[sustran] "Valid" PRT analysis

[Steve Raney]

Eric and Todd raise invalid objections to PRT. For example, Todd was
interviewed for a 2009 article on PRT, but the Boston Globe writer found
Todd's objections invalid, hence: a) there are no quotes by Todd in the
article and b) the writer dismisses a group of stale objections:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/10/04/invasion_of_the_
pod_car/. 

 

I am not claiming that that Eric and Todd are deficient. I applaud most of
their contributions to sustainable transportation. But, for "PRT under
Capitalism," private sector companies have to address a much larger set of
objections/issues, in much more detail, in order to obtain equity
investments and project funding. Readers should envision the equivalent of
1,000 pages of Q&A back and forth regarding objections/issues. There are now
three "established" PRT vendors who have "run Capitalism's gauntlet:" ULTra
PRT, 2getthere, and Vectus. To me, objections based on "non-gauntlet-proven"
PRT systems are straw man (false) arguments (see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man). I agree with Eric that comic-strip
writer Ken Avidor's PRT straw man would be unsafe, expensive, unreliable,
low-capacity, smelly, dirty, poorly-maintained, and ugly.

 

PRT is not the best alternative for every transportation application.
Time-consuming, expensive, expert processes are used to evaluate
transportation alternatives (with O/D flows, benefit-cost analysis,
stakeholder input, etc). It is common for PRT and BRT to be considered as
complementary solutions in a multi-modal mosaic. It is rare for PRT and BRT
to compete directly. Historically, the bias in alternatives analyses has
favored the status quo. 

 

Apple would not debate "the iPod concept" on a listserv, nor would Apple use
a simplistic survey to "vote" on the iPod. There were many failed attempts
at digital music players (Creative Labs, etc) before the iPod succeeded.
Apple would say, "Eric and Todd, in our product research, we came across a
superset of your issues/objections. We would not have moved forward if we
had not convinced ourselves that we could address those objections."  

 

Here is a link,
http://www.ultraprt.com/news/89/149/May-2011-News-LHR-HSR-India-Apple-tools/
, to some current, commercially-oriented information on one of the three
established PRT systems (I am an employee). Item #4 provides characteristics
of Indian PRT applications.  

 

I have had the opportunity to spend 15,000 hours of my working career on
PRT. My peer-reviewed research supports PRT "niche applications" where PRT
synergistically enhances other green modes.  

 

============================================

Steve Raney, Cities21: advanced transit & smart growth

Transportation Research Board Committee Member, AP020 and AP040