Congestion Pricing. Photo by .KM.

A very interesting study released earlier this month counters conventional wisdom, suggesting that a clear majority of people support tolling and road pricing. As the authors of the study, which analyzed numerous national and international public opinion surveys, clearly write in the conclusion of their report, “…in the aggregate, the public supports tolling and road pricing.”

The study’s findings will come as a surprise to many policy makers and elected officials who offer the standard response that tolling and road pricing are unpopular, and should therefore not be implemented lest they defy their constituents.

Traditionally, attempts to solve congestion have focused on building new roads or widening existing ones. But it’s clear that the strategy has not worked. That’s in large part because there’s a cyclical logic to road construction: as more roads are built more people want to drive cars, which in turn, drives the demand for ever more road construction. For decades now, there have been proposals for reducing the demand for road space by charging drivers who use it. But these proposals more often than not went nowhere in large part because of politics.

One of the more important conclusions of the study is that the public needs to be informed about any road pricing project. That is to say that the value of the project needs to be clearly articulated, past examples of successful pricing projects need to be held up, and the governments use of revenue generated from the tolls needs to be justified. In the case of New York City congestion pricing scheme, one that ultimately failed for political reasons, the revenue from pricing was earmarked to fund mass transit projects.

Overall, the study provides interesting insights, and good empirical evidence and arguments to further promote demand management schemes, such as tolling and congestion charging. We already know that road pricing can reduce congestion, pollution, auto accidents and global warming, while providing funding for efficient, clean and cool alternatives: walking, biking and public transport. We now know that, with the right information, people will make the right choices. For me, the clear lesson is that “you better inform and then ask the people”.

Share This

This post is cross-posted on NextBillion.net.

File this under the eye-catching-Bottom-of-the-Pyramid-design category and add it to the list of fascinating cycle innovations intended to meet multiple needs for the poor - in this case, the challenges of water filtration and transportation.

The product is called the Aquaduct, a tricycle designed by a team of five at IDEO that stores water in a twenty gallon tank in the back of the bike’s wide, blue frame. As the user travels back home, the energy they expend pedaling is used to filter the water into a removable two gallon tank that rests in front of the handlebars.

As with any shiny new Bottom-of-the-Pyramid innovation, it’s important to remember that just because the product is inarguably cool doesn’t mean it will actually be applicable in the specific context of local consumers. Has research been done to confirm that the Aquaduct would be cost effective and functional for the BoP in different regions as compared to other available means of water filtration and transport? And I didn’t understand the idea of storing 20 gallons of water but having only two gallons filtered - is this really enough for a family? Does the user have to pedal around every time they want an additional two gallons of filtered water?

These are questions that IDEO will have to answer as the bike moves beyond its prototype status (and I’m sure they will - if they haven’t already). In the meantime, IDEO’s creation has shown promise as grand prize winner of the Innovate or Die contest for sustainable cycle design. Maybe soon, we’ll see it in use on the ground.

Share This

For historical reasons, wireless systems for use in the transportation sector have taken a separate path for technology development. This divergence no longer makes sense. Every other sector in the economy is finding secure, reliable, and economical systems that use internet-protocol and are highly compatible. Continued insistence on separate radio frequencies, closed networks, and obscure proprietary standards mean that technology investments in transportation don’t take advantage of low-cost high-volume components developed for the consumer market or advances in communications hardware and routing software. Congestion charging cameras in London. Photo by jeroen020 on flickr.

Rest-of-the-World Trends: Open networks, Device Convergence, Open Standards, Extensible/Interoperable, Consumer products/parts (high volume, low cost), Redundant networks base, Robustness/Redundancy

Versus

Intelligent Transportation Systems: Closed network, DSRC (Dedicated Short Range Communications), Single-purpose devices, Proprietary, inflexible, Proprietary lock-in, high cost, path dependency, Can’t leverage others’ investment, Centralized command & control (single points of failure)

Below are my recommendations in priority order. Wireless infrastructure investments for congestion pricing, open-road tolling, and road pricing should be:

• Open networks (the data transmission required for user-fees is very small, meaning that a huge amount of excess capacity in these networks is available and should be made available to the public given that this infrastructure is being paid for with taxpayer dollars).

• Open standards (making these networks open is only interesting and useful to others if open standards are used).

• A mesh network be employed.

• An open source mesh network be employed.

• An extensible/interoperable network should be deployed (creating opportunities for user-driven innovation, add-ons — think Google open API model)

What would this system look like? What are the benefits of a system so configured?

Imagine a mesh "white box" in every car that travels through the city. The device would cost between $50-$75 in the volumes needed and be built using low-cost, widely available standard hardware components and open source software. Each car would become a node in a dynamic mesh network, routing and repeating packets of data. People who purchase and install the devices in their cars can be given the first $100-$150 in congestion fees for free. System security requirements would be no different than any other wireless infrastructure, and preserving ample bandwidth for the purpose of collecting fees can be assured. Implementers would need only be responsible for providing key backhaul nodes (e.g., at critical intersections, exits, etc.) while end-users would drive the node density necessary to expand the network. The implications:

• The amount of capital required to implement, maintain, and extend a congestion pricing system is reduced in several ways:
• Congestion pricing hardware, and the majority of the wireless infrastructure, is financed and installed by end users.
• Less infrastructure installed means less to maintain
• This dramatically reduces the debt burden required and the cost of financing it.
• Because the devices are self-configuring, there are reduced engineering costs.
• Reduced installation costs (simply plug them into the vehicles).
• The system can come online and be operational in less time than a system of tags and beacons, and therefore the free premium given to drivers would be a net revenue wash.
• Very low on-going communications costs because the system relies primarily on free peer-to-peer data transmission.

• System redundancy is inherent in such a network. There would be no single point of failure and no need for redundant systems to be designed and included.

• Car location and charging could be based on GPS position or triangulation of vehicles relative to other vehicle and gateways (where the data enters the internet) similar to systems used by Loki and TomTom. [A discussion of protecting locational privacy is discussed in another paper.]

• An in-vehicle mesh-based system allows infinite flexibility in the congestion pricing system.

• The initial pricing cordon chosen by the city can be changed over time without additional on-street hardware investment (At considerable expense, London expanded its cordon from the CBD to a larger section of London after 4 years).
• A dynamic real-time congestion pricing could be implemented covering all city streets, eliminating undesirable edge effects created by a cordon, charging based on actual congestion, increasing public perception of system fairness (charges based on real congestion, not arbitrary geography)

• Enforcement would not be based on cameras and license plate photography, but rather on-the-ground enforcement officials determining whether individual cars in their proximity have an active device. High fines/tickets can be given to those vehicles without the device that are within the congestion pricing zone.

• "Tourist" vehicles passing through the congestion pricing zone can pick up a device at gas stations, highway rest areas, and convenience stores. The cost of the device would be required as a deposit (in cash or by credit card) with an additional amount paid for anticipated fees. On exiting the congestion pricing zone, these devices can be returned with the deposit and unused funds returned to the driver. Those who choose this system would not be eligible for locational privacy, nor the free service premium given to those individuals who buy the device outright.

• Facilitates layering of additional services and applications on a de-prioritized basis vis-a-vis congestion pricing/network data, creating additional potential revenue sources and value to users (e.g., internet access, social networking software, geolocational advertising, real-time traffic/congestion data for drivers).

• Can be utilized to send emergency communications messages to all cars, cars in specific areas, etc.

There are considerable positive "externalities" that this system would give to the city that adopts it:

• Because the network is open to all, within the congestion pricing zone, Manhattan would effectively be one dynamic wireless hotspot
• A ubiquitous wireless network throughout the city, open to all, will generate an untolled/untold amount of innovation and economic development.
• Over time one can anticipate other devices joining the mesh created by the vehicles. Each one of these devices leverages the existing investment of all the previous devices, contributes to the mesh, and gets the full advantages of zero cost peer-to-peer communication within the city. These new devices might be those purchased by other city departments (homeland security, police, emergency vehicles, education, health, social services), or by city residents (mesh-enabled laptops, cell phones, PDAs). The result is a scalable, resilient communications system. Different user classes and/or prioritization schemata can be utilized to ensure critical communications have access to this robust and redundant communications infrastructure.
• An open tech system avoids path dependencies and ensures maximum extensibility during a time of rapid technological innovation and evolution.

Share This

One of Granada’s clean and nice-looking bus stops. Photo by celikins from Flickr.

In October, I spent a few days in Granada, Spain, with my daughter, Lorna. A quick stop by the city’s Tourist Information office gave us the info we needed about the city’s bus system, the regional bus system, and the long-distance bus service. We would soon be heading to the Alpujarras region of the Sierra Nevada mountains for a couple of days hiking and then on to Madrid, so the different bus services would be key for getting around Spain.

One thing we noticed the first day we went to the Via Gran Colon in Granada’s city center was that the series of bus-stops arrayed along the street were clean, safe, and good-looking, each equipped with an electronic display indicating the arrival time of the next bus. What a brilliant move! With one look at the display, you could tell whether the bus was arriving soon or whether you had time to run a quick errand and make it back in time.

My daughter Lorna works at the Medical Center at the University of California, Los Angeles and commutes to work from her apartment in West Los Angeles by bus each day. She told me that an information system like this one would be a great addition for her local bus-stop. As a frequent bus rider too, I couldn’t agree more. After asking a local how Granada’s system worked, I learned that each bus was outfitted with a GPS system, indicating the exact location of the bus from which it was possible to predict its arrival time.

One of the impediments to building and retaining a strong middle-class ridership for transit systems is that many people feel concerned at the loss of “control” over their own time. (If you’re a car-driver or passenger stuck in traffic, the idea of such control can is quite illusory.) But having more information about the arrival-time of your next bus or train does improve this problem. In most US cities, subway systems now have arrival-time information boards installed on the platforms, but I haven’t yet seen them offered at bus-stops on intra-city bus systems.

Of course, it was also important that the buses in Granada arrived on time; that once they arrived the loading system was quick and efficient; that the buses were frequent, clean, and well-maintained; that the numerous bus-lanes in the city-center sped the buses along; and that the broader information about timetables and fares was clear and easy to find.

For our regional and long-distance bus connections we took a bus from the city-center to the Estacion de Autobuses that’s about 1.5 miles west of the city center, and made our bookings and departures from there. On the regional and long-distance systems we were able to make advance bookings, with designated seating, making the whole experience easy, efficient, and pleasant. Our ride from Granada to Orgiva took us along some stunning mountain roads, and past a wind farm. Our ride to Madrid took five hours, about the same time it takes to get there by train and at a fraction of the cost. What’s more, it also had a lot more options for departure times than the train did.

The contrast between the long-distance bus service in Spain and the Greyhound service I ride between Washington DC and central Virginia was stark. What? A bus system with clean terminals, helpful and well-informed ticket agents, helpful and accessible rider information, and no price-gouging on on-line ticket purchases? I’d almost forgotten such a thing existed!

My bottom line is that to maintain a strong and satisfied ridership, good customer service is really important. And finding ways to provide timely, accurate, and helpful information to the riders at all stages of the journey - from planning to riding to disembarking - is a big part of that. Viva Granada!

Share This

Millenium Bridge in London by Neil101 on Flickr

WalkIt.com is a new website out of the United Kingdom that wants “to get people walking more”. In step with the likes of Google Transit and Walkscore, WalkIt.com provides a free, easy to use web service that maps the easiest way to walk from point A to point B in the cities of London, Edinburgh, and Birmingham. You just provide your starting location, your final destination and any in-between stops, and the website plots the best route to follow while letting you know the distance, the time it will take, the calories you will burn and the CO2 that you will save by walking instead of driving, taking a cab, or taking a bus.

A great feature of this website is that the directions it provides are geographically referenced based, meaning that they are similar to how people give directions to other people because they reference specific geographic landmarks. For example, when a user maps a route going from 30 St. Mary Axe to Hyde Park, it gives the user directions including geographic references like, “You’ll eventually pass SMOLLENSKYS ON THE STRAND Restaurant and then SIMPSONS IN THE STRAND Restaurant” and “You’ll pass UNDERGROUND-CHARING CROSS Underground Station”. These references are similar to those you would include when giving directions to another person and are extremely useful because without a car odometer it’s hard to know exactly when to ‘turn right at .7 km’.

This tool is good for encouraging walking as a form of transportation and coupled with other measures like congestion charging and pedestrianization (or should I say pedestrianisation) should help the UK to tackle its obesity problem and cut down on transport related pollution including greenhouse gases responsible for climate change.

Currently WalkIt.com is only for three UK cities (with plans for more) but hopefully they will eventually expand to other countries.

Share This

Photo of traffic congestion in Hong Kong by A.H. 1987 from Flickr

Solving the problem of congestion is usually a top priority for city authorities, who note that congestion not only causes air pollution, but also decreases quality of life and imposes significant economic costs, especially in rapidly growing cities. Although different cities have developed different solutions for dealing with the problem of congestion, few have successfully solved it. Mostly cities come up with ad hoc measures for dealing with congestion, like constructing more roads, bridges and highways, which paradoxically spur more car ownership and, hence, more congestion.

To date, the most effective measure to reduce congestion is something called congestion pricing, a type of road pricing put in place during specific times and locations, namely the most congested areas during peak times like rush hour. The pricing scheme is used to encourage travelers to shift to other travel times, routes and modes of transit. Congestion charging rates are flexible and can differ according to the type of motor vehicle, and can either be a flat rate or updated regularly to reflect the prevailing traffic conditions.

Although congestion pricing is not a new concept (it was first implemented in Singapore in 1975), it has not been widely adopted due to various political, technical and economic reasons. However, the positive results from congestion pricing are considerable, as seen in the cities that have implemented this pricing policy. London, Singapore and Stockholm all use congestion pricing as a tool for fighting congestion, experiencing significant reductions in traffic during peak hours, reduced travel time, lower transport emissions, including CO2, as well as increased traffic speed, higher levels of safety, and greater revenue for cities, which can be used to improve mass transit. Traffic volume decreased by more than 50% and 25% when pricing was first introduced in Singapore and Stockholm respectively, while congestion dropped by 30% within the charging zone in London. Since travel time lost in congestion and other associated externalities are often not captured and paid by motorists, that is, the ones who cause the problems, the implementation of an effective pricing policy will be able to internalize such external costs.

It’s also important to note that access and mobility should never be denied. So it’s crucial to complement a congestion pricing scheme with a public transport system that is affordable, efficient, safe, clean, and comfortable so that people have an alternative way for arriving at their destination.

Share This

A screenshot of Google’s new street view.

Whoever said there’s no such thing as free lunch? Today, after overhearing a discussion at work, and doing a little research to verify what I heard, I learned that Google gives lunch - free of charge! - to its employees. What’s more, Google’s taking it a step further, providing free dinners, organic meals, hormone-free meats and unlimited snacks. According to the Washington Post, Google is spending about $100,000 a day to feed its staff. Apparently, this has helped Google attract young, creative types who are developing amazing tools that City Fix loves.

Google’s initial foray into the world of cartography came in the form of GoogleMaps, which has since been upgraded from simple mapping to include satellite images and hybrid views of cities and streets. Google then came out with Google Transit (the City Fix blogged about it here) and Google Traffic, which even technology and transportation geeks find amazing. Now, they’ve left us speechless with their high-quality Street View, which features street level photographs, virtual walks and other frills that they discuss in their own youtube video.

Now, thanks to Street View there is a whole new “field of study” emerging known as StreetSpotting, or “the ability for users to see certain parts of several big U.S. cities through panoramic images on Google’s Street View feature for Google Maps.” StreetSpotting has caught on because buried within Street View are hidden gems, photographs that are interesting, awkward, and just plain hilarious. Apart from all the eyebrows that it might raise from people concerned with privacy, Street View is definitely worth looking at. Follow the link to the Top 15 Google Street View Sightings.

Are all these new ideas the wealth generated by Google’s free lunch policy? Well, I can’t say for sure. But what I do know is that Google is constantly expanding the boundaries of what we thought mapping applications could achieve. And simultaneously they’ve created new trends that are worth checking out… even if is just for fun.

Share This

A man making his own biodiesel. Photo by Mike Murrow from Flickr.

In Kilmarnock, Scotland, bus passengers will soon be able to pay their fare with used cooking oil instead of cash. Eight buses carrying over 15,000 passengers a week will run on 100% biodiesel generated from used cooking oil and tallow, reducing carbon dioxide emissions by an anticipated 82% and virtually eliminating air-polluting sulfur emissions. As an added incentive to boost the program during its six month trial period, free containers will be provided to those who want to take their used cooking oil to a nearby recycling plant in exchange for discounted bus fare.

Biodiesel is one of the fastest growing alternative fuels in the world. However, most vehicles currently utilizing biodiesel rely on B20, a blend that is only one part biodiesel and four parts regular diesel. The emissions reductions from B20 are modest (less than 20% for carbon dioxide) and do not compare with other alternative fuel sources such as natural gas. And since most biodiesel is produced from virgin vegetable oil derived from crops such as soybeans and rapeseed, there are growing concerns that increased biodiesel generation will compete with food production and cause ecological harm.

Scotland’s innovative program eliminates many of these typical biodiesel concerns because its buses will run on 100% biodiesel (B100) derived entirely from recycled food industry by-products. A similar program exists in the United States, where the city of Berkeley, California runs its entire truck fleet on recycled cooking oil. In 2004, the New York Times reported that it would take only one-fifth of New York City’s waste cooking oil to fuel its entire public transit system. Back in the UK, even McDonalds is attempting to power its 155 delivery vehicles with its own restaurants’ oil waste by 2008.

Overall, the concept seems to hold a lot of potential for public and private transport systems around the world. Any existing diesel vehicle can utilize biodiesel, which is now available at many pump stations, with little to no engine modification. With a few small additions (fuel heaters and filters), diesel vehicles could even begin using waste cooking oil directly without refining, meaning that next time you go to a restaurant to fill your belly, you could fill your gas tank as well.

Need environmental statistics? See Earthtrends.

Share This

In the United States, corn is widely sought as an alternative to oil. Photo by tlindenbaum from Flickr.

The agrarian arms race to turn larger swaths of farmland over for the production of biofuels recently reached rhetorical heights as Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, argued that it would be a crime against humanity to use productive soil to produce fuel and not food when hundreds of millions of people go hungry each year. “It’s a crime against humanity to convert agriculturally productive soil into soil which is producing food stuff which will be burned into biofuel,” he said at a press conference last Friday.

Calling for a five year moratorium on bio-fuels, Mr. Ziegler’s comment came at a time when more and more politicians are looking to energy made by corn, sugarcane, and palm as an alternative to oil.

We’ve covered the environmental impacts of biofuels here, here, and here, but this is the first time that we’ve heard someone make the case against biofuels on the grounds of fighting hunger.

Share This

Are car companies thinking about more than one type of green? Photo by makeshiftlove from Flickr.

The New York Times latest automobile issue takes a dramatic departure from the past and includes several articles on how environmental concerns are shaping the industry. Below, I’ve included some links to the more interesting articles:

Challenging Gasoline: Diesel, Ethanol, Hydrogen – An interesting article about alternative fuels and potential risks. This article quotes our own Lee Schipper, “a former oil industry executive.” We’re not really sure where they came up with that!

Getting to Green – Car manufacturers have switched gears and are focusing on gas mileage and other green touches for their automobiles.

In Europe, a Shift in Tactics – Frankfurt’s International Motor Show, known for emphasizing speed and power, is now trying to play up things like low CO2 emissions and hybrids vehicles.

Marketing Muscle and Guzzle – A look at some of the marketing tricks Hummer is using to sell the most polarizing vehicle on the planet.

Share This