Categories
Blogroll
Archive
- February 2012 (9)
- January 2012 (28)
- December 2011 (23)
- November 2011 (33)
- October 2011 (35)
I wanted to follow up my post from yesterday with another related post on energy, though with a slightly different angle. We’ve done quite a bit of international travel this summer for work, and one observation that my colleagues and I have when we come home is wow, are we behind the curve when it comes to public transportation.
Living in Washington, chronic delays, service outages, unpredictable timetables and uncomfortable traveling conditions are all part of traveling on the city’s metro rail system (Did anyone else walk home last night when you found out that metro was single-tracking trains between Metro Center and Farragut West during rush hour?). Dangerous road conditions and near misses are unavoidable if you decide to bike to work. The bus system is hit or miss – usually overcrowded, too often no air conditioning in the summer, not to mention getting caught in Washington’s horrific traffic (though, to be fair, bus lanes do help alleviate that issue). By and large, I don’t think we do public transportation as well as our international partners.
In Tokyo, predictable timetables (down to the second) make catching your train easy as long as you’re on time, because your train will be. When I was there in June, there were no disruptions even after you boarded the train – no stopping on the tracks to wait on another train to service the next station, no jerking of the trains due to excessive braking.
In Hamburg, the predictable time tables are also a feature of its functioning underground system, and like Tokyo, the rides are smooth (you barely notice you’re moving). But for me, what made Hamburg so unique was its massive infrastructure of bike lanes. There are huge paths for pedestrians and cyclists. Cyclists are separated by red lanes that are explicitly marked on the path, including the sidewalks and streets – with their own crossing lanes between intersections, featuring their own light signal to boot. And to make sure the infrastructure is regularly used, the city has set up a bike rental system at many train stations and frequent locations across town. You use either a credit card or call the number on the bike to get an unlock code so you can rent the bike – free for the first 30 minutes and 1 cent a minute after that. You can then return the bike to any drop off location. (Bike rental places like this are pretty common in Europe – think Paris. And to be fair, the United States is adopting similar programs, one notable one in Portland, Oregon. But I think they should be more common.)
So what does this have to do with energy? Well, it’s all about creating the right incentives to use public transportation to help reduce our energy consumption. In my opinion, there’s more incentive for people abroad to use public transportation because it’s efficient, affordable, predictable, comfortable –it makes sense to use it. I don’t think the same incentives exist here. Time is money, right? Where’s the incentive to spend an hour, maybe even 90 minutes, traveling from Vienna to Metro Center if you can get there in a fraction of the time and purchase a monthly spot at a parking garage for nearly the same cost of riding the metro to and from work 20 days a month. Sure, you have to consider gas prices, but do people tend to justify paying the price of gas to avoid the frustrations of area public transportation? I think more often than you might think.
What about biking to work? I know many people who would bike to work if they weren’t afraid of riding on the streets of Washington. To be fair, we have a wonderful George Washington trail and paths that run through Rock Creek Park – great for weekend adventuring – but getting downtown is no easy feat. I’m encouraged by the recent bike paths added to Pennsylvania Avenue, with the planned goal of growing the infrastructure into 80 miles of bike lanes. But can we do more? Should we do more? And how many cities across the country are doing similar programs? I’ll admit I didn’t do my homework on this one, but would encourage you to comment here and share with us if you know of successful programs across America in some likely or unlikely places.
If the right incentives were there, I’d venture a guess that more people would use public transportation. Am I wrong on that? Consider that energy consumption from the transportation sector accounts for more than 28 percent of our national energy consumption. Reducing our demand in this sector could have an enormous benefit to our national goal of reducing our overall energy consumption – making it the much easier to rely less on foreign sources of oil and reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. Getting there and developing the right incentives is an investment, but one I think that is worthy of consideration. I think we would all benefit.
Just a note: Some might
Just a note: Some might argue that comparing our public transportation to our international partners isn’t a fair comparison. I’m acutely aware that other nations might have more spending flexibility because they don’t have as high of defense expenditures as we do – the United States providing a defense umbrella for many of our partners so they don’t have to invest as much in defense. But I do think the comparisons hold.Will, You mention Portland
Will,
You mention Portland (my current city of residence) as an example of good bicycle transportation (it's much further than just bike rentals--it's also dedicated bike commuter lanes and a strong state lobbyist for cyclists, the Bicycle Transportation Alliance, which is this month holding their annual commute to work challenge: http://www.bikecommutechallenge.com/) but Portland is the jewel in the US's crown for general public transportation as well. Tri-Met is one of the best-run programs in the country, offering light rail, a streetcar, and bus service; as well as two other private bus services for suburban areas. Barring extreme weather or accidents, Tri-Met runs its services in a timely fashion with clean, operational vehicles.
Chicago, too, has a very respectable public transportation system, as does New York (in general) and Washington state, to the degree that it recently completed the first part of its monorail program after a decade of work.
I'm not clear if "we" in your post is meant to refer to DC or to the US in general, but Portland is a great example of how public transport can operate in the US. Granted, it doesn't have the population that DC does, or the space/building issues. But while many US cities may not reach the efficiency and service of other international cities, some certainly do.
Karaka, Thanks for your
Karaka, Thanks for your comments and for highlighting Portland's extensive public transportation programs. You also highlight Chicago and New York, which I agree have respectable public transportation systems. In particular, I really like that NYC has express trains - something I think DC should have planned into its metro system. The "we" in my post is referring to both DC and the United States in general. And you're certainly right that we have some amazing services in cities that could serve as a model for other major cities to emulate. You raise an interesting point about Portland, pointing to its success in part because it doesn't have the population that DC does, or the density issue with buildings. Yet, I can't help but wonder if that's not ironic - at least in terms of justifying the cost of improving a public transportation system in major cities like DC. In smaller cities like Portland, it seems to me it might be harder to have strong investments in public transportation if there's a smaller population that would be better served by an extensive public transportation system. You'd think that because major cities - like DC - have huge populations and density issues that they would have a better public transportation system - one that created some incentive for people to use it (even during rush hour). The large populations would mean a large of pool of customers and in that, more profits. And with the density issues, a popular public transportation system would help reduce congestion. Thanks again for your comments and for reading!Even the crappy Czech train
Even the crappy Czech train was better than many of my metro experiences. I have taken some pleasant Amtrak rides in the US, but it's so limited in number of routes. Chicago's El rocks too. The nation's capital is just especially bad I think. Maybe it's ironic...and maybe it's not at all...Christine, I do think DC has
Christine, I do think DC has a particularly heinous public transit system and an equally poor road transit system; it has a lot of constraints on planning and routing, including geographic, historical, and population-centric issues. Inter-city train transportation is something I'm quite interested in, as there's already a great deal of rail infrastructure in place in the States that was effectively abandoned with the advent and push towards the car. It's limited now, and will be until there's sufficient taxpayer interest in alternative methods of transportation, but there's definitely a model out there for how passenger rail could be applied to the States.
Will, I'm not sure I get what you mean about a disincentive to generate and administer public transport in Portland as opposed to DC; there's significant taxpayer interest in pursuing and subsidizing public transit in PDX. It seems counter intuitive, but there's a cultural upswing in this city that points to discarding car use entirely in favor of public transit and alternative methods of travel. The greater difference between DC and PDX seems to me to be more about land/property restrictions than population density.
I agree with your point,
I agree with your point, please share with us more good articles.1977 Buick Estate Wagon AC Compressor
Add your comment