[sustran] Re: "India is on the road to a transport revolution"

[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.
 
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 at cbuchanan.co.uk <mailto:alan.howes at 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 at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk at list.jca.apc.
org] On Behalf Of Todd Alexander Litman
Sent: 04 May 2006 01:59
To: et3 at 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 at et3.com , www.et3.com
	
	
	> -----Original Message-----
	> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com at list.jca.apc.org
	> [ mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com at list.jca.apc.org
<mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com at 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 at 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