RE: [carfree_cities] Advertisements in mass transit
> -----Original Message-----Agree.
> From: Ronald Dawson [mailto:rdadddmd@...]
> Sent: 9 juin, 2001 22:56
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: RE: [carfree_cities] Advertisements in mass transit
> Matt wrote:
> >Here's a thought:
> >Mr. Crawford writes about removing advertisements from mass transit.
> >Although an ad-free transit ride would be quite pleasant, here's
> >something to think about:
> Personally, I'm not really against ads involving Mass Transit,
> but what I'm
> against is conflict of interest ads, like car ads and their
> related products
> except for maybe rental cars.
What I dislike the most is car ads in transit. The most ridiculous ones
I've seen are those GM car ads on the floor from Sept to Oct. 1999 (IIRC).
When travelling in the station, I would avoid people path or aim my way to
walk right on (not pass beside and look at it). If I needed to wait for
someone, or lining up at ticket booth, I was standing right on it, sweeping
my feet or putting my shopping bags on it. GM builds our Rigaud-Montreal
1800 HP (and the new 3000 HPs as well?) locomotives, why don't they post a
loco ad instead? It'd be odd, and incitative as well... Hmmm, do GM build
buses as well? I believe so, at least for the older "New Look"s.
Car ads invade too many of our neon-paneled posting units (in metro stations
as well), and what about the SAAQ (Quebec Auto association) saying to
innocent people "Pedestrians, don't walk in the street or your life may end
there". That's outrageous. Do they ask drivers to watch for pedestrians?
Especially where peds have right-of-way? At least I hope so, but I don't use
the highway often enough to tell. The moral is we don't want to drive for
others to save our lives, we deserve the minimum level of respect from our
fellow driver, assuming they're still humans.
- Hi Chris,
Again, sorry for the late response.
Could you point me to some of the references on in-car-air-quality?
I've been working closely with a number of auto design engineers who deal
with climate control systems (heating, ventilation and air conditioning).
They pay very close attention to the inside air quality of their designs and
must meet their company standards for minimising build-up of pollutants
inside the car (unfortunately, I don't know of any government standard in
It would be interesting to see if the engineering standards actually 'do'
what they are supposed to do.
P.S. Unfortunately, these designers haven't put a proposal through for the
'spike in the steering wheel', nor the 'exhaust venting through the
From: Chris Bradshaw [mailto:chris@...]
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] Advertisements in mass transit
On June 26th, "Boileau,Pierre [NCR]" wrote:
> . . . . It is often difficult for the human mind to comprehend that a
> choice to drive our car on a Monday morning, rather than ride the bus,
> affects the health of a Nepalese family because their climate changes and
> this creates a greater risk of vector-borne diseases. These messages are
> too surreal for even an intelligent person to comprehend. The messages
> need to be more localised and need to deal with our choices affecting the
> health of our neighbours and ourselves.
And, immediately afterwards, Richard Mosely wrote:
> . . . . I mean in today's urban cities it is the
> non-car user that inhales the fumes, hears the noise, . . .
The driver of the car only _thinks_ (along with many car-free people)
that he is externalizing the fumes, noise, and danger to others. In
fact, he is only _sharing_ them.
Studies have shown that the air quality _inside_ cars is worse than that
along the street edge (perhaps the cyclist sitting near the exhaust pipe
is in the worst location, but not the pedestrian).
As far as noise is concerned, the car noise is not externalized, only
overwhelmed by the stereo.
And the danger? Well, although the motorist has the benefit of safety
gear inside the car he bought, he is the one person whom he most
endangers (although I enjoy the hypothetical rules that cars should
have a spike in the steering wheel and that exhaust should pass through
the cabin on the way to the exterior).
That point should be pressed with the public much more. It brings the
environmental arguments as close to the local/personal as can be.
Also, cars should be required to carry a warning: "Danger to self and
others increases with distance and speed driven."
p.s., For those who still want to point out that the force of the car is
still more chilling for the vulnerable users outside the vehicle, I
would point out that drivers indeed feel guilt and stress over that
imbalance of power. Hitting a pedestrian or cyclist does alot more than
"ruin your day." When police and society try to console drivers, saying
that the assault was really "an accident," they only drive the guilt
even deeper. I wish someone would study the long-term psychological
effects on drivers involved in such collisions.
To Post a message, send it to: carfree_cities@...
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]