From naziaty at alambina.um.edu.my Fri Dec 31 22:16:17 1999 From: naziaty at alambina.um.edu.my (Naziaty Yaacob) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:16:17 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok Transit System ('Skytrain') Message-ID: Sorry Paul. I am using the sustran-discuss, but could you contact me as soon as possible. Thank you. NAZY -----Original Message----- From: SUSTRAN Resource Centre [SMTP:sustran@po.jaring.my] Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 3:47 PM To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok Transit System ('Skytrain') At 14:53 22/11/99 +0800, Alok Jain wrote: >Surprised to hear that "Park & ride" is considered impractical and >unfeasible in Bangkok because of "high cost of land and parking". In Hong >Kong, where the land and cost of parking is much dearer (I think this is >undisputed) Government is actively pushing for Park-n-ride as a means to >reduce urban congestion. I think that the explanation may be that the new mass transit system in Bangkok currently does not extend beyond the inner area of the city which is densely built up. There is also a danger that by putting park n' ride in such dense, mixed land-use locations could possible even reduce ridership by reducing the amount of human activity in the vicinity of stations. I imagine that Park and ride in Hong Kong would only be in the outer New Town areas (please correct me if I am wrong). Paul PLEASE NOTE NEW 8 DIGIT TELEPHONE/FAX NUMBER A. Rahman Paul BARTER Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and the Pacific (SUSTRAN) P.O. Box 11501, Kuala Lumpur 50748, Malaysia. TEL/FAX: +60 3 2274 2590 E-mail: sustran@po.jaring.my SUSTRAN: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS: http://www.egroups.com/group/sustran-discuss/ The SUSTRAN network promotes and popularises people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on Asia and the Pacific. From ajain at kcrc.com Wed Dec 1 11:27:41 1999 From: ajain at kcrc.com (Jain Alok) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 10:27:41 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Parking Requirements Message-ID: Ronaldo, Parking regulations for HK are available in Chapter 8 of HK Planning Standards and Guidelines and you can find them under "Technical Standards" on Planning Department's web page: www.info.gov.hk/planning/index.htm Alok Jain Hong Kong -----Original Message----- From: Ronaldo R. Manahan [mailto:dojie@transportas.com.ph] Sent: November 27, 1999 5:05 PM To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Parking Requirements Fellow SUSTRAN-Discuss members: I would like to inquire whether anyone has access to information regarding parking requirements for different land uses in CBDs and suburbs for Asian countries. Initial interest would be parking requirements fior high-density residential uses (condominiums). Source information (legislation, study recommendations, etc.) would be most useful. Thanks in advance. Ronaldo Manahan Transportas Consulting Manila, Philippines From heckler at quickweb.com.ph Fri Dec 3 20:10:23 1999 From: heckler at quickweb.com.ph (Ramon Fernan III) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 11:10:23 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Determining MRT fares? Message-ID: <199912030327.LAA29816@goku.quickweb.com.ph> Like Bangkok, Metro Manila will begin operations of its newest Metro rail line on Dec. 15. This is the second metro rail in the area and has been given the fancy name of Metro Star Express. As with the Skytrain, there has been debate about what fare to charge. It's a BOT project so the builder wanted to charge Php 44 (Php 40.8/US$1) from Quezon City where it starts to Makati where it currently ends. It is not clear whether fares would be distance based although there is talk to that effect. Anyway, the operator said that they needed to charge this much in order to get economic returns although malls are being built at the major stops from which the operator will earn income (in fact, at its inception, the malls were included precisely so that fares could be kept low and the operator could recoup its investment from their operation rather than the fare). The current LRT in Manila charges a flat fare of Php 10 but the gov't claims it is subsidizing riders at the rate of Php 60 each! There was supposed to be a public hearing held by the gov't (DOTC) on the issue of the fare and apparently there was public clamor to make it affordable to working people (who earn a mandated minimum of about Php 195/day). The DOTC Secretary then went ahead and endorsed the Metro Rail operator's fare structure anyway. (So much for public hearings.) However, President Estrada has ordered the fare lowered to Php34 for the full distance "for an experimental period." For comparison's sake, an aircon bus charges about Php 20 for the full distance although one has to sit in traffic. Taxi fare is about Php 100. So, how do these things get decided anyway? What's a fair fare? Isn't it true that metro rail fares everywhere are subsidized? Ramon Fernan III From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Fri Dec 3 12:50:39 1999 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 12:50:39 Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? Message-ID: <199912030601.OAA04947@phil.gn.apc.org> >Skytrain, there has been debate about what fare to charge. It's a BOT >project so the builder wanted to charge Php 44 (Php 40.8/US$1) from >Quezon City where it starts to Makati where it currently ends. It is >not clear whether fares would be distance based although there is >talk to that effect. Anyway, the operator said that they needed to >charge this much in order to get economic returns although malls are >being built at the major stops from which the operator will earn >income (in fact, at its inception, the malls were included precisely >so that fares could be kept low and the operator could recoup its >investment from their operation rather than the fare). The current It is a sad reflection of the kind of planning done with the Metro Manila rail transit that the fare is being debated on when the project is about to be finished, rather than before it was to be approved... Roberto Verzola From ajain at kcrc.com Fri Dec 3 16:05:06 1999 From: ajain at kcrc.com (Jain Alok) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:05:06 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? Message-ID: Ramon, First to answer your question on how rail fares are determined. In Hong Kong, rail fares are determined using a hybrid of distance-based and zonal fare approach with due cognisance to affordability and fares on competitive modes. And there is no direct fare subsidy from the Government. Of course rail companies here run an efficient operation keeping the costs low (HK$17.39 per car-km operated and HK$4.62 per passenger carried). Indirect subsidy by allowing property development along the railway line is provided and used mainly to fund new extensions. A question back to you. In the Asia Rail conference last month in HK, Paul Daza, VP, Metro Rail Transit Corporation presented a paper on MRT III project which was scheduled to open sometime in Dec. (he did mention exact date but I don't remember). Was he referring to the same line you have written about in your mail? He elaborated in detail the operating arrangement of these Metro lines (which I thought was quite odd and unique) that MRTC would build it and lease it back to Government who will then operate it. MRTC would be responsible for only maintaining the system. All the revenue would be collected by Government which in turn would pay a fixed lease amount to MTRC insuring their returns for any changes in ridership. Please correct me if my undertstanding is not right. Alok Jain Hong Kong -----Original Message----- From: Ramon Fernan III [mailto:heckler@quickweb.com.ph] Sent: December 3, 1999 7:10 PM To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Determining MRT fares? Like Bangkok, Metro Manila will begin operations of its newest Metro rail line on Dec. 15. This is the second metro rail in the area and has been given the fancy name of Metro Star Express. As with the Skytrain, there has been debate about what fare to charge. It's a BOT project so the builder wanted to charge Php 44 (Php 40.8/US$1) from Quezon City where it starts to Makati where it currently ends. It is not clear whether fares would be distance based although there is talk to that effect. Anyway, the operator said that they needed to charge this much in order to get economic returns although malls are being built at the major stops from which the operator will earn income (in fact, at its inception, the malls were included precisely so that fares could be kept low and the operator could recoup its investment from their operation rather than the fare). The current LRT in Manila charges a flat fare of Php 10 but the gov't claims it is subsidizing riders at the rate of Php 60 each! There was supposed to be a public hearing held by the gov't (DOTC) on the issue of the fare and apparently there was public clamor to make it affordable to working people (who earn a mandated minimum of about Php 195/day). The DOTC Secretary then went ahead and endorsed the Metro Rail operator's fare structure anyway. (So much for public hearings.) However, President Estrada has ordered the fare lowered to Php34 for the full distance "for an experimental period." For comparison's sake, an aircon bus charges about Php 20 for the full distance although one has to sit in traffic. Taxi fare is about Php 100. So, how do these things get decided anyway? What's a fair fare? Isn't it true that metro rail fares everywhere are subsidized? Ramon Fernan III From ajain at kcrc.com Fri Dec 3 16:16:59 1999 From: ajain at kcrc.com (Jain Alok) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:16:59 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? Message-ID: I do not think there is anything wrong with determining fares close to the opening of the project. At the planning stage the fares are notional. On such free-standing project (I mean those projects targeted with a financial or economical viability) and especially railway project where construction period is long and accurate financial budgeting is often inaccurate, it is difficult to determine fares at the planning stage (meaning at least 5-6 years before opening). Generally, a minimum return is targeted from the planning stage and fares to achieve that return are determined closer to the opening of the project (I am just stating what is common practice. It may not be the best practice) Alok Jain Hong Kong -----Original Message----- From: Roberto Verzola [mailto:rverzola@phil.gn.apc.org] Sent: December 3, 1999 8:51 PM To: heckler@quickweb.com.ph Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? >Skytrain, there has been debate about what fare to charge. It's a BOT >project so the builder wanted to charge Php 44 (Php 40.8/US$1) from >Quezon City where it starts to Makati where it currently ends. It is >not clear whether fares would be distance based although there is >talk to that effect. Anyway, the operator said that they needed to >charge this much in order to get economic returns although malls are >being built at the major stops from which the operator will earn >income (in fact, at its inception, the malls were included precisely >so that fares could be kept low and the operator could recoup its >investment from their operation rather than the fare). The current It is a sad reflection of the kind of planning done with the Metro Manila rail transit that the fare is being debated on when the project is about to be finished, rather than before it was to be approved... Roberto Verzola From dojie at transportas.com.ph Fri Dec 3 20:02:21 1999 From: dojie at transportas.com.ph (Ronaldo R. Manahan) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 19:02:21 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? In-Reply-To: <199912030327.LAA29816@goku.quickweb.com.ph> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19991203190221.00779d78@transportas.com.ph> Ramon, Jain: The rail line being referred to by Ramon is the same as that presented by Paul Daza. EDSA-MRT Line 3, recently named the Metro Star Express, runs a route along the center of one of Metro Manila's busiest corridors - EDSA. It is actually a circumferential line in form, but radial in function since Metro Manila's road network has failed to catch up with shifting land uses. >there has been debate about what fare to charge. It's a BOT >project so the builder wanted to charge Php 44 (Php 40.8/US$1) from >Quezon City where it starts to Makati where it currently ends. >He elaborated in detail the operating arrangement of these Metro lines >(which I thought was quite odd and unique) that MRTC would build it >and lease it back to Government who will then operate it. As mentioned by Alok Jain, the contract between MRTC and the Government of the Philippines (GOP) is actually a Build-Lease-Transfer (BLT) agreement, where MRTC as the systems provider just leases out the system to the operator, in this case DOTC acting for GOP. It may sound as an unusual arrangement, and it does. In fact, recent policy has been set that no other BLT agreements will be approved, and the MRT EDSA Line 3 will be the first and last BLT contract. >MRTC would be responsible for only maintaining the system. >All the revenue would be collected by Government which in turn would >pay a fixed lease amount to MTRC insuring their returns for any changes >in ridership. Please correct me if my undertstanding is not right. This is correct. DOTC as operator sets the fares. MRTC gets paid a "lease", denominated in dollars to hedge against foreign currency risk, on a train availability basis. Thus, they have to maintain the system, so that they insure service availability. Otherwise, there are stiff penalties if MRTC cannot provide the train capacities based on a pre-agreed schedule. MRTC does not share in ridership or market risk, since this is borne by the government, although I think the contract has some clauses on sharing upside benefits (i.e. MRTC gets a bonus if patronage targets are exceeded). And DOTC as operator needs to set the fares to make sure that they cover those lease payments they would shell out to MRTC. If DOTC allows fares to be subsidized, then it would be every Filipino citizen paying for the balance of the convenience experienced by the MRT users, instead of only the users paying the full cost of the service they are getting. >Anyway, the operator said that they needed to >charge this much in order to get economic returns although malls are >being built at the major stops from which the operator will earn >income (in fact, at its inception, the malls were included precisely >so that fares could be kept low and the operator could recoup its >investment from their operation rather than the fare). Maybe there's some mix-up here. The operator is DOTC, and they are the ones charging the fares. The retail outlets at the stations are also covered by clauses in the BLT agreement, although I am not very familiar with those. >The current LRT in Manila charges a flat fare of Php 10 but the gov't claims it >is subsidizing riders at the rate of Php 60 each! There is indeed subsidy in the first LRT Line (Taft-Rizal Avenue corridor), but I don't know if it would reach P60 per passenger. Line 1, if I remember correctly, ahs one of the highest farebox ratios of any light rail system worlwide (I think no. 2 wordwide), so the subsidy is in the form of capital cost recovery, although if the records are scrutinized, the labor cost component of Line 1 has been increasing in recent years, which should signal that there are things that need to be checked. >However, President Estrada has ordered the fare lowered to >Php34 for the full distance "for an experimental period." Whatever happens, MRTC gets covered, whether there are riders or not. The government will have to pay them the lease payments. If the fare revenues are not enough to cover these, then even non-users will be paying for the benefits the users are getting. The higehr fare structure simply applies the principle of "users pay". >For comparison's sake, an aircon bus charges about Php 20 for the >full distance although one has to sit in traffic. Taxi fare is about >Php 100. So, how do these things get decided anyway? What's a fair >fare? Isn't it true that metro rail fares everywhere are subsidized? The important factor here is time cost. How much would an LRT passenger be willing to pay for the benefit of a shorter travel time compared to riding a bus on the congested streets? But then again, there are other considerations, particularly if the line is privately financed. Investors will be balancing return on investments, as well as fare elasticities. Government has to take all of these considerations PRIOR to approving the proposal, as so eloquently said by Obet Verzola. Of course, there should be allowances for price increases and inflation, since it would take years between contract approval and actual operation. Best regards to all. Ronaldo "Dojie" Manahan Transportas Consulting Quezon City, Philippines From dojie at transportas.com.ph Fri Dec 3 20:39:41 1999 From: dojie at transportas.com.ph (Ronaldo R. Manahan) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 19:39:41 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19991203193941.037ef9e0@transportas.com.ph> The contract between the Philippine Government and PT Citra Lamtoro, who built the Manila South Skyway (elevated urban expressway), included a parametric formula for toll rate escalation, based on a number of factors such as exchange rate, inflation, and a host of others. Should government not be able to enforce the pre-agreed rate (e.g. due to political pressure, or a court-imposed restraining order), then government pays PT Citra the difference. This rate increases cover the whole duration of the concession agreement. If government decides not to impose the increases, then non-users will again end up paying for the benefits gained by the users. In the case of the MRT Line 3 along EDSA, there has been prescribed fares included in the financial analysis as part of the proposal submitted to the government, which is cleared by the Investment Coordination Committee of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA-ICC). Of course, these are financial numbers which would determine viability of the project. As operator, government should have thoroughly scrutinized these numbers, and presumably they did. I remember an average fare of about P1.30 per kilometer in 1995, when we did some studies on this project. Conditions now are much different from conditions then. For one, the financial crisis was not taken into account when they first run those numbers, and when the project was first approved. The costs would have presumably changed, but that is a risk for the prime contractor (Sumitomo) to insure against. Anyway, government must have done a review of those numbers to take all account of these considerations, and decided on the P44 fare. President Estrada has ordered that this be lowered, but I am not sure where he got his new figures. Dojie Manahan Transportas At 15:16 03 12 99 +0800, you wrote: >I do not think there is anything wrong with determining fares close to the >opening of the project. At the planning stage the fares are notional. On >such free-standing project (I mean those projects targeted with a financial >or economical viability) and especially railway project where construction >period is long and accurate financial budgeting is often inaccurate, it is >difficult to determine fares at the planning stage (meaning at least 5-6 >years before opening). Generally, a minimum return is targeted from the >planning stage and fares to achieve that return are determined closer to the >opening of the project (I am just stating what is common practice. It may >not be the best practice) > >Alok Jain >Hong Kong >-----Original Message----- >From: Roberto Verzola [mailto:rverzola@phil.gn.apc.org] >Sent: December 3, 1999 8:51 PM >To: heckler@quickweb.com.ph >Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? > > > >Skytrain, there has been debate about what fare to charge. It's a BOT > >project so the builder wanted to charge Php 44 (Php 40.8/US$1) from > >Quezon City where it starts to Makati where it currently ends. It is > >not clear whether fares would be distance based although there is > >talk to that effect. Anyway, the operator said that they needed to > >charge this much in order to get economic returns although malls are > >being built at the major stops from which the operator will earn > >income (in fact, at its inception, the malls were included precisely > >so that fares could be kept low and the operator could recoup its > >investment from their operation rather than the fare). The current > >It is a sad reflection of the kind of planning done with the Metro >Manila rail transit that the fare is being debated on when the project >is about to be finished, rather than before it was to be approved... > >Roberto Verzola > From ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu Sat Dec 4 01:02:53 1999 From: ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu (Eric Bruun) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 11:02:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? In-Reply-To: <199912030327.LAA29816@goku.quickweb.com.ph> Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Ramon Fernan III wrote: [snip] > > For comparison's sake, an aircon bus charges about Php 20 for the > full distance although one has to sit in traffic. Taxi fare is about > Php 100. So, how do these things get decided anyway? What's a fair > fare? Isn't it true that metro rail fares everywhere are subsidized? > > Ramon Fernan III > They are not subsidized everywhere, but almost everywhere in the developed world. It seems that the rich countries want to encourage public transit use at home but encourage austerity in the poor countries -- only build that for which the private sector can make a profit. Eric Bruun From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Sat Dec 4 03:58:08 1999 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 03:58:08 Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? Message-ID: <199912032109.FAA08747@phil.gn.apc.org> >And DOTC as operator needs to set the fares to make sure that they cover >those lease payments they would shell out to MRTC. If DOTC allows fares to >be subsidized, then it would be every Filipino citizen paying for the >balance of the convenience experienced by the MRT users, instead of only >the users paying the full cost of the service they are getting. > And to think that the Philippine government had no say at all on the placement of the MRT terminals, though it is the govt (and eventually the Filipino people) that will carry the risk. For those who are not familiar with this project (also called LRT III, which runs along the historic EDSA), some terminals were stupidly placed nearly *midway* between major road crossing, and will force riders to walk 600 - 1,000 meters to get their next bus or jeepney (micro-bus) ride. No other adjective can describe it better, sorry. According to the ADB itself, no serious transport study was done for the project (which is why the ADB refused to grant it a loan). Roberto Verzola PS. What is a farebox ratio? From ob110ob at idt.net Sat Dec 4 06:23:37 1999 From: ob110ob at idt.net (Obwon) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 16:23:37 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? References: <3.0.1.32.19991203193941.037ef9e0@transportas.com.ph> Message-ID: <384834D7.8715B6E8@idt.net> I'd probably go for a small loss over the first couple of years! The reason: If this is a big project with a long term expected return that is to be more dependant on the perihiperal businesses, then a culture needs to be established that can be depended on for a long time. Cultures are hard to establish! They are even harder to keep 'seated' when there are competitive options as there are likely to be over long hauls. But it seems to me that this project is designed specifically to depend on a culture of consumerism of varying types. Thus, a low price not only builds higher volumes rapidly, but they encourage people to stay 'in the system' longer, perhaps even using it as an entertainment option. Much like the trolley cars of old America where families rode them on Sundays strictly for their amusement. So, if one stop is near theaters, another near gov't facilities and others near other and varied points of interest, then it will be easy for people to amuse/entertain themselves with a variety of fare simply by remaining in or near the system and using it often and freely. A higher cost causes people to limit their use of the system to only the most productive trips. The lower the fare, the less "Productive" trips will have to be, before people will take them. And since people like to travel in groups, the more trips that will be taken for less "productive" activities, the payment of fares usually falls more on the better off members of the group: ie. parents for kids, friends for friends encouraged to tag along for company etc., So, a lower fare allows people to more easily subsidies others and still use the system not just more often but for a wider variety of reasons. Just my two cents Obwon Ronaldo R. Manahan wrote: > The contract between the Philippine Government and PT Citra Lamtoro, who > built the Manila South Skyway (elevated urban expressway), included a > parametric formula for toll rate escalation, based on a number of factors > such as exchange rate, inflation, and a host of others. Should government > not be able to enforce the pre-agreed rate (e.g. due to political pressure, > or a court-imposed restraining order), then government pays PT Citra the > difference. This rate increases cover the whole duration of the concession > agreement. > > If government decides not to impose the increases, then non-users will > again end up paying for the benefits gained by the users. > > In the case of the MRT Line 3 along EDSA, there has been prescribed fares > included in the financial analysis as part of the proposal submitted to the > government, which is cleared by the Investment Coordination Committee of > the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA-ICC). Of course, > these are financial numbers which would determine viability of the project. > As operator, government should have thoroughly scrutinized these numbers, > and presumably they did. I remember an average fare of about P1.30 per > kilometer in 1995, when we did some studies on this project. > > Conditions now are much different from conditions then. For one, the > financial crisis was not taken into account when they first run those > numbers, and when the project was first approved. The costs would have > presumably changed, but that is a risk for the prime contractor (Sumitomo) > to insure against. Anyway, government must have done a review of those > numbers to take all account of these considerations, and decided on the P44 > fare. President Estrada has ordered that this be lowered, but I am not > sure where he got his new figures. > > Dojie Manahan > Transportas > > At 15:16 03 12 99 +0800, you wrote: > >I do not think there is anything wrong with determining fares close to the > >opening of the project. At the planning stage the fares are notional. On > >such free-standing project (I mean those projects targeted with a financial > >or economical viability) and especially railway project where construction > >period is long and accurate financial budgeting is often inaccurate, it is > >difficult to determine fares at the planning stage (meaning at least 5-6 > >years before opening). Generally, a minimum return is targeted from the > >planning stage and fares to achieve that return are determined closer to the > >opening of the project (I am just stating what is common practice. It may > >not be the best practice) > > > >Alok Jain > >Hong Kong > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Roberto Verzola [mailto:rverzola@phil.gn.apc.org] > >Sent: December 3, 1999 8:51 PM > >To: heckler@quickweb.com.ph > >Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? > > > > > > >Skytrain, there has been debate about what fare to charge. It's a BOT > > >project so the builder wanted to charge Php 44 (Php 40.8/US$1) from > > >Quezon City where it starts to Makati where it currently ends. It is > > >not clear whether fares would be distance based although there is > > >talk to that effect. Anyway, the operator said that they needed to > > >charge this much in order to get economic returns although malls are > > >being built at the major stops from which the operator will earn > > >income (in fact, at its inception, the malls were included precisely > > >so that fares could be kept low and the operator could recoup its > > >investment from their operation rather than the fare). The current > > > >It is a sad reflection of the kind of planning done with the Metro > >Manila rail transit that the fare is being debated on when the project > >is about to be finished, rather than before it was to be approved... > > > >Roberto Verzola > > From kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in Sat Dec 4 10:48:58 1999 From: kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in (kisansbc@bom5) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 17:48:58 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Sharing taxies in Mumbai Message-ID: <199912041637.LAA10199@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> Dear Deepika, Thank you for your email dated 28.11.99 for contradicting my statement that "sharing taxies are not to be found in Mumbai", I know of such rare examples where sharing of taxies is formally and of autorikshaws is informally allowed. My contention was in reference to Ria's query on sharing of taxies as a general rule everywhere like in Tehran, Istanbul. Ria should not select Mumbai for study expecting to see sharing of taxies everywhere. In fact, sharing is also practised at night after 10 pm even in the business areas. I was happy to observe you taking interest in other matters in addition to Biomedical waste. Love Kisan From kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in Sun Dec 5 04:43:04 1999 From: kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in (kisansbc@bom5) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 11:43:04 -0800 Subject: [sustran] DETERMINING MRT FARES Message-ID: <199912041637.LAA10216@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> Dear Friends: We have just received Ramon Fernandes III email of 03.2.99 on the builder's proposal to charge Php 44 equivalent to US$ 1.10 for single journey which President Estrada has reduced to 0.85,. The fare of 1.10 or even 0.85 is prohibitive by any standards in the developing countries. The common man, in whose name project is planned and executed, would not be able to use it. Moreover Metro Manila would not be able to reduce trafic snarls in any case because the motor car owners would not change over to Metro and vehicle journeys would not reduce. We feel fairly convinced that public transport has invariably to be subsidised to ensure efficiency in urban areas and to reduce private vehicles. The question remains as to who should subsidise and how? In European cities and more particularly in London between Fifties and Seventies, public road transport and commuter railway services in cities were subsidised by the state-state or federal govt. This was considered a part of the welfare support to citizens. But this was not a standard practice universally applied. Public transport udertakings devised peculiar practices in their respective areas of operation. In Mumbai, municipalised public road service- BEST Undertaking-has the franchise of distributing electricity in a small part of Mumbai while it operates buses throughout Mumbai and neighbourhood. Its earnings in electricity distributon subsidises bus service providing 4.5 to 5 million journeys dily, by far the largest service in the world. The fares range from Rs.2 for 1.6 km distance upto Rs.11-12 for 30 km journey (Rs 43 is equivalent to US $ 1.00). Suburban railway system in Mumbai and extending to 30-50 km beyond limits into suburban areas provide about 5 million accounting for 40% of daily journeys provided by the Indian Railways throughout India). Fares start at Rs 2 for the shortest stage. Out of the four suburban rail services in Indian cities - Mumbai, Calcutta, Chennai, and Delhi, Mumbai is the only one that earns profits. This is of course possible through overcrowding. A railway train having 750 capacity carries 2500 to 3500. Capacity of some trains is recently increased by increasing cmpartments from nine to twelve.Thus the railway service is subsidised by commuters themselves through overcrowding and risky uncomfortable travel.Overcrowding is much more than we experienced in the Manila LRT. The primary object of the commuting services-road or railway is to provide to the bulk of the citizens a safe, fast and direct facility to move for ensuring efficiency in urban conurbations. The fares have to be within the affordable capacity of the poorest of the poor urbanite. A two way journey cost in the Metro Star Express of Pho 88, the Manila Metro proposal or Pho 8, President Estrada's directive of Phs 68 works out at 45 and 35% of the minimum wage of 195. No citizen can afford to spend so high an amount on travel. Probably the 195 is not universal payment paid to all citizens. Sometimes it is shared by the family of five. We feel that there is no room for the BOT in public transport like in many public amenities that the state is obliged to provide to citizens.In the present case, the Metro Manila must cover its capital cost through malls or any other means.Even the erection of malls is at the public cost and inconvenience so it is the citizens who bear the cost. Where do we go from here? It is clear that the state should provide the basic services including transport. Either it can be through budgetary support or by taxing private vehicles which use public faciliteis like roads and markets. Vehicles cause crowding and pollution plus delays to public transport. They should be made to provide funds through charges to cover total cost of road infrastructure as well as pollution and congestion taxes.Unfortunately the governments in the developing countries have adopted "motorisation"as a goal and giving all faciliteis to private vehicles an obligaton because mobility of private vehicles is treated as the requisite for being accepted as modem. Multilateral funding agencies like the World Bank, ADB help the governments in giving all facilities to private motor cars. This distorts national priorities. Common man continues to suffer.Elevated roads in Manila are of no use to the common man yet more and more are being pursued and built. Kisan Mehta President Save Bombay Committee From kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in Sun Dec 5 04:43:18 1999 From: kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in (kisansbc@bom5) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 11:43:18 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Sharing taxies in Mumbai Message-ID: <199912041637.LAA10248@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> Dear Deepika, Thank you for your email dated 28.11.99 for contradicting my statement that "sharing taxies are not to be found in Mumbai", I know of such rare examples where sharing of taxies is formally and of autorikshaws is informally allowed. My contention was in reference to Ria's query on sharing of taxies as a general rule everywhere like in Tehran, Istanbul. Ria should not select Mumbai for study expecting to see sharing of taxies everywhere. In fact, sharing is also practised at night after 10 pm even in the business areas. I was happy to observe you taking interest in other matters in addition to Biomedical waste. Love Kisan From rocae at hotmail.com Sun Dec 5 15:08:39 1999 From: rocae at hotmail.com (roberto evangelio) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 22:08:39 PST Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? Message-ID: <19991205060839.2897.qmail@hotmail.com> jain, you are right. it is the same project that ramon is talking about. we call it edsa mrt. it is being implmented under the BOT Law. Its a law that encourage private sector particapation in the provision of services traditionally provided by the government. as for the fare setting, it has been set and decided during the conception of the project. During that time, 1996, the average fare used in teh cashflow is P25 pesos. I think the approved rate of P17 minimum and P34 maximum is just about right. The fare is also distant related with the P17 pesos as the flagdown rate. A fare adjustment formula is part of teh BLT Agreement between the government and the private sector proponent (MRTC) The basis of the fare level is not viability of the project, since the government still expect to subsidize its operation in the first few years. ICF Kaiser Consultant conducted a survey to determine the optimum level of fare. SO the basis are wilingness-to-pay, and the competition from other modes of transport in the corridor obet >From: Jain Alok >Reply-To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >To: "'sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org'" >Subject: [sustran] Re: Determining MRT fares? >Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:05:06 +0800 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >From owner-sustran-discuss@mail.jca.apc.org Thu Dec 02 23:13:17 1999 >Received: from [210.151.253.65] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBA10B6F70054D820F39CD297FD410C200; Thu Dec 02 23:06:35 1999 >Received: from mail.jca.apc.org (ni.jca.apc.org [192.168.128.124] (may be >forged))by mail.jca.ne.jp (8.9.3/3.7W_NS-2) with ESMTP id QAA12312;Fri, 3 >Dec 1999 16:01:16 +0900 (JST) >Received: (from majordom@localhost)by mail.jca.apc.org >(8.9.3/3.7WJCA-AX-K6) id QAA19104for sustran-discuss-outgoing; Fri, 3 Dec >1999 16:01:11 +0900 (JST) >Received: from skcrca.kcrc.com ([202.67.227.67])by mail.jca.apc.org >(8.9.3/3.7WJCA-AX-K6) with ESMTP id PAA18773for >; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:59:51 +0900 (JST) >Received: by SKCRCA with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)id ; >Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:05:17 +0800 >Message-ID: >X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) >Sender: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >X-Sequence: sustran-discuss 1332 >Precedence: bulk >X-Unsub1: To unsubscribe, send the command UNSUBSCRIBE sustran-discuss >X-Unsub2: in the body of an e-mail message to majordomo@jca.ax.apc.org > >Ramon, > >First to answer your question on how rail fares are determined. In Hong >Kong, rail fares are determined using a hybrid of distance-based and zonal >fare approach with due cognisance to affordability and fares on competitive >modes. And there is no direct fare subsidy from the Government. Of course >rail companies here run an efficient operation keeping the costs low >(HK$17.39 per car-km operated and HK$4.62 per passenger carried). Indirect >subsidy by allowing property development along the railway line is provided >and used mainly to fund new extensions. > >A question back to you. In the Asia Rail conference last month in HK, Paul >Daza, VP, Metro Rail Transit Corporation presented a paper on MRT III >project which was scheduled to open sometime in Dec. (he did mention exact >date but I don't remember). Was he referring to the same line you have >written about in your mail? He elaborated in detail the operating >arrangement of these Metro lines (which I thought was quite odd and unique) >that MRTC would build it and lease it back to Government who will then >operate it. MRTC would be responsible for only maintaining the system. All >the revenue would be collected by Government which in turn would pay a >fixed >lease amount to MTRC insuring their returns for any changes in ridership. >Please correct me if my undertstanding is not right. > >Alok Jain >Hong Kong >-----Original Message----- >From: Ramon Fernan III [mailto:heckler@quickweb.com.ph] >Sent: December 3, 1999 7:10 PM >To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >Subject: [sustran] Determining MRT fares? > > >Like Bangkok, Metro Manila will begin operations of its newest Metro >rail line on Dec. 15. This is the second metro rail in the area and >has been given the fancy name of Metro Star Express. As with the >Skytrain, there has been debate about what fare to charge. It's a BOT >project so the builder wanted to charge Php 44 (Php 40.8/US$1) from >Quezon City where it starts to Makati where it currently ends. It is >not clear whether fares would be distance based although there is >talk to that effect. Anyway, the operator said that they needed to >charge this much in order to get economic returns although malls are >being built at the major stops from which the operator will earn >income (in fact, at its inception, the malls were included precisely >so that fares could be kept low and the operator could recoup its >investment from their operation rather than the fare). The current >LRT in Manila charges a flat fare of Php 10 but the gov't claims it >is subsidizing riders at the rate of Php 60 each! > >There was supposed to be a public hearing held by the gov't (DOTC) on >the issue of the fare and apparently there was public clamor to make >it affordable to working people (who earn a mandated minimum of about >Php 195/day). The DOTC Secretary then went ahead and endorsed the >Metro Rail operator's fare structure anyway. (So much for >public hearings.) However, President Estrada has ordered the >fare lowered to Php34 for the full distance "for an experimental >period." > >For comparison's sake, an aircon bus charges about Php 20 for the >full distance although one has to sit in traffic. Taxi fare is about >Php 100. So, how do these things get decided anyway? What's a fair >fare? Isn't it true that metro rail fares everywhere are subsidized? > > >Ramon Fernan III ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From dhingra at civil.iitb.ernet.in Mon Dec 6 00:39:32 1999 From: dhingra at civil.iitb.ernet.in (Prof S L Dhingra) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 21:09:32 +0530 (IST) Subject: [sustran] Re: DETERMINING MRT FARES In-Reply-To: <199912041637.LAA10216@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> Message-ID: I may correct the info' given by Mr Kishen Mehta. The peak hour loads on Mumbai suburban (Mass Rapid) trains comprising 9 coaches is 4500 persons on Central railway line and 5400 persons on western rly line against the capacity of 1700 persons (sitting + standees). The peak hour load as rly jargons is more than super dense crush load definitely very urgently needing augumented capacity preferably by UG metro or elevated Mass rapid rail corridors at network level and not only for a single corridor. With warm compliments, Sincerely, dhingra ***********end of message******************* * Dr S. L DHINGRA * * Prof. of TRANSP. SYSTEMS ENGG. (TSE) * * HEAD, CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT * * INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY * * POWAI,BOMBAY-400 076,INDIA * * VOICE:091-022-5767300/01(OFF)/8329(RES) * * 5777001(RES) Private * * 5782545 EXTN 7329/7300(Off)* * 5786530 .. 7348(LAB) * * .. 8329(RES) * * FAX :091-022-5767302/5783480 * * GRAMS:TECHNOLOGY,BOMBY,INDIA * * TELEX:011-72313 IITB IN * * EMAIL:dhingra@civil.iitb.ernet.in * * dhingra@gemini.civil.iitb.ernet.in * * URL:http://www.civil.iitb.ernet.in/ * * civil_people/faculty_dir/dhingra/ * * index.html * ******************************************** On Sat, 4 Dec 1999, kisansbc@bom5 wrote: > Dear Friends: > > We have just received Ramon Fernandes III email of 03.2.99 on the builder's > proposal to charge Php 44 equivalent to US$ 1.10 for single journey which > President Estrada has reduced to 0.85,. The fare of 1.10 or even 0.85 > is prohibitive by any standards in the developing countries. The common > man, > in whose name project is planned and executed, would not be able to use it. > Moreover Metro Manila would not be able to reduce trafic snarls in any case > because the motor car owners would not change over to Metro and vehicle > journeys would not reduce. > > We feel fairly convinced that public transport has invariably to be > subsidised to ensure efficiency in urban areas and to reduce private > vehicles. The question remains as to who should subsidise and how? > In European cities and more particularly in London between Fifties and > Seventies, public road transport and commuter railway > services in cities were subsidised by the state-state or federal govt. > This was > considered a part of the welfare support to citizens. But this was not a > standard practice universally applied. Public transport udertakings devised > peculiar practices in their respective areas of operation. In Mumbai, > municipalised public road service- BEST Undertaking-has the > franchise of distributing electricity in a small part of Mumbai while > it operates buses throughout Mumbai and neighbourhood. Its earnings > in electricity distributon subsidises bus service providing 4.5 to 5 > million > journeys dily, by far the largest service in the world. The > fares range from Rs.2 for 1.6 km distance upto Rs.11-12 for 30 km journey > (Rs 43 is equivalent to US $ 1.00). Suburban railway system in Mumbai and > extending to 30-50 km beyond limits into suburban areas provide > about 5 million accounting for 40% of daily journeys provided by the > Indian > Railways throughout India). Fares start at Rs 2 for the shortest stage. > Out of the four suburban rail services in Indian cities - Mumbai, Calcutta, > > Chennai, and Delhi, Mumbai is the only one that earns profits. This is of > course possible through overcrowding. A railway train having 750 capacity > carries 2500 to 3500. Capacity of some trains is recently increased by > increasing cmpartments from nine to twelve.Thus the railway service is > subsidised by commuters themselves through overcrowding and risky > uncomfortable travel.Overcrowding is much more than we experienced in the > Manila LRT. > > The primary object of the commuting services-road or railway is to provide > to the bulk of the citizens a safe, fast and direct facility to move for > ensuring efficiency in urban conurbations. The fares have to be within the > affordable capacity of the poorest of the poor urbanite. A two way journey > cost in the Metro Star Express of Pho 88, the Manila Metro proposal or Pho > 8, President Estrada's directive of Phs 68 works out at 45 and 35% of > the minimum wage of 195. No citizen can afford to spend so high an amount > on > travel. Probably the 195 is not universal payment paid to all citizens. > Sometimes it is shared by the family of five. > > We feel that there is no room for the BOT in public transport like in many > public amenities that the state is obliged to provide to citizens.In the > present case, the Metro Manila must cover its capital cost through malls or > any other means.Even the erection of malls is at the public cost and > inconvenience so it is the citizens who bear the cost. > > Where do we go from here? It is clear that the state should provide the > basic services including transport. Either it can be through budgetary > support or by taxing private vehicles which use public faciliteis like > roads and markets. Vehicles cause crowding and pollution plus delays > to public transport. They should be made to provide > funds through charges to cover total cost of road infrastructure as well > as > pollution and > congestion taxes.Unfortunately the governments in the developing countries > have adopted "motorisation"as a goal and giving all faciliteis to private > vehicles an obligaton because mobility of private vehicles is treated as > the requisite for being accepted as modem. Multilateral funding agencies > like the World Bank, ADB help the governments in giving all facilities to > private motor cars. This distorts national priorities. Common man continues > > to suffer.Elevated roads in Manila are of no use to the common man > yet more and more are being pursued and built. > > Kisan Mehta > President > Save Bombay Committee > From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue Dec 7 22:20:45 1999 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 14:20:45 +0100 Subject: [sustran] 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative In-Reply-To: <199912051745.MAA27486@freenet3.carleton.ca> Message-ID: Dear Friends, My idea is to post this on a handful of our most authoritative discussion sites to see what it might engender. Any comments or suggestions for me before I put it out for slaughter. eric ====== 20:20 CENTURY TRANSPORT ICONS - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative knowledge building exercise on the Web - What's a 20th century transportation icon? Let me list a few of the longer range variety, though what I propose here is to concentrate on local transport concepts: * Bullet Train * Concord(e) * Interstate Highway system * Autobahn * DC3 * Trans-Siberian Express (wrong century?) * Graf Zeppelin You get the idea. The idea is that the "icon" is somehow so striking that once the concept is understood or, better yet, convincingly demonstrated, that it makes a new crease in the collective brain with the result that all of us begin to think differently about our topic. Or... they somehow change the landscape of transportation thinking and practice. Now.... What I would like to propose if any of you are up to it is to develop in the first instance a simple listing, having in mind that we might at some point want to draw a line and select the "top 20" for eventual closer scrutiny. For it to make any sense to most people, it will probably be appropriate that for each there be some sort of brief all-comer explanation, maybe a picture or two, and a bibliography of sources that have managed to get out of the fog and shed some real light on what's going on, and what should be going on. To get the ball rolling, I am going to start here with a purposely mixed list... with the idea of somehow engendering thoughtfulness, discussion and feedback.. all to the greater good. Also I have stuck in a few Web sites which may be useful for those who do not already know them. 1. Bottlenecking (on purpose, as a strategy) 2. Carsharing (http://www.ecoplan.org/carshare, http://www.bremen.de/info/agenda21/carfree/greengame.html) 3. Carte Orange (i.e., intermodal transit pass) 4. Collectivos 5. Curitiba (http://www.curitiba.pr.gov.br/Ingles/Solucoes/Transporte/index.html) 6. Dial-a-Ride 7. Dutch/Danish bicycles 8. Gothenburg traffic cells 9. Gridlock 10. ITS 11. Mexico City 12. Monorails 13. Mus?e d'Orsay (http://www.smartweb.fr/orsay/) 14. Networks that work (http://malaysiakini.com/sustran/, http://www.ecoplan.org/access, et al) 15. Paratransit 16. Paris Metro (http://www.discoverfrance.net/France/Paris/Paris_metro.shtml --great idea but then again it's not 1900 any more) 17. Parking supply reduction 18. PRT (nice try) 19. Rickshaws 20. Smart 21. Tramway insistence (N. Europe) 22. Transit portals (http://www.sytadin.tm.fr/) 23. Woonerf (http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~la362/allimagecategories/streets/thumbnails/st reetsthumbnail.html) 24. Zurich Ubahn (A wonderful benchmark project and example for us all) That should give you a flavor... and maybe some ideas that we can incorporate before we put this out for potshots. From heckler at quickweb.com.ph Wed Dec 8 16:39:44 1999 From: heckler at quickweb.com.ph (Ramon Fernan III) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 07:39:44 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: DETERMINING MRT FARES In-Reply-To: References: <199912041637.LAA10216@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> Message-ID: <199912072356.HAA29340@goku.quickweb.com.ph> Thanks to everyone who's contributed to this discussion. I guess one of the principles we stand by in sustainable transport is that it should be fair and equitable. I think that means both in terms of giving access to the poor and making transport affordable to the poor. If we were to directly address that issue, how should we go about it in this case (of the EDSA MRT and of the Bangkok Skytrain as well)? Would a fare that takes up half of a person's daily wages be fair to that person and to society even if it is supposed to be "fair" to the entity that put up that transport system? Also, aren't the shopping malls being built in major stations compensation in part to the investor and an incentive to keep fares down? The MRTC is assured an income by the government and also gets income from the mall development. By the way, the first LRT in Manila, as I've said, is supposed to be subsidized as claimed by the government. The (flat) fare is Php10 and the subsidy per rider is Php60 (as claimed). The fare is slowly being raised to Php15. It is almost always packed. The government built it so it doesn't have to return a profit to an outside investor, only to repay the loan with which it was built. Ramon Fernan III From ajain at kcrc.com Wed Dec 8 12:05:06 1999 From: ajain at kcrc.com (Jain Alok) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 11:05:06 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: DETERMINING MRT FARES Message-ID: Its quite difficult to define "fairness" and "equity". As soon as any fare is charged for any a transport system, it is not affordable to some. And then there are diktat's of the free market which are against any cross-subsidy. I think the fair system is where similar subsidy is provided to all the modes. In developing world, there are a lot of subsidy provided to road based transport system (which eventually benefits car-users) by way of free-roads, subsidised fuel and by not recovering the indirect costs incurred. The proponents of "user-pays" principle who try to justify the high fares of mass transit systems (but themselves travel on chauffer driven cars) never target road based system for the same principle. Road based systems are also disguised as means of basic mobility. So much for "free-market economy". Alok Jain -----Original Message----- From: Ramon Fernan III [mailto:heckler@quickweb.com.ph] Sent: December 8, 1999 3:40 PM To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Re: DETERMINING MRT FARES Thanks to everyone who's contributed to this discussion. I guess one of the principles we stand by in sustainable transport is that it should be fair and equitable. I think that means both in terms of giving access to the poor and making transport affordable to the poor. If we were to directly address that issue, how should we go about it in this case (of the EDSA MRT and of the Bangkok Skytrain as well)? Would a fare that takes up half of a person's daily wages be fair to that person and to society even if it is supposed to be "fair" to the entity that put up that transport system? Also, aren't the shopping malls being built in major stations compensation in part to the investor and an incentive to keep fares down? The MRTC is assured an income by the government and also gets income from the mall development. By the way, the first LRT in Manila, as I've said, is supposed to be subsidized as claimed by the government. The (flat) fare is Php10 and the subsidy per rider is Php60 (as claimed). The fare is slowly being raised to Php15. It is almost always packed. The government built it so it doesn't have to return a profit to an outside investor, only to repay the loan with which it was built. Ramon Fernan III From kerry.wood at paradise.net.nz Wed Dec 8 13:03:50 1999 From: kerry.wood at paradise.net.nz (Kerry Wood) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 17:03:50 +1300 Subject: [sustran] 20:40 Transport Icons - Cut 1.1 of idea for a cooperative References: Message-ID: <384DD89C.B6844B21@paradise.net.nz> Dear Friends eric.britton@ecoplan.org wrote: > > > 20:20 CENTURY TRANSPORT ICONS > - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative knowledge building exercise on the Web - > > What's a 20th century transportation icon? Let me list a few of the longer > range variety, though what I propose here is to concentrate on local > transport concepts: > > * Bullet Train > * Concord(e) > * Interstate Highway system > * I think Eric has hit the jackpot with this one. Some more detailed comments: * Which 20th Century? This century has seen as much transport change as the 19th, maybe more, and much more than any other. Would the icons be better based around the millennium, which might be defined as the 40 years 1980 - 2020 ? (Pity about the DC 3, and the 1963 Buchanan Report would miss out too) Call it 20:40, cusp of the Millennium or something. * Are we talking effective solutions or modern technology/ something sexy? We can't afford to leave out the Paris Metro (or London or Brussels for that matter) because it is 1900 technology: How would Paris etc function without it, or with what alternative technology? Rickshaws, bicycles, buses, light rail and walking all have problems with image, 'old' technology or both. But then cars are old technology too... * Mexico City? Is it OK to mix icons and anti-icons? * Monorails? Look nice but can be dreadfully inflexible: so many systems are loops because the system is too inflexible to handle anything else (how do you change the points? have level crossings? get up all those stairs? get access to a crippled unit?) * Add the understanding that urban density matters? * Add the realisation that roads generate traffic? * Add the understanding/imminence of resource depletion, especially oil? I don't understand Eric's points 10 (ITS) and 20 (Smart): must have been asleep that week. Kerry -- Kerry Wood MICE MIPENZ MCIT Transport Consultant 1 McFarlane Street, Wellington 6001, New Zealand Phone + 64 4 971 5549 From COLSZE at ntu.edu.sg Wed Dec 8 14:44:02 1999 From: COLSZE at ntu.edu.sg (Piotr Olszewski (Assoc Prof)) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 13:44:02 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative Message-ID: Conspicuous by its absence from Eric's list of 20th-century wonderful transport solutions is Road Pricing. However politically difficult it may be to implement in practice, it is certainly an effective travel demand management tool. By reducing car usage it shifts the balance in the urban transport system in the right direction (i.e. towards sustainability). The official website of the Electronic Road Pricing in Singapore is: http://www.lta.gov.sg/erp/index.html Unfortunately, there is no website describing ERP's low-cost predecessor, the paper coupon-based Area Licensing Scheme which served its purpose of controlling car use in the Singapore city centre for 23 years (quarter of the century!). The only other similar traffic restraint scheme I'm aware of is in use in Teheran. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Piotr Olszewski colsze@ntu.edu.sg Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (......) > > Dear Friends, > > My idea is to post this on a handful of our most > authoritative discussion > sites to see what it might engender. Any comments or > suggestions for me > before I put it out for slaughter. > > eric > ====== > > 20:20 CENTURY TRANSPORT ICONS > - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative knowledge building exercise on the Web - > What's a 20th century transportation icon? Let me list a few of the longer > range variety, though what I propose here is to concentrate on local > transport concepts: > > * Bullet Train > * Concord(e) > * Interstate Highway system > * Autobahn > * DC3 > * Trans-Siberian Express (wrong century?) > * Graf Zeppelin > > You get the idea. The idea is that the "icon" is somehow so striking that > once the concept is understood or, better yet, convincingly demonstrated, > that it makes a new crease in the collective brain with the result that all > of us begin to think differently about our topic. Or... they somehow change > the landscape of transportation thinking and practice. > > Now.... What I would like to propose if any of you are up to it is to > develop in the first instance a simple listing, having in mind that we might > at some point want to draw a line and select the "top 20" for eventual > closer scrutiny. For it to make any sense to most people, it will probably > be appropriate that for each there be some sort of brief all-comer > explanation, maybe a picture or two, and a bibliography of sources that have > managed to get out of the fog and shed some real light on what's going on, > and what should be going on. > > To get the ball rolling, I am going to start here with a purposely mixed > list... with the idea of somehow engendering thoughtfulness, discussion and > feedback.. all to the greater good. Also I have stuck in a few Web sites > which may be useful for those who do not already know them. > > 1. Bottlenecking (on purpose, as a strategy) > 2. Carsharing (http://www.ecoplan.org/carshare, > http://www.bremen.de/info/agenda21/carfree/greengame.html) > 3. Carte Orange (i.e., intermodal transit pass) > 4. Collectivos > 5. Curitiba > (http://www.curitiba.pr.gov.br/Ingles/Solucoes/Transporte/index.html) > 6. Dial-a-Ride > 7. Dutch/Danish bicycles > 8. Gothenburg traffic cells > 9. Gridlock > 10. ITS > 11. Mexico City > 12. Monorails > 13. Mus?e d'Orsay (http://www.smartweb.fr/orsay/) > 14. Networks that work (http://malaysiakini.com/sustran/, > http://www.ecoplan.org/access, et al) > 15. Paratransit > 16. Paris Metro (http://www.discoverfrance.net/France/Paris/Paris_metro.shtml > --great idea but then again it's not 1900 any more) > 17. Parking supply reduction > 18. PRT (nice try) > 19. Rickshaws > 20. Smart > 21. Tramway insistence (N. Europe) > 22. Transit portals (http://www.sytadin.tm.fr/) > 23. Woonerf (http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~la362/allimagecategories/streets /thumbnails/streetsthumbnail.html) >24. Zurich Ubahn (A wonderful benchmark project and example for us all) > >That should give you a flavor... and maybe some ideas that we can >incorporate before we put this out for potshots. From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Dec 8 18:46:11 1999 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 10:46:11 +0100 Subject: [sustran] 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Piotr Olszewski has written the observation that follows, to which I would like to comment briefly, while at the same time working away to prepare a more completed 20:20 construct that may in time be more worthy of your time and attention. Two quick points I would like to make which I hope may help to clarify what we are about here: 1. First, the idea of the list as it stands thus far is not at all to provide a compendium of "wonderful transport solutions" of our soon gone century. That list as it stands includes not only icons to which I think we might usefully give more thought and attention, but also a certain number of candidates for what, if my courage holds out, we may end up call the "Transportation Hall of Shame" (a bit strong, really). I leave it to you for now to see how that might work out and what should go where. 2. Point two is indeed good old Road Pricing, a terrific idea if every I heard of one. But there is, in the 20:20 view of things anyway, more than one ways to price a road. For instance.... a. Piotr reminds us of Singapore of course, past and present, and that's certainly one way. This is, in my book, the choice of Real Men (which is not me). If you are spoiling for a fight, try road pricing. You'll stay very fit indeed since you will always have to keep moving. b. But what about Road Pricing the Works, a.k.a. parking policy. And that, dear friends, is why parking policy is not only a 20th century icon (for all that we did and did not do with it, despite the fact that it was right there all the time waiting for us to really put it to work). Is this beginning to make any sense at all? (Thanks to Piotr and for others of you who have gotten back to me with idea and challenges that are great grist for this mill.) Eric Britton The Commons ___ technology, economy, society ___ Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France Eric.Britton@EcoPlan.org URL www.the-commons.org Tel: +331.4326.1323 Videoconference +331.4441.6340 (1-4) Fax/voicemail hotline: In Europe +331 5301 2896 Fax/voicemail hotline: In North America +1 888 522 6419 (toll free) Conspicuous by its absence from Eric's list of 20th-century wonderful transport solutions is Road Pricing. However politically difficult it may be to implement in practice, it is certainly an effective travel demand management tool. By reducing car usage it shifts the balance in the urban transport system in the right direction (i.e. towards sustainability). The official website of the Electronic Road Pricing in Singapore is: http://www.lta.gov.sg/erp/index.html Unfortunately, there is no website describing ERP's low-cost predecessor, the paper coupon-based Area Licensing Scheme which served its purpose of controlling car use in the Singapore city centre for 23 years (quarter of the century!). The only other similar traffic restraint scheme I'm aware of is in use in Teheran. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Piotr Olszewski colsze@ntu.edu.sg Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (......) > > ====== > > 20:20 CENTURY TRANSPORT ICONS > - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative knowledge building exercise on the Web - > What's a 20th century transportation icon? Let me list a few of the longer > range variety, though what I propose here is to concentrate on local > transport concepts: > > * Bullet Train > * Concord(e) > * Interstate Highway system > * Autobahn > * DC3 > * Trans-Siberian Express (wrong century?) > * Graf Zeppelin > > You get the idea. The idea is that the "icon" is somehow so striking that > once the concept is understood or, better yet, convincingly demonstrated, > that it makes a new crease in the collective brain with the result that all > of us begin to think differently about our topic. Or... they somehow change > the landscape of transportation thinking and practice. > > Now.... What I would like to propose if any of you are up to it is to > develop in the first instance a simple listing, having in mind that we might > at some point want to draw a line and select the "top 20" for eventual > closer scrutiny. For it to make any sense to most people, it will probably > be appropriate that for each there be some sort of brief all-comer > explanation, maybe a picture or two, and a bibliography of sources that have > managed to get out of the fog and shed some real light on what's going on, > and what should be going on. > > To get the ball rolling, I am going to start here with a purposely mixed > list... with the idea of somehow engendering thoughtfulness, discussion and > feedback.. all to the greater good. Also I have stuck in a few Web sites > which may be useful for those who do not already know them. > > 1. Bottlenecking (on purpose, as a strategy) > 2. Carsharing (http://www.ecoplan.org/carshare, > http://www.bremen.de/info/agenda21/carfree/greengame.html) > 3. Carte Orange (i.e., intermodal transit pass) > 4. Collectivos > 5. Curitiba > (http://www.curitiba.pr.gov.br/Ingles/Solucoes/Transporte/index.html) > 6. Dial-a-Ride > 7. Dutch/Danish bicycles > 8. Gothenburg traffic cells > 9. Gridlock > 10. ITS > 11. Mexico City > 12. Monorails > 13. Mus?e d'Orsay (http://www.smartweb.fr/orsay/) > 14. Networks that work (http://malaysiakini.com/sustran/, > http://www.ecoplan.org/access, et al) > 15. Paratransit > 16. Paris Metro (http://www.discoverfrance.net/France/Paris/Paris_metro.shtml > --great idea but then again it's not 1900 any more) > 17. Parking supply reduction > 18. PRT (nice try) > 19. Rickshaws > 20. Smart > 21. Tramway insistence (N. Europe) > 22. Transit portals (http://www.sytadin.tm.fr/) > 23. Woonerf (http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~la362/allimagecategories/streets /thumbnails/streetsthumbnail.html) >24. Zurich Ubahn (A wonderful benchmark project and example for us all) > >That should give you a flavor... and maybe some ideas that we can >incorporate before we put this out for potshots. From dojie at transportas.com.ph Wed Dec 8 20:22:48 1999 From: dojie at transportas.com.ph (Ronaldo R. Manahan) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:22:48 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: DETERMINING MRT FARES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19991208192248.006c855c@transportas.com.ph> >The proponents of "user-pays" principle who try to justify the high fares of >mass transit systems (but themselves travel on chauffer driven cars) never >target road based system for the same principle. Road based systems are also >disguised as means of basic mobility. The only way in which to make LRT fares "affordable" is indeed to fairly charge all modes. Cities should seriously consider congestion pricing, higher parking charges, etc. The problem in Manila is that there are certain sectors now complaining about increased parking charges at shopping malls, claiming that the retail developments are already earning enough profits from sales, and cite that the "poor" car owners would have to pay more for parking. What they fail to recognize is that retail developments spend for parking, and these costs have to be recovered from somewhere. If they cannot recover them from user charges, then they tack on these costs to goods sold, which affects everybody in terms of higher prices, car owner or LRT rider. Ronaldo Manahan Transportas PO Box 143 University of the Philippines Diliman Quezon City, Philippines From sustran at po.jaring.my Wed Dec 8 18:47:22 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 17:47:22 +0800 Subject: [sustran] fwd: Ford Withdraws From Global Climate Coalition Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991208174722.0086d7c0@relay101.jaring.my> >http://www.nytimes.com/99/12/07/news/financial/ford-coalition.html >New York Times >p. C20 >December 7, 1999 > >Ford Announces Its Withdrawal From Global Climate Coalition > >By KEITH BRADSHER > >DETROIT -- In a concession to environmentalists, the Ford Motor >Co. said Monday that it would pull out of the Global Climate >Coalition, a group of big manufacturers and oil and mining companies that >lobbies against restrictions on emissions of gases linked to global >warming. > >Ford's decision is the latest sign of divisions within heavy industry over >how to respond to global warming. British Petroleum and Shell pulled out >of the coalition two years ago following criticisms >from environmental >groups in Europe, where there has been more public concern than in the >United States. Most scientists believe that emissions from automobiles, >power plants and other man-made sources are warming the Earth's >atmosphere. > >British Petroleum and Shell were so-called general, or junior, members of >the lobbying group. Ford is the first company belonging to the board that >has withdrawn, and the first American company to leave the coalition, >said Frank Maisano, a spokesman for the coalition. > >Ford's chairman since the beginning of this year, William C. Ford Jr., is a >great-grandson of Henry Ford and has long been active in environmental >causes. He has conceded that global warming is an international problem >that requires action, although he has echoed other industry leaders in >opposing the global warming agreement reached two years ago in Kyoto, >Japan. That agreement, signed by more than 100 nations, calls for >reducing man-made emissions of carbon dioxide and other global >warming gases by industrialized countries. > >Environmentalists had questioned whether Ford's company had shifted its >position much, and demanded that Ford leave the coalition. "Over the >course of time," said Terry Bresnihan, a spokesman for the automaker, >"membership in the Global Climate Coalition has become something of an >impediment for Ford Motor to credibly achieving our environmental >objectives." > >Bresnihan said Ford remains opposed to the Kyoto agreement because >developing nations are largely exempt from its rules. Connie Holmes, the >coalition's chairman, said the group opposed the Kyoto agreement and >wanted more scientific research into whether global warming was a >problem, adding that she did not believe Ford's current position was >much different from the coalition's. > >Ford's predecessor as chairman, Alexander Trotman, who became a >British life peer earlier this year, had been one of corporate America's >most outspoken leaders in opposing international pacts on global >warming. Lord Trotman and his counterparts from General Motors and >Chrysler met with President Clinton in October, 1997, and tried to talk >him out of seeking an agreement two months later in Kyoto. After >meeting the president, Lord Trotman held a press conference outside the >White House and denounced the administration's position. >___________________________________________ >Savitha Pathi >Program Assistant >Environmental Media Services >1320 18th Street NW >Washington, DC 20036 >Tel: (202) 463-6670 / Fax: (202) 463-6671 >E-Mail: savitha@ems.org >http://www.ems.org > > From Yewlett at Cardiff.ac.uk Wed Dec 8 15:47:23 1999 From: Yewlett at Cardiff.ac.uk (Chris Yewlett) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 15:47:23 GMT0BST Subject: [sustran] (Fwd) Re: Transport Models in Developing Countries Message-ID: Response from Nigeria for Armin Berger- might be of wider interest! ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date sent: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 14:04:48 +0100 (WAT) From: "Dr. Adesoji Olugbenga Adesanya" To: Yewlett@Cardiff.ac.uk Subject: Re: Transport Models in Developing Countries Hi! hi! Hi!, I am quite sorry for being a bit late in contacting you; I had thought that I'll be able to do so, on the above-mentioned subject, before the end of last week. I had to do a bit of library search. Anyway, a few recent and relevant works have been done by V. Puvanachandran, A. Naude and W. Crous and so on. These works are in CODATU VIII Conference Proceedings titled : 'Urban Transport Policy: A Sustainable Development Tool', edited by Peter Freeman and Christain Jamet and published by A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, 1998. In addition, Yaeko Yamashita (remember her?) has been doing a few things on transport modelling lately. Prof. Huw Williams should be able to provide her address. For the CODATU Conference Proceedings, Jamet could be contacted at Codatu@entpe.fr Armin Berger would find useful information from the proceedings. Thanks and Merry Xmas in advance. Soji. ------- End of forwarded message ------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Yewlett yewlett@cardiff.ac.uk Dept. of City and Regional Planning Cardiff University Tel: (+44) (1222) 875294 Glamorgan Building FAX: (+44) (1222) 874845 King Edward VII Avenue CARDIFF CF10 3WA, UK From ob110ob at idt.net Thu Dec 9 09:06:23 1999 From: ob110ob at idt.net (Obwon) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:06:23 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative References: Message-ID: <384EF27C.52FA124B@idt.net> Mier Space Station! obwon eric.britton@ecoplan.org wrote: > Dear Friends, > > My idea is to post this on a handful of our most authoritative discussion > sites to see what it might engender. Any comments or suggestions for me > before I put it out for slaughter. > > eric > ====== > > 20:20 CENTURY TRANSPORT ICONS > - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative knowledge building exercise on the Web - > > What's a 20th century transportation icon? Let me list a few of the longer > range variety, though what I propose here is to concentrate on local > transport concepts: > > * Bullet Train > * Concord(e) > * Interstate Highway system > * Autobahn > * DC3 > * Trans-Siberian Express (wrong century?) > * Graf Zeppelin > > You get the idea. The idea is that the "icon" is somehow so striking that > once the concept is understood or, better yet, convincingly demonstrated, > that it makes a new crease in the collective brain with the result that all > of us begin to think differently about our topic. Or... they somehow change > the landscape of transportation thinking and practice. > > Now.... What I would like to propose if any of you are up to it is to > develop in the first instance a simple listing, having in mind that we might > at some point want to draw a line and select the "top 20" for eventual > closer scrutiny. For it to make any sense to most people, it will probably > be appropriate that for each there be some sort of brief all-comer > explanation, maybe a picture or two, and a bibliography of sources that have > managed to get out of the fog and shed some real light on what's going on, > and what should be going on. > > To get the ball rolling, I am going to start here with a purposely mixed > list... with the idea of somehow engendering thoughtfulness, discussion and > feedback.. all to the greater good. Also I have stuck in a few Web sites > which may be useful for those who do not already know them. > > 1. Bottlenecking (on purpose, as a strategy) > 2. Carsharing (http://www.ecoplan.org/carshare, > http://www.bremen.de/info/agenda21/carfree/greengame.html) > 3. Carte Orange (i.e., intermodal transit pass) > 4. Collectivos > 5. Curitiba > (http://www.curitiba.pr.gov.br/Ingles/Solucoes/Transporte/index.html) > 6. Dial-a-Ride > 7. Dutch/Danish bicycles > 8. Gothenburg traffic cells > 9. Gridlock > 10. ITS > 11. Mexico City > 12. Monorails > 13. Mus?e d'Orsay (http://www.smartweb.fr/orsay/) > 14. Networks that work (http://malaysiakini.com/sustran/, > http://www.ecoplan.org/access, et al) > 15. Paratransit > 16. Paris Metro > (http://www.discoverfrance.net/France/Paris/Paris_metro.shtml --great idea > but then again it's not 1900 any more) > 17. Parking supply reduction > 18. PRT (nice try) > 19. Rickshaws > 20. Smart > 21. Tramway insistence (N. Europe) > 22. Transit portals (http://www.sytadin.tm.fr/) > 23. Woonerf > (http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~la362/allimagecategories/streets/thumbnails/st > reetsthumbnail.html) > 24. Zurich Ubahn (A wonderful benchmark project and example for us all) > > That should give you a flavor... and maybe some ideas that we can > incorporate before we put this out for potshots. From dojie at transportas.com.ph Thu Dec 9 09:51:05 1999 From: dojie at transportas.com.ph (Ronaldo R. Manahan) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 08:51:05 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19991209085105.006b715c@transportas.com.ph> >That list as it stands includes not only icons to which I think we >might usefully give more thought and attention, but also a certain number of >candidates for what, if my courage holds out, we may end up call the >"Transportation Hall of Shame" (a bit strong, really). I leave it to you for >now to see how that might work out and what should go where. > I nominate the private motor car (in the CBD and without road pricing contexts) to the Hall of Shame grand prize. From COLSZE at ntu.edu.sg Thu Dec 9 17:32:42 1999 From: COLSZE at ntu.edu.sg (Piotr Olszewski (Assoc Prof)) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 16:32:42 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative Message-ID: Eric, I agree with you that there is more than one way to price a road and that good parking policy has undisputed advantages. However, at the risk of repeating some well-known arguments, let me say why I think that road pricing should be one of the transportation icons, especially in the SUSTRAN context. 1. The aim of road pricing is to reduce car travel by charging motorists for road use where and when congestion occurs. Many of the items on your list (e.g. bottlenecking, parking supply reduction, parking charges) also serve the same broad purpose but these are really half-measures. They address the space dimension of congestion (i.e. can limit car trips into a particular area) but not the time dimension. What is worse, bottlenecking and parking supply reduction also reduce accessibility of the affected area. Parking policy does not affect the through traffic, etc... 2. If we are to believe transport economists, congestion pricing is the only way to impose true external cost of driving on the motorists. And any transport system in which users do not bear the true cost of driving CANNOT be sustainable in the long run. This is because the external resources (energy, environment, human health) are being used up at a disproportionate rate. Best of luck with your cooperative knowledge building exercise on the Web! ----------------------------------------------------------------- Piotr Olszewski colsze@ntu.edu.sg Nanyang Technological University, Singapore > -----Original Message----- > From: eric.britton@ecoplan.org [mailto:eric.britton@ecoplan.org] > Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 5:46 PM > To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > Cc: COLSZE@ntu.edu.sg > Subject: [sustran] 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a > cooperative > > > Piotr Olszewski has written the observation that follows, to which I would > like to comment briefly, while at the same time working away to prepare a > more completed 20:20 construct that may in time be more worthy of your time > and attention. Two quick points I would like to make which I hope may help > to clarify what we are about here: > > 1. First, the idea of the list as it stands thus far is not at all to > provide a compendium of "wonderful transport solutions" of our soon gone > century. That list as it stands includes not only icons to which I think we > might usefully give more thought and attention, but also a certain number of > candidates for what, if my courage holds out, we may end up call the > "Transportation Hall of Shame" (a bit strong, really). I leave it to you for > now to see how that might work out and what should go where. > > 2. Point two is indeed good old Road Pricing, a terrific idea if every I > heard of one. But there is, in the 20:20 view of things anyway, more than > one ways to price a road. For instance.... > a. Piotr reminds us of Singapore of course, past and present, and that's > certainly one way. This is, in my book, the choice of Real Men (which is > not me). If you are spoiling for a fight, try road pricing. You'll stay very > fit indeed since you will always have to keep moving. > b. But what about Road Pricing the Works, a.k.a. parking policy. > > And that, dear friends, is why parking policy is not only a 20th century > icon (for all that we did and did not do with it, despite the fact that it > was right there all the time waiting for us to really put it to work). > > Is this beginning to make any sense at all? > > (Thanks to Piotr and for others of you who have gotten back to me with idea > and challenges that are great grist for this mill.) > > Eric Britton > > The Commons ___ technology, economy, society ___ > Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France > Eric.Britton@EcoPlan.org URL www.the-commons.org > Tel: +331.4326.1323 Videoconference +331.4441.6340 (1-4) > Fax/voicemail hotline: In Europe +331 5301 2896 > Fax/voicemail hotline: In North America +1 888 522 6419 (toll free) > From matt.burke at mailbox.uq.edu.au Fri Dec 10 13:54:14 1999 From: matt.burke at mailbox.uq.edu.au (Matthew Burke) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:54:14 +1000 (GMT+1000) Subject: [sustran] Re: 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19991209085105.006b715c@transportas.com.ph> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Dec 1999, Ronaldo R. Manahan wrote: > >That list as it stands includes not only icons to which I think we > >might usefully give more thought and attention, but also a certain number of > >candidates for what, if my courage holds out, we may end up call the > >"Transportation Hall of Shame" (a bit strong, really). I leave it to you for > >now to see how that might work out and what should go where. > > > > I nominate the private motor car (in the CBD and without road pricing > contexts) to the Hall of Shame grand prize. May I formally nominate the Model T Ford to the list - as the icon of all private automobiles. The first mass produced car, the root cause of a fundamental shift in urban form, and the reason why one environmentalist here in Australia recently suggested Henry Ford was the most evil man of the last century [Not all of our environmentalists are that silly though]. It would be a fair bet that the Ford Motor Company also have a website dedicated to the Model T. Matt Matthew Burke Department of Geographical Sciences and Planning University of Queensland Brisbane Qld 4072 From litman at vtpi.org Sat Dec 11 00:26:57 1999 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Litman) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:26:57 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a cooperative Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991210072657.00eda2a0@mail.IslandNet.com> Too often, transportation reformers focus on just one problem and one solution at a time: congestion pricing to address congestion problems, emission charges to address emission charges, etc. But because transportation imposes many different external costs it requires a combination of reforms. For a discussion of these issues see "Transportation Cost Analysis," "Socially Optimal Transport Prices and Markets" and "Reinventing Transportation", all available free at our website: http://www.vtpi.org. Sincerely, Todd Litman, Director Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" 1250 Rudlin Street Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 E-mail: litman@vtpi.org Website: http://www.vtpi.org At 04:32 PM 12/09/1999 +0800, you wrote: >Eric, > >I agree with you that there is more than one way to price a road and that >good parking policy has undisputed advantages. However, at the risk of >repeating some well-known arguments, let me say why I think that road >pricing should be one of the transportation icons, especially in the SUSTRAN >context. > >1. The aim of road pricing is to reduce car travel by charging motorists for >road use where and when congestion occurs. Many of the items on your list >(e.g. bottlenecking, parking supply reduction, parking charges) also serve >the same broad purpose but these are really half-measures. They address the >space dimension of congestion (i.e. can limit car trips into a particular >area) but not the time dimension. What is worse, bottlenecking and parking >supply reduction also reduce accessibility of the affected area. Parking >policy does not affect the through traffic, etc... > >2. If we are to believe transport economists, congestion pricing is the only >way to impose true external cost of driving on the motorists. And any >transport system in which users do not bear the true cost of driving CANNOT >be sustainable in the long run. This is because the external resources >(energy, environment, human health) are being used up at a disproportionate >rate. > >Best of luck with your cooperative knowledge building exercise on the Web! > >----------------------------------------------------------------- >Piotr Olszewski colsze@ntu.edu.sg >Nanyang Technological University, Singapore > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: eric.britton@ecoplan.org [mailto:eric.britton@ecoplan.org] >> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 5:46 PM >> To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >> Cc: COLSZE@ntu.edu.sg >> Subject: [sustran] 20:20 Century Transport Icons - Cut 1 of idea for a >> cooperative >> >> >> Piotr Olszewski has written the observation that follows, to which I >would >> like to comment briefly, while at the same time working away to prepare a >> more completed 20:20 construct that may in time be more worthy of your >time >> and attention. Two quick points I would like to make which I hope may >help >> to clarify what we are about here: >> >> 1. First, the idea of the list as it stands thus far is not at all to >> provide a compendium of "wonderful transport solutions" of our soon gone >> century. That list as it stands includes not only icons to which I think >we >> might usefully give more thought and attention, but also a certain number >of >> candidates for what, if my courage holds out, we may end up call the >> "Transportation Hall of Shame" (a bit strong, really). I leave it to you >for >> now to see how that might work out and what should go where. >> >> 2. Point two is indeed good old Road Pricing, a terrific idea if every I >> heard of one. But there is, in the 20:20 view of things anyway, more than >> one ways to price a road. For instance.... >> a. Piotr reminds us of Singapore of course, past and present, and that's >> certainly one way. This is, in my book, the choice of Real Men (which is >> not me). If you are spoiling for a fight, try road pricing. You'll stay >very >> fit indeed since you will always have to keep moving. >> b. But what about Road Pricing the Works, a.k.a. parking policy. >> >> And that, dear friends, is why parking policy is not only a 20th century >> icon (for all that we did and did not do with it, despite the fact that it >> was right there all the time waiting for us to really put it to work). >> >> Is this beginning to make any sense at all? >> >> (Thanks to Piotr and for others of you who have gotten back to me with >idea >> and challenges that are great grist for this mill.) >> >> Eric Britton >> >> The Commons ___ technology, economy, society ___ >> Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France >> Eric.Britton@EcoPlan.org URL www.the-commons.org >> Tel: +331.4326.1323 Videoconference +331.4441.6340 (1-4) >> Fax/voicemail hotline: In Europe +331 5301 2896 >> Fax/voicemail hotline: In North America +1 888 522 6419 (toll free) >> > > From I95BERNIEW at aol.com Sat Dec 11 00:56:46 1999 From: I95BERNIEW at aol.com (I95BERNIEW@aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:56:46 EST Subject: [sustran] Transportation Communications Message-ID: <0.50aa469d.25827cbe@aol.com> Hi, I'm mostly a reader of this list rather than a contributor, but I thought I'd jump in and pass along something some of you may find of interest. I manage another e-mail list called Transport Communications. The purpose of the list is to share news and information about communications in the transportation field. The list does not deal specifically with sustainable transport issues, but I believe there is some overlap in areas such as traveler information and outreach. The list is more of a news and information source than a discussion group like this one, and volume is light, averaging about one message a day. If you'd like more information about the list, please drop me a note at i95berniew@aol.com. If you're interested in joining the list, please send a blank e-mail message to: transport-communications-subscribe@egroups.com Thanks. Bernie Wagenblast Editor Transport Communications list From kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in Sat Dec 11 10:36:52 1999 From: kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in (kisansbc@bom5) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:36:52 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Child injury prevention Message-ID: <199912111631.LAA20762@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> Dear Friends, Well written article by Ian Roberts and Carolyn Diguiseppi (received Email on 31.08.99) is an eye opener. Not only the number of deaths of children due to road traffic crashes, drowning and fires is alarming but exposes the neglect of the community and the government. People have no idea of the enormity of the avoidable loss of life. The situation in the developing countries probably has not been fully appreciated. Centres of human settlements especially cities are getting crowded due to in migration from villages. There is no semblance of land use planning, schools and health care centres located on busy roads and thorough fares attract citizens.School run more than one shift with students compelled to stroll on busy roads till their classes start. Schools do not necessarily have open space, sometimes run in hired rooms in multistoreyed buildings, again overcrowded due to other users. Many roads have no pavements or in inadequate pavements encroached upon by hawkers, parked cars etc. Crossing faciliteis do not exist and/or are not respected by motorists. Globalisation has increased the number of vehicles. Mumbai's estimated population 13 million in 434 sq km, has 3/3.5% increase in population annually while vehicles increase by 7%. Every inch of space is usurped by stationary rather than moving vehicles. Practically all vehicles are to be found increasingly on our roads. 65% of population stays in slums abutting roads and open spaces. The government promotes motorisation. State governments invite foreign car companies to st up their units in their respective states. The Maharashtra Govt offered to allot 125 ha of land, to be selected by the manufacturer to Ford, the largest car company of the world free of charge! The car owner odes not have to pay any annual charges towards phenomenal road construction/maintenance costs to the municipality. Mumbai municipality spends Rs.1.8 billion towards road maintenance/construction without receiving anything from car owners. Bus commuter pays three different charges to the municipalised bus service amounting to Rs.0.6 billion on (Ind Rs.42 make a US Dollar) for paying to the government. The most glaring example of govt is for motor cars bias provided by the following situation. Mumbai has a suburban facility providing about 5 million journeys daily, accounting for 40% of the total journeys by the Indian Rlys throughout the country. For Mumbai citizens railway though heavily overcrowded is a convenient commuting facility. In one sector of about 10 km of railway tracks are encroached by slums-they are perched hardly 45 cm away. About 30000 slum families area involved. Trains slow down to inches causing serious hardship to cmmuters. Shifting and rehabilitation of these slums is estimated to cost Rs.58-60 billion. The govt has no money! Slum dwellers are under constant threat of death!! On the other hand, the govt has undertaken construction of flyovers costing Rs.180 billion and is proposing construction of elevated roads and trans harbour sea links at a cost of Rs.1000 billion. Motor cars will not pay this cost. Public bus service will not be able to use these monstrocities. Bus stops will be shifted 300 to 800 metres farther from the present most convenient halts. The municipalised bus service - BEST Undertaking provides 4.5 to 5 million journeys daily, unique for any city of the world. Globalisation has wrought disaster in the developing countries. Consumerism is promoted without any consideration for life or convenience of the citizens. Govt priorities make politicians to extend all facilities to overseas manufacturers to bring their outmoded models. Introduction of foreign cars-Suzuki, Mercedes, BMW, secondhand cadilac costs Indian exchequer an estimated Rs.1000 billion a year . Risk to citizens including hazard to children are o no concern. We doubt where the developing countries keep statistics or studies of road fatalities, death by drowning or fire. What can we do? Individual citizen protects are drowned in flyovers Kisan Mehta President Save Bombay Committee From kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in Tue Dec 14 05:26:17 1999 From: kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in (kisansbc@bom5) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 12:26:17 -0800 Subject: [sustran] (no title) Message-ID: <199912131733.MAA01157@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> Sub:Diesel Prices We are responding though belatedly, to Walter Hook's response dated 13.10.99 to G Ananthakrishnan's query on increase in diesel prices. Public transport operators, though basically government owned or municipalised, are perennially in deficit, subsidies or incentives are not provided. The government and municipalities levy charges. So the condition is really precarious. Diesel prices were and continue to be subsidised by the govt which controls the prices for all petroleum products - petrol, diesel, kerosene, naphta etc. Price of 1 litre of diesel is lower than a litre of bottled water-like Bisleri. Diesel marketed is of low quality. Thus the govt subsidises low quality fuel attracting car manufacturers to produce and market diesel cars. The mfrs charge much higher prices for diesel vehicles as if to capitalise on the cheap diesel prices. The first step that needs to be done is to raise the price of diesel to the level of petrol and create a special fund out of the price differential. This fund should be used for upgrading the quality of diesel so that the emissions are brought down to international levels as well as to set up and run health care centres for treating ailments caused by diesel. The fund could as well be used to subsidise the public transport in a numebr of ways. Petroleum product prices are controlled by the state. Fluctuations in international crude prices result in the country having to bear a huge loss. The loss will be around Rs.1500 billion this financial year. This too needs to be corrected. Petrol, diesel etc should certainly not to be subsidised because such subsidies go to increase pollution and motorisation. It is accepted everywhere that public transport should be subsidised. However the actual situation results in the public transport subsidising other road user modes. Bus commuter in Mumbai pays to the government and municipality Rs.0.6 billion to the authorities while private car owner pays nothing. More cars on narrow roads affect the efficiency of public road transport -the municipalised BEST Undertaking which provides daily 4-5 to 5 million journeys while motor cars less than 1 million at an average occupancy of 1.6 persons. Mumbai is amongst the cities having highest road fatalities in the world. Kisan Mehta President Save Bombay Committee From kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in Tue Dec 14 10:14:58 1999 From: kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in (kisansbc@bom5) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:14:58 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Determining MRT Fares Message-ID: <199912132241.RAA20785@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> I am obliged to Prof S L Dhingra for correcting my statement on the crowding in Mumbai's suburban railway services. The super dense crush load of 4500 and 5400 persons in Central and Western Rly 9 coach suburban trains as pointed out by Prof Dhingra strengthens my statement more that public transport is kept within affordable limits by the commuters lose their life daily due to overcrowding but Railways do not consider themselves responsible for such deaths. In Mumbai, vehicles do not pay anything towards municipal road construction/maintenance costs. The govt order the Municipal authorities to stop collecting even the meagre wheel tax. Prof Dhingra recommends UG metro or elevated mass rapid rail service to reduce overcrowding. But the question is as towho will bear the cost of construction and keep commuting costs within the affordable limits. It should not happen like in Manila and Bangkok that commuting will eat away half of the statutory minimum wages earned by the men. It is clear that public road and rail transport have to be augmented to meet growing needs and commutation costs within affordable limits of the poorest of the poor commuter. The state should support public transport and realise costs from people who use facilities and infrastructure created by the state. Motor cars using the roads, the costly infrastructure should provide the funds. In any cost, privatisation or BOT has no room in transport like in other municipal amenities. Kisan Mehta President Save Bombay Committee From kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in Tue Dec 14 05:26:17 1999 From: kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in (kisansbc@bom5) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 12:26:17 -0800 Subject: [sustran] (no title) Message-ID: <199912131733.MAA01157@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> Sub:Diesel Prices We are responding though belatedly, to Walter Hook's response dated 13.10.99 to G Ananthakrishnan's query on increase in diesel prices. Public transport operators, though basically government owned or municipalised, are perennially in deficit, subsidies or incentives are not provided. The government and municipalities levy charges. So the condition is really precarious. Diesel prices were and continue to be subsidised by the govt which controls the prices for all petroleum products - petrol, diesel, kerosene, naphta etc. Price of 1 litre of diesel is lower than a litre of bottled water-like Bisleri. Diesel marketed is of low quality. Thus the govt subsidises low quality fuel attracting car manufacturers to produce and market diesel cars. The mfrs charge much higher prices for diesel vehicles as if to capitalise on the cheap diesel prices. The first step that needs to be done is to raise the price of diesel to the level of petrol and create a special fund out of the price differential. This fund should be used for upgrading the quality of diesel so that the emissions are brought down to international levels as well as to set up and run health care centres for treating ailments caused by diesel. The fund could as well be used to subsidise the public transport in a numebr of ways. Petroleum product prices are controlled by the state. Fluctuations in international crude prices result in the country having to bear a huge loss. The loss will be around Rs.1500 billion this financial year. This too needs to be corrected. Petrol, diesel etc should certainly not to be subsidised because such subsidies go to increase pollution and motorisation. It is accepted everywhere that public transport should be subsidised. However the actual situation results in the public transport subsidising other road user modes. Bus commuter in Mumbai pays to the government and municipality Rs.0.6 billion to the authorities while private car owner pays nothing. More cars on narrow roads affect the efficiency of public road transport -the municipalised BEST Undertaking which provides daily 4-5 to 5 million journeys while motor cars less than 1 million at an average occupancy of 1.6 persons. Mumbai is amongst the cities having highest road fatalities in the world. Kisan Mehta President Save Bombay Committee From ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu Tue Dec 14 04:52:46 1999 From: ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu (Eric Bruun) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 14:52:46 -0500 (EST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Jain Alok on DETERMINING MRT FARES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Dec 1999, Jain Alok wrote: > Its quite difficult to define "fairness" and "equity". As soon as any fare > is charged for any a transport system, it is not affordable to some. And > then there are diktat's of the free market which are against any > cross-subsidy. I think the fair system is where similar subsidy is provided > to all the modes. I disagree, the fair system removes subsidy from those who cause social bads and uses any charges against them to compensate those who suffer from these bads. "Subsidy" can often be viewed as a transfer from those who get the most benefit from the system to those who don't, but help to pay for it, either indirectly or directly. Also, it is very debatable whether "cross-subsidy" really exists in an integrated network -- not every route serves only the people along the route, many also serve through trips with high capacity modes. Also where this capacity is put is somewhat arbitrary if there is more than one right-of-way available, more than one type of solution, etc. This is a concept that right-wing economists push who pay no attention to network effects. The high ridership loss in the UK after deregulation was in large part due to eliminating or reducing service on these so-called "cross-subsidized" routes. (At the same time, other profitable routes have excess capacity.) Eric In developing world, there are a lot of subsidy provided > to road based transport system (which eventually benefits car-users) by way > of free-roads, subsidised fuel and by not recovering the indirect costs > incurred. > > The proponents of "user-pays" principle who try to justify the high fares of > mass transit systems (but themselves travel on chauffer driven cars) never > target road based system for the same principle. Road based systems are also > disguised as means of basic mobility. > > So much for "free-market economy". > > Alok Jain > -----Original Message----- > From: Ramon Fernan III [mailto:heckler@quickweb.com.ph] > Sent: December 8, 1999 3:40 PM > To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > Subject: [sustran] Re: DETERMINING MRT FARES > > > Thanks to everyone who's contributed to this discussion. I guess one > of the principles we stand by in sustainable transport is that it > should be fair and equitable. I think that means both in terms of > giving access to the poor and making transport affordable to the > poor. If we were to directly address that issue, how should we go > about it in this case (of the EDSA MRT and of the Bangkok Skytrain as > well)? Would a fare that takes up half of a person's daily wages > be fair to that person and to society even if it is supposed to be > "fair" to the entity that put up that transport system? Also, aren't > the shopping malls being built in major stations compensation in > part to the investor and an incentive to keep fares down? The MRTC is > assured an income by the government and also gets income from the > mall development. > > By the way, the first LRT in Manila, as I've said, is supposed to be > subsidized as claimed by the government. The (flat) fare is Php10 and > the subsidy per rider is Php60 (as claimed). The fare is slowly > being raised to Php15. It is almost always packed. The government > built it so it doesn't have to return a profit to an outside > investor, only to repay the loan with which it was built. > > > Ramon Fernan III > From sustran at po.jaring.my Tue Dec 14 09:40:47 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 08:40:47 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Online archives for sustran-discuss Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991214084047.00840310@relay101.jaring.my> Dear sustran-discussers Archives of the discussions here are now available online at: http://www.egroups.com/group/sustran-discuss The archives can be useful for going back to read a complete thread or to seek out a specific posting that you didn't save. The archives don't go back very far yet but we are hoping soon to have the entire archive since the list began in May 1997. Paul PLEASE NOTE NEW 8 DIGIT TELEPHONE/FAX NUMBER A. Rahman Paul BARTER Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and the Pacific (SUSTRAN) P.O. Box 11501, Kuala Lumpur 50748, Malaysia. TEL/FAX: +60 3 2274 2590 E-mail: sustran@po.jaring.my SUSTRAN: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS: http://www.egroups.com/group/sustran-discuss/ The SUSTRAN network promotes and popularises people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on Asia and the Pacific. From litman at vtpi.org Wed Dec 15 00:23:30 1999 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Litman) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 07:23:30 -0800 Subject: [sustran] News Release: New VTPI URL Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991214072330.00e67a00@mail.IslandNet.com> -------------- NEWS RELEASE -------------- Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" ----------------------------------- 14 December 1999 --------------------------------- The Victoria Transport Policy Institute website is reorganized, expanded, and has a new address (URL): www.vtpi.org Director Todd Litman's new email address is litman@vtpi.org. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Victoria Transport Policy Institute is an independent research organization working to develop innovative solutions to transportation problems. The VTPI website has more than three dozen free reports addressing a wide range of transport planning and policy issues. New documents are posted regularly. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The following documents are posted at the VTPI website (grouped by subject category): Evaluating Impacts and Problems ------------------------------- Transportation Cost Analysis Summary Evaluating Criticism of Transportation Costing Transportation Market Distortions - A Survey Comparing Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies Generated Traffic; Implications for Transport Planning Evaluating Transportation Equity Solutions/TDM ------------- Win-Win Transportation Solutions Potential TDM Strategies Guide to Calculating TDM Benefits Local Politician's Guide to Urban Transportation (By Councillor Gordon Price) Evaluating Carsharing Benefits First Resort; Resort Community Transportation Demand Management UBC TREK Program Evaluation; Costs, Benefits and Equity Impacts of a University TDM Program (by Todd Litman & Gordon Lovegrove) Critical Evaluation of Electric Vehicle Benefits Optimal Pricing --------------- Socially Optimal Transport Prices and Markets Using Road Pricing Revenue: Economic Efficiency and Equity Considerations Distance-Based Vehicle Insurance Distance-Based Charges; A Practical Strategy for More Optimal Vehicle Pricing Public Transit -------------- Estimating Important Transportation-Related Regional Economic Relationships in Bexar County, Texas (by Jon R. Miller, Ph.D., M. Henry Robison, Ph.D., & Michael L. Lahr, Ph.D.) Evaluating Public Transit Benefits and Costs Appropriate Public Transit Funding Optimizing Public Transit Benefits Humor ----- Lionine Features to Enhance Bridge Capacity (by Walter Kulash, Sandy Curran & Jay Hood) Those Kinky Autophiles Salvation by Bicycle Cycling Route Perfect For Heavenly Bodies Land Use Impacts ---------------- Land Use Impact Costs of Transportation Parking Requirement Impacts on Housing Affordability Pavement Busters Guide The Trouble With Minimum Parking Requirements (by Professor Donald Shoup) Automobile Dependency and Balanced Transportation ------------------------------------------------- Automobile Dependency and Economic Development (Todd Litman & Felix Laube, Ph.D.) The Costs of Automobile Dependency Optimal Level of Automobile Dependency Transportation Paradise; Realm of the Nearly Perfect Automobile? (By Professor John Pucher) Sustainable Transportation -------------------------- Issues In Sustainable Transportation (by Todd Litman & David Burwell) Sustainable Transportation Indicators Transportation Cost Analysis for Sustainability Reinventing Transportation; Exploring the Paradigm Shift Needed to Reconcile Sustainability and Transportation Objectives Non-Motorized Transportation Planning ------------------------------------- Whose Roads? Defining Bicyclists' and Pedestrians' Right to Use Public Roadways Quantifying the Benefits of Non-Motorized Transport for Achieving TDM Objectives Traffic Calming Benefits, Costs and Equity Impacts Click here to access website: http://www.vtpi.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please let us know if you have comments or questions, or if you would like to be removed from our mailing list. Feel free to pass this information to others who may find it useful. Todd Litman, Director Victoria Transport Policy Institute 1250 Rudlin Street Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 E-mail: litman@vtpi.org Website: http://www.vtpi.org From sustran at po.jaring.my Wed Dec 15 11:16:43 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:16:43 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Editorial on motorcycle pollution Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991215101643.00833100@relay101.jaring.my> Editorial from the New Straits Times, Malaysia: NST 14 December 1999 Editorial Voice: DRIVING HOME CLEANER AIR IF the people were to monitor the amount of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide they inhale daily, they may not view so lackadaisically the importance of keeping the air clean. Considering the increase in motor vehicles, including one million motorcycles in the Klang Valley out of five million in the country, you can imagine why air pollution tops the list of complaints received by the Federal Territory Environment Department in the first eight months of this year. And motorcyles are believed to be the cause of half the air pollution problem in the country. So, what is new about the black muck spewing from motor vehicles and threatening the little good air we have left? Even spelling out the dangers of air pollution - lung and heart diseases, damage to the nervous system, kidneys and blood cells as well as reduced fertility - seems to have had little effect in driving home the point to those responsible. Despite a joint blitz over the years by traffic police, Road Transport Department and Department of Environment officials on vehicles which emit smoke above permissible levels, complaints persist about the volume of black fumes discharged. As with most matters, a change in mindset, regulation and enforcement have to work hand-in-hand to put the brake on pollution. It is good news indeed that next year, motorcycles will have to meet stringent smoke emission standards under new regulations that have been more than 10 years in the making. The fact that it has taken this long shows resistance on the part of those affected. The motorcycle industry had earlier cited higher costs, absence of technology and the economic crisis as reasons for dragging its feet in accepting previous proposals. True, cost and economies of scale are a fundamental part of doing business but all the same, excuses contribute to environmental deterioration. The standards drafted now have been proposed by the motor assemblers themselves, based on world standards. Besides, the authorities have given the assurance they are conducive to the local situation and have consulted experts, non-governmental organisations and the industry. Motorcycle owners have to ensure the vehicle engines are regularly maintained to minimise the discharge of black fumes. Compounding errant motorcyclists is a lesson in teaching them the importance of preserving the environment. If this fails, stricter enforcement has to be carried out to put the message across. Perhaps, if tax incentives were to be given to vehicle owners to encourage them to use environmentally-friendly engines and fuels, this may perk their consciousness to contribute to better air quality. Assemblers will also have to comply with emission standards. Motorcycles with two-stroke engines are reportedly among the major culprits in polluting air. The Environmental Quality Act, under which the proposed regulations are being drawn up, stipulates errant assemblers are liable to a fine of up to RM100,000 or five years' jail or both. The atmosphere alone has limited capacity in diluting polluted air as expensive lessons from the Los Angeles smog in the Sixties and that in London in 1952 show. If we care enough to leave a legacy of relatively clean air to future generations, then it has to be a collective effort in arresting further deterioration. From sustran at po.jaring.my Wed Dec 15 14:47:30 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 13:47:30 +0800 Subject: [sustran] re: Editorial on motorcycle pollution Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991215134730.0089ee50@relay101.jaring.my> Below is another news item on the Malaysian motorcycles emissions. I think that there is some double-speak in this statement by a Malaysian Motorcycle industry spokeperson. Can anyone clarify? Correct me if I am wrong but what seems that the Malaysian Department of Environment is finally backing down in the face of opposition from the industry to the stringent Taiwanese Stage II standard. The DOE has been pushing these for years. But instead they have now agreed to impose the less stringent Euro I standards. The Taiwanese standards are devised by a country with many motorcycles (like Malaysia). The Euro I standards are from a continent with very few motorcycles. By the way, is Euro I still applicable in Europe... I thought they had now moved on to more strict standards??? Can someone with more detailed knowledge of emissions standards clarify this for me. It seems to me that if the local industry were to meet the Taiwanese Stage II standard then logically it would also meet the Euro I standard (since Euro I is less stringent). Therefore the comment by the industry about exports being easier under Euro I seems misleading. If Malaysia adopts the Taiwanese standard then wouldn't it be able to export everywhere?? ... including to Taiwan, which it can't if it only adopts Euro I. Paul SUSTRAN ---------------------------- New Straits Times Monday 13 December M-cycle makers welcome move to cut emission By Esther Tan KUALA LUMPUR, Mon. - Motorcycle assemblers have given the thumbs-up to the proposed new standards for smoke emission which they said were internationally accepted, thus making locally assembled machines more competitive in the global market. Motorcycle and Scooter Assemblers and Distributors Association of Malaysia chairman Datuk Syed Mohamed Aidid said today he welcomed the move by the Department of Environment to introduce stringent Euro 1 standards. "They are international standards comparable to the Taiwanese Stage II. A number of our members export their motorcycles and the Euro 1 standards will be more suitable for global competitiveness. These standards are accepted by many countries, especially European nations," he said. Association members comprise assemblers and distributors of all motorcycles found in the country. Syed Mohamed, who is also the Federation of Asian Motorcycle Industries chairman, said although the Taiwanese Stage II standard was slightly more stringent it was not as widely accepted as Euro 1. Syed Mohamed was commenting on today's New Straits Times front page report about the DOE's move to introduce stringent smoke emission standards under a proposed set of regulations to control pollution from motorcycles. The proposal will be submitted for approval soon to Science, Technology and Environment Minister Datuk Law Hieng Ding who will seek Cabinet approval. The DOE had in 1996 proposed the Taiwanese Stage II standard but it was shot down by the motorcyle assemblers and the International Trade and Industry Ministry. The Euro 1 standards were proposed by motorcycle assemblers on Nov 18, 1998. The association had suggested July 1, 2000 as the enforcement date of the stringent standards for new models and July 1, 2001 for existing models. Syed Mohamed said assemblers needed time to make the design changes and adjustments to meet the standards. For new models, assemblers need a year to 18 months. For existing models they need two to two and a-half years to make engine adjustments or to phase them out. To meet the new standards, two-stroke motorcycles will have to be fitted with catalytic converters and four-stroke engines will have to undergo minor adjustments. Asked about the cost and whether the new standards would cause an increase in prices of motorcycles, Syed Mohamed there was always a cost factor when it came to making changes. From debi.beag at SoftHome.net Thu Dec 16 10:15:40 1999 From: debi.beag at SoftHome.net (Debi Goenka) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:45:40 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Editorial on motorcycle pollution References: <3.0.6.32.19991215101643.00833100@relay101.jaring.my> Message-ID: <38583D3C.96551768@SoftHome.net> I would like to know what are the various emission norms for two wheelers in different countries of the world. Also, which are the most stringent? Cheers Debi Goenka From kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in Fri Dec 17 09:02:40 1999 From: kisansbc at bom5.vsnl.net.in (kisansbc@bom5) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:02:40 -0800 Subject: [sustran] More on urban rail transport problems Message-ID: <199912162057.PAA28216@cluster1.vsnl.net.in> Dear Eric & Colleagues, I have still to convey my response discussion raised by Eric Bruun through his email of 21.09.1999. I was out of commission due to serious illness and am not working full time. Public transport is one area which envigorates me. We cannot say more on public transport in Europe or in the UK but during 3-4 decades of interest and concern for mobility for the common man, we feel that the period of London Transport support by the British Government was probably the best. capital expenditure in road and rail transport was booked after Govt along with accumulated loses. London Transport Authority could develop the system and operations to meet commuter needs. Continued increase in the number of vehicles poses serious challenge to mobility. Traffic control is increasingly being used to stop or drastically control vehicle movement in busy areas. In the developing countries, authorities consider the increase in car ownership as an indicator of prosperity and modernity of the country. Public transport has suffered in burgeoning urban areas. Population is increasing beyond limit bringing in bearable train on the civic infrastructure. Slums have proliferated in public and private places.About 65% of Mumbai's population of 13 million stays in slums having no public conveniences. Residents have to travel longer distance. Workers from neighbouring areas have to commute to congested city centres. Public transport everywhere and more particularly in the developing countries have to be substantially subsidised and supported so that minimum efficiency of the urban conglomeration is realised. What one observes in Curitiba is somethign unusual.Land use planning, location of residential and job generating activities, amenities and practically all aspects of urna planning have to forethought and planned to reduce movement and to improve efficiency of human settlements. Implementation of planned urban planning into convenient urban development can bring about relief but how many settlements have the ideal urban development? Transport has an important role to play of moving the people and goods. Public transport -rail and road-cannot stand on their own.Sustainable transport volunteers have to demand efficient, comfortable, direct, affordable facility for movements of the bulk of the residents visitors. We should strive for that efficient level of transport. Sometimes we wonder as to why there should be suggestion that public transport should be self sustainaing when many other aspects of life are taken to be supported/promoted by the state and the community. Are motor cars self paying for all the amenities they receive or the pollution they generate? Is the cost of roads and land used for roads paid for by the motor car owners or do they compensate the community for the pollution theycontinuously generate? Providing minimum movement facility to the bulk of the people is essential for better living so the public transport should be supported. Kisan Mehta President Save Bombay Committee From sustran at po.jaring.my Fri Dec 17 12:21:00 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:21:00 +0800 Subject: [sustran] SUSTRAN News Flash #35: People-centred and sustainable transport news Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991217112100.00831130@relay101.jaring.my> Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and the Pacific (The SUSTRAN Network) P.O. Box 11501, 50748 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel/Fax: PLEASE NOTE NEW 8 DIGIT NUMBER +(60 3) 2274 2590. E-mail: sustran@po.jaring.my URL: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/ See discussions of the SUSTRAN-DISCUSS LIST at http://www.egroups.com/group/sustran-discuss SUSTRAN News Flash #35 11 December 1999 People-centred and sustainable transport news CONTENTS 1. Becaks threatened again in Jakarta 2. Nepal bans import of two-stroke motorcycles 3. Chilean Coalition Takes anti-Highway Campaign to Investors 4. PROFILE: Save Bombay Committee 5. PROFILE: New Zealand Sustainable Transport Network 6. Ho Chi Minh City to Boost Buses Amidst Swarm of Motorcycles 7. Delhi Buses conversion to natural gas 8. Bangkok community resists demolition for expressway 9. Hong Kong Third Comprehensive Transport Study Released 10. INFORMATION RESOURCES 11. INTERNET RESOURCES 12. EVENTS AND CONFERENCES 13. LIGHTER SIDE 1. BECAKS (PEDICABS) THREATENED AGAIN IN JAKARTA An international letter campaign has been launched to appeal to the Indonesian Government to allow pedicabs to continue to operate in Jakarta. In late November, the Jakarta Post reported that President Abdurrahman Wahid addressed a protest organised by the Urban Poor Coalition on Saturday 20 November which included hundreds of becak drivers. He defended the 1988 ban on becaks "on humanitarian grounds" saying the drivers work "like horses" and that they need to be found other jobs ("President Abdurrahman defends ban on 'becak'', Jakarta Post, 21 November 1999, p.1). This prompted Jakarta Mayor Sutiyoso to order authorities to "begin cleansing the city's streets of becak" ("Sutiyoso firm on 'becak' raids", Jakarta Post, 22 November 1999, p3). This follows a reprieve of more than a year in which becaks had been returning to the city. The Urban Poor Consortium in Jakarta, the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) and the Environmental Defense Fund have launched an action alert to appeal to the Indonesian authorities to allow the becaks to operate in Jakarta. For more information on how to take action see: http://www.egroups.com/group/sustran-discuss/86.html or contact ITDP at mobility@igc.org. Letters of protest to the Indonesian President can also be sent via a special email address set up by the Urban Poor Consortium (UPC) in Jakarta (becak@urbanpoor.or.id). 2. NEPAL BANS IMPORT OF TWO-STROKE MOTORCYCLES 1 Sept. Kathmandu: Nepal has banned the import of two-stroke motorcycles in a bid to improve air quality in the Himalayan kingdom, a newspaper report said. Bhakta Bahadur Balayar, a junior minister in charge of population and environment, told the daily Kathmandu Post that the ban would be enforced immediately. - Reuters. 3. COALITION IN SANTIAGO DE CHILE TAKES ITS CAMPAIGN AGAINST URBAN HIGHWAY HOME TO INVESTORS A coalition of community organisations opposed to a major urban highway project has launched an international campaign directed at companies interested in the project (to be offered as a concession), potential investors and public opinion in the companies' countries of origin. The project is the controversial "Costanera Norte" or "East-West System", sponsored by the Chilean Public Works Ministry, a 33 km highway that would cut the capital city of Santiago in half, devastating some of its most historical and culturally significant neighbourhoods. France, Spain and Italy are the main countries of origin for companies interested in the project. Among the companies are the world giants, Egis Bouygues and Suez Lyonnais-owned GTM. The freeway would basically serve Santiago's well-heeled upper-class neighbourhoods, allowing drivers to reach the city centre, the airport or connections to their homes on the beach at speeds of 80-100 km/hour. Only one out of every five daily commutes is made in a car, but cars contribute 50-80% of Santiago's worst pollutants, ozone, carbon monoxide and volatile hydrocarbons. "Living City" (Ciudad Viva), the 25-member coalition, opposing the project, plans to take its case straight to investors and consumers if necessary. [For more information, please contact: Rosa Moreno, Greenpeace Chile, Tel: 562/343 7788, Fax 204 0162, email: climate@greenpeace.cl; Rodrigo Mellado, Codeff/Friends of the Earth, Tel: 562/251 0262, Fax: 251 8433, email: info@codeff.mic.cl; Patricio Lanfranco (English), Living City, Tel: 562/777 7673, Fax: 732 3079, email: lanfrancopato@hotmail.com; C?line D?sram?s (Fran?ais), Ciudad Viva, email: comptoir@netline.cl; Web: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Andes/1583/; Email: ciudadviva@lake.mic.cl]. 4. PROFILE: SAVE BOMBAY COMMITTEE Save Bombay Committee (SBC) was set up in 1972 as a public trust and registered society of members agitating for better quality of life in Mumbai (then Bombay). On transport, SBC stands for a policy geared around the pedestrian and public transport. They lobby for charging the full cost of road construction and maintenance to the motorist "who should also pay a tax for pollution and congestion". SBC has been lobbying the World Bank and other multilateral agencies. An example is the Mumbai Urban Transport Project II (MUTP II). SBC urged the Bank to put more stress on public transport in the project. SBC has also used Public Interest Litigation on issues of public interest when lobbying does not succeed. [Contact: Save Bombay Committee (SBC), Mr Kisan Mehta (President), 620 Jame Jamshed Road, Fourth Floor, Dadar East, Mumbai 400 014, India. Tel: 91-22-414-9688, Fax:91-22-415-5536, Email: kisansbc@bom5.vsnl.net.in]. 5. PROFILE: NEW ZEALAND SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT NETWORK The New Zealand Sustainable Transport Network (STN) is a "loose" network of 250 New Zealand organisations and individuals (principally local sustainable transport advocacy groups and local government) with an interest in pedestrian issues, cycling, telecommuting, ridesharing and public transport. STN produces an e-mail newsletter every two months. [Contact: Elizabeth Yeaman, Transport and Local Government Executive, Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA), PO Box 388, Wellington, New Zealand. Email: Elizabeth.Yeaman@moc.govt.nz, Web: http://www.eeca.govt.nz/content/ew_government/Sustainable_Transport/Sustaina ble_Network.htm] 6. HO CHI MINH CITY TRIES TO BOOST BUSES AMIDST SWARM OF MOTORCYCLES Ho Chi Minh City's hopes to improve its fading public transport and increase the use of buses sixfold in the next few years. There are now more than two million motorbikes in the city - a major factor in the decline of the public bus system (and of bicycle use). Nearly 1,000 tri-wheeled Lambrettas will be changed into mini-buses and 700 large buses converted to 1,700 medium-sized buses. A new fleet of 12 to 25 seater vehicles will also be introduced. France's RATP bus company will also set up a joint venture with 100-seater buses travelling four routes. The city now has only 500 buses. Authorities have also proposed that those who own buses and cars used for public travel be given tax breaks and preferential interest rate bank loans to renovate their old vehicles. They will also be encouraged to use 12 seater vehicles suited to the city's streets. - VNA. 7. DELHI BUSES CONVERSION TO NATURAL GAS The Delhi Transport Corporation is looking for excuses and more time to meet the deadline for converting its entire bus fleet to compressed natural gas. April 1, 2001 is the date set by the Supreme Court (SC) for the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) to convert its entire bus fleet to compressed natural gas (CNG). Faced with the challenge of reducing particulate matter in Delhi, in July 1998, the apex court ordered buses more than eight years old to be converted to run on CNG or other "clean fuels" by April 1, 2000 and the entire bus fleet by April 2001. So far, DTC has done little in terms of framing an action plan for its implementation. With the deadline approaching, the target seems to be getting increasingly unachievable. Delhi chief minister Sheila Dikshit has already started seeking more time. "We are neither confident nor sure whether we will be able to supply over 1,800 CNG buses (more than eight years old) by March 31, 2000. We may even have to approach the Court at a later stage," she told the media recently. [Contact: Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), 41 Tughlakabad Institutional Area, New Delhi 110-062, India. Tel: 91 11 698-1110, 698-1124, 698-3394, 698-6399, Fax: 91 11 698 5879, Email: cse@cseindia.org, URL: http://www.cseindia.org, For details on this report see http://www.oneworld.org/cse/html/dte/dte990831/dte_srep1.htm] 8. BANGKOK COMMUNITY RESISTS DEMOLITION FOR EXPRESSWAY September, 1999. Bangkok. The Muslim Saphan Hua Chang community at Bang Khrua successfully resisted another attempt to begin construction of the controversial section B of the Second Stage Bangkok Expressway. Project owner, Bangkok Expressway Plc (BECL), sent 50 workers and engineers into the area to demolish buildings. After a tense five-hour standoff the construction teams were forced out of the area. The villagers plan to consult the Law Society of Thailand in a bid to file a lawsuit against BECL. - The Nation, Bangkok. 9. HONG KONG THIRD COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORT STUDY RELEASED The Third Comprehensive Transport Study is entitled, "Hong Kong Moving Ahead". Some highlights include: - Siting intensive developments and employment centres within easy pedestrian reach of rail stations - Railway will form the backbone of Hong Kong's transport system. - Greater efforts will be made to explain the importance of an environmentally sustainable transport system for Hong Kong and the need for public support in this endeavour. More details are at: http://www.info.gov.hk/tb/ 10. RESOURCES "Road Designs for Improving Traffic Flow: A Bicycle Master Plan for Delhi", by Geetam Tiwari. [Payment by bank draft - US$5 plus $1.75 postage and handling ($1 for each extra copy). Order from: Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Programme (TRIPP), Main Building (Room MS808),Indian Institute of Technology Delhi (IIT), Hau Khas New Delhi - 110016, INDIA. Fax. +91 11 685 8703, Email: maheshgaur@hotmail.com]. "Urban mobility in the developing world", by R Gakenheimer Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 671-689 "The trouble with minimum parking requirements", by DC Shoup. Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 549-574 "Demand management as an element of transportation policy: using carrots and sticks to influence travel behavior", by MD Meyer. Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 575-599 "Transformation of transport policy in Great Britain", by P Goodwin. Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 655-669 "Patterns of automobile dependence in cities: an international overview of key physical and economic dimensions with some implications for urban policy", by JR Kenworthy and FB Laube. Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 691-723 "Transport sector in India: an analysis in the context of sustainable development", by R Ramanathan, JK Parikh. Transport Policy, Vol. 6, No. 1, Aug. 1999, pp 35-45 11. INTERNET RESOURCES Pednet's International Pedestrian Lexicon (glossary): http://user.itl.net/~wordcraf/lexicon.html Developing a walking strategy. Downloadable report from the UK's Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions. http://www.local-transport.detr.gov.uk/walk/walk.htm "Children on the Move" site on children and transport: http://www.ecoplan.org/children Smogbusters Australian National Website: http://www.environment.gov.au/smogbusters World Transport Policy and Practice Electronic Edition http://www.ecoplan.org/wtpp The Victoria Transport Policy Institute website (featured in several previous SUSTRAN News Flashes) has been reorganised, expanded, and has a new address (URL): http://www.vtpi.org, Director Todd Litman's new email address is litman@vtpi.org. GENDER AND TRANSPORT web-site and Social Exclusion & Transport web-site. Maintained by Jeff Turner, Research Fellow, Dept. of Planning, University of Manchester: http://www.art.man.ac.uk/transres TR Update (Free Elsevier Science Transportation Research Newsletter) is now available online: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/trupdate or http://www.elsevier.nl/locate/trupdate. If you would like to be alerted whenever a new issue goes live on the web send an email to: s.iannacci@elsevier.co.uk Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) Guide to Cleaner Vehicle Production, Use and Disposal: http://www.edf.org/programs/PPA/vlc/index.html Some pictures of bicycles and pedicabs in Indonesia: http://www.geocities.com/~tadrake/bicycle.html 12. EVENTS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION: SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION & CLEAN AIR, MAY 31ST- JUNE 2ND 2000, JAKARTA, INDONESIA. Organised with the support of the support of the SUSTRAN Network and the Institute for Transport and Development Policy (ITDP). [For more information: Sustainable Transportation and Clean Air Conference Secretariat c/o Clean Air Project, Jakarta, Jalan Wijaya XII, No. 44, 12160 Jakarta, Indonesia. Phone: +62 21 739 40 41, Fax: +62 21 722 30 37, E-mail: cap@swisscontact.or.id]. "WalkC21" International Walking Conference, Guildhall, London, UK, 21 and 22 February 2000. "Walking is the glue binding together the transport system" say the organisers. See: http://www.ottawalk.org/pednet/lists/h-pednet/month1099/msg00192.html "CODATU IX World Congress on Urban Transportation" - central theme: Urban Transportation and the Environment, Mexico City 11-14 April 2000 [Contact: CODATU IX Scientific Committee, Christian JAMET, 9/11, Av. De Villars 75007 Paris, France. Fax: +33 1 44 18 78 04, E-mail: christian.jamet@stp-paris.fr]. First International Conference on Urban Regeneration and Sustainability, 25 - 27 April 2000. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Organised by UniverCidade, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and Wessex Institute of Technology, Southampton, UK. [Contact: Conference Secretariat, The Sustainable City, Wessex Institute of Technology, Ashurst Lodge, Ashurst, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. Tel: 44 (0) 23 80 293223, Fax: 44 (0) 23 80 292853, Email: wit@wessex.ac.uk, Web: http://www.witpress.com/authors.htm VELO MONDIALE 2000 World Bicycle Conference, June 18-22, 2000, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. [Contact: Congress Organisation Services, PO Box 1558, 6501 BN Nijmegen, The Netherlands, Fax: +31 24 360 1159, http://www.velomondial2000.nl/] Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-ce) is planning an Intensive Bicycle Training Programme to follow the Velo Mondiale conference in the Netherlands in June 2000. [For more information contact: I-ce, Predikherenstraat 17, 3512 TL Utrecht, The Netherlands. Tel. +31 - 30 - 230 45 21, Fax +31 - 30 - 230 45 21, Email: i-ce@cycling.nl, Web: http://www.cycling.nl]. Global Cities 21, ICLEI World Congress of Local Governments: transformation for a sustainable future, June 28 - July 2, 2000, Sachsen-Anhalt, Germany. The Sixth International Conference on Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century, 26 - 28 July 2000, at Cambridge University, UK. Organised by: Wessex Institute of Technology (WIT), Southampton, UK. Abstract deadline ASAP. [Contact: Karen Neal, WIT Marketing Co-ordinator, Wessex Institute of Technology (WIT), Ashurst Lodge, Ashurst, Southampton SO40 7AA, UK. Tel: +44 (0) 238 029 3223, Fax: +44 (0) 238 029 2853, Email: kneal@wessex.ac.uk, Web: http://www.wessex.ac.uk/conferences/2000] XI Panamerican Conference in Traffic and Transportation Engineering , 19-23 November, 2000, Gramado, state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. [Contact: Dr. Luis Antonio Lindau, President of the Organising Committee, Escola de Engenharia/UFRGS, Pra?a Argentina n.9 Sala 408, 90040-020 Porto Alegre, Brasil. Tel: + 55 51 316 3596, Fax : + 55 51 316 4007, email: panam@orion.ufrgs.br, Web: http://www.ufrgs.br/panam] First Call for Papers for the 9th World Conference on Transport Research (WCTR) to be held at ASEM International Convention Center, Seoul, July 22-27, 2001. Co-organisers: Korean Society of Transportation & The Korea Transport Institute. Deadline for submission of abstracts April 15, 2000. [For further information, contact: Secretariat of 9th WCTR Conference, The Korea Transport Institute, 2311 Daehwa-Dong, Ilsan-Gu, Koyang-city, Kyonggi-Do, 411-410, KOREA. Tel : +82-344-910-3100, Fax: +82-344-910-3200, Email: wctr@cis.koti.re.kr, Web: http://www.koti.re.kr/~wctr] 13. LIGHTER SIDE A pro-Green Transport Dinosaur joined the November race for Mayor of Vancouver in Canada. Mr T. Raax ran with the support of the Dinosaurs Against Fossil Fuels (the Dino Party). Calling themselves "the only party honest enough to admit it's out of date", the main plank of the Dino platform is sane transportation and opposition to burning of fossils (in the engines of cars). The suave and reptilian Mr. T. Raax has been a transportation activist and all-around Party animal since the late Cretaceous. Raax vows that if elected he will lead Vancouver back to the past, when reptiles ruled the earth and fossil-burning was punishable by being eaten. Their slogans include: "Every Dinosaur Knows: Extinction Stinks", "Don't be a foSSiL fooL, Stop burning fossil fuels!!" and "Vote for a real dinosaur: Vote Dino." [See pictures and details of the campaign at: http://www.sustainability.com/dinos]. The Victoria Transport Policy Institute web site (http://www.vtpi.org) has also started a small collection of transport humour. Check it out! ----------------------------------------------------- Written and compiled by A. Rahman Paul Barter We rely on you, the participants in the network, for our news. Thank you to all those who have contributed. Please keep the contributions coming. We welcome brief news and announcements from all over the world. The Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia & the Pacific (the SUSTRAN Network) promotes and popularises people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on Asia and the Pacific. From sustran at po.jaring.my Fri Dec 17 11:04:46 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 10:04:46 +0800 Subject: [sustran] SUSTRAN News Flash #35: People-centred and sustainable transport news Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991217100446.007c7e90@relay101.jaring.my> Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and the Pacific (The SUSTRAN Network) P.O. Box 11501, 50748 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel/Fax: PLEASE NOTE NEW 8 DIGIT NUMBER +(60 3) 2274 2590. E-mail: sustran@po.jaring.my URL: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/ See discussions of the SUSTRAN-DISCUSS LIST at http://www.egroups.com/group/sustran-discuss SUSTRAN News Flash #35 11 December 1999 People-centred and sustainable transport news CONTENTS 1. Becaks threatened again in Jakarta 2. Nepal bans import of two-stroke motorcycles 3. Chilean Coalition Takes anti-Highway Campaign to Investors 4. PROFILE: Save Bombay Committee 5. PROFILE: New Zealand Sustainable Transport Network 6. Ho Chi Minh City to Boost Buses Amidst Swarm of Motorcycles 7. Delhi Buses conversion to natural gas 8. Bangkok community resists demolition for expressway 9. Hong Kong Third Comprehensive Transport Study Released 10. INFORMATION RESOURCES 11. INTERNET RESOURCES 12. EVENTS AND CONFERENCES 13. LIGHTER SIDE 1. BECAKS (PEDICABS) THREATENED AGAIN IN JAKARTA An international letter campaign has been launched to appeal to the Indonesian Government to allow pedicabs to continue to operate in Jakarta. In late November, the Jakarta Post reported that President Abdurrahman Wahid addressed a protest organised by the Urban Poor Coalition on Saturday 20 November which included hundreds of becak drivers. He defended the 1988 ban on becaks "on humanitarian grounds" saying the drivers work "like horses" and that they need to be found other jobs ("President Abdurrahman defends ban on 'becak'', Jakarta Post, 21 November 1999, p.1). This prompted Jakarta Mayor Sutiyoso to order authorities to "begin cleansing the city's streets of becak" ("Sutiyoso firm on 'becak' raids", Jakarta Post, 22 November 1999, p3). This follows a reprieve of more than a year in which becaks had been returning to the city. The Urban Poor Consortium in Jakarta, the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) and the Environmental Defense Fund have launched an action alert to appeal to the Indonesian authorities to allow the becaks to operate in Jakarta. For more information on how to take action see: http://www.egroups.com/group/sustran-discuss/86.html or contact ITDP at mobility@igc.org. Letters of protest to the Indonesian President can also be sent via a special email address set up by the Urban Poor Consortium (UPC) in Jakarta (becak@urbanpoor.or.id). 2. NEPAL BANS IMPORT OF TWO-STROKE MOTORCYCLES 1 Sept. Kathmandu: Nepal has banned the import of two-stroke motorcycles in a bid to improve air quality in the Himalayan kingdom, a newspaper report said. Bhakta Bahadur Balayar, a junior minister in charge of population and environment, told the daily Kathmandu Post that the ban would be enforced immediately. - Reuters. 3. COALITION IN SANTIAGO DE CHILE TAKES ITS CAMPAIGN AGAINST URBAN HIGHWAY HOME TO INVESTORS A coalition of community organisations opposed to a major urban highway project has launched an international campaign directed at companies interested in the project (to be offered as a concession), potential investors and public opinion in the companies' countries of origin. The project is the controversial "Costanera Norte" or "East-West System", sponsored by the Chilean Public Works Ministry, a 33 km highway that would cut the capital city of Santiago in half, devastating some of its most historical and culturally significant neighbourhoods. France, Spain and Italy are the main countries of origin for companies interested in the project. Among the companies are the world giants, Egis Bouygues and Suez Lyonnais-owned GTM. The freeway would basically serve Santiago's well-heeled upper-class neighbourhoods, allowing drivers to reach the city centre, the airport or connections to their homes on the beach at speeds of 80-100 km/hour. Only one out of every five daily commutes is made in a car, but cars contribute 50-80% of Santiago's worst pollutants, ozone, carbon monoxide and volatile hydrocarbons. "Living City" (Ciudad Viva), the 25-member coalition, opposing the project, plans to take its case straight to investors and consumers if necessary. [For more information, please contact: Rosa Moreno, Greenpeace Chile, Tel: 562/343 7788, Fax 204 0162, email: climate@greenpeace.cl; Rodrigo Mellado, Codeff/Friends of the Earth, Tel: 562/251 0262, Fax: 251 8433, email: info@codeff.mic.cl; Patricio Lanfranco (English), Living City, Tel: 562/777 7673, Fax: 732 3079, email: lanfrancopato@hotmail.com; C?line D?sram?s (Fran?ais), Ciudad Viva, email: comptoir@netline.cl; Web: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Andes/1583/; Email: ciudadviva@lake.mic.cl]. 4. PROFILE: SAVE BOMBAY COMMITTEE Save Bombay Committee (SBC) was set up in 1972 as a public trust and registered society of members agitating for better quality of life in Mumbai (then Bombay). On transport, SBC stands for a policy geared around the pedestrian and public transport. They lobby for charging the full cost of road construction and maintenance to the motorist "who should also pay a tax for pollution and congestion". SBC has been lobbying the World Bank and other multilateral agencies. An example is the Mumbai Urban Transport Project II (MUTP II). SBC urged the Bank to put more stress on public transport in the project. SBC has also used Public Interest Litigation on issues of public interest when lobbying does not succeed. [Contact: Save Bombay Committee (SBC), Mr Kisan Mehta (President), 620 Jame Jamshed Road, Fourth Floor, Dadar East, Mumbai 400 014, India. Tel: 91-22-414-9688, Fax:91-22-415-5536, Email: kisansbc@bom5.vsnl.net.in]. 5. PROFILE: NEW ZEALAND SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT NETWORK The New Zealand Sustainable Transport Network (STN) is a "loose" network of 250 New Zealand organisations and individuals (principally local sustainable transport advocacy groups and local government) with an interest in pedestrian issues, cycling, telecommuting, ridesharing and public transport. STN produces an e-mail newsletter every two months. [Contact: Elizabeth Yeaman, Transport and Local Government Executive, Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA), PO Box 388, Wellington, New Zealand. Email: Elizabeth.Yeaman@moc.govt.nz, Web: http://www.eeca.govt.nz/content/ew_government/Sustainable_Transport/Sustaina ble_Network.htm] 6. HO CHI MINH CITY TRIES TO BOOST BUSES AMIDST SWARM OF MOTORCYCLES Ho Chi Minh City's hopes to improve its fading public transport and increase the use of buses sixfold in the next few years. There are now more than two million motorbikes in the city - a major factor in the decline of the public bus system (and of bicycle use). Nearly 1,000 tri-wheeled Lambrettas will be changed into mini-buses and 700 large buses converted to 1,700 medium-sized buses. A new fleet of 12 to 25 seater vehicles will also be introduced. France's RATP bus company will also set up a joint venture with 100-seater buses travelling four routes. The city now has only 500 buses. Authorities have also proposed that those who own buses and cars used for public travel be given tax breaks and preferential interest rate bank loans to renovate their old vehicles. They will also be encouraged to use 12 seater vehicles suited to the city's streets. - VNA. 7. DELHI BUSES CONVERSION TO NATURAL GAS The Delhi Transport Corporation is looking for excuses and more time to meet the deadline for converting its entire bus fleet to compressed natural gas. April 1, 2001 is the date set by the Supreme Court (SC) for the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) to convert its entire bus fleet to compressed natural gas (CNG). Faced with the challenge of reducing particulate matter in Delhi, in July 1998, the apex court ordered buses more than eight years old to be converted to run on CNG or other "clean fuels" by April 1, 2000 and the entire bus fleet by April 2001. So far, DTC has done little in terms of framing an action plan for its implementation. With the deadline approaching, the target seems to be getting increasingly unachievable. Delhi chief minister Sheila Dikshit has already started seeking more time. "We are neither confident nor sure whether we will be able to supply over 1,800 CNG buses (more than eight years old) by March 31, 2000. We may even have to approach the Court at a later stage," she told the media recently. [Contact: Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), 41 Tughlakabad Institutional Area, New Delhi 110-062, India. Tel: 91 11 698-1110, 698-1124, 698-3394, 698-6399, Fax: 91 11 698 5879, Email: cse@cseindia.org, URL: http://www.cseindia.org, For details on this report see http://www.oneworld.org/cse/html/dte/dte990831/dte_srep1.htm] 8. BANGKOK COMMUNITY RESISTS DEMOLITION FOR EXPRESSWAY September, 1999. Bangkok. The Muslim Saphan Hua Chang community at Bang Khrua successfully resisted another attempt to begin construction of the controversial section B of the Second Stage Bangkok Expressway. Project owner, Bangkok Expressway Plc (BECL), sent 50 workers and engineers into the area to demolish buildings. After a tense five-hour standoff the construction teams were forced out of the area. The villagers plan to consult the Law Society of Thailand in a bid to file a lawsuit against BECL. - The Nation, Bangkok. 9. HONG KONG THIRD COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORT STUDY RELEASED The Third Comprehensive Transport Study is entitled, "Hong Kong Moving Ahead". Some highlights include: - Siting intensive developments and employment centres within easy pedestrian reach of rail stations - Railway will form the backbone of Hong Kong's transport system. - Greater efforts will be made to explain the importance of an environmentally sustainable transport system for Hong Kong and the need for public support in this endeavour. More details are at: http://www.info.gov.hk/tb/ 10. RESOURCES "Road Designs for Improving Traffic Flow: A Bicycle Master Plan for Delhi", by Geetam Tiwari. [Payment by bank draft - US$5 plus $1.75 postage and handling ($1 for each extra copy). Order from: Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Programme (TRIPP), Main Building (Room MS808),Indian Institute of Technology Delhi (IIT), Hau Khas New Delhi - 110016, INDIA. Fax. +91 11 685 8703, Email: maheshgaur@hotmail.com]. "Urban mobility in the developing world", by R Gakenheimer Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 671-689 "The trouble with minimum parking requirements", by DC Shoup. Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 549-574 "Demand management as an element of transportation policy: using carrots and sticks to influence travel behavior", by MD Meyer. Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 575-599 "Transformation of transport policy in Great Britain", by P Goodwin. Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 655-669 "Patterns of automobile dependence in cities: an international overview of key physical and economic dimensions with some implications for urban policy", by JR Kenworthy and FB Laube. Transportation Research Part A, Vol.33, No. 7-8, Aug-1999, pp 691-723 "Transport sector in India: an analysis in the context of sustainable development", by R Ramanathan, JK Parikh. Transport Policy, Vol. 6, No. 1, Aug. 1999, pp 35-45 11. INTERNET RESOURCES Pednet's International Pedestrian Lexicon (glossary): http://user.itl.net/~wordcraf/lexicon.html Developing a walking strategy. Downloadable report from the UK's Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions. http://www.local-transport.detr.gov.uk/walk/walk.htm "Children on the Move" site on children and transport: http://www.ecoplan.org/children Smogbusters Australian National Website: http://www.environment.gov.au/smogbusters World Transport Policy and Practice Electronic Edition http://www.ecoplan.org/wtpp The Victoria Transport Policy Institute website (featured in several previous SUSTRAN News Flashes) has been reorganised, expanded, and has a new address (URL): http://www.vtpi.org, Director Todd Litman's new email address is litman@vtpi.org. GENDER AND TRANSPORT web-site and Social Exclusion & Transport web-site. Maintained by Jeff Turner, Research Fellow, Dept. of Planning, University of Manchester: http://www.art.man.ac.uk/transres TR Update (Free Elsevier Science Transportation Research Newsletter) is now available online: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/trupdate or http://www.elsevier.nl/locate/trupdate. If you would like to be alerted whenever a new issue goes live on the web send an email to: s.iannacci@elsevier.co.uk Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) Guide to Cleaner Vehicle Production, Use and Disposal: http://www.edf.org/programs/PPA/vlc/index.html Some pictures of bicycles and pedicabs in Indonesia: http://www.geocities.com/~tadrake/bicycle.html 12. EVENTS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION: SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION & CLEAN AIR, MAY 31ST- JUNE 2ND 2000, JAKARTA, INDONESIA. Organised with the support of the support of the SUSTRAN Network and the Institute for Transport and Development Policy (ITDP). [For more information: Sustainable Transportation and Clean Air Conference Secretariat c/o Clean Air Project, Jakarta, Jalan Wijaya XII, No. 44, 12160 Jakarta, Indonesia. Phone: +62 21 739 40 41, Fax: +62 21 722 30 37, E-mail: cap@swisscontact.or.id]. "WalkC21" International Walking Conference, Guildhall, London, UK, 21 and 22 February 2000. "Walking is the glue binding together the transport system" say the organisers. See: http://www.ottawalk.org/pednet/lists/h-pednet/month1099/msg00192.html "CODATU IX World Congress on Urban Transportation" - central theme: Urban Transportation and the Environment, Mexico City 11-14 April 2000 [Contact: CODATU IX Scientific Committee, Christian JAMET, 9/11, Av. De Villars 75007 Paris, France. Fax: +33 1 44 18 78 04, E-mail: christian.jamet@stp-paris.fr]. First International Conference on Urban Regeneration and Sustainability, 25 - 27 April 2000. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Organised by UniverCidade, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and Wessex Institute of Technology, Southampton, UK. [Contact: Conference Secretariat, The Sustainable City, Wessex Institute of Technology, Ashurst Lodge, Ashurst, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. Tel: 44 (0) 23 80 293223, Fax: 44 (0) 23 80 292853, Email: wit@wessex.ac.uk, Web: http://www.witpress.com/authors.htm VELO MONDIALE 2000 World Bicycle Conference, June 18-22, 2000, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. [Contact: Congress Organisation Services, PO Box 1558, 6501 BN Nijmegen, The Netherlands, Fax: +31 24 360 1159, http://www.velomondial2000.nl/] Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-ce) is planning an Intensive Bicycle Training Programme to follow the Velo Mondiale conference in the Netherlands in June 2000. [For more information contact: I-ce, Predikherenstraat 17, 3512 TL Utrecht, The Netherlands. Tel. +31 - 30 - 230 45 21, Fax +31 - 30 - 230 45 21, Email: i-ce@cycling.nl, Web: http://www.cycling.nl]. Global Cities 21, ICLEI World Congress of Local Governments: transformation for a sustainable future, June 28 - July 2, 2000, Sachsen-Anhalt, Germany. The Sixth International Conference on Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century, 26 - 28 July 2000, at Cambridge University, UK. Organised by: Wessex Institute of Technology (WIT), Southampton, UK. Abstract deadline ASAP. [Contact: Karen Neal, WIT Marketing Co-ordinator, Wessex Institute of Technology (WIT), Ashurst Lodge, Ashurst, Southampton SO40 7AA, UK. Tel: +44 (0) 238 029 3223, Fax: +44 (0) 238 029 2853, Email: kneal@wessex.ac.uk, Web: http://www.wessex.ac.uk/conferences/2000] XI Panamerican Conference in Traffic and Transportation Engineering , 19-23 November, 2000, Gramado, state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. [Contact: Dr. Luis Antonio Lindau, President of the Organising Committee, Escola de Engenharia/UFRGS, Pra?a Argentina n.9 Sala 408, 90040-020 Porto Alegre, Brasil. Tel: + 55 51 316 3596, Fax : + 55 51 316 4007, email: panam@orion.ufrgs.br, Web: http://www.ufrgs.br/panam] First Call for Papers for the 9th World Conference on Transport Research (WCTR) to be held at ASEM International Convention Center, Seoul, July 22-27, 2001. Co-organisers: Korean Society of Transportation & The Korea Transport Institute. Deadline for submission of abstracts April 15, 2000. [For further information, contact: Secretariat of 9th WCTR Conference, The Korea Transport Institute, 2311 Daehwa-Dong, Ilsan-Gu, Koyang-city, Kyonggi-Do, 411-410, KOREA. Tel : +82-344-910-3100, Fax: +82-344-910-3200, Email: wctr@cis.koti.re.kr, Web: http://www.koti.re.kr/~wctr] 13. LIGHTER SIDE A pro-Green Transport Dinosaur joined the November race for Mayor of Vancouver in Canada. Mr T. Raax ran with the support of the Dinosaurs Against Fossil Fuels (the Dino Party). Calling themselves "the only party honest enough to admit it's out of date", the main plank of the Dino platform is sane transportation and opposition to burning of fossils (in the engines of cars). The suave and reptilian Mr. T. Raax has been a transportation activist and all-around Party animal since the late Cretaceous. Raax vows that if elected he will lead Vancouver back to the past, when reptiles ruled the earth and fossil-burning was punishable by being eaten. Their slogans include: "Every Dinosaur Knows: Extinction Stinks", "Don't be a foSSiL fooL, Stop burning fossil fuels!!" and "Vote for a real dinosaur: Vote Dino." [See pictures and details of the campaign at: http://www.sustainability.com/dinos]. The Victoria Transport Policy Institute web site (http://www.vtpi.org) has also started a small collection of transport humour. Check it out! ----------------------------------------------------- Written and compiled by A. Rahman Paul Barter We rely on you, the participants in the network, for our news. Thank you to all those who have contributed. Please keep the contributions coming. We welcome brief news and announcements from all over the world. The Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia & the Pacific (the SUSTRAN Network) promotes and popularises people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on Asia and the Pacific. From townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au Sat Dec 18 07:24:25 1999 From: townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au (Craig Townsend) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:24:25 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Two-strokes doomed by regulations Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991217142425.0079a470@central.murdoch.edu.au> >From The Bangkok Post, 17 December 1999 Two-strokes doomed by regulations: End of the road for smoke-belchers Anchalee Kongrut Two-stroke engined motorcycles, considered a major cause of urban air pollution, will be phased out when the government starts applying new and tougher emission standards on motorcycle manufacturers next year. Supat Wangwongwatana, head of the Pollution Control Department's air quality and noise management division, said the new emission standard for motorcycles was expected to be in place next year. The new regulations, with tougher requirements for clean emissions would make it impossible both "technically and economically" to manufacture two-stroke motorcycle engines, Mr Supat said. Two-stroke engines produce white exhaust fumes which are more hazardous to health than four-stroke engines. The current standard sets the maximum level of carbon monoxide (CO) in exhaust pipe emissions at 13 grammes/kilometre, and at 5g/km for hydrocarbon (HC). The new standard-the fourth to be enforced-seeks to reduce the CO emission level to 4.5 g/km and the HC level to 3 g/km. Hydrocarbon emissions from two-stroke engines can be reduced to 3g/km at most, while emissions from four-stroke engines can be lowered to 0.8-1 g/km. "Most two-stroke motorcycle engines now comply with the current third emission standard, but once the government introduces a tougher emission control, it is very likely that two-stroke engined motorcycles will be completely phased out," said Vallop Tiasiri, head of the Thai Kawasaki Motors. The third standard was already tough for two-stroke engine manufacturers, Mr Supat said. Statistics showed the number of four-stroke motorcycles on the kingdom's roads has increased since the third emission standard was introduced in 1995. In 1994, the growth rate of four-stroke models was only two percent. Before 1994, the emission standard in Thailand was quite lax and two-stroke motorcycles dominated the Thai market. Five years after the third standard was launched, the number of four-stroke engined motorcycles increased by 43%. Mr Vallop, also vice president for technical development at the Automotive Industry Association, conceded that four-stroke motorcycles had only been introduced here in recent years. Two-stroke motorcycles are expected to become "extinct" in Thailand with the launch of the fifth emission standard in 2003. ________________________________________________ Craig Townsend Institute for Sustainability & Technology Policy Murdoch University South Street, Murdoch Perth, Western Australia 6150 tel: (61 8) 9360 6293 fax: (61 8) 9360 6421 email: townsend@central.murdoch.edu.au From badami at interchange.ubc.ca Fri Dec 17 15:53:08 1999 From: badami at interchange.ubc.ca (Madhav Badami) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:53:08 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Motorized two-wheeler emission standards in sustran-discuss V1 #527 Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991216225308.007bce90@pop.interchg.ubc.ca> Dear Debi Goenka, Re: Two-wheeler emission standards worldwide You will find a quite comprehensive and up-to-date compilation of emission standards for motorized two-wheelers worldwide in Faiz, A. et al. 1996. Air pollution from motor vehicles: standards and technologies for controlling emissions. Washington, DC: World Bank. It not only lists the most recent, and forthcoming, emission standards in several countries, but also, I believe, traces the evolution of the standards through time. However, if memory serves, it does not list the standards expected to come into force in India in 2000 and beyond. Incidentally, Faiz et al 1996 contains a superb treatment of other transport air pollution related topics, such as vehicle technologies, fuel qualities, alternative fuels, and inspection and maintenance. If you cannot get a hold of this reference, do let me know, and I will be happy to mail you a photocopy of the pages containing the information on two-wheeler emission standards. Cheers, Madhav Badami ***************************************************************** "As for the future, your task is not (merely) to foresee, but to enable it." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupery. Madhav Badami UBC Centre for Human Settlements The University of British Columbia 2206 East Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada Phones: (604) 822-6081 (Work); (604) 224-1042 (Home) Fax: (604) 822-6164 From tranhung98 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 17 19:59:00 1999 From: tranhung98 at hotmail.com (tran manh hung) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 02:59:00 PST Subject: [sustran] Re: Motorized two-wheeler emission standards in sustran-discuss V1 #527 Message-ID: <19991217105900.17690.qmail@hotmail.com> Dear Madhav Badami, Please mail me a photocopy of the pages containing the information on two-wheeler emission standards. I cannot get a hold of reference of Faiz et al 1996 at my University. I am particularly interested in negative impacts of two-wheeler emission in the cities of developing countries. Thank you for your kind understanding. Best regards, Tran Manh Hung Institute for Regional Planning (IFR) The University of Karlsruhe - Germany >From: Madhav Badami >Reply-To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >Subject: [sustran] Re: Motorized two-wheeler emission standards in >sustran-discuss V1 #527 >Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:53:08 -0800 > >Dear Debi Goenka, > >Re: Two-wheeler emission standards worldwide > >You will find a quite comprehensive and up-to-date compilation of emission >standards for motorized two-wheelers worldwide in Faiz, A. et al. 1996. Air >pollution from motor vehicles: standards and technologies for controlling >emissions. Washington, DC: World Bank. > >It not only lists the most recent, and forthcoming, emission standards in >several countries, but also, I believe, traces the evolution of the >standards through time. However, if memory serves, it does not list the >standards expected to come into force in India in 2000 and beyond. > >Incidentally, Faiz et al 1996 contains a superb treatment of other >transport air pollution related topics, such as vehicle technologies, fuel >qualities, alternative fuels, and inspection and maintenance. > >If you cannot get a hold of this reference, do let me know, and I will be >happy to mail you a photocopy of the pages containing the information on >two-wheeler emission standards. > >Cheers, > >Madhav Badami > > >***************************************************************** > >"As for the future, your task is not (merely) to foresee, but to enable >it." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupery. > >Madhav Badami >UBC Centre for Human Settlements >The University of British Columbia >2206 East Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada >Phones: (604) 822-6081 (Work); (604) 224-1042 (Home) >Fax: (604) 822-6164 > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From kirkb at start.com.au Mon Dec 20 09:09:00 1999 From: kirkb at start.com.au (kirk bendall) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 9:09:00 AM Subject: [sustran] A 21st Century Rickshaw / Becak? Message-ID: <02f8547352213c9MANAGE01@smtpmail.start.com.au> The Nov 12 issue of Urban Tpt'n Monitor reports a new rickshaw design, much lighter and easier to operate. This is to provide NMT so the Taj Mahal is protected from local motor vehicle emission damage. The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy, The Asian Institute for Transport Development and the Agency for International Development are partners in this project Also see: http://www.itdp.org/India.html Kirk Bendall Member of Action for Public Transport PO Box K606 Haymarket 1240 Sydney Australia www.cs.usyd.edu.au/~jimd/apt/ __________________________________________________________________ Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au/ From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Dec 20 15:39:28 1999 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 07:39:28 +0100 Subject: [sustran] =?iso-8859-1?Q?Curitiba_-_Silver_bullet=3F?= Message-ID: Dear Friends, As most of you on these lists know very well, there is a lot of interest in various corners of the world today in Curitiba's transport system. I am interested too, in part because I had the good luck to be working in Brazil of a small book on the future of transport there (Transport in Brazil: Preparing for the Eighties) for several months at a stretch in the mid seventies. One great benefit of all this was that I was able to have a good look at it as things were picking up momentum in Curitiba. They were using pretty crude and not very clean vehicles, and were pushing ahead on a transport concept that in part had been brought to them by some European consultants who, truth to tell, had little idea what a great and novel thing they were getting into. Anyway, here's my point. Some of the commentary I see on Curitiba these days is a bit of starry-eyed. In fact, it seem as if the less information any given commentator happens to have on the day to day realities of making the thing actually work (it ain't easy, there are some real problems, and there's a lot of work yet to do on it), the more the enthusiasm that gushes forth. That's bothersome, because I fear that the message will get out that it's plum easy and that once a project gets underway and the usual glitches and difficulties begin to roll in, the would-be innovator may run away from it. There is, as it happens, a solid collection of background materials on Curitiba which are available over the Web, and recently we complied a couple of pages of both electronic and print sources which do a very good job of covering most if not all of the bases. I will not load down this list with it, but if you are interested you can pick it up via our @ccess on the Web site (http://www.ecoplan.org/access ). You also can have some fun with the 20-minute video (you'll need RealMedia, which is free at http://www.real.com/) "Curitiba: Public Transit Role Model for Los Angeles?" which you can pick up at http://real.telebuild.com/ramgen/e-architect/pia/rudc/inourlifetime.rm . If you haven't had a chance to visit the system, the video and several of the other references provide good visuals on some of the details. And here, in closing, and for what it's worth, is my particular take on.... WHY THE CURITIBA SYSTEM WORKS... THERE -- And what you may not necessarily find in most other cities or communities where you may wish to do something similar -- 1. Concept: Because the basic transportation concept ("surface metro") was and is a very strong one - an idea for its time. (And there are not all that many of those around today.) 2. Leadership: Because of farsighted, strong and cagey local political leadership. (In how many places you find that?) 3. Staying Power: Because the system has been supported over a period of many years by consistent policies and resources. (Unfortunately there are few cities which appear to be able to sustain long-term programs of this sort, though there are exceptions and the should be among the more obvious targets.) 4. Real Estate Pinch: Because of the fact that most of the reserved bus streets and lanes that created over the course of the last 20 years have been located not in the old, dense historic city center but in outlying, basically "green field" situations. (This is extremely, extremely important because one of the most significant barriers to a busway system such as this is the heavy competition for road space, above all of course by private vehicles. That leaves the not easy challenge: how are you going to get the real estate you need to make the concept work? Think it's going to be easy?) 5. Fame: Because the project was early able to obtain certain level of international acclaim and support, which has helped them enormously as they have sought and received additional resources and support both within their own city, region and at the national level. When people are good at what they do, proud of it, and receive wide international support for their efforts, this can be a very important ingredient for success. 6. True Integration: Because the city's transport system has from the beginning been viewed as part of a broader philosophy of urban development and governance which extends well beyond transport, vehicles and roadways. Now, does that mean that I think that what works in Curitiba can only work there? Not at all, but it does mean that it will take meticulous preparation, hard work and perseverance to make it succeed anywhere else. IF you can't manage that, better to stay home. (If you check out the sources in the @ccess bibliography you will see more and quite possibly better on this.) Comments? Eric Britton ecopl@n ___ technology, economy, society ___ Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org URL www.ecoplan.org Tel: +331.4326.1323 Videoconference +331.4441.6340 (1-4) Fax/voicemail hotline: In Europe +331 5301 2896 Fax/voicemail hotline: In North America +1 888 522 6419 (toll free) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 7608 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19991220/e34aeb6b/winmail.bin From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Dec 22 21:57:38 1999 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:57:38 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Greetings from The Commons Message-ID: December 22, 1999, The Commons, Paris Dear Friends, If you take the front door to The Commons at some point over this holiday season (via the usual http:// ecoplan.org), you will find our Seasons Greetings (with a little help from Ghirlandaio, and the Louvre) to all our friends and collaborators around the planet with whom we have exchanged ideas, information, work and encouragement over this last year and more. Our card this year, like just about everything that happens on The Commons, is not only entirely free and "off the economy" as we like to say (it cost us only thought, time and work), but also something that is deeply embedded in our collective culture and potentially useful in different ways and through many layers. For those of you who are equipped with RealMedia, for instance, you will find some thought-provoking substance behind those few words that appear on your virtual page. Click around. You will find there a live BBC broadcast from a war zone where tanks are firing on children, the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony for M?decins Sans Fronti?res that took place ten days ago in Oslo (the first five minutes of which will give you a great chance to brush up your Norwegian), and, more peacefully, a bit of background on Ghirlandaio and his work. So there you have it. Another millennium behind us, and it appears that there are still a few things that we have yet to figure out and get straight. So to you and your families, our very best wishes for health and happiness in the year ahead. We are going to need all the energy and good will we can muster. And we are going to have to do this together. Nobody else is going to do it for us. Cordially, Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 4884 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19991222/844a3cc2/winmail.bin From litman at vtpi.org Mon Dec 27 15:07:47 1999 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Litman) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 22:07:47 -0800 Subject: [sustran] VTPI NEWS, Winter 1999-2000 Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19991226220747.013d7be0@mail.IslandNet.com> ----------- VTPI NEWS ----------- Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" ----------------------------------- Winter 1999-2000 Vol. 2, No. 4 --------------------------------- The Victoria Transport Policy Institute is an independent research organization dedicated to developing innovative solutions to transportation problems. The VTPI website has numerous documents addressing a wide range of transport planning and policy issues. VTPI also provides consulting services. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NEW URL AND EMAIL ADDRESS ========================= We now have our own Internet domain. Our new website address is www.vtpi.org. Our website is reorganized and expanded, with new features and materials, including a growing humor collection, bibliographies, and important reports by other researchers. Some documents are now available in a choice of formats (PDF, Word, HTML) to better meet your needs. Todd Litman's new email address is litman@vtpi.org. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NEW REPORTS =========== The following reports are posted at http://www.vtpi.org. "The Trouble With Minimum Parking Requirements" By Donald Shoup Minimum parking requirements are often arbitrary and excessive. They are a market distortion that imposes significant economic and environmental costs and encourages increased driving. Subsidized parking is one of the largest external costs of automobile use. A more efficient and equitable approach is to use pricing to match parking supply and demand. Posted with permission. "Estimating Important Transportation-Related Regional Economic Relationships in Bexar County, Texas" By Jon R. Miller, Ph.D., M. Henry Robison, Ph.D. and Michael L. Lahr, Ph.D. This study finds significant regional economic benefits from reduced consumer expenditures on automobile travel. Each 1% of personal trips shifted from automobile to public transit is estimated to add 226 regional jobs and $2.9 million in regional value added. Each million dollars shifted from automobile to public transit expenditures generates nearly $900,000 in regional income and 53.8 jobs. This reflects the fact that automobile expenditures provide less economic development and employment than most other consumer expenditures. Posted with permission. "Leonine Features to Enhance Bridge Capacity" By Walter Kulash, Sandy Curran, and Jay Hood. This paper helps answer the question, "Is 'traffic engineer humor' an oxymoron?" It outlines the historic role of bridge lions, summarizes current research in the field, and offers a state-of-the-art method for computing their impacts on traffic capacity. Three illustrations, a "Ferocity Factors" table, one case study. Posted with permission. "Local Politician's Guide to Urban Transportation" By Gordon Price, Councillor, City of Vancouver Pity the politician who promises to fix urban transportation problems. Traffic congestion may be one of their constituents' greatest frustrations, but there is often little they can do with available resources and conventional solutions. This guide, written by an experienced municipal politician, discusses the transportation challenges facing local officials, and offers innovative solutions. Posted with permission. "The Asphalt Attack" By Jane Holtz Kay, Architecture and Planning Critic This includes four recent articles on sprawl and automobile dependency: "Overheated Car Culture," "All Sprawl Down," "Time to Depave the Landscape" and "Dreaming of a Clean Car?" Posted with permission. "Issues in Sustainable Transportation" By Todd Litman & David Burwell This paper explores various issues related to how sustainable transportation is defined, evaluated and implemented. It suggests that sustainable transportation planning requires a broad scope that takes into account economic, social equity and local environmental impacts, as well as long-term ecological risks. "Transportation Market Distortions" By Todd Litman This report examines how transportation markets violate market principles. Although individual market distortions may appear modest and justified, their cumulative effects are significant, exacerbating virtually all transportation problems. In a less distorted market consumers would drive less and be better off overall as a result. Market reforms that reduce distortions can provide significant economic, social and environmental benefits. Please let us know if you have transport policy papers that you would like to have posted at our website. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ REVISED REPORTS =============== The following reports have been substantially revised. "Automobile Dependency and Economic Development" By Todd Litman and Felix Laube This paper describes theoretical and empirical evidence indicating that excessive automobile dependence can reduce economic productivity and development. Automobile dependence requires significant economic resources for vehicles, fuel, roads and parking facilities, and increases traffic congestion, accidents and environmental damages. It reduces the viability of other travel modes and leads to more dispersed land use, resulting in reduced access and increased transport costs. "Win-Win Transportation Solutions; Cooperation for Economic, Social and Environmental Benefits" Win-Win strategies help solve transportation problems by increasing consumer choice and removing market distortions. They are cost effective, technically feasible reforms based on market principles. Win-Win strategies can help achieve a variety of goals including traffic congestion reduction, road and parking facility cost savings, road safety, economic development, consumer savings, increased travel choice, environmental protection, community livability, and equity. These multiple benefits create opportunities for cooperation and coordination among a wide range of organizations and political interests. This paper discusses the Win-Win concept and describes more than a dozen Win-Win strategies. WEB LINKS ========= We continue to add links to other useful websites. Please add a link to us from your organization's website and we will reciprocate. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ APPOINTMENTS AND AWARDS ======================= * Transportation Research Editorial Advisory Board VTPI Director Todd Litman has been appointed to the Editorial Advisory Board for Transportation Research A & B, two leading transportation research journals. * Lincoln Institute Fellowship VTPI Director Todd Litman has been awarded a David C. Lincoln Fellowship to fund research on the relationships between transportation, land use and taxation. This three-year project will investigate how current tax and regulatory practices affect the amount of land devoted to roads and parking facilities, and how this impacts transport patterns. The study will develop ways to measure the amount of land devoted to transport facilities, examine how this varies under different circumstances, estimate the value of this resource, evaluate how tax policies and regulations treat this land, and analyze whether current practices are optimal in terms of various economic and social objectives. * TRB Sustainability Task Force VTPI Director Todd Litman has been appointed to the Transportation Research Board Task Force A5T57 on Transportation and Sustainability. This Task Force will have several sessions on January 11, 2000 at the TRB Annual Meeting, held in Washington DC. Todd will present two papers at TRB: "Evaluating Carsharing Benefits" Paper #0521 Session 161, Social and Economic Factors and Personal Mobility, Monday, January 10, 7:30-9:30 p.m., first presentation, Hilton, Jefferson West. "Transportation Market Reforms for Sustainability" Paper #0523 Session 298, Symposium on Transportation and Sustainability, Tuesday, January 11, 3:45-5:30, first presentation, Hilton, Jefferson West. * National Economics Club Presentation, "Win-Win Transportation Solutions: Cooperation for Economic, Social and Environmental Benefits". While in Washington DC for the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, VTPI Director Todd Litman will give a presentation at the National Economists Club during their luncheon meeting on Thursday, January 13, from noon until 1:30 p.m., at the Hudson Institute, 1015 18th St., NW, 3rd floor, one block from the Farragut North or West Metro stations. The presentation is open to the public, so feel free to attend if you are in town. For more information visit http://www.national-economists.org. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please let us know if you have comments or questions about any information in this newsletter, or if you would like to be removed from our mailing list. And please pass this newsletter on to others who may find it useful. Todd Litman, Director Victoria Transport Policy Institute 1250 Rudlin Street Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 E-mail: litman@vtpi.org Website: http://www.vtpi.org