[sustran] Re: PRT proposal for Delhi convinces Chief Minister

Lee Schipper schipper at berkeley.edu
Fri Apr 29 23:43:28 JST 2011


"chauffeured trips"? Where Todd. If there is only 1.55 people/car in the US where are the Chauffers? 

Lee Schipper
Global Met Studies  UC Berkeley
Precourt En Eff Center Stanford



On Apr 29, 2011, at 5:00, "Todd Alexander Litman" <litman at vtpi.org> wrote:

> There are a number of important factors to consider when comparing public
> transit and automobile costs, and therefore when comparing the
> cost-efficiency of roadway versus transit investments.
> 
> * Automobiles require a vehicle, road space and parking facilities at every
> destination. Rail transit and BRT systems include all of these cost
> components (rights-of-way, vehicles and stations). 
> 
> * Motor vehicles only serve the portion of travelers who can afford them and
> are able to drive or hire a driver.
> 
> * A large portion of automobile travel consists of chauffeured trips (a
> special trip made by a driver to deliver a passenger) and so generates an
> empty backhaul. Such trips generate one wasted vehicle-km per passenger-km
> of travel.
> 
> * Expanding urban roadways often simply shifts the location of traffic
> congestion. For example, building an urban highway or flyover tends to
> increase total traffic volumes, which increases congestion on surface
> streets.
> 
> * Automobile travel is very resource intensive, requiring 10-100 times as
> much land area for roads and parking, and 10-1,000 times as much
> non-renewable energy, as the same trips made by walking, cycling and public
> transport (www.planetizen.com/node/46570 ). Most road and parking costs are
> subsidized (borne through general taxes and businesses), resulting in
> regressive subsidies of wealthier people at the expense of poorer people.
> 
> * A typical car is only operated one or two daily hours, compared with 14-18
> for a typical bus. A typical car lasts 10-15 years, a typical bus or train
> 15-40 years. Buses and trains are therefore much more efficiently used
> assets. 
> 
> 
> There are also additional factors that should be considered when comparing
> bus and PRT. PRT systems require passengers to travel in enclosed "pods"
> with strangers, which creates insecurity problems. They often require
> passengers to walk up several flights of stairs to boarding platforms, which
> requires extra time and effort, and elevators at each station to accommodate
> people with disabilities and luggage, which increases financial and energy
> costs, costs often seem overlooked in project analysis. As a result, their
> demand is probably lower and their costs probably higher than proponents
> project. 
> 
> For illustrations of PRT systems, and other "advanced" transport, visit
> http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/whatsnew.htm . They all look great
> in the drawings, but think about what it would actually be like to travel in
> a little pod in hot weather after a few years when the plastic is scratched
> and cracked, the interior is worn and damaged by vandals, and it smells of
> previous passengers' body odor. I think there are good reasons to be
> skeptical about these systems. I suspect that improving walking, cycling and
> public transit, and increasing the supply of affordable housing along major
> transit corridors, will be far more cost effective investments overall.
> 
> This is not to suggest that cities should invest nothing to accommodate
> automobile transport, nor that BRT is the only solution to urban transport
> problems, but all of these factors should be considered when evaluating and
> comparing options, and determining how they should be financed. In general,
> efficiency and equity require that automobile users be charged the full
> costs for the roads, parking facilities and fuel they consume, while there
> are good reasons for society to subsidize some public transit costs, and
> where there are conflicts (such as limited road space), favor public transit
> over automobile travel, since it is more efficient and equitable. 
> 
> 
> For more information on these issues see:
> 
> Todd Litman (2006), "Smart Congestion Reductions II: Reevaluating The Role
> Of Public Transit For Improving Urban Transportation," VTPI (www.vtpi.org);
> at www.vtpi.org/cong_reliefII.pdf . 
> 
> Todd Litman (2007), "Evaluating Rail Transit Criticism," Victoria Transport
> Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/railcrit.pdf . 
> 
> Todd Litman (2009), "Evaluating Public Transit Benefits and Costs," VTPI
> (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/tranben.pdf . This includes sections on
> comparing automobile and transit, and comparing bus and rail.
> 
> Todd Litman (2010), "Raise My Taxes, Please! Evaluating Household Savings
>> From High Quality Public Transit Service," VTPI (www.vtpi.org); at
> www.vtpi.org/raisetaxes.pdf .
> 
> Todd Litman (2010), "The Selfish Automobile," Planetizen
> (www.planetizen.com); at www.planetizen.com/node/46570 .   
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> Todd 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"
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+litman=vtpi.org at list.jca.apc.org
> [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+litman=vtpi.org at list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf
> Of ashok datar
> Sent: April-28-11 10:52 PM
> To: Sarath Guttikunda
> Cc: sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
> Subject: [sustran] Re: PRT proposal for Delhi convinces Chief Minister
> 
> *cost of bus and car per person *
> 
> Dear All,
> if we calculate the investment cost per seat in a car vs the same in a bus
> we get a disturbing picture
> If a Volvo bus costs a min of Rs. 70 lakhs for 40 seats
> it means the investment per seat is Rs. 1.75 lakhs
> on the other hand , popular cars such as Santro, Indica, Alto etc all cost
> around Rs 3 to Rs. 4 lak rupees .
> that means the investment per seat would be Rs one lakh per seat
> why does it have to be so ?
> Earlier , the ordinary BEST used to cost only Rs. 11 lakhs to Rs. 18 lakhs-
> obviously they  were very basic and the costs are up but in those days
> investment cost per seat in a bus was only Rs. 30 to 40000
> I think there is something radically wrong that the cost of a bus needs to
> be so high in India
> can we not provide good quality 40 seater buses under Rs. 40 lakhs
> and if a car air conditioning costs Rs. 25000, how much extra it should cost
> for a bus ?
> Ultimately in India , investment cost is more important than even the fuel
> cost
> let us think about this issue which can make a radical difference to the
> approach of people to buses and cars
> that is where no public transport can compete with two wheelers
> ashok datar
> 
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Sarath Guttikunda
> <sguttikunda at gmail.com>wrote:
> 
>> Dear Lee and Co.,
>> 
>> attached is a summary of the results published by Ministry of Urban
>> Development in 2008-09 on the passenger travel trends and they tell a good
>> story of where the cities are headed.
>> 
>> Important messages on this page:
>> 
>>   - As the cities grew (in size of population, which is proxy to the
>>   geographical size), access to the work places in less than 15 mins
> travel
>>   time decreases
>>   - As the cities grew, the share of public transport in the form of bus
>>   transport (percent of passenger trips) increases - which is a good
> sign,
>>   meaning the cities are realizing the importance of promoting public
>>   transport and more efforts are headed that way as the cities expand
>>   - As the cities grew, the share of non-motorized transport in the form
>>   of walking and biking (percent of passenger trips) decreases - which is
> the
>>   sad part of the equation, meaning the role of cars and SUVs is
> overtaking
>>   the need to promote NMT
>>   - Lower the share of non-motorized transport in the city, lower the
>>   service index (% trips accessible in less than 15 mins travel time) and
>>   higher the congestion index, primarily due increase in the personal
>>   transport
>> 
>> The access to public transport is growing, but not enough to support the
>> travel demand growth in the big cities. Figure 3, top right panel,
> presents
>> the share of passenger trips covered by the public transport against the
>> population in the cities. The access to the public transport is high in
> the
>> megacities, and expected to grow under the JNNURM funds. However, the lack
>> of infrastructure in the bus manufacturing sector to supply the necessary
>> 
>> With regards,
>> Sarath
>> 
>> --
>> Dr. Sarath Guttikunda, New Delhi, India
>> UrbanEmissions.Info <http://www.urbanemissions.info/> | TED Fellow |
>> +1(202)683-0937 (till June)
>> http://www.dri.edu/sarath-guttikunda
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------- 
> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------- 
> If you get sustran-discuss 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.
> 
> ================================================================
> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). 


More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list