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

Re: [carfree_cities] Car Free Cities

Expand Messages
  • Doug Salzmann
    ... Hi, Andrew. I don t think Andy meant that the per-journey cost of auto operation is lower than public transit. He was reminding us that, once a car owner
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 8, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      At 06:07 PM 2/7/2001, Andrew wrote in part:

      >Andy Morris wrote:
      >
      > > Being a car-free individual in a car-addicted city is
      > > hard. Once you own a car, the perceived incremental cost per journey is
      > > lower than public transport.
      >
      > >> This is not true- the car is still very expensive to maintain and if
      > you put a
      >cost on life, it is definitely cheaper to take public transportation,
      >especially
      >when every 40 seconds somebody dies from an automobile (American Public
      >Transportation Association).

      Hi, Andrew.

      I don't think Andy meant that the per-journey cost of auto operation is
      lower than public transit. He was reminding us that, once a car owner is
      paying all of the other costs of ownership, it may *seem* to that owner
      that the additional (incremental) cost of hopping into the car for a trip
      to the store is very low, perhaps even cheaper than taking the tram or bus.

      This problem of perceived cost is a major barrier to discussing the
      relative economies of auto operation vs. public transit. So many of the
      costs of automobility are either hidden or paid by society as a whole that
      it often seems much cheaper than it really is.

      -Doug
    • Ronald Dawson
      ... farty ... Do you think speed governors or photo radar would help? Dawson
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 8, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        J.H. Crawford wrote:




        >>One last point, if someone its me at speed, in a car that exceeds the
        'farty
        >>car' spec, can we not make the manufacturer and retailer take some
        >>responsibility? They sold a machine that was dangerously over powered and
        >>encouraged an irresponsible attitude in the driver.

        >I've often wondered why the manufacturers are not routinely
        >sued in any case in which speeds in excess of the posted
        >65 mph (in the USA) are involved. It would be simple to prove
        >in court that the manufacturers are encouraging illegal
        >behaviour. Take this quote (from the book):

        Do you think speed governors or photo radar would help? Dawson
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.