From debi.cat at gmail.com Tue Nov 4 11:23:59 2008 From: debi.cat at gmail.com (Debi Goenka) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 07:53:59 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Noise barriers Message-ID: <003501c93e24$6c08f180$686ef579@TOSHIBALAPTOP> Hi all I was wondering where I can find details of noise barriers required to be constructed along highways/freeways/flyovers, particularly in congested areas of cities. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, warm regards Debi --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 sujitjp at gmail.com Tue Nov 4 18:29:42 2008 From: sujitjp at gmail.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 14:59:42 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Noise barriers In-Reply-To: <003501c93e24$6c08f180$686ef579@TOSHIBALAPTOP> References: <003501c93e24$6c08f180$686ef579@TOSHIBALAPTOP> Message-ID: <4cfd20aa0811040129q3d369ceah9c2c680349546247@mail.gmail.com> The *BEST *noise barrier for congested areas of the city is the decision to ban motorised traffic from the area. Prior to that it would help to be avoid road widening (or keep it to a minimum only to help NMT), to avoid building freeways and to absolutely ban any flyovers. I'm saying this with complete seriousness as patchwork solutions never work, but are often forced on traffic activists by planners/administrators who say "the decision has already been taken and we can at best minimise the damage (in this case noise)". This is like saying "suggest a good mask as we're going to build a smoke belching factory right in the middle of this residential area but we want to protect your lungs". -- Sujit On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Debi Goenka wrote: > Hi all > > I was wondering where I can find details of noise barriers required to be > constructed along highways/freeways/flyovers, particularly in congested > areas of cities. > > Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > Cheers, warm regards > > Debi > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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. > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujitjp@gmail.com "Yamuna", ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India Tel: +91 20 25537955 Cell: +91 98220 26627 ----------------------------------------------------- Hon. Secretary: Parisar www.parisar.org ------------------------------------------------------ Founder Member: PTTF (Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum) www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------ From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue Nov 4 18:47:28 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 10:47:28 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Commenting the San Francisco RFQ (Request for Qualifications) Message-ID: <006701c93e62$5d40e160$17c2a420$@britton@ecoplan.org> Dear Carshare friends, I would like to invite comment here if you think it useful - i.e., via email to WorldCarShare@yahoogroups.com - on the San Francisco RFQ (Request for Qualifications). Again, the base documents are available at http://mission.sfgov.org/OCABidPublication/BidDetail.aspx?K=1694 To get the ball rolling, let me offer . . . 1. "The City and County of San Francisco is seeking qualified candidates to provide car sharing/rental services in order to maximize efficiencies and meet the mobility needs of city employees, while minimizing cost, fuel consumption, and vehicle emissions." 2. At first glance it looks like a very useful approach, aiming as it does specifically to target city employees (I'd like to see that in EVERY carshare project) as well as providing specific (though provisional) geographical targets. 3. The documents refer to them repeatedly as "rental vehicles". And "rental pool vehicles". (Striking me as a good commonsensical way of seeing all this.) 4. The encouragement with solid incentives for provision of services by local business enterprises. 5. And for non-profits 6. I note the very tight time schedule for the RFQ responses (barely two weeks). I guess this implies that the city team 7. Very useful that the city team provides specific accounting background on the costs of operating vehicles in their own conventional city owned/operated fleets ($7,364/year). Provides a nice solid benchmark. 8. My first reading seems to indicate that the successful operator will be able to redeploy vehicles for more general service in non-peak (for city employees' needs) periods.) Let me leave it at that for now, since I am sure that you comments will be more useful than mine, given that many of you here have years of direct hands-on experience. The final point I would like to draw to your attention, however, is that this is very much in line with our main 2009-2012 goal for World Carshare - namely to see how we can thought this collaborative network and our own contributions bring information, materials, ideas and perspective to cities so that they can become stronger partners in carsharing that really works. I look forward with real interest to your comments. Eric Britton From morten7an at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 21:03:43 2008 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 04:03:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Noise barriers In-Reply-To: <4cfd20aa0811040129q3d369ceah9c2c680349546247@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <282186.19919.qm@web51010.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi, I agree with Sujit here, but other possible measures to reduce noise pollution from traffic include reducing car speeds, and planting bushes or trees along roads. Reducing car-speeds ( traffic calming + speed limits and possibly increased enforcement) has the following advantages : * improves accessibility for more sustainable modes/healthy transport ( Cycling, walking, passenging/public transport) * renders other modes more competitive with the private car * reduces air pollution * reduces petrol consumption * improves traffic safety * reinforces the notion that there are limits to what car drivers can be allowed to do * more "realistic" in the short run than banning cars :-) I recall having heard that actually reducing speeds can increase traffic flow. ( Building on the assumption that drivers adjust the distance to the car in front, because braking distances increase greatly with speed - varies as speed squared, I seem to recall) Best Regards, Morten Lange --- On Tue, 4/11/08, Sujit Patwardhan wrote: > From: Sujit Patwardhan > Subject: [sustran] Re: Noise barriers > To: "Debi Goenka" > Cc: "sustrandiscusslist" , sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Date: Tuesday, 4 November, 2008, 9:29 AM > The *BEST *noise barrier for congested areas of the city is > the decision to > ban motorised traffic from the area. Prior to that it would > help to be avoid > road widening (or keep it to a minimum only to help NMT), > to avoid building > freeways and to absolutely ban any flyovers. > > I'm saying this with complete seriousness as patchwork > solutions never work, > but are often forced on traffic activists by > planners/administrators who say > "the decision has already been taken and we can at > best minimise the damage > (in this case noise)". This is like saying > "suggest a good mask as we're > going to build a smoke belching factory right in the middle > of this > residential area but we want to protect your lungs". > > -- > Sujit > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Debi Goenka > wrote: > > > Hi all > > > > I was wondering where I can find details of noise > barriers required to be > > constructed along highways/freeways/flyovers, > particularly in congested > > areas of cities. > > > > Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > > > Cheers, warm regards > > > > Debi > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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. > > > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > Sujit Patwardhan > sujitjp@gmail.com > > "Yamuna", > ICS Colony, > Ganeshkhind Road, > Pune 411 007 > India > Tel: +91 20 25537955 > Cell: +91 98220 26627 > ----------------------------------------------------- > Hon. Secretary: > Parisar > www.parisar.org > ------------------------------------------------------ > Founder Member: > PTTF > (Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum) > www.pttf.net > ------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 edelman at greenidea.eu Tue Nov 4 21:10:13 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 13:10:13 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Noise barriers In-Reply-To: <282186.19919.qm@web51010.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <282186.19919.qm@web51010.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <49103BA5.30505@greenidea.eu> Morten Lange wrote: [...] > * more "realistic" in the short run than banning cars :-) > [...] THERE is no "short run" for a new or widened highway. Create this monster under the conditions that its claws are filed, but it will be alive a long time and will figure out a way to sharpen its claws. -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From zvi.leve at gmail.com Wed Nov 5 00:15:25 2008 From: zvi.leve at gmail.com (Zvi Leve) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 11:15:25 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Noise barriers In-Reply-To: <49103BA5.30505@greenidea.eu> References: <282186.19919.qm@web51010.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <49103BA5.30505@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: An Urban "Boulevard " may be a more realistic compromise than trying to minimize the impact of a highway. Boulevards typically include numerous interventions related to the "aesthetic" qualities of the facility (I know, how can one talk about road "aesthetics"?), and by definition boulevards are intended to accommodate many different types of road-user. Plus boulevards can even accommodate a measure of 'public space' which can even be dedicated to non-transportation related activities, such as vendors. We should all be wary of building more exclusively car-centric projects. It is doubly damaging when such projects are dropped into an existing multi-modal urban environment. Tearing places apart in order to more "efficiently" accommodate motorized vehicles is a very short-sighted development approach. Anyway... Good luck! Zvi On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > Morten Lange wrote: > > [...] > > * more "realistic" in the short run than banning cars :-) > > > [...] > > THERE is no "short run" for a new or widened highway. Create this > monster under the conditions that its claws are filed, but it will be > alive a long time and will figure out a way to sharpen its claws. > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > 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. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 dsengupta at gmail.com Wed Nov 5 02:37:05 2008 From: dsengupta at gmail.com (Dibu Sengupta) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 12:37:05 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Noise barriers In-Reply-To: References: <282186.19919.qm@web51010.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <49103BA5.30505@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: You can see FHWA's Highway Construction Noise Barrier Handbooks for ideas http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/handbook/index.htm http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/manual.htm Dibu =================================================== On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Zvi Leve wrote: > An Urban "Boulevard " may be a > more > realistic compromise than trying to minimize the impact of a highway. > Boulevards typically include numerous interventions related to the > "aesthetic" qualities of the facility (I know, how can one talk about road > "aesthetics"?), and by definition boulevards are intended to accommodate > many different types of road-user. Plus boulevards can even accommodate a > measure of 'public space' which can even be dedicated to non-transportation > related activities, such as vendors. > > We should all be wary of building more exclusively car-centric projects. It > is doubly damaging when such projects are dropped into an existing > multi-modal urban environment. Tearing places apart in order to more > "efficiently" accommodate motorized vehicles is a very short-sighted > development approach. > > Anyway... Good luck! > > Zvi > > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory > wrote: > > > Morten Lange wrote: > > > > [...] > > > * more "realistic" in the short run than banning cars :-) > > > > > [...] > > > > THERE is no "short run" for a new or widened highway. Create this > > monster under the conditions that its claws are filed, but it will be > > alive a long time and will figure out a way to sharpen its claws. > > > > -- > > -------------------------------------------- > > > > Todd Edelman > > Green Idea Factory > > > > Urbanstr. 45 > > D-10967 Berlin > > Germany > > > > Skype: toddedelman > > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > > > edelman@greenidea.eu > > www.greenidea.eu > > 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. > > > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 litman at vtpi.org Thu Nov 6 15:52:08 2008 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 22:52:08 -0800 Subject: [sustran] VTPI News - Autumn 2008 Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20081105225159.09e4e3c8@mail.islandnet.com> ----------- VTPI NEWS ----------- Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" ------------------------------------- Autumn 2008 Vol. 11, No. 4 ----------------------------------- The Victoria Transport Policy Institute is an independent research organization dedicated to developing innovative solutions to transportation problems. The VTPI website (http://www.vtpi.org ) has many resources addressing a wide range of transport planning and policy issues. VTPI also provides consulting services. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NEW DOCUMENTS ============== "A Good Example of Bad Transportation Performance Evaluation: Critique of the Fraser Institute Report, 'Transportation Performance of the Canadian Provinces'" (http://www.vtpi.org/per_ind.pdf ) This paper discusses transportation performance evaluation concepts and critiques the recent report, 'Transportation Performance of the Canadian Provinces,' By David T. Hartgen, Claire G. Chadwick and M. Gregory Fields. That report uses a unique set of 23 indicators to evaluate and compare transportation system performance of Canadian provinces. A few of these indicators are appropriate and widely used, but several are ambiguous and biased, and some are illogical. This paper examines these indicators in detail and grades their appropriateness for planning and management applications. * * * * * "Multi-Modal Transport Planning" (http://www.vtpi.org/multimodal_planning.pdf ). This short paper summarizes basic principles for transportation planning. It describes conventional transport planning, which tends to focus on motor vehicle traffic conditions, and newer methods for more multi-modal planning and evaluation. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE =================== Planetizen Blogs (http://www.planetizen.com ): * "Crises Come And Go, But Smart Policies Live on" (http://www.planetizen.com/node/35651 ) * "Planning for True Security" (http://www.planetizen.com/node/35475 ) * "Driving Versus Public Transit Costs" (http://www.planetizen.com/node/35075 ) "Parking Management Best Practices," ITE Journal on the Web, Vol. 78, No. 9; at http://www.vtpi.org/PMBP_ITE_SEPT2008.pdf . * * * * * "National Study on Carless and Special Needs Evacuation Planning: A Literature Review" (http://www.planning.uno.edu/docs/CarlessEvacuationPlanning.pdf ) by John L. Renne, Thomas W. Sanchez and Todd Litman for the Federal Transit Administration. This report investigates how transportation agencies and local governments can consider the unique needs of minority, low-income, elderly, disabled, and limited English proficient persons in their emergency preparedness planning. * * * * * "Managing Transport Challenges When Oil Prices Rise" (http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/reports/357.pdf ), by Stuart Donovan, et al., Research Report 357, New Zealand Transport Agency. This report provides practical guidance to central, regional, and local government agencies on how to manage the transport challenges associated with rising oil prices. * * * * * "Transport Network Optimisation Think-Piece" (http://viastrada.co.nz/pub/network-optimisation-think-piece ) by Andrew Macbeth and Megan Fowler for the New Zealand Transport Agency. The document examines ways of optimising New Zealand's road transport network. It describes specific local and regional government policies that can increase transport system efficiency and equity. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BEEN THERE - DONE THAT ====================== Connected Urban Development (http://www.connectedurbandevelopment.org ) During the 23rd-24th September Amsterdam Conference several new CUD projects were launched, including Amsterdam's Smart Work Center, Seoul's Smart Road Pricing and San Francisco's EcoMap prototype. VTPI presented information on Connected Public Transit planning and benefit analysis (http://www.connectedurbandevelopment.org/connected_and_sustainable_mobility/connected_public_transit ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ UPCOMING EVENTS ================= Pay-As-You-Drive Vehicle Pricing Workshop When: Friday, 21 November 2008, 1:00-4:30 pm Where: UBC Robson Square (downtown Vancouver), Room C150 Price: Free, but registration is limited (70 maximum participants) For more information: Todd Litman (litman@vtpi.org or 250-360-1560) This workshop explores Pay-As-You-Drive (PAYD) vehicle pricing, which means that insurance premiums are based directly on the amount a vehicle is driven during the policy term. Pay-As-You-Drive pricing provides several benefits: it is more actuarially accurate (premiums better reflect a vehicle's insurance claim costs), is more affordable and progressive with respect to income (most lower-income motorists would save money), can help reduce uninsured driving, and by rewarding mileage reductions PAYD helps reduce traffic congestion, traffic accidents, energy consumption and pollution emissions. Backgrounders: "Pay-As-You-Drive Pricing in British Columbia" (http://www.vtpi.org/paydbc.pdf ). "Pay-As-You-Drive Insurance" (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm79.htm ) "Pay-As-You-Drive Auto Insurance: A Simple Way to Reduce Driving-Related Harms and Increase Equity" (http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2008/07_payd_bordoffnoel.aspx ) * * * * * Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting (http://www.trb.org ) 11-15 January 2009 The Victoria Transport Policy Institute will present papers in the following TRB sessions: Workshop 117, "Developing Transportation Data Quality Standards" 11 January 2009, 9:00 am 12:00 noon, Hilton, Military Workshop 169, "Sustainability and Social Measures for Transportation" Sunday, January 11, 2009, 1:30pm- 4:30pm, Hilton, Lincoln East Session 314, "Taxing Our Way to a Greener Future?" DATE: Monday, January 12, 2009, 1:30pm- 3:15pm, Hilton, International East Session 364, "Integration and Co-Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation Policies" Monday, January 12, 2009, 3:45pm- 5:30pm, Hilton, Monroe West Session 713, "Sustainable Transportation" DATE: Wednesday, January 14, 2009, 10:15am-12:00pm, Hilton, International East * * * * * UrbanRAIL (www.informa.com.au/urbanrail/spk ) 17th-18th March 2009, Sydney, Australia This conference will bring together government agencies, rail operators, track owners, transport consultancies and engineering companies to discuss key trends, major projects, and the future of Australasia's urban rail. VTPI Executive Director Todd Litman will speak about rail benefit evaluation. Please contact VTPI if you are interested in having Todd speak at other events in Australia or New Zealand during March 19-30. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ IN THE NEWS ================= "Comments on the Notice of Preparation for Draft Environmental Impact Report For the Transportation 2035 Plan" (http://ag.ca.gov/globalwarming/pdf/comments_MTC_RT_Plan.pdf ). This letter by the California Attorney General indicates that regional transport plans must support state emission reduction targets, including consideration of induced travel impacts. It references our report, "Generated Traffic and Induced Travel: Implications for Transport Planning" (http://www.vtpi.org/gentraf.pdf) * * * * * California PAYD Rules (http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/0070-2008/release089-08.cfm ) The Victoria Transport Policy Institute contributed to the development of draft California State insurance rules that will explicitly allow Pay-As-You-Drive (PAYD) insurance pricing. The rule is expected to be finalized in 2009. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ USEFUL RESOURCES ================= "Improved Methods For Assessing Social, Cultural, And Economic Effects Of Transportation Projects" (http://www.statewideplanning.org/_resources/234_NCHRP-8-36-66.pdf ) This report identifies existing and emerging community and social impact assessment practices that can be used as indicators of community quality of life. * * * * * "Smart Transportation Guidebook: Planning and Designing Highways and Streets that Support Sustainable and Livable Communities" (http://www.dvrpc.org/asp/pubs/publicationabstract.asp?pub_id=08030A ) Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. This comprehensive guidebook integrates roadway and community planning to help increase efficiency and create more livable communities. * * * * * "Addressing Climate Change Without Impairing the U.S. Economy: The Economics and Environmental Science of Combining a Carbon-Based Tax and Tax Relief" (http://www.climatetaskforce.org/pdf/CTF_CarbonTax_Earth_Spgs.pdf ), by Robert Shapiro, Nam Pham and Arun Malik. This study used the U.S. Department of Energy's National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) to evaluate the economic impacts of a Carbon Tax (http://www.vtpi.org/carbontax.pdf ) that begins at $14 per ton and increases to $50 per ton of CO2 by 2030, with 90% of the revenues returned to households and businesses in tax relief. They conclude that this would reduce climate change emissions 30% while only reducing GDP growth from 33.6% to 33.4%, and would provide other social and environmental benefits. * * * * * "80in50 Scenarios for Deep Reductions in Greenhouse Gas Emissions from California Transportation: Meeting an 80% Reduction Goal in 2050" (http://steps.ucdavis.edu/research/Thread_6/80in50 ) by Christopher Yang, et al, for the Sustainable Transportation Energy Pathways Project, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California. This report analyzes options for meeting California's ambitious greenhouse gas emission reductions goal (80% below 1990 levels by 2050) in the transportation sector. This document identifies vehicle and fuel technologies that might achieve this goal, but concludes that reductions in total motor vehicle travel are important and deserve research. * * * * * "The Green Bean Commuting Newsletter" by Accor Services provides information on commuter benefits. To subscribe visit http://accorservicesusa.com/eNews.aspx and select "Accor Services USA Newsletter".This document describes a recent commuter survey in which 44% of respondents report that rising fuel prices have affected their travel decisions (http://www.accorservicesusa.com/Images/email/commuting_habit_change.jpg) * * * * * "Commuter Benefits Now Extended to Cover Bicyclist" (http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/10/bailout-bill-gi.html) H.R. 1498 - The Bike Commuter Act, adds "bicycles" to the definition of transportation covered by qualified transportation fringe benefit to IRS Code 132(f). This gives bicycle commuters the same financial incentive as commuters using other modes. * * * * * "Active Transportation for America: A Case for Increased Federal Investment in Bicycling and Walking" (http://www.railstotrails.org/ATFA ), by Thomas Gotschi and Kevin Mills. This report quantifies the transportation, energy, climate, public health, and economic benefits of bicycling and walking. * * * * * "Suburbanizing the City: How New York City Parking Requirements Lead to More Driving" (http://www.transalt.org/files/newsroom/reports/suburbanizing_the_city.pdf ), by Rachel Weinberger, Mark Seaman and Carolyn Johnson. This study shows how generous minimum parking requirements increase vehicle ownership and use in New York City neighborhoods. * * * * * "An International Review of The Significance of Rail in Developing More Sustainable Urban Transport Systems in Higher Income Cities" (http://www.eco-logica.co.uk/pdf/wtpp14.2.pdf ), by J. Kenworthy. This study divides 60 high-income cities into strong rail, weak rail and no-rail cities based on its rail performance and competitiveness with automobile transport. It finds that more strongly rail-oriented cities generally experience various positive impacts. * * * * * The Impact of Fuel Prices on Consumer Behavior and Traffic Congestion, (http://scorecard.inrix.com/scorecard). This study evaluated the effects of fuel price increases on U.S. vehicle travel and traffic congestion, using INRIX's "Smart Dust Network" of GPS-enabled vehicles which report roadway travel conditions. It also includes results of a survey concerning the effects fuel prices have on consumer travel behavior. The results indicate that increased gas prices in the first half of 2008 significantly reduced VMT and traffic congestion. * * * * * "The GPI Transportation Accounts: Sustainable Transportation in Halifax Regional Municipality" (http://www.gpiatlantic.org/pdf/transportation/hrmtransportation.pdf ). This study uses various indicators to evaluate regional transportation system performance. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please let us know if you have comments or questions about any information in this newsletter, or if you would like to be removed from our email list. And please pass this newsletter on to others who may find it useful. Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Thu Nov 6 20:18:28 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 12:18:28 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 Message-ID: <00fe01c94001$66dc5330$3494f990$@britton@ecoplan.org> Comment: It strikes me that they are taking a rather easy path in this. There is a lot more to CO2/transport reduction than the short list that follows here. Pity that we don't have a way of bringing more ideas into this one. Eric Britton Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 Tokyo, Japan - The Renault Nissan Alliance and the city of Yokohama have announced a partnership to study sustainable mobility solutions for Yokohama. Under the Environment Model City pilot, Yokohama aims to achieve significant CO2 reductions by experimenting with a range of methodologies across key sectors, including transportation, housing and renewable energy development. Nissan will introduce an all-electric vehicle in Yokohama by 2010, making the city one of the first in the world to offer the vehicle. The scope of the partnership includes measures to promote eco-driving, a study of route navigation systems to alleviate traffic congestion, and measures to promote the mass acceptance of electric vehicles, such as customer incentives and the development of a vehicle charging infrastructure. Nissan has been piloting its Intelligent Transport Systems in Yokohama since September 2006, combining telematics and vehicle navigation systems. The University of Tokyo is also participating to monitor and evaluate the program's progress. "Through our Environment Model City pilot, we hope to define an innovative vision that leads to CO2 reduction, sustainability and improved quality of life for our citizens," said Yokohama mayor Hiroshi Nakada. "We look forward to a mutually beneficial partnership with Nissan." Source: http://www.canadiandriver.com/thenews/2008/11/05/nissan-announces-zero-emiss ion-partnership-in-yokohama.htm The New Mobility Agenda - http://www.invent.newmobility.org Europe: 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France T: +331 4326 1323 or +339 7044 4179 Skype: ericbritton New Mobility Partnerships - http://partners.newmobility.org USA: 9440 Readcrest Drive Los Angeles, CA 90210 T: +1 310 601-8468 Skype : newmobility From edelman at greenidea.eu Thu Nov 6 20:44:20 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:44:20 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 In-Reply-To: <00fe01c94001$66dc5330$3494f990$@britton@ecoplan.org> References: <00fe01c94001$66dc5330$3494f990$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: <4912D894.6080506@greenidea.eu> Hi, Will they listen to our ideas? From their press release: "Nissan firmly believes the solution to sustainable mobility can be achieved with electric vehicles. We look forward to working with the city of Yokohama to make electric vehicles a sensible, attractive and eco-friendly choice for customers," said Carlos Tavares, executive vice president of Nissan. They do not want New Mobility, they simply want to perpetuate the private urban car system. It is obvious to us that the problem with Old Mobility is not just about Co2 (but I am sure if they repeat this over and over most consumers will be convinced that it is.) And just to make sure you get a clearer picture of their (e)mission, please see a few of their other press releases from the last week: Nissan launches new X-Trail in China Nissan Releases New KIX Mini SUV All-New 2009 Nissan 370Z Coupe Readies For Debut If Nissan wants to use their experience, knowledge and capital to only make something which is actually new and sustainable, I will be the first to send them a C.V. Thanks, T Eric Britton wrote: > Comment: It strikes me that they are taking a rather easy path in this. > There is a lot more to CO2/transport reduction than the short list that > follows here. Pity that we don't have a way of bringing more ideas into this > one. Eric Britton > > > > > > > > Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 > > Tokyo, Japan - The Renault Nissan Alliance and the city of Yokohama have > announced a partnership to study sustainable mobility solutions for > Yokohama. Under the Environment Model City pilot, Yokohama aims to achieve > significant CO2 reductions by experimenting with a range of methodologies > across key sectors, including transportation, housing and renewable energy > development. > > Nissan will introduce an all-electric vehicle in Yokohama by 2010, making > the city one of the first in the world to offer the vehicle. > > The scope of the partnership includes measures to promote eco-driving, a > study of route navigation systems to alleviate traffic congestion, and > measures to promote the mass acceptance of electric vehicles, such as > customer incentives and the development of a vehicle charging > infrastructure. Nissan has been piloting its Intelligent Transport Systems > in Yokohama since September 2006, combining telematics and vehicle > navigation systems. The University of Tokyo is also participating to monitor > and evaluate the program's progress. > > "Through our Environment Model City pilot, we hope to define an innovative > vision that leads to CO2 reduction, sustainability and improved quality of > life for our citizens," said Yokohama mayor Hiroshi Nakada. "We look forward > to a mutually beneficial partnership with Nissan." > > Source: > http://www.canadiandriver.com/thenews/2008/11/05/nissan-announces-zero-emiss > ion-partnership-in-yokohama.htm > > > > > > The New Mobility Agenda - http://www.invent.newmobility.org > > Europe: 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France > > T: +331 4326 1323 or +339 7044 4179 Skype: ericbritton > > > > New Mobility Partnerships - http://partners.newmobility.org > > USA: 9440 Readcrest Drive Los Angeles, CA 90210 > > T: +1 310 601-8468 Skype : newmobility > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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'). > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From etts at indigo.ie Thu Nov 6 20:58:52 2008 From: etts at indigo.ie (Brendan Finn) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 11:58:52 -0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 In-Reply-To: <4912D894.6080506@greenidea.eu> References: <00fe01c94001$66dc5330$3494f990$@britton@ecoplan.org> <4912D894.6080506@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <31E7099AA3494030BD27B9445F41F5DD@MicroPro271007> Todd, Eric, You are surprised that the auto manufacturers focus on 'solutions' that don't reduce the number of cars? With best wishes, Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" To: ; Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 11:44 AM Subject: [sustran] Re: Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 > Hi, > > Will they listen to our ideas? From their press release: > > "Nissan firmly believes the solution to sustainable mobility can be > achieved with electric vehicles. We look forward to working with the > city of Yokohama to make electric vehicles a sensible, attractive and > eco-friendly choice for customers," said Carlos Tavares, executive vice > president of Nissan. > > > They do not want New Mobility, they simply want to perpetuate the > private urban car system. It is obvious to us that the problem with Old > Mobility is not just about Co2 (but I am sure if they repeat this over > and over most consumers will be convinced that it is.) And just to make > sure you get a clearer picture of their (e)mission, please see a few of > their other press releases from the last week: > > Nissan launches new X-Trail in China > > > Nissan Releases New KIX Mini SUV > > > All-New 2009 Nissan 370Z Coupe Readies For Debut > > > If Nissan wants to use their experience, knowledge and capital to only > make something which is actually new and sustainable, I will be the > first to send them a C.V. > > Thanks, > T > > Eric Britton wrote: >> Comment: It strikes me that they are taking a rather easy path in this. >> There is a lot more to CO2/transport reduction than the short list that >> follows here. Pity that we don't have a way of bringing more ideas into this >> one. Eric Britton >> >> >> >> Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 >> >> Tokyo, Japan - The Renault Nissan Alliance and the city of Yokohama have >> announced a partnership to study sustainable mobility solutions for >> Yokohama. Under the Environment Model City pilot, Yokohama aims to achieve >> significant CO2 reductions by experimenting with a range of methodologies >> across key sectors, including transportation, housing and renewable energy >> development. >> >> Nissan will introduce an all-electric vehicle in Yokohama by 2010, making >> the city one of the first in the world to offer the vehicle. >> >> The scope of the partnership includes measures to promote eco-driving, a >> study of route navigation systems to alleviate traffic congestion, and >> measures to promote the mass acceptance of electric vehicles, such as >> customer incentives and the development of a vehicle charging >> infrastructure. Nissan has been piloting its Intelligent Transport Systems >> in Yokohama since September 2006, combining telematics and vehicle >> navigation systems. The University of Tokyo is also participating to monitor >> and evaluate the program's progress. >> >> "Through our Environment Model City pilot, we hope to define an innovative >> vision that leads to CO2 reduction, sustainability and improved quality of >> life for our citizens," said Yokohama mayor Hiroshi Nakada. "We look forward >> to a mutually beneficial partnership with Nissan." >> >> Source: >> http://www.canadiandriver.com/thenews/2008/11/05/nissan-announces-zero-emiss >> ion-partnership-in-yokohama.htm >> From morten7an at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 22:40:18 2008 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 05:40:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 In-Reply-To: <31E7099AA3494030BD27B9445F41F5DD@MicroPro271007> Message-ID: <691735.47579.qm@web51005.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi, There are laws about untruthful advertising, for instance in the UK. Is it not timely to use those laws against greenwashing in the transport sector ? The problem is the costs and risks involved in bringing such cases before the courts. A wealthy and strong partner is needed. Some possible candidates spring to mind : - ICLEI ( ass of local authorities, worldwide ) - The Global Alliance for EcoMobility ( where ICLEI is a founding member, but saly also the FIA - as an "expert") Just my 2 ?-cents. Best Regards, Morten --- On Thu, 6/11/08, Brendan Finn wrote: > From: Brendan Finn > Subject: [sustran] Re: Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 > To: edelman@greenidea.eu, NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Date: Thursday, 6 November, 2008, 11:58 AM > Todd, Eric, > > You are surprised that the auto manufacturers focus on > 'solutions' that don't reduce the number of > cars? > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel > : +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" > > To: ; > > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 11:44 AM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Nissan and city of Yokohama partner > to reduce CO2 > > > > Hi, > > > > Will they listen to our ideas? From their press > release: > > > > "Nissan firmly believes the solution to > sustainable mobility can be > > achieved with electric vehicles. We look forward to > working with the > > city of Yokohama to make electric vehicles a sensible, > attractive and > > eco-friendly choice for customers," said Carlos > Tavares, executive vice > > president of Nissan. > > > > > > > They do not want New Mobility, they simply want to > perpetuate the > > private urban car system. It is obvious to us that the > problem with Old > > Mobility is not just about Co2 (but I am sure if they > repeat this over > > and over most consumers will be convinced that it is.) > And just to make > > sure you get a clearer picture of their (e)mission, > please see a few of > > their other press releases from the last week: > > > > Nissan launches new X-Trail in China > > > > > > > Nissan Releases New KIX Mini SUV > > > > > > > All-New 2009 Nissan 370Z Coupe Readies For Debut > > > > > > > If Nissan wants to use their experience, knowledge and > capital to only > > make something which is actually new and sustainable, > I will be the > > first to send them a C.V. > > > > Thanks, > > T > > > > > Eric Britton wrote: > >> Comment: It strikes me that they are taking a > rather easy path in this. > >> There is a lot more to CO2/transport reduction > than the short list that > >> follows here. Pity that we don't have a way of > bringing more ideas into this > >> one. Eric Britton > >> > > >> > >> > >> Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 > >> > >> Tokyo, Japan - The Renault Nissan Alliance and the > city of Yokohama have > >> announced a partnership to study sustainable > mobility solutions for > >> Yokohama. Under the Environment Model City pilot, > Yokohama aims to achieve > >> significant CO2 reductions by experimenting with a > range of methodologies > >> across key sectors, including transportation, > housing and renewable energy > >> development. > >> > >> Nissan will introduce an all-electric vehicle in > Yokohama by 2010, making > >> the city one of the first in the world to offer > the vehicle. > >> > >> The scope of the partnership includes measures to > promote eco-driving, a > >> study of route navigation systems to alleviate > traffic congestion, and > >> measures to promote the mass acceptance of > electric vehicles, such as > >> customer incentives and the development of a > vehicle charging > >> infrastructure. Nissan has been piloting its > Intelligent Transport Systems > >> in Yokohama since September 2006, combining > telematics and vehicle > >> navigation systems. The University of Tokyo is > also participating to monitor > >> and evaluate the program's progress. > >> > >> "Through our Environment Model City pilot, we > hope to define an innovative > >> vision that leads to CO2 reduction, sustainability > and improved quality of > >> life for our citizens," said Yokohama mayor > Hiroshi Nakada. "We look forward > >> to a mutually beneficial partnership with > Nissan." > >> > >> Source: > >> > http://www.canadiandriver.com/thenews/2008/11/05/nissan-announces-zero-emiss > >> ion-partnership-in-yokohama.htm > >> > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 edelman at greenidea.eu Fri Nov 7 02:12:50 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:12:50 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 In-Reply-To: <31E7099AA3494030BD27B9445F41F5DD@MicroPro271007> References: <00fe01c94001$66dc5330$3494f990$@britton@ecoplan.org> <4912D894.6080506@greenidea.eu> <31E7099AA3494030BD27B9445F41F5DD@MicroPro271007> Message-ID: <49132592.4000006@greenidea.eu> Hi Brendan, I am not surprised. The sad thing is that UNEP is probably going to given them an award if they meet their goals for Co2 reduction. I don't think that does us any favours. - T Brendan Finn wrote: > Todd, Eric, > > You are surprised that the auto manufacturers focus on 'solutions' > that don't reduce the number of cars? > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie > tel : +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" > > To: >; > > > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 11:44 AM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 > > > Hi, > > > > Will they listen to our ideas? From their press release: > > > > "Nissan firmly believes the solution to sustainable mobility can be > > achieved with electric vehicles. We look forward to working with the > > city of Yokohama to make electric vehicles a sensible, attractive and > > eco-friendly choice for customers," said Carlos Tavares, executive vice > > president of Nissan. > > > > > > They do not want New Mobility, they simply want to perpetuate the > > private urban car system. It is obvious to us that the problem with Old > > Mobility is not just about Co2 (but I am sure if they repeat this over > > and over most consumers will be convinced that it is.) And just to make > > sure you get a clearer picture of their (e)mission, please see a few of > > their other press releases from the last week: > > > > Nissan launches new X-Trail in China > > > > > > Nissan Releases New KIX Mini SUV > > > > > > All-New 2009 Nissan 370Z Coupe Readies For Debut > > > > > > If Nissan wants to use their experience, knowledge and capital to only > > make something which is actually new and sustainable, I will be the > > first to send them a C.V. > > > > Thanks, > > T > > > > > Eric Britton wrote: > >> Comment: It strikes me that they are taking a rather easy path in this. > >> There is a lot more to CO2/transport reduction than the short list that > >> follows here. Pity that we don't have a way of bringing more ideas > into this > >> one. Eric Britton > >> > > >> > >> > >> Nissan and city of Yokohama partner to reduce CO2 > >> > >> Tokyo, Japan - The Renault Nissan Alliance and the city of Yokohama > have > >> announced a partnership to study sustainable mobility solutions for > >> Yokohama. Under the Environment Model City pilot, Yokohama aims to > achieve > >> significant CO2 reductions by experimenting with a range of > methodologies > >> across key sectors, including transportation, housing and renewable > energy > >> development. > >> > >> Nissan will introduce an all-electric vehicle in Yokohama by 2010, > making > >> the city one of the first in the world to offer the vehicle. > >> > >> The scope of the partnership includes measures to promote > eco-driving, a > >> study of route navigation systems to alleviate traffic congestion, and > >> measures to promote the mass acceptance of electric vehicles, such as > >> customer incentives and the development of a vehicle charging > >> infrastructure. Nissan has been piloting its Intelligent Transport > Systems > >> in Yokohama since September 2006, combining telematics and vehicle > >> navigation systems. The University of Tokyo is also participating > to monitor > >> and evaluate the program's progress. > >> > >> "Through our Environment Model City pilot, we hope to define an > innovative > >> vision that leads to CO2 reduction, sustainability and improved > quality of > >> life for our citizens," said Yokohama mayor Hiroshi Nakada. "We > look forward > >> to a mutually beneficial partnership with Nissan." > >> > >> Source: > >> > http://www.canadiandriver.com/thenews/2008/11/05/nissan-announces-zero-emiss > >> ion-partnership-in-yokohama.htm > >> -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From edelman at greenidea.eu Mon Nov 10 04:42:27 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 20:42:27 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Philippines: PT-related deaths, delayed rail project, Binay as President? Message-ID: <49173D23.3070907@greenidea.eu> Death in our highways DEMAND AND SUPPLY By Boo Chanco Updated November 10, 2008 12:00 AM I don't think there has ever been a night when TV Patrol World did not report at least two fatal road accidents. Some road accidents are more sensational than others... like the one where a prominent eye doctor was killed when his car was sideswiped by a bus that was racing another bus past midnight on EDSA. Last week, the newscast compiled the day's harvest of accident reports and garnished it with fresh statistics from the Department of Health (DOH) that proclaimed this grim reality: road accidents are now the fourth leading cause of death in the Philippines. Many of these accidents are preventable. Physical fatigue, a demanding "boundary" system, lack of respect for traffic rules and plain stupidity are among the leading causes of death in our highways. Those motorcycle riders who get themselves killed or injured because they were drunk while operating the motorcycle, didn't wear helmets and went the other way on a one way street probably deserved to die and thus prevent their seed from polluting the nation's gene pool. Stupidity is inexcusable. At least these stupid motorcycle riders, in most cases, only kill or injure themselves. Bus and jeepney drivers who take stupid risks on the road tend to kill many innocent victims. But while these bus (and jeepney) drivers always take the blame, it is apparent that they could be victims of our make shift transportation "system". The "boundary" system where the drivers effectively pay rent for the right to drive the bus (or jeepney) for a day could be what's at the root of our problem. They have to earn their "boundary" first before they even pocket their first peso. Bus drivers abroad who work on a salary are more inclined to follow the rules and even keep to a strict schedule of stops in designated points. Here, a dog-eat-dog competition for passengers has bred some of the most ill-mannered and dangerous drivers anywhere. Last Friday, TV Patrol World showed video clips of jeepney drivers who were zigzaging as if they were in a Formula 1 race... to compete for potential passengers. The "boundary" system also makes the drivers work longer than they should. A bus driver told the ABS-CBN reporter he usually starts his daily grind at 4 a.m. He drives for 18 straight hours until 12 midnight. "Sometimes it's being sleepy," the driver said. "That's the main problem of drivers... sleepiness." According to Dr. Cecile Magturo of the DOH, fatigue, due to long driving hours, contribute greatly to drivers losing control of their vehicles. When fatigue sets in, it is not unusual for drivers to become irritable. This, according to health experts, leads to driving errors and accidents. "Drivers are bent on trying to reach their quota, that is where we have problems, accompanied by fatigue," Dr. Magturo told the ABS-CBN reporter. Magturo said she blames operators and concerned agencies for their insufficient safety policies. If the trend continues, health officials said they fear that road accidents could become the leading cause of deaths in the country by the year 2020. The LTO official interviewed by ABS-CBN said they will look into limiting the number of hours a driver can be allowed to drive. It invites questions on how they are going to implement a rule like that. If the boundary system remains, drivers themselves will complain that reduced hours will prevent them from earning as much as they can. And even if they require a personal booklet for every bus driver that logs their time on the road, who is to ensure that the entries are true or even half accurate. Today, our land transportation officials seem to merely tiptoe around the problem. Yes, it is good that they have required bus drivers to undertake extensive seminars on traffic rules, proper behavior on the road and even basic exercises to relax themselves and fight fatigue while driving. Maybe they should also impose a rule requiring buses to have seat belts. If cars are required by law to have seat belts, there is more reason for public vehicles to have those safety belts. But there is likely a need to finally look into the "boundary" system and require operators to pay fixed salaries to their drivers. Market risk should be assumed by operators rather than drivers because they are more financially able to meet it than the drivers. We have to remove the prime motivation for bad driving which is the fight to the death for passengers specially on EDSA where it is obvious there are more buses than there are passengers on any given day. The LTFRB has blood on its hands for issuing more bus franchises on EDSA than the market can support. Unless our authorities decide it is time to fix our public transport system from the ground up, death on our highways will always be part of the nightly newscast. That would make our highways extremely dangerous for every one, not just for the folks who use public transportation. The next one who dies at the hands of these drivers could be the LTO or LTFRB chiefs. *Railroad project* According to the Financial Times, a railroad building project worth $8.3 billion being undertaken by China Railway Construction Corp. in Nigeria is being put on hold pending investigation. In a stock market filing, CRCC said Nigeria's transport ministry had taken over control of work on the 1,315 km line between southern Lagos city and northern Kano. It would take about 90 days to "redefine" the scope of the contract. The Export-Import Bank of China, a policy lender, promised to back the project with $1bn in soft loans, but it appears to have fallen victim to a broad review of deals agreed under Nigeria's previous president. Reuters quoted a Nigerian presidential spokesman saying last week: "The federal government had suspended the execution of the Chinese railway contract because this administration had discovered that the contract was over inflated." "Everything about the contract was wrong. There was no fund allocated for the project other than a promise by the immediate past administration to give the Chinese company an oil block." he added. CRCC is formerly the railway-building unit of the People's Liberation Army. It also signed a $300-million road project in Nigeria. Oh well... it sounds eerily like our North Rail project which is still on hold. Arsenio Bartolome III, former president and CEO of Northrail, recommended the termination of the contract with the Chinese firm after it unilaterally suspended the construction work and demanded close to $300 million in additional costs to continue the project. He said contractor China National Machinery and Equipment Corp. Group (CNMEG) made it onerous for the Philippine government to continue the project. The new head of the project, after a few months of study, had recommended proceeding by accepting the increased costs the Chinese want. The not so funny thing is, we have spent a bundle on it already, displaced thousands of squatter families and not an inch of rail had been laid about four years after the project was supposed to have been started. This is an embarrassment to both the Chinese government and Ate Glue's administration. The funny thing is, the NorthRail Project is a major component of the Strong Republic Transit System and is among Ate Glue's priority projects. Yet, it is going nowhere. If she can't get her own priority project going, what can she do? Last July 14, Trade and Industry Secretary Peter B. Favila confirmed that "Manila has agreed to keep the $400-million Northrail project under the state-owned China and National Machinery Equipment Group (CNMEG). He declined to elaborate." Favila's confirmation, according to GMA7 News, indicated that Malaca?ang has given CNMEG 45 days to begin the project anew. That was 123 days ago and we haven't heard a pip yet. In 2004, China agreed to provide some $400 million worth of funds to begin construction. It is considered as the largest Chinese project in Southeast Asia. Now that the Nigerians are also having the same experience, maybe we should be extra careful in signing up similar large projects with the Chinese. Then again, from what I hear, our side is more than worthy of the blame too. The Chinese may probably even be victims, if you know what I mean. *Parallelisms* Have you noticed how we follow the pattern of Americans in electing Presidents? They elected General Eisenhower. We elected General Ramos. They elected actor Ronald Reagan. We elected actor Erap Estrada. Their Supreme Court elected the son of a former President. Our Supreme Court elected the daughter of a former President. Because they elected their first black President... in 2010, we are destined to elect Jejomar Binay. Parang iginuhit na ng tadhana, di ba, Jojo? Boo Chanco's e-mail address is bchanco@gmail.com From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Nov 10 16:36:07 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:36:07 +0100 Subject: [sustran] FW: [China Urban Travel Ranking System Message-ID: <003401c94307$00e26980$02a73c80$@britton@ecoplan.org> CPN Urban Travel Ranking System CPN Whitepaper: State of Urban Transport in China After a year's preparation, China Planning Network is initiating the CPN Urban Travel Ranking System: the largest-scale, independent, public-participating social surveys on China's urban travel. In collaboration with China's media and internet communities, we collect first hand data on China's urban travel directly from the public. And in collaboration with top transport scholars and professionals in the world, we develop a definitive evaluation framework and survey methodology. The survey methodology and data collected will be published at the CPN website and freely available to the public and scholars interested in China' urban transport. The surveys will be done on annual basis. We will publish the CPN Whitepaper: State of Urban Transport in China based on the results of the annual surveys and the researches based on these survey data. For scholars: provide food for research Scholars have been hunger for data on China' urban transport, particularly data from the public's viewpoint. The CPN surveys provide food for research on China's urban transport. In doing so, not only we intrigue scholars from all over the world with the richness and complexity of China's urban transport, but also we enable their studies with first-hand survey data. This is the best way to attract world scholarship to study China. For the public: engage participation in a realistic way The CPN surveys play two roles for the public: First, this is not only an information collection exercise, but also an educational one. By participating in the survey, the widest population can learn, from the world scholarship, what the key aspects are when we evaluate a city's transport; what the latest concerns are, such as CO2 footprint, energy consumption, social equity, affordability; what the newest policies innovations are; how we can get involved in this type of social surveys, etc. Second and more importantly, the CPN survey is a realistic way of engaging public participation in China. This helps the public express their views about urban lives, in an acceptable, yet powerful way. For government: get on to the agenda For the government, given the fact that decision makers in the cities and states pay high attention to these types of ranking results, concerns expressed in CPN surveys can jump onto their agenda right away and can be fed into the decision making process effectively. Because the methodology is based on the best thinking the world transport scholarship has to offer and the data are directly from their own fellow citizens, the survey results are hard to ignore. Features of the CPN surveys include: 1. Three tiers of seriousness of participation We recognize the different levels of interest and knowledge of the public so we design three tiers of participation. Tier I: "vote for fun", where 3~5 simple voting questions are asked to obtain the instant impression from the participants Tier II: "a bit more serious", for those who go beyond the question of "I like Qingdao's transport the best", and ask "why I think it is the best", a one-page survey with questions on key aspects of urban transport is offered so that people can give reasons to their statements Tier III: "a 20-page long questionnaire", for those who are really into this, we provide an in-depth, 20-page questionnaire, covering the widest aspects of urban travel, as well as a detailed travel diary, socio-economic background and attitudinal and perceptional questions. Can entertainment and serious research coexist? Why not! In this way, we can attract the widest participation while carefully distinguish the serious ones from the others. 2. Expectation oriented In addition to questions on the current travel conditions, we ask people's expectation of the future. "How do you think Shanghai's subway system will look like in five years' time given your understanding of the public transport plan?" "How would you envision the situation of congestion when every family has a car in Beijing?" These questions offer a unique perspective on people's sense of change in China, people's understanding of the planning and people's view of the ideal life in the future. 3. Longitudinally consistent and internationally compatible The power of the surveys lies in the comparability. The CPN surveys will be held on an annual basis and the ranking framework will be longitudinally consistent to enable year on year comparison. In dynamic cities such as those in China, changes are the norm and we want to trace them. Internationally compatibility will be considered as much as possible even though we will start from within China. We will be glad to see cities from outside China to adopt our evaluation methods so that we can position Chinese cities within the world city system and vice versa. 4. Leading to a vision As well as the classic transport questions, we are introducing topics such as transport equity and affordability, green travel and energy efficiency, transport and lifestyle, mobile media, social image concern and car ownership, land use and transport accessibility$B!D(BNot only these questions inquire on the various aspects of urban travel, but together they add up to a vision of the future for China's urban transport to develop in. How to get involved If you and/or your organization are interested in the CPN initiative, please contact me directly at jinhua@mit.edu. All levels or forms of involvement are welcome: from minor method revision to full scale design of the questionnaires; from participating in testing surveys to cleaning the data and analyzing the results; from helping introduce the initiative to others to sponsoring the CPN initiative. We have set up an Expert Advisory Committee consisting of 25 leading transport scholars and professionals. If you are interested in joining the Committee, please don't hesitate to contact me. We distinguish the responsibilities for method design, data collection and result publication: the scholars and professionals from the West and China are responsible for the methodology of the survey, the data are collected from the public voting and surveys, and CPN is solely responsible for the results. 2009 and beyond There will be in one session of the CPN Transport Congress 2009 to focus on the discussion on this initiative. The CPN Urban Travel Ranking System is the Part I of the CPN ranking series including urban housing, urban environment, urban energy, urban risk reduction, etc. We envision that in five years the Urban Travel Ranking System and the CPN Whitepaper will become one of the most important data sources for academic research, a definitive evaluation framework for government policies, and the most accessible topic for debates and dialogues of the public. Best, Ming, Zhan and Jinhua -- --------- Jinhua Zhao Executive Commissioner, China Planning Network Massachusetts Institute of Technology http://www.ChinaUrbanTransport.com/ http://www.ChinaPlanningNetwork.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CPN Urban Travel Ranking System.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 66629 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081110/e178afbc/CPNUrbanTravelRankingSystem.pdf From Mohsin.Sarker at roads.vic.gov.au Tue Nov 11 14:01:41 2008 From: Mohsin.Sarker at roads.vic.gov.au (Mohsin.Sarker at roads.vic.gov.au) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:01:41 +1100 Subject: [sustran] Mohsin Sarker is out of the office. Message-ID: I will be out of the office starting 11/11/2008 and will not return until 17/11/2008. I will be on training from 11 Nov 08 till 14 Nov 08. I will respond to your message when I return on 17 Nov 08. If it is urgent, please contact my team leader, Mario Maldoni on 9313 1209 or by email at mario.maldoni@roads.vic.gov.au DISCLAIMER The following conditions apply to this communication and any attachments: VicRoads reserves all of its copyright; the information is intended for the addressees only and may be confidential and/or privileged - it must not be passed on by any other recipients; any expressed opinions are those of the sender and not necessarily VicRoads; VicRoads accepts no liability for any consequences arising from the recipient's use of this means of communication and/or the information contained in and/or attached to this communication. If this communication has been received in error, please contact the person who sent this communication and delete all copies. From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue Nov 11 17:02:28 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:02:28 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Identifying and Ranking Sustainable Transport Practices - INVITATION TO CONTRIBUTE Message-ID: <009801c943d3$dc97b4e0$95c71ea0$@britton@ecoplan.org> Thought this might interest, eventually be of use to you. If you wish to contribute, you will find all the necessary information below. Eric Britton INVITATION TO CONTRIBUTE Commentaries on Methods and Techniques that Could be Used in Making Decisions about Identifying, Adopting, or Implementing Sustainable Transport Practices Research Report 2 Transport Canada Project Methodologies for Identifying and Ranking Sustainable Transport Practices In Urban Regions Eric, As can be seen by visiting http://www.wellarconsulting.com/, research on the Transport Canada project, Methodologies for Identifying and Ranking Sustainable Transport Practices in Urban Regions, is on schedule. The purpose of this note is to invite you to contribute to Research Report 2, Commentaries on Methods and Techniques that Could be Used in Making Decisions about Identifying, Adopting, or Implementing Sustainable Transport Practices. The full cover page for the report follows on the next page. The contribution -- a two-page commentary --, can be for a method or technique in Research Report 1 which has not yet been assigned. Or, it could be a discussion of a method or technique which was not identified in Research Report 1, and which fits the decision environment of the Transport Canada project. For convenience the list of identified methods and techniques presented in Research Report 1 follows the cover page. A model is provided by the commentaries which I wrote for five methods or techniques in Research Report 1, and which can be viewed at http://www.wellarconsulting.com/ I look forward to receiving submissions which are consistent with those that have already been done, so that there is no editing or re-writing at my end, and all I need to do is paste the commentaries into the draft of Research Report 2 which is ready to receive contributions. The only formatting conditions of import are that the text of the commentaries are in Arial, 12-point, and the length is not to exceed two pages, including room for spacing as per the model commentaries Contributors can use or not use sub-headings as they wish, since they best know how they want to 'tell the story" about a method or technique which could be used in making decisions about identifying, adopting, and/or implementing a sustainable transport practice. In terms of the due date for the commentaries, I would like to have this report ready for posting on or about November 30, which means that the sooner I confirm the commentators for the respective methods and techniques, the better the chances of meeting the target date. As for the assignment of methods and techniques, the driving research design criterion to include as many perspectives as possible by distributing the assignment of commentaries among experts from different disciplines, agencies, institutions, locations, modal experiences, political experiences, etc. I am therefore inviting the individuals I am contacting to list the numbers of the methods and techniques for which expertise is held, and to put the numbers in order of preference. I will then do my best to best match your preferences with my needs as outlined above. Finally, the names of contributors along with their "co-ordinates" will be included in Appendix A. I am optimistic that when Research Report 2 is complete, the roster of names will be compelling. I look forward to hearing from you in the next several days. Best regards. Barry Wellar, PhD, MCIP Principal Wellar Consulting Inc. 890 Ridley Blvd. Ottawa, ON K2A 3P5 wellarb@uottawa.ca http://www.wellarconsulting.com/ Ottawa, ON November 9, 2008 Commentaries on Methods and Techniques that Could be Used in Making Decisions about Identifying, Adopting, or Implementing Sustainable Transport Practices Research Report 2 Transport Canada Project Methodologies for Identifying and Ranking Sustainable Transport Practices In Urban Regions (main project) Principal Investigator: Barry Wellar, PhD, MCIP Professor Emeritus, University of Ottawa Principal, Wellar Consulting Inc. wellarb@uottawa.ca http://www.wellarconsulting.com/ Ottawa, Ontario November 30, 2008 Commentaries have already been prepared for numbers 1, 9, 21, 25, and 39, and they may serve as models for commentaries on other methods and techniques that have been identified, or are proposed. 1. Anatomical Sourcing 1. Attitudinal Surveys 2. Authority 3. Brainstorming 4. Charrette 5. Committee Approach 6. Common Sense 7. Comparative Analysis 8. Copycat/Follow the Leader 9. Cost-Benefit Analysis 10. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis 11. Counterfoil Research 12. Cross-Impact Analysis 13. Econometric Analysis 14. Focus Groups 15. Follow the Money 16. Forecasting Delphi Technique 17. Highest and Best Use 18. Impact Assessment 19. Indicators 20. Indexing 21. Life-Cycle Analysis 22. Modelling 23. Normative Delphi Technique 24. NIMBY Strategy 25. Open House 26. Opinion Polls 27. Optimization Techniques 28. Panel Evaluation 29. Pilot Study 30. Policy Delphi Technique 31. Pre-Test 32. Referenda 33. Roundtables 34. Scaling 35. Simulation 36. Squeaky Wheel 37. Surveys 38. Trial Run 39. Walking Security Index 41. Workshops 42. YIMBY Strategy From sustainable_universal_mobility at hotmail.com Tue Nov 11 19:43:30 2008 From: sustainable_universal_mobility at hotmail.com (Tim Frodsham) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:13:30 +0930 Subject: [sustran] Re: FW: [China Urban Travel Ranking System In-Reply-To: <003401c94307$00e26980$02a73c80$@britton@ecoplan.org> References: <003401c94307$00e26980$02a73c80$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: please take me off the sustran mailing list for the time being. thanks, timSustainable Universal Mobility International Transport Consultancy ABN 78965310898 tel: +61 8-9337 3898 fax: +61 (0)8 9335 7741 web: www.geocities.com/sustainable_universal_mobility/ email: sustainable_universal_mobility@ hotmail.com post: 4 Victor St, Hilton, WA, Australia 6163> From: eric.britton@ecoplan.org> To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:36:07 +0100> CC: jinhua@mit.edu> Subject: [sustran] FW: [China Urban Travel Ranking System> > CPN Urban Travel Ranking System > > CPN Whitepaper: State of Urban Transport in China> > > > After a year's preparation, China Planning Network is initiating the CPN> Urban Travel Ranking System: the largest-scale, independent,> public-participating social surveys on China's urban travel. > > In collaboration with China's media and internet communities, we collect> first hand data on China's urban travel directly from the public. And in> collaboration with top transport scholars and professionals in the world, we> develop a definitive evaluation framework and survey methodology. > > The survey methodology and data collected will be published at the CPN> website and freely available to the public and scholars interested in China'> urban transport. The surveys will be done on annual basis. We will publish> the CPN Whitepaper: State of Urban Transport in China based on the results> of the annual surveys and the researches based on these survey data. > > For scholars: provide food for research > > Scholars have been hunger for data on China' urban transport, particularly> data from the public's viewpoint. The CPN surveys provide food for research> on China's urban transport. In doing so, not only we intrigue scholars from> all over the world with the richness and complexity of China's urban> transport, but also we enable their studies with first-hand survey data.> This is the best way to attract world scholarship to study China. > > For the public: engage participation in a realistic way> > The CPN surveys play two roles for the public:> > First, this is not only an information collection exercise, but also an> educational one. By participating in the survey, the widest population can> learn, from the world scholarship, what the key aspects are when we evaluate> a city's transport; what the latest concerns are, such as CO2 footprint,> energy consumption, social equity, affordability; what the newest policies> innovations are; how we can get involved in this type of social surveys,> etc. > > Second and more importantly, the CPN survey is a realistic way of engaging> public participation in China. This helps the public express their views> about urban lives, in an acceptable, yet powerful way. > > For government: get on to the agenda> > For the government, given the fact that decision makers in the cities and> states pay high attention to these types of ranking results, concerns> expressed in CPN surveys can jump onto their agenda right away and can be> fed into the decision making process effectively. Because the methodology is> based on the best thinking the world transport scholarship has to offer and> the data are directly from their own fellow citizens, the survey results are> hard to ignore. > > > > Features of the CPN surveys include: > > 1. Three tiers of seriousness of participation> > We recognize the different levels of interest and knowledge of the public so> we design three tiers of participation. > > Tier I: "vote for fun", where 3~5 simple voting questions are asked to> obtain the instant impression from the participants> > Tier II: "a bit more serious", for those who go beyond the question of "I> like Qingdao's transport the best", and ask "why I think it is the best", a> one-page survey with questions on key aspects of urban transport is offered> so that people can give reasons to their statements> > Tier III: "a 20-page long questionnaire", for those who are really into> this, we provide an in-depth, 20-page questionnaire, covering the widest> aspects of urban travel, as well as a detailed travel diary, socio-economic> background and attitudinal and perceptional questions.> > Can entertainment and serious research coexist? Why not! In this way, we can> attract the widest participation while carefully distinguish the serious> ones from the others. > > 2. Expectation oriented > > In addition to questions on the current travel conditions, we ask people's> expectation of the future. "How do you think Shanghai's subway system will> look like in five years' time given your understanding of the public> transport plan?" "How would you envision the situation of congestion when> every family has a car in Beijing?"> > These questions offer a unique perspective on people's sense of change in> China, people's understanding of the planning and people's view of the ideal> life in the future. > > 3. Longitudinally consistent and internationally compatible> > The power of the surveys lies in the comparability. The CPN surveys will be> held on an annual basis and the ranking framework will be longitudinally> consistent to enable year on year comparison. In dynamic cities such as> those in China, changes are the norm and we want to trace them.> Internationally compatibility will be considered as much as possible even> though we will start from within China. We will be glad to see cities from> outside China to adopt our evaluation methods so that we can position> Chinese cities within the world city system and vice versa. > > 4. Leading to a vision> > As well as the classic transport questions, we are introducing topics such> as transport equity and affordability, green travel and energy efficiency,> transport and lifestyle, mobile media, social image concern and car> ownership, land use and transport accessibility$B!D(BNot only these> questions inquire on the various aspects of urban travel, but together they> add up to a vision of the future for China's urban transport to develop in.> > > > How to get involved> > If you and/or your organization are interested in the CPN initiative, please> contact me directly at jinhua@mit.edu. All levels or forms of involvement> are welcome: from minor method revision to full scale design of the> questionnaires; from participating in testing surveys to cleaning the data> and analyzing the results; from helping introduce the initiative to others> to sponsoring the CPN initiative.> > We have set up an Expert Advisory Committee consisting of 25 leading> transport scholars and professionals. If you are interested in joining the> Committee, please don't hesitate to contact me. > > We distinguish the responsibilities for method design, data collection and> result publication: the scholars and professionals from the West and China> are responsible for the methodology of the survey, the data are collected> from the public voting and surveys, and CPN is solely responsible for the> results. > > > > 2009 and beyond> > There will be in one session of the CPN Transport Congress 2009 to focus on> the discussion on this initiative. The CPN Urban Travel Ranking System is> the Part I of the CPN ranking series including urban housing, urban> environment, urban energy, urban risk reduction, etc. > > We envision that in five years the Urban Travel Ranking System and the CPN> Whitepaper will become one of the most important data sources for academic> research, a definitive evaluation framework for government policies, and the> most accessible topic for debates and dialogues of the public.> > > > Best,> > Ming, Zhan and Jinhua> > -- > ---------> Jinhua Zhao> Executive Commissioner, China Planning Network> Massachusetts Institute of Technology> http://www.ChinaUrbanTransport.com/> http://www.ChinaPlanningNetwork.org/> > -------------- next part --------------> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...> Name: CPN Urban Travel Ranking System.pdf> Type: application/pdf> Size: 66629 bytes> Desc: not available> Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081110/e178afbc/CPNUrbanTravelRankingSystem.pdf> -------------------------------------------------------- > 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'). _________________________________________________________________ Your dream beach house escape for summer! Sign up for the Hotmail Road Trip today. http://www.ninemsn.com.au/hotmailroadtrip From sustainable_universal_mobility at hotmail.com Tue Nov 11 19:43:32 2008 From: sustainable_universal_mobility at hotmail.com (Tim Frodsham) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:13:32 +0930 Subject: [sustran] Re: FW: [China Urban Travel Ranking System In-Reply-To: <003401c94307$00e26980$02a73c80$@britton@ecoplan.org> References: <003401c94307$00e26980$02a73c80$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: please take me off the sustran mailing list for the time being. thanks, timSustainable Universal Mobility International Transport Consultancy ABN 78965310898 tel: +61 8-9337 3898 fax: +61 (0)8 9335 7741 web: www.geocities.com/sustainable_universal_mobility/ email: sustainable_universal_mobility@ hotmail.com post: 4 Victor St, Hilton, WA, Australia 6163> From: eric.britton@ecoplan.org> To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:36:07 +0100> CC: jinhua@mit.edu> Subject: [sustran] FW: [China Urban Travel Ranking System> > CPN Urban Travel Ranking System > > CPN Whitepaper: State of Urban Transport in China> > > > After a year's preparation, China Planning Network is initiating the CPN> Urban Travel Ranking System: the largest-scale, independent,> public-participating social surveys on China's urban travel. > > In collaboration with China's media and internet communities, we collect> first hand data on China's urban travel directly from the public. And in> collaboration with top transport scholars and professionals in the world, we> develop a definitive evaluation framework and survey methodology. > > The survey methodology and data collected will be published at the CPN> website and freely available to the public and scholars interested in China'> urban transport. The surveys will be done on annual basis. We will publish> the CPN Whitepaper: State of Urban Transport in China based on the results> of the annual surveys and the researches based on these survey data. > > For scholars: provide food for research > > Scholars have been hunger for data on China' urban transport, particularly> data from the public's viewpoint. The CPN surveys provide food for research> on China's urban transport. In doing so, not only we intrigue scholars from> all over the world with the richness and complexity of China's urban> transport, but also we enable their studies with first-hand survey data.> This is the best way to attract world scholarship to study China. > > For the public: engage participation in a realistic way> > The CPN surveys play two roles for the public:> > First, this is not only an information collection exercise, but also an> educational one. By participating in the survey, the widest population can> learn, from the world scholarship, what the key aspects are when we evaluate> a city's transport; what the latest concerns are, such as CO2 footprint,> energy consumption, social equity, affordability; what the newest policies> innovations are; how we can get involved in this type of social surveys,> etc. > > Second and more importantly, the CPN survey is a realistic way of engaging> public participation in China. This helps the public express their views> about urban lives, in an acceptable, yet powerful way. > > For government: get on to the agenda> > For the government, given the fact that decision makers in the cities and> states pay high attention to these types of ranking results, concerns> expressed in CPN surveys can jump onto their agenda right away and can be> fed into the decision making process effectively. Because the methodology is> based on the best thinking the world transport scholarship has to offer and> the data are directly from their own fellow citizens, the survey results are> hard to ignore. > > > > Features of the CPN surveys include: > > 1. Three tiers of seriousness of participation> > We recognize the different levels of interest and knowledge of the public so> we design three tiers of participation. > > Tier I: "vote for fun", where 3~5 simple voting questions are asked to> obtain the instant impression from the participants> > Tier II: "a bit more serious", for those who go beyond the question of "I> like Qingdao's transport the best", and ask "why I think it is the best", a> one-page survey with questions on key aspects of urban transport is offered> so that people can give reasons to their statements> > Tier III: "a 20-page long questionnaire", for those who are really into> this, we provide an in-depth, 20-page questionnaire, covering the widest> aspects of urban travel, as well as a detailed travel diary, socio-economic> background and attitudinal and perceptional questions.> > Can entertainment and serious research coexist? Why not! In this way, we can> attract the widest participation while carefully distinguish the serious> ones from the others. > > 2. Expectation oriented > > In addition to questions on the current travel conditions, we ask people's> expectation of the future. "How do you think Shanghai's subway system will> look like in five years' time given your understanding of the public> transport plan?" "How would you envision the situation of congestion when> every family has a car in Beijing?"> > These questions offer a unique perspective on people's sense of change in> China, people's understanding of the planning and people's view of the ideal> life in the future. > > 3. Longitudinally consistent and internationally compatible> > The power of the surveys lies in the comparability. The CPN surveys will be> held on an annual basis and the ranking framework will be longitudinally> consistent to enable year on year comparison. In dynamic cities such as> those in China, changes are the norm and we want to trace them.> Internationally compatibility will be considered as much as possible even> though we will start from within China. We will be glad to see cities from> outside China to adopt our evaluation methods so that we can position> Chinese cities within the world city system and vice versa. > > 4. Leading to a vision> > As well as the classic transport questions, we are introducing topics such> as transport equity and affordability, green travel and energy efficiency,> transport and lifestyle, mobile media, social image concern and car> ownership, land use and transport accessibility$B!D(BNot only these> questions inquire on the various aspects of urban travel, but together they> add up to a vision of the future for China's urban transport to develop in.> > > > How to get involved> > If you and/or your organization are interested in the CPN initiative, please> contact me directly at jinhua@mit.edu. All levels or forms of involvement> are welcome: from minor method revision to full scale design of the> questionnaires; from participating in testing surveys to cleaning the data> and analyzing the results; from helping introduce the initiative to others> to sponsoring the CPN initiative.> > We have set up an Expert Advisory Committee consisting of 25 leading> transport scholars and professionals. If you are interested in joining the> Committee, please don't hesitate to contact me. > > We distinguish the responsibilities for method design, data collection and> result publication: the scholars and professionals from the West and China> are responsible for the methodology of the survey, the data are collected> from the public voting and surveys, and CPN is solely responsible for the> results. > > > > 2009 and beyond> > There will be in one session of the CPN Transport Congress 2009 to focus on> the discussion on this initiative. The CPN Urban Travel Ranking System is> the Part I of the CPN ranking series including urban housing, urban> environment, urban energy, urban risk reduction, etc. > > We envision that in five years the Urban Travel Ranking System and the CPN> Whitepaper will become one of the most important data sources for academic> research, a definitive evaluation framework for government policies, and the> most accessible topic for debates and dialogues of the public.> > > > Best,> > Ming, Zhan and Jinhua> > -- > ---------> Jinhua Zhao> Executive Commissioner, China Planning Network> Massachusetts Institute of Technology> http://www.ChinaUrbanTransport.com/> http://www.ChinaPlanningNetwork.org/> > -------------- next part --------------> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...> Name: CPN Urban Travel Ranking System.pdf> Type: application/pdf> Size: 66629 bytes> Desc: not available> Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081110/e178afbc/CPNUrbanTravelRankingSystem.pdf> -------------------------------------------------------- > 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'). _________________________________________________________________ Time for change? Find your ideal job with SEEK. http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Eseek%2Ecom%2Eau%2F%3Ftracking%3Dsk%3Atl%3Ask%3Anine%3A0%3Ahottag%3Achange&_t=757263783&_r=SEEK_tagline&_m=EXT From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Sat Nov 15 03:31:03 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:31:03 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Shocker: Speed Limits Are Useless Message-ID: <01af01c94687$2931ab20$7b950160$@britton@ecoplan.org> At the end of the day, policy in this area has to be driven by common sense and a firm knowledge of behavioral psychology and culture. Reinforced of course by the crown jewels of traffic engineering and street design. Here is my 1 2 3 take of the foundation points on this important issue: 1. Cars make us drivers impatient. We are also insulated by our steel capsule, line of vision, internal noise controls, and thus divorced from the real world. That is part of what cars are all about (you just have to look at the ads), speeding us along like a magic carpet from place to where we want to go. 2. Thus, 9 people out of 10 - me included sorry to say- are going to drive pretty much as fast as they think circumstances will "reasonably" permit. And this is, much of the time at least, simply too fast in a city situation. 3. There are parts of the world, not many sadly, where there is a 'slow car culture', which specifically can take the form of smilingly yielding priority to pedestrians, cyclists and even other cars and public transit vehicles. I know that I for one do that just about all the time - but the demon of speed is still there itching in my psyche and ready to roar out when the circumstances permit. 4. Thus, culture helps, but it's not that of the majority - so we can hardly count on that 5. And fear of retribution helps too - but many divers tend to "work with that" in various ways. Not all of them necessarily nasty per se, but the result is very simple: they take their chances and speed mains and kills, no matter how pure our thoughts may be. 6. And yes Martin Cassini, ill-placed traffic signals do indeed often make things worse. Drivers will play them, and knowing the cycle will speed up beyond the limit in order to make it through just in time (or a bit later but what the hell, eh?). 7. Posted speed limits: Just part of the environment. For most people they are not credible, or reasonable. A vague part of the landscape. So they are an eventual reference point but not a heavily determinant one. Now that we have seen what an evil person I am - I am the Joe Average at the wheel - the next question is what do we do to deal with me. Here is what I propose, building on some of the points suggested here in the last two days, but also on the very large body of work and information that is underway on this for decades, going back to Donald Appleyard's Livable Streets and Jane Jacob's Death and Life, and winding all the way through the good work that has been done by many people and places, with a nod for sure to our greatly regretted Hans Monderman. 1. So we know, people, most people at least, are going to drive as fast as they can, if they can. Even on a city street. Or at the very least, too fast to be safe in a world of darting children, wobbling cyclists, old people in dark coats, and that other driver how is also going too fast. 2. So we have to restrain them physically and psychically - and the only restraint that works is street architecture. We work by shortening the straight lines, narrowing the road way, alternating surfaces, popping in uncomfortable speed bumps, and using lights and visual, aura and tactile signals and tricks to force slowing down. 3. IT also helps greatly to have large numbers s of pedestrians, cyclists and playing children and chatting adults out onto the street, so that it comes clear to all that this is a shared space for all. In French we call it 'occuper le terrain", possibly "make it ours". 4. Truly English friends, the mindless propagation of intrusive tracking technology to handle every 21st century problem that emerges involving people is not an advance toward a more civilized world. Just because we can do it, should not be taken to mean that we should. 5. But traffic police, laws and courts who strike hard on miscreant, parked and others are certainly part of the solution set. There you have my rough and ready speed control toolkit. I have observed and worked with these issues for a long time, and I can't get any brighter on this than what you have here. Eric Britton PS I still love Robert Stussi's wonderful little Homage to Hans Monderman clip, at 90 seconds and you'll see it on the internal left menu at http://www.media.newmobility.org. And as the terrific man on the street being interviewed put it: "And statistically we can prove it, dear sir". We sure can. From edelman at greenidea.eu Sun Nov 16 23:23:35 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:23:35 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Jakarta air getting healthier thanks to carfree days Message-ID: <49202CE7.1010906@greenidea.eu> *Jakarta air getting healthier: Official http://old.thejakartapost.com/detailcity.asp?fileid=20081115.C02&irec=1 * City News - Saturday, November 15, 2008 *Adianto P. Simamora*, The Jakarta Post, Bangkok While compulsory emissions testing for private cars continues to be delayed, the Jakarta administration claims air quality is getting better across the city thanks to regular car-free days. Data from the Jakarta Environment Management Board (BPLHD) shows Jakartans breathed healthy air on 104 days up to October this year, compared to only 73 days last year and 45 days in 2006. The city launched "voluntary" emission checks for private cars in 2006. BPLHD chairman Budirama Natakusumah said Car-Free Day significantly contributed to a reduction in air pollution in the city. "Up until October we had carried out Car-Free Day 18 times this year, including along the city's main street of Jl. Jend. Sudirman," he told /The Jakarta Post/ on the sidelines of the Better Air Quality conference in Bangkok on Thursday. Budirama said concentration of particulate matter measuring 10 mm (PM10) decreased by an average of 40 percent each Car-Free Day. The amount of carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) declined an average of 63 percent and 67 percent respectively. The pollutants expelled by motor vehicles and industries cause various diseases, particularly respiratory disease, hypertension, kidney failure, coronary disease and cancer. Budirama said the office used a mobile air monitoring unit to measure air quality during Car-Free Day, which was mostly conducted on weekends when many Jakartans stay at home. Jakarta, which organized three car-free days last year, has five air quality monitoring stations, but only three of them are in good condition. "We plan on holding Car-Free Day 22 times next year. Hopefully, we can also enforce the law on mandatory emissions tests for private cars and motorcycles," Budirama said. In 2005, the administration issued a bylaw requiring all private cars to test their emissions, in an effort to clean the city's air. Under the bylaw, vehicle owners are required to have their vehicles tested twice a year. Owners of vehicles that pollute heavily are fined Rp 2 million or face two months in prison. Budirama said the delay in enforcing the law was due to technical problems, holding back the supply of certificates and stickers for emission tests. Chairman of the Public Health School at the University of Indonesia, Budi Haryanto, doubted the validity of the air quality figures, saying data from Car-Free Day could not represent the real condition of the whole city. "We need to verify the data given the fact more and more people are falling ill because of air pollution in Jakarta," he said. Budi said results from measuring the air quality on the weekend would be different to tests on working days, when millions of private cars and motorcycles flocked to Jakarta. Chairman of the Indonesian Lead Information Center (KPPB), Ahmad Safruddin, who is also involved in the Car-Free Day campaign, said hydrocarbon (HC) in Jakarta remained a big problem. "We need to improve fuel quality in Jakarta and retrofit catalytic converters in order to cut pollutants of HC, PM10 and CO," he said. -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From morten7an at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 03:14:55 2008 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:14:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Jakarta air getting healthier thanks to carfree days In-Reply-To: <49202CE7.1010906@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <6229.4677.qm@web51003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Nice news, Todd But I found it a bit too sketchy on the details to have a good stomach feeling about forwarding the story. What do the car-free days entail ? How large areas were closed off ? Another strand in the story is the one on car - emission controls and steep (?) fines. The particulate pollution there must be very bad, by the way : 10 mm particles ? Oh they mean micrometers :-) The 10 micron measurements do not work very well here in Iceland, as the dust from the roads related to studded tyres, and from the Icelandic deserts plus particles of sea salt, weighs in very heavily (literally) at that size. It is the smaller ( below 2.5 micron or even below 1 micron soot particles, mixed with VOC, NOx and SOx etc ) that are really bad though. The small particles penetrate further into the lungs and the alveoli, which render them more dangerous. Chemically active particles, and particles with a larger surface area add to the health threat. Some experts hae suggested counting the number of small particles rather than weighing. Best Regards, Morten Lange --- On Sun, 16/11/08, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory > Subject: [sustran] Jakarta air getting healthier thanks to carfree days > To: "Sustran Resource Centre" , LotsLessCars@yahoogroups.com > Date: Sunday, 16 November, 2008, 2:23 PM > *Jakarta air getting healthier: Official > > http://old.thejakartapost.com/detailcity.asp?fileid=20081115.C02&irec=1 > * > > City News - Saturday, November 15, 2008 > > *Adianto P. Simamora*, The Jakarta Post, Bangkok > > While compulsory emissions testing for private cars > continues to be > delayed, the Jakarta administration claims air quality is > getting better > across the city thanks to regular car-free days. > > Data from the Jakarta Environment Management Board (BPLHD) > shows > Jakartans breathed healthy air on 104 days up to October > this year, > compared to only 73 days last year and 45 days in 2006. > > The city launched "voluntary" emission checks for > private cars in 2006. > > BPLHD chairman Budirama Natakusumah said Car-Free Day > significantly > contributed to a reduction in air pollution in the city. > > "Up until October we had carried out Car-Free Day 18 > times this year, > including along the city's main street of Jl. Jend. > Sudirman," he told > /The Jakarta Post/ on the sidelines of the Better Air > Quality conference > in Bangkok on Thursday. > > Budirama said concentration of particulate matter measuring > 10 mm (PM10) > decreased by an average of 40 percent each Car-Free Day. > > The amount of carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) > declined an > average of 63 percent and 67 percent respectively. > > The pollutants expelled by motor vehicles and industries > cause various > diseases, particularly respiratory disease, hypertension, > kidney > failure, coronary disease and cancer. > > Budirama said the office used a mobile air monitoring unit > to measure > air quality during Car-Free Day, which was mostly conducted > on weekends > when many Jakartans stay at home. > > Jakarta, which organized three car-free days last year, has > five air > quality monitoring stations, but only three of them are in > good condition. > > "We plan on holding Car-Free Day 22 times next year. > Hopefully, we can > also enforce the law on mandatory emissions tests for > private cars and > motorcycles," Budirama said. > > In 2005, the administration issued a bylaw requiring all > private cars to > test their emissions, in an effort to clean the city's > air. > > Under the bylaw, vehicle owners are required to have their > vehicles > tested twice a year. Owners of vehicles that pollute > heavily are fined > Rp 2 million or face two months in prison. > > Budirama said the delay in enforcing the law was due to > technical > problems, holding back the supply of certificates and > stickers for > emission tests. > > Chairman of the Public Health School at the University of > Indonesia, > Budi Haryanto, doubted the validity of the air quality > figures, saying > data from Car-Free Day could not represent the real > condition of the > whole city. > > "We need to verify the data given the fact more and > more people are > falling ill because of air pollution in Jakarta," he > said. > > Budi said results from measuring the air quality on the > weekend would be > different to tests on working days, when millions of > private cars and > motorcycles flocked to Jakarta. > > Chairman of the Indonesian Lead Information Center (KPPB), > Ahmad > Safruddin, who is also involved in the Car-Free Day > campaign, said > hydrocarbon (HC) in Jakarta remained a big problem. > > "We need to improve fuel quality in Jakarta and > retrofit catalytic > converters in order to cut pollutants of HC, PM10 and > CO," he said. > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > 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. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 sudhir at cai-asia.org Tue Nov 18 10:57:47 2008 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:57:47 +0800 Subject: [sustran] For an easy ride, get your new vehicle registration certificate from your dealer (India) Message-ID: Dear all, A good way to promote automobile sales ?? "For an easy ride, get your new vehicle registration certificate from your dealer" http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/for-an-easy-ride-get-your-new-vehicle-registration-certificate-from-your-dealer/386644/ it would be interesting to see the impact on sales. 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 edelman at greenidea.eu Tue Nov 18 19:35:26 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:35:26 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Dont accept Brazilian agrofuels as sustainable, say campaigners to EU Message-ID: <49229A6E.2070508@greenidea.eu> Corporate Europe Observatory Press Release Embargo: 00.01 CET Monday 17th November Groups Highlight Brazilian Government's Damaging Agrofuel Push Brazilian agrofuels, including ethanol from sugarcane, should not be accepted by the EU as sustainable, campaigners said today (Monday) in a joint open letter [1], published as EU representatives attend an International Biofuel Conference, hosted by Brazil, where leaders are expected to push for greater reliance on agrofuels [2]. The call comes as the EU prepares to decide on the Renewable Energy Directive, including mandatory targets to promote the use of agrofuel (fuel from crops) in transport [3]. New research, published by Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) alongside the letter to European decision makers shows how the Brazilian government is engaged in a global campaign to expand its agrofuel industry, including the promotion of projects in developing countries, some of which are funded from European aid budgets [4]. Campaigners say the Brazilian government is ignoring the damaging environmental and social impacts of agrofuels, including sugarcane ethanol, in its expansion bid. Amaranta Herrero, a campaigner with Corporate Europe Observatory, said: "The Brazilian government wants to push its agrofuels regardless of the social and environmental costs. In Brazil, sugarcane expansion is pushing soy and cattle farmers into the Amazon, causing deforestation and exacerbating climate change, while in developing countries, agrofuels are competing with food crops and undermining people?s right to food." Europe in particular has been seen by Brazil as a major market for its agrofuel exports. CEO research shows that Brazil is developing bilateral agreements with EU member states to access agrofuel markets in Europe and promote agrofuel production in parts of Africa and other developing countries which benefit from tariff-free imports to Europe. Some EU member states, keen to access cheap agrofuel imports, are going as far as promoting agrofuel production in developing countries by encouraging foreign direct investment (FDI) via aid policies [5]. Kim Bizzarri, author of the CEO research, said: "Brazil clearly wants to secure a market for its agrofuel crops and is targeting individual EU member states who are keen to source alternative energy supplies. This is what lies at the heart of agrofuel expansion, not fighting climate change or promoting sustainable development." As the European Parliament debates the proposed targets for agrofuels use in European transport and some member states review their national targets, the Brazilian government and industry are lobbying hard in Brussels not to loose Europe's commitment to bioenergy [6]. The Brazilian sugarcane industry lobby group, UNICA, is also accused of running misleading greenwash campaigns about agrofuels in Brussels and the media and has been nominated for a Worst EU Lobbying Award [7] - while the Brazilian government is threatening a legal challenge against Europe?s proposal to introuce social and environmental criteria to agrofuels imported into Europe [8]. European environmental and social campaign groups are calling for a stop to agrofuel expansion, including the elimination of financial and policy incentives and an end to EU and national targets. Amaranta Herrero continued: "Europe must not be allowed to fuel its cars at the expense of people's right to food. Agrofuels are not the solution to the energy crisis and they are not the solution to climate change." Notes: [1] http://www.corporateeurope.org/docs/Open_letter_on_IBF.pdf [2]Brazil is hosting an International Conference on Biofuels in S?o Paulo from 17-21st November - and EU representatives from the European Commission and EU member states will be attending. (An International Popular Seminar on Agrofuels will also take place alongside - for more information contact: Alexania: Phone +55 (11) 7239.7987) [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) Rue du Tr?ne 141 1050 Brussels Belgium -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From edelman at greenidea.eu Wed Nov 19 21:35:56 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:35:56 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Boom Time for Indian Bike Industry Message-ID: <4924082C.9020005@greenidea.eu> Boom Time for Indian Bike Industry NEW DELHI, India -- It's boom time in India's bike industry. Not only because of the Indian rupee dropping to an all-time low level against the US dollar which will attract more sourcing, but also because of the government ordering 1.5 million bikes to be handed out to school-going children. The country's government has emerged as the biggest consumer of bicycles manufactured in the country. India has more than two dozen states, most of which are inviting annual tenders for the supply of bicycles, mainly from the big four makers: Hero Cycles, TI Cycles, Avon Cycles and Atlas Cycles. Capacities fully utilized These tenders have revitalized the whole industry: even second tier suppliers and smaller vendors supplying the big four are flush with orders. These orders have also helped manufacturers to utilize their installed capacity. "The capacities have been utilized fully from the time the government have started procuring bicycles from bicycle manufacturers," said Mr Gautam Kapur, Managing Director, Atlas Cycles (Sahibabad) Ltd. Atlas is among the major beneficiaries of the bicycles ordered by various state governments. It's estimated that over 1.5 million bicycles are being ordered by state governments to fulfil their annual commitments under the various schemes. "Of late, the government has surfaced as a large buyer in India. Various state governments have started Child Education Development Schemes, whereby the cycles are distributed to school-going children. About 1.4 million bicycles were purchased by various governments last year. Hero Cycles Ltd. has supplied 600,000 units in the last fiscal year, and it has already supplied 160,000 this year with another order of 200,000 units yet to finalized. Child Education Development Schemes The schemes are being funded by international agencies. "Aid comes from the World Bank which supports schemes like promoting education among the female children. If a girl travels to 10 miles to school, the child becomes entitled to a bicycle under the Child Education Development Schemes," said Gautam Kapur. Ludhiana based Avon Cycles has already supplied 200,000 units and another 200,000 are expected to be delivered. "Bicycles are being procured in sizes of 50 cms (20") and 55 cms (22") under the Sarva Shikha Ahiyan (Education Scheme)," stated Mr Onkar Singh, Managing Director, Avon Cycles Ltd. Chennai-based TI Cycles is likely to supply 280,000 units this fiscal year. It has already supplied about 1.2 million bicycles. "We are expecting further orders of 150,000 bicycles from Karnataka," said Nambier. Atlas is supplying around 50,000 bicycles each to the states of Tamil Nadu & Jharkhand annually. Tamil Nadu procured 130,000 units from Atlas this year and Bihar has ordered 200,000 bicycles. "We have supplied bicycles to our dealers in Bihar and Senior Secondary school students get vouchers from the state governments to buy bicycles from dealerships," said Gautam Kapur of Atlas Cycles. Originally, the scheme was confined to girl students only, but it has now been extended to boys as well. There is another order to the tune of 150,000 units from Andhra Pradesh. Even smaller bicycle manufacturers like Arpan Cycles are also among the beneficiaries of bicycle tenders. Indian component manufacturers are also benefiting from the governments tenders. -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From zvi.leve at gmail.com Wed Nov 19 23:39:11 2008 From: zvi.leve at gmail.com (Zvi Leve) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:39:11 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Boom Time for Indian Bike Industry In-Reply-To: <4924082C.9020005@greenidea.eu> References: <4924082C.9020005@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: And as a counterpoint to this - a recent article in the Jakarta Post about bicycle usage tumbling throughout Asia: http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/11/13/bicycles-could-disappear-asia-experts-warn.html Bicycles could disappear from Asia, experts warn *Adianto P. Simamora* , The Jakarta Post , Bangkok | Thu, 11/13/2008 10:29 AM | Headlines It is likely bicycles will have disappeared from China's and India's streets within the next decade, unless governments of the world's two most populous countries make a U-turn in their transportation policies. A joint study by the Netherlands-based Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-CE) and Indian-based Transport Research and Injury Prevention Program (TRIPP) was conducted in China, India, Taiwan, Singapore, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh to measure each government's attitude to cyclists. "Today, China and India still have a lot of bikes but we are not sure if they will exist in the next five or 10 years as the governments' policies are not bicycle-friendly," I-CE resident representative in India, Anvita Arora, said during the Better Air Quality workshop here Tuesday. In India alone, the study -- covering 19 of the country's medium and large cities -- showed a sharp decline in bicycle journeys over the past two decades. "In New Delhi, only 5 percent of trips were made by bicycle in 2000, compared with about 20 percent in previous years," the study said. "The major shortcoming of almost all development proposals in Indian cities is that the bicycle tracks have not been planned as an integral part of the road networks." In Taiwan, home to 23 million residents and known as the kingdom of bicycle manufacturing, the government has long neglected cyclists. "There has been a growing dependence on private motorized transportation, as evidenced by the presence of 5.7 million cars and 12 million motorcycles," the study shows. Taiwan is currently trying to encourage cyclists to take to the road again. "In Singapore, you don't find bicycles at all and there is less policy support for them," Arora said, claiming the declining trend was affecting all Asian countries. "Everybody is talking about the impacts of climate change and air pollution but the number of bicycles is going down in Asia. It is very worrying." But Indonesia has made some progress in promoting the use of bicycles in the past three years, according to Transportation Study Institute (Instran) director Darmaningtyas. "There is a rising number of cyclists in Indonesia, mainly since the 2005 fuel price hike. Regional administrations, including Jakarta, Surakarta (Central Java) and Ngawi (East Java), are actively promoting the use of bicycles," he said. I-CE executive officer Tom Godefrooij said the main challenge for Asia was reversing the decline in the number of bicycles. "There are lots of programs to make it happen, including by stopping plans to provide roads (only) for cars. The road must be a place for all users, including cyclists," he said. He said the Dutch and Danish governments had maintained the proportion of bicycle trips at 20 to 25 percent of the total. On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 7:35 AM, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > > Boom Time for Indian Bike Industry > > "Interesting" times we live in.... ("may you live in interesting times" is reputedly a Chinese curse !) Zvi From aquaboi924 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 02:26:23 2008 From: aquaboi924 at yahoo.com (Jojo Guevarra) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:26:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Boom Time for Indian Bike Industry References: <4924082C.9020005@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <331003.41500.qm@web65703.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> i'm in gurgaon (delhi) at the moment and all i'm seeing is cars and more cars...mostly small cars. i live in singapore and while it's true that bicycles are not ubiquitous or shall i say easily seen but there's more awareness now and people are taking to it - more for recreation though rather than for work or small trips...i feel there's growing awareness in the region and my group in the philippines has just recently put a bike rental system in the country's leading public university...and it has been quite successful in its first run... been a lurker here but thought i'd put my 0.02...cheers! jose ________________________________ From: Zvi Leve To: edelman@greenidea.eu Cc: LotsLessCars@yahoogroups.com; Sustran Resource Centre Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 10:39:11 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: Boom Time for Indian Bike Industry And as a counterpoint to this - a recent article in the Jakarta Post about bicycle usage tumbling throughout Asia: http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/11/13/bicycles-could-disappear-asia-experts-warn.html Bicycles could disappear from Asia, experts warn *Adianto P. Simamora* , The Jakarta Post , Bangkok | Thu, 11/13/2008 10:29 AM | Headlines It is likely bicycles will have disappeared from China's and India's streets within the next decade, unless governments of the world's two most populous countries make a U-turn in their transportation policies. A joint study by the Netherlands-based Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-CE) and Indian-based Transport Research and Injury Prevention Program (TRIPP) was conducted in China, India, Taiwan, Singapore, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh to measure each government's attitude to cyclists. "Today, China and India still have a lot of bikes but we are not sure if they will exist in the next five or 10 years as the governments' policies are not bicycle-friendly," I-CE resident representative in India, Anvita Arora, said during the Better Air Quality workshop here Tuesday. In India alone, the study -- covering 19 of the country's medium and large cities -- showed a sharp decline in bicycle journeys over the past two decades. "In New Delhi, only 5 percent of trips were made by bicycle in 2000, compared with about 20 percent in previous years," the study said. "The major shortcoming of almost all development proposals in Indian cities is that the bicycle tracks have not been planned as an integral part of the road networks." In Taiwan, home to 23 million residents and known as the kingdom of bicycle manufacturing, the government has long neglected cyclists. "There has been a growing dependence on private motorized transportation, as evidenced by the presence of 5.7 million cars and 12 million motorcycles," the study shows. Taiwan is currently trying to encourage cyclists to take to the road again. "In Singapore, you don't find bicycles at all and there is less policy support for them," Arora said, claiming the declining trend was affecting all Asian countries. "Everybody is talking about the impacts of climate change and air pollution but the number of bicycles is going down in Asia. It is very worrying." But Indonesia has made some progress in promoting the use of bicycles in the past three years, according to Transportation Study Institute (Instran) director Darmaningtyas. "There is a rising number of cyclists in Indonesia, mainly since the 2005 fuel price hike. Regional administrations, including Jakarta, Surakarta (Central Java) and Ngawi (East Java), are actively promoting the use of bicycles," he said. I-CE executive officer Tom Godefrooij said the main challenge for Asia was reversing the decline in the number of bicycles. "There are lots of programs to make it happen, including by stopping plans to provide roads (only) for cars. The road must be a place for all users, including cyclists," he said. He said the Dutch and Danish governments had maintained the proportion of bicycle trips at 20 to 25 percent of the total. On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 7:35 AM, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > > Boom Time for Indian Bike Industry > > "Interesting" times we live in.... ("may you live in interesting times" is reputedly a Chinese curse !) Zvi -------------------------------------------------------- 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 richings at telus.net Thu Nov 20 05:20:09 2008 From: richings at telus.net (Ron Richings) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:20:09 -0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: Cyclists - 'Get Visible' video and more Message-ID: <19740414223344.D4EF04043C2BA1AB@priv-edmwaa06.telusplanet.net> Get Visible or get hurt. That is the reality of fall/winter riding in the dark and rainy northwest - and in many other parts of the country. So MOMENTUM magazine, the Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition, and the B:C:Clettes have joined together to make 'Lets Get Visible'. This video, a take off on Olivia Newton-John's old hit, shows what a difference blinkies, headlights, reflectors, and reflective fabric can make. Amy Walker, publisher of MOMENTUM magazine, channels Newton-John in a performance that may be talked about for years. Watch the video at: http://blip.tv/file/1478141/ high quality, but a largish file, or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7DBf_Uxfeg mediocre quality but a smaller download . Go with the first version if you can. Ron Richings Vancouver, BC Canada From edelman at greenidea.eu Thu Nov 20 07:56:05 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:56:05 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: FW: Cyclists - 'Get Visible' video and more In-Reply-To: <19740414223344.D4EF04043C2BA1AB@priv-edmwaa06.telusplanet.net> References: <19740414223344.D4EF04043C2BA1AB@priv-edmwaa06.telusplanet.net> Message-ID: <49249985.3020201@greenidea.eu> Ron Richings wrote: > > Get Visible or get hurt. > > That is the reality of fall/winter riding in the dark and rainy northwest - > and in many other parts of the country. > > So MOMENTUM magazine, the Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition, and the > B:C:Clettes have joined together to make 'Lets Get Visible'. > > This video, a take off on Olivia Newton-John's old hit, shows what a > difference blinkies, headlights, reflectors, and reflective fabric can make. > > Amy Walker, publisher of MOMENTUM magazine, channels Newton-John in a > performance that may be talked about for years. > > Watch the video at: > > , high quality, but a largish file, or > > , mediocre quality but a > smaller download. > > Go with the first version if you can. > > Ron Richings > Vancouver, BC > Canada Hi, First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making this video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the serious message. It only emphasized it. Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst things that any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination then what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and reflector, rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and reflectors on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically an international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All of these extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not particularly eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally required with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount of responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and another cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This also applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to cyclists glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective vest becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and some of us know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a proposed public bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think that mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but this hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not so lit up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, but the real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the weight of cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a driver can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web before the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do one featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the coin: or and then we would need not to change the lyrics too much. - T > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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'). > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From laura.lauramachado at gmail.com Thu Nov 20 19:23:34 2008 From: laura.lauramachado at gmail.com (Laura) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:23:34 -0200 Subject: [sustran] =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rio_ter=E1_esta=E7=F5es_de_aluguel_de_bi?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?cicletas_a_partir_do_m=EAs_que_vem?= Message-ID: <47b030540811200223p528ad969s4de119a112f4c45@mail.gmail.com> Rio ter? esta??es de aluguel de bicicletas a partir do m?s que vem No m?s que vem, a orla do Rio e outros pontos da cidade v?o come?ar a receber as esta??es de aluguel de bicicletas. Batizado de Samba (Solu??o Alternativa para a Mobilidade por Bicicleta de Aluguel), o projeto foi desenvolvido pela empresa pernambucana Sertell, que venceu a licita??o da prefeitura. A id?ia ? melhorar a mobilidade das pessoas e a fluidez do tr?fego, e contribuir para redu??o de emiss?o de poluentes. O projeto dever? ser ampliado tamb?m para cidades como B?zios, Cabo Frio, Rio das Ostras, Angra dos Reis e Niter?i. O sistema ? composto por esta??es com dez bicicletas cada, conectadas a uma central de controle, que responde pela manuten??o e abastecimento das esta??es. De acordo com o presidente da Sertell, Angelo Leite, a implanta??o do Samba vai servir de vitrine e modelo para a implanta??o de sistemas ciclovi?rios em todo o pa?s. - O projeto pode ser implantado em qualquer lugar, mas temos que estudar o potencial de cada cidade - diz. As bicicletas t?m um design que permite o uso por pessoas de qualquer idade e j? v?m equipadas com sinaliza??o e buzina. O desenho ? pr?prio para circular em posi??o confort?vel e em baixa velocidade. H? pino especial de engate e travamento, etiqueta eletr?nica e numera??o de identifica??o. Para o secret?rio estadual de Transportes, J?lio Lopes, que foi a Pernambuco conhecer a tecnologia usada pela empresa, um dos objetivos do projeto ? conscientizar as pessoas sobre transportes de menor impacto ambiental e maior qualidade de vida: - Para isso, vamos investir em conceitos e valores associados a importantes ?reas, como sa?de, educa??o, cultura, desenvolvimento sustent?vel, turismo e meio ambiente. http://oglobo.globo.com/rio/transito/mat/2008/11/19/rio_tera_estacoes_de_aluguel_de_bicicletas_partir_do_mes_que_vem-586466431.asp From cpuchalsky at dvrpc.org Thu Nov 20 23:47:19 2008 From: cpuchalsky at dvrpc.org (Puchalsky, Chris) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:47:19 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Bicycle Sharing Demand Estimation Message-ID: <27EF5D58E0436F49B3E73833C0FB51E20BC8C26BE0@dvrpc-ex02.dvrpc.org> I work at the Metropolitan Planning Organization in Philadelphia. We are currently exploring a bicycle sharing program in the city and are trying to estimate the demand. I am currently looking for what methodologies have been used in other cities to estimate the demand for such programs. Please forward me any contacts or information that you might have. thank you, Christopher M. Puchalsky, Ph.D. Senior Transportation Engineer Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission 190 N. Independence Mall West Philadelphia, PA 19106-1520 P: 215.238.2949 F: 215.592.9125 From litman at vtpi.org Fri Nov 21 00:08:12 2008 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:08:12 -0800 Subject: [sustran] =?iso-8859-1?Q?VTPI_News_=96_Traffic_Safety_Special_Edi?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?tion?= Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20081120070801.08d90f40@mail.islandnet.com> "Rethinking Transportation Safety" (http://www.planetizen.com/node/36138 ) This new blog describes a paradigm shift that is changing the way transportation professionals think about safety. The new paradigm recognizes that crash risk increases with per capita vehicle mileage, so policies that stimulate vehicle travel tend to increase crashes, while traffic reductions and shifts to alternative modes tend to increase safety and health. This new approach expands the scope of traffic safety strategies to include mobility management and smart growth. These strategies reduce total crashes and provide co-benefits such as congestion reduction, road and parking facility cost savings, consumer savings, energy conservation, pollution reductions, improved mobility for non-drivers, and improved public fitness and health. One example is "Pay-As-You-Drive Insurance," the subject of a workshop to be held in Vancouver tomorrow, described in the media advisory below. Spaces are still available. ======================================================== Pay-As-You-Drive Insurance Workshop Media Advisory For Information: Todd Litman (250-360-1560; litman@vtpi.org) VANCOUVER, November 20 - British Columbia's first public workshop on Pay-As-You-Drive (PAYD) vehicle insurance takes place tomorrow at UBCs downtown campus. Date: Friday, 21 November 2008 Time: 1:00 4:30 p.m. Place: UBC Robson Square (Room C150) 800 Robson Street Vancouver, British Columbia PAYD pricing means that insurance premiums are based directly on the amount a vehicle is driven during the policy term, offering motorists a financial incentive to reduce their vehicle travel. This provides several benefits: * Increased affordability and consumer savings. * Substantial reductions in traffic crashes and casualties. * Reduced traffic congestion, energy consumption and pollution emissions. PAYD pilot projects are being implemented in other jurisdictions including California, Washington and Texas. The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia declined to participate in this workshop, stating that ICBCs current priorities do not include further exploration of distance-based insurance. "This is unfortunate", said workshop speaker Todd Litman, an internationally recognized expert on PAYD pricing. "Pay-as-you-drive insurance rewards motorists when they drive less, with greater incentives for higher-risk drivers. It can significantly reduce traffic crashes and associated costs, and help solve other transportation problems including congestion and pollution. It also increases insurance affordability. ICBC should support PAYD research." FAQs * Q: Will I be required to purchase my automobile insurance under the PAYD system? * A: PAYD can be a consumer option. As opposed to paying a set premium price for insurance, you will be billed according to the number of kilometres you drive. * Q: I drive long distances and more than the average driver. How will PAYD insurance benefit me as a frequent driver? * A: Again, PAYD is optional. Motorists would choose it if they save money. All motorists benefit from reduced traffic congestion and accident risk. * Q: What are the environmental benefits of PAYD insurance? * A: PAYD insurance helps reduce CO2 emissions and traffic congestion. * Q: What are the economic benefits of PAYD insurance? * A: Drivers can save several hundreds of dollars annually in vehicle insurance, and it reduces external costs including crash risk, traffic congestion, road and parking facility costs. * Q: Will PAYD cause people to give up their cars? * A: No. PAYD simply prices insurance fairly according to each vehicle's usage. PAYD reduces driving costs and increases insurance affordability. * Q: What other factors (besides mileage) are incorporated in PAYD rates? * A: PAYD premiums incorporate all existing rating factors such as driving experience and territory. Lower risk drivers pay less per kilometer than a high risk driver. Backgrounders: Workshop Information (http://clevername.wufoo.com/forms/pay-as-you-drive-general-information ). "Pay-As-You-Drive Pricing in British Columbia" (http://www.vtpi.org/paydbc.pdf ). "Distance-Based Vehicle Insurance as a TDM Strategy" (www.vtpi.org/dbvi.pdf ) "Pay-As-You-Drive Auto Insurance: A Simple Way to Reduce Driving-Related Harms and Increase Equity" (http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2008/07_payd_bordoffnoel.aspx ) California Insurance Commissioner Sets Framework For EnvironmentallyFriendly Automobile Insurance, Increased Options For Consumers, California Department of Insurance (www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/0070-2008/release089-08.cfm ). Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" From richings at telus.net Fri Nov 21 05:15:49 2008 From: richings at telus.net (Ron Richings) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:15:49 -0800 Subject: [sustran] 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd Message-ID: <19740414223344.B1111903301B8F13@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> Hi Todd I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple of seconds of face time in it. I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is safer than invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and usually at the last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor reflective material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and wonder -- WHY ?? Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists too dumb to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their ways, it will have done a useful job. Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course parts of the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to wear brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as good in them as the B:C:Clettes do. Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at night you would see: A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, back, and arms. A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all angles. On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the frame, fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances reflective material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that rises to three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small blinkies at the top of the pole. Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify the odd approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime running lights for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and others will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should not be used. As someone who lives in a country where such running lights have been standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly exceeds any drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car approaching on a rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those running lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips that many cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If they are to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. And of course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of inexpensive LED blinkies will make them considerably more visible. Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal reflectors while riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think so - that really rests with them. Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation to pay attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and alive than minimally legal and dead. So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get Visible". Ron Richings Vancouver, BC Canada -----Original Message----- From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] Hi, First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making this video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the serious message. It only emphasized it. Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst things that any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination then what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and reflector, rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and reflectors on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically an international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All of these extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not particularly eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally required with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount of responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and another cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This also applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to cyclists glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective vest becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and some of us know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a proposed public bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think that mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but this hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not so lit up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, but the real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the weight of cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a driver can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web before the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do one featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the coin: or and then we would need not to change the lyrics too much. - T From morten7an at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 07:07:19 2008 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:07:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sustran] Re: 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd In-Reply-To: <19740414223344.B1111903301B8F13@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> Message-ID: <459996.45152.qm@web51006.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi Ron, I was thinking of replying to the video post and the "get visible / luminous crusade" with a bit of praise for an ambitious and fun video, but also with arguments very roughly in the direction that Todd went. I think you both have soma valid points. But if we could get a bit more solid basis for the arguments of the two "sides", that could be interesting. Hand-waving has its place, but solid arguments are better. ( Correct me if I'm wrong - I am beeing sincere here ) Ron, you wrote : "...the odd approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime running lights for cars." Do you think throwing emotional distance between yourself and "them" improves your argument ? Incidentally the European Cyclists' Federation took a very similar stance, in opposing such requirements ath the EU-level (European Union). Perhaps the major argument was that the potential detrimental effects on cyclist and pedestrians safety had not been duly considered in the process within the EU. (By the way The ECF represents the major utility cycling organisations in about 80% ( my guestimate) of the European countries( EU nations and other countries as well) What put me most off was the scaremongering opening sentence in your post where you advertised the video ( Get Visible or get hurt ), and now you repeat the same stuff again. Issuing statements like "But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and alive than minimally legal and dead.", does more to arouse negative feelings than to further the debate. I hope I am not further stirring up feelings of animosity here. Perhaps to provide some balance, I will mention that I feel Todd could have been a bit more friendly / less provocative in his post as well. But let me pit forward something on the constructive side, regarding where you, Ron, and I, and perhaps Todd, might agree : I think shops should be mandated to always sell adequate lights and reflectors with every bike, and include it in the price. Exemptions should be made only when customers can provide a really good reason, like show the light they are going to use, or a testimony that the bike is for he exclusive use far from any traffic, and in broad daylight. ( Some people will always cheat, but they will know they have cheated ) Another thing is that the industry need to so better on quality and durability. Perhaps the lights could be more integrated and /or more hardy (shock-resistant etc). And put dynamos in with the bearings of the front wheel on many more models than today. The Danish authorities have promoted a model that uses magnets fastened to the spokes, and lights that produce electricity and hence lights directly where the magnets pass, without any cabling. They produce flashing lights aft and fore, and store up energy to provide lights some minutes while stationary. Best Regards, Morten P.S: Being very visible is OK for those who would otherwise not dear to bike at night. And I guess when training groups of cyclists on-street. But we cycling advocates should be very careful in joining in with the fearmongering choirs. There are way too many of them already. The scaremongering choirs both scare people away from cycling and give car-centric and bike sceptic people a push they don?t need. Reducing cycling is in itself very likely to reduce overall traffic safety. Todd Litman recently sent material to the WorldTransport Forum list about the new paradigm in traffic safety which says just that, and that reducing driven kilometres by cars is one of the best measures for traffic safety. See e.g. : http://www.planetizen.com/node/36138 P.S2 To repeat : The video we debate here is this one : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJenAE4e6EE ( Better quality higher bandwidth version available elsewhere) --- On Thu, 20/11/08, Ron Richings wrote: > From: Ron Richings > Subject: [sustran] 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd > To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Date: Thursday, 20 November, 2008, 8:15 PM > Hi Todd > > > I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a > couple of seconds > of face time in it. > > I don't think that the message is confused at all. > Visible is safer than > invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. > > As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and > usually at the > last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light > nor reflective > material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and > wonder -- WHY ?? > > Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the > herd' of cyclists too dumb > to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at > night. > > If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change > their ways, it will > have done a useful job. > > Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of > course parts of > the video are 'over the top'. We don't really > expect people to wear > brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look > nearly as good in them > as the B:C:Clettes do. > > Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride > at night you > would see: > > A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the > front, > back, and arms. > > A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from > all > angles. > > On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on > the frame, > fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances > reflective > material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement > that rises to > three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small > blinkies at > the top of the pole. > > Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't > think so. > > There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to > justify the odd > approach that British cycling groups took in opposing > daytime running lights > for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then > cyclists and others > will be comparatively less visible, so running lights > should not be used. > > As someone who lives in a country where such running lights > have been > standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety > vastly exceeds any > drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car > approaching on a > rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of > course those running > lights very effectively 'light up' the > retro-reflective strips that many > cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. > > Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at > night. If they are > to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see > you. And of > course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see > them. > > And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of > inexpensive LED > blinkies will make them considerably more visible. > > Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal > reflectors while > riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I > don't think so - that > really rests with them. > > Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal > obligation to pay > attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be > bright and alive > than minimally legal and dead. > > So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and > "Get Visible". > > > Ron Richings > Vancouver, BC > Canada > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory > [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] > > > > Hi, > > First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into > making this > video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract > from the serious > message. It only emphasized it. > > Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the > worst things that > any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more > illumination then > what is required by law in most places (front white > headlight and reflector, > rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, > and reflectors > on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- > practically an > international standard if we just work at it a little > harder). All of these > extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is > not particularly > eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is > generally required > with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable > amount of > responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. > > Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas > tree" and another > cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively > invisible! This also > applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used > to cyclists > glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the > others. > Next thing that will happen is that wearing something like > a reflective vest > becomes required. It is similar to what happens with > helmets, and some of us > know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of > a proposed public > bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). > > Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see > cyclists. > > Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - > I think that > mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth > considering - but this > hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who > are not so lit > up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable > solution, but the > real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, > the weight of > cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the > things a driver > can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a > few. > > So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off > the web before > the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and > either do one > featuring only what is required by law, or on the other > side of the coin: > or > and then > we would need not to > change the lyrics too much. > > - T > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 Nov 21 07:19:48 2008 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:19:48 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Lights jackets and 80s rock, plus helmets In-Reply-To: <459996.45152.qm@web51006.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <459996.45152.qm@web51006.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4925E284.5040607@gmail.com> Hi, This debate is pretty similar to the helmets debate, and just as passionate. The main issue is that, at the sight of accidents in bicycles, one can either go to the normative side (i.e. push for helmet and light use) or to the "causal" side (i.e. ask for reductions of speed and a better "taming of beasts" on the road). Possibly one way to see it is that the normative measures have an effective *but short term* impact, while the causal implementations are long term. In some cities, we have to do both, while clearly stating that the ideal is to solve the causes in the long term and that the bright costume will not be necessary in some years, sort of like saying "this is our emergency response to this problem while we work on the real causes to enable everyone to ride freely". BTW, I'm in London and use a helmet, a reflective jacket and front and rear blinking lights plus reflective lights. I feel like a freak, but the red buses are so intimidating and the health system is so bad that I will continue with my emergency costume until I'm back in Bogot?, where I'll most probably die of bad air quality due to the high levels of sulfur in Diesel. Best regards, Carlos. Morten Lange wrote: > Hi Ron, > > I was thinking of replying to the video post and the "get visible / luminous crusade" with a bit of praise for an ambitious and fun video, but also with arguments very roughly in the direction that Todd went. > > I think you both have soma valid points. But if we could get a bit more solid basis for the arguments of the two "sides", that could be interesting. Hand-waving has its place, but solid arguments are better. ( Correct me if I'm wrong - I am beeing sincere here ) > > > Ron, you wrote : > "...the odd approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime running lights for cars." > > Do you think throwing emotional distance between yourself and "them" improves your argument ? > > Incidentally the European Cyclists' Federation took a very similar stance, in opposing such requirements ath the EU-level (European Union). Perhaps the major argument was that the potential detrimental effects on cyclist and pedestrians safety had not been duly considered in the process within the EU. > > (By the way The ECF represents the major utility cycling organisations in about 80% ( my guestimate) of the European countries( EU nations and other countries as well) > > What put me most off was the scaremongering opening sentence in your post where you advertised the video ( Get Visible or get hurt ), and now you repeat the same stuff again. > > Issuing statements like > "But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and > alive than minimally legal and dead.", > does more to arouse negative feelings than to further the debate. > > I hope I am not further stirring up feelings of animosity here. Perhaps to provide some balance, I will mention that I feel Todd could have been a bit more friendly / less provocative in his post as well. > > > But let me pit forward something on the constructive side, regarding where you, Ron, and I, and perhaps Todd, might agree : > > I think shops should be mandated to always sell adequate lights and reflectors with every bike, and include it in the price. Exemptions should be made only when customers can provide a really good reason, like show the light they are going to use, or a testimony that the bike is for he exclusive use far from any traffic, and in broad daylight. ( Some people will always cheat, but they will know they have cheated ) > > Another thing is that the industry need to so better on quality and durability. Perhaps the lights could be more integrated and /or more hardy (shock-resistant etc). And put dynamos in with the bearings of the front wheel on many more models than today. > > The Danish authorities have promoted a model that uses magnets fastened to the spokes, and lights that produce electricity and hence lights directly where the magnets pass, without any cabling. They produce flashing lights aft and fore, and store up energy to provide lights some minutes while stationary. > > > Best Regards, > Morten > > P.S: > > Being very visible is OK for those who would otherwise not dear to bike at night. And I guess when training groups of cyclists on-street. > > But we cycling advocates should be very careful in joining in with the fearmongering choirs. There are way too many of them already. The scaremongering choirs both scare people away from cycling and give car-centric and bike sceptic people a push they don?t need. Reducing cycling is in itself very likely to reduce overall traffic safety. Todd Litman recently sent material to the WorldTransport Forum list about the new paradigm in traffic safety which says just that, and that reducing driven kilometres by cars is one of the best measures for traffic safety. > > See e.g. : http://www.planetizen.com/node/36138 > > P.S2 > To repeat : > The video we debate here is this one : > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJenAE4e6EE > ( Better quality higher bandwidth version available elsewhere) > > > --- On Thu, 20/11/08, Ron Richings wrote: > > >> From: Ron Richings >> Subject: [sustran] 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd >> To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >> Date: Thursday, 20 November, 2008, 8:15 PM >> Hi Todd >> >> >> I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a >> couple of seconds >> of face time in it. >> >> I don't think that the message is confused at all. >> Visible is safer than >> invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. >> >> As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and >> usually at the >> last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light >> nor reflective >> material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and >> wonder -- WHY ?? >> >> Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the >> herd' of cyclists too dumb >> to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at >> night. >> >> If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change >> their ways, it will >> have done a useful job. >> >> Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of >> course parts of >> the video are 'over the top'. We don't really >> expect people to wear >> brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look >> nearly as good in them >> as the B:C:Clettes do. >> >> Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride >> at night you >> would see: >> >> A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the >> front, >> back, and arms. >> >> A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from >> all >> angles. >> >> On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on >> the frame, >> fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances >> reflective >> material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement >> that rises to >> three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small >> blinkies at >> the top of the pole. >> >> Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't >> think so. >> >> There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to >> justify the odd >> approach that British cycling groups took in opposing >> daytime running lights >> for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then >> cyclists and others >> will be comparatively less visible, so running lights >> should not be used. >> >> As someone who lives in a country where such running lights >> have been >> standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety >> vastly exceeds any >> drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car >> approaching on a >> rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of >> course those running >> lights very effectively 'light up' the >> retro-reflective strips that many >> cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. >> >> Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at >> night. If they are >> to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see >> you. And of >> course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see >> them. >> >> And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of >> inexpensive LED >> blinkies will make them considerably more visible. >> >> Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal >> reflectors while >> riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I >> don't think so - that >> really rests with them. >> >> Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal >> obligation to pay >> attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be >> bright and alive >> than minimally legal and dead. >> >> So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and >> "Get Visible". >> >> >> Ron Richings >> Vancouver, BC >> Canada >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory >> [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into >> making this >> video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract >> from the serious >> message. It only emphasized it. >> >> Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the >> worst things that >> any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more >> illumination then >> what is required by law in most places (front white >> headlight and reflector, >> rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, >> and reflectors >> on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- >> practically an >> international standard if we just work at it a little >> harder). All of these >> extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is >> not particularly >> eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is >> generally required >> with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable >> amount of >> responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. >> >> Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas >> tree" and another >> cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively >> invisible! This also >> applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used >> to cyclists >> glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the >> others. >> Next thing that will happen is that wearing something like >> a reflective vest >> becomes required. It is similar to what happens with >> helmets, and some of us >> know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of >> a proposed public >> bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). >> >> Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see >> cyclists. >> >> Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - >> I think that >> mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth >> considering - but this >> hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who >> are not so lit >> up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable >> solution, but the >> real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, >> the weight of >> cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the >> things a driver >> can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a >> few. >> >> So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off >> the web before >> the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and >> either do one >> featuring only what is required by law, or on the other >> side of the coin: >> or >> and then >> we would need not to >> change the lyrics too much. >> >> - T >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 morten7an at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 09:21:55 2008 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:21:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Bicycle Sharing Demand Estimation In-Reply-To: <27EF5D58E0436F49B3E73833C0FB51E20BC8C26BE0@dvrpc-ex02.dvrpc.org> Message-ID: <662686.43561.qm@web51010.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi Chris, Nice to hear that your city is considering a Bicycle Sharing program, following up on the success in cities like Barcelona, Paris, and several more. I suggest you join the special mailing list on bike sharing/ City bikes, and ask there : http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/WorldCityBike/ Eric Britton has provided suggestions for a set of criteria before implementing such a program. That is if you want maximum efficiency and jaw-dropping success :-) Description of the group, WorldCityBikes from the above URL : This public interest Forum of the New Mobility Agenda is open to all interested people and groups world wide, but we do ask that you first address a short email to secretariat@newmobility.org identifying yourself with address, email, phone, and Skype (if you have it), along with a few words explaining your interest in city bikes. We will get back to you immediately. Thanks. Welcome to the invitational forum of the collaborative World City Bike project. This moderated forum offers a flexible discussion space and shared library - given over specifically to exchanges of information, sources and ideas for people and groups around the world interested in city or public bikes. It is intended to be a useful supplement to the public information you will find at the World City Bike site. Best Regards, Morten, Reykjav?k, Iceland (+ Oslo/Trondheim, Norway) --- On Thu, 20/11/08, Puchalsky, Chris wrote: > From: Puchalsky, Chris > Subject: [sustran] Bicycle Sharing Demand Estimation > To: "sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org" > Date: Thursday, 20 November, 2008, 2:47 PM > I work at the Metropolitan Planning Organization in > Philadelphia. We are currently exploring a bicycle sharing > program in the city and are trying to estimate the demand. > I am currently looking for what methodologies have been used > in other cities to estimate the demand for such programs. > Please forward me any contacts or information that you might > have. > > thank you, > > Christopher M. Puchalsky, Ph.D. > Senior Transportation Engineer > Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission > 190 N. Independence Mall West > Philadelphia, PA 19106-1520 > P: 215.238.2949 > F: 215.592.9125 > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 richings at telus.net Fri Nov 21 05:07:33 2008 From: richings at telus.net (Ron Richings) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:07:33 -0800 Subject: [sustran] 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd In-Reply-To: <49248ACB.2050302@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <19740415012944.23DA3A303816BF52@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net> Hi Todd I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple of seconds of face time in it. I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is safer than invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and usually at the last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor reflective material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and wonder -- WHY ?? Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists too dumb to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their ways, it will have done a useful job. Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course parts of the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to wear brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as good in them as the B:C:Clettes do. Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at night you would see: A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, back, and arms. A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all angles. On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the frame, fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances reflective material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that rises to three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small blinkies at the top of the pole. Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify the odd approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime running lights for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and others will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should not be used. As someone who lives in a country where such running lights have been standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly exceeds any drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car approaching on a rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those running lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips that many cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If they are to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. And of course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of inexpensive LED blinkies will make them considerably more visible. Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal reflectors while riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think so - that really rests with them. Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation to pay attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and alive than minimally legal and dead. So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get Visible". Ron Richings Vancouver, BC Canada -----Original Message----- From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] Hi, First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making this video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the serious message. It only emphasized it. Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst things that any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination then what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and reflector, rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and reflectors on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically an international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All of these extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not particularly eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally required with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount of responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and another cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This also applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to cyclists glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective vest becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and some of us know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a proposed public bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think that mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but this hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not so lit up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, but the real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the weight of cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a driver can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web before the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do one featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the coin: or and then we would need not to change the lyrics too much. - T From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Nov 21 18:04:16 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:04:16 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Bangkok Dispatch: Seeking Clean Asian Air (Plus the other side of Dr. Schipper) Message-ID: <009101c94bb8$26238ee0$726aaca0$@britton@ecoplan.org> And don't forget to spend some quality time with Dr. Schipper at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArYUn3NAntE Bangkok Dispatch: Seeking Clean Asian Air By Andrew C. Revkin Hanoi traffic Asian cities, including Hanoi pictured here, are beset by traffic and smog. (Credit: Lee Schipper) Lee Schipper, a specialist on cities, transportation and pollution diving time between Stanford and Berkeley, is a frequent presence on Dot Earth and a source for me when pondering how the world heads toward nine billion mainly-urban humans with the fewest traffic jams and smog alerts. He sent the following note from a conference in Bangkok on cleaning the air in Asian cities. You may have seen the news on Asia 's growing brown clouds this week. Postcard from Better Air Quality '08: Much has been made of rising aspirations of the middle class in developing countries, with the implication that this must mean literally hundreds of millions of cars - and hundreds of millions of tonnes of oil use and resulting CO2 emissions. Unfortunately these aspirations continue to collide with reality in the congested and polluted cities all over Asia, compounded by the huge brown clouds of pollution hovering over many parts of Asia recently noted in The Times. The foul air, with people stuck in traffic, is costing thousands of unnecessary deaths every year. This is not a new problem, as I have noted elsewhere . This week, leaders from all the major countries and cities have been gathering at a semi-annual event, Better Air Quality '08, organized by the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities, a group recently spun off from the Asian Development Bank. There are four main goals: . Liveable, walkable, safe cities as the examples of Singapore and Seoul in Asia show. . Better technologies, not necessarily as expensive as many think, since Asians have not yet dug holes as Americans have with a very car-intensive world. . Modest lifestyles, not the kinds Americans are used to but ones we're beginning to adjust to as home ownership, water, food, energy and everything else is suddenly more expensive or risky than we thought. . Good governance, with the usual panoply of taxes, regulations to make the first three outcomes happen. This was brought out by Enrique Penalosa, former mayor of Bogota, who transformed that city and its bus system into the envy of the world. Many informal, and in some cases, closed-door sessions here let public and private stakeholders work on real solutions. BAQ 08 is upbeat on local air pollution. In Hanoi, for example, a city with more motorcycles per capita than New York has cars per capita, measures are being taken to clean up the resulting pollution. China has developed fuel economy standards on new cars, and high-level representatives from other Asian governments attended a special workshop to discuss how their countries should approach this issue. Bus rapid transit around the world was featured as well. But some of the messages from such conferences are depressing: Greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise, and the success stories are still the exception. Lee Schipper, Global Metropolitan Studies, Univ. of Calif., Berkeley, and Precourt Institute for Energy Efficiency, Stanford University Have you traveled or lived in Asia? If so, what do you see as signs of progress, or big trouble? Dr. Schipper did point out to me that at least one other element of the meeting was upbeat -- the music, provided at the opening reception by none other than Lee Schipper and the Mitigators. Let's go to the videotape: . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArYUn3NAntE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 55524 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/5d3c4881/attachment.bin From sudhir at cai-asia.org Fri Nov 21 20:54:52 2008 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:54:52 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) News Digest- Vol. 5 Issue 14 - 21 November 2008 Message-ID: Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) News Digest Vol. 5 Issue 14 - 21 November 2008 SUMA News Digest is a free monthly 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! SUMA partners in order to maximize the outreach activity and to make more people aware of the benefits of SUMA, participated in the Better Air Quality workshop which had approximately 1000 participants. Number of presentations and pre events were conducted on sustainable urban mobility in Asia during the period (November 10-14). Please click on the link http://www.baq2008.org to know more about the training courses, presentations etc. The workshop had good media coverage on Sustainable Urban Transport. Please click on the link http://www.baq2008.org/media/press-releases to know more about the discussions and conclusions. GTZ activities in BAQ can be found at http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1331&Itemid=1&lang=uk Embarq in partnership with UMTC is bringing 30 Indian delegates to Latin America in a study tour in order to understand and study the process of planning or implementing BRT systems. NEWSREPORTS Asia: Batam, Makassar, Palembang Promise Green Transport http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73094.html Pakistan: Public transportation continues to deteriorate http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73101.html India: Asian Development Bank to finance BRTS plan http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73100.html India: Fearing resentment, party mum on BRT http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73102.html Korea: Bicycle Fever Sweeps Korea amid Energy, Environmental woes http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73096.html Thailand: Three-Wheelers Destroy Peace http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73098.html Asia: Clean Air and Livable Cities http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73095.html Indonesia: City plans to reorganize Transjakarta http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/11/08/city-plans-reorganize-transjakarta.html Singapore: Why wheelchair accessible buses refuse to accept wheelchair- bound passengers? http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20081118-101452.html Thailand : Motorcycles and aging vehicles negate efforts to cut emissions http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20081118-101452.html * * * * INTERESTING FINDS/SEMINARS Publication of the fall 2008 issue of the Journal of Transport and Land Use, is available at https://www.jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu. The journal is freely accessible and it contains original interdisciplinary papers on the interaction of transport and land use. EMBARQ has published reports on cities Queretaro, Hanoi, and Porto Alegre which contains quantification of emissions reductions from transport solutions. Please read http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.aspx CALL FOR RESEARCH PAPERS We in CAI-Asia are looking for good analytical/research papers on Sustainable Transport and Air Pollution. If you would like your paper to be linked/ published in the CAI website, please let us know? * * * * MARK YOUR CALENDARS 1.Conference & Exhibition on Urban Mobility In India-2008, 3rd - 5th December, 2008 http://urbanmobilityindia.com/images/brochure.pdf & http://urbanindia.nic.in/moud/programme/ut/annu_con_exhi.pdf 2.International Conference on Integrated Transport for Sustainable Urban Development , 15/12/2008 , http://www.trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=9167 3.Third International Conference on Urban Transport Systems, Shanghai China,March 18-20, http://www.asce.org/files/pdf/conferences/Call-for-Papers-v2.pdf 4.Transport Asia 2009 Exhibition, Karachi Expo Centre,28-30 March 2009 5.The 4th International Conference on Future Urban Transport , 19-21/4/2009 , http://www.fut.se/ 6.eceee 2009 Summer Study , 1-6/6/2009 , http://www.eceee.org/summer_study/ 7.Urban Transport 2009 , 22-24/6/2009 , http://www2.wessex.ac.uk/09-conferences/urban-transport-2009.html 8.ICSUTE 2009 : "International Conference on Sustainable Urban Transport and Environment" Paris, France, June 24-26, 2009, http://www.waset.org/wcset09/paris/icsute/ 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 < 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 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SUMA News" group. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to suma-news-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/suma-news?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- -- 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 eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Nov 21 19:29:49 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:29:49 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Latest News on Road Crashes is Depressing Message-ID: <00bb01c94bc4$364a9320$a2dfb960$@britton@ecoplan.org> From: ITF.contact@oecd.org [mailto:ITF.contact@oecd.org] = Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 10:27 AM Subject: Press Release: The Latest News on Road Crashes is Depressing Postal address 2 rue Andr=E9 Pascal, F-75775 Paris Cedex 16 Office address 2/4 rue Louis David, F-75016 Paris Tel. 33 (0)1 45 24 95 96 Fax 33 (0)1 45 24 13 22 itf.contact@oecd.org = www.internationaltransportforum.org = Press Release Paris, 20 November 2008 The Latest News on Road Crashes is Depressing International Transport Forum Presents the Latest Available Data on Road Crashes "The latest news on road crashes is depressing" said the Secretary General of the International Transport Forum Jack Short today in Paris, as he presented the most recent data from the International Transport Forum. Over 150 000 people lost their lives and a further 6 million people were injured in road crashes in the 44 countries of the Forum that reported data for 2007. Road deaths per capita vary by a factor of almost 8 across the countries. "This is what is most depressing", said Short, "the measures and policies to reduce crashes and fatalities are well known. If all countries had fatality rates like Japan, Norway, UK or the Netherlands more than 80 000 lives would be saved". Looking regionally, Central and Eastern Europe both show significant increases in fatalities. Rapid motorisation is a factor in the region but the figures show "the lack of continuous and determined political effort" in these countries, according to Short. In Western Europe, the picture is more mixed but the recent decline in fatalities has slowed and the 1.2% decline in 2007 fatalities is the smallest for the last 5 years. Moreover, in Western Europe the number of casualties and the number of injury accidents have increased "a sure sign that we are not making our road system safer" said the Secretary General. Better news comes from countries outside Europe where there have been small reductions in fatalities, casualties and injury accidents in the major countries. The US reduced both injury accidents and casualties for the seventh consecutive year; Japan's striking improvement makes it now the best performing country in the International Transport Forum with 45 fatalities per million inhabitants. In Western Europe the number of road traffic fatalities declined in 2007 by 1.2%. However this decrease was accompanied by a rise in both the number of casualties (+1.4%) and the number of accidents (+5.6%). These data are strongly influenced by the performance of Turkey which has shown significant increases in all three indicators. In 2007, only the United Kingdom and Greece recorded drops in the number of fatalities, casualties and injury accidents. At the same time Denmark, Finland and Sweden have seen their road fatalities increase by 32.7%, 13.1% and 5.8% respectively. In Central and Eastern Europe the number of road fatalities increased by 6.4% in 2007. This result is all the more disappointing since the region recorded at the same time strong increases in the number of casualties (+6.4%) and number of accidents (+6.7%). With the exception of Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary and Lithuania, which show a drop in road fatalities, casualties and injury accidents, all other countries have been confronted with a rise in the number of fatalities on their roads. Countries like the Czech Republic and Romania saw their fatalities increase by 15% and 12.8% respectively. In 2007, the Community of Independent States (CIS) recorded a strong rise of its road fatalities by 8.2%, breaking the positive signs recorded in the last few years. With the exception of Russia (+1.8%) the number of persons killed on roads increased strongly in all countries, and particularly in Ukraine with +38.1%. As far as non European members of the ITF are concerned, they continue to show encouraging results in 2007, recording a drop of 3.1% in the number of fatalities, 2.8% in the number of casualties and 3.3% in the number of injury accidents. Only Mexico and New Zealand are showing a strong rise in road fatalities (+10% and 7.9% respectively). The number of casualties and injury accidents are also increasing in these two countries. Behind these global figures there are significant variations from one country to another, as the following tables show: Road fatalities in 2007 Western Europe Number of fatalities 2007/2006 % Austria 691 -5.3 Belgium 1 067 -0.2 Denmark 406 32.7 Finland 380 13.1 France 4 620 -1.9 Germany 4 949 -2.8 Greece 1 578 -4.8 Iceland 15 -51.6 Luxembourg 43 19.4 Malta 12 9.1 Netherlands 791 -2.5 Norway 233 -3.7 Portugal 854 0.5 Spain 3 823 -6.8 Sweden 471 5.8 Switzerland 384 3.8 Turkey 5 004 8.0 United Kingdom 3 059 -7.2 Total 28 380 -1.2 = Central and Eastern Europe Number of fatalities 2007/2006 % Albania 384 38.6 Bulgaria 1 006 -3.5 Croatia 619 0.8 Czech Republic 1 222 15.0 Estonia 196 -3.9 FYROM 173 23.6 Hungary 1 232 -5.4 Latvia 419 2.9 Lithuania 740 -2.6 Poland 5 583 6.5 Romania 2 794 12.8 Serbia 962 6.9 Slovakia 661 8.7 Slovenia 293 11.8 Total 16 284 6.4 = CIS countries Number of fatalities 2007/2006 % Azerbaijan 1 107 7.8 Georgia 737 9.2 Moldova 464 21.5 Russia 33 308 1.8 Ukraine 9 481 38.1 Total 45 097 8.2 = = Other ITF Number of fatalities 2007/2006 % Australia 1 616 1.1 Canada 2 729 -5.6 Japan 5 744 -9.6 Korea 6 166 -2.5 Mexico 5 398 10.0 New Zealand 422 7.9 United States 41 059 -3.9 Total 63 134 -3.1 = Aggregates Number of fatalities 2007/2006 % OECD1 106 234 -1.8 EU2 42 924 0.2 ITF1,3 158 929 1.3 1) For Italy and Ireland, the number of fatalities refers to the year 2006. 2) Cyprus is not included. 3) Armenia, Belarus, Bosnia, Montenegro, are not included. = More detailed information on latest trends will be available on the Forum website in December 2008 (www.internationaltransportforum.org ) and in the forthcoming publication =93Trends in the Transport Sector, 1970-2007=94. This informati= on may be reproduced, provided the ITF is quoted as the source. Contact: Michael Zirpel Director of Communications International Transport Forum Tel. +(33-1) 45 24 95 96 michael.zirpel@oecd.org __._,_.___ = = -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd= 8ebf40/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 10797 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/b= d8ebf40/attachment.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 78770 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/b= d8ebf40/attachment.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 1850 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/b= d8ebf40/attachment-0001.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 9014 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/b= d8ebf40/attachment.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 823 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/b= d8ebf40/attachment-0001.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ATT00177.txt Type: text/plain Size: 6663 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/b= d8ebf40/ATT00177.txt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd= 8ebf40/ATT00180.html From morten7an at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 22:08:22 2008 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:08:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Latest News on Road Crashes is Depressing In-Reply-To: <00bb01c94bc4$364a9320$a2dfb960$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: <956512.86535.qm@web51007.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi I want to point to a fallacy or oversimplification, ( on my mind) in the text, that needs to be countered, at least in part : "the measures and policies to reduce crashes and fatalities are well known. If all countries had fatality rates like Japan, Norway, UK or the Netherlands more than 80 000 lives would be saved". The South should rather leapfrog past the concrete-, fences and highway-, super expensive and resource-wasting "solutions" of those rich nations. The realisations that Todd Litman pointed to recently need much more traction than they have gotten so far : Rethinking transportation safety http://www.planetizen.com/node/36138 The opening sentences : A paradigm shift is changing the way we think about transportation safety. In the past, traffic safety experts evaluated risk using distance-based units (traffic crashes and casualties per 100 million vehicle-miles or billion vehicle-kilometers), which ignores increases in vehicle traffic as a risk factor, and mobility management as a safety strategy. Yet, we now have overwhelming evidence that the amount people drive has a major impact on their chance of being injured or killed in a traffic accident. Also check out this article on the car-centric raod safety lobby: http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/05/15/car-nage/ Best Regards, Moten --- On Fri, 21/11/08, Eric Britton wrote: > From: Eric Britton > Subject: [sustran] Latest News on Road Crashes is Depressing > To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com > Cc: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Date: Friday, 21 November, 2008, 10:29 AM > From: ITF.contact@oecd.org [mailto:ITF.contact@oecd.org] > Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 10:27 AM > Subject: Press Release: The Latest News on Road Crashes is > Depressing > > Postal address 2 rue Andr? Pascal, F-75775 Paris Cedex > 16 > Office address 2/4 rue Louis David, F-75016 Paris > Tel. 33 (0)1 45 24 95 96 Fax 33 (0)1 45 24 13 22 > > itf.contact@oecd.org > www.internationaltransportforum.org > > > > Press Release > > Paris, 20 November 2008 > > > The Latest News on Road Crashes is Depressing > > International Transport Forum Presents the Latest Available > Data on Road > Crashes > > "The latest news on road crashes is depressing" > said the Secretary General > of the International Transport Forum Jack Short today in > Paris, as he > presented the most recent data from the International > Transport Forum. > > Over 150 000 people lost their lives and a further 6 > million people were > injured in road crashes in the 44 countries of the Forum > that reported data > for 2007. > > Road deaths per capita vary by a factor of almost 8 across > the countries. > "This is what is most depressing", said Short, > "the measures and policies to > reduce crashes and fatalities are well known. If all > countries had fatality > rates like Japan, Norway, UK or the Netherlands more than > 80 000 lives would > be saved". > > Looking regionally, Central and Eastern Europe both show > significant > increases in fatalities. Rapid motorisation is a factor in > the region but > the figures show "the lack of continuous and > determined political effort" in > these countries, according to Short. > > In Western Europe, the picture is more mixed but the recent > decline in > fatalities has slowed and the 1.2% decline in 2007 > fatalities is the > smallest for the last 5 years. Moreover, in Western Europe > the number of > casualties and the number of injury accidents have > increased "a sure sign > that we are not making our road system safer" said the > Secretary General. > > Better news comes from countries outside Europe where there > have been small > reductions in fatalities, casualties and injury accidents > in the major > countries. The US reduced both injury accidents and > casualties for the > seventh consecutive year; Japan's striking improvement > makes it now the best > performing country in the International Transport Forum > with 45 fatalities > per million inhabitants. > > In Western Europe the number of road traffic fatalities > declined in 2007 by > 1.2%. However this decrease was accompanied by a rise in > both the number of > casualties (+1.4%) and the number of accidents (+5.6%). > These data are > strongly influenced by the performance of Turkey which has > shown significant > increases in all three indicators. In 2007, only the United > Kingdom and > Greece recorded drops in the number of fatalities, > casualties and injury > accidents. At the same time Denmark, Finland and Sweden > have seen their road > fatalities increase by 32.7%, 13.1% and 5.8% respectively. > > In Central and Eastern Europe the number of road fatalities > increased by > 6.4% in 2007. This result is all the more disappointing > since the region > recorded at the same time strong increases in the number of > casualties > (+6.4%) and number of accidents (+6.7%). With the exception > of Bulgaria, > Estonia, Hungary and Lithuania, which show a drop in road > fatalities, > casualties and injury accidents, all other countries have > been confronted > with a rise in the number of fatalities on their roads. > Countries like the > Czech Republic and Romania saw their fatalities increase by > 15% and 12.8% > respectively. > > In 2007, the Community of Independent States (CIS) recorded > a strong rise of > its road fatalities by 8.2%, breaking the positive signs > recorded in the > last few years. With the exception of Russia (+1.8%) the > number of persons > killed on roads increased strongly in all countries, and > particularly in > Ukraine with +38.1%. > > As far as non European members of the ITF are concerned, > they continue to > show encouraging results in 2007, recording a drop of 3.1% > in the number of > fatalities, 2.8% in the number of casualties and 3.3% in > the number of > injury accidents. Only Mexico and New Zealand are showing a > strong rise in > road fatalities (+10% and 7.9% respectively). The number of > casualties and > injury accidents are also increasing in these two > countries. > > Behind these global figures there are significant > variations from one > country to another, as the following tables show: > > > Road fatalities in 2007 > > > Western Europe > > Number of fatalities > > 2007/2006 % > > > Austria > > 691 > > -5.3 > > > Belgium > > 1 067 > > -0.2 > > > Denmark > > 406 > > 32.7 > > > Finland > > 380 > > 13.1 > > > France > > 4 620 > > -1.9 > > > Germany > > 4 949 > > -2.8 > > > Greece > > 1 578 > > -4.8 > > > Iceland > > 15 > > -51.6 > > > Luxembourg > > 43 > > 19.4 > > > Malta > > 12 > > 9.1 > > > Netherlands > > 791 > > -2.5 > > > Norway > > 233 > > -3.7 > > > Portugal > > 854 > > 0.5 > > > Spain > > 3 823 > > -6.8 > > > Sweden > > 471 > > 5.8 > > > Switzerland > > 384 > > 3.8 > > > Turkey > > 5 004 > > 8.0 > > > United Kingdom > > 3 059 > > -7.2 > > > Total > > 28 380 > > -1.2 > > > > Central and Eastern Europe > > Number of fatalities > > 2007/2006 % > > > Albania > > 384 > > 38.6 > > > Bulgaria > > 1 006 > > -3.5 > > > Croatia > > 619 > > 0.8 > > > Czech Republic > > 1 222 > > 15.0 > > > Estonia > > 196 > > -3.9 > > > FYROM > > 173 > > 23.6 > > > Hungary > > 1 232 > > -5.4 > > > Latvia > > 419 > > 2.9 > > > Lithuania > > 740 > > -2.6 > > > Poland > > 5 583 > > 6.5 > > > Romania > > 2 794 > > 12.8 > > > Serbia > > 962 > > 6.9 > > > Slovakia > > 661 > > 8.7 > > > Slovenia > > 293 > > 11.8 > > > Total > > 16 284 > > 6.4 > > > > CIS countries > > Number of fatalities > > 2007/2006 % > > > Azerbaijan > > 1 107 > > 7.8 > > > Georgia > > 737 > > 9.2 > > > Moldova > > 464 > > 21.5 > > > Russia > > 33 308 > > 1.8 > > > Ukraine > > 9 481 > > 38.1 > > > Total > > 45 097 > > 8.2 > > > > > > Other ITF > > Number of fatalities > > 2007/2006 % > > > Australia > > 1 616 > > 1.1 > > > Canada > > 2 729 > > -5.6 > > > Japan > > 5 744 > > -9.6 > > > Korea > > 6 166 > > -2.5 > > > Mexico > > 5 398 > > 10.0 > > > New Zealand > > 422 > > 7.9 > > > United States > > 41 059 > > -3.9 > > > Total > > 63 134 > > -3.1 > > > > > Aggregates > > Number of fatalities > > 2007/2006 % > > > OECD1 > > 106 234 > > -1.8 > > > EU2 > > 42 924 > > 0.2 > > > ITF1,3 > > 158 929 > > 1.3 > > > 1) For Italy and Ireland, the number of fatalities refers > to the year 2006. > > 2) Cyprus is not included. > > 3) Armenia, Belarus, Bosnia, Montenegro, are not included. > > > > More detailed information on latest trends will be > available on the Forum > website in December 2008 > (www.internationaltransportforum.org > ) and > in the forthcoming > publication ?Trends in the Transport Sector, > 1970-2007?. This information > may be reproduced, provided the ITF is quoted as the > source. > > Contact: Michael Zirpel > > Director of Communications > > International Transport Forum > > Tel. +(33-1) 45 24 95 96 > > michael.zirpel@oecd.org > > __._,_.___ > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd8ebf40/attachment.html > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: image/jpeg > Size: 10797 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd8ebf40/attachment.jpe > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/octet-stream > Size: 78770 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd8ebf40/attachment.bin > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: image/jpeg > Size: 1850 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd8ebf40/attachment-0001.jpe > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: image/png > Size: 9014 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd8ebf40/attachment.png > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/octet-stream > Size: 823 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd8ebf40/attachment-0001.bin > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: ATT00177.txt > Type: text/plain > Size: 6663 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd8ebf40/ATT00177.txt > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/bd8ebf40/ATT00180.html > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 schipper at wri.org Sat Nov 22 03:08:08 2008 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:08:08 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: [KyotoWorldCities] Bangkok Dispatch: Seeking Clean Asian Air (Plus the other side of Dr. Schipper) References: <009101c94bb8$26238ee0$726aaca0$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C0316261E@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> And if you do like the music, try "schipper BAQ" on the main you tube site for lots more! Attached is yours truly with Dexter Gordon, Aarhus, Denmark, Sept 1970. Where did I go wrong? Lee ________________________________ From: KyotoWorldCities@yahoogroups.com [mailto:KyotoWorldCities@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Britton Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 1:04 AM To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; KyotoWorldCities@yahoogroups.com Cc: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: [KyotoWorldCities] Bangkok Dispatch: Seeking Clean Asian Air (Plus the other side of Dr. Schipper) And don't forget to spend some quality time with Dr. Schipper at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArYUn3NAntE Bangkok Dispatch: Seeking Clean Asian Air By Andrew C. Revkin Asian cities, including Hanoi pictured here, are beset by traffic and smog. (Credit: Lee Schipper) Lee Schipper, a specialist on cities, transportation and pollution diving time between Stanford and Berkeley, is a frequent presence on Dot Earth and a source for me when pondering how the world heads toward nine billion mainly-urban humans with the fewest traffic jams and smog alerts. He sent the following note from a conference in Bangkok on cleaning the air in Asian cities. You may have seen the news on Asia's growing brown clouds this week. Postcard from Better Air Quality '08 : Much has been made of rising aspirations of the middle class in developing countries, with the implication that this must mean literally hundreds of millions of cars - and hundreds of millions of tonnes of oil use and resulting CO2 emissions. Unfortunately these aspirations continue to collide with reality in the congested and polluted cities all over Asia, compounded by the huge brown clouds of pollution hovering over many parts of Asia recently noted in The Times. The foul air, with people stuck in traffic, is costing thousands of unnecessary deaths every year. This is not a new problem, as I have noted elsewhere . This week, leaders from all the major countries and cities have been gathering at a semi-annual event, Better Air Quality '08 , organized by the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities, a group recently spun off from the Asian Development Bank. There are four main goals: * Liveable, walkable, safe cities as the examples of Singapore and Seoul in Asia show. * Better technologies, not necessarily as expensive as many think, since Asians have not yet dug holes as Americans have with a very car-intensive world. * Modest lifestyles, not the kinds Americans are used to but ones we're beginning to adjust to as home ownership, water, food, energy and everything else is suddenly more expensive or risky than we thought. * Good governance, with the usual panoply of taxes, regulations to make the first three outcomes happen. This was brought out by Enrique Penalosa, former mayor of Bogota, who transformed that city and its bus system into the envy of the world. Many informal, and in some cases, closed-door sessions here let public and private stakeholders work on real solutions. BAQ 08 is upbeat on local air pollution. In Hanoi, for example, a city with more motorcycles per capita than New York has cars per capita, measures are being taken to clean up the resulting pollution . China has developed fuel economy standards on new cars, and high-level representatives from other Asian governments attended a special workshop to discuss how their countries should approach this issue. Bus rapid transit around the world was featured as well. But some of the messages from such conferences are depressing: Greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise, and the success stories are still the exception. Lee Schipper, Global Metropolitan Studies, Univ. of Calif., Berkeley , and Precourt Institute for Energy Efficiency , Stanford University Have you traveled or lived in Asia? If so, what do you see as signs of progress, or big trouble? Dr. Schipper did point out to me that at least one other element of the meeting was upbeat -- the music, provided at the opening reception by none other than Lee Schipper and the Mitigators. Let's go to the videotape: * http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArYUn3NAntE __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar _________________________________________________________ The Kyoto 20/20 Cities Challenge: http://kyotocities.org A single ambitious environmental objective for your city: *** A 20% improvement in 20 months, and within budget. *** Please think twice before posting to the group as a whole (It might be that your note is best sent to one person?) MARKETPLACE ________________________________ >From kitchen basics to easy recipes - join the Group from Kraft Foods Yahoo! Groups Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity Visit Your Group New business? Get new customers. List your web site in Yahoo! Search. Moderator Central An online resource for moderators of Yahoo! Groups. Get in Shape on Yahoo! Groups Find a buddy and lose weight. . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/11b7becc/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 55524 bytes Desc: image001.jpg Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/11b7becc/attachment.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: dexterlee.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13209 bytes Desc: dexterlee.jpg Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081121/11b7becc/dexterlee.jpg From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Sun Nov 23 19:36:31 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 11:36:31 +0100 Subject: [sustran] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Message-ID: <003901c94d57$5df01b40$19d051c0$@britton@ecoplan.org> That=92s a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton = On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 = Hi Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be included. = As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. Curiously yours Roland Sapsford Roland Sapsford Sustainability Solutions Consulting = = Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport = = PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) = Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: = A trav=E9s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir emisiones de CO2 - tambi=E9n en el =E1rea del transporte. M=E1s informaciones: http://www.cdm-cooperation.de/7.0.html Para saber m=E1s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa=ED= ses de Am=E9rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). Clean Development Mechanism The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one hand, it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. = Best regards, Rainer Rothfuss ----------------------- Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com = -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 823 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/e= 813df6f/attachment.bin From aashu.gupta20 at gmail.com Sun Nov 23 20:08:54 2008 From: aashu.gupta20 at gmail.com (Aashish Gupta) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:38:54 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: <8490352351503119344@unknownmsgid> References: <8490352351503119344@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: Dear Eric I have gained much from the discussions at New moility cafe, Cities-for-Mobility and sustrans. I have a suggestion. Cant we integrate all the lists, since all of them have a common focus. It would be much easier, as well as enlarge the discussion. Aashish Gupta Department of Humanities and Social Sciences Indian Institute of Technology Madras On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Eric Britton wrote: > That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with > some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at > http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or > other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton > > > > On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford > Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 > > > > > > Hi > > Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations > around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be > included. > > As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM > credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that > transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as > projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. > > Curiously yours > Roland Sapsford > > > > Roland Sapsford > Sustainability Solutions Consulting > > Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport > > > PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand > +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) > > > > > Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: > > > A trav?s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir > emisiones de CO2 - tambi?n en el ?rea del transporte. > > > M?s informaciones: http://www.cdm-cooperation.de/7.0.html > > Para saber m?s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa?ses > de Am?rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). > > > Clean Development Mechanism > > > The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid > down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention > on > Climate Change (UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one > hand, > it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission > targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic > incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. > > Best regards, > > Rainer Rothfuss > > > ----------------------- > Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: > http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility > Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/octet-stream > Size: 823 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/e813df6f/attachment.bin > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 edelman at greenidea.eu Mon Nov 24 01:06:47 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:06:47 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: References: <8490352351503119344@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: <49297F97.2010605@greenidea.eu> Hi Aashish, This is an important question - which could perhaps include "Lots Less Cars" - and I am sure the three different administrator/co-administrators will answer it soon. For me it is clear that Sustran is about developing world/Global South issues. Very often the same messages go out on both New Mobility Cafe and Lots Less Cars, and while there are guidelines to make it simple for me what I usually do is if it something interesting and useful I send it to Lots Less and if even more exciting, revolutionary and important/critical I also send to New Mobility. And of course also to Sustran if applicable. I know that Eric works very hard at keeping the discussion lean and focused and while I sometimes object if a post I make - especially if I take a lot of time with it - is rejected, I see the reason for this. We can always post anything we want on our own Blogs, or of course start our own discussions. Sustran, New Mobility/Lots Less and Sustran also originate in three different institutions/entities, and perhaps some differences between them are fundamental. As for me, I do not participate in Cities for Mobility. It seems that the discussions held there could be useful but I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how inclusive-seeming - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the Stuttgart-based automobile industry. Cities for Mobility has as one of its "mobility columns" the private urban car, and in (not just) my eyes this is Old Mobility and thus presents a fundamental difference from - and obviously a challenge to - the philosophy behind/purpose of the other lists. Regards, T Aashish Gupta wrote: > Dear Eric > I have gained much from the discussions at New moility cafe, > Cities-for-Mobility and sustrans. I have a suggestion. Cant we integrate all > the lists, since all of them have a common focus. It would be much easier, > as well as enlarge the discussion. > > Aashish Gupta > Department of Humanities and Social Sciences > Indian Institute of Technology Madras > > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Eric Britton wrote: > > >> That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with >> some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at >> http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or >> other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton >> >> >> >> On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford >> Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi >> >> Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations >> around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be >> included. >> >> As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM >> credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that >> transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as >> projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. >> >> Curiously yours >> Roland Sapsford >> >> >> >> Roland Sapsford >> Sustainability Solutions Consulting >> >> Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport >> >> >> PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand >> +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: >> >> >> A trav?s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir >> emisiones de CO2 - tambi?n en el ?rea del transporte. >> >> >> M?s informaciones: http://www.cdm-cooperation.de/7.0.html >> >> Para saber m?s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa?ses >> de Am?rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). >> >> >> Clean Development Mechanism >> >> >> The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid >> down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention >> on >> Climate Change (UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one >> hand, >> it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission >> targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic >> incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Rainer Rothfuss >> >> >> ----------------------- >> Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: >> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility >> Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >> Name: not available >> Type: application/octet-stream >> Size: 823 bytes >> Desc: not available >> Url : >> http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/e813df6f/attachment.bin >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> 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'). > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From edelman at greenidea.eu Mon Nov 24 01:06:47 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:06:47 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: References: <8490352351503119344@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: <49297F97.2010605@greenidea.eu> Hi Aashish, This is an important question - which could perhaps include "Lots Less Cars" - and I am sure the three different administrator/co-administrators will answer it soon. For me it is clear that Sustran is about developing world/Global South issues. Very often the same messages go out on both New Mobility Cafe and Lots Less Cars, and while there are guidelines to make it simple for me what I usually do is if it something interesting and useful I send it to Lots Less and if even more exciting, revolutionary and important/critical I also send to New Mobility. And of course also to Sustran if applicable. I know that Eric works very hard at keeping the discussion lean and focused and while I sometimes object if a post I make - especially if I take a lot of time with it - is rejected, I see the reason for this. We can always post anything we want on our own Blogs, or of course start our own discussions. Sustran, New Mobility/Lots Less and Sustran also originate in three different institutions/entities, and perhaps some differences between them are fundamental. As for me, I do not participate in Cities for Mobility. It seems that the discussions held there could be useful but I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how inclusive-seeming - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the Stuttgart-based automobile industry. Cities for Mobility has as one of its "mobility columns" the private urban car, and in (not just) my eyes this is Old Mobility and thus presents a fundamental difference from - and obviously a challenge to - the philosophy behind/purpose of the other lists. Regards, T Aashish Gupta wrote: > Dear Eric > I have gained much from the discussions at New moility cafe, > Cities-for-Mobility and sustrans. I have a suggestion. Cant we integrate all > the lists, since all of them have a common focus. It would be much easier, > as well as enlarge the discussion. > > Aashish Gupta > Department of Humanities and Social Sciences > Indian Institute of Technology Madras > > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Eric Britton wrote: > > >> That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with >> some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at >> http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or >> other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton >> >> >> >> On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford >> Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi >> >> Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations >> around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be >> included. >> >> As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM >> credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that >> transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as >> projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. >> >> Curiously yours >> Roland Sapsford >> >> >> >> Roland Sapsford >> Sustainability Solutions Consulting >> >> Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport >> >> >> PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand >> +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: >> >> >> A trav?s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir >> emisiones de CO2 - tambi?n en el ?rea del transporte. >> >> >> M?s informaciones: http://www.cdm-cooperation.de/7.0.html >> >> Para saber m?s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa?ses >> de Am?rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). >> >> >> Clean Development Mechanism >> >> >> The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid >> down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention >> on >> Climate Change (UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one >> hand, >> it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission >> targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic >> incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Rainer Rothfuss >> >> >> ----------------------- >> Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: >> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility >> Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >> Name: not available >> Type: application/octet-stream >> Size: 823 bytes >> Desc: not available >> Url : >> http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/e813df6f/attachment.bin >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> 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'). > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From schipper at wri.org Mon Nov 24 02:24:33 2008 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:24:33 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport References: <003901c94d57$5df01b40$19d051c0$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> Why would you want public transport in CDM, when the values/costs/benefits of time saved, lower air pollution, less noise, greater rider security and safety etc DWARF the carbon values...and when adding a CDM component slows the entire improvement of transport down immensely while all of us don our green visors and count carbon. Counting that carbon is VERY hard (http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.aspx examined some of these issues including a paper we wrote for the 2007 ECEEE conference on measuring CO2 emissions CHANGES from transport projects). I'm VERY worried about CO2 in transport, but I'm convinced CDM and like process that link to "carbon finance" either slow the process down (see GEF grant progress), put too much focus on reducing CO2 rather than improving transport (they are not the same), filter our vision to projects whose carbon savings are relatively to measure (hybrid buses, proven but expensive) or ones with tiny and often questionable savings (like small additions of biodiesel to bus fuel). I'm not against rewarding carbon saving or efforts at mass transit, but the proportions of $ for carbon are tiny compared to the overall pot of time, transport, urban development. Can Mexico City honestly say that their Metrobus was "additional", ie., would not have been undertaken to save $$ millions in saved time, accidents, local air pollution, reduced numbers of cars on the road (according to a nice report by the Instituto Nacional de Ecologia published in 2006) for a few hundred thousand $ of carbon finance funds arranged after the fact? Juerg Gruetter has made a good case for CDM and carbon financing of BRT projects, but in the end these only affect a small amount of CO2 (in buses) and, while they draw a modest number of riders from cars, still leave the rest of cars untouched. My fear is that CDM draws interest to those easily bankable projects and away from the much greater challenge, use of cars and other light duty vehicles. In four Latin American cities (Mexico City region, Bogota, S Paulo, and Santiago) cars and taxis appear to account for 65-70% of all direct GHG emissions from road traffic (including trucks). Without policies and projects that reduce that traffic (and its growth) SIGNIFICANTLY, the savings from 'urban transport projects" in general will be small. Since most fo the carbon is in cars, most of the change has to come from cars. How do you measure that and sell the results against a rapidly growing baseline? And cars and trucks are not "cdm-able", i.e., owned by the kinds of entities that can be part of CDM directly. Of course $$ could be given to cities who undertook strong transport measures, but again, why would they not undertake those measures anyway? And why would national governments not want to promulgate fuel economy standards to save oil? In short, is this really about $$ or political will? Finally, consider the following very rough numbers that illustrate the scale of the problem. World GDP 60 Trillion (until the crash) World gross investment $10 TN (remember buildings burn energy leading to CO2 emissions, too) Investments in transport infrastructure (road, rail, port, air, facilities like transfer stations) - my guess $1-2 TN World purchase of private household transport equipment $1TN (40 mn cars $25 000/car) World purchase of road fuels (roughly 2 TN) Are we really talking about putting hundreds of billions YEARLY into doing what is the right thing even if CO2 was not a problem. Conversely, if we had a CO2 free fuel tomorrow, we'd still have a traffic mess worldwide. So maybe focusing on transport and Co2, rather than more broadly clean development - and understanding why developing cities' traffic is such a mess even before CO2 is considered - is higher on the agenda. If there are going to be N-S transfers, aka Overseas Development Assistance, is CO2 "abatement" the most cost effective way of using money for development? Realistically, how can CDM have more than a demonstration effect? If so, then let's forget CDM as such and move to a wider effort to Demonstrate various regional policy and technical solutions, investing (for once) in enough competence building and data gathering so localities can monitor traffic, emissions, fuel, safety etc better. Our EMBARQ project in se Asia (PSUTA) discovered that authorities' ability to monitor even the most elementary problems of transport was pretty meager --http://embarq.wri.org/en/ProjectCitiesDetail.aspx?id=9 Some of these issues will be discussed at the upcoming COP (Dec 5). Maybe Climate negotiations are not the right place to decide how to use the streets? There will also be a spirited discussion during Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington DC, both during the meeting itself and at a special side event Friday 16 January. This note is copied to several of those involved in these discussions. Watch this space! Lee Schipper, Ph.D Project Scientist Global Metropolitan Studies 2614 Dwight Way 2nd floor University of California Berkeley CA 94720-1782 USA TEL +1 510 642 6889 FAX +1 510 642 6061 CELL +1 202 262 7476 skype: mrmeter http://metrostudies.berkeley.edu/ Senior Research Engineer Precourt Institute for Energy Efficiency Stanford University Senior Analyst Emeritus EMBARQ, the WRI Center for Sustainable Transport ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Britton Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 2:37 AM To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Cc: Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com Subject: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 Hi Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be included. As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. Curiously yours Roland Sapsford Roland Sapsford Sustainability Solutions Consulting Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: A trav?s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir emisiones de CO2 - tambi?n en el ?rea del transporte. M?s informaciones: http://www.cdm-cooperation.de/7.0.html Para saber m?s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa?ses de Am?rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). Clean Development Mechanism The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one hand, it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. Best regards, Rainer Rothfuss ----------------------- Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Links | Database | Polls | Calendar Check in here via the homepage at http://www.newmobility.org To post message to group: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Please think twice before posting to the group as a whole (It might be that your note is best sent to one person?) MARKETPLACE ________________________________ >From kitchen basics to easy recipes - join the Group from Kraft Foods Yahoo! Groups Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity Visit Your Group Yahoo! Finance It's Now Personal Guides, news, advice & more. Find helpful tips for Moderators on the Yahoo! Groups team blog. Dog Fanatics on Yahoo! Groups Find people who are crazy about dogs. . __,_._,___ From rothfuss at cities-for-mobility.net Mon Nov 24 03:19:02 2008 From: rothfuss at cities-for-mobility.net (Dr. Rainer Rothfuss) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 19:19:02 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: <49297F97.2010605@greenidea.eu> References: <8490352351503119344@unknownmsgid> <49297F97.2010605@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <20081123191902.0hoal8vkq8o4sc4c@webmail.df.eu> Dear Todd Edelmann, sorry for expressing myself so directly but your evaluation of "Cities for Mobility" has absolutely nothing to do with the reality: You say: "I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how inclusive-seeming - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the Stuttgart-based automobile industry" CfM is a municipal initiative and we, as masterminds behind the network, feel 100% committed to greening urban mobility and not feeding any kind of industry. But, to be honest, without the money we receive from some private firms, including our local car producers, we could not work without membership fees and invite members from Africa, Asia and Latina America for free (other city networks charge 8.000 Euros per year, no matter from where you are!). The companies that help us to finance the work of the Municipality of Stuttgart within the framework of CfM have agreed to give us their support without asking anything in return. There is not even a council or something where they could bring in their views or make their voices heard in order to influence the work of the network. To be honest, our somewhat depressing perception was that they don't even care about us as we, with our almost 500 partners from over 60 countries, are not at all important for companies that have an annual turnover bigger than several small national economies together!! But, yes you are rigth, we also work on the topic of motorized individual mobility. But we don't tell anyone what Stuttgart's car makers would like to hear but just what we need in order to achieve real benefits for the environmental situation in cities. To cover 100% of all mobility demands by non-motorized mobility would be ideal - you may be right! But the fact is that motorized individual mobility will allways be there. So the crucial question is how we can green it (e.g. electric mobility with light vehicles and renewable energies - that's what we are dealing with in ongoing projects). We just dare facing this up to now inevitable motorized 90% share of the mobility reality that many others seem to ignore thinking that this way it will disappear... How about you? In general, I'm convinced it's better to go there and ask people what they think and want and really do before you judge them in public... But yes, I agree, it's good to have different platforms for working on the same issues. Each one will bring in new and valuable aspects. The big question for me just is whether we shall stick to a typical German way of thinking, I would say, that there is only one right answer and only one solution to such a complex problem and reality as is mobility, asking the rest of the world to obey, stop thinking and to follow it... So I'd be glad if you acknowledged also the value of the work we have been doing in the past years within CfM for the same cause as yours. Thanks! Regards, Rainer Rothfuss ----------------------- Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ----------------------- Dr. Rainer Rothfuss Coordinator of International Relations ----------------------- Coordination Office Cities for Mobility State Capital Stuttgart ----------------------- Postal address: D-70161 Stuttgart GERMANY Tel.: +49-8381-891-68 38 Fax: +49-8381-891-68 39 Mob: +49-177-894 08 04 Skype: rainer.rothfuss rothfuss@cities-for-mobility.net www.cities-for-mobility.netMessage from "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" : > Hi Aashish, > > This is an important question - which could perhaps include "Lots Less > Cars" - and I am sure the three different > administrator/co-administrators will answer it soon. > > For me it is clear that Sustran is about developing world/Global South > issues. Very often the same messages go out on both New Mobility Cafe > and Lots Less Cars, and while there are guidelines to make it simple > for me what I usually do is if it something interesting and useful I > send it to Lots Less and if even more exciting, revolutionary and > important/critical I also send to New Mobility. And of course also to > Sustran if applicable. > > I know that Eric works very hard at keeping the discussion lean and > focused and while I sometimes object if a post I make - especially if > I take a lot of time with it - is rejected, I see the reason for this. > We can always post anything we want on our own Blogs, or of course > start our own discussions. > > Sustran, New Mobility/Lots Less and Sustran also originate in three > different institutions/entities, and perhaps some differences between > them are fundamental. As for me, I do not participate in Cities for > Mobility. It seems that the discussions held there could be useful but > I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how inclusive-seeming > - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the Stuttgart-based > automobile industry. Cities for Mobility has as one of its "mobility > columns" the private urban car, and in (not just) my eyes this is Old > Mobility and thus presents a fundamental difference from - and > obviously a challenge to - the philosophy behind/purpose of the other > lists. > > Regards, > T > > > > > > Aashish Gupta wrote: >> Dear Eric >> I have gained much from the discussions at New moility cafe, >> Cities-for-Mobility and sustrans. I have a suggestion. Cant we integrate all >> the lists, since all of them have a common focus. It would be much easier, >> as well as enlarge the discussion. >> >> Aashish Gupta >> Department of Humanities and Social Sciences >> Indian Institute of Technology Madras >> >> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Eric Britton? >> wrote: >> >> >>> That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with >>> some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at >>> http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or >>> other details to improve? its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton >>> >>> >>> >>> On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford >>> Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations >>> around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be >>> included. >>> >>> As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM >>> credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota.? The main barrier is that >>> transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as >>> projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. >>> >>> Curiously yours >>> Roland Sapsford >>> >>> >>> >>> Roland Sapsford >>> Sustainability Solutions Consulting >>> >>> Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport >>> >>> >>> PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand >>> +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: >>> >>> >>> A trav?s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir >>> emisiones de CO2 - tambi?n en el ?rea del transporte. >>> >>> >>> M?s informaciones: http://www.cdm-cooperation.de/7.0.html >>> >>> Para saber m?s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa?ses >>> de Am?rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). >>> >>> >>> Clean Development Mechanism >>> >>> >>> The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid >>> down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention >>> on >>> Climate Change (UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one >>> hand, >>> it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission >>> targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic >>> incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Rainer Rothfuss >>> >>> >>> ----------------------- >>> Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: >>> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility >>> Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- >>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >>> Name: not available >>> Type: application/octet-stream >>> Size: 823 bytes >>> Desc: not available >>> Url : >>> http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/e813df6f/attachment.bin >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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'). > > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > 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. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with > slight modification) From cornie.huizenga at cai-asia.org Mon Nov 24 12:10:52 2008 From: cornie.huizenga at cai-asia.org (Cornie Huizenga) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:10:52 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: References: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> Message-ID: <7e2a2770811231910l46773f4en6ece36e8aec9e66f@mail.gmail.com> Dear All, To advance the discussion on transport and climate two approaches are required: 1) *Try to get transport into the climate agenda.* Obviously this is much wider than the question on CDM. The upcoming COP 14 in Poland will be an important step on the road to a follow-up agreement to the Kyoto Protocol. Based on the 4 th. Assessment Report of the IPCC it is clear that the overall ambition level of the new agreement which will be signed in Copenhagen needs to be a radically different one than in the case of the Kyoto Protocol. Many of the Annex 1 countries are now talking about reductions of 20-30% by 2020 and 50-80% by 2050. If such more ambitious targets are adopted for Annex 1 countries this will need to have radical consquences for transport in the Annex 1 countries. It is logical that these radical changes in the Annex 1 countries will spill over to non-Annex countries at some point in time. In Poland there will be lots of dicussions on the new Agreement, especially in the ad-hoc Working Group on Long Term Cooperative Action, which was set up in Bali last year to "translate" the Bali Action Plan into a new agreement. These discussions will also focus on mesurable mitigation activities that developing countries/ non-Annex 1 countries will start to undertake to reduce GHG emissions (outside the scope of any CDM activities). This clearly opens the possibility to talk transport as well. In the ad-how working group on Future Commitments of Annex 1 countries under the Kyoto Protocol there will be comprehensive discussions on how to move forward with CDM. The suggestions made in previous meetings of this working group indicate that there is a strong awareness of the limitations of the current CDM instrument. While the transport community has been lamenting that transport was not integrated in CDM, a large part of the wider climate community has already come to the conclusion that CDM was flawed by itself and not suitable to contribute to the relatively modest reduction goals under the commitment period 2008-2012. Looking at the discussions and suggestions on the future of CDM as well as the broader agenda for COP 14 in Poland the important thing for the transport community is to look forward and focus on: - The current importance of the transport sector as a contributor to GHG emissions in Annex 1 and non- Annex 1 countries and the BAU scenario's w= hich will explain how the various reduction scenario's require reductions wit= hin the transport sector for them to become reality; - Options to reduce transport emissions to a level required under different GHG reduction scenarios through technological and non-technological measures in both Annex 1 and non-Annex1 countries; - Mix of command and control and market based instruments to implement the technological and non-technological measures, in both Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries; - Transfer payments between Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries which cover a substantial part of transport emissions AND which at the same time encourage/reward non Annex 1 countries to take policy measures to reduce transpot emissions further; - Capacity building measures to support non-Annex 1 countries to formulate and implement broad based measures to reduce GHG emissions from the transport sector through command and control as well as market based approaches, both those which are implemented with and those which are implemented without some form of transfer payment. To promote such a more broad based approach to the integration of transport in climate change a number of organizations have decided to coordinate in the organization of transport related side events at COP 14. They will also seek to find some form of consensus on steps to be taken to arrive at a common Action Plan of steps to be taken in 2009 leading up to COP 15 in Copenhagen to promote a better integration of transport in the climate agenda. We will be able to send out a brochure soon of the transport side events at COP 15. *2. Get climate into the transport agenda.* Equally important is to ensure that transport planners take note of the climate implications of the decisions made. While the number of CDM projects is and will be limited in the time to come we should be aware that every day investment decisions are being made in non-Annex 1 countries which will lock in GHG emissions for the next 20-30 years. Until and unless climate becomes an integral component in transport policy and urban planning non Annex 1 countries will be unable to decouple economic growth and development of the transport sector from the growth in GHG emissions. A better integration of transport in the climate agenda can help both Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries on the necessity to mainstream climate in transport policy making. This because of the higher political priority attached to climate if a successful new agreement is reached in Copenhagen which incudes mitigation activities for non-Annex 1 countries and which makes specific reference to the transport sector. To stimulate this discussion a double session on Transport and Climate in TRB in January. In a side event on 16 th. January the preliminary results of a number of think pieces on transport and climate commissioned by the Asian Development bank will be presented. This will include: - measurement of CO2 in the transport sector - co-benefits of climate oriented measures and e.g. air quality oriented measures - policies for a low carbon sustainable transport future - financing of low carbon transport - institutional arrangements in support of low carbin transport *Informal survey on Climate and Transport activities in 2009* ** It will be helpful for the transport community to have an idea of what the different organizations are doing/planning to do with respect to transport and climate in 2009. To get such a overview we are implementing a small informal survey - which is attached. If you are subscribed to a news group which does not allow attachments please send me an email and I will be happy to send the survey form to you. best regards, Cornie On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:17 AM, wrote: > Lee > > I agree to what you write. I think, however, that the 'co-benefits' don't > materialize either if the urban transport discussion is boiled down to a = bus > system discussion or on capacity expansion of public transport. Other > mechanisms are needed supporting sustainable urban transport more broadly. > > Cap and trade and CDM like mechanisms will not lead to action in the > transport sector, because it is too expensive relative to other sectors to > cut CO2 emissions there. > > Best > > Andreas > > > > Dr. Andreas Kopp > Lead Economist > World Bank Group > Department for Energy, Transport and Water > 1818 H Street NW > Washington, D.C. 20433 > USA > ph. +1 202 473 6031 > > -----"Lee Schipper" wrote: ----- > > To: , > From: "Lee Schipper" > Date: 11/23/2008 12:24PM > cc: , "Cornie Huizenga" < > cornie.huizenga@cai-asia.org>, , "Holger > Dalkmann" , "Sergio Sanchez" < > ssanchez@cleanairinstitute.org>, , > Subject: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism)= - > public transport > > Why would you want public transport in CDM, when the > values/costs/benefits of time saved, lower air pollution, less noise, > greater rider security and safety etc DWARF the carbon values=85and when > adding a CDM component slows the entire improvement of transport down > immensely while all of us don our green visors and count carbon. > > > > Counting that carbon is VERY hard ( http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.= aspx > examined some of these issues including a paper we wrote for the 2007 ECE= EE > conference on measuring CO2 emissions CHANGES from transport projects). > > > > I'm VERY worried about CO2 in transport, but I'm convinced CDM and like > process that link to "carbon finance" either slow the process down (see G= EF > grant progress), put too much focus on reducing CO2 rather than improving > transport (they are not the same), filter our vision to projects whose > carbon savings are relatively to measure (hybrid buses, proven but > expensive) or ones with tiny and often questionable savings (like small > additions of biodiesel to bus fuel). > > I'm not against rewarding carbon saving or efforts at mass transit, but t= he > proportions of $ for carbon are tiny compared to the overall pot of time, > transport, urban development. Can Mexico City honestly say that their > Metrobus was "additional", ie., would not have been undertaken to save $$ > millions in saved time, accidents, local air pollution, reduced numbers of > cars on the road (according to a nice report by the Instituto Nacional de > Ecologia published in 2006) for a few hundred thousand $ of carbon finance > funds arranged after the fact? > > > > Juerg Gruetter has made a good case for CDM and carbon financing of BRT > projects, but in the end these only affect a small amount of CO2 (in buse= s) > and, while they draw a modest number of riders from cars, still leave the > rest of cars untouched. My fear is that CDM draws interest to those easily > bankable projects and away from the much greater challenge, use of cars a= nd > other light duty vehicles. > > > > In four Latin American cities (Mexico City region, Bogota, S Paulo, and > Santiago) cars and taxis appear to account for 65-70% of all direct GHG > emissions from road traffic (including trucks). Without policies and > projects that reduce that traffic (and its growth) SIGNIFICANTLY, the > savings from 'urban transport projects" in general will be small. Since > most fo the carbon is in cars, most of the change has to come from cars. = How > do you measure that and sell the results against a rapidly growing baseli= ne? > And cars and trucks are not "cdm-able", i.e., owned by the kinds of entit= ies > that can be part of CDM directly. Of course $$ could be given to cities w= ho > undertook strong transport measures, but again, why would they not undert= ake > those measures anyway? And why would national governments not want to > promulgate fuel economy standards to save oil? > > > > In short, is this really about $$ or political will? > > > > Finally, consider the following very rough numbers that illustrate the > scale of the problem. > > World GDP 60 Trillion (until the crash) > > World gross investment $10 TN (remember buildings burn energy leading to > CO2 emissions, too) > > Investments in transport infrastructure (road, rail, port, air, facilities > like transfer stations) =96 my guess $1-2 TN > > World purchase of private household transport equipment $1TN (40 mn cars > $25 000/car) > > World purchase of road fuels (roughly 2 TN) > > > > Are we really talking about putting hundreds of billions YEARLY into doi= ng > what is the right thing even if CO2 was not a problem. Conversely, if we = had > a CO2 free fuel tomorrow, we'd still have a traffic mess worldwide. So ma= ybe > focusing on transport and Co2, rather than more broadly clean development= =96 > and understanding why developing cities' traffic is such a mess even befo= re > CO2 is considered =96 is higher on the agenda. If there are going to be N= -S > transfers, aka Overseas Development Assistance, is CO2 "abatement" the mo= st > cost effective way of using money for development? > > > > Realistically, how can CDM have more than a demonstration effect? If so, > then let's forget CDM as such and move to a wider effort to > > Demonstrate various regional policy and technical solutions, investing (f= or > once) in enough competence building and data gathering so localities can > monitor traffic, emissions, fuel, safety etc better. Our EMBARQ project in > se Asia (PSUTA) discovered that authorities' ability to monitor even the > most elementary problems of transport was pretty meager -- > http://embarq.wri.org/en/ProjectCitiesDetail.aspx?id=3D9 > > > > Some of these issues will be discussed at the upcoming COP (Dec 5). Maybe > Climate negotiations are not the right place to decide how to use the > streets? There will also be a spirited discussion during Transportation > Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington DC, both during the meeting > itself and at a special side event Friday 16 January. This note is copied > to several of those involved in these discussions. Watch this space! > > > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > *Lee Schipper, Ph.D * > > *Project Scientist *** > > Global Metropolitan Studies > > > > 2614 Dwight Way 2 nd floor > *University of California Berkeley * > > CA 94720-1782 USA > > > > TEL +1 510 642 6889 > > FAX +1 510 642 6061 > CELL +1 202 262 7476 > > skype : mrmeter > > http://metrostudies.berkeley.edu/ > > > > *Senior Research Engineer *** > > Precourt Institute for Energy Efficiency > > *Stanford University *** > > > > *Senior Analyst Emeritus *** > > *EMBARQ, the WRI Center for Sustainable Transport *** > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --------------- > > > > > *From: *NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto: > NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Eric Britton > *Sent: *Sunday, November 23, 2008 2:37 AM > *To: *NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > *Cc: *Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com > *Subject: *[NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - > public transport > > > > That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with > some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at > http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or > other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton > > > > *On Behalf Of *Roland Sapsford > *Sent: *Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 > > > > > Hi > > Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations > around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be > included. > > As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM > credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that > transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as > projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. > > Curiously yours > Roland Sapsford > > > Roland Sapsford > Sustainability Solutions Consulting > > Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport > > > PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand > +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) > > > > > > Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: > > A trav=E9s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reduc= ir > emisiones de CO2 - tambi=E9n en el =E1rea del transporte. > M=E1s informaciones: http://www.cdm -cooperation.de/7.0.html > > > Para saber m=E1s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa= =EDses > de Am=E9rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). > > Clean Development Mechanism > > The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid > down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention= on > Climate Change ( UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one > hand, it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s > emission targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an > economic incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate > protection. > > Best regards, > > > Rainer Rothfuss > > > ----------------------- > Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: > http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility > Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > __._,_.___ > > Messages in this topic > ( > 1 ) Reply (via web post) > | > Start a new topic > > > Messages > | > Links > | > Database > | > Polls > | > Calendar > > > Check in here via the homepage at http://www.newmobility.org > To post message to group: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com > Please think twice before posting to the group as a whole > (It might be that your note is best sent to one person?) > > > > > MARKETPLACE > ------------------------------ > > From kitchen basics to easy recipes - join the Group from Kraft Foods > > > [image: Yahoo! Groups] > Change settings via the Web > (Yahoo! > ID required) > Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest > | > Switch format to Traditional > > Visit Your Group > | > Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscri= be > > > Recent Activity > > Visit Your Group > > > Yahoo! Finance > > It's Now Personal > > > Guides, news, > > advice & more. > > Find helpful tips > > for Moderators > > > on the Yahoo! > > Groups team blog. > > Dog Fanatics > > on Yahoo! Groups > > > Find people who are > > crazy about dogs. > > . > > > __,_._,___ > > > -- = Cornie Huizenga Executive Director CAI-Asia Center www://cleanairnet.org/caiasia cornie.huizenga@cai-asia.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Survey Transport and Climate.doc Type: application/msword Size: 41984 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081124/1= aae8187/SurveyTransportandClimate.doc From akopp at worldbank.org Mon Nov 24 11:17:08 2008 From: akopp at worldbank.org (akopp at worldbank.org) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 21:17:08 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> References: <003901c94d57$5df01b40$19d051c0$@britton@ecoplan.org>, <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/c1ccd600/attachment.html From schipper at wri.org Mon Nov 24 12:36:54 2008 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 22:36:54 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport References: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> <7e2a2770811231910l46773f4en6ece36e8aec9e66f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162AC4@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> Thanks Cornie and Andreas. I agree with Andreas basic thrust - in my words, "carbocentricity", aka focusing mainly on carbon (and the cost of carbon saved), something CDM tends to bring in, won't get much done because of the problems I tried to outline below. The issue is whether fixing transport - which needs a HUGE amount of fixing - is something that can happen within the confines of the UNFCCC and COP process, or in the broader (her it comes) "Kopp process", the broader approach Andreas suggests. If the latter, is there is a need for hundreds of billions to flow from North to South each year for transport / climate, or is the issue a much deeper one of cleaner development as I tried to suggest? I ask this because people keep asking how to get Transport in to Climate. There is no way to make transfer payments, Cornie, for emissions that do not need to occur unless the north has a magic formula for land use, housing, and the other elements of development that have a big sway over how people and goods move around. Technology will help but this is much more than technology. If the north hasn't mastered the low carbon high wealth society (which I firmly believe exists or can exist), what can it give to the South to find that society? Why do countries continue on their present path of motorization to the exclusion of the majority of travelers who won't have wheels for decades? Can we somehow de-motorize the north? Will both north and south institute carbon taxes? Finally, what are the technological measures and who owns them? Surely we can shrink our cars in the north by a factor of two and double our efficiency- that gets us to a quarter the per capita emissions from cars. A third less driving and wow, we're down to 1 /6 of the present per capita emissions, at least in the US and Canada. WE can learn how to use trucks better and reduce the volume of bulk we move around. But were still a factor of 4-6 higher per capita than most of the developing world in Asia. Why are they rushing so fast to get there? The question is, does the south have to first be like us then pay the awful price to transform itself? Unless we understand the reasons for this rush to be "like us", I don't think all the money in ADB would help decarbonizes the world. Unfortunately that begs the question "Why are we like us"? Pres. Jimmie Carter asked that question almost 41 years ago and was laughed at. Climate specialist James Hansen has been asking that question recently and taking lots of criticism. http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/20081121_Obama.pdf Maybe Pres. Obama will be brave enough to ask it again? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cornie Huizenga [mailto:cornie.huizenga@cai-asia.org] Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 7:11 PM To: akopp@worldbank.org Cc: Lee Schipper; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com; bert.fabian@cai-asia.org; Holger Dalkmann; Sergio Sanchez; jleather@adb.org Subject: Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Dear All, To advance the discussion on transport and climate two approaches are required: 1) Try to get transport into the climate agenda. Obviously this is much wider than the question on CDM. The upcoming COP 14 in Poland will be an important step on the road to a follow-up agreement to the Kyoto Protocol. Based on the 4 th. Assessment Report of the IPCC it is clear that the overall ambition level of the new agreement which will be signed in Copenhagen needs to be a radically different one than in the case of the Kyoto Protocol. Many of the Annex 1 countries are now talking about reductions of 20-30% by 2020 and 50-80% by 2050. If such more ambitious targets are adopted for Annex 1 countries this will need to have radical consquences for transport in the Annex 1 countries. It is logical that these radical changes in the Annex 1 countries will spill over to non-Annex countries at some point in time. In Poland there will be lots of dicussions on the new Agreement, especially in the ad-hoc Working Group on Long Term Cooperative Action, which was set up in Bali last year to "translate" the Bali Action Plan into a new agreement. These discussions will also focus on mesurable mitigation activities that developing countries/ non-Annex 1 countries will start to undertake to reduce GHG emissions (outside the scope of any CDM activities). This clearly opens the possibility to talk transport as well. In the ad-how working group on Future Commitments of Annex 1 countries under the Kyoto Protocol there will be comprehensive discussions on how to move forward with CDM. The suggestions made in previous meetings of this working group indicate that there is a strong awareness of the limitations of the current CDM instrument. While the transport community has been lamenting that transport was not integrated in CDM, a large part of the wider climate community has already come to the conclusion that CDM was flawed by itself and not suitable to contribute to the relatively modest reduction goals under the commitment period 2008-2012. Looking at the discussions and suggestions on the future of CDM as well as the broader agenda for COP 14 in Poland the important thing for the transport community is to look forward and focus on: * The current importance of the transport sector as a contributor to GHG emissions in Annex 1 and non- Annex 1 countries and the BAU scenario's which will explain how the various reduction scenario's require reductions within the transport sector for them to become reality; * Options to reduce transport emissions to a level required under different GHG reduction scenarios through technological and non-technological measures in both Annex 1 and non-Annex1 countries; * Mix of command and control and market based instruments to implement the technological and non-technological measures, in both Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries; * Transfer payments between Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries which cover a substantial part of transport emissions AND which at the same time encourage/reward non Annex 1 countries to take policy measures to reduce transpot emissions further; * Capacity building measures to support non-Annex 1 countries to formulate and implement broad based measures to reduce GHG emissions from the transport sector through command and control as well as market based approaches, both those which are implemented with and those which are implemented without some form of transfer payment. To promote such a more broad based approach to the integration of transport in climate change a number of organizations have decided to coordinate in the organization of transport related side events at COP 14. They will also seek to find some form of consensus on steps to be taken to arrive at a common Action Plan of steps to be taken in 2009 leading up to COP 15 in Copenhagen to promote a better integration of transport in the climate agenda. We will be able to send out a brochure soon of the transport side events at COP 15. 2. Get climate into the transport agenda. Equally important is to ensure that transport planners take note of the climate implications of the decisions made. While the number of CDM projects is and will be limited in the time to come we should be aware that every day investment decisions are being made in non-Annex 1 countries which will lock in GHG emissions for the next 20-30 years. Until and unless climate becomes an integral component in transport policy and urban planning non Annex 1 countries will be unable to decouple economic growth and development of the transport sector from the growth in GHG emissions. A better integration of transport in the climate agenda can help both Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries on the necessity to mainstream climate in transport policy making. This because of the higher political priority attached to climate if a successful new agreement is reached in Copenhagen which incudes mitigation activities for non-Annex 1 countries and which makes specific reference to the transport sector. To stimulate this discussion a double session on Transport and Climate in TRB in January. In a side event on 16 th. January the preliminary results of a number of think pieces on transport and climate commissioned by the Asian Development bank will be presented. This will include: * measurement of CO2 in the transport sector * co-benefits of climate oriented measures and e.g. air quality oriented measures * policies for a low carbon sustainable transport future * financing of low carbon transport * institutional arrangements in support of low carbin transport Informal survey on Climate and Transport activities in 2009 It will be helpful for the transport community to have an idea of what the different organizations are doing/planning to do with respect to transport and climate in 2009. To get such a overview we are implementing a small informal survey - which is attached. If you are subscribed to a news group which does not allow attachments please send me an email and I will be happy to send the survey form to you. best regards, Cornie On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:17 AM, wrote: Lee I agree to what you write. I think, however, that the 'co-benefits' don't materialize either if the urban transport discussion is boiled down to a bus system discussion or on capacity expansion of public transport. Other mechanisms are needed supporting sustainable urban transport more broadly. Cap and trade and CDM like mechanisms will not lead to action in the transport sector, because it is too expensive relative to other sectors to cut CO2 emissions there. Best Andreas Dr. Andreas Kopp Lead Economist World Bank Group Department for Energy, Transport and Water 1818 H Street NW Washington, D.C. 20433 USA ph. +1 202 473 6031 -----"Lee Schipper" wrote: ----- To: , From: "Lee Schipper" Date: 11/23/2008 12:24PM cc: , "Cornie Huizenga" , , "Holger Dalkmann" , "Sergio Sanchez" , , Subject: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Why would you want public transport in CDM, when the values/costs/benefits of time saved, lower air pollution, less noise, greater rider security and safety etc DWARF the carbon values...and when adding a CDM component slows the entire improvement of transport down immensely while all of us don our green visors and count carbon. Counting that carbon is VERY hard ( http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.aspx examined some of these issues including a paper we wrote for the 2007 ECEEE conference on measuring CO2 emissions CHANGES from transport projects). I'm VERY worried about CO2 in transport, but I'm convinced CDM and like process that link to "carbon finance" either slow the process down (see GEF grant progress), put too much focus on reducing CO2 rather than improving transport (they are not the same), filter our vision to projects whose carbon savings are relatively to measure (hybrid buses, proven but expensive) or ones with tiny and often questionable savings (like small additions of biodiesel to bus fuel). I'm not against rewarding carbon saving or efforts at mass transit, but the proportions of $ for carbon are tiny compared to the overall pot of time, transport, urban development. Can Mexico City honestly say that their Metrobus was "additional", ie., would not have been undertaken to save $$ millions in saved time, accidents, local air pollution, reduced numbers of cars on the road (according to a nice report by the Instituto Nacional de Ecologia published in 2006) for a few hundred thousand $ of carbon finance funds arranged after the fact? Juerg Gruetter has made a good case for CDM and carbon financing of BRT projects, but in the end these only affect a small amount of CO2 (in buses) and, while they draw a modest number of riders from cars, still leave the rest of cars untouched. My fear is that CDM draws interest to those easily bankable projects and away from the much greater challenge, use of cars and other light duty vehicles. In four Latin American cities (Mexico City region, Bogota, S Paulo, and Santiago) cars and taxis appear to account for 65-70% of all direct GHG emissions from road traffic (including trucks). Without policies and projects that reduce that traffic (and its growth) SIGNIFICANTLY, the savings from 'urban transport projects" in general will be small. Since most fo the carbon is in cars, most of the change has to come from cars. How do you measure that and sell the results against a rapidly growing baseline? And cars and trucks are not "cdm-able", i.e., owned by the kinds of entities that can be part of CDM directly. Of course $$ could be given to cities who undertook strong transport measures, but again, why would they not undertake those measures anyway? And why would national governments not want to promulgate fuel economy standards to save oil? In short, is this really about $$ or political will? Finally, consider the following very rough numbers that illustrate the scale of the problem. World GDP 60 Trillion (until the crash) World gross investment $10 TN (remember buildings burn energy leading to CO2 emissions, too) Investments in transport infrastructure (road, rail, port, air, facilities like transfer stations) - my guess $1-2 TN World purchase of private household transport equipment $1TN (40 mn cars $25 000/car) World purchase of road fuels (roughly 2 TN) Are we really talking about putting hundreds of billions YEARLY into doing what is the right thing even if CO2 was not a problem. Conversely, if we had a CO2 free fuel tomorrow, we'd still have a traffic mess worldwide. So maybe focusing on transport and Co2, rather than more broadly clean development - and understanding why developing cities' traffic is such a mess even before CO2 is considered - is higher on the agenda. If there are going to be N-S transfers, aka Overseas Development Assistance, is CO2 "abatement" the most cost effective way of using money for development? Realistically, how can CDM have more than a demonstration effect? If so, then let's forget CDM as such and move to a wider effort to Demonstrate various regional policy and technical solutions, investing (for once) in enough competence building and data gathering so localities can monitor traffic, emissions, fuel, safety etc better. Our EMBARQ project in se Asia (PSUTA) discovered that authorities' ability to monitor even the most elementary problems of transport was pretty meager --http://embarq.wri.org/en/ProjectCitiesDetail.aspx?id=9 Some of these issues will be discussed at the upcoming COP (Dec 5). Maybe Climate negotiations are not the right place to decide how to use the streets? There will also be a spirited discussion during Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington DC, both during the meeting itself and at a special side event Friday 16 January. This note is copied to several of those involved in these discussions. Watch this space! Lee Schipper, Ph.D Project Scientist Global Metropolitan Studies 2614 Dwight Way 2 nd floor University of California Berkeley CA 94720-1782 USA TEL +1 510 642 6889 FAX +1 510 642 6061 CELL +1 202 262 7476 skype : mrmeter http://metrostudies.berkeley.edu/ Senior Research Engineer Precourt Institute for Energy Efficiency Stanford University Senior Analyst Emeritus EMBARQ, the WRI Center for Sustainable Transport ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Britton Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 2:37 AM To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Cc: Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com Subject: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 Hi Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be included. As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. Curiously yours Roland Sapsford Roland Sapsford Sustainability Solutions Consulting Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: A trav?s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir emisiones de CO2 - tambi?n en el ?rea del transporte. M?s informaciones: http://www.cdm -cooperation.de/7.0.html Para saber m?s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa?ses de Am?rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). Clean Development Mechanism The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ( UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one hand, it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. Best regards, Rainer Rothfuss ----------------------- Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com __._,_.___ Messages in this topic ( 1 ) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Links | Database | Polls | Calendar Check in here via the homepage at http://www.newmobility.org To post message to group: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Please think twice before posting to the group as a whole (It might be that your note is best sent to one person?) MARKETPLACE ________________________________ >From kitchen basics to easy recipes - join the Group from Kraft Foods Yahoo! Groups Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity Visit Your Group Yahoo! Finance It's Now Personal Guides, news, advice & more. Find helpful tips for Moderators on the Yahoo! Groups team blog. Dog Fanatics on Yahoo! Groups Find people who are crazy about dogs. . __,_._,___ -- Cornie Huizenga Executive Director CAI-Asia Center www://cleanairnet.org/caiasia cornie.huizenga@cai-asia.org From sudhir at cai-asia.org Mon Nov 24 12:59:26 2008 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:59:26 +0800 Subject: [sustran] International Workshop on Integrated Transport for Sustainable Urban Development in China (Announcement) Message-ID: *International Workshop on Integrated Transport for Sustainable Urban Development in China* * * *Tentative Program * Recent governmental reform in China has created a national Ministry of Transport. This consolidated ministry will be better able to address urban issues comprehensively. The stage has been set for increased administrative efficiency, and also for real innovation in transport policy. Real change is possible only if a new culture for urban transport is shared by authorities, institutes, as well as citizens. Policy and institution determined today will set the agenda for the next five years and beyond. But how to go beyond the political and theoretical level and find practical ways to achieve the integrated urban and transport development is the most pressing issue for China, and even for the whole world. With the success of EU-China Workshop on Sustainable Urban Transport in 2006, China Academy of Transportation Sciences of Ministry of Transport, China Communication and Transportation Association and The Institute for Comprehensive Transportation of National Development and Reform Commission are taking a lead in organizing the International Workshop on Integrated Transport for Sustainable Urban Development in Beijing on December 15-17, 2008. The workshop will address the policy and institutional aspects as well as practical technical measures. It is a platform for the exchange of innovative and contemporary ideas, experiences, lessons, and technologies on the development of sustainable transport. It will be organized in a set of scientific and technical presentations with subsequent focus group discussions. Exhibition and site visit will also be organized during or after the workshop. The workshop is open to all persons who are interested in transport, and of particular interest to decision makers at all levels, transport planners and researchers, operators and companies. Your participation and contribution will surely help China and the whole world in her sustainable development career. CATS will be able to provide you with additional information or assistance in connection with this event. Please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Leilei Liu at leilei_xmt@126.com or leilei_xmt@hotmail.com. Tel: +86-10-58278509 Fax: +86-10-64964252. Date and Venue: December 15-17, 2008 Catic Plaza, Beijing Hosted by? China Academy of Transport Sciences, Ministry of Transport China Communication and Transportation Association, National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) Co-hosted by: Forum on Transport Development and Reform in the Central Cities of China Organized by: China Urban Sustainable Transport Research Center Jiaotong International Cooperation Service Planning and Transport Research and Computation Beijing Shijimingshang Culture Development Center Sponsored by? Directorate General for Energy and Transport, European Commission Volvo Research and Educational Foundations The World Bank Supported by: China Highway Association China Association of Civil Aviation Road Traffic Safety Association of the People's Republic of China China Urban Public Transport Association Transport Systems Engineering Society of China Rail Commission of China Association of Civil Engineer Transportation Research Board American Geographical Society Peking University-Lincoln Institute, Center for Urban Development and Land Policy The University of California at Davis Deutsche Gesellschaft f?r Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH (German Technical Cooperation) -- 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 litman at vtpi.org Mon Nov 24 14:51:46 2008 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 21:51:46 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI .CRM.Local> References: <003901c94d57$5df01b40$19d051c0$@britton@ecoplan.org> <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20081123211931.05b0f708@mail.islandnet.com> I agree with Lee on two points. First, investments in alternative modes by themselves are an inefficient way to conserve energy and reduce emissions. It is far more important to implement pricing reforms which discourage automobile travel and encourage the purchase of more efficient vehicles then to simply invest in public transit, since only about 5% of fuel savings result from shifts to public transit - the rest results from other changes such as the purchase of more efficient vehicles, and shifts to walking, cycling, ridesharing, and closer destinations. Second, public transit service improvements are justified on many other grounds besides climate change emissions, so focusing on this one objective would result in underinvestment in public transit. It is far better to justify public transit improvements due to their economic and social benefits (congestion reduction, road and parking facility cost savings, consumer savings, accident reductions, improved mobility for non-drivers) rather than focusing on energy conservation and emission reduction benefits. That being said, climate change concerns are stimulating a lot of rethinking about transportation planning goals and practices. If the CDM can help justify some additional investment in efficient transportation, I'm all for it. Ideally, climate change emission reduction advocates should work with other interest groups (economic development, traffic safety, equity, public health, consumer interests, etc.) to build support for the substantial changes required to create truly sustainable transportation systems. Let me tell you a related story. I'm currently writing a paper concerning methods for monetizing (measuring in monetary units) carbon emissions. There are two general approaches: damage costs, which may be hundreds of dollars per tonne, and control costs, which are probably much lower, perhaps $30-50 per tonne. A colleague wants to use the higher value for analysis because he assumes that will justify greater reductions in vehicle travel, but I'm not convinced. A very high climate change value will justify technical solutions that ONLY reduce emissions (such as regulations and incentives that increase fuel efficiency or shifts to alternative fuels) since the high value implies that climate change is the dominant, while a lower value will justify more mobility management solutions that reduce total vehicle travel and therefore help achieve multiple planning objectives. For more information see: "Win-Win Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies" (www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ) "Smart Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies" (www.vtpi.org/ster.pdf ) "Carbon Taxes: Tax What You Burn, Not What You Earn" (www.vtpi.org/carbontax.pdf ) Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 09:24 AM 23/11/2008, Lee Schipper wrote: >Why would you want public transport in CDM, when the >values/costs/benefits of time saved, lower air pollution, less >noise, greater rider security and safety etc DWARF the carbon >values...and when adding a CDM component slows the entire >improvement of transport down immensely while all of us don our >green visors and count carbon. > >Counting that carbon is VERY hard >(http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.aspx examined some of these >issues including a paper we wrote for the 2007 ECEEE conference on >measuring CO2 emissions CHANGES from transport projects). > >I'm VERY worried about CO2 in transport, but I'm convinced CDM and >like process that link to "carbon finance" either slow the process >down (see GEF grant progress), put too much focus on reducing CO2 >rather than improving transport (they are not the same), filter our >vision to projects whose carbon savings are relatively to measure >(hybrid buses, proven but expensive) or ones with tiny and often >questionable savings (like small additions of biodiesel to bus fuel). > >I'm not against rewarding carbon saving or efforts at mass transit, >but the proportions of $ for carbon are tiny compared to the overall >pot of time, transport, urban development. Can Mexico City honestly >say that their Metrobus was "additional", ie., would not have been >undertaken to save $$ millions in saved time, accidents, local air >pollution, reduced numbers of cars on the road (according to a nice >report by the Instituto Nacional de Ecologia published in 2006) for >a few hundred thousand $ of carbon finance funds arranged after the fact? > >Juerg Gruetter has made a good case for CDM and carbon financing of >BRT projects, but in the end these only affect a small amount of CO2 >(in buses) and, while they draw a modest number of riders from cars, >still leave the rest of cars untouched. My fear is that CDM draws >interest to those easily bankable projects and away from the much >greater challenge, use of cars and other light duty vehicles. > >In four Latin American cities (Mexico City region, Bogota, S Paulo, >and Santiago) cars and taxis appear to account for 65-70% of all >direct GHG emissions from road traffic (including trucks). Without >policies and projects that reduce that traffic (and its growth) >SIGNIFICANTLY, the savings from 'urban transport projects" in >general will be small. Since most fo the carbon is in cars, most of >the change has to come from cars. How do you measure that and sell >the results against a rapidly growing baseline? And cars and trucks >are not "cdm-able", i.e., owned by the kinds of entities that can be >part of CDM directly. Of course $$ could be given to cities who >undertook strong transport measures, but again, why would they not >undertake those measures anyway? And why would national governments >not want to promulgate fuel economy standards to save oil? > >In short, is this really about $$ or political will? >Finally, consider the following very rough numbers that illustrate >the scale of the problem. > * World GDP 60 Trillion (until the crash) > * World gross investment $10 TN (remember buildings burn energy > leading to CO2 emissions, too) > * Investments in transport infrastructure (road, rail, port, > air, facilities like transfer stations) - my guess $1-2 TN > * World purchase of private household transport equipment $1TN > (40 mn cars $25 000/car) > * World purchase of road fuels (roughly 2 TN) > >Are we really talking about putting hundreds of billions YEARLY >into doing what is the right thing even if CO2 was not a problem. >Conversely, if we had a CO2 free fuel tomorrow, we'd still have a >traffic mess worldwide. So maybe focusing on transport and Co2, >rather than more broadly clean development - and understanding why >developing cities' traffic is such a mess even before CO2 is >considered - is higher on the agenda. If there are going to be N-S >transfers, aka Overseas Development Assistance, is CO2 "abatement" >the most cost effective way of using money for development? > >Realistically, how can CDM have more than a demonstration effect? If >so, then let's forget CDM as such and move to a wider effort to > >Demonstrate various regional policy and technical solutions, >investing (for once) in enough competence building and data >gathering so localities can monitor traffic, emissions, fuel, safety >etc better. Our EMBARQ project in se Asia (PSUTA) discovered that >authorities' ability to monitor even the most elementary problems of >transport was pretty meager >--http://embarq.wri.org/en/ProjectCitiesDetail.aspx?id=9 > >Some of these issues will be discussed at the upcoming COP (Dec 5). >Maybe Climate negotiations are not the right place to decide how to >use the streets? There will also be a spirited discussion during >Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington DC, both >during the meeting itself and at a special side event Friday 16 >January. This note is copied to several of those involved in these >discussions. Watch this space! > >Lee Schipper, Ph.D >Project Scientist >Global Metropolitan Studies >2614 Dwight Way 2nd floor >University of California Berkeley >CA 94720-1782 USA >TEL +1 510 642 6889 >FAX +1 510 642 6061 >CELL +1 202 262 7476 Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" From Brian.Williams at unhabitat.org Mon Nov 24 18:11:09 2008 From: Brian.Williams at unhabitat.org (Brian D. Williams) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:11:09 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: <20081123191902.0hoal8vkq8o4sc4c@webmail.df.eu> Message-ID: Dear All, As I attended the most recent CfM Congress in Stuttgart, I would also like to add my .02 cents here and also say I was most pleased to see the very broad-based and open participation from a variety of stakeholders in urban mobility at the congress. In addition, there was a very open and critical discussion of various urban mobility options with a clear consensus, even among car manufacturers, that an over-reliance on the private automobile to meet future transport demand is problematic in the extreme. The notion that private car manufacturers are not going to be able to maintain their market share for urban mobility if the only product they produce is stuck in gridlock, was made clear. Discussions of diversifying transport products (e.g. public transport vehicles, other personal mobility vehicles, including NMTs) was discussed. In addition, the degree to which these issues resonate very differently in the developing country context was also a key highlight of the meeting as almost half of all delegates were from the developing world. I don't know about everybody else, but for me, one of the most attractive aspects of working in the area of urban transport is the strange bedfellows and unexpected strategic alliances one gets involved in. Although one needs to tread carefully, just because a car manufacturer may financially sponsor a meeting doesn't necessarily mean only one angle or perspective is going to be discussed. Thanks, Brian Brian Williams, Chief Energy and Transport Section Water, Sanitation and Infrastructure Branch Human Settlements Financing Division United Nations Human Settlements Program (UN-HABITAT) P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya TEL: (25420) 762-3916 FAX: (25420) 762-3588 EMAIL: brian.williams@unhabitat.org web site: http:// www.un-habitat.org "Dr. Rainer Rothfuss" Sent by: sustran-discuss-bounces+brian.williams=unhabitat.org@list.jca.apc.org 24/11/2008 03:02 AM To edelman@greenidea.eu cc Giselle Xavier , Lake Sagaris , "Paul A. Barter" , NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, lsagaris@yahoo.com, Sustran Resource Centre , sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, cities-for-mobility@yahoogroups.com Subject [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Dear Todd Edelmann, sorry for expressing myself so directly but your evaluation of "Cities for Mobility" has absolutely nothing to do with the reality: You say: "I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how inclusive-seeming - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the Stuttgart-based automobile industry" CfM is a municipal initiative and we, as masterminds behind the network, feel 100% committed to greening urban mobility and not feeding any kind of industry. But, to be honest, without the money we receive from some private firms, including our local car producers, we could not work without membership fees and invite members from Africa, Asia and Latina America for free (other city networks charge 8.000 Euros per year, no matter from where you are!). The companies that help us to finance the work of the Municipality of Stuttgart within the framework of CfM have agreed to give us their support without asking anything in return. There is not even a council or something where they could bring in their views or make their voices heard in order to influence the work of the network. To be honest, our somewhat depressing perception was that they don't even care about us as we, with our almost 500 partners from over 60 countries, are not at all important for companies that have an annual turnover bigger than several small national economies together!! But, yes you are rigth, we also work on the topic of motorized individual mobility. But we don't tell anyone what Stuttgart's car makers would like to hear but just what we need in order to achieve real benefits for the environmental situation in cities. To cover 100% of all mobility demands by non-motorized mobility would be ideal - you may be right! But the fact is that motorized individual mobility will allways be there. So the crucial question is how we can green it (e.g. electric mobility with light vehicles and renewable energies - that's what we are dealing with in ongoing projects). We just dare facing this up to now inevitable motorized 90% share of the mobility reality that many others seem to ignore thinking that this way it will disappear... How about you? In general, I'm convinced it's better to go there and ask people what they think and want and really do before you judge them in public... But yes, I agree, it's good to have different platforms for working on the same issues. Each one will bring in new and valuable aspects. The big question for me just is whether we shall stick to a typical German way of thinking, I would say, that there is only one right answer and only one solution to such a complex problem and reality as is mobility, asking the rest of the world to obey, stop thinking and to follow it... So I'd be glad if you acknowledged also the value of the work we have been doing in the past years within CfM for the same cause as yours. Thanks! Regards, Rainer Rothfuss ----------------------- Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ----------------------- Dr. Rainer Rothfuss Coordinator of International Relations ----------------------- Coordination Office Cities for Mobility State Capital Stuttgart ----------------------- Postal address: D-70161 Stuttgart GERMANY Tel.: +49-8381-891-68 38 Fax: +49-8381-891-68 39 Mob: +49-177-894 08 04 Skype: rainer.rothfuss rothfuss@cities-for-mobility.net www.cities-for-mobility.netMessage from "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" : > Hi Aashish, > > This is an important question - which could perhaps include "Lots Less > Cars" - and I am sure the three different > administrator/co-administrators will answer it soon. > > For me it is clear that Sustran is about developing world/Global South > issues. Very often the same messages go out on both New Mobility Cafe > and Lots Less Cars, and while there are guidelines to make it simple > for me what I usually do is if it something interesting and useful I > send it to Lots Less and if even more exciting, revolutionary and > important/critical I also send to New Mobility. And of course also to > Sustran if applicable. > > I know that Eric works very hard at keeping the discussion lean and > focused and while I sometimes object if a post I make - especially if > I take a lot of time with it - is rejected, I see the reason for this. > We can always post anything we want on our own Blogs, or of course > start our own discussions. > > Sustran, New Mobility/Lots Less and Sustran also originate in three > different institutions/entities, and perhaps some differences between > them are fundamental. As for me, I do not participate in Cities for > Mobility. It seems that the discussions held there could be useful but > I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how inclusive-seeming > - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the Stuttgart-based > automobile industry. Cities for Mobility has as one of its "mobility > columns" the private urban car, and in (not just) my eyes this is Old > Mobility and thus presents a fundamental difference from - and > obviously a challenge to - the philosophy behind/purpose of the other > lists. > > Regards, > T > > > > > > Aashish Gupta wrote: >> Dear Eric >> I have gained much from the discussions at New moility cafe, >> Cities-for-Mobility and sustrans. I have a suggestion. Cant we integrate all >> the lists, since all of them have a common focus. It would be much easier, >> as well as enlarge the discussion. >> >> Aashish Gupta >> Department of Humanities and Social Sciences >> Indian Institute of Technology Madras >> >> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Eric Britton >> wrote: >> >> >>> That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with >>> some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at >>> http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or >>> other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton >>> >>> >>> >>> On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford >>> Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations >>> around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be >>> included. >>> >>> As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM >>> credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that >>> transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as >>> projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. >>> >>> Curiously yours >>> Roland Sapsford >>> >>> >>> >>> Roland Sapsford >>> Sustainability Solutions Consulting >>> >>> Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport >>> >>> >>> PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand >>> +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: >>> >>> >>> A trav?s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir >>> emisiones de CO2 - tambi?n en el ?rea del transporte. >>> >>> >>> M?s informaciones: http://www.cdm-cooperation.de/7.0.html >>> >>> Para saber m?s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa?ses >>> de Am?rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). >>> >>> >>> Clean Development Mechanism >>> >>> >>> The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid >>> down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention >>> on >>> Climate Change (UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one >>> hand, >>> it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission >>> targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic >>> incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Rainer Rothfuss >>> >>> >>> ----------------------- >>> Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: >>> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility >>> Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com< http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-MobilityCities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com > >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- >>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >>> Name: not available >>> Type: application/octet-stream >>> Size: 823 bytes >>> Desc: not available >>> Url : >>> http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/e813df6f/attachment.bin >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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'). > > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > 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. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with > slight modification) -------------------------------------------------------- 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 Brian.Williams at unhabitat.org Mon Nov 24 18:11:09 2008 From: Brian.Williams at unhabitat.org (Brian D. Williams) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:11:09 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: <20081123191902.0hoal8vkq8o4sc4c@webmail.df.eu> Message-ID: Dear All, As I attended the most recent CfM Congress in Stuttgart, I would also like to add my .02 cents here and also say I was most pleased to see the very broad-based and open participation from a variety of stakeholders in urban mobility at the congress. In addition, there was a very open and critical discussion of various urban mobility options with a clear consensus, even among car manufacturers, that an over-reliance on the private automobile to meet future transport demand is problematic in the extreme. The notion that private car manufacturers are not going to be able to maintain their market share for urban mobility if the only product they produce is stuck in gridlock, was made clear. Discussions of diversifying transport products (e.g. public transport vehicles, other personal mobility vehicles, including NMTs) was discussed. In addition, the degree to which these issues resonate very differently in the developing country context was also a key highlight of the meeting as almost half of all delegates were from the developing world. I don't know about everybody else, but for me, one of the most attractive aspects of working in the area of urban transport is the strange bedfellows and unexpected strategic alliances one gets involved in. Although one needs to tread carefully, just because a car manufacturer may financially sponsor a meeting doesn't necessarily mean only one angle or perspective is going to be discussed. Thanks, Brian Brian Williams, Chief Energy and Transport Section Water, Sanitation and Infrastructure Branch Human Settlements Financing Division United Nations Human Settlements Program (UN-HABITAT) P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya TEL: (25420) 762-3916 FAX: (25420) 762-3588 EMAIL: brian.williams@unhabitat.org web site: http:// www.un-habitat.org "Dr. Rainer Rothfuss" Sent by: sustran-discuss-bounces+brian.williams=unhabitat.org@list.jca.apc.org 24/11/2008 03:02 AM To edelman@greenidea.eu cc Giselle Xavier , Lake Sagaris , "Paul A. Barter" , NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, lsagaris@yahoo.com, Sustran Resource Centre , sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, cities-for-mobility@yahoogroups.com Subject [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Dear Todd Edelmann, sorry for expressing myself so directly but your evaluation of "Cities for Mobility" has absolutely nothing to do with the reality: You say: "I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how inclusive-seeming - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the Stuttgart-based automobile industry" CfM is a municipal initiative and we, as masterminds behind the network, feel 100% committed to greening urban mobility and not feeding any kind of industry. But, to be honest, without the money we receive from some private firms, including our local car producers, we could not work without membership fees and invite members from Africa, Asia and Latina America for free (other city networks charge 8.000 Euros per year, no matter from where you are!). The companies that help us to finance the work of the Municipality of Stuttgart within the framework of CfM have agreed to give us their support without asking anything in return. There is not even a council or something where they could bring in their views or make their voices heard in order to influence the work of the network. To be honest, our somewhat depressing perception was that they don't even care about us as we, with our almost 500 partners from over 60 countries, are not at all important for companies that have an annual turnover bigger than several small national economies together!! But, yes you are rigth, we also work on the topic of motorized individual mobility. But we don't tell anyone what Stuttgart's car makers would like to hear but just what we need in order to achieve real benefits for the environmental situation in cities. To cover 100% of all mobility demands by non-motorized mobility would be ideal - you may be right! But the fact is that motorized individual mobility will allways be there. So the crucial question is how we can green it (e.g. electric mobility with light vehicles and renewable energies - that's what we are dealing with in ongoing projects). We just dare facing this up to now inevitable motorized 90% share of the mobility reality that many others seem to ignore thinking that this way it will disappear... How about you? In general, I'm convinced it's better to go there and ask people what they think and want and really do before you judge them in public... But yes, I agree, it's good to have different platforms for working on the same issues. Each one will bring in new and valuable aspects. The big question for me just is whether we shall stick to a typical German way of thinking, I would say, that there is only one right answer and only one solution to such a complex problem and reality as is mobility, asking the rest of the world to obey, stop thinking and to follow it... So I'd be glad if you acknowledged also the value of the work we have been doing in the past years within CfM for the same cause as yours. Thanks! Regards, Rainer Rothfuss ----------------------- Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ----------------------- Dr. Rainer Rothfuss Coordinator of International Relations ----------------------- Coordination Office Cities for Mobility State Capital Stuttgart ----------------------- Postal address: D-70161 Stuttgart GERMANY Tel.: +49-8381-891-68 38 Fax: +49-8381-891-68 39 Mob: +49-177-894 08 04 Skype: rainer.rothfuss rothfuss@cities-for-mobility.net www.cities-for-mobility.netMessage from "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" : > Hi Aashish, > > This is an important question - which could perhaps include "Lots Less > Cars" - and I am sure the three different > administrator/co-administrators will answer it soon. > > For me it is clear that Sustran is about developing world/Global South > issues. Very often the same messages go out on both New Mobility Cafe > and Lots Less Cars, and while there are guidelines to make it simple > for me what I usually do is if it something interesting and useful I > send it to Lots Less and if even more exciting, revolutionary and > important/critical I also send to New Mobility. And of course also to > Sustran if applicable. > > I know that Eric works very hard at keeping the discussion lean and > focused and while I sometimes object if a post I make - especially if > I take a lot of time with it - is rejected, I see the reason for this. > We can always post anything we want on our own Blogs, or of course > start our own discussions. > > Sustran, New Mobility/Lots Less and Sustran also originate in three > different institutions/entities, and perhaps some differences between > them are fundamental. As for me, I do not participate in Cities for > Mobility. It seems that the discussions held there could be useful but > I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how inclusive-seeming > - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the Stuttgart-based > automobile industry. Cities for Mobility has as one of its "mobility > columns" the private urban car, and in (not just) my eyes this is Old > Mobility and thus presents a fundamental difference from - and > obviously a challenge to - the philosophy behind/purpose of the other > lists. > > Regards, > T > > > > > > Aashish Gupta wrote: >> Dear Eric >> I have gained much from the discussions at New moility cafe, >> Cities-for-Mobility and sustrans. I have a suggestion. Cant we integrate all >> the lists, since all of them have a common focus. It would be much easier, >> as well as enlarge the discussion. >> >> Aashish Gupta >> Department of Humanities and Social Sciences >> Indian Institute of Technology Madras >> >> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Eric Britton >> wrote: >> >> >>> That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with >>> some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at >>> http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or >>> other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton >>> >>> >>> >>> On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford >>> Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations >>> around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be >>> included. >>> >>> As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM >>> credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that >>> transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as >>> projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. >>> >>> Curiously yours >>> Roland Sapsford >>> >>> >>> >>> Roland Sapsford >>> Sustainability Solutions Consulting >>> >>> Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport >>> >>> >>> PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand >>> +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: >>> >>> >>> A trav?s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir >>> emisiones de CO2 - tambi?n en el ?rea del transporte. >>> >>> >>> M?s informaciones: http://www.cdm-cooperation.de/7.0.html >>> >>> Para saber m?s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa?ses >>> de Am?rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). >>> >>> >>> Clean Development Mechanism >>> >>> >>> The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid >>> down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention >>> on >>> Climate Change (UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one >>> hand, >>> it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission >>> targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic >>> incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Rainer Rothfuss >>> >>> >>> ----------------------- >>> Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: >>> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility >>> Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com< http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-MobilityCities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com > >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- >>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >>> Name: not available >>> Type: application/octet-stream >>> Size: 823 bytes >>> Desc: not available >>> Url : >>> http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/e813df6f/attachment.bin >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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'). > > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > 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. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with > slight modification) -------------------------------------------------------- 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 morten7an at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 18:42:20 2008 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 01:42:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <635556.97908.qm@web51011.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi, For those that had problems with the text being scrubbed as a HTML attachment, like I had. Below is the plain text from Andreas Kopp : - Morten > Lee > > I agree to what you write. I think, however, that the 'co-benefits' > don't materialize either if the urban transport discussion is > boiled down to a bus system discussion or on capacity expansion > of public transport. Other mechanisms are needed supporting > sustainable urban transport more broadly. > > Cap and trade and CDM like mechanisms will not lead to action in > the transport sector, because it is too expensive relative to > other sectors to cut CO2 emissions there. > > Best > Andreas > > Dr. Andreas Kopp > > Lead Economist World Bank > Group Department for Energy,Transport and Water > 1818 H Street NW Washington, D.C. 20433 > USA > +1 202 473 6031 > --- On Mon, 24/11/08, akopp@worldbank.org wrote: > From: akopp@worldbank.org > Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport > To: "Lee Schipper" > Cc: "Holger Dalkmann" , NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, "Cornie Huizenga" , jleather@adb.org, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com, akopp@worldbank.org, "Sergio Sanchez" > Date: Monday, 24 November, 2008, 2:17 AM > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/c1ccd600/attachment.html > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 morten7an at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 19:06:47 2008 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 02:06:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20081123211931.05b0f708@mail.islandnet.com> Message-ID: <758303.17594.qm@web51011.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi Interesting discussion. How do you think personal CO2/GHG quoatas fit into this picture ? Personal carbon quotas considered http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4645031.stm Personal carbon trading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_carbon_trading Best Regards, Morten Lange Chairman of the Icelandic Cyclists' Federation --- On Mon, 24/11/08, Todd Alexander Litman wrote: > From: Todd Alexander Litman > Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport > To: "Lee Schipper" , NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Cc: "Holger Dalkmann" , "Cornie Huizenga" , jleather@adb.org, Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com, akopp@worldbank.org, "Sergio Sanchez" > Date: Monday, 24 November, 2008, 5:51 AM > I agree with Lee on two points. First, investments in > alternative > modes by themselves are an inefficient way to conserve > energy and > reduce emissions. It is far more important to implement > pricing > reforms which discourage automobile travel and encourage > the purchase > of more efficient vehicles then to simply invest in public > transit, > since only about 5% of fuel savings result from shifts to > public > transit - the rest results from other changes such as the > purchase of > more efficient vehicles, and shifts to walking, cycling, > ridesharing, > and closer destinations. > > Second, public transit service improvements are justified > on many > other grounds besides climate change emissions, so focusing > on this > one objective would result in underinvestment in public > transit. It > is far better to justify public transit improvements due to > their > economic and social benefits (congestion reduction, road > and parking > facility cost savings, consumer savings, accident > reductions, > improved mobility for non-drivers) rather than focusing on > energy > conservation and emission reduction benefits. > > That being said, climate change concerns are stimulating a > lot of > rethinking about transportation planning goals and > practices. If the > CDM can help justify some additional investment in > efficient > transportation, I'm all for it. Ideally, climate change > emission > reduction advocates should work with other interest groups > (economic > development, traffic safety, equity, public health, > consumer > interests, etc.) to build support for the substantial > changes > required to create truly sustainable transportation > systems. > > Let me tell you a related story. I'm currently writing > a paper > concerning methods for monetizing (measuring in monetary > units) > carbon emissions. There are two general approaches: damage > costs, > which may be hundreds of dollars per tonne, and control > costs, which > are probably much lower, perhaps $30-50 per tonne. A > colleague wants > to use the higher value for analysis because he assumes > that will > justify greater reductions in vehicle travel, but I'm > not convinced. > A very high climate change value will justify technical > solutions > that ONLY reduce emissions (such as regulations and > incentives that > increase fuel efficiency or shifts to alternative fuels) > since the > high value implies that climate change is the dominant, > while a lower > value will justify more mobility management solutions that > reduce > total vehicle travel and therefore help achieve multiple > planning objectives. > > For more information see: > "Win-Win Transportation Emission Reduction > Strategies" > (www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf > ) > "Smart Transportation Emission Reduction > Strategies" > (www.vtpi.org/ster.pdf > ) > "Carbon Taxes: Tax What You Burn, Not What You > Earn" > (www.vtpi.org/carbontax.pdf > ) > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > > At 09:24 AM 23/11/2008, Lee Schipper wrote: > >Why would you want public transport in CDM, when the > >values/costs/benefits of time saved, lower air > pollution, less > >noise, greater rider security and safety etc DWARF the > carbon > >values...and when adding a CDM component slows the > entire > >improvement of transport down immensely while all of us > don our > >green visors and count carbon. > > > >Counting that carbon is VERY hard > >(http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.aspx examined > some of these > >issues including a paper we wrote for the 2007 ECEEE > conference on > >measuring CO2 emissions CHANGES from transport > projects). > > > >I'm VERY worried about CO2 in transport, but > I'm convinced CDM and > >like process that link to "carbon finance" > either slow the process > >down (see GEF grant progress), put too much focus on > reducing CO2 > >rather than improving transport (they are not the > same), filter our > >vision to projects whose carbon savings are relatively > to measure > >(hybrid buses, proven but expensive) or ones with tiny > and often > >questionable savings (like small additions of biodiesel > to bus fuel). > > > >I'm not against rewarding carbon saving or efforts > at mass transit, > >but the proportions of $ for carbon are tiny compared > to the overall > >pot of time, transport, urban development. Can Mexico > City honestly > >say that their Metrobus was "additional", > ie., would not have been > >undertaken to save $$ millions in saved time, > accidents, local air > >pollution, reduced numbers of cars on the road > (according to a nice > >report by the Instituto Nacional de Ecologia published > in 2006) for > >a few hundred thousand $ of carbon finance funds > arranged after the fact? > > > >Juerg Gruetter has made a good case for CDM and carbon > financing of > >BRT projects, but in the end these only affect a small > amount of CO2 > >(in buses) and, while they draw a modest number of > riders from cars, > >still leave the rest of cars untouched. My fear is that > CDM draws > >interest to those easily bankable projects and away > from the much > >greater challenge, use of cars and other light duty > vehicles. > > > >In four Latin American cities (Mexico City region, > Bogota, S Paulo, > >and Santiago) cars and taxis appear to account for > 65-70% of all > >direct GHG emissions from road traffic (including > trucks). Without > >policies and projects that reduce that traffic (and its > growth) > >SIGNIFICANTLY, the savings from 'urban transport > projects" in > >general will be small. Since most fo the carbon is in > cars, most of > >the change has to come from cars. How do you measure > that and sell > >the results against a rapidly growing baseline? And > cars and trucks > >are not "cdm-able", i.e., owned by the kinds > of entities that can be > >part of CDM directly. Of course $$ could be given to > cities who > >undertook strong transport measures, but again, why > would they not > >undertake those measures anyway? And why would national > governments > >not want to promulgate fuel economy standards to save > oil? > > > >In short, is this really about $$ or political will? > >Finally, consider the following very rough numbers that > illustrate > >the scale of the problem. > > * World GDP 60 Trillion (until the crash) > > * World gross investment $10 TN (remember buildings > burn energy > > leading to CO2 emissions, too) > > * Investments in transport infrastructure (road, > rail, port, > > air, facilities like transfer stations) - my guess > $1-2 TN > > * World purchase of private household transport > equipment $1TN > > (40 mn cars $25 000/car) > > * World purchase of road fuels (roughly 2 TN) > > > >Are we really talking about putting hundreds of > billions YEARLY > >into doing what is the right thing even if CO2 was not > a problem. > >Conversely, if we had a CO2 free fuel tomorrow, > we'd still have a > >traffic mess worldwide. So maybe focusing on transport > and Co2, > >rather than more broadly clean development - and > understanding why > >developing cities' traffic is such a mess even > before CO2 is > >considered - is higher on the agenda. If there are > going to be N-S > >transfers, aka Overseas Development Assistance, is CO2 > "abatement" > >the most cost effective way of using money for > development? > > > >Realistically, how can CDM have more than a > demonstration effect? If > >so, then let's forget CDM as such and move to a > wider effort to > > > >Demonstrate various regional policy and technical > solutions, > >investing (for once) in enough competence building and > data > >gathering so localities can monitor traffic, emissions, > fuel, safety > >etc better. Our EMBARQ project in se Asia (PSUTA) > discovered that > >authorities' ability to monitor even the most > elementary problems of > >transport was pretty meager > >--http://embarq.wri.org/en/ProjectCitiesDetail.aspx?id=9 > > > >Some of these issues will be discussed at the upcoming > COP (Dec 5). > >Maybe Climate negotiations are not the right place to > decide how to > >use the streets? There will also be a spirited > discussion during > >Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in > Washington DC, both > >during the meeting itself and at a special side event > Friday 16 > >January. This note is copied to several of those > involved in these > >discussions. Watch this space! > > > >Lee Schipper, Ph.D > >Project Scientist > >Global Metropolitan Studies > >2614 Dwight Way 2nd floor > >University of California Berkeley > >CA 94720-1782 USA > >TEL +1 510 642 6889 > >FAX +1 510 642 6061 > >CELL +1 202 262 7476 > > > Sincerely, > Todd Alexander Litman > Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) > litman@vtpi.org > Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 > 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA > "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Nov 24 19:09:49 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:09:49 +0100 Subject: [sustran] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: References: <20081123191902.0hoal8vkq8o4sc4c@webmail.df.eu> Message-ID: <007c01c94e1c$ccd08c00$6671a400$@britton@ecoplan.org> Re: Commentary on future role and contribution of CfM - and what we all can do about it. Dear Friends, This topic has been extremely interesting information and views on a number of grounds, and as you seen has in effect split into two sets of considerations. The first directly addressing the CDM issues -- and the second concerning the role and contribution of the Cities for Mobility (CfM) program from Stuttgart. I think both conversations are terrific but in this note would like just to share with you a few thoughts on the latter. I've been following the CfM program from its origins in with great interest including for the reasons that Brian Williams has pointed out: the fact that in a world of many strongly felt, urgent needs it's probably not a wise idea to eliminate possible sources of new ideas, new competences and new energy, just because we may not always agree with them. We also need to bear in mind that in this time of so many fundamental challenges and shifts, all of us are continually adapting to the new information and situation as we go along. Were we not to do this, we would be pretty poor souls indeed. That said, let me comment briefly on two aspects of the CfM program as I understand it. Let's start with the critical commentary concerning the thrust of the messages which are being sent out from the organization's headquarters, which to some here are far too focused on vehicle technologies and fuels, as opposed to the more strategic policy and management aspects which indeed hold the key to the system sustainability. We all here understand that the key to the issues of reforming transport in cities lies specifically and above all to the massive reduction of car traffic in cities -- and not to new kinds of vehicles or new and cleaner kinds of fuels. That is not to say that these last are not desirable and do not have a role in the longer-term, but the real challenges lie in doing something about this in the next months and couple of years directly ahead. This is something you either agree with or don't, but I read the position of most of those participating in our several related groups and discussions as agreeing with the importance of coming to grips with these issues without further delay. So, if I can, I would urge the organizers over there in Stuttgart to consider the idea of a major course change in the navigation under this program. To make it very simple, I would suggest that the orientation of all aspects of the program, those messages from their listserv group included, be now strongly oriented to issues of mobility management and the strategic details of managing the shift from what is essentially a car-based system/paradigm, to programs, modes and systems that offer a broad range of alternative ways of getting around in cities which are more efficient, more environmental, and more people and community friendly. That's the critical part, but there is considerably more to CfM than that. The real accomplishments of their program have to do with the extent to which they have over the last couple of years -- let's not forget it's quite a new program -- brought together hundreds of cities and partners in many parts of the world in a way that seems to have their attention. This is a considerable accomplishment and is one which is certainly the crux of their contribution. The challenge now is to build on this, and I think all of us here can have a role in this. So let's keep talking to each other about this, let's keep sharing our thoughts with the CfM organizers, and sure enough, some good things are going to come out of this. And they better had or otherwise we are in even deeper trouble! As always, Eric From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Nov 24 19:14:23 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:14:23 +0100 Subject: [sustran] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Message-ID: <008101c94e1d$6ebd07f0$4c3717d0$@britton@ecoplan.org> Re: Commentary on future role and contribution of CfM - and what we all can do about it. Dear Friends, This topic has been extremely interesting information and views on a number of grounds, and as you seen has in effect split into two sets of considerations. The first directly addressing the CDM issues -- and the second concerning the role and contribution of the Cities for Mobility (CfM) program from Stuttgart. I think both conversations are terrific but in this note would like just to share with you a few thoughts on the latter. I've been following the CfM program from its origins in with great interest including for the reasons that Brian Williams has pointed out: the fact that in a world of many strongly felt, urgent needs it's probably not a wise idea to eliminate possible sources of new ideas, new competences and new energy, just because we may not always agree with them. We also need to bear in mind that in this time of so many fundamental challenges and shifts, all of us are continually adapting to the new information and situation as we go along. Were we not to do this, we would be pretty poor souls indeed. That said, let me comment briefly on two aspects of the CfM program as I understand it. Let's start with the critical commentary concerning the thrust of the messages which are being sent out from the organization's headquarters, which to some here are far too focused on vehicle technologies and fuels, as opposed to the more strategic policy and management aspects which indeed hold the key to the system sustainability. We all here understand that the key to the issues of reforming transport in cities lies specifically and above all to the massive reduction of car traffic in cities -- and not to new kinds of vehicles or new and cleaner kinds of fuels. That is not to say that these last are not desirable and do not have a role in the longer-term, but the real challenges lie in doing something about this in the next months and couple of years directly ahead. This is something you either agree with or don't, but I read the position of most of those participating in our several related groups and discussions as agreeing with the importance of coming to grips with these issues without further delay. So, if I can, I would urge the organizers over there in Stuttgart to consider the idea of a major course change in the navigation under this program. To make it very simple, I would suggest that the orientation of all aspects of the program, those messages from their listserv group included, be now strongly oriented to issues of mobility management and the strategic details of managing the shift from what is essentially a car-based system/paradigm, to programs, modes and systems that offer a broad range of alternative ways of getting around in cities which are more efficient, more environmental, and more people and community friendly. That's the critical part, but there is considerably more to CfM than that. The real accomplishments of their program have to do with the extent to which they have over the last couple of years -- let's not forget it's quite a new program -- brought together hundreds of cities and partners in many parts of the world in a way that seems to have their attention. This is a considerable accomplishment and is one which is certainly the crux of their contribution. The challenge now is to build on this, and I think all of us here can have a role in this. So let's keep talking to each other about this, let's keep sharing our thoughts with the CfM organizers, and sure enough, some good things are going to come out of this. And they better had or otherwise we are in even deeper trouble! As always, Eric From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Nov 24 20:21:29 2008 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:21:29 +0100 Subject: [sustran] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Message-ID: <00b501c94e26$ce44d0f0$6ace72d0$@britton@ecoplan.org> From: Cornie Huizenga [mailto:cornie.huizenga@cai-asia.org] = Sent: Monday, 24 November 2008 04:16 Dear Eric, = Following Lee's suggestion - can you post this? = Cornie -- = Cornie Huizenga Executive Director CAI-Asia Center www://cleanairnet.org/caiasia cornie.huizenga@cai-asia.org = ---------- Forwarded message -------- From: Cornie Huizenga Date: Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:10 AM Subject: Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Dear All, = To advance the discussion on transport and climate two approaches are required: = 1) Try to get transport into the climate agenda. = = Obviously this is much wider than the question on CDM. The upcoming COP 14 in Poland will be an important step on the road to a follow-up agreement to the Kyoto Protocol. Based on the 4 th. Assessment Report of the IPCC it is clear that the overall ambition level of the new agreement which will be signed in Copenhagen needs to be a radically different one than in the case of the Kyoto Protocol. Many of the Annex 1 countries are now talking about reductions of 20-30% by 2020 and 50-80% by 2050. If such more ambitious targets are adopted for Annex 1 countries this will need to have radical consquences for transport in the Annex 1 countries. It is logical that these radical changes in the Annex 1 countries will spill over to non-Annex countries at some point in time. = = In Poland there will be lots of dicussions on the new Agreement, especially in the ad-hoc Working Group on Long Term Cooperative Action, which was set up in Bali last year to "translate" the Bali Action Plan into a new agreement. These discussions will also focus on mesurable mitigation activities that developing countries/ non-Annex 1 countries will start to undertake to reduce GHG emissions (outside the scope of any CDM activities). This clearly opens the possibility to talk transport as well. = In the ad-how working group on Future Commitments of Annex 1 countries under the Kyoto Protocol there will be comprehensive discussions on how to move forward with CDM. The suggestions made in previous meetings of this working group indicate that there is a strong awareness of the limitations of the current CDM instrument. While the transport community has been lamenting that transport was not integrated in CDM, a large part of the wider climate community has already come to the conclusion that CDM was flawed by itself and not suitable to contribute to the relatively modest reduction goals under the commitment period 2008-2012. = Looking at the discussions and suggestions on the future of CDM as well as the broader agenda for COP 14 in Poland the important thing for the transport community is to look forward and focus on: * The current importance of the transport sector as a contributor to GHG emissions in Annex 1 and non- Annex 1 countries and the BAU scenario's which will explain how the various reduction scenario's require reductions within the transport sector for them to become reality; * Options to reduce transport emissions to a level required under different GHG reduction scenarios through technological and non-technological measures in both Annex 1 and non-Annex1 countries; * Mix of command and control and market based instruments to implement the technological and non-technological measures, in both Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries; * Transfer payments between Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries which cover a substantial part of transport emissions AND which at the same time encourage/reward non Annex 1 countries to take policy measures to reduce transpot emissions further; * Capacity building measures to support non-Annex 1 countries to formulate and implement broad based measures to reduce GHG emissions from the transport sector through command and control as well as market based approaches, both those which are implemented with and those which are implemented without some form of transfer payment. To promote such a more broad based approach to the integration of transport in climate change a number of organizations have decided to coordinate in the organization of transport related side events at COP 14. They will also seek to find some form of consensus on steps to be taken to arrive at a common Action Plan of steps to be taken in 2009 leading up to COP 15 in Copenhagen to promote a better integration of transport in the climate agenda. We will be able to send out a brochure soon of the transport side events at COP 15. = 2. Get climate into the transport agenda. = Equally important is to ensure that transport planners take note of the climate implications of the decisions made. While the number of CDM projects is and will be limited in the time to come we should be aware that every day investment decisions are being made in non-Annex 1 countries which will lock in GHG emissions for the next 20-30 years. Until and unless climate becomes an integral component in transport policy and urban planning non Annex 1 countries will be unable to decouple economic growth and development of the transport sector from the growth in GHG emissions. = A better integration of transport in the climate agenda can help both Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries on the necessity to mainstream climate in transport policy making. This because of the higher political priority attached to climate if a successful new agreement is reached in Copenhagen which incudes mitigation activities for non-Annex 1 countries and which makes specific reference to the transport sector. = = To stimulate this discussion a double session on Transport and Climate in TRB in January. In a side event on 16 th. January the preliminary results of a number of think pieces on transport and climate commissioned by the Asian Development bank will be presented. This will include: * measurement of CO2 in the transport sector * co-benefits of climate oriented measures and e.g. air quality oriented measures * policies for a low carbon sustainable transport future * financing of low carbon transport * institutional arrangements in support of low carbin transport = Informal survey on Climate and Transport activities in 2009 = It will be helpful for the transport community to have an idea of what the different organizations are doing/planning to do with respect to transport and climate in 2009. To get such a overview we are implementing a small informal survey - which is attached. If you are subscribed to a news group which does not allow attachments please send me an email and I will be happy to send the survey form to you. = best regards, = Cornie ---- = = On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:17 AM, wrote: Lee = I agree to what you write. I think, however, that the 'co-benefits' don't materialize either if the urban transport discussion is boiled down to a bus system discussion or on capacity expansion of public transport. Other mechanisms are needed supporting sustainable urban transport more broadly. Cap and trade and CDM like mechanisms will not lead to action in the transport sector, because it is too expensive relative to other sectors to cut CO2 emissions there. Best Andreas Dr. Andreas Kopp Lead Economist World Bank Group Department for Energy, Transport and Water 1818 H Street NW Washington, D.C. 20433 USA ph. +1 202 473 6031 = = -----"Lee Schipper" wrote: ----- To: , From: "Lee Schipper" Date: 11/23/2008 12:24PM cc: , "Cornie Huizenga" , , "Holger Dalkmann" , "Sergio Sanchez" , , Subject: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Why would you want public transport in CDM, when the values/costs/benefits of time saved, lower air pollution, less noise, greater rider security and safety etc DWARF the carbon values=85and when adding a CDM component slows = the entire improvement of transport down immensely while all of us don our green visors and count carbon. = = Counting that carbon is VERY hard ( http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.aspx examined some of these issues including a paper we wrote for the 2007 ECEEE conference on measuring CO2 emissions CHANGES from transport projects). = = I'm VERY worried about CO2 in transport, but I'm convinced CDM and like process that link to "carbon finance" either slow the process down (see GEF grant progress), put too much focus on reducing CO2 rather than improving transport (they are not the same), filter our vision to projects whose carbon savings are relatively to measure (hybrid buses, proven but expensive) or ones with tiny and often questionable savings (like small additions of biodiesel to bus fuel). = I'm not against rewarding carbon saving or efforts at mass transit, but the proportions of $ for carbon are tiny compared to the overall pot of time, transport, urban development. Can Mexico City honestly say that their Metrobus was "additional", ie., would not have been undertaken to save $$ millions in saved time, accidents, local air pollution, reduced numbers of cars on the road (according to a nice report by the Instituto Nacional de Ecologia published in 2006) for a few hundred thousand $ of carbon finance funds arranged after the fact? = = Juerg Gruetter has made a good case for CDM and carbon financing of BRT projects, but in the end these only affect a small amount of CO2 (in buses) and, while they draw a modest number of riders from cars, still leave the rest of cars untouched. My fear is that CDM draws interest to those easily bankable projects and away from the much greater challenge, use of cars and other light duty vehicles. = = In four Latin American cities (Mexico City region, Bogota, S Paulo, and Santiago) cars and taxis appear to account for 65-70% of all direct GHG emissions from road traffic (including trucks). Without policies and projects that reduce that traffic (and its growth) SIGNIFICANTLY, the savings from 'urban transport projects" in general will be small. Since most fo the carbon is in cars, most of the change has to come from cars. How do you measure that and sell the results against a rapidly growing baseline? And cars and trucks are not "cdm-able", i.e., owned by the kinds of entities that can be part of CDM directly. Of course $$ could be given to cities who undertook strong transport measures, but again, why would they not undertake those measures anyway? And why would national governments not want to promulgate fuel economy standards to save oil? = = In short, is this really about $$ or political will? = = Finally, consider the following very rough numbers that illustrate the scale of the problem. = World GDP 60 Trillion (until the crash) = World gross investment $10 TN (remember buildings burn energy leading to CO2 emissions, too) = Investments in transport infrastructure (road, rail, port, air, facilities like transfer stations) =96 my guess $1-2 TN = World purchase of private household transport equipment $1TN (40 mn cars $25 000/car) = World purchase of road fuels (roughly 2 TN) = = Are we really talking about putting hundreds of billions YEARLY into doing what is the right thing even if CO2 was not a problem. Conversely, if we had a CO2 free fuel tomorrow, we'd still have a traffic mess worldwide. So maybe focusing on transport and Co2, rather than more broadly clean development = =96 and understanding why developing cities' traffic is such a mess even before CO2 is considered =96 is higher on the agenda. If there are going to be N-S transfers, aka Overseas Development Assistance, is CO2 "abatement" the most cost effective way of using money for development? = = Realistically, how can CDM have more than a demonstration effect? If so, then let's forget CDM as such and move to a wider effort to = Demonstrate various regional policy and technical solutions, investing (for once) in enough competence building and data gathering so localities can monitor traffic, emissions, fuel, safety etc better. Our EMBARQ project in se Asia (PSUTA) discovered that authorities' ability to monitor even the most elementary problems of transport was pretty meager --http://embarq.wri.org/en/ProjectCitiesDetail.aspx?id=3D9 = = Some of these issues will be discussed at the upcoming COP (Dec 5). Maybe Climate negotiations are not the right place to decide how to use the streets? There will also be a spirited discussion during Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington DC, both during the meeting itself and at a special side event Friday 16 January. This note is copied to several of those involved in these discussions. Watch this space! = = Lee Schipper, Ph.D = Project Scientist = Global Metropolitan Studies = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ = = From: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Britton Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 2:37 AM To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Cc: Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com Subject: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport = = That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came up with some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to sources or other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton = = On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 = Hi Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in negotiations around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be included. = As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is that transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as well as projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard to meet. Curiously yours Roland Sapsford Roland Sapsford Sustainability Solutions Consulting = = Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport = = PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) = Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: = A trav=E9s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para reducir emisiones de CO2 - tambi=E9n en el =E1rea del transporte. = M=E1s informaciones: http://www.cdm -cooperation.de/7.0.html = Para saber m=E1s del los proyectos ya implementados en los diferentes pa=ED= ses de Am=E9rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). = Clean Development Mechanism = The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based mechanism, laid down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ( UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one hand, it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s emission targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an economic incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate protection. = Best regards, = Rainer Rothfuss ----------------------- Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility = Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com = __._,_.___ = -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Survey Transport and Climate.doc Type: application/msword Size: 41984 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081124/a= f4401ec/SurveyTransportandClimate.doc From edelman at greenidea.eu Mon Nov 24 22:50:34 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:50:34 +0100 Subject: [sustran] BBC: 2010 World Cup's transport legacy Message-ID: <492AB12A.1000005@greenidea.eu> 2010 World Cup's transport legacy *South Africa will invest US$15.96 billion in transport for an estimated 450,000 visitors during the 2010 World Cup, Transport Minister Jeff Radebe said on Sunday. * Radebe told a news conference the amount included funds for airport and roads upgrades and the creation of new rail and bus systems. He also said the money would ensure a major overhaul of the country's transport system, leaving a legacy after the tournament. "We are driven by a desire to make sure that South Africa becomes a destination of choice for tourists and business. The World Cup in 2010 is a catalyst for the development of our system because we need to meet FIFA requirements," Radebe said. "But the huge sum of money we are investigating will also ensure a lasting legacy for our people." Radebe said US$1.3 billion from the overall budget had been allocated to cities hosting World Cup matches. South Africa has 10 venues for the 2010 finals in nine cities. An integrated ticketing system for visitors is to be introduced for the World Cup in several types of transport, including rail, buses and mini-bus taxi services. Radebe said the number of railway police would increase from 1,400 to 5,000 by 2010 and other security measure introduced for the safety of visitors. Story from BBC SPORT: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/sport2/hi/f -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From edelman at greenidea.eu Tue Nov 25 02:25:09 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:25:09 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd Message-ID: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> Amy Walker/Momentum Magazine wrote: > Todd, > > The premise of the video is "if you want to be seen while riding at > night, get some lights/reflectors on." > > There is absolutely no implied message of "you get what you deserve if > you get hit" Ever. Period. > > Thanks for your interest ? and happy riding! > > Amy Hi Amy, It is clear to me that any message of that sort was not intentional, but what the video showed was a level of illumination (technology) beyond what is required, and so I would not be surprised if some people interpreted it - even subconsciously - as a recommendation to take that degree of action in regards to their own safety whilst cycling. Would it be possible to see if this is really the case? If the video was about a government health authority recommending drinking a certain amount of water everyday, it could show people having water fights, going swimming, and so on. Fun imagery perhaps, and appropriate to convey the importance of water. But not precise enough for an actual regulation. Imagine the equivalent of "get some lights/reflectors on" directed towards motorists in regards to the lighting or other critical safety equipment in their vehicles. A message like that would not be taken seriously. In addition, there may in fact be requirements for the maximum illumination possible for motorised road vehicles. I am sure you understand how important imagery and text are in delivering messages, especially those which can relate specifically to a road traffic regulation. So it seems like it would have been helpful to at the very least make those regulations clear - and the importance of following them - in a video like this, which I am also sure you could have done in a very fun and non-preachy manner. Thanks for your hard work, T Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I think I was clear - and sorry if I was not - that I think cyclists >> should absolutely use the legal minimum. I was not recommending >> invisibility. Wearing black is great if your bike is lit up according >> to law. The issue about DRLs (daytime running lights) is like >> everything beyond requirements proposed in the video (except the >> shorts) a distraction figuratively and literally-speaking. Also, cars >> are big, go fast, cant manouver or stop so quick... DRLs are a bad >> analogy. On a dull, rainy winter afternoon cars need to slow down - a >> lot! - and not have DRLs which make their drivers think they can go >> as fast as before. >> >> Sure, obviously in carfree cities bikes may only need front and rear >> lights to be seen by pedestrians and none of the rest, so accepting >> the additional reflectors etc. is already a concession to a failed >> surface transport system. You did not respond to my thoughts about >> something recommended - or what drivers like - becoming something >> mandatory. Even without the unfortunate Darwin comment - the mostly >> selfless act of choosing to ride a bike outweighs any >> irresponsibility of not being lit up - I find it troubling that you >> seem to think that others who are not lit beyond what is required and >> are hit, etc. get what they deserve. In a much more gentle way that >> is of course the main premise of the video. >> >> - T >> >> Ron Richings wrote: >>> Hi Todd >>> >>> >>> I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple of >>> seconds >>> of face time in it. >>> >>> I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is safer >>> than >>> invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. >>> >>> As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and usually >>> at the >>> last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor >>> reflective >>> material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and wonder -- >>> WHY ?? >>> >>> Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists >>> too dumb >>> to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. >>> >>> If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their ways, >>> it will >>> have done a useful job. >>> >>> Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course >>> parts of >>> the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to wear >>> brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as good in >>> them >>> as the B:C:Clettes do. >>> >>> Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at night you >>> would see: >>> >>> A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, >>> back, and arms. >>> >>> A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all >>> angles. >>> >>> On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the frame, >>> fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances reflective >>> material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that rises to >>> three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small blinkies at >>> the top of the pole. >>> >>> Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. >>> >>> There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify the odd >>> approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime >>> running lights >>> for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and >>> others >>> will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should not be >>> used. >>> >>> As someone who lives in a country where such running lights have been >>> standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly >>> exceeds any >>> drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car approaching on a >>> rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those >>> running >>> lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips that >>> many >>> cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. >>> >>> Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If >>> they are >>> to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. And of >>> course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. >>> >>> And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of >>> inexpensive LED >>> blinkies will make them considerably more visible. >>> >>> Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal >>> reflectors while >>> riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think so - that >>> really rests with them. >>> >>> Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation to pay >>> attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and alive >>> than minimally legal and dead. >>> >>> So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get Visible". >>> >>> >>> Ron Richings >>> Vancouver, BC >>> Canada >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making this >>> video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the >>> serious >>> message. It only emphasized it. >>> >>> Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst >>> things that >>> any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination >>> then >>> what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and >>> reflector, >>> rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and >>> reflectors >>> on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically an >>> international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All >>> of these >>> extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not >>> particularly >>> eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally >>> required >>> with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount of >>> responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. >>> >>> Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and another >>> cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This >>> also >>> applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to cyclists >>> glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next >>> thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective vest >>> becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and >>> some of us >>> know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a >>> proposed public >>> bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). >>> >>> Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. >>> >>> Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think >>> that >>> mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but >>> this >>> hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not >>> so lit >>> up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, >>> but the >>> real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the >>> weight of >>> cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a >>> driver >>> can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. >>> >>> So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web >>> before >>> the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do one >>> featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the >>> coin: >>> or >>> and then we would need >>> not to >>> change the lyrics too much. >>> >>> - T >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From rothfuss at cities-for-mobility.net Wed Nov 26 03:06:40 2008 From: rothfuss at cities-for-mobility.net (Dr. Rainer Rothfuss) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 19:06:40 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: CfM strategy discussion In-Reply-To: <007c01c94e1c$ccd08c00$6671a400$@britton@ecoplan.org> References: <20081123191902.0hoal8vkq8o4sc4c@webmail.df.eu> <007c01c94e1c$ccd08c00$6671a400$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: <20081125190640.bohhoi5wggc44csw@webmail.df.eu> Dear Eric, I would suggest that in "Cities for Mobility" we follow BOTH strategies at the SAME time: 1.) "MASSIVE REDUCTION OF CAR TRAFFIC IN CITIES" as you called it AND 2.) GREENING OF THE REMAINING MOTORISED INDIVIDUAL TRANSPORT. From the beginning of the existence of our network (established with financial support from the EU in 1999 as URB-AL network with roughly 250 members from 30 European and Latin American countries - the past two years these two figures doubled) we have put much more emphasis on "reduction of car traffic in cities" than on motorised individual transport (no project at all in this field out of a total of 10 until 2008!! --> see list of concluded projects: http://www.cities-for-mobility.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=41&Itemid=185). Point 2.) is extremely important in my eyes! Because we won't witness that industry gives up producing cars and earning big money with mobility voluntarily. It's also unlikely that people worldwide stop wishing to have a car? (we are talking about potentially 4 billion people in developing countries who never owned a car). THE VEHICLES THAT ARE PRODUCED TODAY WILL REMAIN FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS ON THE ROADS OF THIS PLANET AND THE ONES PLANNED TODAY WILL REMAIN THERE FOR ANOTHER 40 YEARS TO COME!! So how shouldn't we care about this crucial fact? Regarding the settlement structure: 50% OF THE WORLD POPULATION STILL LIVES IN RURAL AREAS THAT ARE HARD TO COVER WITH PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES (--> high CO2 emissions per passenger due to scarce users in rich countries that can afford subsidies and bad service in poor countries). For a disperse population light and energy efficient vehicles for individual motorised transport may be the most rational solution where the bicycle doesn't do the job due to distances or loads! What you call "strategic policy and management" is important. But to be honest, it wasn't so much Mobility Management or awareness raising that made people e.g. in Los Angeles starting to use public transport rather than their private car in the past 2 years. It was the rocketing gas prices! So I think that it's a whole bundle of measures that we need to take into consideration when we want to achieve improvements in the highly complex field of mobility. For Cities for Mobility I just see the PROBLEM THAT IN THE PAST 2 YEARS WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH PRO-ACTIVE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE NON-MOTORISED MOBILITY SECTION! Please use the open discussion forum "Cities for Mobility" and give us useful inputs on applicable strategies how to reduce car traffic in cities on a regular basis! We all would appreciate that a lot! Everyone should contribute with his/her strengths in a decentralised network in order to keep all represented perspectives in a balance! Best regards, Rainer Rothfuss ----------------------- Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ----------------------- Dr. Rainer Rothfuss Coordinator of International Relations ----------------------- Coordination Office Cities for Mobility State Capital Stuttgart ----------------------- Postal address: D-70161 Stuttgart GERMANY Tel.: +49-8381-891-68 38 Fax: +49-8381-891-68 39 Mob: +49-177-894 08 04 Skype: rainer.rothfuss rothfuss@cities-for-mobility.net www.cities-for-mobility.netMessage from Eric Britton : > Re: Commentary on future role and contribution of CfM - and what we all can > do about it. > > > > Dear Friends, > > > > This topic has been extremely interesting information and views on a number > of grounds, and as you seen has in effect split into two sets of > considerations. The first directly addressing the CDM issues -- and the > second concerning the role and contribution of the Cities for Mobility (CfM) > program from Stuttgart. I think both conversations are terrific but in this > note would like just to share with you a few thoughts on the latter. > > > > I've been following the CfM program from its origins in with great interest > including for the reasons that Brian Williams has pointed out: the fact that > in a world of many strongly felt, urgent needs it's probably not a wise idea > to eliminate possible sources of new ideas, new competences and new energy, > just because we may not always agree with them. We also need to bear in mind > that in this time of so many fundamental challenges and shifts, all of us > are continually adapting to the new information and situation as we go > along. Were we not to do this, we would be pretty poor souls indeed. > > > > That said, let me comment briefly on two aspects of the CfM program as I > understand it. > > > > Let's start with the critical commentary concerning the thrust of the > messages which are being sent out from the organization's headquarters, > which to some here are far too focused on vehicle technologies and fuels, as > opposed to the more strategic policy and management aspects which indeed > hold the key to the system sustainability.? We all here understand that the > key to the issues of reforming transport in cities lies specifically and > above all to the massive reduction of car traffic in cities -- and not to > new kinds of vehicles or new and cleaner kinds of fuels. That is not to say > that these last are not desirable and do not have a role in the longer-term, > but the real challenges lie in doing something about this in the next months > and couple of years directly ahead. This is something you either agree with > or don't, but I read the position of most of those participating in our > several related groups and discussions as agreeing with the importance of > coming to grips with these issues without further delay. > > > > So, if I can, I would urge the organizers over there in Stuttgart to > consider the idea of a major course change in the navigation under this > program. To make it very simple, I would suggest that the orientation of all > aspects of the program, those messages from their listserv group included, > be now strongly oriented to issues of mobility management and the strategic > details of managing the shift from what is essentially a car-based > system/paradigm, to programs, modes and systems that offer a broad range of > alternative ways of getting around in cities which are more efficient, more > environmental, and more people and community friendly. > > > > That's the critical part, but there is considerably more to CfM than that. > The real accomplishments of their program have to do with the extent to > which they have over the last couple of years -- let's not forget it's quite > a new program -- brought together hundreds of cities and partners in many > parts of the world in a way that seems to have their attention. This is a > considerable accomplishment and is one which is certainly the crux of their > contribution. > > > > The challenge now is to build on this, and I think all of us here can have a > role in this. So let's keep talking to each other about this, let's keep > sharing our thoughts with the CfM organizers, and sure enough, some good > things are going to come out of this. And they better had or otherwise we > are in even deeper trouble! > > > > As always, > > > > Eric > > > > From whook at itdp.org Thu Nov 27 02:00:08 2008 From: whook at itdp.org (Walter Hook) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:00:08 -0500 Subject: [sustran] anyone know anything about bike parking in buildings regulations? In-Reply-To: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> References: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial and/or residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their buildings or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a bill in New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. Best walter -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:25 PM To: Sustran Resource Centre Subject: [sustran] Re: 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd Amy Walker/Momentum Magazine wrote: > Todd, > > The premise of the video is "if you want to be seen while riding at > night, get some lights/reflectors on." > > There is absolutely no implied message of "you get what you deserve if > you get hit" Ever. Period. > > Thanks for your interest - and happy riding! > > Amy Hi Amy, It is clear to me that any message of that sort was not intentional, but what the video showed was a level of illumination (technology) beyond what is required, and so I would not be surprised if some people interpreted it - even subconsciously - as a recommendation to take that degree of action in regards to their own safety whilst cycling. Would it be possible to see if this is really the case? If the video was about a government health authority recommending drinking a certain amount of water everyday, it could show people having water fights, going swimming, and so on. Fun imagery perhaps, and appropriate to convey the importance of water. But not precise enough for an actual regulation. Imagine the equivalent of "get some lights/reflectors on" directed towards motorists in regards to the lighting or other critical safety equipment in their vehicles. A message like that would not be taken seriously. In addition, there may in fact be requirements for the maximum illumination possible for motorised road vehicles. I am sure you understand how important imagery and text are in delivering messages, especially those which can relate specifically to a road traffic regulation. So it seems like it would have been helpful to at the very least make those regulations clear - and the importance of following them - in a video like this, which I am also sure you could have done in a very fun and non-preachy manner. Thanks for your hard work, T Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I think I was clear - and sorry if I was not - that I think cyclists >> should absolutely use the legal minimum. I was not recommending >> invisibility. Wearing black is great if your bike is lit up according >> to law. The issue about DRLs (daytime running lights) is like >> everything beyond requirements proposed in the video (except the >> shorts) a distraction figuratively and literally-speaking. Also, cars >> are big, go fast, cant manouver or stop so quick... DRLs are a bad >> analogy. On a dull, rainy winter afternoon cars need to slow down - a >> lot! - and not have DRLs which make their drivers think they can go >> as fast as before. >> >> Sure, obviously in carfree cities bikes may only need front and rear >> lights to be seen by pedestrians and none of the rest, so accepting >> the additional reflectors etc. is already a concession to a failed >> surface transport system. You did not respond to my thoughts about >> something recommended - or what drivers like - becoming something >> mandatory. Even without the unfortunate Darwin comment - the mostly >> selfless act of choosing to ride a bike outweighs any >> irresponsibility of not being lit up - I find it troubling that you >> seem to think that others who are not lit beyond what is required and >> are hit, etc. get what they deserve. In a much more gentle way that >> is of course the main premise of the video. >> >> - T >> >> Ron Richings wrote: >>> Hi Todd >>> >>> >>> I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple of >>> seconds >>> of face time in it. >>> >>> I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is safer >>> than >>> invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. >>> >>> As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and usually >>> at the >>> last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor >>> reflective >>> material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and wonder -- >>> WHY ?? >>> >>> Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists >>> too dumb >>> to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. >>> >>> If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their ways, >>> it will >>> have done a useful job. >>> >>> Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course >>> parts of >>> the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to wear >>> brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as good in >>> them >>> as the B:C:Clettes do. >>> >>> Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at night you >>> would see: >>> >>> A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, >>> back, and arms. >>> >>> A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all >>> angles. >>> >>> On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the frame, >>> fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances reflective >>> material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that rises to >>> three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small blinkies at >>> the top of the pole. >>> >>> Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. >>> >>> There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify the odd >>> approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime >>> running lights >>> for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and >>> others >>> will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should not be >>> used. >>> >>> As someone who lives in a country where such running lights have been >>> standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly >>> exceeds any >>> drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car approaching on a >>> rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those >>> running >>> lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips that >>> many >>> cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. >>> >>> Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If >>> they are >>> to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. And of >>> course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. >>> >>> And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of >>> inexpensive LED >>> blinkies will make them considerably more visible. >>> >>> Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal >>> reflectors while >>> riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think so - that >>> really rests with them. >>> >>> Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation to pay >>> attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and alive >>> than minimally legal and dead. >>> >>> So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get Visible". >>> >>> >>> Ron Richings >>> Vancouver, BC >>> Canada >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making this >>> video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the >>> serious >>> message. It only emphasized it. >>> >>> Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst >>> things that >>> any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination >>> then >>> what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and >>> reflector, >>> rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and >>> reflectors >>> on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically an >>> international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All >>> of these >>> extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not >>> particularly >>> eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally >>> required >>> with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount of >>> responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. >>> >>> Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and another >>> cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This >>> also >>> applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to cyclists >>> glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next >>> thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective vest >>> becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and >>> some of us >>> know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a >>> proposed public >>> bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). >>> >>> Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. >>> >>> Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think >>> that >>> mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but >>> this >>> hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not >>> so lit >>> up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, >>> but the >>> real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the >>> weight of >>> cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a >>> driver >>> can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. >>> >>> So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web >>> before >>> the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do one >>> featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the >>> coin: >>> or >>> and then we would need >>> not to >>> change the lyrics too much. >>> >>> - T >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------------------------------------------------- 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 hs.sudhira at gmail.com Thu Nov 27 02:27:27 2008 From: hs.sudhira at gmail.com (H S Sudhira) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:57:27 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: anyone know anything about bike parking in buildings regulations? In-Reply-To: References: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <63ffe5800811260927u2d4456b7j8e29f705971f1632@mail.gmail.com> In Bangalore, the Land Transport Authority is preparing a Parking Policy that actually aims to reduce the demand for parking for automobiles. On the same lines, it is being proposed that for commercial 2-wheeler parking there has to be a provision for 'free' bicycle parking. The draft policy was discussed in the fourth authority meeting. The policy would be approved in a month and will be available on BMLTA website. Regards, Sudhira On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:30 PM, Walter Hook wrote: > Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial and/or > residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their > buildings > or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a bill in > New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. > > Best > > walter > > From zvi.leve at gmail.com Thu Nov 27 02:29:19 2008 From: zvi.leve at gmail.com (Zvi Leve) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:29:19 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: anyone know anything about bike parking in buildings regulations? In-Reply-To: References: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: Walter, The City of Montreal has recently updated their municipal by-lawsto include "provisions regarding parking requirements for bicycles upon the construction, extension or change of use of a building." There are also new by-laws concerning the *maximum* number of on-site parking spaceswhich can be built with new developments! Both of these by-laws are applied at the 'Borough' level, which means that each sector of the city if free to apply their own standards. Still too early to know how much of an impact these by-laws will have. Montreal has always had relatively numbers of bicyclists, but this is primarily due to socio-economic factors (ie students, artists and other low income households), more than anything else. In recent years the number of cars on the island (of Montreal) has been going up quickly. An influx of (relatively) wealthier people to inner-core neighbourhoods, compounded with the vicious cycle of transit fare increases and service cuts, has been behind this increase. Best, Zvi On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Walter Hook wrote: > Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial and/or > residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their > buildings > or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a bill in > New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. > > Best > > walter > > -----Original Message----- > From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook = > itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf > Of Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:25 PM > To: Sustran Resource Centre > Subject: [sustran] Re: 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd > > Amy Walker/Momentum Magazine wrote: > > Todd, > > > > The premise of the video is "if you want to be seen while riding at > > night, get some lights/reflectors on." > > > > There is absolutely no implied message of "you get what you deserve if > > you get hit" Ever. Period. > > > > Thanks for your interest - and happy riding! > > > > Amy > Hi Amy, > > It is clear to me that any message of that sort was not intentional, but > what the video showed was a level of illumination (technology) beyond > what is required, and so I would not be surprised if some people > interpreted it - even subconsciously - as a recommendation to take that > degree of action in regards to their own safety whilst cycling. Would it > be possible to see if this is really the case? > > If the video was about a government health authority recommending > drinking a certain amount of water everyday, it could show people having > water fights, going swimming, and so on. Fun imagery perhaps, and > appropriate to convey the importance of water. But not precise enough > for an actual regulation. > > Imagine the equivalent of "get some lights/reflectors on" directed > towards motorists in regards to the lighting or other critical safety > equipment in their vehicles. A message like that would not be taken > seriously. In addition, there may in fact be requirements for the > maximum illumination possible for motorised road vehicles. > > I am sure you understand how important imagery and text are in > delivering messages, especially those which can relate specifically to a > road traffic regulation. So it seems like it would have been helpful to > at the very least make those regulations clear - and the importance of > following them - in a video like this, which I am also sure you could > have done in a very fun and non-preachy manner. > > Thanks for your hard work, > T > > > > Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I think I was clear - and sorry if I was not - that I think cyclists > >> should absolutely use the legal minimum. I was not recommending > >> invisibility. Wearing black is great if your bike is lit up according > >> to law. The issue about DRLs (daytime running lights) is like > >> everything beyond requirements proposed in the video (except the > >> shorts) a distraction figuratively and literally-speaking. Also, cars > >> are big, go fast, cant manouver or stop so quick... DRLs are a bad > >> analogy. On a dull, rainy winter afternoon cars need to slow down - a > >> lot! - and not have DRLs which make their drivers think they can go > >> as fast as before. > >> > >> Sure, obviously in carfree cities bikes may only need front and rear > >> lights to be seen by pedestrians and none of the rest, so accepting > >> the additional reflectors etc. is already a concession to a failed > >> surface transport system. You did not respond to my thoughts about > >> something recommended - or what drivers like - becoming something > >> mandatory. Even without the unfortunate Darwin comment - the mostly > >> selfless act of choosing to ride a bike outweighs any > >> irresponsibility of not being lit up - I find it troubling that you > >> seem to think that others who are not lit beyond what is required and > >> are hit, etc. get what they deserve. In a much more gentle way that > >> is of course the main premise of the video. > >> > >> - T > >> > >> Ron Richings wrote: > >>> Hi Todd > >>> > >>> > >>> I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple of > >>> seconds > >>> of face time in it. > >>> > >>> I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is safer > >>> than > >>> invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. > >>> > >>> As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and usually > >>> at the > >>> last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor > >>> reflective > >>> material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and wonder -- > >>> WHY ?? > >>> > >>> Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists > >>> too dumb > >>> to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. > >>> > >>> If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their ways, > >>> it will > >>> have done a useful job. > >>> > >>> Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course > >>> parts of > >>> the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to wear > >>> brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as good in > >>> them > >>> as the B:C:Clettes do. > >>> > >>> Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at night you > >>> would see: > >>> > >>> A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, > >>> back, and arms. > >>> > >>> A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all > >>> angles. > >>> > >>> On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the frame, > >>> fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances reflective > >>> material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that rises to > >>> three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small blinkies at > >>> the top of the pole. > >>> > >>> Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. > >>> > >>> There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify the odd > >>> approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime > >>> running lights > >>> for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and > >>> others > >>> will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should not be > >>> used. > >>> > >>> As someone who lives in a country where such running lights have been > >>> standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly > >>> exceeds any > >>> drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car approaching on a > >>> rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those > >>> running > >>> lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips that > >>> many > >>> cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. > >>> > >>> Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If > >>> they are > >>> to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. And of > >>> course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. > >>> > >>> And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of > >>> inexpensive LED > >>> blinkies will make them considerably more visible. > >>> > >>> Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal > >>> reflectors while > >>> riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think so - that > >>> really rests with them. > >>> > >>> Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation to pay > >>> attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and alive > >>> than minimally legal and dead. > >>> > >>> So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get Visible". > >>> > >>> > >>> Ron Richings > >>> Vancouver, BC > >>> Canada > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] > >>> > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making this > >>> video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the > >>> serious > >>> message. It only emphasized it. > >>> > >>> Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst > >>> things that > >>> any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination > >>> then > >>> what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and > >>> reflector, > >>> rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and > >>> reflectors > >>> on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically an > >>> international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All > >>> of these > >>> extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not > >>> particularly > >>> eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally > >>> required > >>> with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount of > >>> responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. > >>> > >>> Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and another > >>> cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This > >>> also > >>> applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to cyclists > >>> glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next > >>> thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective vest > >>> becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and > >>> some of us > >>> know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a > >>> proposed public > >>> bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). > >>> > >>> Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. > >>> > >>> Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think > >>> that > >>> mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but > >>> this > >>> hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not > >>> so lit > >>> up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, > >>> but the > >>> real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the > >>> weight of > >>> cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a > >>> driver > >>> can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. > >>> > >>> So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web > >>> before > >>> the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do one > >>> featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the > >>> coin: > >>> or > >>> and then we would need > >>> not to > >>> change the lyrics too much. > >>> > >>> - T > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > 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. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > 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. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 edelman at greenidea.eu Thu Nov 27 03:31:02 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:31:02 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: anyone know anything about bike parking in buildings regulations? In-Reply-To: References: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <492D95E6.1010909@greenidea.eu> Hi Walter, I believe San Francisco has a regulation which requires buildings with freight elevators to allow bikes.... and I think a related one which mandates showers in new buildings and renovations. Andy? Also, I would suggest that the TA people contact the Durst organisation about One Bryant, their new big high-profile midtown Manhattan "green" office building which will have bike parking and no car parking. - T Zvi Leve wrote: > Walter, > > The City of Montreal has recently updated their municipal > by-lawsto > include "provisions regarding parking requirements for bicycles upon > the > construction, extension or change of use of a building." There are also new > by-laws concerning the *maximum* number of on-site parking > spaceswhich > can be built with new developments! > > Both of these by-laws are applied at the 'Borough' level, which means that > each sector of the city if free to apply their own standards. > > Still too early to know how much of an impact these by-laws will have. > Montreal has always had relatively numbers of bicyclists, but this is > primarily due to socio-economic factors (ie students, artists and other low > income households), more than anything else. In recent years the number of > cars on the island (of Montreal) has been going up quickly. An influx of > (relatively) wealthier people to inner-core neighbourhoods, compounded with > the vicious cycle of transit fare increases and service cuts, has been > behind this increase. > > Best, > > Zvi > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Walter Hook wrote: > > >> Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial and/or >> residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their >> buildings >> or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a bill in >> New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. >> >> Best >> >> walter >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org >> [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook = >> itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf >> Of Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory >> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:25 PM >> To: Sustran Resource Centre >> Subject: [sustran] Re: 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd >> >> Amy Walker/Momentum Magazine wrote: >> >>> Todd, >>> >>> The premise of the video is "if you want to be seen while riding at >>> night, get some lights/reflectors on." >>> >>> There is absolutely no implied message of "you get what you deserve if >>> you get hit" Ever. Period. >>> >>> Thanks for your interest - and happy riding! >>> >>> Amy >>> >> Hi Amy, >> >> It is clear to me that any message of that sort was not intentional, but >> what the video showed was a level of illumination (technology) beyond >> what is required, and so I would not be surprised if some people >> interpreted it - even subconsciously - as a recommendation to take that >> degree of action in regards to their own safety whilst cycling. Would it >> be possible to see if this is really the case? >> >> If the video was about a government health authority recommending >> drinking a certain amount of water everyday, it could show people having >> water fights, going swimming, and so on. Fun imagery perhaps, and >> appropriate to convey the importance of water. But not precise enough >> for an actual regulation. >> >> Imagine the equivalent of "get some lights/reflectors on" directed >> towards motorists in regards to the lighting or other critical safety >> equipment in their vehicles. A message like that would not be taken >> seriously. In addition, there may in fact be requirements for the >> maximum illumination possible for motorised road vehicles. >> >> I am sure you understand how important imagery and text are in >> delivering messages, especially those which can relate specifically to a >> road traffic regulation. So it seems like it would have been helpful to >> at the very least make those regulations clear - and the importance of >> following them - in a video like this, which I am also sure you could >> have done in a very fun and non-preachy manner. >> >> Thanks for your hard work, >> T >> >> >> >> Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: >> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I think I was clear - and sorry if I was not - that I think cyclists >>>> should absolutely use the legal minimum. I was not recommending >>>> invisibility. Wearing black is great if your bike is lit up according >>>> to law. The issue about DRLs (daytime running lights) is like >>>> everything beyond requirements proposed in the video (except the >>>> shorts) a distraction figuratively and literally-speaking. Also, cars >>>> are big, go fast, cant manouver or stop so quick... DRLs are a bad >>>> analogy. On a dull, rainy winter afternoon cars need to slow down - a >>>> lot! - and not have DRLs which make their drivers think they can go >>>> as fast as before. >>>> >>>> Sure, obviously in carfree cities bikes may only need front and rear >>>> lights to be seen by pedestrians and none of the rest, so accepting >>>> the additional reflectors etc. is already a concession to a failed >>>> surface transport system. You did not respond to my thoughts about >>>> something recommended - or what drivers like - becoming something >>>> mandatory. Even without the unfortunate Darwin comment - the mostly >>>> selfless act of choosing to ride a bike outweighs any >>>> irresponsibility of not being lit up - I find it troubling that you >>>> seem to think that others who are not lit beyond what is required and >>>> are hit, etc. get what they deserve. In a much more gentle way that >>>> is of course the main premise of the video. >>>> >>>> - T >>>> >>>> Ron Richings wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Todd >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple of >>>>> seconds >>>>> of face time in it. >>>>> >>>>> I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is safer >>>>> than >>>>> invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. >>>>> >>>>> As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and usually >>>>> at the >>>>> last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor >>>>> reflective >>>>> material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and wonder -- >>>>> WHY ?? >>>>> >>>>> Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists >>>>> too dumb >>>>> to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. >>>>> >>>>> If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their ways, >>>>> it will >>>>> have done a useful job. >>>>> >>>>> Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course >>>>> parts of >>>>> the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to wear >>>>> brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as good in >>>>> them >>>>> as the B:C:Clettes do. >>>>> >>>>> Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at night you >>>>> would see: >>>>> >>>>> A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, >>>>> back, and arms. >>>>> >>>>> A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all >>>>> angles. >>>>> >>>>> On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the frame, >>>>> fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances reflective >>>>> material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that rises to >>>>> three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small blinkies at >>>>> the top of the pole. >>>>> >>>>> Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. >>>>> >>>>> There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify the odd >>>>> approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime >>>>> running lights >>>>> for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and >>>>> others >>>>> will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should not be >>>>> used. >>>>> >>>>> As someone who lives in a country where such running lights have been >>>>> standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly >>>>> exceeds any >>>>> drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car approaching on a >>>>> rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those >>>>> running >>>>> lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips that >>>>> many >>>>> cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. >>>>> >>>>> Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If >>>>> they are >>>>> to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. And of >>>>> course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. >>>>> >>>>> And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of >>>>> inexpensive LED >>>>> blinkies will make them considerably more visible. >>>>> >>>>> Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal >>>>> reflectors while >>>>> riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think so - that >>>>> really rests with them. >>>>> >>>>> Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation to pay >>>>> attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and alive >>>>> than minimally legal and dead. >>>>> >>>>> So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get Visible". >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ron Richings >>>>> Vancouver, BC >>>>> Canada >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making this >>>>> video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the >>>>> serious >>>>> message. It only emphasized it. >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst >>>>> things that >>>>> any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination >>>>> then >>>>> what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and >>>>> reflector, >>>>> rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and >>>>> reflectors >>>>> on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically an >>>>> international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All >>>>> of these >>>>> extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not >>>>> particularly >>>>> eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally >>>>> required >>>>> with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount of >>>>> responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. >>>>> >>>>> Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and another >>>>> cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This >>>>> also >>>>> applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to cyclists >>>>> glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next >>>>> thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective vest >>>>> becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and >>>>> some of us >>>>> know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a >>>>> proposed public >>>>> bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). >>>>> >>>>> Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. >>>>> >>>>> Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think >>>>> that >>>>> mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but >>>>> this >>>>> hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not >>>>> so lit >>>>> up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, >>>>> but the >>>>> real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the >>>>> weight of >>>>> cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a >>>>> driver >>>>> can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. >>>>> >>>>> So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web >>>>> before >>>>> the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do one >>>>> featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the >>>>> coin: >>>>> or >>>>> and then we would need >>>>> not to >>>>> change the lyrics too much. >>>>> >>>>> - T >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> -- >> -------------------------------------------- >> >> Todd Edelman >> Green Idea Factory >> >> Urbanstr. 45 >> D-10967 Berlin >> Germany >> >> Skype: toddedelman >> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >> >> edelman@greenidea.eu >> www.greenidea.eu >> 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. >> >> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >> >> -- >> -------------------------------------------- >> >> Todd Edelman >> Green Idea Factory >> >> Urbanstr. 45 >> D-10967 Berlin >> Germany >> >> Skype: toddedelman >> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >> >> edelman@greenidea.eu >> www.greenidea.eu >> 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. >> >> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> 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'). >> >> > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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'). > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From jglacerda at ta.org.br Thu Nov 27 03:51:39 2008 From: jglacerda at ta.org.br (Joao Lacerda) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:51:39 -0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: anyone know anything about bike parking in buildings regulations? In-Reply-To: <492D95E6.1010909@greenidea.eu> References: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> <492D95E6.1010909@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <00D89EA9-A063-4843-A844-EEE466678E2A@ta.org.br> Walter, Rio de Janeiro and S?o Paulo here in Brazil have laws to promote bike parking in places that atract a lot of people. Mainly shopping malls and alike. Also, underground parking facilities in Rio must offer bicycle parking. We at Transporte Ativo were able to turn this law into reality by pressing the owners to obey what their obligations concerning bicycles was. First the law in Rio that makes shopping malls and alike to have proper parking facilities for bicycles: Lei complementar N? 77, de 22 de ABRIL de 2005 And the law in S?o Paulo, that talks about places that attract people in general. LEI N? 13.995, de 10 de JUNHO de 2005 I tend to like this kind of legislation a lot, but here and Brazil they only worked with pressure from groups that encourage bicycle use. Ask me if you need some help with the portuguese. And here is how we did it: http://www.ta.org.br/site/area/cinelandia/Cinelandia.htm First a visit along with the local media. Then a test during September 22nd, later, they finally gave us the infra-structure. The best parking facility in town, that charges you for it. Another underground parking made the infra-structure without our intervention and doesn't charge the cyclists for it. Surely the example made then do it by themselves. All the best, -------------------------------- Jo?o Guilherme Lacerda Transporte Ativo - S?o Paulo www.ta.org.br htttp://blog.ta.org.br On Nov 26, 2008, at 4:31 PM, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > Hi Walter, > > I believe San Francisco has a regulation which requires buildings with > freight elevators to allow bikes.... and I think a related one which > mandates showers in new buildings and renovations. > > Andy? > > Also, I would suggest that the TA people contact the Durst > organisation > about One Bryant, their new big high-profile midtown Manhattan "green" > office building which will have bike parking and no car parking. > > - T > > Zvi Leve wrote: >> Walter, >> >> The City of Montreal has recently updated their municipal >> by-laws> >to >> include "provisions regarding parking requirements for bicycles upon >> the >> construction, extension or change of use of a building." There are >> also new >> by-laws concerning the *maximum* number of on-site parking >> spaces> >which >> can be built with new developments! >> >> Both of these by-laws are applied at the 'Borough' level, which >> means that >> each sector of the city if free to apply their own standards. >> >> Still too early to know how much of an impact these by-laws will >> have. >> Montreal has always had relatively numbers of bicyclists, but this is >> primarily due to socio-economic factors (ie students, artists and >> other low >> income households), more than anything else. In recent years the >> number of >> cars on the island (of Montreal) has been going up quickly. An >> influx of >> (relatively) wealthier people to inner-core neighbourhoods, >> compounded with >> the vicious cycle of transit fare increases and service cuts, has >> been >> behind this increase. >> >> Best, >> >> Zvi >> >> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Walter Hook wrote: >> >> >>> Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require >>> commercial and/or >>> residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their >>> buildings >>> or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such >>> a bill in >>> New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> walter >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org >>> [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook >> %2Bwhook>= >>> itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf >>> Of Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory >>> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:25 PM >>> To: Sustran Resource Centre >>> Subject: [sustran] Re: 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd >>> >>> Amy Walker/Momentum Magazine wrote: >>> >>>> Todd, >>>> >>>> The premise of the video is "if you want to be seen while riding at >>>> night, get some lights/reflectors on." >>>> >>>> There is absolutely no implied message of "you get what you >>>> deserve if >>>> you get hit" Ever. Period. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your interest - and happy riding! >>>> >>>> Amy >>>> >>> Hi Amy, >>> >>> It is clear to me that any message of that sort was not >>> intentional, but >>> what the video showed was a level of illumination (technology) >>> beyond >>> what is required, and so I would not be surprised if some people >>> interpreted it - even subconsciously - as a recommendation to take >>> that >>> degree of action in regards to their own safety whilst cycling. >>> Would it >>> be possible to see if this is really the case? >>> >>> If the video was about a government health authority recommending >>> drinking a certain amount of water everyday, it could show people >>> having >>> water fights, going swimming, and so on. Fun imagery perhaps, and >>> appropriate to convey the importance of water. But not precise >>> enough >>> for an actual regulation. >>> >>> Imagine the equivalent of "get some lights/reflectors on" directed >>> towards motorists in regards to the lighting or other critical >>> safety >>> equipment in their vehicles. A message like that would not be taken >>> seriously. In addition, there may in fact be requirements for the >>> maximum illumination possible for motorised road vehicles. >>> >>> I am sure you understand how important imagery and text are in >>> delivering messages, especially those which can relate >>> specifically to a >>> road traffic regulation. So it seems like it would have been >>> helpful to >>> at the very least make those regulations clear - and the >>> importance of >>> following them - in a video like this, which I am also sure you >>> could >>> have done in a very fun and non-preachy manner. >>> >>> Thanks for your hard work, >>> T >>> >>> >>> >>> Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: >>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I think I was clear - and sorry if I was not - that I think >>>>> cyclists >>>>> should absolutely use the legal minimum. I was not recommending >>>>> invisibility. Wearing black is great if your bike is lit up >>>>> according >>>>> to law. The issue about DRLs (daytime running lights) is like >>>>> everything beyond requirements proposed in the video (except the >>>>> shorts) a distraction figuratively and literally-speaking. Also, >>>>> cars >>>>> are big, go fast, cant manouver or stop so quick... DRLs are a bad >>>>> analogy. On a dull, rainy winter afternoon cars need to slow >>>>> down - a >>>>> lot! - and not have DRLs which make their drivers think they can >>>>> go >>>>> as fast as before. >>>>> >>>>> Sure, obviously in carfree cities bikes may only need front and >>>>> rear >>>>> lights to be seen by pedestrians and none of the rest, so >>>>> accepting >>>>> the additional reflectors etc. is already a concession to a failed >>>>> surface transport system. You did not respond to my thoughts about >>>>> something recommended - or what drivers like - becoming something >>>>> mandatory. Even without the unfortunate Darwin comment - the >>>>> mostly >>>>> selfless act of choosing to ride a bike outweighs any >>>>> irresponsibility of not being lit up - I find it troubling that >>>>> you >>>>> seem to think that others who are not lit beyond what is >>>>> required and >>>>> are hit, etc. get what they deserve. In a much more gentle way >>>>> that >>>>> is of course the main premise of the video. >>>>> >>>>> - T >>>>> >>>>> Ron Richings wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Todd >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple >>>>>> of >>>>>> seconds >>>>>> of face time in it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is >>>>>> safer >>>>>> than >>>>>> invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. >>>>>> >>>>>> As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and >>>>>> usually >>>>>> at the >>>>>> last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor >>>>>> reflective >>>>>> material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and >>>>>> wonder -- >>>>>> WHY ?? >>>>>> >>>>>> Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists >>>>>> too dumb >>>>>> to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their >>>>>> ways, >>>>>> it will >>>>>> have done a useful job. >>>>>> >>>>>> Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course >>>>>> parts of >>>>>> the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to >>>>>> wear >>>>>> brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as >>>>>> good in >>>>>> them >>>>>> as the B:C:Clettes do. >>>>>> >>>>>> Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at >>>>>> night you >>>>>> would see: >>>>>> >>>>>> A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, >>>>>> back, and arms. >>>>>> >>>>>> A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all >>>>>> angles. >>>>>> >>>>>> On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the >>>>>> frame, >>>>>> fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances >>>>>> reflective >>>>>> material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that >>>>>> rises to >>>>>> three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small >>>>>> blinkies at >>>>>> the top of the pole. >>>>>> >>>>>> Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. >>>>>> >>>>>> There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify >>>>>> the odd >>>>>> approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime >>>>>> running lights >>>>>> for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and >>>>>> others >>>>>> will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should >>>>>> not be >>>>>> used. >>>>>> >>>>>> As someone who lives in a country where such running lights >>>>>> have been >>>>>> standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly >>>>>> exceeds any >>>>>> drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car >>>>>> approaching on a >>>>>> rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those >>>>>> running >>>>>> lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips >>>>>> that >>>>>> many >>>>>> cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If >>>>>> they are >>>>>> to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. >>>>>> And of >>>>>> course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. >>>>>> >>>>>> And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of >>>>>> inexpensive LED >>>>>> blinkies will make them considerably more visible. >>>>>> >>>>>> Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal >>>>>> reflectors while >>>>>> riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think >>>>>> so - that >>>>>> really rests with them. >>>>>> >>>>>> Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation >>>>>> to pay >>>>>> attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright >>>>>> and alive >>>>>> than minimally legal and dead. >>>>>> >>>>>> So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get >>>>>> Visible". >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron Richings >>>>>> Vancouver, BC >>>>>> Canada >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu >>>>>> ] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into >>>>>> making this >>>>>> video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from >>>>>> the >>>>>> serious >>>>>> message. It only emphasized it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst >>>>>> things that >>>>>> any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more >>>>>> illumination >>>>>> then >>>>>> what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and >>>>>> reflector, >>>>>> rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and >>>>>> reflectors >>>>>> on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- >>>>>> practically an >>>>>> international standard if we just work at it a little harder). >>>>>> All >>>>>> of these >>>>>> extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not >>>>>> particularly >>>>>> eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally >>>>>> required >>>>>> with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable >>>>>> amount of >>>>>> responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. >>>>>> >>>>>> Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and >>>>>> another >>>>>> cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! >>>>>> This >>>>>> also >>>>>> applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to >>>>>> cyclists >>>>>> glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. >>>>>> Next >>>>>> thing that will happen is that wearing something like a >>>>>> reflective vest >>>>>> becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and >>>>>> some of us >>>>>> know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a >>>>>> proposed public >>>>>> bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see >>>>>> cyclists. >>>>>> >>>>>> Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I >>>>>> think >>>>>> that >>>>>> mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - >>>>>> but >>>>>> this >>>>>> hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are >>>>>> not >>>>>> so lit >>>>>> up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable >>>>>> solution, >>>>>> but the >>>>>> real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the >>>>>> weight of >>>>>> cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the >>>>>> things a >>>>>> driver >>>>>> can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. >>>>>> >>>>>> So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the >>>>>> web >>>>>> before >>>>>> the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and >>>>>> either do one >>>>>> featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of >>>>>> the >>>>>> coin: >>>>>> or >>>>>> and then we would >>>>>> need >>>>>> not to >>>>>> change the lyrics too much. >>>>>> >>>>>> - T >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> -- >>> -------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Todd Edelman >>> Green Idea Factory >>> >>> Urbanstr. 45 >>> D-10967 Berlin >>> Germany >>> >>> Skype: toddedelman >>> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >>> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >>> >>> edelman@greenidea.eu >>> www.greenidea.eu >>> 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. >>> >>> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >>> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >>> >>> -- >>> -------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Todd Edelman >>> Green Idea Factory >>> >>> Urbanstr. 45 >>> D-10967 Berlin >>> Germany >>> >>> Skype: toddedelman >>> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >>> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >>> >>> edelman@greenidea.eu >>> www.greenidea.eu >>> 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. >>> >>> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >>> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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'). >>> >>> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> 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'). >> >> > > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > 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. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 hertel at zedat.fu-berlin.de Thu Nov 27 03:59:09 2008 From: hertel at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Christof Hertel) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:59:09 +0100 (CET) Subject: [sustran] Re: anyone know anything about bike parking in buildings regulations? In-Reply-To: <492D95E6.1010909@greenidea.eu> References: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> <492D95E6.1010909@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <3627.134.28.107.21.1227725949.webmail@portal.zedat.fu-berlin.de> Hi Walter, ones again Berlin: http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/verkehr/radverkehr/fahrradparken/de/bln_bauordnung.shtml In new houses it is Parking facilities (locking possibility and safe to stand) for 2 bikes per flat, or 1 per 100squaremeter shopping-space. and see the box on page 21 in their guidebook, nearly any building has an specific number: http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/verkehr/radverkehr/fahrradparken/download/leitfaden_fahrradparken.pdf greetings christof "As a partner in the EU funded project SpiCycles (Sustainable Planning and Innovation for Bicycles) Berlin takes part in a comprehensive programme focussed on the promotion of cycling, including the exchange of innovative ideas on the European level. The current handbook on the provision of bicycle parking facilities has been prepared within this overall framework. The handbook ?Bicycle Parking in Berlin addresses itself to public and private investors, architects and planners, real estate owners and housing administrators, shop keepers and employers, as well as to public bodies and institutions. In addition, to achieve good solutions for bicycle parking in collaboration with the owners of buildings and other responsible parties may also be of interest for the occupiers of rented housing, for shoppers, employees and users of public spaces and facilities generally." > Hi Walter, > > I believe San Francisco has a regulation which requires buildings with > freight elevators to allow bikes.... and I think a related one which > mandates showers in new buildings and renovations. > > Andy? > > Also, I would suggest that the TA people contact the Durst organisation > about One Bryant, their new big high-profile midtown Manhattan "green" > office building which will have bike parking and no car parking. > > - T > > Zvi Leve wrote: >> Walter, >> >> The City of Montreal has recently updated their municipal >> by-lawsto >> include "provisions regarding parking requirements for bicycles upon >> the >> construction, extension or change of use of a building." There are also >> new >> by-laws concerning the *maximum* number of on-site parking >> spaceswhich >> can be built with new developments! >> >> Both of these by-laws are applied at the 'Borough' level, which means >> that >> each sector of the city if free to apply their own standards. >> >> Still too early to know how much of an impact these by-laws will have. >> Montreal has always had relatively numbers of bicyclists, but this is >> primarily due to socio-economic factors (ie students, artists and other >> low >> income households), more than anything else. In recent years the number >> of >> cars on the island (of Montreal) has been going up quickly. An influx of >> (relatively) wealthier people to inner-core neighbourhoods, compounded >> with >> the vicious cycle of transit fare increases and service cuts, has been >> behind this increase. >> >> Best, >> >> Zvi >> >> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Walter Hook wrote: >> >> >>> Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial >>> and/or >>> residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their >>> buildings >>> or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a >>> bill in >>> New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> walter >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org >>> [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook >>> = >>> itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf >>> Of Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory >>> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:25 PM >>> To: Sustran Resource Centre >>> Subject: [sustran] Re: 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd >>> >>> Amy Walker/Momentum Magazine wrote: >>> >>>> Todd, >>>> >>>> The premise of the video is "if you want to be seen while riding at >>>> night, get some lights/reflectors on." >>>> >>>> There is absolutely no implied message of "you get what you deserve if >>>> you get hit" Ever. Period. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your interest - and happy riding! >>>> >>>> Amy >>>> >>> Hi Amy, >>> >>> It is clear to me that any message of that sort was not intentional, >>> but >>> what the video showed was a level of illumination (technology) beyond >>> what is required, and so I would not be surprised if some people >>> interpreted it - even subconsciously - as a recommendation to take that >>> degree of action in regards to their own safety whilst cycling. Would >>> it >>> be possible to see if this is really the case? >>> >>> If the video was about a government health authority recommending >>> drinking a certain amount of water everyday, it could show people >>> having >>> water fights, going swimming, and so on. Fun imagery perhaps, and >>> appropriate to convey the importance of water. But not precise enough >>> for an actual regulation. >>> >>> Imagine the equivalent of "get some lights/reflectors on" directed >>> towards motorists in regards to the lighting or other critical safety >>> equipment in their vehicles. A message like that would not be taken >>> seriously. In addition, there may in fact be requirements for the >>> maximum illumination possible for motorised road vehicles. >>> >>> I am sure you understand how important imagery and text are in >>> delivering messages, especially those which can relate specifically to >>> a >>> road traffic regulation. So it seems like it would have been helpful to >>> at the very least make those regulations clear - and the importance of >>> following them - in a video like this, which I am also sure you could >>> have done in a very fun and non-preachy manner. >>> >>> Thanks for your hard work, >>> T >>> >>> >>> >>> Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: >>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I think I was clear - and sorry if I was not - that I think cyclists >>>>> should absolutely use the legal minimum. I was not recommending >>>>> invisibility. Wearing black is great if your bike is lit up according >>>>> to law. The issue about DRLs (daytime running lights) is like >>>>> everything beyond requirements proposed in the video (except the >>>>> shorts) a distraction figuratively and literally-speaking. Also, cars >>>>> are big, go fast, cant manouver or stop so quick... DRLs are a bad >>>>> analogy. On a dull, rainy winter afternoon cars need to slow down - a >>>>> lot! - and not have DRLs which make their drivers think they can go >>>>> as fast as before. >>>>> >>>>> Sure, obviously in carfree cities bikes may only need front and rear >>>>> lights to be seen by pedestrians and none of the rest, so accepting >>>>> the additional reflectors etc. is already a concession to a failed >>>>> surface transport system. You did not respond to my thoughts about >>>>> something recommended - or what drivers like - becoming something >>>>> mandatory. Even without the unfortunate Darwin comment - the mostly >>>>> selfless act of choosing to ride a bike outweighs any >>>>> irresponsibility of not being lit up - I find it troubling that you >>>>> seem to think that others who are not lit beyond what is required and >>>>> are hit, etc. get what they deserve. In a much more gentle way that >>>>> is of course the main premise of the video. >>>>> >>>>> - T >>>>> >>>>> Ron Richings wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Todd >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple of >>>>>> seconds >>>>>> of face time in it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is safer >>>>>> than >>>>>> invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. >>>>>> >>>>>> As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and usually >>>>>> at the >>>>>> last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor >>>>>> reflective >>>>>> material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and wonder -- >>>>>> WHY ?? >>>>>> >>>>>> Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists >>>>>> too dumb >>>>>> to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their ways, >>>>>> it will >>>>>> have done a useful job. >>>>>> >>>>>> Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course >>>>>> parts of >>>>>> the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to wear >>>>>> brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as good in >>>>>> them >>>>>> as the B:C:Clettes do. >>>>>> >>>>>> Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at night >>>>>> you >>>>>> would see: >>>>>> >>>>>> A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, >>>>>> back, and arms. >>>>>> >>>>>> A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all >>>>>> angles. >>>>>> >>>>>> On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the frame, >>>>>> fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances >>>>>> reflective >>>>>> material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that rises >>>>>> to >>>>>> three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small blinkies >>>>>> at >>>>>> the top of the pole. >>>>>> >>>>>> Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. >>>>>> >>>>>> There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify the >>>>>> odd >>>>>> approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime >>>>>> running lights >>>>>> for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and >>>>>> others >>>>>> will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should not be >>>>>> used. >>>>>> >>>>>> As someone who lives in a country where such running lights have >>>>>> been >>>>>> standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly >>>>>> exceeds any >>>>>> drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car approaching on >>>>>> a >>>>>> rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those >>>>>> running >>>>>> lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips that >>>>>> many >>>>>> cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If >>>>>> they are >>>>>> to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. And >>>>>> of >>>>>> course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. >>>>>> >>>>>> And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of >>>>>> inexpensive LED >>>>>> blinkies will make them considerably more visible. >>>>>> >>>>>> Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal >>>>>> reflectors while >>>>>> riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think so - >>>>>> that >>>>>> really rests with them. >>>>>> >>>>>> Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation to >>>>>> pay >>>>>> attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and >>>>>> alive >>>>>> than minimally legal and dead. >>>>>> >>>>>> So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get Visible". >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron Richings >>>>>> Vancouver, BC >>>>>> Canada >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making >>>>>> this >>>>>> video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the >>>>>> serious >>>>>> message. It only emphasized it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst >>>>>> things that >>>>>> any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination >>>>>> then >>>>>> what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and >>>>>> reflector, >>>>>> rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and >>>>>> reflectors >>>>>> on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically >>>>>> an >>>>>> international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All >>>>>> of these >>>>>> extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not >>>>>> particularly >>>>>> eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally >>>>>> required >>>>>> with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount >>>>>> of >>>>>> responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. >>>>>> >>>>>> Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and >>>>>> another >>>>>> cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This >>>>>> also >>>>>> applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to >>>>>> cyclists >>>>>> glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next >>>>>> thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective >>>>>> vest >>>>>> becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and >>>>>> some of us >>>>>> know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a >>>>>> proposed public >>>>>> bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. >>>>>> >>>>>> Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think >>>>>> that >>>>>> mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but >>>>>> this >>>>>> hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not >>>>>> so lit >>>>>> up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, >>>>>> but the >>>>>> real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the >>>>>> weight of >>>>>> cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a >>>>>> driver >>>>>> can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. >>>>>> >>>>>> So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web >>>>>> before >>>>>> the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do >>>>>> one >>>>>> featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the >>>>>> coin: >>>>>> or >>>>>> and then we would need >>>>>> not to >>>>>> change the lyrics too much. >>>>>> >>>>>> - T >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> -- >>> -------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Todd Edelman >>> Green Idea Factory >>> >>> Urbanstr. 45 >>> D-10967 Berlin >>> Germany >>> >>> Skype: toddedelman >>> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >>> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >>> >>> edelman@greenidea.eu >>> www.greenidea.eu >>> 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. >>> >>> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >>> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >>> >>> -- >>> -------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Todd Edelman >>> Green Idea Factory >>> >>> Urbanstr. 45 >>> D-10967 Berlin >>> Germany >>> >>> Skype: toddedelman >>> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >>> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >>> >>> edelman@greenidea.eu >>> www.greenidea.eu >>> 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. >>> >>> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >>> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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'). >>> >>> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> 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'). >> >> > > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > 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. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 Nov 27 04:41:16 2008 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:41:16 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: anyone know anything about bike parking in buildings regulations? In-Reply-To: <3627.134.28.107.21.1227725949.webmail@portal.zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> <492D95E6.1010909@greenidea.eu> <3627.134.28.107.21.1227725949.webmail@portal.zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: <492DA65C.2010603@gmail.com> Hi Walter, Really useful discussion. It would be great if TA sends any document = they produce on this! In Bogot=E1, there are two regulations related to thi= s: 1- Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial (Decreto 469 de 2003, art=EDculo 256) = - the sort of master plan of city development, says the following = textually (my translation): " for every type of use, one bicycle parking space shall be provided for = every two [automobile] parking spaces, and dimensions will be = established by DAPD [local planning department], which will be placed = within the private area under proper safety measures" (I hope it's = understandable). Please note that the above is only for constructions done from 2003, not = earlier (that is, no "retroffiting" is expected). I am attaching the = original text in Spanish. 2- Decreto 036 de 2004 (specific decree for bike parking): it's very = ambiguous and pretty useless, but it states, more or less, that = constructions on surface which are built for parking should have one car = space fitted for bicycle parking, for every 10 car park spaces. If there = are less than 120 car park spaces, it should have 12 car spaces fitted = for bicycle parking. I am attaching the original decree. Finally, on the issue of bringing bicycles into buildings, that's = entirely up to the building management... there's some colleagues in = Bogot=E1 who have their office in a building where you have to carry your = bike three floors up, because they won't let you use the car parking spaces! If you ask me, the first regulation is the one to quote. Don't even = mention the second one because it's too confusing. All the best for TA on this. Carlos. Christof Hertel wrote: > Hi Walter, > ones again Berlin: > http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/verkehr/radverkehr/fahrradparken/de= /bln_bauordnung.shtml > In new houses it is > Parking facilities (locking possibility and safe to stand) for 2 bikes per > flat, or 1 per 100squaremeter shopping-space. > > and see the box on page 21 in their guidebook, nearly any building has an > specific number: > http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/verkehr/radverkehr/fahrradparken/do= wnload/leitfaden_fahrradparken.pdf > greetings > christof > > "As a partner in the EU funded project SpiCycles (Sustainable Planning and > Innovation for Bicycles) Berlin takes part in a comprehensive programme > focussed on the promotion of cycling, including the exchange of innovative > ideas on the European level. The current handbook on the provision of > bicycle parking facilities has been prepared within this overall > framework. > The handbook =84Bicycle Parking in Berlin addresses itself to public and > private investors, architects and planners, real estate owners and housing > administrators, shop keepers and employers, as well as to public bodies > and institutions. In addition, to achieve good solutions for bicycle > parking in collaboration with the owners of buildings and other > responsible parties may also be of interest for the occupiers of rented > housing, for shoppers, employees and users of public spaces and facilities > generally." > > > = >> Hi Walter, >> >> I believe San Francisco has a regulation which requires buildings with >> freight elevators to allow bikes.... and I think a related one which >> mandates showers in new buildings and renovations. >> >> Andy? >> >> Also, I would suggest that the TA people contact the Durst organisation >> about One Bryant, their new big high-profile midtown Manhattan "green" >> office building which will have bike parking and no car parking. >> >> - T >> >> Zvi Leve wrote: >> = >>> Walter, >>> >>> The City of Montreal has recently updated their municipal >>> by-lawsto >>> include "provisions regarding parking requirements for bicycles upon >>> the >>> construction, extension or change of use of a building." There are also >>> new >>> by-laws concerning the *maximum* number of on-site parking >>> spaceswhich >>> can be built with new developments! >>> >>> Both of these by-laws are applied at the 'Borough' level, which means >>> that >>> each sector of the city if free to apply their own standards. >>> >>> Still too early to know how much of an impact these by-laws will have. >>> Montreal has always had relatively numbers of bicyclists, but this is >>> primarily due to socio-economic factors (ie students, artists and other >>> low >>> income households), more than anything else. In recent years the number >>> of >>> cars on the island (of Montreal) has been going up quickly. An influx of >>> (relatively) wealthier people to inner-core neighbourhoods, compounded >>> with >>> the vicious cycle of transit fare increases and service cuts, has been >>> behind this increase. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Zvi >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Walter Hook wrote: >>> >>> >>> = >>>> Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial >>>> and/or >>>> residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their >>>> buildings >>>> or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a >>>> bill in >>>> New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> walter >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=3Ditdp.org@list.jca.apc.org >>>> [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook >>>> =3D >>>> itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf >>>> Of Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory >>>> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:25 PM >>>> To: Sustran Resource Centre >>>> Subject: [sustran] Re: 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd >>>> >>>> Amy Walker/Momentum Magazine wrote: >>>> >>>> = >>>>> Todd, >>>>> >>>>> The premise of the video is "if you want to be seen while riding at >>>>> night, get some lights/reflectors on." >>>>> >>>>> There is absolutely no implied message of "you get what you deserve if >>>>> you get hit" Ever. Period. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for your interest - and happy riding! >>>>> >>>>> Amy >>>>> >>>>> = >>>> Hi Amy, >>>> >>>> It is clear to me that any message of that sort was not intentional, >>>> but >>>> what the video showed was a level of illumination (technology) beyond >>>> what is required, and so I would not be surprised if some people >>>> interpreted it - even subconsciously - as a recommendation to take that >>>> degree of action in regards to their own safety whilst cycling. Would >>>> it >>>> be possible to see if this is really the case? >>>> >>>> If the video was about a government health authority recommending >>>> drinking a certain amount of water everyday, it could show people >>>> having >>>> water fights, going swimming, and so on. Fun imagery perhaps, and >>>> appropriate to convey the importance of water. But not precise enough >>>> for an actual regulation. >>>> >>>> Imagine the equivalent of "get some lights/reflectors on" directed >>>> towards motorists in regards to the lighting or other critical safety >>>> equipment in their vehicles. A message like that would not be taken >>>> seriously. In addition, there may in fact be requirements for the >>>> maximum illumination possible for motorised road vehicles. >>>> >>>> I am sure you understand how important imagery and text are in >>>> delivering messages, especially those which can relate specifically to >>>> a >>>> road traffic regulation. So it seems like it would have been helpful to >>>> at the very least make those regulations clear - and the importance of >>>> following them - in a video like this, which I am also sure you could >>>> have done in a very fun and non-preachy manner. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your hard work, >>>> T >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: >>>> >>>> = >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I think I was clear - and sorry if I was not - that I think cyclists >>>>>> should absolutely use the legal minimum. I was not recommending >>>>>> invisibility. Wearing black is great if your bike is lit up according >>>>>> to law. The issue about DRLs (daytime running lights) is like >>>>>> everything beyond requirements proposed in the video (except the >>>>>> shorts) a distraction figuratively and literally-speaking. Also, cars >>>>>> are big, go fast, cant manouver or stop so quick... DRLs are a bad >>>>>> analogy. On a dull, rainy winter afternoon cars need to slow down - a >>>>>> lot! - and not have DRLs which make their drivers think they can go >>>>>> as fast as before. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sure, obviously in carfree cities bikes may only need front and rear >>>>>> lights to be seen by pedestrians and none of the rest, so accepting >>>>>> the additional reflectors etc. is already a concession to a failed >>>>>> surface transport system. You did not respond to my thoughts about >>>>>> something recommended - or what drivers like - becoming something >>>>>> mandatory. Even without the unfortunate Darwin comment - the mostly >>>>>> selfless act of choosing to ride a bike outweighs any >>>>>> irresponsibility of not being lit up - I find it troubling that you >>>>>> seem to think that others who are not lit beyond what is required and >>>>>> are hit, etc. get what they deserve. In a much more gentle way that >>>>>> is of course the main premise of the video. >>>>>> >>>>>> - T >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron Richings wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> = >>>>>>> Hi Todd >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple of >>>>>>> seconds >>>>>>> of face time in it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is safer >>>>>>> than >>>>>>> invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and usually >>>>>>> at the >>>>>>> last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor >>>>>>> reflective >>>>>>> material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and wonder -- >>>>>>> WHY ?? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists >>>>>>> too dumb >>>>>>> to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their ways, >>>>>>> it will >>>>>>> have done a useful job. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course >>>>>>> parts of >>>>>>> the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to wear >>>>>>> brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as good in >>>>>>> them >>>>>>> as the B:C:Clettes do. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at night >>>>>>> you >>>>>>> would see: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, >>>>>>> back, and arms. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all >>>>>>> angles. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the frame, >>>>>>> fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances >>>>>>> reflective >>>>>>> material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that rises >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small blinkies >>>>>>> at >>>>>>> the top of the pole. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify the >>>>>>> odd >>>>>>> approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime >>>>>>> running lights >>>>>>> for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and >>>>>>> others >>>>>>> will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should not be >>>>>>> used. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As someone who lives in a country where such running lights have >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly >>>>>>> exceeds any >>>>>>> drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car approaching on >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those >>>>>>> running >>>>>>> lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips that >>>>>>> many >>>>>>> cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If >>>>>>> they are >>>>>>> to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. And >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of >>>>>>> inexpensive LED >>>>>>> blinkies will make them considerably more visible. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal >>>>>>> reflectors while >>>>>>> riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think so - >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> really rests with them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation to >>>>>>> pay >>>>>>> attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and >>>>>>> alive >>>>>>> than minimally legal and dead. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get Visible". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ron Richings >>>>>>> Vancouver, BC >>>>>>> Canada >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making >>>>>>> this >>>>>>> video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the >>>>>>> serious >>>>>>> message. It only emphasized it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst >>>>>>> things that >>>>>>> any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination >>>>>>> then >>>>>>> what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and >>>>>>> reflector, >>>>>>> rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and >>>>>>> reflectors >>>>>>> on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically >>>>>>> an >>>>>>> international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All >>>>>>> of these >>>>>>> extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not >>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>> eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally >>>>>>> required >>>>>>> with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and >>>>>>> another >>>>>>> cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This >>>>>>> also >>>>>>> applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to >>>>>>> cyclists >>>>>>> glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next >>>>>>> thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective >>>>>>> vest >>>>>>> becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and >>>>>>> some of us >>>>>>> know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a >>>>>>> proposed public >>>>>>> bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but >>>>>>> this >>>>>>> hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not >>>>>>> so lit >>>>>>> up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, >>>>>>> but the >>>>>>> real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the >>>>>>> weight of >>>>>>> cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a >>>>>>> driver >>>>>>> can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web >>>>>>> before >>>>>>> the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do >>>>>>> one >>>>>>> featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the >>>>>>> coin: >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> and then we would ne= ed >>>>>>> not to >>>>>>> change the lyrics too much. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - T >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> = >>>> -- >>>> -------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Todd Edelman >>>> Green Idea Factory >>>> >>>> Urbanstr. 45 >>>> D-10967 Berlin >>>> Germany >>>> >>>> Skype: toddedelman >>>> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >>>> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >>>> >>>> edelman@greenidea.eu >>>> www.greenidea.eu >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >>>> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> -------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Todd Edelman >>>> Green Idea Factory >>>> >>>> Urbanstr. 45 >>>> D-10967 Berlin >>>> Germany >>>> >>>> Skype: toddedelman >>>> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >>>> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >>>> >>>> edelman@greenidea.eu >>>> www.greenidea.eu >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >>>> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>>> 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. >>> >>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >>> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >>> (the 'Global South'). >>> >>> >>> = >> -- >> -------------------------------------------- >> >> Todd Edelman >> Green Idea Factory >> >> Urbanstr. 45 >> D-10967 Berlin >> Germany >> >> Skype: toddedelman >> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >> >> edelman@greenidea.eu >> www.greenidea.eu >> 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. >> >> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> 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. >> >> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >> 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 YAHOOGRO= UPS. = > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to j= oin the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroup= s version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sust= ran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apol= ogies for the confusing arrangement. > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equit= able and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'G= lobal South'). = > > = -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: BICI_PARQ_Decret036de2004_16_34_18.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 35688 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081126/1= 7c1fb6b/BICI_PARQ_Decret036de2004_16_34_18.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: bicicletas parqueo POT.txt Type: text/plain Size: 343 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081126/1= 7c1fb6b/bicicletasparqueoPOT.txt From litman at vtpi.org Thu Nov 27 04:43:24 2008 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 11:43:24 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: anyone know anything about bike parking in buildings regulations? In-Reply-To: References: <492AE375.4070904@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20081126114121.0aed5468@mail.islandnet.com> See the "Bicycle Parking" chapter of our Online TDM Encyclopedia (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm85.htm ) which includes a few examples of parking requirements incorporated into zoning codes. Please let me know if you find any good information to add. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 09:00 AM 26/11/2008, Walter Hook wrote: >Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial and/or >residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their buildings >or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a bill in >New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. > >Best > >walter > >-----Original Message----- >From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org >[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf >Of Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory >Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:25 PM >To: Sustran Resource Centre >Subject: [sustran] Re: 'Get Visible' video - response to Todd > > Amy Walker/Momentum Magazine wrote: > > Todd, > > > > The premise of the video is "if you want to be seen while riding at > > night, get some lights/reflectors on." > > > > There is absolutely no implied message of "you get what you deserve if > > you get hit" Ever. Period. > > > > Thanks for your interest - and happy riding! > > > > Amy >Hi Amy, > >It is clear to me that any message of that sort was not intentional, but >what the video showed was a level of illumination (technology) beyond >what is required, and so I would not be surprised if some people >interpreted it - even subconsciously - as a recommendation to take that >degree of action in regards to their own safety whilst cycling. Would it >be possible to see if this is really the case? > >If the video was about a government health authority recommending >drinking a certain amount of water everyday, it could show people having >water fights, going swimming, and so on. Fun imagery perhaps, and >appropriate to convey the importance of water. But not precise enough >for an actual regulation. > >Imagine the equivalent of "get some lights/reflectors on" directed >towards motorists in regards to the lighting or other critical safety >equipment in their vehicles. A message like that would not be taken >seriously. In addition, there may in fact be requirements for the >maximum illumination possible for motorised road vehicles. > >I am sure you understand how important imagery and text are in >delivering messages, especially those which can relate specifically to a >road traffic regulation. So it seems like it would have been helpful to >at the very least make those regulations clear - and the importance of >following them - in a video like this, which I am also sure you could >have done in a very fun and non-preachy manner. > >Thanks for your hard work, >T > > > >Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I think I was clear - and sorry if I was not - that I think cyclists > >> should absolutely use the legal minimum. I was not recommending > >> invisibility. Wearing black is great if your bike is lit up according > >> to law. The issue about DRLs (daytime running lights) is like > >> everything beyond requirements proposed in the video (except the > >> shorts) a distraction figuratively and literally-speaking. Also, cars > >> are big, go fast, cant manouver or stop so quick... DRLs are a bad > >> analogy. On a dull, rainy winter afternoon cars need to slow down - a > >> lot! - and not have DRLs which make their drivers think they can go > >> as fast as before. > >> > >> Sure, obviously in carfree cities bikes may only need front and rear > >> lights to be seen by pedestrians and none of the rest, so accepting > >> the additional reflectors etc. is already a concession to a failed > >> surface transport system. You did not respond to my thoughts about > >> something recommended - or what drivers like - becoming something > >> mandatory. Even without the unfortunate Darwin comment - the mostly > >> selfless act of choosing to ride a bike outweighs any > >> irresponsibility of not being lit up - I find it troubling that you > >> seem to think that others who are not lit beyond what is required and > >> are hit, etc. get what they deserve. In a much more gentle way that > >> is of course the main premise of the video. > >> > >> - T > >> > >> Ron Richings wrote: > >>> Hi Todd > >>> > >>> > >>> I am not one of the makers of the video, but I do have a couple of > >>> seconds > >>> of face time in it. > >>> > >>> I don't think that the message is confused at all. Visible is safer > >>> than > >>> invisible, and there are many ways to make yourself seen. > >>> > >>> As a cyclist and driver, every time that I see (barely and usually > >>> at the > >>> last minute) a person riding a bike at night with no light nor > >>> reflective > >>> material, and often wearing dark clothes, I get cranky and wonder -- > >>> WHY ?? > >>> > >>> Aside from its Darwinian value in 'thinning the herd' of cyclists > >>> too dumb > >>> to survive, there is little to recommend invisibility at night. > >>> > >>> If the video gets even a few of those cyclists to change their ways, > >>> it will > >>> have done a useful job. > >>> > >>> Too much visibility? A bit hard to imagine in reality. Of course > >>> parts of > >>> the video are 'over the top'. We don't really expect people to wear > >>> brightly reflective shorts. And most wouldn't look nearly as good in > >>> them > >>> as the B:C:Clettes do. > >>> > >>> Beyond what you describe as the legal minimum, when I ride at night you > >>> would see: > >>> > >>> A bright yellow jacket with retro-reflective strips on the front, > >>> back, and arms. > >>> > >>> A silver helmet with retro-reflective strips visible from all > >>> angles. > >>> > >>> On my recumbent bike, several retro-reflective strips on the frame, > >>> fenders, mirror backs, rear bag, and in some circumstances reflective > >>> material on the pole and body of a rear flag arrangement that rises to > >>> three feet above my head. I may also put a couple of small blinkies at > >>> the top of the pole. > >>> > >>> Too much? Am I endangering other cyclists ? I don't think so. > >>> > >>> There was a similar line of peculiar argument used to justify the odd > >>> approach that British cycling groups took in opposing daytime > >>> running lights > >>> for cars. Since the cars would be more visible, then cyclists and > >>> others > >>> will be comparatively less visible, so running lights should not be > >>> used. > >>> > >>> As someone who lives in a country where such running lights have been > >>> standard for over 20 years, their contribution to safety vastly > >>> exceeds any > >>> drawbacks that they may have. Being able to see a car approaching on a > >>> rainy, dull, winter afternoon makes me safer. And of course those > >>> running > >>> lights very effectively 'light up' the retro-reflective strips that > >>> many > >>> cyclists have on their bikes and clothing. > >>> > >>> Many car drivers are notably inattentive, particular at night. If > >>> they are > >>> to have any chance of avoiding you, they first have to see you. And of > >>> course if I am to avoid other cyclists, I too have to see them. > >>> > >>> And if a cyclist feels that is not enough, then a couple of > >>> inexpensive LED > >>> blinkies will make them considerably more visible. > >>> > >>> Does this endanger cyclists who have no lights and minimal > >>> reflectors while > >>> riding a dark bicycle and wearing dark clothes? I don't think so - that > >>> really rests with them. > >>> > >>> Certainly none of this changes the motorist's legal obligation to pay > >>> attention. But as a practical matter I would rather be bright and alive > >>> than minimally legal and dead. > >>> > >>> So I would encourage everyone to watch the video and "Get Visible". > >>> > >>> > >>> Ron Richings > >>> Vancouver, BC > >>> Canada > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory [mailto:edelman@greenidea.eu] > >>> > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> First of all I sincerely admire all the work that went into making this > >>> video. It was cheesy on purpose, but that did not distract from the > >>> serious > >>> message. It only emphasized it. > >>> > >>> Unfortunately the message is totally confused. One of the worst > >>> things that > >>> any cycling advocate or activist can do is support more illumination > >>> then > >>> what is required by law in most places (front white headlight and > >>> reflector, > >>> rear red taillight and reflector, reflectors on the pedals, and > >>> reflectors > >>> on the spokes or reflectorised sidewalls on the tyres -- practically an > >>> international standard if we just work at it a little harder). All > >>> of these > >>> extra decorations are lovely - though perhaps some of it is not > >>> particularly > >>> eco-friendly to manufacture - but by conflating what is generally > >>> required > >>> with all the other stuff the video proposes an unreasonable amount of > >>> responsibility for the cyclist for his or her own safety. > >>> > >>> Moreover, if one cyclist is "lit up like a Christmas tree" and another > >>> cyclist nearby is not, the latter becomes relatively invisible! This > >>> also > >>> applies in general, over time, i.e. if a driver gets used to cyclists > >>> glowing like a discotheque then they will not see the others. Next > >>> thing that will happen is that wearing something like a reflective vest > >>> becomes required. It is similar to what happens with helmets, and > >>> some of us > >>> know too well how this can throw a spanner in the works of a > >>> proposed public > >>> bike programme (e.g. in Vancouver.). > >>> > >>> Also, reflectors are not designed to help pedestrians see cyclists. > >>> > >>> Everyone wants to protect themselves and their loved ones - I think > >>> that > >>> mandatory vests and helmets for children is worth considering - but > >>> this > >>> hyperillumination is selfish and just hurts the others who are not > >>> so lit > >>> up. Banning private cars in cities is the only sustainable solution, > >>> but the > >>> real issues of any car reformation programme include speed, the > >>> weight of > >>> cars, the hardness of bonnets and windscreens, and all the things a > >>> driver > >>> can legally do in their car while moving, to name just a few. > >>> > >>> So I propose that the fine folks in BC take their video off the web > >>> before > >>> the lessons it tries to teach kill or injure someone, and either do one > >>> featuring only what is required by law, or on the other side of the > >>> coin: > >>> or > >>> and then we would need > >>> not to > >>> change the lyrics too much. > >>> > >>> - T > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > >-- >-------------------------------------------- > >Todd Edelman >Green Idea Factory > >Urbanstr. 45 >D-10967 Berlin >Germany > >Skype: toddedelman >Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > >edelman@greenidea.eu >www.greenidea.eu >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. > >"Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >- B. Brecht (with slight modification) > >-- >-------------------------------------------- > >Todd Edelman >Green Idea Factory > >Urbanstr. 45 >D-10967 Berlin >Germany > >Skype: toddedelman >Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > >edelman@greenidea.eu >www.greenidea.eu >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. > >"Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >- B. Brecht (with slight modification) > >-------------------------------------------------------- >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'). Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" From richings at telus.net Thu Nov 27 05:40:51 2008 From: richings at telus.net (Ron Richings) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:40:51 -0800 Subject: [sustran] bike parking in buildingsregulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19740414223344.0C9506343C383F29@priv-edmwaa06.telusplanet.net> Hi Walter Vancouver, BC, Canada is working up some revised/improved regulations on such bicycle parking. I am not sure how far the process has proceeded but will try to get that info, and some of the specific provisions, and forward them to you. Ron Richings Vancouver, BC Canada -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+richings=telus.net@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+richings=telus.net@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Walter Hook Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 9:00 AM To: 'Sustran Resource Centre' Subject: [sustran] anyone know anything about bike parking in buildingsregulations? Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial and/or residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their buildings or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a bill in New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. Best walter From richings at telus.net Thu Nov 27 06:42:46 2008 From: richings at telus.net (Ron Richings) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:42:46 -0800 Subject: [sustran] bike parking in buildings-regulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada Message-ID: <19740414223344.B24B2A223C0B48C2@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> Hi Walter Here is the info on Vancouver's regulations. I think that much of this relates to residents or employees with bikes. Is your proposal more focussed on visitors/clients/shoppers and such who may just be visiting a building? Ron Richings -----Original Message----- From: Stary, Peter [mailto:peter.stary@vancouver.ca] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 1:32 PM To: Ron Richings Subject: RE: bike parking in buildings-regulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada Hi Ron, Here's the by-law and guidelines: http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/parking/admin/developers.htm Here's the report that generated the changes: http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20080513/documents/tt2.pdf Peter -----Original Message----- From: Ron Richings [mailto:richings@telus.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 12:45 PM To: Stary, Peter Subject: bike parking in buildings-regulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada Hi Peter Can you update me on where the revisions/improvements to residential (and commercial?) bike parking regulations are at? Have the changes/resulting provisions been compiled in one shareable document? I remember discussion of this from a Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting a few months ago. Ron -----Original Message----- From: Ron Richings [mailto:richings@telus.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 12:41 PM To: 'Walter Hook' Cc: 'sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org' Subject: bike parking in buildingsregulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada Hi Walter Vancouver, BC, Canada is working up some revised/improved regulations on such bicycle parking. I am not sure how far the process has proceeded but will try to get that info, and some of the specific provisions, and forward them to you. Ron Richings Vancouver, BC Canada -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+richings=telus.net@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+richings=telus.net@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Walter Hook Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 9:00 AM To: 'Sustran Resource Centre' Subject: [sustran] anyone know anything about bike parking in buildingsregulations? Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial and/or residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their buildings or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a bill in New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. Best walter __________ NOD32 3637 (20081124) Information __________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com From whook at itdp.org Thu Nov 27 06:49:05 2008 From: whook at itdp.org (Walter Hook) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:49:05 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: bike parking in buildings-regulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada In-Reply-To: <19740414223344.B24B2A223C0B48C2@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> References: <19740414223344.B24B2A223C0B48C2@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> Message-ID: Thanks for all this great info! Since Paul White from TA is monitoring this, it seems, and knows the details better than I, I will leave him to explain their campaign as I confess i don't know the details of the proposal they are trying to move through the city council. -----Original Message----- From: Ron Richings [mailto:richings@telus.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 4:43 PM To: 'Walter Hook' Cc: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: bike parking in buildings-regulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada Hi Walter Here is the info on Vancouver's regulations. I think that much of this relates to residents or employees with bikes. Is your proposal more focussed on visitors/clients/shoppers and such who may just be visiting a building? Ron Richings -----Original Message----- From: Stary, Peter [mailto:peter.stary@vancouver.ca] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 1:32 PM To: Ron Richings Subject: RE: bike parking in buildings-regulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada Hi Ron, Here's the by-law and guidelines: http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/parking/admin/developers.htm Here's the report that generated the changes: http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20080513/documents/tt2.pdf Peter -----Original Message----- From: Ron Richings [mailto:richings@telus.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 12:45 PM To: Stary, Peter Subject: bike parking in buildings-regulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada Hi Peter Can you update me on where the revisions/improvements to residential (and commercial?) bike parking regulations are at? Have the changes/resulting provisions been compiled in one shareable document? I remember discussion of this from a Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting a few months ago. Ron -----Original Message----- From: Ron Richings [mailto:richings@telus.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 12:41 PM To: 'Walter Hook' Cc: 'sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org' Subject: bike parking in buildingsregulations-Vancouver, BC, Canada Hi Walter Vancouver, BC, Canada is working up some revised/improved regulations on such bicycle parking. I am not sure how far the process has proceeded but will try to get that info, and some of the specific provisions, and forward them to you. Ron Richings Vancouver, BC Canada -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+richings=telus.net@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+richings=telus.net@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Walter Hook Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 9:00 AM To: 'Sustran Resource Centre' Subject: [sustran] anyone know anything about bike parking in buildingsregulations? Does anyone know of cities with regulations that require commercial and/or residential buildings to allow people to bring bicycles into their buildings or provide some parking for them? TA is trying to introduce such a bill in New York City, and I am unaware of any precedent. Best walter __________ NOD32 3637 (20081124) Information __________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com From sudhir at cai-asia.org Thu Nov 27 18:17:02 2008 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:17:02 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Transport and Climate Change: An Urgent Call for Action to be held on 10 December in Poznan Message-ID: Dear all, We are pleased to confirm that the event "Transport and Climate Change: An Urgent Call for Action" will be held in Poznan, Poland, on December 10, 2008 (10:00 am to 18:30 pm). This event is co-organized by the Clean Air Institute and the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities, with support from the Carbon Fund Assist Program of the World Bank Institute and the Asian Development Bank, in coordination with ICLEI's Local Government Climate Sessions. Agenda and additional information coming soon! Other key transport related side events have been organized along the COP14, as shown bellow. For more details Contact Holger Dalkmann < hdalkmann@trl.co.uk >, Cornie Huizenga ( cornie.huizenga@cai-asia.org )and/or Sergio Sanchez (ssanchez@cleanairinstitute.org ) Click the link below to see the Transport and Climate Change Flyer for COP14 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73104.html Other transport events at the COP14 include: Emerging capacity development needs and the way forward for CDM Thursday 4th December 15:00 ? 18:15 Blue Room UNEP Risoe Centre Rewarding co-benefits of climate friendly transportation strategies in the future regime Friday 5th December 10:15 ? 12:30 Blue Room IGES, UNCRD A low carbon transport under different regimes? Friday 5th December 18:00 ? 19:30 Room: White-tailed eagle TRL, GTZ, UITP, UIC Transport and Climate Change: An Urgent Call for Action Wednesday 10th December: 10:00 ? 18:15 Room: VIP-Lounge CAI-LAC, World Bank, CAI-Asia, ICLEI Clean energy, sustainable transport & natural resource management in support of climate change policy Wednesday 10th December 13:00 ? 15:00 Room: White-tailed eagle EIB, AfDB, ADB Local government climate roadmap ? Bali ? Poznan ? Copenhagen Wednesday 10th December 19:30 ? 21:00 Room: Grebe How to anchor preference for EcoMobility in a post-2012 global climate regime? Thursday 11th December 11:30 ? 13:00 Entrance Hall Global Alliance for EcoMobility 50 by 50: 50% better new car fuel economy world- wide by 2050 Friday 12th December 18:00 ? 19:30 Room: Grebe ITF, IEA, UNEP & FIA Foundation From Lnadal at itdp.org Fri Nov 28 07:02:23 2008 From: Lnadal at itdp.org (Luc Nadal) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:02:23 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: anyone know anything about regulations allowing bikes into commercial buildings? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Requirements for bicycle storage (+ baby strollers) in private buildings are becoming standard in France though they are the prerogative of municipalities and vary from one to the other. Legal requirements can only apply to new building construction and building rehabilitations subjected to building permit. Municipal governements set the requirements (or non-requirements) for motorized and non motorized parking as part of their binding Local Urban Planning Plan (Plan local d"urbanisme, or PLU), voted by city councils. Recommendations to local legislators nation-wide were issued in 2003 by the Minist?re de l'?cologie, de l'Energie, du D?veloppement durable et de l'Am?nagement du territoire (coordinated by its Centre d?Etudes sur les R?seaux, les Transports, l?Urbanisme - CERTU). They are as follow: Housing: 0.5 to 2 spaces per housing units according to a scale from studio appartments (0.5-1 space/unit), to 5-room apartments and more (2 spaces/unit) Schools: 1 space per 3-5 middle to high school students, 1 space per 8-12 elementary school students, 1 space per 5 college/university students. Business & administrations: 1 space for every 5 employees sources (in French): http://www.transports.equipement.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Fiche_velo_sur_emplacements_prives_cle51ce6c.pdf http://www.transports.equipement.gouv.fr/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=2207 The Paris PLU, voted by the Council of Paris in 2006, requires ground- floor, enclosed and protected storage facilities for bicycles and strollers of a minimum area of 10m2 per building or over 2,25% of the building's floor area, -- whichever is larger. Building construction/rehabilitation of less than 250 m2 is exempt. The minima apply to housing and office buildings only; the text remains vague when it comes to commerce, industry and other facilities where "the area devoted to bicycle and stroller storage will take into account the nature and destination of the premises, as well as their location and users." (Paris PLU article UG 12.3). sources (in French): http://www.paris.fr/portail/viewmultimediadocument?multimediadocument-id=21576 http://www.paris.fr/portail/Urbanisme/Portal.lut?page_id=7042&document_type_id=4&document_id=21439&portlet_id=16186 Note: 10m2 = 5-7 bicycle parking spaces, according to CERTU standards above, including access but not accounting for baby stroller space. Luc Nadal, ITDP From sudhir at cai-asia.org Fri Nov 28 12:42:19 2008 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:42:19 +0800 Subject: [sustran] BRT plans in Xian Message-ID: Dear All, We are updating our records on BRT and were interested on information on BRT plans in Xian, China? Does any body know about the status? best 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 edelman at greenidea.eu Fri Nov 28 19:29:22 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:29:22 +0100 Subject: [sustran] New Agriculturist: Jatropha in India Message-ID: <492FC802.1080200@greenidea.eu> New Agriculturist: Jatropha in India http://www.new-ag.info/08/06/focuson/focuson2.php Oil, toil and trouble bubbling - India's jatropha tussle *"By pursuing the energy security of the few - the middle classes and the rich - we are compromising the livelihood security of the poor,"* Indian government has welcomed biofuels with open arms. Faced with a rapidly growing economy, the world's second-largest population and an eye-watering fuel import bill, finding a renewable domestic power source has become a top priority. The country's recently-revised national biofuel policy, announced in September 2008, sets out the government's intentions in black-and- white: to produce 20 per cent of the country's diesel from crops by 2017, primarily from plantations of jatropha (Jatropha curcas). This means that the oilseed-bearing shrub, already introduced in some states, needs to be planted on an additional 14 million hectares of the country's so-called 'wasteland'. This has ignited fierce debate: supporters see the move as the solution to the fuel-versus- food conundrum, while critics are fearful that millions of peasants, who rely on these lands, will lose out. Wasteland - a misnomer A far cry from the post-industrial 'brown field' sites familiar to planners in the developed world, India's wastelands have historical resonance. Classified in colonial times as areas that could not be cultivated and which were, therefore, unable to produce revenue, everything from forests to semi-jungle to wetlands fell into the category of 'wasteland'. But, quite unlike the idea of a barren wilderness, these vast areas - comprising about 25 percent of India's landmass - are more appropriately described as marginal lands, and have supported millions of the country's poorest people for centuries. Traditionally, local communities have looked after these lands as common resources, coming to depend on them for food, fodder, fuel wood and medicine. In terms of their day-to-day importance, the figures speak for themselves: around 20 percent of poor households' income and over 60 percent of their fuel wood come from common property resources. In the mixed farming systems of the country's semi-arid regions, some three-quarters of people depend on the commons for grazing. Nationwide, the India-based NGO Foundation for Ecological Security (FES) estimates that the commons contribute up to US$5 billion to poor rural households. And, with investment and proper management, the organisation believes the commons could supply a quarter of the country's fodder needs. These commons also perform important ecological functions, providing habitats for wildlife, harbouring rainwater and absorbing greenhouse gases. For whose benefit? India's common lands have been under threat for at least the past half-century, with between 25-50 per cent already lost due to population pressure and increasing degradation. Little wonder the proposed jatropha plantations are contentious. "By pursuing the energy security of the few - the middle classes and the rich - we are compromising the livelihood security of the poor," laments Subrata Singh of FES. The government has tried to find a win-win solution. In an attempt to help the poor share the rewards of the country's anticipated biofuel boom, the expansion of jatropha production is taking place through the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS). Under proposed plans, local communities will be paid to plant, tend and harvest the crop on common land. But critics argue that once jatropha is in the ground, livelihoods will become irrevocably tied to the productivity of the crop and the stability of its market price. While jatropha supporters point to the crop's near-magical ability to tolerate harsh, drought-like conditions, others have suggested that official estimates of its productivity on suboptimal land have been exaggerated. If the crop fails to live up to expectations the poor will have traded access to precious land in return for neither food, fodder, fuel, medicine - nor a source of income. "Eventually, planting these areas with biofuels might force people from the land," continues Singh. "We are concerned they might become ecological refugees and migrate to urban areas for their livelihoods." Redefining the commons FES has been working with state governments to help communities achieve legal recognition for the wasteland commons. It has already assisted communities in six states to establish long-term leases over the areas they depend on and is promoting investment in land restoration through the NREGS. The organisation is also working with the South Asia Pro-Poor Livestock Programme to document the value of the commons to poor livestock keepers, to protect the land and to help other communities diversify into animal husbandry. Despite progress in these areas, India is simply too large for FES to protect all the affected communities and jatropha plantations have already swallowed-up pockets of common land. Significantly, in the same month that the government unveiled its new biofuels target, state-run refinery Bharat Petroleum announced plans to invest US$480 million in jatropha production. The race for 'wasteland' is well underway. -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From edelman at greenidea.eu Fri Nov 28 20:33:00 2008 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:33:00 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public tran In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <492FD6EC.2070105@greenidea.eu> Hi Patrick, hi all, I thank you for the invite to Stuttgart. I believe I understand how it works there, and I have been to a lot of professional sustainable transport-related events, and I know people who attend CfM events. I have already explained my reasons for opting out, and will hopefully explain this more precisely in my delayed response to Rainer. Just one comment for now, see below. Patrick.Daude@stuttgart.de wrote: > > Dear Todd, > > [...] > Our Premium Partners do note have any influence on the topics that are > treated within the network. [...] PLEASE, can you help explain their rationale for being involved? Successful businesses don't just randomly create and place imagery related to their brand and products. I may ask Rainer the same question - and I encourage others on this List etc. to answer it - but I will keep this email short. Thanks, T > Best wishes, > Patrick Daude > > > Coordinator Global Network "Cities for Mobility" > City Hall of Stuttgart, Germany > Mayor's Policy Office > Policy Coordination and Planning > Rathaus, Marktplatz 1 > D-70173 Stuttgart > > Telephone: +49 711/ 216 - 85 01 > Fax: +49 711/ 216 - 61 05 > E-Mail: patrick.daude@stuttgart.de > Website: http://www.cities-for-mobility.org > > ----- Weitergeleitet von Patrick Daude/OB-S/LHS/DE am 27.11.2008 11:30 > ----- > *"pdaude78" * > Gesendet von: notify@yahoogroups.com > > 27.11.2008 10:33 > > > An > patrick.daude@stuttgart.de, wolfgang.forderer@stuttgart.de, > n.leyva@stuttgart.de > Kopie > > Thema > Fwd: Re: [sustran] Re: CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - > public tran > > > > > > > > > > --- In Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. Rainer Rothfuss" > wrote: > > > > Dear Todd Edelmann, > > sorry for expressing myself so directly but your evaluation of > "Cities for Mobility" has absolutely nothing to do with the reality: > > You say: "I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how > inclusive-seeming - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the > Stuttgart-based automobile industry" > > CfM is a municipal initiative and we, as masterminds behind the > network, feel 100% committed to greening urban mobility and not > feeding any kind of industry. But, to be honest, without the money we > receive from some private firms, including our local car producers, we > could not work without membership fees and invite members from Africa, > Asia and Latina America for free (other city networks charge 8.000 > Euros per year, no matter from where you are!). > > The companies that help us to finance the work of the Municipality > of Stuttgart within the framework of CfM have agreed to give us their > support without asking anything in return. There is not even a council > or something where they could bring in their views or make their > voices heard in order to influence the work of the network. To be > honest, our somewhat depressing perception was that they don't even > care about us as we, with our almost 500 partners from over 60 > countries, are not at all important for companies that have an annual > turnover bigger than several small national economies together!! > > But, yes you are rigth, we also work on the topic of motorized > individual mobility. But we don't tell anyone what Stuttgart's car > makers would like to hear but just what we need in order to achieve > real benefits for the environmental situation in cities. To cover 100% > of all mobility demands by non-motorized mobility would be ideal - you > may be right! But the fact is that motorized individual mobility will > allways be there. So the crucial question is how we can green it (e.g. > electric mobility with light vehicles and renewable energies - that's > what we are dealing with in ongoing projects). We just dare facing > this up to now inevitable motorized 90% share of the mobility reality > that many others seem to ignore thinking that this way it will > disappear... How about you? > > In general, I'm convinced it's better to go there and ask people > what they think and want and really do before you judge them in > public... > > But yes, I agree, it's good to have different platforms for working > on the same issues. Each one will bring in new and valuable aspects. > The big question for me just is whether we shall stick to a typical > German way of thinking, I would say, that there is only one right > answer and only one solution to such a complex problem and reality as > is mobility, asking the rest of the world to obey, stop thinking and > to follow it... So I'd be glad if you acknowledged also the value of > the work we have been doing in the past years within CfM for the same > cause as yours. Thanks! > > Regards, > > Rainer Rothfuss > > ----------------------- > Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: > http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility > Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com > ----------------------- > > Dr. Rainer Rothfuss > Coordinator of International Relations > ----------------------- > Coordination Office > Cities for Mobility > State Capital Stuttgart > ----------------------- > Postal address: > D-70161 Stuttgart > GERMANY > Tel.: +49-8381-891-68 38 > Fax: +49-8381-891-68 39 > Mob: +49-177-894 08 04 > Skype: rainer.rothfuss > rothfuss@... > www.cities-for-mobility.netMessage from "Todd Edelman, Green Idea > Factory" : > > > Hi Aashish, > > > > This is an important question - which could perhaps include "Lots Less > > Cars" - and I am sure the three different > > administrator/co-administrators will answer it soon. > > > > For me it is clear that Sustran is about developing world/Global South > > issues. Very often the same messages go out on both New Mobility Cafe > > and Lots Less Cars, and while there are guidelines to make it simple > > for me what I usually do is if it something interesting and useful I > > send it to Lots Less and if even more exciting, revolutionary and > > important/critical I also send to New Mobility. And of course also to > > Sustran if applicable. > > > > I know that Eric works very hard at keeping the discussion lean and > > focused and while I sometimes object if a post I make - especially if > > I take a lot of time with it - is rejected, I see the reason for this. > > We can always post anything we want on our own Blogs, or of course > > start our own discussions. > > > > Sustran, New Mobility/Lots Less and Sustran also originate in three > > different institutions/entities, and perhaps some differences between > > them are fundamental. As for me, I do not participate in Cities for > > Mobility. It seems that the discussions held there could be useful but > > I am convinced that the whole project - no matter how inclusive-seeming > > - is in large part a greenwashing exercise for the Stuttgart-based > > automobile industry. Cities for Mobility has as one of its "mobility > > columns" the private urban car, and in (not just) my eyes this is Old > > Mobility and thus presents a fundamental difference from - and > > obviously a challenge to - the philosophy behind/purpose of the other > > lists. > > > > Regards, > > T > > > > > > > > > > > > Aashish Gupta wrote: > >> Dear Eric > >> I have gained much from the discussions at New moility cafe, > >> Cities-for-Mobility and sustrans. I have a suggestion. Cant we > integrate all > >> the lists, since all of them have a common focus. It would be much > easier, > >> as well as enlarge the discussion. > >> > >> Aashish Gupta > >> Department of Humanities and Social Sciences > >> Indian Institute of Technology Madras > >> > >> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Eric Britton > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >>> That's a good question Roland. I just tried Knoogling it and came > up with > >>> some interesting responses. You might wish to give it a try at > >>> http://knoogle.net . (And if you have suggestions for us as to > sources or > >>> other details to improve its operation ,please do . . . Eric Britton > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford > >>> Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 00:11 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Hi > >>> > >>> Is anyone aware of any work underway through the CDM, or in > negotiations > >>> around its successors, to make it easier for transport projects to be > >>> included. > >>> > >>> As far as I know, the only public transport project so far granted CDM > >>> credits is the TransMilenio busway in Bogota. The main barrier is > that > >>> transport projects usually involve policy and planning changes as > well as > >>> projects, and the methodological tests for additionality are hard > to meet. > >>> > >>> Curiously yours > >>> Roland Sapsford > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Roland Sapsford > >>> Sustainability Solutions Consulting > >>> > >>> Climate Change, Cities, Energy, Transport > >>> > >>> > >>> PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand > >>> +64-4-9341106(w); +64-4-3851105(h); +64-21-651105(m) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Dr. Rainer Rothfuss wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> A trav?s del instrumento CDM se pueden financiar proyectos para > reducir > >>> emisiones de CO2 - tambi?n en el ?rea del transporte. > >>> > >>> > >>> M?s informaciones: http://www.cdm-cooperation.de/7.0.html > >>> > >>> Para saber m?s del los proyectos ya implementados en los > diferentes pa?ses > >>> de Am?rica Latina hay que registrarse como usuario (gratuito). > >>> > >>> > >>> Clean Development Mechanism > >>> > >>> > >>> The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a project-based > mechanism, laid > >>> down in the Kyoto Protocol within the United Nations Framework > Convention > >>> on > >>> Climate Change (UNFCCC ) in 1997. On the one > >>> hand, > >>> it serves as a tool for the achievement of companies? or state?s > emission > >>> targets under minimum costs. On the other hand, it provides an > economic > >>> incentive for investments in technologies aiming at climate > protection. > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> > >>> Rainer Rothfuss > >>> > >>> > >>> ----------------------- > >>> Join the Cities for Mobility online forum: > >>> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cities-for-Mobility > >>> > Cities-for-Mobility-subscribe@yahoogroups.com > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -------------- next part -------------- > >>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > >>> Name: not available > >>> Type: application/octet-stream > >>> Size: 823 bytes > >>> Desc: not available > >>> Url : > >>> > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20081123/e813df6f/attachment.bin > >>> -------------------------------------------------------- > >>> 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'). > > > > > > -- > > -------------------------------------------- > > > > Todd Edelman > > Green Idea Factory > > > > Urbanstr. 45 > > D-10967 Berlin > > Germany > > > > Skype: toddedelman > > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > > > edelman@... > > www.greenidea.eu > > 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. > > > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with > > slight modification) > > --- End forwarded message --- > > > > > > > > > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu 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. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Sun Nov 30 07:23:46 2008 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 22:23:46 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20081123211931.05b0f708@mail.islandnet.com> References: <003901c94d57$5df01b40$19d051c0$@britton@ecoplan.org> <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> <6.2.3.4.2.20081123211931.05b0f708@mail.islandnet.com> Message-ID: <4931C0F2.2050909@gmail.com> Hi, This discussion goes directly to the issue of what measures can have a long term (positive) effect in transport. Recently I've been having discussions with city planners and urbanists about it, and to an extent they may be right when they say that before jumping to measures on transport one should work on the purposes of trips and how to reduce those trips. This would be similar to the shift from purely technological measures (i.e. change the bus, use cleaner fuels) to more demand-based measures. In this case, it would be going further back and asking why demand is there and trying to reduce those motives (the typical answer being higher densities and mixed land uses, etc, but more measures can be implemented!). It may be easier to work on this with high-income population than low-income (similar to the Annex I and Non-Annex I issue), but the former are those who are more mobile than the latter and probably more polluting in some cases. A related anecdote: I was once in a conversation with an employee of a UN agency who worked in transport. He told us that he loved his 4500 cc car, and that regardless of increasing fuel prices he'd still come to the office by car. Thankfully, he was seldom at the office... The above is not really a novel idea, but good to think about it in the context of carbon, transport and financing, and what to do and discuss in Copenhaguen (all the best to those who can make it there). Best regards, Carlos. Todd Alexander Litman wrote: > I agree with Lee on two points. First, investments in alternative > modes by themselves are an inefficient way to conserve energy and > reduce emissions. It is far more important to implement pricing > reforms which discourage automobile travel and encourage the purchase > of more efficient vehicles then to simply invest in public transit, > since only about 5% of fuel savings result from shifts to public > transit - the rest results from other changes such as the purchase of > more efficient vehicles, and shifts to walking, cycling, ridesharing, > and closer destinations. > > Second, public transit service improvements are justified on many > other grounds besides climate change emissions, so focusing on this > one objective would result in underinvestment in public transit. It > is far better to justify public transit improvements due to their > economic and social benefits (congestion reduction, road and parking > facility cost savings, consumer savings, accident reductions, > improved mobility for non-drivers) rather than focusing on energy > conservation and emission reduction benefits. > > That being said, climate change concerns are stimulating a lot of > rethinking about transportation planning goals and practices. If the > CDM can help justify some additional investment in efficient > transportation, I'm all for it. Ideally, climate change emission > reduction advocates should work with other interest groups (economic > development, traffic safety, equity, public health, consumer > interests, etc.) to build support for the substantial changes > required to create truly sustainable transportation systems. > > Let me tell you a related story. I'm currently writing a paper > concerning methods for monetizing (measuring in monetary units) > carbon emissions. There are two general approaches: damage costs, > which may be hundreds of dollars per tonne, and control costs, which > are probably much lower, perhaps $30-50 per tonne. A colleague wants > to use the higher value for analysis because he assumes that will > justify greater reductions in vehicle travel, but I'm not convinced. > A very high climate change value will justify technical solutions > that ONLY reduce emissions (such as regulations and incentives that > increase fuel efficiency or shifts to alternative fuels) since the > high value implies that climate change is the dominant, while a lower > value will justify more mobility management solutions that reduce > total vehicle travel and therefore help achieve multiple planning objectives. > > For more information see: > "Win-Win Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies" > (www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ) > "Smart Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies" > (www.vtpi.org/ster.pdf ) > "Carbon Taxes: Tax What You Burn, Not What You Earn" > (www.vtpi.org/carbontax.pdf ) > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > > At 09:24 AM 23/11/2008, Lee Schipper wrote: > >> Why would you want public transport in CDM, when the >> values/costs/benefits of time saved, lower air pollution, less >> noise, greater rider security and safety etc DWARF the carbon >> values...and when adding a CDM component slows the entire >> improvement of transport down immensely while all of us don our >> green visors and count carbon. >> >> Counting that carbon is VERY hard >> (http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.aspx examined some of these >> issues including a paper we wrote for the 2007 ECEEE conference on >> measuring CO2 emissions CHANGES from transport projects). >> >> I'm VERY worried about CO2 in transport, but I'm convinced CDM and >> like process that link to "carbon finance" either slow the process >> down (see GEF grant progress), put too much focus on reducing CO2 >> rather than improving transport (they are not the same), filter our >> vision to projects whose carbon savings are relatively to measure >> (hybrid buses, proven but expensive) or ones with tiny and often >> questionable savings (like small additions of biodiesel to bus fuel). >> >> I'm not against rewarding carbon saving or efforts at mass transit, >> but the proportions of $ for carbon are tiny compared to the overall >> pot of time, transport, urban development. Can Mexico City honestly >> say that their Metrobus was "additional", ie., would not have been >> undertaken to save $$ millions in saved time, accidents, local air >> pollution, reduced numbers of cars on the road (according to a nice >> report by the Instituto Nacional de Ecologia published in 2006) for >> a few hundred thousand $ of carbon finance funds arranged after the fact? >> >> Juerg Gruetter has made a good case for CDM and carbon financing of >> BRT projects, but in the end these only affect a small amount of CO2 >> (in buses) and, while they draw a modest number of riders from cars, >> still leave the rest of cars untouched. My fear is that CDM draws >> interest to those easily bankable projects and away from the much >> greater challenge, use of cars and other light duty vehicles. >> >> In four Latin American cities (Mexico City region, Bogota, S Paulo, >> and Santiago) cars and taxis appear to account for 65-70% of all >> direct GHG emissions from road traffic (including trucks). Without >> policies and projects that reduce that traffic (and its growth) >> SIGNIFICANTLY, the savings from 'urban transport projects" in >> general will be small. Since most fo the carbon is in cars, most of >> the change has to come from cars. How do you measure that and sell >> the results against a rapidly growing baseline? And cars and trucks >> are not "cdm-able", i.e., owned by the kinds of entities that can be >> part of CDM directly. Of course $$ could be given to cities who >> undertook strong transport measures, but again, why would they not >> undertake those measures anyway? And why would national governments >> not want to promulgate fuel economy standards to save oil? >> >> In short, is this really about $$ or political will? >> Finally, consider the following very rough numbers that illustrate >> the scale of the problem. >> * World GDP 60 Trillion (until the crash) >> * World gross investment $10 TN (remember buildings burn energy >> leading to CO2 emissions, too) >> * Investments in transport infrastructure (road, rail, port, >> air, facilities like transfer stations) - my guess $1-2 TN >> * World purchase of private household transport equipment $1TN >> (40 mn cars $25 000/car) >> * World purchase of road fuels (roughly 2 TN) >> >> Are we really talking about putting hundreds of billions YEARLY >> into doing what is the right thing even if CO2 was not a problem. >> Conversely, if we had a CO2 free fuel tomorrow, we'd still have a >> traffic mess worldwide. So maybe focusing on transport and Co2, >> rather than more broadly clean development - and understanding why >> developing cities' traffic is such a mess even before CO2 is >> considered - is higher on the agenda. If there are going to be N-S >> transfers, aka Overseas Development Assistance, is CO2 "abatement" >> the most cost effective way of using money for development? >> >> Realistically, how can CDM have more than a demonstration effect? If >> so, then let's forget CDM as such and move to a wider effort to >> >> Demonstrate various regional policy and technical solutions, >> investing (for once) in enough competence building and data >> gathering so localities can monitor traffic, emissions, fuel, safety >> etc better. Our EMBARQ project in se Asia (PSUTA) discovered that >> authorities' ability to monitor even the most elementary problems of >> transport was pretty meager >> --http://embarq.wri.org/en/ProjectCitiesDetail.aspx?id=9 >> >> Some of these issues will be discussed at the upcoming COP (Dec 5). >> Maybe Climate negotiations are not the right place to decide how to >> use the streets? There will also be a spirited discussion during >> Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington DC, both >> during the meeting itself and at a special side event Friday 16 >> January. This note is copied to several of those involved in these >> discussions. Watch this space! >> >> Lee Schipper, Ph.D >> Project Scientist >> Global Metropolitan Studies >> 2614 Dwight Way 2nd floor >> University of California Berkeley >> CA 94720-1782 USA >> TEL +1 510 642 6889 >> FAX +1 510 642 6061 >> CELL +1 202 262 7476 >> > > > Sincerely, > Todd Alexander Litman > Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) > litman@vtpi.org > Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 > 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA > "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 schipper at wri.org Sun Nov 30 07:47:51 2008 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 17:47:51 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport References: <003901c94d57$5df01b40$19d051c0$@britton@ecoplan.org> <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> <6.2.3.4.2.20081123211931.05b0f708@mail.islandnet.com> <4931C0F2.2050909@gmail.com> Message-ID: <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C031F9F7A@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> A key question, Carlos is "Who is coming to Poznan or (next year) Copenhagen who is empowered to grant bus concessions, build apartments around metro stops, put up bike racks and start bike sharing in large cities, or turn a street into a pedestrian zone." I fear that answer is "no one". Some officials who will be there can affect fuel economy standards -- the event I organized with ITF last December around that theme in Bali was packed. But as you say, one has to go far beyond what technology can do to vehicles and fuels. The people who can do that are far beyond the COP process. Are they out of reach? Is development strategy itself in reach of this conference? Hopefully some of the events Sergio and Cornie have organized will address these issues. I'll be waiting in Berkeley for the news. Lee ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------- -----Original Message----- From: Carlosfelipe Pardo [mailto:carlosfpardo@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 2:24 PM To: Todd Alexander Litman Cc: Lee Schipper; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org; Holger Dalkmann; Cornie Huizenga; jleather@adb.org; Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com; akopp@worldbank.org; Sergio Sanchez Subject: Re: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport Hi, This discussion goes directly to the issue of what measures can have a long term (positive) effect in transport. Recently I've been having discussions with city planners and urbanists about it, and to an extent they may be right when they say that before jumping to measures on transport one should work on the purposes of trips and how to reduce those trips. This would be similar to the shift from purely technological measures (i.e. change the bus, use cleaner fuels) to more demand-based measures. In this case, it would be going further back and asking why demand is there and trying to reduce those motives (the typical answer being higher densities and mixed land uses, etc, but more measures can be implemented!). It may be easier to work on this with high-income population than low-income (similar to the Annex I and Non-Annex I issue), but the former are those who are more mobile than the latter and probably more polluting in some cases. A related anecdote: I was once in a conversation with an employee of a UN agency who worked in transport. He told us that he loved his 4500 cc car, and that regardless of increasing fuel prices he'd still come to the office by car. Thankfully, he was seldom at the office... The above is not really a novel idea, but good to think about it in the context of carbon, transport and financing, and what to do and discuss in Copenhaguen (all the best to those who can make it there). Best regards, Carlos. Todd Alexander Litman wrote: > I agree with Lee on two points. First, investments in alternative > modes by themselves are an inefficient way to conserve energy and > reduce emissions. It is far more important to implement pricing > reforms which discourage automobile travel and encourage the purchase > of more efficient vehicles then to simply invest in public transit, > since only about 5% of fuel savings result from shifts to public > transit - the rest results from other changes such as the purchase of > more efficient vehicles, and shifts to walking, cycling, ridesharing, > and closer destinations. > > Second, public transit service improvements are justified on many > other grounds besides climate change emissions, so focusing on this > one objective would result in underinvestment in public transit. It > is far better to justify public transit improvements due to their > economic and social benefits (congestion reduction, road and parking > facility cost savings, consumer savings, accident reductions, > improved mobility for non-drivers) rather than focusing on energy > conservation and emission reduction benefits. > > That being said, climate change concerns are stimulating a lot of > rethinking about transportation planning goals and practices. If the > CDM can help justify some additional investment in efficient > transportation, I'm all for it. Ideally, climate change emission > reduction advocates should work with other interest groups (economic > development, traffic safety, equity, public health, consumer > interests, etc.) to build support for the substantial changes > required to create truly sustainable transportation systems. > > Let me tell you a related story. I'm currently writing a paper > concerning methods for monetizing (measuring in monetary units) > carbon emissions. There are two general approaches: damage costs, > which may be hundreds of dollars per tonne, and control costs, which > are probably much lower, perhaps $30-50 per tonne. A colleague wants > to use the higher value for analysis because he assumes that will > justify greater reductions in vehicle travel, but I'm not convinced. > A very high climate change value will justify technical solutions > that ONLY reduce emissions (such as regulations and incentives that > increase fuel efficiency or shifts to alternative fuels) since the > high value implies that climate change is the dominant, while a lower > value will justify more mobility management solutions that reduce > total vehicle travel and therefore help achieve multiple planning objectives. > > For more information see: > "Win-Win Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies" > (www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ) > "Smart Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies" > (www.vtpi.org/ster.pdf ) > "Carbon Taxes: Tax What You Burn, Not What You Earn" > (www.vtpi.org/carbontax.pdf ) > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > > At 09:24 AM 23/11/2008, Lee Schipper wrote: > >> Why would you want public transport in CDM, when the >> values/costs/benefits of time saved, lower air pollution, less >> noise, greater rider security and safety etc DWARF the carbon >> values...and when adding a CDM component slows the entire >> improvement of transport down immensely while all of us don our >> green visors and count carbon. >> >> Counting that carbon is VERY hard >> (http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.aspx examined some of these >> issues including a paper we wrote for the 2007 ECEEE conference on >> measuring CO2 emissions CHANGES from transport projects). >> >> I'm VERY worried about CO2 in transport, but I'm convinced CDM and >> like process that link to "carbon finance" either slow the process >> down (see GEF grant progress), put too much focus on reducing CO2 >> rather than improving transport (they are not the same), filter our >> vision to projects whose carbon savings are relatively to measure >> (hybrid buses, proven but expensive) or ones with tiny and often >> questionable savings (like small additions of biodiesel to bus fuel). >> >> I'm not against rewarding carbon saving or efforts at mass transit, >> but the proportions of $ for carbon are tiny compared to the overall >> pot of time, transport, urban development. Can Mexico City honestly >> say that their Metrobus was "additional", ie., would not have been >> undertaken to save $$ millions in saved time, accidents, local air >> pollution, reduced numbers of cars on the road (according to a nice >> report by the Instituto Nacional de Ecologia published in 2006) for >> a few hundred thousand $ of carbon finance funds arranged after the fact? >> >> Juerg Gruetter has made a good case for CDM and carbon financing of >> BRT projects, but in the end these only affect a small amount of CO2 >> (in buses) and, while they draw a modest number of riders from cars, >> still leave the rest of cars untouched. My fear is that CDM draws >> interest to those easily bankable projects and away from the much >> greater challenge, use of cars and other light duty vehicles. >> >> In four Latin American cities (Mexico City region, Bogota, S Paulo, >> and Santiago) cars and taxis appear to account for 65-70% of all >> direct GHG emissions from road traffic (including trucks). Without >> policies and projects that reduce that traffic (and its growth) >> SIGNIFICANTLY, the savings from 'urban transport projects" in >> general will be small. Since most fo the carbon is in cars, most of >> the change has to come from cars. How do you measure that and sell >> the results against a rapidly growing baseline? And cars and trucks >> are not "cdm-able", i.e., owned by the kinds of entities that can be >> part of CDM directly. Of course $$ could be given to cities who >> undertook strong transport measures, but again, why would they not >> undertake those measures anyway? And why would national governments >> not want to promulgate fuel economy standards to save oil? >> >> In short, is this really about $$ or political will? >> Finally, consider the following very rough numbers that illustrate >> the scale of the problem. >> * World GDP 60 Trillion (until the crash) >> * World gross investment $10 TN (remember buildings burn energy >> leading to CO2 emissions, too) >> * Investments in transport infrastructure (road, rail, port, >> air, facilities like transfer stations) - my guess $1-2 TN >> * World purchase of private household transport equipment $1TN >> (40 mn cars $25 000/car) >> * World purchase of road fuels (roughly 2 TN) >> >> Are we really talking about putting hundreds of billions YEARLY >> into doing what is the right thing even if CO2 was not a problem. >> Conversely, if we had a CO2 free fuel tomorrow, we'd still have a >> traffic mess worldwide. So maybe focusing on transport and Co2, >> rather than more broadly clean development - and understanding why >> developing cities' traffic is such a mess even before CO2 is >> considered - is higher on the agenda. If there are going to be N-S >> transfers, aka Overseas Development Assistance, is CO2 "abatement" >> the most cost effective way of using money for development? >> >> Realistically, how can CDM have more than a demonstration effect? If >> so, then let's forget CDM as such and move to a wider effort to >> >> Demonstrate various regional policy and technical solutions, >> investing (for once) in enough competence building and data >> gathering so localities can monitor traffic, emissions, fuel, safety >> etc better. Our EMBARQ project in se Asia (PSUTA) discovered that >> authorities' ability to monitor even the most elementary problems of >> transport was pretty meager >> --http://embarq.wri.org/en/ProjectCitiesDetail.aspx?id=9 >> >> Some of these issues will be discussed at the upcoming COP (Dec 5). >> Maybe Climate negotiations are not the right place to decide how to >> use the streets? There will also be a spirited discussion during >> Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington DC, both >> during the meeting itself and at a special side event Friday 16 >> January. This note is copied to several of those involved in these >> discussions. Watch this space! >> >> Lee Schipper, Ph.D >> Project Scientist >> Global Metropolitan Studies >> 2614 Dwight Way 2nd floor >> University of California Berkeley >> CA 94720-1782 USA >> TEL +1 510 642 6889 >> FAX +1 510 642 6061 >> CELL +1 202 262 7476 >> > > > Sincerely, > Todd Alexander Litman > Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) > litman@vtpi.org > Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 > 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA > "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 litman at vtpi.org Sun Nov 30 10:26:53 2008 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 17:26:53 -0800 Subject: [sustran] CDM Projects (Clean Development Mechanism) - public transport In-Reply-To: <4931C0F2.2050909@gmail.com> References: <003901c94d57$5df01b40$19d051c0$@britton@ecoplan.org> <46E2E1971BCEC1459149FBB1A4B4342C03162A47@wricsex029330.WRI.CRM.Local> <6.2.3.4.2.20081123211931.05b0f708@mail.islandnet.com> <4931C0F2.2050909@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20081129170307.109e66e0@mail.islandnet.com> Thanks Carlos. Yes, I think it is critical to understand and manage travel demand. There is a lot of specific information on ways to do this in our Online TDM Encyclopedia (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm ). It is important to understand and apply these strategies in order to maximize the effectiveness and benefits of transit investments. For example, simply building a busway or train line may do little to reduce automobile travel, energy consumption and pollution emissions if we fail to create transit oriented development (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm45.htm ) around the stations, and to improve complementary modes such as walking and cycling ( http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm25.htm ). Equally important is to implement pricing reforms, such as higher fuel taxes (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm17.htm ) parking pricing (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm26.htm ), road pricing (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm35.htm ) and distance-based insurance and registration fees (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm10.htm ). These and other mobility management strategies both support and are supported by investments in high quality transit services. In other words, we should not support transit improvements alone, but as part of an integrated program that rationalizes transport. Unfortunately, this requires more coordination than currently exists. For example, transit investments usually depend on a combination of local, regional and federal funds, transit oriented development generally depends on local and private investor actions, fuel taxes generally require state/provincial and federal action, parking pricing generally requires local action, road pricing requires local and regional action, and distance-based pricing requires reforms by regulators and private companies. It will therefore require institutional reforms and creative incentives. This is not to suggest that such changes are impossible. They are all justified for multiple reasons: congestion reduction, road and parking facility cost savings, accident reductions, equity objectives, improved consumer options and affordability, and support for various other planning objectives, and so are the best overall emission reduction solutions (http://www.vtpi.org/ster.pdf ). They are "Win-Win" strategies (www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ). In other words, they help increase transportation overall system efficiency. However, we will need to be creative and build new partnerships. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 02:23 PM 29/11/2008, Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: >Hi, > >This discussion goes directly to the issue of what measures can have >a long term (positive) effect in transport. Recently I've been >having discussions with city planners and urbanists about it, and to >an extent they may be right when they say that before jumping to >measures on transport one should work on the purposes of trips and >how to reduce those trips. This would be similar to the shift from >purely technological measures (i.e. change the bus, use cleaner >fuels) to more demand-based measures. In this case, it would be >going further back and asking why demand is there and trying to >reduce those motives (the typical answer being higher densities and >mixed land uses, etc, but more measures can be implemented!). It may >be easier to work on this with high-income population than >low-income (similar to the Annex I and Non-Annex I issue), but the >former are those who are more mobile than the latter and probably >more polluting in some cases. > >A related anecdote: I was once in a conversation with an employee of >a UN agency who worked in transport. He told us that he loved his >4500 cc car, and that regardless of increasing fuel prices he'd >still come to the office by car. Thankfully, he was seldom at the office... > >The above is not really a novel idea, but good to think about it in >the context of carbon, transport and financing, and what to do and >discuss in Copenhaguen (all the best to those who can make it there). > >Best regards, > >Carlos > > >Todd Alexander Litman wrote: >>I agree with Lee on two points. First, investments in alternative >>modes by themselves are an inefficient way to conserve energy and >>reduce emissions. It is far more important to implement pricing >>reforms which discourage automobile travel and encourage the >>purchase of more efficient vehicles then to simply invest in public >>transit, since only about 5% of fuel savings result from shifts to >>public transit - the rest results from other changes such as the >>purchase of more efficient vehicles, and shifts to walking, >>cycling, ridesharing, and closer destinations. >> >>Second, public transit service improvements are justified on many >>other grounds besides climate change emissions, so focusing on this >>one objective would result in underinvestment in public transit. It >>is far better to justify public transit improvements due to their >>economic and social benefits (congestion reduction, road and >>parking facility cost savings, consumer savings, accident >>reductions, improved mobility for non-drivers) rather than focusing >>on energy conservation and emission reduction benefits. >> >>That being said, climate change concerns are stimulating a lot of >>rethinking about transportation planning goals and practices. If >>the CDM can help justify some additional investment in efficient >>transportation, I'm all for it. Ideally, climate change emission >>reduction advocates should work with other interest groups >>(economic development, traffic safety, equity, public health, >>consumer interests, etc.) to build support for the substantial >>changes required to create truly sustainable transportation systems. >> >>Let me tell you a related story. I'm currently writing a paper >>concerning methods for monetizing (measuring in monetary units) >>carbon emissions. There are two general approaches: damage costs, >>which may be hundreds of dollars per tonne, and control costs, >>which are probably much lower, perhaps $30-50 per tonne. A >>colleague wants to use the higher value for analysis because he >>assumes that will justify greater reductions in vehicle travel, but >>I'm not convinced. A very high climate change value will justify >>technical solutions that ONLY reduce emissions (such as regulations >>and incentives that increase fuel efficiency or shifts to >>alternative fuels) since the high value implies that climate change >>is the dominant, while a lower value will justify more mobility >>management solutions that reduce total vehicle travel and therefore >>help achieve multiple planning objectives. >> >>For more information see: >>"Win-Win Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies" >>(www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ) >>"Smart Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies" >>(www.vtpi.org/ster.pdf ) >>"Carbon Taxes: Tax What You Burn, Not What You Earn" >>(www.vtpi.org/carbontax.pdf ) >> >> >>Best wishes, >>-Todd Litman >> >> >>At 09:24 AM 23/11/2008, Lee Schipper wrote: >> >>>Why would you want public transport in CDM, when the >>>values/costs/benefits of time saved, lower air pollution, less >>>noise, greater rider security and safety etc DWARF the carbon >>>values...and when adding a CDM component slows the entire >>>improvement of transport down immensely while all of us don our >>>green visors and count carbon. >>> >>>Counting that carbon is VERY hard >>>(http://embarq.wri.org/en/Article.140.aspx examined some of these >>>issues including a paper we wrote for the 2007 ECEEE conference on >>>measuring CO2 emissions CHANGES from transport projects). >>> >>>I'm VERY worried about CO2 in transport, but I'm convinced CDM and >>>like process that link to "carbon finance" either slow the process >>>down (see GEF grant progress), put too much focus on reducing CO2 >>>rather than improving transport (they are not the same), filter >>>our vision to projects whose carbon savings are relatively to >>>measure (hybrid buses, proven but expensive) or ones with tiny and >>>often questionable savings (like small additions of biodiesel to bus fuel). >>> >>>I'm not against rewarding carbon saving or efforts at mass >>>transit, but the proportions of $ for carbon are tiny compared to >>>the overall pot of time, transport, urban development. Can Mexico >>>City honestly say that their Metrobus was "additional", ie., would >>>not have been undertaken to save $$ millions in saved time, >>>accidents, local air pollution, reduced numbers of cars on the >>>road (according to a nice report by the Instituto Nacional de >>>Ecologia published in 2006) for a few hundred thousand $ of carbon >>>finance funds arranged after the fact? >>> >>>Juerg Gruetter has made a good case for CDM and carbon financing >>>of BRT projects, but in the end these only affect a small amount >>>of CO2 (in buses) and, while they draw a modest number of riders >>>from cars, still leave the rest of cars untouched. My fear is that >>>CDM draws interest to those easily bankable projects and away from >>>the much greater challenge, use of cars and other light duty vehicles. >>> >>>In four Latin American cities (Mexico City region, Bogota, S >>>Paulo, and Santiago) cars and taxis appear to account for 65-70% >>>of all direct GHG emissions from road traffic (including >>>trucks). Without policies and projects that reduce that traffic >>>(and its growth) SIGNIFICANTLY, the savings from 'urban transport >>>projects" in general will be small. Since most fo the carbon is >>>in cars, most of the change has to come from cars. How do you >>>measure that and sell the results against a rapidly growing >>>baseline? And cars and trucks are not "cdm-able", i.e., owned by >>>the kinds of entities that can be part of CDM directly. Of course >>>$$ could be given to cities who undertook strong transport >>>measures, but again, why would they not undertake those measures >>>anyway? And why would national governments not want to promulgate >>>fuel economy standards to save oil? >>> >>>In short, is this really about $$ or political will? >>>Finally, consider the following very rough numbers that illustrate >>>the scale of the problem. >>> * World GDP 60 Trillion (until the crash) >>> * World gross investment $10 TN (remember buildings burn >>> energy leading to CO2 emissions, too) >>> * Investments in transport infrastructure (road, rail, port, >>> air, facilities like transfer stations) - my guess $1-2 TN >>> * World purchase of private household transport equipment $1TN >>> (40 mn cars $25 000/car) >>> * World purchase of road fuels (roughly 2 TN) >>> >>>Are we really talking about putting hundreds of billions YEARLY >>>into doing what is the right thing even if CO2 was not a problem. >>>Conversely, if we had a CO2 free fuel tomorrow, we'd still have a >>>traffic mess worldwide. So maybe focusing on transport and Co2, >>>rather than more broadly clean development - and understanding why >>>developing cities' traffic is such a mess even before CO2 is >>>considered - is higher on the agenda. If there are going to be N-S >>>transfers, aka Overseas Development Assistance, is CO2 "abatement" >>>the most cost effective way of using money for development? >>> >>>Realistically, how can CDM have more than a demonstration effect? >>>If so, then let's forget CDM as such and move to a wider effort to >>> >>>Demonstrate various regional policy and technical solutions, >>>investing (for once) in enough competence building and data >>>gathering so localities can monitor traffic, emissions, fuel, >>>safety etc better. Our EMBARQ project in se Asia (PSUTA) >>>discovered that authorities' ability to monitor even the most >>>elementary problems of transport was pretty meager >>>--http://embarq.wri.org/en/ProjectCitiesDetail.aspx?id=9 >>> >>>Some of these issues will be discussed at the upcoming COP (Dec >>>5). Maybe Climate negotiations are not the right place to decide >>>how to use the streets? There will also be a spirited discussion >>>during Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington >>>DC, both during the meeting itself and at a special side event >>>Friday 16 January. This note is copied to several of those >>>involved in these discussions. Watch this space! >>> >>>Lee Schipper, Ph.D >>>Project Scientist >>>Global Metropolitan Studies >>>2614 Dwight Way 2nd floor >>>University of California Berkeley >>>CA 94720-1782 USA >>>TEL +1 510 642 6889 >>>FAX +1 510 642 6061 >>>CELL +1 202 262 7476 >>> >> >> >>Sincerely, >>Todd Alexander Litman >>Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) >>litman@vtpi.org >>Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 >>1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA >>"Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" >>-------------------------------------------------------- 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'). >> > Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" From kanthikannan at gmail.com Sun Nov 30 21:37:42 2008 From: kanthikannan at gmail.com (Kanthi Kannan) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:07:42 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: R2W and increase in business incomes Message-ID: <4932891f.0c636e0a.2eb7.1878@mx.google.com> Dear all We in the Right to Walk Foundation are trying to get 'Evidence' that benefit of sidewalks reach all sections of society. We are trying to get therefore evidence regarding China and the effect of pedestrianisation there. In our city the politicians would be against sidewalks because they will get the traders to go on a strike if we get sidewalks made. Can any of you help us in this endeavour? We are trying to submit a petition to the Chief Minister of our State regarding the necessity of having sidewalks and pedestrian crossings. Thanks and Warm Regards Kanthi Kannan The Right to Walk Foundation www.right2walk.com