Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Digest Number 680

Expand Messages
  • Stephen Plowden
    Re car-free cities 1. Simon is too pessimistic about shopping! There is a huge amount of evidence from Europe and N America (elsewhere?) that turnover goes up
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 30 2:52 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Re car-free cities
      1. Simon is too pessimistic about shopping! There is a huge amount of
      evidence from Europe and N America (elsewhere?) that turnover goes up in
      response to pedestrianization. (In the 1970s OECD had a dossier on this,
      I don't know if they still do.) I don't think this result would be
      possible if motorists took their business elsewhere but non-motorists
      bought more in the pedestrianised centres. However, what I don't know is
      whether motorists switched to other modes for their entire journey or
      only for the last bit (finding somewhere to park close to the pedestrian
      area). The literature may throw some light on this.

      2. To make cycling safe, the important thing is to reduce traffic
      speeds. Partial segregation can be counter-productive. In addition to
      the review by John Franklin, which I have referred to before, which
      makes this point, a speaker from Denmark also made it about 2 years ago
      in a talk here in London, I think it was to the Transport Users
      Statistical Society. Cycling should also be made safer by action to
      control the vehicles which are especially dangerous to cyclists,
      especially heavy lorries and motorcycles.

      3. Parking control is a very important and often under-used instrument
      of parking policy, but it is not only about pricing. It is also about
      the actual numbers of spaces allowed, times of availability , permitted
      lengths of stay, and discrimination between users not based on price (or
      not solely on price, you could have different charges for different
      people). However, parking control can be counterproductive on its own,
      especially in central areas, since the road space taken by people who
      used to drive in (I don't mean just the space they used for parking)
      will be filled up by traffic that does not need to park, such as through
      traffic. Parking combines very powerfully with other measures.


      NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com wrote:

      > The New Mobility Idea Factory
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe;_ylc=X3oDMTJkNGJuNzlhBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNoZHIEc2xrA2hwaARzdGltZQMxMTU5NjA2MDAy>
      >
      >
      >
      > Messages In This Digest (4 Messages)
      >
      > 1.
      > FW: Krakow Forum <#1> From: fredkent@...
      >
      > 2.
      > Mo.Ve International Forum Venice, 8-9 November 2006 <#2> From:
      > Fischer Mo.Ve [mailto:fischer@move-forum.
      >
      > 3.
      > car free cities <#3> From: Simon Norton
      >
      > 4.
      > Swiss Federal Office for Energy: 2006 Evaluation CarSharing ...
      > <#4> From: Eric Britton
      >
      > View All Topics
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/messages;_ylc=X3oDMTJmbGkybXRyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawNhdHBjBHN0aW1lAzExNTk2MDYwMDM-?xm=1&m=p&tidx=1>
      > | Create New Topic
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJmNmYzaGljBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzExNTk2MDYwMDM->
      >
      >
      >
      > Messages
      >
      > 1.
      >
      >
      > FW: Krakow Forum
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/message/1755;_ylc=X3oDMTJxMjBidmp0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTUEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw-->
      >
      >
      >
      > Posted by: "fredkent@..." fredkent@...
      > <mailto:fredkent@...?Subject=Re:%20FW%3A%20Krakow%20Forum>
      > fekbritton <http://profiles.yahoo.com/fekbritton>
      >
      >
      > Fri Sep 29, 2006 3:22 am (PST)
      >
      > From: Fred Kent [mailto:fredkent@... <mailto:fredkent%40pps.org>]
      > Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 7:30 PM
      > To: undisclosed-recipients:
      > Subject: FW: Krakow Forum
      >
      > "Great Places, Great Cities": A Forum & City Tour for Civic
      > Leaders, Krakow,
      > Poland
      >
      > Thursday, 9th November & Friday 10, November
      >
      > We are very excited about our upcoming forum and city tour in
      > Krakow, and we
      > really hope you will be able to join us in Europe for two days of
      > enlightening
      > and stimulating discussions and tours.
      >
      > The Krakow main square is the best of the best. It defines what a
      > square is and
      > should be about. Krakow is a historic city that has not been over
      > - touristed.
      > It is a fully functionong real city, which has not been
      > "disney-fied". There are
      > wonderful districts within the city that are very interesting and
      > which I
      > believe hold enormous inspiration for us all.
      >
      > The forum will have many of our clients and contacts from Eastern
      > Europe -
      > leaders who have worked on Placemaking throughout this region.
      > They have
      > rediscovered a real sense of what communities used to be and can
      > again become in
      > this new era.
      >
      > Our partner in hosting this forum is Levende Stad (Living City), a
      > very
      > important group in the Netherlands. We both believe that defining
      > cities and
      > governments around managing the public realm - rather than being
      > narrowly
      > defined by disciplines - is a fundamental shift to enhance local
      > community
      > assets around places and destinations that have meaning to the
      > local population.
      >
      > The discussions over the two days of the forum will be around
      > these basic ideas.
      > We hope the outcomes will lay the ground for our first
      > international conference
      > on Placemaking in Seattle next June.
      >
      > Levende Stad is taking registrations now - so please email
      > Mireille Hazenbosch
      > at m.hazenbosch@... <mailto:m.hazenbosch%40deroo.nl> if you
      > would like to attend. The cost is Euro 175 per
      > person - and please don't hesitate to visit our website if you
      > would like to
      > download the conference PDF.
      > http://www.pps.org/info/placemakingtools/events/great_places_great_cities_krakow
      > <http://www.pps.org/info/placemakingtools/events/great_places_great_cities_krakow>
      > .
      >
      > I hope you will join us!
      >
      > Fred
      >
      > Fred Kent
      > President
      >
      > Project for Public Spaces
      > 700 Broadway New York, NY 10003
      > T (212) 620-5660 F (212) 620-3821
      > <blocked::http://www.pps.org/ <http://www.pps.org/>>
      > http://www.pps.org <http://www.pps.org>
      > <http://www.pps.org/ <http://www.pps.org/>>
      >
      > Back to top <#toc>
      > Reply to sender
      > <mailto:fredkent@...?Subject=Re:%20FW%3A%20Krakow%20Forum> |
      > Reply to group
      > <mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com?Subject=Re:%20FW%3A%20Krakow%20Forum>
      > | Reply via web post
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcjloMHJvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTUEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw--?act=reply&messageNum=1755>
      >
      > Messages in this topic
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/message/1755;_ylc=X3oDMTM1aWZpbDkyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTUEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMwR0cGNJZAMxNzU1>
      > (1)
      >
      > 2.
      >
      >
      > Mo.Ve International Forum Venice, 8-9 November 2006
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/message/1756;_ylc=X3oDMTJxamI2MDAxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTYEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw-->
      >
      >
      >
      > Posted by: "Fischer Mo.Ve [mailto:fischer@move-forum."
      > Fischer Mo.Ve [mailto:fischer@...]
      > <mailto:Fischer%20Mo.Ve%20%5Bmailto:fischer@...%5D?Subject=Re:%20Mo%2EVe%20International%20Forum%20Venice%2C%208-9%20November%202006>
      > fekbritton <http://profiles.yahoo.com/fekbritton>
      >
      >
      > Fri Sep 29, 2006 3:25 am (PST)
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Fischer Mo.Ve [mailto:fischer@...
      > <mailto:fischer%40move-forum.net>]
      > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 6:11 PM
      > To: eric.britton@... <mailto:eric.britton%40ecoplan.org>
      > Subject: Mo.Ve International Forum Venice, 8-9 November 2006
      >
      > Dear Mr. Britton,
      >
      > Despite you have initially informed us that you would have been
      > unable to
      > participate to the Mo.Ve Forum we would like to share with you the
      > latest
      > developments of the programme and kindly ask you to evaluate the
      > opportunity of
      > attending the Forum as participant as we would greatly esteem your
      > presence.
      >
      > At this purpose I am pleased to inform you that as of today we
      > will count the
      > presence of: Mr. Pascal Smet – Belgian Minister of Mobility, Mr.
      > Sergio
      > Chiamparino –Mayor of Turin, Mr. Alberto Belloch –Mayor of
      > Zaragoza, Mr. Enrique
      > Penalosa- past Mayor of Bogotà, M. Jean Pierre Caffet – Deputy
      > Mayor of Paris,
      > M. Gilles Vesco Vice-President of Gran Lyon, over 10 Members of
      > European
      > parliament, Mr. Paolo Costa –President of TRAN Committee of
      > European Parliament,
      > Mr. Jack Short-Secretary General ECMT, Mr. Oldrich
      > Vlasak-Executive President of
      > CEMR, Mr. Patrick Oliva – Director Special Group Projects
      > Michelin, along with
      > other numerous outstanding representatives from National and Local
      > European
      > governments and Presidents of Automobile Clubs, private
      > organisations and
      > exceptional international academics.
      >
      > Concerning the Forum structure and issues I hereby enclose 3 short
      > descriptions
      > in order to give you further insight on what we are presently
      > working at.
      >
      > Session1: Serge Wachter will introduce the issue of a socially
      > equitable city in
      > relation to mobility and in particular, as head of the Mo.Ve Task
      > Force, will
      > present the outcomes of the Mo.Ve study that analyses the impact
      > on social
      > equity deriving from transport policies and practices introduced
      > in selected
      > cities. The study focuses on the changes affecting different
      > social groups with
      > respect to their access to employment, services and amenities (i.e
      > food,
      > clothing and other shopping; parks, entertainment, and other leisure
      > facilities), and other key Quality of Life parameters.
      >
      > The keynote speakers (Hans Rat – UITP; Oldirch Vlasak – CEMR) will
      > outline how
      > this issue stands in the domain of local authorities and how it
      > affects the
      > imperative to strengthen their capabilities to meet the
      > diversified demands
      > (social, economic, political, cultural, etc.) in order to
      > encourage and
      > stimulate development, competitiveness and growth, within a
      > socially equitable
      > frame.
      >
      > Session 2 is dedicated to a more refined analysis of the
      > theoretical issues and
      > practical actions towards equitable and sustainable mobility. The
      > Rapporteur,
      > Barbara Lenz, will extract and report in a systematic framework
      > the rich
      > material presented in the Mo.Ve Scientific Workshop organised in
      > Madrid and
      > integrate with the contributions received for the Final Technical
      > Report. These
      > documents include for instance themes like:
      >
      > • Direct effects occurring by the use of ICT for mobility purposes
      >
      > • Indirect effects occurring by the use of ICT for other than mobility
      > purposes
      >
      > • Road pricing experiences in OECD countries, including the innovative
      > Dutch national pricing scheme
      >
      > • Benchmarking of demand management practices
      >
      > • The relevance of parking management policies
      >
      > • The role of public support for the success of sustainable mobility
      > policies
      >
      > The two keynote speakers (Paolo Costa – EP; Jack Short, ECMT) will
      > present their
      > own views and experiences on the issues and a selected group of
      > respondents will
      > be invited to comment the previous presentation avoiding the
      > introduction of non
      > relevant discussion.
      >
      > The aim of session 3 is to project our vision on the foreseeable
      > future. This
      > aim will be achieved in two ways. First we will ask the civic
      > leaders to state
      > their views and present concrete actions taken or planned on a
      > number of
      > strategic issues related to mobility and urban development.
      >
      > Some of these issues have already been brought forward and debated
      > during the
      > introductory international workshop of the 10th International
      > Architecture
      > Exhibition of la Biennale (Mo.Ve International Forum will be the
      > concluding
      > workshop) and they include, among others:
      >
      > • What administrative and technological tools are envisaged and being
      > developed to cope with congestion / pollution problems
      >
      > • What will be the overall effects of mobility/urban policies on
      > social
      > equity and social cohesion
      >
      > Secondly, after the civic leaders’ contributions, we will ask the
      > actors and
      > professionals (not directly involved in Local government
      > management and
      > controversies) to highlight the main prospects concerning these
      > same issues in
      > order to simulate possible alternatives to urban development.
      >
      > Session 3 will also see the contribution of Mr. Rommerts (DGTREN)
      > who will
      > present the main issues tackled in the Green Paper on Energy
      > efficiency in urban
      > transport to be delivered shortly.
      >
      > We are glad to inform you that the participants to the Forum will
      > have the
      > opportunity to visit the International Architecture Exhibition of
      > la Biennale di
      > Venezia and that local transfers and accommodation expenses for
      > the night of the
      > 8th would be covered by the organisation.
      >
      > Please feel free to contact me for any support. Hoping to seeing
      > you in Venice.
      >
      > Kind regards
      > Karin Fischer
      >
      > Karin Fischer
      >
      > Mo.Ve project officers
      > M: +39 335 6361335
      >
      > E: <mailto:fischer@...
      > <mailto:fischer%40move-forum.net>> fischer@...
      > <mailto:fischer%40move-forum.net>
      >
      > Mo.Ve is an International Association promoted by 4 Automobile Clubs:
      > ACI (Italy), RACE (Spain), RACC (Catalonia) and OEAMTC (Austria).
      > Its main purpose is to offer the international community a platform
      > to exchange opinions and experiences between institutions
      > (supranational, national and local), associations, business and
      > academia
      > on priority issues regarding the sustainable mobility
      > in metropolitan areas.
      >
      > Mo.Ve Association
      > C/o Methodos S.p.A
      > Via San Vittore 39 – 20123 – Milan – Italy
      > T: +39 02 48011219
      > F: +39 02 48193369
      > E: move@... <mailto:move%40move-forum.net>
      >
      >
      >
      > Back to top <#toc>
      > Reply to sender
      > <mailto:Fischer%20Mo.Ve%20%5Bmailto:fischer@...%5D?Subject=Re:%20Mo%2EVe%20International%20Forum%20Venice%2C%208-9%20November%202006>
      > | Reply to group
      > <mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com?Subject=Re:%20Mo%2EVe%20International%20Forum%20Venice%2C%208-9%20November%202006>
      > | Reply via web post
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxc2IxOTdnBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTYEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw--?act=reply&messageNum=1756>
      >
      > Messages in this topic
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/message/1756;_ylc=X3oDMTM1ZHE4cmtuBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTYEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMwR0cGNJZAMxNzU2>
      > (1)
      >
      > 3.
      >
      >
      > car free cities
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/message/1757;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcnUydmFnBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTcEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw-->
      >
      >
      >
      > Posted by: "Simon Norton" S.Norton@...
      > <mailto:S.Norton@...?Subject=Re:%20car%20free%20cities>
      > simonphillipsnorton
      > <http://profiles.yahoo.com/simonphillipsnorton>
      >
      >
      > Fri Sep 29, 2006 3:29 am (PST)
      >
      > A question which I believe deserves discussion is how one might
      > arrange the
      > ground rules so that businesses no longer feel a commercial
      > imperative to
      > obstruct any move to control cars.
      >
      > It is often said that even when businesses oppose
      > pedestrianisation initially
      > they eventually come to see that as many or more people will
      > continue to
      > patronise them when it is implemented. This may be true, but is it
      > the full
      > story ?
      >
      > I strongly suspect that many, perhaps most, motorists choose their
      > shopping
      > destination primarily for its car friendliness, whereas
      > non-motorists choose
      > their destination primarily for ease of access. This means that if one
      > discourages cars in a given centre, one runs the risk of reducing
      > the number of
      > motorists without significantly increasing the number of
      > non-motorists. The
      > latter will have a much more pleasant time but this doesn't figure
      > in the
      > calculations.
      >
      > Even in Central London, where the modal share of the car is
      > relatively small,
      > there has been resistance to congestion charging, and the
      > widespread exemptions
      > mean, for example, that it is only in operation for about a third
      > of the week.
      > What hope is there of extending the system to outer London and to
      > other cities
      > where the modal split is very different ?
      >
      > The only way I can think of dealing with the situation is by a tax
      > on private
      > parking. This was, indeed, suggested by the Blair government at
      > one stage but it
      > was dropped, allegedly as a result of lobbying by a supermarket
      > chain who
      > offered to sponsor a party conference. It had been proposed by
      > Transport 2000,
      > one of our leading transport campaign groups, as a national tax
      > which could be
      > topped up by local authorities. The watered down version, for a
      > tax on workplace
      > parking only, has been left entirely to local discretion, with the
      > result that
      > it has not been implemented by any local authority even though
      > they are
      > perpetually grumbling about shortage of money (as they are
      > strictly limited in
      > the amount they are allowed to raise through the property tax
      > system) -- no
      > doubt they are all worried about driving business away to their
      > neighbours.
      >
      > On another issue, I rceently visited Copenhagen, and other Danish
      > and Swedish
      > cities, on a trip organised by Transport 2000. During the trip we
      > were supplied
      > with bikes and taken on a tour of the city. I have often asked
      > myself what it
      > would take so that people like me would feel confident enough to
      > cycle. Now I
      > know. The main features are:
      >
      > (a) A widespread network of cycle lanes on both sides of main
      > roads, wide enough
      > to permit overtaking.
      > (b) The ability to traverse signalled junctions without having to
      > worry about
      > turning traffic.
      >
      > Unfortunately I came away with the conclusion that I will never be
      > able to cycle
      > back home: the system has evolved as a result of 40 or so years of
      > incremental
      > improvements, and in 40 years time I'll almost certainly no longer
      > have the
      > physical capacity to cycle (if I'm still alive, which is unlikely).
      >
      > Simon Norton
      >
      >
      > Back to top <#toc>
      > Reply to sender
      > <mailto:S.Norton@...?Subject=Re:%20car%20free%20cities>
      > | Reply to group
      > <mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com?Subject=Re:%20car%20free%20cities>
      > | Reply via web post
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxNW1xYW5xBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTcEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw--?act=reply&messageNum=1757>
      >
      > Messages in this topic
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/message/1757;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YTc1dnF2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTcEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMwR0cGNJZAMxNzU3>
      > (1)
      >
      > 4.
      >
      >
      > Swiss Federal Office for Energy: 2006 Evaluation CarSharing
      > ...
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/message/1758;_ylc=X3oDMTJxdjltY2czBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTgEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw-->
      >
      >
      >
      > Posted by: "Eric Britton" eric.britton@...
      > <mailto:eric.britton@...?Subject=Re:%20Swiss%20Federal%20Office%20for%20Energy%3A%202006%20Evaluation%20CarSharing%20%2E%2E%2E>
      > fekbritton <http://profiles.yahoo.com/fekbritton>
      >
      >
      > Fri Sep 29, 2006 4:37 am (PST)
      >
      > [The following has been quickly cut from the German language
      > report sent on
      > today by Conrad Wagner (too big to attach here, so get in touch
      > with Conrad or
      > me for a copy of the full German original) . I have resorted to
      > this since I
      > know how time starved many of you are, but I really think that you
      > should have
      > a look. BTW, next year Mobility will be 20 years old. We should
      > figure out a way
      > to celebrate. Eric Britton
      >
      > PS. And oh yes, where are your videos for our shared carshare
      > library???]
      >
      > C Summary
      >
      > In Switzerland there has been strong development of Car-Sharing
      > over the last
      > fifteen years; for this
      >
      > reason, Switzerland is seen internationally as a leader in organized
      > Car-Sharing. The last impact
      >
      > analysis of Car-Sharing was conducted several years ago, however,
      > and due to
      > numerous changing
      >
      > framework conditions, there is an urgent need for an updated
      > evaluation.
      >
      > 1.1 Goals and methods
      >
      > The present evaluation examined the following areas:
      >
      > - utilization of services offered by Mobility Car-Sharing Switzerland
      >
      > - analysis of the Car-Sharing fleet of vehicles
      >
      > - key data on Mobility customers
      >
      > - impact of Car-Sharing on energy consumption
      >
      > - future potential of Car-Sharing
      >
      > The evaluation results base on the following sources:
      >
      > - evaluation of Mobility's extensive company databases
      >
      > - written surveys (in French and German) of private customers (n = 520
      > households with 1,404 persons) and business customers (n = 144
      > companies) of
      > Mobility
      >
      > - evaluation of the Car-Sharing research literature
      >
      > - a workshop conducted with Mobility Car-Sharing Switzerland in the
      > framework of assessing future potential.
      >
      > 1.2 Utilization of Mobility's services
      >
      > The number of customers of Mobility Car-Sharing is considerable,
      > but growth in
      > participation has flattened
      >
      > in recent years. Mobility Car-Sharing Switzerland had
      > approximately 63,700
      > subscribed customers
      >
      > at the end of 2005. This represents an increase in customers of
      > almost 70
      > percent since 2000.
      >
      > Almost 70 percent of Mobility customers used the Car-Sharing
      > services at least
      > once in 2005 ("active"
      >
      > customers). Taken together, these active customers used 1,735
      > vehicles for trips
      > totaling almost 32
      >
      > million kilometers.
      >
      > Looking at active customers only, the average private Mobility
      > customer takes 16
      > to 17 trips per year,
      >
      > with an average distance of 42 kilometers per trip. The average
      > business
      > customer takes an average
      >
      > of 33 trips annually averaging 55 kilometers per trip. Typical
      > private customers
      > use Mobility for trips of
      >
      > less than 500 kilometers total per year, while for average
      > business customers,
      > vehicle-kilometers traveled
      >
      > (VKT) with Mobility is nearly twice that figure. As to whether use
      > behavior is
      > dependent upon
      >
      > length of time the customer has been a Mobility subscriber, there
      > is no clearly
      > visible trend.
      >
      > The main reason for the flattening of the growth curve in recent
      > years is not a
      > decrease in new customer
      >
      > subscriptions but rather an increase in canceled subscriptions.
      > The most
      > frequent reason for
      >
      > canceling customer subscriptions is an increase or decrease in the
      > household's
      > need for mobility by
      >
      > car. Besides that, passive members in particular are canceling their
      > subscriptions in reaction to an
      >
      > increase in the annual subscription fee.
      >
      > 1.3 Analysis of the Car-Sharing fleet
      >
      > Mobility Car-Sharing has invested consistently in energy efficient
      > vehicles. In
      > 2005 the average fuel
      >
      > consumption (based on the standard consumption) of the entire
      > Mobility fleet was
      > approximately 15
      >
      > percent lower than the fuel consumption of all new cars in
      > Switzerland in the
      > year 2005. Compared to
      >
      > all cars in Switzerland, the Mobility fleet consumed in 2005
      > approximately 26
      > percent less fuel. In contrast
      >
      > to the declining average fuel consumption of new cars on the road, the
      > consumption of the Mobility
      >
      > fleet has remained practically constant over the years. Probably
      > the main reason
      > for this is, for one,
      >
      > the already very low fuel consumption of the fleet of Mobility
      > vehicles due to
      > the choice of vehicles
      >
      > procured; for another, the efficiency gains are probably offset due to
      > Mobility's extension of the fleet to
      >
      > include larger vehicles and vehicles having larger cubic capacity
      > in addition to
      > the very efficient Volkswagen
      >
      > model called the 3liter Lupo (designed to use just three liters of
      > fuel per 100
      > kilometers about
      >
      > 78 miles per U.S. gallon).
      >
      > The average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of the Mobility fleet
      > in 2005 are
      > approximately 18 percent
      >
      > lower than new cars on the road in Switzerland in the same years
      > and 25 percent
      > lower than the
      >
      > average emissions of all private cars in Switzerland in 2005.
      >
      > 1.4 Key data on mobility customers
      >
      > 1.4.1 Key data on private customers
      >
      > Car-Sharing households are larger than average, have above-average
      > incomes, and
      > are environmentally
      >
      > conscious. The car ownership of Car-Sharing households lies below
      > the Swiss
      > average, as expected.
      >
      > When Mobility customers were asked about before-and-after car
      > ownership, the
      > results
      >
      > showed that the households reduced car ownership more after
      > joining Car-Sharing:
      > 31 percent of the
      >
      > households surveyed own at least one motor vehicle today, and 24
      > percent own at
      > least one car. Before
      >
      > becoming Car-Sharing customers, 47 percent of the households owned
      > at least one
      > motor vehicle,
      >
      > and 40 percent of those owned at least one car. Today, 73 percent
      > of the
      > households own a General
      >
      > Pass for the Swiss Federal Railways, an annual subscription with
      > the Swiss
      > Federal Railways for
      >
      > a specific route, or an annual ticket for the services of a
      > regional public
      > transport operator. One quarter
      >
      > of the households have more public transport passes and
      > subscriptions today than
      > before,
      >
      > while 8 percent have fewer.
      >
      > 1.4.2 Key data on business customers
      >
      > For business customers, Car-Sharing replaces vehicle ownership or
      > provides
      > additional vehicles, but it
      >
      > does not increase the overall vehicle-kilometers traveled (VKT).
      > More than half
      > of the companies surveyed
      >
      > (most of them in the service sector) did not own vehicles in the
      > past, nor do
      > they today. After
      >
      > becoming Car-Sharing customers, the number of companies owning
      > company vehicles
      > decreased
      >
      > from 57 to 52 percent, with the total number of company-owned vehicles
      > decreasing from 265 to 251.
      >
      > The companies reported that there was practically no change in
      > annual VKT
      > traveled by car for business
      >
      > trips after joining Car-Sharing. There was also no change for
      > person-kilometers
      > traveled (PKT)
      >
      > by public transport.
      >
      > If there were no Car-Sharing, half of those business trips would
      > be made by
      > motorized individual
      >
      > transport (MIV), 5 percent using public transport, and the rest by
      > a combination
      > of the two forms of
      >
      > transport.
      >
      > C:\Program
      > Files\FileNET\IDM\Cache\2006092111083900001\Evaluation_CarSharing_2006.doc
      >
      > 1.5 Impacts on mobility and energy consumption
      >
      > 1.5.1 Private customers
      >
      > For the analysis of the effects of Car-Sharing on mobility
      > behavior of private
      > customers, the perspective
      >
      > of the affected households and a cross-comparison (Car-Sharing/no
      > Car-Sharing)
      > were chosen. A
      >
      > combination of two approaches was used:
      >
      > - Impact 1: This bases on private customers' responses to the
      > question of how
      > today's Car-Sharing
      >
      > trips would be made if there were no Car-Sharing.
      >
      > - Impact 2: Viewed separately were those 116 households (22.3%)
      > that stated
      > hypothetically that if
      >
      > Mobility Car-Sharing did not exist, they would purchase one (or
      > more) additional
      > cars. This impact
      >
      > assessment thus considers reduction in car ownership as an impact of
      > Car-Sharing. These 116
      >
      > households were compared to comparable households that were
      > surveyed in the
      > Swiss Mikrozensus
      >
      > Verkehr [Swiss Travel Behavior Microcensus]. The underlying
      > hypothesis was the
      > following: In
      >
      > the long term, if Car-Sharing did not exist, the behavior of these
      > household
      > Car-Sharing subscribers
      >
      > would become much like the behavior of other households that have
      > comparable
      > mobility
      >
      > needs.
      >
      > The most important findings on mobility behavior are shown in the
      > figure below:
      >
      > - Use of public transportation characterizes the mobility behavior of
      > today's households that use Car-Sharing; the lion's share of
      > kilometers traveled
      > (excluding walking or bicycling) is by public transportation.
      >
      > - Somewhat surprisingly, Car-Sharing subscribing households used
      > Car-Sharing vehicles for only about one-seventh of all
      > vehicle-kilometers
      > traveled.
      >
      > - Approximately 10 percent of Mobility car trips - where motorization
      > rate is constant, according to assumptions in Impact 1 - must be
      > called induced
      > travel (the trips would not have been made without Car-Sharing).
      >
      > - If Car-Sharing did not exist, respondents would rely much more
      > strongly on the use of personal vehicles (+26% VKT) to the
      > detriment of public
      > transport use (12% PKT).
      >
      > All in all, for most of the private customers (77.7%) Car-Sharing
      > leads to
      > increased vehicle travel. This
      >
      > increase in VKT is, however, rather low, and it is more than made
      > up for by the
      > fact that a part of the
      >
      > private customers (22.3%) would buy a car if Car-Sharing services
      > stopped. It is
      > through this smaller
      >
      > segment of private customers that the fuel and emissions savings
      > are achieved.
      >
      > MOBILITY CAR-SHARING PRIVATE CUSTOMERS (CAR-SHARING EXISTS)
      >
      > AS COMPARED TO HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION WITH NO CAR-SHARING
      >
      > [Go to report pdf for graphic]
      >
      > Based on these results, an energy balance was extrapolated for all
      > Mobility
      > Car-Sharing private customers
      >
      > in the year 2005. Altogether, the result for total impact is
      > energy savings in
      > the magnitude of
      >
      > approximately 78.4 TJ (terajoules: one million joules) per year.
      > This amount of
      > energy is equivalent to
      >
      > approximately 2.5 million liters of gasoline (660,430 U.S.
      > gallons). Taking the
      > total impact of aggregated
      >
      > energy savings, this calculates out to approximately 1,400 MJ
      > (megajoules: one
      > million joules;
      >
      > 1,400 MJ corresponds to 190 kilograms CO2 emissions) per customer
      > at the end of
      > the year (published
      >
      > in the respective annual report) and 1'450 MJ (corresponds to 200
      > kilograms CO2
      > emissions)
      >
      > per Car-Sharing customer. When the overall savings for 2005 are
      > calculated per
      > active customers
      >
      > only, the resulting value is approximately 2,100 MJ per customer
      > (corresponds to
      > reduced CO2 emissions
      >
      > of 290 kg).
      >
      > 1.5.2 Business customers
      >
      > In the case of the business customers, two different assessments
      > were made for
      > triangulation purposes.
      >
      > The two approaches indicate within a range the possible spectrum
      > of effects.
      > Because induced
      >
      > travel is not considered here as it was for private customers,
      > these values
      > probably tend to overestimate
      >
      > the actual impact.
      >
      > - The first comparison is similar to the way of examining things in
      > Impact 1 for private customers. The energy balance based on
      > replaced Car-Sharing
      > trips results in total savings of approximately 3.0 TJ per year.
      >
      > - The second comparison considers an important effect of participation
      > in business Car-Sharing, namely, that the company reduces its
      > fleet of business
      > vehicles or decides not to further increase its fleet of business
      > vehicles. This
      > effect can be only roughly quantified in the present evaluation.
      > Taking the
      > total VKT for business Car-Sharing in 2005 (5.9 million),
      > extrapolation results
      > in, as an upper limit, savings of 28.4 TJ on the whole.
      >
      > As was expected, determination of the effects of business
      > Car-Sharing on the
      > mobility behavior of
      >
      > companies was beset with methodological difficulties (complex actor
      > constellations, small database).
      >
      > For this reason, it will be important to conduct further
      > investigations in this
      > area of impact analysis in
      >
      > future.
      >
      > But in addition to these direct benefits of business car sharing,
      > there is also
      > an indirect effect to be
      >
      > considered that was not the subject of the present evaluation. For
      > business
      > trips, Mobility vehicles are
      >
      > often used at times of day when there is little demand for
      > vehicles by private
      > customers. This improves
      >
      > utilization of the entire system, thus strengthening the car
      > sharing system.
      >
      > 1.6 Assessment of future potential
      >
      > The mobility product Car-Sharing will grow also in the future. The
      > main
      > influencing factors here are
      >
      > developing factors in the general environment (in accordance with
      > official
      > perspectives on passenger
      >
      > transport), utilization of climate policy (air quality policy) as an
      > opportunity, and the marketing strategy
      >
      > of Mobility Car-Sharing or any other Car-Sharing providers.
      > Investments in
      > promoting Car-Sharing
      >
      > use, in professional sales structures, and in fleets of vehicles
      > that are energy
      > efficient and cover a
      >
      > variety of needs stand in the foreground. Given the available
      > data, specific
      > predictions in terms of a
      >
      > number are fraught with great uncertainties. As key factors, the
      > following come
      > into consideration:
      >
      > - As a theoretical quantity, 0.5 million potential customers is an
      > upper threshold value. With today's general environment and
      > today's business
      > strategies, however, it will not be possible to tap the full
      > potential.
      >
      > - The rate of growth of public transport can be taken as a reference,
      > because Car-Sharing can be realized only in partnership with the
      > public
      > transport system. A growth rate of 2 to 3 percent per year is
      > therefore quite
      > realistic.
      >
      > - Addition potential can result, if additional investments and larger
      > communication budgets allow new demographic market segments to be
      > more deeply
      > cultivated. It is difficult to estimate how great this additional
      > potential is.
      > To assess this it would be necessary to include current
      > marketing-controlling
      > activities.
      >
      > - If the customer group of car owners can be cultivated successfully
      > and if through this cars are purchased or not purchased, then it
      > is likely also
      > in the future that higher growth rates will result for energy
      > savings than for
      > total vehicle kilometers traveled. That would be the case
      > particularly if the
      > fleet procurement policy continues to focus on energy efficient
      > vehicles.
      >
      > - The customer group of car owners, whose representatives when joining
      > Car-Sharing sold their personal vehicles or who would buy an
      > additional vehicle
      > if there were no Car-Sharing, stands out today with comparatively
      > high household
      > income, residence in urban centers and urban agglomerations,
      > average household
      > size, and use of public transport. Based on this group's high
      > house- hold
      > income, it can certainly be concluded that there will be increased
      > demand for
      > comfort and convenience (of vehicles, reservations, and
      > pickup/drop-off
      > locations) and quality of the service.
      >
      > - If a customer potential of 100,000 customers can be achieved in the
      > medium term, a maximum annual energy savings potential of 140 TJ
      > can be
      > expected. Approximately 19,000 tonnes (metric tonne = 1,000
      > kilograms, or
      > 2,204.62 pounds) of CO2 can be avoided.
      >
      > Back to top <#toc>
      > Reply to sender
      > <mailto:eric.britton@...?Subject=Re:%20Swiss%20Federal%20Office%20for%20Energy%3A%202006%20Evaluation%20CarSharing%20%2E%2E%2E>
      > | Reply to group
      > <mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com?Subject=Re:%20Swiss%20Federal%20Office%20for%20Energy%3A%202006%20Evaluation%20CarSharing%20%2E%2E%2E>
      > | Reply via web post
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcDVlcHA0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTgEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw--?act=reply&messageNum=1758>
      >
      > Messages in this topic
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/message/1758;_ylc=X3oDMTM1NnAxNjJmBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BG1zZ0lkAzE3NTgEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMwR0cGNJZAMxNzU4>
      > (1)
      >
      > Visit Your Group
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe;_ylc=X3oDMTJla3M5cWFuBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw-->
      >
      > Yahoo! Movies
      >
      > Want a sneak peek?
      > <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hh1d9id/M=493064.8985660.9760761.8674578/D=groups/S=1707205954:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1159613203/A=3848595/R=0/SIG=113nf7q6i/*http://movies.yahoo.com/trailers/>
      >
      > Check out new
      >
      > trailers and clips
      >
      > Yahoo! 360°
      >
      > Blog Now
      > <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hqp4bjj/M=493064.8985654.9760645.8674578/D=groups/S=1707205954:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1159613203/A=3848503/R=0/SIG=10mmpqqkm/*http://360.yahoo.com>
      >
      > Share your life
      >
      > With friends, family
      >
      > Yahoo! Mail
      >
      > Get it all!
      > <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hpcq8eh/M=493064.8985657.9760727.8674578/D=groups/S=1707205954:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1159613203/A=3848570/R=0/SIG=12j26nlu5/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42411/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/handraisers>
      >
      > With the all-new
      >
      > Yahoo! Mail Beta
      >
      > Need to Reply?
      >
      > Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the
      > Daily Digest.
      >
      > Create New Topic
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlN2djdTdiBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw-->
      > | Visit Your Group on the Web
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe;_ylc=X3oDMTJja29yaTYwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2hwBHN0aW1lAzExNTk2MDYwMDM->
      >
      > Messages
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/messages;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaWZhdmdzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA21zZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw-->
      > | Files
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/files;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMTNndDUxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2ZpbGVzBHN0aW1lAzExNTk2MDYwMDM->
      > | Photos
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/photos;_ylc=X3oDMTJlbzY4dTU0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Bob3QEc3RpbWUDMTE1OTYwNjAwMw-->
      > | Links
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/links;_ylc=X3oDMTJmc2I1YzVkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2xpbmtzBHN0aW1lAzExNTk2MDYwMDM->
      > | Database
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/database;_ylc=X3oDMTJjMzkxZjdvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2RiBHN0aW1lAzExNTk2MDYwMDM->
      > | Polls
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/polls;_ylc=X3oDMTJma203a2M3BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3BvbGxzBHN0aW1lAzExNTk2MDYwMDM->
      > | Calendar
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/calendar;_ylc=X3oDMTJkNG5vdHZxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2NhbARzdGltZQMxMTU5NjA2MDAz>
      >
      > Check in here via the homepage at http://www.newmobility.org
      > To post message to group: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com
      > Please think twice before posting to the group as a whole
      > (It might be that your note is best sent to one person?)
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkbDl0ZjEwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMTU5NjA2MDAz>
      >
      > Change settings via the Web
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJmcDVxNTczBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3N0bmdzBHN0aW1lAzExNTk2MDYwMDM->
      > (Yahoo! ID required)
      > Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Individual
      > <mailto:NewMobilityCafe-normal@yahoogroups.com?subject=Email%20Delivery:%20Indiviual%20Email>
      > | Switch format to Traditional
      > <mailto:NewMobilityCafe-traditional@yahoogroups.com?subject=Change%20Delivery%20Format:%20Traditional>
      >
      > Visit Your Group
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe;_ylc=X3oDMTJkMm4yN2o1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNjAyMjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2hwZgRzdGltZQMxMTU5NjA2MDAz>
      > | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> |
      > Unsubscribe
      > <mailto:NewMobilityCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.