A few days ago I ran across an article at the BBC web site worthy of a diary. It was an article in the Future Technology category by Jon Stewart examining some developments in bus design that deserves a look in these days of rising gas prices at the same time too many places are slashing funds for mass transit. Add in concerns about climate change issues, increased urbanization, and an aging population, and it's a subject that could use some discussion. Not to mention the 99% - 1%. If you can make it all the way through, there'll be some theorizing on public versus private.
More below the Orange Omnilepticon.
Size May Or May Not Matter - But It Can't Be Ignored.
Buses are not usually all that exciting, not when people are hoping for electric or hybrid vehicles that will somehow enable us to keep driving like we always have. Buses also have some constraints where they make sense as a transportation solution. It's a question of finding a 'sweet spot' of ridership numbers, routes that take people where they need/want to go, a schedule/fare structure that works to attract and keep riders, and a fair comparison of all the costs compared to alternatives.
But... there are places where really large bus designs are being built and put into service, places where many people need to get around, and the powers that be are willing to look beyond building new expressways for cars and expanding parking options. Some may remember the old disaster movie parody, "The Big Bus", about an atomic powered giant bus and its disaster-ridden maiden voyage. (Note the dome on the rear section of the bus would not have fit through the door it just came out of...)
Well the buses Stewart examines are no less impressive - and they're for real - or could be Real Soon Now.
Take the 3D Fast Bus from the Shenzhen Hashi Future Parking Equipment Company. This prototype behemoth could carry up to 1,000 passengers its designers believe. But its most innovative feature is not its size, but its design. It is designed to skip traffic problems by straddling the road, allowing it to cruise over gridlocked traffic or allowing traffic to flow underneath it when it is stopped. Passengers ride in a cabin 5m above the ground, on wheels supported on streamlined stilts. Its designers say the electric bus could reduce traffic jams by up to 30%, and cost only 10% of the price of a subway to build.
Granted, the design above is a bit exotic to say the least, and is not going to run on just any street anytime soon, but it's evidence that bus technology is not standing still. It's happening now.
Indeed, two cities – Beijing and Hangzhou – have just announced that they will take delivery of fleets of what could be the world’s largest bus - the catchily named Youngman JNP6250G.
The massive mover will carry up to 300 passengers at a time and will have two concertinaed sections to allow it to turn corners like a regular bus is 25m (82ft) long - around 13m longer than a regular bus. To ensure they cut through urban traffic they will use dedicated lanes in both cities, something that may allow drivers to test their top speed. One driver reportedly told the Chinese Youth Daily newspaper that he reached 51mph (82km/h) on a drive from Zhejiang Province to Shanghai.
(Here's a link to an article about it in English.)
It's not just about China, however. Brazil has an impressive vehicle to boast about. Stewart again:
Curitiba, capital of the Brazilian state of Parana, operates the Ligeirao Azul bus - a snaking monster that is 3m (10ft) longer than its Chinese rival but carries 50 fewer passengers. It is one of a handful of bus designs that cruise the streets of Curitiba, each with a different function. The biodiesel-fuelled Ligeirao Azul, for example, is a “Fast Transit” system that uses exclusive lanes and have priority at traffic signals in an attempt to cut down on journey times. It is part of an exclusively bus-based transport system that has won worldwide acclaim. In fact, the bus scheme has been s successful that it is estimated that 80% of the city’s residents now use the service – something that has helped reduce congestion, pollution and commuter frustration.
Here's a news video discussing the bus, showing it in action and a few of its features. (Narrated in Portuguese I'm afraid, but it has a catchy soundtrack.)
Indeed, there'a a variety of articulated bus designs out there, and not just conventional buses. Trolley bus designs run on rubber tires so they can share the streets with conventional cars and trucks - but they're powered via overhead wires. And if you look at the video below, you'll see the same wires powering trolleys on rails.
This is by no means an exhaustive look at what is being done with buses around the world - but it points out how meager transportation planning is in the U.S. by comparison. These sorts of transport options take long term planning and investment in public resources at the government level. It takes coordination, because buses like these are part of a larger set of transportation options; they can't function in isolation.
Now, super buses aren't for everywhere; cities with constricted roads, areas with low bridges or lots of hills, areas with limited space for facilities are going to be better suited to conventional buses. But... they are one of a range of options that we could do a better job putting to use. A region with a lot of rail lines for example might be a good fit for a light rail system.
Puzzle, Meet Pieces
A well designed system will have synergy because the different elements reinforce each other. The trolley buses above share infrastructure with rail trolleys - which have the additional option of routes which can run on rails beyond the streets so they can reach higher speeds without mixing with other traffic. Intersecting routes, shared stations, connections to other elements like conventional passenger rail, airports, etc. - all of this just works when it's done right. It's something that can be convenient, affordable, and sustainable.
Let's assume a ridership base large enough to justify a bus system and all the related infrastructure. There are four questions any potential rider is going to have:
• When is the next bus coming, and where can I get on?
• How can I get from A to B, with maybe a stop at C or D?
• How do I pay for it?
• Is there another way to do this?
These are old questions - but the answers keep changing. The next bus problem, the route problem, has several different answers. One of course is the traditional paper schedule or poster. Old tech, but still useful in some circumstances. These days a web site for a bus service can be set up to answer those questions, can be updated frequently - and also gives the bus service direct feedback on where people want to go and when for planning purposes.
Buses that are linked into a dedicated information system with GPS can constantly be reporting their position, their speed (or none if stuck in traffic), and smart bus stops can display this information for potential riders. And, smart bus stops can also report how many people are waiting for a bus, so supervisors can adjust service to meet unexpected demand. (There's few things more infuriating than waiting for a bus, only to see it go by because it's full.) A smart bus stop could also be equipped to hep people figure out routes.
As for paying for the ride, there's the traditional cash for tickets model (which can really slow boarding a bus), the option of buying bus passes or swipe cards, and other options. The Washington Metro has vending machines that sell paper tickets with a magnetic stripe; just pay the amount of money in that you need on your ticket, and go. But... there's an even better way that's just starting to impact: the smart phone.
All anyone with a smart phone needs is connectivity - given the right AP. A quick search of the Apple Ap Store turned up this one:
Seoul Bus 2 - Metropolitan Bus
Seoul bus provides local bus information for the grater Seoul metropolitan area - not only all regions of Seoul, but also for Incheon and areas of Gyeonggi-do nearby.
Via Internet access and real-time data, users can determine where a bus is right now or when a bus will arrive at a particular stop. Offline usage provides users with the ability to determine bus numbers, routes and stops.
In addition, nearby bus stops can be located and with the map, any station can be searched for and found.
* When locating nearby stops, the iPhone utilizes GPS technology and is very accurate, whereas the iPod Touch relies on WiFi which is not as efficient and may result in slight relative errors.
* Bus stop names are displayed in Korean (see screenshot) but the stop's unique ID number - 5 digits with a dash - can be conveniently used with the search function.
* Continued use of GPS running in the background (GPS Alarm without battery save mode) can dramatically increase battery life.
People are already walking around with the technology needed to make this happen - just make WiFi available at bus stops and on buses, make a decent AP available, and BINGO! Making WiFi available on buses and other transport modes is inevitable - and it's one way of making time in transit less of a waste. That alone could get people out of cars. (An AP feature to alert people when they're about to reach their stop would probably be a good idea.)
It also deals with the other two questions. A smart phone AP could also be used track ridership and bill the rider on a monthly basis, serving as an electronic pass. There's no reason why an integrated transport system couldn't also direct riders to other options, such as a nearby subway stop, light rail system - or just call a cab if it comes to that.
And to get back to purely physical concerns for a moment, bus stops like docking stations aren't unknown. If you make the stops accessible for those with disabilities, you can make getting onto the bus trivial. (This doesn't replace the need for access on the bus itself - just makes it easier to accomplish in most cases.)
Access for people with bikes expands options, especially if there's a public bike system in place.
A bus stop with comm links has other public uses as well; it can serve as a public safety system access point. Cameras inside can allow remote monitoring. Emergency call systems for police and fire can be part of a standard layout. The kind of systems that make it a smart bus stop don't have to be just about riding the bus.
Why We Can't Have Nice Things
The big problem in all this is not technological; it's cultural and ideological. Mass transit, Public transit in America is not something that gets a lot of appreciation or resources. Americans have been brought up with the idea that you're not really free unless you have a car and can drive anywhere you want to go any time you want. Americans who live in big cities with decent transit know better of course. And increasingly, most people around the world are going to be living in cities. Decent transit is not a luxury.
The idea that cities must be built to accommodate everyone in their own personal vehicle is just not going to work - and smaller cities and towns can use some help with the same problem. Dependable mass transit makes life easier for people of limited means - it lets them get to work, get to school, and save money they otherwise need for gas, insurance, repairs, etc. (Hey - it works for people whose means aren't so limited too.) It makes life easier for an aging population that may not want or can no longer safely use a personal vehicle.
The key problem though is the idea of public mass transit, specifically public. There is a dedicated political movement which is determined to eliminate the public sphere in favor of the private everywhere they can. Their ideology holds that any investment of money in the public sector removes money from the private sector. Frankly, they don't believe in the public sector or the public good. Everything begins and ends with personal interest; and they can throw a lot of money around to ensure just whose personal interest gets served.
What we've seen though is that there are some problems the private sector can not or will not solve; it takes public investment to make it work at all. A mass transit system based solely on a for-profit model run and owned by private interests ain't gonna happen; there are few if any places where one thrives, unless it's based on some kind of monopoly or other special condition.
Mass transit systems are not seen as a good investment - the rate of return is just not there compared to playing games with moving piles of money around. They typically take years to establish and achieve full operation - not practical for corporations that live and die by quarterly numbers. Ditto for the amounts of money involved. They can't target the most profitable market segments and ignore the rest, not if they are going to be a real public mass transit system. The burden of keeping shareholders happy means any such system would be subject to a drain of resources needed to keep equipment running, staff adequately paid, and service at acceptable levels.
It takes either public investment or some combination of public and private partnership to have a viable public mass transit system. Government can (or used to anyway) plan for the long haul, programs that can take years or decades to complete. (Like the interstate highway system.) It can invest in projects without an immediate payoff or proven track record, like the original Erie Canal, the transcontinental railroad, or the internet. It can calculate costs and benefits with factors that don't fit on a corporate business sheet - improved air quality, energy independence, quality of life issues. It doesn't have to satisfy the ROI for an isolated group of shareholders - just all of the voters and taxpayers who stand to benefit, a far larger group with a much larger stake in the success of the outcome.
Consider the problem of externalization. Corporations can increase profits by externalizing costs - that is, getting other people to pick up the tab for pollution, resource exhaustion, health issues, etc. Make it somebody else's problem, and pocket the difference. (If you want to see this spelled out, just watch the video at the Story of Stuff. Not to say government doesn't pass the buck too, but their charter is to look out for the interests of everyone. By definition, private interests don't.
Flip it around and consider externalization of benefits. This is a concept less considered, but what it means is public investments can have payback that extends far beyond their specific goals. A functional mass transit system makes it possible for a business to tap a much larger pool of workers, a wider range of customers. Individuals benefit from a reliable system they don't have to worry about. It makes life easier even for people who don't use it - less traffic congestion, less noise, cleaner air, fewer wasted resources. A private entity trying to run such a system would be hard pressed to find a way to recover the costs of providing this -they'd need to find some way to charge for it; a public system can justify it as good use of tax revenues. You know, the Common Good.
But, those same private interests would have you believe paying taxes is just throwing money into a black hole - instead of an investment in the common good. (Watch the movie here for more detail.) At a time of unemployment that's still too high, when there is a real need to get manufacturing going again here at home, when interest costs are at record lows, when energy policies make no sense, when we have crumbling infrastructure that needs to be rebuilt, when we have to make real changes in the way we live for the long term...
Maybe a super bus isn't the particular piece of the puzzle for where you live - but Jay Ackroyd over at Atrios's place has some audio from David Cay Johnston about what bus drivers can do in a country that doesn't put the people with the most money first.
UPDATE: Just in time for the Community Spotlight, some news about public transportation: Public transportation use up across the nation in 2011. A couple of excerpts from the USA TODAY story by Larry Copeland:
Fueled partly by rising gas prices, public transportation ridership across the USA increased by 2.31% in 2011 over the previous year, the American Public Transportation Association reports.
Americans last year took 235 million more trips on buses, trains and subways than in 2010. That's the most ridership since 2008, when gas prices soared to a national average of $4.11 a gallon in July.
And....
In Boston, where unemployment was down 2 percentage points since the beginning of 2010 and the economy added 64,000 jobs, ridership was up 4% last year to an average of 1.3 million passenger trips a day on weekdays, says Joe Pesaturo, of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.
Other factors driving Boston's rise: improved vehicle maintenance and better on-time performance on some routes. As in many cities, transit riders in Boston last year also had broader access to arrival and departure times via new smartphone applications.
"That people can look in the palm of their hand to see when the next bus or train is going to be arriving makes it a more attractive option," Pesaturo says.