"Come argue with me" (but stick to the point please)
In response to my Monday editorial in World Streets – www.WorldStreets.org -- on the central importance of finding ways to achieve near term reductions of motor vehicle traffic (VKT/VMT) as the primary policy tool for taking pressure from the transport sector off the planet in the next two to five years, we are receiving a number of postings about new technology car proposals, all of them interesting in themselves.. However given our tight time horizon for massive results they are not within the scope of this discussion. So if you wish to follow them may I suggest that you get in touch directly with the authors as follows:
· Palle Palle R Jensen ruf@...
More generally what strikes me is the extent to which some of these comments jump way beyond the single strategic tenet of my article, namely that we need to find ways to reduce the quantum of motorized traffic – and always with the caveat of (a) not undermining the economy and (b) life quality for all. I particularly like the common-sensical way that France B sums up the strategic basics in her commentary of yesterday.
I have not yet made any statements about the means in which these reductions can be achieved. There is not only no mention of trains, and certainly not "tactics calculated to force people onto trains".
So if we can stick to the point in these comments here, and in a few days give me a shot at the "how tos" at which point you can arm your bows and let go.
PS. Let me pick out however the closing words of Bruce just above when he says: "increasing the efficiency of car travel (and this could include robocars), reducing actual travel by increasing virtual travel (video conferencing, etc.), increasing the walkability and cyclability of cities." While our time frame does not allow for the robocars bit, all the rest is pure gold. Thank you Bruce.