[sustran] Re: Fuel consumed by idling

[martincassini at blueyonder.co.uk]

Given a green light (!) for the film and/or TV programme / series that I'm
planning, there will be the opportunity to research and establish these
and other facts and figures. One question: why are g/km (CO2 per
kilometre) figures published but not g/pm (CO2 per minute engine
running/idling)? Even the manufacturers don't seem to know.

Martin

> I still have trouble with that figure —  would love to see a clear,
> published, written reference where
> we can see the sources, assumptions, and numbers crunched. And of
> course, let us know which gases!
>
>>>> <martincassini at blueyonder.co.uk> 5/10/2007 5:54:26 AM >>>
> I thought I said, and meant, that 40% of polluting gases from traffic,
> not
> fuel used, is from traffic idling. I got that figure from
> pro-regulation
> man Prof David Begg. As you might have read, chronic lung disease and
> malformations occur in children who live on or near main roads. My
> lung
> function has suffered since I moved to King's Cross. On the Euston
> Road, I
> see catastrophic congestion every day of the week, caused largely by
> an
> endless procession of mandatory traffic lights, permanent bus lanes,
> and
> the congestion charge which forces vehicles on to outer routes.
>>
>> Please cite sources for the claim that 40% of fuel is used from
>> idling. I suspect that it is a misinterpretation of the data. A
>> typical vehicle consumes about a tenth as much fuel per unit of time
>> while idling as under load (typically about 1 liter per hour for a
>> car and 2 liters an hour for a large truck). If an average vehicle
> is
>> driven 1 hour per day and idles 5 minutes, idling represents about
> 1%
>> of total fuel consumption.
>>
>> I think Cassini may be confusing idling with stop-and-go driving
>> conditions, but I'm skeptical that the traffic management strategies
>> he advocates would actually increase traffic efficiencies. I think
>> there is a good case for converting stop signs and signal
>> intersections to roundabouts, but I've yet to see evidence that
>> eliminating traffic controls altogether ("naked streets") reduces
>> delay or crash risk overall in most situations.
>>
>> There are many anti-idling campaigns underway, but most seem to
>> exaggerate the benefits, they are an excuse to avoid the more
>> critical reforms needed to reduce economically excessive vehicle
>> travel and associated social costs (see
> http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf
>> ).
>>
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> -Todd Litman
>>
>>
>> At 10:42 AM 5/6/2007, Martin Cassini wrote:
>>>Dashing out, but in the UK, about 30% of our CO2 output is from
> traffic.
>>>Prof David Begg admits that 40% of that is from traffic idling. How
>>>often does traffic idle at lights for no good reason? I live in
> King's
>>>Cross, and I would say a good (or bad!) half the time. Also you have
> to
>>>add the cost of manufacturing, installing, maintaining and RUNNING
> the
>>>galaxy of 24-hour lights - this alone represents a massive carbon
>>>footprint. If it wasn't for the lights, traffic would filter and
> flow,
>>>instead of continually stop, idle and re-start. Traffic volume can be
> a
>>>drama, but volume + controls = crisis.
>>>
>>>Martin
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Todd Alexander Litman
>> Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)
>> litman at vtpi.org
>> Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
>> 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
>> "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity"
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> 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').
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 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').
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 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').