From peebeebarter at gmail.com Sun Dec 2 16:06:40 2007 From: peebeebarter at gmail.com (Paul Barter) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 15:06:40 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Fwd: Event: Getting the climate right for transport Message-ID: <6fc1c1110712012306w2d93600dh8ca5eb327655d2b4@mail.gmail.com> Trying to forward this message which the list blocked for some reason. Paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Carlosfelipe Pardo To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:05:30 -0500 Subject: Event: Getting the climate right for transport Transport side event at COP 13, Bali Indonesia Organized by TRL/GTZ, UITP, UIC, ITPS The German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) will host a side event titled "Getting the climate right for transport" at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 13) in Bali. The event will be in cooperation with the Transport Research Laboratory (UK), UITP, UIC and Institution for Transport Policy Studies (Japan). The event will discuss future pathways to a more sustainable transport system along with options for decision-makers to integrate climate change mitigation measures into the transport sector. The event will take place on 7th and 8th December, 2007 from 1 to 3 pm in the Tidal Room at the Grand Hyatt Hotel. The event will combine practical as well as methodological approaches with actual experience on sustainable transportation. The draft program is on our SUTP website at www.sutp.org . At this event Mr. Manfred Breithaupt (GTZ) and Mr. Holger Dalkmann (TRL) will present the new sourcebook module titled "Transport and Climate Change", which is the latest publication in the GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport series, and discuss available instruments to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the transport sector. The module summarises the challenges that climate change mitigation has to face in the transport sector and presents the major options and instruments available to deal with them. The module also explains the various sustainable transport policy and planning options and sketches out their potential for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. With the new module, the GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Sourcebook now has 26 modules focussing on various issues of transportation. All the modules are available to download from the SUTP websites at no cost ( http://www.sutp.org and http://www.sutp.cn for Chinese users). -- Carlosfelipe Pardo Coordinador de Proyecto- Project Coordinator GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC) Cl 93A # 14-17 of 708 Bogot? D.C., Colombia Tel/fax: +57 (1) 236 2309 Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662 carlos.pardo@sutp.org www.sutp.org -- Carlosfelipe Pardo Coordinador de Proyecto- Project Coordinator GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC) Cl 93A # 14-17 of 708 Bogot? D.C., Colombia Tel/fax: +57 (1) 236 2309 Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662 carlos.pardo@sutp.org www.sutp.org From operations at velomondial.net Mon Dec 3 03:46:42 2007 From: operations at velomondial.net (Pascal van den Noort) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 19:46:42 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Global Knowledge for Local Sustainability In-Reply-To: <4750156B.6090301@gmail.com> References: <4750156B.6090301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <141401c83513$b9ebfac0$9a00000a@MPBV> YOU ARE CORDIALLY INVITED TO ATTEND THE LAUNCH OF SUSTA-INFO Global Knowledge for Local Sustainability Parallel event to the United Nations Climate Change Conference, Bali Indonesia Susta-Info is an initiative that supports local authorities in attaining sustainable development, by establishing a portal and web based database, making knowledge on local sustainable development accessible to a large group of targeted users. Susta-Info provides validated access to European Commission funded projects on urban management, sustainable land use, water treatment and management, and urban mobility. Additionally, it provides access to urban research projects supported by UN-HABITAT and case studies from the UN-HABITAT best practices database. When: Tuesday December 11, 2007 8:30 - 9:30 Susta-Info Launch Breakfast Host: Susta-Info Consortium; Venue: Grand Hyatt Bali Hotel - Courtyard . Breakfast and Official launch on behalf of European Commission and UN-HABITAT . EU and UN-HABITAT representatives will be present 11:30 - 12:30 Added Value of Susta-Info Host: Susta-Info Consortium; Venue: Grand Hyatt Bali Hotel - Room Singaraja I . Opening . The relevance of research for sustainable development of cities: Mrs. Marta Moreno Abat, EC . The usefulness for Susta-Info in relation to Millennium Development Goals/Climate change/ Local Agenda 21 . The need for easily accessible knowledge. Video Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium . The added value of Susta-info tool for local governments; Ewa Ciuk, ICLEI, Toronto, Canada . Susta-Info: validation, abstracts, Collexis search; Demonstration of the system itself Vanessa Foo, GHK Consulting, London, England . The Future of Susta-Info. Discussion on the future of Susta-info with Mrs. Marta Moreno Abat, EC Mr. Marco Keiner, UN-HABITAT and others. Moderated by Paul van Beek, Goudappel Coffeng, The Hague, The Netherlands . Closing 12:30 - 13:00 How to use Susta-Info Host: Susta-Info Consortium; Venue: Grand Hyatt Bali HotelSingaraja I . Hands on demonstration of the Susta-Info system by Vanessa Foo, GHK Consulting, London, England www.susta-info.net (accessible from December 11, 2007) From operations at velomondial.net Mon Dec 3 03:47:47 2007 From: operations at velomondial.net (Pascal van den Noort) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 19:47:47 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Global Knowledge for Local Sustainability In-Reply-To: <20071129030119.51B012DD6E@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> References: <20071129030119.51B012DD6E@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: <141f01c83513$eee07f80$9a00000a@MPBV> YOU ARE CORDIALLY INVITED TO ATTEND THE LAUNCH OF SUSTA-INFO Global Knowledge for Local Sustainability Parallel event to the United Nations Climate Change Conference, Bali Indonesia Susta-Info is an initiative that supports local authorities in attaining sustainable development, by establishing a portal and web based database, making knowledge on local sustainable development accessible to a large group of targeted users. Susta-Info provides validated access to European Commission funded projects on urban management, sustainable land use, water treatment and management, and urban mobility. Additionally, it provides access to urban research projects supported by UN-HABITAT and case studies from the UN-HABITAT best practices database. When: Tuesday December 11, 2007 8:30 - 9:30 Susta-Info Launch Breakfast Host: Susta-Info Consortium; Venue: Grand Hyatt Bali Hotel - Courtyard . Breakfast and Official launch on behalf of European Commission and UN-HABITAT . EU and UN-HABITAT representatives will be present 11:30 - 12:30 Added Value of Susta-Info Host: Susta-Info Consortium; Venue: Grand Hyatt Bali Hotel - Room Singaraja I . Opening . The relevance of research for sustainable development of cities: Mrs. Marta Moreno Abat, EC . The usefulness for Susta-Info in relation to Millennium Development Goals/Climate change/ Local Agenda 21 . The need for easily accessible knowledge. Video Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium . The added value of Susta-info tool for local governments; Ewa Ciuk, ICLEI, Toronto, Canada . Susta-Info: validation, abstracts, Collexis search; Demonstration of the system itself Vanessa Foo, GHK Consulting, London, England . The Future of Susta-Info. Discussion on the future of Susta-info with Mrs. Marta Moreno Abat, EC Mr. Marco Keiner, UN-HABITAT and others. Moderated by Paul van Beek, Goudappel Coffeng, The Hague, The Netherlands . Closing 12:30 - 13:00 How to use Susta-Info Host: Susta-Info Consortium; Venue: Grand Hyatt Bali HotelSingaraja I . Hands on demonstration of the Susta-Info system by Vanessa Foo, GHK Consulting, London, England www.susta-info.net (accessible from December 11, 2007) From itdpasia at comcast.net Mon Dec 3 19:13:00 2007 From: itdpasia at comcast.net (John Ernst) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 03:13:00 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? Message-ID: <20071202181335.859F92DB9C@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> If I can pick up this now dated thread on the Jakarta busway (with apologies, I was on vacation)... I agree with the assessment that the Jakarta busway is in serious trouble. It is also true that former Governor Sutiyoso forced the busway through. (I still complement him for it because my guess is that going slow would have meant not going at all.) I believe Jakarta holds the record as the shortest design and build time of any full BRT in the world. (I would welcome hearing of other systems that might be contenders.) Jakarta officially started planning in May of 2003. By early 2008 it will have about 200km of corridors, or an average of 40km per year from conception to operation. By 'full BRT', I basically mean segregated lanes, raised platforms and pre-board fare collection, but we could niggle on mixed traffic sections of segregated corridors, etc. (Keep in mind that I am definitely talking about quantity here, not quality.) One of the main consequences of Sutiyoso's rapid implementation is that there was little legal work completed. There is no provision in law or regulation for the busway itself, it is actually a manipulation of normal bus route licenses. The appropriation of road space for the busway is also a gray area. My understanding is that because the busway does not have clear legal basis, the police consider it up to their discretion whether or not they enforce the corridors. This year, one of the new corridors under construction is in a very wealthy area. So, there have been a lot of complaints about losing road space for cars. A lot of this is misunderstanding -- in that area the city will widen the road to preserve the same number of mixed traffic lanes, although narrower ones. In the meantime, the police have reacted by opening more and more sections of bus lanes to mixed traffic. ITDP is one group working to keep BRT on course in Jakarta. We have this year begun working more with the police (city police in Indonesia are not under city government, but under a national police agency). For example, we took a key member of the police to Bogota for the transit fair last month. I agree fully with Carlos Pardo's comments (Nov 23) about the difficulty of convincing the public about BRT lanes. Overall, this is an interesting problem in implementing BRT systems: the lanes often look empty. When we see a photo of a BRT, it always has a bus or two in the lane, but between buses you see only 2-5 minutes of empty lane -- at least in closed systems without overlapping routes. On the other hand, if the mixed traffic lanes are not congested, there is no reason to build segregated BRT lanes. In a city like Jakarta, where for 20 years streets have been generally filled curb-to-curb, it is very hard to accept that a lane that looks empty could be carrying 10 or 20 times as many passengers as the ones that look chock-full. You can imagine the pressure on the police officer on the street. A lot needs to be done to improve the capacity and performance of the Jakarta busway. Hopefully that will soon include returning to full enforcement of all busway corridors. While several scenarios are possible, it's unlikely to fully happen until the 3 corridors now under construction start operating at full service. If history is any guide, that could be around next June. I hope this information is useful. Sorry to be slow to pitch in. Best, John At 11:09 PM 11/21/2007, you wrote: >Evidence on the ground in Jakarta suggest that there is indeed cause for >serious concern over the continued viability of Bus Rapid Transit in >Jakarta. The history of excellent measures being scrapped due to problems of >implementation is crowded enough to give one pause. > >The whole endeavor was basically forced through on the force of personality >by Governor Sutiyoso loosely based on Transmilenio, Bogota. His gamble >seemed a good one at the time: We can endure the hardship of construction >and the initial decrease in the flow of traffic confident that in the >medium-term, more people will take to the buses, even those with cars, and >overall mobility as quantified and perceived will increase. The problem is >that even Jakartans that one would expect to support the busway are now >incensed at the dramatically worsening of conditions. They eagerly await >what they perceive as the all but inevitable rolling back of the program and >a return to the ever expanding asphalt approach to mobility. > >I am not aware of serious endeavors towards course correction but I will >inquire a bit. > >Robert Cowherd, PhD, Associate Professor of Architecture >Wentworth Institute of Technology 550 Huntington Ave. Boston, MA 02115 USA >cowherdr@wit.edu; +1 617 989-4453 > > >On 11/21/07 8:43 AM, "Walter Hook" wrote: > > > John ernst tells me that several of the corridors have been open for some > > time now during the construction, but that it is temporary. > > > > 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 Paul Barter > > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 1:49 AM > > To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport > > Subject: [sustran] Jakarta busway twists and turns? > > > > The Jakarta busways appear to be facing some curious decisions according > > to this Jakarta Post article below. > > > > See near the end where it says: > > "On Nov. 5 the administration announced motorists would be permitted to > > use certain sections of other busway corridors in the city for a month. > > The decision was made to ease traffic congestion caused by the ongoing > > construction of the three new corridors." > > > > This means mixed traffic is being allowed into operational busways? > > Can anyone fill in the background on what is going on in Jakarta? Should > > we be worried about the future of BRT there or is this a minor hiccup? > > > > Paul > > ------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - John Ernst - Senior Program Director ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy 127 W 26th St. Suite 1002, New York, NY 10001 Tel +1 (212) 629-8001 Direct Tel +1 (347) 694-4771 Direct Fax +1 (801) 365-5914 Skype: john.ernst Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide Visit http://www.itdp.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From litman at vtpi.org Tue Dec 4 05:42:19 2007 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 12:42:19 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Fwd: Event: Getting the climate right for transport In-Reply-To: <6fc1c1110712012306w2d93600dh8ca5eb327655d2b4@mail.gmail.co m> References: <6fc1c1110712012306w2d93600dh8ca5eb327655d2b4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20071203123020.03a7e830@mail.islandnet.com> Last week I attended the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Energy Analysis Forum in Golden, Colorado (http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/news.html ), where leading North American energy analysts shared the latest thinking concerning greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies and legislation, much of which involves emission cap and trade programs (http://www.rff.org/rff/News/Releases/2007Releases/loader.cfm?url=/commonspot/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=31222 ). Similarly, a recent report by McKinsey, "Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much At What Cost" (http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/greenhousegas.asp ) estimates the economic costs of achieving emission reduction targets. Virtually all these analyses are biased against mobility management (various strategies that increase transport system efficiency by improving mobility options, encouraging use of more efficient modes, and reducing the need to travel), for the following reasons: * Co-benefits are ignored. Current analysis gives virtually no consideration to benefits such as reduced traffic congestion, road and parking cost savings, consumer savings, reduced traffic risk, improved mobility for non-drivers, and improved public health, although these benefits are often larger in total value than emission reduction benefits (see http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and www.ap-net.org/docs/16th_seminar/huizenga_caiasia_special.pdf ). * Current analysis generally ignores the additional external costs that result when increased vehicle fuel efficiency and subsidized alternative fuels stimulates additional vehicle travel, called a "rebound effect" (see http://www.vtpi.org/cafe.pdf and http://www.rff.org/documents/RFF-DP-04-53.pdf ). * Mobility management emission reductions are considered difficult to predict. Although case studies and models are available for many of these strategies (see for example, case studies in http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and the TRIMMS Model at http://www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs77704.htm ), such models are not widely available or designed for energy planning. * Mobility management programs are considered difficult to implement. Such programs often involve multiple stakeholders, such as regional and local governments, employers and developers, and various special interest groups. Even PAYD, a relatively simple strategy, requires cooperation of insurance regulators, insurance companies, and various special interest groups. As a result, they tend to seem difficult and risky compared with other emission reduction strategies that only require changes to utility operations, fuel production or vehicle designs. * Analysis often assume that current transport patterns are economically optimal and any reduction in vehicle travel harms consumers and the economy. This ignores various market distortions that stimulate motor vehicle travel, and the benefits to consumers and the economy of many mobility management strategies (www.vtpi.org/distortions_BPJ.pdf ). With improved travel options and efficient incentives travel reductions reflect low-value vehicle-miles that consumers willingly forego in exchange for cost savings. In a more optimal market, with efficient road, parking and vehicle insurance pricing, and more optimal planning practices, motorists would drive significantly less and be better off overall (http://www.vtpi.org/sotpm.pdf ). Described differently, there are two general approaches to reducing transportation emissions: reduce emission rates per vehicle-kilometer or reduce total vehicle-travel. The first generally seems easier, because it simply requires changing fuels or vehicle design, but, if done correctly, the second provides far more total benefits. As a result, significant emission reductions can be achieved with negative costs (they provide net economic benefits). Due to these factors, currently proposed emission reduction programs will not implement mobility management as much as optimal and so will fail to achieve other important benefits such as congestion reductions, crash reductions, consumer savings and equity objectives (http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ). A truly sustainable transportation system requires more than simply reducing consumption of fossil fuels, it requires creating a more efficient transportation system. It will be up to those of us who understand the wider value of mobility management to educate decision makers about their full benefits and overcome barriers, so they can be implemented as much as justified. Please let me know if you have comments or questions. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 11:06 PM 12/1/2007, Paul Barter wrote: >Trying to forward this message which the list blocked for some reason. >Paul > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >From: Carlosfelipe Pardo >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:05:30 -0500 >Subject: Event: Getting the climate right for transport > Transport side event at COP 13, Bali Indonesia >Organized by TRL/GTZ, UITP, UIC, ITPS > >The German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) will host a side event titled "Getting >the climate right for transport" at the United Nations Climate Change >Conference (COP 13) in Bali. The event will be in cooperation with the >Transport Research Laboratory (UK), UITP, UIC and Institution for Transport >Policy Studies (Japan). > >The event will discuss future pathways to a more sustainable transport >system along with options for decision-makers to integrate climate change >mitigation measures into the transport sector. > >The event will take place on 7th and 8th December, 2007 from 1 to 3 pm in >the Tidal Room at the Grand Hyatt Hotel. > >The event will combine practical as well as methodological approaches with >actual experience on sustainable transportation. The draft program is on our >SUTP website at www.sutp.org . > >At this event Mr. Manfred Breithaupt (GTZ) and Mr. Holger Dalkmann (TRL) >will present the new sourcebook module titled "Transport and Climate >Change", which is the latest publication in the GTZ Sustainable Urban >Transport series, and discuss available instruments to reduce carbon dioxide >emissions in the transport sector. > >The module summarises the challenges that climate change mitigation has to >face in the transport sector and presents the major options and instruments >available to deal with them. The module also explains the various >sustainable transport policy and planning options and sketches out their >potential for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. >With the new module, the GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Sourcebook now has >26 modules focussing on various issues of transportation. All the modules >are available to download from the SUTP websites at no cost ( >http://www.sutp.org and http://www.sutp.cn for Chinese users). > >-- >Carlosfelipe Pardo >Coordinador de Proyecto- Project Coordinator >GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC) >Cl 93A # 14-17 of 708 >Bogot? D.C., Colombia >Tel/fax: +57 (1) 236 2309 Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662 >carlos.pardo@sutp.org www.sutp.org >-------------------------------------------------------- >IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > >Please go to >http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >to join the real sustran-discuss and get full >membership rights. The yahoogroups version is >only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to >the real sustran-discuss (even if the >yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). >Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > >================================================================ >SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion >of people-centred, equitable and sustainable >transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). 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 cherry at utk.edu Wed Dec 5 06:56:05 2007 From: cherry at utk.edu (Chris Cherry) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 16:56:05 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? In-Reply-To: <20071204030123.C72F52D9F3@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> References: <20071204030123.C72F52D9F3@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: <000001c836c0$7870fab0$6952f010$@edu> There has been some research coming out of the transportation engineering (Michael Cassidy and Carlos Daganzo) group looking at trying to maximize the use of these "empty" BRT lanes (or any limited access lane for that matter). Essentially, if planned right, one could allow vehicles to enter the restricted lane only at bottlenecks in the system and thus vastly increase the throughput of cars with minimal disruption to buses. They have been looking at this from the context of HOV lanes in the USA, but have recently been trying to apply the theory to busways in China. This would ultimately improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce congestion and potentially allow the drivers to perceive the BRT system in a better light. Of course there are a lot of policy issues around letting cars in some strategic areas of the BRT system and convincing them that it is not beneficial to let them in the entire system. Here are a couple of paper out of the UC-Berkeley Volvo Center http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2007/VWP/UCB-ITS-VWP-2007-1.pdf http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/ucb/2005/vwp/ucb-its-vwp-2005-2.pdf Chris Cherry Assistant Professor Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Tennessee-Knoxville 223 Perkins Hall Knoxville, TN 37996-2010 phone: 865-974-7710 mobile: 865-684-8106 fax: 865-974-2669 http://web.utk.edu/~cherry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 03:13:00 -0700 From: John Ernst Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? To: Message-ID: <20071202181335.859F92DB9C@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed If I can pick up this now dated thread on the Jakarta busway (with apologies, I was on vacation)... I agree with the assessment that the Jakarta busway is in serious trouble. It is also true that former Governor Sutiyoso forced the busway through. (I still complement him for it because my guess is that going slow would have meant not going at all.) I believe Jakarta holds the record as the shortest design and build time of any full BRT in the world. (I would welcome hearing of other systems that might be contenders.) Jakarta officially started planning in May of 2003. By early 2008 it will have about 200km of corridors, or an average of 40km per year from conception to operation. By 'full BRT', I basically mean segregated lanes, raised platforms and pre-board fare collection, but we could niggle on mixed traffic sections of segregated corridors, etc. (Keep in mind that I am definitely talking about quantity here, not quality.) One of the main consequences of Sutiyoso's rapid implementation is that there was little legal work completed. There is no provision in law or regulation for the busway itself, it is actually a manipulation of normal bus route licenses. The appropriation of road space for the busway is also a gray area. My understanding is that because the busway does not have clear legal basis, the police consider it up to their discretion whether or not they enforce the corridors. This year, one of the new corridors under construction is in a very wealthy area. So, there have been a lot of complaints about losing road space for cars. A lot of this is misunderstanding -- in that area the city will widen the road to preserve the same number of mixed traffic lanes, although narrower ones. In the meantime, the police have reacted by opening more and more sections of bus lanes to mixed traffic. ITDP is one group working to keep BRT on course in Jakarta. We have this year begun working more with the police (city police in Indonesia are not under city government, but under a national police agency). For example, we took a key member of the police to Bogota for the transit fair last month. I agree fully with Carlos Pardo's comments (Nov 23) about the difficulty of convincing the public about BRT lanes. Overall, this is an interesting problem in implementing BRT systems: the lanes often look empty. When we see a photo of a BRT, it always has a bus or two in the lane, but between buses you see only 2-5 minutes of empty lane -- at least in closed systems without overlapping routes. On the other hand, if the mixed traffic lanes are not congested, there is no reason to build segregated BRT lanes. In a city like Jakarta, where for 20 years streets have been generally filled curb-to-curb, it is very hard to accept that a lane that looks empty could be carrying 10 or 20 times as many passengers as the ones that look chock-full. You can imagine the pressure on the police officer on the street. A lot needs to be done to improve the capacity and performance of the Jakarta busway. Hopefully that will soon include returning to full enforcement of all busway corridors. While several scenarios are possible, it's unlikely to fully happen until the 3 corridors now under construction start operating at full service. If history is any guide, that could be around next June. I hope this information is useful. Sorry to be slow to pitch in. Best, John At 11:09 PM 11/21/2007, you wrote: >Evidence on the ground in Jakarta suggest that there is indeed cause for >serious concern over the continued viability of Bus Rapid Transit in >Jakarta. The history of excellent measures being scrapped due to problems of >implementation is crowded enough to give one pause. > >The whole endeavor was basically forced through on the force of personality >by Governor Sutiyoso loosely based on Transmilenio, Bogota. His gamble >seemed a good one at the time: We can endure the hardship of construction >and the initial decrease in the flow of traffic confident that in the >medium-term, more people will take to the buses, even those with cars, and >overall mobility as quantified and perceived will increase. The problem is >that even Jakartans that one would expect to support the busway are now >incensed at the dramatically worsening of conditions. They eagerly await >what they perceive as the all but inevitable rolling back of the program and >a return to the ever expanding asphalt approach to mobility. > >I am not aware of serious endeavors towards course correction but I will >inquire a bit. > >Robert Cowherd, PhD, Associate Professor of Architecture >Wentworth Institute of Technology 550 Huntington Ave. Boston, MA 02115 USA >cowherdr@wit.edu; +1 617 989-4453 > > >On 11/21/07 8:43 AM, "Walter Hook" wrote: > > > John ernst tells me that several of the corridors have been open for some > > time now during the construction, but that it is temporary. > > > > 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 Paul Barter > > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 1:49 AM > > To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport > > Subject: [sustran] Jakarta busway twists and turns? > > > > The Jakarta busways appear to be facing some curious decisions according > > to this Jakarta Post article below. > > > > See near the end where it says: > > "On Nov. 5 the administration announced motorists would be permitted to > > use certain sections of other busway corridors in the city for a month. > > The decision was made to ease traffic congestion caused by the ongoing > > construction of the three new corridors." > > > > This means mixed traffic is being allowed into operational busways? > > Can anyone fill in the background on what is going on in Jakarta? Should > > we be worried about the future of BRT there or is this a minor hiccup? > > > > Paul > > ------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - John Ernst - Senior Program Director ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy 127 W 26th St. Suite 1002, New York, NY 10001 Tel +1 (212) 629-8001 Direct Tel +1 (347) 694-4771 Direct Fax +1 (801) 365-5914 Skype: john.ernst Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide Visit http://www.itdp.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 12:42:19 -0800 From: Todd Alexander Litman Subject: [sustran] Re: Fwd: Event: Getting the climate right for transport To: "Paul Barter" , sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20071203123020.03a7e830@mail.islandnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Last week I attended the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Energy Analysis Forum in Golden, Colorado (http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/news.html ), where leading North American energy analysts shared the latest thinking concerning greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies and legislation, much of which involves emission cap and trade programs (http://www.rff.org/rff/News/Releases/2007Releases/loader.cfm?url=/commonspo t/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=31222 ). Similarly, a recent report by McKinsey, "Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much At What Cost" (http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/greenhousegas.asp ) estimates the economic costs of achieving emission reduction targets. Virtually all these analyses are biased against mobility management (various strategies that increase transport system efficiency by improving mobility options, encouraging use of more efficient modes, and reducing the need to travel), for the following reasons: * Co-benefits are ignored. Current analysis gives virtually no consideration to benefits such as reduced traffic congestion, road and parking cost savings, consumer savings, reduced traffic risk, improved mobility for non-drivers, and improved public health, although these benefits are often larger in total value than emission reduction benefits (see http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and www.ap-net.org/docs/16th_seminar/huizenga_caiasia_special.pdf ). * Current analysis generally ignores the additional external costs that result when increased vehicle fuel efficiency and subsidized alternative fuels stimulates additional vehicle travel, called a "rebound effect" (see http://www.vtpi.org/cafe.pdf and http://www.rff.org/documents/RFF-DP-04-53.pdf ). * Mobility management emission reductions are considered difficult to predict. Although case studies and models are available for many of these strategies (see for example, case studies in http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and the TRIMMS Model at http://www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs77704.htm ), such models are not widely available or designed for energy planning. * Mobility management programs are considered difficult to implement. Such programs often involve multiple stakeholders, such as regional and local governments, employers and developers, and various special interest groups. Even PAYD, a relatively simple strategy, requires cooperation of insurance regulators, insurance companies, and various special interest groups. As a result, they tend to seem difficult and risky compared with other emission reduction strategies that only require changes to utility operations, fuel production or vehicle designs. * Analysis often assume that current transport patterns are economically optimal and any reduction in vehicle travel harms consumers and the economy. This ignores various market distortions that stimulate motor vehicle travel, and the benefits to consumers and the economy of many mobility management strategies (www.vtpi.org/distortions_BPJ.pdf ). With improved travel options and efficient incentives travel reductions reflect low-value vehicle-miles that consumers willingly forego in exchange for cost savings. In a more optimal market, with efficient road, parking and vehicle insurance pricing, and more optimal planning practices, motorists would drive significantly less and be better off overall (http://www.vtpi.org/sotpm.pdf ). Described differently, there are two general approaches to reducing transportation emissions: reduce emission rates per vehicle-kilometer or reduce total vehicle-travel. The first generally seems easier, because it simply requires changing fuels or vehicle design, but, if done correctly, the second provides far more total benefits. As a result, significant emission reductions can be achieved with negative costs (they provide net economic benefits). Due to these factors, currently proposed emission reduction programs will not implement mobility management as much as optimal and so will fail to achieve other important benefits such as congestion reductions, crash reductions, consumer savings and equity objectives (http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ). A truly sustainable transportation system requires more than simply reducing consumption of fossil fuels, it requires creating a more efficient transportation system. It will be up to those of us who understand the wider value of mobility management to educate decision makers about their full benefits and overcome barriers, so they can be implemented as much as justified. Please let me know if you have comments or questions. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 11:06 PM 12/1/2007, Paul Barter wrote: >Trying to forward this message which the list blocked for some reason. >Paul > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >From: Carlosfelipe Pardo >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:05:30 -0500 >Subject: Event: Getting the climate right for transport > Transport side event at COP 13, Bali Indonesia >Organized by TRL/GTZ, UITP, UIC, ITPS > >The German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) will host a side event titled "Getting >the climate right for transport" at the United Nations Climate Change >Conference (COP 13) in Bali. The event will be in cooperation with the >Transport Research Laboratory (UK), UITP, UIC and Institution for Transport >Policy Studies (Japan). > >The event will discuss future pathways to a more sustainable transport >system along with options for decision-makers to integrate climate change >mitigation measures into the transport sector. > >The event will take place on 7th and 8th December, 2007 from 1 to 3 pm in >the Tidal Room at the Grand Hyatt Hotel. > >The event will combine practical as well as methodological approaches with >actual experience on sustainable transportation. The draft program is on our >SUTP website at www.sutp.org . > >At this event Mr. Manfred Breithaupt (GTZ) and Mr. Holger Dalkmann (TRL) >will present the new sourcebook module titled "Transport and Climate >Change", which is the latest publication in the GTZ Sustainable Urban >Transport series, and discuss available instruments to reduce carbon dioxide >emissions in the transport sector. > >The module summarises the challenges that climate change mitigation has to >face in the transport sector and presents the major options and instruments >available to deal with them. The module also explains the various >sustainable transport policy and planning options and sketches out their >potential for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. >With the new module, the GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Sourcebook now has >26 modules focussing on various issues of transportation. All the modules >are available to download from the SUTP websites at no cost ( >http://www.sutp.org and http://www.sutp.cn for Chinese users). > >-- >Carlosfelipe Pardo >Coordinador de Proyecto- Project Coordinator >GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC) >Cl 93A # 14-17 of 708 >Bogot? D.C., Colombia >Tel/fax: +57 (1) 236 2309 Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662 >carlos.pardo@sutp.org www.sutp.org >-------------------------------------------------------- >IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > >Please go to >http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >to join the real sustran-discuss and get full >membership rights. The yahoogroups version is >only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to >the real sustran-discuss (even if the >yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). >Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > >================================================================ >SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion >of people-centred, equitable and sustainable >transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). 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'). End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 52, Issue 2 ********************************************** From richmond at alum.mit.edu Wed Dec 5 17:49:00 2007 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan Richmond) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 12:49:00 +0400 (Arabian Standard Time) Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? In-Reply-To: <000001c836c0$7870fab0$6952f010$@edu> References: <20071204030123.C72F52D9F3@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> <000001c836c0$7870fab0$6952f010$@edu> Message-ID: I am very interested in this - does anyone think that this principle could be extended to optimizing the use of BRT rights of way to allow buses to enter and leave at various points without causing congestion? On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Chris Cherry wrote: > There has been some research coming out of the transportation engineering > (Michael Cassidy and Carlos Daganzo) group looking at trying to maximize the > use of these "empty" BRT lanes (or any limited access lane for that matter). > Essentially, if planned right, one could allow vehicles to enter the > restricted lane only at bottlenecks in the system and thus vastly increase > the throughput of cars with minimal disruption to buses. They have been > looking at this from the context of HOV lanes in the USA, but have recently > been trying to apply the theory to busways in China. This would ultimately > improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce congestion and > potentially allow the drivers to perceive the BRT system in a better light. > Of course there are a lot of policy issues around letting cars in some > strategic areas of the BRT system and convincing them that it is not > beneficial to let them in the entire system. Here are a couple of paper out > of the UC-Berkeley Volvo Center > > http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2007/VWP/UCB-ITS-VWP-2007-1.pdf > http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/ucb/2005/vwp/ucb-its-vwp-2005-2.pdf > > > Chris Cherry > Assistant Professor > Civil and Environmental Engineering > University of Tennessee-Knoxville > 223 Perkins Hall > Knoxville, TN 37996-2010 > phone: 865-974-7710 > mobile: 865-684-8106 > fax: 865-974-2669 > http://web.utk.edu/~cherry > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 03:13:00 -0700 > From: John Ernst > Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? > To: > Message-ID: <20071202181335.859F92DB9C@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > > If I can pick up this now dated thread on the Jakarta busway (with > apologies, I was on vacation)... > > I agree with the assessment that the Jakarta busway is in serious > trouble. It is also true that former Governor Sutiyoso forced the > busway through. (I still complement him for it because my guess is > that going slow would have meant not going at all.) > > I believe Jakarta holds the record as the shortest design and build > time of any full BRT in the world. (I would welcome hearing of other > systems that might be contenders.) Jakarta officially started > planning in May of 2003. By early 2008 it will have about 200km of > corridors, or an average of 40km per year from conception to > operation. By 'full BRT', I basically mean segregated lanes, raised > platforms and pre-board fare collection, but we could niggle on mixed > traffic sections of segregated corridors, etc. (Keep in mind that I > am definitely talking about quantity here, not quality.) > > One of the main consequences of Sutiyoso's rapid implementation is > that there was little legal work completed. There is no provision in > law or regulation for the busway itself, it is actually a > manipulation of normal bus route licenses. The appropriation of road > space for the busway is also a gray area. My understanding is that > because the busway does not have clear legal basis, the police > consider it up to their discretion whether or not they enforce the > corridors. > > This year, one of the new corridors under construction is in a very > wealthy area. So, there have been a lot of complaints about losing > road space for cars. A lot of this is misunderstanding -- in that > area the city will widen the road to preserve the same number of > mixed traffic lanes, although narrower ones. In the meantime, the > police have reacted by opening more and more sections of bus lanes to > mixed traffic. > > ITDP is one group working to keep BRT on course in Jakarta. We have > this year begun working more with the police (city police in > Indonesia are not under city government, but under a national police > agency). For example, we took a key member of the police to Bogota > for the transit fair last month. > > I agree fully with Carlos Pardo's comments (Nov 23) about the > difficulty of convincing the public about BRT lanes. Overall, this > is an interesting problem in implementing BRT systems: the lanes > often look empty. When we see a photo of a BRT, it always has a bus > or two in the lane, but between buses you see only 2-5 minutes of > empty lane -- at least in closed systems without overlapping > routes. On the other hand, if the mixed traffic lanes are not > congested, there is no reason to build segregated BRT lanes. > > In a city like Jakarta, where for 20 years streets have been > generally filled curb-to-curb, it is very hard to accept that a lane > that looks empty could be carrying 10 or 20 times as many passengers > as the ones that look chock-full. You can imagine the pressure on > the police officer on the street. > > A lot needs to be done to improve the capacity and performance of the > Jakarta busway. Hopefully that will soon include returning to full > enforcement of all busway corridors. While several scenarios are > possible, it's unlikely to fully happen until the 3 corridors now > under construction start operating at full service. If history is > any guide, that could be around next June. > > I hope this information is useful. Sorry to be slow to pitch in. > > Best, > John > > At 11:09 PM 11/21/2007, you wrote: >> Evidence on the ground in Jakarta suggest that there is indeed cause for >> serious concern over the continued viability of Bus Rapid Transit in >> Jakarta. The history of excellent measures being scrapped due to problems > of >> implementation is crowded enough to give one pause. >> >> The whole endeavor was basically forced through on the force of personality >> by Governor Sutiyoso loosely based on Transmilenio, Bogota. His gamble >> seemed a good one at the time: We can endure the hardship of construction >> and the initial decrease in the flow of traffic confident that in the >> medium-term, more people will take to the buses, even those with cars, and >> overall mobility as quantified and perceived will increase. The problem is >> that even Jakartans that one would expect to support the busway are now >> incensed at the dramatically worsening of conditions. They eagerly await >> what they perceive as the all but inevitable rolling back of the program > and >> a return to the ever expanding asphalt approach to mobility. >> >> I am not aware of serious endeavors towards course correction but I will >> inquire a bit. >> >> Robert Cowherd, PhD, Associate Professor of Architecture >> Wentworth Institute of Technology 550 Huntington Ave. Boston, MA 02115 USA >> cowherdr@wit.edu; +1 617 989-4453 >> >> >> On 11/21/07 8:43 AM, "Walter Hook" wrote: >> >>> John ernst tells me that several of the corridors have been open for > some >>> time now during the construction, but that it is temporary. >>> >>> 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 Paul Barter >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 1:49 AM >>> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >>> Subject: [sustran] Jakarta busway twists and turns? >>> >>> The Jakarta busways appear to be facing some curious decisions according >>> to this Jakarta Post article below. >>> >>> See near the end where it says: >>> "On Nov. 5 the administration announced motorists would be permitted to >>> use certain sections of other busway corridors in the city for a month. >>> The decision was made to ease traffic congestion caused by the ongoing >>> construction of the three new corridors." >>> >>> This means mixed traffic is being allowed into operational busways? >>> Can anyone fill in the background on what is going on in Jakarta? Should >>> we be worried about the future of BRT there or is this a minor hiccup? >>> >>> Paul >>> ------------------------------------------------------- > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > John Ernst - Senior Program Director > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy > 127 W 26th St. Suite 1002, New York, NY 10001 > Tel +1 (212) 629-8001 Direct Tel +1 (347) 694-4771 Direct Fax > +1 (801) 365-5914 > Skype: john.ernst > > Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide > Visit http://www.itdp.org > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 12:42:19 -0800 > From: Todd Alexander Litman > Subject: [sustran] Re: Fwd: Event: Getting the climate right for > transport > To: "Paul Barter" , > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20071203123020.03a7e830@mail.islandnet.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed > > > Last week I attended the National Renewable > Energy Laboratory (NREL) Energy Analysis Forum in > Golden, Colorado > (http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/news.html ), where > leading North American energy analysts shared the > latest thinking concerning greenhouse gas > emission reduction strategies and legislation, > much of which involves emission cap and trade > programs > (http://www.rff.org/rff/News/Releases/2007Releases/loader.cfm?url=/commonspo > t/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=31222 > ). Similarly, a recent report by McKinsey, > "Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much > At What Cost" > (http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/greenhousegas.asp > ) estimates the economic costs of achieving emission reduction targets. > > Virtually all these analyses are biased against > mobility management (various strategies that > increase transport system efficiency by improving > mobility options, encouraging use of more > efficient modes, and reducing the need to travel), for the following > reasons: > > * Co-benefits are ignored. Current analysis gives > virtually no consideration to benefits such as > reduced traffic congestion, road and parking cost > savings, consumer savings, reduced traffic risk, > improved mobility for non-drivers, and improved > public health, although these benefits are often > larger in total value than emission reduction > benefits (see http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and > www.ap-net.org/docs/16th_seminar/huizenga_caiasia_special.pdf ). > > * Current analysis generally ignores the > additional external costs that result when > increased vehicle fuel efficiency and subsidized > alternative fuels stimulates additional vehicle > travel, called a "rebound effect" (see > http://www.vtpi.org/cafe.pdf and > http://www.rff.org/documents/RFF-DP-04-53.pdf ). > > * Mobility management emission reductions are > considered difficult to predict. Although case > studies and models are available for many of > these strategies (see for example, case studies > in http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and the TRIMMS Model > at http://www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs77704.htm > ), such models are not widely available or designed for energy planning. > > * Mobility management programs are considered > difficult to implement. Such programs often > involve multiple stakeholders, such as regional > and local governments, employers and developers, > and various special interest groups. Even PAYD, a > relatively simple strategy, requires cooperation > of insurance regulators, insurance companies, and > various special interest groups. As a result, > they tend to seem difficult and risky compared > with other emission reduction strategies that > only require changes to utility operations, fuel production or vehicle > designs. > > * Analysis often assume that current transport > patterns are economically optimal and any > reduction in vehicle travel harms consumers and > the economy. This ignores various market > distortions that stimulate motor vehicle travel, > and the benefits to consumers and the economy of > many mobility management strategies > (www.vtpi.org/distortions_BPJ.pdf > ). With improved travel options and efficient > incentives travel reductions reflect low-value > vehicle-miles that consumers willingly forego in > exchange for cost savings. In a more optimal > market, with efficient road, parking and vehicle > insurance pricing, and more optimal planning > practices, motorists would drive significantly > less and be better off overall (http://www.vtpi.org/sotpm.pdf ). > > > Described differently, there are two general > approaches to reducing transportation emissions: > reduce emission rates per vehicle-kilometer or > reduce total vehicle-travel. The first generally > seems easier, because it simply requires changing > fuels or vehicle design, but, if done correctly, > the second provides far more total benefits. As a > result, significant emission reductions can be > achieved with negative costs (they provide net economic benefits). > > Due to these factors, currently proposed emission > reduction programs will not implement mobility > management as much as optimal and so will fail to > achieve other important benefits such as > congestion reductions, crash reductions, consumer > savings and equity objectives > (http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ). A truly > sustainable transportation system requires more > than simply reducing consumption of fossil fuels, > it requires creating a more efficient > transportation system. It will be up to those of > us who understand the wider value of mobility > management to educate decision makers about their > full benefits and overcome barriers, so they can > be implemented as much as justified. > > Please let me know if you have comments or questions. > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > At 11:06 PM 12/1/2007, Paul Barter wrote: >> Trying to forward this message which the list blocked for some reason. >> Paul >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Carlosfelipe Pardo >> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >> Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:05:30 -0500 >> Subject: Event: Getting the climate right for transport >> Transport side event at COP 13, Bali Indonesia >> Organized by TRL/GTZ, UITP, UIC, ITPS >> >> The German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) will host a side event titled > "Getting >> the climate right for transport" at the United Nations Climate Change >> Conference (COP 13) in Bali. The event will be in cooperation with the >> Transport Research Laboratory (UK), UITP, UIC and Institution for Transport >> Policy Studies (Japan). >> >> The event will discuss future pathways to a more sustainable transport >> system along with options for decision-makers to integrate climate change >> mitigation measures into the transport sector. >> >> The event will take place on 7th and 8th December, 2007 from 1 to 3 pm in >> the Tidal Room at the Grand Hyatt Hotel. >> >> The event will combine practical as well as methodological approaches with >> actual experience on sustainable transportation. The draft program is on > our >> SUTP website at www.sutp.org . >> >> At this event Mr. Manfred Breithaupt (GTZ) and Mr. Holger Dalkmann (TRL) >> will present the new sourcebook module titled "Transport and Climate >> Change", which is the latest publication in the GTZ Sustainable Urban >> Transport series, and discuss available instruments to reduce carbon > dioxide >> emissions in the transport sector. >> >> The module summarises the challenges that climate change mitigation has to >> face in the transport sector and presents the major options and instruments >> available to deal with them. The module also explains the various >> sustainable transport policy and planning options and sketches out their >> potential for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. >> With the new module, the GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Sourcebook now has >> 26 modules focussing on various issues of transportation. All the modules >> are available to download from the SUTP websites at no cost ( >> http://www.sutp.org and http://www.sutp.cn for Chinese users). >> >> -- >> Carlosfelipe Pardo >> Coordinador de Proyecto- Project Coordinator >> GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC) >> Cl 93A # 14-17 of 708 >> Bogot? D.C., Colombia >> Tel/fax: +57 (1) 236 2309 Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662 >> carlos.pardo@sutp.org www.sutp.org >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS. >> >> Please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >> to join the real sustran-discuss and get full >> membership rights. The yahoogroups version is >> only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to >> the real sustran-discuss (even if the >> yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). >> Apologies for the confusing arrangement. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion >> of people-centred, equitable and sustainable >> transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > 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'). > > End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 52, Issue 2 > ********************************************** > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > ----- Jonathan Richmond Transport Adviser to the Government of Mauritius Ministry of Public Infrastructure, Land Transport and Shipping Level 4 New Government Centre Port Louis Mauritius +230 707-1134 (Mauritius mobile: most reliable way to reach me at all times) +1 (617) 395-4360 (US phone number rings at home -- call me in Mauritius for the price of a call to the US). +1 (425) 998-0998 (US phone number, connects to mobile phone when in wifi zone, or goes to voice mail) +44 (0)7978 807532 (UK mobile number, connects to mobile phone when in wifi zone, or goes to voice mail). This is also a SIP number. If you have a SIP phone you can reach me by dialing: sip:447978807532@truphone.com >From Google Talk you can add me as a contact by clicking add and then entering ext+447978807532@truphone.com. Clicking on this address will then ring my mobile phone when I am in a wifi zone, or go to voice mail at other times. e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From edelman at greenidea.eu Wed Dec 5 23:49:00 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 15:49:00 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Calcutta: Lawyer no-show derails smog plan Message-ID: <4756BA5C.5030501@greenidea.eu> Lawyer no-show derails smog plan *Attempts to cut pollution in the Indian city of Calcutta by banning old vehicles have failed after state lawyers did not appear in court.* Judges dismissed the case as "invalid" after officials from West Bengal state's law department missed the crucial hearing. The state government had earlier said it wanted to ban all vehicles made before 1990 in the fight against smog. Air pollution in Calcutta is believed to be among the worst in the world. *Nobody appeared* In May 2005, the West Bengal government said that it wanted all buses, trucks and taxis manufactured before 1990 to be taken off the streets of Calcutta, because they were heavily polluting the city's air. If the initiative had gone ahead, it would have meant that nearly 80% of the city's buses and trucks and nearly 50% of its taxis and auto-rickshaws would have been forced off the roads. But the Bengal Bus Syndicate challenged the state government in the Calcutta High Court. When the case came up for hearing on Wednesday before a division bench of the Calcutta High Court, nobody appeared for the government. Justices Pratap Roy and Prasenjit Mondal had no option but to dismiss the case and declare the government notification invalid. *'Half-hearted and callous'* "The case has fallen through on technical grounds because there was no one to represent the government," said Swapan Dutta, a lawyer for the Bengal Bus Syndicate. The office of the state's Advocate-General Balai Ray pleaded ignorance about the hearing. "The transport department should inform us about the case date. Unless they do that, how can we send our lawyers?" an official in the advocate-general's office said. The state government blamed the absence of a "junior lawyer" as the cause of the case falling through. Environmentalist Subhas Dutta condemned the state government for not taking the issue of Calcutta's air pollution seriously enough. "They have been half-hearted and callous in pressing for the ban on old vehicles," he said. "This is a killer but the government is doing nothing to check it." About 70% of people in Calcutta suffer from respiratory disorders caused by air pollution, a recent study by a prominent cancer institute in India concluded. Ailments include lung cancer, breathing difficulties and asthma, the Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute (CNCI) study said. One of its key findings was a direct link between air pollution among the 18 million people of Calcutta and the high incidence of lung cancer. Calcutta tops all Indian cities when it comes to lung cancer - at 18.4 cases per 100,000 people - far ahead of Delhi at 13.34 cases per 100,000. -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunni 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic Skype: toddedelman ++420 605 915 970 ++420 222 517 832 edelman@greenidea.eu http://greenideafactory.blogspot.com/ www.flickr.com/photos/edelman Green Idea Factory is a member of World Carfree Network www.worldcarfree.net From schipper at wri.org Thu Dec 6 01:10:32 2007 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 11:10:32 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? References: <20071204030123.C72F52D9F3@mx-list.jca.ne.jp><000001c836c0$7870fab0$6952f010$@edu> Message-ID: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342CC7353E@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> This is what Alan Hoffman of San Diego has been developing, he calls his busways smartways. Lee Schipper Director of Research, EMBARQ www.embarq.wri.org >From Oct 1, Visiting Scholar, UC Transportation Center UC Berkeley, CA www.uctc.net 510 642 6889 202 262 7476 -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+schipper=wri.org@list.jca.apc.org on behalf of Jonathan Richmond Sent: Wed 12/5/2007 3:49 AM To: Chris Cherry Cc: UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; Sustran List Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? I am very interested in this - does anyone think that this principle could be extended to optimizing the use of BRT rights of way to allow buses to enter and leave at various points without causing congestion? On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Chris Cherry wrote: > There has been some research coming out of the transportation engineering > (Michael Cassidy and Carlos Daganzo) group looking at trying to maximize the > use of these "empty" BRT lanes (or any limited access lane for that matter). > Essentially, if planned right, one could allow vehicles to enter the > restricted lane only at bottlenecks in the system and thus vastly increase > the throughput of cars with minimal disruption to buses. They have been > looking at this from the context of HOV lanes in the USA, but have recently > been trying to apply the theory to busways in China. This would ultimately > improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce congestion and > potentially allow the drivers to perceive the BRT system in a better light. > Of course there are a lot of policy issues around letting cars in some > strategic areas of the BRT system and convincing them that it is not > beneficial to let them in the entire system. Here are a couple of paper out > of the UC-Berkeley Volvo Center > > http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2007/VWP/UCB-ITS-VWP-2007-1.pdf > http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/ucb/2005/vwp/ucb-its-vwp-2005-2.pdf > > > Chris Cherry > Assistant Professor > Civil and Environmental Engineering > University of Tennessee-Knoxville > 223 Perkins Hall > Knoxville, TN 37996-2010 > phone: 865-974-7710 > mobile: 865-684-8106 > fax: 865-974-2669 > http://web.utk.edu/~cherry > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 03:13:00 -0700 > From: John Ernst > Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? > To: > Message-ID: <20071202181335.859F92DB9C@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > > If I can pick up this now dated thread on the Jakarta busway (with > apologies, I was on vacation)... > > I agree with the assessment that the Jakarta busway is in serious > trouble. It is also true that former Governor Sutiyoso forced the > busway through. (I still complement him for it because my guess is > that going slow would have meant not going at all.) > > I believe Jakarta holds the record as the shortest design and build > time of any full BRT in the world. (I would welcome hearing of other > systems that might be contenders.) Jakarta officially started > planning in May of 2003. By early 2008 it will have about 200km of > corridors, or an average of 40km per year from conception to > operation. By 'full BRT', I basically mean segregated lanes, raised > platforms and pre-board fare collection, but we could niggle on mixed > traffic sections of segregated corridors, etc. (Keep in mind that I > am definitely talking about quantity here, not quality.) > > One of the main consequences of Sutiyoso's rapid implementation is > that there was little legal work completed. There is no provision in > law or regulation for the busway itself, it is actually a > manipulation of normal bus route licenses. The appropriation of road > space for the busway is also a gray area. My understanding is that > because the busway does not have clear legal basis, the police > consider it up to their discretion whether or not they enforce the > corridors. > > This year, one of the new corridors under construction is in a very > wealthy area. So, there have been a lot of complaints about losing > road space for cars. A lot of this is misunderstanding -- in that > area the city will widen the road to preserve the same number of > mixed traffic lanes, although narrower ones. In the meantime, the > police have reacted by opening more and more sections of bus lanes to > mixed traffic. > > ITDP is one group working to keep BRT on course in Jakarta. We have > this year begun working more with the police (city police in > Indonesia are not under city government, but under a national police > agency). For example, we took a key member of the police to Bogota > for the transit fair last month. > > I agree fully with Carlos Pardo's comments (Nov 23) about the > difficulty of convincing the public about BRT lanes. Overall, this > is an interesting problem in implementing BRT systems: the lanes > often look empty. When we see a photo of a BRT, it always has a bus > or two in the lane, but between buses you see only 2-5 minutes of > empty lane -- at least in closed systems without overlapping > routes. On the other hand, if the mixed traffic lanes are not > congested, there is no reason to build segregated BRT lanes. > > In a city like Jakarta, where for 20 years streets have been > generally filled curb-to-curb, it is very hard to accept that a lane > that looks empty could be carrying 10 or 20 times as many passengers > as the ones that look chock-full. You can imagine the pressure on > the police officer on the street. > > A lot needs to be done to improve the capacity and performance of the > Jakarta busway. Hopefully that will soon include returning to full > enforcement of all busway corridors. While several scenarios are > possible, it's unlikely to fully happen until the 3 corridors now > under construction start operating at full service. If history is > any guide, that could be around next June. > > I hope this information is useful. Sorry to be slow to pitch in. > > Best, > John > > At 11:09 PM 11/21/2007, you wrote: >> Evidence on the ground in Jakarta suggest that there is indeed cause for >> serious concern over the continued viability of Bus Rapid Transit in >> Jakarta. The history of excellent measures being scrapped due to problems > of >> implementation is crowded enough to give one pause. >> >> The whole endeavor was basically forced through on the force of personality >> by Governor Sutiyoso loosely based on Transmilenio, Bogota. His gamble >> seemed a good one at the time: We can endure the hardship of construction >> and the initial decrease in the flow of traffic confident that in the >> medium-term, more people will take to the buses, even those with cars, and >> overall mobility as quantified and perceived will increase. The problem is >> that even Jakartans that one would expect to support the busway are now >> incensed at the dramatically worsening of conditions. They eagerly await >> what they perceive as the all but inevitable rolling back of the program > and >> a return to the ever expanding asphalt approach to mobility. >> >> I am not aware of serious endeavors towards course correction but I will >> inquire a bit. >> >> Robert Cowherd, PhD, Associate Professor of Architecture >> Wentworth Institute of Technology 550 Huntington Ave. Boston, MA 02115 USA >> cowherdr@wit.edu; +1 617 989-4453 >> >> >> On 11/21/07 8:43 AM, "Walter Hook" wrote: >> >>> John ernst tells me that several of the corridors have been open for > some >>> time now during the construction, but that it is temporary. >>> >>> 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 Paul Barter >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 1:49 AM >>> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >>> Subject: [sustran] Jakarta busway twists and turns? >>> >>> The Jakarta busways appear to be facing some curious decisions according >>> to this Jakarta Post article below. >>> >>> See near the end where it says: >>> "On Nov. 5 the administration announced motorists would be permitted to >>> use certain sections of other busway corridors in the city for a month. >>> The decision was made to ease traffic congestion caused by the ongoing >>> construction of the three new corridors." >>> >>> This means mixed traffic is being allowed into operational busways? >>> Can anyone fill in the background on what is going on in Jakarta? Should >>> we be worried about the future of BRT there or is this a minor hiccup? >>> >>> Paul >>> ------------------------------------------------------- > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > John Ernst - Senior Program Director > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy > 127 W 26th St. Suite 1002, New York, NY 10001 > Tel +1 (212) 629-8001 Direct Tel +1 (347) 694-4771 Direct Fax > +1 (801) 365-5914 > Skype: john.ernst > > Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide > Visit http://www.itdp.org > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 12:42:19 -0800 > From: Todd Alexander Litman > Subject: [sustran] Re: Fwd: Event: Getting the climate right for > transport > To: "Paul Barter" , > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20071203123020.03a7e830@mail.islandnet.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed > > > Last week I attended the National Renewable > Energy Laboratory (NREL) Energy Analysis Forum in > Golden, Colorado > (http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/news.html ), where > leading North American energy analysts shared the > latest thinking concerning greenhouse gas > emission reduction strategies and legislation, > much of which involves emission cap and trade > programs > (http://www.rff.org/rff/News/Releases/2007Releases/loader.cfm?url=/commonspo > t/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=31222 > ). Similarly, a recent report by McKinsey, > "Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much > At What Cost" > (http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/greenhousegas.asp > ) estimates the economic costs of achieving emission reduction targets. > > Virtually all these analyses are biased against > mobility management (various strategies that > increase transport system efficiency by improving > mobility options, encouraging use of more > efficient modes, and reducing the need to travel), for the following > reasons: > > * Co-benefits are ignored. Current analysis gives > virtually no consideration to benefits such as > reduced traffic congestion, road and parking cost > savings, consumer savings, reduced traffic risk, > improved mobility for non-drivers, and improved > public health, although these benefits are often > larger in total value than emission reduction > benefits (see http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and > www.ap-net.org/docs/16th_seminar/huizenga_caiasia_special.pdf ). > > * Current analysis generally ignores the > additional external costs that result when > increased vehicle fuel efficiency and subsidized > alternative fuels stimulates additional vehicle > travel, called a "rebound effect" (see > http://www.vtpi.org/cafe.pdf and > http://www.rff.org/documents/RFF-DP-04-53.pdf ). > > * Mobility management emission reductions are > considered difficult to predict. Although case > studies and models are available for many of > these strategies (see for example, case studies > in http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and the TRIMMS Model > at http://www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs77704.htm > ), such models are not widely available or designed for energy planning. > > * Mobility management programs are considered > difficult to implement. Such programs often > involve multiple stakeholders, such as regional > and local governments, employers and developers, > and various special interest groups. Even PAYD, a > relatively simple strategy, requires cooperation > of insurance regulators, insurance companies, and > various special interest groups. As a result, > they tend to seem difficult and risky compared > with other emission reduction strategies that > only require changes to utility operations, fuel production or vehicle > designs. > > * Analysis often assume that current transport > patterns are economically optimal and any > reduction in vehicle travel harms consumers and > the economy. This ignores various market > distortions that stimulate motor vehicle travel, > and the benefits to consumers and the economy of > many mobility management strategies > (www.vtpi.org/distortions_BPJ.pdf > ). With improved travel options and efficient > incentives travel reductions reflect low-value > vehicle-miles that consumers willingly forego in > exchange for cost savings. In a more optimal > market, with efficient road, parking and vehicle > insurance pricing, and more optimal planning > practices, motorists would drive significantly > less and be better off overall (http://www.vtpi.org/sotpm.pdf ). > > > Described differently, there are two general > approaches to reducing transportation emissions: > reduce emission rates per vehicle-kilometer or > reduce total vehicle-travel. The first generally > seems easier, because it simply requires changing > fuels or vehicle design, but, if done correctly, > the second provides far more total benefits. As a > result, significant emission reductions can be > achieved with negative costs (they provide net economic benefits). > > Due to these factors, currently proposed emission > reduction programs will not implement mobility > management as much as optimal and so will fail to > achieve other important benefits such as > congestion reductions, crash reductions, consumer > savings and equity objectives > (http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ). A truly > sustainable transportation system requires more > than simply reducing consumption of fossil fuels, > it requires creating a more efficient > transportation system. It will be up to those of > us who understand the wider value of mobility > management to educate decision makers about their > full benefits and overcome barriers, so they can > be implemented as much as justified. > > Please let me know if you have comments or questions. > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > At 11:06 PM 12/1/2007, Paul Barter wrote: >> Trying to forward this message which the list blocked for some reason. >> Paul >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Carlosfelipe Pardo >> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >> Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:05:30 -0500 >> Subject: Event: Getting the climate right for transport >> Transport side event at COP 13, Bali Indonesia >> Organized by TRL/GTZ, UITP, UIC, ITPS >> >> The German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) will host a side event titled > "Getting >> the climate right for transport" at the United Nations Climate Change >> Conference (COP 13) in Bali. The event will be in cooperation with the >> Transport Research Laboratory (UK), UITP, UIC and Institution for Transport >> Policy Studies (Japan). >> >> The event will discuss future pathways to a more sustainable transport >> system along with options for decision-makers to integrate climate change >> mitigation measures into the transport sector. >> >> The event will take place on 7th and 8th December, 2007 from 1 to 3 pm in >> the Tidal Room at the Grand Hyatt Hotel. >> >> The event will combine practical as well as methodological approaches with >> actual experience on sustainable transportation. The draft program is on > our >> SUTP website at www.sutp.org . >> >> At this event Mr. Manfred Breithaupt (GTZ) and Mr. Holger Dalkmann (TRL) >> will present the new sourcebook module titled "Transport and Climate >> Change", which is the latest publication in the GTZ Sustainable Urban >> Transport series, and discuss available instruments to reduce carbon > dioxide >> emissions in the transport sector. >> >> The module summarises the challenges that climate change mitigation has to >> face in the transport sector and presents the major options and instruments >> available to deal with them. The module also explains the various >> sustainable transport policy and planning options and sketches out their >> potential for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. >> With the new module, the GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Sourcebook now has >> 26 modules focussing on various issues of transportation. All the modules >> are available to download from the SUTP websites at no cost ( >> http://www.sutp.org and http://www.sutp.cn for Chinese users). >> >> -- >> Carlosfelipe Pardo >> Coordinador de Proyecto- Project Coordinator >> GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC) >> Cl 93A # 14-17 of 708 >> Bogot? D.C., Colombia >> Tel/fax: +57 (1) 236 2309 Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662 >> carlos.pardo@sutp.org www.sutp.org >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS. >> >> Please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >> to join the real sustran-discuss and get full >> membership rights. The yahoogroups version is >> only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to >> the real sustran-discuss (even if the >> yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). >> Apologies for the confusing arrangement. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion >> of people-centred, equitable and sustainable >> transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > 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'). > > End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 52, Issue 2 > ********************************************** > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > ----- Jonathan Richmond Transport Adviser to the Government of Mauritius Ministry of Public Infrastructure, Land Transport and Shipping Level 4 New Government Centre Port Louis Mauritius +230 707-1134 (Mauritius mobile: most reliable way to reach me at all times) +1 (617) 395-4360 (US phone number rings at home -- call me in Mauritius for the price of a call to the US). +1 (425) 998-0998 (US phone number, connects to mobile phone when in wifi zone, or goes to voice mail) +44 (0)7978 807532 (UK mobile number, connects to mobile phone when in wifi zone, or goes to voice mail). This is also a SIP number. If you have a SIP phone you can reach me by dialing: sip:447978807532@truphone.com >From Google Talk you can add me as a contact by clicking add and then entering ext+447978807532@truphone.com. Clicking on this address will then ring my mobile phone when I am in a wifi zone, or go to voice mail at other times. e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From edelman at greenidea.eu Thu Dec 6 02:57:46 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:57:46 +0100 Subject: [sustran] [Fwd: [carfree_network] Carfree conference -- Proposals due Dec 15 -- help get the word out!] Message-ID: <4756E69A.1060707@greenidea.eu> Hi, I think this was posted here before but it is a good thing to remind people about... (By the way.... to peoples from Latin America and beyond: The organisers of the TCFC series cannot necessarily fund travel or other costs, even for presenters... so now is the time to start to look for a way to get lots of people to Portland who might not be able to fund it on their own... or because they are the director, etc. of their organisation...) - T -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [carfree_network] Carfree conference -- Proposals due Dec 15 -- help get the word out! Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 08:07:08 -0800 From: Eleanor Blue To: WCN list , Shift , Portland Car Free Day , Trans - Action Hi all, This is a reminder that proposals for presentations and activities at Towards Carfree Cities VIII in Portland next June are due on December 15, which is in less than two weeks. If you're considering submitting a proposal, now is the time! Also, please take a few minutes to help us get the word out by forwarding the message below to colleagues, friends, professional organizations, and nonprofits who do work on carfree-related issues. If you have any questions, feel free to email carfreeportland@gmail.com . Thanks, Elly Towards Carfree Cities VIII ----------------------------------- Greetings! In June of 2008 Portland, Oregon will be the first American city to host the annual conference of the World Carfree Network. This is an international conference focusing on the future of urban transportation and livability. Titled "Towards Carfree Cities: Rethinking Mobility, Rediscovering Proximity", this conference seeks to find creative, practical solutions to the environmental, economic, community, and public health problems that arise from car-oriented urban policies, culture, and development. We are currently soliciting presenters from around the world on this theme and urge you and your colleagues to submit a proposal. Please see the proposal description below, or visit our website http://www.carfreeportland.org for more information and to download a PDF version of Call for Proposals. Sincerely, Elly Blue Conference Organizer portland@worldcarfree.net ------------------------------------------------- *TOWARDS CARFREE CITIES VIII, JUNE 16-20, PORTLAND, OREGON, USA * *CALL FOR PROGRAM PROPOSALS * The Towards Carfree Cities conference series brings together people from around the world who are promoting practical alternatives to car dependence. Professionals, activists, and community leaders alike will share how they have been building sustainable transportation systems and promoting the transformation of cities, towns and villages into human-scaled environments rich in public space and community life. As a part of the carfree movement, the conference seeks to find creative, practical solutions to the environmental, economic, community, and public health problems that arise from car-oriented urban policies, culture, and development. It looks to promote local, diverse, and sustainable neighborhoods that are accessible and pleasurable to everyone in the community. This year's conference theme is "Rethinking mobility, rediscovering proximity." The theme is intended to promote discussion of urban livability, mixed-use development, local agriculture, pedestrian safety, strong neighborhoods, accessible public space, and sustainable transportation. *PROPOSALS SOLICITED * World Carfree Network and Shift are now seeking program proposals on the theme of "Rethinking Mobility, Rediscovering Proximity". Proposals are requested in the following categories: * Research abstracts * Presentations of programs (e.g., government, non-profit, or private sector initiatives) * Presentations of World Carfree Network members' organizational activities * Panelists on the following topics: a) alternatives to the private automobile; b) closures of parks or city streets to cars, c) carfree towns, housing developments, or shopping districts; d) experiences of carfree individuals and families, e) World Carfree Day events * Interactive workshops, activities, and tours * Films * Works of art Proposals of 1-2 pages in length, in English, shall include a title and description of the proposed activity, any equipment, time, or space requirements, relevant personal information or experience, and full contact details. Discounted entry for presenters. Send all proposals and questions to proposals@carfreeportland.org or mail to: Shift, PO Box 6662, Portland OR 97228, USA by December 15, 2007. See www.carfreeportland.org for further details about the conference. -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunni 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic Skype: toddedelman ++420 605 915 970 ++420 222 517 832 edelman@greenidea.eu http://greenideafactory.blogspot.com/ www.flickr.com/photos/edelman Green Idea Factory is a member of World Carfree Network www.worldcarfree.net From edelman at greenidea.eu Thu Dec 6 03:10:26 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:10:26 +0100 Subject: [sustran] World Throughput Update (was Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns?) In-Reply-To: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342CC7353E@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> References: <20071204030123.C72F52D9F3@mx-list.jca.ne.jp><000001c836c0$7870fab0$6952f010$@edu> <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342CC7353E@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> Message-ID: <4756E992.8060209@greenidea.eu> Lee Schipper wrote: > This is what Alan Hoffman of San Diego has been developing, he calls his busways smartways. > > Lee Schipper > Director of Research, EMBARQ > www.embarq.wri.org > >From Oct 1, Visiting Scholar, > UC Transportation Center > UC Berkeley, CA > www.uctc.net > 510 642 6889 > 202 262 7476 > > > > [...] > >> There has been some research coming out of the transportation engineering >> (Michael Cassidy and Carlos Daganzo) group looking at trying to maximize the >> use of these "empty" BRT lanes (or any limited access lane for that matter). >> Essentially, if planned right, one could allow vehicles to enter the >> restricted lane only at bottlenecks in the system and thus vastly increase >> the throughput of cars with minimal disruption to buses. MY first thought - even before noticing which research centre this came out of - was that increasing private automobile throughput would simply induce more traffic on adjacent streets... [...] >> In a city like Jakarta, where for 20 years streets have been >> generally filled curb-to-curb, it is very hard to accept that a lane >> that looks empty could be carrying 10 or 20 times as many passengers >> as the ones that look chock-full. You can imagine the pressure on >> the police officer on the street. >> HOW about a large portable L.E.D. sign - similar to ones warning of road hazards, temporary speed limit, etc. - which shows current passenger throughput? It could be based on average occupancy of private cars and buses... one such apparatus could be moved to different locations, would look great on TV, etc... there could be a live throughput counter on municipal website, local news websites... >> A lot needs to be done to improve the capacity and performance of the >> Jakarta busway. Hopefully that will soon include returning to full >> enforcement of all busway corridors. YES. >> [...] -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunni 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic Skype: toddedelman ++420 605 915 970 ++420 222 517 832 edelman@greenidea.eu http://greenideafactory.blogspot.com/ www.flickr.com/photos/edelman Green Idea Factory is a member of World Carfree Network www.worldcarfree.net From whook at itdp.org Thu Dec 6 06:11:24 2007 From: whook at itdp.org (Walter Hook) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 16:11:24 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00ad01c83783$66be4c50$3601a8c0@DFJLYL81> The papers from Berkeley make a few generalizations that are more typical of conditions in the US than in developing countries. Segregated bus lanes will actually increase the speeds and capacity of the mixed traffic lanes if the current traffic mix includes a large number of buses with very disorganized stopping behavior. This situation is typical on many BRT corridors that ITDP is working on, all in developing countries, but it is quite rare in the US. In conditions, as frequently occurs in the US, where bus frequencies and passenger volumes are quite low, say below 5000 pphpd, and certainly below 2000pphpd, the advantages of physically segregated lanes drop if this leads to congestion of mixed traffic, since a mixed traffic lane can move almost as many people depending on the vehicle mix. This is a real issue in the US where the bus frequencies tend to be pretty low due to low demand except on a few very exceptional corridors. This would be the case on Wiltshire Boulevard, for instance, and on a few major arterials in New York, etc. Probably a cost benefit analysis of converting a mixed traffic lane to an exclusive bus lane would only yield a positive result in higher demand corridors, and so harder to sell in the US. Of course you can drop bus priority at bottlenecks, but you only need bus priority at bottlenecks, so what is the point of the bus priority? On many brt systems we are planning there are parts of the brt network where we end the physical segregation for a certain section. Flyovers are the typical situation. However, we continue the segregation up to the bottleneck, so the bus avoids the cue that sometimes forms to reach the bottleneck. This works fine. But to open the brt up only at traffic bottlenecks sort of defeats the purpose of the lane segregation otherwise, no? In the developing world, this low bus frequency is not so typical. In the case of TransJakarta the lanes look empty at times in part because the bus procurement has been held up, in part because demand is not that high yet because there are very few feeder buses, and in part because the station/bus interface in Corridor I, with only one door per bus on Corridor I, can't really handle so many buses per hour. Once these problems are resolved, then the bus frequency will be much higher, and there will no longer be empty lanes. The justification for removing segregation will be weaker. That being said, even a bus every 1.5 minutes looks pretty empty except at the stations. Stand on the road sometime and count a minute and a half inside a lane, it seems like a long time. There are bus priority systems in Europe where there are bus priorty lanes only at such bottlenecks, and they are cheaper to build but lack a system identity. Hope this clarifies rather than confuses 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 Jonathan Richmond Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 3:49 AM To: Chris Cherry Cc: UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; Sustran List Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? I am very interested in this - does anyone think that this principle could be extended to optimizing the use of BRT rights of way to allow buses to enter and leave at various points without causing congestion? On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Chris Cherry wrote: > There has been some research coming out of the transportation engineering > (Michael Cassidy and Carlos Daganzo) group looking at trying to maximize the > use of these "empty" BRT lanes (or any limited access lane for that matter). > Essentially, if planned right, one could allow vehicles to enter the > restricted lane only at bottlenecks in the system and thus vastly increase > the throughput of cars with minimal disruption to buses. They have been > looking at this from the context of HOV lanes in the USA, but have recently > been trying to apply the theory to busways in China. This would ultimately > improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce congestion and > potentially allow the drivers to perceive the BRT system in a better light. > Of course there are a lot of policy issues around letting cars in some > strategic areas of the BRT system and convincing them that it is not > beneficial to let them in the entire system. Here are a couple of paper out > of the UC-Berkeley Volvo Center > > http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2007/VWP/UCB-ITS-VWP-2007-1.pdf > http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/ucb/2005/vwp/ucb-its-vwp-2005-2.pdf > > > Chris Cherry > Assistant Professor > Civil and Environmental Engineering > University of Tennessee-Knoxville > 223 Perkins Hall > Knoxville, TN 37996-2010 > phone: 865-974-7710 > mobile: 865-684-8106 > fax: 865-974-2669 > http://web.utk.edu/~cherry > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 03:13:00 -0700 > From: John Ernst > Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? > To: > Message-ID: <20071202181335.859F92DB9C@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > > If I can pick up this now dated thread on the Jakarta busway (with > apologies, I was on vacation)... > > I agree with the assessment that the Jakarta busway is in serious > trouble. It is also true that former Governor Sutiyoso forced the > busway through. (I still complement him for it because my guess is > that going slow would have meant not going at all.) > > I believe Jakarta holds the record as the shortest design and build > time of any full BRT in the world. (I would welcome hearing of other > systems that might be contenders.) Jakarta officially started > planning in May of 2003. By early 2008 it will have about 200km of > corridors, or an average of 40km per year from conception to > operation. By 'full BRT', I basically mean segregated lanes, raised > platforms and pre-board fare collection, but we could niggle on mixed > traffic sections of segregated corridors, etc. (Keep in mind that I > am definitely talking about quantity here, not quality.) > > One of the main consequences of Sutiyoso's rapid implementation is > that there was little legal work completed. There is no provision in > law or regulation for the busway itself, it is actually a > manipulation of normal bus route licenses. The appropriation of road > space for the busway is also a gray area. My understanding is that > because the busway does not have clear legal basis, the police > consider it up to their discretion whether or not they enforce the > corridors. > > This year, one of the new corridors under construction is in a very > wealthy area. So, there have been a lot of complaints about losing > road space for cars. A lot of this is misunderstanding -- in that > area the city will widen the road to preserve the same number of > mixed traffic lanes, although narrower ones. In the meantime, the > police have reacted by opening more and more sections of bus lanes to > mixed traffic. > > ITDP is one group working to keep BRT on course in Jakarta. We have > this year begun working more with the police (city police in > Indonesia are not under city government, but under a national police > agency). For example, we took a key member of the police to Bogota > for the transit fair last month. > > I agree fully with Carlos Pardo's comments (Nov 23) about the > difficulty of convincing the public about BRT lanes. Overall, this > is an interesting problem in implementing BRT systems: the lanes > often look empty. When we see a photo of a BRT, it always has a bus > or two in the lane, but between buses you see only 2-5 minutes of > empty lane -- at least in closed systems without overlapping > routes. On the other hand, if the mixed traffic lanes are not > congested, there is no reason to build segregated BRT lanes. > > In a city like Jakarta, where for 20 years streets have been > generally filled curb-to-curb, it is very hard to accept that a lane > that looks empty could be carrying 10 or 20 times as many passengers > as the ones that look chock-full. You can imagine the pressure on > the police officer on the street. > > A lot needs to be done to improve the capacity and performance of the > Jakarta busway. Hopefully that will soon include returning to full > enforcement of all busway corridors. While several scenarios are > possible, it's unlikely to fully happen until the 3 corridors now > under construction start operating at full service. If history is > any guide, that could be around next June. > > I hope this information is useful. Sorry to be slow to pitch in. > > Best, > John > > At 11:09 PM 11/21/2007, you wrote: >> Evidence on the ground in Jakarta suggest that there is indeed cause for >> serious concern over the continued viability of Bus Rapid Transit in >> Jakarta. The history of excellent measures being scrapped due to problems > of >> implementation is crowded enough to give one pause. >> >> The whole endeavor was basically forced through on the force of personality >> by Governor Sutiyoso loosely based on Transmilenio, Bogota. His gamble >> seemed a good one at the time: We can endure the hardship of construction >> and the initial decrease in the flow of traffic confident that in the >> medium-term, more people will take to the buses, even those with cars, and >> overall mobility as quantified and perceived will increase. The problem is >> that even Jakartans that one would expect to support the busway are now >> incensed at the dramatically worsening of conditions. They eagerly await >> what they perceive as the all but inevitable rolling back of the program > and >> a return to the ever expanding asphalt approach to mobility. >> >> I am not aware of serious endeavors towards course correction but I will >> inquire a bit. >> >> Robert Cowherd, PhD, Associate Professor of Architecture >> Wentworth Institute of Technology 550 Huntington Ave. Boston, MA 02115 USA >> cowherdr@wit.edu; +1 617 989-4453 >> >> >> On 11/21/07 8:43 AM, "Walter Hook" wrote: >> >>> John ernst tells me that several of the corridors have been open for > some >>> time now during the construction, but that it is temporary. >>> >>> 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 Paul Barter >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 1:49 AM >>> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >>> Subject: [sustran] Jakarta busway twists and turns? >>> >>> The Jakarta busways appear to be facing some curious decisions according >>> to this Jakarta Post article below. >>> >>> See near the end where it says: >>> "On Nov. 5 the administration announced motorists would be permitted to >>> use certain sections of other busway corridors in the city for a month. >>> The decision was made to ease traffic congestion caused by the ongoing >>> construction of the three new corridors." >>> >>> This means mixed traffic is being allowed into operational busways? >>> Can anyone fill in the background on what is going on in Jakarta? Should >>> we be worried about the future of BRT there or is this a minor hiccup? >>> >>> Paul >>> ------------------------------------------------------- > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > John Ernst - Senior Program Director > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy > 127 W 26th St. Suite 1002, New York, NY 10001 > Tel +1 (212) 629-8001 Direct Tel +1 (347) 694-4771 Direct Fax > +1 (801) 365-5914 > Skype: john.ernst > > Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide > Visit http://www.itdp.org > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 12:42:19 -0800 > From: Todd Alexander Litman > Subject: [sustran] Re: Fwd: Event: Getting the climate right for > transport > To: "Paul Barter" , > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20071203123020.03a7e830@mail.islandnet.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed > > > Last week I attended the National Renewable > Energy Laboratory (NREL) Energy Analysis Forum in > Golden, Colorado > (http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/news.html ), where > leading North American energy analysts shared the > latest thinking concerning greenhouse gas > emission reduction strategies and legislation, > much of which involves emission cap and trade > programs > (http://www.rff.org/rff/News/Releases/2007Releases/loader.cfm?url=/commonspo > t/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=31222 > ). Similarly, a recent report by McKinsey, > "Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much > At What Cost" > (http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/greenhousegas.asp > ) estimates the economic costs of achieving emission reduction targets. > > Virtually all these analyses are biased against > mobility management (various strategies that > increase transport system efficiency by improving > mobility options, encouraging use of more > efficient modes, and reducing the need to travel), for the following > reasons: > > * Co-benefits are ignored. Current analysis gives > virtually no consideration to benefits such as > reduced traffic congestion, road and parking cost > savings, consumer savings, reduced traffic risk, > improved mobility for non-drivers, and improved > public health, although these benefits are often > larger in total value than emission reduction > benefits (see http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and > www.ap-net.org/docs/16th_seminar/huizenga_caiasia_special.pdf ). > > * Current analysis generally ignores the > additional external costs that result when > increased vehicle fuel efficiency and subsidized > alternative fuels stimulates additional vehicle > travel, called a "rebound effect" (see > http://www.vtpi.org/cafe.pdf and > http://www.rff.org/documents/RFF-DP-04-53.pdf ). > > * Mobility management emission reductions are > considered difficult to predict. Although case > studies and models are available for many of > these strategies (see for example, case studies > in http://www.vtpi.org/tdm and the TRIMMS Model > at http://www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs77704.htm > ), such models are not widely available or designed for energy planning. > > * Mobility management programs are considered > difficult to implement. Such programs often > involve multiple stakeholders, such as regional > and local governments, employers and developers, > and various special interest groups. Even PAYD, a > relatively simple strategy, requires cooperation > of insurance regulators, insurance companies, and > various special interest groups. As a result, > they tend to seem difficult and risky compared > with other emission reduction strategies that > only require changes to utility operations, fuel production or vehicle > designs. > > * Analysis often assume that current transport > patterns are economically optimal and any > reduction in vehicle travel harms consumers and > the economy. This ignores various market > distortions that stimulate motor vehicle travel, > and the benefits to consumers and the economy of > many mobility management strategies > (www.vtpi.org/distortions_BPJ.pdf > ). With improved travel options and efficient > incentives travel reductions reflect low-value > vehicle-miles that consumers willingly forego in > exchange for cost savings. In a more optimal > market, with efficient road, parking and vehicle > insurance pricing, and more optimal planning > practices, motorists would drive significantly > less and be better off overall (http://www.vtpi.org/sotpm.pdf ). > > > Described differently, there are two general > approaches to reducing transportation emissions: > reduce emission rates per vehicle-kilometer or > reduce total vehicle-travel. The first generally > seems easier, because it simply requires changing > fuels or vehicle design, but, if done correctly, > the second provides far more total benefits. As a > result, significant emission reductions can be > achieved with negative costs (they provide net economic benefits). > > Due to these factors, currently proposed emission > reduction programs will not implement mobility > management as much as optimal and so will fail to > achieve other important benefits such as > congestion reductions, crash reductions, consumer > savings and equity objectives > (http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ). A truly > sustainable transportation system requires more > than simply reducing consumption of fossil fuels, > it requires creating a more efficient > transportation system. It will be up to those of > us who understand the wider value of mobility > management to educate decision makers about their > full benefits and overcome barriers, so they can > be implemented as much as justified. > > Please let me know if you have comments or questions. > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > At 11:06 PM 12/1/2007, Paul Barter wrote: >> Trying to forward this message which the list blocked for some reason. >> Paul >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Carlosfelipe Pardo >> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >> Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:05:30 -0500 >> Subject: Event: Getting the climate right for transport >> Transport side event at COP 13, Bali Indonesia >> Organized by TRL/GTZ, UITP, UIC, ITPS >> >> The German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) will host a side event titled > "Getting >> the climate right for transport" at the United Nations Climate Change >> Conference (COP 13) in Bali. The event will be in cooperation with the >> Transport Research Laboratory (UK), UITP, UIC and Institution for Transport >> Policy Studies (Japan). >> >> The event will discuss future pathways to a more sustainable transport >> system along with options for decision-makers to integrate climate change >> mitigation measures into the transport sector. >> >> The event will take place on 7th and 8th December, 2007 from 1 to 3 pm in >> the Tidal Room at the Grand Hyatt Hotel. >> >> The event will combine practical as well as methodological approaches with >> actual experience on sustainable transportation. The draft program is on > our >> SUTP website at www.sutp.org . >> >> At this event Mr. Manfred Breithaupt (GTZ) and Mr. Holger Dalkmann (TRL) >> will present the new sourcebook module titled "Transport and Climate >> Change", which is the latest publication in the GTZ Sustainable Urban >> Transport series, and discuss available instruments to reduce carbon > dioxide >> emissions in the transport sector. >> >> The module summarises the challenges that climate change mitigation has to >> face in the transport sector and presents the major options and instruments >> available to deal with them. The module also explains the various >> sustainable transport policy and planning options and sketches out their >> potential for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. >> With the new module, the GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Sourcebook now has >> 26 modules focussing on various issues of transportation. All the modules >> are available to download from the SUTP websites at no cost ( >> http://www.sutp.org and http://www.sutp.cn for Chinese users). >> >> -- >> Carlosfelipe Pardo >> Coordinador de Proyecto- Project Coordinator >> GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC) >> Cl 93A # 14-17 of 708 >> Bogot? D.C., Colombia >> Tel/fax: +57 (1) 236 2309 Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662 >> carlos.pardo@sutp.org www.sutp.org >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS. >> >> Please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >> to join the real sustran-discuss and get full >> membership rights. The yahoogroups version is >> only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to >> the real sustran-discuss (even if the >> yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). >> Apologies for the confusing arrangement. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion >> of people-centred, equitable and sustainable >> transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > 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'). > > End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 52, Issue 2 > ********************************************** > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > ----- Jonathan Richmond Transport Adviser to the Government of Mauritius Ministry of Public Infrastructure, Land Transport and Shipping Level 4 New Government Centre Port Louis Mauritius +230 707-1134 (Mauritius mobile: most reliable way to reach me at all times) +1 (617) 395-4360 (US phone number rings at home -- call me in Mauritius for the price of a call to the US). +1 (425) 998-0998 (US phone number, connects to mobile phone when in wifi zone, or goes to voice mail) +44 (0)7978 807532 (UK mobile number, connects to mobile phone when in wifi zone, or goes to voice mail). This is also a SIP number. If you have a SIP phone you can reach me by dialing: sip:447978807532@truphone.com >From Google Talk you can add me as a contact by clicking add and then entering ext+447978807532@truphone.com. Clicking on this address will then ring my mobile phone when I am in a wifi zone, or go to voice mail at other times. e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From cherry at utk.edu Thu Dec 6 06:36:36 2007 From: cherry at utk.edu (Chris Cherry) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 16:36:36 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? In-Reply-To: <00ad01c83783$66be4c50$3601a8c0@DFJLYL81> References: <00ad01c83783$66be4c50$3601a8c0@DFJLYL81> Message-ID: <001501c83786$ea083190$be1894b0$@edu> I didn't work on this project directly, but if I understand it correctly, one would open up the bus lane at the bottleneck so that the traffic is always flowing out of the bottleneck at maximum capacity (so a 2 mixed + 1 BRT configuration would have an effective capacity of three lanes). The bus would still have a huge advantage in heavily congested corridors because it would effectively jump the longest queues leading up to the bottleneck and would be inhibited by mixed traffic for only a short section of the busway (like the queue formed by one cycle length). One could design it so that the queue never expanded more than one cycle length at a signalized intersection. Of course this traffic theory and technology leads to many policy and implementation questions etc and it might be dangerous to concede any bus right of way, especially in a difficult enforcement environment. Also, as the bus lane becomes more saturated with buses, the effectiveness of trying to use excess lane capacity dwindles. One note, Volvo is one of the leading bus producers in the world and sells a lot of buses in China under its joint venture Sunwin. -----Original Message----- From: Walter Hook [mailto:whook@itdp.org] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 4:11 PM To: 'Jonathan Richmond'; 'Chris Cherry' Cc: UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; 'Sustran List' Subject: RE: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? The papers from Berkeley make a few generalizations that are more typical of conditions in the US than in developing countries. Segregated bus lanes will actually increase the speeds and capacity of the mixed traffic lanes if the current traffic mix includes a large number of buses with very disorganized stopping behavior. This situation is typical on many BRT corridors that ITDP is working on, all in developing countries, but it is quite rare in the US. In conditions, as frequently occurs in the US, where bus frequencies and passenger volumes are quite low, say below 5000 pphpd, and certainly below 2000pphpd, the advantages of physically segregated lanes drop if this leads to congestion of mixed traffic, since a mixed traffic lane can move almost as many people depending on the vehicle mix. This is a real issue in the US where the bus frequencies tend to be pretty low due to low demand except on a few very exceptional corridors. This would be the case on Wiltshire Boulevard, for instance, and on a few major arterials in New York, etc. Probably a cost benefit analysis of converting a mixed traffic lane to an exclusive bus lane would only yield a positive result in higher demand corridors, and so harder to sell in the US. Of course you can drop bus priority at bottlenecks, but you only need bus priority at bottlenecks, so what is the point of the bus priority? On many brt systems we are planning there are parts of the brt network where we end the physical segregation for a certain section. Flyovers are the typical situation. However, we continue the segregation up to the bottleneck, so the bus avoids the cue that sometimes forms to reach the bottleneck. This works fine. But to open the brt up only at traffic bottlenecks sort of defeats the purpose of the lane segregation otherwise, no? In the developing world, this low bus frequency is not so typical. In the case of TransJakarta the lanes look empty at times in part because the bus procurement has been held up, in part because demand is not that high yet because there are very few feeder buses, and in part because the station/bus interface in Corridor I, with only one door per bus on Corridor I, can't really handle so many buses per hour. Once these problems are resolved, then the bus frequency will be much higher, and there will no longer be empty lanes. The justification for removing segregation will be weaker. That being said, even a bus every 1.5 minutes looks pretty empty except at the stations. Stand on the road sometime and count a minute and a half inside a lane, it seems like a long time. There are bus priority systems in Europe where there are bus priorty lanes only at such bottlenecks, and they are cheaper to build but lack a system identity. Hope this clarifies rather than confuses 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 Jonathan Richmond Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 3:49 AM To: Chris Cherry Cc: UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK; Sustran List Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? I am very interested in this - does anyone think that this principle could be extended to optimizing the use of BRT rights of way to allow buses to enter and leave at various points without causing congestion? On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Chris Cherry wrote: > There has been some research coming out of the transportation engineering > (Michael Cassidy and Carlos Daganzo) group looking at trying to maximize the > use of these "empty" BRT lanes (or any limited access lane for that matter). > Essentially, if planned right, one could allow vehicles to enter the > restricted lane only at bottlenecks in the system and thus vastly increase > the throughput of cars with minimal disruption to buses. They have been > looking at this from the context of HOV lanes in the USA, but have recently > been trying to apply the theory to busways in China. This would ultimately > improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce congestion and > potentially allow the drivers to perceive the BRT system in a better light. > Of course there are a lot of policy issues around letting cars in some > strategic areas of the BRT system and convincing them that it is not > beneficial to let them in the entire system. Here are a couple of paper out > of the UC-Berkeley Volvo Center > > http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2007/VWP/UCB-ITS-VWP-2007-1.pdf > http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/ucb/2005/vwp/ucb-its-vwp-2005-2.pdf > > > Chris Cherry > Assistant Professor > Civil and Environmental Engineering > University of Tennessee-Knoxville > 223 Perkins Hall > Knoxville, TN 37996-2010 > phone: 865-974-7710 > mobile: 865-684-8106 > fax: 865-974-2669 > http://web.utk.edu/~cherry > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 03:13:00 -0700 > From: John Ernst > Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta busway twists and turns? > To: > Message-ID: <20071202181335.859F92DB9C@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > > If I can pick up this now dated thread on the Jakarta busway (with > apologies, I was on vacation)... > > I agree with the assessment that the Jakarta busway is in serious > trouble. It is also true that former Governor Sutiyoso forced the > busway through. (I still complement him for it because my guess is > that going slow would have meant not going at all.) > > I believe Jakarta holds the record as the shortest design and build > time of any full BRT in the world. (I would welcome hearing of other > systems that might be contenders.) Jakarta officially started > planning in May of 2003. By early 2008 it will have about 200km of > corridors, or an average of 40km per year from conception to > operation. By 'full BRT', I basically mean segregated lanes, raised > platforms and pre-board fare collection, but we could niggle on mixed > traffic sections of segregated corridors, etc. (Keep in mind that I > am definitely talking about quantity here, not quality.) > > One of the main consequences of Sutiyoso's rapid implementation is > that there was little legal work completed. There is no provision in > law or regulation for the busway itself, it is actually a > manipulation of normal bus route licenses. The appropriation of road > space for the busway is also a gray area. My understanding is that > because the busway does not have clear legal basis, the police > consider it up to their discretion whether or not they enforce the > corridors. > > This year, one of the new corridors under construction is in a very > wealthy area. So, there have been a lot of complaints about losing > road space for cars. A lot of this is misunderstanding -- in that > area the city will widen the road to preserve the same number of > mixed traffic lanes, although narrower ones. In the meantime, the > police have reacted by opening more and more sections of bus lanes to > mixed traffic. > > ITDP is one group working to keep BRT on course in Jakarta. We have > this year begun working more with the police (city police in > Indonesia are not under city government, but under a national police > agency). For example, we took a key member of the police to Bogota > for the transit fair last month. > > I agree fully with Carlos Pardo's comments (Nov 23) about the > difficulty of convincing the public about BRT lanes. Overall, this > is an interesting problem in implementing BRT systems: the lanes > often look empty. When we see a photo of a BRT, it always has a bus > or two in the lane, but between buses you see only 2-5 minutes of > empty lane -- at least in closed systems without overlapping > routes. On the other hand, if the mixed traffic lanes are not > congested, there is no reason to build segregated BRT lanes. > > In a city like Jakarta, where for 20 years streets have been > generally filled curb-to-curb, it is very hard to accept that a lane > that looks empty could be carrying 10 or 20 times as many passengers > as the ones that look chock-full. You can imagine the pressure on > the police officer on the street. > > A lot needs to be done to improve the capacity and performance of the > Jakarta busway. Hopefully that will soon include returning to full > enforcement of all busway corridors. While several scenarios are > possible, it's unlikely to fully happen until the 3 corridors now > under construction start operating at full service. If history is > any guide, that could be around next June. > > I hope this information is useful. Sorry to be slow to pitch in. > > Best, > John > > At 11:09 PM 11/21/2007, you wrote: >> Evidence on the ground in Jakarta suggest that there is indeed cause for >> serious concern over the continued viability of Bus Rapid Transit in >> Jakarta. The history of excellent measures being scrapped due to problems > of >> implementation is crowded enough to give one pause. >> >> The whole endeavor was basically forced through on the force of personality >> by Governor Sutiyoso loosely based on Transmilenio, Bogota. His gamble >> seemed a good one at the time: We can endure the hardship of construction >> and the initial decrease in the flow of traffic confident that in the >> medium-term, more people will take to the buses, even those with cars, and >> overall mobility as quantified and perceived will increase. The problem is >> that even Jakartans that one would expect to support the busway are now >> incensed at the dramatically worsening of conditions. They eagerly await >> what they perceive as the all but inevitable rolling back of the program > and >> a return to the ever expanding asphalt approach to mobility. >> >> I am not aware of serious endeavors towards course correction but I will >> inquire a bit. >> >> Robert Cowherd, PhD, Associate Professor of Architecture >>