[sustran] Re: Indian roads - planes, cows, elephants, mosques

[Lee Schipper]

There are about 35 mn drivers in Canada, so 753 gallons total (if you
believe it is that high) works out
to about 21 gallons/driver, which, at Canadian prices of $4 CDN/US
gallon give us about $88/driver, hardly a princely sum!

Lee Schipper
Director of Research
EMBARQ, the WRI Center
for Sustainable Transport
10 G St. NE
Washington DC, 20002
+1202 729 7735
FAX +1202 7297775
www.embarq.wri.org

>>> "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" <edelman at greenidea.info>
5/6/2007 1:33:43 PM >>>
Hi,

Martin Cassini wrote:
> In the interests of long-term survival, people need to find other
ways
> of getting about, work more from home, develop new energy sources.
But
> something can be done NOW to make an impact on climate change: scrap
> traffic lights, the biggest gas-guzzlers of them all! From a
Canadian
> website: “If every driver in Canada avoided idling for 5 minutes a
day,
> 1.6 million tonnes of CO2 would not enter the atmosphere. It is
> estimated that idling and stop-go traffic costs motorists 753
million
> gallons of gas a year, or $1,194 per driver in wasted fuel and
time.”
> But how do we avoid idling when traffic lights block progress in
every
> sense? (In haste again, sorry)
>   
FIRST of all, you are conflating stop-go traffic and idling into one 
thing. Stop-go can be on roads where are there are no traffic lights, 
like freeways and highways.

Second, you are saying that cars produce most of their CO2 because of 
the lights... the "biggest gas-guzzlers of them all"? That's nuts.

Third, what people can do NOW is exercise some self-control rather than

just depend on a lack of traffic lights to solve their personal carbon

problems.

- T


>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
>
sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk at list.jca.apc.org

>
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk at list.jca.
> apc.org] On Behalf Of Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory
> Sent: 06 May 2007 11:54
> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
> Subject: [sustran] Re: Indian roads - planes, cows, elephants,
mosques
>
>
> Martin Cassini wrote:
>   
>> Lots to say and little time but in brief: my sympathies and analysis

>> are pro-planet and pro-freedom of choice/movement, but not
anti-car.
>>     
> I FIRMLY believer that is a contradiction. But to clarify one thing I
am
>
> pro-appropriate transport, not anti-car. Except in cities. For me
this 
> means:
> * In the short- to medium-term: A gradual reduction in private cars 
> though various means, and a big increase in all the "alternative 
> transport" modes, from walking to carshare, and also support of small

> carfree projects (both optically carfree and really carfree)
> * In the medium-term: Densification of settlements, freeze and
reduction
>
> on what many call "sprawl", continued development of carfree areas, 
> alternative transport improvements
> * In the medium- to long-term: Complete transformation of all cities
so 
> that cars are not desired and so not allowed.
>
> Cars are fine when used appropriately.
>   
>>  Roughly
>> speaking, traffic signals double congestion, journey times and fuel

>> use (and they are responsible for much of the carnage on the
roads),
>>     
> AS you give one vague figure here ("double") are you saying that
traffic
>
> signals double pollution within the wider scope of reducing 
> sustainability by half? I am not a traffic engineer, but it seems
that 
> highways, freeways etc.. fill up no matter how wide they get, how
many 
> lanes are added, and get jammed up, and all of this without the help
of 
> traffic signals.
>   
>>  so
>> until clean cars are widely available, e.g. the compressed air car 
>> from France/Spain,
>>     
> WHERE does the electricity come from for that? What kind of behaviour

> does a car enable? Longer trips to the store, bigger refrigerators 
> because the store is far away... so high energy use.
>
> But more importantly, how does half of the things you mention above 
> compare to the total amount of pollution etc., caused by a doubling
in 
> walking, public transport and cycling? If one-half of the carnage is

> caused by traffic signals, then this means roughly *only* 600,000
people
>
> die on the roads each year due to collisions? This is acceptable to
you?
>
> I am not even mentioning the air, noise and visual pollution part.
>   
>>  scrapping lights would bring an immediate and significant reduction

>> in greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, lights cost a fortune to 
>> manufacture, install, maintain and run. What is the cost to the grid

>> of the UK's galaxy of 24-hour lights?
>>     
> REMEMBER, that I generally agree with you about there being too many

> signals and signs.
>   
>> Todd, I like your point about
>> facilitating life between buildings,
>>     
> THANKS.
>   
>>  but I question the social
>> engineering element in some of your proposals.
>>     
> AUTOmobilisation is one of the biggest social engineering projects
ever!
>
> People are born in places which are already dominated by the car, so

> their fates are already engineered. The good engineering continues,
from
>
> the smallest regenerative braking system in a hybrid car to the 
> Interstate Highway System in the USA. And all the marketing and 
> advertising hocus pocus which makes people feel inadequate unless
they 
> don't have a car. Toyota, etc. is very brilliant. All enabled by
human 
> nature, e.g. peer pressure, to be sure. The engineers know that
well.
>   
>>  If people want to go
>> further afield and carry stuff or passengers,
>>     
> THERE are so many existing alternative solutions for this. You are 
> talking to me like I am from Mars.
>   
>>  and go door-to-door,
>>     
> DRIVE a car up to my door? Not in places with life between buildings.

> Walking works, cycling too.
>
> Sorry, Martin, you are dreaming about resources which don't exist. I
am 
> dreaming about using our resources in the most efficient, sustainable

> and desirable way.
>
> DO you really think that we if we eliminating signals and
perpetuating 
> the dominance of even tamed individual cars is a recipe for a 
> sustainable world?
>
> - T
>
>
>   
>>  good
>> luck to them!
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:
>>
sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk at list.jca.apc.or

>> sustran-discuss-bounces+g
>>
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk at list.jc

>> a.
>> apc.org] On Behalf Of Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory
>> Sent: 04 May 2007 16:36
>> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
>> Subject: [sustran] Re: Indian roads - planes, cows, elephants,
mosques
>>
>>
>> Mr Cassini,
>>
>> It might interest you to know that the issue you discuss is one of
the
>> ideas for debate at Towards Carfree Cities in Istanbul late in
August.
>>     
>
>   
>> <http://www.worldcarfree.net/conference>
>>
>> Debate:
>> "Complete streets (see www.completestreets.org 
>> <http://www.completestreets.org/> for more info) and shared space
(see
>>     
>
>   
>> "shared space" entry in Wikipedia) concepts vs. pedestrianisation"
>>
>> If you are interested in debating this or participating in some way
>> please contact istanbul at worldcarfree.net 
>> <mailto:istanbul at worldcarfree.net>
>>
>> I realise that Complete Streets and Shared Space are not the same 
>> thing.
>>
>> ***
>>
>> My own opinion, briefly, is that your concept of sharing without 
>> signals
>>
>> etc. is GREAT except that private automobiles are not sustainable on
a
>> global level and even carshare is not desirable as a long-term
>>     
> solution 
>   
>> because of the way that cars ensure that streets remain solely in
the 
>> job of fulfilling transport duties, rather than a traditional and I

>> think better role to facilitate life between buildings, with
transport
>>     
>
>   
>> not hindering this and only enabling it. To put it another way, a
>>     
> street
>   
>> full of cars with drivers acting politely as possible still
dominates
>> the scene, even if collisions go down (and I have seen the videos of

>> Shared Space and believe they do. I really do agree that people
need
>>     
> to 
>   
>> make eye contact and so on. Signs are also ugly.).
>>
>> So, it is certainly better than the current situation but no
long-term
>> solution, or even a mid-term solution.
>>
>> But you also seem to say that it is the traffic signals which are 
>> making
>>
>> things difficult for polar bears, rather than the car traffic
itself, 
>> no
>>
>> matter what speed it is operating at. This is really funny. Are you
>> serious?
>>
>> It would be a fine system if there were no cars. In fact, this is
the
>> way it us 100-120 years ago. No signals, no signs, and no cars.
>>
>> So, I propose a compromise: No signals AND  no cars.
>>
>> Hope to see you in Istanbul. If Mr. Irons can come too, it would be
>> great, as long as he doesn't fly there. The polar bears would not 
>> approve. Or will you argue that airplanes should also not have
>> restrictions?
>>
>> - T
>>
>>
>>
>> Martin Cassini wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> May I second Madhav's delightful point? As some of you know, my 
>>> frustration is with too much traffic regulation, which in my view
is 
>>> counterproductive, makes roads dangerous and hostile, where the
very 
>>> restraints - which go against the grain of human nature - set the 
>>> stage for conflict and congestion. I love what I see when lights
are 
>>> out of action and there are no external controls - congestion 
>>> dissolving, courtesy thriving, everyone merging in a merry mix of 
>>> meandering movement, and the emergence of a new hierarchy, with 
>>> vulnerable road-users at the top. Perhaps there is an elegant 
>>> compromise to be found - some midway point between India and
England 
>>> ... priority rules and regimented controls dropped in favour of 
>>> natural cooperation, where might is not right, and we adopt 1Q, 
>>> denoting single queueing and innate intelligence.
>>>  
>>> Martin
>>> www.goodfun.tv <http://www.goodfun.tv>
>>>  
>>>  
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> *From:*
>>>
sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk at list.jca.apc.o

>>> sustran-discuss-bounces+r
>>> sustran-discuss-bounces+g
>>>
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk at list.j

>>> c
>>> a.apc.org]
>>> *On Behalf Of *Madhav Badami, Prof.
>>> *Sent:* 04 May 2007 15:00
>>> *To:* Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
>>> *Subject:* [sustran] Re: Indian roads - planes, cows, elephants,
>>>     
>>>       
>> mosques
>>   
>>     
>>>     Dear Carlos,
>>>      
>>>     Once the craziness of the academic term comes to an end, I
>>>       
> promise
>   
>>>     a detailed response to Jonathan Richmond's (and others')
postings
>>>     on the situation in India (and what we can and ought to do
about
>>>     it). I will try and work elephants, cows and yoga  -- but not
>>>     planes -- into my response as well :-). Meanwhile, I will
leave
>>>     you with this personal viewpoint ... India is like life itself
--
>>>     joyous, sometimes sublime, and at the very same time, very
messy,
>>>     even obscene, but never ever dull and boring.
>>>      
>>>     Madhav
>>>      
>>>
>>>     
>>>       
>> --------------------------------------------
>>
>> Todd Edelman
>> Director
>> Green Idea Factory
>>
>> Korunní 72
>> CZ-10100 Praha 10
>> Czech Republic
>>
>> ++420 605 915 970
>> ++420 222 517 832
>> Skype: toddedelman
>>
>> edelman at greenidea.info 
>>
>> Green Idea Factory,
>> a member of World Carfree Network
>> www.worldcarfree.net 
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> 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').
>>
>>
>>
>>   
>>     
>
>
>   


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

Todd Edelman
Director
Green Idea Factory

Korunní 72
CZ-10100 Praha 10
Czech Republic

++420 605 915 970
++420 222 517 832
Skype: toddedelman

edelman at greenidea.info 

Green Idea Factory,
a member of World Carfree Network
www.worldcarfree.net 

-------------------------------------------------------- 
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').