From sunny.enie at gmail.com Thu May 1 19:22:59 2008 From: sunny.enie at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 17:22:59 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Urban Transport Project - Newsletter - Feb - Apr 2008 Message-ID: <27b8dced0805010322x74532665j1cb9694aa42ba5d9@mail.gmail.com> /*Sustainable Urban Transport Project (GTZ SUTP) Update*/ *_February - April, 2008_* This newsletter gives updates on the SUTP resources, news and events related to our topic of interest. For more information or feedback, please contact sutp@sutp.org , or visit our website at www.sutp.org (China users go to www.sutp.cn ). /*****_Project related News_*****/ /(For greater detail of the news below, please click the link below each item)/ */Two-day and six day training courses Mass Transit training held by GTZ SUTP under SUMA-Project/* 26 April 2008 GTZ, CAI-Asia, Energy Foundation China and Shandong University have jointly organised a 2-day training course on Mass Transit and BRT Planning in Jinan on April 24-25, 2008. The event was hosted by Shandong University of Jinan and was a part of the SUMA project developed together with CAI-Asia and other partners. The training covered the planning steps of a Mass Transit / Bus Rapid Transit project from its conception to its final implementation and inauguration. Resource persons for the course were Mr Paulo Custodio (Brazil), Prof Jason Chang (China) and Mr Carlosfelipe Pardo (Colombia). This course was part of a larger 6-day specialized course on the same topic for future trainers from China, part of the SUMA program. For more information please contact sutp[at]sutp.org . Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1113&Itemid=1&lang=uk */Specialised BRT course in Guatemala /*23 April 2008 GTZ SUTP, along with Nestlac and other partners in Latin America, will hold a training course on Bus Rapid Transit Planning during May 8-9, 2008 in Guatemala City, Guatemala. The course will be led by Ang?lica Castro (former Manager of TransMilenio) and supported by Carlosfelipe Pardo (GTZ). Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1111&Itemid=1&lang=uk */ Training course on NMT Planning held in New Delhi under SUMA /*16 April 2008 As a part of the SUMA training activities, GTZ-SUTP conducted a training course on Non-motorised Planning from 10th -16th April 2008 at the India Habitat Centre in New Delhi, India. The course was targeted towards a group of pre-selected future trainers as a part of the "Training-of-Trainers" SUMA capacity building activity. Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-Ce), also a SUMA partner, took part in the course. The course focussed on the various aspects of Non-motorised transport planning and integration with other transport modes. The participants of the course also had a chance to participate in a cycle rally organised jointly by the Transport Research and Injury Prevention Program (TRIPP) of Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Delhi and the Local government. The rally took place on April 13, 2008. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1109&Itemid=1&lang=uk */GTZ-SUTP supports the promotion of cycle rickshaws in Udon Thani/* 08 April 2008 Dr. Thirayoot Limanond, GTZ-SUTP, took part in a two day activity focussing on increasing the number of cycle rickshaws in Udon Thani, Thailand. Dr. Limanond gave a presentation demonstrating how developed countries do not consider rickshaws as a low-quality means of transport, but an environmentally friendly alternative to car usage. Dr. Limanond, on behalf of GTZ-SUTP, supported the project being undertaken by the Udon Thani municipality in promoting rickshaw taxis. During this event, he also highlighted the various approaches in promoting tricycle taxis. More information on this event can be received by emailing sutp[at]sutp.org Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1101&Itemid=1 *//* */GTZ-SUTP delivers one day session on NMT in Bangkok/* 28 March 2007 Carlos F. Pardo from GTZ SUTP delivered a one day session on non motorised policies in Bangkok on March 28 2008, oriented towards medium and high level municipal transport officials from Thailand. The activity was supported by Thailand's Office of Transport and Traffic Policy and Planning (OTP), and was held in a venue provided by this organization. The meeting focussed on discussing why Non motorised transport (cycling and pedestrians) should be an integral part of a transport policy, and gave certain level of detail on how this has been achieved in other cities of the world, and how it could be achieved in Bangkok and other Thai cities. Participants to the course came from various cities and provinces from Thailand, as well as from Bangkok. A more detailed report can be requested from sutp[at]sutp.org . Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1098&Itemid=1&lang=uk */TDM Training Course held in Singapore/* 22 March 2008*/ /* *//*Following the 3rd Regional EST Forum held in Singapore during March 17-19 2008, GTZ, CAI-Asia and LTA Academy (supported by UNCRD, and as part of the SUMA project) jointly organized a 2-day training course on Travel Demand Management (TDM) and related measures in Singapore on 19-20 March, 2008. The event was hosted by LTA Academy of Singapore (www.LTAacademy.gov.sg ), and covered various TDM measures such as congestion pricing, parking schemes, fuel pricing, taxes and charges (vehicle ownership and registration management), repricing mobility services, physical restraint measures, land use measures and public transport complementary measures. Main trainers for the course were Mr Michael Replogle and Professors Gopinath Menon and Paul Barter. This was also part of a larger 6-day specialised course on the topic for SUMA Chinese future trainers. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1095&Itemid=1&lang=uk */SUTP contributes towards 3rd Regional Environmentally Sustainable Transport (EST) Forum, Singapore/* 19 March 2008 The United Nations Centre for Regional Development (UNCRD), Land Transport Authority (LTA) of the Ministry of Transport of Singapore, National Environment Agency (NEA) of the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources of Singapore, and the Ministry of the Environment - Government of Japan, jointly organized the Third Regional Environmentally Sustainable Transport (EST) Forum on 17-19 March 2008 in Singapore. The Forum was supported by various international organizations such as World Health Organization (WHO), Swedish International Development Agency (Sida), Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), German Technical Cooperation (GTZ), South Asia Cooperative Environment Programme (SACEP), and the ASEAN Working Group on Environmentally Sustainable Cites (AWGESC). The Forum was attended by approximately 120 participants, comprised of governmental representatives from 22 Asian countries (including the members of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), Mongolia, China, Republic of Korea and Japan, and for the first time, SACEP member countries from South Asia), international experts, and representatives from various international organizations. (MoE-Japan). SUTP Project Director Manfred Breithaupt, as one of the expert members of EST, moderated break out sessions during the forum and held a speech at the luncheon session on 17.3.3008 about TDM together with Michael Replogle, Transportation Director of Environmental Defense. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1097&Itemid=40&lang=uk */GTZ SUTP signs an MoU with LTA Academy, Singapore/* 19 March 2008 GTZ SUTP and Land Transport Authority Academy (LTA Academy), Singapore, have signed a Memorandum of Understanding on March 19, 2008. The Memorandum of Cooperation has been developed looking forward to the following: A mutual desire to coordinate, where practicable, developments by the Parties in the field of land transport capacity building, consultancy, research and knowledge transfer and exchange; a recognition of the strong friendship and cooperation amongst the administrations and peoples of Germany, the international land transport community, and Singapore; a mutual interest in the exchange of information concerning land transportation policy, planning, development, management and operations; and a recognition of advantages in undertaking certain new programmes jointly or in coordinating work on programmes already in progress. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1096&Itemid=1&lang=uk */GTZ-SUTP, I-Ce and Suranaree University train local government officials in Bangkok /*08 March 2008 GTZ-SUTP, in cooperation with Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-Ce ) and Suranaree Technical University, gave a two-day training course during 6-7th March, 2008 on Bicycle Planning for Thai cities. The course was conducted at the premises of Bangkok Metropolitan Authority (BMA) and was attended by 38 provincial government officials working in the planning and engineering divisions. Mr. Jeroen Buis was the trainer from I-Ce and Dr. Thirayoot Limanond, SUTP, assisted Mr. Buis. The course focussed on a technical audience and discussed the technical details of planning for bicycles. Topics such as Bicycle inclusive planning, intergation on bicycle with various modes, were included in the discussion. For more information please email sutp[at]sutp. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1099&Itemid=1&lang=uk */GTZ presentation at "New Energy Indicators for Transport: The Way Forward" Workshop /*08 February 2008 On January 29, Sascha Thielmann, Technical Advisor in GTZ's Transport and Energy Section, gave a presentation on GTZ's survey "International Fuel Prices" at the workshop "New Energy Indicators for Transport:The Way Forward". The workshop was organised by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in collaboration with the International Transport Forum (ITF). The workshop brought together statisticians, analysts and policy-makers to share information about different approaches to transport data collection and indicators development and use. It was held in the Framework of the G8 Dialogue on Climate Change, Clean Energy and Sustainable Development. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1057&Itemid=1 */Reading List: "Increasing and Volatile Oil Prices - Impact ? Subsidies and Market Mechanisms ? Policy Responses"/* The world market prices for crude oil are climbing to ever higher levels. A growing debate focuses on the question how to adjust to these price levels as well as how to mitigate the impact on vulnerable groups. In order to facilitate the dialogue, GTZ compiled a reading list with documents on "Impact", "Subsidies and Market Mechanisms" and "Policy Responses"*. * **Read more: www.gtz.de/fuelprices (or) http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=3&Itemid=69&lang=uk */Chinese translation of module 5d: The CDM in the transport sector /*05 February 2008 GTZ SUTP has published the Chinese translation of Module 5d: The CDM in the Transport Sector. The module was released in 2007 and written by Dr J?rg Gr?tter from gr?tter consulting. It discusses the relevance of the CDM in transport projects, and provides a case study of Bogot?'s TransMilenio CDM methodology, the first approved CDM methodology for the transport sector. The module will also be translated to Spanish this year. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1056&Itemid=1 */"Module 1e: Raising Public Awareness about Sustainable Urban Transport" translated to Indonesian /* 04 February 2008 GTZ-SUTP released an Indonesian version of the "Module 1e: Raising Public Awareness about Sustainable Urban Transport" the Indonesian version is titled "Modul 1e: Meningkatkan Kesadaran Masyarakat akan Transportasi Perkotaan Berkelanjutaan". The module was originally authored by Carlos F. Pardo. Registered SUTP users can download the document from SUTP downloads section. Unregistered users can register (free of charge) on the SUTP home page and then proceed to download. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1045&Itemid=1 */Bahasa Indonesia translation of "Module 1a: Role of Transport in Urban Development Policy" published/* 30January 2008 GTZ-SUTP released an Indonesian version of the "Module 1a: Role of Transport in Urban Development Policy" the Indonesian version is titled "Modul 1a: Peran Transportasi Dalam Kebijakan Perkembangan Perkotaan". The module was originally authored by Enrique Pe?alosa. Registered SUTP users can download the document from SUTP downloads section. Unregistered users can register (free of charge) on the SUTP home page and then proceed to download. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1044&Itemid=1&lang=uk /*****_Upcoming Events about Sustainable Urban Transport_***** //*segregated chronologically// / *Cities for Mobility ? World Congress 2008* The City of Stuttgart will hold the World Congress 2008 of the global network /Cities for Mobility/ titled *"Towards environmentally friendly mobility in our cities"* on June 1 - 4, 2008. The main objective of the event is to provide a dynamic platform for the promotion of direct cooperation between local governments, as well as other partners from the fields of business, science and the civil society that are active in the field of urban mobility. In the various sessions and workshops participants will have the opportunity to learn from projects that have already been successfully implemented. The congress provides an excellent opportunity to exchange experiences and best practices with the objective of jointly initiating innovative project proposals and cooperation initiatives. Several interesting project proposals launched during the last World Congress are on their way to implementation and will be presented at this year's congress. Moreover the City of Stuttgart offers a special programme which includes a tour through the city on electric bicycles and visits to the Mercedes-Benz-Museum, the Daimler plant in Sindelfingen and the Porsche plant in Stuttgart. On the website www.cities-for-mobility.org you can find all relevant information on the World Congress. The *_deadline for registration is May 9, 2008_*. Date : 28.05.2008 Venue : Leipzig, DE Title : International Transport Forum 2008 Read more : http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=217 Date : 28.05.2008 Venue : Volgograd, RU Title : Eurasian Division Conference Read more : http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=203 Date : 01.06.2008 Venue : Stuttgart, DE Title : Cities for Mobility: World Congress 2008 Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=241&lang=uk Date : 10.06.2008 Venue : Paris, FR Title : Transports Publics 2008 Read more : http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=230 Date : 04.06.2008 Venue : London, UK Title : 12th ECOMM 4-6 June 2008 in London Read more : http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=233 Date : 12.06.2008 Venue : Istanbul, TR Title : 9th Light Rail Conference Read more : http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=204 Date : 16.06.2008 Venue : Portland, US Title : Towards Carfree Cities VIII Read more : http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=211 Date : 19.06.2008 Venue : Paris, FR Title : 3rd Third International Conference on Funding Transport Infrastructure Read more : http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=212 Date : 23.06.2008 Venue : Singapore, SG Title : World cities Summit 2008 Read more : http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=237 *More events can be viewed from the link below * http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&lang=uk */IMPORTANT NOTE/* /If you haven't registered to our site or were only registered to the previous website, we would be pleased if you can validate your email and account info just by going to /http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=registers&lang=en / //and registering on-line. / / /*/Thank you very much for your consideration./ * */SUTP TEAM/* From sudhirgota at gmail.com Wed May 7 21:23:52 2008 From: sudhirgota at gmail.com (sudhir gota) Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 17:53:52 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) News Digest - Vol-5 (Issue-7) Message-ID: Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) News Digest Vol. 5 Issue 7 7 May 2008 SUMA News Digest is a free weekly e-mail publication that features news, information, and events related to sustainable urban transportation in Asia. *** VISIT THE SUMA PAGES: http://www.cleanairnet.org/suma *** SUMA Partners on the Move! Two-day and six day training courses Mass Transit training held by GTZ SUTP under SUMA-Project, 26 April 2008 GTZ, CAI-Asia, Energy Foundation China and Shandong University have jointly organised a 2-day training course on Mass Transit and BRT Planning in Jinan on April 24-25, 2008. The event was hosted by Shandong University of Jinan and was a part of the SUMA project developed together with CAI-Asia and other partners. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1113&Itemid=1&lang=uk Training course on NMT Planning held in New Delhi under SUMA, 16 April 2008 GTZ-SUTP conducted a training course on Non-motorised Planning from 10th -16th April 2008 at the India Habitat Centre in New Delhi, India. The course was targeted towards a group of pre-selected future trainers as a part of the SUMA capacity building activity. Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-Ce), also a SUMA partner, took part in the course. Read more: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1109&Itemid=1&lang=uk * * * * * HEADLINES A busload of money for city transit 30 April 2008 Bus Rapid Transit is catching the imagination of whole world with many cities pledging support to the scheme. Latest to join the bandwagon is the city of wheels I.e. Chicago. Exponential growth in congestion has forced the government to pool in $153 million to create a bus-rapid-transit program in the city on four designated corridors. http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72619.html Mass transit the answer to North Texas traffic problems 30 April 2008 Urban Land Institute a Washington based research organization has asked United States to "wake up" and fix up the ailing infrastructure. The institute studied America's 23 largest urban areas, which the report said plan to spend nearly $2 trillion on transportation alone in the next 25 years. The report suggests proper land use planning with transit oriented development would provide some relief. ** http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72620.html VIET NAM: Ha Noi acts to return city pavements to pedestrians 29 April 2008 Ho Noi city in Vietnam has proposed to crack whip on roadside parking and footside vendors to protect the right of way of pedestrians. Pedestrians for long have faced blocks with road side parking and vendors who illegally block the pedestrian movements. http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72621.html USA: Highlights from the 7th EcoCity World Summit 28 April 2008 "*In order to transform our cities, we need to move from ego-culture to eco-culture*." The above statement by Rusong Wang, President, Ecological Society of China sums up the highlights of 7th ecocity world summit. The summit had many experts interchanging ideas and accessing the impacts of various measures unleashed in various eco cities of world. The link provides some of the summit key discussions http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72622.html 18% of Employees Leave Cars at Home and Take Mass Transit after Enrolling in Commuter Benefits Programs at Work, Finds New Study from TransitCenter, 28 April 2008 A study conducted by Business Week Research Services has estimated that nearly one in five employees signing up for tax-free commuter benefits switches from driving a car to commuting by mass transit to get to work in New York. Many researchers for long have campaigned for the increase in Transport Demand Strategies such as Cummuter Benefit Program for achieving sustainable transportation. The other intersting find by the study was that nearly 53 percent of employees whose companies donot currently offer tax-free commuter benefits would participate in a program if it was offered indicating its far-reaching potential. http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72623.html Massport sets goals for carbon footprint reduction, 22 April 2008 The Massachusetts Port Authority said Tuesday it has planned a series of environmental initiatives to reduce the carbon footprint of its operations. The initiatives would also enhance its environmental stewardship and give customers options that can reduce their impact on the environment. http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72591.html India: Roads to Perdition, 21 April 2008 The Congestion and Pollution are not the only terms associated with roads but also accidents and safety. A new Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) study reveals some chilling figures on the causes for death in accident cases on roads. Only 19 per cent victims get the help of an ambulance, 48 per cent have to make it to hospital on their own. The police are conspicuous by their absence. In fact, it is fear of harassment by the police that stops passersby from helping victims.** http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72624.html INDIA: Metro to zoom into 4 cities soon, 18 April 2008 Metro has found favors with the Indian Government with proposals being made to expedite the metro works in four cities of India namely Mumbai, Hyderabad, Chennai and Kochi. The government plans to tackle rapid increase in congestion and pollution by improving the public transport systems with metro in these cities.** http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72625.html More air quality and sustainable mobility news at http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/propertyvalue-14783.html * * * * * INTERESTING FINDS What will it Cost to Protect Ourselves from Global Warming? By Nathaniel Keohane, Ph.D. and Peter Goldmark This paper examines the potential impact of a cap on greenhouse gases on the U.S. economy as a whole and on American families. What will it cost to protect ourselves against the potentially catastrophic consequences of global warming? Advocates of action anticipate minimal costs. Those who want to do nothing sometimes assert that carbon cuts will bankrupt the economy. Who is right? This paper conducts the broadest assessment to date of the impacts on the U.S. economy of capping greenhouse gases. This report synthesizes the findings of several state-of-the-art economic models, and arrives at a strong conclusion: The United States can enjoy robust economic growth over the next several decades while making ambitious reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. If we put a cap-and-trade policy in place soon, we can achieve substantial cuts in greenhouse gas emissions without significant adverse consequences to the economy. And in the long run, the coming low-carbon economy can provide the foundation for sustained American economic growth and prosperity. http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72589.html Pedestrians at Crossroads: A Case Study of Bangalore By Sudhir, CAI Asia and Sameera Kumar, Secon Pvt. Ltd. Walking is the most ancient mode of transport but in this automobile age, walking is often the most neglected mode. There is a tendency to underestimate the pedestrian infrastructure needs when compared to the needs of the motorists. The situation has come to such a state that daily at least one pedestrian is killed on Bangalore roads. In this paper, the authors have tried to investigate the design-safety-economic and policy issues concerning existing pedestrian infrastructure in Bangalore. Also an attempt has been made to access the public perception on pedestrian issues. http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72580.html Deciding on Human Plunder By Curtis A. Moore, Editor, Spring 2008 Newsletter on Health and Clean Air The Earth is, in the words of one prominent climatologist, "perilously close to dramatic climate change that could run out of our control". Confronted now with arguably the gravest threat to its survival in recorded history, humanity is, on the one hand, allowing sheer inertia to dictate the outcome, while on the other deciding affirmatively, but wrongly. Curtis A. Moore, the editor of newsletter on Health and Clean Air reviews the worldwide research on pollution and lists down the classic case of pollution paradox ruling the roost. Read more http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72626.html * * * * * MARK YOUR CALENDARS The European Sustainability Summit Berlin 6 May 2008, http://www.eurohypo.com/media/ehlisten/englisch/sonstiges/Programme_The_European_Sustainability_Summit_F.pdf A Lighter Footprint': Sustainability Conference 16-17 May ? 2008, http://extension.osu.edu/~news/story.php?id=4567 ECOMM 2008 - The 11th Annual European Conference On Mobility Management, Travel Demand Management - Tackling Climate Change 4-6 June-2008, London http://www.ecomm2008.eu/ Towards Carfree Cities VIII, Rethinking Mobility, Rediscovering Proximity 16-20 June 2008, Portland, Oregon, USA, http://www.carfreeportland.org/ World Cities Summit 2008, Livable and Vibrant Cities, 23-25 June 2008, Singapore, http://www.worldcities.com.sg/ PODCAR City Sustainable Transport Conference, 14-16 September 2008, Ithaca, New York, http://www.podcar.org/ithacaconference/ UITP 2nd Sustainable Development Conference Making tomorrow today 22-24 October 2008, Milan, Italy http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72425.html Better Air Quality (BAQ) Workshop 2008 12-14 November 2008 Bangkok, Thailand Call for Abstracts ongoing; First Call for Pre-events http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72312.html See more SUT events http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/propertyvalue-27089.html See CAI-Asia's events calendar http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/propertyvalue-13577.html * * * CONTRIBUTE * * * To contribute articles, news items, or event announcements for the next issue, send an email with the complete details and URL source to suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com with subject "FOR SUMA NEWS". mailto: suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com?subject=FOR_SUMA_NEWS< suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com?subject=FOR_SUMA_NEWS>. Past issues from March and April 2008 are found at http://groups.google.com/group/suma-news * * * ABOUT SUMA * * * The Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) program of the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities ( www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia), Asian Development Bank ( www.adb.org), EMBARQ-the World Resources Institute Center for Sustainable Transport ( http://embarq.wri.org ), GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project ( www.sutp.org), Interface for Cycling Expertise ( www.cycling.nl), Institute for Transportation and Development Policy ( www.itdp.org), and United Nations Center for Regional Development ( www.uncrd.or.jp/est) is made possible through the generous support of the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency ( www.sida.se). SUMA works with Asian countries and cities to strengthen then formulation and implementation of sustainable urban transportation policies, specifically in (i) Improving urban air quality by adopting AQM planning in sustainable transport policies and promoting public transportation, (ii)Improving road safety by encouraging non-motorized transport and public transport, and (iii)Reducing transport's contribution to climate change by adopting a co-benefits approach with urban air quality management. -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 sudhir(at)cai-asia.org http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia From yanivbin at gmail.com Wed May 7 22:29:54 2008 From: yanivbin at gmail.com (Vinay Baindur) Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 18:59:54 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Now, the debate is on how 5.5 km elevated road will be funded Message-ID: <86b8a7050805070629p3fd18b09xccfad0003984f9b8@mail.gmail.com> In Bangalore a 30 km elevated reoad will be tendered for the umpteenth time internationally and it cost 1600 crs for a four lane . IT IS UNVIABLE IT WILL NEVER see the light of day. But the Pune idea is TERRIBLE and many times costlier Do we really need flyovers in COPY CAT style of BANGKOK city? ** *Now, the debate is on how 5.5 km elevated road will be funded* *Dar Consultants put cost at Rs 1,075 cr; PMC looks to IL&FS for funding solution * NitinPatil / AJAY KHAPE *Posted online: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 at 2308 hrs IST * Pune, May 6 Ten years ago, the construction of Mumbai-Pune six-lane Expressway comprising six tunnels and a few bridges cost around Rs 24 crore per km. As per a proposal submitted by the Indian arm of the UK-based Dar Consultants it will cost the Pune Municipal Corporation over Rs 195 crore per km for a 5.5-km-long elevated road from Sangam bridge to Mhatre bridge. As per the proposal, the elevated stretch, with dual three-lane for traffic plus nine metres for bus carriage, will cost Rs 1,075 crore. But now the PMC is saying that it is looking beyond Dar Consultants, at Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Service ( IL&FS) to find funding options for the project. Municipal Commissioner Praveensinh Pardeshi told The Indian Express on Tuesday, "The planning of the project should also include identifying a source for raising money for the construction of the road from Kharadi to Shivne. The report, that Dar Consultants submitted, does not mention the funding source as the idea was that the project would be funded under Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM). But, this project cannot be executed under JNNURM and the PMC cannot raise this money." Now, the PMC has appointed IL&FS for giving a feasibility report and planning of the project, Pardeshi said. The consultant would also have to suggest ways for raising the money for implementation of the project, he said. When contacted, a Dar Consultant officer said the company was unable to comment on the appointment of a new consultant by PMC for the Kharadi-Shivne project as it has received no such intimation till date. "We were told that the project was to be implemented with JNNURM funds, so there was no question of giving suggestions for raising funds for the project," he said. "The PMC has not been responding to us despite repeated follow up for starting the project," he added. Talk to officers at the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC), that has done many such projects in the past including many flyovers in Pune and was even the nodal agency for implementing the Mumbai-Pune Expressway, and the verdict is clear ? that the budget for the elevated road will easily overshoot Rs 1,075 crore. "If the elevated road project is planned in the riverbed, the expenses will rise automatically as laying a solid foundation is necessary. Besides, the cost for the project is bound to go beyond the estimates, as the prices of the steel and cement have skyrocketed," executive engineer of MSRDC, Vidyadhar Sardeshmukh, said. The gigantic Mumbai-Pune Expressway project, spanning 95 km between the two cities, was completed at a cost of Rs 2,250 crore, but that was in 2002, he said. According to Pardeshi, a road along the riverbank would obstruct the flow of water during the monsoon and the elevated road is a better solution. "The elevated road is necessary for environmental reasons as it will not be possible for road construction on the riverbank without damaging the environment," he said. From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Thu May 8 08:23:56 2008 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 18:23:56 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Mass transit modes "competition" Message-ID: <48223A0C.2060105@gmail.com> Hi, I think the whole topic of mass transit modes (bus-based, rail-based, and its divisions) cries for a real and objective comparison in terms of characteristics, real (not theoretical) capacities, costs, impacts and long term benefits, plus other stuff like social impact of the city where a system is implemented (employment, local operator involvement, etc). The issue of projected - real costs has been reviewed and has given some impressive results (in the negative sense). The recent BRT Planning Guide from ITDP, GTZ, UNEP, GEF, Hewlett, Viva has a nice chapter on this issue, which I invite everyone to check out (and the whole guide, for that matter). The real problem with fighting between rail and bus-based options is that, in the meantime, people are getting off public transport and into cars... Best regards, Carlos. bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: > Brendan > > Did I say I defend such estimates? I don't know the history of who > sanctioned the estimates, but I don't automatically blame consultants > or the industry. Sometimes it is the politicians who hunt around for > someone who will say what they want to hear. This estimate should > never have been taken seriously. I also know that in some cases the > fares changed dramatically from the original assumptions, important > destinations get deleted, etc. > > As I have said before, I am not opposing BRT. But my main point still > holds, I think. It is pretty unfair to say that a 65 km system > carrying 600,000 per day is "abysmal" by comparing it to the > hypothetical performance of BRT that is currently carrying about 0 > passengers, 10 years after both projects were initiated. > > I also think it is short-sighted to not take into account the > long-term impacts on sustainability. This can also justify higher > initial capital costs. If rail succeeds in supporting densification of > land use, this benefit will last for perpetuity. This would make a > good topic for future discussion. > > Eric Bruun > > I > > Quoting Brendan Finn : > > >> Dear Eric, >> >> When a very large amount of public money is sanctioned based on a >> projection which turns out to be 5 times higher than the actual >> out-turn, there is something seriously wrong. And not just with the >> math. Patronage and financial projections for rail-based systems >> are very seriously wrong time and time again. Are you telling us >> that consultants didn't learn after the first few occasions and are >> incapable of revising their methodologies? >> >> A lot of metro and rail projects around the world get approved on >> dodgy math and wildly-optimistic assumptions which don't come to >> pass. It is systematic within the sector. This is gross and wilful >> deception, aided and abetted by companies that present themselves as >> professionals. Whether or not it is a nice metro does not excuse >> such practices. >> >> With best wishes, >> >> >> Brendan. >> _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ >> Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: >> To: "Sujit Patwardhan" >> Cc: "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport" >> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 10:59 PM >> Subject: [sustran] Re: BRTS in Delhi >> >> >> >>> Sujit >>> >>> 3.1 million per day is unrealistic. It always was. That doesn't make >>> Metro a bad idea just because someone made bad predictions. >>> >>> But 600,000 is not insignificant. You can argue that BRT would be >>> better value for money, but how much has been built? Both BRT and the >>> Metro were authorized in 1997. One is working and making a valuable >>> contribution, the other still is not. Yet, we keep hearing that BRT >>> can be done quickly and Metros take forever. >>> >>> Eric Bruun >>> >>> Quoting Sujit Patwardhan : >>> >>> >>>> Dear Eric, >>>> >>>> 65 Kilometers is correct. And the ridership of 600,000 *is* "abysmal" when >>>> compared to the project projection of over 3.1 million. When projects >>>> involving huge sums (of people's money) are invested in a project meant to >>>> produce specific result it is highly objectionable when the actual figures >>>> fall short not by 5% or 10% but by over 80%. >>>> >>>> This is how most *non viable* projects are cooked up whether they be Mega >>>> Dams or Transportation / Urban infrastructure projects. If the ridership of >>>> 3.1 million seems ridiculous, why did the Govt sanction the project, >>>> particularly when much cheaper options were available? >>>> >>>> I don't think figures of ridership on the Washington Metro are quite >>>> relevant to Asian countries with much higher population densities. Pune >>>> Municipal Transport buses of very poor quality, for instance carry over >>>> 600,000 commuters each day. They do this with about 650 buses which are of >>>> old technology, and in poor condition of upkeep. We feel Pune with about >>>> 2000 modern semi low floor and efficient buses would be able to provide >>>> excellent quality public transport with a citywide network. If the >>>> city were >>>> to provide the same coverage by Metro we will need 10 years or more to make >>>> it functional and be certainly driven to bankruptcy. And everyone >>>> knows that >>>> Bogota's Transmilenio carries more passengers than the Washington Metro at >>>> a much lower cost . >>>> >>>> So there are serious problems with Metro but politicians love expensive >>>> projects and this is supported by the elites who want to keep up with the >>>> Jones's. They say if Bangkok can have a Metro why not India? Much like the >>>> juvenile boast of "mine's bigger than yours" . >>>> I think we need to move beyond that and face the hard reality of a choice >>>> between car dominated "business as usual" scenario and the alternative "New >>>> Mobility" vision that honours walking, cycling and affordable public >>>> transport system -- best of which today appears to be the BRT. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sujit >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 7:18 AM, wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Aashish >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the ridership figure. (I think the 65 km is out of date. It >>>>> was 66 kms 3 years ago.) >>>>> >>>>> The reason I was asking is that Sujit said the ridership was >>>>> "abysmal." But 600,000 persons for 66 kms is actually pretty crowded. >>>>> The Washington Metro is 105 miles (over 160 kms) and several of the >>>>> lines are genuinely crush loaded during the rush hours with only >>>>> 700,000 passengers per day. Admittedly, people in the U.S. tend to be >>>>> larger than in India, which also aggravates the crowding. >>>>> >>>>> As for an estimate of 3.1 Million, this seems ridiculous. Of course, >>>>> it isn't going to meet that. Maybe if the fare was assumed to be very >>>>> low and crowding standards were extreme...... >>>>> >>>>> Eric >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Quoting Sujit Patwardhan : >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>>>> From: Sujit Patwardhan >>>>>> Date: Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:08 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [pttfgen:1409] BRTS in Delhi >>>>>> To: pttfgen@googlegroups.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 25 April 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> BRT in Delhi >>>>>> ========= >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes problems galore and I've been following the reports in the media >>>>>> including the CNN IBN that Ashok Datar was to appear on, but didn't for >>>>>> >>>>> some >>>>> >>>>>> reason. >>>>>> >>>>>> My take on all this is as follows: >>>>>> >>>>>> Deterioration in traffic has been an ongoing process in many Asian >>>>>> >>>>> cities >>>>> >>>>>> for the last 3 decades or more. Like the frog sitting in a beaker of >>>>>> >>>>> water >>>>> >>>>>> being slowly heated it has not had an occasion to "explode". Metro was >>>>>> >>>>> taken >>>>> >>>>>> up and executed brilliantly by Mr. E Sridharan, with attention to the >>>>>> minutest detail and a free hand guaranteeing "no interference" from >>>>>> politicians. On top of that every lapse and overshooting of budgets as >>>>>> >>>>> well >>>>> >>>>>> as abysmally poor ridership compared to the projected figures was >>>>>> >>>>> pardoned >>>>> >>>>>> by a supportive Govt and compensated from additional funds made >>>>>> >>>>> available >>>>> >>>>>> without delay and cloaked in secrecy. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Delhi Metro project is a marketing triumph that fills every Indian's >>>>>> >>>>> chest >>>>> >>>>>> with pride*. However, how much travel-coverage (as Public Transport) the >>>>>> very expensive Metro will be able to provide is a big question mark. >>>>>> >>>>> There >>>>> >>>>>> is also the real possibility that the amount spent on the Metro >>>>>> >>>>> represents >>>>> >>>>>> lost opportunity for other investments - like libraries and cultural >>>>>> centres, gardens, public spaces and other amenities needed by the city. >>>>>> >>>>> *But >>>>> >>>>>> in the final analysis we should accept that the Metro is pubic transport >>>>>> >>>>> and >>>>> >>>>>> hence we must support it* unlike the eight lane highways, flyovers, >>>>>> multistory car parks and other infrastructures being *routinely provided >>>>>> >>>>> by >>>>> >>>>>> the city as subsidy to ever growing number of car and 2 wheeler owners >>>>>> >>>>> at >>>>> >>>>>> the cost of other more efficient modes of travel.* >>>>>> >>>>>> BRT unlike the Metro has to deal with the existing conditions on our >>>>>> >>>>> roads. >>>>> >>>>>> Of indiscipline, rampant irregularities, encroachments, poor >>>>>> >>>>> engineering, >>>>> >>>>>> lack of understanding about the rights of pedestrians, cyclists and non >>>>>> personal auto users. So if the road surface is poor BRT is blamed, if >>>>>> drivers are indisciplined BRT is blamed, if a car stalls in the MV lane >>>>>> >>>>> and >>>>> >>>>>> clogs up the traffic it is perceived as a problem caused by the BRT. If >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>>> >>>>>> BRT lanes look empty (as indeed they will - considering each bus carries >>>>>> many more people), it is seen as waste of an expensive resource -- >>>>>> >>>>> although >>>>> >>>>>> not many of these critics complained much all these years about the >>>>>> >>>>> *wasteful >>>>> >>>>>> use of resources when low occupancy cars filled up these very roads* - >>>>>> >>>>> well >>>>> >>>>>> before BRT appeared on the scene. >>>>>> >>>>>> So it is clear that BRT planning should have been rooted in outreach and >>>>>> marketing it as a concept that will improve mobility (of people as >>>>>> >>>>> against >>>>> >>>>>> just near-empty personal vehicles), will greatly improve access for >>>>>> >>>>> people >>>>> >>>>>> who are today helpless captive users of uncomfortable and outdated >>>>>> >>>>> buses, it >>>>> >>>>>> will provide an option to those who are forced to use personal >>>>>> >>>>> transport, >>>>> >>>>>> not necessarily out of choice but compulsion, and as benefits of a >>>>>> >>>>> growing >>>>> >>>>>> BRT network becomes visible and better, more comfortable and even A/C >>>>>> >>>>> buses >>>>> >>>>>> start plying on the BRT corridors, the higher middle class and even the >>>>>> >>>>> rich >>>>> >>>>>> will have no problem patronizing this mode for purely rational reasons >>>>>> >>>>> of >>>>> >>>>>> getting a faster, more punctual, comfortable and stress-free mode of >>>>>> >>>>> travel. >>>>> >>>>>> This indeed is the situation in many cities in Europe and while we have >>>>>> >>>>> no >>>>> >>>>>> qualms about importing western concepts (English medium education, >>>>>> >>>>> wearing >>>>> >>>>>> suits and tie however uncomfortable they may be in our weather, >>>>>> >>>>> listening to >>>>> >>>>>> western music, eating the big Mac (ughhh) and even importing >>>>>> >>>>> Cheerleaders >>>>> >>>>>> for our newly formed Cricket Series) why do we suddenly start protesting >>>>>> when our capital city tries to copy a Western/ Latin American idea of >>>>>> excellent bus system/BRT calling it a foreign concept?????? >>>>>> >>>>>> The need is to publicise wider benefits of public transport and to reach >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>>> >>>>>> *majority *of citizens who are users/potential users of *bus based >>>>>> >>>>> public >>>>> >>>>>> transport, cycling and walking* in the city. (It is they who will >>>>>> >>>>> benefit >>>>> >>>>>> most from a good BRT) >>>>>> >>>>>> It is this huge majority of commuters who will have the opportunity of >>>>>> breaking free from the shackles of our present horrendous conditions of >>>>>> urban traffic. >>>>>> >>>>>> So let's not worry too much about the high pitched screams coming from >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>>> >>>>>> pampered lot of car users (and to some extent from two wheelers) >>>>>> >>>>> protesting >>>>> >>>>>> against dedicated BRT lanes taking away *their* road space, and let's >>>>>> >>>>> reach >>>>> >>>>>> the gagged-majority who have been at the receiving end of the stick ever >>>>>> since our cities became car-dominated *and if necessary bring them on >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>>> >>>>>> roads to block the MV lanes and put the personal cars in their place. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Does this sound extreme? Not when contrasted with the obscene arrogant >>>>>> >>>>> rant >>>>> >>>>>> coming from Mr Chandan Mitra - representing the car >>>>>> >>>>> lobby/media/politician >>>>> >>>>>> clique on the recent CNN IBN TV report about the mess accompanying the >>>>>> >>>>> BRT >>>>> >>>>>> trials in Delhi. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sujit >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Abhay Patil >>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Looks like BRTS in Delhi has reached a flash point. From the visuals >>>>>>> >>>>> (CNN >>>>> >>>>>>> IBN, newspapers) it looks like Delhi's implementation is no better than >>>>>>> Pune. Empty BRTS lanes, sloppy junctions, ordinary bus stops and so >>>>>>> >>>>> on. I >>>>> >>>>>>> don't know what went amiss in the capital. Sheila Dixit has promised >>>>>>> >>>>> that >>>>> >>>>>>> she would make an all out effort to remove the glitches in a few weeks. >>>>>>> Most important - she has said that she would not hesitate to drop the >>>>>>> project if they are unable to get their act together right away. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On a positive note - everybody is looking at BRTS now. On a negative >>>>>>> >>>>> note >>>>> >>>>>>> - it is appears to be quite a tall order to fix it. Given the ugly >>>>>>> >>>>> traffic >>>>> >>>>>>> jams and vociferousness of folks like journalist MP Chandan Mitra - it >>>>>>> >>>>> is >>>>> >>>>>>> quite likely that the baby would be thrown out with the bath water! >>>>>>> >>>>> And, >>>>> >>>>>>> that would have serious repercussions on BRTS in other cities. I can >>>>>>> >>>>> not >>>>> >>>>>>> imagine the cacophony that would ensue once that happens... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Abhay >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > From bruun at seas.upenn.edu Thu May 8 10:22:50 2008 From: bruun at seas.upenn.edu (bruun at seas.upenn.edu) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 21:22:50 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Mass transit modes "competition" In-Reply-To: <48220441.70808@gmail.com> References: <4cfd20aa0804250038k343da7cama026aaa2bfe99972@mail.gmail.com><4cfd20aa0804250041n56b7aca1td97093e8cd486d3c@mail.gmail.com><20080426214839.ww8ircdfacso84cc@webmail.seas.upenn.edu><4cfd20aa0804270328q3215c523ga08c49270a095ea6@mail.gmail.com> <20080428175902.3z54of00040c8o80@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <20080428211854.2flsgmnuw0gowowo@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <48220441.70808@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080507212250.5gdomdcqw9w4wso8@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> Carlos I have read most of the chapter to which you refer and much of the BRT Planning Guide. I just don't happen to agree that your comparisons are as "real and objective" as you think that they are. By making a guide that pretty much recommends BRT for every situation, no matter how big the city, no matter what the priorities or weightings of the various project goals might be, no matter how dense the development of the city or its geography, what rights-of-way are available (or not), or how bad the traffic is, maybe your consortium is not completely objective either. Eric Bruun Quoting Carlosfelipe Pardo : > Hi, > > I think the whole topic of mass transit modes (bus-based, rail-based, > and its divisions) cries for a real and objective comparison in terms > of characteristics, real (not theoretical) capacities, costs, impacts > and long term benefits, plus other stuff like social impact of the > city where a system is implemented (employment, local operator > involvement, etc). The issue of projected - real costs has been > reviewed and has given some impressive results (in the negative > sense). The recent BRT Planning Guide from ITDP, GTZ, UNEP, GEF, > Hewlett, Viva has a nice chapter on this issue, which I invite > everyone to check out (and the whole guide, for that matter). > > The real problem with fighting between rail and bus-based options is > that, in the meantime, people are getting off public transport and > into cars... > > Best regards, > > Carlos. > > bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: > > BrendanDid I say I defend such estimates? I don't know the history > of who sanctioned the estimates, but I don't automatically blame > consultants or the industry. Sometimes it is the politicians who hunt > around for someone who will say what they want to hear. This estimate > should never have been taken seriously. I also know that in some cases > the fares changed dramatically from the original assumptions, > important destinations get deleted, etc.As I have said before, I am > not opposing BRT. But my main point still holds, I think. It is pretty > unfair to say that a 65 km system carrying 600,000 per day is > "abysmal" by comparing it to the hypothetical performance of BRT that > is currently carrying about 0 passengers, 10 years after both projects > were initiated.I also think it is short-sighted to not take into > account the long-term impacts on sustainability. This can also justify > higher initial capital costs. If rail succeeds in supporting > densification of land use, this benefit will last for perpetuity. This > would make a good topic for future discussion.Eric BruunIQuoting > Brendan Finn : > > Dear Eric,When a very large amount of public money is sanctioned > based on a projection which turns out to be 5 times higher than the > actual out-turn, there is something seriously wrong. And not just > with the math. Patronage and financial projections for rail-based > systems are very seriously wrong time and time again. Are you telling > us that consultants didn't learn after the first few occasions and > are incapable of revising their methodologies?A lot of metro and rail > projects around the world get approved on dodgy math and > wildly-optimistic assumptions which don't come to pass. It is > systematic within the sector. This is gross and wilful deception, > aided and abetted by companies that present themselves as > professionals. Whether or not it is a nice metro does not excuse such > practices.With best wishes,Brendan. > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286----- Original Message ----- From: > To: "Sujit Patwardhan" Cc: > "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport" > Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 10:59 > PM Subject: [sustran] Re: BRTS in Delhi > > Sujit3.1 million per day is unrealistic. It always was. That > doesn't make Metro a bad idea just because someone made bad > predictions.But 600,000 is not insignificant. You can argue that BRT > would be better value for money, but how much has been built? Both > BRT and the Metro were authorized in 1997. One is working and making a > valuable contribution, the other still is not. Yet, we keep hearing > that BRT can be done quickly and Metros take forever.Eric BruunQuoting > Sujit Patwardhan : > > Dear Eric,65 Kilometers is correct. And the ridership of 600,000 > *is* "abysmal" when compared to the project projection of over 3.1 > million. When projects involving huge sums (of people's money) are > invested in a project meant to produce specific result it is highly > objectionable when the actual figures fall short not by 5% or 10% but > by over 80%.This is how most *non viable* projects are cooked up > whether they be Mega Dams or Transportation / Urban infrastructure > projects. If the ridership of 3.1 million seems ridiculous, why did > the Govt sanction the project, particularly when much cheaper options > were available?I don't think figures of ridership on the Washington > Metro are quite relevant to Asian countries with much higher > population densities. Pune Municipal Transport buses of very poor > quality, for instance carry over 600,000 commuters each day. They do > this with about 650 buses which are of old technology, and in poor > condition of upkeep. We feel Pune with about 2000 modern semi low > floor and efficient buses would be able to provide excellent quality > public transport with a citywide network. If the city were to provide > the same coverage by Metro we will need 10 years or more to make it > functional and be certainly driven to bankruptcy. And everyone knows > that Bogota's Transmilenio carries more passengers than the > Washington Metro at a much lower cost .So there are serious problems > with Metro but politicians love expensive projects and this is > supported by the elites who want to keep up with the Jones's. They say > if Bangkok can have a Metro why not India? Much like the juvenile > boast of "mine's bigger than yours" . I think we need to move beyond > that and face the hard reality of a choice between car dominated > "business as usual" scenario and the alternative "New Mobility" vision > that honours walking, cycling and affordable public transport system > -- best of which today appears to be the BRT.-- SujitOn Sun, Apr 27, > 2008 at 7:18 AM, wrote: > > AashishThanks for the ridership figure. (I think the 65 km is out > of date. It was 66 kms 3 years ago.)The reason I was asking is that > Sujit said the ridership was "abysmal." But 600,000 persons for 66 kms > is actually pretty crowded. The Washington Metro is 105 miles (over > 160 kms) and several of the lines are genuinely crush loaded during > the rush hours with only 700,000 passengers per day. Admittedly, > people in the U.S. tend to be larger than in India, which also > aggravates the crowding.As for an estimate of 3.1 Million, this seems > ridiculous. Of course, it isn't going to meet that. Maybe if the fare > was assumed to be very low and crowding standards were > extreme......EricQuoting Sujit Patwardhan : > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sujit Patwardhan > Date: Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:08 PM Subject: Re: > [pttfgen:1409] BRTS in Delhi To: pttfgen@googlegroups.com25 April > 2008BRT in Delhi =========Yes problems galore and I've been following > the reports in the media including the CNN IBN that Ashok Datar was to > appear on, but didn't for > > some > > reason.My take on all this is as follows:Deterioration in traffic > has been an ongoing process in many Asian > > cities > > for the last 3 decades or more. Like the frog sitting in a beaker > of > > water > > being slowly heated it has not had an occasion to "explode". Metro > was > > taken > > up and executed brilliantly by Mr. E Sridharan, with attention to > the minutest detail and a free hand guaranteeing "no interference" > from politicians. On top of that every lapse and overshooting of > budgets as > > well > > as abysmally poor ridership compared to the projected figures was > > > pardoned > > by a supportive Govt and compensated from additional funds made > > available > > without delay and cloaked in secrecy.*Delhi Metro project is a > marketing triumph that fills every Indian's > > chest > > with pride*. However, how much travel-coverage (as Public > Transport) the very expensive Metro will be able to provide is a big > question mark. > > There > > is also the real possibility that the amount spent on the Metro > > represents > > lost opportunity for other investments - like libraries and > cultural centres, gardens, public spaces and other amenities needed by > the city. > > *But > > in the final analysis we should accept that the Metro is pubic > transport > > and > > hence we must support it* unlike the eight lane highways, flyovers, > multistory car parks and other infrastructures being *routinely > provided > > by > > the city as subsidy to ever growing number of car and 2 wheeler > owners > > at > > the cost of other more efficient modes of travel.*BRT unlike the > Metro has to deal with the existing conditions on our > > roads. > > Of indiscipline, rampant irregularities, encroachments, poor > > engineering, > > lack of understanding about the rights of pedestrians, cyclists and > non personal auto users. So if the road surface is poor BRT is blamed, > if drivers are indisciplined BRT is blamed, if a car stalls in the MV > lane > > and > > clogs up the traffic it is perceived as a problem caused by the > BRT. If > > the > > BRT lanes look empty (as indeed they will - considering each bus > carries many more people), it is seen as waste of an expensive > resource -- > > although > > not many of these critics complained much all these years about the > > > *wasteful > > use of resources when low occupancy cars filled up these very > roads* - > > well > > before BRT appeared on the scene.So it is clear that BRT planning > should have been rooted in outreach and marketing it as a concept that > will improve mobility (of people as > > against > > just near-empty personal vehicles), will greatly improve access > for > > people > > who are today helpless captive users of uncomfortable and outdated > > > buses, it > > will provide an option to those who are forced to use personal > > transport, > > not necessarily out of choice but compulsion, and as benefits of a > > > growing > > BRT network becomes visible and better, more comfortable and even > A/C > > buses > > start plying on the BRT corridors, the higher middle class and even > the > > rich > > will have no problem patronizing this mode for purely rational > reasons > > of > > getting a faster, more punctual, comfortable and stress-free mode > of > > travel. > > This indeed is the situation in many cities in Europe and while we > have > > no > > qualms about importing western concepts (English medium education, > > > wearing > > suits and tie however uncomfortable they may be in our weather, > > listening to > > western music, eating the big Mac (ughhh) and even importing > > Cheerleaders > > for our newly formed Cricket Series) why do we suddenly start > protesting when our capital city tries to copy a Western/ Latin > American idea of excellent bus system/BRT calling it a foreign > concept??????The need is to publicise wider benefits of public > transport and to reach > > the > > *majority *of citizens who are users/potential users of *bus based > > > public > > transport, cycling and walking* in the city. (It is they who will > > > benefit > > most from a good BRT)It is this huge majority of commuters who will > have the opportunity of breaking free from the shackles of our present > horrendous conditions of urban traffic.So let's not worry too much > about the high pitched screams coming from > > the > > pampered lot of car users (and to some extent from two wheelers) > > protesting > > against dedicated BRT lanes taking away *their* road space, and > let's > > reach > > the gagged-majority who have been at the receiving end of the stick > ever since our cities became car-dominated *and if necessary bring > them on > > the > > roads to block the MV lanes and put the personal cars in their > place.*Does this sound extreme? Not when contrasted with the obscene > arrogant > > rant > > coming from Mr Chandan Mitra - representing the car > > lobby/media/politician > > clique on the recent CNN IBN TV report about the mess accompanying > the > > BRT > > trials in Delhi.-- SujitOn Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Abhay > Patil > > wrote: > > Looks like BRTS in Delhi has reached a flash point. From the > visuals > > (CNN > > IBN, newspapers) it looks like Delhi's implementation is no better > than Pune. Empty BRTS lanes, sloppy junctions, ordinary bus stops and > so > > on. I > > don't know what went amiss in the capital. Sheila Dixit has > promised > > that > > she would make an all out effort to remove the glitches in a few > weeks. Most important - she has said that she would not hesitate to > drop the project if they are unable to get their act together right > away.On a positive note - everybody is looking at BRTS now. On a > negative > > note > > - it is appears to be quite a tall order to fix it. Given the ugly > > > traffic > > jams and vociferousness of folks like journalist MP Chandan Mitra - > it > > is > > quite likely that the baby would be thrown out with the bath water! > > > And, > > that would have serious repercussions on BRTS in other cities. I > can > > not > > imagine the cacophony that would ensue once that happens...-Abhay > > > -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT > NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS.Please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the > real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups > version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real > sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you > can). Apologies for the confusing > arrangement.================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing > countries (the 'Global South'). From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Thu May 8 13:30:26 2008 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 23:30:26 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Mass transit modes "competition" In-Reply-To: <20080507212250.5gdomdcqw9w4wso8@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> References: <4cfd20aa0804250038k343da7cama026aaa2bfe99972@mail.gmail.com><4cfd20aa0804250041n56b7aca1td97093e8cd486d3c@mail.gmail.com><20080426214839.ww8ircdfacso84cc@webmail.seas.upenn.edu><4cfd20aa0804270328q3215c523ga08c49270a095ea6@mail.gmail.com> <20080428175902.3z54of00040c8o80@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <20080428211854.2flsgmnuw0gowowo@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <48220441.70808@gmail.com> <20080507212250.5gdomdcqw9w4wso8@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> Message-ID: <482281E2.1090400@gmail.com> Eric, Thanks for your point of view. The excerpts below from the planning guide itself may be useful to see if it is truly objective or not. I invite everyone else to give their opinion. ?Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is thus just one of the many public transport technology options. Additionally, there are a range of rail-based public transport systems that are possible, including underground metros, elevated rail systems, Light Rail Transit (LRT), and trams (Figures 2.1 through 2.6). No one of these options is inherently correct or incorrect. Local conditions and local preferences play a significant role in determining the preferred system type? The decision to select a particular technology depends upon many factors. Costs, performance characteristics, local conditions, and personal preferences have historically all played a role in the decision-making process? In recent years, significant debate amongst transport professionals has occurred on whether BRT or rail-based solutions are the most appropriate. Such competition between systems can actually be healthy as it implies an environment in which all technologies must strive to improve. A rigorous evaluation process will help ensure that a city makes the most appropriate choice? In reality, a top-down approach that begins with a technology focus is perhaps not the ideal. It is much preferred to define desired public transport characteristics prior to selecting a particular technology. By understanding customer needs with respect to fare levels, routing and location, travel time, comfort, safety, security, frequency of service, quality of infrastructure, and ease of access, system developers can define the preferred type of service without bias toward any particular technology (Figure 2.15). Thus, much of the planning noted in this Planning Guide can actually be conducted without committing to one type of technology over another. In this scenario, the public transport technology is one of the last issues to be introduced in the decision-making process. Such a customer-orientated approach will likely have the best chance of producing a public transport service that can effectively compete with the private automobile? The choice of public transport technology should be based on a range of considerations with performance and cost being amongst the most important. As suggested, these requirements are ideally derived from an objective analysis of the existing and projected situation. Table 2.1 outlines categories of the characteristics that can help shape a city?s decision towards the most appropriate type of public transport technology. *Table 2.1 Factors in choosing a type of public transport technology* Category Factor *Cost* *Capital costs (infrastructure and property costs)* * * *Operating costs* * * *Planning costs* *Planning and management* *Planning and implementation time* * * *Management and administration* *Design* *Scalability* * * *Flexibility* * * *Diversity versus homogeneity* *Performance* *Capacity* * * *Travel time / speed* * * *Service frequency* * * *Reliability* * * *Comfort* * * *Safety* * * *Customer service* * * *Image and perception* *Impacts* *Economic impacts * * * *Social impacts * * * *Environmental impacts * * * *Urban impacts* Again, no one public transport solution is the right solution for all cities. The local circumstances and public policy objectives play a significant role in selecting the most appropriate public transport solution for any city.? bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: > Carlos > > I have read most of the chapter to which you refer and much of the BRT > Planning Guide. I just don't happen to agree that your comparisons are > as "real and objective" as you think that they are. By making a guide > that pretty much recommends BRT for every situation, no matter how big > the city, no matter what the priorities or weightings of the various > project goals might be, no matter how dense the development of the > city or its geography, what rights-of-way are available (or not), or > how bad the traffic is, maybe your consortium is not completely > objective either. > > Eric Bruun > > > Quoting Carlosfelipe Pardo : > >> Hi, >> >> I think the whole topic of mass transit modes (bus-based, rail-based, >> and its divisions) cries for a real and objective comparison in terms >> of characteristics, real (not theoretical) capacities, costs, impacts >> and long term benefits, plus other stuff like social impact of the >> city where a system is implemented (employment, local operator >> involvement, etc). The issue of projected - real costs has been >> reviewed and has given some impressive results (in the negative >> sense). The recent BRT Planning Guide from ITDP, GTZ, UNEP, GEF, >> Hewlett, Viva has a nice chapter on this issue, which I invite >> everyone to check out (and the whole guide, for that matter). >> >> The real problem with fighting between rail and bus-based options is >> that, in the meantime, people are getting off public transport and >> into cars... >> >> Best regards, >> >> Carlos. >> >> bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: >> >> BrendanDid I say I defend such estimates? I don't know the history >> of who sanctioned the estimates, but I don't automatically blame >> consultants or the industry. Sometimes it is the politicians who hunt >> around for someone who will say what they want to hear. This estimate >> should never have been taken seriously. I also know that in some cases >> the fares changed dramatically from the original assumptions, >> important destinations get deleted, etc.As I have said before, I am >> not opposing BRT. But my main point still holds, I think. It is pretty >> unfair to say that a 65 km system carrying 600,000 per day is >> "abysmal" by comparing it to the hypothetical performance of BRT that >> is currently carrying about 0 passengers, 10 years after both projects >> were initiated.I also think it is short-sighted to not take into >> account the long-term impacts on sustainability. This can also justify >> higher initial capital costs. If rail succeeds in supporting >> densification of land use, this benefit will last for perpetuity. This >> would make a good topic for future discussion.Eric BruunIQuoting >> Brendan Finn : >> >> Dear Eric,When a very large amount of public money is sanctioned >> based on a projection which turns out to be 5 times higher than the >> actual out-turn, there is something seriously wrong. And not just >> with the math. Patronage and financial projections for rail-based >> systems are very seriously wrong time and time again. Are you telling >> us that consultants didn't learn after the first few occasions and >> are incapable of revising their methodologies?A lot of metro and rail >> projects around the world get approved on dodgy math and >> wildly-optimistic assumptions which don't come to pass. It is >> systematic within the sector. This is gross and wilful deception, >> aided and abetted by companies that present themselves as >> professionals. Whether or not it is a nice metro does not excuse such >> practices.With best wishes,Brendan. >> _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ >> >> Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : >> +353.87.2530286----- Original Message ----- From: >> To: "Sujit Patwardhan" Cc: >> "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport" >> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 10:59 >> PM Subject: [sustran] Re: BRTS in Delhi >> >> Sujit3.1 million per day is unrealistic. It always was. That >> doesn't make Metro a bad idea just because someone made bad >> predictions.But 600,000 is not insignificant. You can argue that BRT >> would be better value for money, but how much has been built? Both >> BRT and the Metro were authorized in 1997. One is working and making a >> valuable contribution, the other still is not. Yet, we keep hearing >> that BRT can be done quickly and Metros take forever.Eric BruunQuoting >> Sujit Patwardhan : >> >> Dear Eric,65 Kilometers is correct. And the ridership of 600,000 >> *is* "abysmal" when compared to the project projection of over 3.1 >> million. When projects involving huge sums (of people's money) are >> invested in a project meant to produce specific result it is highly >> objectionable when the actual figures fall short not by 5% or 10% but >> by over 80%.This is how most *non viable* projects are cooked up >> whether they be Mega Dams or Transportation / Urban infrastructure >> projects. If the ridership of 3.1 million seems ridiculous, why did >> the Govt sanction the project, particularly when much cheaper options >> were available?I don't think figures of ridership on the Washington >> Metro are quite relevant to Asian countries with much higher >> population densities. Pune Municipal Transport buses of very poor >> quality, for instance carry over 600,000 commuters each day. They do >> this with about 650 buses which are of old technology, and in poor >> condition of upkeep. We feel Pune with about 2000 modern semi low >> floor and efficient buses would be able to provide excellent quality >> public transport with a citywide network. If the city were to provide >> the same coverage by Metro we will need 10 years or more to make it >> functional and be certainly driven to bankruptcy. And everyone knows >> that Bogota's Transmilenio carries more passengers than the >> Washington Metro at a much lower cost .So there are serious problems >> with Metro but politicians love expensive projects and this is >> supported by the elites who want to keep up with the Jones's. They say >> if Bangkok can have a Metro why not India? Much like the juvenile >> boast of "mine's bigger than yours" . I think we need to move beyond >> that and face the hard reality of a choice between car dominated >> "business as usual" scenario and the alternative "New Mobility" vision >> that honours walking, cycling and affordable public transport system >> -- best of which today appears to be the BRT.-- SujitOn Sun, Apr 27, >> 2008 at 7:18 AM, wrote: >> >> AashishThanks for the ridership figure. (I think the 65 km is out >> of date. It was 66 kms 3 years ago.)The reason I was asking is that >> Sujit said the ridership was "abysmal." But 600,000 persons for 66 kms >> is actually pretty crowded. The Washington Metro is 105 miles (over >> 160 kms) and several of the lines are genuinely crush loaded during >> the rush hours with only 700,000 passengers per day. Admittedly, >> people in the U.S. tend to be larger than in India, which also >> aggravates the crowding.As for an estimate of 3.1 Million, this seems >> ridiculous. Of course, it isn't going to meet that. Maybe if the fare >> was assumed to be very low and crowding standards were >> extreme......EricQuoting Sujit Patwardhan : >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sujit Patwardhan >> Date: Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:08 PM Subject: Re: >> [pttfgen:1409] BRTS in Delhi To: pttfgen@googlegroups.com25 April >> 2008BRT in Delhi =========Yes problems galore and I've been following >> the reports in the media including the CNN IBN that Ashok Datar was to >> appear on, but didn't for >> >> some >> >> reason.My take on all this is as follows:Deterioration in traffic >> has been an ongoing process in many Asian >> >> cities >> >> for the last 3 decades or more. Like the frog sitting in a beaker >> of >> >> water >> >> being slowly heated it has not had an occasion to "explode". Metro >> was >> >> taken >> >> up and executed brilliantly by Mr. E Sridharan, with attention to >> the minutest detail and a free hand guaranteeing "no interference" >> from politicians. On top of that every lapse and overshooting of >> budgets as >> >> well >> >> as abysmally poor ridership compared to the projected figures was >> >> >> pardoned >> >> by a supportive Govt and compensated from additional funds made >> >> available >> >> without delay and cloaked in secrecy.*Delhi Metro project is a >> marketing triumph that fills every Indian's >> >> chest >> >> with pride*. However, how much travel-coverage (as Public >> Transport) the very expensive Metro will be able to provide is a big >> question mark. >> >> There >> >> is also the real possibility that the amount spent on the Metro >> >> represents >> >> lost opportunity for other investments - like libraries and >> cultural centres, gardens, public spaces and other amenities needed by >> the city. >> >> *But >> >> in the final analysis we should accept that the Metro is pubic >> transport >> >> and >> >> hence we must support it* unlike the eight lane highways, flyovers, >> multistory car parks and other infrastructures being *routinely >> provided >> >> by >> >> the city as subsidy to ever growing number of car and 2 wheeler >> owners >> >> at >> >> the cost of other more efficient modes of travel.*BRT unlike the >> Metro has to deal with the existing conditions on our >> >> roads. >> >> Of indiscipline, rampant irregularities, encroachments, poor >> >> engineering, >> >> lack of understanding about the rights of pedestrians, cyclists and >> non personal auto users. So if the road surface is poor BRT is blamed, >> if drivers are indisciplined BRT is blamed, if a car stalls in the MV >> lane >> >> and >> >> clogs up the traffic it is perceived as a problem caused by the >> BRT. If >> >> the >> >> BRT lanes look empty (as indeed they will - considering each bus >> carries many more people), it is seen as waste of an expensive >> resource -- >> >> although >> >> not many of these critics complained much all these years about the >> >> >> *wasteful >> >> use of resources when low occupancy cars filled up these very >> roads* - >> >> well >> >> before BRT appeared on the scene.So it is clear that BRT planning >> should have been rooted in outreach and marketing it as a concept that >> will improve mobility (of people as >> >> against >> >> just near-empty personal vehicles), will greatly improve access >> for >> >> people >> >> who are today helpless captive users of uncomfortable and outdated >> >> >> buses, it >> >> will provide an option to those who are forced to use personal >> >> transport, >> >> not necessarily out of choice but compulsion, and as benefits of a >> >> >> growing >> >> BRT network becomes visible and better, more comfortable and even >> A/C >> >> buses >> >> start plying on the BRT corridors, the higher middle class and even >> the >> >> rich >> >> will have no problem patronizing this mode for purely rational >> reasons >> >> of >> >> getting a faster, more punctual, comfortable and stress-free mode >> of >> >> travel. >> >> This indeed is the situation in many cities in Europe and while we >> have >> >> no >> >> qualms about importing western concepts (English medium education, >> >> >> wearing >> >> suits and tie however uncomfortable they may be in our weather, >> >> listening to >> >> western music, eating the big Mac (ughhh) and even importing >> >> Cheerleaders >> >> for our newly formed Cricket Series) why do we suddenly start >> protesting when our capital city tries to copy a Western/ Latin >> American idea of excellent bus system/BRT calling it a foreign >> concept??????The need is to publicise wider benefits of public >> transport and to reach >> >> the >> >> *majority *of citizens who are users/potential users of *bus based >> >> >> public >> >> transport, cycling and walking* in the city. (It is they who will >> >> >> benefit >> >> most from a good BRT)It is this huge majority of commuters who will >> have the opportunity of breaking free from the shackles of our present >> horrendous conditions of urban traffic.So let's not worry too much >> about the high pitched screams coming from >> >> the >> >> pampered lot of car users (and to some extent from two wheelers) >> >> protesting >> >> against dedicated BRT lanes taking away *their* road space, and >> let's >> >> reach >> >> the gagged-majority who have been at the receiving end of the stick >> ever since our cities became car-dominated *and if necessary bring >> them on >> >> the >> >> roads to block the MV lanes and put the personal cars in their >> place.*Does this sound extreme? Not when contrasted with the obscene >> arrogant >> >> rant >> >> coming from Mr Chandan Mitra - representing the car >> >> lobby/media/politician >> >> clique on the recent CNN IBN TV report about the mess accompanying >> the >> >> BRT >> >> trials in Delhi.-- SujitOn Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Abhay >> Patil >> >> wrote: >> >> Looks like BRTS in Delhi has reached a flash point. From the >> visuals >> >> (CNN >> >> IBN, newspapers) it looks like Delhi's implementation is no better >> than Pune. Empty BRTS lanes, sloppy junctions, ordinary bus stops and >> so >> >> on. I >> >> don't know what went amiss in the capital. Sheila Dixit has >> promised >> >> that >> >> she would make an all out effort to remove the glitches in a few >> weeks. Most important - she has said that she would not hesitate to >> drop the project if they are unable to get their act together right >> away.On a positive note - everybody is looking at BRTS now. On a >> negative >> >> note >> >> - it is appears to be quite a tall order to fix it. Given the ugly >> >> >> traffic >> >> jams and vociferousness of folks like journalist MP Chandan Mitra - >> it >> >> is >> >> quite likely that the baby would be thrown out with the bath water! >> >> >> And, >> >> that would have serious repercussions on BRTS in other cities. I >> can >> >> not >> >> imagine the cacophony that would ensue once that happens...-Abhay >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT >> NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via >> YAHOOGROUPS.Please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the >> real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups >> version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real >> sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you >> can). Apologies for the confusing >> arrangement.================================================================ >> >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing >> countries (the 'Global South'). > > > From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Thu May 8 13:30:26 2008 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 23:30:26 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Mass transit modes "competition" Message-ID: <44C70B79-7BF5-447A-90C3-9374074FFB61@gmail.com> FYI--------------- Eric, Thanks for your point of view. The excerpts below from the planning guide itself may be useful to see if it is truly objective or not. I invite everyone else to give their opinion. ?Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is thus just one of the many public transport technology options. Additionally, there are a range of rail-based public transport systems that are possible, including underground metros, elevated rail systems, Light Rail Transit (LRT), and trams (Figures 2.1 through 2.6). No one of these options is inherently correct or incorrect. Local conditions and local preferences play a significant role in determining the preferred system type? The decision to select a particular technology depends upon many factors. Costs, performance characteristics, local conditions, and personal preferences have historically all played a role in the decision-making process? In recent years, significant debate amongst transport professionals has occurred on whether BRT or rail-based solutions are the most appropriate. Such competition between systems can actually be healthy as it implies an environment in which all technologies must strive to improve. A rigorous evaluation process will help ensure that a city makes the most appropriate choice? In reality, a top-down approach that begins with a technology focus is perhaps not the ideal. It is much preferred to define desired public transport characteristics prior to selecting a particular technology. By understanding customer needs with respect to fare levels, routing and location, travel time, comfort, safety, security, frequency of service, quality of infrastructure, and ease of access, system developers can define the preferred type of service without bias toward any particular technology (Figure 2.15). Thus, much of the planning noted in this Planning Guide can actually be conducted without committing to one type of technology over another. In this scenario, the public transport technology is one of the last issues to be introduced in the decision-making process. Such a customer-orientated approach will likely have the best chance of producing a public transport service that can effectively compete with the private automobile? The choice of public transport technology should be based on a range of considerations with performance and cost being amongst the most important. As suggested, these requirements are ideally derived from an objective analysis of the existing and projected situation. Table 2.1 outlines categories of the characteristics that can help shape a city?s decision towards the most appropriate type of public transport technology. *Table 2.1 Factors in choosing a type of public transport technology* Category Factor *Cost* *Capital costs (infrastructure and property costs)* * * *Operating costs* * * *Planning costs* *Planning and management* *Planning and implementation time* * * *Management and administration* *Design* *Scalability* * * *Flexibility* * * *Diversity versus homogeneity* *Performance* *Capacity* * * *Travel time / speed* * * *Service frequency* * * *Reliability* * * *Comfort* * * *Safety* * * *Customer service* * * *Image and perception* *Impacts* *Economic impacts * * * *Social impacts * * * *Environmental impacts * * * *Urban impacts* Again, no one public transport solution is the right solution for all cities. The local circumstances and public policy objectives play a significant role in selecting the most appropriate public transport solution for any city.? bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: > Carlos > > I have read most of the chapter to which you refer and much of the BRT > Planning Guide. I just don't happen to agree that your comparisons are > as "real and objective" as you think that they are. By making a guide > that pretty much recommends BRT for every situation, no matter how big > the city, no matter what the priorities or weightings of the various > project goals might be, no matter how dense the development of the > city or its geography, what rights-of-way are available (or not), or > how bad the traffic is, maybe your consortium is not completely > objective either. > > Eric Bruun > > > Quoting Carlosfelipe Pardo : > >> Hi, >> >> I think the whole topic of mass transit modes (bus-based, rail-based, >> and its divisions) cries for a real and objective comparison in terms >> of characteristics, real (not theoretical) capacities, costs, impacts >> and long term benefits, plus other stuff like social impact of the >> city where a system is implemented (employment, local operator >> involvement, etc). The issue of projected - real costs has been >> reviewed and has given some impressive results (in the negative >> sense). The recent BRT Planning Guide from ITDP, GTZ, UNEP, GEF, >> Hewlett, Viva has a nice chapter on this issue, which I invite >> everyone to check out (and the whole guide, for that matter). >> >> The real problem with fighting between rail and bus-based options is >> that, in the meantime, people are getting off public transport and >> into cars... >> >> Best regards, >> >> Carlos. >> >> bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: >> >> BrendanDid I say I defend such estimates? I don't know the history >> of who sanctioned the estimates, but I don't automatically blame >> consultants or the industry. Sometimes it is the politicians who hunt >> around for someone who will say what they want to hear. This estimate >> should never have been taken seriously. I also know that in some >> cases >> the fares changed dramatically from the original assumptions, >> important destinations get deleted, etc.As I have said before, I am >> not opposing BRT. But my main point still holds, I think. It is >> pretty >> unfair to say that a 65 km system carrying 600,000 per day is >> "abysmal" by comparing it to the hypothetical performance of BRT that >> is currently carrying about 0 passengers, 10 years after both >> projects >> were initiated.I also think it is short-sighted to not take into >> account the long-term impacts on sustainability. This can also >> justify >> higher initial capital costs. If rail succeeds in supporting >> densification of land use, this benefit will last for perpetuity. >> This >> would make a good topic for future discussion.Eric BruunIQuoting >> Brendan Finn : >> >> Dear Eric,When a very large amount of public money is sanctioned >> based on a projection which turns out to be 5 times higher than the >> actual out-turn, there is something seriously wrong. And not just >> with the math. Patronage and financial projections for rail-based >> systems are very seriously wrong time and time again. Are you telling >> us that consultants didn't learn after the first few occasions and >> are incapable of revising their methodologies?A lot of metro and rail >> projects around the world get approved on dodgy math and >> wildly-optimistic assumptions which don't come to pass. It is >> systematic within the sector. This is gross and wilful deception, >> aided and abetted by companies that present themselves as >> professionals. Whether or not it is a nice metro does not excuse such >> practices.With best wishes,Brendan. >> _____________________________________________________________________ >> __________________________________________ >> >> Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : >> +353.87.2530286----- Original Message ----- From: >> To: "Sujit Patwardhan" Cc: >> "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport" >> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 10:59 >> PM Subject: [sustran] Re: BRTS in Delhi >> >> Sujit3.1 million per day is unrealistic. It always was. That >> doesn't make Metro a bad idea just because someone made bad >> predictions.But 600,000 is not insignificant. You can argue that BRT >> would be better value for money, but how much has been built? Both >> BRT and the Metro were authorized in 1997. One is working and >> making a >> valuable contribution, the other still is not. Yet, we keep hearing >> that BRT can be done quickly and Metros take forever.Eric >> BruunQuoting >> Sujit Patwardhan : >> >> Dear Eric,65 Kilometers is correct. And the ridership of 600,000 >> *is* "abysmal" when compared to the project projection of over 3.1 >> million. When projects involving huge sums (of people's money) are >> invested in a project meant to produce specific result it is highly >> objectionable when the actual figures fall short not by 5% or 10% but >> by over 80%.This is how most *non viable* projects are cooked up >> whether they be Mega Dams or Transportation / Urban infrastructure >> projects. If the ridership of 3.1 million seems ridiculous, why did >> the Govt sanction the project, particularly when much cheaper options >> were available?I don't think figures of ridership on the Washington >> Metro are quite relevant to Asian countries with much higher >> population densities. Pune Municipal Transport buses of very poor >> quality, for instance carry over 600,000 commuters each day. They do >> this with about 650 buses which are of old technology, and in poor >> condition of upkeep. We feel Pune with about 2000 modern semi low >> floor and efficient buses would be able to provide excellent quality >> public transport with a citywide network. If the city were to provide >> the same coverage by Metro we will need 10 years or more to make it >> functional and be certainly driven to bankruptcy. And everyone knows >> that Bogota's Transmilenio carries more passengers than the >> Washington Metro at a much lower cost .So there are serious problems >> with Metro but politicians love expensive projects and this is >> supported by the elites who want to keep up with the Jones's. They >> say >> if Bangkok can have a Metro why not India? Much like the juvenile >> boast of "mine's bigger than yours" . I think we need to move beyond >> that and face the hard reality of a choice between car dominated >> "business as usual" scenario and the alternative "New Mobility" >> vision >> that honours walking, cycling and affordable public transport system >> -- best of which today appears to be the BRT.-- SujitOn Sun, Apr 27, >> 2008 at 7:18 AM, wrote: >> >> AashishThanks for the ridership figure. (I think the 65 km is out >> of date. It was 66 kms 3 years ago.)The reason I was asking is that >> Sujit said the ridership was "abysmal." But 600,000 persons for 66 >> kms >> is actually pretty crowded. The Washington Metro is 105 miles (over >> 160 kms) and several of the lines are genuinely crush loaded during >> the rush hours with only 700,000 passengers per day. Admittedly, >> people in the U.S. tend to be larger than in India, which also >> aggravates the crowding.As for an estimate of 3.1 Million, this seems >> ridiculous. Of course, it isn't going to meet that. Maybe if the fare >> was assumed to be very low and crowding standards were >> extreme......EricQuoting Sujit Patwardhan : >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sujit Patwardhan >> Date: Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:08 PM Subject: Re: >> [pttfgen:1409] BRTS in Delhi To: pttfgen@googlegroups.com25 April >> 2008BRT in Delhi =========Yes problems galore and I've been following >> the reports in the media including the CNN IBN that Ashok Datar >> was to >> appear on, but didn't for >> >> some >> >> reason.My take on all this is as follows:Deterioration in traffic >> has been an ongoing process in many Asian >> >> cities >> >> for the last 3 decades or more. Like the frog sitting in a beaker >> of >> >> water >> >> being slowly heated it has not had an occasion to "explode". Metro >> was >> >> taken >> >> up and executed brilliantly by Mr. E Sridharan, with attention to >> the minutest detail and a free hand guaranteeing "no interference" >> from politicians. On top of that every lapse and overshooting of >> budgets as >> >> well >> >> as abysmally poor ridership compared to the projected figures was >> >> >> pardoned >> >> by a supportive Govt and compensated from additional funds made >> >> available >> >> without delay and cloaked in secrecy.*Delhi Metro project is a >> marketing triumph that fills every Indian's >> >> chest >> >> with pride*. However, how much travel-coverage (as Public >> Transport) the very expensive Metro will be able to provide is a big >> question mark. >> >> There >> >> is also the real possibility that the amount spent on the Metro >> >> represents >> >> lost opportunity for other investments - like libraries and >> cultural centres, gardens, public spaces and other amenities >> needed by >> the city. >> >> *But >> >> in the final analysis we should accept that the Metro is pubic >> transport >> >> and >> >> hence we must support it* unlike the eight lane highways, flyovers, >> multistory car parks and other infrastructures being *routinely >> provided >> >> by >> >> the city as subsidy to ever growing number of car and 2 wheeler >> owners >> >> at >> >> the cost of other more efficient modes of travel.*BRT unlike the >> Metro has to deal with the existing conditions on our >> >> roads. >> >> Of indiscipline, rampant irregularities, encroachments, poor >> >> engineering, >> >> lack of understanding about the rights of pedestrians, cyclists and >> non personal auto users. So if the road surface is poor BRT is >> blamed, >> if drivers are indisciplined BRT is blamed, if a car stalls in the MV >> lane >> >> and >> >> clogs up the traffic it is perceived as a problem caused by the >> BRT. If >> >> the >> >> BRT lanes look empty (as indeed they will - considering each bus >> carries many more people), it is seen as waste of an expensive >> resource -- >> >> although >> >> not many of these critics complained much all these years about the >> >> >> *wasteful >> >> use of resources when low occupancy cars filled up these very >> roads* - >> >> well >> >> before BRT appeared on the scene.So it is clear that BRT planning >> should have been rooted in outreach and marketing it as a concept >> that >> will improve mobility (of people as >> >> against >> >> just near-empty personal vehicles), will greatly improve access >> for >> >> people >> >> who are today helpless captive users of uncomfortable and outdated >> >> >> buses, it >> >> will provide an option to those who are forced to use personal >> >> transport, >> >> not necessarily out of choice but compulsion, and as benefits of a >> >> >> growing >> >> BRT network becomes visible and better, more comfortable and even >> A/C >> >> buses >> >> start plying on the BRT corridors, the higher middle class and even >> the >> >> rich >> >> will have no problem patronizing this mode for purely rational >> reasons >> >> of >> >> getting a faster, more punctual, comfortable and stress-free mode >> of >> >> travel. >> >> This indeed is the situation in many cities in Europe and while we >> have >> >> no >> >> qualms about importing western concepts (English medium education, >> >> >> wearing >> >> suits and tie however uncomfortable they may be in our weather, >> >> listening to >> >> western music, eating the big Mac (ughhh) and even importing >> >> Cheerleaders >> >> for our newly formed Cricket Series) why do we suddenly start >> protesting when our capital city tries to copy a Western/ Latin >> American idea of excellent bus system/BRT calling it a foreign >> concept??????The need is to publicise wider benefits of public >> transport and to reach >> >> the >> >> *majority *of citizens who are users/potential users of *bus based >> >> >> public >> >> transport, cycling and walking* in the city. (It is they who will >> >> >> benefit >> >> most from a good BRT)It is this huge majority of commuters who will >> have the opportunity of breaking free from the shackles of our >> present >> horrendous conditions of urban traffic.So let's not worry too much >> about the high pitched screams coming from >> >> the >> >> pampered lot of car users (and to some extent from two wheelers) >> >> protesting >> >> against dedicated BRT lanes taking away *their* road space, and >> let's >> >> reach >> >> the gagged-majority who have been at the receiving end of the stick >> ever since our cities became car-dominated *and if necessary bring >> them on >> >> the >> >> roads to block the MV lanes and put the personal cars in their >> place.*Does this sound extreme? Not when contrasted with the obscene >> arrogant >> >> rant >> >> coming from Mr Chandan Mitra - representing the car >> >> lobby/media/politician >> >> clique on the recent CNN IBN TV report about the mess accompanying >> the >> >> BRT >> >> trials in Delhi.-- SujitOn Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Abhay >> Patil >> >> wrote: >> >> Looks like BRTS in Delhi has reached a flash point. From the >> visuals >> >> (CNN >> >> IBN, newspapers) it looks like Delhi's implementation is no better >> than Pune. Empty BRTS lanes, sloppy junctions, ordinary bus stops and >> so >> >> on. I >> >> don't know what went amiss in the capital. Sheila Dixit has >> promised >> >> that >> >> she would make an all out effort to remove the glitches in a few >> weeks. Most important - she has said that she would not hesitate to >> drop the project if they are unable to get their act together right >> away.On a positive note - everybody is looking at BRTS now. On a >> negative >> >> note >> >> - it is appears to be quite a tall order to fix it. Given the ugly >> >> >> traffic >> >> jams and vociferousness of folks like journalist MP Chandan Mitra - >> it >> >> is >> >> quite likely that the baby would be thrown out with the bath water! >> >> >> And, >> >> that would have serious repercussions on BRTS in other cities. I >> can >> >> not >> >> imagine the cacophony that would ensue once that happens...-Abhay >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT >> NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via >> YAHOOGROUPS.Please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the >> real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups >> version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real >> sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you >> can). Apologies for the confusing >> arrangement.========================================================= >> ======= >> >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing >> countries (the 'Global South'). > > > -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From bruun at seas.upenn.edu Fri May 9 07:32:42 2008 From: bruun at seas.upenn.edu (bruun at seas.upenn.edu) Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 18:32:42 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Quoted text about Mass transit modes "competition" In-Reply-To: <482281E2.1090400@gmail.com> References: <4cfd20aa0804250038k343da7cama026aaa2bfe99972@mail.gmail.com><4cfd20aa0804250041n56b7aca1td97093e8cd486d3c@mail.gmail.com><20080426214839.ww8ircdfacso84cc@webmail.seas.upenn.edu><4cfd20aa0804270328q3215c523ga08c49270a095ea6@mail.gmail.com> <20080428175902.3z54of00040c8o80@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <20080428211854.2flsgmnuw0gowowo@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <48220441.70808@gmail.com> <20080507212250.5gdomdcqw9w4wso8@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <482281E2.1090400@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080508183242.cckaohppss00k44c@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> Carlos Of course, it all sounds good, and who can disagree? We should look at all modes. And we shouldn't start by assuming a mode, but by reviewing a particular situation on its merits. I have no quarrel with this part of your book. I quarrel with your analyis and comparison methodologies and your assumptions about performance of various modes. In point of fact, your ultimate outcome is virtually always in favor of BRT, regardless of the city. I hold as an exmaple the one we started with: Delhi. This is a city of approximately 13 million people with extreme population densities in some places, long distances requiring high speeds to cover long distances, and serious opposition to dedicated use of roads for public transport -- a fact that is all too evident right now. Yet even here you speak harshly of rapid transit. So can you blame me for suspecting that you are not objective? Eric Bruun Quoting Carlosfelipe Pardo : > Eric, > > Thanks for your point of view. The excerpts below from the planning > guide itself may be useful to see if it is truly objective or not. I > invite everyone else to give their opinion. > > ?Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is thus just one of the many public > transport technology options. Additionally, there are a range of > rail-based public transport systems that are possible, including > underground metros, elevated rail systems, Light Rail Transit (LRT), > and trams (Figures 2.1 through 2.6). No one of these options is > inherently correct or incorrect. Local conditions and local > preferences play a significant role in determining the preferred > system type? > > The decision to select a particular technology depends upon many > factors. Costs, performance characteristics, local conditions, and > personal preferences have historically all played a role in the > decision-making process? > > In recent years, significant debate amongst transport professionals > has occurred on whether BRT or rail-based solutions are the most > appropriate. Such competition between systems can actually be > healthy as it implies an environment in which all technologies must > strive to improve. A rigorous evaluation process will help ensure > that a city makes the most appropriate choice? > > In reality, a top-down approach that begins with a technology focus > is perhaps not the ideal. It is much preferred to define desired > public transport characteristics prior to selecting a particular > technology. By understanding customer needs with respect to fare > levels, routing and location, travel time, comfort, safety, > security, frequency of service, quality of infrastructure, and ease > of access, system developers can define the preferred type of > service without bias toward any particular technology (Figure 2.15). > Thus, much of the planning noted in this Planning Guide can > actually be conducted without committing to one type of technology > over another. In this scenario, the public transport technology is > one of the last issues to be introduced in the decision-making > process. Such a customer-orientated approach will likely have the > best chance of producing a public transport service that can > effectively compete with the private automobile? > > The choice of public transport technology should be based on a range > of considerations with performance and cost being amongst the most > important. As suggested, these requirements are ideally derived from > an objective analysis of the existing and projected situation. > Table 2.1 outlines categories of the characteristics that can help > shape a city?s decision towards the most appropriate type of public > transport technology. > > *Table 2.1 Factors in choosing a type of public transport technology* > > Category > > > > Factor > > *Cost* > > > > *Capital costs (infrastructure and property costs)* > > * * > > > > *Operating costs* > > * * > > > > *Planning costs* > > *Planning and management* > > > > *Planning and implementation time* > > * * > > > > *Management and administration* > > *Design* > > > > *Scalability* > > * * > > > > *Flexibility* > > * * > > > > *Diversity versus homogeneity* > > *Performance* > > > > *Capacity* > > * * > > > > *Travel time / speed* > > * * > > > > *Service frequency* > > * * > > > > *Reliability* > > * * > > > > *Comfort* > > * * > > > > *Safety* > > * * > > > > *Customer service* > > * * > > > > *Image and perception* > > *Impacts* > > > > *Economic impacts * > > * * > > > > *Social impacts * > > * * > > > > *Environmental impacts * > > * * > > > > *Urban impacts* > > Again, no one public transport solution is the right solution for > all cities. The local circumstances and public policy objectives > play a significant role in selecting the most appropriate public > transport solution for any city.? > > > > bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: >> Carlos >> >> I have read most of the chapter to which you refer and much of the >> BRT Planning Guide. I just don't happen to agree that your >> comparisons are as "real and objective" as you think that they are. >> By making a guide that pretty much recommends BRT for every >> situation, no matter how big the city, no matter what the >> priorities or weightings of the various project goals might be, no >> matter how dense the development of the city or its geography, what >> rights-of-way are available (or not), or how bad the traffic is, >> maybe your consortium is not completely objective either. >> >> Eric Bruun >> >> >> Quoting Carlosfelipe Pardo : >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I think the whole topic of mass transit modes (bus-based, rail-based, >>> and its divisions) cries for a real and objective comparison in terms >>> of characteristics, real (not theoretical) capacities, costs, impacts >>> and long term benefits, plus other stuff like social impact of the >>> city where a system is implemented (employment, local operator >>> involvement, etc). The issue of projected - real costs has been >>> reviewed and has given some impressive results (in the negative >>> sense). The recent BRT Planning Guide from ITDP, GTZ, UNEP, GEF, >>> Hewlett, Viva has a nice chapter on this issue, which I invite >>> everyone to check out (and the whole guide, for that matter). >>> >>> The real problem with fighting between rail and bus-based options is >>> that, in the meantime, people are getting off public transport and >>> into cars... >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Carlos. >>> >>> bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: >>> >>> BrendanDid I say I defend such estimates? I don't know the history >>> of who sanctioned the estimates, but I don't automatically blame >>> consultants or the industry. Sometimes it is the politicians who hunt >>> around for someone who will say what they want to hear. This estimate >>> should never have been taken seriously. I also know that in some cases >>> the fares changed dramatically from the original assumptions, >>> important destinations get deleted, etc.As I have said before, I am >>> not opposing BRT. But my main point still holds, I think. It is pretty >>> unfair to say that a 65 km system carrying 600,000 per day is >>> "abysmal" by comparing it to the hypothetical performance of BRT that >>> is currently carrying about 0 passengers, 10 years after both projects >>> were initiated.I also think it is short-sighted to not take into >>> account the long-term impacts on sustainability. This can also justify >>> higher initial capital costs. If rail succeeds in supporting >>> densification of land use, this benefit will last for perpetuity. This >>> would make a good topic for future discussion.Eric BruunIQuoting >>> Brendan Finn : >>> >>> Dear Eric,When a very large amount of public money is sanctioned >>> based on a projection which turns out to be 5 times higher than the >>> actual out-turn, there is something seriously wrong. And not just >>> with the math. Patronage and financial projections for rail-based >>> systems are very seriously wrong time and time again. Are you telling >>> us that consultants didn't learn after the first few occasions and >>> are incapable of revising their methodologies?A lot of metro and rail >>> projects around the world get approved on dodgy math and >>> wildly-optimistic assumptions which don't come to pass. It is >>> systematic within the sector. This is gross and wilful deception, >>> aided and abetted by companies that present themselves as >>> professionals. Whether or not it is a nice metro does not excuse such >>> practices.With best wishes,Brendan. >>> _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel >>> : >>> +353.87.2530286----- Original Message ----- From: >>> To: "Sujit Patwardhan" Cc: >>> "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport" >>> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 10:59 >>> PM Subject: [sustran] Re: BRTS in Delhi >>> >>> Sujit3.1 million per day is unrealistic. It always was. That >>> doesn't make Metro a bad idea just because someone made bad >>> predictions.But 600,000 is not insignificant. You can argue that BRT >>> would be better value for money, but how much has been built? Both >>> BRT and the Metro were authorized in 1997. One is working and making a >>> valuable contribution, the other still is not. Yet, we keep hearing >>> that BRT can be done quickly and Metros take forever.Eric BruunQuoting >>> Sujit Patwardhan : >>> >>> Dear Eric,65 Kilometers is correct. And the ridership of 600,000 >>> *is* "abysmal" when compared to the project projection of over 3.1 >>> million. When projects involving huge sums (of people's money) are >>> invested in a project meant to produce specific result it is highly >>> objectionable when the actual figures fall short not by 5% or 10% but >>> by over 80%.This is how most *non viable* projects are cooked up >>> whether they be Mega Dams or Transportation / Urban infrastructure >>> projects. If the ridership of 3.1 million seems ridiculous, why did >>> the Govt sanction the project, particularly when much cheaper options >>> were available?I don't think figures of ridership on the Washington >>> Metro are quite relevant to Asian countries with much higher >>> population densities. Pune Municipal Transport buses of very poor >>> quality, for instance carry over 600,000 commuters each day. They do >>> this with about 650 buses which are of old technology, and in poor >>> condition of upkeep. We feel Pune with about 2000 modern semi low >>> floor and efficient buses would be able to provide excellent quality >>> public transport with a citywide network. If the city were to provide >>> the same coverage by Metro we will need 10 years or more to make it >>> functional and be certainly driven to bankruptcy. And everyone knows >>> that Bogota's Transmilenio carries more passengers than the >>> Washington Metro at a much lower cost .So there are serious problems >>> with Metro but politicians love expensive projects and this is >>> supported by the elites who want to keep up with the Jones's. They say >>> if Bangkok can have a Metro why not India? Much like the juvenile >>> boast of "mine's bigger than yours" . I think we need to move beyond >>> that and face the hard reality of a choice between car dominated >>> "business as usual" scenario and the alternative "New Mobility" vision >>> that honours walking, cycling and affordable public transport system >>> -- best of which today appears to be the BRT.-- SujitOn Sun, Apr 27, >>> 2008 at 7:18 AM, wrote: >>> >>> AashishThanks for the ridership figure. (I think the 65 km is out >>> of date. It was 66 kms 3 years ago.)The reason I was asking is that >>> Sujit said the ridership was "abysmal." But 600,000 persons for 66 kms >>> is actually pretty crowded. The Washington Metro is 105 miles (over >>> 160 kms) and several of the lines are genuinely crush loaded during >>> the rush hours with only 700,000 passengers per day. Admittedly, >>> people in the U.S. tend to be larger than in India, which also >>> aggravates the crowding.As for an estimate of 3.1 Million, this seems >>> ridiculous. Of course, it isn't going to meet that. Maybe if the fare >>> was assumed to be very low and crowding standards were >>> extreme......EricQuoting Sujit Patwardhan : >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sujit Patwardhan >>> Date: Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:08 PM Subject: Re: >>> [pttfgen:1409] BRTS in Delhi To: pttfgen@googlegroups.com25 April >>> 2008BRT in Delhi =========Yes problems galore and I've been following >>> the reports in the media including the CNN IBN that Ashok Datar was to >>> appear on, but didn't for >>> >>> some >>> >>> reason.My take on all this is as follows:Deterioration in traffic >>> has been an ongoing process in many Asian >>> >>> cities >>> >>> for the last 3 decades or more. Like the frog sitting in a beaker >>> of >>> >>> water >>> >>> being slowly heated it has not had an occasion to "explode". Metro >>> was >>> >>> taken >>> >>> up and executed brilliantly by Mr. E Sridharan, with attention to >>> the minutest detail and a free hand guaranteeing "no interference" >>> from politicians. On top of that every lapse and overshooting of >>> budgets as >>> >>> well >>> >>> as abysmally poor ridership compared to the projected figures was >>> >>> >>> pardoned >>> >>> by a supportive Govt and compensated from additional funds made >>> >>> available >>> >>> without delay and cloaked in secrecy.*Delhi Metro project is a >>> marketing triumph that fills every Indian's >>> >>> chest >>> >>> with pride*. However, how much travel-coverage (as Public >>> Transport) the very expensive Metro will be able to provide is a big >>> question mark. >>> >>> There >>> >>> is also the real possibility that the amount spent on the Metro >>> >>> represents >>> >>> lost opportunity for other investments - like libraries and >>> cultural centres, gardens, public spaces and other amenities needed by >>> the city. >>> >>> *But >>> >>> in the final analysis we should accept that the Metro is pubic >>> transport >>> >>> and >>> >>> hence we must support it* unlike the eight lane highways, flyovers, >>> multistory car parks and other infrastructures being *routinely >>> provided >>> >>> by >>> >>> the city as subsidy to ever growing number of car and 2 wheeler >>> owners >>> >>> at >>> >>> the cost of other more efficient modes of travel.*BRT unlike the >>> Metro has to deal with the existing conditions on our >>> >>> roads. >>> >>> Of indiscipline, rampant irregularities, encroachments, poor >>> >>> engineering, >>> >>> lack of understanding about the rights of pedestrians, cyclists and >>> non personal auto users. So if the road surface is poor BRT is blamed, >>> if drivers are indisciplined BRT is blamed, if a car stalls in the MV >>> lane >>> >>> and >>> >>> clogs up the traffic it is perceived as a problem caused by the >>> BRT. If >>> >>> the >>> >>> BRT lanes look empty (as indeed they will - considering each bus >>> carries many more people), it is seen as waste of an expensive >>> resource -- >>> >>> although >>> >>> not many of these critics complained much all these years about the >>> >>> >>> *wasteful >>> >>> use of resources when low occupancy cars filled up these very >>> roads* - >>> >>> well >>> >>> before BRT appeared on the scene.So it is clear that BRT planning >>> should have been rooted in outreach and marketing it as a concept that >>> will improve mobility (of people as >>> >>> against >>> >>> just near-empty personal vehicles), will greatly improve access >>> for >>> >>> people >>> >>> who are today helpless captive users of uncomfortable and outdated >>> >>> >>> buses, it >>> >>> will provide an option to those who are forced to use personal >>> >>> transport, >>> >>> not necessarily out of choice but compulsion, and as benefits of a >>> >>> >>> growing >>> >>> BRT network becomes visible and better, more comfortable and even >>> A/C >>> >>> buses >>> >>> start plying on the BRT corridors, the higher middle class and even >>> the >>> >>> rich >>> >>> will have no problem patronizing this mode for purely rational >>> reasons >>> >>> of >>> >>> getting a faster, more punctual, comfortable and stress-free mode >>> of >>> >>> travel. >>> >>> This indeed is the situation in many cities in Europe and while we >>> have >>> >>> no >>> >>> qualms about importing western concepts (English medium education, >>> >>> >>> wearing >>> >>> suits and tie however uncomfortable they may be in our weather, >>> >>> listening to >>> >>> western music, eating the big Mac (ughhh) and even importing >>> >>> Cheerleaders >>> >>> for our newly formed Cricket Series) why do we suddenly start >>> protesting when our capital city tries to copy a Western/ Latin >>> American idea of excellent bus system/BRT calling it a foreign >>> concept??????The need is to publicise wider benefits of public >>> transport and to reach >>> >>> the >>> >>> *majority *of citizens who are users/potential users of *bus based >>> >>> >>> public >>> >>> transport, cycling and walking* in the city. (It is they who will >>> >>> >>> benefit >>> >>> most from a good BRT)It is this huge majority of commuters who will >>> have the opportunity of breaking free from the shackles of our present >>> horrendous conditions of urban traffic.So let's not worry too much >>> about the high pitched screams coming from >>> >>> the >>> >>> pampered lot of car users (and to some extent from two wheelers) >>> >>> protesting >>> >>> against dedicated BRT lanes taking away *their* road space, and >>> let's >>> >>> reach >>> >>> the gagged-majority who have been at the receiving end of the stick >>> ever since our cities became car-dominated *and if necessary bring >>> them on >>> >>> the >>> >>> roads to block the MV lanes and put the personal cars in their >>> place.*Does this sound extreme? Not when contrasted with the obscene >>> arrogant >>> >>> rant >>> >>> coming from Mr Chandan Mitra - representing the car >>> >>> lobby/media/politician >>> >>> clique on the recent CNN IBN TV report about the mess accompanying >>> the >>> >>> BRT >>> >>> trials in Delhi.-- SujitOn Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Abhay >>> Patil >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Looks like BRTS in Delhi has reached a flash point. From the >>> visuals >>> >>> (CNN >>> >>> IBN, newspapers) it looks like Delhi's implementation is no better >>> than Pune. Empty BRTS lanes, sloppy junctions, ordinary bus stops and >>> so >>> >>> on. I >>> >>> don't know what went amiss in the capital. Sheila Dixit has >>> promised >>> >>> that >>> >>> she would make an all out effort to remove the glitches in a few >>> weeks. Most important - she has said that she would not hesitate to >>> drop the project if they are unable to get their act together right >>> away.On a positive note - everybody is looking at BRTS now. On a >>> negative >>> >>> note >>> >>> - it is appears to be quite a tall order to fix it. Given the ugly >>> >>> >>> traffic >>> >>> jams and vociferousness of folks like journalist MP Chandan Mitra - >>> it >>> >>> is >>> >>> quite likely that the baby would be thrown out with the bath water! >>> >>> >>> And, >>> >>> that would have serious repercussions on BRTS in other cities. I >>> can >>> >>> not >>> >>> imagine the cacophony that would ensue once that happens...-Abhay >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT >>> NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via >>> YAHOOGROUPS.Please go to >>> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the >>> real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups >>> version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real >>> sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you >>> can). Apologies for the confusing >>> arrangement.================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of >>> people-centred, >>> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing >>> countries (the 'Global South'). >> >> >> From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Fri May 9 08:27:34 2008 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 18:27:34 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Quoted text about Mass transit modes "competition" In-Reply-To: <20080508183242.cckaohppss00k44c@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> References: <4cfd20aa0804250038k343da7cama026aaa2bfe99972@mail.gmail.com><4cfd20aa0804250041n56b7aca1td97093e8cd486d3c@mail.gmail.com><20080426214839.ww8ircdfacso84cc@webmail.seas.upenn.edu><4cfd20aa0804270328q3215c523ga08c49270a095ea6@mail.gmail.com> <20080428175902.3z54of00040c8o80@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <20080428211854.2flsgmnuw0gowowo@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <48220441.70808@gmail.com> <20080507212250.5gdomdcqw9w4wso8@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> <482281E2.1090400@gmail.com> <20080508183242.cckaohppss00k44c@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> Message-ID: <48238C66.50004@gmail.com> Eric, Thanks for your feedback. So we agree on my initial remark: > I think the whole topic of mass transit modes (bus-based, rail-based, > and its divisions) cries for a real and objective comparison in terms > of characteristics, real (not theoretical) capacities, costs, impacts > and long term benefits, plus other stuff like social impact of the > city where a system is implemented (employment, local operator > involvement, etc). Any suggestions on other documents or research that provides an objective point of view would be great. From my point of view, the BRT planning guide (which is not "mine", as you imply) is a good resource. I look forward to your suggestions about recent publications that can also provide greater information to this discussion. (sorry to everyone else if this discussion is becoming a ping-pong). Best regards, Carlos. bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: > Carlos > > Of course, it all sounds good, and who can disagree? We should look at > all modes. And we shouldn't start by assuming a mode, but by reviewing > a particular situation on its merits. I have no quarrel with this part > of your book. I quarrel with your analyis and comparison methodologies > and your assumptions about performance of various modes. > > In point of fact, your ultimate outcome is virtually always in favor > of BRT, regardless of the city. I hold as an exmaple the one we > started with: Delhi. This is a city of approximately 13 million people > with extreme population densities in some places, long distances > requiring high speeds to cover long distances, and serious opposition > to dedicated use of roads for public transport -- a fact that is all > too evident right now. Yet even here you speak harshly of rapid > transit. So can you blame me for suspecting that you are not objective? > > Eric Bruun > > Quoting Carlosfelipe Pardo : > > >> Eric, >> >> Thanks for your point of view. The excerpts below from the planning >> guide itself may be useful to see if it is truly objective or not. I >> invite everyone else to give their opinion. >> >> ?Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is thus just one of the many public >> transport technology options. Additionally, there are a range of >> rail-based public transport systems that are possible, including >> underground metros, elevated rail systems, Light Rail Transit (LRT), >> and trams (Figures 2.1 through 2.6). No one of these options is >> inherently correct or incorrect. Local conditions and local >> preferences play a significant role in determining the preferred >> system type? >> >> The decision to select a particular technology depends upon many >> factors. Costs, performance characteristics, local conditions, and >> personal preferences have historically all played a role in the >> decision-making process? >> >> In recent years, significant debate amongst transport professionals >> has occurred on whether BRT or rail-based solutions are the most >> appropriate. Such competition between systems can actually be >> healthy as it implies an environment in which all technologies must >> strive to improve. A rigorous evaluation process will help ensure >> that a city makes the most appropriate choice? >> >> In reality, a top-down approach that begins with a technology focus >> is perhaps not the ideal. It is much preferred to define desired >> public transport characteristics prior to selecting a particular >> technology. By understanding customer needs with respect to fare >> levels, routing and location, travel time, comfort, safety, >> security, frequency of service, quality of infrastructure, and ease >> of access, system developers can define the preferred type of >> service without bias toward any particular technology (Figure 2.15). >> Thus, much of the planning noted in this Planning Guide can >> actually be conducted without committing to one type of technology >> over another. In this scenario, the public transport technology is >> one of the last issues to be introduced in the decision-making >> process. Such a customer-orientated approach will likely have the >> best chance of producing a public transport service that can >> effectively compete with the private automobile? >> >> The choice of public transport technology should be based on a range >> of considerations with performance and cost being amongst the most >> important. As suggested, these requirements are ideally derived from >> an objective analysis of the existing and projected situation. >> Table 2.1 outlines categories of the characteristics that can help >> shape a city?s decision towards the most appropriate type of public >> transport technology. >> >> *Table 2.1 Factors in choosing a type of public transport technology* >> >> Category >> >> >> >> Factor >> >> *Cost* >> >> >> >> *Capital costs (infrastructure and property costs)* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Operating costs* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Planning costs* >> >> *Planning and management* >> >> >> >> *Planning and implementation time* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Management and administration* >> >> *Design* >> >> >> >> *Scalability* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Flexibility* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Diversity versus homogeneity* >> >> *Performance* >> >> >> >> *Capacity* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Travel time / speed* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Service frequency* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Reliability* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Comfort* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Safety* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Customer service* >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Image and perception* >> >> *Impacts* >> >> >> >> *Economic impacts * >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Social impacts * >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Environmental impacts * >> >> * * >> >> >> >> *Urban impacts* >> >> Again, no one public transport solution is the right solution for >> all cities. The local circumstances and public policy objectives >> play a significant role in selecting the most appropriate public >> transport solution for any city.? >> >> >> >> bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: >> >>> Carlos >>> >>> I have read most of the chapter to which you refer and much of the >>> BRT Planning Guide. I just don't happen to agree that your >>> comparisons are as "real and objective" as you think that they are. >>> By making a guide that pretty much recommends BRT for every >>> situation, no matter how big the city, no matter what the >>> priorities or weightings of the various project goals might be, no >>> matter how dense the development of the city or its geography, what >>> rights-of-way are available (or not), or how bad the traffic is, >>> maybe your consortium is not completely objective either. >>> >>> Eric Bruun >>> >>> >>> Quoting Carlosfelipe Pardo : >>> >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I think the whole topic of mass transit modes (bus-based, rail-based, >>>> and its divisions) cries for a real and objective comparison in terms >>>> of characteristics, real (not theoretical) capacities, costs, impacts >>>> and long term benefits, plus other stuff like social impact of the >>>> city where a system is implemented (employment, local operator >>>> involvement, etc). The issue of projected - real costs has been >>>> reviewed and has given some impressive results (in the negative >>>> sense). The recent BRT Planning Guide from ITDP, GTZ, UNEP, GEF, >>>> Hewlett, Viva has a nice chapter on this issue, which I invite >>>> everyone to check out (and the whole guide, for that matter). >>>> >>>> The real problem with fighting between rail and bus-based options is >>>> that, in the meantime, people are getting off public transport and >>>> into cars... >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Carlos. >>>> >>>> bruun@seas.upenn.edu wrote: >>>> >>>> BrendanDid I say I defend such estimates? I don't know the history >>>> of who sanctioned the estimates, but I don't automatically blame >>>> consultants or the industry. Sometimes it is the politicians who hunt >>>> around for someone who will say what they want to hear. This estimate >>>> should never have been taken seriously. I also know that in some cases >>>> the fares changed dramatically from the original assumptions, >>>> important destinations get deleted, etc.As I have said before, I am >>>> not opposing BRT. But my main point still holds, I think. It is pretty >>>> unfair to say that a 65 km system carrying 600,000 per day is >>>> "abysmal" by comparing it to the hypothetical performance of BRT that >>>> is currently carrying about 0 passengers, 10 years after both projects >>>> were initiated.I also think it is short-sighted to not take into >>>> account the long-term impacts on sustainability. This can also justify >>>> higher initial capital costs. If rail succeeds in supporting >>>> densification of land use, this benefit will last for perpetuity. This >>>> would make a good topic for future discussion.Eric BruunIQuoting >>>> Brendan Finn : >>>> >>>> Dear Eric,When a very large amount of public money is sanctioned >>>> based on a projection which turns out to be 5 times higher than the >>>> actual out-turn, there is something seriously wrong. And not just >>>> with the math. Patronage and financial projections for rail-based >>>> systems are very seriously wrong time and time again. Are you telling >>>> us that consultants didn't learn after the first few occasions and >>>> are incapable of revising their methodologies?A lot of metro and rail >>>> projects around the world get approved on dodgy math and >>>> wildly-optimistic assumptions which don't come to pass. It is >>>> systematic within the sector. This is gross and wilful deception, >>>> aided and abetted by companies that present themselves as >>>> professionals. Whether or not it is a nice metro does not excuse such >>>> practices.With best wishes,Brendan. >>>> _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel >>>> : >>>> +353.87.2530286----- Original Message ----- From: >>>> To: "Sujit Patwardhan" Cc: >>>> "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport" >>>> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 10:59 >>>> PM Subject: [sustran] Re: BRTS in Delhi >>>> >>>> Sujit3.1 million per day is unrealistic. It always was. That >>>> doesn't make Metro a bad idea just because someone made bad >>>> predictions.But 600,000 is not insignificant. You can argue that BRT >>>> would be better value for money, but how much has been built? Both >>>> BRT and the Metro were authorized in 1997. One is working and making a >>>> valuable contribution, the other still is not. Yet, we keep hearing >>>> that BRT can be done quickly and Metros take forever.Eric BruunQuoting >>>> Sujit Patwardhan : >>>> >>>> Dear Eric,65 Kilometers is correct. And the ridership of 600,000 >>>> *is* "abysmal" when compared to the project projection of over 3.1 >>>> million. When projects involving huge sums (of people's money) are >>>> invested in a project meant to produce specific result it is highly >>>> objectionable when the actual figures fall short not by 5% or 10% but >>>> by over 80%.This is how most *non viable* projects are cooked up >>>> whether they be Mega Dams or Transportation / Urban infrastructure >>>> projects. If the ridership of 3.1 million seems ridiculous, why did >>>> the Govt sanction the project, particularly when much cheaper options >>>> were available?I don't think figures of ridership on the Washington >>>> Metro are quite relevant to Asian countries with much higher >>>> population densities. Pune Municipal Transport buses of very poor >>>> quality, for instance carry over 600,000 commuters each day. They do >>>> this with about 650 buses which are of old technology, and in poor >>>> condition of upkeep. We feel Pune with about 2000 modern semi low >>>> floor and efficient buses would be able to provide excellent quality >>>> public transport with a citywide network. If the city were to provide >>>> the same coverage by Metro we will need 10 years or more to make it >>>> functional and be certainly driven to bankruptcy. And everyone knows >>>> that Bogota's Transmilenio carries more passengers than the >>>> Washington Metro at a much lower cost .So there are serious problems >>>> with Metro but politicians love expensive projects and this is >>>> supported by the elites who want to keep up with the Jones's. They say >>>> if Bangkok can have a Metro why not India? Much like the juvenile >>>> boast of "mine's bigger than yours" . I think we need to move beyond >>>> that and face the hard reality of a choice between car dominated >>>> "business as usual" scenario and the alternative "New Mobility" vision >>>> that honours walking, cycling and affordable public transport system >>>> -- best of which today appears to be the BRT.-- SujitOn Sun, Apr 27, >>>> 2008 at 7:18 AM, wrote: >>>> >>>> AashishThanks for the ridership figure. (I think the 65 km is out >>>> of date. It was 66 kms 3 years ago.)The reason I was asking is that >>>> Sujit said the ridership was "abysmal." But 600,000 persons for 66 kms >>>> is actually pretty crowded. The Washington Metro is 105 miles (over >>>> 160 kms) and several of the lines are genuinely crush loaded during >>>> the rush hours with only 700,000 passengers per day. Admittedly, >>>> people in the U.S. tend to be larger than in India, which also >>>> aggravates the crowding.As for an estimate of 3.1 Million, this seems >>>> ridiculous. Of course, it isn't going to meet that. Maybe if the fare >>>> was assumed to be very low and crowding standards were >>>> extreme......EricQuoting Sujit Patwardhan : >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sujit Patwardhan >>>> Date: Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:08 PM Subject: Re: >>>> [pttfgen:1409] BRTS in Delhi To: pttfgen@googlegroups.com25 April >>>> 2008BRT in Delhi =========Yes problems galore and I've been following >>>> the reports in the media including the CNN IBN that Ashok Datar was to >>>> appear on, but didn't for >>>> >>>> some >>>> >>>> reason.My take on all this is as follows:Deterioration in traffic >>>> has been an ongoing process in many Asian >>>> >>>> cities >>>> >>>> for the last 3 decades or more. Like the frog sitting in a beaker >>>> of >>>> >>>> water >>>> >>>> being slowly heated it has not had an occasion to "explode". Metro >>>> was >>>> >>>> taken >>>> >>>> up and executed brilliantly by Mr. E Sridharan, with attention to >>>> the minutest detail and a free hand guaranteeing "no interference" >>>> from politicians. On top of that every lapse and overshooting of >>>> budgets as >>>> >>>> well >>>> >>>> as abysmally poor ridership compared to the projected figures was >>>> >>>> >>>> pardoned >>>> >>>> by a supportive Govt and compensated from additional funds made >>>> >>>> available >>>> >>>> without delay and cloaked in secrecy.*Delhi Metro project is a >>>> marketing triumph that fills every Indian's >>>> >>>> chest >>>> >>>> with pride*. However, how much travel-coverage (as Public >>>> Transport) the very expensive Metro will be able to provide is a big >>>> question mark. >>>> >>>> There >>>> >>>> is also the real possibility that the amount spent on the Metro >>>> >>>> represents >>>> >>>> lost opportunity for other investments - like libraries and >>>> cultural centres, gardens, public spaces and other amenities needed by >>>> the city. >>>> >>>> *But >>>> >>>> in the final analysis we should accept that the Metro is pubic >>>> transport >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> hence we must support it* unlike the eight lane highways, flyovers, >>>> multistory car parks and other infrastructures being *routinely >>>> provided >>>> >>>> by >>>> >>>> the city as subsidy to ever growing number of car and 2 wheeler >>>> owners >>>> >>>> at >>>> >>>> the cost of other more efficient modes of travel.*BRT unlike the >>>> Metro has to deal with the existing conditions on our >>>> >>>> roads. >>>> >>>> Of indiscipline, rampant irregularities, encroachments, poor >>>> >>>> engineering, >>>> >>>> lack of understanding about the rights of pedestrians, cyclists and >>>> non personal auto users. So if the road surface is poor BRT is blamed, >>>> if drivers are indisciplined BRT is blamed, if a car stalls in the MV >>>> lane >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> clogs up the traffic it is perceived as a problem caused by the >>>> BRT. If >>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> BRT lanes look empty (as indeed they will - considering each bus >>>> carries many more people), it is seen as waste of an expensive >>>> resource -- >>>> >>>> although >>>> >>>> not many of these critics complained much all these years about the >>>> >>>> >>>> *wasteful >>>> >>>> use of resources when low occupancy cars filled up these very >>>> roads* - >>>> >>>> well >>>> >>>> before BRT appeared on the scene.So it is clear that BRT planning >>>> should have been rooted in outreach and marketing it as a concept that >>>> will improve mobility (of people as >>>> >>>> against >>>> >>>> just near-empty personal vehicles), will greatly improve access >>>> for >>>> >>>> people >>>> >>>> who are today helpless captive users of uncomfortable and outdated >>>> >>>> >>>> buses, it >>>> >>>> will provide an option to those who are forced to use personal >>>> >>>> transport, >>>> >>>> not necessarily out of choice but compulsion, and as benefits of a >>>> >>>> >>>> growing >>>> >>>> BRT network becomes visible and better, more comfortable and even >>>> A/C >>>> >>>> buses >>>> >>>> start plying on the BRT corridors, the higher middle class and even >>>> the >>>> >>>> rich >>>> >>>> will have no problem patronizing this mode for purely rational >>>> reasons >>>> >>>> of >>>> >>>> getting a faster, more punctual, comfortable and stress-free mode >>>> of >>>> >>>> travel. >>>> >>>> This indeed is the situation in many cities in Europe and while we >>>> have >>>> >>>> no >>>> >>>> qualms about importing western concepts (English medium education, >>>> >>>> >>>> wearing >>>> >>>> suits and tie however uncomfortable they may be in our weather, >>>> >>>> listening to >>>> >>>> western music, eating the big Mac (ughhh) and even importing >>>> >>>> Cheerleaders >>>> >>>> for our newly formed Cricket Series) why do we suddenly start >>>> protesting when our capital city tries to copy a Western/ Latin >>>> American idea of excellent bus system/BRT calling it a foreign >>>> concept??????The need is to publicise wider benefits of public >>>> transport and to reach >>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> *majority *of citizens who are users/potential users of *bus based >>>> >>>> >>>> public >>>> >>>> transport, cycling and walking* in the city. (It is they who will >>>> >>>> >>>> benefit >>>> >>>> most from a good BRT)It is this huge majority of commuters who will >>>> have the opportunity of breaking free from the shackles of our present >>>> horrendous conditions of urban traffic.So let's not worry too much >>>> about the high pitched screams coming from >>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> pampered lot of car users (and to some extent from two wheelers) >>>> >>>> protesting >>>> >>>> against dedicated BRT lanes taking away *their* road space, and >>>> let's >>>> >>>> reach >>>> >>>> the gagged-majority who have been at the receiving end of the stick >>>> ever since our cities became car-dominated *and if necessary bring >>>> them on >>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> roads to block the MV lanes and put the personal cars in their >>>> place.*Does this sound extreme? Not when contrasted with the obscene >>>> arrogant >>>> >>>> rant >>>> >>>> coming from Mr Chandan Mitra - representing the car >>>> >>>> lobby/media/politician >>>> >>>> clique on the recent CNN IBN TV report about the mess accompanying >>>> the >>>> >>>> BRT >>>> >>>> trials in Delhi.-- SujitOn Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Abhay >>>> Patil >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Looks like BRTS in Delhi has reached a flash point. From the >>>> visuals >>>> >>>> (CNN >>>> >>>> IBN, newspapers) it looks like Delhi's implementation is no better >>>> than Pune. Empty BRTS lanes, sloppy junctions, ordinary bus stops and >>>> so >>>> >>>> on. I >>>> >>>> don't know what went amiss in the capital. Sheila Dixit has >>>> promised >>>> >>>> that >>>> >>>> she would make an all out effort to remove the glitches in a few >>>> weeks. Most important - she has said that she would not hesitate to >>>> drop the project if they are unable to get their act together right >>>> away.On a positive note - everybody is looking at BRTS now. On a >>>> negative >>>> >>>> note >>>> >>>> - it is appears to be quite a tall order to fix it. Given the ugly >>>> >>>> >>>> traffic >>>> >>>> jams and vociferousness of folks like journalist MP Chandan Mitra - >>>> it >>>> >>>> is >>>> >>>> quite likely that the baby would be thrown out with the bath water! >>>> >>>> >>>> And, >>>> >>>> that would have serious repercussions on BRTS in other cities. I >>>> can >>>> >>>> not >>>> >>>> imagine the cacophony that would ensue once that happens...-Abhay >>>> >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT >>>> NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via >>>> YAHOOGROUPS.Please go to >>>> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the >>>> real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups >>>> version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real >>>> sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you >>>> can). Apologies for the confusing >>>> arrangement.================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of >>>> people-centred, >>>> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing >>>> countries (the 'Global South'). >>>> >>> > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From MPai at wri.org Fri May 9 22:25:45 2008 From: MPai at wri.org (Madhav Pai) Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 09:25:45 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Note from a visit to the Delhi BRT corridorReport on Delhi BRT Message-ID: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C01CA1178@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> Report on Delhi BRT Madhav Pai EMBARQ WRI Delhi BRT - I went to Delhi on Saturday April 26, 2008. It was working quiet well. The bus lanes were working well. There were 6-8 traffic wardens at every junction instructing pedestrians, cars, bus drivers and bus passengers. The big problems they faced/fixed in the first three days - The traffic signals did not work properly. Apparently there was some lost in translation from the signal timing plans on paper and the timing inputs to the controller. - High number of bus breakdowns in the bus lane. The chief minister has suggested keeping a crane on the corridor. - The bus driver behavior was a concern. They had very little idea of what to do. The additional traffic wardens have helped providing instructions. - Motor vehicles and two wheelers in bus lanes There are still concerns, - Blue line drivers stand at the bus stop until the light turns green and don't move to the signal. - Motorcycles are using the bicycle lanes and cut in at the last moment at the junction. - The queues in the motor vehicle lanes are long. The travel time along the corridor has got substantially worse. I think flaring the roads at junctions and long turn bays may have helped and certain locations. Turn bays will require driver education as well. Anyway the proof of concept has been done and the bus lanes will stay. I have attached some pictures from the corridor. I was told they were processing 10 Buses per cycle in the peak hour. These include mini-buses, contract buses, blue line buses and the DTC CNG buses. So 10 buses per cycle, 20 cycles per hour, assuming an average occupancy 70 makes it 14,000 phpdt. They do have parallel platforms. The one bus I photographed had much more than 70 people. I would say it had over 200 people. The traffic wardens are from a private security agency. The traffic police are missing from the scene. There have been very high incidences of breakdowns of the blue line buses on the corridor. Madhav Pai India Transport Engineer EMBARQ, The WRI Center for Sustainable Transport 10 G Street NE, Suite 800 | Washington DC, 20002 email: mpai@wri.org phone: (202) 729-7683 cell: +91-99206 44182 website: embarq.wri.org blog: TheCityFix.com From c_bradshaw at rogers.com Sat May 10 01:51:33 2008 From: c_bradshaw at rogers.com (Chris Bradshaw) Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 12:51:33 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Mass transit modes "competition" References: <48223A0C.2060105@gmail.com> Message-ID: <033401c8b1f4$f418c620$0202a8c0@acer56fb35423d> Any debate over bus vs rail should consider the Ottawa experience. Ottawa chose buses for its "rapid transit" technology in the late 1970s. It uses former rail and greenspace corridors for the two lane roads which passed over and under intersecting general-traffic roads. All was fine, until a new mayor championed a rail demonstration project along an abandoned rail line running from the west of downtown to the southern extremities, just short of the airport. This started operation on a single pair of tracks about five years ago. It turned out to be more popular than anyone expected. Perhaps a bit to popular. Two years ago, it was slated to be closed down for upgrading to twin tracks and electric propulsion, and extension further south to connect a satellite city straddling our main river, all at a cost of about $900 million. But, an election and some meddling from a federal minister led to a reneging on the contract (and a threatened lawsuit from the winning bidder for $250 million-plus). Now the new council has proposed a new, much more gradiose plan, that will cost four times as much ($3.8 billion). Basically, it proposes converting the inner sections of the existing busway to rail, and putting the downtown section into a tunnel (or two, is not clear, as the present system uses two parallel streets). It is quite clearly a "political" solution. It overcomes the envy of the citizens whose far suburbs were passed over by the former council's south-axis-only plan. This shows how a community, once it had 'tasted' riding on rail, decided that the bus technology was 'old-fashioned' and wanted to modernize. As one of the people who thinks that "rapid transit" is an oxymoron, and that you can't get both with the same system, I have to agree with one of the downtown councillors that the new proposal will not garner the senior-government's dollars, since it only is a switch in technology for a nicer ride and better image, and won't attract any new riders. It's route still will avoid the concentrations of residences, jobs, and activities that lie along main streets where traffic encounters more 'conflicts.' He and I both urge a return to rail on main streets, commonly known as streetcars. It is the effort to move large volumes of people long distances during rush hour that drives 'rapid transit.' And only to jobs that are in a dense enough area to make noon-hour conveniences available and dense enough for walkability and high parking charges. And since it doesn't serve people who reasonably live fairly close to this minority of jobs that meet these requirements, this avoids 98% of the trips that should be targeted by transit. As most here know, most trips are for purposes that are not for commuting, and the destinations are far closer. There are also many people who either don't work, don't work full-time, or don't commute during rush hour who are poorly served by this narrowly defined kind of transit. I have proposed serving commuting trips at rush hour, including those to city centres (now about 15% of all jobs in Ottawa), with a combination of carsharing and ridesharing, with the cars being available at each end of the commute for 'metered' private (personal or business) travel, which itself overcomes one of the reasons people insist on driving to their jobs -- it is the only way to have access to a car during the workday! As to an ideal transit technology, I champion one that has never been built, and as far as I know, has not been proposed by anyone but me (first presented at the Auto-Free Cities Conference in Toronto in 1992). It would link surface stations at the core of distinct neighbourhoods (about 1-2 kms apart) with deep tunnels and cars riding on rail. The cars would not have any engines, but rely on gravity up to a few feet from the next station, when they would be pulled up the last bit by motors under the tracks, like roller coasters (also gravity-dependent), ensuring no high speeds at stations. I have dubbed it a "gravi-tram." Now that would be both sustainable and pedestrian-friendly! Chris Bradshaw Ottawa From arulgreen at yahoo.com Fri May 9 23:33:06 2008 From: arulgreen at yahoo.com (arul rathinam) Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 07:33:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] BRT - Reservations on the road: pause, reflect & learn Message-ID: <93971.29463.qm@web51108.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Reservations on the road: pause, reflect & learn The Hindu 06.05.2008 http://www.hindu.com/2008/05/06/stories/2008050654720800.htm Tathagata Chatterji To become successful, the BRT or any other transit system needs to grow beyond mere traffic engineering. Socio-cultural parameters need to be built in, right from the conceptualisation stage. The experimental Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system in Delhi, which reserves a portion of the road space to facilitate fast movement of high capacity buses and prioritises public transport over private, has been facing a barrage of vitriolic media criticism ever since its inception. A wary Union Urban Development Ministry has now ordered a review of the Rs.2,883-crore BRT plan for eight other cities ? Ahmedabad, Bhopal, Indore, Jaipur, Pune, Rajkot, Visakhapatnam and Vi jayawada. Apart from this, Chennai is also planning a BRT under a separate funding pattern. The controversy has put a question mark over the future of mobility in urban India. But before we apply permanent brakes ? under political and media pressure ? on a system which has succeeded in several big cities across the world, we need to pause, reflect and learn the appropriate lessons. Cities across India are now choked with cars. Between 1981 and 2001, on an average, the population of the six metro cities multiplied by 1.8 times but the number of vehicles increased by over 6 times. With 1,396 cars per square kilometre, Chennai today has a higher car density than the vastly more affluent Berlin. The crisis is sure to escalate further as the new set of mini-cars hits the roads in the near future. Cars occupy 75 per cent of road space but are used by less than 15 per cent of the populace even in the most affluent Indian cities. In contrast, buses occupy a mere 8 per cent of the road area but are used by almost 20 to 60 per cent of the people. Pedestrians and cyclists constitute an overwhelming 40 to 75 per cent of commuters but are completely marginalised in our planning system as a major part of budget allocations is consumed for road widening or flyover building, which primarily benefit cars and two wheelers. Compare this with New York, London, Paris or Singapore ? the high temples of international finance. These are all cities where people get around on foot, by cab or via mass transit. Urban policies discourage private cars. With oil prices consistently hovering above $100 a barrel and the threats of global warming looming large, there is a clear need to reprioritise our urban transportation policy in favour of public transit. Among the major urban mass transit options, the road-based bus rapids are much more economical in terms of capital cost and offer greater operational flexibility compared to rail based systems like Metro or Light Rail Transit (LRT). For the cost of one km of a metro system, about 8 to 10 km of LRT or a 30-50 km modern bus network can be developed. In terms of day-to-day running costs and ability to move large numbers of people at high speed, dedicated bus transits enjoy certain advantages over LRT systems. However, electric powered rail based systems are environmentally more sustainable ? when running in full capacity ? and have been better able to attract motorists as many stations offer park and ride facility. They also enjoy a better public image. In India, the Delhi Metro has emerged as a benchmark of efficiency in public service, even though running under huge state subsidy. It is of course wrong to see different mass transit options in an ?either-or? context, as great cities frequently have a combination of all, most often with integrated ticketing and connection at key junctions for seamless transfer. The bus rapids, light rails and tramways frequently act as feeders to the metro system. The appropriateness of the transit alternative depends on ridership pattern and economic profile of the area. Another important factor in integrated planning is scalability. That is, a particular region may start with BRT, with an eventual plan of changing over to LRT or full-fledged metro, at a future date, as demand increases. Rede Integrada de Transporte, the world?s first bus rapid transit, was pioneered in 1974 in the Brazilian industrial city of Curitiba. Enrique Pe?alosa, the former mayor of Columbia?s capital, Bogot?, started the famed Transmileno BRT in 2001 as part of his visionary concept of a more inclusive urban space. He sought to give the city back to the people through an integrated policy for pedestrian and cycle friendly streets and affordable mass transit. In doing so, of course, he had to overcome extreme political hostility. The Transmileno is now universally acknowledged as the most advanced BRT system, and operates almost like a surface metro ? even with grade separation in stretches. It has attractive stations with wheelchair access, bicycle parking and air conditioned low floor buses. The central control room monitors bus movements, round the clock, through GPS and synchronises traffic lights. The success of Bogot? has inspired other bus rapids such as the Los Angles Orange Line, Ottawa Transitway, and Adelaide O-bahn. Several Chinese cities are going big on BRT and the Beijing one will be opened before the Olympics. Of course, success in other countries does not guarantee the success of BRT in India, as we have a unique, heterogeneous traffic pattern. In most of our cities, overspeeding cars, buses, tempos, zigzagging bikers, slow push carts and jay walking pedestrians all jostle for road space with little regard for road discipline. On the other hand, adverse feedback from a small stretch in South Delhi does not mean that BRT cannot succeed elsewhere in India, for each city has certain inherent internal characteristics. Chennai, Mumbai or Kolkata have a much more compact urban form, a longer tradition of public transit and better road discipline than Delhi. The Delhi NCR has a sprawling spatial pattern, great distances and more cars than the combined figure of the other three metros. Although appropriate at a broad conceptual level, the BRT implementation in Delhi has suffered due to poor detailing and lack of interdisciplinary coordination amongst the stakeholder agencies. Undoubtedly, cars and two wheelers offer the most comfortable door-to-door journey, particularly for distances up to 15-20 km. Since the primary objective of the BRT is to reduce road congestion, all successful systems in the world offer high-quality vehicles that are clean, easy to board, and comfortable to ride. Lack of synchronisation But what the Delhi BRT has rolled out are the same accident prone, rickety tin-pot Blueline buses charging down the road in competitive frenzy. The high capacity low floor buses originally proposed and ordered for the segment have been grossly inadequate in numbers. Obviously, the bus procurement plan and BRT implementation were not synchronised. The Delhi Metro, in contrast, from the very beginning, had caught the public imagination, with its spic and span image, punctuality and attention to quality. Urban India is no longer willing to accept something second-rate and obsolete. Pedestrians, who should normally have first claim on the road in any mature city, have become the missing dimension in our transportation policy. Be it the BRT or any of the newly opened flyovers which criss-cross our cities today, the case is the same: Desperate women trying to jump over the medians or old men running through the maze of traffic to cross the road are sights common enough in India. Thus the BRT has bus stops along the central verge, but without any quick crossover. In our country, pedestrian crossovers get built only after a few fatalities ? as an afterthought. Elevated foot over bridges with long stair climbs are of course a cruel joke on the disabled and the aged. But then who cares? To become successful, the BRT or any other transit system needs to grow beyond mere traffic engineering. Socio-cultural parameters need to be built in, right from the conceptualisation stage. The issues of equity and social justice in the urban physical realm are seldom explored. We need to make our urban transportation policies more inclusive, equitable and sustainable. But the crux of the challenge lies in co-ordinated policy implementation. Failing this, the future of mobility in urban India will forever remain stuck in a jam. (The author is a Delhi-based architect and urban planner.) http://www.hindu.com/2008/05/06/stories/2008050654720800.htm ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ From chuwasg at yahoo.com Thu May 15 01:05:19 2008 From: chuwasg at yahoo.com (chuwa) Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 09:05:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] How much land does a car "eat" for a year? In-Reply-To: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C01CA1178@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> Message-ID: <432052.68645.qm@web36908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Sorry if this subject sounds funny. The long question is: How much land is need to produce enough bio-fuel for a typical car for a year? This a a question I asked my boys to trigger them to search for an answer. I don't have the answer and I would really appreciate if anyone can point me to useful pages which may contain the answer (for primary /secondary student level). After they found the answer, the next question will be: If this piece of land is used to grow food (e.g. rice), how many people can it provide for a year? With thanks, Chu Wa From zvi.leve at gmail.com Thu May 15 01:26:56 2008 From: zvi.leve at gmail.com (Zvi Leve) Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 12:26:56 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much land does a car "eat" for a year? In-Reply-To: <432052.68645.qm@web36908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C01CA1178@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> <432052.68645.qm@web36908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Chu Wa, I am familiar with a blog article which analyses the production of Ethanol from Corn and evaluates whether it is Renewable or Sustainable. The article does a global energy-balance analysis using the following assumptions: the number of metric tons of corn harvested per hectare is 9,400, a metric ton of corn produces 4,000 liters of ethanol, and that flex-fuel vehicles typically get about 20-30% fewer miles per liter when fueled with ethanol. Make your assumptions about vehicle KM's and fuel consumption per year and you can figure out how much land would be necessary per car. The author's conclude that producing ethanol from corn is neither renewable nor sustainable: [my emphasis] "*it would take all the corn in the country to displace about 3.5% of our gasoline consumption *? only slightly more than we could displace by making sure drivers' tires were inflated properly!" As Lee likes to say "Bio-fuels are for fools!" Sounds like an excellent project. Plan to do something similar for my kids when they are a bit older. Zvi On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, chuwa wrote: > Sorry if this subject sounds funny. > > The long question is: > How much land is need to produce enough bio-fuel for a typical car for a > year? > > This a a question I asked my boys to trigger them to search for an answer. > I don't have the answer and I would really appreciate if anyone can point me > to useful pages which may contain the answer (for primary /secondary student > level). > > After they found the answer, the next question will be: > If this piece of land is used to grow food (e.g. rice), how many people can > it provide for a year? > > With thanks, > > Chu Wa > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to > join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The > yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the > real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you > can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > From madhav.g.badami at mcgill.ca Thu May 15 01:26:38 2008 From: madhav.g.badami at mcgill.ca (Madhav Badami, Prof.) Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 12:26:38 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much land does a car "eat" for a year? References: <432052.68645.qm@web36908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <45AEE06A4800AF4FAD8BEF09C433D85F06325985@EXCHANGE2VS2.campus.mcgill.ca> It is not a funny question at all ... indeed, it is not just a question of how much land and other resources are consumed by the production and distribution of bio- (or any other kind of fuel), but the car itself, as well as its wastes (including that from burning the fuel), and the infrastructure for cars ... Madhav ************************************************************************ "As for the future, your task is not to foresee, but to enable it." Antoine de Saint-Exupery Madhav G. Badami, PhD School of Urban Planning and McGill School of Environment McGill University Macdonald-Harrington Building 815 Sherbrooke Street West Montreal, QC, H3A 2K6, Canada Phone: 514-398-3183 (Work); 514-486-2370 (Home) Fax: 514-398-8376; 514-398-1643 URLs: www.mcgill.ca/urbanplanning www.mcgill.ca/mse e-mail: madhav.badami@mcgill.ca -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+madhav.g.badami=mcgill.ca@list.jca.apc.org on behalf of chuwa Sent: Wed 5/14/2008 12:05 PM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] How much land does a car "eat" for a year? Sorry if this subject sounds funny. The long question is: How much land is need to produce enough bio-fuel for a typical car for a year? This a a question I asked my boys to trigger them to search for an answer. I don't have the answer and I would really appreciate if anyone can point me to useful pages which may contain the answer (for primary /secondary student level). After they found the answer, the next question will be: If this piece of land is used to grow food (e.g. rice), how many people can it provide for a year? With thanks, Chu Wa -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From info at autofrei-wohnen.de Thu May 15 02:33:18 2008 From: info at autofrei-wohnen.de (Markus Heller) Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 19:33:18 +0200 Subject: [sustran] the quote ... // Re: How much land does a car "eat" for a year? References: <432052.68645.qm@web36908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02a801c8b5e8$d10e6200$0100a8c0@Markus> An quote from a German press article: "(...) Depending on your driving style, every hundred kilometers you are using 0.2 to 0.3 people! (...)" full article: http://www.taz.de/index.php?id=archivseite&dig=2008/04/24/a0137 see below its translation in the latest WCN e-Bulletin (archive: http://www.worldcarfree.net/bulletin/) Markus Heller www.autofrei-wohnen.de/homeEngl.html * * * WORLD CARFREE NEWS >>> Edition no. 55 - May 2008 - English version (...) QUOTATION OF THE MONTH >> __________________________ "Speculation and so-called Bio-fuels are leading us to a shortening of raw food sources world-wide. The consequence: Poor people go even hungrier, so that the rich can drive their cars in a supposedly environmentally friendly way. This shows the duality of the term bio-fuels. "Bio" means life. In this case, it is the life of those, who must give them up for our gas station fill-ups. Perhaps we should, as cynical as it sounds, indicate the usage of a car in terms of hungering people per one hundred kilometers. An SUV uses the equivalent of one year of a person's food needs for every full tank of bio-fuel. Depending on your driving style, every hundred kilometers you are using 0.2 to 0.3 people! I would rather stick to my bicycle." -Marco Walter, Constance, Germany, reported in the taz, 17.4.08. __________________________ From sudhirgota at gmail.com Thu May 15 19:19:32 2008 From: sudhirgota at gmail.com (sudhir) Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 03:19:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) News Digest-Vol. 5 Issue 8 In-Reply-To: <43c6b67d-4261-4186-99bd-dbed29a29be0@i36g2000prf.googlegroups.com> References: <43c6b67d-4261-4186-99bd-dbed29a29be0@i36g2000prf.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) News Digest Vol. 5 Issue 8 15 May 2008 SUMA News Digest is a free weekly e-mail publication that features news, information, and events related to sustainable urban transportation in Asia. *** VISIT THE SUMA PAGES:http://www.cleanairnet.org/suma*** ?HEADLINES ASIA: Asia launches climate change fund with US$40m 6 May, 2008 Efforts to battle Climate change in Asia received a boost when ADB announced an establishment of a new fund of $40 million to combat climate change. The purpose of the fund is to facilitate greater investments in developing countries in Asia and the Pacific to address the causes and consequences of global warming. Money from the fund will be used to provide grant financing for technical assistance, investment projects, research and other activities. ?Read Morehttp://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72640.html GLOBAL: Pollution 'ups blood clot risk' 12 May, 2008 Harvard School of Public Health has found that breathing of air pollution affected development of deep vein thrombosis - blood clots in the legs - in a study of 2,000 people. This conclusion is set to raise the stakes in fighting the global pollution. The researchers have concluded that the pollution made the blood more sticky thus more likely to clot. Read More http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72655.html CHINA: ?Investment in public transit can help save the world 12 May, 2008 In this news report, the reporter has questioned the supply oriented policies of the government and has explained how the investment in public transit would improve the traffic/environment of a city. ?Read more to know as to why public transit can save our world. http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72649.html INDIA: Shimla Road Users and Pedestrians Act 2007 Enforced Himachal Pradesh State Government in India has enacted a Road User & Pedestrian act in order to convert the City into sustainable city. This act is an Indian version of congestion charge technique being applied in other parts of world. This act restricts the vehicle usage by charging annual fees on several roads. The charge is waived of for people who currently reside or work on those roads on submission of valid documents. Success of this scheme would popularize the concept of clean and green city. Read more http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72618.html USA : ?Unmanned Aircraft To Study Southern California Smog And Its Consequences 8 ?May, 2008 CAPPS ? The California Air Pollution Profiling study by research scientists at Scripps Institution of Oceanography aims to assess Southern California's potential for climate change its sources of air pollution. The characteristics of Southern California climate and meteorology - ranging from its dry weather to its tendency to trap rather than export smog - could make it especially prone to climate change consequences of air pollution such as accelerated snowmelt and dimming at ground level. Read this interesting article http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72661.html COMBODIA: Offer Vehicle License Plates at Point Of Sale: Cambodian PM 15 May 2008 The news report suggests that the government officials and the general public is buoyant with the announcement of vehicle retailers to provide temporary license plates on purchase of automobiles. The government hopes to control vehicle numbers with such a measure. But the moot point is whether easing of restricted, lengthy, complex procedures would actually control or induce the vehicular growth. Readmore http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72660.html More air quality and sustainable mobility news at http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/propertyvalue-14783.html * * * * INTERESTING FINDS Developing Integrated Emission Strategies for Existing Land Transport" (DIESEL) Program, Bangkok - Thailand The DIESEL program is a three year study and technical assistance project on pollution from in-use diesel vehicles in Bangkok, Thailand. The project was funded by a grant from the Energy Sector Management Assistance Programme (ESMAP) and the Environment and Social Development Department (EASES) in the East Asia and Pacific Region of the World Bank. The program aims at developing a comprehensive understanding of the in-use diesel vehicles, their emissions and emission control options and decision making for better urban air quality in Asian cities. The five principal tasks of the program were to -Enhance the capacity of local stakeholders, analyze the potential to reduce local emissions, assess the effectiveness of a select number of viable and affordable policies, prepare tools to assist decision makers and disseminate research findings through the Clean Air Initiative networks in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Read More ?http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72628.html Success stories within the road transport sector on reducing greenhouse gas emission and producing ancillary benefits (2008) ?For EU to meet its intermediate and long term targets on Climate Change it is essential that the environmental performance of the transport sector notably improves. In order to establish the best practices, EEA commissioned the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) to undertake a study identifying and reporting on 'success stories' in the road transport sector. The following six projects were cherry- picked and investigated in order to establish the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and ancillary benefits. ?The Ecodrive Programme (The Netherlands) ?Speed Control (The Netherlands) ?Environmental Zone (Czech Republic) ?London Congestion Charging Zone (United Kingdom) ?Freight Consolidation Centre (United Kingdom) ?Teleconferencing (United Kingdom) Read more:http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72632.html Brazil, India's Citizens Are Greenest, Survey Finds By : National Geographic & GlobeScan A global survey on lifestyle habits has rated Brazil and India's citizens as greenest in the whole world. National Geographic and the international polling firm GlobeScan conducted a study measuring and monitoring consumer progress toward environmentally sustainable consumption in 14 countries around the world, interviewing 14000 consumers. The index developed "Greendex" is a meta-index composed of four sub-indexes: housing, transportation, food, and consumption of goods. The goods sub-index takes into account everyday purchases and waste disposal, as well as ownership of big-ticket items such as appliances.?Read more http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72630.html ?Saving the Climate @ the Speed of Light By: ?Dennis Pamlin & ?Katalin Sozomolanyi ?Information Communication Technologies can be utilized as a demand management ? travel replace strategy. In this report, the authors strive to inspire actions that can support ICT strategy for combating climate change. The project "Saving the climate @ the speed of light" is a joint ETNO-WWF initiative. It began in Budapest after the First European Conference on Telecommunications and Sustainability on 25-26 November 2004. The conclusions of this report are really interesting. Read More ?http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72645.html * * * * * MARK YOUR CALENDARS ECOMM 2008 - The 11th Annual European Conference On Mobility Management,Travel Demand Management - Tackling Climate Change, 4-6 June-2008, Londonhttp://www.ecomm2008.eu/ Towards Carfree Cities VIII, Rethinking Mobility, Rediscovering Proximity 16-20 June 2008, Portland, Oregon, USA,http://www.carfreeportland.org/ World Cities Summit 2008, Livable and Vibrant Cities, 23-25 June 2008, Singapore,http://www.worldcities.com.sg/ Fourteenth International Conference on Urban Transport and the Environment in the 21st Century, 1 - 3 September 2008, Malta,http:// www.wessex.ac.uk/conferences/2008/urban08/ PODCAR City Sustainable Transport Conference, 14-16 September 2008, Ithaca, ?New York,http://www.podcar.org/ ithacaconference/ UITP 2nd Sustainable Development Conference Making tomorrow today 22-24 October 2008, Milan, Italyhttp://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72425.html Better Air Quality (BAQ) Workshop 2008 12-14 November 2008 Bangkok, Thailand Call for Abstracts ongoing; First Call for Pre-events http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72312.html See more SUT eventshttp://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/propertyvalue-27089.html See CAI-Asia's events calendarhttp://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/propertyvalue-13577.html * * * CONTRIBUTE * * * To contribute articles, news items, or event announcements for the next ?issue, send an email with the complete details and URL source to suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com with subject "FOR SUMA NEWS". mailto: suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com?subject=FOR_SUMA_NEWS< suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com?subject=FOR_SUMA_NEWS>. Past issues from March and April 2008 are found athttp://groups.google.com/group/suma-news * * * ABOUT SUMA * * * The Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) program of the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia), Asian Development Bank (www.adb.org), EMBARQ-the World Resources Institute Center ?for Sustainable Transport (http://embarq.wri.org), GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project (www.sutp.org), Interface for Cycling Expertise (www.cycling.nl), Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (www.itdp.org), and United Nations Center for Regional Development (www.uncrd.or.jp/est) is made possible through the generous support of the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (www.sida.se). SUMA works with Asian countries and cities to strengthen then formulation and implementation of sustainable urban transportation policies, specifically in (i) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Improving urban air quality by adopting AQM planning in sustainable transport policies and promoting public transportation, (ii) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Improving road safety by encouraging non-motorized transport and public transport, and (iii) ? ? ? ? ? ? Reducing transport's contribution to climate change by adopting a co-benefits approach with urban air quality management. From tpfarr1 at verizon.net Sat May 17 02:48:29 2008 From: tpfarr1 at verizon.net (Tom Farr) Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 13:48:29 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Think Out of the Box Message-ID: <482DC8ED.1010707@verizon.net> Philadelphia, PA May 16, 2008 Tom Farr, director, Better Times, inc. a nonprofit association. We all know cycling is great -- and, bicycles save gas, reduce traffic congestion, fight global warming and make us fit and trim instead of fat. Clearly, the world would be much better off if millions more rode bikes. And, we all know that the 700 million cars will soon be over a billion as China and India continue their economic progress; everyone loves their cars -- the power, the freedom and the sexy designs. But, the economic resources expended on cars, their roads and their fuel has grown beyond the point of rational justification. Societies around the globe want more cars, more fuel and more roads as desperately as the addict wants his fix. So, what's going to happen as gas prices continue to rise? This morning, I heard on CNN that Christiane Amanpour, their renowned* *Chief International Correspondent, rides a bike to work -- but, not today, it is raining. Let me tell you about a concept we are promoting at Better Times. "Roadways for People" are enclosed and elevated roadways for bicycles, pedestrians and small electric scooters. The reason we are so excited about them is that they are pre-designed modular components; they are simply 'assembled' to form a roadway that can run over existing streets, rivers, train tracks and parks. This means: THEY ARE VERY INEXPENSIVE. THEY DO NOT DISRUPT THE COMMUNITY DURING CONSTRUCTION. Because they are elevated, they don't compete with the cars or trucks or buses. WE WANT PEOPLE RIDING BIKES -- WE DON'T NEED TO START A WAR with car drivers fighting over limited resources (space on the asphalt). If a Roadway for People network existed in New York City, Christiane Amanpour could have ridden her bike to work because the rain wouldn't have affected her (since the roadway is enclosed); she could also ride this winter in a snowstorm (and laugh at the cars stuck on the streets below); and, she would not become one of the 15,000 struck by cars each year in New York. Here's the problem: people think in a box. A different concept = A nut talking about a stupid idea. Scientists have found only 2% of people will give serious consideration to a new concept; 97% will run away. If you happen to be one of those 2%, check out our website where this concept is discussed in great detail; you will see pictures, designs, an economic analysis and much more! Can you imagine, within 10 years 850 million people will be riding 2.6 trillion miles each year on 3,300 Roadway for People networks in urban areas around the world. This will prevent 85 billion gallons of gasoline from being burned. Give it a try -- think out of the box. Warmest regards and may you have good weather and find a safe road for biking, Tom Farr Better Times From richmond at alum.mit.edu Sat May 17 02:46:32 2008 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan Richmond) Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 22:46:32 +0500 (Caucasus Daylight Time) Subject: [sustran] Expression of Interest -- Mauritius Bus Modernization Programme Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I hope some of you might be interested in our Bus Modernization Programme in Mauritius. Our announcement is below, and you can obtain full details at the web address indicated. Best, --Jonathan EXPRESSION OF INTEREST ? MAURITIUS BUS MODERNIZATION PROGRAMME (Authorised under Section 14(12) of the Public Procurement Act 2006) (Ref No. CPB/44/2008) The Government of the Republic of Mauritius is embarking on a major Bus Modernization Programme and hereby invites Expressions of Interests for preparation of this project from qualified consulting firms or consortiums in line with the Mauritius Public Procurement Act of 2006. Financing is planned to come jointly from the Government of Mauritius and the World Bank under the Project Preparation Facility (PPF) to meet the cost of preparing the Mauritius Bus Modernization Programme. At the heart of the modernization programme will be the feasibility study, detailed design and implementation of a 25 km busway using a disused rail right of way and of 12 km of bus-only lanes to be placed along an existing motorway, the two components to be operated as an integrated high speed system. The system is needed to radically improve bus service performance, safety, convenience and reliability. The programme will also include a route restructuring and review of the regulatory and fare regimes to bring them in line with the needs of the new express bus facilities and the general interests of modernization. The Expression of Interest and all documentations, in sealed envelope marked ?EOI ? Mauritius Bus Modernization Programme?, should be sent to the Chairman, Central Procurement Board, 1st Floor, Social Security House, Julius Nyerere Avenue, Rose Hill, Mauritius on 11 June 2008 at 13.30 hours (local time) at the latest. Detailed information regarding the requirements of the Expression of Interest which include inter alia the scope of services, a brief on the terms of reference, the profile of the consultants etc is available on the website of the Ministry of Public Infrastructure, Land Transport & Shipping at http://publicinfrastructure.gov.mu. Further information and clarification may be obtained from acunniah@mail.gov.mu. 16 May 2008 ----- Jonathan Richmond Transport Adviser to the Government of Mauritius Ministry of Public Infrastructure, Land Transport and Shipping New Government Centre, Level 4 Port Louis Mauritius +230 707-1134 (Mauritius mobile: most reliable way to reach me) +1 (617) 395-4360 (US phone number rings at home -- call me in Mauritius for the price of a call to the US). +44 (0)7978 807532 (UK mobile number, connects to mobile phone when in wifi zone, or goes to voice mail). This is also a SIP number. If you have a SIP phone you can reach me by dialing: sip:447978807532@truphone.com e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From edelman at greenidea.eu Sun May 18 05:57:35 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 22:57:35 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Can better highways save Afghanistan? Message-ID: <482F46BF.5060403@greenidea.eu> Down the ... road a bit, what will be filling up these highways when things become more "stable", buses... or cars? - T *** Asphalt Dreams Afghanistan?s high plateaus and steep mountains have served throughout history as obstacles to foreign intrusion. Alexander the Great?s campaign through Afghanistan led to a temporary fusion of Western and Eastern art and culture but left no lasting roads in its wake. Centuries later, the Turco-Mongol conqueror Tamerlane complained in his memoirs of rough travel through the region, lamenting that he had to submit to being lowered down cliffs in a basket. When his horses were subjected to the same procedure, many flailed and were battered to death upon the rocks. His exit from the Hindu Kush mountain range was preceded by a prayer for his deliverance. When the United States and its allies invaded Afghanistan, in 2001, they found the conditions to be nearly as rough. A dearth of traversable roads hindered the attack on al-Qaeda forces at Tora Bora, and has complicated the country?s governance. NATO allies squabble over many things, but on one they all agree: if Afghanistan is ever to be secure, prosperous, and cohesive, it must first be paved. The country?s main roadway, known as the Ring Road and intended to link Afghanistan?s largest cities, was begun in the 1960s. But war in the 1970s prevented the 1,900-mile ring from being completed; bombings, flash floods, and harsh winters badly degraded what had been built. Since 2001, international development groups have devoted some $2 billion to rebuilding and expanding the country?s road network. The Asian Development Bank alone has allocated $600 million for rebuilding the Ring Road. Road building is by far Afghanistan?s largest public-works program today, and as such it is to some extent an end in itself. One U.S. military engineer, Army Commander Larry LeGree, boasts that?with his extensive budget?he can outspend the Taliban and al-Qaeda at every bend in the road. If, for example, al-Qaeda-backed insurgents are getting $5 a day, he?ll pay a road worker $5.50. He says he is banking on the belief that many insurgents will?for the right price?opt out of the fight in favor of roadwork. The completion of the Ring Road (scheduled for 2010), along with key bridges and border-crossing points, is expected to raise the nation?s official trade from $4.7 billion in 2005 to some $12 billion in 2016. Already, the 300-mile ride south from Kabul to Kandahar on this route, which used to take 14 hours, can be completed in five, or fewer if you are in a hurry, which is invariably the case. Fresh asphalt hasn?t kept the Taliban and assorted brigands from setting up mobile ?gantlets? along the highway, where they sometimes extort, rob, kidnap, or behead passersby. Still, these security threats seem to be only a limited deterrent for Afghan truck drivers, who are renowned across South Asia for their stamina and courage. Will better roads really make a big difference to Afghanistan?s future? The Taliban certainly seem to think so: the group?s forces have made a concerted effort to stop construction. Insurgents regularly target road crews in their camps and as they work. Indeed, LeGree?s wage math leaves out an important variable: al-Qaeda not only pays insurgents a day rate, but also?according to U.S. platoon leaders?offers incentives for killing U.S. soldiers and Afghan road workers, dozens of whom have been slaughtered in eastern Afghanistan alone. The need for fortified camps and armed guards makes the cost of road construction in Afghanistan 30 to 50 percent higher than elsewhere in South Asia. The lion?s share of U.S. road money is now directed toward smaller roads and bridges?many of them entirely new?in eastern Afghanistan, the very terrain that hindered Alexander and Tamerlane and that helped Osama bin Laden escape from Tora Bora. When completed, these roads?which snake into the remotest valleys and toward the hottest insurgent strongholds?will, in theory, serve as a ?fire wall? against infiltration from Pakistan, by allowing more-comprehensive patrols and exposing the winding goat paths used by inbound insurgents and arms smugglers. The cost of this latest endeavor is high, and progress slow. Sealing the unmarked and largely unguarded 1,400-mile border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, with its endless valleys and passes, would appear to be a near-Sisyphean task. Yet at the same time, it is clear that Afghanistan?s mountains, which for so long guaranteed the country?s security and independence, are now helping to destabilize it?acting as a sieve for insurgents slipping in and out. It is perhaps ironic that one key to the country?s viability?its border security?may turn out to involve the paving-over of the natural barriers that have always protected it. *Asphalt Dreams* *The Ring * Afghanistan?s main highway, the Ring Road, is almost complete. Only three major portions are still unfinished: a Japanese-financed stretch between Kandahar and Helmand provinces, where the British and Canadians do daily battle with the Taliban; a rough section in the northwest near Turkmenistan, which has also come under heavy attack in recent months; and a section close to Tajikistan. Workers regularly face roadside bombs, gunfights, and rocket attacks. *Hope Through Better Highways? * Heavy fighting continues in isolated valleys, particularly in the Korengal Valley, where road building is under way. But a road through the Pech Valley, now complete, has provided the kind of economic and security boost that U.S. officers say they anticipated. Senator Joseph Biden, who visited Kunar province in February, told the Associated Press, ?How do you spell /hope/ in Dari and Pashtu? A-S-P-H-A-L-T.? *Bombs Away * U.S. commanders in Kunar province say that the number of roadside bomb attacks has been cut by more than half over the past year, in part because of road improvements?mines are more difficult to conceal on asphalt roads than on dirt ones. Overall, confirmed deaths of NATO and coalition forces in Kunar have dropped, from about 30 in 2006 to 10 or so in 2007, and to just one during the first three months of this year. -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunni 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic Skype: toddedelman ++420 605 915 970 ++420 222 517 832 edelman@greenidea.eu http://greenideafactory.blogspot.com/ www.flickr.com/photos/edelman Green Idea Factory is a member of World Carfree Network www.worldcarfree.net CAR is over. If you WANT it. From edelman at greenidea.eu Thu May 22 20:19:09 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 13:19:09 +0200 Subject: [sustran] EU may force car makers to reveal emissions in adverts [and more] Message-ID: <483556AD.2040004@greenidea.eu> *EU may force car makers to reveal emissions in adverts * * * The Independent (London), May 17, 2008 Saturday - The European Union is preparing to introduce tough new rules on car advertising, forcing manufacturers to include conspicuous and easily understood information about petrol consumption and emissions. The new line follows the EU's decision to exert ever-greater control on the way that tobacco, alcohol and food products can be advertised, counterbalancing the claims and sales lines of advertisers with warnings about the health implications of their products. Details of the proposal to compel car manufacturers to own up to the carbon footprint of their vehicles will be unveiled by the end of the month, after which the politicians and car industry representatives will discuss them for the first time. [The following is for me the most interesting] As well as spelling out the environmental implications of the cars, the draft regulations are said by Der Spiegel magazine to require manufacturers to put a brake on the prose and the images used to imprint the desirability of their latest models. Any reference to sportiness will apparently be frowned on. The target of the new rules is obviously the gas-guzzler, and as the country that produces the great majority of Europe's luxury cars - including those driven by the chauffeurs of most European Commissioners - the German industry is already up in arms about the restrictions. As the EU sends its forces of righteousness into new terrain, the advertising men are putting up a fight. Volker Nickel, of the German Advertising Industry Association, complains of "constant new regulations and more and more government control," amounting to "a gigantic re-education programme for consumers and producers." Magazine and newspaper publishers, which depend on car advertising for as much as 20 per cent of their revenue, are worried that the car companies, threatened with having their images of luxury and sportiness mutilated by the sort of loud warnings that adorn cigarette packets, may seek other ways to promote their products. Bernd Kundrun, the chairman of the German publishing company Gruner + Jahr, fears "dramatic consequences" for print media. Mathias Dopfner, the chief executive of the publishing giant Axel Springer, claimed the new rules would be "a major threat to free competition and journalism". Environmentalists argue that the car industry has only itself to blame. Way back in 1999, Brussels introduced guidelines on information about the CO2 emissions and petrol consumption of cars, stating that it should be "easily legible and no less pronounced than the main part of the advertising message" and "easily understood, even when read briefly". But these were only guidelines, and the industry abused them heartily. In a flagrant recent example highlighted by environmental campaigners, the image of a luxury car was splashed across a 23ft-long hoarding - with the consumption and emissions information about it printed in letters one-quarter of an inch high. So now self-regulation has failed, tough rules are to follow. But they are still being thrashed out in Brussels. The president of the EU Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, is still fighting a long duel with the car industry over CO2 emissions caps, due to be introduced in 2012, and is said to be chary about starting another war until that one is resolved. So the first guidelines may be relatively mild, but if so that will be only a tactical ploy. Implementation of tough rules will merely be delayed. Meanwhile, the commissioners will continue to burn down the Continent's roads in their Mercedes, BMWs, Audis and Jaguars. The only exception, appropriately, is the Environmental Commissioner, Stavros Dimas - who ostentatiously putters about in a Japanese hybrid. May 17, 2008 Copyright ? 2007 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy Also see: The last seven photos are new since the last announced update... - T -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunni 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic Skype: toddedelman ++420 605 915 970 ++420 222 517 832 edelman@greenidea.eu http://greenideafactory.blogspot.com/ www.flickr.com/photos/edelman Green Idea Factory is a member of World Carfree Network www.worldcarfree.net CAR is over. If you WANT it. From mike.co at cai-asia.org Fri May 23 17:53:21 2008 From: mike.co at cai-asia.org (Michael Co) Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 16:53:21 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Reminder: BAQ 2008 submission of abstracts (until 30 May 2008) Message-ID: <48368601.6080202@cai-asia.org> Dear all, The BAQ 2008 Program Committee has received over 200 abstracts already and is in the process of reviewing these. Meanwhile, we would like to offer the possibility to those people who missed the original deadline to submit their abstracts focusing on the linkage(s) of air quality and climate change and the co-benefits of addressing these issues in a joint manner. The extended deadline is 30 May 2008. Please follow the guidelines for abstracts submission on www.baq2008.org carefully. Abstracts on the following topics will be a priority: 1. Co-benefits and Air Quality Management * Scientific understanding of linkage between air pollutant emissions and GHG emissions at the local, national and regional scale * Monitoring and modeling * Inventories and source apportionment * Impacts on health and environment * Policies and legislation * Financing and cost-benefit analysis * Institutional arrangements to promote a co-benefits approach * Technology transfer 2. Co-benefits and Transport * Inventories, emission factors and measuring methodology * Engine technology * Fuels and fuel quality standards * Sustainable transport planning and implementation * Land use planning * Policy instruments * Financing, including CDM or alternative approaches such as sectoral or policy based CDM 3. Co-benefits and Industry and Power Generation * Inventories, emission factors and measuring methodology * Combustion and processing technology * Energy efficiency * Fuels and renewable energy * Policy instruments * Financing, including CDM or alternative approaches such as sectoral or policy based CDM 4. Co-benefits and Indoor Air Pollution * Linkage between indoor-outdoor air * Relationship in-door air quality and climate change * Inventories, emission factors and measuring methodology * Impacts * Technology developments Best regards, Bert Fabian & Cornie Huizenga From sudhirgota at gmail.com Fri May 23 19:41:27 2008 From: sudhirgota at gmail.com (sudhir gota) Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 16:11:27 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) News Digest :- Vol. 5 Issue 9 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: *Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) News Digest Vol. 5 Issue 9 23 May 2008* SUMA News Digest is a free weekly e-mail publication that features news, information, and events related to sustainable urban transportation in Asia. *** VISIT THE SUMA PAGES: http://www.cleanairnet.org/suma **** * * * *HEADLINES * * * ASIA: TWO STROKES AND YOU'RE OUT 21 May 2008 David Kushner from Discover Magazine in a news report highlights the problem of two stroke engines aptly titled "two strokes and you're out". He indicates that the outdoor air pollution kills 800,000 people a year and sickens many more and the main contributor is the emissions blasted from the two stroke engines of motor cycles, scooters etc. Read more of this article to know how two stroke engines affects your life, http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72698.html INDIA: STOP BREATHING. THE AIR'S FOUL 20 May 2008 In a detailed news report, Dr. Umarajaratnam reminds us the destructive quality of air pollution. The author highlights that it's not only the age and technology incorporated in the automobile that has a bearing on the level of pollution, but also the manner of driving has a significant impact on the quantum generated. The solution to our own mess is the clean technologies and the effective public transportation. Read More http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72695.html GLOBAL: A TRUE BICYCLE CULTURE REMAINS ELUSIVE 18 May 2008 The issue of utility riders "the people for whom cycling is survival, not sport" is highlighted in the news article by Murray Whyte. In this blazing piece on Toronto's driving culture, the author reaffirms the issue of dedicated right of way for the cyclists. The author urges people and planners to consider bicycles as" parallel transit system" rather than a recreation sport. In his words "In the transportation endgame, with oil shattering its record high and humanity exploding and urbanizing at its fastest rate in human history, changing the culture is, unenviably, both a necessary and near-impossible task." Read More http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72688.html GLOBAL: FACTS BACK MOVING BEYOND OIL 18 May 2008 The writer who is a green management consultant with Post-Petroleum Transportation, based in Sausalito, Calif shatters several myths pertaining to the issue of Oil. He suggests that the Myths associated with Oil production and consumption is causing the confusion for consumers, businesses and government policymakers thus delaying our sustainable march. Read more to know more about myths and facts? http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72689.html ASIA: ADB PRESIDENT SAYS ASIA MUST ATTRACT CLEAN ENERGY INVESTMENTS ADB President Haruhiko Kuroda at a climate change seminar in Madrid announced that with demand for energy in Asia soaring, governments urgently need to create the right environment to attract investments in clean energy. He emphasised the fact that Asia's share of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions has tripled since 1973 and is expected to reach 42% by 2030 unless there is a dramatic change in the trend to build new coal power plants and other polluting energy infrastructure across the region. Read More http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72682.html GLOBAL: CHRYSLER GASOLINE PRICE GUARANTEE In the age of "Fuel Economy", "Global Warming" and "Peak Oil", the automobile manufacturer Chrysler has offered all car purchasers of selected types to pay only $2,99 per gallon. This move definitely a setback for "sustainable environment" would impact the vehicle sales. Continuing further, the author suggests that assuming for similar scheme but with hybrid variety- "for each car purchaser, the installment for a photovoltaic will be 3 years paid. The photovoltaic is sized for 12000 miles per years." The scheme would work out more economical to the Chrysler and thus more greener to the environment. Read More http://car.pege.org/2008-news/chrysler-gasoline-price.htm * *More air quality and sustainable mobility news at http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/propertyvalue-14783.html * * * * *INTERESTING FINDS * ECONOMIC INCENTIVES IN A NEW CLIMATE AGREEMENT By : Joseph E. Aldy & Robert N. Stavins In this research paper by the authors on behalf of The Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements, suggested potential use of market-based or economic-incentive instruments to ensure that polluters face direct cost incentives to mitigate emissions at the lowest possible cost. The authors propose that the market based instruments that are most appropriate for climate policy are taxes and cap-and-trade measures. Under an emission tax, a government could impose a charge per unit of pollutant discharge, or it could set a tax on the carbon content of fossil fuels. Under a cap-and-trade scheme, the government could set an overall cap on emissions, allocates emission allowances that in sum equal the cap- to firms in the economy, and allows trade in these allowances among firms. Under a variant of emission trading ? an emission-reduction-credit system ? firms generate credits for reducing their emissions that they can sell into a cap-and-trade system. Read this interesting proposition http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72683.html IMPROVING CAPACITY PLANNING FOR DEMAND-RESPONSIVE PARATRANSIT SERVICES By: DiwakarGupta, Hao-Wei Chen, Lisa Miller, and Fajarrani Surya In this Research Project supported by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the University of Minnesota's Center for Transportation Studies, the authors used data from Metro Mobility ( a Para Transit Service Provider in twin cities) to identify opportunities for improving efficiency and service quality. The main motive of the researchers were to reoptimize routes developed by Metro Mobility's route-building software at the end of each day of booking operations to reduce the total time it takes to serve booked trips. The other idea was to evaluate the selective use of non-dedicated vehicles and service providers (e.g. taxi services) for lowering operational costs. The output of such a research provides the researchers from across the globe with an opportunity to apply the underlying principles to a variety of other situations in different parts of the state and the country. Read this article to learn more about as to how para transit can improve its efficiency. http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72700.html Key Elements of a Global Deal on Climate Change By : Nicholas Stern In this analytical research paper the author suggests that the balance of scientific evidence implies need for all countries to plan credible emissions reduction policies now, if mankind is to avoid substantial risks to future generations. The impact of global warming is already being felt, and future generations face grave risks if activities continue unaltered. Delaying action increases the cost of meeting any temperature or concentration goal, and raises the risks of irreversible impacts as temperature thresholds are exceeded. The author further suggests the need for utilizing the the 3 "E" measures namely Effectiveness, Efficiency & Equity for sustainable development. The author indicates that The UN Conference of the Parties in Copenhagen in late 2009 would be decisive in determining the post-2012 policy frameworks, and designing an effective institutional architecture and our generation should not miss this golden opportunity. Read More http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72684.html HOT, THIRSTY AND CROWDED: TIME FOR A MODEL CHANGE By : Dr John Wormald In this brilliant special report by Dr. John Wormld, he plays the role of devil's advocate and dissects the automobile industry for better appreciation. He investigates the environmental challenges to the automobile industry; the competitive challenge from Asia; the fight for the aftermarket cash cow; the innovation challenge; the conflict over original and non-original parts; and the choices that must be made over the future of the industry. Though the discussion's and the illustrations are cantered on the European automotive industry. But much of the argument is valid globally, as the same issues are going to crop up in future. In the process of analysing the industry historical trends and probable future outlooks, he raises some fundamental questions. What kind of a European automotive industry do we want for the 21st century? And, once we have answered that one, what do we expect of Brussels after 2010 ? Do we want another face-lift? Or a real model change? Read the SWOT analysis of European automobile industry to know more.... http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72701.html * * * * *EVENTS/WORKSHOPS/CONFERENCES* TOWARDS A GLOBAL APPROACH TO AUTOMOTIVE FUEL ECONOMY 15-16 May 2008 The FIA Foundation organized in cooperation with UNEP, the International Transport Forum and the International Energy Agency a workshop to review the current status of fuel economy regulations in the world and the desirability and feasibility to develop a global initiative on fuel economy. Cornie Huizenga, Executive Director, of the CAI-Asia Center participated in the meeting. One of the recommendations of the meeting relevant for Asia was to assess the possibility to develop a pilot program on fuel economy with ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations). For the presentations of the workshop see: http://www.fiafoundation.org/news/archive/related/Pages/FuelEconomySymposiumPresentations.aspx U.S.-JAPAN CO-BENEFITS WORKSHOP Institute of Global Environmental Strategies in association with Japanese Ministry of the Environment (MoEJ) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) conducted a workshop in Bangkok, Thailand entitled "The Co-benefits of Climate Actions in Asia." Cornie Huizenga, Executive Director and Sophie Punte, Deputy Executive Director participated in the deliberations.* *The main agenda of the meeting was to assess the opportunities for and obstacles to enhancing the policy impacts of co-benefits in Asia. To know more the "Co-Benefits" approach click the following link: http://www.iges.or.jp/en/cp/activity21.html * * * * *MARK YOUR CALENDARS* ECOMM 2008 - The 11th Annual European Conference On Mobility Management,Travel Demand Management - Tackling Climate Change, 4-6 June-2008, London http://www.ecomm2008.eu/ Towards Carfree Cities VIII, Rethinking Mobility, Rediscovering Proximity 16-20 June 2008, Portland, Oregon, USA, http://www.carfreeportland.org/ World Cities Summit 2008, Livable and Vibrant Cities, 23-25 June 2008, Singapore, http://www.worldcities.com.sg/ Fourteenth International Conference on Urban Transport and the Environment in the 21st Century, 1 - 3 September 2008, Malta, http://www.wessex.ac.uk/conferences/2008/urban08/ PODCAR City Sustainable Transport Conference, 14-16 September 2008, Ithaca, New York, http://www.podcar.org/ithacaconference/ UITP 2nd Sustainable Development Conference Making tomorrow today 22-24 October 2008, Milan, Italy http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72425.html Better Air Quality (BAQ) Workshop 2008 12-14 November 2008 Bangkok, Thailand Call for Abstracts ongoing; First Call for Pre-events http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-72312.html See more SUT events http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/propertyvalue-27089.html See CAI-Asia's events calendar http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/propertyvalue-13577.html ** * * CONTRIBUTE * * * * ** To contribute articles, news items, or event announcements for the next issue, send an email with the complete details and URL source to suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com with subject "FOR SUMA NEWS". mailto: suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com?subject=FOR_SUMA_NEWS< suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com?subject=FOR_SUMA_NEWS>. Past issues from March and April 2008 are found at http://groups.google.com/group/suma-news ** * * ABOUT SUMA * * ** * * The Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) program of the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities ( www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia), Asian Development Bank ( www.adb.org), EMBARQ-the World Resources Institute Center for Sustainable Transport ( http://embarq.wri.org ), GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project ( www.sutp.org), Interface for Cycling Expertise ( www.cycling.nl), Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (www.itdp.org), and United Nations Center for Regional Development ( www.uncrd.or.jp/est) is made possible through the generous support of the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency ( www.sida.se). SUMA works with Asian countries and cities to strengthen then formulation and implementation of sustainable urban transportation policies, specifically in (i) Improving urban air quality by adopting AQM planning in sustainable transport policies and promoting public transportation, (ii) Improving road safety by encouraging non-motorized transport and public transport, and (iii) Reducing transport's contribution to climate change by adopting a co-benefits approach with urban air quality management. With Regards Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota From debi.cat at gmail.com Tue May 27 12:26:53 2008 From: debi.cat at gmail.com (Debi Goenka) Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 08:56:53 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Road width standards Message-ID: <005001c8bfa9$84b96560$0100a8c0@DebiDesktop> Hi Can some one help me with details of the road width standards in India in urban and rural areas. I am particularly interested in knowing if the width of the pavements is fixed as a proportion of the total raod width. And also, does the Municipal Corporation of Mumbai have its own standards? Many thanks Debi Goenka --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Debi Goenka Executive Trustee Conservation Action Trust www.cat.org.in Mobile +91 98200 86404 e-mail: debi.cat@gmail.com ------------------------------------------------- 6 E-1 Court Chambers 35 New Marine Lines Mumbai 400020 Tel: (91-22) 22006116/5/4 Tfax: 22006115 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. From aquaboi924 at yahoo.com Wed May 28 00:44:32 2008 From: aquaboi924 at yahoo.com (Jojo Guevarra) Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 08:44:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Promoting Cycling Message-ID: <632433.21881.qm@web65603.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Folks, Just wanted to share with you an initiative to promote cycling as an alternative means of transport in the University of the Philippines, Diliman Campus by the University of the Philippines Mountaineers (UPM). You can download the feature, which was shown on Philippine national TV stations, here: http://now.abs-cbn.com/episodedetails.aspx?showid=274&epid=32448&isep=1&showlink=1 Cheers, Jojo From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Wed May 28 05:28:28 2008 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 15:28:28 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Training course on Mass Transit (and BRT) on June 27-28, 2008 in Indore, 2008 Message-ID: <483C6EEC.8060500@gmail.com> GTZ, Embarq-WRI, ITDP and CAI-Asia will jointly organize a 2-day workshop / training course on Mass transit and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and related measures in Indore on 27-28 June 2008. The event will be hosted by Indore Transport City Services Ltd. The training will cover various aspects of Mass Transit modes, and will focus more on Bus Rapid Transit Planning steps such as demand analysis, corridor selection, business structure, stakeholder involvement, integration, and other key aspects of a BRT system. Resource persons for the course will include Dr Dar?o Hidalgo (Embarq-WRI), Ms. Shreya Gadepalli (ITDP), Mr Carlosfelipe Pardo (GTZ SUTP). Expected participants are policymakers, planners and engineers from Indian cities or other interested parties. There are only 35 vacancies for the course, which will be filled up as registrations are received. *_The registration deadline is 19 June 2008_*. Course details are updated daily in the following website: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1163&Itemid=1&lang=uk If further information is required, please email sutp@sutp.org . SUTP team From bert.fabian at cai-asia.org Thu May 29 18:39:25 2008 From: bert.fabian at cai-asia.org (Bert Fabian) Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 17:39:25 +0800 Subject: [sustran] A broader debate on Transport and Climate Change for Asia Message-ID: <483E79CD.9000309@cai-asia.org> Apologies for cross-posting... ___ Dear All, The transport sector is expected to be one of the fastest growing sectors in terms of CO2 emissions in Asia. Over the past few months CAI-Asia has had discussions with ADB and a range of other stakeholders on how to develop a more broad based discussion on Climate and Transport in Asia. This has resulted in the attached note which suggests that to advance the transport debate and action on the ground it is important to deal with carbon in transport in an integrated manner. Current available experience indicates that any effective strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from the transport sector in Asia will need to be an integrated strategy with multiple objectives whereby CO2 emission reduction is one of the objectives. Other important objectives include: air quality, congestion, road safety, fuel security, fuel prices and general quality of urban life. It is suggested to focus on three main areas 1. Measurement of carbon 2. Interventions 3. Process The "process" part of the document suggests to make use of three events in 2008 to structure the debate on Climate and Transport in Asia: * The ADB Transport forum in Manila in the week of 9 September * The Better Air Quality (BAQ) 2008 workshop in Bangkok from 12-14 November * COP 14 in Poznan, Poland 1-12 December After these three events a decision is to be taken on how to continue and possibly institutionalize the debate. The attached note proposes the implementation of a number of think-pieces to advance the discussion. The choice of the topics of the think pieces has not been finalized. We welcome suggestions for alternative topics. We also welcome statements of interest from persons or organizations who would like to involved in composing the think pieces. It is expected that about 2-3 weeks will be available for drafting these short pieces (10-15 pages) and authors should be available to participate in at least 2 of the the 3 key events (Transport Forum, BAQ and COP). If interested send your cv and short statement of interest indicating which think piece you are interested in to bert.fabian@cai-asia.org and cornie.huizenga@cai.asia.org. In discussing this note please send your comments to this newsgroup or to Bert and me directly. Looking forward to hear from you. Cornie -- Cornie Huizenga Executive Director CAI-Asia Center www://cleanairnet.org/caiasia cornie.huizenga@cai-asia.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You have received this message because you are subscribed to Group "SUT, Carbon Finance WG" of Google. If you want to publish in this group, he/she sends an electronic mail message to sut-carbon-finance-wg@googlegroups.com To annul the subscription to this group, he/she sends a message to sut-carbon-finance-wg-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com To obtain more options, it visits this group in http://groups.google.com/group/sut-carbon-finance-wg?hl=en. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Sat May 31 04:27:44 2008 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (carlosfpardo at gmail.com) Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 14:27:44 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Article from downtoearth.org.in Message-ID: Dear Sustran, This article has been sent to you by Carlos (carlosfpardo@gmail.com). This article is also available at www.downtoearth.org.in, the online edition of Down To Earth magazine, a leading science & environment fortnightly published by Society for Environmental Communications. _____ Headline : No public transport? Intro:Cars are swamping roads at an unprecedented rate, outstripping the increase in road space. The results are congestion, reduced mobility and rising air pollution. Yet cars have not replaced buses, which carry the bulk of the population. sumana narayanan reports Indian cities desperately need to build a public transit system and also give it a right of way On April 21, a small stretch of road in a congested corner of south Delhi, one of the most polluted cities in the world, turned into an epicentre of chaos, confusion and downright indignation. The 5.6 km stretch was where the pilot phase of a public transport system that allows buses to operate on a right of way separated from other traffic, was opened. As vehicles strayed into wrong lanes and cars piled up in long queues for the first few days, the media unleashed relentless criticism, calling the project corridor of chaos, ill-conceived, a blunder and demanding that it be scrapped. Car users and residents? welfare associations of colonies along the stretch also attacked the new system?Bus Rapid Transit (brt)?aimed at improving traffic flow. It did not ease traffic; instead it caused more traffic snarls, they said. People in cars and riding motorcycles felt road space had been ?stolen? from them by creating a separate dedicated lane for buses. In this great outcry fact was difficult to separate from fury. To cut through the noise and confusion, one needs to understand the concept of brt. Conventional road planning is geared towards motorized vehicles and caters to their needs by increasing road space and building flyovers and underpasses. But in Indian cities the majority of the people travel by public transport (mainly buses), bicycle or on foot. brt aims at ensuring an equitable sharing of road space and safety by segregating traffic into different lanes depending on their speed and function. Buses, for example, stop regularly for passengers while cars and motorcycles need to keep moving. So a bus that halts, blocks the left lane and causes the vehicles behind it to try and merge with the right lane, thus, slowing down traffic. Also, non-motorized traffic, which prefers to hug the left lane, blocks buses from pulling into the bus stops, so buses just stop in the middle of the road. And amid all this, bus passengers must negotiate traffic to board buses. The results: underused or unused road space, slow traffic movement and increased risk for pedestrians and non-motorized vehicles. Moving buses into a separate lane prevents them from coming into conflict with other traffic, so they get a dedicated lane in the centre. Non-motorized vehicles are given a lane on the extreme left since they are vulnerable amid motorized vehicles and tend to slow down motorized vehicles. Further left, the pedestrians have a well-paved, low pavement. Why BRT? Delhi needs a dedicated bus lane because 60 per cent people in the city travel on buses. With Delhi?s population growing at the rate of 3.85 per year, only a robust public transport can ensure mobility. There is a limit to the number of cars roads can accommodate. Already 21 per cent of Delhi?s area is under roads?a high percentage compared to other cities worldwide. brt is also a step towards cleaning Delhi?s air. According to the Economic Survey of Delhi, the city had 1.60 million cars and 3.34 million two-wheelers in 2006-07. The number of city buses was only 8,000. Every day, 1,000 vehicles are added to the city?s roads. Where will it lead to? Due to the spurt in cars, Delhi has already squandered its gains from switching to cng. Air pollution levels that had dropped from 140 microgramme per cubic metre (?g/cu m) in 2002 to 100 ?g/cu m in 2005 due to the introduction of cng, are again on the rise. In 2007, the pollution level was up at 155 ?g/cu m. With increasing traffic jams and rising pollution what choices does Delhi have? Personal vehicles are part of the problem, not solution. It was to avoid this dead end that Delhi planned a network of brt, metro and monorail. The Committee on Sustainable Transport headed by the Delhi chief secretary has recommended building 14 brt corridors across the city by 2020. Designed and developed by the Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Programme (tripp) at iit Delhi, brt is based on the successful Bogota (Columbia) model, TransMilenio, the first to earn carbon credits. Adapting it in India is not uncomplicated. In Pune the first phase of brt became functional in 2006 but has been plagued by problems of enforcement and lane discipline. The situation is somewhat similar in Delhi, where a part of the 19 km brt corridor?from Ambedkar Nagar to Delhi Gate?has become functional. On the ground Commuters say they are not comfortable crossing three lanes to get to the bus stop. ?This system is confusing. I find it difficult to cross so many lanes because I am not sure which side the buses and cars are coming from,? says Rajesh Kumari, a pharmacist at Batra Hospital who daily takes the brt corridor for work. Rakhi Mallik, a domestic help, agrees that getting to the bus stop is a problem, though she says the bus trip is now faster. The bus stops were placed just before traffic lights because buses anyway have to stop for traffic lights (see box: Left, right). This way they don?t stop multiple times. People have no lane discipline. Even as this reporter was talking to one of the marshals regulating traffic a man parked his scooter right in front of the marshal, Ajay Kumar Singh, to get some water. When the marshal admonished him, his answer, as he hurried away, was that it was just for a minute. The marshal shrugs, ?There is nothing I can do.? The marshals have no power to book anyone. At times they get abused by people for enforcing lane discipline. Motorcyclists and car users say brt has made traffic snarls longer. Some, however, feel it is good to move buses out of the regular traffic. Pradeep Kumar Yadav, who has been driving an autorickshaw for the past two years, says brt is a good idea. ?I don?t agree jams have become worse. The traffic flow is better and it is nice not to have to deal with buses,? he says. But sitting in her chauffeured, air-conditioned Innova, Vineet Bammi is irate. ?The idea is terrible. It takes forever to travel down this stretch of road,? she says. Those who commute by bus are happy that the ride down the brt stretch has become smooth and fast?some passengers cheekily wave at the cars as they pass by?but point out that it can do with some improvements. In the heat, they have to walk to the nearest traffic light to get to the bus stop. It is a furnace under the steel bus shelter and there are no seats in it, points out a commuter. ?The buses don?t stop exactly in front of the break in the railings at the bus stop. So people have to squeeze themselves between the railings and the bus. It is dangerous,? says a passenger as he boards a bus. These problems will be fixed, promises the Delhi Integrated Multi-Modal Transit System (dimts), which is in charge of the project. S Sahai, managing director, dimts, says, ?We are aware of the problems. I agree the shelters are pathetic. We will change them.? Shopkeepers along the brt corridor are not excited either because parking is not allowed on the corridor. This, they think, will affect their business. ?Parking is a problem for my customers. They end up parking on the pavement,? says Himanshu Bansal, a stationery shop owner. People need time to learn the system, says Nathu Lal, a conductor with the Delhi Transport Corporation deputed to regulate buses and commuters at the Pushp Vihar bus stop. As he herds pedestrians towards the pavement leading to the bus stop he says, ?Look at these people. There is a perfectly good pavement but they insist on walking in the bus lane.? He then moves away to scold a young man trying to slip between the bus and the railing. Alam, an engineer, both explains and demonstrates the problem. ?People don?t follow the law. Bikes go on bus lanes, pedestrians cross at will. I think the brt concept is good but people need lane discipline,? he says without a hint of consciousness, riding a motorcycle in the bicycle lane. ---------- BOX:Left, right ---------- If there are many left turns on a road, then a bus lane on the extreme left will hamper other traffic turning left or turning into traffic. It also means that every time the bus has to stop for traffic lights, it tempts passengers to board or disembark at risky areas. Also a curb side bus lane is used for parking by autos, two-wheelers, thus, forcing buses to stop in the middle of the road. So the bus lane is placed in the centre. ?The design makes it safer to alight and board a bus from a bus stop in the centre than play dodge with vehicles on the road,? explains Geetam Tiwari of tripp who is one of the minds behind the corridor?s design. ---------- BOX:Safe ride ---------- Cyclists rarely figure in debates on traffic but if you take the BRT corridor early morning it will be difficult to miss hundreds of commuters pedalling to work on the bicycle lane. On average 8,326 cycles and 1,023 rickshaws use the corridor. They are the biggest beneficiaries of BRT, for they are the most vulnerable on roads. ?Any day it is better to have a cycle track,? says Mahesh Kumar, a daily wager, adding, ?but you feel like killing bikers who invade the bicycle lane.? Paved track also keep tracks dirt-free. ---------- Caravan to disaster ---------- Growth in personal vehicles is unsustainable and the cost of congestion too high Roads in urban India are creaking under the weight of the growing number of vehicles?personal vehicles, to be precise. Population growth means more people to buy cars and motorcycles; economic growth means more people can buy; and urbanization means more people will buy vehicles. In short, a crisis is at hand. In the developing world, vehicle ownership is growing much faster than the population. In Delhi, for example, the rate of registration of vehicles per day has doubled between 2000 and 2006. By 2010, urban India?s population is expected to reach 410 million from 300 million in 2000, which means more cars and motorcycles will be unleashed on the already vehicle-choked roads. The number of cars in Delhi alone has gone up from 0.7 million in 1997 to 1.6 million in 2007. Infrastructure is just not keeping pace with vehicle growth.Between 1996 and 2006, road length in Delhi increased by 20 per cent, while the number of cars increased by 132 per cent. Congestion is eased temporarily when roads are widened or flyovers built but as more vehicles are added every day, this space is quickly overtaken and the situation is back to square one. In fact, it is getting worse. In 2001, the road length per vehicle in Delhi was 8.5 km. This has come down to 6 km per vehicle in 2007. So the driving space is actually decreasing. This leads to congestion, slow traffic movement and pollution. Indian cities are already facing this reality; congestion is becoming a routine part of life and air pollution is on the rise. Misplaced priority The present situation could have been averted had public transport not been neglected. Public transport services have worsened in terms of comfort, frequency and coverage, hence people are switching to private transport. ?We care only about ourselves and forget about the greater public good. No one cares about marginalized groups such as pedestrians and bus commuters,? says Rakesh Mehta, chief secretary, Delhi. Economic growth and liberalization policies have exacerbated this trend by making it easier and cheaper to buy cars. Taxes are slashed to please car manufacturers and the upper and the middle class. The road tax buses pay every year is more than the one-time road tax cars and two-wheelers pay. This year the government further reduced the excise duty on cars. Cars also get privileges in terms of cheap parking. Buses, the most efficient mode of transport, did not get priority despite the fact that they transport more people than cars and motorcycles. In Delhi, personal vehicles represent 94 per cent of total vehicles, but meet only 30 per cent of the travel demand. Since buses transport more people, their per person fuel efficiency is better. Cars consume six times more energy than buses, and two-wheelers, 2.5 times the energy. In terms of road space per person too buses have the upper hand. To move the same number of people, cars occupy 38 times the road space than a bus, and two-wheelers occupy 54 times the space. But where is space? Endless increase in road length is impossible. Vicious cycle With the ever increasing number of private vehicles, the clamour to deal with congestion has become louder. The traditional response to congestion has been to widen roads, build flyovers and elevated roads. Every Indian city is on a flyover building spree. Under the 9th and 10th Five Year Plans, over a thousand crore rupees were set aside for bridges and flyovers. It is now recognized world over that more roads and flyovers are not the solution. It leads to a vicious cycle: traffic increases leading to congestion, so roads are widened and that in turn encourages more vehicles to be introduced onto the roads. For every 10 per cent increase in road length, a 9 per cent increase in traffic is seen, estimates Sierra Club, an American environmental organization. Cost of congestion Small wonder Indian cities never have enough roads. With every additional vehicle, there is more congestion and emissions. Congestion also runs up the fuel bill. A 1997 study by the Petroleum Conservation Research Association, Delhi, showed that idling vehicles in the city wasted 321,432 litres of petrol and 101,312 litres of diesel every day. At current fuel rates, this costs Rs 1.84 crore a day, enough to build the first brt corridor in Delhi in seven months at Rs 20 crore a km. According to the Central Institute of Road Transport, Pune, congestion costs India Rs 3,000-4,000 crore a year. In Bangkok congestion shaves 6 per cent off its economic production. Traffic jams cost time as well. The 2007 Urban Mobility Report of the Texas Transportation Institute, us, estimates that congestion made urban Americans travel 4.2 billion hours more and spend an extra 11 billion litres of petrol at the cost of us $78 billion in a year. This is more than 100 times the extra aid the World Food Programme has sought to tide over the global food crisis. Slow moving vehicles pollute more. At 75 km per hour, an automobile emits 6.4 g of carbon monoxide per km. But at 10 km per hour, the peak hour speed in Delhi, a car spews 33 g of carbon monoxide per km. Peak hour speed in Kolkata is 7 km per hour, a bit like slow cycling. Even a 5 per cent reduction in traffic will increase vehicle speed by at least 10 per cent. The health cost-respiratory and cardiac problems-is immense. The introduction of congestion tax in London in 2003 has improved the health of its people. The tax is levied on private vehicles entering central London during working hours. A study published in the journal, Occupational and Environmental Medicine, this year stated that due to reduced pollution, 1,888 lives are saved each year in London. There is yet another cost. Road accidents in India cost the country 1 per cent of its gross national product, according to the Central Institute of Road Transport. Cutting these costs, clearly, requires putting a brake on car growth. ---------- BOX:Traffic stress ---------- A study on stress levels among bus drivers in Los Angeles shows association between exposure to peak traffic conditions and on-the-job elevations of urinary catecholamines, stress-related hormones. Traffic congestion lowers perceived control, which in turn can result in stress. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1991 Persons reporting traffic stress had lower health status and more depressive symptoms among urban populations, according to a US study. Social Science Medicine, 2004 A survey in Britain, Finland and the Netherlands to identify factors provoking motorists to behave aggressively shows that traffic density may have a role. Seventy-four per cent respondents said they would get angry on losing the parking spot they had been eyeing. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2002 A US study found traffic congestion, road construction and lack of parking space as sources of stress for drivers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2000 The European Community Respiratory Health Survey II conducted during 1999-2001 in 12 countries showed that annoyance due to air pollution could be used to classify air quality. Forty-three per cent participants reported moderate annoyance and 14 per cent, high annoyance. International Journal of Epidemiology, 2007 ---------- Can?t miss the bus ---------- Public transport is the only answer to congestion and pollution The present crisis demands new solutions. And the solution is public transport, for space to accommodate cars is limited and cleaner and fuel-efficient technologies defeated by the number of vehicles. The Delhi government is planning to have 120 km of metro, 292 km of brt, and 50 km each of monorail and light rail by 2020. These will be interconnected. ?We need different modes of transport. In the Walled City, for instance, metro or brt will not work because the roads are not wide enough. There we are going for the light rail system,? says Rakesh Mehta, chief secretary, Delhi. brt is cheaper and quicker to construct as compared to metro. Metro costs Rs 100-300 crore per kilometre, while brt costs Rs 10-20 crore. ?While Bangalore metro is scheduled to roll out in 2011, I expect it to be ready only by 2015. Its intended coverage is inadequate,? says G V Dasarathi, director of applications, Cadem Technologies, member of a network of citizens promoting public transport in Bangalore, Greener Bangalore. The Delhi metro has, however, inspired other cities. The Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (dmrc) has carried out a feasibility study for a Chennai metro. Ahmedabad and Hyderabad are also developing a metro system. But Kolkata and Delhi metros have not met the projected ridership. The Kolkata metro was to carry about 1.7 million passengers per day but its ridership is only 0.2-0.3 million. Integrating different public transport systems is crucial to their optimal utilization. ?We found that only people who live or work near metro stations and those who had cars and could park them were using the metro. We have 100 feeder buses and are going to get 300 more,? says Anuj Dayal, public relations officer, dmrc. ?brt acting as a feeder to metro is a good thing. Metro can?t reach everywhere and there is enough demand in Delhi for the two systems.? Meeting this demand will require massive investment. But the benefits of public transport if properly counted?health and energy and space efficiency?will make it worthwhile. Enhancing energy and emission efficiency will need a younger bus fleet and special provisions like a dedicated bus lane. Money factor One challenge with public transport is meeting its operational cost. Revenues come mainly from fares and advertisements, but fares have to be kept low to ensure that more people travel by bus. A few countries levy taxes on cars which are channelled into developing public transport. France asks employers with more than nine employees to pay a transport tax that contributes to public transport operation. ?Such a tax could be introduced in India,? says S K Lohia, director, urban transport, urban development ministry. London levies a congestion tax on cars to drive into central London. It has now proposed linking the tax to emission levels. This discourages use of personal vehicles. Other possible sources of finance could be differential parking fees for private vehicles during peak and non-peak hours. Parking fares could also be varied depending on the locality and duration of space use. San Francisco, Belgrade and Bogota are some cities with such methods of parking pricing. Carbon credits Until recently public transport systems were not considered for the clean development mechanism (cdm). The brt system in Bogota, TransMilenio, is the only public transport system registered for cdm with the un Framework Convention on Climate Change. This makes it earn carbon credits. A new methodology for evaluating brt systems had to be developed when TransMilenio applied for cdm. Emission reductions are calculated taking into consideration upgrade of bus fleet, increased bus capacity, development of infrastructure for better bus operation and incentives for commuters to switch from cars to public transport. TransMilenio?s estimated revenue from cdm between 2006 and 2012 is us $ 20 million for reducing greenhouse gases by 1.7 million tonnes. ---------- BOX:BRT users ---------- The city of Bogota, Columbia, is famous for its BRT project. This is one of the first successful BRT models, and the Delhi BRT is based on it. The BRT system in Bogota, TransMilenio, carries over 1,050,000 passengers daily. The first phase of the system became operational in 2000 and is more than 60 km long. TransMilenio is the only public transport system earning carbon credits. TransMilenio was based on the BRT system in Curitiba, Brazil. Curitiba?s BRT started in the 1960s. Of the 2.7 million people in Curitiba, 1.9 million use BRT. With 70 per cent of commuters using the system Curitiba?s use of the public transport system is the highest of all Brazilian state capitals. As a result, the city?s fuel consumption is 30 per cent lower than in comparable Brazilian cities. Today the BRT system is being used in Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Boston, Sydney, Adelaide, Quito (Ecuador) and Leeds (UK).Several other cities are planning to implement the BRT concept. In India, BRT projects are to come up in Ahmedabad, Bhopal, Indore, Jaipur, Pune, Rajkot, Visakhapatnam, Vijayawada and Bangalore. Unlike Delhi, most of these projects are being funded by the central government under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission. ---------- Act fast ---------- The BRT concept cannot be abandoned The clock is ticking fast. Roads in Indian cities are getting saturated by vehicles. There is no option but to build a public transport system efficient and attractive enough to replace cars. Therefore, the brt concept cannot be abandoned; it must be improved to make it work. The Delhi government has a few plans like coordinating signals. They will be automated and the signal length will vary during peak and non-peak traffic hours. As for accusations of lack of coordination and cooperation between agencies, the government says the mistake will not be repeated in the next stretch of the brt corridor. The Delhi Integrated Multi-Modal Transit System will be in charge of the corridor. ?So many cities in the country are setting up brt that we can?t get the buses as soon as we would like to.The companies, Tata and Ashok Leyland, are getting inundated with orders,? says the Delhi chief secretary. The success of the Delhi brt cannot be judged in a few weeks. It will take time and discipline. One measure will be whether the number of private vehicles on the road reduces. And that won?t happen until various public transit systems are interconnected and parking facilities created for car users, so that they can take the bus. Making public transport score over cars in terms of comfort, speed, accessibility, cost and convenience is a tall order but not impossible. Giving buses a right of way is in everybody?s interest; it frees space for cars, for in unsegregated traffic buses block two lanes. Urban India has no choice but to board the bus. Story link Copyright ? 2002 Society for Environmental Communications Down To Earth is a science and environment fortnightly published by the Society for Environmental Communications, India. Subscribe to Down To Earth to read some of the best articles on environment, sustainability and development. Click here for information on advertising opportunities with Down to Earth online, or E-mail: advt@downtoearth.org.in