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

Lee Schipper schipper at berkeley.edu
Sat Apr 30 01:03:46 JST 2011


2% of trips?
-- 
Lee Schipper, Ph.D
Project Scientist
Global Metropolitan Studies
http://metrostudies.berkeley.edu/

Street/Mail Address:
UC Berkeley Global Metropolitan Studies
1950 Addison 2nd floor, Berkeley.
Berkeley CA 94704-2647


+1 510 642 6889,
FAX +1 510 642 6061
Cell +1 202 262 7476

skype: mrmeter



> I think that's called "dropping the kids off at school".
>
> Rob
>
> Robert Graff
> Manager, Office of Energy and Climate Change Initiatives
> Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission
> 215-238-2826
> www.dvrpc.org/EnergyClimate
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+rgraffwork=gmail.com at list.jca.apc.org
> [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+rgraffwork=gmail.com at list.jca.apc.org] On
> Behalf Of Lee Schipper
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 10:43 AM
> To: Todd Alexander Litman
> Cc: sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
> Subject: [sustran] Re: PRT proposal for Delhi convinces Chief Minister
>
> "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').
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 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