Have we passed “Peak Travel?”
Posted by Prof. Goose on June 20, 2008 - 9:55am
Topic: Demand/Consumption
Tags: bruce springsteen, peak travel, travel [list all tags]
This is a guest post by Jason Bradford who has written here previously on "Relocalization: A Strategic Response to Peak Oil and Climate Change" and "Does Less Energy Mean More Farmers?". Jason has a PhD in Biology, is the founder of Willits Economic Localization (WELL) and runs a CSA in Willits, CA.
As a fan of Bruce Springsteen, I am keenly aware of the American fetish with the automobile, and travel in general. Check out these opening lines from the 1975 Springsteen classic “Born to Run.”
In the day we sweat it out in the streets of a runaway American dream
At night we ride through mansions of glory in suicide machines
Sprung from cages out on Highway 9
Chrome wheeled, fuel injected
And steppin’ out over the line
Baby this town rips the bones from your back
It’s a death trap, it’s a suicide rap
We gotta get out while we’re young
‘Cause tramps like us, baby we were born to run
The car does more than get you between home and work. It represents freedom, sex, power, fun, status, and if need be a way to fly away from your troubles, at least temporarily. What then, does the following graphic (updated through April) from the U.S. Department of Transportation portend for “the runaway American dream?” Has the U.S. passed Peak Travel?
Here’s the press release associated with the graphic:
Source: http://www.dot.gov/affairs/dot8408.htm
DOT 84-08
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Contact: Doug Hecox
Tel.: (202) 366-0660
Americans Drove 1.4 Billion Fewer Highway Miles in April of 2008 than in April 2007 While Fuel Prices and Transit Ridership Are Both on the Rise
Sixth Month of Declining Vehicle Miles Traveled Signals Need to Find New Revenue Sources for Highway and Transit Programs, Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters Says
WASHINGTON – At a time of record-high gas prices and a corresponding surge in transit ridership, Americans are driving less for the sixth month in a row, highlighting the need to find a more sustainable and effective way to fund highway construction and maintenance, said U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters.
The Secretary said that Americans drove 1.4 billion fewer highway miles in April 2008 than at the same time a year earlier and 400 million miles less than in March of this year. She added that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on all public roads for April 2008 fell 1.8 percent as compared with April 2007 travel. This marks a decline of nearly 20 billion miles traveled this year, and nearly 30 billion miles traveled since November.
“We’re burning less fuel as energy costs change driving patterns, steer people toward more fuel efficient vehicles and encourage more to use transit. Which is exactly why we need a more effective funding source than the gas tax,” Secretary Peters said.
The Secretary said as Americans drive less, the federal Highway Trust Fund receives less revenue from gasoline and diesel sales – 18.4 cents per gallon and 24.4 cents per gallon, respectively.
The Secretary noted that data show midsize SUV sales were down last month 38 percent over May of last year; car sales, which had accounted for less than half of the industry volume in 2007, rose to 57 percent in May. She said past trends have shown Americans will continue to drive despite high gas prices, but will drive more fuel efficient vehicles consuming less fuel. “History shows that we’re going to continue to see congested roads while gas tax revenues decline even further,” she said.
“As positive as any move toward greater fuel efficiency is, we need to make sure we have the kind of sustainable funding measures in place to support needed highway and transit improvements well into the future,” said Acting Federal Highway Administrator Jim Ray.
To review the FHWA’s “Traffic Volume Trends” reports, including that of April 2008, visit http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/tvtw/tvtpage.htm.
The great irony of this press release is that it calls for a way to continually expand funding of highways while people are finally using them less and public transportation more! While I can’t read minds, it does seem that the Department of Transportation believes that this downward trend in driving miles is temporary. They imagine that drivers will transition away from gas guzzlers and into fuel efficient vehicles, which will be sufficient to maintain future demand for high quality pavement.
What’s at stake America? I think Bruce explains it well in the 1978 hit “Racing in the Street”
Some guys they just give up living
And start dying little by little, piece by piece,
Some guys come home from work and wash up,
And go racin’ in the street
Might we have to do that racing in something other than a V8? Or will the big engine be a symbol of rebellion in the face of high prices. After all, when Springsteen coined his lines the economy was struggling from high oil prices. Why would we expect it to be any different this time…right?
Peak Travel has probably been reached with the current paradigm. There is still plenty of energy for travel if we change paradigms. The physics is simple, it costs less to move less. In congested, repetitive travel, why are we moving a ton to move a person?
We can build a physical-internet. This is the application of ultra-light rail networks.
Here is a link to the CSX commercial where they ask the reasonable question, "How much can a 50 miles per gallon vehicle (Prius) do for the environment?" And answer it as the Prius drives onto a rail car "not as much as the car that carries it." As they explain how they can move a ton of freight 423 miles on a gallon of fuel.
Morgantown's Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) system opened in 1975. It has delivered 110 million injury-free, electrically powered passenger miles.
Masdar, the zero-carbon city, is being built with PRT as the internal transport system.
Heathrow is being expanded using PRT.
PB-244854, from the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment in 1975 sketched how PRT can make our cities independent of foreign oil.
Booz, Allen, Hamilton's study in 2007 for the State of New Jersey affirms the findings of PB=244854. There are similar finding by the EU.
Anyone interested in contacts in this effort to re-tool to sustainable transportation, please contact me. My email is listed.
Thanks
Bill James
I live in Hollywood Florida near the Intracoastal Waterway.
We already have water taxis here and I have often wonder about the feasability of solar powered watercraft for mass transport along this route. I mean if they can do it in London. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/5189318.stm
You figure it would be possible to do it in the Sunshine State maybe?
BTW for racing after work I suggest ocean kayaking, I am currently lusting after a V10 surf ski from Epic Kayak. The rougher the weather the better! We are talking about a boat that is over 20 ft long and I can pick one up with one hand.
Hi Hungarian(?) kayaker,
Sorry to disappoint you but this is not exactly mass transport:-) If memory serves me correctly this distance is about 500+metres or 1km return trip. Much faster to paddle, maybe 2.5 minutes in your sea kayak?
BTW, since i don't live by the sea my kayaking is a 8kg carbon/kevlar racing K1 on the river Thames.
Thanks for the post Jason.
While we're quoting song lyrics, here is an excerpt from the appropriately titled 'Rising Down' on the recently released album of the same name by Philadelphia's The Roots. There is certainly a sense of urgency here:
Between the greenhouse gases and earth spinnin' off its axis
Got Mother Nature doin' backflips 'n' natural disasters
It's like 80 degrees in Alaska, you in trouble if you're not an Onassis
It ain't hard to tell that the conditions is drastic
Just turn on the telly, check for the news flashin'
How you want it bagged, paper or plastic?
Lost in translation or just lost in traffic
Yo, I don't wanna floss I done lost my passion
and I ain't trying to climb, yo, I lost my traction
Note: 'to floss' can be defined as showing off something that is or appears to be of high value, specifically an automobile.
Thanks for the information Prof. Goose, I would lke to see a graph similar t this that represents Peak Stupidity. I wonder if we have passed that point also ?
Peak Stupidity. I wonder if we have passed that point also
Albert Einstein. Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
Everyone takes turns at being stupid. - DAK
Thus - peak stupidity will happen just before the global population drops. A strong argument can be made that there will be a spike in stupid just before a population reducing nuclear war gets started.
Enjoyed your interview with Jeff the other day.
Thanks.
Rat
Native American males on the plains would paint themselves, run off their high spirits on horseback and then glorify it with song. That was sustainable. Our mistake was to "energize" the same need for release with machines and fuel that could not be sustainably used (still glorifying it with song). The challenge now is to come up with new ways of letting off steam that do not contract our future options.
Argueably it was even less sustainable than the automobile. Remember at the time that Henry Ford introduced the model T cities were having MAJOR polution (and disease) problems due to massive amounts of horse poop. Imagine if every car on the road left a steaming pile everyhwere it went...and you think diesel exhaust is dirty! In addition feeding the many millions of horses was putting a strain on food supplies.
"The normal city horse produced between fifteen and thirty-five pounds of manure a day and about a quart of urine, usually distributed along the course of its route or deposited in the stable. "
http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/578.html
http://www.all-creatures.org/nyca/ch-hist-19711000.html
Total Travel Miles = F ( (-)energy costs, (+)fuel efficiency, (-)distance between home/goods/services/workplace/recreationplace, (neutral?)availability of transport alternatives (mass transit/bike), (-)availability of substitute travel goods (internet/telephone/other) )
I just made that up. Make your own equation. Clearly energy costs drive travel miles down... but energy costs can go much higher and travel miles can still increase.
For example economic changes driven by energy costs may cause people to devalue central city locations and continue to drive them further away from the city... while controlling costs by buying much more efficient cars... resulting in more travel miles even in a higher energy cost environment.
The general proposition that energy costs will decrease travel miles is probably correct... but one can imagine complex effects in a changing economy that mitigate that effect... or even produce counterintuitive results.
Greetings from Melbourne, Oz
Just returned from tennis duty (we were washed out), with two conflicting examples of where I think we're standing...
News this morning on MS radio directly blamed petrol prices for reported downturns in restaurant patronage (though, we are in the middle of winter here!), as well as reporting a ten-year low in consumption at the bowser.
Yet: The idea of being on tennis duty (the boys were playing away) is to meet at a central hub, then head off in a single car. But, guess what! Four boys, four parents, four cars, 8km trip... We all went separately!
So, if we've hit a travel peak, I haven't seen it!
Regards, Matt B
"The approaching storm will engulf the unaware" (I like this analogy. Just hope it's a thundery storm and not a hurricane. And that it doesn't come during the night).
Well, each price increment makes a dent first at the lower income level... and then works its way up the income scale. Obviously the price hasn't started enough to bite in your personal situation.
You will see it... nationally... and then personally.
I believe in the U.S. spending on transportation consumes 15 to 20 percent of the family budget. There is a limit at which people begin to travel less.
I understand the enough-is-enough factor; I'm just curious what the "limit" in Australia might be and if we ever get there any time soon... Or does it all just stop! (The long, slowly declining plateau to the cliff scenario).
Regards, Matt B
I like your equation. It gave me a couple of ideas.
Mobility, like education and free speech, is an aspect of liberty. We need to equate relative to what is important. Here is a first cut at such a formula:
Mobility = Want (hope, desire) + Need - Access Penalty - Energy Penalty - Time Penalty - Distance Penalty (maybe)
In designing transportation systems, we need to emphasize the positive and drive out the negatives.
The distance penalty may not be needed as time and energy penalties likely already include the costs of distance. There are practical technologies today that make distance of less importance. You could take a ship to Europe and enjoy the travel as its own reward; the time penalty would account for the negatives.
The same point can be made for riding a bike. The trip can add to need and want.
It will require time and effort to re-tool transportation but there are alternatives. Other mobility technologies such as ET3 can take the energy and time out of travel. JPods, Vectus, ULTra, etc... can take out the access and energy penalties.
What do you think?
Bill,
Yes there are alternatives. Unfortunately, they don't include your "GadgetBahn" technologies. Do you reasonably see for instance a highly complicated, pervasive network of podmobiles on elevated, at grade or subway podtracks being easier to maintain in a post peak oil world than a concrete, or cobblestone or asphalt surface accomodating bicylces or very light electric vehicles requiring no computer gadgetry for control headed to the nearest mass transport node. That's your competition!!!!
I think Alan and others have already spelled it out for you yet you refuse to acknowledge reality.
We'll see, we could be deluded but the "GadgetBahn" claim seems an emotional decision.
Cell phones in 1984 would have been claimed as "GadgetBahn".
I am sure the Wright Brothers and Ford were told something similiar.
I am pretty sure the will be a mix of alternative transport solutions. I would recommend letting anyone try anything they are willing to risk their money on. Reality will sort out what is practical.
I like your proposal. But I like any effort to reduce complex problems to simple equations! :-)
Have you hit the share this button today? :) Danke.
I'd like to ask a question.
How does the "Government" know how many miles are driven on the highways? It appears to me that everyone just accepts the numbers put out by the Government without questioning the methodoligy of the numbers acquisition.
I don't "report" my miles driven to the government, do you? If they are guessing using fuel purchased and average fuel milage, then a chance in average fuel milage could throw off their numbers?
I don't say I flat don't believe their numbers, I am just questioning if there is a possibility that their numbers of miles driven could be wrong?
How does the "Government" know how many miles are driven on the highways?
I assume they use the highway gas tax. I assume they have to figure in MPG average.
If you google "Vehicle Miles traveled" there are different methods employed by various agencies, and quite a few exercises comparing and contrasting the different methods.
My purely non-scientific answer is they found the calculation that showed "a billion less miles," whichever one that is, and used it as the basis for their report. The same way the weather man will say rain is good if you need it for crops but bad if you need it for a parade that day.
I wondered the same thing so I checked the EIA gasoline sales data for the period DOT mentioned. Gasoline sales declined by 0.0024%. Therefore one would have to assume that a lot of gas was sold that didn't get used.
Personally, I think its impossible to measure miles driven. The DOT press release also touts a decline in emissions, so I suspect that this was the motivation for what I consider to government info that is right up there with the inflation data. Bogus.
Well, they model it, of course. And decades of using the model makes comparisons possible to view trends even if we all agree that the number is more of an index than a census.
It does not seem to me that "travel" will decline significantly. A high % of trips in automobiles are very short. 40% less than two miles, I hear sometimes? So "Peak automobile travel" maybe, but people are swapping in new modes (bike, foot, transit, telecommute, trip chaining). I highly doubt that a lot people are sitting at home with empty pantries because gas is above $4.
What THAT means is the US needs to better account for other modes of travel. Start better counting transit ridership, start counting bike riders, and carpoolers and then factor those numbers into the travel data.
Actual traffic counts are routine. Two common methods of data collection include:
1. A countbox linked to tubes crossing the road. Usually used on lower volume roads. Can be used to infer traffic composition (truck vs car)
2. Inductance loops buried in the pavement.
I believe the federal VMT data is based something like 4000 (?) count locations.
Start by realistically taxing trucks based on their impact on the interstates. Impossible, of course, given all the drivers currently going out of business due to high diesel prices.
Turn all interstates into toll roads and charge proportionate to weight and gas mileage. Provide a transponder to all who desire to use the interstate. Works like a dream on the current toll road to the Denver Airport. People can continue to race in the streets if they so desire and can afford the gas. This would be over and above the current gas tax. Provide flexibility so that this could be raised and lowered depending upon traffic patterns and revenue needs. Our current system with a fixed amount regardless of price of gas is absurd. We certainly don't tax other goods that way.
Do not, under any circumstances, provide disincentives to those who choose to purchase vehicles with good gas mileage. Do not simply charge based upon miles traveled without regard to weight and gas mileage.
Long term. Convert interstates or portions thereof to rail. Those who want to travel cross country in their cars can load their cars onto the trains. This has already been done for ferrys and certain rail routes.
Even longer term. Shut down the interstates; the cost to maintain them will just be too great.
I think that the maintenance costs will eventually take care of that.
First, it will start taking longer and longer to complete repairs. Eventually, longer and longer stretches of highway will be down to just one lane in each direction, with the orange cones remaining there seemingly forever, while completion of repair projects in progress is put on hold pending funding availability.
Eventually, the stretches of interstate that are more than one lane each direction and that are not reduced speed will become the exception rather than the rule.
Next, some stretches will have to be closed off altogether, and traffic routed around a detour. Again, these detours will remain in place longer and longer, and eventually become de-facto permanent.
Eventually, it will get to the point where it is hardly worth even trying to take the interstates. One will be able to make better time on the older US and state highways. The speed limits will be lower on those, but one will be more likely to actually travel at the speed limit. These will be kept in better repair, because so many people and businesses are located along them and need to have access.
Finally, the interstates will all just be permanently blocked off to all except official state and local vehicles. Gradually, they will deteriorate to the point where they become impassible.
...and then the dingos will start eating your babies...
RC
A large goods vehicle does around 10,000 times the damage of a private car:
http://project151.wordpress.com/2008/05/14/new-national-poll-shows-ameri...
New national poll shows Americans dislike larger, heavier trucks on U.S. highways. « Project151.org
Frost cycles do not help, but a combination of Alan's plan for shifting goods to rail, which should happen anyway with rising fuel costs, closing redundant lanes and using concrete rather than asphalt and gravel on small roads should make the system fairly robust to be kept going in reasonable shape for some time.
It would take political courage which seems in short supply but a proper charging system for the road damage caused by HGV would help a lot, and make more apparent the advantages of rail.
Under the current paradigm, peak travel has been reached. But, it is a dual dynamic, both price and preferrence. Even if prices return towards cost, demand may not improve. People are eagerly becoming reluctant to , for example, to spew thousands of pounds of carbon into the atmosphere on trips to 'vanishing coral reefs,' 'ski Kilimanjaro, etc. Probably, dirigibles are the way onward
They are rightly worried. The American consumer eats most of that driving as food-miles. As the revenue from gas tax decline they still have to keep maintaining the same number of highway miles and bridges that they have built for a long time yet. And you only need one pothole to brake the axle of coast-to-coast salad dressing truck and that will be the end of civilization as we know it...
How about we wire the mouths shut of the obese. The resultant weight loss would save millions of gallons of gas. So many of these people are so fat they have to have a heavy framed SUV just to carry the weight. Many are so big they couldn't even get in a Prius.
Nahh... Just get them a scooter.
So many people are obese because our society is broken, in my opinion. Angry and abusive suggestions will do nothing to change that.
"It's all society's fault! I am helpless!"
Is that an infant or an adult speaking?
Hi Kaishu - thank you for your reply.
Note that I didn't say "everyone is obese because society is broken." Individual choices play a role. But the epidemic of obesity that exists has deeper causes. It's a run-away train of lipids, and it's worth asking why.
There is a simpleminded appeal to the idea if only fat people would have some will power, well, the problem would be solved. Fast Food Nation, The Geography Of Nowhere, Car Sick, to name just a very few books, highlight some of what is wrong, in my opinion.
What is most telling is the rise in childhood obesity. Kids are seriously overweight before they even know how to spell. They are given crap to eat at home, at school, and everywhere in between. They often aren't allowed, let alone encouraged, to walk or bike to school. And those fat little bodies will be a burden to them the rest of their lives. It's not just in a few families or neighbourhoods or communities where this is happening - it's everywhere. That suggests to me that, at some level, in some respects, society is broken. We are failing our kids and ourselves. One of the things I like about this site is that many people can see that alternatives exist, and that in a number of ways we'll be better off for it. That's my view anyway.
And in reply to my question as to whether it's an infant or an adult speaking, you tell me about children being made fat by their parents.
Yes, children are not responsible. But children grow up into adults, and adults are responsible for what they do.
I wouldn't go so far as blame it on a broken society because we do have choices. However, our corn based food system is part of the problem. Some of us, however, find it more difficult to lose weight than others even though we have essentially the same diets.
I don't know the cause, but I recently visited the southeast USA (SC,NC) and I was amazed at the % of extremely overweight women. The men appeared to be slightly heavier than in Toronto, yet the women were on a whole different level. It appeared that most women actually outweighed the guy they were with.
One positive from this will be an end to the increase of a force for negative social change. As explained in my 1998 article "Impending Social and Economic Catastrophe due to Excessive Cars and Roads" which was totally ignored by the UK government and not one jot of fault ever shown in its arguments.
PS- As its point is now merely academic I suggest not reading it if you need to get on with more currently-relevant studying instead.
RobinPC,
Great article. And I was looking forward to going to bed right now.
I see also that you have written for 'Personality and Individual Differences' and are a stalwart opponent of political correctness. Being a personal friend of the Ogre of Edinburgh, and one of the few owners of his depublished book, may I say that one of the great things about 'The Oil Drum' is that you never know who you'll meet here!