|
View:
New views
20 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
| < Prev | 1 - 2 | Next > |
|
|
Chennai monorail controversySome of you may be interested to know that Chennai (formerly Madras) in India is in the midst of a heated controversy over public transport. The Tamil Nadu state government decision to opt for a huge monorail network is the issue.
Both 'Metro' supporters and BRT supporters seem to be weighing in (with the heavy rail supporters louder and more influential it seems). http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/03/stories/2006020315440700.htm (Monorail plan ill-advised: Sreedharan)
Already the State had burnt its fingers with the "ill-advised" mass rapid transit system (MRTS) and the monorail would be its another "ill-advised venture," he said in a letter to the State Government. The State, which had asked the DMRC to submit a comprehensive report for a rail based metro system for Chennai, dashed off a letter to the Corporation recently asking it to stop all its investigations and surveys. Expressing surprise over the decision, Mr. Sreedharan suspected that the State had been "influenced by monorail lobby with its tall claims and false promises." The lobby, the letter noted, had already stalled the metro project in Bangalore. … or http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/29/stories/2006012901640500.htm (Divergent views emerge on utility of monorail project) Any comments? Paul Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy | National University of Singapore | 29 Heng Mui Keng Terrace | Singapore 119620 | Tel: ᄍ-6516 3324 | Fax: ᄍ-6778 1020 | Email: paulbarter@... | http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/faculty/paulbarter/ I am speaking for myself, not for my employers.
================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chennai monorail controversyThe history of monorails fiascos is so long, so rocambolesque (is that a word in English? .. otherwise think Cervantes), and so without real exception that one wonders about our collective memory. I started looking at them in the context of my first world transport technology survey in 1969 which gave me an opportunity to kick their wheels in half a dozen places, and yes! I did have several months of thinking maybe they had a place in the future of our cities. But these are the sins of a foolish youth, and how in the world could any reasonably informed sapient person give in to the crude disinformation machine and sweetheart deals that the monorail lobby has come up with in city after city around the world. Oh dear.
So for your reading pleasure, just below the couple of exchanges that have introduced this hot topic, I reproduce the text of “Back to the Future: Which way is the new Las Vegas Monorail heading?”, by Wayne Curtis;-)
-----Original Message----- I would suggest that concerned individuals have a look at the Seattle Monorail fiasco. It shouldn't be hard to follow if one goes to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Seattle Times websites and does an archival search.
Eric Bruun
-----Original Message----- >From: John Ernst <itdpasia@...> >Sent: Feb 6, 2006 1:11 PM >Subject: [sustran] Re: Chennai monorail controversy > >The experience in Chennai appears to be >increasingly common in the larger Asian >cities. Following some initial work by ITDP, >Hyderabad was considering a BRT system, but >monorail and rail companies quickly came in with enticing proposals. > >Typically, these companies overestimate demand >and promise a totally self-sustaining system >running with only private investment. Though >untrue, the promise is still appealing to governments. > >After one false start, Jakarta had a privately >financed monorail start construction. But the >company soon came to the government asking for a >subsidy, then stopped construction. The governor >set a deadline of 6 days ago for the company to >get started again or he would look for yet another set of investors... > >It seems monorail is an easy dream to sell, a hard one to fulfill. > >Best, >John > >At 12:18 AM 2/6/2006, Paul Barter wrote: >>content-class: urn:content-classes:message >>Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >> boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C62AED.77CA1878" >> >>Some of you may be interested to know that >>Chennai (formerly Madras) in India is in the >>midst of a heated controversy over public transport. >> >>The Tamil Nadu state government decision to opt >>for a huge monorail network is the issue. >>See >><http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=chennai+monorail&btnG=Search+News>http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=chennai+btnG=Search+News >>for the latest. >> >>Both 'Metro' supporters and BRT supporters seem >>to be weighing in (with the heavy rail >>supporters louder and more influential it seems). >> >><http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/03/stories/2006020315440700.htm>http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/03/stories/2006020315440700.htm >>(Monorail plan ill-advised: Sreedharan) >>"The Tamil Nadu Government's decision to go for >>monorail for Chennai city to meet its growing >>traffic needs is most `unfortunate' as it will >>not help meet the transport requirement of city >>commuters," says Delhi Metro Rail Corporation managing director E. Sreedharan. >> >>Already the State had burnt its fingers with the >>"ill-advised" mass rapid transit system (MRTS) >>and the monorail would be its another >>"ill-advised venture," he said in a letter to the State Government. >> >>The State, which had asked the DMRC to submit a >>comprehensive report for a rail based metro >>system for Chennai, dashed off a letter to the >>Corporation recently asking it to stop all its investigations and surveys. >> >>Expressing surprise over the decision, Mr. >>Sreedharan suspected that the State had been >>"influenced by monorail lobby with its tall >>claims and false promises." The lobby, the >>letter noted, had already stalled the metro project in Bangalore. … >> >>or >><http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/29/stories/2006012901640500.htm>http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/29/stories/2006012901640500.htm >>(Divergent views emerge on utility of monorail project) >> >>Any comments? >> >>Paul >> >>Paul A. Barter
Back to the Future
by Wayne Curtis .....
Howard Hughes was right. He said Las Vegas could be a "city of the future," setting a course for the rest of America. (Hughes envisioned a "super environmental" city free of smog and run by an enlightened local government—but whatever.) When I read that Las Vegas had opened a new monorail system last year to whisk travelers up and down the Strip, my first thought was, Of course: all cities of the future have monorails. My second thought was, When can I ride it? Those of us who came of age making pilgrimages to Disney's Tomorrowland know that monorails produce a complicated nostalgia for the future. For me the very word "monorail" triggers a slightly faded Technicolor reverie in which my back yard has its own helipad and my wife, Zorga, wears a silver body suit and sports a stiffly epoxied hairdo that resembles an inverted chafing dish. So when I visited Las Vegas in September, it wasn't the buffets or the baccarat tables that lured me out of my hotel room before I had even unpacked. It was the prospect of a monorail ride. I made my way over to the nearest station, paid my three dollars, and hopped on the next train, uncertain whether I was bound for the past or the future.
I have my own criteria for a monorail. It has a single rail, of course. But it must also run swiftly on quiet rubber wheels right into the lobby of a hotel or an office building. There should be a soft swooshing sound as it slows; bonus points are awarded for a slight but discernible change in air pressure when it arrives. The opening of the doors should be accompanied by a soft bonging, followed by a lush female voice, at once intimate and aloof, urging one to step smartly inside. The Las Vegas Monorail gets mixed marks on these counts. Its cars, based on the five-eighths-scale Alweg cars originally commissioned by Disney, are pleasingly futuristic—not fully Jetsons, but not far from A Clockwork Orange. Most of them are wrapped in advertising, like the buses that double as billboards. A beguiling female voice beckoned me inside, but after the doors closed, the spell was broken by piped-in ads for casinos, including one in which Barry Manilow personally implored me to disembark at the Hilton. Perhaps the most disappointing thing about the Las Vegas Monorail is the route. The trains don't glide into hotel lobbies or even past football-field-size neon signs. The platforms are behind the casinos on the east side of the Strip, and getting to them from the west side requires a wearying hike across traffic and through bewildering, unmarked thickets of clanging slot machines. Once you're on board, the view out the window is sadly quotidian. The four-mile track winds behind the hotels, affording views mostly of parking lots, croupiers taking cigarette breaks, and vast, sand-colored roofs dotted with HVAC domes that shimmer in the desert heat like distant Bedouin encampments. And the ride is bumpy and not very fast, owing to track curves and frequent station stops. "I have to admit, it's a little rough," said Pedersen, who recently spent five days in Las Vegas shooting video to promote monorails in other cities. "Especially having ridden so many Japanese monorails, which are as smooth as glass." Monorails have more history than you might think. A patent for the first prototype was registered in 1821, and the first one-track passenger train appeared in 1825, drawn by a single horse. The Philadelphia Centennial Exposition, in 1876, featured a Victorian-looking double-decker steam monorail, and in 1911 the first of the modern monorail cars—those that resemble huge suppositories—made an appearance in Seattle, running on a wooden track. But not until the middle of the past century did America reach the brink of its golden Monorail Age. In 1961 Disney nearly tripled the length of its 1959 Tomorrowland monorail, to two and a half miles, and made it as much a form of transportation as an amusement ride. A year later Seattle opened its mile-long monorail linking downtown to the World's Fair grounds and the Space Needle. A 1964 Saturday Evening Post article painted a glorious picture of tomorrow: "After reaching their train via escalator, the passengers recline in molded fiber-glass seats and gaze out large picture windows as electric power shoots them from station to station at 90 miles per hour." And tomorrow was nearly here. "The climate is right for a breakthrough in urban transportation," Popular Mechanics reported at about the same time, "and those monorail builders are just itching to show what they can do." So what happened? "Well, that's the mystery," Pedersen told me. "It runs the gamut from conspiracy theories involving oil and automobile companies to the fact that they just haven't been looked at seriously because they've been at theme parks and world's fairs." I blame the future. The monorail shows that an idealized tomorrow can be every bit as encumbering as an imperfect yesterday. The monorail was twenty years ahead of its time, and it has been mired there ever since. It is to mass transportation what the theremin is to the symphony—a novelty that most people feel is best experienced once. This vexes Pedersen, who remains convinced that monorails make good practical sense—despite the fact that the Las Vegas Monorail has been plagued by problems since its opening, including metal pieces that fell into the street, trains that stopped for no apparent reason, and one that left the station with its door open. Pedersen has also videotaped monorails in Malaysia and Japan, and he notes that one-track elevated systems can be installed relatively quickly and without claiming a large right-of-way in crowded urban cores. He sees the burgeoning urban interest in trolleys and other light rail, which often blocks car lanes and contributes to ground-level congestion, as "insane." And he wishes that people (I sense that by "people" he means writers like me) would stop imprisoning monorails in the future and let them come rolling into the present.
This all sounded important, and I tried to focus on what he was saying. It was difficult. The second-floor conference room in which we sat was just yards from the elevated track, and every few minutes a monorail would streak past cinematically, filling the window with the canary-yellow cars of the Nextel train, or the Martian-green cars of Star Trek: The Experience's Borg Invasion 4D. (Resistance is futile, they read. You will be assimilated.) It brought to mind Alvy Singer's home under the Coney Island roller coaster in Annie Hall. Each time, I looked away from Myles and stared at the trains. He noticed. "I get a review of my job performance every six minutes," he said. It was more than that. Sitting in the quiet office with the monorail whispering past, I was wholly transported to another time. Here was the future—just as I remembered it.
================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
Re: Chennai monorail controversyLee, Bangkok doesn't have a monorail, maybe you were thinking of Kuala
Lumpur. I don't know if this KL system has any adherents (have never heard of one), but after opening in August 2003 to a stated - by the then PM - forecast of 80,000 daily passengers by the end of 2003, possibly by the end of 2005 they had achieved half this number. I tend to agree with Eric & Eric that it seems there are so many monorail fiascos around that you can't really just put it down to people's differing perceptions. Bangkok Skytrain (an elevated heavy rail, not a monorail) is a different story. Although financially it's been a failure, overall it's had many positive benefits for the city. Karl Fjellstrom -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+karl=dnet.net.id@... [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+karl=dnet.net.id@...] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: Tuesday, 7 February 2006 10:45 AM To: ericbruun@...; sustran-discuss@... Cc: preston@... Subject: [sustran] Re: Chennai monorail controversy But one need only look to Bangkok to see the same problem...and the Seattle Monorail, like Bangkok, or the Metro in Lima, has many adherents. Something is not convincing to certain people! >>> Eric Bruun <ericbruun@...> 2/6/2006 9:26:27 PM >>> I would suggest that concerned individuals have a look at the Seattle Monorail fiasco. It shouldn't be hard to follow if one goes to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Seatte Times websites and does an archival search. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: John Ernst <itdpasia@...> >Sent: Feb 6, 2006 1:11 PM >To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport <sustran-discuss@...> >Subject: [sustran] Re: Chennai monorail controversy > >The experience in Chennai appears to be >increasingly common in the larger Asian >cities. Following some initial work by ITDP, >Hyderabad was considering a BRT system, but >monorail and rail companies quickly came in with enticing proposals. > >Typically, these companies overestimate demand >and promise a totally self-sustaining system >running with only private investment. Though >untrue, the promise is still appealing to governments. > >After one false start, Jakarta had a privately >financed monorail start construction. But the >company soon came to the government asking for a >subsidy, then stopped construction. The governor >set a deadline of 6 days ago for the company to >get started again or he would look for yet another set of investors... > >It seems monorail is an easy dream to sell, a hard one to fulfill. > >Best, >John > >At 12:18 AM 2/6/2006, Paul Barter wrote: >>content-class: urn:content-classes:message >>Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >> boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C62AED.77CA1878" >> >>Some of you may be interested to know that >>Chennai (formerly Madras) in India is in the >>midst of a heated controversy over public transport. >> >>The Tamil Nadu state government decision to opt >>for a huge monorail network is the issue. >>See >><http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=chennai+monorail&btnG=Search+N >>for the latest. >> >>Both 'Metro' supporters and BRT supporters seem >>to be weighing in (with the heavy rail >>supporters louder and more influential it seems). >> >><http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/03/stories/2006020315440700.htm>http://www.h indu.com/2006/02/03/stories/2006020315440700.htm >>(Monorail plan ill-advised: Sreedharan) >>"The Tamil Nadu Government's decision to go for >>monorail for Chennai city to meet its growing >>traffic needs is most `unfortunate' as it will >>not help meet the transport requirement of city >>commuters," says Delhi Metro Rail Corporation managing director E. Sreedharan. >> >>Already the State had burnt its fingers with the >>"ill-advised" mass rapid transit system (MRTS) >>and the monorail would be its another >>"ill-advised venture," he said in a letter to the State Government. >> >>The State, which had asked the DMRC to submit a >>comprehensive report for a rail based metro >>system for Chennai, dashed off a letter to the >>Corporation recently asking it to stop all its investigations and surveys. >> >>Expressing surprise over the decision, Mr. >>Sreedharan suspected that the State had been >>"influenced by monorail lobby with its tall >>claims and false promises." The lobby, the >>letter noted, had already stalled the metro project in Bangalore. * >> >>or >><http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/29/stories/2006012901640500.htm>http://www.h >>(Divergent views emerge on utility of monorail project) >> >>Any comments? >> >>Paul >> >>Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY >>School of Public Policy | National University >>of Singapore | 29 Heng Mui Keng >>Terrace | Singapore 119620 | Tel: >>ᄍ-6516 3324 | Fax: ᄍ-6778 >>1020 | Email: paulbarter@... | >><http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/faculty/paulbarter/>http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/f >> >> >>I am speaking for myself, not for my employers. >>Are you interested in urban transport in >>developing countries? Then try >><http://urbantransportasia.blogspot.com/>http://urbantransportasia.blogspo t.com/ >> >>And consider joining the SUSTRAN-DISCUSS list, >><http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss>http://list.jca.a pc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >>or <http://www.geocities.com/sustrannet/>http://www.geocities.com/sustrannet/ >> >> >>================================================================ >>SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion >>of people-centred, equitable and sustainable >>transport with a focus on developing countries >>(the 'Global South'). Because of the history of >>the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. > >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >John Ernst - Director, Asia Region > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy >Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation > Visit http://www.itdp.org >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > >================================================================ >SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Chennai monorail controversyLeaving aside the issues of cost and getting to and from a monorail, and
the difficulty of network development, I believe I've isolated the fallacy that leads monorail and light rail producers to wildly exaggerated claims about the capacity of such systems. They calculate the theoretical capacity of these systems based on the number of people that these trains can carry, times the number of trains per hour that the signaling system can handle, and simply multiply. This will usually give you an impressive number, and it seems very logical. The trouble is that at high volumes even in the best of systems there is a fair amount of pushing and shoving to get in and out of the doors, so at any station with high volumes of boarding and alighting, the stop time tends to quickly move beyond allocated 10 seconds allocated. In two minute headways it does not take long before the train behind is stuck waiting and a queue forms. Hence, as with BRT the bottleneck is the station stop. However, because these systems don't exist in developing countries where demand is anywhere near high enough for this problem to manifest itself, the capacity calculation mistakenly assumes the bottleneck is the size of the vehicle and the lead time headway. -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@... [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@...] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 10:26 AM To: karl@...; sustran-discuss@... Subject: [sustran] Re: Chennai monorail controversy I was thinking more generally of large over or underground systems (the Bangkok Metro you illustrated in 2004 !). I did'nt even know about K.. thanks for the clarifications. >>> karl@... 2/7/2006 9:59:38 AM >>> Lee, Bangkok doesn't have a monorail, maybe you were thinking of Kuala Lumpur. I don't know if this KL system has any adherents (have never heard of one), but after opening in August 2003 to a stated - by the then PM - forecast of 80,000 daily passengers by the end of 2003, possibly by the end of 2005 they had achieved half this number. I tend to agree with Eric & Eric that it seems there are so many monorail fiascos around that you can't really just put it down to people's differing perceptions. Bangkok Skytrain (an elevated heavy rail, not a monorail) is a different story. Although financially it's been a failure, overall it's had many positive benefits for the city. Karl Fjellstrom -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+karl=dnet.net.id@... [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+karl=dnet.net.id@...] On Behalf Of Lee Schipper Sent: Tuesday, 7 February 2006 10:45 AM To: ericbruun@...; sustran-discuss@... Cc: preston@... Subject: [sustran] Re: Chennai monorail controversy But one need only look to Bangkok to see the same problem...and the Seattle Monorail, like Bangkok, or the Metro in Lima, has many adherents. Something is not convincing to certain people! >>> Eric Bruun <ericbruun@...> 2/6/2006 9:26:27 PM >>> I would suggest that concerned individuals have a look at the Seattle Monorail fiasco. It shouldn't be hard to follow if one goes to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Seatte Times websites and does an archival search. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: John Ernst <itdpasia@...> >Sent: Feb 6, 2006 1:11 PM >To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport <sustran-discuss@...> >Subject: [sustran] Re: Chennai monorail controversy > >The experience in Chennai appears to be >increasingly common in the larger Asian >cities. Following some initial work by ITDP, >Hyderabad was considering a BRT system, but >monorail and rail companies quickly came in with enticing proposals. > >Typically, these companies overestimate demand >and promise a totally self-sustaining system >running with only private investment. Though >untrue, the promise is still appealing to governments. > >After one false start, Jakarta had a privately >financed monorail start construction. But the >company soon came to the government asking for a >subsidy, then stopped construction. The governor >set a deadline of 6 days ago for the company to >get started again or he would look for yet another set of > >It seems monorail is an easy dream to sell, a hard one to fulfill. > >Best, >John > >At 12:18 AM 2/6/2006, Paul Barter wrote: >>content-class: urn:content-classes:message >>Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >> boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C62AED.77CA1878" >> >>Some of you may be interested to know that >>Chennai (formerly Madras) in India is in the >>midst of a heated controversy over public transport. >> >>The Tamil Nadu state government decision to opt >>for a huge monorail network is the issue. >>See >><http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=chennai+monorail&btnG=Sear ews>http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=chennai+btnG=Search+News >>for the latest. >> >>Both 'Metro' supporters and BRT supporters seem >>to be weighing in (with the heavy rail >>supporters louder and more influential it seems). >> >><http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/03/stories/2006020315440700.htm>http://w ww.h indu.com/2006/02/03/stories/2006020315440700.htm >>(Monorail plan ill-advised: Sreedharan) >>"The Tamil Nadu Government's decision to go for >>monorail for Chennai city to meet its growing >>traffic needs is most `unfortunate' as it will >>not help meet the transport requirement of city >>commuters," says Delhi Metro Rail Corporation managing director E. Sreedharan. >> >>Already the State had burnt its fingers with the >>"ill-advised" mass rapid transit system (MRTS) >>and the monorail would be its another >>"ill-advised venture," he said in a letter to the State Government. >> >>The State, which had asked the DMRC to submit a >>comprehensive report for a rail based metro >>system for Chennai, dashed off a letter to the >>Corporation recently asking it to stop all its investigations and >> >>Expressing surprise over the decision, Mr. >>Sreedharan suspected that the State had been >>"influenced by monorail lobby with its tall >>claims and false promises." The lobby, the >>letter noted, had already stalled the metro project in Bangalore. * >> >>or >><http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/29/stories/2006012901640500.htm>http://w ww.h indu.com/2006/01/29/stories/2006012901640500.htm >>(Divergent views emerge on utility of monorail project) >> >>Any comments? >> >>Paul >> >>Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY >>School of Public Policy | National University >>of Singapore | 29 Heng Mui Keng >>Terrace | Singapore 119620 | Tel: >>ᄍ-6516 3324 | Fax: ᄍ-6778 >>1020 | Email: paulbarter@... | >><http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/faculty/paulbarter/>http://www.spp.nus.edu. aculty/paulbarter/ >> >> >>I am speaking for myself, not for my employers. >>Are you interested in urban transport in >>developing countries? Then try >><http://urbantransportasia.blogspot.com/>http://urbantransportasia.blo gspo t.com/ >> >>And consider joining the SUSTRAN-DISCUSS list, >><http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss>http://list.j ca.a pc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >>or <http://www.geocities.com/sustrannet/>http://www.geocities.com/sustranne t/ >> >> >>================================================================ >>SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion >>of people-centred, equitable and sustainable >>transport with a focus on developing countries >>(the 'Global South'). Because of the history of >>the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. > >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >John Ernst - Director, Asia Region > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy >Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation > Visit http://www.itdp.org >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > >================================================================ >SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Perceived railmarket in Asia + BRT in EuropeHi,
This will definately not quiet the discussion about appropriate transport for developing countries: Tapping Into Asia’s Euros 10 Billion A Year Rail Market A STUDY of the Euros 10 billion/year Asian railway market based on market segments speaks of considerable pent-up potential in public transport investment in the region in the years ahead. It suggests that even if overall economic momentum should slow down in future, significant development potential exists in individual areas. http://www.railjournal.com/A/xfeature1.html ---- In case anyone cares, I say "On the Train" because I think train makes sense as the core of land-based transport, in a country where streets are living spaces between buildings. BUT depending on the country it should either be just long-distance intercity services (unless they have sleeper cars on buses) or in Europe the situation is certainly different in regards to historical tram infrastructure, etc. BRT is more or less guided transport, which is why I like it. Also, "On the Train" is for now focused on Europe, particularly on Eastern Europe. By the way I imagine that in the near future - when cheap and easy oil is gone - many of the ring roads etc all over Europe will just be used for BRT. Unless I am missing a major technical hitch? People might want to use rail solutions for whatever reason but unless vehicles are light too much of the infrastructure would need to be strengthened - in addition to laying of rails, etc - and the resulting cost and energy use could be prohibative. I am actually going to see if someone wants to develop some concept BRTsolutions for future of Europe's ringroads. Some more questions: - There is a short item in the new Carbusters talking about how particles from wearing-down tyres are causing health problems. Are any BRT systems dealing with this? - Also, if buses used for BRT could last as long as trains it would be great. Are buyers of buses for BRT making sure they at least get vehicles which can be recycled easily? - Do any "BRT cities" have a unique solution for urban freight? Jaime Lerner is correct in saying that it is natural that people want to be above ground, but freight doesnt have eyes. So... whatever is appropriate, and watch out for the lobbyists! - T, On the (you bought it whether you liked it or not) to the Future! ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman International Coordinator On the Train Towards the Future! Green Idea Factory Laubova 5 CZ-13000 Praha 3 ++420 605 915 970 edelman@... www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Perceived railmarket in Asia + BRT in EuropeHello,
> >This will definately not quiet the discussion about appropriate transport for developing countries: > > As has already been pointed out, in the context of developing countries mass transit is attracting many people who would have alternatively used non-motorized modes of transport (which presumably are more "sustainable"). For example, in China, bicycle rights of way (ROW) are steadily eroding as more and more road space is allocated to motorized vehicles. For BRT to be succesful, it should ideally have a completely dedicated ROW and signal priority in the congested sections. Maintaining BRT ROW often comes at the expense of completely prohibiting bicycle traffic on certain roads. Obviously the best solution would be to find a way to maintain (or even improve) non-motorized accessibility while also improving public transit accessibility. Given that these two goals may be at odds, how best to procede? From a 'sustainability' point of view: if BRT can move 15,000 people per hour in a given corridor (in say 100 vehicles) at such and such an energy consumption and cost, whereas the same road space could serve 3000 bicycles (clearly less "through-put") with no fuel consumption and no emissions, what is the better use of the space? Just some food for thought! Zvi ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Perceived railmarket in Asia + BRT in EuropeZvi,
In my view one of the most appealing things about BRT is that most new applications, including all of the Chinese BRT systems being developed, are median-aligned. The bike lanes meanwhile are side-aligned, and even when there are no bike lanes the bikes tend to ride on the side. So there is usually no contradiction between bikes and BRT and no need to choose one or the other. In fact it's the opposite. The present situation is often for high volumes of buses and bicycles to be in conflict in the side lanes, which is bad for both. With BRT you remove these conflicts, improving conditions for both. Karl -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+karl=dnet.net.id@... [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+karl=dnet.net.id@...] On Behalf Of Zvi Leve Sent: Wednesday, 8 February 2006 7:09 AM To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport Subject: [sustran] Re: Perceived railmarket in Asia + BRT in Europe Hello, > >This will definately not quiet the discussion about appropriate transport for developing countries: > > As has already been pointed out, in the context of developing countries mass transit is attracting many people who would have alternatively used non-motorized modes of transport (which presumably are more "sustainable"). For example, in China, bicycle rights of way (ROW) are steadily eroding as more and more road space is allocated to motorized vehicles. For BRT to be succesful, it should ideally have a completely dedicated ROW and signal priority in the congested sections. Maintaining BRT ROW often comes at the expense of completely prohibiting bicycle traffic on certain roads. Obviously the best solution would be to find a way to maintain (or even improve) non-motorized accessibility while also improving public transit accessibility. Given that these two goals may be at odds, how best to procede? From a 'sustainability' point of view: if BRT can move 15,000 people per hour in a given corridor (in say 100 vehicles) at such and such an energy consumption and cost, whereas the same road space could serve 3000 bicycles (clearly less "through-put") with no fuel consumption and no emissions, what is the better use of the space? Just some food for thought! Zvi ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
Re: Perceived railmarket in Asia + BRT in Europe
8 February 2006
I agree with Karl. In Indian cities too wherever BRT is being hesitatingly (Govt prefers the high cost Metro for obvious reasons) implemented (Delhi, Ahmedabad, Pune) the design comprises a central lane for BRT buses, with safe lanes for bicycles and pedestrians on the sides. Major credit for this must go to Dr Geetam Tiwari and Dr Dinesh Mohan of TRIPP, IIT Delhi who have been tirelessly advocating the need for inclusion of these vulnerable modes of traffic (walking and cycling) in planning the road design. In fact at least in such cases, it is the possibility of BRT that may ultimately make the roads in Pune safe for walking and cycling. As the once "city of cyclists" we are looking forward to speedy (and meticulous) implementation of BRT. -- Sujit Sujit Patwardhan PTTF Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum, c/o Parisar, "Yamuna", ICS Colony,Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India At 09:44 AM 2/8/2006, you wrote: Zvi,Sustainable Urban Transport --------------------------------------------------- Sujit Patwardhan Member PTTF Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum, c/o Parisar, "Yamuna", ICS Colony,Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India Tel: +91 20 25537955 Cell: +91 98220 26627 Email: <sujit@...>, <sujitjp@...> ----------------------------------------------------- ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
Re: Perceived railmarket in Asia + BRT in EuropeKarl Fjellstrom wrote:
>Zvi, >In my view one of the most appealing things about BRT is that most new >applications, including all of the Chinese BRT systems being developed, are >median-aligned. > > That's great! Unfortunately, I have never had the opportunity to actually experience a real functioning BRT system (there isn't one in Montreal, and I've never been to South America), so my comments are only based on my perceptions from reading about things. Another thing which comes across about BRT is that these systems (at least those which work well) do seem to be very well integrated with their urban environments. In North America there is not much of a culture of urban boulevards, so median alignments are more difficult to achieve. I have only been to Shanghai in China, and I did not see any BRT there, although they may be planning some. In terms of bicycles being 'squeezed off of the road', scooters seem to be much more of a problem. It seems inevitable that increased motorization (be it personal vehicles or mass transit) follows rising income levels. But it would be a pity if countries which had high levels of non-motorized transport would completely shift away from that. There seems to be very little interest in higher-end bicycles.... On the rail versus BRT debate, Singapore is also an interesting example. Apparantly yhey were told that bus-oriented transit would be a much more efficient and less expensive solution, but the authorities strongly felt that they needed heavy rail in order to create the dense development patterns that they needed given their limited land area. Zvi ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Perceived railmarket in Asia + BRT in EuropeDear Eric, Certainly The Delhi High Capacity Bus system is still
being widely talked about and they say they are going to implement the first
corridor any day now, but they have been saying that for more than three
years. The main factor seems to be that there was
simply enough money both foreign and domestic in the Delhi metro to allow the
project promoters to force through the creation of a fully independent parastatal We have been pressing for years now to get
The problem is that the DMRC and its
various domestic and foreign corporate backers are actually killing politically
much more cost effective BRT proposals. Per capita incomes in Sensible municipal authorities in India
could just make rational plans for metro in one or two high volume corridors
and BRT in other corridors and develop integrated systems, but this just isnt’ how projects are promoted and implemented in
India right now largely due to the weakness of the government. -----Original Message----- Sujit: What are the "obvious reasons" that Govt
prefers Metro? I see several reasons, some of which might be "bad" some of which might be
"good" depending upon your perspective. I think that this is the only realistic approach given
the urgency and severity of the air pollution, the traffic congestion and
the distances involved. While BRT could certainly be cheaper to construct than
the Metro, my analysis of the situation is that it would have taken
years to gather the right-of-way through the core of the city. The population
densities reach 23,000 per square kilometer. Some people and businesses would
have to be displaced and relocated. No doubt the motorists would have protested
taking their precious road space, too. Probably the policy-makers themselves
are amongst those opposing taking space from autos since they are amongst the
elite who own cars. (I think this is also one of the main reasons why
bicycle lanes are disappearing in China.) It would also take years to get the traffic
re-organized to favor the BRT vehicles consistently, reliably and safely across
intersections and through neighborhoods. It would have to be very reliable
and with long station spacings in order to have a decent speed. Speed is
important for a city with the distances of Delhi. Speed is the way that
people living in the outer areas can reach employment in far away locations and
also what attracts people out of their autos and off their motorcycles.) As I have argued here before, I think that
high-performance Metros sometimes are the only realistic answer, even
if it does cost more money. Because a nation doesn't have as much money to
spend on infrastructure doesn't change the physical and political
realities facing megacities. Finally, I note from the IRJ article posted
yesterday that the 55 kms of the Metro already open are carrying 700,000
trips per day. It must be pretty heavily used. The entire Washington DC Metro
system of about 140 kms carries the same amount and it gets plenty crowded
during the rush hours. Eric Bruun
Sustainable
Urban Transport ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| < Prev | 1 - 2 | Next > |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |