[sustran] Public sector specifying technology

[Eric Britton]

Dear Friends,

Oh dear. In the wake of this enthusiastic exchange of best intentioned
views on what buses should best run on in London or indeed anywhere on
this benighted planet, I offer the following impolite commentary for
those views and counter-comments. 

Any public sector agency specifying a technology to do a given job?
Ethanol, electric, hybrid, banana-driven or what have you? 

This is a painful and one would hoe by now unnecessary business. Every
time I run into this sort of thing I have to shake my head and wonder
what if anything we have learned from our cumulative past experience of
the last thirty years of this kind of thing. 

Public authorities know demonstrably and irrevocably N O T H I N G about
technology or how to put a viable technology package together for
operation in, say, a dense urban environment (or just about any other
while we are at it.)

So if you want a "clean" public vehicle for this or that use, you should
have a close look at the state of the art and the specific performance
parameters which reflect the best thing that you can bring aboard at
affordable cost to the taxpayer (hey, that's ME!!) and at the same time
be reliable and affordable in terms of maintenance and operation for the
poor guys who have to run the damn thing. 

There are, I can observe from experience, only four reasons for
specifying the technology (including some infelicitous combination of
all four):

1.	Because you are an ideologue and this fits in with your articles
of faith.

2.	Because you are ignorant of past experience.

3.	Because you are lazy and looking for the media op of the moment
(at no matter what longer term cost).

4.	Because you are influenced by the interested economic players.

It's that simple!!!  It don't wash! (Do I have any friends left here?) 

Eric Britton

*	*	*

FROM: ian.wingrove at london.gov.uk 
DATE: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:15:41 -0000 
SUBJECT: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] Congestion charging and polluter pays 

Thanks again. 

Mayor's office went to visit Stockholm a few months ago and 
very interested. I bumped into a Swedish Green last weekend 
and chatted about this. I will be pressing them on using 
sewage as well. 

Cheers 

IW 

-----Original Message-----
From: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
[mailto:NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Bruun
Sent: 17 November 2006 19:27
To: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] Congestion charging and polluter pays
Ian
 
You are probably already aware, but Stockholm has been making ethanol
for central city buses from
municipal waste for years. If you don't have a contact there, I can
probably find one for you.
 
Thanks for taking the time to explain London's program.
 
Eric

-----Original Message----- 
From: Ian Wingrove 
Sent: Nov 17, 2006 5:33 AM 
To: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com 
Subject: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] Congestion charging and polluter pays 


Eric
You are of course right that having a 100% zero emission vehicles is not
the solution to all problems, even if it solves air pollution problems
at the point of use - air quality still being a major problem in London.
Again, it is the context of doing this within a framework of other
successful policies. For example, zero emissions will do nothing to stop
road deaths. Since 2000 when the GLA was established, London's road
casualty rate has fallen faster than any other urban centre in the UK
and we have tougher targets for casualty reduction than anywhere else in
the UK. My boss has been the Mayor's Road Safety Ambassador during this
time and has argued for higher investment in the things we know work and
research into the next generation of ideas. The London road safety
budget has more than doubled and we are piloting technological solutions
such as speed limiters. 
We have just started pushing forward on decentralised energy and local
renewables in London. I can't claim any success as it is early days and
we are so far behind other European cities. But the aim surely is to
have an integrated system, where people produce enough energy locally to
meet many of their energy needs - including charging up vehicles. For
example, a recent report for the Mayor showed that they could power the
entire bus fleet from energy produced from waste.
Cheers
IW
-----Original Message-----
From: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
[mailto:NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Bruun
Sent: 16 November 2006 19:52
To: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] Congestion charging and polluter pays
Ian
 
But there is still no way that giving low emissions cars free entry can
possibly reduce congestion and
the demand for parking. At best traffic will stay the same, at worst it
increase the traffic. 
 
I also think that "zero" emissions private autos is a misguided goal.
Unless a country is
100 percent without fossil fuels for generating electricity, even
electric cars still use petroleum or coal 
(or maybe even nuclear power) to charge their batteries. Furthermore,
batteries are themselves an eco-problem.
 
If your current fuel prices aren't already enough to deter SUV use, then
UK's problem is that a lot of people
are so darned rich that price doesn't matter to them. These are the same
people who will no doubt be the first
to be buying hybrids or zero emission vehicles, since access is
important and price is not. They will also no doubt
continue to use their SUVs or luxury cars for their remaining trips.
 
Finally, I want to point out the experience from the Virginia burb's of
Wash DC and in California. Hybrids
were allowed to use the HOV lanes and they wrecked the transit services
that operate on them due to 
high congestion. End result - lots of cars sales (a windfall to auto
manufacturers) an increase in public transport operating costs, and a 
reduction in public transport use.
 
Eric Bruun

-----Original Message----- 
From: Ian Wingrove 
Sent: Nov 16, 2006 5:40 AM 
To: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com 
Subject: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] Congestion charging and polluter pays 


We are certainly practical greens who want to see people shift from
badly polluting vehicles to less polluting vehicles as a result of this
relatively short term measure. We are keen to help create a market for
zero emission vehicles and price diffentials have been very successful
in doing this. If we can stop the UK from adopting the SUV culture of
the US, then that will be a useful achievement.
As for second cars - in all of inner London and much of outer London,
they would have to pay residents parking charges, on top of all the
other car owning charges. 
Nor is this CC policy a one off. All of the London initiatives have to
be seen within the context of increased public transport provision, a
growing momentum behind using 'soft measures' to reduce the demand for
travel and a tightening up of car parking standards in the planning
policy (by no means perfect). Despite London's rapidly growing
population, we have still managed a slight decrease in traffic since
2000 across the whole of the city - at a time when it has grown by 5% in
the rest of the country.
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
[mailto:NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Bruun
Sent: 15 November 2006 20:16
To: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Congestion charging and polluter pays
I think it is typical that "environmental" groups would advocate zero
charge for less
polluting vehicles. I oppose it. The congestion charge isn't just about
emissions, it
is about space and energy consumption as well. We can expect to see the
wealthy
buy additional cars (maybe not even selling their old ones) and increase
in traffic.
 
Eric Bruun

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20061120/3599f335/attachment.html