Transportation Archives

The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) just announced that the U.S. transit industry carried more than 10 billion transit trips in 2006, the first time the industry has exceeded 10 billion trips since 1957. Naturally, APTA -- the transit industry's leading lobby group -- sees this as "10 billion reasons to increase local and federal investment in public transportation."

The 10-billion milestone looks a lot less impressive when compared with the growing population of urban residents. It works out to just 42.7 trips per urban resident in 2006. (A trip, incidentally, is a transit boarding: if you get on a subway, then transfer to a bus, that is counted as two trips.)

While 42.7 trips per urbanite is more than were carried in 2005, it is not more than 2001, and it is less than in any year between 1907 (the first year for which transit data are available) and 1993.

In the meantime, transit subsidies already average 64 cents per passenger mile, compared with less than 0.4 cents for subsidies to auto driving. Over the past decade, APTA's transit factbook says that the U.S. has "invested" more than $100 billion in public transit capital improvements, mostly for expensive rail transit projects. Many of the cities that have built rail transit lines have actually seen transit ridership drop because the high cost of rail has forced them to cut bus services.

As I explain in more detail in my Antiplanner blog, the real problem with the transit industry is too much money. Because transit agencies get the vast majority of their funds from taxpayers rather than transit riders, their incentives are to build expensive, glitsy urban monuments rather than provide economical transit services to those who need them. The solution is to stop subsidizing transit agencies and instead give vouchers to transit users, who can use them for buses, taxis, or any other public conveyance.

Recently, the BBC featured my home town of Portland as an example of how good transportation planning can create a city "where the car is not king." The reporter (a vice chair of Britain's Conservative Party) was conned by Portland's planners.

In fact, Portlanders recently learned that their much-praised transportation plans were really nothing more than a scheme by what local reporters call the "light-rail mafia" to separate taxpayers from their money and enrich themselves. Far from relieving congestion or getting people to stop driving, Portlanders are so angry at the congestion and other problems resulting from the plans that they have repeatedly voted against light rail and other projects.

Worst of all, the high cost of these plans has led to a decline in urban services throughout the Portland area. This was illustrated with Dickensian irony in September when a leading member of the light-rail mafia calmly ate dinner at an outdoor restaurant a few feet away from police who were kicking a schizophrenic man to death. The budgets for police and mental health services that could have saved this man's life had been cut by the city council that continued to subsidize rail transit and high-density developments that enriched the light-rail mafia.

Now, cities such as Albuquerque and Madison are rushing to follow Portland's example of rebuilding downtown streetcar lines. Yet, despite claims of Portland's advocates, the streetcar did not get anyone out of their cars or stimulate economic development.

Indur Goklany's post (below) is accurate, but I want to explore further why death rates from disasters have declined. What is it about our wealth that makes us more resilient?

One of the most important factors is mobility. In 1900, few people in Galveston could quickly get out of the way of a hurricane. Today, most Americans own autos and can evacuate a city before a storm or leave after the storm to a safe place.

New Orleans is the exception that probes the rule. We have heard that 60 percent of New Orleans residents are black, but it has been little noted that a third of those black families do not own a car -- nor do 15 percent of white families.It is these people who were left behind when those with cars evacuated. (See this table from the 2000 census for data on auto-ownership rates by race in New Orleans, Biloxi, and Gulfport.)

This is one more example of the benefits of automobility -- benefits forgotten by those who urge people to give up their cars for expensive rail transit systems, etc.

Apparently, claims by some environmental groups in Britain about the environmental hazards posed by airport expansion have not been influential enough to convince regional governments to veto such plans.

Seemingly, one of the most basic tenets of the economic discipline - the role of specialization - has not influenced Friends of the Earth. Last week, some British news outlets reported on a claim by Friends of the Earth that expansion of airports creates an economic deficit in the UK because it encourages people to spend money outside the UK:

Friends of the Earth said visitors flying in spent £11b in the UK in 2004, while UK residents flying out spent £26bn abroad - a £15bn deficit.

The folks over at The Globalization Institute have explained the lunacy of this idea. An excerpt:

Why Friends of the Earth are happy for money to be spent in the UK but not abroad is curious. We do not worry about the trade balances between Manchester and Sheffield. Why then does it become an issue when one of the parties is foreign?

Moreover, such logic might also lead us to ask why we need competing charities whose purpose is to fend for the environment -- wouldn't it be more efficient to have just one?

Professor Bainbridge ponders whether to buy a hybrid car.

In early July, London's Congestion Charge increased from £5 to £8. Note that the congestion charge is meant to reduce congestion -- e.g. to reduce the absolute number of cars which populate London's streets during the business day.

Meanwhile, billboards have sprung up across the city advertising that Toyota's Prius is exempt from the Congestion Charge. If that isn't enough of a reason to buy your very own, the UK's very own Prince of Wales just purchased a Prius.

I wondered if the Prius possesses magical properties -- akin to the wizards' ability to "Apparate" and "Disapparate" in the Harry Potter books -- which enable it to take up less space than other cars.

But it's far more likely that this is a case of special interest lobbying... since the car produces just as much congestion as any other car on London's streets.

Are Segways good or bad for the environment? That's a question New York lawmakers are addressing as they consider a bill to define the Segway as an "electric personal assistive mobility device," rather than as a motor vehicle. Some environmentalists oppose the measure. As the NYT reports:

While the Segway may appear eco-friendly at first blush - it is futuristic in aesthetic detail and a self-balancing people mover powered by batteries - clean air proponents say the bill, if signed into law, would do harm by making life harder for pedestrians.

Walkers may be forced into cars, said Peter M. Iwanowicz, of the American Lung Association. Or, those who trade walking for Segways would contribute to pollution, he said, since they would have to plug the batteries the Segway used into the wider electric grid to charge them.

In light of a recent $1.5 billion budget request, members of Congress are asking the GAO to take a look at the Washington Metro's finances, focusing on its handling of the last $1 billion it got from Congress. So, be sure to ride the Metro next time you're in Washington, D.C. If you've already helped pay for it, you might as well use it.

The Beartooth Highway, which noted traveler Charles Kuralt once referred to as "the most scenic drive in America," may be closed for the summer due to mudslides from a wet season to the east of Yellowstone. The pictures of the slide in the Billings Gazette are rather good. While the water is welcome news to those fighting off a long drought in the area and for keeping down forest fires, it has put a road that I travel at least once a summer for the stunning views completely out of commission.

Almost ten years ago, Terry Anderson and Mark Liffman proposed that maybe it was time for the road to become a toll road due to its high maintenance costs and extensive tourist travel. By linking the costs imposed on the road by tourists with revenues to support the road, the road would be better maintained and the citizens of Montana would not be the ones footing the maintenance costs for thousands of out-of-staters each year. A multiple-use or year-round pass for locals could help keep the costs down for the frequent travelers over the roadway.

With the recent mudslides, this might be the best time yet for a toll on the road. One can guarantee that the effort to get the road back up and running would kick into overdrive if Yellowstone National Park and the State of Montana were missing out on potential toll dollars with each passing day.

Senator Dole placed a call to Andrew Card before Christmas asking the White House to consider Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory for EPA administrator, among other positions.

UPDATE: It appears that the majority of McCrory's federal and environmental experience has come in the form of lobbying for dollars for light rail transit and "smart growth" initiatives. See, for instance, his congressional testimony from March of 1997. The only difference between McCrory's "conservative" smart growth and other smart growth policies is that he seeks more of the subsidy dollars for developers directly instead of city regulatory coffers --- though he certainly hasn't been squeamish about soliciting federal dollars for the city of Charlotte itself. One thing seems rather certain: there certainly would be nothing conservative about the budget for a McCrory EPA.

Hybrid buses do not deliver the promised gains in fuel economy, according to this report, titled "'Magic' Fuel-Saving Buses Fall a Bit Short on Wonders." Yet if one reads past the headlines, it seems that many officials at transit agencies operating hybrid buses are pleased with the results, especially the emission reductions.

One of the largest market obstacles for natural gas vehicles has been the lack of an extensive retail fuel infrastructure. Gasoline stations are ubiquitous, but it's hard to find somewhere to refuel a natual gas car. Even electric vehicles are more practical -- as you can plug those in at home. As a result, this has meant that the natural gas has only been a cost-effective fuel choice for centralized fleets with their owen refuelilng stations, such as buses, delivery trucks, and utility vehicles. That may begin to change, however. Honda is announcing that it will begin selling home refueling units for natural gas vehicles, and expects to market the device in California and a few other states. It will be interesting to see whether this development increases consumer acceptance of natural gas vehicles.