 | Australia Pumping Empty: the Looming Peak Oil Crisis | The Oil Drum: Australia/New Zealand | The Bullroarer - Friday, 18th April |  |
45 comments on Policies to Develop a Low Emissions Transport Sector in Australia
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
45 comments on Policies to Develop a Low Emissions Transport Sector in Australia
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Contact
- anz at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
GAIA Host Collective
Trains have never been the primary provider of personal mobility
Factually wrong.
For over a century, the dominant means of inter-city transportation in both the USA and Europe (and I assume Australia as well) was trains. Armies planned around them in their campaigns.
And within New Orleans (and we were not unique) streetcars were the primary means of public transportation (shoe leather #2) for over 3 decades.
We had 222 miles of tracks in a dense urban network. Where I live, there was a choice of three streetcar lines within 3 blocks.
Horses were rare for personal use, even by gold and silver dollar millionaires, and used mainly for commercial hauling.
And even today, public transportation in Warsaw still has about 60% modal share (relayed to me by friend that talked with administration there).
Best Hopes for Understanding Historical Truths,
Alan
Yep, Australia, too. Well - Melbourne, at least. Our rail network in 1929, with frequencies of trains in minutes, peak/non-peak period.
These frequencies were achieved with manual signalling and track changes - a guy with a stick changed the sign, and another guy with a crowbar moved the tracks. They're twice the frequency achieved today. Yes, they ran twice as many trains 79 years ago.
In 1950 - still with the manual signalling and track changes - Melbourne had 1.3 million people, and carried 204 million passengers; that is, there 157 train trips annually per Melburnian. Nowadays we have 3.85 million people with 180 million trips, or 47 train trips per Melburnian annually. That is, trains were taken more than three times as often in 1950 as today, and again that was with "inefficient" manual signalling and track changes.
In Amsterdam and Copenhagen today, of all trips taken, about one-third are by private car, one-third by bike or foot, and one-third by public transport - buses, trains and trams.
So really the mixture of use of modes of transport you have in a city have not much to do with anything inherent in those modes, and all to do with the way you choose to run the things.
If you have a frequent, reliable, quick and pleasant service, people will use it. This is a basic principle understood by any businessperson who didn't go broke in the first six months, but is apparently a great puzzle and surprise to many public transport operators in the West.