From zbzhu at center.njtu.edu.cn Sun May 2 09:44:27 1999 From: zbzhu at center.njtu.edu.cn (zbzhu) Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 08:44:27 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: 1st announce for call for papers Message-ID: <9904280041.AA35936@center.njtu.edu.cn> ---------- > ??????: SUSTRAN Resource Centre > ??????: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > ????: [sustran] 1st announce for call for papers > ????: 1999??4??14?? 15:00 > > This bounced at first because it came from a non-member address. So I am > forwarding it. > > >From: "KhZahidul Hoque" > >To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > >Subject: Re: [sustran] 1st announce fot call for papers > >Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 00:01:22 PDT > >Mime-Version: 1.0 > >Content-type: text/plain > > > > > >Dear all, > > > >There is an announcement for papers for the 6th International > >Conference on Applications of Advanced Technologies in Transportation > >Engineering, 28-30 June 2000 (6th AATT 2000), Singapore. I believe, > >many of us would be interested for this conference. The scope of the > >conference is very wide and is aimed to address advance technologies > >in Transportation Engineering. It includes the following areas: > > > > > > ()Intelligent transportation systems > > ()Real-time control systems > > ()Information technology > > ()Robotics and automation > > ()Vehicle navigation and control > > ()Artificial vision and image processing > > ()Transportation infrastructure management technologies > > ()Advanced construction and maintenance technology > > ()Meterial technology > > ()Road pricing techniques > > ()Computer-aided engineering > > ()Standards for advanced transportation technology > > ()Benefits and costs of advanced technologies > > ()Communication systems > > ()Advanced technologies in transportation safety > > ()Education and training > > ()Traffic management technologies > > ()Modelling and prediction technology > > ()Systems planning and management technology > > ()Transportation and logistics > > > > > > Please contact the address below for more information. > > > > Transportation Resource Centre > > c/o Department of Civil Engineering > > National University of Singapore > > 10 Kent Ridge Crescent > > SINGAPORE 119260 > > Fax : 65-777-0994 > > Email: Dr Kelvin R.L. Cheu cvecrl@nus.edu.sg > > > > URL: ://www.eng.nus.edu.sg/civil/Conference/AATT > > > > > >Thanks for reading. > > > > > >Kh Zahidul Hoque > >Engineer > >Samwoh Asphalt Premix Pte Ltd > >52A Sungei Kadut Street 1 > >Singapore 729356 > >URL: http://www.cyberway.com.sg/~samwoh/ > > > >Email: zahidul@hotmail.com > > > >______________________________________________________ > >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > > > From sustran at po.jaring.my Mon May 3 16:13:48 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 15:13:48 +0800 Subject: [sustran] 5th World Conference on Injury Prevention and Control Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990503151348.007bad60@relay101.jaring.my> The 5th World Conference on Injury Prevention and Control, to be held in New Delhi on 5-8 March 2000, has issued a call for papers. Abstracts must be submitted by 30 June 1999. See the conference website for details http://www.ciionline.org/fiwoco/ Transport-related themes include: 123- Safer vehicle design 127- Transportation safety 130- Vulnerable road users Some confirmed transport papers so far include: Murray Mackay (UK): "Folklore and science in traffic safety: some new directions" Dietmar Otte (Germany): "Vehicle design for injury control of vulnerable road users" Geetam Tiwari (India): "Traffic flow and safety: need for new models for mixed traffic" Liisa H. Blomqvist (Finland): "Aging and transportation: mobility or safety?" From sustran at po.jaring.my Tue May 4 15:04:12 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 14:04:12 +0800 Subject: [sustran] fwd: ICTTS 2000 Call for Papers Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990504140412.0081a260@relay101.jaring.my> ICTTS'2000 The Second International Conference on Traffic and Transportation Studies Call for Papers Beijing, People's Republic of China July 31-August 2, 2000 School of Traffic and Transportation Northern Jiaotong University Beijing, 100044 P.R.China BACKGROUND The Second International Conference on Traffic and Transportation Studies (ICTTS) will be held in Beijing (China) from July 31 to August 2, 2000. The objective of the conference is to have a forum for researchers, experts and professionals, government officials, policy makers, and managers from around the world to present, discuss and exchange views and experience on recent developments in transportation. The conference will provide a variety of opportunities to explore the key issues, innovative technologies, current projects and future prospects for transportation system studies. At this conference, internationally known transportation experts and railway and highway administrators will be invited to deliver guest keynote lectures. SPONSORING ORGANISATION China Association for Science and Technology (CAST) CO-SPONSORING ORGANISATIONS American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) ARRB Transport Research LTD (ARRB TR) China Highway and Transportation Society (CHTS) China Land Society (CLS) China Railway Society (CRS) Chinese Society for Science and Technology of Labor Protection (CSSTLP) Chinese Society for Urban Studies (CSUS) Hong Kong Society for Transportation Studies (HKSTS) Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) Institute of Transport Engineers (ITE) National Nature Science Foundation of China (NNSFC) Northern Jiaotong University (NJU) The Geographical Society of China (GSC) HONORARY CHAIRMAN Prof. ZHOU, Guangzhao, Academician, Chairman of CAST INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE Chairman: Prof.YANG, Zhaoxia, and NJU, China. Co-Chairman: Prof. BELL, Michael G. H., UK Prof. SINHA, Kumares C., U.S.A. Members: Prof. BLACK John A., Australia Prof. BONSALL, Peter, UK Dr. CHIN, Anthony, Singapore Prof. DONG, Decun, China Prof. EASTHAM, Tony R., Hongkong Dr. FERREIRA, Luis, Australia Prof. GAO, Ziyou, China Prof. GOODMAN, C. J., UK Prof. HARATA, Noboru, Japan Prof. HEIDEMANN, Dirk, Germany Prof. HU, Siji, China Prof. KYTE, Michael, U.S.A. Dr. LAM, William H.K., Hong Kong Prof. LAPORTE, Gilbert, Canada Dr. LO, Hong Kam, Hong Kong Prof. MARCHAL, Jean, Belgium Prof. NING, Bin, China. Prof. PALMA, Andre De, France Dr. POLAK, John, UK Prof. WANG, Xiaojing, China Prof. WU, Yujian, China Prof. XU, Jianmin, China Prof. YAN, Xinping, China Dr. YANG, Hai, Hong Kong Prof. YANG, Hao, China Prof. YANG, Peikun, China Prof. YANG, Zhaosheng, China ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Chairman: Prof. JI, Jialun, NJU, China Co-Chairman: Dr. WANG, Kelvin C.P., University of Arkansas, U.S.A. Prof. MAO, Baohua, NJU, China Secretary General: Dr. XIAO, Guiping, NJU, China Members: Dr. HAN, Baoming, NJU, China Ms. HAN, Yanhui, NJU, China Ms. JIANG, Xi, NJU, China Ms. LIU, Hua, NJU, China Mr. LIU, Zuoyi, NJT, China Mr. SHI, Yingtao, CAST, China Mr. TIAN, Zongzhong, U.S.A. Ms. YANG, Yuefang, NJU, China Dr. ZHAO, Shengchuan, Japan. TOPICS The following conference topics are recommended by the International Scientific Committee of ICTTS. You are also encouraged to add other areas and propose sessions, tutorials, and panel sessions related to the theme of the Conference. ? Traffic flow theories and applications ? Intelligent transportation systems ? Freeway real-time control systems ? Transportation safety, environment and sustainability ? Transport planning and management ? Transportation system simulation ? Urban light rail transit systems ? High-speed railway and Heavy-duty rail transportation ?? Urban transportation: TDM and land use ?? Transportation Infrastructure and Pavement Systems ?? Nonmotorized transport in developing countries DEADLINES Deadline for Submission of Abstracts August 20,1999 Release of Call for Invited Papers September 10,1999 Deadline for Submission of Draft Full Papers January 11, 2000 Notification of Acceptance of Papers February 1, 2000 Deadline for Submission of Final Full Papers March 15, 2000 PROCEEDINGS All final manuscripts received on time and accepted for presentation will be published in the Proceedings of the conference by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). The Proceedings will be distributed to the participants at the beginning of the conference. LANGUAGE Working Language of the Conference is English. Papers will be written in English for inclusion in the proceedings. TECHNICAL VISITS The Organizer will arrange special half-day technical visits for conference participants. The visits provide a rare opportunity for delegates to gain insights to transportation projects and systems in Beijing. SOCIAL PROGRAMME FOR ACCOMPANYING PERSONS An interesting social program will be arranged for accompanying persons during the Conference, which will include sightseeing and other activities within Beijing. AFTER CONFERENCE TOURS After the conference, sightseeing/technical tours to places of interest in China will be specially arranged for participants and their accompanying persons. Fees for these tours are extra. SELECTION OF PAPERS Those who wish to present at this conference are invited to send to the International Scientific Committee of the conference two copies of draft full papers as well as floppy disk according to the specific deadlines. The selection of final papers to be included in the Proceedings are based on the following criteria; papers must be written in English and abide by ASCE publication rules; paper should deal with transportation related topics; the innovative features of the analysis and experience will be an important criterion in judging the paper's quality. REGISTRATION INFORMATION Participation is open to all persons interested in traffic and transportation studies. Those who wish to attend the conference should complete the enclosed pre-registration form and airmail or fax it to the Organizing Committee. Copies of the pre-registration form can be used. Before May 15,2000 After May 15,2000 US$325 US$375 PAPER SUBMISSION/PRE-REGISTRATION FORM Title of paper (if submitted): ___________________________ Topic area: ________________________________________ Name of the major author: ____________________________ Position: _________________Affiliation__________________ Address: __________________________________________ Telephone: ________________ Facsimile________________ Email address: _____________________________________ Co-author name(s): _________________________________ Attendee(s) of the Conference: ________________________ Please return this form with your abstract(s), draft full papers and any request for information to: Organizing Committee (Dr.XIAO, Guiping) School of Traffic and Transportation Northern Jiaotong University Beijing 100044, People's Republic of China. Tel: (8610) 6324,0314 Fax: (8610) 6324,0308 E-mail: ictts@center.njtu.edu.cn From sustran at po.jaring.my Wed May 5 11:09:59 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 10:09:59 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Diesel auto giant intimidates environmentalists in India Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990505100959.007dc470@relay101.jaring.my> Dear sustran-discussers Our friends at CSE in Delhi may be needing some help - information, solidarity, even contributions to a legal fighting fund(!?). See below. Note also the other interesting legal developments in Delhi - the court has restricted the number of new cars pending a possible ban on diesel cars. Paul ---------------------------------- What's new at the Centre and Science and Environment, New Delhi, India Diesel automobile giant uses money power to intimidate environmentalists in India. TELCO (Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd.), an auto major in India has slapped a Rs 100 crore ($25 million) legal suit on Anil Agarwal and Sunita Narain, environmental researchers in the Centre for Science and Environment for their campaign against diesel cars to control harmful emissions of small toxic particulate. Presently, the Supreme Court in India is hearing a case on banning of diesel cars in the capital city of Delhi. As a prelude to this the Supreme Court order of April 29 effectively restricts the increase in the number of all cars in Delhi as an interim measure till the final decision is taken on the proposed ban of diesel cars. In a dramatic development this court order has also advanced the enforcement of more stringent emission standards for both petrol and diesel cars, read on at http://www.oneworld.org/cse/html/au/au4_050499.htm ...... (other items deleted) .... Usha Sekhar Website Unit Centre for Science and Environment **************************************************************** * NOTE CHANGE IN OUR EMAIL ADDRESS: PLEASE NOTE IT AS FOLLOWS * **************************************************************** CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENT ( CSE ) 41, TUGHLAKABAD INSTITUTIONAL AREA, NEW DELHI- 110 062 TELE: 698 1110, 698 1124 698 3394, 698 6399 FAX : 91-11-698 5879 VISIT US AT: http://www.cseindia.org Email: webadmin@cseindia.org **************************************************************** SUSTRAN Resource Centre P. O. Box 11501, 50748 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel/Fax: +60 3 2742590, E-mail: sustran@po.jaring.my Web: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/ The SUSTRAN Resource Centre provides information, research and advice on people-centred and sustainable approaches to urban transport, especially in low and middle-income Asia. From sustran at po.jaring.my Wed May 5 11:27:31 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 10:27:31 +0800 Subject: [sustran] fwd: Atmospheric Issues e-newsletter Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990505102731.007dc470@relay101.jaring.my> Dear sustran-discussers The UK-based electronic newsletter, Atmospheric Issues, is a useful resource on recent news in air pollution and atmospheric impacts. I include below some of items from the latest issue. Paul SUSTRAN Resource Centre P. O. Box 11501, 50748 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel/Fax: +60 3 2742590, E-mail: sustran@po.jaring.my Web: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/ From: "Joe Buchdahl" Organization: Manchester Metropolitan University To: "Atmospheric Issues" Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 14:32:16 GMT Subject: May newsletter Reply-to: j.buchdahl@mmu.ac.uk Dear Reader, Below is May's edition of Atmospheric Issues (also attached as a text file). Joe Buchdahl ARIC Sue Hare / Joe Buchdahl - Coordinators Dept. of Environmental & Geographical Sciences Manchester Metropolitan University Chester Street Manchester M1 5GD Tel: 0161 247 1590/3, Fax: 0161 247 6332 E-mail: aric@mmu.ac.uk Internet: http://www.doc.mmu.ac.uk/aric/arichome.html Atmospheric Issues May 1999 Volume 5, Issue 2 ....... NEW DIESEL CATALYST The US manufacturer Engelhard is to market a new diesel exhaust after treatment device in the UK. The device reduces particulates and other pollutants and is likely to bring strong competition for Eminox, the main competitor on the market. The Engelhard DPX catalysts will cost ?3,000, compared to a cost of ?3500+ for the Eminox CRT (a similar device that requires the use of ultra low sulphur diesel). The DPX catalysed soot filter uses an active catalyst surface deposited on a ceramic particulate filter. This combines a particulate filter with the function of an oxidation catalyst. 95% of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons can be oxidised by the DPX filters and 90% of particulate matter is removed. The Vehicle Certification Agency has approved the product, and says it will allow commercial vehicle users to qualify for the ?1,000 per year excise duty rebate for green vehicles. Source: Air Quality Management, April 1999. ....... NEW UK CLIMATE CHANGE TAX TO BE LAUNCHED IN 2001 >From April 2001, the UK government plans to introduce a tax on the business use of energy. The new tax is set to deliver about a quarter of the greenhouse gas reduction targets for Britain. The tax will apply to coal, natural gas and electricity used by businesses, the public sector and agriculture. It will not apply to electricity producers or the transport sector. It is expected that ?1.75 billion will be generated by the tax in the first year and carbon emissions are expected to reduce by 1.5 million metric tonnes a year by 2010. The government has promised to make the new tax fiscally neutral by putting money back into companies through energy efficiency programs, support for the use of renewables and cuts in employers' national insurance contributions. >From the 1st June, excise duties for large cars and light goods vehicles will increase, whilst duties for smaller cleaner cars will be cut. Next year, a shift in the tax system based on CO2 emissions will take place and duties on gasoline will rise by 6% to favour the use of low-sulphur diesel. More tax measures will follow in the future to promote the use of non-car commuting. Source: Global Environmental Change Report, 12th March 1999; DETR News Release, 29th March 1999 1998 - THE WARMEST YEAR OF THE MILLENIUM 1998 was recorded as the warmest year to date in the observational record of surface temperatures. According to a report in the 15th March issue of Geophysical Research Letters (vol. 26, pp. 1759-1762), 1998 may also be the warmest year of the past 1000 years. Extending previous research that showed the 20th century was the warmest of the past six centuries, Michael Mann of the University of Massachusetts and colleagues analysed tree ring and ice core back to AD 1000. The analysis showed that there was a cooling in surface temperature until around 1900 of 0.2?C per century, followed by a dramatic temperature rise. The warmest decade prior to the 1990s is said to be 1166-1175 and the 1990s are seen to be significantly warmer than this time. 1998 is seen to be significantly warmer than 1249, the warmest year prior to the 1990s. This supports the researchers' conclusion that "both the past decades and past years are likely to be the warmest for the Northern Hemisphere this millennium". Source: Global Environmental Change Report, 12th March 1999 SOLAR VARIATION ALONE COULD NOT PRODUCE CURRENT GLOBAL WARMING The past few decades have seen a rapid warming in the temperatures at the Earth's surface. According to a report in the 27 January issue of Journal of Geophysical Research, solar variation alone could not have been responsible for this warming. Researchers David Rind, Judith Lean and R. Healy of Goddard Space Flight Centre (USA) used computer models to discover what impact solar variations had on global temperatures. They concluded that changes in solar output on their own would not be sufficient to produce the rapid warming during the last few decades. According to the researchers, changes in energy output from the Sun account for a temperature increase of approximately 0.2?C over the past century, or about one third of the observed temperature increase, and a 0.45?C increase since 1600. Source: Global Environmental Change Report, 12th March 1999 IS URBAN WARMING RESPONSIBLE FOR BIASING GLOBAL TEMPERATURE TRENDS? Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center (Ashville, North Caroliner, USA) and colleagues have used data from the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) to show that global warming is not biased by urban warming. Many temperature-recording stations are based in urban areas and hence skeptics have suggested that urban warming has skewed overall temperature trends. The researchers used two different methods to classify the 7280 stations in the GHCN network as urban or rural. Then they performed an analysis of global temperatures using only the stations that qualified as rural under both classifications. They compared the result trends to those seen in the complete data set and found no significant difference in trends between the two data sets. The researchers concluded that "the global land surface air temperature signal is robust and not affected by urban warming". Source: Global Environmental Change Report, 12th March 1999 From rogerh at foe.co.uk Wed May 5 22:57:38 1999 From: rogerh at foe.co.uk (Roger Higman) Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 13:57:38 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: Diesel auto giant intimidates environmentalists in India In-Reply-To: SUSTRAN Resource Centre "[sustran] Diesel auto giant intimidates environmentalists in India" (May 5, 10:09am) References: <3.0.6.32.19990505100959.007dc470@relay101.jaring.my> Message-ID: <990505135746.ZM17543@unknown.zmail.host> Paul/Usha If there's anything we can do, please let us know. I have access to most of the UK Government's papers on diesel and its harmful effects. Roger Higman "A thorn in the side of Senior Campaigner (Atmosphere and Transport) the motor industry" Friends of the Earth (E,W+NI), Car Magazine 26-28 Underwood Street, London, N1 7JQ Tel + 44 171 566 1661 Fax + 44 171 490 0881 E-mail rogerh@foe.co.uk http://www.foe.co.uk From sustran at po.jaring.my Thu May 6 18:46:17 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 17:46:17 +0800 Subject: [sustran] SUSTRAN News Flash #33: People-centred and sustainable transport news Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990506174617.007b4210@relay101.jaring.my> SUSTRAN Resource Centre P.O. Box 11501, 50748 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel/Fax: +603 274 2590. E-mail: sustran@po.jaring.my, Web: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/ SUSTRAN NEWS FLASH #33 5 May 1999 CONTENTS 1. Profiles of active groups * Sustainable Transport Environment Penang (STEP) * Forum on Automobile Issues in Japan (FAJ) * Forum for Equitable and Environment-friendly Transport (FEET) * Dr Debasish Bhattacharyya, Calcutta 2. Stay Order Against Mumbai-Pune Expressway 3. Manila bike against pollution 4. Cars and meat cause most damage 5. Resources 6. Web sites 7. Events 8. Lighter Side Did you receive this News Flash as a forwarded message from a friend or colleague? If you would like to get future Flashes directly yourself or want to know more about our information services, then please contact us at sustran@po.jaring.my. We have also established a more interactive forum, the sustran-discuss list, to discuss these issues. Email us for instructions on joining. 1. PROFILES OF ACTIVE GROUPS Here are some brief profiles and updates on groups that are active on people-centred and sustainable transport issues. There will be more in future news flashes. Please send us your latest details and news if you would like your group to be profiled. * Sustainable Transport Environment Penang (STEP) was founded in 1997 and grew out of the Sustainable Penang Initiative led by the Socio-economic and Environment Research Institute (SERI). STEP is a network of local NGOs promoting a more participatory transport planning process, is pushing for the development of a cycling master plan, and has developed a list of 'indicators' to use for getting media attention and building public awareness. The group is pushing for public transport to be regulated locally from Penang instead of by a Kuala Lumpur-based board, as at present. Along with other groups, it opposes plans to build a second road link between the island of Penang and the mainland, arguing that the full potential of the existing ferry services should be exploited first. STEP also includes an active group of advocates for disabled people's access. This group has produced a compelling photo essay of the difficulties faced by wheelchair users and blind people on a short stretch of one of the city's main streets (see Resources below). STEP is also collaborating with a new UN-funded project to make Penang's built environment accessible to people with disabilities. [Contact: Mr Ganesh Rasagam, Sustainable Transport Environment Penang (STEP), c/o SERI, 10a Persiaran Bukit Jambul, 11900 Penang, Malaysia. Tel: 604-645-1710, Fax: 604-645-1807, Email: rasagam@tm.net.my]. * Forum on Automobile Issues in Japan (FAJ) is a sustainable transport advocacy group in Japan (recently renamed from Demotorization Forum Japan). FAJ campaigns for human-oriented and sustainable transport. It also campaigns for cutting automobile traffic, safer walking/cycling and better quality of public transportation services. FAJ is planning a Car Free Day festival for Earth Day 2000. This will be Japan's first Car Free Day event. FAJ welcomes any suggestsions and experiences from elsewhere on how to make their car-free festival a success. [Contact: Masashi Tada, ED2000 Japan, Forum on Automobile Issues in Japan (FAJ), Bessho3-16-4, Minami-ku, Yokohama-shi, Japan 232-0064. Tel. +81-45-712-9095, Email: QWT07203@nifty.ne.jp, Web: http://member.nifty.ne.jp/railway_ecology/]. * Forum for Equitable and Environment-friendly Transport (FEET) is a newly formed group in the Klang Valley (Kuala Lumpur's metropolitan area), Malaysia. Its aim is to promote more people-friendly and environment-friendly transport, especially by promoting the interests of pedestrians, public-transport users and bicyclists. FEET includes representatives of residents' associations, people with disabilities, transport experts, members of the press and concerned individuals. FEET has first raised its voice over the failure of relevant authorities to build enough pedestrian crossings across a newly-opened expressway, the Damansara-Puchong Highway. This came after a serious injury sparked a controversy. In a number of places along the road, school students and other residents have had no choice but to scamper across 6 lanes of high-speed traffic to cross the road. FEET is also now cooperating with the Malaysian Association for the Blind (MAB) and the Kuala Lumpur City Hall to promote pedestrian improvements for Brickfields, an inner-city neighbourhood frequented by many people with visual impairments, since it is home to the MAB centre and numerous traditional blind massage centres. [Contact: Naziaty Yaacob, Tel. +60 3 759 5396; naziaty@hotmail.com or Zaitun Kasim, Tel/Fax. +60 3 274 2590, tkasim@pc.jaring.my]. * Dr Debasish Bhattacharyya is a public transport campaigner in Calcutta, India. He and his colleagues are involved in a lobbying effort to save the Calcutta Tramways from a slow death from official neglect, mismanagement and replacement by diesel buses. It is feared that the loss of the trams will only hasten motorisation and the deterioration of public transport service and worsen air-pollution which already exceeds WHO standards by many times. Protests have stopped the tram system from being totally dismantled, but maintenance and management of the system remains poor. Activists and academics estimate that reviving the CTC trams would cost roughly $25 - $35 million, or $29 per annual passenger, but the agency hasn't even requested the money. By contrast, Japan's OECF has agreed to fund a second line on the Calcutta metro, which has only about 200,000 daily passengers, and costs $1860 per annual passenger, and highway flyovers at several downtown intersections, costing the municipality $128 per motorist. In a poor city like Calcutta this is a serious mis-allocation of scarce public funds. The Japanese-funded flyovers are now the subject of a court case over allegations of corruption. [Contact: Dr Debasish Bhattacharyya , 4 Raja S.C. Mullick Road, Jadavpur, Calcutta 700 032, India. Tel: 91-33-473-3491, 91-33-455-0858 (Res), Fax: 91-33-473-0284 or 91-33-473-5197, Email: iichbio@giascl01.vsnl.net.in]. 2. STAY ORDER AGAINST MUMBAI-PUNE EXPRESSWAY A High Court in Bombay has recently admitted a Writ Petition filed by several NGOs and affected villagers, opposing the land acquisition for the Mega City Project which is part of the Mumbai-Pune Expressway. The High court has stayed further acquisition of land pending hearing and final disposal of the petition. The court has also restrained the respondents, Maharashtra Government and the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC), from evicting, affecting blasting, or interfering in any manner with the possession and occupation of the persons residing in the different tribal areas. The admission of the Writ Petition vindicates those who have been opposing the project and demanding more transparency and openness from the Government. [Contact: Sujit Patwardhan, PARISAR, Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India. Tel: 327955 Email: sujit@vsnl.com]. 3. MANILA CYCLE AGAINST POLLUTION As part of the Earth Day '99 celebrations, Cycling Advocates, CYCAD, the Manila-based bicycle advocacy group, together with various environmental groups organised a 50 kilometre bike ride around the metropolitan area and a people's march for clean air. On April 25 more than a thousand cyclists, some of them colourfully costumed as a horse, firefly or a grasshopper, joined the leisurely ride which began around 7:30 am and ended around 1pm. The bike ride show-cased the feasibility of urban cycling while at the same time decrying the worsening conditions for cycling, primarily the poor air quality. The bike ride was dubbed as the "Tour of the Fireflies" after the fireflies which have fled the city because of the bad air. It took participants through seven cities in the metro area and finished with a rally, a picnic lunch, an environmental fair, exhibits and a concert. [Contact: Ramon Fernan III, 1563 Pasaje Rosario, Paco 1007, Manila, Philippines. Email: cycad@quickweb.com.ph]. 4. CARS AND MEAT CAUSE MOST DAMAGE A new book co-authored by Dr. Warren Leon, deputy director at the Union of Concerned Scientists, looks at which consumer alternatives cause the least and most environmental damage. "The Consumer's Guide to Effective Environmental Choices" (published by Three Rivers Press) shows that only a few Consumer activities - use of cars and trucks, consumption of meat, and choice of homes and appliances - are responsible for the vast majority of consumer related environmental harm. After grouping 134 consumer spending choices into 50 categories like furnishings, clothing, computers, the authors discovered that most environmental degradation is linked to just seven categories: cars; meat; produce and grains; household appliances and lighting; home heating and cooling; home construction; and household water and sewage. Cars and light trucks cause the most environmental damage overall - nearly half of the toxic air pollution and more than one-quarter of the greenhouse gases traceable to household consumption. [Source: Environmental News Service, http://www.ens.lycos.com/ens]. 5. RESOURCES "An International Sourcebook of Automobile Dependence in Cities 1960-1990" by Jeff Kenworthy and Felix Laube with Peter Newman, Paul Barter, Tamim Raad, Chamlong Poboon and Benedicto Guia (Jr). [Contact: University Press of Colorado, Fax +1 303 530 5306 or Darrin Pratt, Email: prattd@stripe.colorado.edu]. "Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence" by Peter Newman and Jeff Kenworthy [Contact: Institute for Science and Technology Policy (ISTP), Murdoch University, South Street, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia. Tel: +61 8 9360 2913, Fax: +61 8 9360 6421, Email: istp@central.murdoch.edu.au, Web: http://wwwistp.murdoch.edu.au/]. "Proceedings of Velo Australis 1996 International Bicycle Conference" Fremantle, Western Australia. [Contact: Ian Ker, Dept. of Transport, 441 Murray Street, Perth, PO Box 7272, Cloisters Square, W. Australia 6850 Tel: 61 8 9320 9491 Fax: 61 8 9320 9497, Email: iker@transport.wa.gov.au]. "Directory of NGOs in the Field of Human Settlements" and "Directory of NGOs in the OECD Countries" by UNCHS (Habitat), OECD, NGLS and GRET. [Contact: UNCHS (Habitat), PO Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya. Tel: 254 2 621234 Fax: 254 2 624266/7, Web: http://habitat.unchs.org/home.htm]. "A Walk from St Nicholas Home to One-Stop Shopping Complex" by TAN Kuan Aw of the Penang Society for Disabled Persons. Paper featuring a photo-essay on accessibility problems for people with disabilities along a major street in Penang. It was presented at the STEP Forum, August 23, 1998, Penang, Malaysia. [Contact: TAN Kuan Aw, E-mail: tanka@pc.jaring.my or STEP - see profile above]. "Financing European Transport Infrastructure" by Sheila Farrell of Imperial College London. [Contact: Fiona Woodruffe-Peacock, Macmillan Press Houndsmill, Basingstoke RG21 6XS UK. Fax: +44 1256 330688, E-mail: f.woodruffe-peacock@macmillan.co.uk]. Victoria Transport Policy Institute reports available for free downloading at their revised and expanded website. Most were previously available only as printed documents, with prices ranging from $8 to $16 per copy. Free reports include: Evaluating Transportation Equity; Generated Traffic; Implications for Transport Planning; Land Use Impact Costs of Transportation; Parking Requirement Impacts on Housing Affordability; Reply to Critics of Transportation Costing; Win-Win Transportation Strategies; Whose Roads? Defining Bicyclists' and Pedestrians' Right to Use Public Roads [Contact: Todd Litman, Director, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada, Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560, E-mail: litman@islandnet.com, Website: www.islandnet.com/~litman]. 6. WEB SITES * The International Bicycle Fund (ibike@ibike.org) has posted several new bibliographies and reading lists on their web site. http://www.ibike.org/bibliography/ * Car Free Days site http://www.ecoplan.org/carfreeday/ * John Z Wetmore's pedestrian links web site "Perils for Pedestrians" http://www.pedestrians.org * European Local Transport Information Service, ELTIS: http://www.eltis.org * EcoPlan International - Technology, Economy, Society: The Nexus Latest action on The Commons Web site at http://www.ecoplan.org * PTRC training courses up to June 1999 on web-site: http://www.ptrcers.demon.co.uk * Hank Dittmar of the Surface Transportation Policy Project's discussion on Transportation Consumption at web: http://www.newdream.org/discuss * "Relationships between Highway Capacity and Induced Vehicle Travel" a research paper on induced demand, available at : http://www.epa.gov/tp/trb-rn.pdf * ITDP's New Transport Actions Online on web-site: http://www.itdp.org/TRAhome.htm * Comprehensive Sustainable Urban Travel bibliographies at http://omni.ac.uk:8099/lczhmc/bibs/sustrav * Human Settlements in Asia site hosted by the Urban Management Centre at the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Thailand. The site includes two searchable databases: one on available expertise in the field of human settlements and another on current projects in the region by multilateral and bilateral agencies. Go to http://www.hsd.ait.ac.th/ 7. EVENTS "53rd UITP International Congress" - An Urban and Congestion-Free 21st Century, May 23-28, 1999, Toronto, Canada. [Contact: UITP Tel: +32.2.673.61.00 Fax : +32.2.660.10.72, E-mail : events@uitp.com, administration@uitp.com, Web site: www.uitp.com]. "7th International Conference on Low Volume Roads", May 23-27, 1999, Mpumalanga, South Africa. [Contact: G P Jayaprakash, Transportation Research Board, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington DC, 204218, USA. Tel: 1 202 334 2952, Fax: 1 202 334 2003, Email: gjayapra@nas.edu]. TRL short training courses. "Management of Appropriate Technology in the Road Sector for Developing and Emerging Economies" June 21- 25, 1999, "Roads and Transport in Developing Countries and Emerging Nations" June 28- July 09, 1999, [Contact: Ms. Linda Parsley, International Development Unit, Transport Research Laboratory, Old Wokingham Road, Crowthorne, Berkshire RG45 6AU, United Kingdom Fax : + 44 1344 770356 Tel: + 44 1344 770551 E-mail: international_enquiries@trl.co.uk]. "Balancing the Load: A fair deal for women. Designing National Policy Guidelines for Gender and Rural Transport", The culmination of a research project comprising 31 case studies from 15 countries in Africa and Asia. Two 3-day seminars: Colombo, Sri Lanka, 24-25 June 1999 and Pretoria, South Africa, 15-16 July 1999 [Contact: International Forum for Rural Transport and Development (IFRTD) Secretariat, 150 Southampton Row, 2nd Floor, London WciB 5AL, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 171 278 3670, Fax: +44 171 278 6880, Email: ifrtd@gn.apc.org, Web: http://www.gn/apc.org/ifrtd]. "3rd Asia Pacific ITS Seminar", July 4-7, 1999, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. [Contact: Road Engineering Association of Malaysia, Unit A2-22, Block A, 2nd Floor, PJ Industrial Park, Jalan Kemajuan, Section 13, 46200 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. Tel: 6033 7544403, Fax: 603 7548376 Email: ream@po.jaring.my]. "Deals On Wheels: Sustainable Transportation Initiatives Supporting The Economy And The Environment In Developing Countries" July 28-30, 1999, San Salvador, El Salvador. [Contact: Maria J. Figueroa., UNEP Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment, Risoe National Laboratory, P.O. Box 49, Roskilde, DK-4000 Denmark. Fax: +45 46 32 19 99 E-mail: maria.figueroa@risoe.dk]. "21st World Road Congress", October 3-9, 1999, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. [Contact: MPCR/PIARC, La Grande Arche, Paris Nord, Niveau 8, 92053 La Defense Cedex, France. Fax: +33 1 49 000202 Email: piarc@pratique.fr]. "Transportation Science and Technology into the Next Millennium" December 4, 1999, Hong Kong. [Contact: Dr. Hong K. Lo, c/o Department of Civil Engineering, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay Hong Kong, PR China Fax : (852) 2358- 1534 E-mail : cehklo@ust.hk. Web: http://home.netvigator.com/~hksts/conf99.htm]. "Thailand National Bicycle Conference" (in Thai) organised by the Thailand Cycling Club (TCC), planned for late 1999 or early 2000. [Contact: Nancy (Mrs Kasama Panswad) or Dr Thongchai Panswad, Thailand Cycling Club c/o Environmental Engineering Department, Chulalongkorn University, Phyathai Rd, Bangkok 10330, Thailand. Tel: 66 2-2186669, Fax: 66 2-252 7510, Email: pthongch@chula.ac.th ]. "Planning For Sustainable And Integrated Transport System In The New Millennium", January 4-7, 2000, Sussex, England. [Contact: Dr. Julian Hine, Transport Research Institute/School of the Built Environment, Napier University Redwood House, 66 Spylaw Road, Edinburgh EH10 5BR, UK. Tel: 0131-455-5140 fax: 0131-455-5141 Email: j.hine@napier.ac.uk]. "Setting Child Safety Priority Within a Safe Community Framework", February 26-28, 2000, Dhaka, Bangladesh. [Contact: Dr AKM Fazlur Rahman, Institute of Child and Mother Health, Matuail, Dhaka-1362, Bangladesh. Tel: 880 2 9122509, Fax: 880 2 822679 Email: fazlur@citecho.net]. "5th World Conference on Injury Prevention and Control", New Delhi on 5-8 March 2000, CALL FOR PAPERS. Abstracts by 30 June 1999. [Contact: Ms Arati Walia, CONFER, D-1, Kalindi Colony, New Delhi 110065, India. Tel: +91 11 6919377, Fax: +91 11 6848343, 6929541, e-mail: awconfer@del2.vsnl.net.in, Web: http://www.ciionline.org/fiwoco/]. "2nd International Conference on Quality of Life in Cities- 21st Century QOL", ICQOLC 2000, 8-10 March 2000, Singapore. CALL FOR PAPERS. Closing date for abstracts: 1 August. [Contact: Dr Foo Tuan Seik Conference Secretary, Conference Secretariat (ICQOLC 2000) School of Building and Real Estate National University of Singapore 10 Kent Ridge Crescent Singapore 119260 Tel: (65) 772-3440 Fax: (65) 775-5502 E-mail: qolnet@nus.edu.sg, WWW site: http://www.qolnet.nus.edu.sg/conf2/main.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]. "2nd APTE 2000 - Asia Pacific Conference on Transportation and the Environment", April 11-13, 2000, Beijing, China. [Contact: Mr Wang Haiqing, Mr Richard Bi, 2nd APTE' 2000 Sec. Office, 240,Huixinli, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100029, P R China Tel: 86 10 6491 4809 Fax: 86 10 6491 8204 Email: tcs@iicc,ac,cn]. "Earth Day 2000", April 22, 2000. Global citizens' movement to transform how we live with the Earth and each other. [Contact: Earth Day Network, Mark Dubois Tel: +1 206.264.0114x203, Shalini Ramanathan Tel: +1 206.264.0114x214 Email: worldwide@earthday.net]. "ICTTS'2000 - The Second International Conference on Traffic and Transportation Studies", Beijing, July 31-August 2, 2000. CALL FOR PAPERS. Deadline for Submission of Abstracts - August 20,1999. [Contact: Organizing Committee (Dr.XIAO, Guiping), School of Traffic and Transportation, Northern Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, People's Republic of China., Tel: +8610 6324,0314, Fax: +8610 6324,0308, E-mail: ictts@center.njtu.edu.cn] 8. LIGHTER SIDE A German couple out for a Christmas drive near Berlin ended up in a river -- apparently because their luxury car's computer forgot to mention they had to wait for a ferry. The 57-year-old driver and his passenger were not injured in the accident, police said the couple were out driving at night when they came to a ferry crossing at the Havel River in Caputh, 10km from Berlin. That information, however, was never stored in the satellite-guided navigation system they were using. The driver kept going straight in the dark, expecting a bridge, and ended up in the water. [Source: newspapers]. A giant pedicab (or "beca" - pronounced "becha" in Malay) measuring 7 metres high and 9 metres wide has been erected by the South Muar District Council in Johor State, Malaysia. Muar has adopted the Beca as something of a symbol for the town, since it is said that Muar always had more of the 3-wheeled pedicabs than other Malaysian towns. [Source: New Straits Times, 7 Feb. 1999] ------------------------------------------------------------------ Written and compiled by A. Rahman Paul Barter and Sreela Kolandai. The SUSTRAN Resource Centre provides the SUSTRAN News Flashes as a service for the Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and the Pacific. We rely on you, the participants in the network, for our news. Please keep the contributions coming. We welcome brief news and announcements from all over the world. The SUSTRAN Resource Centre is a not-for-profit organisation that provides information, research and advice on people-centred and sustainable approaches to urban transport for low- and middle-income cities, with a special focus on Asia. From sustran at po.jaring.my Wed May 12 10:39:36 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 09:39:36 +0800 Subject: [sustran] fwd: The Real Price Of Gas Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990512093936.007fcc10@relay101.jaring.my> [forwarded from the kabelvag list on sustainable consumption] Mailing-List: contact kabelvag-owner@egroups.com X-Mailing-List: kabelvag@egroups.com X-URL: http://www.egroups.com/list/kabelvag/ Reply-To: kabelvag@egroups.com Delivered-To: listsaver-egroups-kabelvag@egroups.com From: "Nat" To: "kabelvag" Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:16:57 +0800 Subject: [kabelvag] The Real Price Of Gas The Real Price Of Gas Executive Summary ---------- This report by the International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA) identifies and quantifies the many external costs of using motor vehicles and the internal combustion engine that are not reflected in the retail price Americans pay for gasoline. These are costs that consumers pay indirectly by way of increased taxes, insurance costs, and retail prices in other sectors. The report divides the external costs of gasoline usage into five primary areas: (1) Tax Subsidization of the Oil Industry; (2) Government Program Subsidies; (3) Protection Costs Involved in Oil Shipment and Motor Vehicle Services; (4) Environmental, Health, and Social Costs of Gasoline Usage; and (5) Other Important Externalities of Motor Vehicle Use. Together, these external costs total $558.7 billion to $1.69 trillion per year, which, when added to the retail price of gasoline, result in a per gallon price of $5.60 to $15.14. TAX SUBSIDIES The federal government provides the oil industry with numerous tax breaks designed to ensure that domestic companies can compete with international producers and that gasoline remains cheap for American consumers. Federal tax breaks that directly benefit oil companies include: the Percentage Depletion Allowance (a subsidy of $784 million to $1 billion per year), the Nonconventional Fuel Production Credit ($769 to $900 million), immediate expensing of exploration and development costs ($200 to $255 million), the Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit ($26.3 to $100 million), foreign tax credits ($1.11 to $3.4 billion), foreign income deferrals ($183 to $318 million), and accelerated depreciation allowances ($1.0 to $4.5 billion). Tax subsidies do not end at the federal level. The fact that most state income taxes are based on oil firms' deflated federal tax bill results in undertaxation of $125 to $323 million per year. Many states also impose fuel taxes that are lower than regular sales taxes, amounting to a subsidy of $4.8 billion per year to gasoline retailers and users. New rules under the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 are likely to provide the petroleum industry with additional tax subsidies of $2.07 billion per year. In total, annual tax breaks that support gasoline production and use amount to $9.1 to $17.8 billion. PROGRAM SUBSIDIES Government support of US petroleum producers does not end with tax breaks. Program subsidies that support the extraction, production, and use of petroleum and petroleum fuel products total $38 to $114.6 billion each year. The largest portion of this total is federal, state, and local governments' $36 to $112 billion worth of spending on the transportation infrastructure, such as the construction, maintenance, and repair of roads and bridges. Other program subsidies include funding of research and development ($200 to $220 million), export financing subsidies ($308.5 to $311.9 million), support from the Army Corps of Engineers ($253.2 to $270 million), the Department of Interior's Oil Resources Management Programs ($97 to $227 million), and government expenditures on regulatory oversight, pollution cleanup, and liability costs ($1.1 to $1.6 billion). PROTECTION SUBSIDIES Beyond program subsidies, governments, and thus taxpayers, subsidize a large portion of the protection services required by petroleum producers and users. Foremost among these is the cost of military protection for oil-rich regions of the world. US Defense Department spending allocated to safeguard the world's petroleum resources total some $55 to $96.3 billion per year. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a federal government entity designed to supplement regular oil supplies in the event of disruptions due to military conflict or natural disaster, costs taxpayers an additional $5.7 billion per year. The Coast Guard and the Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration provide other protection services totaling $566.3 million per year. Of course, local and state governments also provide protection services for oil industry companies and gasoline users. These externalized police, fire, and emergency response expenditures add up to $27.2 to $38.2 billion annually. ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH AND SOCIAL COSTS Environmental, health, and social costs represent the largest portion of the externalized price Americans pay for their gasoline reliance. These expenses total some $231.7 to $942.9 billion every year. The internal combustion engine contributes heavily to localized air pollution. While the amount of damage that automobile fumes cause is certainly very high, the total dollar value is rather difficult to quantify. Approximately $39 billion per year is the lowest minimum estimate made by researchers in the field of transportation cost analysis, although the actual total is surely much higher and may exceed $600 billion. Considering that researchers have conclusively linked auto pollution to increased health problems and mortality, the CTA report's estimate of $29.3 to $542.4 billion for the annual uncompensated health costs associated with auto emissions may not adequately reflect the value of lost or diminished human life. Other costs associated with localized air pollution attributable to gasoline-powered automobiles include decreased agricultural yields ($2.1 to $4.2 billion), reduced visibility ($6.1 to $44.5 billion), and damage to buildings and materials ($1.2 to $9.6 billion). Global warming ($3 to $27.5 billion), water pollution ($8.4 to $36.8 billion), noise pollution ($6 to $12 billion), and improper disposal of batteries, tires, engine fluids, and junked cars ($4.4 billion) also add to the environmental consequences wrought by automobiles. Some of the costs associated with the real price of gasoline go beyond the effects of acquiring and burning fuel to reflect social conditions partially or wholly created by the automobile's preeminence in the culture of the United States. Chief among these conditions is the growth of urban sprawl. While monetizing the impact of sprawl may prove a challenging endeavor, several researchers have done significant work on the subject. The costs of sprawl include: additional environmental degradation (up to $58.4 billion), aesthetic degradation of cultural sites (up to $11.7 billion), social deterioration (up to $58.4 billion), additional municipal costs (up to $53.8 billion), additional transportation costs (up to $145 billion), and the barrier effect ($11.7 to $23.4 billion). Because assessment of the costs of sprawl is somewhat subjective and because study of the topic remains in a nascent stage, the CTA report follows the lead of other researchers in field of transportation cost analysis and reduces the total of the potential cost of sprawl by 25% to 50% to arrive at a total of $163.7 to $245.5 billion per year. OTHER EXTERNAL COSTS Finally, external costs not included in the first four categories amount to $191.4 to $474.1 billion per year. These include: travel delays due to road congestion ($46.5 to $174.6 billion), uncompensated damages caused by car accidents ($18.3 to $77.2 billion), subsidized parking ($108.7 to $199.3 billion), and insurance losses due to automobile-related climate change ($12.9 billion). The additional cost of $5.0 to $10.1 billion associated with US dependence on imported oil could rise substantially, totaling $7.0 to $36.8 billion, in the event of a sudden price increase for crude oil. RECOMMENDATIONS The ultimate result of the externalization of such a large portion of the real price of gasoline is that consumers have no idea how much fueling their cars actually costs them. The majority of people paying just over $1 for a gallon of gasoline at the pump has no idea that through increased taxes, excessive insurance premiums, and inflated prices in other retail sectors that that same gallon of fuel is actually costing them between $5.60 and $15.14. When the price of gasoline is so drastically underestimated in the minds of drivers, it becomes difficult if not impossible to convince them to change their driving habits, accept alternative fuel vehicles, support mass transit, or consider progressive residential and urban development strategies. The first step toward getting the public to recognize the damage caused by the United States' gasoline dependance is getting the public to recognize how much they are paying for this damage. The best way, in turn, to accomplish this goal is to eliminate government tax subsidies, program subsidies, and protection subsidies for petroleum companies and users, and to internalize the external environmental, health, and social costs associated with gasoline use. This would mean that consumers would see the entire cost of burning gasoline reflected in the price they pay at the pump. Drivers faced with the cost of their gasoline usage up front may have a more difficult time ignoring the harmful effects that their addiction to automobiles and the internal combustion engine have on national security, the environment, their health, and their quality of life. From wcox at publicpurpose.com Wed May 12 23:38:29 1999 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 07:38:29 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: fwd: The Real Price Of Gas Message-ID: <000e01be9c85$1ba2f380$8e3ce6cf@wendell-cox> Where does one find the full report? -----Original Message----- From: SUSTRAN Resource Centre To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Date: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 7:52 PM Subject: [sustran] fwd: The Real Price Of Gas >[forwarded from the kabelvag list on sustainable consumption] > >Mailing-List: contact kabelvag-owner@egroups.com >X-Mailing-List: kabelvag@egroups.com >X-URL: http://www.egroups.com/list/kabelvag/ >Reply-To: kabelvag@egroups.com >Delivered-To: listsaver-egroups-kabelvag@egroups.com >From: "Nat" >To: "kabelvag" >Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:16:57 +0800 >Subject: [kabelvag] The Real Price Of Gas > >The Real Price Of Gas >Executive Summary >---------- > >This report by the International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA) >identifies and quantifies the many external costs of using motor vehicles >and the internal combustion engine that are not reflected in the retail >price Americans pay for gasoline. These are costs that consumers pay >indirectly by way of increased taxes, insurance costs, and retail prices in >other sectors. > >The report divides the external costs of gasoline usage into five primary >areas: (1) Tax Subsidization of the Oil Industry; (2) Government Program >Subsidies; (3) Protection Costs Involved in Oil Shipment and Motor Vehicle >Services; (4) Environmental, Health, and Social Costs of Gasoline Usage; >and (5) Other Important Externalities of Motor Vehicle Use. Together, >these external costs total $558.7 billion to $1.69 trillion per year, >which, when added to the retail price of gasoline, result in a per gallon >price of $5.60 to $15.14. > > >TAX SUBSIDIES > >The federal government provides the oil industry with numerous tax breaks >designed to ensure that domestic companies can compete with international >producers and that gasoline remains cheap for American consumers. Federal >tax breaks that directly benefit oil companies include: the Percentage >Depletion Allowance (a subsidy of $784 million to $1 billion per year), the >Nonconventional Fuel Production Credit >($769 to $900 million), immediate expensing of exploration and development >costs ($200 to $255 million), the Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit ($26.3 to >$100 million), foreign tax credits ($1.11 to $3.4 billion), foreign income >deferrals ($183 to $318 million), and accelerated depreciation allowances >($1.0 to $4.5 billion). > >Tax subsidies do not end at the federal level. The fact that most state >income taxes are based on oil firms' deflated federal tax bill results in >undertaxation of $125 to $323 million per year. Many states also impose >fuel taxes that are lower than regular sales taxes, amounting to a subsidy >of $4.8 billion per year to gasoline retailers and users. New rules under >the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 are likely to provide the petroleum >industry with additional tax subsidies of $2.07 billion per year. In total, >annual tax breaks that support gasoline production and use amount to $9.1 >to $17.8 billion. > > >PROGRAM SUBSIDIES > >Government support of US petroleum producers does not end with tax breaks. >Program subsidies that support the extraction, production, and use of >petroleum and petroleum fuel products total $38 to $114.6 billion each >year. The largest portion of this total is federal, state, and local >governments' $36 to $112 billion worth of spending on the transportation >infrastructure, such as the construction, maintenance, and repair of roads >and bridges. Other program subsidies include funding of research and >development ($200 to $220 million), export financing subsidies ($308.5 to >$311.9 million), support from the Army Corps of Engineers ($253.2 to $270 >million), the Department of Interior's Oil Resources Management Programs >($97 to $227 million), and government expenditures on regulatory oversight, >pollution cleanup, and liability costs ($1.1 to $1.6 billion). > > > >PROTECTION SUBSIDIES > >Beyond program subsidies, governments, and thus taxpayers, subsidize a >large portion of the protection services required by petroleum producers >and users. Foremost among these is the cost of military protection for >oil-rich regions of the world. US Defense Department spending allocated to >safeguard the world's petroleum resources total some $55 to $96.3 billion >per year. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a federal government entity >designed to supplement regular oil supplies in the event of disruptions due >to military conflict or natural disaster, costs taxpayers an additional >$5.7 billion per year. The Coast Guard and the >Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration provide other >protection services totaling $566.3 million per year. Of course, local and >state governments also provide protection services for oil industry >companies and gasoline users. These externalized police, fire, and >emergency response expenditures add up to $27.2 to $38.2 billion annually. > > >ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH AND SOCIAL COSTS > >Environmental, health, and social costs represent the largest portion of >the externalized price Americans pay for their gasoline reliance. These >expenses total some $231.7 to $942.9 billion every year. The internal >combustion engine contributes heavily to localized air pollution. While the >amount of damage that automobile fumes cause is certainly very high, the >total dollar value is rather difficult to quantify. Approximately >$39 billion per year is the lowest minimum estimate made by researchers in >the field of transportation cost analysis, although the actual total is >surely much higher and may exceed $600 billion. > >Considering that researchers have conclusively linked auto pollution to >increased health problems and mortality, the CTA report's estimate of $29.3 >to $542.4 billion for the annual uncompensated health costs >associated with auto emissions may not adequately reflect the value of lost >or diminished human life. Other costs associated with localized air >pollution attributable to gasoline-powered automobiles include decreased >agricultural yields ($2.1 to $4.2 billion), reduced visibility ($6.1 to >$44.5 billion), and damage to buildings and materials ($1.2 to $9.6 >billion). Global warming ($3 to $27.5 billion), water pollution ($8.4 to >$36.8 billion), noise pollution ($6 to $12 billion), and improper disposal >of batteries, tires, engine fluids, and junked cars ($4.4 billion) also add >to the environmental consequences wrought by automobiles. > >Some of the costs associated with the real price of gasoline go beyond the >effects of acquiring and burning fuel to reflect social conditions >partially or wholly created by the automobile's preeminence in the culture >of the United States. Chief among these conditions is the growth of urban >sprawl. While monetizing the impact of sprawl may prove a challenging >endeavor, several researchers have done significant work on the subject. >The costs of sprawl include: additional environmental degradation (up to >$58.4 billion), aesthetic degradation of cultural sites (up to $11.7 >billion), social deterioration (up to $58.4 billion), additional municipal >costs (up to $53.8 billion), additional transportation costs (up to $145 >billion), and the barrier effect ($11.7 to $23.4 billion). Because >assessment of the costs of sprawl is somewhat subjective and because study >of the topic remains in a nascent stage, the CTA report follows the lead >of other researchers in field of transportation cost analysis and reduces >the total of the potential cost of sprawl by 25% to 50% to arrive at a >total of $163.7 to $245.5 billion per year. > > >OTHER EXTERNAL COSTS > >Finally, external costs not included in the first four categories amount to >$191.4 to $474.1 billion per year. These include: travel delays due to road >congestion ($46.5 to $174.6 billion), uncompensated damages >caused by car accidents ($18.3 to $77.2 billion), subsidized parking >($108.7 to $199.3 billion), and insurance losses due to automobile-related >climate change ($12.9 billion). The additional cost of $5.0 to $10.1 >billion associated with US dependence on imported oil could rise >substantially, totaling $7.0 to $36.8 billion, in the event of a sudden >price increase for crude oil. > > >RECOMMENDATIONS > >The ultimate result of the externalization of such a large portion of the >real price of gasoline is that consumers have no idea how much fueling >their cars actually costs them. The majority of people paying just over $1 >for a gallon of gasoline at the pump has no idea that through increased >taxes, excessive insurance premiums, and inflated prices in other retail >sectors that that same gallon of fuel is actually costing them between >$5.60 and $15.14. When the price of gasoline is so drastically >underestimated in the minds of drivers, it becomes difficult if not >impossible to convince them to change their driving habits, accept >alternative fuel vehicles, support mass transit, or consider progressive >residential and urban development strategies. > >The first step toward getting the public to recognize the damage caused by >the United States' gasoline dependance is getting the public to recognize >how much they are paying for this damage. The best way, in turn, to >accomplish this goal is to eliminate government tax subsidies, program >subsidies, and protection subsidies for petroleum companies and users, and >to internalize the external environmental, health, and social >costs associated with gasoline use. This would mean that consumers would >see the entire cost of burning gasoline reflected in the price they pay at >the pump. Drivers faced with the cost of their gasoline usage up >front may have a more difficult time ignoring the harmful effects that >their addiction to automobiles and the internal combustion engine have on >national security, the environment, their health, and their quality >of life. > From rogerh at foe.co.uk Wed May 12 23:39:55 1999 From: rogerh at foe.co.uk (Roger Higman) Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:39:55 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: fwd: The Real Price Of Gas In-Reply-To: SUSTRAN Resource Centre "[sustran] fwd: The Real Price Of Gas" (May 12, 9:39am) References: <3.0.6.32.19990512093936.007fcc10@relay101.jaring.my> Message-ID: <990512143956.ZM9759@unknown.zmail.host> > This report by the International Center for Technology Assessment > (CTA) identifies and quantifies the many external costs of using motor > vehicles and the internal combustion engine that are not reflected in > the retail price Americans pay for gasoline. Does anyone know who the International Center for Technology Assessment are (and how they can be contacted)? I would be interested in getting hold of a copy of this report. Roger Higman "A thorn in the side of Senior Campaigner (Atmosphere and Transport) the motor industry" Friends of the Earth (E,W+NI), Car Magazine 26-28 Underwood Street, London, N1 7JQ Tel + 44 171 566 1661 Fax + 44 171 490 0881 E-mail rogerh@foe.co.uk http://www.foe.co.uk From sustran at po.jaring.my Wed May 12 23:30:29 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 22:30:29 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: fwd: The Real Price Of Gas In-Reply-To: <000e01be9c85$1ba2f380$8e3ce6cf@wendell-cox> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990512223029.007e2a20@relay101.jaring.my> At 07:38 12/05/99 -0700, Wendell Cox wrote: >Where does one find the full report? A quick web search yielded the following: THE REAL PRICE OF GAS by the Campaign on Auto Pollution (CAP), 310 D St., N.E., Washington, DC 20002 For a copy of the full report, contact: CTA at +1 202-547-9359, or www.icta.org More specifically, it can be downloaded at http://www.icta.org/projects/trans/ However they warn that "This is a large file that may take some time to download" Best wishes, A. Rahman Paul BARTER SUSTRAN Resource Centre P.O. Box 11501, Kuala Lumpur 50748, Malaysia. Tel/Fax: +60 3 2742590, E-mail: sustran@po.jaring.my Web: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/ The SUSTRAN Resource Centre is a not-for-profit organisation that provides information, research and advice on people-centred and sustainable urban transport for low- and middle-income cities, with a special focus on Asia. From litman at islandnet.com Wed May 12 23:36:03 1999 From: litman at islandnet.com (Todd Litman) Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 07:36:03 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: fwd: The Real Price Of Gas In-Reply-To: <000e01be9c85$1ba2f380$8e3ce6cf@wendell-cox> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19990512073603.01000100@mail.IslandNet.com> At 07:38 AM 5/12/99 -0700, Wendell Cox wrote: >Where does one find the full report? The report's full title is: "The Real Price of Gasoline; An Analysis of the Hidden External Costs Consumers Pay to Fuel Their Automobiles," Center for Technology Assessment, 1998. It can be downloaded at their website: www.icta.org. I'd like to make a few comments about this report, particularly since it cites some of our research on the full costs of transportation. Like many such studies, it makes a mistake by suggesting that the full costs of automobile use should be internalized through a fuel tax. This is done because fuel taxes are the traditional way to charge for vehicle use, and is a better pricing instrument than a fixed charge (such as vehicle registration fees). But there are a number of problems with fuel taxes. Fuel taxes can not effectively represent costs that vary depending on when and where driving occurs, vehicle or driver characteristics. They are not an effective way to represent marginal congestion, road use, parking, accident or even some polltion emission costs. They are therefore neither particularly efficient (i.e., prices do not accurately reflect marginal costs) or equitable (some motorists would pay far more than they costs they impose, while others would pay far less). In addition, they are easily avoided by cross-border or illegal fuel purchases. An optimal pricing structure requires a number of pricing reforms, including direct charges for parking and congestion, and mileage-based fees for insurance, registration, road use (weight-distance charges and mileage-based registration fees), and emissions. Our research indicates that fuel prices would only increase a small amount, fixed costs (particularly insurance and registration fees) would decline, while per-mile costs would increase significantly. The combination of internalizing external costs and converting fixed costs into variable costs would increase the percieved financial cost of driving from the current 10? per mile to 25-35? per mile, resulting in a significant (25-35%, and more if matched with other TDM strategies) reduction in vehicle use, and even greater reductions in pollution and accidents (since high polluting and high-risk driving would have an even greater incentive to reduce mileage). To put this another way, a quarter to a third of current motor vehicle use results from market distortions that encourage consumers to use motor vehicles more than they would under a more neutral market. Reforming these distortions would give consumers an incentive to reduce their mileage and be better off overall. Most of our current transportation problems (excessive congestion, roadway expenses, pollution, accidents, consumer costs), would be greatly reduced with such reforms. For discussions of these issues see the following reports: "Socially Optimal Transport Prices and Markets", VTPI (http://www.islandnet.com/~litman) "Mileage-Based Fees; A Practical Strategy for More Optimal Pricing," VTPI (http://www.islandnet.com/~litman), forthecoming in the Transportation Research Record. "Transport Market Distortions - A Survey" VTPI (http://www.islandnet.com/~litman) Todd Litman, Charles Komanoff and Douglas Howell, "Road Relief; Tax and Pricing Shifts for a Fairer, Cleaner, and Less Congested Transportation System in Washington State," Energy Outreach Center (Olympia; http://www.eoc.org), 1998. I'd appreciate hearing any feedback anybody has on these ideas. 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@islandnet.com Website: http://www.islandnet.com/~litman >-----Original Message----- >From: SUSTRAN Resource Centre >To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >Date: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 7:52 PM >Subject: [sustran] fwd: The Real Price Of Gas > > >>[forwarded from the kabelvag list on sustainable consumption] >> >>Mailing-List: contact kabelvag-owner@egroups.com >>X-Mailing-List: kabelvag@egroups.com >>X-URL: http://www.egroups.com/list/kabelvag/ >>Reply-To: kabelvag@egroups.com >>Delivered-To: listsaver-egroups-kabelvag@egroups.com >>From: "Nat" >>To: "kabelvag" >>Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:16:57 +0800 >>Subject: [kabelvag] The Real Price Of Gas >> >>The Real Price Of Gas >>Executive Summary >>---------- >> >>This report by the International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA) >>identifies and quantifies the many external costs of using motor vehicles >>and the internal combustion engine that are not reflected in the retail >>price Americans pay for gasoline. These are costs that consumers pay >>indirectly by way of increased taxes, insurance costs, and retail prices in >>other sectors. >> >>The report divides the external costs of gasoline usage into five primary >>areas: (1) Tax Subsidization of the Oil Industry; (2) Government Program >>Subsidies; (3) Protection Costs Involved in Oil Shipment and Motor Vehicle >>Services; (4) Environmental, Health, and Social Costs of Gasoline Usage; >>and (5) Other Important Externalities of Motor Vehicle Use. Together, >>these external costs total $558.7 billion to $1.69 trillion per year, >>which, when added to the retail price of gasoline, result in a per gallon >>price of $5.60 to $15.14. >> >> >>TAX SUBSIDIES >> >>The federal government provides the oil industry with numerous tax breaks >>designed to ensure that domestic companies can compete with international >>producers and that gasoline remains cheap for American consumers. Federal >>tax breaks that directly benefit oil companies include: the Percentage >>Depletion Allowance (a subsidy of $784 million to $1 billion per year), the >>Nonconventional Fuel Production Credit >>($769 to $900 million), immediate expensing of exploration and development >>costs ($200 to $255 million), the Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit ($26.3 to >>$100 million), foreign tax credits ($1.11 to $3.4 billion), foreign income >>deferrals ($183 to $318 million), and accelerated depreciation allowances >>($1.0 to $4.5 billion). >> >>Tax subsidies do not end at the federal level. The fact that most state >>income taxes are based on oil firms' deflated federal tax bill results in >>undertaxation of $125 to $323 million per year. Many states also impose >>fuel taxes that are lower than regular sales taxes, amounting to a subsidy >>of $4.8 billion per year to gasoline retailers and users. New rules under >>the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 are likely to provide the petroleum >>industry with additional tax subsidies of $2.07 billion per year. In total, >>annual tax breaks that support gasoline production and use amount to $9.1 >>to $17.8 billion. >> >> >>PROGRAM SUBSIDIES >> >>Government support of US petroleum producers does not end with tax breaks. >>Program subsidies that support the extraction, production, and use of >>petroleum and petroleum fuel products total $38 to $114.6 billion each >>year. The largest portion of this total is federal, state, and local >>governments' $36 to $112 billion worth of spending on the transportation >>infrastructure, such as the construction, maintenance, and repair of roads >>and bridges. Other program subsidies include funding of research and >>development ($200 to $220 million), export financing subsidies ($308.5 to >>$311.9 million), support from the Army Corps of Engineers ($253.2 to $270 >>million), the Department of Interior's Oil Resources Management Programs >>($97 to $227 million), and government expenditures on regulatory oversight, >>pollution cleanup, and liability costs ($1.1 to $1.6 billion). >> >> >> >>PROTECTION SUBSIDIES >> >>Beyond program subsidies, governments, and thus taxpayers, subsidize a >>large portion of the protection services required by petroleum producers >>and users. Foremost among these is the cost of military protection for >>oil-rich regions of the world. US Defense Department spending allocated to >>safeguard the world's petroleum resources total some $55 to $96.3 billion >>per year. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a federal government entity >>designed to supplement regular oil supplies in the event of disruptions due >>to military conflict or natural disaster, costs taxpayers an additional >>$5.7 billion per year. The Coast Guard and the >>Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration provide other >>protection services totaling $566.3 million per year. Of course, local and >>state governments also provide protection services for oil industry >>companies and gasoline users. These externalized police, fire, and >>emergency response expenditures add up to $27.2 to $38.2 billion annually. >> >> >>ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH AND SOCIAL COSTS >> >>Environmental, health, and social costs represent the largest portion of >>the externalized price Americans pay for their gasoline reliance. These >>expenses total some $231.7 to $942.9 billion every year. The internal >>combustion engine contributes heavily to localized air pollution. While the >>amount of damage that automobile fumes cause is certainly very high, the >>total dollar value is rather difficult to quantify. Approximately >>$39 billion per year is the lowest minimum estimate made by researchers in >>the field of transportation cost analysis, although the actual total is >>surely much higher and may exceed $600 billion. >> >>Considering that researchers have conclusively linked auto pollution to >>increased health problems and mortality, the CTA report's estimate of $29.3 >>to $542.4 billion for the annual uncompensated health costs >>associated with auto emissions may not adequately reflect the value of lost >>or diminished human life. Other costs associated with localized air >>pollution attributable to gasoline-powered automobiles include decreased >>agricultural yields ($2.1 to $4.2 billion), reduced visibility ($6.1 to >>$44.5 billion), and damage to buildings and materials ($1.2 to $9.6 >>billion). Global warming ($3 to $27.5 billion), water pollution ($8.4 to >>$36.8 billion), noise pollution ($6 to $12 billion), and improper disposal >>of batteries, tires, engine fluids, and junked cars ($4.4 billion) also add >>to the environmental consequences wrought by automobiles. >> >>Some of the costs associated with the real price of gasoline go beyond the >>effects of acquiring and burning fuel to reflect social conditions >>partially or wholly created by the automobile's preeminence in the culture >>of the United States. Chief among these conditions is the growth of urban >>sprawl. While monetizing the impact of sprawl may prove a challenging >>endeavor, several researchers have done significant work on the subject. >>The costs of sprawl include: additional environmental degradation (up to >>$58.4 billion), aesthetic degradation of cultural sites (up to $11.7 >>billion), social deterioration (up to $58.4 billion), additional municipal >>costs (up to $53.8 billion), additional transportation costs (up to $145 >>billion), and the barrier effect ($11.7 to $23.4 billion). Because >>assessment of the costs of sprawl is somewhat subjective and because study >>of the topic remains in a nascent stage, the CTA report follows the lead >>of other researchers in field of transportation cost analysis and reduces >>the total of the potential cost of sprawl by 25% to 50% to arrive at a >>total of $163.7 to $245.5 billion per year. >> >> >>OTHER EXTERNAL COSTS >> >>Finally, external costs not included in the first four categories amount to >>$191.4 to $474.1 billion per year. These include: travel delays due to road >>congestion ($46.5 to $174.6 billion), uncompensated damages >>caused by car accidents ($18.3 to $77.2 billion), subsidized parking >>($108.7 to $199.3 billion), and insurance losses due to automobile-related >>climate change ($12.9 billion). The additional cost of $5.0 to $10.1 >>billion associated with US dependence on imported oil could rise >>substantially, totaling $7.0 to $36.8 billion, in the event of a sudden >>price increase for crude oil. >> >> >>RECOMMENDATIONS >> >>The ultimate result of the externalization of such a large portion of the >>real price of gasoline is that consumers have no idea how much fueling >>their cars actually costs them. The majority of people paying just over $1 >>for a gallon of gasoline at the pump has no idea that through increased >>taxes, excessive insurance premiums, and inflated prices in other retail >>sectors that that same gallon of fuel is actually costing them between >>$5.60 and $15.14. When the price of gasoline is so drastically >>underestimated in the minds of drivers, it becomes difficult if not >>impossible to convince them to change their driving habits, accept >>alternative fuel vehicles, support mass transit, or consider progressive >>residential and urban development strategies. >> >>The first step toward getting the public to recognize the damage caused by >>the United States' gasoline dependance is getting the public to recognize >>how much they are paying for this damage. The best way, in turn, to >>accomplish this goal is to eliminate government tax subsidies, program >>subsidies, and protection subsidies for petroleum companies and users, and >>to internalize the external environmental, health, and social >>costs associated with gasoline use. This would mean that consumers would >>see the entire cost of burning gasoline reflected in the price they pay at >>the pump. Drivers faced with the cost of their gasoline usage up >>front may have a more difficult time ignoring the harmful effects that >>their addiction to automobiles and the internal combustion engine have on >>national security, the environment, their health, and their quality >>of life. >> > > > From ccordero at amauta.rcp.net.pe Fri May 14 06:25:51 1999 From: ccordero at amauta.rcp.net.pe (Carlos Cordero V.) Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:25:51 -0500 Subject: [sustran] AAA -- Accountable to Anyone? Message-ID: <000101be9da7$570076a0$81b601c8@q8v1n7> we got this from another mailing list, seems very interesting >Posted by sburrington@clf.org >Here is an interesting account of one citizen's attempt to find out whether his >AAA chapter was accountable in any way to anyone. It's long for an e-mail item, >but I thought it worth transmitting in full regardless. Reactions would be >welcome. > >Stephen Burrington >Conservation Law Foundation >sburrington@clf.org > >* * * >To Whom is AAA of Southern New England Accountable? > >Ted Smith >Cambridge, Massachusetts >April, 1999 > > Several months ago it occurred to me that I had never seen an annual report >from AAA. As a member in good standing, I thought I deserved to see an annual >report. The inspiration for my curiosity arose from knowing that AAA lobbies >actively for highway and vehicle legislation in state capitals and does so >because it wishes to influence transportation policy, generally in the direction >of supporting the role of automobiles. > > Knowing the transportation policy can be contentious, that the U.S. Congress >sees it differently from many other signatories to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on >global warming, and feeling that I should have a right to know how my membership >dollars are used by AAA, I set out to acquire an AAA (Southern New England) >annual report. I was interested to see financial data and a list of the >positions AAA takes when it lobbies for specific legislation "on my behalf". > >I began by visiting the reception desk at the High Street office of AAA in >Boston and simply asked for a copy of the latest annual report. The >receptionist quickly called for the branch manager, Christopher Hurren >(617-443-9300). Mr. Hurren asked what I wanted? I explained. He appeared >puzzled and a little surprised. He told me that he had never seen an annual >report. He then excused himself to call AAA headquarters (Southern New England) >in Warwick, Rhode Island. After several minutes on the phone in his office, he >emerged, told me there was no annual report, but that I could call someone in >the Rhode Island office. On the back of his card he gave me a name and number >to call. Hurren then told me that he had been at this branch for five years, >that he knew how much money his branch made, but that he had no idea how much >the entire AAA of Southern New England made. (Note: I had not asked him about >revenues.) He seemed interested and encouraged me to report back to him with >whatever information I could come up with. He added that he felt certain that >AAA was not legally required to publish an annual report, but he did not attempt >to explain why it didn't. > >I called the Warwick, RI number given to me and reached a self-described former >newspaper man, Bob Murray (401-732-5000, Ext. 411), who apparently handles >government and public relations for AAA. Although reserved at first, once he >warmed up, he seemed happy to talk-especially about the history and the >(fiscally responsible Yankee) culture of AAA. He knows, for example, that the >first American cars were manufactured in Springfield, MA; that the first real >interest and hubbub over cars in this state was in Worcester, not Boston; and >that the wealthy of Newport, RI first organized a club at the beginning of the >century. > >Back to the Annual Report request: He told me that they had never (sic) >published one. I asked whether there was any reporting to the public beyond >their in-house quarterly magazine which never carries financials nor policy >material I was seeking? The answer was, "no." He offered no explanation for >the absence of an annual report: they just don't do one. I said, "Golly, a >membership organization that doesn't give any real information to its members?" >He said, "That's the case, but there aren't any stockholders." I replied, "That >may be, but I am still surprised that a Member cannot obtain an annual report." >He didn't seem to know what to say. I let it go by suggesting that he, a former >newspaperman, might favor of a more open publications policy. > >He told me that only one person asked to see an annual report last year. I am >the first one in a year to ask. I got the feeling from him that no one is >interested in the financial and policy affairs of AAA. > >Murray said that the organization's by-laws date to 1902 and that AAA has been >remarkably stable and resilient over the years-always carrying 6 months of >operating costs in reserve in the event of some kind of downturn. So he >said-seemingly at pains to represent the fiscal integrity of the organization.. > >He called AAA a non-profit/profit-making corporation, but I decided not to press >for the formal IRS designation, figuring this wasn't his area. It is chartered >and wholly owned in Rhode Island, he said. > >There has been no annual meeting in recent memory. I gained the impression that >they would shudder at the thought of dealing with the membership of 1.7 million. > >They have quarterly board meetings, according to Murray. The Board is >self-elected; members do not participate. There is great continuity in board >membership. There are apparently no terms (or else re-election is close to >automatic), and some serve for 25 or more years. Committees meet in between >board meetings. I did not ask about Board member compensation-information which >I have not seen published as it would be in annual corporate publications. > >The AAA of Southern New England is one of 93 clubs that is accredited every five >years (rigorously, he says). > >This club was founded originally by the Newport, RI elite. A reasonably good >history is available (1900-1974), but acquisitions by AAA in the last 25 years >make recent history harder to follow. Mr. Murray has the history in a >loose-leaf binder and assured me that AAA has archives to preserve some of its >past. (I might have asked if a book had ever been written about the American >Automobile Association nationally, but didn't.) > >Membership data are not published, but the total has been growing-bumped up >recently by Massachusetts insurance discounts to AAA members. (The latest >annual membership growth figure was stated to be 8% by Murray, a growth rate is >which above the norm.) > >Murray then explained that he used to prepare a Chairman's report annually, but >(he told me) that the chairman hasn't prepared an annual report for about the >last three years. He laments this fact-feels that there should be a historical >record. But the chairman hasn't asked for him to work on a report. (Note: >This means that not only does AAA not have a public annual report; they also may >not have an internal annual report-the availability of statistics >notwithstanding. Since I was told there was no internal annual report, I have >to take it as fact for the time being. But it would be extremely unlikely to >find that the CEO does not prepare an annual report for the Directors.) > >I asked for the 1999 annual budget figure. He told me it wasn't available. I >then politely asked for the 1998 budget number-assuming that last year's budget >number was history and could be openly shared. Again, he told me that this was >not available. At that point I made a passing reference to the fact that the >financials would show up in the tax returns which are on file with the various >states and he said that in Massachusetts it would be in the Insurance >Commissioner's files. (Not the Attorney General's files?) > >Revenues? My arithmetic shows that 1.7 million members @ $30 membership fee >(his figure; I pay $41.00) totals $51 million. He said this was about 60% of >total annual revenues. This means total annual revenues of AAA Southern New >England could be in the range of $85 million or more, a non-trivial operation. > >The largest expenditure is allocated to road service-about $25 million/year, he >said. The latest annual figure Murray gave to me showed 1.4 million road calls >at an average figure of $17. > >The number of employees in Southern New England AAA, I was told, is about 1,200. > Murray said or implied that they are all happy and like working for AAA. > >I asked if they use AAA funds to lobby for legislation? "Yes", he said, and >identified himself as one of the lobbyists. This raised a question in my mind: >on whose behalf are they lobbying? Not mine, at least not with my agreement, >because I don't know what they lobby for and have no input. > >He happily rattled off some board member names, indicating that the newest was >Alan Morse, Chairman of Harvard Pilgrim Health. He said it took four months to >get this new member chosen following the resignation of someone who had served >for 30 years. Other board members mentioned were: > > John DiBiaggio-President of Tufts University > Ruth Sheer-foundation person (and board secretary) > Wayne Budd-Bell Atlantic > Dave Finneran-Lobbyist > > Summary Notes. AAA/Southern New England is a membership organization of 1.7 >million members. It has an annual budget which probably approaches an estimated >$100 million. It has neither an annual meeting nor does it publish an annual >report. It is not a charitable organization, but is not intended to earn a >profit. It lobbies for specific legislation that affects public policy. Its >internal operations are unknown to both its membership and to the general >public. > > A public policy issue at stake here is one bearing on road transportation. >Once this topic is raised, a wide range of policy concerns comes into play. The >one in which I have greatest interest at the moment is global climate change-or >the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Modern vehicular transport is a >major contributor to emissions. An organization which promotes road >transportation is, willy-nilly, directly involved in greenhouse gas emission >issues. This fact begs the question of AAA's role in non-public, >non-accountable actions intended to influence the course of public policy >decision-making. For which generation does AAA speak? > > > > > > >***************************************************************** >* TRANSPORTATION FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES NETWORK * >* ** Visit TLCNet on the web: http://www.tlcnetwork.org ** * >* Postings to TLCNet-Streettalk may be cross-posted * >* to the TLCNet website * >***************************************************************** >***************************************************************** >* To post a message to this listserv, send your message * >* to: tlcnet-streettalk@igc.org * >* To unsubscribe, send a message to Majordomo@igc.org * >* the text is "unsubscribe tlcnet-streettalk" * >* Send problems or questions to communities@clf.org * >* TLCNet is a project of the Conservation Law Foundation * >***************************************************************** > From mailroom at ecoplan.org Wed May 19 01:17:45 1999 From: mailroom at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 18:17:45 +0200 Subject: [sustran] The Auto and its Enemies Message-ID: <000b01bea149$f6674480$6c8ffea9@cybercable.fr> "The broad public, having been exposed for years to strident anti-automobile rhetoric, deserves a better understanding of the mentality behind the anti-car ideology..." Read all about it: ========== The Auto and its Enemies (Reprinted from Innovation Briefs, Vol. 10 No. 3, May/June 1999) By all accounts the automobile is the nearest thing to an ideal transportation system. No transport technology offers people more convenience, comfort, security and privacy. The auto serves its users on demand, from door to door, with no transfers, no waiting, and at an acceptable price. Widespread car ownership has given millions of people more options of where to live and work and opened up access to greater social and economic opportunity. So, how come a number of vocal critics see the auto not as a solution but as a problem, and view existing auto and highway policies not as a success but as a failure? In an insightful and widely noticed book, James A. Dunn examines the gulf in perceptions that separates the auto's critics from the millions of ordinary citizens who treasure the auto as a symbol of personal freedom. James A. Dunn Jr., Driving Forces: The Automobile, Its Enemies and the Politics of Mobility, Brooking Institution Press, 1998 Behind the current anti-highway rhetoric, James Dunn, professor of political science at Rutgers University-Camden, sees a loosely organized band of crusaders who harbor visceral hostility toward the auto and its culture. This "anti-auto vanguard," as Dunn calls them, view the automobile "not as a proud achievement of American industry but as a relentless oppressor and a menace to civilization." The fact that cars are less polluting, safer and more energy efficient today than they were twenty-five years ago is no consolation. The car critics are not interested in solving the problems caused by the car, writes Dunn. "It is the whole gestalt of the auto as the central sociocultural icon of our society that they want to eliminate." The vanguard's immediate goal is not a total abolition of the car, just a dramatic decline in its importance in the transportation system, writes Dunn. But the anti-auto activists go beyond seeking more balance in transportation by improving public transit and providing incentives for its use. They want to make auto travel more expensive and less convenient, if necessary, by resorting to legislative mandates and regulatory measures. The ultimate goal of the vanguard is to bring about a massive change in our travel habits. Dunn finds this highly ironic. In the past, he observes, progress meant replacing an older transportation technology with a newer one that offered greater mobility. The vanguard's goal of replacing the auto with "alternative transportation," transit, walking and bicycles would be the first modal shift in transportation history that would reverse this historic process by restricting rather than expanding mobility. The vanguard's objective, far from being progressive, is profoundly reactionary. The Vanguard's Impact How successful has the anti-auto movement been so far, and how is it likely to fare in the future? Dunn traces the rise of the anti-car sensibility to the "green tradition" in American thought and literature of the 19th century, exemplified by Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau and Walt Whitman. In the 20th century, social critics and urbanists like Lewis Mumford and Jane Jacobs drew on these values to focus on the negative effects of the automobile on America's cities. The 1970s saw an outpouring of books, articles and reports that were highly critical in their assessment of the car's impact. "Within a few years the private car and the whole industrial and social apparatus that supported it were redefined by its critics in very negative terms," writes Dunn. The car was demonized as a voracious consumer of irreplaceable energy resources, a major source of greenhouse gases, a killer of tens of thousands of accident victims, a destroyer of cohesive communities and a despoiler of the landscape. But the early critics' predictions of the "death knells of the automobile culture," did not materialize. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s the automobile kept gaining ground, and not just in America but in the rest of the world as well. The critics vastly overestimated the public's willingness to give up personal mobility and underestimated the extent to which autos and highways fit the values of the American political and social culture. What does the current generation of critics make of the auto's continued dominance? Do they still expect the end of automobility? Or have they changed their views? "The visceral hostility to the auto and its culture is clearly still present" writes Dunn. The most committed members of the anti-car movement resist arguments that their basic goals may be unattainable. Contemporary critics, such as James Howard Kunstler (The Geography of Nowhere, 1993) and Jane Holtz Kay (Asphalt Nation: How the Automobile Took Over America, 1997) still believe, in Kunstler's words, that "the Auto Age as we have known it, will shortly come to an end." The mainstream environmental movement, although less apocalyptic in its predictions and more restrained in its rhetoric, is no less convinced of the need for fundamental change. Groups such as the Worldwatch Institute, Union of Concerned Scientists, Environmental Defense Fund and Surface Transportation Policy Project (STPP) build their policy recommendations on the basic proposition that the current dominance of the automobile is unsustainable in the long run. There are three key elements in the vanguard's long term strategy, observes Dunn. First, there must be continuous consciousness-raising among policymakers and the general public. The auto must be made to pay its "true social costs." Once people are confronted with paying the full costs of auto travel, they will be much more willing to consider other transportation alternatives. Second, the auto critics must engage in effective lobbying of the legislature. The most notable success in this regard, notes Dunn, have been the efforts of the STPP to introduce more funding flexibility into the federal-aid highway program and to earmark funds for environmentally-friendly transportation initiatives. The third element of the vanguard's strategy is to build bureaucratic momentum, writes Dunn. To this end, the vanguard has become an active part of the policymaking process and seeks a voice in numerous forums to influence the course of debate on auto-related environmental issues, such as global warming, "sustainability," "smart growth" and "livable communities." Will the vanguard succeed in its campaign to drastically reduce society's dependence on the automobile and bring about a massive modal shift? Dunn doubts it. The main strength of the anti-car lobby lies in their sense of outrage and their missionary zeal. Their weakness which Dunn thinks, will doom their efforts in the end is that they are disconnected from mainstream America. Their goals are not shared by the vast majority of people and run counter to deeply entrenched preferences of most Americans. The vanguard's vision of a largely carless world in which residents mostly rely on bicycles and public transportation lacks political realism and seems beyond the bounds of public acceptability. "They [the anti-auto vanguard] threaten to take away the individuals' tangible embodiment of their personal freedom, their car, without offering a superior substitute," Dunn notes. The Politics of Mobility for the 21st Century Dunn offers an alternative policy future. The most effective policy response to the pressing auto-related problems, he writes, is not to discourage people from using cars but to encourage improvement in the technology of the auto itself. "It is easier and more politically astute to use Washington's arsenal of powers against Detroit than against tens of millions of citizen motorists," writes Dunn. Such a policy would welcome the advent of less polluting, more efficient cars. It would allow individuals and communities to choose freely from an expanded range of choices rather than seek to impose bureaucratic "command and control" patterns of travel behavior. It would try to preserve rather than denigrate the immense and undeniable benefits of car ownership. Above all, Dunn believes that "a successful politics of mobility must have commonsense appeal to citizens." People must see it as a means to help them meet their specific personal needs, not as a crusade to save the planet or to reshape the living environment in the elitist image of the anti-car vanguard. The anti-auto forces will not like Dunn's book much. But the broad public, having been exposed for years to strident anti-automobile rhetoric, deserves a better understanding of the mentality behind the anti-car ideology. James Dunn has performed a valuable public service in better illuminating the anti-auto movement's agenda, motivation and philosophy. From ccordero at amauta.rcp.net.pe Wed May 19 13:12:44 1999 From: ccordero at amauta.rcp.net.pe (Carlos Cordero V.) Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 23:12:44 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: The Auto and its Enemies Message-ID: <000801bea1ae$2b57ac20$bcb601c8@q8v1n7> >"The broad public, having been exposed for years to strident anti-automobile >rhetoric, deserves a better understanding of the mentality behind the >anti-car ideology..." > First. Interesting article, such a good piece for debate. however not accurate in a lot items. Very provocative which is good. Just from your quote: ' the broad public ' , in Latinamerica at least, there is no broad public exposed to this arguments. Africa? , Asia ? >By all accounts the automobile is the nearest thing to an ideal >transportation system. Second. this argument forget how costly (not only in economic terms) is the builded environment where the auto is operated. So again, the world is not USA and Europe. And it is not only the automovile, it is the build environment need to run them No transport technology offers people more >convenience, comfort, security and privacy. The auto serves its users on >demand, from door to door, with no transfers, no waiting, and at an >acceptable price. Widespread car ownership has given millions of people >more options of where to live and work and opened up access to greater >social and economic opportunity. > Third. Totally true. For less than ten percent of the population in LA (Latinamerica, not Los Angeles). But even them start to feel that something is wrong. About 80,000 thousand people are working as a taxi drivers in Lima. Without license to drive a cab, without social security. They have to work about 12 hours per day, seven days per week, to pay the car rent (about us$ 10 per day) and to get about US$ 300 - 400 per month. Ask them about the pleasure to drive a car >So, how come a number of vocal critics see the auto not as a solution but as a problem, and view existing auto and highway policies not as a success but as a failure? In an insightful and widely noticed book, James A. Dunn >examines the gulf in perceptions that separates the auto's critics from the >millions of ordinary citizens who treasure the auto as a symbol of personal >freedom. > Why should define myself as an anticar people, we should not be anticar. How can be anticar somebody (with an average earning of US$ 200) in LA who can not afford a car in the next 100 years.? Being pro something is different than only beign against something else. Sometimes both match, sometimes not. >Behind the current anti-highway rhetoric, James Dunn, professor of political science at Rutgers University-Camden, sees a loosely organized band of crusaders who harbor visceral hostility toward the auto and its culture. >This "anti-auto vanguard," as Dunn calls them, view the automobile "not as a proud achievement of American industry but as a relentless oppressor and a >menace to civilization." The conditions which make US the car country are not possible in other parts of the world, unless you want to become Brasil (two countries in one, huge foreign debt, etc) >The fact that cars are less polluting, safer and more energy efficient today than they were twenty-five years ago is no consolation. The car critics are not interested in solving the problems caused by the car, writes Dunn. >"It is the whole gestalt of the auto as the central sociocultural icon of >our society that they want to eliminate." The car is less poluting for several reasons, industrial competition, oil crisis, and technology development which allow the industry itself to put more cars on the roads, and also the bunch of critics, who see the results of current policies, etc. It is true however that part of the solution has to come from the car industry (and others too). But seeing the solutions for the problems the car create, only inside the car is a short view. > >The vanguard's immediate goal is not a total abolition of the car, just a >dramatic decline in its importance in the transportation system, writes >Dunn. But the anti-auto activists go beyond seeking more balance in >transportation by improving public transit and providing incentives for its >use. They want to make auto travel more expensive and less convenient, if >necessary, by resorting to legislative mandates and regulatory measures. Theultimate goal of the vanguard is to bring about a massive change in our >travel habits. Dunn finds this highly ironic. In the past, he observes, >progress meant replacing an older transportation technology with a newer one that offered greater mobility. The vanguard's goal of replacing the auto >with "alternative transportation," transit, walking and bicycles would be >the first modal shift in transportation history that would reverse this >historic process by restricting rather than expanding mobility. The >vanguard's objective, far from being progressive, is profoundly reactionary. There is some schematism in this view. When we started to work for more sustainable trasnsport systems, we did not see it as a part of a global, worldwide group. One has to respond for local problems. To face them. Later comes to realize that there is other people in the same route. The sucessive changes in technology does not mean kill the older or even the contemporary. Bicycles are not older than cars, planes are not newer than cars, etc. The idea of modal shift as replacing older technology is very, very conservative. Successful tech as internet use the phone, electricity, etc. Even the car does it. ' Making the auto more expensive and less convenient' is not a true statement. Driving a car in Singapur, must be the most convenient place to do it at a fair price. It is possible internalizing cost but also due to a well cared public transportation. Countries with cheaper automovile transportation are countries with expensive problems for the future. "Within a few years the private car and the whole industrial >and social apparatus that supported it were redefined by its critics in very negative terms," writes Dunn. The car was demonized as a voracious consumer of irreplaceable energy resources, a major source of greenhouse gases, a >killer of tens of thousands of accident victims, a destroyer of cohesive >communities and a despoiler of the landscape. So, the critics invented the problems. They did not exist before. Come on... The critics vastly overestimated the public's willingness >to give up personal mobility and underestimated the extent to which autos >and highways fit the values of the American political and social culture. > Why a book like Dunn's is written now and not 30 years ago? Because there is a disccussion which starts to arise. Values? What does it mean? That car is a culture besides of beign a simple mean of transport?. So it is posssible to realize that as a any other culture creation it was a response to concrete problems and that maybe is not any more the answer? That is also possible to build an alternative culture which got back the car to a single mean of transport and again to get answers for NEW problems (including those created for the car irself?) . I think the point here is that the car is not the only issue, there is a context which make possible such perception of personal mobility. .... and bring about a massive modal shift? Dunn >doubts it. ... againg the idea of ' massive shift '. The situation is that the massive shift ocurred years ago, when public transport was broken up in several countries and even now thousand of bikers and walkers choices are not allowed due to biased policies. Proposing an Integrated transport systems and internalizing cost are separated issues or sides of the same coin? >The anti-auto forces will not like Dunn's book much. Are you sure? it is important to debate. Society gets a benefit. Unless you think there is no real problems to talk about. That every problem is just imagination coming out from a bunch of idealistic people . Send me one book, please, and think about HOW (means of transport?) to send it. " All the rhinos and hippos and elephants in the world, if gathered in one city, could not begin to create the menace and explosive intensity of the hourly and daily experience of the internal -combustion engine . Are people really expected to internalize - live with- all this power and expplosive violence, without processing and siphoning it off into some form of fantasy for compensation and balance? Marshal McLuhan > > > From halubis at trans.si.itb.ac.id Wed May 19 14:31:32 1999 From: halubis at trans.si.itb.ac.id (Harun al-Rasyid Sorah Lubis) Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 12:31:32 +0700 Subject: [sustran] tariff affordability study Message-ID: <003601bea1b8$dadfb160$1102cda7@harun.si.itb.ac.id> As mood in public utility management tends to go for privatisation, tariff setting and its adjustment is one of a crucial issue. In Britain, the mood was started during the Tory (conservative) , as they called it Thatcherism at that time. Regarding transport related tariff, toll, road pricing, public tranport, crossing, etc. I have never heard of the issue of tariff affordability was discussed during that period. Quite differently in Indonesia, as the wave of privatisation is now started to be adopted as a model for the future public utility management, issue of tariff affordability become very relevant, as at least 50% of the sociey are under the poverty line, as the result of the recent economic crisis. Also the issue of public service obligation, to dictate how much should the private provide service for the poor with low tariff, apart from the commercial services. I found quite many similar studies focused on sectors such as housing, health, defence, BUT not in transport. Anybody could pin point me of previous tariff affordability (or ability to pay) studies in the transport market ? Kindly regards, Harun al-Rasyid S. Lubis http://trans.si.itb.ac.id Traffic Lab, Transport Engineering Division Dept. of Civil Engineering - ITB Jl. Ganeca 10 Bandung 40132 - Indonesia Tel/Facs. +62 22 250 23 50 halubis@trans.si.itb.ac.id From litman at islandnet.com Wed May 19 22:47:50 1999 From: litman at islandnet.com (Todd Litman) Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 06:47:50 -0700 Subject: [sustran] tariff affordability study Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19990519064750.01016400@mail.IslandNet.com> You may want to download our report "Evaluating Transportation Equity" available at http://www.islandnet.com/~litman, which discusses this issue. Some equity advocates argue that society should strive to insure that "basic mobility" is affordable. Of course, this requires defining both "basic mobility" and "affordability". Generally, this means that people should be able to access essential services (medical care, food and other household goods), employment and education without spending an excessive portion of their income or time budget, or bearing excessive risk. This justifies, for example, subsidies for public transit, discounted fares for disadvantaged groups, and priority services for disabled travelers. Road tolls, parking fees and increased fuel taxes are often criticized as being regressive and inequitable, but this actually depends on how the revenues are used. It is easy to structure price increases to benefit lower-income/disadvantaged populations populations. For example, higher fees on private automoible travel can be used to increase subsidies for walking, bicycling and transit modes, providing a net benefit to the poor, and helping to reduce traffic congestion and accident risk to motorists. Incrased fuel taxes and tolls can be used to reduce other, more regressive taxes. Land use policies also have a lot to do with transportation equity. In particular, if lower-income people do not have affordable housing toward urban centers, they bear higher transportation costs. For example, lower-income neighborhoods in most South American cities are at the urban periphery, where commuting costs are high. Finding ways to provide more affordable housing closer to employment centers can be an important part of reducing the financial burden of transportation to lower-income households. Similarly, improving services, such as schools and medical services to lower-income areas can reduce the travel burden. 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@islandnet.com Website: http://www.islandnet.com/~litman At 12:31 PM 5/19/99 +0700, you wrote: >From: "Harun al-Rasyid Sorah Lubis" > >As mood in public utility management tends to go for privatisation, tariff >setting and its adjustment is one of a crucial issue. In Britain, the mood >was started during the Tory (conservative) , as they called it Thatcherism >at that time. Regarding transport related tariff, toll, road pricing, public >tranport, crossing, etc. I have never heard of the issue of tariff >affordability was discussed during that period. > >Quite differently in Indonesia, as the wave of privatisation is now started >to be adopted as a model for the future public utility management, issue >of tariff affordability become very relevant, as at least 50% of the sociey >are under the poverty line, as the result of the recent economic crisis. >Also the issue of public service obligation, to dictate how much should the >private provide service for the poor with low tariff, apart from the >commercial services. > >I found quite many similar studies focused on sectors such as housing, >health, defence, BUT not in transport. > >Anybody could pin point me of previous tariff affordability (or ability to >pay) studies in the transport market ? > > >Kindly regards, > >Harun al-Rasyid S. Lubis http://trans.si.itb.ac.id >Traffic Lab, Transport Engineering Division >Dept. of Civil Engineering - ITB >Jl. Ganeca 10 Bandung 40132 - Indonesia >Tel/Facs. +62 22 250 23 50 halubis@trans.si.itb.ac.id > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >ONElist: the best source for group communications. >http://www.onelist.com >Join a new list today! >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Messages to the list should be sent to tmip@onelist.com. > >You may unsubscribe by sending a blank message to >tmip-unsubscribe@onelist.com. > >You can change to digest mode by sending a blank message to >tmip-digest@onelist.com. > >You can change back to normal mode by sending a blank >message to tmip-normal@onelist.com. >---------------------------------------------------------------- > > From ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu Thu May 20 03:12:05 1999 From: ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu (Eric Bruun) Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 14:12:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: The Auto and its Enemies In-Reply-To: <000b01bea149$f6674480$6c8ffea9@cybercable.fr> Message-ID: Professor John Pucher, also of Rutgers University, has written a scathing review of Professor James Dunn's book. It is forthcoming in Transportation Quarterly, so I will not post it without permission. My own personal comment: I find it hard to believe that a Professor of Political Science actually believes that "car-haters" have political power anywhere close to what the highway lobby has in the US. What we have today is hardly a response to the public desires -- in fact, there are numerous examples of politicians ignoring what the public wants.... Eric Bruun On Tue, 18 May 1999, Eric Britton wrote: > "The broad public, having been exposed for years to strident anti-automobile > rhetoric, deserves a better understanding of the mentality behind the > anti-car ideology..." > > Read all about it: > > ========== > The Auto and its Enemies > (Reprinted from Innovation Briefs, Vol. 10 No. 3, May/June 1999) > > By all accounts the automobile is the nearest thing to an ideal > transportation system. No transport technology offers people more > convenience, comfort, security and privacy. The auto serves its users on > demand, from door to door, with no transfers, no waiting, and at an > acceptable price. Widespread car ownership has given millions of people > more options of where to live and work and opened up access to greater > social and economic opportunity. > > So, how come a number of vocal critics see the auto not as a solution but as > a problem, and view existing auto and highway policies not as a success but > as a failure? In an insightful and widely noticed book, James A. Dunn > examines the gulf in perceptions that separates the auto's critics from the > millions of ordinary citizens who treasure the auto as a symbol of personal > freedom. > > James A. Dunn Jr., Driving Forces: The Automobile, Its Enemies and the > Politics of Mobility, > Brooking Institution Press, 1998 > > Behind the current anti-highway rhetoric, James Dunn, professor of political > science at Rutgers University-Camden, sees a loosely organized band of > crusaders who harbor visceral hostility toward the auto and its culture. > This "anti-auto vanguard," as Dunn calls them, view the automobile "not as a > proud achievement of American industry but as a relentless oppressor and a > menace to civilization." > > The fact that cars are less polluting, safer and more energy efficient today > than they were twenty-five years ago is no consolation. The car critics > are not interested in solving the problems caused by the car, writes Dunn. > "It is the whole gestalt of the auto as the central sociocultural icon of > our society that they want to eliminate." > > The vanguard's immediate goal is not a total abolition of the car, just a > dramatic decline in its importance in the transportation system, writes > Dunn. But the anti-auto activists go beyond seeking more balance in > transportation by improving public transit and providing incentives for its > use. They want to make auto travel more expensive and less convenient, if > necessary, by resorting to legislative mandates and regulatory measures. The > ultimate goal of the vanguard is to bring about a massive change in our > travel habits. Dunn finds this highly ironic. In the past, he observes, > progress meant replacing an older transportation technology with a newer one > that offered greater mobility. The vanguard's goal of replacing the auto > with "alternative transportation," transit, walking and bicycles would be > the first modal shift in transportation history that would reverse this > historic process by restricting rather than expanding mobility. The > vanguard's objective, far from being progressive, is profoundly reactionary. > The Vanguard's Impact > How successful has the anti-auto movement been so far, and how is it likely > to fare in the future? > Dunn traces the rise of the anti-car sensibility to the "green tradition" in > American thought and literature of the 19th century, exemplified by Ralph > Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau and Walt Whitman. > > In the 20th century, social critics and urbanists like Lewis Mumford and > Jane Jacobs drew on these values to focus on the negative effects of the > automobile on America's cities. The 1970s saw an outpouring of books, > articles and reports that were highly critical in their assessment of the > car's impact. "Within a few years the private car and the whole industrial > and social apparatus that supported it were redefined by its critics in very > negative terms," writes Dunn. The car was demonized as a voracious consumer > of irreplaceable energy resources, a major source of greenhouse gases, a > killer of tens of thousands of accident victims, a destroyer of cohesive > communities and a despoiler of the landscape. > > But the early critics' predictions of the "death knells of the automobile > culture," did not materialize. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s the > automobile kept gaining ground, and not just in America but in the rest of > the world as well. The critics vastly overestimated the public's willingness > to give up personal mobility and underestimated the extent to which autos > and highways fit the values of the American political and social culture. > > What does the current generation of critics make of the auto's continued > dominance? Do they still expect the end of automobility? Or have they > changed their views? "The visceral hostility to the auto and its culture is > clearly still present" writes Dunn. The most committed members of the > anti-car movement resist arguments that their basic goals may be > unattainable. Contemporary critics, such as James Howard Kunstler (The > Geography of Nowhere, 1993) and Jane Holtz Kay (Asphalt Nation: How the > Automobile Took Over America, 1997) still believe, in Kunstler's words, that > "the Auto Age as we have known it, will shortly come to an end." The > mainstream environmental movement, although less apocalyptic in its > predictions and more restrained in its rhetoric, is no less convinced of > the need for fundamental change. Groups such as the Worldwatch Institute, > Union of Concerned Scientists, Environmental Defense Fund and Surface > Transportation Policy Project (STPP) build their policy recommendations on > the basic proposition that the current dominance of the automobile is > unsustainable in the long run. > > There are three key elements in the vanguard's long term strategy, observes > Dunn. First, there must be continuous consciousness-raising among > policymakers and the general public. The auto must be made to pay its "true > social costs." Once people are confronted with paying the full costs of auto > travel, they will be much more willing to consider other transportation > alternatives. Second, the auto critics must engage in effective lobbying of > the legislature. The most notable success in this regard, notes Dunn, have > been the efforts of the STPP to introduce more funding flexibility into the > federal-aid highway program and to earmark funds for > environmentally-friendly transportation initiatives. The third element of > the vanguard's strategy is to build bureaucratic momentum, writes Dunn. To > this end, the vanguard has become an active part of the policymaking process > and seeks a voice in numerous forums to influence the course of debate on > auto-related environmental issues, such as global warming, "sustainability," > "smart growth" and "livable communities." > > Will the vanguard succeed in its campaign to drastically reduce society's > dependence on the automobile and bring about a massive modal shift? Dunn > doubts it. The main strength of the anti-car lobby lies in their sense of > outrage and their missionary zeal. Their weakness which Dunn thinks, will > doom their efforts in the end is that they are disconnected from mainstream > America. Their goals are not shared by the vast majority of people and run > counter to deeply entrenched preferences of most Americans. The vanguard's > vision of a largely carless world in which residents mostly rely on bicycles > and public transportation lacks political realism and seems beyond the > bounds of public acceptability. > "They [the anti-auto vanguard] threaten to take away the individuals' > tangible embodiment of their personal freedom, their car, without offering a > superior substitute," Dunn notes. > The Politics of Mobility for the 21st Century > Dunn offers an alternative policy future. The most effective policy response > to the pressing auto-related problems, he writes, is not to discourage > people from using cars but to encourage improvement in the technology of the > auto itself. "It is easier and more politically astute to use Washington's > arsenal of powers against Detroit than against tens of millions of citizen > motorists," writes Dunn. > > Such a policy would welcome the advent of less polluting, more efficient > cars. It would allow individuals and communities to choose freely from an > expanded range of choices rather than seek to impose bureaucratic "command > and control" patterns of travel behavior. It would try to preserve rather > than denigrate the immense and undeniable benefits of car ownership. > > Above all, Dunn believes that "a successful politics of mobility must have > commonsense appeal to citizens." People must see it as a means to help them > meet their specific personal needs, not as a crusade to save the planet or > to reshape the living environment in the elitist image of the anti-car > vanguard. > > The anti-auto forces will not like Dunn's book much. But the broad public, > having been exposed for years to strident anti-automobile rhetoric, deserves > a better understanding of the mentality behind the anti-car ideology. James > Dunn has performed a valuable public service in better illuminating the > anti-auto movement's agenda, motivation and philosophy. > > > From ob110ob at idt.net Thu May 20 09:35:54 1999 From: ob110ob at idt.net (Obwon) Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 20:35:54 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: The Auto and its Enemies References: <000801bea1ae$2b57ac20$bcb601c8@q8v1n7> Message-ID: <374358E9.8F35CE4E@idt.net> This post cleary certifies a 'certifiable' social/pathological view of the auto/anti auto conflict of interests! It is a terrible handicap to those seeking real remedies to the lack of peaceful communities that the auto provides while their struggles to 'comprimise' are taken and seized upon as evidence of the impracticality of all auto use reduction proposals. Bikes and human powered vehicles are most useful and practical in neighborhoods for the laarge variety of short trips that make up the average day! Until we somehow provide vehicles of utilty, that can carry groceries home from the local store and allow a friend or two to join one easily on the local rounds, they will have only a small impact. Here in my community, because car's are so expensive to operate, inconvienent to park, etc., more and more local trips are being assigned to bike trips. A wider variety of hpv utility vehicles would probably be welcomed/embraced quickly. People in communities that have few cars on their streets are begining to notice how much more peaceful and friendly bikes are when traveling their quiet streets than are cars. So, the psychological comparison made, I see more people accepting bikes as an alternative means of transport if only to pereserve the tranquility they moved to those isolated streets for. The better approach is not to denigrate the auto or it's use! But let the observer/interviewee do it themselves! Ask simple question designed to elicite their own real views of auto use! Like -- "What a lovely neighborhood you live in, why wouldn't you want a nice highway access built here, so you won't have to drive so far to get to the highway?" Hahaha! Or "This is a lovely wide street, why shouldn't we route truck delivery traffic through here, then we could keep much of the truck traffic off congested local streets." These kinds of questions are likely to be met with horrified gasps of terror! At the root of which will be the responders real fears of the anti tranquil auto! Then let them ponder their own auto averse proclivities against their auto-centric culturism. Now you can ask the properly prepared responder about alternatives and see what they then have to say. Obwon From ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu Sat May 22 04:26:38 1999 From: ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu (Eric Bruun) Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 15:26:38 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Pucher's review of The Auto and its Enemies References: Message-ID: <3745B36D.88E231F0@rci.rutgers.edu> Here is the review that I mentioned before. If you pass it along, please cite that it is forthcoming in Transportation Quarterly. Thanks, Eric Bruun REVIEW OF ?DRIVING FORCES? FOR TRANSPORTATION QUARTERLY by John Pucher (to appear in summer 1999 TQ) James A. Dunn, Jr., Driving Forces: The Automobile, its Enemies, and the Politics of Mobility. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998, ISBN 0-8157-1964-7, 230 pp, $44.95. Transportation Paradise: Realm of the Nearly Perfect Automobile? (by John Pucher) According to James Dunn?s Driving Forces, Americans enjoy the best of all possible worlds. Our auto-dominated transportation system is convenient, comfortable, fast, dependable, safe, and affordable, offering levels of mobility the rest of the world can only dream of. Portraying the United States as a veritable transportation nirvana, Dunn briefly concedes a few ?minor? problems but claims that they can be solved by painless technological fixes. In short, Dunn views the auto-highway transport system as almost perfect and getting better all the time. If only it were true! One wonders whether Americans feel like they are in paradise when stuck in traffic jams for hours. Is road rage indicative of the ecstasy that cars inspire? Are the millions of traffic injuries and tens of thousands of deaths each year only a ?minor? problem? Can we simply ignore the noise, air, and water pollution caused by cars and highways? Do the residents of a smogged-in, gridlocked Los Angeles, Phoenix, or Denver really think that the car is an almost perfect mode of transportation? There can be no doubt that the auto-highway transport system does indeed provide enormous mobility benefits, but at what cost? Consider just a few of the many social and environmental impacts of the nearly perfect automobile: ? In the United States alone, there were 6,613,000 car accidents in 1995, resulting in 3,386,000 injuries and 41,798 deaths. In the 25 years between 1970 and 1995, 1.2 million Americans died in traffic accidents. Motorists are not the only victims: over a third of traffic fatalities in American cities are pedestrians and cyclists killed by car and truck drivers. ? Most Americans get little or no exercise, partly because they use the car instead of walking or cycling, even for short trips. Our sedentary, car-based lifestyle leads to one of the world?s highest proportions of obesity (one-fifth of all adults) and serious health problems. How much of the precious time saved by driving instead of walking or cycling is eventually lost through premature death? A 1992 study for the British Medical Association found that the time spent cycling and walking is more than offset by the health benefits of such cardiovascular exercise, which extends life expectancy by more than the extra time it takes to walk or cycle. The Surgeon General of the U.S. also recommends walking and cycling as valuable forms of regular exercise to promote health. By comparison, visits to the gym or track (usually reached by car) are almost never frequent enough to provide regular exercise throughout life. ? Total hours of congestion delay in U.S. metropolitan areas have roughly tripled since 1980. For many Americans, the daily commute to work has become a seemingly endless nightmare. Without question, the dramatic shift from transit, walking, and carpooling to single-occupant auto use over the past few decades has contributed to congestion in our cities. ? Air, water, and noise pollution remain serious problems of the auto-highway transportation system. Cars and trucks are a major source of noise and air pollution in most cities, in spite of technological improvements over the past two decades. The huge increase in vehicle miles traveled has partly offset the impressive reductions in carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and nitrogen oxide pollution per vehicle mile traveled. ? The automobile is America?s primary source of carbon dioxide emissions, the main greenhouse gas causing global warming. None of the pollution control measures to date have dealt with this problem. It is not entirely clear what the timing and long-term effects of greenhouse gases on global warming will be. Nevertheless, in 1997 virtually all OECD countries (including the U.S.) formally committed themselves in Kyoto, Japan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over the coming two decades. Unless auto use can be curtailed, it is virtually inconceivable that the U.S. will be able to fulfill its international commitment. ? Notwithstanding the mobility benefits the auto-highway system provides for the affluent majority, it disadvantages anyone who cannot afford a car or who is physically or mentally unable to drive a car. Extensive roadways, parking facilities, and homeowner subsidies have encouraged extremely low-density suburban sprawl that puts most destinations out of reach for anyone without a car. The poor, the elderly, and the disabled are the main victims. Their opportunities are already restricted through financial and physical handicaps; substandard accessibility further disadvantages them and segregates them from the rest of society. An auto-based society discriminates against the disadvantaged. ? Even affluent households are adversely affected by a transport system that immobilizes anyone who cannot drive a car. Suburban children are totally dependent on their parents to get anywhere, since auto-oriented land-use patterns are so spread out that trips to almost all desired destinations are either too long or too dangerous to cover by foot or by bicycle. Suburban sprawl sharply limits the mobility and independence of children and requires their parents to spend hundreds of hours a year chauffeuring them everywhere. This forced mobility dependence wastes the time and energy of everybody involved. It also requires most suburban families to own two or more cars, since almost no trips by anyone are possible without a car. ? As suggested by critics of the auto, America suffers from a number of other, perhaps more controversial and less quantifiable harmful impacts of auto dominance: the loss of a sense of community and social cohesion; suburban sprawl and the ugliness of auto-based strip development along highways; the disruption of neighborhoods both during and after roadway construction; depletion of natural resources; loss of inner-city vitality; and the atomization and further segregation of our society by income, race, and ethnicity . ? Finally, a growing number of scientists have attempted to measure the indirect cost of autos for society, the so-called external cost not borne by auto users directly. The estimates range widely and are controversial, but they certainly suggest a huge social and environmental cost of the auto-highway transport system. Generally, the figures range from about $500 billion per year to $1,500 billion per year for the United States. Even taking the lower bound, that is an immense cost, amounting to about $0.20 per vehicle mile traveled or $2,400 per car per year. That is the minimum estimate of costs and only includes the social and environmental costs not directly borne by the driver of the car (such as noise and pollution). Given this long list of negative impacts, it is hard to believe that anyone could seriously argue that the costs of the auto-highway system are not enormous. Yet that is the conclusion reached by Dunn in Driving Forces. Evidently, we just don?t realize how lucky we are to be living in the best of all possible worlds, the auto-based transportation paradise. Most auto apologists in the U.S. are quite generous in wanting to spread the American auto paradise to the rest of the world. What?s good for us must be good for other countries as well. Even at their much lower levels of auto ownership and use, however, developing countries are experiencing serious social and environmental problems from rising motorization. Congestion, pollution, noise, injury and death caused by cars in the Third World often exceed levels in the United States, since developing countries have fewer resources to deal with such problems. Many still use leaded gasoline. Most cars and trucks are old and in disrepair. Driving habits are dangerous due to lack of driver training, lax licensing of drivers, and non-enforcement of traffic laws. Finally, their roadway networks are scanty and usually in terrible shape. Round-trip car commutes in the largest cities regularly average three hours or more. Pollution levels in Mexico City, Manila, Shanghai, Teheran, Bangkok, and Cairo are so high that they can precipitate immediate illness and even death for susceptible individuals, not just long-term health risks. Traffic deaths and injuries are skyrocketing. Between 1968 and 1985, traffic fatalities rose 300% in Africa and almost 200% in Asia. >From 1960 to 1995, traffic fatalities in Brazil rose from 5,000 to 32,532. From 1966 to 1992 traffic fatalities in India rose from 8,700 to 59,400. From 1972 to 1994, traffic fatalities in China rose from 10,000 to 66,362. Moreover, in these developing countries, 56%-74% of traffic fatalities are pedestrians and cyclists killed by car and truck drivers. According to the World Health Organization, road traffic accidents will be the second leading cause of death in developing countries by the year 2020. Clearly, the increase in auto ownership and use in developing countries is not bringing the transportation paradise envisioned by Dunn. On the contrary, rising motorization is worsening almost all their already severe social and environmental problems. By ignoring the serious transport problems in developing countries, as well as those of disadvantaged groups in the U.S., Dunn?s analysis is far too narrow. Unquestionably, it is the view through the windshield of a car, representing the perspective of an auto driver in a multi-car household living in an affluent American suburb. Even for affluent Americans, however, Dunn exaggerates the benefits of the automobile while vastly understating its costs. Finally, the book is shortsighted; it ignores many of long-term impacts of the auto such as global warming, resource depletion, public health problems, and suburban sprawl. Having listed here a number of criticisms of the auto, this reviewer will inevitably be branded as one of those notorious ?enemies of the auto? that belong to the ?anti-auto vanguard.? According to Dunn and his fellow defenders of the car, anyone who criticizes the auto-highway system has a visceral hatred for the car and opposes it, not because of any real problems it causes, but out of ideological opposition to the car-based American way of life. This charge is both unfair and absurd. Does Dunn really believe that the danger, congestion, noise, pollution, and inequity documented above are imaginary, and that there is no legitimate basis for criticizing the car? In fact, hundreds of millions of people all around the world suffer every day from the very real problems of excessive auto use. One need not have an ideological axe to grind to find fault with the auto-dominated system of transportation. Who doesn?t know someone?a relative, friend, or neighbor?who has been killed or seriously injured in a car accident? Who doesn?t get irritated by motor vehicle noise and air pollution? Who doesn?t occasionally get stuck in a traffic jam? How many pedestrians and cyclists are harassed, intimidated, and endangered every day by inconsiderate motorists who refuse to respect the legal rights of way of non-motorists? How many residential neighborhoods would be safer and more pleasant if there were less and slower motor vehicle traffic? The problems of the auto-based transport system are hardly imaginary, and those who suffer from them certainly have a right to complain. Millions of victims?not the few academics Dunn denounces as the ?anti-auto vanguard??form the core of opposition to the auto?s domination of our transportation system and our lives. What IS imaginary is the mythical vision of an automobile paradise portrayed in this book. ENDNOTES: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Transportation Statistics, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Washington, D.C., 1997. The pedestrian/bicyclist share of traffic fatalities is higher in urban areas and lower in rural areas. In 1995, the U.S. had 6,415 pedestrian and cyclist traffic fatalities. A disproportionate share of motorist fatalities occurs in non-urban areas, where travel speeds are much higher and the distance to the nearest hospital is much farther. According to the National Institute of Health, more than one-half of Americans between the ages of 20 and 74 are overweight, and one-fifth are severely overweight and technically designated as obese. For details see ?Overweight Was Bad Enough: The Fat Get Fatter,? New York Times, May 2, 1999; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Disease Control and Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, 1996. British Medical Association, Cycling Towards Health and Safety, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1992. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General Texas Transportation Institute, Urban Roadway Congestion, College Station Texas: University of Texas, 1996. Environmental Protection Agency, National Air Pollutant Emissions Trends, 1970-1995, Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, 1997; Don Pickrell, ?Cars and Clean Air: A Reappraisal,? Transportation Research, Vol. 33, No. 7/8, autumn 1999, forthcoming. World Bank, Sustainable Transport: Priorities for Policy Reform. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 1996; P. Newman and J. Kenworthy, Sustainability and Cities. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1999; Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Urban Travel and Sustainable Development, Paris: OECD, 1995. Aside from the problem of trip distance, the shameful neglect of pedestrian and cyclist safety in the United States makes walking and cycling unsafe for unaccompanied children. Separate facilities for pedestrians and cyclists are woefully lacking in the United States, in sharp contrast to Europe. Moreover, motorists rarely yield right of way to non-motorists, although the laws in virtually all states require it. K. Schaeffer and E. Sclar, Access for All, New York: Columbia University Press, 1980; J. Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York: Vintage Books, 1961; J. Kay, Asphalt Nation, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999; A. Downs, New Visions for Metropolitan America, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1994. M. Delucchi, The Annualized Costs of Motor Vehicle Use in the U.S.: Summary of Theory, Data, and Results, Davis, Cal: University of California, 1998; J. MacKenzie, R. Dower, and D. Chen, The Going Rate: What it really Costs to Drive, Washington, D.C.: The World Resources Institute, 1992; J. Holtzclaw, ?America?s Autos and Trucks on Welfare: A Summary of Subsidies,? Mobilizing the Region, No. 15, Feb. 3, 1995, p. 3; T. Litman, The Full Costs of Transportation, Victoria, BC: Transportation Policy Institute, 1994. E. Vasconcellos, ?Transport and Environment in Developing Countries: Comparing Air Pollution and Traffic Accidents as Policy Priorities,? Habitat International, Vol. 21, No. 1, 1997, pp. 79-89. R. Gakenheimer, ?Urban Mobility in the Developing World,? Transportation Research, Vol. 33, Nos. 7/8, autumn 1999, forthcoming. E. Vasconcellos, ?Reassessing Traffic Accidents in Developing Countries,? Transport Policy, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1996. The older figures on traffic fatalities in this section come from the two Vasconcellos articles cited above. The latest figures (for 1992 and 1994) were provided directly by Dr. Paul Guitink of the World Bank (Washington, D.C.) from unpublished data the World Bank has collected. World Health Organization, Investing in Health Research and Development, Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 1996, Table S.1, pg. xxiv. AUTHOR BIO FOR JOHN PUCHER John Pucher is professor in the Department of Urban Planning at Rutgers University (New Brunswick, New Jersey). Since receiving his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1978, he has conducted research on a wide range of topics in transport economics and finance. He has directed numerous research projects for the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Canadian Government, and various European ministries of transport. In recent years, his research has focussed on comparative analysis of transport policies in Europe, Canada, and the United States. His most recent book, The Urban Transport Crisis in Europe and North America, was published by Macmillan Press (London, UK) in 1996. From ob110ob at idt.net Sat May 22 07:59:12 1999 From: ob110ob at idt.net (Obwon) Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 18:59:12 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Pucher's review of The Auto and its Enemies References: <3745B36D.88E231F0@rci.rutgers.edu> Message-ID: <3745E53F.2E960523@idt.net> Eric Bruun wrote: > Here is the review that I mentioned before. If you pass it along, please cite that > > it is forthcoming in Transportation Quarterly. Thanks, Eric Bruun > > REVIEW OF ?DRIVING FORCES? FOR TRANSPORTATION QUARTERLY ---- ----- ------ ------ ---- ---- ----- Excellent peice of writing, balanced and well thought out. It provokes much ancilliary thought for which there is no proper place in such a report but should surely be noted. Often it arises that the only alternatives to car use that are offered are either too costly to implement quickly and/or are motorized alternatives themselves. Here, take a look at a problem in point: Here in NYC, we have Kennedy Intern't'l Airport, which has for yeas been accessible only by either bus or pvt/comm. auto. The alternative offered, discussed and studied is a rail link. Even though the NYC subway syetem passes within a mile of the main terminal, years of study and debate over funding have produce no viable solution. Other than a rail link which as usual is so expensive that it's forever doubtful that it will ever get funded. The simple alternatives I can see are 1) A moving sidewalk inside a covered passage way. Or 2) Why not provide bike lanes and h.p.v. trikes that could carry both passengers and luggage and even be used inside those spacious terminal buildings? Are people so terribly frail that they can't cover that last mile under their own power? The hpv's could hook together to form trains so that attendants could easily redestribute them as needed using motorized/electric carts. The same motorzed electric carts could be callable for the infirm/disabled etc. And this solution costs less than a million dollars! Viola, problem solved! If such hpv's were two, three or four seaters, then an able compainion or two could easily assist the less able member of the group without waiting for motorized assistance. But NO! Such 'outside the box' thinking is non-viable in our auto-cultured world. Millions must be spent to provide some kind of motorized solution that cost too much to reasonably implement ever! Thusly, while insuring that nothing gets done, it preserves and supports the illusion that we are totally dependant upon cars! Perhaps others here on this list can or hopefully will identify places where specially designed hpv's together with covered bike trails and/or with motorized assists can be formed into 'trains' for redistribution or to assist with troublesome topographical features of the areas under study, might provide simple low cost alternatives to massive costly projects that won't get implemented and thereby leave people inexplicably dependant on autos. Obwon From debi.beag at SoftHome.net Sat May 22 09:59:22 1999 From: debi.beag at SoftHome.net (Debi Goenka) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:29:22 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Thanks Message-ID: <37460168.CE8A4A4B@SoftHome.net> Dear Roger This is to acknowledge receipt of your parcel, with all the material I had requested. Once again, many thanks. It now seems that TELCO has apparently withdrawn their legal notice to CSE, so it turns out to be a damp squib! Cheers Debi P.S. Please feel free to publicise whatever you feel appropriate. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: debi.beag.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 385 bytes Desc: Card for Debi Goenka Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19990522/b6961119/debi.beag.vcf From debi.beag at SoftHome.net Sat May 22 09:59:22 1999 From: debi.beag at SoftHome.net (Debi Goenka) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:29:22 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Thanks Message-ID: <37460168.CE8A4A4B@SoftHome.net> Dear Roger This is to acknowledge receipt of your parcel, with all the material I had requested. Once again, many thanks. It now seems that TELCO has apparently withdrawn their legal notice to CSE, so it turns out to be a damp squib! Cheers Debi P.S. Please feel free to publicise whatever you feel appropriate. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: debi.beag.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 385 bytes Desc: Card for Debi Goenka Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19990522/b6961119/debi.beag-0001.vcf From debi.beag at SoftHome.net Sat May 22 10:00:54 1999 From: debi.beag at SoftHome.net (Debi Goenka) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:30:54 +0530 Subject: [sustran] [Fwd: telco (fwd)] Message-ID: <374601C5.664950CC@SoftHome.net> Roger This is for your info. Cheers Debi -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Darryl D'Monte" Subject: telco (fwd) Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 09:52:18 +0530 (IST) Size: 3925 Url: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19990522/d1bf53e6/attachment.eml -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: debi.beag.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 385 bytes Desc: Card for Debi Goenka Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19990522/d1bf53e6/debi.beag.vcf From debi.beag at SoftHome.net Sat May 22 10:00:54 1999 From: debi.beag at SoftHome.net (Debi Goenka) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:30:54 +0530 Subject: [sustran] [Fwd: telco (fwd)] Message-ID: <374601C5.664950CC@SoftHome.net> Roger This is for your info. Cheers Debi -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Darryl D'Monte" Subject: telco (fwd) Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 09:52:18 +0530 (IST) Size: 3925 Url: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19990522/d1bf53e6/attachment-0001.eml -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: debi.beag.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 385 bytes Desc: Card for Debi Goenka Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19990522/d1bf53e6/debi.beag-0001.vcf From debi.beag at SoftHome.net Sun May 23 00:58:33 1999 From: debi.beag at SoftHome.net (Debi Goenka) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 21:28:33 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Apologies Message-ID: <3746D427.2920DEC2@SoftHome.net> To all members of the Sustran discuss list I apoligize for posting my messages to Roger Higman of FOE on the Sustran Discussion List. Debi Goenka -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: debi.beag.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 385 bytes Desc: Card for Debi Goenka Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19990522/adbe0265/debi.beag.vcf From debi.beag at SoftHome.net Sun May 23 00:58:33 1999 From: debi.beag at SoftHome.net (Debi Goenka) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 21:28:33 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Apologies Message-ID: <3746D427.2920DEC2@SoftHome.net> To all members of the Sustran discuss list I apoligize for posting my messages to Roger Higman of FOE on the Sustran Discussion List. Debi Goenka -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: debi.beag.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 385 bytes Desc: Card for Debi Goenka Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/19990522/adbe0265/debi.beag-0001.vcf From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon May 24 08:56:31 1999 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (tabnet) Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 01:56:31 +0200 Subject: [sustran] "The Auto and its Good Friends". Revisited by John Pucher and others In-Reply-To: <19990521160133.2615.qmail@gehenna.rutgers.edu> Message-ID: <000701bea577$e17cdb20$ef47fea9@think> Very nice John. Excellent piece of work. Thanks for sharing it with all and sundry. You really have touched many of the bases, and this will give the reader, especially the younger ones, a very good checklist... just in case they run into this lines of argumentation again.... which we can be sure they will. I might point out too the good fit that your piece has with the notes on this review of Wed 5/19/99 on Sustran of our colleague Carlos Cordero of Peru. As to our "Enemies" author (sorry, forgot his name already... oh blessed memory), I have to base what I have to say briefly this morning not on his book, which I have not (and certainly will not) read, but on Ken Orski's review of it which has been circulated in several of these sites - and in the knowledge that I can have 100% confidence in Ken's ability to recapitulate accurately this line of reasoning. And as I read it an even handful of things struck me above all. * The first is the manner in which the author undertakes to occupy the high ground of information, balance and reason... more or less killing by kindness (of a sort) his chosen opponents. Hmmm. Debating 101. * The second is the heavy aura of false, self-appointed expertise. The gravitas balloon. But when it comes to trotting out the arguments, he runs out of steam kind of early. This of course is one of the most common infections of the transportation debate anyway, since we are all such experts on how we get around. When it comes to transportation expertise, the operative position of so many commentators, on all sides, usually seems to be, "I move, therefore I think." * The third salient point is - and this you have jumped on to with both feet - his sheer meanness of spirit. Need one say more? * The fourth is that there is absolutely nothing new in it. Since I write this while on the road I do not happen to have my files and his article with me, but I certainly recall as I read through the piece that it might as well have been 1979 as far as his basic arguments were concerned. * The last is grimmer news - and that is to underscore the point that, whatever its defects, this is the line of reasoning that to this day prevails in most international and national counsel. And while we may hear occasional eco-squeaks to the contrary, when it comes right down to the concrete and steel, dollars and hours, air and blood, this is the real bottom line. So this gent is not just a joke that all of us who sing variously here in the choir can put down and smile at knowingly. This is the state of play. This is not just some weird rightist out there sawing away in some miserable small corner of the public purview, these are the guys that own the playing field, lay down the lines, bring the ball, decide the rules, and appoint their own referees. And if it's achieved results that are the bottom line, most of the rest of us might as well be stuck up there right on top of the Andes. Step I in turning this around is to remember just that. Not to be discouraged by it, mind you, but to bear in mind that unless we get smarter and more effective this is going to continue to be the case. We cannot just continue to solider along as we have been doing until now. We need a much higher energy level, more and better tools, more convincing real world demonstrations, larger and more committed constituencies, better information sharing and peer support systems, more leadership skills, and more. Otherwise we will continue to lose the car war, with all the heavy social price tags that go along with it and which Professor Pucher has so carefully spelled out. Or do I have this terribly wrong, again? Eric Britton From sustran at po.jaring.my Mon May 24 10:53:55 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 09:53:55 +0800 Subject: [sustran] british green transport events Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990524095355.007efb50@relay101.jaring.my> Dear sustran-discussers I keep seeing announcements of "bike to work days", "green transport weeks", and such like in various countries. Here are some British examples. Does anyone have any examples outside of the West? A. Rahman Paul BARTER SUSTRAN Resource Centre P.O. Box 11501, Kuala Lumpur 50748, Malaysia. Tel/Fax: +60 3 2742590, E-mail: sustran@po.jaring.my Web: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/2853/ ------------------------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 08:26:33 +0100 From: Geraint Jennings Subject: pednet: Upcoming UK events This message sent to pednet by Geraint Jennings . Walk to School Week - will be launched on 24th May, and run from then on either for a week or for one day a week for the rest of term. Don't Choke Britain Month - launch on 28th May Breathe Easy Week The British Lung Foundation's week of action on air pollution will take place between May 29th and June 6th 1999. More information is available from the BLF website: http://www.lunguk.org. Alternatively, phone 0171 8315831. Green Transport Week (Environmental Transport Association) - will be launched on 4th June and run from 5 - 13 June. http://www.eta.co.uk/tr/pj/gtw/gtwintro.htm National Car Free Day - will be 8th June. http://www.eta.co.uk/tr/pj/cfd/cfdintro.htm National Bike Week - will be from 12 - 20th June. The CTC together with Sustrans are gearing up in 1999 to a millenium cycling week in 2000, when the first stages of the National Cycle Network will be open. There will be local rides and events during the week. http://www.national-bike-week.org.uk/ Bike to Work Day will be 16th June. From farheen at riet.org.sg Fri May 28 10:36:32 1999 From: farheen at riet.org.sg (Farheen Mukri) Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 09:36:32 +0800 Subject: [sustran] henry ford's dream Message-ID: I was forwarded this and was amazed at the $$$$ amount. FYI Farheen > Europe spent ---=== $10 000 000 000 000 ===--- on new > transportation systems..!!!!! That's incredible. > > > > Published Thursday, May 27, 1999, in the San Jose Mercury News > > > VOICES OF OUR TIME > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > > > Henry Ford's dream has hurt the Earth > Rod Diridon > Public-transit advocate > From your perspective, what have been some of the most important > developments of the 20th century, and how will the world be different 100 > years from now? > > Henry Ford's dream of mobility has had a staggering impact. The nation has > been provided mobility, jobs, exports and an auto-worship that carries us > physically and mentally from puberty to the grave. > > Now Henry's ``car for every working family'' has grown to three or four. > His dream is a strangling nightmare of fouled air, hopelessly congested > highways and a massive balance-of-trade deficit caused by the need to > import more than half the petroleum those cars use each year. > > We've become so physically and emotionally auto-addicted that we > viscerally oppose any restrictions on their use, especially the gas taxes > that every other country in the world uses to build fine multimodal > transportation systems. The result: During the past decade, the European > Community has spent nearly $10 trillion on new transportation > infrastructure based primarily on clean, energy-efficient, 150- to 200-mph > high-speed trains. Our governments have quarreled over a relatively meager > couple of trillion dollars invested primarily in more highways that become > long parking lots the moment they're opened in our urban areas. > > Other nations have fine rail, bus, bike and pedestrian systems that offer > environmentally sensitive alternatives to the automobile. Because we're so > wedded to our cars, we've not developed those systems and, indeed, seem > determined to invest our mobility dollars into the latest and greatest > gas-guzzling sport-utility vehicles. > > Well, that will sure be more comfortable for our families now -- but how > about their children's children? Will there be anything left when our time > as custodians of Earth is past? Are we being good ancestors? > > > > > From sustran at po.jaring.my Mon May 31 13:23:55 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 12:23:55 +0800 Subject: [sustran] fwd: Fall in World Oil Prices Triggers Overconsumption Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990531122355.007f8960@relay101.jaring.my> fowarded from the kabelvag discussion group on sustainable consumption. Mailing-List: contact kabelvag-owner@egroups.com X-Mailing-List: kabelvag@egroups.com X-URL: http://www.egroups.com/list/kabelvag/ Reply-To: kabelvag@egroups.com Delivered-To: listsaver-egroups-kabelvag@egroups.com From: "Ajay Darshan Behera" To: Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 03:48:21 +0530 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Subject: [kabelvag] Energy Connections " The price of a barrel of crude oil has dropped from about $20in early 1998 to about $10 -- the lowest in decades -- sparking acash crisis among petroleum-exporting countries. And on the flip side, the rise in oil consumption is threateningto set off a greater demand for consumer products such asgas-guzzling motor vehicles and high-energy home appliances. If current trends in energy and fossil fuel consumptioncontinue, by 2010 global energy consumption and carbon dioxide(CO2) emissions will have risen by almost 50 percent above 1993levels, according to the report. In addition, consumers are drivingmore, and are tending to buy less fuel-efficient vehicles, in partas a result of low gasoline prices. " ---------- ENERGY: FALL IN WORLD OIL PRICES TRIGGERS OVERCONSUMPTION Thalif Deen , Inter Press Service English News Wire, 9th March, 1999. ---------- UNITED NATIONS, Mar. 9 (IPS) -- The United Nations is worried that a sharp drop in oil prices is triggering an overconsumption of energy -- and a rise in demand for luxury cars and heavy duty motor vehicles. "Current growth in energy consumption is driven in part by declining oil prices," warns a 23-page U.N. report released yesterday. The price of a barrel of crude oil has dropped from about $20 in early 1998 to about $10 -- the lowest in decades -- sparking a cash crisis among petroleum-exporting countries. And on the flip side, the rise in oil consumption is threatening to set off a greater demand for consumer products such as gas-guzzling motor vehicles and high-energy home appliances. If current trends in energy and fossil fuel consumption continue, by 2010 global energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions will have risen by almost 50 percent above 1993 levels, according to the report. In addition, consumers are driving more, and are tending to buy less fuel-efficient vehicles, in part as a result of low gasoline prices. Last year U.S. consumers continued to shift from cars to sports utility vehicles, vans and pick-up trucks, which are less fuel efficient and more polluting than cars. Those trends in consumption are outpacing improvements in fuel efficiency, the study says. The decline in oil prices also has resulted in sharp cuts in government spending, including postponement of infrastructure projects, in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Nigeria and Algeria -- all of whom depend heavily on petroleum exports for their foreign exchange earnings. Titled "A comprehensive review of changing consumption and production patterns", the report will go before a meeting of the Commission on Sustainable Development Apr. 19-30. The study says that there is general agreement that further increases in energy and material efficiency in production processes will need to be combined with shifts in consumption patterns towards good and services that are inherently less energy and resource intensive -- if greenhouse gas emissions are to be stabilized. Motor vehicles account for about 15 percent of global fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions, and 80 percent of transport-related energy consumption. Since the early 1970s, the global fleet of cars, trucks and buses has been growing by 16 million vehicles per year, to a total of some 630 million in 1994. "If this growth continues, the world will have one billion vehicles on the road by 2025," the report says. Speaking on behalf of the 133 developing nations of the Group of 77, Alison Drayton of Guyana said that overconsumption in the North and poverty-related problems in the South are both unsustainable. Therefore, structural changes are crucial in both instances. "In a world of globalization and trade liberalization, the consumption patterns of developed countries strongly influence those of developing countries," she told the UN Commission on Sustainable Development last week. Any discussion of sustainable consumption patterns would not be complete without a discussion of trade, investment, communication, media, advertising and marketing. "Information is the key to raising awareness on the range of consumption options available, and enabling consumers to make informed choices," Drayton says. "We believe that there is also a need for a thorough study of the role of media and advertising in promoting unsustainable consumption patterns, and indeed, in exporting them." Trade pressure from rich countries has also contributed to unsustainable consumption practices in poorer countries. For example, it is not unusual for developed countries to seek, through various means, agreement on lower taxes on their exports to developing countries. From a trade perspective, they might consider this to be a justifiable policy. However, from the perspective of achieving sustainable consumption patterns, argues Drayton, there are a number of implications which have to be considered. The lowering of taxes on luxury cars, energy-wasting home appliances and expensive imports from developed countries, will have a definite impact on the consumption patterns of developing nations. The U.N. report points out that developing countries, with 80 percent of the world population, currently consume about one third of the world's energy. This share is expected to grow to about 40 percent by 2010, if current consumption trends continue. In most industrialized countries, on the other hand, there has been continued progress in reducing energy and material consumption per unit of production. The improvement in efficiency per unit of production, however, has been offset by increases in the volume of production and consumption, leading to continued increases in total energy and materials consumed. ---------- From sustran at po.jaring.my Mon May 31 19:36:43 1999 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (SUSTRAN Resource Centre) Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 18:36:43 +0800 Subject: [sustran] fwd: UK local authorities and green transport Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990531183643.007ece10@relay101.jaring.my> A UK story from the pednet list ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 20:48:21 +0100 From: Geraint Jennings Subject: pednet: From today's Sunday Times - pushing drivers off roads This message sent to pednet by Geraint Jennings . May 30 1999 Councils to push drivers off roads by Stephen Bevan HUNDREDS of miles of high streets and main roads are to be declared car-free zones under radical green transport policies being drawn up by local authorities. Among the more radical measures aimed at making life difficult for the motorist are "intelligent" traffic lights that detect pedestrians and hold cars until they have crossed; pelican crossings that change as soon as a button is pressed - ending the current wait - and "smart" bollards that sink into the road to allow buses through, but that rise up to block oncoming cars. The aim of the policies is to make car use so expensive and journeys so time-consuming that motorists will swap their vehicles for cycling, walking or public transport. Other measures are designed to hit Britain's 26m car owners where it hurts, such as Wiltshire county council's proposal to abolish car park season tickets and a plan by the seven West Midlands councils, including Birmingham, to charge a ?250 tax on company car spaces. The measures emerged from a Sunday Times survey of local authorities - the first attempt to draw a national picture of the changes and their effects. Stephen Joseph, of Transport 2000, a green lobby group, said the plans signalled an end to the domination of the car. "A lot of people use cars but they don't like them when they dominate towns and cities. This represents a sea change where cars will be on tap but not on top." Perhaps the most controversial plans are those to ban cars from many town and city centres. The trend is well advanced in most big cities. Birmingham has pedestrianised a quarter of its city centre and plans to convert another 20%, while Liverpool is considering extending its scheme. Smaller towns are following these examples. In Essex, the county council plans to close 25 miles of road to motorists, banning cars from Brentwood and Clacton town centres. Elsewhere, Dorset will be pedestrianising six miles of roads and Durham city is planning more bus-only streets. In areas where cars cannot be excluded they will be slowed to a crawl by measures such as traffic lights that favour pedestrians and cyclists, road humps and rough surfaces that give an uncomfortably bumpy ride except at low speed, and increasingly tough parking rules. Devon and Bedfordshire county councils are among the leaders in such schemes with plans for traffic lights that not only change as soon as pedestrians press a button but which also stay red for longer than a pedestrian needs to cross. Bedford town centre has been pedestrianised and further schemes in the region are being considered. Many councils are combining a policy of persecuting the car with encouragements for benign modes of transport. Bromley is proposing free shower facilities for cyclists while Liverpool plans more free supervised bike parks. Some cities are, however, moderating their approach. In Manchester the council is closing off a number of main streets to cars, but only during the day. The council was concerned that deserted streets could be a temptation to criminals at night. A spokeswoman said: "People feel safer with cars passing by instead of it being purely pedestrianised." Tony Juniper, of Friends of the Earth, said such local initiatives would achieve only modest results. He said: "The government expects 25% more cars on our roads in 10 years' time than now and we need a national target for road traffic reduction." Additional reporting: Cathy Cooper, Andrea Perry =================== Distributed for purposes of study and research in accordance with the fair dealing provisions of the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act. So there. ***************** Geraint Jennings ******************* Artist, Teacher, Green, and general all-round good egg geraint@itl.net ************* http://user.itl.net/~geraint/ *************