From ktsourl at yahoo.com Fri Jun 1 04:50:22 2001 From: ktsourl at yahoo.com (Konstantinos Tsourlakis) Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 12:50:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] [sustran] Re: FW: H*elp the Shell Foundation to do good with their new Sustainability Message-ID: <20010531195022.33705.qmail@web14505.mail.yahoo.com> Do you have any data (cost,efficiency,public acceptance e.t.c.) about any real implementation of such a system (ETT, ULPV, PRT e.t.c.), because in order to make a fair comparision one has to put actual figures (e.g. of rail systems) next to actual figures (of other systems) and not only plans and estimations > > >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 00:49:30 -0700 >From: "Daryl Oster" >Subject: [sustran] Re: FW: H*elp the Shell Foundation to do good with their new Sustainability > >Planning Sustainable, High Benefit To Cost Transportation. >Copyright '01, Daryl Oster, Crystal River FL > >The automobile and airplane result in prosperity, that is not sustainable. >Experts see oil production peaking around 2010 (http://www.hubbertpeak.com). >The sustainability movement is based on observations that traditional >planning yields: global warming, acid storm runoff, wildlife harm, bad air, >noise, accidents, crumbling infrastructure, and congestion. A new quantum >leap is needed. > >Advocating a return to old ways is popular. Rail systems are being proposed >as sustainable transportation. Trains are appropriate vehicles to move >elephant sized cargo, not humans; http://www.publicpurpose.com displays the >failure of rail. > >Bicycles are sustainable, but weather exposure, meager speed and pathetic >capacity limit use; so the car gains ground. The "sustainable communities", >and "smart growth" initiatives, are also bids to return to old ways. They >oppose social expectations of expanding affluence, limiting success. > >Evacuated Tube Transport (ETT), Ultra Low Power Vehicles (ULPV), and >Personal Rapid Transport (PRT) are sustainable transportation technologies >that do not challenge social momentum. >ETT is: >* FAST - to 500 kph for regional use, (6000 kph international). >* CONVENIENT- runs continuously without delays. >* EFFICIENT- a human powered ETT can achieve 500kph. >* CLEAN- environmentally benign using renewable energy. >* SAFE- isolated guideway eliminates collisions in any weather. >* ACHIEVABLE- equipment exists to build ETT with common components. >* SCALEABLE - capacity can be inexpensively added as demand grows. >The automated, silent ETT works by removing resistance. Ultra lightweight, >pressurized cabins travel in tubes on thin steel wheels, or P-MagLev. No >air is in the tube to cause resistance. Acceleration energy is recovered >when slowing.(See http://www.et3.com/intro.htm ) > >ULPVs are: >* Under 5kw to minimize energy use and emissions. >* Under 100kg to maximize acceleration, and minimize material use. >* Enclosed for usability in varying conditions. >* Streamlined to reach highway speeds. >* Narrow - double lane capacity with a stripe. >* Low cost without subsidies. >* fit in ETT capsules for fast, distant travel with personal transport >convenience. > >Automated PRT costs 10% to build and operate verses light rail, and is twice >as fast. (http://www.artwerkz.com/h/ links to other PRT here as well) > >Government and industry must achieve public purpose at minimum cost. >Proposals must be compared on a benefit to cost basis; and show capital and >energy costs for use factors from 5% up to maximum capacity. This will show >relative risk if use fails expectations. > >Failure to implement high benefit to cost technologies will result in >moribund economies, degrading environment, starvation, and war, as people >struggle to survive without cheap energy. > >For a sustainable transportation plan to succeed short term it must offer; >improved convenience, capacity, and speed at lower cost. For long term, it >must specify systems that offer a tenfold improvement in energy efficiency, >and improve environmental conditions with tenfold reduction in emissions. > >Planning and funding a sustainable transit initiative using the appropriate >application of high cost to benefit technologies like ETT, ULPV, and PRT >will yield results unobtainable any other way. > > > > > > >Best Regards, > >Daryl Oster, CEO et3.com Inc. > >******************************************* >Web Site: http://www.et3.com (also .org and .net) >e-mail to:et3@fx2.com >s-mail to: P.O. Box 1423, Crystal River FL 34423-1423 >Phone: (352)797-5415 (Mobile 257-8337) > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From lfwright at usa.net Fri Jun 1 23:16:53 2001 From: lfwright at usa.net (Lloyd Wright) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 10:16:53 EDT Subject: [sustran] EVs in India Message-ID: <20010601141653.48.qmail@aw162.netaddress.usa.net> India's electric vehicle makers seek govt help ------------------------------------------------------------------------- INDIA: June 1, 2001 NEW DELHI - India's pioneering electric vehicle manufacturers showed off an electric car, bus and auto rickshaws yesterday but said they needed government help to make their environmentally friendly products more affordable. "Electric vehicle manufacturers need a bit of hand-holding by the government so we can grow in big numbers," said A. Sahay, vice chairman of the Electric Vehicles Association of India. Sahay was speaking at a line-up of five electric vehicles by Indian manufacturers, including a compact two-door city car called Reva due to be launched in Bangalore later this year at a price of 240,000 rupees ($5,100). "These vehicles are beyond Euro I and Euro II emission norms. They are zero-emission cars," said Sudarshan Maini, chairman of the Maini group, which makes the Reva in association with Amerigon Inc of the United States. The Reva, which can reach a maximum speed of 65 km (41 miles) an hour, will also be sold abroad. So far there are six electric vehicle manufacturers in India, four of which have launched their products commercially. Although cleaner than fossil-fuel driven vehicles, which are responsible for making India's cities among the most polluted in the world, electric vehicles still are too costly to become a common sight on the road, Sahay said. "Imported components are now taxed up to 50 percent and excise duty has been increased to 16 percent from eight percent," said Sahay, who is also chairman of Scooters India Ltd. The government levies a basic duty of 35 percent on the three major imported components of electric vehicles - battery, motor and controller - whereas the basic duty on compressed natural gas kits is five percent. This hurts the commercialisation of electric vehicles, Sahay said. According to a Supreme Court order, all commercial vehicles in Delhi must switch to compressed natural gas by September. Scooters India first launched its battery-powered three-wheeler, a bubble-shaped taxi, in Nepal about seven years ago as part of a 'Save the Himalayas' campaign and introduced it in India a year later. Electric vehicles are not new on Indian roads. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd launched an experimental, battery-operated bus in the 1980s. "An electric car will be a secondary vehicle for most users. Three-wheelers will have much more demand and will take a bigger chunk of the market," Sahay said. REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.amexmail.com/?A=1 From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Sat Jun 2 13:15:17 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 12:15:17 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: Opinion piece on motorisation in Indian cities Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F390@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> This opinion piece is from the latest edition of "What's new at the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), New Delhi, India." ------------------------------------------------- A message from the Chairperson, Anil Agarwal: INCOMPETENCE AT ITS BEST DESPITE the growing mayhem in city after city and town after town, neither the Central government nor any of the state governments has found a way to deal with the problem even as urban India fast drives itself into an abyss. As a result, it is courts and public-spirited citizens who are taking up the cudgels to get the government to clean up its act. But how far can the courts do anything, when our bureaucrats and politicians, who are supposed to govern, are so corrupt and incompetent? Let us take a look at the mayhem being created by the automobilisation of our cities. It is well known that a spurt in automobiles leads to pollution, urban sprawl and, if inadequate attention is paid to investments in road and traffic infrastructure, severe congestion on the roads and more pollution. Modern urban life in such a situation becomes hell and as it takes a lot of time to get improved infrastructure in place, the rule of the devil stays for a long time. Urban Indians, thus, have to face a remarkably poor quality of life regardless of who rules - whether it is the Congress or the Bharatiya Janata Party. Let us take a look at the impact of the dramatic growth of automobiles in the capitally polluted city of Delhi - India's much vaunted capital. It has been known for a long time that Delhi has a bigger stock of motor vehicles than Chennai, Mumbai and Kolkata combined. Though Delhi, fortunately, has a much better road infrastructure than these other metros, with the rapid growth of motorised vehicles, even this infrastructure is proving to be inadequate and traffic congestion is increasing by leaps and bounds. If motorisation is to continue at the same rate, Indian cities will have to go the American way - huge investments will have to be made in flyovers a nd expressways. In Delhi, there is even a proposal to build an elevated expressway on the existing Ring Road which circles the city at a cost of several thousand crore. But as everyone knows, these investments inevitably prove to be inadequate over time - as Mr Peter of Peter's Principle fame would put it, automobiles expand to fill the space available for them. This will be especially true in a country whose population and urban population are both expanding rapidly, and where a large segment of the urban population is extremely poor. Automobiles will, thus, not only keep on demanding more and more space for themselves but also keep crowding out the space of non-motorised commuters, that is, children and the poor especially. Not surprisingly, over four people are killed on Delhi's roads every day, a large fraction of which is children, pedestrians and cyclists. Even a transport commissioner with the brain the size of a peanut, whether one belongs to the much-vaunted IAS or not, will know that there is a simple answer to this problem. Slow down the growth of private vehicles and increase the growth of public transport. In Delhi, buses occupy less than five per cent of the road space whereas they carry over 50 per cent of the total commuter load. One simple tool that is in the hands of all transport officials is the road tax. A tool that is hardly used in India or used in a manner that will promote pollution. Let us see how Delhi, with its rapidly growing and already high overload of motorisation, fixes its road tax. A Maruti 800 will have to pay Rs 3,815 as road tax in Delhi whereas Mumbai (which now charges road as a percentage of the price of the vehicle) will charge Rs 10,382. Chennai, on other hand, will charge an individual owner Rs 8,210 and a company owner Rs 16,240. In other words, Delhi that should be valuing its road space more, is valuing it dramatically less. More than that, all transport authorities, as they are incapable of collecting taxes, are beginning to charge a one-time tax at the point of sale which means that vehicles don't come in for annual road worthiness tests, a must in all modern traffic management. Therefore road transport authorities are not doing their work. Now lets see how these taxes are levied with respect to rich and poor commuters. Unlike cars that pay a one-time tax, buses in Delhi pay an annual tax of Rs.14,325. Buses ply 250 km a day and for 300 days a year which gives a road tax of about 19 paise per km - a form of transport taken by poorer commuters. But a car which, say, lasts a lifetime of 15 years and runs some 10,000 km a year ends up paying 2.54 paise per km. Amazing, this is India's bureaucratic socialism. >From the point of view of pollution, all countries charge higher and higher road tax as the vehicles grow older. As a result, Japanese cannot afford to keep a vehicle more than 5-6 years old and then threaten India's fledgling auto industry with second hand car exports. However in Indian metros the absurd takes place, the road tax goes down as the age of the vehicle increases. In Mumbai, a new vehicle has to pay four per cent of the price of the vehicle; a 1-2 year old 97.2 per cent of the four per cent tax; and, and an over 17 year old only 27.7 per cent of the original four per cent tax. This is contrary to any traffic management in any sensible country in the world. Surely, how much more stupid can you get? Traffic management in India is contrary to that in any sensible country in the world - Anil Agarwal (This article is also available online at http://www.cseindia.org/html/dte/dte20010531/dte_edit.htm ... CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENT ( CSE ) 41, TUGHLAKABAD INSTITUTIONAL AREA, NEW DELHI- 110 062 TELE: 608 1110, 608 1124 608 3394, 608 6399 FAX : 91-11-608 5879 VISIT US AT: http://www.cseindia.org Email: webadmin@cseindia.org From et3 at fx2.com Sat Jun 2 17:08:04 2001 From: et3 at fx2.com (Daryl) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 04:08:04 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Help the Shell Foundation - ETT, ULPV, PRT In-Reply-To: <20010531195022.33705.qmail@web14505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Konstantinos Tsourlakis wrote: >Do you have any data (cost,efficiency,public acceptance e.t.c.) about any >real implementation of such a system (ETT, ULPV, PRT e.t.c.), because in >order to make a fair comparision one has to put actual figures (e.g. of >rail systems) next to actual figures (of other systems) and not only plans >and estimations The answer to your question for ETT is no, an ETT system to transport people has not been built, but the construction and operating costs have been extensively compared. You bring up a valid point, that when choosing a transportation system the costs should be compared as accurately, fairly and impartial as possible if the best choice is to be made. The fairest comparisons start with a rigorous identification of: the transportation goals, underlying scientific principals, and likelihood of long-term sustainability if widely adopted. Comparing the predicted parameters of different transportation systems by using standard scientific methodology filters out the effect of economic factors that are not constants. For instance there is often a large disparity between costs of scientifically equivalent rail systems that are built by different companies, or in different locations. The costs of existing transit systems like cars; airplanes, motorcycles, bicycles, trains and ships are well known. As are the manufacturing costs, the development costs, the maintenance costs, the energy use, the speed, etc. Combining the best of the elements used in similar transportation systems generally results in incremental, and predictable gains. This approach is used to expand the marketability of existing products by creating slightly different products. Usually this route of improvement results in "channeled thinking" and the perpetuation of basic flaws, along with some occasional gains. Often there are improvement mandates, or goals to reach by a given time; this approach is used to mitigate inherent flaws. Usually this type of improvement results in greater costs, and perhaps even subsidies to attempt to "force the wheel out of the rut". These two approaches are highly evident in the transportation industry. Random experimentation leads to unpredictable results, occasionally the results are totally unexpected, either negatively or positively, many important discoveries where made using this approach. This approach has a very low success rate and its use is limited to low cost iterations. Occasionally, clean sheet of paper designs seek to use improvements from many varied fields, without the preconceptions of channeled thinking approaches, or without subsidizing, or continuing to perpetuate well known flaws. This approach relies on using data from fields outside the existing transportation field. The majority who are used to and trained in the "channeled thinking" approaches often resists this approach. Perhaps the resistance is because they must learn new material, or rely on different processes, beyond what they are familiar with. Using this approach resulted in the steam ship, locomotive, and aircraft; all quantum leaps. The Wrights observed nature (birds), and knew flight to be possible. They used math, known scientific data and experimental measurements (wind tunnel) to accurately predict the power, weight, lift, speed, and other parameters of flight, before the first aircraft was built. They gathered verifiable knowledge from several diverse, mature fields. Transportation is a requirement for survival. Without the ability to get to food, water, and shelter (or have them brought to us) we would all die. This is why transportation is the biggest growth market in the world, and the growth rate is double the growth rate of the gross world product. Almost all of our current transportation systems are dependant on oil production. Energy experts predict that world oil production will peak around 2010. Our current systems are not sustainable; WE MUST CHANGE TO SURVIVE. If a prerequisite of transportation system planning is that the system must be in operation, and fully tested before it will be considered, then we are doomed to the use of endless permutations of existing systems only. No quantum leap would be possible. How would Orville and Wilbur Wright have answered your question in the year 1901? Your question is good, but please consider the cost of asking it every time a new system is proposed, and automatically throwing out the proposal if an affirmative answer is not given. Ask the questions: What happens if we don't change? How can we get the most SUSTAINABLE transportation for the least total cost? What developments and proven technologies from other fields can be used to make the biggest gains in transportation efficiency? What happens if everyone on the planet where using this method? For ETT: ETT makes the observation that virtually 100% efficient transportation is possible (the motion of the planets), and seeks to put into practice the principals making this possible to achieve a hundred fold or better improvement in efficiency. Vacuum production, tube construction, automation, electrical energy systems, life support systems, environmental, and transportation engineering are all established fields. Vacuum is used in countless industrial processes, and the cost of producing and maintaining a vacuum is well known. Tube and pipeline production and installation costs are well known, for any size tube from a fraction of a meter to several meters in diameter. All the materials and most subsystems for ETT production are basic commodities, with numerous sources worldwide. The underling principals of ETT are all individually well known, and there is extensive data supporting the calculated energy and cost savings, capacity, and speeds claimed for ETT, all available on the www.et3.com web site. For ULPVs: Bicycle, motorcycle, motor scooter, aircraft, and automotive cost and performance data are firmly established. Experimentation in human powered vehicles has proven that aerodynamics is a huge factor in efficiency and speed. A typical athlete can achieve about 38mph on a traditional bicycle, and about 73mph in a fully streamlined human powered vehicle (HPV), or about 157mph if drafting a high-powered racecar with a special bicycle. The HPVs use materials and aerodynamic techniques perfected in aircraft production. The cost weight and fuel consumption of a scooter capable of 35mph are well known. Applying the aerodynamic lessons learned with HPVs, predicts that the speed and fuel efficiency can be doubled, while keeping the weight about the same. Thus many of the benefits of scooters and cars may be achieved for about the same cost of a typical scooter. The average vehicle on the road caries about 1.3 persons. A ULPV only requires half the lane space, and can carry more than the passenger car averages. Thus converting a single car lane to two "ULPV only" lanes will double existing infrastructure capacity. The cost of the conversion is the cost of a stripe down the center of the lane, plus a few signs, and cameras for enforcement. For PRT: I will leave it to you to search out and study the dozen or two websites advocating various systems classified as PRT. Most of the designs are sound, and compared to rail; the operating and the initial cost advantages are undeniable. Best Regards, Daryl Oster, et3.com Inc. P.O. Box 1423 Crystal River FL 34423-1423 http://www.et3.com (352)795-5415 cell(352)257-8337 -----Original Message----- From: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org [mailto:owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org]On Behalf Of Konstantinos Tsourlakis Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 3:50 PM To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: [sustran] [sustran] Re: FW: H*elp the Shell Foundation to do good with their new Sustainability Do you have any data (cost,efficiency,public acceptance e.t.c.) about any real implementation of such a system (ETT, ULPV, PRT e.t.c.), because in order to make a fair comparision one has to put actual figures (e.g. of rail systems) next to actual figures (of other systems) and not only plans and estimations > > >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 00:49:30 -0700 >From: "Daryl Oster" >Subject: [sustran] Re: FW: H*elp the Shell Foundation to do good with their new Sustainability > >Planning Sustainable, High Benefit To Cost Transportation. >Copyright '01, Daryl Oster, Crystal River FL > >The automobile and airplane result in prosperity, that is not sustainable. >Experts see oil production peaking around 2010 (http://www.hubbertpeak.com). >The sustainability movement is based on observations that traditional >planning yields: global warming, acid storm runoff, wildlife harm, bad air, >noise, accidents, crumbling infrastructure, and congestion. A new quantum >leap is needed. > >Advocating a return to old ways is popular. Rail systems are being proposed >as sustainable transportation. Trains are appropriate vehicles to move >elephant sized cargo, not humans; http://www.publicpurpose.com displays the >failure of rail. > >Bicycles are sustainable, but weather exposure, meager speed and pathetic >capacity limit use; so the car gains ground. The "sustainable communities", >and "smart growth" initiatives, are also bids to return to old ways. They >oppose social expectations of expanding affluence, limiting success. > >Evacuated Tube Transport (ETT), Ultra Low Power Vehicles (ULPV), and >Personal Rapid Transport (PRT) are sustainable transportation technologies >that do not challenge social momentum. >ETT is: >* FAST - to 500 kph for regional use, (6000 kph international). >* CONVENIENT- runs continuously without delays. >* EFFICIENT- a human powered ETT can achieve 500kph. >* CLEAN- environmentally benign using renewable energy. >* SAFE- isolated guideway eliminates collisions in any weather. >* ACHIEVABLE- equipment exists to build ETT with common components. >* SCALEABLE - capacity can be inexpensively added as demand grows. >The automated, silent ETT works by removing resistance. Ultra lightweight, >pressurized cabins travel in tubes on thin steel wheels, or P-MagLev. No >air is in the tube to cause resistance. Acceleration energy is recovered >when slowing.(See http://www.et3.com/intro.htm ) > >ULPVs are: >* Under 5kw to minimize energy use and emissions. >* Under 100kg to maximize acceleration, and minimize material use. >* Enclosed for usability in varying conditions. >* Streamlined to reach highway speeds. >* Narrow - double lane capacity with a stripe. >* Low cost without subsidies. >* fit in ETT capsules for fast, distant travel with personal transport >convenience. > >Automated PRT costs 10% to build and operate verses light rail, and is twice >as fast. (http://www.artwerkz.com/h/ links to other PRT here as well) > >Government and industry must achieve public purpose at minimum cost. >Proposals must be compared on a benefit to cost basis; and show capital and >energy costs for use factors from 5% up to maximum capacity. This will show >relative risk if use fails expectations. > >Failure to implement high benefit to cost technologies will result in >moribund economies, degrading environment, starvation, and war, as people >struggle to survive without cheap energy. > >For a sustainable transportation plan to succeed short term it must offer; >improved convenience, capacity, and speed at lower cost. For long term, it >must specify systems that offer a tenfold improvement in energy efficiency, >and improve environmental conditions with tenfold reduction in emissions. > >Planning and funding a sustainable transit initiative using the appropriate >application of high cost to benefit technologies like ETT, ULPV, and PRT >will yield results unobtainable any other way. > >Best Regards, > >Daryl Oster, CEO et3.com Inc. From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jun 4 17:54:25 2001 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 10:54:25 +0200 Subject: [sustran] =?iso-8859-1?Q?Shell_S/T_Workshop_-_Pitching_in_via_the_virtual_workshop?= Message-ID: [NOTE: 4 DAYS REMAIN TO GET YOUR COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS BEFORE THE WORKSHOP.] With the workshop a scant four days ahead, this is perhaps a good time to take advantage of the considerable networking resources we have at our disposal in order to help make sure that Shell is on the right track in defining their terrific proposed Sustainable Transport Centre activities. But first a quick look at our tools: 1. The basic toolkit for the accompanying virtual assembly and support group is open to all at http://newmobility.org, with the workings of this support activity clearly spelled out under the 7 June Workshop link on both menus. 2. It is perhaps worth noting that in addition to the three dozen or so select experts who will be showing up in person on Friday here in Paris, we have now made contact, direct and indirect, with thousands of our colleagues and interested people around the world, many of whom are well placed to help the organizers sort out their priorities and eventual programs. (I might note that in the last days we are seeing visitors coming into the website at a tempo of about one every five minutes, which strikes me as an interesting indication of the reach and potential of this approach.) 3. Bearing in mind the potential of the Net to extend activities such as this in many ways - over physical space, time, range of background, disciplines, countries, et al - we have decided to continue to support the accompanying e-conference here on @New Mobility for the entire month of June. This will give us all ample time for study and reflection on these important issues, and time to provide comments, materials and recommendations both before next Friday's workshop and in the weeks immediately following it. In addition, this will give us a chance to exchange ideas about the workshop Proceedings as soon as they are placed on the Foundation's site (again that's http://www.shellfoundation.org/). 4. At the completion of the month's work, we intend to draw up a short evaluation of the achievements and shortcomings of this attempt to mesh the physical and virtual workshops. There will certainly be lessons to be drawn from this experience. BACKGROUND PAPER REVIEW; This key background piece is of course posted on the site, and we very much hope that you will take the time to review it and in turn to sharer you reactions, comments and recommendations with at least the organizers and, if at all possible and appropriate, with the group as a whole. At 23 pages, the draft-for-comment is not a quick read, so perhaps it might be useful to try to point you to what in our view are among the main pivot issues in which the organizers can profit from the collective wisdom and experience of this network. In addition to providing background on the issues of sustainable and unsustainable transport, with particular emphasis on the energy/transport interface, which makes sense given the sponsor's own backgrounds, the draft challenges the reader with something on the order of fifty questions on quite a wide range of topics. Bearing in mind that the workshop organizers may chose to spend some time on these, I thought that it might be a useful starting point if I were to try to come up with a single handful of central questions, the answers to which might be directly useful to the Centre in the earliest planning stages. FIVE QUESTIONS FOR THE WORKSHOP: 1. "SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION"? How can the Foundation ensure that their program gives fair and wise coverage over the years to the _full range_ of issues that fall under the broad umbrella of 'sustainable transportation'? (Examples: central role of job creation, travel-reduction, rectifying the social injustices inherent in an auto-based transportation system, inclusion of new and as yet largely unknown kinds of transportation arrangements and purveyors, etc.) 2. IN OR OUT OF THE BOX? Do we have a clear enough understanding of the difference between old mobility and new mobility - on the grounds that the latter aims not at fixing problems (that often as not past technology, planning, values and expertise have actually created and then consistently and blindly exacerbated) but rather at creating a radically different mental and physical "architecture" of transportation and all that defines it? 3. DO IT OR LINK IT? Is it the priority for the Shell Foundation Sustainable Transportation Centre to have its own research program - or should the emphasis be on an explicit and consistent philosophy, wise funding and creative networking? 4. EDIFICE COMPLEX? Will the Centre be best served by having its own building, staff, and budget - or will it be able to achieve its objectives better based on 21st century communications and collaborative arrangements? 5. SOUTH/NORTH LEARNING? Since it is a fair criticism to note that most of the mega-transport problems of third world cities can be traced to the unthinking application of what can be called the "northern model", might not the Centre do well give attention as well to highlighting Third World problem solving and examples, not just for other cities in less developed countries but also across the OECD region? * * * To close for the moment: This is a splendid and most timely initiative on the part of the Foundation and I am sure that all of those who have been working in our own various ways to advance the sustainability agenda over the last decades are extremely gratified to learn that a significant new program along these lines is about to be launched. The need for original thinking, new paths of problem-solving in the sector, and the more effective highlighting of promising new solution paths is enormous. And for once we have technology on our side. With the Net, we will be able to create the networks and knowledge flows that are going to be vital in collectively defining the new transportation paradigm that is needed to move toward sustainability. [Comments on the above will be posted on the site as received. They should be addressed to newmob@yahoogroups.com if you wish to share them with the group as a whole, or to eric.britton@ecoplan.org if you wish to address the author directly.] Eric Britton The @New Mobility Forum is permanently at http://newmobility.org The Commons ___Sustainable Development and Social Justice___ Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France Eric.Britton@NewMobility.org Tel: +331 4326 1323 From townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au Tue Jun 5 11:18:01 2001 From: townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au (Craig Townsend) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:18:01 +0800 Subject: [sustran] news item: air pollution Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010605100115.009f3670@central.murdoch.edu.au> The following article from the online edition of the Globe and Mail may be of interest to Sustran. The online article contains links to the Ontario Medical Association's estimates of health impacts of air pollution and the Canadian Automobile Association's estimates of the cost of running a car. http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/RTGAMArticleHTMLTemplate/D/20010604/wairr0406?tf=RT/fullstory.html&cf=RT/config-neutral&vg=BigAdVariableGenerator&slug=wairr0406&date=20010604&archive=RTGAM&site=Front&ad_page_name=breakingnews Monday, June 04 Clean-air campaign fights rising air pollution By JOSIPA PETRUNIC When commuters stepped off the train at Toronto's downtown Union Station Monday morning, they got an unexpected welcome from a provincial minister and a slew of supporters. The commuters weren't athletes coming home from a successful tournament. They weren't dignitaries. They weren't really special in any way. All they did was take the train to work. But for environmental groups such as Ontario's Pollution Probe, which has supported clean-air campaigns for nearly a decade, those commuters are saviours. With millions of illnesses, and thousands of deaths and hospital visits in Ontario every year due to smog, the group says that not only is commuting good for the environment, it literally saves lives. In Ontario last year, there were about 1,900 premature deaths due to smog, along with another 9,800 hospital admissions and 47 million minor illnesses, such as asthma attacks, allergic reactions and throat problems. The vast majority of the air pollution that causes those illnesses comes from cars. The Ontario Medical Association, which compiled those figures, also says that by 2015, the number of premature deaths due to smog will rise to 2,600; hospital admissions will number 13,000; emergency room visits will be 18,000; and minor illnesses will increase to 53 million. That's why Pollution Probe officials and provincial Environment Minister Elizabeth Witmer say they were at Union Station early in the morning, congratulating commuters as they stepped onto the platform to make their way toward the subway station or nearby office buildings. The greetings heralded the official launch of Pollution Probe's month-long anti-smog campaign. The "Clean Air" campaign runs throughout June, and gets mid- to large-sized companies to compete for the most tonnes of pollution prevented. Companies that sign up are supposed to encourage employees to commute by any other means than driving. Although bus riding and biking are obvious options, some participants have been more ambitious in the past, says Patty Chilton, a director at Pollution Probe. Last year, a couple lawyers canoed to the Harbour and then carried their canoe through the streets to their office, she says. Pollution Probe mathematically assigns a number to different means of transportation that employees use, and then converts it into the tonnes of pollution saved. Ms. Chilton says employees saved a total of 380 tonnes of pollution last year ? including carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and other pollutants, She hopes to get more companies involved each year, especially considering the costs associated with air pollution. Air pollution adds more than $1-billion annually to the health-care system and to employers and employees because of lost work days, the medical association says. It also estimates the value of "pain and suffering, and loss of life," due to smog is another $10-billion, which will rise to about $12-billion in 2015. Pollution Probe says it has recently gained support from the federal government, too. The federal Liberals are apparently going to add to the Clean Air effort by announcing about $145-million in new environmental spending over the next two weeks. Some of the money will go toward improving water quality, energy efficiency and reducing smog across the country. Environment Minister David Anderson and National Resources Minister Ralph Goodale say they are also planning to announce $50-million to reduce smog at a "smog summit" June 11 in Toronto. Those announcements are to coincide with this year's national Environment Week, which runs until Saturday, and with World Environment Day, held on Tueday. But John Wellner, a director at Pollution Probe who follows the statistical rate of deaths from smog in the province, says a quicker local solution would be to lower the cost of bus passes so that commuters are attracted away from their cars. With current prices, it costs more than $1,100 a year to buy a transit pass in Toronto. That compares with the estimated $8,900 a year that it costs to own and operate a car, according to the Canadian Automobile Association, which included the cost of gas, insurance and parking in its calculations. But Mr. Wellner says there are thousands of more people who will not abandon their cars until public transit is even cheaper, faster and more comfortable. "Governments have to increase their financial interest in public transit," he said. With reports from Canadian Press From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue Jun 5 19:37:39 2001 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 12:37:39 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Update on latest Shell conference presentations Message-ID: If you go to the @New Mobility site at http://newmobility.org and click Contributions under the Shell Workshop heading, you will see the latest submittals, which include most recently: * Peter Newman on long term trends and challenges of transport in cities, * A commentary on the Pollution Probe program in Canada as an eventual collaboration model for the new Centre * Peter Wiederkehr on Hard Won Lessons from the OECD EST program * Al Cormier on Critical Sustainability Issues from the CST in Canada, * A very challenging note from Marcus Wiggen on the Spatially Disadvantaged Each day a new and challenging piece is posted to the site for information and comment. Could be that the next one is from you? Eric Britton The @New Mobility Forum is permanently at http://newmobility.org The Commons ___Sustainable Development and Social Justice___ Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France Eric.Britton@NewMobility.org Tel: +331 4326 1323 From kisansbc at vsnl.com Thu Jun 7 18:51:56 2001 From: kisansbc at vsnl.com (kisan mehta) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:21:56 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Motorisation in India & in Indian cities References: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F390@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: <003901c0ef37$af88ed00$bd4bc5cb@t4f2a8> Dear Paul, Anilbhai and Colleagues, It was good that Paul put Anil Agarwal's exhaustuve article "Incompetence at its best" before Sustran members. The article exposes the government bias for motorisation in India despite increase in hardship to citizens. The World Bank and the IMF have issued dictat to poor countries to build infrastructure to allow to multinational corporations free access to their markets including making automobiles easily available. Private car is the barometer measuring success of liberalisation hence all incentives and concessions to be extended. Car manufacturers shout that the market has sagged hence reduce taxes. Supply gasoline at regulated low price even though global oil prices have shot up. This will cost Rs 120 billion (Rs 48 equals $ 1) to the national exchequer in the current financial year. Gasoline prices in India are lower than prices ruling in the developed countries. Our ministers do not want to worry about upgrading diesel (now increasingly being used in personal cars) because that may raise diesel prices which to-day is lower than that of bottled water. Supplying surplus food at concession to the poorest of the poor to stave off starvation deaths is not on the government agenda. This is the loyalty we exhibit to the WB/IMF to avoid WTO censure. It may not be correct to term the actions of bureaucrats and ministers as Incompetence At Its Best as euphemistically described by the author. They work most competently to exhibit their loyalty to affluent countries even if that means flouting court directives and disregarding citizen opinion. Pavements are removed or drastically narrowed down for widening carriageways as well as constructing flyovers/elevated roads and then make them out of bounds to public transport. Rump pavements are used for parking by private cars. Streets too narrow for providing pavements are made `one way streets' to allow parking on both sides. Job of the Traffic Police is to create more parking space in Mumbai and possibly throughout India. There is a High Court directive on the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) to build pavements where they do not exist and restore them but who cares. Vehicles pay absolutely no charge or tax for use of roads. What Mr. Agarwal refers to is the state government's annual vehicle registration, which has now been turned into one time tax, compounded to the sum payable for 17 years with concession given to old cars by reducing the amount for the number of years that they are on the road. There is no provision for scrapping a vehicle on the expiry of stipulated period. It is common to see 25 year old ramshackles making lot of noise on the road while smoking like nobody's business. This tax has nothing to do with road maintenance/construction as that is the obligatory duty of the municipal body. The government on the other hand collects from every bus commuter a passenger tax and a surcharge what used to be known as nutrition charge when it was first introduced in 1971-72. These surcharges accounting to 6 to 8% of the fare are collected through bus ticket so no chance of skipping. Again revenue not to be utilised for improving public bus service or easing traffic conditions. The MCGM spends about Rs 3 billion(appro 12-14% of its budget) annually on road construction but this is not realised from vehicle owners. Car owners in Mumbai used to pay a paltry amount annually by way of wheel tax. My father paid annually Rs 140 for his Ford purchased in 1937 at Rs 4,500. I paid wheel tax at the same rate till1989. When I changed over to 800 cc Suzuki (assembled and marketed as Maruti) in 1989 costing Rs 200,000, my annual wheel tax was reduced to Rs 100. Total wheel tax realisation by the MCGM came to Rs 35 million against annual spending of Rs 3 billion. The state government last year directed the MCGM to stop demanding this tax so even 35 million are no more realised. The tram fare for 12 km distance in 1937 was 16th part of a rupee while the bus fare now comes to Rs 10. Mumbai discarded trams in the fifties to remove hurdles to usher in emerging cars. The MCGM in addition charges Rs 6 to 7 million to the municipalised BEST Bus Undertaking which again falls on commuters. Buses cannot use 52 flyovers built during 1999-01 at public cost of Rs 18 billion. They ensure uninterrupted movement to car owners while leaving buses and all types of motorised and nonmotorised vehicles to fight for space on the original patch making pedestrians running helter skelter to avoid being run over. The BEST buses, attaining an average speed of 14 km/h because of jams, provides about 5 million journeys daily, probably the highest for city public road transport in the world in contrast to less than one million journeys by Mumbai's one million cars. Mumbai is fortunate in having a comparatively better public road transport than other cities including Delhi as the BEST is municipalised and professionally managed. Shortfall is made up by citizens by paying higher electricity charges. Traffic snarls and congestion are an everyday experience. Bureaucrats built flyovers but this has only aggravated jams as many more vehicles now enter and move in the congested areas. Bureaucrats do not know and rather do not want to know that traffic is better controlled by eliminating or at least reducing unessential vehicles on roads and by creating conducive conditions for BEST buses to have higher turnaround. Traffic management and road pricing are absent. Mumbai's population increases by less than 2% a year while motor cars by 8% yet no restrictions. Traffic planners do not take citizens as a factor of traffic whose needs and hardship should normally be the topmost concern. We have been suggesting levy of wheel tax on the basis of the gravity of congestion in different zones. For example, 800 cc Maruti and Mercedes wanting to enter the congested South Mumbai shall take annual green card paying Rs 10,000 and 25,000 respectively per year, amber for slightly less congested areas Rs 8,000 and 20,000 and red for comparatively free areas Rs 6,000 and 15,000. Loans extended by government and private financial institutions at practically no interest for personal car should be stopped. Today, financial institutions run after car owners acquiring first or nth car, to extend loan but would not help citizens to buy a cycle at Rs 1,500. Many Indian cities have already seen that traffic jams and accidents are not reduced by flyovers and elevated roads. As construction and maintenance cost does not fall on the sole users, the motorists, this only increases the number of private cars. General public who bear the cost of these gadgets face suffocation and death. So it is more than certain that the American pattern of more and more roads cannot be the solution for Indian cities. Road widening and construction result in breaking down communities and increasing antisocial activities. Los Angeles is no more considered as an articulating city reflecting the aspirations of residents. Mumbai surrounded by sea on practically all sides cannot have more roads. The only solution lies in following what is now being pursued on the Continent and Singapore of taking more cars off the road by strengthening public transport including rebuilding tramways rejected by bureaucrats as outmoded . It would be necessary to raise the price of gasoline plus levy pollution and congestion tax at 10% each and use the amount for reducing pollution and congestion. Who understands this, not at least ministers and bureaucrats. Kisan Mehta, Save Bombay Committee, 629 Jame Jamshed Road, Dadar East, MUMBAI 400 014 From akiladinakar at hotmail.com Thu Jun 7 21:49:24 2001 From: akiladinakar at hotmail.com (Akila Dinakar) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 12:49:24 -0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: Motorisation in India & in Indian cities Message-ID: That was a good story. In fact, the problems are the same at Chennai too, which I have already posted on Sustran. Lesser finance and thrust on public transport, more flyovers that do not provide space for buses, zero pavements, increasing number of cars and two-wheelers, most pampered when it comes to price and provision of parking facilities. Result - increasing air pollution and more accidents. Solution: Lobbying for increasing financial support for better public transport and investment in public transport projects rather than providing convenient causeways for cars and two-wheelers. Akila Dinakar, Reporter, The Hindu, Chennai. >From: "kisan mehta" >Reply-To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >To: >CC: "Aaasust-flash'" , "Paul Alexander >Barter" , , , >, , , >, "Harshad Kamdar" >Subject: [sustran] Motorisation in India & in Indian cities >Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:21:56 +0530 > >Dear Paul, Anilbhai and Colleagues, > >It was good that Paul put Anil Agarwal's exhaustuve article "Incompetence >at its best" before Sustran members. The article exposes the government >bias for motorisation in India despite increase in hardship to citizens. >The World Bank and the IMF have issued dictat to poor countries to build >infrastructure to allow to multinational corporations free access to their >markets including making automobiles easily available. Private car is >the barometer measuring success of liberalisation hence all incentives and >concessions to be extended. > >Car manufacturers shout that the market has sagged hence reduce taxes. >Supply gasoline at regulated low price even though global oil prices have >shot up. This will cost Rs 120 billion (Rs 48 equals $ 1) to the national >exchequer in the current financial year. Gasoline prices in India are lower >than prices ruling in the developed countries. Our ministers do not want to >worry about upgrading diesel (now increasingly being used in personal cars) >because that may raise diesel prices which to-day is lower than that of >bottled water. Supplying surplus food at concession to the poorest of the >poor to stave off starvation deaths is not on the government agenda. This >is the loyalty we exhibit to the WB/IMF to avoid WTO censure. It may not >be correct to term the actions of bureaucrats and ministers as Incompetence >At Its Best as euphemistically described by the author. They work most >competently to exhibit their loyalty to affluent countries even if that >means flouting court directives and disregarding citizen opinion. > >Pavements are removed or drastically narrowed down for widening >carriageways as well as constructing flyovers/elevated roads and then make >them out of bounds to public transport. Rump pavements are used for >parking >by private cars. Streets too narrow for providing pavements are made `one >way streets' to allow parking on both sides. Job of the Traffic Police is >to create more parking space in Mumbai and possibly throughout India. >There is a High Court directive on the Municipal Corporation of Greater >Mumbai (MCGM) to build pavements where they do not exist and restore them >but who cares. > > >Vehicles pay absolutely no charge or tax for use of roads. What Mr. >Agarwal refers to is the state government's annual vehicle registration, >which has now been turned into one time tax, compounded to the sum payable >for 17 years with concession given to old cars by reducing the amount for >the number of years that they are on the road. There is no provision for >scrapping a vehicle on the expiry of stipulated period. It is common to >see 25 year old ramshackles making lot of noise on the road while smoking >like nobody's business. This tax has nothing to do with road >maintenance/construction as that is the obligatory duty of the municipal >body. The government on the other hand collects from every bus commuter a >passenger tax and a surcharge what used to be known as nutrition charge >when >it was first introduced in 1971-72. These surcharges accounting to 6 to >8% >of the fare are collected through bus ticket so no chance of skipping. >Again revenue not to be utilised for improving public bus service or >easing >traffic conditions. > >The MCGM spends about Rs 3 billion(appro 12-14% of its budget) annually >on >road construction but this is not realised from vehicle owners. Car owners >in Mumbai used to pay a paltry amount annually by way of wheel tax. My >father paid annually Rs 140 for his Ford purchased in 1937 at Rs 4,500. I >paid wheel tax at the same rate till1989. When I changed over to 800 cc >Suzuki (assembled and marketed as Maruti) in 1989 costing Rs 200,000, my >annual wheel tax was reduced to Rs 100. Total wheel tax realisation by >the >MCGM came to Rs 35 million against annual spending of Rs 3 billion. The >state government last year directed the MCGM to stop demanding this tax so >even 35 million are no more realised. The tram fare for 12 km distance in >1937 was 16th part of a rupee while the bus fare now comes to Rs 10. >Mumbai >discarded trams in the fifties to remove hurdles to usher in emerging cars. >The MCGM in addition charges Rs 6 to 7 million to the municipalised BEST >Bus >Undertaking which again falls on commuters. > >Buses cannot use 52 flyovers built during 1999-01 at public cost of Rs 18 >billion. They ensure uninterrupted movement to car owners while leaving >buses and all types of motorised and nonmotorised vehicles to fight for >space on the original patch making pedestrians running helter skelter to >avoid being run over. The BEST buses, attaining an average speed of 14 >km/h because of jams, provides about 5 million journeys daily, probably >the highest for city public road transport in the world in contrast to less >than one million journeys by Mumbai's one million cars. Mumbai is >fortunate in having a comparatively better public road transport than other >cities including Delhi as the BEST is municipalised and professionally >managed. Shortfall is made up by citizens by paying higher electricity >charges. > >Traffic snarls and congestion are an everyday experience. Bureaucrats built >flyovers but this has only aggravated jams as many more vehicles now enter >and move in the congested areas. Bureaucrats do not know and rather do >not >want to know that traffic is better controlled by eliminating or at least >reducing unessential vehicles on roads and by creating conducive conditions >for BEST buses to have higher turnaround. Traffic management and road >pricing are absent. Mumbai's population increases by less than 2% a year >while motor cars by 8% yet no restrictions. Traffic planners do not take >citizens as a factor of traffic whose needs and hardship should normally be >the topmost concern. > >We have been suggesting levy of wheel tax on the basis of the gravity of >congestion in different zones. For example, 800 cc Maruti and Mercedes >wanting to enter the congested South Mumbai shall take annual green card >paying Rs 10,000 and 25,000 respectively per year, amber for slightly less >congested areas Rs 8,000 and 20,000 and red for comparatively free areas Rs >6,000 and 15,000. Loans extended by government and private financial >institutions at practically no interest for personal car should be stopped. >Today, financial institutions run after car owners acquiring first or nth >car, to extend loan but would not help citizens to buy a cycle at Rs >1,500. > >Many Indian cities have already seen that traffic jams and accidents are >not >reduced by flyovers and elevated roads. As construction and maintenance >cost >does not fall on the sole users, the motorists, this only increases the >number of private cars. General public who bear the cost of these gadgets >face suffocation and death. So it is more than certain that the American >pattern of more and more roads cannot be the solution for Indian cities. >Road widening and construction result in breaking down communities and >increasing antisocial activities. Los Angeles is no more considered as >an >articulating city reflecting the aspirations of residents. Mumbai >surrounded by sea on practically all sides cannot have more roads. > >The only solution lies in following what is now being pursued on the >Continent and Singapore of taking more cars off the road by strengthening >public transport including rebuilding tramways rejected by bureaucrats as >outmoded . It would be necessary to raise the price of gasoline plus levy >pollution and congestion tax at 10% each and use the amount for reducing >pollution and congestion. Who understands this, not at least ministers and >bureaucrats. > >Kisan Mehta, Save Bombay Committee, >629 Jame Jamshed Road, Dadar East, >MUMBAI 400 014 > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. From mohsin_jp at yahoo.com Fri Jun 8 07:41:08 2001 From: mohsin_jp at yahoo.com (Mohsin Sarker) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Statistics for planning Message-ID: <20010607224108.29786.qmail@web10502.mail.yahoo.com> Hello I am looking for a good book on statistics written especially for urban and transportation planning. Can anyone suggest any? Mohsin Japan __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From johnrenne at hotmail.com Fri Jun 8 14:55:42 2001 From: johnrenne at hotmail.com (John Renne) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 23:55:42 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Re: Statistics for planning Message-ID: I don't know of any that are written specifically for urban and transportation planning, but if anyone else does, I would love to know as well. Last year I helped tutor a course in Planning Methods at the University of Colorado. We used a book called 'Statistics: A Tool for Social Research' written by Joseph F. Healey. It's pretty much a basic introductory book that ends with multiple regression. The good thing about it is that each chapter has SPSS exercises at the back which helps students to learn how to use this program, which can be useful. You might also want to check 'Quantitative Data Analysis for Social Scientists' by Alan Bryman and Duncan Cramer. It also talks about SPSS. Hope this helps, John Renne Visiting Scholar Institute for Sustainability and Technology Policy (ISTP) Murdoch University Perth, Western Australia >From: Mohsin Sarker >Reply-To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >Subject: [sustran] Statistics for planning >Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:41:08 -0700 (PDT) > >Hello > >I am looking for a good book on statistics written >especially for urban and transportation planning. Can >anyone suggest any? > >Mohsin >Japan > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 >a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From ifrtd at gn.apc.org Tue Jun 12 01:16:56 2001 From: ifrtd at gn.apc.org (kate.czuczman) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 17:16:56 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Colin Relf Award Message-ID: <200106111619.RAA23092@nfs1.gn.apc.org> Please circulate this to all your contacts who may be interested in applying. (and if you want to contribute to the fund please send donations to IFRTD or address below). COLIN RELF AWARD Applications are invited by the Secretariat of the International Forum for Rural Transport and Development (IFRTD) for the Colin Relf Award for innovative work on rural transport. In 1985, Colin Relf initiated the idea for the Forum, he helped establish it and continued to support its work till his death last year. He was also a pioneer in highlighting the fact that large-scale investments in transport infrastructure were not improving the lives of rural people. This award celebrates Colin's interest in promoting and motivating the people with whom he worked. The award, worth 250 UK pounds (approx 350 US dollars), will be given to a student or young professional from a developing country whose study/project/proposal, the panel of judges considers the most interesting and exciting in terms of furthering the current thinking on rural transport. There is no standard application form. Applicants need to: * submit a letter explaining why they think they would be a good candidate for the award * attach a piece of their work in support of their letter. This could be in the form of o a paper or essay o a report of work carried out o a proposal for future research * attach a brief curriculum vitae with two referees and their contact details, including email address where possible. Applications should reach the IFRTD Secretariat no later than August 31, 2001. The successful candidate will be announced at the IFRTD Advisory Committee Meeting at the end of September and details will appear in the Forum News. Apply to: International Forum for Rural Transport and Development 2 Spitfire Studios, 63-71 Collier Street, London N1 9BE, UK Tel: + 44 (0) 20 7713 6699 Fax: + 44 (0) 20 7713 8290 E-mail: ifrtd@gn.apc.org Web page: http://www.ifrtd.org FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE COLIN RELF AWARD FUND Please send payment by cheque to: Intermediate Technology Consultants The Schumacher Centre for Technology & Development Bourton Hall, Bourton-on-Dunsmore, Rugby CV34 4TT, UK or by bank transfer to: Account Name: Intermediate Technology Development Group Account No: 70203890 Sort Code: 20-73-48 Bank Address: c/o Barclays Bank PLC, PO Box 11, 36 North Street, Rugby CV21 2AN. UK Quote reference COLIN RELF AWARD FUND . From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Tue Jun 12 11:05:27 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:05:27 +0800 Subject: [sustran] fwd: First Report & Commentary on June 8th Shell Foundation Works hop Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F3B4@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> Forwarded from the wtpp list. ------ Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 17:56:13 +0200 From: Subject: First Report & Commentary on June 8th Shell Foundation Workshop First Report & Commentary on June 8th Shell Foundation Workshop (You comments invited - to eric.britton@newmobility.org) I. WHAT IS THIS? This is the first of three short reports to be submitted by Eric Britton who represented The Commons and the New Mobility Forum at the Shell Foundation expert workshop organized in Paris on June 8th in an attempt to gather a broad range of ideas and independent expert counsel for their future Sustainable Transportation Centre activity. The second note will address some of the issues, views and some of the observed accomplishments of the workshop, while the third will provide a set of proposals and recommendations to Shell for this activity. It was a terrific and wide open meeting. Those in attendance were well prepared, had strong backgrounds in our topic, and expressed themselves with interest and freely. The organizers did not flinch from the suggestions and critical reactions of the group, that were at times at some variance with the draft position paper they had submitted for comment. The comments that follow are strictly personal and based only on my observations and rough notes. I anticipate numerous reactions, corrections and additions to what you find here. All these will be placed on the http://newmobility.org site, and as comments come in they will be added directly to this original draft so that readers will have a rounded view of the validity or otherwise of these statements. You will also be able to cross check them for accuracy as the more definitive materials are posted on both this and the Foundation's site at www.shellfoundation.org, II. INTENDED NEXT STEPS >From Shell: * They will post all meeting documents to www.shellfoundation.org, including final agenda, participants list, working papers and presentations as available * They have indicated as well that they are pleased to have the benefit of the comments and suggestions of this group. * We have invited all participants to post their notes and thoughts here on the @New Mobility Forum site, either by addressing them as open emails to the whole group at newmob@yahoogroups.com, to us privately at ShellComments@NewMobility.org (with your instructions concerning how they should be treated,, or directly to the organizers at sf@shellfoundation.org >From The Commons; * Post the "think octagons" (you will see) - and invite you to play with them... * Strategic review and commentary on the meeting, propositions made, etc. * Our recommendation's for Shell - 2001-2003 (and beyond) * Continued maintenance of the Shell section of the New Mobility site A selection of the publicly submitted pieces will be turned into Yikes! articles for broader circulation and comment. (Yikes! is the @New Mobility Forum e-magazine, as in "Yikes!, it's already the 21st century".) III. PARTICIPATION 1. The workshop brought together some fifty people coming from close to two dozen countries and four continents (The full list with affiliations will shortly be forthcoming from the organizers.) a. Approximately half of these were people with university or consultancy affiliations. b. A bit more than half (different half) had strong energy backgrounds c. Roughly a quarter came from public sector institutions. d. And another rough quarter for the Third World countries (though at least as many of the others have a high standard of knowledge and experience in transport in the developing world). e. Rather surprisingly there was no representatives of the host country (France of course), and a general dearth of people from Southern Europe. f. Perhaps one in four or five had industry affiliations g. Most of those in attendance were oldish (40/50+) h. None appeared to be physically handicapped to the point of being unable to negotiate today's transport options. i. The very poor, the bottom 50%, say, were not present. j. The closest to a wild-eyed public interest firebrand in the room was perhaps me (i.e., no friends from Greenpeace, FoE, Amnesty....) 2. This kind of distribution is of course quite typical of policy and decision fora for matter relating to transport, sustainable or other. And perhaps that is in part one of the reasons why we finds ourselves locked into the problem. 3. Missing Women: The biggest single oversight from my point of view was that only one in ten were women. Now to my way of thinking, this is or at least should be no longer possible. The transportation/environment mess that we face today is the product of basically all-male expert guided decision-making, and while that does not of course account for everything - far from it - we now at the very least should be making a MAJOR effort to provide "Finnish style" 50/50 parity in all reflection and decision counsel on these matters. a. Just to see if we are not alone in this, we placed a quick poll device on the site the day of the workshop. Thus if you have any views of the subject we invite you to make them known. b. There is also space there for comments on a logbook, which might also be helpful to Shell (and to us all). 4. I do not run down this list in the attempt of politically correct disparagement of the organizers - not least because achieving this necessary balance is a challenge that thus far in our circles few have directly addressed, never mind solved. But it is a vital consideration and I certainly hope that it will be take seriously into account in ALL their future activities. Since the goal of the new Centre is sustainable transportation (something that cannot exist without social justice), then we can only hope that all of us will take this very seriously and strive to attain the necessary broader and better balance in future projects and consultations. Whether run by Shell, or indeed any of us! 5. Not to be clever, but as McLuhan reminded us: the medium is the message. And here the medium was of course our group. IV. THREE QUICK PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS 1. Flexibility? The organizers gave every evidence of flexibility and a general willingness to take into account the messages that came out of the workshop and all their other preliminary conversations and consultations. * Their sincerity in this was evidenced by the way that they showed themselves ready to back off from a number of the propositions set out in their preparatory thinkpiece/background paper, to revise them radically, and to take on new and at times very different ideas. 2. Social Justice? Probably the strongest single "contrary statement" and proposition that was made was offered by Dinesh Mohan, when he said with a certain vigor that the goal of all initiatives of the foundation should be specifically in making major improvements in the transport and daily life lots of the bottom half (in economic terms) of society. (I translate this in my own mind as meaning (a) if that slice of our society is not the MAJOR beneficiary of any given project or effort created or sustainability by the Foundation, then it should be set aside swiftly and forever; and (b) that the target group in the OECD nations should be the bottom quintile. * Professor Mohan further made the fundamental point that if the activities of the new Centre were to concentrate on either congestion reduction or energy issues per se, they would immediately be skewed away from the priority needs of what should be our main target group. * If Dinesh's proposal is to be taken seriously, it suggests a name change. The proposed working title w as "Shell Foundation Centre for Sustainable Transportation, Energy, and Environment". Might it not be better as "The Centre for Sustainable Transportation, Environment, and Social Justice". * We can look at this later, but I bring it to your attention right here up front because it is such a fundamental building block in their new structure. (Though I add that this also overlaps and reinforces quite nicely with the Foundation's program in the area of Community Development, though the two are obviously entirely separate considerations.) 3. Budget? The announced budget of the Shell Centre is on the order of an average of million dollars or so for each of the next five years. And while this has to be regarded as an important start, it also needs to be said that in light of the wealth of the group, their prospects over the rest of this decade, and the huge environmental and social impacts of its activities, this is a very very small number. * My thought on this is that perhaps if we all get together and help them shape a program that begins to have visible, powerful impacts they may gain in courage and do the right thing. * Which of course is to put a billion dollars into the Foundation. * There is something about a billion dollars that gets my attention. * So let's help them get this started and then we can see. * * * To conclude, for now: The Shell Foundation team is off to a good start - and their willingness to work with this very large and very public open forum, entirely independent and perhaps at times a bit uncomfortable as a working partner, has to be taken as a sign of the sincerely of their commitment. Let's follow closely what happens next as the others report back their observations and recommendations. This could get interesting. From townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au Sat Jun 16 13:51:07 2001 From: townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au (Craig Townsend) Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 12:51:07 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Bangkok Post story Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010616114952.009eb920@central.murdoch.edu.au> An encouraging story from Thailand, although I would note that although the central government has urged these municipalities (which are the central areas of smaller cities of under half a million) to create bike lanes, it isn't yet providing them with funding and the municipalities don't have the capacity and ability to fund these things themselves. For over thirty years politicians and bureaucrats talked about the importance of high capacity mass transit in Bangkok, but at the end of the day they didn't provide funding, while providing funding for over 300 km of large elevated expressways. The first elevated heavy rail system (opened 1999) was a purely private sector investment and a subway under construction was only after extensive lobbying by Japanese interests and finance from JBIC at extremely favourable terms. I wonder if the World Bank or ADB has ever or would consider funding bike lanes? From The Bangkok Post, online edition, 16 June 2001 Twenty-one municipalities seek funding for bike lane projects Twenty-one municipalities have proposed bicycle lane projects for funding from the National Energy Policy Office, said the director of its Energy Conservation and Renewable Energy Division. Pongpisit Viseshakul said each project would receive 500,000 baht if approved by Nepo's Energy Conservation Promotion Fund panel. In April, the fund committee urged 99 municipalities nationwide to create bicycle lanes to promote energy conservation and environmentally-friendly transport. Municipalities submitting proposals included Ayutthaya, Chai Nat, Maha Sarakham, Lamphun, Loei, Narathiwat, Phuket, Nong Khai, Phrae and Sakon Nakhon. Mr Pongpisit said the available fund was limited and only 10 munici-palities would be selected forfunding. ________________________________________________ Craig Townsend Institute for Sustainability & Technology Policy Murdoch University South Street, Murdoch Perth, Western Australia 6150 tel: (61 8) 9360 6293 fax: (61 8) 9360 6421 email: townsend@central.murdoch.edu.au From subbuvincent at yahoo.com Sun Jun 17 19:53:12 2001 From: subbuvincent at yahoo.com (Subramaniam Vincent) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 16:23:12 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Motorisation in India & in Indian cities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Akila Dinakar, Kisan Mehta, others, I think solutions to these problems while needing to include lobbying, must go beyond and inter-sectorally as well. Like other problems in India and elsewhere these problems are addressed best by better governance where the development and socio-economic priorities of the majority drive public policy and not the unsustainable social momentum of the fewer. But arguably, better governance in democracies comes only when it is demanded by the majority in a cohesive, sustained and undeniably political fashion. So how does the public that sees hundred of thousands images on TV and posters and hoardings that program the mind that "true progress" for the working class family is moving from the drudgery of the public transport offering to buying a car, in turn setting personal/family growth priorities accordingly..., turn around and demand better public transport? Subbu Vincent Bangalore. http://www.indiatogether.org > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > [mailto:owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org]On Behalf Of Akila Dinakar > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 6:19 PM > To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > Subject: [sustran] Re: Motorisation in India & in Indian cities > > > That was a good story. In fact, the problems are the same at Chennai too, > which I have already posted on Sustran. Lesser finance and thrust > on public > transport, more flyovers that do not provide space for buses, zero > pavements, increasing number of cars and two-wheelers, most > pampered when it > comes to price and provision of parking facilities. Result - > increasing air > pollution and more accidents. Solution: Lobbying for increasing financial > support for better public transport and investment in public transport > projects rather than providing convenient causeways for cars and > two-wheelers. Akila Dinakar, Reporter, The Hindu, Chennai. > > >From: "kisan mehta" > >Reply-To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > >To: > >CC: "Aaasust-flash'" , "Paul Alexander > >Barter" , , , > >, , , > >, "Harshad Kamdar" > >Subject: [sustran] Motorisation in India & in Indian cities > >Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:21:56 +0530 > > > >Dear Paul, Anilbhai and Colleagues, > > > >It was good that Paul put Anil Agarwal's exhaustuve article > "Incompetence > >at its best" before Sustran members. The article exposes the government > >bias for motorisation in India despite increase in hardship to citizens. > >The World Bank and the IMF have issued dictat to poor countries to build > >infrastructure to allow to multinational corporations free > access to their > >markets including making automobiles easily available. > Private car is > >the barometer measuring success of liberalisation hence all > incentives and > >concessions to be extended. > > > >Car manufacturers shout that the market has sagged hence reduce taxes. > >Supply gasoline at regulated low price even though global oil prices have > >shot up. This will cost Rs 120 billion (Rs 48 equals $ 1) to > the national > >exchequer in the current financial year. Gasoline prices in > India are lower > >than prices ruling in the developed countries. Our ministers do > not want to > >worry about upgrading diesel (now increasingly being used in > personal cars) > >because that may raise diesel prices which to-day is lower than that of > >bottled water. Supplying surplus food at concession to the poorest of the > >poor to stave off starvation deaths is not on the government > agenda. This > >is the loyalty we exhibit to the WB/IMF to avoid WTO censure. > It may not > >be correct to term the actions of bureaucrats and ministers as > Incompetence > >At Its Best as euphemistically described by the author. They work most > >competently to exhibit their loyalty to affluent countries even if that > >means flouting court directives and disregarding citizen opinion. > > > >Pavements are removed or drastically narrowed down for widening > >carriageways as well as constructing flyovers/elevated roads and > then make > >them out of bounds to public transport. Rump pavements are used for > >parking > >by private cars. Streets too narrow for providing pavements > are made `one > >way streets' to allow parking on both sides. Job of the Traffic > Police is > >to create more parking space in Mumbai and possibly throughout India. > >There is a High Court directive on the Municipal Corporation of Greater > >Mumbai (MCGM) to build pavements where they do not exist and restore them > >but who cares. > > > > > >Vehicles pay absolutely no charge or tax for use of roads. What Mr. > >Agarwal refers to is the state government's annual vehicle registration, > >which has now been turned into one time tax, compounded to the > sum payable > >for 17 years with concession given to old cars by reducing the amount for > >the number of years that they are on the road. There is no provision for > >scrapping a vehicle on the expiry of stipulated period. It is common to > >see 25 year old ramshackles making lot of noise on the road while smoking > >like nobody's business. This tax has nothing to do with road > >maintenance/construction as that is the obligatory duty of the municipal > >body. The government on the other hand collects from every bus > commuter a > >passenger tax and a surcharge what used to be known as nutrition charge > >when > >it was first introduced in 1971-72. These surcharges > accounting to 6 to > >8% > >of the fare are collected through bus ticket so no chance of skipping. > >Again revenue not to be utilised for improving public bus service or > >easing > >traffic conditions. > > > >The MCGM spends about Rs 3 billion(appro 12-14% of its budget) > annually > >on > >road construction but this is not realised from vehicle owners. > Car owners > >in Mumbai used to pay a paltry amount annually by way of wheel tax. My > >father paid annually Rs 140 for his Ford purchased in 1937 at Rs > 4,500. I > >paid wheel tax at the same rate till1989. When I changed over to 800 cc > >Suzuki (assembled and marketed as Maruti) in 1989 costing Rs 200,000, my > >annual wheel tax was reduced to Rs 100. Total wheel tax realisation by > >the > >MCGM came to Rs 35 million against annual spending of Rs 3 > billion. The > >state government last year directed the MCGM to stop demanding > this tax so > >even 35 million are no more realised. The tram fare for 12 km > distance in > >1937 was 16th part of a rupee while the bus fare now comes to Rs 10. > >Mumbai > >discarded trams in the fifties to remove hurdles to usher in > emerging cars. > >The MCGM in addition charges Rs 6 to 7 million to the municipalised BEST > >Bus > >Undertaking which again falls on commuters. > > > >Buses cannot use 52 flyovers built during 1999-01 at public cost of Rs 18 > >billion. They ensure uninterrupted movement to car owners > while leaving > >buses and all types of motorised and nonmotorised vehicles to fight for > >space on the original patch making pedestrians running helter skelter to > >avoid being run over. The BEST buses, attaining an average speed of 14 > >km/h because of jams, provides about 5 million journeys daily, probably > >the highest for city public road transport in the world in > contrast to less > >than one million journeys by Mumbai's one million cars. Mumbai is > >fortunate in having a comparatively better public road transport > than other > >cities including Delhi as the BEST is municipalised and professionally > >managed. Shortfall is made up by citizens by paying higher electricity > >charges. > > > >Traffic snarls and congestion are an everyday experience. > Bureaucrats built > >flyovers but this has only aggravated jams as many more vehicles > now enter > >and move in the congested areas. Bureaucrats do not know and rather do > >not > >want to know that traffic is better controlled by eliminating or at least > >reducing unessential vehicles on roads and by creating conducive > conditions > >for BEST buses to have higher turnaround. Traffic management and road > >pricing are absent. Mumbai's population increases by less than 2% a year > >while motor cars by 8% yet no restrictions. Traffic planners do not take > >citizens as a factor of traffic whose needs and hardship should > normally be > >the topmost concern. > > > >We have been suggesting levy of wheel tax on the basis of the gravity of > >congestion in different zones. For example, 800 cc Maruti and Mercedes > >wanting to enter the congested South Mumbai shall take annual green card > >paying Rs 10,000 and 25,000 respectively per year, amber for > slightly less > >congested areas Rs 8,000 and 20,000 and red for comparatively > free areas Rs > >6,000 and 15,000. Loans extended by government and private financial > >institutions at practically no interest for personal car should > be stopped. > >Today, financial institutions run after car owners acquiring first or nth > >car, to extend loan but would not help citizens to buy a cycle at Rs > >1,500. > > > >Many Indian cities have already seen that traffic jams and accidents are > >not > >reduced by flyovers and elevated roads. As construction and maintenance > >cost > >does not fall on the sole users, the motorists, this only increases the > >number of private cars. General public who bear the cost of these gadgets > >face suffocation and death. So it is more than certain that > the American > >pattern of more and more roads cannot be the solution for Indian cities. > >Road widening and construction result in breaking down communities and > >increasing antisocial activities. Los Angeles is no more > considered as > >an > >articulating city reflecting the aspirations of residents. Mumbai > >surrounded by sea on practically all sides cannot have more roads. > > > >The only solution lies in following what is now being pursued on the > >Continent and Singapore of taking more cars off the road by > strengthening > >public transport including rebuilding tramways rejected by > bureaucrats as > >outmoded . It would be necessary to raise the price of > gasoline plus levy > >pollution and congestion tax at 10% each and use the amount for reducing > >pollution and congestion. Who understands this, not at least > ministers and > >bureaucrats. > > > >Kisan Mehta, Save Bombay Committee, > >629 Jame Jamshed Road, Dadar East, > >MUMBAI 400 014 > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From rocae at hotmail.com Mon Jun 18 01:08:03 2001 From: rocae at hotmail.com (roberto evangelio) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 01:08:03 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bangkok Post story Message-ID: >I wonder if the World Bank or ADB has ever or would consider funding bike >lanes? craig, with regard to your question above, World Bank has provided a grant to one of the municipality (Marikina)in Metro Manila to finance a bicyle lanes within the area. The project is a component of a bigger project called "Metro Manila Urban Transport Integration project. If im not mistaken, they provided a grant of about US$1 million. obet _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Mon Jun 18 11:19:44 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 10:19:44 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Indonesia public transport strike over fuel price rise Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F3D2@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailheadlines.asp?fileid=20010618.@01&irec=0 The Jakarta Post 18 June 2001 Strike likely to continue: Police JAKARTA (JP): Jakarta Police warned that a public transportation strike that affected some parts of the city on Saturday would be repeated again on Monday to protest the 30 percent increase of fuel prices. City police spokesman Sr. Comr. Anton Bachrul Alam said on Sunday that information collected by police intelligence personnel indicated that a strike would most likely affect some parts of the city. "We have received news from our intelligence units that Saturday's strike, which involved hundreds of public bus and minivan drivers, will continue on Monday," Anton told The Jakarta Post on Sunday. Nevertheless, Anton said the police had coordinated with the Indonesian Military (TNI) and the city administration to take necessary measures should the strike materialize. "Together, we will deploy over 100 trucks in bus terminals across the capital to transport stranded passengers," Anton said. Anton warned that police would not hesitate to arrest anybody caught trying to coerce public minivan or bus drivers to participate in the strike. The police arrested 12 people during Saturday's strike at Ciputat, South Jakarta. They included workers, university students, laborers and a commander of the City Forum (Forkot). "The police will not tolerate any sort of chaos in the capital," Anton said. Currently, 21,000 police personnel are on high alert and deployed in the capital's economic centers, around public facilities and in and around the capital's gas stations. A wave of protests and strikes in several locations throughout the country took place on Saturday and Sunday after the government announced the hike of fuel prices, which became effective on Saturday. The price of premium leaded gasoline has risen to Rp 1,450 (13 U.S. cents) per liter from Rp 1,150; automotive diesel oil to Rp 900 per liter from Rp 600; and kerosene to Rp 400 from Rp 350 per liter. According to National Police data, strikes by public transportation drivers had affected at least 19 Indonesian cities as of Sunday, most of them located in Java. Bandung, the capital of West Java, experienced the worst strike, which followed violent labor protests at the end of last week. The Bandung administration bowed to the drivers' demand and approved a fare increase for public transportation by between 25 percent and 30 percent. "I hope the drivers will start operating their vehicles because their demand (for an increased fare) has been met. The students have to sit their final examinations on Monday," West Java Governor R. Nuriana exclaimed on Sunday. The situation in Bandung returned to normal on Sunday. Shops and markets resumed trading while there were still few public vehicles visible in the streets. Drivers who had not begun working again admitted that they were afraid of intimidation from fellow drivers and possible riots if they resumed operations. "I'll see if many of my friends start serving passengers. I will too, but if there's only a few of them I'd rather not operate my vehicle," a minivan driver, Deden, said. On several routes, such as in Lembang and Ciwiduey, however, the public transportation had ground to a complete halt. Still on Sunday, in Kebon Kelapa and Cicadas terminal, Bandung Police arrested five members of the Democratic People's Party (PRD) who were allegedly distributing pamphlets about a rally planned for Monday. Bandung police chief Sr. Comr. Timur Pradopo claimed the arrested PRD members were provoking drivers to strike on Monday. In Jambi, the strike continued on Sunday with only several vehicles resuming operations. Antara reported that many of the public minivan drivers just parked their vehicles in several terminals. The striking public minivan drivers there also demanded a public transportation fare increase. Jambi Governor Zulkifli Nurdin said that his administration would consider the demands made by the public minivan drivers after thorough discussion with other related agencies. (25/30/ylt/emf) ----------- forwarded for the purposes of education and research. From sustran at po.jaring.my Wed Jun 27 01:46:13 2001 From: sustran at po.jaring.my (sustran@po.jaring.my) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 16:46:13 +0000 Subject: [sustran] fare integration Message-ID: <010735946081a61SGWEB1@sgweb1.thatweb.com> >>Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 01:56:07 +0900 (JST) >>From: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >>To: sustran-discuss-approval@jca.apc.org >>CC: >>Subject: BOUNCE sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org: Non-member submission from [Paula Negron-Poblete ] To: liste transport , liste transport 2 Subject: fare integration Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello, I'm looking for some theoric information about fare integrtaion in developed and developing countries, does anyone know somethong about it? Thanks -- Paula Negron Faculté de l'Aménagement Université de Montréal p.negron-poblete@umontreal.ca _________________________________________________ The simple way to read all your emails at ThatWeb http://www.thatweb.com From townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au Wed Jun 27 15:32:11 2001 From: townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au (Craig Townsend) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:32:11 +0800 Subject: [sustran] seeking B. Wildermuth Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010627142936.009f2db0@central.murdoch.edu.au> Dear Sustran, Does anyone know how I could get in touch with Bruno Wildermuth? I will be in Singapore in a couple of weeks and I hope to make contact with him. Thanks in advance, Craig ________________________________________________ Craig Townsend Institute for Sustainability & Technology Policy Murdoch University South Street, Murdoch Perth, Western Australia 6150 tel: (61 8) 9360 6293 fax: (61 8) 9360 6421 email: townsend@central.murdoch.edu.au