Czechia (or perhaps North America) is not the whole world. In many South European and Asian cities (and in an ever growing number of African countries) motorcycle traffic is an important part of motorised traffic (and in many cases - e.g China or Vietnam- a first step towards car motorisation). In Athens for instance, 1 million motorcycles pollute freely the city, besides 2 million automobiles - without any (unlike cars) exhaust gas and noise controls. Motorcycling is deliberately promoted (instead of biking - Athens lacks even 1 km of bike lane) in order to maximize motorised traffic. The corrupt administration favours motorcycling because they don't compete cars, but use mostly pedestrian spaces and other free spaces (parks, squares etc) - they have also recently granted them legally free access to dedicated bus lanes. They use under police immunity sidewalks and other pedestrian spaces and act more aggressively than cars, being a major component of the violence and oppression pedestrians experience in Athens in everyday life, and an important (although unrecognised) part of the pollution of the most polluted capital in Europe. You are not right: they don't only cause damage to the motorcyclists themselves, but they also kill pedestrians and bicyclists. Even the damage they bring about to themselves shouldn't be confronted with indifference, given the efforts the motorcycle lobby makes to lure inexperienced and aggression inclined people to the motorcycle ideology. However I agree with you that fines and efforts should concentrate more to the damage they cause to others (like speeding or pedestrian rights violations) than the harm they cause to themselves (like helmet use - advising rather than penalties are more appropriate in this case). Although carfree cities is a worthy prospect, perhaps a completely carfree world is still far away, but a motorcycle free world is already feasible (and may become a first step towards the carfree vision). For a more thorough discussion about motorcycles look at http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.rtf or http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.htm _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From edelman at greenidea.info Wed May 17 19:57:50 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 12:57:50 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: [carfree_cities] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT Message-ID: <1135.62.245.95.24.1147863470.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> re: http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329473814-103630,00.html also, interesting information on MOTORCYCLES IN ATHENS at these links: http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.rtf or http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.htm and below...as well as original email. I suggest we move this discussion off the Carfree Cities as it is my understanding that carfree definately means motorcycle-free in the view of the owner of the Carfree Cities list, with no discussion possible. I just wanted to respond to your points. Todd --- Hi KT! Thanks for your comments and criticism! > > Motorcycles may be "little guy" in Czechia, but Czechia (or perhaps > North America) is not the whole world. In many South European and > Asian cities (and in an ever growing number of African countries) > motorcycle traffic is an important part of motorised traffic (and in > many cases - e.g China or Vietnam- a first step towards car motorisation). I CERTAINLY dont think that Czechia or the EU or North America is the whole world! I should add that I sent blind copies of the original email to a few members of the Committee on Transport and Tourism in the European Commission who I thought might be or I know are sympathetic to my point of view. Good laws in the EU can certainly be good examples for elsewhere. Motorised two-wheelers represent a very small part of the transport mix in most of the northern countries of the EU, and I think most if not all of the new EU states. I realise that Italy, and perhaps France (and Spain?) are different. To summarize my opinion on your points below and in the linked page you provided: I absolutely agree that motorcycles are worse than many people think, and as bad as you claim. I just wanted to say that the restrictions on driving age etc should apply to both, and things like a top speed of 30km/h should apply to all motorised vehicles (except for trams) in built-up areas. Again, this - if enforced by police (active) and design (passive) - will slow down all vehicles, and reduce some of the advantage of motorcycles. I dont think motorcycles resemble bicycles in any way. So, lets focus on Athens, as you suggest: > > In Athens for instance, 1 million motorcycles pollute freely the city, > besides 2 million automobiles - without any (unlike cars) exhaust gas > and noise controls. Motorcycling is deliberately promoted (instead of > biking - Athens lacks even 1 km of bike lane) in order to maximize > motorised traffic. The corrupt administration favours motorcycling > because they don't compete cars, but use mostly pedestrian spaces and > other free spaces (parks, squares etc) - they have also recently > granted them legally free access to dedicated bus lanes. They use > under police immunity sidewalks and other pedestrian spaces and act > more aggressively than cars, being a major component of the violence > and oppression pedestrians experience in Athens in everyday life, and > an important (although unrecognised) part of the pollution of the most > polluted capital in Europe. WELL, this certainly seems like hell. A main point of my first email was to question why all countries dont have the same regulations for both motorcycles and cars. I also understand that two-stroke-powered have been made illegal, and while this means they will eventually dissappear, it would certainly be great to get them off the streets sooner. And I understand your point that four-stroke is not much of an advantage (In Prague and other cities of the new EU especially, a HUGE problem is all the old Diesel trucks and service vehicles... and I have not yet found out how to get them off of the road or when/if laws might force it. > > You are not right: they don't only cause damage to the motorcyclists > themselves, but they also kill pedestrians and bicyclists. Even the > damage they bring about to themselves shouldn't be confronted with > indifference, given the efforts the motorcycle lobby makes to lure > inexperienced and aggression inclined people to the motorcycle > ideology. However I agree with you that fines and efforts should > concentrate more to the damage they cause to others (like speeding or > pedestrian rights violations) than the harm they cause to themselves > (like helmet use - advising rather than penalties are more appropriate > in this case). YES, you are right, in Athens, some other southern EU cities, and in many parts of the developing world. In sum, many many more people than who are in the EU. Reducing motorcycle traffic in many parts of the EU will not make a big difference. (Brussels, too, I think!). So, that is why I mention the "little guy": I mean this as the easiest target, not necessarily the cause of the least problems. (To say it another way, there is big push for people to unplug their computers when they are not at home, but many of these people leave home by car!) > > Although carfree cities is a worthy prospect, perhaps a completely > carfree world is still far away, but a motorcycle free world is > already feasible (and may become a first step towards the carfree > vision). AGAIN, making Prague and other parts of the EU motorcycle-free will not make a big difference. It is much fairer to treat all private motorised transport with strict rules regarding emissions and speed... OR to really take them seriously - for a change - and to ban all of it immediately when city design/public transport can replace it via proximity and replacment mobility... and to start redesigning cities and improving PT so no one needs cars and motorcycles and no one needs them either. Four wheels bad, two wheels bad (if you have a motor), two wheels good if you have no motor, and pedestrians always come first. And European Commission really needs to take a look at what is happening in Athens and see if they are violating laws (I imagine they are regarding emissions) and do something to help. There are two Greeks on the Committee for Transport and Tourism: One seems to be very active on Womens Issues, and since women (and children) are known as vulnerable road users, maybe she will have an ear for your points. I am forwarding this email to her... See: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/activities/expert/committees/presentation.do?committee=1242&language=EN Thanks, T Original email: EU laws to put brake on bikers http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329473814-103630,00.html Relevant excerpts to our discussion: "...The first, which comes into force in two years, will see riders who want to obtain a full licence complete a new 'break and swerve' course in which they perform high-speed manoeuvres, including an emergency stop at 50mph..." "...A second directive - due to come into force by 2012 - will deal the industry another blow. The directive, which has yet to be rubber-stamped by the EU, proposes to raise the minimum age for riding motorcycles over 125cc from 17 to 19. Novices who want a licence to ride any bike will have to be over 24..." *** How come an 18 year-old new driver is allowed to drive any normal car with an engine far exceeding 125cc in size? I imagine motorcyclists are involved in crashes and collisions in higher proportion to their kilometres driven than car drivers... but isnt most of the damage to the motorcyclists themselves? Of course motorcycles are noisy, polluting and create road chaos - as opposed to pedestrians, bicycles and guided-vehicles (rail and BRT) - but these new laws are part of a trend to go after the "little guy", when it is private cars that doing the most damage and killing the most people over all: In the Czech Republic a law was passed recently to require helmets for bicyclists up to age 18. The law was formerly for up to age 15. This will probably turn away some from riding at all, keeping in mind how "uncool" helmets might be for teenagers. (Another interesting aside is that a 15 year-old is allowed to have sex with anyone their age or older than them here, so... a 15 year-old needs to put on a helmet to to visit their adult boyfriend or girlfriend, etc.) At the same time children and adults are being encouraged to wear things like reflective vests and bright clothing, which are not required by law. Children are given vests by their parents. To take this another step... EU would probably like it to be the law that European children have flourescent skin, huh? In the Czech Republic there are some new laws coming into effect regarding enforcement (point penalty system, etc) BUT nothing about reducing 50km/h speed limit to 30km/h in built-up areas, which is the standard in many European cities. It seems to me logical to reduce car use with tougher restictions for drivers, just as is being done for motorcylists. THAT is the very least Brussels can do. (EU wants to reduce road deaths by 50% by 2010... BUT Czechia wont meet the goal (not close) and if you tell me that only one of my friends died rather than two... I wont exactly be happy! I admit I am a little confused about what EU can regulate and what it cant. Licenses for motorcyclists: YES, maybe because motorcyclists can go everywhere in the EU. BUT 30km/h speedlimits in built-up areas? No. Why not? Because the built-up areas themselves cant cross borders? Dont EU citizens deserve as similar traffic conditions as possible in all the countries of the EU they visit or reside in? If governments (and people) REALLY want to reduce road deaths, they need to: * Remove as many cars as possible from the streets * Slow down as much as possible many cars as possible which are still allowed * Start teaching drivers that they are problematic guests in shared public space between buildings.... ... in addition to increasing public transport and railway funding (in Germany funds for regional rail are being cut even as fuel prices go up: This is the wrong way to decrease mobility.)... ... and of course ALSO setting a goal of perhaps 50% more carfree urban areas (hectares) by 2010!!! - T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Thu May 18 05:00:12 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 22:00:12 +0200 Subject: [sustran] EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT In-Reply-To: <1135.62.245.95.24.1147863470.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Message-ID: <00e801c679ec$8560bc70$6501a8c0@Home> Todd Edelman wrote on this date with ref to the letter of our knowledgeable Greek colleague K. Tsourlakis and his pertinent comments on motorcycles (see below) as follows: >> I suggest we move this discussion off the Carfree Cities as it is my understanding that carfree definately means motorcycle-free in the view of the owner of the Carfree Cities list, with no discussion possible.<< Fair enough Mr. Owner. But I just want my colleagues here in our fine Sustran group and in the New Mobility Agenda that I really like the "no discussion possible" bit. It tells us a great deal about the real world relevance of this point of view and I must conclude the forum itself. But what is great about the web of course is that there is plenty of space out here for utopian thinking, and it is only right that they set their own agendas. What is apparently most important in this case is not the untidy world in which we live and have to work with, but the pristine ones that some of us have in our heads. Life is sweet. Okay, why do I bother you all with this? It is more than just an opportunity to share a wry grin with you. To the contrary, it is to encourage more critical discussion and idea mongering on both these fora of precisely the motorcycles in cities dilemma. It's a huge reality (you know, reality). For those of us who have lived and worked in Asia, we can only see that this is a situation which is profoundly out of control and which, as it happens. Deal with phenomena and practices which have entirely escaped both planners and policy makers. To take just one point of the untidy real world: there is a growing population of people for whom two wheels bangers are cheaper and "better" than even the cheapest bus. Well, what do we do then? So if the "no discussion possible" comments do nothing other than to activate further discussions and work on this here, well they would have made a real contribution. Eric Britton Motorcycles may be "little guy" in Czechia, but Czechia (or perhaps North America) is not the whole world. In many South European and Asian cities (and in an ever growing number of African countries) motorcycle traffic is an important part of motorised traffic (and in many cases - e.g China or Vietnam- a first step towards car motorisation). In Athens for instance, 1 million motorcycles pollute freely the city, besides 2 million automobiles - without any (unlike cars) exhaust gas and noise controls. Motorcycling is deliberately promoted (instead of biking - Athens lacks even 1 km of bike lane) in order to maximize motorised traffic. The corrupt administration favours motorcycling because they don't compete cars, but use mostly pedestrian spaces and other free spaces (parks, squares etc) - they have also recently granted them legally free access to dedicated bus lanes. They use under police immunity sidewalks and other pedestrian spaces and act more aggressively than cars, being a major component of the violence and oppression pedestrians experience in Athens in everyday life, and an important (although unrecognised) part of the pollution of the most polluted capital in Europe. You are not right: they don't only cause damage to the motorcyclists themselves, but they also kill pedestrians and bicyclists. Even the damage they bring about to themselves shouldn't be confronted with indifference, given the efforts the motorcycle lobby makes to lure inexperienced and aggression inclined people to the motorcycle ideology. However I agree with you that fines and efforts should concentrate more to the damage they cause to others (like speeding or pedestrian rights violations) than the harm they cause to themselves (like helmet use - advising rather than penalties are more appropriate in this case). Although carfree cities is a worthy prospect, perhaps a completely carfree world is still far away, but a motorcycle free world is already feasible (and may become a first step towards the carfree vision). For a more thorough discussion about motorcycles look at http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.rtf or http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060517/512930fc/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.info Thu May 18 06:02:37 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 23:02:37 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT Message-ID: <1583.62.245.95.24.1147899757.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Eric Britton said: > Todd Edelman wrote on this date with ref to the letter of our > knowledgeable Greek colleague K. Tsourlakis and his pertinent comments > on motorcycles (see below) as follows: "I suggest we move this discussion off the Carfree Cities as it is my understanding that carfree definately means motorcycle-free in the view of the owner of the Carfree Cities list, with no discussion possible." Britton continued: > "Fair enough Mr. Owner. But I just want my colleagues here in our fine > Sustran group and in the New Mobility Agenda that I really like the "no > discussion possible" bit. It tells us a great deal about the real world > relevance of this point of view and I must conclude the forum itself. > But what is great about the web of course is that there is plenty of > space out here for utopian thinking, and it is only right that they set > their own agendas. What is apparently most important in this case is not > the untidy world in which we live and have to work with, but the > pristine ones that some of us have in our heads. Life is sweet. Eric, you are so sensitive! I had a dream I wanted to share with you: The World Bank hired Daryl Oster and started to build his Evacuated Tube Transport. Some Thai kids stole a motorcycle powered by a secret utopian energy source and drove it through the unfinished ETT all the way to Paris, where you greeted them with fresh bread, soft cheese and all of a sudden the dreaded Wikipolice showed up and asked you some serious questions. The skies turned black and subsonic thunder vibrated the cosmos. Then the skies turned bright blue just as abruptly and the Carfree Ark appeared and the naked carfree children gave utopian vitamins to everyone and all the worlds problems were solved, forever. --- > > Okay, why do I bother you all with this? It is more than just an > opportunity to share a wry grin with you. To the contrary, it is to > encourage more critical discussion and idea mongering on both these fora > of precisely the motorcycles in cities dilemma. It's a huge reality > (you know, reality). For those of us who have lived and worked in Asia, > we can only see that this is a situation which is profoundly out of > control and which, as it happens. Deal with phenomena and practices > which have entirely escaped both planners and policy makers. To take > just one point of the untidy real world: there is a growing population > of people for whom two wheels bangers are cheaper and "better" than even > the cheapest bus. Well, what do we do then? > > So if the "no discussion possible" comments do nothing other than to > activate further discussions and work on this here, well they would have > made a real contribution. The Thai kids later found out that each of them had two half-time jobs: One was to work on carfree cities; the other was to work on doing as much as possible to eliminate the dangers of stinky, evil motorcycles. Their bosses, unsurprisingly, did not find the two jobs to be a conflict of purpose. - Fin - The non-Canadian Todd (Edelman) > > Eric Britton > > > > > Motorcycles may be "little guy" in Czechia, but Czechia (or perhaps > North > America) is not the whole world. In many South European and Asian cities > (and in > an ever growing number of African countries) motorcycle traffic is an > important > part of motorised traffic (and in many cases - e.g China or Vietnam- a > first > step towards car motorisation). > > In Athens for instance, 1 million motorcycles pollute freely the city, > besides 2 > million automobiles - without any (unlike cars) exhaust gas and noise > controls. > Motorcycling is deliberately promoted (instead of biking - Athens lacks > even 1 > km of bike lane) in order to maximize motorised traffic. The corrupt > administration favours motorcycling because they don't compete cars, but > use > mostly pedestrian spaces and other free spaces (parks, squares etc) - > they have > also recently granted them legally free access to dedicated bus lanes. > They use > under police immunity sidewalks and other pedestrian spaces and act more > aggressively than cars, being a major component of the violence and > oppression > pedestrians experience in Athens in everyday life, and an important > (although > unrecognised) part of the pollution of the most polluted capital in > Europe. > > You are not right: they don't only cause damage to the motorcyclists > themselves, > but they also kill pedestrians and bicyclists. Even the damage they > bring about > to themselves shouldn't be confronted with indifference, given the > efforts the > motorcycle lobby makes to lure inexperienced and aggression inclined > people to > the motorcycle ideology. However I agree with you that fines and efforts > should > concentrate more to the damage they cause to others (like speeding or > pedestrian > rights violations) than the harm they cause to themselves (like helmet > use - > advising rather than penalties are more appropriate in this case). > > Although carfree cities is a worthy prospect, perhaps a completely > carfree world > is still far away, but a motorcycle free world is already feasible (and > may > become a first step towards the carfree vision). For a more thorough > discussion > about motorcycles look at > > http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.rtf > or > http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.htm > > ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From scott at pedalsong.net Thu May 18 12:31:21 2006 From: scott at pedalsong.net (D. Scott TenBrink) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:31:21 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Re: [carfree_cities] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT In-Reply-To: <1135.62.245.95.24.1147863470.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> References: <1135.62.245.95.24.1147863470.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Message-ID: <20060517213121.nyxw7a890vkog0kk@www.pedalsong.net> Todd E. said, ?I don?t think motorcycles resemble bicycles in any way.? In addressing motorcycle use, I think it is important to recognize the similarities of bicycles and motorbikes. They are both less expensive to purchase and operate than a four-wheeled vehicle. They consume a similar amount of road and parking space. They both tend to be single occupancy vehicles (though to a less extent in Asia). They can both move through traffic by accessing space between lanes, sidewalks, and other informal spaces. Operators of both vehicles have a greater tendency to break traffic rules and be overlooked in enforcement of those rules. This is debatable, but I also find that there is a wider variation in operating behavior in these modes than in four-wheel vehicle operation. My experience has been that within both bike and motorcycle operators, there are very aggressive, very slow-moving, very risky, and very inexperienced riders in both modes. I think the points I mention above allow for this within-group variation to be more easily expressed than in a car. Of course there are a great number of differences between the two as well. I?m hardly arguing that they should be considered the same in all policy, but to deny any resemblance between the vehicles and their operators may blind us to potential obstacles and solutions. -Scott From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Thu May 18 16:03:24 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:03:24 +0200 Subject: [sustran] ;-) In-Reply-To: <2245.62.245.95.24.1147526851.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Message-ID: <006201c67a49$31272c90$6501a8c0@Home> I especially like the World Bank business. Http://www.gatnet.net/ From edelman at greenidea.info Thu May 18 19:21:32 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:21:32 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: [carfree_cities] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT In-Reply-To: <20060517213121.nyxw7a890vkog0kk@www.pedalsong.net> References: <1135.62.245.95.24.1147863470.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> <20060517213121.nyxw7a890vkog0kk@www.pedalsong.net> Message-ID: <1054.62.245.95.24.1147947692.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> > Todd E. said, ?I don?t think motorcycles resemble bicycles in any way.? > > In addressing motorcycle use, I think it is important to recognize the > similarities of bicycles and motorbikes. They are both less expensive to > purchase and operate than a four-wheeled vehicle. They consume a similar > amount of road and parking space. They both tend to be single occupancy > vehicles (though to a less extent in Asia). They can both move through > traffic > by accessing space between lanes, sidewalks, and other informal spaces. > Operators of both vehicles have a greater tendency to break traffic > rules and > be overlooked in enforcement of those rules. > > This is debatable, but I also find that there is a wider variation in > operating > behavior in these modes than in four-wheel vehicle operation. My > experience > has been that within both bike and motorcycle operators, there are very > aggressive, very slow-moving, very risky, and very inexperienced riders > in both > modes. I think the points I mention above allow for this within-group > variation > to be more easily expressed than in a car. > > Of course there are a great number of differences between the two as > well. I?m hardly arguing that they should be considered the same in all > policy, but > to deny any resemblance between the vehicles and their operators may > blind us to > potential obstacles and solutions. > > -Scott THANKS, Scott! I guess I was thinking of a city of motorised two-wheelers and a city of non-motorised two-wheelers, and how big a difference THAT would be between the two. Because of the physical similarity there are lots of problems, yes. I think that traffic enforcement is an important part of the solution, as a part of a behaviour change programme, involving clowns on bikes pretending to be operating motors and polluting, for example. In my experience most cyclists go onto the sidewalk/pavement when they have no other choice, so if we create acceptable spaces for bicycles on streets (whether through slowing the street, getting the parked cars off of the street, getting all of the cars off the street, etc) we can solve at least two problems. T T > > > ================================================================ > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From et3 at et3.com Fri May 19 07:27:31 2006 From: et3 at et3.com (Daryl Oster) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 18:27:31 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: ;-) In-Reply-To: <006201c67a49$31272c90$6501a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <200605182227.k4IMRYLt012474@njbrsmtp1.vzwmail.net> Me too! The bikes must have been the recumbent varsity. Now I'll have to design something to close the tube ends during construction! Daryl Oster (c) 2006? all rights reserved.? ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc.? For licensing information contact:?POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423? (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com > -----Original Message----- > From: sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of > Eric.Britton > Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 3:03 AM > To: 'Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport' > Subject: [sustran] ;-) > > I especially like the World Bank business. Http://www.gatnet.net/ From ktsourl at mailbox.gr Fri May 19 22:13:01 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 19 May 2006 16:13:01 +0300 Subject: [sustran] EU laws to put brake on bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT Message-ID: <20060519131301.10655.qmail@mailbox.gr> You may be thinking that reducing motorcycle traffic in many parts of the EU will not make a big difference, but you must realize that in those cities where motorcycles are a significant part of the traffic it will make a huge difference. I am not sure if you also imply that people living there are worth less attention, but in any case don't expect your arguments to sound them very persuasive. I don't find logical the position, either to ban all forms of motorized traffic immediately, or leave them all. Some of them may be easier to be banned. Why not start from them? Even if this is considered by some as a small victory, it is still a victory. When environmental and living conditions start to improve, this will certainly create an incentive to follow further the carfree path, which will improve also the totality of the cities of Europe and tha whole world. Certainly it will be nice if European Commission makes something on this point, although they are frequently accused for involving unnecessarily in local matters. But of course, not only motorcycles can cross the borders, but also pollution, mentalities and prospective road victims. >re: http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329473814-103630,00.html > >also, interesting information on MOTORCYCLES IN ATHENS at these links: >http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.rtf >or >http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.htm > >and below...as well as original email. > >I suggest we move this discussion off the Carfree Cities as it is my >understanding that carfree definately means motorcycle-free in the view of >the owner of the Carfree Cities list, with no discussion possible. I just >wanted to respond to your points. > >Todd > >--- > >Hi KT! > >Thanks for your comments and criticism! > >>> >>> Motorcycles may be "little guy" in Czechia, but Czechia (or perhaps >>> North America) is not the whole world. In many South European and >>> Asian cities (and in an ever growing number of African countries) >>> motorcycle traffic is an important part of motorised traffic (and in >>> many cases - e.g China or Vietnam- a first step towards car motorisation). > > >I CERTAINLY dont think that Czechia or the EU or North America is the >whole world! I should add that I sent blind copies of the original email >to a few members of the Committee on Transport and Tourism in the European >Commission who I thought might be or I know are sympathetic to my point of >view. > >Good laws in the EU can certainly be good examples for elsewhere. > >Motorised two-wheelers represent a very small part of the transport mix in >most of the northern countries of the EU, and I think most if not all of >the new EU states. I realise that Italy, and perhaps France (and Spain?) >are different. > >To summarize my opinion on your points below and in the linked page you >provided: I absolutely agree that motorcycles are worse than many people >think, and as bad as you claim. I just wanted to say that the restrictions >on driving age etc should apply to both, and things like a top speed of >30km/h should apply to all motorised vehicles (except for trams) in >built-up areas. Again, this - if enforced by police (active) and design >(passive) - will slow down all vehicles, and reduce some of the advantage >of motorcycles. > >I dont think motorcycles resemble bicycles in any way. > >So, lets focus on Athens, as you suggest: > >>> >>> In Athens for instance, 1 million motorcycles pollute freely the city, >>> besides 2 million automobiles - without any (unlike cars) exhaust gas >>> and noise controls. Motorcycling is deliberately promoted (instead of >>> biking - Athens lacks even 1 km of bike lane) in order to maximize >>> motorised traffic. The corrupt administration favours motorcycling >>> because they don't compete cars, but use mostly pedestrian spaces and >>> other free spaces (parks, squares etc) - they have also recently >>> granted them legally free access to dedicated bus lanes. They use >>> under police immunity sidewalks and other pedestrian spaces and act >>> more aggressively than cars, being a major component of the violence >>> and oppression pedestrians experience in Athens in everyday life, and >>> an important (although unrecognised) part of the pollution of the most >>> polluted capital in Europe. > > >WELL, this certainly seems like hell. A main point of my first email was >to question why all countries dont have the same regulations for both >motorcycles and cars. I also understand that two-stroke-powered have been >made illegal, and while this means they will eventually dissappear, it >would certainly be great to get them off the streets sooner. And I >understand your point that four-stroke is not much of an advantage (In >Prague and other cities of the new EU especially, a HUGE problem is all >the old Diesel trucks and service vehicles... and I have not yet found out >how to get them off of the road or when/if laws might force it. > >>> >>> You are not right: they don't only cause damage to the motorcyclists >>> themselves, but they also kill pedestrians and bicyclists. Even the >>> damage they bring about to themselves shouldn't be confronted with >>> indifference, given the efforts the motorcycle lobby makes to lure >>> inexperienced and aggression inclined people to the motorcycle >>> ideology. However I agree with you that fines and efforts should >>> concentrate more to the damage they cause to others (like speeding or >>> pedestrian rights violations) than the harm they cause to themselves >>> (like helmet use - advising rather than penalties are more appropriate >>> in this case). > > >YES, you are right, in Athens, some other southern EU cities, and in many >parts of the developing world. In sum, many many more people than who are >in the EU. > >Reducing motorcycle traffic in many parts of the EU will not make a big >difference. (Brussels, too, I think!). So, that is why I mention the >"little guy": I mean this as the easiest target, not necessarily the cause >of the least problems. (To say it another way, there is big push for >people to unplug their computers when they are not at home, but many of >these people leave home by car!) > >>> >>> Although carfree cities is a worthy prospect, perhaps a completely >>> carfree world is still far away, but a motorcycle free world is >>> already feasible (and may become a first step towards the carfree >>> vision). > > >AGAIN, making Prague and other parts of the EU motorcycle-free will not >make a big difference. It is much fairer to treat all private motorised >transport with strict rules regarding emissions and speed... OR to really >take them seriously - for a change - and to ban all of it immediately when >city design/public transport can replace it via proximity and replacment >mobility... and to start redesigning cities and improving PT so no one >needs cars and motorcycles and no one needs them either. > >Four wheels bad, two wheels bad (if you have a motor), two wheels good if >you have no motor, and pedestrians always come first. > >And European Commission really needs to take a look at what is happening >in Athens and see if they are violating laws (I imagine they are regarding >emissions) and do something to help. > >There are two Greeks on the Committee for Transport and Tourism: One seems >to be very active on Womens Issues, and since women (and children) are >known as vulnerable road users, maybe she will have an ear for your >points. I am forwarding this email to her... > >See: >http://www.europarl.europa.eu/activities/expert/committees/presentation.do?committee=1242&language=EN > >Thanks, >T _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From ktsourl at mailbox.gr Fri May 19 22:20:09 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 19 May 2006 16:20:09 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution Message-ID: <20060519132009.20893.qmail@mailbox.gr> So, was advertisement illegal in US between 1907 and 1921? Or not yet invented? If there was not any car lobby then, how did public officials come to the decision to create car infrastructure (or even allow the circulation of cars)? Do you consider them such bright minded and influence immune? (at least you have good reasons not to think so, since they haven't yet paid the attention you think it is proper for the transport mode you advocate) But I think you missed the point of my remark. The point is that it is not the market that decides about the modes of transportation, but governing officials, acting under the pressure of several lobbies. It is not a decision created by a (free and competitive) market but a decision about the creation of a (controlled and biased) market. Even you expect "some public officials may actually insist on the highest possible transportation value for the public they represent". Countries (either developing or developed) don't "choose" – it’s the public officials who choose and they present to the public opinion their choices as reflecting the general interest. The stronger lobby wins. The lobby having more money at its disposal is stronger. The solution that creates more profit has more money at its disposal. The most wasteful solution creates more turnover and profit. Hence, the most wasteful solution wins. This is also supported by empirical evidence (that's why automobiles win everywhere) > >>> Original Message From: K. Tsourlakis >>> >>> It seems you imply that informed consumers decide for rail or road >>> transport prevalence. However this is a collective decision of the society >>> mediated through politicians choices and actually shaped by lobbying >>> (often a euphemism for corruption) and advertisement (i.e. mass >>> brainwashing). > > >This may be true in a country that is not yet developed, however in the US >where cars were developed, cars displaced rail IN SPITE OF a very powerful >rail lobby, and a non-existent car lobby. So, in the case of the first 14 >years or so (from about 1907 to about 1921) Cars had no significant lobby >power compared to the lobby power of rail; AND cars won the US market anyway >biased on their relative merits and without any brainwashing needed. This >also occurred in Europe, and then Japan. > > >>> I have of course many historical data of how this happened in my country >>> (as you, I suppose, can find for yours - and everybody else for his/hers), >>> but being on this listserv I find more proper to concentrate on what is >>> happening in India concerning this process. > > >It is clear that there is a fierce lobby battle for transportation mode in >developing countries. Since the global car market is now mature, and has >displaced rail, they are starting to copy the sophisticated lobby efforts >the rail industry has been following for 50 years or more. Unfortunately, >the lobby focus is not about safety or ecology, but only about market share >and doing things to generate sales. > >The developing countries are actually in a position of power, for since they >are unencumbered by existing infrastructure, and many advances have been >made since the invention of trains and cars, they could choose to adopt the >best leading edge transportation technology and avoid the costly technology >progression and market share transitions that developed countries have had >to pay for. (China is doing this under their "National 863 Program".) > > >>> Having seen these pictures from "Golden Quadrilateral Project" motorway, I > > >>> was impressed of how empty it looked (as far as I know, as a rule of >>> thumb, a motorway has to have at least an average daily traffic of 10.000 >>> cars to justify its expenses -does this happen in stretches far from the >>> cities?). > > >Since ETT can be built for 1/4th the cost of a freeway, AND the operating >cost about 1/10th the minimum daily volume to justify construction is also >much less. > > >>> I also wonder if feasibility studies are carried out, and, if so, what >>> cost was assigned to the crossing pedestrians danger and delay, the >>> pollution, noise and other externalities, whether tolls are collected (and > > >>> how much) etc. For the brainwashing my questions are less - the NYtimes >>> article document well this point. > > >Such studies are always carries out in the US. The government conducted a >study comparing the demand and cost prediction accuracy of road with rail, >and found that railroad consultants lie much more frequently, and to a much >greater degree than freeway consultants do. > > > >>> I am not sure if ETT (Evacuated Tube Transport) is a feasible solution, >>> and I think we will never be sure until it is tried in practice. >>> Things in real world can be quite different than in papers - consider the >>> experience of Maglev. > > > >Wheel operation is not observed in nature, wheels for transportation were >invented without natural example. Even though bird flight was readily >observable, human flight was not manifest until thousands of years after >wheels were invented. > >Several forms of maglev have been built and proven in the last 40 years. In >my opinion, one reason that maglev experiments have always followed >predictions made in papers is that initial maglev development had no natural >analog to form the basis of the science, for magnetic levitation had NEVER >been observed in nature. More than 4 types of Maglev are now well >understood, and very predictable, and there will likely be many more future >developments as predicted in current papers. > >ETT is not reliant on proposed or unproven forms of maglev or other >sciences. Unlike initial maglev development, the main principals of ETT ARE >observable to everyone: >* The perpetual motion of the moon around the earth, and the earth around >the sun, in the evacuated environment of space has been observed as long as >recorded human history. >* Spacecraft in orbit produce the same perpetual motion as the moon and >earth do. ETT is just "space travel on earth". >* Pipeline transportation of liquids and gasses have been proven for more >than 1000 years, pneumatic (air propelled) tube transport of capsules has >been proven for 150 years. The costs and practicalities are well known. >* The forces of aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance of wheels are well >known, and accurately predictable. >* Vacuum technology far more advanced than required for ETT is in use all >over the world for more than 100 years. >* Several Maglev technologies are well proven. >* Linear electric motors and generators are in use in many industries, >including transportation. >* Automation of transportation is well known, E.G. elevators and >manufacturing. > > >>> But I am sure that if it has any merit, companies looking after >>> profit will make some attempts to experiment on it (even if use of >>> "lobbying" and "advertisement" is required to promote it). > > >Automobiles and aircraft did not use or focus on lobby efforts to brainwash >policy makers in the early days of innovation. The advantages of cars and >planes were immediately discernable to the market, and they were able to >quickly displace rail by offering more transportation value (a higher >benefit to cost ratio). > >ETT implementation will not need government funding or subsidy to be >implemented, for ETT offers far more transportation value than do the >present value leaders (cars and aircraft). > >We focus less than 1% of our meager recourses on lobby of government and on >advertising. Our efforts are mostly focused on private implementation of >ETT, and we do make information on ETT available to governments that are >considering transportation infrastructure, as we believe that eventually >some public officials may actually insist on the highest possible >transportation value for the public they represent. > > >Daryl Oster >(c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" >e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks >of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River >FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com> > > _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From edelman at greenidea.info Fri May 19 23:07:41 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 16:07:41 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Born to be wild! (Just not in our cities, thanks!) was: motorcycles, Athens.. Message-ID: <2097.62.245.95.24.1148047661.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> KT wrote: > > You may be thinking that reducing motorcycle traffic in many parts of > the EU will not make a big difference, but you must realize that in > those cities where motorcycles are a significant part of the traffic > it will make a huge difference. I am not sure if you also imply that > people living there are worth less attention, but in any case don't > expect your arguments to sound them very persuasive. KT, I dont think that is what I said. I agree that in cities like Athens and perhaps some other southern EU cities reducing the number/danger of motorcycles will make a difference because they represent a significant part of the transport mix. --- > > I don't find logical the position, either to ban all forms of > motorized traffic immediately, or leave them all. Some of them may be > easier to be banned. Why not start from them? Even if this is > considered by some as a small victory, it is still a victory. When > environmental and living conditions start to improve, this will > certainly create an incentive to follow further the carfree path, > which will improve also the totality of the cities of Europe and tha > whole world. I am pretty sure I didnt say to leave them all. My point was that things like reasonable and enforced speed limits will affect ALL vehicles on the streets, including cars, trucks, motorcycles and bicycles. This will reduce the damage caused by all of them, as we start to equip, re-equip, re-design and design cities for full functionality without individual motorised vehicles. Also, if only motorcycles are targeted it lets the cars off easy: This solves little in many places and gives the motorcyclists a political advantage, in comparison to all individual motorcized forms being targeted. This has I suppose some similarities to the kind of funny argument by many drivers of "normal-sized" cars to get SUVs out of the cities. I am for getting SUVs and motorcycles out, but the reality is that "normal" cars do more damage. A city in Belgium gave free transport passes to people/families who gave up their cars, and I strongly suggest something similar is done in Athens regarding motorcycles. (Maybe there can be former-motorcyclist only sections of PT with black leather seats, and simulated motorcycle sounds and vibrations ;-)) --- > > Certainly it will be nice if European Commission makes something on > this point, although they are frequently accused for involving > unnecessarily in local matters. But of course, not only motorcycles > can cross the borders, but also pollution, mentalities and prospective > road victims. YES, transport is in no way a local matter, as I am sure you agree. Some things are more important than others but my understanding is that the entire territory of the EU needs to be reasonably safe and homogeneous in regards to conditions. So Athens and perhaps other places need serious action on motorcycles, and many cities need serious action on speed limits and also emissions from Diesel vehicles. I hope you also appreciate that I forwarded your points about motorcycles in Athens to the one of the Greek MEPs on the Transport and Tourism committee. - T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From ericbruun at earthlink.net Sat May 20 04:15:13 2006 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 15:15:13 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT Message-ID: <16350362.1148066113925.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> We have been over this before, but I want to mention these points one more time: 1) We should distinguish between richer countries like Greece that have decent public transportation but still allow motorcycles to run wild in cities and poor countries where transit options don't exist. Motorcycles don't have to be the first step towards automobiles, their use can be curtailed down to far more reasonable levels if there is some investment in higher-quality transit (rail, BRT, bus lanes, etc.). Have a look at Taipei if you don't believe me. Why not give the World Bank and national governments some blame for the situation as well? They are the ones that ignore transit while promoting roads for the rich and for commerce. Can you blame the lower income people for wanting to be mobile? Why is it OK for the elite to drive around in their cars and hog so much of the street space, to endanger pedestrians, to pollute, and so on. 2) Motorcycles are not automatically "stinkier". They can be cleaned up just like automobiles. Again blame governments too, not just the people who buy what is for sale. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: Todd Edelman >Sent: May 17, 2006 5:02 PM >To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >Cc: mailbox@carfree.com >Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT > >Eric Britton said: > >> Todd Edelman wrote on this date with ref to the letter of our >> knowledgeable Greek colleague K. Tsourlakis and his pertinent comments >> on motorcycles (see below) as follows: > >"I suggest we move this discussion off the Carfree Cities as it is my >understanding that carfree definately means motorcycle-free in the view >of the owner of the Carfree Cities list, with no discussion possible." > >Britton continued: >> "Fair enough Mr. Owner. But I just want my colleagues here in our fine >> Sustran group and in the New Mobility Agenda that I really like the "no >> discussion possible" bit. It tells us a great deal about the real world >> relevance of this point of view and I must conclude the forum itself. >> But what is great about the web of course is that there is plenty of >> space out here for utopian thinking, and it is only right that they set >> their own agendas. What is apparently most important in this case is not >> the untidy world in which we live and have to work with, but the >> pristine ones that some of us have in our heads. Life is sweet. > >Eric, you are so sensitive! I had a dream I wanted to share with you: > >The World Bank hired Daryl Oster and started to build his Evacuated Tube >Transport. Some Thai kids stole a motorcycle powered by a secret utopian >energy source and drove it through the unfinished ETT all the way to >Paris, where you greeted them with fresh bread, soft cheese and all of a >sudden the dreaded Wikipolice showed up and asked you some serious >questions. > >The skies turned black and subsonic thunder vibrated the cosmos. Then the >skies turned bright blue just as abruptly and the Carfree Ark appeared and >the naked carfree children gave utopian vitamins to everyone and all the >worlds problems were solved, forever. > >--- >> >> Okay, why do I bother you all with this? It is more than just an >> opportunity to share a wry grin with you. To the contrary, it is to >> encourage more critical discussion and idea mongering on both these fora >> of precisely the motorcycles in cities dilemma. It's a huge reality >> (you know, reality). For those of us who have lived and worked in Asia, >> we can only see that this is a situation which is profoundly out of >> control and which, as it happens. Deal with phenomena and practices >> which have entirely escaped both planners and policy makers. To take >> just one point of the untidy real world: there is a growing population >> of people for whom two wheels bangers are cheaper and "better" than even >> the cheapest bus. Well, what do we do then? >> >> So if the "no discussion possible" comments do nothing other than to >> activate further discussions and work on this here, well they would have >> made a real contribution. > >The Thai kids later found out that each of them had two half-time jobs: >One was to work on carfree cities; the other was to work on doing as much >as possible to eliminate the dangers of stinky, evil motorcycles. Their >bosses, unsurprisingly, did not find the two jobs to be a conflict of >purpose. > >- Fin - > >The non-Canadian Todd (Edelman) > > >> >> Eric Britton >> >> >> >> >> Motorcycles may be "little guy" in Czechia, but Czechia (or perhaps >> North >> America) is not the whole world. In many South European and Asian cities >> (and in >> an ever growing number of African countries) motorcycle traffic is an >> important >> part of motorised traffic (and in many cases - e.g China or Vietnam- a >> first >> step towards car motorisation). >> >> In Athens for instance, 1 million motorcycles pollute freely the city, >> besides 2 >> million automobiles - without any (unlike cars) exhaust gas and noise >> controls. >> Motorcycling is deliberately promoted (instead of biking - Athens lacks >> even 1 >> km of bike lane) in order to maximize motorised traffic. The corrupt >> administration favours motorcycling because they don't compete cars, but >> use >> mostly pedestrian spaces and other free spaces (parks, squares etc) - >> they have >> also recently granted them legally free access to dedicated bus lanes. >> They use >> under police immunity sidewalks and other pedestrian spaces and act more >> aggressively than cars, being a major component of the violence and >> oppression >> pedestrians experience in Athens in everyday life, and an important >> (although >> unrecognised) part of the pollution of the most polluted capital in >> Europe. >> >> You are not right: they don't only cause damage to the motorcyclists >> themselves, >> but they also kill pedestrians and bicyclists. Even the damage they >> bring about >> to themselves shouldn't be confronted with indifference, given the >> efforts the >> motorcycle lobby makes to lure inexperienced and aggression inclined >> people to >> the motorcycle ideology. However I agree with you that fines and efforts >> should >> concentrate more to the damage they cause to others (like speeding or >> pedestrian >> rights violations) than the harm they cause to themselves (like helmet >> use - >> advising rather than penalties are more appropriate in this case). >> >> Although carfree cities is a worthy prospect, perhaps a completely >> carfree world >> is still far away, but a motorcycle free world is already feasible (and >> may >> become a first step towards the carfree vision). For a more thorough >> discussion >> about motorcycles look at >> >> http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.rtf >> or >> http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.htm >> >> > > >------------------------------------------------------ > >Todd Edelman >International Coordinator >On the Train Towards the Future! > >Green Idea Factory >Laubova 5 >CZ-13000 Praha 3 > >++420 605 915 970 > >edelman@greenidea.info >http://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. From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon May 22 05:07:28 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 22:07:28 +0200 Subject: [sustran] 2006 World Technology Environment Awards - Join us in seconding nominations of Jan Gehl and Greenwheels Message-ID: <002101c67d12$305e7d60$6501a8c0@Home> Dear Friends, This year, after a number of emails and calls to discuss many great ideas, we are finally nominating two outstanding innovators for the 2006 World Technology Environment Awards, one an individual pioneer and one group showing the way. Our group nominees this year are the redoubtable Dane Jan Geld and the Greenwheels carsharing organization in the Netherlands (the fastest growing such group in the world). This is as many of you will recall a group effort each year, and you are as always invited cordially to anticipate and make sure that our nominees receive the international recognition that they so richly deserve. The path to do this is short and simple: all you have to do is click to the New Mobility Agenda at www.newmobility.org and from there click 2006 Awards on the top menu. At that point you will see the first draft of our nominations, together with everything you need to quickly join us in this fine group effort. I would remind you that we have a 100% hit ratio for our nominations over the last three years, the reason being not only the exceptional contributions of people and teams like: Hans Monderman for his reducing one technology (the motor car) to it rightful (rather modest) pace in residential streets; and the Seoul :Restoration Technology" car control project in their city; in 2004 Ken Livingstone for leading Congestion Charging project in London, and the Stockholm Partnerships for Sustainable Cities program; and back in 2003 a trio of outstanding carsharing project each trying to push the envelope in terms of the emerging city/car agenda: Caisse Commune in Paris, City Car Club in Helsinki, and Statoil Bilpool in Stockholm - but also the way that we have got behind them to make sure that the judges and many others as well understand the importance of their contributions. Last year we have more than fifty of our international colleagues join us in the nominations, and this year we hope to do at least as well. It is important to get the message out, and to do it right require that we all join in. We need to go for every chance we run across. Only in that way will we make the progress that is so badly needed. My sincere thanks for joining us to support Jan and the Greenwheels teams. And indeed all our work. Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060521/8ea21371/attachment.html From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Mon May 22 13:41:10 2006 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:41:10 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: Jaime Lerner Lecture Notes Message-ID: Forwarded from another list. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Dempsey [mailto:dempseys3@COMCAST.NET] > Sent: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 3:42 PM > Subject: Jaime Lerner Lecture Notes > > Notes from the 5/10/06 Jaime Lerner appearance at the Great > Valley Conference. Lerner is the former mayor of Curitiba > (and governor of the surrounding state). Curitiba remains a > shining example of how design can improve the quality of > life, even in a third-world, relatively poor city: > > Jaime Lerner - 40 years in city building > > Went in '88 to consult in Cuba, renovate Havana (jokes that > Castro speaks for 10 - 12 hours when he's happy. > Lerner jokes that he's feeling happy, so watch out!) > > "City is not a problem, city is a solution" > > Promises 2 - 3 years to improve quality of life. > > Needs political will, build core responsibility - > *not* a problem of scale or finances. > > Recounts the example of having to clean a bay for his city. > Rather than hire a garbage cleanup, he told fishermen that > the city would pay for garbage when they "fished" it out of > the bay. Fishermen could sell fish to the market, and garbage > to the city. Either way, they could win. It save the city > millions in cleanup costs, and made the bay more productive > for fishing. > > Slides show: Vita the turtle - an admirable animal that has > its residence near its work. It even has an urban design > etched in its shell ("casque" says Lerner). > > On the other hand (new slide with cartoon car) Otto the > Automobile is the kind of guy who's always the last to leave > the party. People are folding chairs, putting away dishes and > he's still around. He has a terrible drinking problem, and > smokes. He also is something of an egoist. He can only carry > a few people. > > He's like your mother-in-law. You want a good relationship, > but you don't want her to run your life. > > Accordian buses, like those in Curitiba that supplanted a > proposed rail installation, can transport 300 people (Volvo > says 270, but Lerner says Swedes don't know Brasilians) > > "Without design, you don't have priorities." > > "Cities are a strategy for living and working together." The > spine - public transport and land use. > > Separate living and working, and it's a disaster. > > You can apply design criteria either to a city or a state. > > Curitiba has 1.8M in the city, 3M in the metropolitan area. > > Slide: a wide road flanked by skyscrapers: > > X X > X X X X > X__X__X____X__X__X > > The wide road is the transit corridor. The building heights > (density) decreases with distance from that corridor. > > When Lerner ran for Governor, he polled only 6% of the vote > when the campaign began. His opponent was an experienced > politician, and an actor (handsome! ...the room laughed). > Lerner's design thoughts won, though. > > His design for the larger scale of the state > (Garana?): > > Ensure development is no more than 1 hour from hospitals and > universities. His agrarian reform resettled 100,000 slum > dwellers to new housing on enough land to grow their own food > in 4 - 8 rural villages. The design paradigm: Street crosses field. > > All transit modes are possible, but they must never compete > in the same space. > > Curitiba's mass transit volumes: > > 1974 - 25,000/day > 2000 - 2,000,000/day > > Frequency of buses: 30 seconds. (!) > > The Curitiba system is a public/private partnership. > The buses are privately owned, the routes, stops and fares > are publicly controlled. There are no subsidies. > (I've also read that it boasts increasing ridership despite > increasing per-capita auto ownership, something that not even > the Europeans can boast). > > Sustainable cities are particularly important, especially in > light of the climate change problem. > > Lerner's five commandments: > > 1. Use fewer cars. > > 2. Separate garbage > > 3. Keep work and home close > > 4. Waste minimum, save maximum > > 5. Have multi-use facilities (a stadium doubles as a market > in the morning) > > Curitiba's education system promotes these things (and the > history of the city). The kids teach the parents. > > The education is fun. Skits, and costumes are plentiful > (slide of the "leaf" family...people in tree > suits) > > Curitiba has a free university for the environment. > Why not train *everyone* about the environment (even the janitors)? > > Built a botanical garden in two months, not the typical 100 > years. Mentions that speed is an important feature of > development changes. (His current practice, Lerner calls > "urban accupuncture.") > > A city's identity is like a family portrait. Its preserved > history is a prominent feature of Lerner's public spaces and > monuments. > > Lerner tells about meeting a man very interested in > biodiversity, fierce about it, even. He asked "Do you have > different land uses where you live, like entertainment, > shopping, offices?" No, said the biodiversity fan. "What > about different kinds of people, those with different > income?" No, says the biodiversity fan. > > The crowd laughs, and Lerner says social diversity is as > important as biodiversity. > > Shows a slide of redesigned street furniture, modelled on > Paris book vendor stalls (street merchant stalls with folding > security doors that double as sun shades). > > With all his cautions about autos, Lerner still designed a > museum for Brasilian racing. He even designs electric line towers. > > One principle of city design: create meeting places. > (In Japan... he says you have to have real chutzpah to > propose urban accupuncture in Japan) > > ...Jokes that age has its advantages, but you still have to > get up three times a night. > > Waste land, like old quarries is a starting place for many > projects for parks, theaters, etc. > > Cities must integrate formal and informal spaces to avoid > violence. Talked about bringing dangerous streets to life by > bringing "portable streets" to them (trucking in tubes with > meeting places, theaters, > vendors) > > Has a show of his designs at a Chicago museum. > > Sponsored the "World Nature Games" - an olympics using > natural features (kayaking, cross-country runs, etc.) Did so > without building any buildings. > > Makes recycled buses into travelling culture shows - theaters > > His final words: "It is possible. You can do it. Si, es possible" > > Standing ovation > > Panel discussion: the room's energy diminishes immediately, > after the charming Lerner. > > - GVC (the sponsor) takes credit for the Hwy 99 bond money > earmark - for high tech, sustainable visitor centers. > > - Also touts the regional blueprint (Lerner would probably > agree that vision is important to promote, and the Blueprint > does that.) > > West Sacramento mayor Cabalodon: sustaining a vision is > difficult if only because of political turnover. > Unlike Lerner, politicians don't stay 40 years on the job > here. (Odd, Supervisor Illa Collin is just retiring after > some decades on the job...) > > - Transactions, not vision are the focus of city councils. > Vision itself must be the product of civic involvement by the > population. A politician has to overlook stakeholders to > maintain the vision. > (Nice excuse for lack of civic leadership...But Cabaldon was > courageous enough to attend this lecture, not something one > could say about any other Sacramento City or County leader) > > - The owner of a local taqueria (Sal's), a woman on > Schwartzeneggar's business council, says business buy-in to > the vision is important, as is education. > > Lerner comments: > > We cannot have consensus in everything. When the discussion > is done, you have to stop it. > > For business people, what makes them invest, what makes the > difference? > > - quality of life > - qualification of employees (education) > - logistics (civic design) > > Administration is still difficult (shakes his head, recalling > a conflict about redesigning a single bus stop). > > County administrator: implementation is tough. > Visionaries need to show up to get what they want. > > The vision must be long term. > > -- > One aside: Lerner previously mentioned that Brasilian > politicians get free media for a few months before their elections. > > -- > -- > --Regards, > --Mark Dempsey > From ktsourl at mailbox.gr Mon May 22 22:17:32 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 22 May 2006 16:17:32 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Re: [carfree_cities] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT Message-ID: <20060522131732.24648.qmail@mailbox.gr> Motorcycles resemble to bicycles in having two wheels and to automobiles in having a motor. So, it is a matter of viewpoint to consider which one is the dominant feature: if you adopt a sustainability viewpoint, then they are on a par with automobiles if your purpose is to fill in the city with as much traffic as possible, then they are an (lucrative for some) alternative of bicycles Moreover, although I clearly oppose to the movement of bicycles on sidewalks, I must inform those who are not familiar with motorcycles, that for pedestrians the nuisance and dangers of motorcycles on the sidewalks are orders of magnitude more severe than that of bicycles. >Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:31:21 -0600 >From: "D. Scott TenBrink" >Subject: [sustran] Re: [carfree_cities] Re: EU laws to put brake on > bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT >To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >Message-ID: <20060517213121.nyxw7a890vkog0kk@www.pedalsong.net> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format="flowed" > >Todd E. said, ?I don?t think motorcycles resemble bicycles in any way.? > >In addressing motorcycle use, I think it is important to recognize the >similarities of bicycles and motorbikes. They are both less expensive to >purchase and operate than a four-wheeled vehicle. They consume a similar >amount of road and parking space. They both tend to be single occupancy >vehicles (though to a less extent in Asia). They can both move through >traffic >by accessing space between lanes, sidewalks, and other informal spaces. >Operators of both vehicles have a greater tendency to break traffic >rules and >be overlooked in enforcement of those rules. > >This is debatable, but I also find that there is a wider variation in >operating >behavior in these modes than in four-wheel vehicle operation. My experience >has been that within both bike and motorcycle operators, there are very >aggressive, very slow-moving, very risky, and very inexperienced riders >in both >modes. I think the points I mention above allow for this within-group >variation >to be more easily expressed than in a car. > >Of course there are a great number of differences between the two as >well. I?m hardly arguing that they should be considered the same in all >policy, but >to deny any resemblance between the vehicles and their operators may >blind us to >potential obstacles and solutions. > >-Scott > _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From ktsourl at mailbox.gr Mon May 22 22:22:23 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 22 May 2006 16:22:23 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Born to be wild! (Just not in our cities, thanks!) was: motorcycles, Athens.. Message-ID: <20060522132223.31101.qmail@mailbox.gr> The problem is not to target only at motorcycles, but not to leave them out of scope e.g. labelling them as "little guys". For instance, the official policy of the greek government is currently against private automobiles and in favour of public transit, bicycles and motorcycles (of course this is the _declared_ policy, not the _implemented_ - actually Athens is unwalkable, lacks even 1 km of bike lanes, while motorcyclists gain always new privileges and car space is meticulously preserved, e.g. when tramways are designed). I consider the SUV ban would be a positive measure, despite the dangers you mention (i.e. to be used as a substitute for more effective actions - this danger is always present in any positive measure), because it sends the correct message to the general public. You have also to take into consideration the imminent danger lying in the spread of motorcycles, for places where their use is now marginal. Athens and other motorcycle plagued cities are a vivid paradigm on how these places may become. Yes, I do appreciate your interest in forwarding my posting, but if they are greeks they are certainly aware of the situation in Athens. In fact it is more those who are not greek, who should be notified on where their slackness towards motorcycles can lead a city (if you think they would care about) >Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 16:07:41 +0200 (CEST) >From: "Todd Edelman" >Subject: [sustran] Born to be wild! (Just not in our cities, thanks!) > was: motorcycles, Athens.. >To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >Message-ID: <2097.62.245.95.24.1148047661.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> >Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-2 > >KT wrote: > >>> >>> You may be thinking that reducing motorcycle traffic in many parts of >>> the EU will not make a big difference, but you must realize that in >>> those cities where motorcycles are a significant part of the traffic >>> it will make a huge difference. I am not sure if you also imply that >>> people living there are worth less attention, but in any case don't >>> expect your arguments to sound them very persuasive. > > >KT, I dont think that is what I said. I agree that in cities like Athens >and perhaps some other southern EU cities reducing the number/danger of >motorcycles will make a difference because they represent a significant >part of the transport mix. > >--- > >>> >>> I don't find logical the position, either to ban all forms of >>> motorized traffic immediately, or leave them all. Some of them may be >>> easier to be banned. Why not start from them? Even if this is >>> considered by some as a small victory, it is still a victory. When >>> environmental and living conditions start to improve, this will >>> certainly create an incentive to follow further the carfree path, >>> which will improve also the totality of the cities of Europe and tha >>> whole world. > > >I am pretty sure I didnt say to leave them all. My point was that things >like reasonable and enforced speed limits will affect ALL vehicles on the >streets, including cars, trucks, motorcycles and bicycles. This will >reduce the damage caused by all of them, as we start to equip, re-equip, >re-design and design cities for full functionality without individual >motorised vehicles. > >Also, if only motorcycles are targeted it lets the cars off easy: This >solves little in many places and gives the motorcyclists a political >advantage, in comparison to all individual motorcized forms being >targeted. This has I suppose some similarities to the kind of funny >argument by many drivers of "normal-sized" cars to get SUVs out of the >cities. I am for getting SUVs and motorcycles out, but the reality is that >"normal" cars do more damage. > >A city in Belgium gave free transport passes to people/families who gave >up their cars, and I strongly suggest something similar is done in Athens >regarding motorcycles. (Maybe there can be former-motorcyclist only >sections of PT with black leather seats, and simulated motorcycle sounds >and vibrations ;-)) > >--- > >>> >>> Certainly it will be nice if European Commission makes something on >>> this point, although they are frequently accused for involving >>> unnecessarily in local matters. But of course, not only motorcycles >>> can cross the borders, but also pollution, mentalities and prospective >>> road victims. > > >YES, transport is in no way a local matter, as I am sure you agree. Some >things are more important than others but my understanding is that the >entire territory of the EU needs to be reasonably safe and homogeneous in >regards to conditions. So Athens and perhaps other places need serious >action on motorcycles, and many cities need serious action on speed limits >and also emissions from Diesel vehicles. > >I hope you also appreciate that I forwarded your points about motorcycles >in Athens to the one of the Greek MEPs on the Transport and Tourism >committee. > >- T > > >------------------------------------------------------ > >Todd Edelman >International Coordinator >On the Train Towards the Future! > >Green Idea Factory >Laubova 5 >CZ-13000 Praha 3 > >++420 605 915 970 > >edelman@greenidea.info >http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain > >Green Idea Factory, >a member of World Carfree Network > _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From ktsourl at mailbox.gr Mon May 22 22:28:34 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 22 May 2006 16:28:34 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT Message-ID: <20060522132834.2874.qmail@mailbox.gr> You may be thinking that Greece has decent public transportation, but obviously it is not so decent to attract motorcycle users. I agree with you that the correct solution to the problem is to improve public transport, and not to favour motorcycles (actually this is not any better than favouring automobiles) - and to improve walking and bike conditions too, I would also add up. Motorcycles can not be "cleaned up" as easy as automobiles (for a more detailed argumentation look at http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.htm ) I don’t blame people who buy motorcycles at all. In fact it is indeed "the national governments" and other institutions like that you mention I put the blame on, even for motorcycles aggressiveness, because this aggressiveness is instigated by the attitude of the authorities. In Athens people with disabilities have been disappeared from the streets because of the harsh pedestrian conditions. And many other vulnerable (and also the not vulnerable) users, like elderly people, small children etc suffer and are forced to risk everyday (or, even worse, stay home - Greece has the highest rate of obesity in Europe). Athens is the most polluted capital in Europe, and new pollutants appeared recently (like benzyl and heavy metals from defective car catalysts). Tourism remains stagnant, despite the unique monuments the city is endowed by history and the excellent climate by nature (before destroyed by motorised traffic). It is actually a crime, and some from the administration should have been put on trial for what they have done (and still do) to the city and its people, but...you know, even more serious crimes are left unpunished these days. And the greek "justice" is notoriously corrupt and dependent to them for doing anything. >Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 15:15:13 -0400 (GMT-04:00) >From: Eric Bruun >Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) > BUT BUT BUT >To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > , sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >Message-ID: > <16350362.1148066113925.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > >We have been over this before, but I want to mention these points one more time: > >1) We should distinguish between richer countries like Greece that have decent public transportation but still allow motorcycles to run wild in cities and poor countries where transit options don't exist. Motorcycles don't >have to be the first step towards automobiles, their use can be curtailed down to far more reasonable levels if there is some investment in higher-quality transit (rail, BRT, bus lanes, etc.). Have a look at Taipei if you >don't believe me. > >Why not give the World Bank and national governments some blame for the situation as well? They >are the ones that ignore transit while promoting roads for the rich and for commerce. Can >you blame the lower income people for wanting to be mobile? Why is it OK for the elite >to drive around in their cars and hog so much of the street space, to endanger pedestrians, to >pollute, and so on. > >2) Motorcycles are not automatically "stinkier". They can be cleaned up just like automobiles. Again >blame governments too, not just the people who buy what is for sale. > >Eric Bruun > > >-----Original Message----- > >>>From: Todd Edelman >>>Sent: May 17, 2006 5:02 PM >>>To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >>>Cc: mailbox@carfree.com >>>Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT >>> >>>Eric Britton said: >>> >> >>>>> Todd Edelman wrote on this date with ref to the letter of our >>>>> knowledgeable Greek colleague K. Tsourlakis and his pertinent comments >>>>> on motorcycles (see below) as follows: >> >>> >>>"I suggest we move this discussion off the Carfree Cities as it is my >>>understanding that carfree definately means motorcycle-free in the view >>>of the owner of the Carfree Cities list, with no discussion possible." >>> >>>Britton continued: >> >>>>> "Fair enough Mr. Owner. But I just want my colleagues here in our fine >>>>> Sustran group and in the New Mobility Agenda that I really like the "no >>>>> discussion possible" bit. It tells us a great deal about the real world >>>>> relevance of this point of view and I must conclude the forum itself. >>>>> But what is great about the web of course is that there is plenty of >>>>> space out here for utopian thinking, and it is only right that they set >>>>> their own agendas. What is apparently most important in this case is not >>>>> the untidy world in which we live and have to work with, but the >>>>> pristine ones that some of us have in our heads. Life is sweet. >> >>> >>>Eric, you are so sensitive! I had a dream I wanted to share with you: >>> >>>The World Bank hired Daryl Oster and started to build his Evacuated Tube >>>Transport. Some Thai kids stole a motorcycle powered by a secret utopian >>>energy source and drove it through the unfinished ETT all the way to >>>Paris, where you greeted them with fresh bread, soft cheese and all of a >>>sudden the dreaded Wikipolice showed up and asked you some serious >>>questions. >>> >>>The skies turned black and subsonic thunder vibrated the cosmos. Then the >>>skies turned bright blue just as abruptly and the Carfree Ark appeared and >>>the naked carfree children gave utopian vitamins to everyone and all the >>>worlds problems were solved, forever. >>> >>>--- >> >>>>> >>>>> Okay, why do I bother you all with this? It is more than just an >>>>> opportunity to share a wry grin with you. To the contrary, it is to >>>>> encourage more critical discussion and idea mongering on both these fora >>>>> of precisely the motorcycles in cities dilemma. It's a huge reality >>>>> (you know, reality). For those of us who have lived and worked in Asia, >>>>> we can only see that this is a situation which is profoundly out of >>>>> control and which, as it happens. Deal with phenomena and practices >>>>> which have entirely escaped both planners and policy makers. To take >>>>> just one point of the untidy real world: there is a growing population >>>>> of people for whom two wheels bangers are cheaper and "better" than even >>>>> the cheapest bus. Well, what do we do then? >>>>> >>>>> So if the "no discussion possible" comments do nothing other than to >>>>> activate further discussions and work on this here, well they would have >>>>> made a real contribution. >> >>> >>>The Thai kids later found out that each of them had two half-time jobs: >>>One was to work on carfree cities; the other was to work on doing as much >>>as possible to eliminate the dangers of stinky, evil motorcycles. Their >>>bosses, unsurprisingly, did not find the two jobs to be a conflict of >>>purpose. >>> >>>- Fin - >>> >>>The non-Canadian Todd (Edelman) >>> >>> >> >>>>> >>>>> Eric Britton >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Motorcycles may be "little guy" in Czechia, but Czechia (or perhaps >>>>> North >>>>> America) is not the whole world. In many South European and Asian cities >>>>> (and in >>>>> an ever growing number of African countries) motorcycle traffic is an >>>>> important >>>>> part of motorised traffic (and in many cases - e.g China or Vietnam- a >>>>> first >>>>> step towards car motorisation). >>>>> >>>>> In Athens for instance, 1 million motorcycles pollute freely the city, >>>>> besides 2 >>>>> million automobiles - without any (unlike cars) exhaust gas and noise >>>>> controls. >>>>> Motorcycling is deliberately promoted (instead of biking - Athens lacks >>>>> even 1 >>>>> km of bike lane) in order to maximize motorised traffic. The corrupt >>>>> administration favours motorcycling because they don't compete cars, but >>>>> use >>>>> mostly pedestrian spaces and other free spaces (parks, squares etc) - >>>>> they have >>>>> also recently granted them legally free access to dedicated bus lanes. >>>>> They use >>>>> under police immunity sidewalks and other pedestrian spaces and act more >>>>> aggressively than cars, being a major component of the violence and >>>>> oppression >>>>> pedestrians experience in Athens in everyday life, and an important >>>>> (although >>>>> unrecognised) part of the pollution of the most polluted capital in >>>>> Europe. >>>>> >>>>> You are not right: they don't only cause damage to the motorcyclists >>>>> themselves, >>>>> but they also kill pedestrians and bicyclists. Even the damage they >>>>> bring about >>>>> to themselves shouldn't be confronted with indifference, given the >>>>> efforts the >>>>> motorcycle lobby makes to lure inexperienced and aggression inclined >>>>> people to >>>>> the motorcycle ideology. However I agree with you that fines and efforts >>>>> should >>>>> concentrate more to the damage they cause to others (like speeding or >>>>> pedestrian >>>>> rights violations) than the harm they cause to themselves (like helmet >>>>> use - >>>>> advising rather than penalties are more appropriate in this case). >>>>> >>>>> Although carfree cities is a worthy prospect, perhaps a completely >>>>> carfree world >>>>> is still far away, but a motorcycle free world is already feasible (and >>>>> may >>>>> become a first step towards the carfree vision). For a more thorough >>>>> discussion >>>>> about motorcycles look at >>>>> >>>>> http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.rtf >>>>> or >>>>> http://www.geocities.com/pezosgr/motocbust.htm >>>>> >>>>> >> >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>>Todd Edelman >>>International Coordinator >>>On the Train Towards the Future! >>> >>>Green Idea Factory >>>Laubova 5 >>>CZ-13000 Praha 3 >>> >>>++420 605 915 970 >>> >>>edelman@greenidea.info >>>http://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. > > _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon May 22 22:21:49 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 15:21:49 +0200 Subject: [sustran] EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT In-Reply-To: <20060522131732.24648.qmail@mailbox.gr> Message-ID: <015601c67da2$b11141f0$6501a8c0@Home> In Paris we have ? thanks to Mayor Delano? and his sustainable transport guy Denis Baupin and their team, -- a situation in which bicycles are able to circulate on the fat growing and really quite fine indeed new BRT lanes, while motorcycles are obliged to stack up with the cars. This has several interesting consequences. It gives a related speed edge to the cyclist while putting the motorcycles where they belong, in that every longer queue with the cars. Moreover, I as a cycling feel a lot safer pedaling away in a lane in which not only is there less traffic by far, but also I am sharing the lane with trained professional drivers. It makes a big difference. Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060522/bf23fa68/attachment.html From pendakur at interchange.ubc.ca Mon May 22 23:38:29 2006 From: pendakur at interchange.ubc.ca (Pendakur) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 07:38:29 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: FW: Jaime Lerner Lecture Notes References: Message-ID: <007301c67db0$97121aa0$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> If there is a pdf version of his presentation, We would all benefit from seeing it. I would like to see it if one is available. Thanks. Cheers. Setty. Dr. V. Setty Pendakur Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia Honorary Professor, China National Academy of Sciences Secretary,TRB-ABE90 and Director, ITDP President, Pacific Policy and Planning Associates 702-1099 Marinaside Crescent Vancouver, BC, Canada V6Z 2Z3 Phone: 1-604-263-3576, Fax: 1-604-263-6493 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Barter" To: "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport" Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 9:41 PM Subject: [sustran] FW: Jaime Lerner Lecture Notes > Forwarded from another list. > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark Dempsey [mailto:dempseys3@COMCAST.NET] >> Sent: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 3:42 PM >> Subject: Jaime Lerner Lecture Notes >> >> Notes from the 5/10/06 Jaime Lerner appearance at the Great >> Valley Conference. Lerner is the former mayor of Curitiba >> (and governor of the surrounding state). Curitiba remains a >> shining example of how design can improve the quality of >> life, even in a third-world, relatively poor city: >> >> Jaime Lerner - 40 years in city building >> >> Went in '88 to consult in Cuba, renovate Havana (jokes that >> Castro speaks for 10 - 12 hours when he's happy. >> Lerner jokes that he's feeling happy, so watch out!) >> >> "City is not a problem, city is a solution" >> >> Promises 2 - 3 years to improve quality of life. >> >> Needs political will, build core responsibility - >> *not* a problem of scale or finances. >> >> Recounts the example of having to clean a bay for his city. >> Rather than hire a garbage cleanup, he told fishermen that >> the city would pay for garbage when they "fished" it out of >> the bay. Fishermen could sell fish to the market, and garbage >> to the city. Either way, they could win. It save the city >> millions in cleanup costs, and made the bay more productive >> for fishing. >> >> Slides show: Vita the turtle - an admirable animal that has >> its residence near its work. It even has an urban design >> etched in its shell ("casque" says Lerner). >> >> On the other hand (new slide with cartoon car) Otto the >> Automobile is the kind of guy who's always the last to leave >> the party. People are folding chairs, putting away dishes and >> he's still around. He has a terrible drinking problem, and >> smokes. He also is something of an egoist. He can only carry >> a few people. >> >> He's like your mother-in-law. You want a good relationship, >> but you don't want her to run your life. >> >> Accordian buses, like those in Curitiba that supplanted a >> proposed rail installation, can transport 300 people (Volvo >> says 270, but Lerner says Swedes don't know Brasilians) >> >> "Without design, you don't have priorities." >> >> "Cities are a strategy for living and working together." The >> spine - public transport and land use. >> >> Separate living and working, and it's a disaster. >> >> You can apply design criteria either to a city or a state. >> >> Curitiba has 1.8M in the city, 3M in the metropolitan area. >> >> Slide: a wide road flanked by skyscrapers: >> >> X X >> X X X X >> X__X__X____X__X__X >> >> The wide road is the transit corridor. The building heights >> (density) decreases with distance from that corridor. >> >> When Lerner ran for Governor, he polled only 6% of the vote >> when the campaign began. His opponent was an experienced >> politician, and an actor (handsome! ...the room laughed). >> Lerner's design thoughts won, though. >> >> His design for the larger scale of the state >> (Garana?): >> >> Ensure development is no more than 1 hour from hospitals and >> universities. His agrarian reform resettled 100,000 slum >> dwellers to new housing on enough land to grow their own food >> in 4 - 8 rural villages. The design paradigm: Street crosses field. >> >> All transit modes are possible, but they must never compete >> in the same space. >> >> Curitiba's mass transit volumes: >> >> 1974 - 25,000/day >> 2000 - 2,000,000/day >> >> Frequency of buses: 30 seconds. (!) >> >> The Curitiba system is a public/private partnership. >> The buses are privately owned, the routes, stops and fares >> are publicly controlled. There are no subsidies. >> (I've also read that it boasts increasing ridership despite >> increasing per-capita auto ownership, something that not even >> the Europeans can boast). >> >> Sustainable cities are particularly important, especially in >> light of the climate change problem. >> >> Lerner's five commandments: >> >> 1. Use fewer cars. >> >> 2. Separate garbage >> >> 3. Keep work and home close >> >> 4. Waste minimum, save maximum >> >> 5. Have multi-use facilities (a stadium doubles as a market >> in the morning) >> >> Curitiba's education system promotes these things (and the >> history of the city). The kids teach the parents. >> >> The education is fun. Skits, and costumes are plentiful >> (slide of the "leaf" family...people in tree >> suits) >> >> Curitiba has a free university for the environment. >> Why not train *everyone* about the environment (even the janitors)? >> >> Built a botanical garden in two months, not the typical 100 >> years. Mentions that speed is an important feature of >> development changes. (His current practice, Lerner calls >> "urban accupuncture.") >> >> A city's identity is like a family portrait. Its preserved >> history is a prominent feature of Lerner's public spaces and >> monuments. >> >> Lerner tells about meeting a man very interested in >> biodiversity, fierce about it, even. He asked "Do you have >> different land uses where you live, like entertainment, >> shopping, offices?" No, said the biodiversity fan. "What >> about different kinds of people, those with different >> income?" No, says the biodiversity fan. >> >> The crowd laughs, and Lerner says social diversity is as >> important as biodiversity. >> >> Shows a slide of redesigned street furniture, modelled on >> Paris book vendor stalls (street merchant stalls with folding >> security doors that double as sun shades). >> >> With all his cautions about autos, Lerner still designed a >> museum for Brasilian racing. He even designs electric line towers. >> >> One principle of city design: create meeting places. >> (In Japan... he says you have to have real chutzpah to >> propose urban accupuncture in Japan) >> >> ...Jokes that age has its advantages, but you still have to >> get up three times a night. >> >> Waste land, like old quarries is a starting place for many >> projects for parks, theaters, etc. >> >> Cities must integrate formal and informal spaces to avoid >> violence. Talked about bringing dangerous streets to life by >> bringing "portable streets" to them (trucking in tubes with >> meeting places, theaters, >> vendors) >> >> Has a show of his designs at a Chicago museum. >> >> Sponsored the "World Nature Games" - an olympics using >> natural features (kayaking, cross-country runs, etc.) Did so >> without building any buildings. >> >> Makes recycled buses into travelling culture shows - theaters >> >> His final words: "It is possible. You can do it. Si, es possible" >> >> Standing ovation >> >> Panel discussion: the room's energy diminishes immediately, >> after the charming Lerner. >> >> - GVC (the sponsor) takes credit for the Hwy 99 bond money >> earmark - for high tech, sustainable visitor centers. >> >> - Also touts the regional blueprint (Lerner would probably >> agree that vision is important to promote, and the Blueprint >> does that.) >> >> West Sacramento mayor Cabalodon: sustaining a vision is >> difficult if only because of political turnover. >> Unlike Lerner, politicians don't stay 40 years on the job >> here. (Odd, Supervisor Illa Collin is just retiring after >> some decades on the job...) >> >> - Transactions, not vision are the focus of city councils. >> Vision itself must be the product of civic involvement by the >> population. A politician has to overlook stakeholders to >> maintain the vision. >> (Nice excuse for lack of civic leadership...But Cabaldon was >> courageous enough to attend this lecture, not something one >> could say about any other Sacramento City or County leader) >> >> - The owner of a local taqueria (Sal's), a woman on >> Schwartzeneggar's business council, says business buy-in to >> the vision is important, as is education. >> >> Lerner comments: >> >> We cannot have consensus in everything. When the discussion >> is done, you have to stop it. >> >> For business people, what makes them invest, what makes the >> difference? >> >> - quality of life >> - qualification of employees (education) >> - logistics (civic design) >> >> Administration is still difficult (shakes his head, recalling >> a conflict about redesigning a single bus stop). >> >> County administrator: implementation is tough. >> Visionaries need to show up to get what they want. >> >> The vision must be long term. >> >> -- >> One aside: Lerner previously mentioned that Brasilian >> politicians get free media for a few months before their elections. >> >> -- >> -- >> --Regards, >> --Mark Dempsey >> > > > ================================================================ > 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 edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 23 04:40:21 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 21:40:21 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: [carfree_cities] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT In-Reply-To: <20060522131732.24648.qmail@mailbox.gr> References: <20060522131732.24648.qmail@mailbox.gr> Message-ID: <1638.62.245.95.24.1148326821.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> KT wrote: > > Motorcycles resemble to bicycles in having two wheels and to automobiles > in having a motor. So, it is a matter of viewpoint to consider which one > is the dominant feature: > if you adopt a sustainability viewpoint, then they are on a par with > automobiles > if your purpose is to fill in the city with as much traffic as possible, > then they are an (lucrative for some) alternative of bicycles > > Moreover, although I clearly oppose to the movement of bicycles on > sidewalks, I must inform those who are not familiar with motorcycles, that > for pedestrians the nuisance and dangers of motorcycles on the sidewalks > are orders of magnitude more severe than that of bicycles. IN response to the general issue in this and your following messages: I think - and would love to agree with everyone on this list - that all individually-operated and owned motor vehicles are really really really terrible for cities. 1 - So the difference between motorcycles and cars and SUVs is not so big 2 - So guided (rails and/or dedicated lane) and as clean as possible public transport is (obviously) allowed, and if affordable/desirable should be separated from pedestrians without impeding pedestrians (underground, green viaducts) 3 - So carsharing is a reasonable temporary measure until we redesign our cities (narrow streets, eliminate parking) and run out of easy to find fuel 4 - That "utopian" is a compliment, and a complement. T > > >>Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:31:21 -0600 >>From: "D. Scott TenBrink" >>Subject: [sustran] Re: [carfree_cities] Re: EU laws to put brake on >> bikers (motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT >>To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >>Message-ID: <20060517213121.nyxw7a890vkog0kk@www.pedalsong.net> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format="flowed" >> >>Todd E. said, ?I don?t think motorcycles resemble bicycles in any way.? >> >>In addressing motorcycle use, I think it is important to recognize the >>similarities of bicycles and motorbikes. They are both less expensive to >>purchase and operate than a four-wheeled vehicle. They consume a similar >>amount of road and parking space. They both tend to be single occupancy >>vehicles (though to a less extent in Asia). They can both move through >>traffic >>by accessing space between lanes, sidewalks, and other informal spaces. >>Operators of both vehicles have a greater tendency to break traffic >>rules and >>be overlooked in enforcement of those rules. >> >>This is debatable, but I also find that there is a wider variation in >>operating >>behavior in these modes than in four-wheel vehicle operation. My >> experience >>has been that within both bike and motorcycle operators, there are very >>aggressive, very slow-moving, very risky, and very inexperienced riders >>in both >>modes. I think the points I mention above allow for this within-group >>variation >>to be more easily expressed than in a car. >> >>Of course there are a great number of differences between the two as >>well. I?m hardly arguing that they should be considered the same in all >>policy, but >>to deny any resemblance between the vehicles and their operators may >>blind us to >>potential obstacles and solutions. >> >>-Scott >> > > > _____________________________________________________________________________________ > http://www.mailbox.gr ????????? ?????? ?? ???????? ??? e-mail. > http://www.superweb.gr ?????????? ??? ????????? ?????? web hosting ?? > ??????? ???????? controlpanel > http://wwww.domains.gr ?? ????? ??? ??? internet ???? ?? 10 ????. > > --===============1164984401== > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > > > ================================================================ > 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. > --===============1164984401==-- > ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 23 04:44:55 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 21:44:55 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT In-Reply-To: <015601c67da2$b11141f0$6501a8c0@Home> References: <20060522131732.24648.qmail@mailbox.gr> <015601c67da2$b11141f0$6501a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <1644.62.245.95.24.1148327095.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Eric wrote: > In Paris we have � thanks to Mayor Delano? and his sustainable transport > guy Denis Baupin and their team, -- a situation in which bicycles are > able to circulate on the fat growing and really quite fine indeed new > BRT lanes, while motorcycles are obliged to stack up with the cars. This > has several interesting consequences. It gives a related speed edge to > the cyclist while putting the motorcycles where they belong, in that > every longer queue with the cars. Moreover, I as a cycling feel a lot > safer pedaling away in a lane in which not only is there less traffic by > far, but also I am sharing the lane with trained professional drivers. > It makes a big difference. YES! Mayor of Paris is doing great things! And Eric, if you want to remove the car/motorcycle lane and its stinking, shreaking contents so you can have more space for cycling... but then the Mayor calls you "utopian"... I will throw a pie in his face, in order to defend your honour. T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 23 04:48:52 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 21:48:52 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Born to be wild! (Just not in our cities, thanks!) was: motorcycles, Athens.. In-Reply-To: <20060522132223.31101.qmail@mailbox.gr> References: <20060522132223.31101.qmail@mailbox.gr> Message-ID: <1647.62.245.95.24.1148327332.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> KT wrote: > The problem is not to target only at motorcycles, but not to leave them > out of scope e.g. labelling them as "little guys". For instance, the > official policy of the greek government is currently against private > automobiles and in favour of public transit, bicycles and motorcycles (of > course this is the _declared_ policy, not the _implemented_ - actually > Athens is unwalkable, lacks even 1 km of bike lanes, while motorcyclists > gain always new privileges and car space is meticulously preserved, e.g. > when tramways are designed). > > I consider the SUV ban would be a positive measure, despite the dangers > you mention (i.e. to be used as a substitute for more effective actions - > this danger is always present in any positive measure), because it sends > the correct message to the general public. > > You have also to take into consideration the imminent danger lying in the > spread of motorcycles, for places where their use is now marginal. Athens > and other motorcycle plagued cities are a vivid paradigm on how these > places may become. > > Yes, I do appreciate your interest in forwarding my posting, but if they > are greeks they are certainly aware of the situation in Athens. In fact it > is more those who are not greek, who should be notified on where their > slackness towards motorcycles can lead a city (if you think they would > care about) YES, YES... you are right. I sent the email to your fellow countrywoman not so she would be informed BUT so her fellow committee members would see she got the same info (maybe they dont know about "Motocyclopolis"). YES, get rid of the SUVs if you can, the motorcycles if you can.... BAN ALL YOU CAN!!! BUT dont let the car drivers off the hook if you ban motorcycles or SUVs first. www.banallyoucan.com T > > > >>Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 16:07:41 +0200 (CEST) >>From: "Todd Edelman" >>Subject: [sustran] Born to be wild! (Just not in our cities, thanks!) >> was: motorcycles, Athens.. >>To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >>Message-ID: <2097.62.245.95.24.1148047661.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> >>Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-2 >> >>KT wrote: >> >>>> >>>> You may be thinking that reducing motorcycle traffic in many parts of >>>> the EU will not make a big difference, but you must realize that in >>>> those cities where motorcycles are a significant part of the traffic >>>> it will make a huge difference. I am not sure if you also imply that >>>> people living there are worth less attention, but in any case don't >>>> expect your arguments to sound them very persuasive. >> >> >>KT, I dont think that is what I said. I agree that in cities like Athens >>and perhaps some other southern EU cities reducing the number/danger of >>motorcycles will make a difference because they represent a significant >>part of the transport mix. >> >>--- >> >>>> >>>> I don't find logical the position, either to ban all forms of >>>> motorized traffic immediately, or leave them all. Some of them may be >>>> easier to be banned. Why not start from them? Even if this is >>>> considered by some as a small victory, it is still a victory. When >>>> environmental and living conditions start to improve, this will >>>> certainly create an incentive to follow further the carfree path, >>>> which will improve also the totality of the cities of Europe and tha >>>> whole world. >> >> >>I am pretty sure I didnt say to leave them all. My point was that things >>like reasonable and enforced speed limits will affect ALL vehicles on the >>streets, including cars, trucks, motorcycles and bicycles. This will >>reduce the damage caused by all of them, as we start to equip, re-equip, >>re-design and design cities for full functionality without individual >>motorised vehicles. >> >>Also, if only motorcycles are targeted it lets the cars off easy: This >>solves little in many places and gives the motorcyclists a political >>advantage, in comparison to all individual motorcized forms being >>targeted. This has I suppose some similarities to the kind of funny >>argument by many drivers of "normal-sized" cars to get SUVs out of the >>cities. I am for getting SUVs and motorcycles out, but the reality is >> that >>"normal" cars do more damage. >> >>A city in Belgium gave free transport passes to people/families who gave >>up their cars, and I strongly suggest something similar is done in Athens >>regarding motorcycles. (Maybe there can be former-motorcyclist only >>sections of PT with black leather seats, and simulated motorcycle sounds >>and vibrations ;-)) >> >>--- >> >>>> >>>> Certainly it will be nice if European Commission makes something on >>>> this point, although they are frequently accused for involving >>>> unnecessarily in local matters. But of course, not only motorcycles >>>> can cross the borders, but also pollution, mentalities and prospective >>>> road victims. >> >> >>YES, transport is in no way a local matter, as I am sure you agree. Some >>things are more important than others but my understanding is that the >>entire territory of the EU needs to be reasonably safe and homogeneous in >>regards to conditions. So Athens and perhaps other places need serious >>action on motorcycles, and many cities need serious action on speed >> limits >>and also emissions from Diesel vehicles. >> >>I hope you also appreciate that I forwarded your points about motorcycles >>in Athens to the one of the Greek MEPs on the Transport and Tourism >>committee. >> >>- T >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------ >> >>Todd Edelman >>International Coordinator >>On the Train Towards the Future! >> >>Green Idea Factory >>Laubova 5 >>CZ-13000 Praha 3 >> >>++420 605 915 970 >> >>edelman@greenidea.info >>http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain >> >>Green Idea Factory, >>a member of World Carfree Network >> > > > > _____________________________________________________________________________________ > http://www.mailbox.gr ????????? ?????? ?? ???????? ??? e-mail. > http://www.superweb.gr ?????????? ??? ????????? ?????? web hosting ?? > ??????? ???????? controlpanel > http://wwww.domains.gr ?? ????? ??? ??? internet ???? ?? 10 ????. > > --===============1761817349== > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > > > ================================================================ > 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. > --===============1761817349==-- > ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 23 04:53:32 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 21:53:32 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT In-Reply-To: <20060522132834.2874.qmail@mailbox.gr> References: <20060522132834.2874.qmail@mailbox.gr> Message-ID: <1653.62.245.95.24.1148327612.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> KT wrote: > > I don�t blame people who buy motorcycles at all. In fact it is indeed "the > national governments" and other institutions like that you mention I put > the blame on, even for motorcycles aggressiveness, because this > aggressiveness is instigated by the attitude of the authorities... It is > > actually a crime,and some from the administration should > have been put on trial for what they have done (and still do) to the city > and its people, but...you know, even more serious crimes are left > unpunished these days. And the greek "justice" is notoriously corrupt and > dependent to them for doing anything. WAIT, hold on ! - dont people have some personal responsiblity? Even if people have no other option (?) than riding a motorcycle they do have the choice to ride carefully, dont they? - T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From ericbruun at earthlink.net Tue May 23 05:08:40 2006 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 16:08:40 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [sustran] Final comment on MCs Message-ID: <969294.1148328520788.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Todd Don't put words in people's mouths. No one said that riders have the right to break the law. I can't speak for others, but my point was that people want to be mobile and it would be very hard to convince them that they can't be when others are driving around in cars and they are stranded. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: Todd Edelman >Sent: May 22, 2006 3:53 PM >To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport >Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT > >KT wrote: >> >> I don�t blame people who buy motorcycles at all. In fact it is >indeed "the >> national governments" and other institutions like that you mention I put >> the blame on, even for motorcycles aggressiveness, because this >> aggressiveness is instigated by the attitude of the authorities... It is >> > actually a crime,and some from the administration should >> have been put on trial for what they have done (and still do) to the city >> and its people, but...you know, even more serious crimes are left >> unpunished these days. And the greek "justice" is notoriously corrupt and >> dependent to them for doing anything. > >WAIT, hold on ! - dont people have some personal responsiblity? Even if >people have no other option (?) than riding a motorcycle they do have the >choice to ride carefully, dont they? > >- T > >------------------------------------------------------ > >Todd Edelman >International Coordinator >On the Train Towards the Future! > >Green Idea Factory >Laubova 5 >CZ-13000 Praha 3 > >++420 605 915 970 > >edelman@greenidea.info >http://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. From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 23 05:28:04 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 22:28:04 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Final comment on MCs In-Reply-To: <969294.1148328520788.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.ne t> References: <969294.1148328520788.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <1974.62.245.95.24.1148329684.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Eric B. wrote: > > Don't put words in people's mouths. No one said that riders have the right > to break the law. I DIDNT say that anyone said that motorcycle riders have that right. I asked if the riders have the choice to be careful. --- > I can't speak for others, but my point was that people want to be mobile > and it would > be very hard to convince them that they can't be when others are driving > around in cars and > they are stranded. THEY still can make choices and this mobility obsession can be replaced by something other than alternative mobility. - T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From pendakur at interchange.ubc.ca Tue May 23 06:55:50 2006 From: pendakur at interchange.ubc.ca (Pendakur) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 14:55:50 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Final comment on MCs References: <969294.1148328520788.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <005901c67dea$7ef5e020$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> Yes, people break the law, car drivers, mcycle drivers and also pedestrians and cyclists. But that does not give the right to governments to ban one or all of thegroups from any location and decrease their mobility and increase their costs. We need to be creative to produce solutions which convert our present urban structure into safe precincts for every one. Those of us who have worked in Asia know that mcycles are family vehicles and they are actually the cars of the middle income people. The issues are complex and I have yet to see a simple and universal solution. Whatever environmental rules we wish to abide by, they should be non-discriminant. Cheers from Vancouver. Setty. Dr. V. Setty Pendakur Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia Honorary Professor, China National Academy of Sciences Secretary,TRB-ABE90 and Director, ITDP President, Pacific Policy and Planning Associates 702-1099 Marinaside Crescent Vancouver, BC, Canada V6Z 2Z3 Phone: 1-604-263-3576, Fax: 1-604-263-6493 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Bruun" To: "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport" ; "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport" Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 1:08 PM Subject: [sustran] Final comment on MCs > > Todd > > Don't put words in people's mouths. No one said that riders have the right > to break the law. > I can't speak for others, but my point was that people want to be mobile > and it would > be very hard to convince them that they can't be when others are driving > around in cars and > they are stranded. > > Eric Bruun > > > -----Original Message----- >>From: Todd Edelman >>Sent: May 22, 2006 3:53 PM >>To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport >> >>Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT >>BUT BUT >> >>KT wrote: >>> >>> I don�t blame people who buy motorcycles at all. In fact it is >>indeed "the >>> national governments" and other institutions like that you mention I put >>> the blame on, even for motorcycles aggressiveness, because this >>> aggressiveness is instigated by the attitude of the authorities... It is >>> > actually a crime,and some from the administration should >>> have been put on trial for what they have done (and still do) to the >>> city >>> and its people, but...you know, even more serious crimes are left >>> unpunished these days. And the greek "justice" is notoriously corrupt >>> and >>> dependent to them for doing anything. >> >>WAIT, hold on ! - dont people have some personal responsiblity? Even if >>people have no other option (?) than riding a motorcycle they do have the >>choice to ride carefully, dont they? >> >>- T >> >>------------------------------------------------------ >> >>Todd Edelman >>International Coordinator >>On the Train Towards the Future! >> >>Green Idea Factory >>Laubova 5 >>CZ-13000 Praha 3 >> >>++420 605 915 970 >> >>edelman@greenidea.info >>http://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. > > > > ================================================================ > 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 et3 at et3.com Tue May 23 08:41:44 2006 From: et3 at et3.com (Daryl Oster) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 19:41:44 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Final comment on MCs In-Reply-To: <005901c67dea$7ef5e020$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> Message-ID: <200605222341.k4MNfktK003845@txslsmtp1.vzwmail.net> The sustainable way to displace MCs from the market is to offer modes with greater transportation value. Daryl Oster (c) 2006? all rights reserved.? ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth" e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks of et3.com Inc.? For licensing information contact:?POB 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423? (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com > -----Original Message----- > From: sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of > Pendakur > Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 5:56 PM > To: Eric Bruun; Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > Subject: [sustran] Re: Final comment on MCs > > Yes, people break the law, car drivers, mcycle drivers and also > pedestrians > and cyclists. But that does not give the right to governments to ban one > or > all of thegroups from any location and decrease their mobility and > increase > their costs. We need to be creative to produce solutions which convert > our > present urban structure into safe precincts for every one. Those of us > who > have worked in Asia know that mcycles are family vehicles and they are > actually the cars of the middle income people. > > The issues are complex and I have yet to see a simple and universal > solution. Whatever environmental rules we wish to abide by, they should > be > non-discriminant. > > Cheers from Vancouver. Setty. > > Dr. V. Setty Pendakur > Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia > Honorary Professor, China National Academy of Sciences > Secretary,TRB-ABE90 and Director, ITDP > > President, Pacific Policy and Planning Associates > 702-1099 Marinaside Crescent > Vancouver, BC, Canada V6Z 2Z3 > Phone: 1-604-263-3576, Fax: 1-604-263-6493 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eric Bruun" > To: "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport" > ; "Asia and the Pacific sustainable > transport" > Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 1:08 PM > Subject: [sustran] Final comment on MCs > > > > > > Todd > > > > Don't put words in people's mouths. No one said that riders have the > right > > to break the law. > > I can't speak for others, but my point was that people want to be mobile > > and it would > > be very hard to convince them that they can't be when others are driving > > around in cars and > > they are stranded. > > > > Eric Bruun > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>From: Todd Edelman > >>Sent: May 22, 2006 3:53 PM > >>To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > >> > >>Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT > >>BUT BUT > >> > >>KT wrote: > >>> > >>> I don�t blame people who buy motorcycles at all. In fact it is > >>indeed "the > >>> national governments" and other institutions like that you mention I > put > >>> the blame on, even for motorcycles aggressiveness, because this > >>> aggressiveness is instigated by the attitude of the authorities... It > is > >>> > actually a crime,and some from the administration should > >>> have been put on trial for what they have done (and still do) to the > >>> city > >>> and its people, but...you know, even more serious crimes are left > >>> unpunished these days. And the greek "justice" is notoriously corrupt > >>> and > >>> dependent to them for doing anything. > >> > >>WAIT, hold on ! - dont people have some personal responsiblity? Even if > >>people have no other option (?) than riding a motorcycle they do have > the > >>choice to ride carefully, dont they? > >> > >>- T > >> > >>------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >>Todd Edelman > >>International Coordinator > >>On the Train Towards the Future! > >> > >>Green Idea Factory > >>Laubova 5 > >>CZ-13000 Praha 3 > >> > >>++420 605 915 970 > >> > >>edelman@greenidea.info > >>http://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. > > > > > > > > ================================================================ > > 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 edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 23 09:37:14 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 02:37:14 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Final comment on MCs In-Reply-To: <005901c67dea$7ef5e020$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> References: <969294.1148328520788.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <005901c67dea$7ef5e020$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> Message-ID: <1061.62.245.95.24.1148344634.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Setty wrote: > Yes, people break the law, car drivers, mcycle drivers and also > pedestrians > and cyclists. But that does not give the right to governments to ban one > or > all of thegroups from any location and decrease their mobility and > increase > their costs. We need to be creative to produce solutions which convert > our > present urban structure into safe precincts for every one. Those of us > who > have worked in Asia know that mcycles are family vehicles and they are > actually the cars of the middle income people. > > The issues are complex and I have yet to see a simple and universal > solution. Whatever environmental rules we wish to abide by, they should > be > non-discriminant. > > Cheers from Vancouver. I simply disagree that mobility should be the goal. If mobility is the goal, then transport - and it could be any kind of transport - is the solution, and sometimes it means that the richer one is the bigger the negative effects their transport on others, and sometimes this is not the case at all. If access is the goal, which means bringing the things one needs closer to the person who needs it, the mobility is decreased, but quality of life is not. "Solutions which convert our present urban structure into safe precincts for everyone" should mean exactly that, conversion of the urban structure, not simply a different transport solution for the same urban structure. The "two-wheeled family car" is just a mobility tool, a transport solution. A better solution is to determine how to bring this family what it needs in the simplest, cheapest and most environmentally friendly way. This means a real conversion of the urban structure is more important than a modification of what moves inside the urban structure. Increasing access, with proxmity - not mobility - as the way to do it, automatically decreases discrimination, but it also means that the one cannot use a transport means which discriminates against a simpler, slower one. This means that walking is at the top of the hierarchy, bicycling is next, followed by public transport, followed by motorcycles and cars until the improvements of the first three make these last two unnecessary and unwanted and impossible. Their HAS to be a hierarchy. Any "solution" to allow pedestrians and motorcycles to share the same space will always be far less than perfect. Ideally the structure is made best for pedestrians, so everything else is less than ideal, and has to have less priority. Eventually, when a motorcycle is not allowed, this does not mean increased discrimation against motorcyclists and car drivers, it means a decrease of discrimination against PT, cycling and walking. Access via proximity, rather than by mobility (alternatively: Access via proximity, rather than mobility via transport) needs to be a main goal for quality of life in cities (and elsewhere). This is what we need to start talking about, and this is what we need to tell others (politicians, "the people") about. - T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From pendakur at interchange.ubc.ca Tue May 23 09:45:41 2006 From: pendakur at interchange.ubc.ca (Pendakur) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 17:45:41 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Final comment on MCs References: <969294.1148328520788.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <005901c67dea$7ef5e020$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> <1061.62.245.95.24.1148344634.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Message-ID: <000d01c67e02$391a0a00$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> I would like to hear from a mcycle family which has tow children in two different schools, wife and husband working different places, living in a large Indian city and ask how them how all this theory on SUSTRAN works in real life!! Cheers from Vancouver. Dr. V. Setty Pendakur Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia Honorary Professor, China National Academy of Sciences Secretary,TRB-ABE90 and Director, ITDP President, Pacific Policy and Planning Associates 702-1099 Marinaside Crescent Vancouver, BC, Canada V6Z 2Z3 Phone: 1-604-263-3576, Fax: 1-604-263-6493 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Todd Edelman" To: "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport" Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 5:37 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: Final comment on MCs > Setty wrote: > >> Yes, people break the law, car drivers, mcycle drivers and also >> pedestrians >> and cyclists. But that does not give the right to governments to ban one >> or >> all of thegroups from any location and decrease their mobility and >> increase >> their costs. We need to be creative to produce solutions which convert >> our >> present urban structure into safe precincts for every one. Those of us >> who >> have worked in Asia know that mcycles are family vehicles and they are >> actually the cars of the middle income people. >> >> The issues are complex and I have yet to see a simple and universal >> solution. Whatever environmental rules we wish to abide by, they should >> be >> non-discriminant. >> >> Cheers from Vancouver. > > I simply disagree that mobility should be the goal. If mobility is the > goal, then transport - and it could be any kind of transport - is the > solution, and sometimes it means that the richer one is the bigger the > negative effects their transport on others, and sometimes this is not the > case at all. > > If access is the goal, which means bringing the things one needs closer to > the person who needs it, the mobility is decreased, but quality of life is > not. > > "Solutions which convert our present urban structure into safe precincts > for everyone" should mean exactly that, conversion of the urban structure, > not simply a different transport solution for the same urban structure. > > The "two-wheeled family car" is just a mobility tool, a transport > solution. A better solution is to determine how to bring this family what > it needs in the simplest, cheapest and most environmentally friendly way. > This means a real conversion of the urban structure is more important than > a modification of what moves inside the urban structure. Increasing > access, with proxmity - not mobility - as the way to do it, automatically > decreases discrimination, but it also means that the one cannot use a > transport means which discriminates against a simpler, slower one. This > means that walking is at the top of the hierarchy, bicycling is next, > followed by public transport, followed by motorcycles and cars until the > improvements of the first three make these last two unnecessary and > unwanted and impossible. > > Their HAS to be a hierarchy. Any "solution" to allow pedestrians and > motorcycles to share the same space will always be far less than perfect. > Ideally the structure is made best for pedestrians, so everything else is > less than ideal, and has to have less priority. Eventually, when a > motorcycle is not allowed, this does not mean increased discrimation > against motorcyclists and car drivers, it means a decrease of > discrimination against PT, cycling and walking. > > Access via proximity, rather than by mobility (alternatively: Access via > proximity, rather than mobility via transport) needs to be a main goal for > quality of life in cities (and elsewhere). This is what we need to start > talking about, and this is what we need to tell others (politicians, "the > people") about. > > - T > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Todd Edelman > International Coordinator > On the Train Towards the Future! > > Green Idea Factory > Laubova 5 > CZ-13000 Praha 3 > > ++420 605 915 970 > > edelman@greenidea.info > http://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. From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 23 10:10:49 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 03:10:49 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Final comment on MCs In-Reply-To: <000d01c67e02$391a0a00$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> References: <969294.1148328520788.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <005901c67dea$7ef5e020$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> <1061.62.245.95.24.1148344634.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> <000d01c67e02$391a0a00$6600a8c0@pendakur82241d> Message-ID: <1073.62.245.95.24.1148346649.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Setty wrote: > I would like to hear from a mcycle family which has tow children in two > different schools, wife and husband working different places, living in a > large Indian city and ask how them how all this theory on SUSTRAN works in > real life!! WE need to work to change the design of the city (that was the point of my last email) while we also minimize the negatives and increase the positives of our current transport solutions (which is no less important, but was not the subject of that email). But, eventually, changing the design will simply mean less transport is needed. I would like to hear from a mcycle family which wants to change their large Indian city so that their schools and workplaces are within walking, cycling or PT distance - in that order of priority - of home. - T "Utopia" is complimentary and complementary. ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue May 23 19:37:44 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 12:37:44 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Changes in Sustran? Message-ID: <000201c67e54$ee2b0ff0$6601a8c0@Home> I count on Paul Barter and our other long standing members to correct me here if I have this wrong, but I find of late that we are starting to overload with too many often rather chatty messages, most of which are not really helping me in my work and information on the challenges of transport and well being in the Sustran region. There are plenty of places out there on the web to chat about some of the things we are now getting here, but I am not sure that Sustran is one of them. (Examples: CarFree Discussions at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFree/; Carfree Cities at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/carfree_cities/; and our own CarFree (less car really) Caf? at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFreeCafe/) Against this backdrop, here is what I would like to toss out for comment here, in the hope that we can deal with this efficiently and then get back to the main business of Sustran. Should we not be thinking of limiting ourselves to say two or three messages each per week max? Is that too few? Too many? Or simply a bad idea? Admittedly I am a bit disappointed since our message yesterday on trying to get your support for the current round of votes for the international recognition of two outstanding, let me call them ?sustainable transport practitioners and examples?: namely Jan Gehl for his work in taming cars and creating safe and enjoyable public spaces, and the Greenwheels group for taking the concept of carsharing one more important step ahead ? since that message apparently got lost in the plethora of short chat messages competing for your attention. I know myself that when I start to get too much email from just about any source, I do turn off. And I do not at all like the idea of turning off from Sustran. But tell me I am wrong. It would not be the first time. Eric Britton PS. If you do want to show your support for Gehl and Greenwheels, it is real easy. You just go to http://www.newmobility.org , click 2006 Awards (New) on the top menu, and you have it there before you. You will also be able to read the first round of supporting messages, which themselves are very interesting. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060523/8e3edd74/attachment.html From Alan.Howes at cbuchanan.co.uk Tue May 23 19:40:43 2006 From: Alan.Howes at cbuchanan.co.uk (Alan Howes) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 11:40:43 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Changes in Sustran? Message-ID: <324DCD7680954F468CF306EE5404F0010225E89F@mail01.cbuchanan.co.uk> I agree - too much (e-)traffic on Sustrans. My recent gems have gone un-noticed too! Alan (briefly!) -- Alan Howes Associate Transport Planner Colin Buchanan 4 St Colme Street Edinburgh EH3 6AA Scotland email: alan.howes@cbuchanan.co.uk tel: (0)131 226 4693 (switchboard) (0)7952 464335 (mobile) fax: (0)131 220 0232 www: http:/www.cbuchanan.co.uk/ _______________________________ ________________________________ From: sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk@list.jca.apc. org] On Behalf Of Eric.Britton Sent: 23 May 2006 11:38 To: Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Changes in Sustran? I count on Paul Barter and our other long standing members to correct me here if I have this wrong, but I find of late that we are starting to overload with too many often rather chatty messages, most of which are not really helping me in my work and information on the challenges of transport and well being in the Sustran region. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ DISCLAIMER This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. Unless you are the named addressee, or authorised to receive it for the addressee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender by replying to this email. Any views expressed by an individual within this email which do not constitute or record professional advice relating to the business of Colin Buchanan, do not necessarily reflect the views of the company. Any professional advice or opinion contained within this email is subject to our terms and conditions of business. We have taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses. We do not accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060523/a311d071/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 23 20:03:36 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 13:03:36 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Changes in Sustran? Message-ID: <1451.62.245.95.24.1148382216.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Hi, I pledge to practice better personal email traffic demand management for the near term - I just needed to clear up some things and hope it helped others as much as it helped me. Less chat, more action! - T p.s. It's fun, easy and satisfying to second the nominations of Gehl and Greenwheels for the World Technology Award! I just did it... what is your excuse for not doing it, huh?, if indeed you appreciate the work of Gehl and Greenwheels as much as I do! ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From whook at itdp.org Tue May 23 22:30:41 2006 From: whook at itdp.org (Walter Hook) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 09:30:41 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: 2006 World Technology Environment Awards - Join us inseconding nominations of Jan Gehl and Greenwheels In-Reply-To: <002101c67d12$305e7d60$6501a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <00aa01c67e6d$16a8e3e0$c301a8c0@DFJLYL81> We will support the jan gehl nomination. Richly deserved. w. -----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.Britton Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 4:07 PM To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; CarShareCafe@yahoogroups.com Cc: Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] 2006 World Technology Environment Awards - Join us inseconding nominations of Jan Gehl and Greenwheels Dear Friends, This year, after a number of emails and calls to discuss many great ideas, we are finally nominating two outstanding innovators for the 2006 World Technology Environment Awards, one an individual pioneer and one group showing the way. Our group nominees this year are the redoubtable Dane Jan Geld and the Greenwheels carsharing organization in the Netherlands (the fastest growing such group in the world). This is as many of you will recall a group effort each year, and you are as always invited cordially to anticipate and make sure that our nominees receive the international recognition that they so richly deserve. The path to do this is short and simple: all you have to do is click to the New Mobility Agenda at www.newmobility.org and from there click 2006 Awards on the top menu. At that point you will see the first draft of our nominations, together with everything you need to quickly join us in this fine group effort. I would remind you that we have a 100% hit ratio for our nominations over the last three years, the reason being not only the exceptional contributions of people and teams like: Hans Monderman for his reducing one technology (the motor car) to it rightful (rather modest) pace in residential streets; and the Seoul :Restoration Technology" car control project in their city; in 2004 Ken Livingstone for leading Congestion Charging project in London, and the Stockholm Partnerships for Sustainable Cities program; and back in 2003 a trio of outstanding carsharing project each trying to push the envelope in terms of the emerging city/car agenda: Caisse Commune in Paris, City Car Club in Helsinki, and Statoil Bilpool in Stockholm - but also the way that we have got behind them to make sure that the judges and many others as well understand the importance of their contributions. Last year we have more than fifty of our international colleagues join us in the nominations, and this year we hope to do at least as well. It is important to get the message out, and to do it right require that we all join in. We need to go for every chance we run across. Only in that way will we make the progress that is so badly needed. My sincere thanks for joining us to support Jan and the Greenwheels teams. And indeed all our work. Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060523/9ec68aa1/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed May 24 14:48:52 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 07:48:52 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Beijing's pollution not just an 'official' problem Message-ID: <008601c67ef5$be89b160$6601a8c0@Home> Beijing's pollution not just an 'official' problem By Emma Moore (chinadaily.com.cn) http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2006-05/22/content_596560.htm Updated: 2006-05-22 09:10 It doesn't take a slew of complex statistics and reports to convince Beijingers that their city has a problem with air pollution. Just stepping outside and taking a couple of deep breaths is proof enough of the severity of the pollution levels in China's capital. Much of the city's haze is caused by dust whipped up from construction sites and the Gobi Desert. But the real health dangers come from toxic vehicle emissions and that's something all Beijing residents need to take responsibility for. Satellite images taken by the European Space Agency in 2005 show Beijing and the surrounding north-east China region has the world's worst nitrogen dioxide pollution. This noxious heavy gas can cause potentially deadly lung damage and respiratory problems. Combined with air particles, it often blankets the city in a brownish pall. Looking down on this murky smog from my office window is enough to make me want to hold my breath all day. Once internationally famous as the city of bicycles, Beijing currently has over 2.6 million motor vehicles with a further 1,000 plus hitting the streets daily. It seems like everyone in the city now aspires to own a car. And why shouldn't the liberals might argue. But the thought of all the adults among Beijing's ever-growing 15 million plus population driving a car each is mind-boggling. Already the city's roads are clearly overcrowded and at rush hour, the city seems to be choking to death in some traffic hotspots. The clamor of drivers honking their horns impatiently, worn brakes screeching, engines revving and bicycle bells ringing incessantly is enough to make even the most serene person's blood pressure lurch. City authorities are now taking decisive steps to prevent the looming environmental and public health disaster. The stunted two-line subway network is being rapidly expanded, highway toll systems are being upgraded and extended, vehicle emission standards are being more rigorously enforced and efforts are being made to limit the number of taxis prowling the city streets. It sometimes seems that too little is being done almost too late; and there remains much more to be done, but the right noises are being made in planning offices. Now it's up to Beijingers to do their part to save themselves and their city. Beijing already promotes International Car Free Day on September 22, but one day of reduced exhaust emissions out of every 365 is a mere token gesture in the face of China's skyrocketing pollution levels. Du Shaozhong, deputy director of the Beijing Environment Protection Bureau, is setting a good example by welcoming a new 'blue skies' campaign. The campaign aims to reduce private vehicle use and encourage walking by persuading drivers to give up their cars for one day a month. To date, 200,000 vehicle owners from 79 car clubs have voiced their support for the movement. That's a good start, but commitment is needed from many more drivers if any real impact is to be made. What I don't understand is that if drivers are able to walk to work one day a month, what prevents them from walking one day a week or even every single day? Buying a car may be expensive but it doesn't cost owners their legs! The trouble with car ownership is that it inevitably leads to laziness. One of the sponsors of the 'blue skies' campaign, Wu Zhonghua, chairman of Beijing's Sohu Car Club sums up the situation succinctly: "We cannot control the weather, but we can control our wheels." We can also control our natural inclination to avoid physical effort. Walking or riding a bicycle around town everyday is often looked down on as lower class and unsophisticated by ambitious city types. But in most developed countries many people now choose to walk or cycle whenever possible and save their cars for trips too long to walk. The benefits of not driving walkable distances are numerous and far-reaching. On a personal level, regular exercise helps with weight loss and control; improves fitness; reduces stress, and of course saves money on petrol and parking. Leaving your car at home helps minimize air and noise pollution, traffic accidents, oil consumption, road repairs and beautifies cities. The Beijing Environment Protection Bureau reported 17 days of level four or five (severe) air pollution in the first quarter of 2006, compared to only nine days in all of 2005, and just 60 blue-sky days - 16 less than the same period last year. It seems that things are getting worse before they will get better. I hope Beijingers will bear this in mind and remember the advantages of walking next time they're hunting for their car keys. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060524/7fe3d39f/attachment.html From etts at indigo.ie Wed May 24 18:57:49 2006 From: etts at indigo.ie (etts at indigo.ie) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 05:57:49 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing's pollution not just an 'official' problem Message-ID: <380-22006532495749921@M2W006.mail2web.com> I think it is significant that this appeared as an opinion in China Daily. That doesn't necessarily mean that all the desired change will come, but it is a strong signal. Since last year there has been an official policy to prioritise public transport, and of course this needs to be matched by a policy to manage the urban space and car use. The one surprising thing is that there is no mention of the newly-opened BRT which is carrying over 80,000 persons per day on average, and they have more lines underway. With best wishes, Brendan Finn. Original Message: ----------------- From: Eric.Britton eric.britton@ecoplan.org Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 07:48:52 +0200 To: CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, emoore@chinadaily.com.cn, editorial@chinadaily.com.cn Subject: [sustran] Beijing's pollution not just an 'official' problem Beijing's pollution not just an 'official' problem By Emma Moore (chinadaily.com.cn) http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2006-05/22/content_596560.htm Updated: 2006-05-22 09:10 It doesn't take a slew of complex statistics and reports to convince Beijingers that their city has a problem with air pollution. Just stepping outside and taking a couple of deep breaths is proof enough of the severity of the pollution levels in China's capital. Much of the city's haze is caused by dust whipped up from construction sites and the Gobi Desert. But the real health dangers come from toxic vehicle emissions and that's something all Beijing residents need to take responsibility for. Satellite images taken by the European Space Agency in 2005 show Beijing and the surrounding north-east China region has the world's worst nitrogen dioxide pollution. This noxious heavy gas can cause potentially deadly lung damage and respiratory problems. Combined with air particles, it often blankets the city in a brownish pall. Looking down on this murky smog from my office window is enough to make me want to hold my breath all day. Once internationally famous as the city of bicycles, Beijing currently has over 2.6 million motor vehicles with a further 1,000 plus hitting the streets daily. It seems like everyone in the city now aspires to own a car. And why shouldn't the liberals might argue. But the thought of all the adults among Beijing's ever-growing 15 million plus population driving a car each is mind-boggling. Already the city's roads are clearly overcrowded and at rush hour, the city seems to be choking to death in some traffic hotspots. The clamor of drivers honking their horns impatiently, worn brakes screeching, engines revving and bicycle bells ringing incessantly is enough to make even the most serene person's blood pressure lurch. City authorities are now taking decisive steps to prevent the looming environmental and public health disaster. The stunted two-line subway network is being rapidly expanded, highway toll systems are being upgraded and extended, vehicle emission standards are being more rigorously enforced and efforts are being made to limit the number of taxis prowling the city streets. It sometimes seems that too little is being done almost too late; and there remains much more to be done, but the right noises are being made in planning offices. Now it's up to Beijingers to do their part to save themselves and their city. Beijing already promotes International Car Free Day on September 22, but one day of reduced exhaust emissions out of every 365 is a mere token gesture in the face of China's skyrocketing pollution levels. Du Shaozhong, deputy director of the Beijing Environment Protection Bureau, is setting a good example by welcoming a new 'blue skies' campaign. The campaign aims to reduce private vehicle use and encourage walking by persuading drivers to give up their cars for one day a month. To date, 200,000 vehicle owners from 79 car clubs have voiced their support for the movement. That's a good start, but commitment is needed from many more drivers if any real impact is to be made. What I don't understand is that if drivers are able to walk to work one day a month, what prevents them from walking one day a week or even every single day? Buying a car may be expensive but it doesn't cost owners their legs! The trouble with car ownership is that it inevitably leads to laziness. One of the sponsors of the 'blue skies' campaign, Wu Zhonghua, chairman of Beijing's Sohu Car Club sums up the situation succinctly: "We cannot control the weather, but we can control our wheels." We can also control our natural inclination to avoid physical effort. Walking or riding a bicycle around town everyday is often looked down on as lower class and unsophisticated by ambitious city types. But in most developed countries many people now choose to walk or cycle whenever possible and save their cars for trips too long to walk. The benefits of not driving walkable distances are numerous and far-reaching. On a personal level, regular exercise helps with weight loss and control; improves fitness; reduces stress, and of course saves money on petrol and parking. Leaving your car at home helps minimize air and noise pollution, traffic accidents, oil consumption, road repairs and beautifies cities. The Beijing Environment Protection Bureau reported 17 days of level four or five (severe) air pollution in the first quarter of 2006, compared to only nine days in all of 2005, and just 60 blue-sky days - 16 less than the same period last year. It seems that things are getting worse before they will get better. I hope Beijingers will bear this in mind and remember the advantages of walking next time they're hunting for their car keys. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From ktsourl at mailbox.gr Wed May 24 22:08:50 2006 From: ktsourl at mailbox.gr (K. Tsourlakis) Date: 24 May 2006 16:08:50 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) BUT BUT BUT Message-ID: <20060524130850.22293.qmail@mailbox.gr> I didn't mean I don't blame those who ride motorcycles aggressively and violate pedestrian rights (of course I do blame those, as well as car drivers who behave that way). I actually said I don't blame those who buy motorcycles. However, even in the case of the former the attribute "little-guy" is more accurate. Because, it is not them who design and control the overall transport system which creates these behaviours, but the authorities. People are not offered good alternatives and are under a continuous brainwashing about how good is the motorised traffic. Most people are not experts to understand what should be done, although they realize the deception (e.g. confidence to politicians is very low). It is normal in a general population of million inhabitants to be found a small percentage (corresponding to a large absolute number) of criminals, perverted, immature or...just simply dumb. But if the authorities leave their actions unpunished and reward them (like greek police do for pedestrian rights violations) it is natural to enforce this behaviour. For example, there is currently underway a huge plan to transform Athens (and others greek cities) central squares in underground garages. In many cases locals opposed, because, in addition to the car pollution, those underground garages degrade the plantation on top of them - but they faced callous reaction from the administration. These thousands of new parking spaces are going to create an even worse future, leading cars right to the centre of the greek cities (note that these parking spaces are explicitly earmarked not for the residents of the area, but for the visitors). But these projects are advertised as the solution to the traffic problems, even as environment protection projects! Now, who is the "big-guy" and who the "little-guy" in this case? Who do you put mostly the blame on? >Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 21:53:32 +0200 (CEST) >From: "Todd Edelman" >Subject: [sustran] Re: EU laws to put brake on bikers(motorcyclists) > BUT BUT BUT >To: "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport" > >Message-ID: <1653.62.245.95.24.1148327612.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> >Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-2 > >KT wrote: >> >> I don�t blame people who buy motorcycles at all. In fact it is >indeed "the >> national governments" and other institutions like that you mention I put >> the blame on, even for motorcycles aggressiveness, because this >> aggressiveness is instigated by the attitude of the authorities... It is >> > actually a crime,and some from the administration should >> have been put on trial for what they have done (and still do) to the city >> and its people, but...you know, even more serious crimes are left >> unpunished these days. And the greek "justice" is notoriously corrupt and >> dependent to them for doing anything. > >WAIT, hold on ! - dont people have some personal responsiblity? Even if >people have no other option (?) than riding a motorcycle they do have the >choice to ride carefully, dont they? > >- T > >------------------------------------------------------ > >Todd Edelman >International Coordinator >On the Train Towards the Future! > >Green Idea Factory >Laubova 5 >CZ-13000 Praha 3 > >++420 605 915 970 > >edelman@greenidea.info >http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain > >Green Idea Factory, >a member of World Carfree Network > _____________________________________________________________________________________ http://www.mailbox.gr Αποκτήστε δωρεάν το μοναδικό σας e-mail. http://www.superweb.gr Οικονομικά και αξιόπιστα πακέτα web hosting με ασφαλές Ελληνικό controlpanel http://wwww.domains.gr Το όνομά σας στο internet μόνο με 10 Ευρώ. From mpotter at gol.com Mon May 22 11:13:44 2006 From: mpotter at gol.com (mpotter) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 11:13:44 +0900 Subject: [sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution and beyond to transportation economy In-Reply-To: <20060519132009.20893.qmail@mailbox.gr> References: <20060519132009.20893.qmail@mailbox.gr> Message-ID: Well said and most true. Re economies (or lack thereof), despite its complete dependency on imported petroleum, Japan's per-capita mobility costs are about 1/2 what they are in the US-- 9% of the GNP as opposed to 18%. A heavy dependence on well-implemented electrified rail is one of the key reasons. And (though we're veering away from freight here), in cities where public transit and bicycle implementations are well-executed, the victory of the automobile is far from complete. In Bogota, for example, the car's trip-share is down to 13% from 17% in 1998, before then-mayor Enrique Pe?alosa's courageous (apparently he risked impeachment) measures against cars parking on the sidewalks and creation of bicycle-friendly infrastructure. Please refer to the encouraging article with the admittedly exaggerated title "Bicycle is king of the road as gas costs rise" from the May 5, 2006 International herald Tribune for more. Mark Potter On May 19, 2006, at 10:20 PM, K. Tsourlakis wrote: > > So, was advertisement illegal in US between 1907 and 1921? Or not yet > invented? If there was not any car lobby then, how did public > officials come to the decision to create car infrastructure (or even > allow the circulation of cars)? Do you consider them such bright > minded and influence immune? (at least you have good reasons not to > think so, since they haven't yet paid the attention you think it is > proper for the transport mode you advocate) > > But I think you missed the point of my remark. The point is that it is > not the market that decides about the modes of transportation, but > governing officials, acting under the pressure of several lobbies. It > is not a decision created by a (free and competitive) market but a > decision about the creation of a (controlled and biased) market. Even > you expect "some public officials may actually insist on the highest > possible transportation value for the public they represent". > Countries (either developing or developed) don't "choose" ? it?s the > public officials who choose and they present to the public opinion > their choices as reflecting the general interest. The stronger lobby > wins. The lobby having more money at its disposal is stronger. The > solution that creates more profit has more money at its disposal. The > most wasteful solution creates more turnover and profit. Hence, the > most wasteful solution wins. This is also supported by empirical > evidence (that's why automobiles win ev > erywhere) > > >> >>>> Original Message From: K. Tsourlakis >>>> >>>> It seems you imply that informed consumers decide for rail or road >>>> transport prevalence. However this is a collective decision of the >>>> society >>>> mediated through politicians choices and actually shaped by lobbying >>>> (often a euphemism for corruption) and advertisement (i.e. mass >>>> brainwashing). >> >> >> This may be true in a country that is not yet developed, however in >> the US >> where cars were developed, cars displaced rail IN SPITE OF a very >> powerful >> rail lobby, and a non-existent car lobby. So, in the case of the >> first 14 >> years or so (from about 1907 to about 1921) Cars had no significant >> lobby >> power compared to the lobby power of rail; AND cars won the US market >> anyway >> biased on their relative merits and without any brainwashing needed. >> This >> also occurred in Europe, and then Japan. >> >> >>>> I have of course many historical data of how this happened in my >>>> country >>>> (as you, I suppose, can find for yours - and everybody else for >>>> his/hers), >>>> but being on this listserv I find more proper to concentrate on >>>> what is >>>> happening in India concerning this process. >> >> >> It is clear that there is a fierce lobby battle for transportation >> mode in >> developing countries. Since the global car market is now mature, and >> has >> displaced rail, they are starting to copy the sophisticated lobby >> efforts >> the rail industry has been following for 50 years or more. >> Unfortunately, >> the lobby focus is not about safety or ecology, but only about market >> share >> and doing things to generate sales. >> >> The developing countries are actually in a position of power, for >> since they >> are unencumbered by existing infrastructure, and many advances have >> been >> made since the invention of trains and cars, they could choose to >> adopt the >> best leading edge transportation technology and avoid the costly >> technology >> progression and market share transitions that developed countries >> have had >> to pay for. (China is doing this under their "National 863 Program".) >> >> >>>> Having seen these pictures from "Golden Quadrilateral Project" >>>> motorway, I >> >> >>>> was impressed of how empty it looked (as far as I know, as a rule of >>>> thumb, a motorway has to have at least an average daily traffic of >>>> 10.000 >>>> cars to justify its expenses -does this happen in stretches far >>>> from the >>>> cities?). >> >> >> Since ETT can be built for 1/4th the cost of a freeway, AND the >> operating >> cost about 1/10th the minimum daily volume to justify construction is >> also >> much less. >> >> >>>> I also wonder if feasibility studies are carried out, and, if so, >>>> what >>>> cost was assigned to the crossing pedestrians danger and delay, the >>>> pollution, noise and other externalities, whether tolls are >>>> collected (and >> >> >>>> how much) etc. For the brainwashing my questions are less - the >>>> NYtimes >>>> article document well this point. >> >> >> Such studies are always carries out in the US. The government >> conducted a >> study comparing the demand and cost prediction accuracy of road with >> rail, >> and found that railroad consultants lie much more frequently, and to >> a much >> greater degree than freeway consultants do. >> >> >> >>>> I am not sure if ETT (Evacuated Tube Transport) is a feasible >>>> solution, >>>> and I think we will never be sure until it is tried in practice. >>>> Things in real world can be quite different than in papers - >>>> consider the >>>> experience of Maglev. >> >> >> >> Wheel operation is not observed in nature, wheels for transportation >> were >> invented without natural example. Even though bird flight was readily >> observable, human flight was not manifest until thousands of years >> after >> wheels were invented. >> >> Several forms of maglev have been built and proven in the last 40 >> years. In >> my opinion, one reason that maglev experiments have always followed >> predictions made in papers is that initial maglev development had no >> natural >> analog to form the basis of the science, for magnetic levitation had >> NEVER >> been observed in nature. More than 4 types of Maglev are now well >> understood, and very predictable, and there will likely be many more >> future >> developments as predicted in current papers. >> >> ETT is not reliant on proposed or unproven forms of maglev or other >> sciences. Unlike initial maglev development, the main principals of >> ETT ARE >> observable to everyone: >> * The perpetual motion of the moon around the earth, and the earth >> around >> the sun, in the evacuated environment of space has been observed as >> long as >> recorded human history. >> * Spacecraft in orbit produce the same perpetual motion as the moon >> and >> earth do. ETT is just "space travel on earth". >> * Pipeline transportation of liquids and gasses have been proven for >> more >> than 1000 years, pneumatic (air propelled) tube transport of capsules >> has >> been proven for 150 years. The costs and practicalities are well >> known. >> * The forces of aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance of wheels are >> well >> known, and accurately predictable. >> * Vacuum technology far more advanced than required for ETT is in use >> all >> over the world for more than 100 years. >> * Several Maglev technologies are well proven. >> * Linear electric motors and generators are in use in many industries, >> including transportation. >> * Automation of transportation is well known, E.G. elevators and >> manufacturing. >> >> >>>> But I am sure that if it has any merit, companies looking after >>>> profit will make some attempts to experiment on it (even if use of >>>> "lobbying" and "advertisement" is required to promote it). >> >> >> Automobiles and aircraft did not use or focus on lobby efforts to >> brainwash >> policy makers in the early days of innovation. The advantages of >> cars and >> planes were immediately discernable to the market, and they were able >> to >> quickly displace rail by offering more transportation value (a higher >> benefit to cost ratio). >> >> ETT implementation will not need government funding or subsidy to be >> implemented, for ETT offers far more transportation value than do the >> present value leaders (cars and aircraft). >> >> We focus less than 1% of our meager recourses on lobby of government >> and on >> advertising. Our efforts are mostly focused on private >> implementation of >> ETT, and we do make information on ETT available to governments that >> are >> considering transportation infrastructure, as we believe that >> eventually >> some public officials may actually insist on the highest possible >> transportation value for the public they represent. >> >> >> Daryl Oster >> (c) 2006 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on >> earth" >> e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service >> marks >> of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal >> River >> FL 34423-1423 (352)257-1310, et3@et3.com , www.et3.com> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > ______________ > http://www.mailbox.gr ????????? ?????? ?? ???????? ??? e-mail. > http://www.superweb.gr ?????????? ??? ????????? ?????? web hosting ?? > ??????? ???????? controlpanel > http://wwww.domains.gr ?? ????? ??? ??? internet ???? ?? 10 ????. > > > ================================================================ > 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 edelman at greenidea.info Thu May 25 02:12:13 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:12:13 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Typical mixed messages on petrol in USA Message-ID: <1344.62.245.95.24.1148490733.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Hi, I only have the whole story on the last one... --- U.S. buyers may shun SUVs due to gas prices, survey finds DETROIT (Reuters) -- More than a third of U.S. consumers are considering swapping their SUVs and big cars for more fuel-efficient vehicles because of high gasoline prices, according to a survey released on Wednesday. Keywords: Shun, swapping AND DALE JEWETT COMMENTARY 5/23/2006 Automotive News Here's an idle thought while you're stuck in line Americans spend a lot of time waiting -- at restaurants, at the driver's license bureau and in our vehicles. All of this waiting can be pretty dull and, with the growing cost of fuel, somewhat expensive. The next time you're stuck waiting in your car, just shut off the engine. Keywords: Dull, waiting BUT GM to top up drivers' fuel bills GM's previous attempts to lure customers have hurt their profits Problem-hit carmaker General Motors has offered to subsidise petrol prices for drivers of its vehicles in California and Florida in order to boost sales. Full story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5011794.stm Keywords: Lure, subsidize ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Thu May 25 02:46:09 2006 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric.Britton) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:46:09 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Parking strategies Message-ID: <005201c67f59$f290ca70$6601a8c0@Home> This one, forwarded to us by our friend Dave Brooks from Portland (father of the father of Flexcar). Be patient with the video which may take a bit of time to load: http://www.rebargroup.org/projects/parking/index.html# I'm serious. I'd like to see a lot of these. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060524/759a37a8/attachment.html From roadnotes at freenet.de Fri May 26 16:53:06 2006 From: roadnotes at freenet.de (Robert Bartlett) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 09:53:06 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Document on Motocarros Message-ID: <4476B3E2.9000806@freenet.de> I have just worked with a group of Peruvian engineers to produce a short bilingual / multimedia document on motocarros in Peru - its about 2.7 MB. If anyone is interested in a (free) copy please then they are invited to download it from the following link. http://www.caminosrurales.com/papers/6_004_12p.pdf I would be happy to discuss the background and purpose and would welcome feedback. Robert Bartlett roadnotes@freenet.de From cesteves at wmata.com Sat May 27 05:49:37 2006 From: cesteves at wmata.com (Christina Esteves) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:49:37 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Job Posting Message-ID: Please post the following job posting: WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY (WMATA) EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Applications are now being accepted in the Office of Human Resource Management and Planning for the position listed below. Please submit an application/resume to the Office of Human Resource Management and Planning, 600 5th Street, NW, Room 7F, Washington, DC 20001 or fax to 202-962-1180. Please include position title and posting number on your application/resume. APPLICATIONS MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING NO LATER THAN 5:00 PM ON THE CLOSING DATE OF THE POSITION. POSITION: Riders' Advisory Council (RAC) Staff Coordinator/ 2170 FLSA: EXEMPT SALARY RANGE: $45,014 - $67,522 POSTING NUMBER: 06-0415-CE OPENING DATE: MAY 18, 2006 CLOSING DATE: JUNE 2, 2006 JOB DESCRIPTION: The incumbent performs administrative and issue-oriented work of considerable difficulty and complexity, often involving confidential or sensitive information. This position involves the business coordination and daily operational support of the Riders' Advisory Council, which requires frequent interaction with senior governmental officials and executives both within and outside of the Authority. The RAC Staff Coordinator assists in preparing Council Agendas and Council Meeting Minutes. The incumbent must possess a good understanding of and a familiarity with the authority's programs and policies. The RAC Staff Coordinator must be able to perform duties within established guidelines using discretion and under minimal direction and be able to exercise sound, independent judgment. QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS: To be considered for the position, you must meet minimum qualifications. It is, therefore, very important for you to include on your application any education/experience you have had that is described in the minimum qualifications. Incomplete information may delay the assessment process. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Graduation from and accredited college or university with a Bachelor's degree in Business Administration, Public Administration or a related field. A minimum of six (6) years progressively responsible research, analytical and administrative experience dealing with highly visible and politically sensitive issues and responding to employees at all levels. Or, an equivalent combination of post high school education and a minimum of eight (8) years progressively responsible research, analytical and administrative experience dealing with highly visible and politically sensitive issues and responding to employees at all levels EVALUATION CRITERIA MAY INCLUDE ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: 1) Education, training and experience 2) Personal interview 3) Medical examination which may include alcohol and drug testing 4) Performance and attendance record 5) Background check to include criminal, education, work and driver's record THE WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER, AND ENCOURAGES APPLICATIONS FROM MINORITIES, FEMALES AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES. If you require additional information, please reply to this e-mail. Thank you in advance. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 060415.wpd Type: application/x-wordperfect6 Size: 20830 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060526/c1207fbd/060415.bin From edelman at greenidea.info Sun May 28 04:49:43 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 21:49:43 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Ecocity Conference in Bangalore in August Message-ID: <2478.62.245.95.24.1148759383.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> August 5-8, The 6th International Ecocity Conference, Bangalore, India. Previous conferences were held in Berkeley CA, Australia, Senegal, Brazil and China. This conference will focus on ecocity applications for Bangalore and other cities, towns and villages in India. Side trip to Auroville after the conference. For more information, go to Ecocity Builders' website: http://www.ecocitybuilders.org. ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 30 06:14:39 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 23:14:39 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] Call for papers for BRT conference in Bogota Message-ID: <1568.62.245.95.24.1148937279.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> UITP 5th Intl Bus Conference Bus Systems without Limits Feb 2007 Deadline for proposals: 15 June 2006! http://www.uitp.com/Events/2007/bogota/en/index.cfm ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From edelman at greenidea.info Tue May 30 18:51:28 2006 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 11:51:28 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [sustran] [Fwd: Sources of Sustainable Profits] Message-ID: <1103.62.245.95.24.1148982688.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> ----------------------------- P?vodn? zpr?va ----------------------------- P?edm?t: Sources of Sustainable Profits Od: "Matthew.Probyn@greenpowerconferences.com" Datum: 30 Kv?ten 2006, 9:02 Komu: "List Member" -------------------------------------------------------------------------- A One Stop Shop for the Asian Sustainable Finance Industry 3 Leading Conferences - 1 Location Carbon Markets Asia 13-14 June Cleantech Investment Forum 14 June Renewable Energy Finance Asia 15-16 June Excelsior Hotel, Hong Kong http//:www.greenpowerconferences.com 120+ International Industry Experts Already Confirmed to Meet in Hong Kong, including: 3 Tier Environmental Forecasting 3i ABN AMRO Agrinergy Apax Applied Energy Solutions Asia Carbon International Asia Network Services Asian Development Bank ASrIA Baker & McKenzie Biox BNP Paribas Bronzeoak Business Environment Council Byun & Co. CaFiS -- carbon finance solutions CAMCO International Chadbourne & Parke LLP China Capital Ventures LLC China Enterprise News China Environment Fund Clean Energy Development Co Cleantech Capital Group Cleantech Venture Partners Climate Change Capital CLP Power Asia CO2 Australia Limited Deutsche Bank Development Bank of Japan E + Co ECI Telecom EcoSecurities Emissions Daily ERI European Carbon Fund Farsighted Group FE Clean Energy Group GE Commercial Finance GE Energy Global Forestry Services Malaysia Greenbank Capital ICF Consulting Independent Power Producers Forum International Emissions Trading Association IXIS Corporate & Investment Bank Japan Carbon Finance Japan Bank for International Cooperation J-Power (EPDC) KfW Bankengruppe Korea Energy Management Corporation (KEMCO) Mallesons Stephen Jacques Marsh MBA Polymers Merritt Partners MGM International National Development and Reform Commission New Energy Finance NSW Greenhouse Gas Office OPIC Philippine BioSciences Point Carbon PROPARCO Qatar Fuel Additives Company REEEP RNK Capital Roaring 40s Shell Solar Standard Chartered Bank Starfish Ventures The World Bank Tradition Financial Services Triodos Bank Triodos International Fund Management United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Vestas China Watson, Farley & Williams LLP West LB Capital Markets YesBank _______________________________________________________________________ Powered by Microsoft Small Business To unsubscribe follow the link: http://lb.bcentral.com/ex/sp?c=46314&s=D309D85261E5191A&m=122 ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@greenidea.info http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060530/2fa3814a/untitled-2.html