116 comments on Does the Public Transit Model Still Work?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
116 comments on Does the Public Transit Model Still Work?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Pessimism of the Intellect; Optimism of the Will.”
—Antonio Gramsci
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
The best short & long term mass-transit solution is the bicycle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle#Performance
excerpt:
--------------
In both biological and mechanical terms, the bicycle is extraordinarily efficient. In terms of the amount of energy a person must expend to travel a given distance, investigators have calculated it to be the most efficient self-powered means of transportation.1 From a mechanical viewpoint, up to 99% of the energy delivered by the rider into the pedals is transmitted to the wheels, although the use of gearing mechanisms may reduce this by 10-15% 2 9. In terms of the ratio of cargo weight a bicycle can carry to total weight, it is also a most efficient means of cargo transportation.
A human being travelling on a bicycle at low to medium speeds of around 10-15 mph (16-24 km/h), using only the energy required to walk, is the most energy-efficient means of transport generally available. On firm, flat, ground, a 70 kg man requires about 100 watts to walk at 5 km/h. That same man on a bicycle, on the same ground, with the same power output, can average 25 km/h, so energy expenditure in terms of kcal/kg/km is roughly one-fifth as much.
-------------
Building enclosed and elevated [solar powered or windmills for heat or cooling] bicycle freeways is by far the best solution. There is no detritus requirement except to build the infrastructure, then everything is biosolar after the system is up and running. Food ingestion for transport distance is the most efficient we can do.
A nationwide crash program to build this would save so much energy that those unable to pedal, due to age or handicap, could drive Hummers, and it would still be just a drop in the bucket.
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Or imagine a pedal-powered commuter train of thirty riders in a highly aerodynamic bullet on steel wheels to lower rolling resistance to a minimum:
From WIKIPEDIA again:
---------------------
Even at moderate speeds, most cycling energy is spent in overcoming aerodynamic drag, which increases with the square of speed; therefore, power needs increase approximately with the cube of speed.
Typical speeds for bicycles are 16 to 32 km/h (10 to 20 mph). On a fast racing bicycle, a reasonably fit rider can ride at 50 km/h (30 mph) on flat ground for short periods. The highest speed ever officially attained on the flat, without using motor pacing and wind-blocks, is by Canadian Sam Whittingham, who in 2002 set a 130.36 km/h (81.00 mph) record on his highly aerodynamic faired recumbent bicycle. This stands as the official record for all human-powered vehicles.
----------------
Sam, obviously a world class sprinter, had to break his own wind, and suffered the full effects of drag. But a bullet train would share the frontal wind resistance and the final drag over thirty riders allowing them a much easier pedaling effort. In other words, for the same individual effort of going 10mph on an unfaired rubber-tired bicycle, the thirty man team might be able to cruise at 30-35 mph-- which is far faster than most commuting rush hour speeds!
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
The problem remains - trucks. Then the intersections have to be really smart.
No, think more wildly. Thirty recumbents on a four steel wheel frame, but only 2 or 3 ft high, same width, fully enclosed like the Japanese bullet train, but no gaps. Frontal resistance and trailing drag minimized. Dedicated rail path with no intersections.
When I ride my bicycle, I try my best to synchronize with the streelights so I do not have to use my brakes--I HATE scrubbing off my own energy. Those pedal commuters who have to cover a longer distance would welcome a 'chain gang' effort to reduce the required energy vs. covering this distance alone.
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
My system would have these sails moving to and fro and people accelerate to them from the curb and break from them in a converse fashion. Dynamic - riders join and leave. Hills present a problem - and thats where your powered system would excel.
Bike use is a lot better for energy consumption than car use, but it would be interesting to take the 10-1 ag conversion into account. My point is there is no free lunch with the energy. Your theoretical pedal train has one problem. At the start of the trip it will need electric motor assist becuse there are few passengers to pedal. Pedal plus batteries? (store extra pedal power when full)
Bicycles have the same problem of motorcycles: It's a 2-wheel balancing device. Ice can cause a car to go into a flat spin, but 2-wheel devices wreck right on the spot. Usually, you can recover from a spin when your car starts to yaw, but bikes fall down, not yaw. Fortunately for bicycles you are going slower.
A self-solving problem is how lots of people are now badly out of shape. Not for long! :)
EVs at least have the weight of batteries to add stability.
Instability is the major deterrent to scooters and motorcycles. The second is exposure to weather. Cold weather sure deters motorcyclists! But sooner or later gas prices will have to deter driving cars. The scooter could end up being the choice of the working poor who must still commute. And eventually, the bicycle. Public transit in suburbs will remain unviable for some time if not for good. Bike to buses? Possible.
I've covered the issue of escalating gas prices on ordinary commuters in other threads. I used examples with actual cases with coworkers living gallons away. Any step away from the car is easally called a step down in living standards. You either use up more time to commute or expose yourself to danger or both. (car > bus: time, car > motorcycle: danger, car > bicycle: time + danger)
If the average Miamian lives 1.8 miles from a station, biking to the station, parking or taking a fold-up bike, seems QUITE viable.
One thing. If a lot of transit capacity is needed cheap, there are the old fashioned yellow school bus! No A/C but windows can be opened! That would be the "Cuban method" of ramping up transit cheap. Use what you already have, since the Fed's priority is the No Billionaire Left Behind tax cuts and gratuitous wars.
www.zemusa.com
He doesn't have much use for Rhoades Cars.
Lightfoot claims their semi-upright utility trikes are as stable as any quad:
http://www.lightfootcycles.com/index.htm
And 10 MPH is effortless once you're used to riding a bike.
Cheaper and easier than building overhead bikeways, let's require bicyclists to become trained and licensed, and then make automobile drivers responsible for any collisions between moving motorists and bicyclists. Then everyone can just bike on the roads like most of us who bike regularly do anyway.
If oil became really expensive, I would expect to see suburbs slowly disappear and human transportation switch to walking/biking/buses/trains. That's essentially where we were before the oil age, and it's certainly still available as a fallback if needed. Except for the suburbs part, we could get most of the way there in 5 years if we had to. The suburbs part means that it would take many decades.
A sailboat goes on wind until it wears out(*), which kind of puts it on a different efficiency scale.
* - I think I'd rather pay for bike repairs ;-)
For commuting I do not recommend sailboats, but as a pleasant way enjoy one's life, sailing is as much fun as you can have with your clothes on.
BTW, sailmakers get approximately sweatshop wages for doing highly skilled work. It seems (to me) that everybody and her sister-in-law wants to become a sailmaker.
Sailing instructors do not make enough to support a family, but, OHHHHHH do we ever have fun! My own solution has been to get my income from other sources and donate my skills to teach sailing for fun. And although I can fix my own bikes, I do take them to a master mechanic, because I'd rather spend my time having fun rather than replacing spokes, etc.
(even when the "boat owners" and "bicyclists" are the same person)
(For self-protection, some of my best friends have power boats and are nice people. Not all rich people who own 80 foot power yachts or 45 ft. sport-fisherman boats are slobs.)
Most rich folk I know buy their slips and regard them as good investments: We are looking at six digits to the left of the decimal point here. Indeed, the price of slips for big boats in desirable locations has gone up, I'd estimate, at two or three times the rate of prices of luxury homes over the past fifteen years. For the price of a good slip you can buy a nice house . . . .
And is that a pulse and glide result?
And a human is about 20% efficient in turning oatmeal into mechanical power. Humans are not heat engines and are hence not stuck with the Carnot limit. They are fuel cells able to use all sorts of fuel, not just super finicky hydrogen like those other fuel cells we hear so much about.
The power capability of humans, again from Wilson, are- flat out max for a few seconds-2300 watts, for 10 minutes, 600 watts, for 1 hr, 400 watts, and for ordinary people like me, far advanced into geezerdom, for maybe 5 hours, more than 80 watts and I'm dead. 80 watts on an ordinary bike gives me about 9 mph on the level with no wind. You young guys can call this "effortless' if you want.
i am still working on my automatic bike transmission and making good progress. I figure that since the market in the US is about $4 E9 I can get maybe 1/1000 of that with which I shall save the world as I desire it.
A so-called horsepower (primitive unit!) is 746 watts
I used to walk 17-minute miles for a couple hours at a time, but age has slowed me down to somewhat over 18- minute miles, and usually not for more than 90 or 100 minutes at a time.
Since I've been on Medicare I've still been able to maintain 12 m.p.h. on a bike, but I rarely go for more than 100 minutes without a rest. Indeed, the part of my anatomy that I first become aware of is my rear end, and I stop to rest it usually about once an hour.
For long-distance riding I now use an electric-assisted bike, a Giant LaFree that I'm very happy with, and to do 30 miles on that machine is a piece of cake. Also, when one is biking home into a 15+ m.p.h. headwind, just putting the electric power on and gearing down turns what would be an unpleasant ordeal into an easy, if somewhat slow, ride.
I sail small boats (10 to 23 ft. long, mostly) and use for auxilliary power oars or paddle or 55 pound thrust electric trolling motor. My total out-of-pocket sailing expenses, including costs of towing boats on trailers is about $400 per year, (plus more if I go cruising in Caribbean or Mediterranean, etc.) and I try to sail at least 1,000 hours each summer. Most of the time I sail with a University affiliated sailing club, and once the membership fee ($200 for nonstudents, less a $20 discount for early joining) is paid I can use the boats all that I want. My big expense is driving to and from various lakes--of which there are 10,000 or more in Minnesota. However, only about 500 to 1,000 of those lakes are very good for sailing.
The ice today just finished clearing away from small lakes in southern Minnesota, and so tomorrow I can sail;-)
Or maybe this afternoon . . . .
Now, the fuel mileage skyrockets when you use less energy-intensive agriculture. With fully natural methods, you get the whole 684. Bicycles shine when combined with the natural agriculture but aren't SO good with petro-agriculture.
In the late 1990s I was in Beijing, and they still had the bicycle economy going. There was this contraption that they had put together - in the back you sort of had a small flatbed over an axle with wheels on either side, and the front was essentially the front half of a bicycle.
These things seemed remarkably efficient for carrying small amounts of cargo around town.
Then there was the time that we saw a guy who had 3 refrigerators loaded up on the back of one of these things. Relatively small fridges to be sure. It was too heavy for him to pedal so the guy was walking the thing up the street.
I expect people could design some kind of human-powered farm equipment based on peddle power that would be more effective than hand/arm powered sythes and such, but more efficient than tractors - if human labor were to become cheaper than petroleum labor.
Thus what a guy used to look for in a woman has changed, at least in some places, but not necessarily in my home town of Lake Wobegon, where: "All the women are strong; all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average."
*********************
That may have been true in Europe or Asia, possibly. But not in America. Draft animals in America were cheap because land for fodder was cheap.
You learn a lot when teaching American Economic History, which I used to do;-)