## Efficiency and the automobile

Expand Messages
• I ve been lurking for a while, but came across a neat web page today, and thought I d try posting it. Excerpt: The Strange Case of the Weighty Lunchbox a
Message 1 of 22 , Feb 2, 2006
• 0 Attachment
I've been lurking for a while, but came across a neat web page today,
and thought I'd try posting it.
Excerpt:

The Strange Case of the Weighty Lunchbox

a thought experiment:

Let's say you and I work in the same office. Every morning you are
intrigued to watch me lug a 25 pound insulated metal cube -- about 18
inches on a side -- into my cubicle, with some effort. Every evening,
with another grunt or two, I lug the darned thing out again. It looks
to you something like a portable mini-safe.

Eventually your curiosity gets the better of you. You peek over the
partition one day and say, "I'm so sorry to bother you, but I'm just
This isn't the Pentagon, you know -- what on earth are you carrying in
the armoured case?"

Let's say I look at you blankly for a moment, then heave the
mysterious box up onto my desk and open it. Inside several inches of
foam padding you see the big secret: one apple, one sandwich. "I
usually bring my lunch," I say. "Happy now?"

You stare for a few seconds at the mini-safe lying open on my desk, at
You can't figure out quite what is wrong with someone who feels a need
to carry around 20 ounces of lunch in a 25 pound metal box, and you
can tell by the blank expression on my face that I don't understand
that it takes all kinds, etc.

Now let's say you and I both go shopping. You arrive in your car; I
arrive on my bike.

When I see you get into your car with your bag of groceries, this is
what's going through my mind:

You weigh somewhere between 130 and 180 pounds. Your groceries weigh
about 30 pounds. Your car weighs over 2000 pounds. If it's a SUV or
minivan, it might weigh over 3000 pounds. On average, your car weighs
at least 10 times more than its payload -- maybe 15 times more, but to
keep the math simple, let's say 10.

So if we accept this optimistic figure, then your car's engine devotes
only 1/11th of its total energy output to transporting its payload,
and 10/11ths of its energy transporting only itself. To me this seems
as crazy as our thought experiment above, in which I lugged my lunch
to work in a box that weighs ten times as much as the lunch itself!

But it's actually worse than that. Of the energy released by burning
percent actually goes to moving the wheels around and moving the car
forward. The remaining 90 percent is lost as heat: friction which
heats up bearings, heat dissipated by the radiator and other engine
surfaces, and heat vented in the exhaust.

So for each gallon of fuel you're burning as you drive your car, only
1/10th of it actually moves the car. The rest just warms up the air
around the car. And of the 1/10th of a gallon that's not wasted as
heat, only 1/11th actually goes to moving you and your cargo, and the
rest goes to just moving the heavy body of the car. The resulting
percentage (how much fuel is actually used to move you and your cargo)
is an attractive repeating decimal: .00909090909... or about .91
percent. In other words, not quite one percent of the fuel you burn in
the car is devoted to moving you and your cargo.

If I apply this ratio back to the lunchbox model, I would have to use
a lunchbox 100 times heavier than my lunch in order to approximate the
"overkill" represented by your car. If I bring about a pound and a
half of lunch (24 ounces), I'd have to carry 2400 ounces, or 150 lbs,
of lunchbox.

This is one reason why I think the word "efficient" doesn't apply to
cars.

from http://www.ucolick.org/~de/AltTrans/efficiency.html
• I guess the only car that is actually efficient would be a taxi. Later, Andrew
Message 2 of 22 , Feb 24, 2006
• 0 Attachment
I guess the only car that is actually efficient would be a taxi. Later,
Andrew

>From: "redjenny111" <jhayter@...>
>To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [carfree_cities] Efficiency and the automobile
>Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 22:03:09 -0000
>
>I've been lurking for a while, but came across a neat web page today,
>and thought I'd try posting it.
>Excerpt:
>
>The Strange Case of the Weighty Lunchbox
>
>a thought experiment:
>
>Let's say you and I work in the same office. Every morning you are
>intrigued to watch me lug a 25 pound insulated metal cube -- about 18
>inches on a side -- into my cubicle, with some effort. Every evening,
>with another grunt or two, I lug the darned thing out again. It looks
>to you something like a portable mini-safe.
>
>Eventually your curiosity gets the better of you. You peek over the
>partition one day and say, "I'm so sorry to bother you, but I'm just
>This isn't the Pentagon, you know -- what on earth are you carrying in
>the armoured case?"
>
>Let's say I look at you blankly for a moment, then heave the
>mysterious box up onto my desk and open it. Inside several inches of
>foam padding you see the big secret: one apple, one sandwich. "I
>usually bring my lunch," I say. "Happy now?"
>
>You stare for a few seconds at the mini-safe lying open on my desk, at
>You can't figure out quite what is wrong with someone who feels a need
>to carry around 20 ounces of lunch in a 25 pound metal box, and you
>can tell by the blank expression on my face that I don't understand
>that it takes all kinds, etc.
>
>Now let's say you and I both go shopping. You arrive in your car; I
>arrive on my bike.
>
>When I see you get into your car with your bag of groceries, this is
>what's going through my mind:
>
>You weigh somewhere between 130 and 180 pounds. Your groceries weigh
>about 30 pounds. Your car weighs over 2000 pounds. If it's a SUV or
>minivan, it might weigh over 3000 pounds. On average, your car weighs
>at least 10 times more than its payload -- maybe 15 times more, but to
>keep the math simple, let's say 10.
>
>So if we accept this optimistic figure, then your car's engine devotes
>only 1/11th of its total energy output to transporting its payload,
>and 10/11ths of its energy transporting only itself. To me this seems
>as crazy as our thought experiment above, in which I lugged my lunch
>to work in a box that weighs ten times as much as the lunch itself!
>
>But it's actually worse than that. Of the energy released by burning
>percent actually goes to moving the wheels around and moving the car
>forward. The remaining 90 percent is lost as heat: friction which
>heats up bearings, heat dissipated by the radiator and other engine
>surfaces, and heat vented in the exhaust.
>
>So for each gallon of fuel you're burning as you drive your car, only
>1/10th of it actually moves the car. The rest just warms up the air
>around the car. And of the 1/10th of a gallon that's not wasted as
>heat, only 1/11th actually goes to moving you and your cargo, and the
>rest goes to just moving the heavy body of the car. The resulting
>percentage (how much fuel is actually used to move you and your cargo)
>is an attractive repeating decimal: .00909090909... or about .91
>percent. In other words, not quite one percent of the fuel you burn in
>the car is devoted to moving you and your cargo.
>
>If I apply this ratio back to the lunchbox model, I would have to use
>a lunchbox 100 times heavier than my lunch in order to approximate the
>"overkill" represented by your car. If I bring about a pound and a
>half of lunch (24 ounces), I'd have to carry 2400 ounces, or 150 lbs,
>of lunchbox.
>
>This is one reason why I think the word "efficient" doesn't apply to
>cars.
>
>from http://www.ucolick.org/~de/AltTrans/efficiency.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
• ... What s efficient about a taxi, under the criteria used for the thought experiment ? The payload-to-vehicle-weight ratio is about the same (assuming one
Message 3 of 22 , Feb 25, 2006
• 0 Attachment
>I guess the only car that is actually efficient would be a taxi. Later,
>Andrew
>

What's efficient about a taxi, under the criteria used for the 'thought experiment'? The payload-to-vehicle-weight ratio is about the same (assuming one passenger plus the driver, who in this scenario doesn't really count since s/he is not the person we're transporting, except as the pilot of the vehicle). So is the efficiency of the engine (i.e. the chemical reaction of combustion of gasoline/diesel into motive power). Moreover, a taxi must drive an extra distance between fares, adding to the inefficiencies.

For that matter, under these criteria, what's efficient about a bus or a train? The best one can say about these modes of transport is that they are "less inefficient" than cars (including taxis).

Joel [Siegel]

-----Original Message-----
>From: Andrew Dawson <m82a1_dawson@...>
>Sent: Feb 25, 2006 2:36 AM
>To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [carfree_cities] Efficiency and the automobile
>
>I guess the only car that is actually efficient would be a taxi. Later,
>Andrew
>
>
>>From: "redjenny111" <jhayter@...>
>>To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
>>Subject: [carfree_cities] Efficiency and the automobile
>>Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 22:03:09 -0000
>>
>>I've been lurking for a while, but came across a neat web page today,
>>and thought I'd try posting it.
>>Excerpt:
>>
>>The Strange Case of the Weighty Lunchbox
>>
>>a thought experiment:

[snip]

• Um, perhaps this is not the list for this discussion although transitions to carfree cities will certainly deal with interfaces to the car-world (as in
Message 4 of 22 , Mar 3, 2006
• 0 Attachment
Um, perhaps this is not the list for this discussion although transitions
to carfree cities will certainly deal with interfaces to the car-world (as
in Crawford's book) even if there are completely carfree areas.

So, a bit on taxis and "what is most efficient":

1) A large part of the environmental cost of any car is its being built at
all. Most cars sit idle most of the time, hogging lots of space, which is
also grossly inefficient in myriad ways.

2) In a busy city, it's likely many taxies are full most of the time.
There must be studies of this if one wants details. Even if not, the
industry can with regulation (if the market doesn't already regulate)
reduce availability and fare search time until a least waste point is
reached.

3) A fleet of taxis is much smaller and more centralized than a fleet of
private automobiles, so it's easier to ensure they're up to code and to
introduce new fleets that are as energy efficient as possible (not that
it's easy, just much more possible).

4) Carsharing has many of these same advantages, and if one had to choose
between the two, I would strongly expect carsharing to result in fewer
cars actually in use, although there might be more in existence (sitting
idle more often), depending on circumstance.

Jason

On Sun, 26 Feb 2006, Joel Siegel wrote:

>> I guess the only car that is actually efficient would be a taxi. Later,
>> Andrew
>>
>
> What's efficient about a taxi, under the criteria used for the 'thought
> (assuming one passenger plus the driver, who in this scenario doesn't
> really count since s/he is not the person we're transporting, except as
> the pilot of the vehicle). So is the efficiency of the engine (i.e. the
> chemical reaction of combustion of gasoline/diesel into motive power).
> Moreover, a taxi must drive an extra distance between fares, adding to
> the inefficiencies.
>
> For that matter, under these criteria, what's efficient about a bus or a
> train? The best one can say about these modes of transport is that they
> are "less inefficient" than cars (including taxis).
>
> Joel [Siegel]
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andrew Dawson <m82a1_dawson@...>
>> Sent: Feb 25, 2006 2:36 AM
>> To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: RE: [carfree_cities] Efficiency and the automobile
>>
>> I guess the only car that is actually efficient would be a taxi. Later,
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>> From: "redjenny111" <jhayter@...>
>>> To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
>>> Subject: [carfree_cities] Efficiency and the automobile
>>> Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 22:03:09 -0000
>>>
>>> I've been lurking for a while, but came across a neat web page today,
>>> and thought I'd try posting it.
>>> Excerpt:
>>>
>>> The Strange Case of the Weighty Lunchbox
>>>
>>> a thought experiment:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> from http://www.ucolick.org/~de/AltTrans/efficiency.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
• All this talk about taxies, sorry if I sound car-lite again. If a company instead of providing company cars for her employees had one alternative fuel car that
Message 5 of 22 , Mar 3, 2006
• 0 Attachment
All this talk about taxies, sorry if I sound car-lite again.

If a company instead of providing company cars for her employees had one
alternative fuel car that was shared and all the other personal
transportation needed in the line of business was inter-modial with the taxi
as the last link, they could save a lot of cash. One result would be that of
teaching people whom normally only drive that alternative modes of transport
exist and can do the job even better.

The change from totally auto centric to totally carfree is going to have to
happen in stages. I can't see any other way than by increasing step by step
the amount of carfree pedestrian space, one or two streets at a time, whilst
at the same time the total amount of traffic in the rest of the city is both
calmed and reduced. The taxi can play a key role in this transitional
period.

Changing the subject I've just received this link to a PRT project in
not really sold on the idea. I have the added problem of one person in my
FoE group who seems to think this is the future of mass transit, to the
extent of carrying around a bunt of brochures about these things and showing
them at every opportunity.

Question; what is the best argument against these things? Is it just my
paranoia that they look a bit like cars that puts me off or can PRT be a
good thing?

Ian Fiddies
• I don t know if a taxi is effiecient but they are necassary for some people to get around. Usually poeple who don t own cars and can t walk or use the bus. I
Message 6 of 22 , Mar 4, 2006
• 0 Attachment
I don't know if a taxi is effiecient but they are necassary for some people to get around. Usually poeple who don't own cars and can't walk or use the bus.
I use them myself.
But short of culling the blind and disabled, I'm not sure we could dispense with a taxi like equivelent in our car free world.
Unless rickshaws really took off as a business venture. I'd prefer a rickshaw. Pollution free and you get to watcha muscled beind ;-)

Shyrley

Jason Meggs <jmeggs@...> wrote:
Um, perhaps this is not the list for this discussion although transitions
to carfree cities will certainly deal with interfaces to the car-world (as
in Crawford's book) even if there are completely carfree areas.

So, a bit on taxis and "what is most efficient":

1) A large part of the environmental cost of any car is its being built at
all. Most cars sit idle most of the time, hogging lots of space, which is
also grossly inefficient in myriad ways.

2) In a busy city, it's likely many taxies are full most of the time.
There must be studies of this if one wants details. Even if not, the
industry can with regulation (if the market doesn't already regulate)
reduce availability and fare search time until a least waste point is
reached.

3) A fleet of taxis is much smaller and more centralized than a fleet of
private automobiles, so it's easier to ensure they're up to code and to
introduce new fleets that are as energy efficient as possible (not that
it's easy, just much more possible).

4) Carsharing has many of these same advantages, and if one had to choose
between the two, I would strongly expect carsharing to result in fewer
cars actually in use, although there might be more in existence (sitting
idle more often), depending on circumstance.

Jason

On Sun, 26 Feb 2006, Joel Siegel wrote:

>> I guess the only car that is actually efficient would be a taxi. Later,
>> Andrew
>>
>
> What's efficient about a taxi, under the criteria used for the 'thought
> (assuming one passenger plus the driver, who in this scenario doesn't
> really count since s/he is not the person we're transporting, except as
> the pilot of the vehicle). So is the efficiency of the engine (i.e. the
> chemical reaction of combustion of gasoline/diesel into motive power).
> Moreover, a taxi must drive an extra distance between fares, adding to
> the inefficiencies.
>
> For that matter, under these criteria, what's efficient about a bus or a
> train? The best one can say about these modes of transport is that they
> are "less inefficient" than cars (including taxis).
>
> Joel [Siegel]
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andrew Dawson
>> Sent: Feb 25, 2006 2:36 AM
>> To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: RE: [carfree_cities] Efficiency and the automobile
>>
>> I guess the only car that is actually efficient would be a taxi. Later,
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>> From: "redjenny111"
>>> To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
>>> Subject: [carfree_cities] Efficiency and the automobile
>>> Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 22:03:09 -0000
>>>
>>> I've been lurking for a while, but came across a neat web page today,
>>> and thought I'd try posting it.
>>> Excerpt:
>>>
>>> The Strange Case of the Weighty Lunchbox
>>>
>>> a thought experiment:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> from http://www.ucolick.org/~de/AltTrans/efficiency.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
• ... Actually, if anyone would READ Carfree Cities, they would have noticed that I said: 1. Taxi drivers are among the most dangerous and aggressive 2. I would
Message 7 of 22 , Mar 4, 2006
• 0 Attachment
>The change from totally auto centric to totally carfree is going to have to
>happen in stages. I can't see any other way than by increasing step by step
>the amount of carfree pedestrian space, one or two streets at a time, whilst
>at the same time the total amount of traffic in the rest of the city is both
>calmed and reduced. The taxi can play a key role in this transitional
>period.

Actually, if anyone would READ Carfree Cities, they would have
noticed that I said:

1. Taxi drivers are among the most dangerous and aggressive
2. I would like to get rid of taxis entirely
3. I don't, in fact, think that this is possible
4. Taxis should be tiny, battery powered, and speed limited
5. The fares should be outrageously high

Zermatt is carfree, but it does have some electric taxis
that largely fill the requirements I have proposed. Their
drivers, however, are still aggressive enough to be
dangerous and annoying. One solution is to put an e-stop
switch on all corners of the vehicle. Anyone in the street
can slap it, bringing the taxi to an abrupt halt until
the driver gets out, gets told off by the annoyed pedestrian,
pulls out the e-stop switch, and drives on. It MIGHT work.
Then again, taxi drivers are taxi drivers--about half of
them are bastards, the world around.

Pedal-powered taxis may be the only workable alternative.

Regards,

----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
• ... I think this is a touch unfair. Yes taxi drivers are aggressive, I ve cycled in enough cites to have a lot of personal experience. Cycle couriers I ve
Message 8 of 22 , Mar 4, 2006
• 0 Attachment
> 1. Taxi drivers are among the most dangerous and aggressive
> Then again, taxi drivers are taxi drivers--about half of
> them are bastards, the world around.
>
> Pedal-powered taxis may be the only workable alternative.
>

I think this is a touch unfair. Yes taxi drivers are aggressive, I've cycled
in enough cites to have a lot of personal experience. Cycle couriers I've
noticed tend to be a bit on the hard side as well. The only time I've ever
experienced gridlock was in Varanasi and caused by aggressive rickshaw
riders refusing to give way and getting the back wheels locked. I would
suggest that taxi drivers and cycle couriers become aggressive because of
their working environment. I personally cannot remember the last time I
verbally abused anyone that wasn't in some way connected with them trying to
kill me, someone standing near me or my dog, with their car/taxi/bus/bike.

Taxi drivers are aggressive for exactly the same reason that we are
proponents of carfree living. They're not all bastards some of them just
lack our insight and eloquence but I'm 100% sure that they're pissed off at
the same thing as we are.

I like the idea about the yellow button. My favourite while cycling is
slamming my open palm on the roof of the car that just tried to kill me. It
makes a wonderful noise.

Ian Fiddies
• Are taxis actually being advocated as an alternative to cars? I thought taxis WERE cars, just a car driven by someone else? Brett
Message 9 of 22 , Mar 4, 2006
• 0 Attachment
Are taxis actually being advocated as an alternative to cars?
I thought taxis WERE cars, just a car driven by someone else?

Brett
• ... From: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com [mailto:carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Ian Fiddies Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 12:54 AM To:
Message 10 of 22 , Mar 4, 2006
• 0 Attachment
-----Original Message-----
From: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Ian Fiddies
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 12:54 AM
To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] Efficiency and the automobile

"The change from totally auto centric to totally carfree is going to have to
happen in stages."

Why?

Just a matter of making the individual choice that driving a car is "off the
charts" and using alternatives....

Brett
• I like the idea of an e-stop button. Same idea as e-stop buttons in gas stations and shop rooms--allow someone to hit a mushroom button to stop a dangerous
Message 11 of 22 , Mar 4, 2006
• 0 Attachment
I like the idea of an e-stop button. Same idea as e-stop buttons in gas stations and shop
rooms--allow someone to hit a mushroom button to stop a dangerous situation. It would
allow for hijacking, but on the other hand, a lack of e-stop buttons would not stop a
determined hijacker.

However, I suspect that vehicle hijacking would not be a problem in Joel's reference city,
since there would be eyes on the street--you could safely walk around at 0400 if you
wanted. As for armored cash deliveries, there's metro-freight, and seeing that armored
trucks typically aren't robbed while waiting a few minutes at a red light or in heavy traffic, I
doubt that an [electric] armored truck would be vulnerable moving down a carfree street at
3 mph. (How is cash delivered to ATMs in Venice?)

What would the restrictions be on walk-behind electric trucks in a carfree city? I'm
primarily thinking of electric pallet trucks for moving extremely shipping pallets at 3 mph.

> Zermatt is carfree, but it does have some electric taxis
> that largely fill the requirements I have proposed. Their
> drivers, however, are still aggressive enough to be
> dangerous and annoying. One solution is to put an e-stop
> switch on all corners of the vehicle. Anyone in the street
> can slap it, bringing the taxi to an abrupt halt until
> the driver gets out, gets told off by the annoyed pedestrian,
> pulls out the e-stop switch, and drives on. It MIGHT work.
> Then again, taxi drivers are taxi drivers--about half of
> them are bastards, the world around.
• ... Just put the armored cash-carriers on metro-freight (then the banks must be located on the central boulevard, but that s no serious problem). ... No idea.
Message 12 of 22 , Mar 5, 2006
• 0 Attachment
>As for armored cash deliveries, there's metro-freight, and
>seeing that armored
>trucks typically aren't robbed while waiting a few minutes at a red
>light or in heavy traffic, I
>doubt that an [electric] armored truck would be vulnerable moving down
>a carfree street at
>3 mph.

Just put the armored cash-carriers on metro-freight
(then the banks must be located on the central boulevard,
but that's no serious problem).

>(How is cash delivered to ATMs in Venice?)

No idea. Anyone?

>What would the restrictions be on walk-behind electric trucks in a
>carfree city? I'm
>primarily thinking of electric pallet trucks for moving extremely
>shipping pallets at 3 mph.

It would be nearly impossible to get along without
these, or something very similar.

----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
• ... Use electron-based transactions (debit cards, etc) instead. All money is is information. No need for heavy and burdonsome exteranl symbols like cash and
Message 13 of 22 , Mar 5, 2006
• 0 Attachment
>(How is cash delivered to ATMs in Venice?)

Use electron-based transactions (debit cards, etc) instead. All money is is
information. No need for heavy and burdonsome exteranl symbols like cash and
coin.
Or the neo-ludites can barter.

Brett
• Here s an interesting policy idea for a carfree city: allow electric vehicles on the condition that they are being escorted by a pedestrian. This is seen today
Message 14 of 22 , Mar 5, 2006
• 0 Attachment
Here's an interesting policy idea for a carfree city: allow electric vehicles on the condition that
they are being escorted by a pedestrian. This is seen today in large home-improvement
stores, where an employee walks in front of an oncoming forklift to clear the area. I can't
imagine a escorted forklift moving 3 mph being a danger. This would also allow for walk-
behind trucks carrying heavy or large shipments.

Since the streets in a carfree city would be wider than the sidewalks we're used to, we'd
actually be more flexible with deliveries. If a family is moving and a 20*8 foot trailer is
parked on the edge 30' wide street for a whole day, there's still plenty of space for the
pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Ideally, this should be arranged in advance with whatever
authority is in charge of the streets, so they can cone-off an area in advance.

> >What would the restrictions be on walk-behind electric trucks in a
> >carfree city? I'm
> >primarily thinking of electric pallet trucks for moving extremely
> >shipping pallets at 3 mph.
>
> It would be nearly impossible to get along without
> these, or something very similar.
• I have to give that a big, fat no . I m huge on privacy and love how cash lets me buy products in relative anonymity in an era of data mining. My classic
Message 15 of 22 , Mar 6, 2006
• 0 Attachment
I have to give that a big, fat "no". I'm huge on privacy and love how cash lets me buy
products in relative anonymity in an era of data mining. My classic example is that a
you soon get letters stating that your health insurance and home fire insurance rates are
going up. I don't smoke and hate smoking, but you get the point.

Among other reasons, that's one of my reasons to appreciate rail transportation:
anonymity. My wife and I recently went to southern NJ: our Delta flight from Tallahassee to
Philadelphia required photo ID and tickets in our names. But the NJT bus route winding
through the small towns in south Jersey? I bought those tickets with cash and no ID. Thus,
there exists no record that we ever made that trip--and that's the way I want it.

When I was in Madrid in 1999, I bought a round-trip high-speed rail ticket to Sevilla with
cash. Again, no record that I ever made that trip--just record that the trip was made by
someone. Haven't been to Europe since 9/11, though, so I'm not sure if they require ID for
inter-city today.

Joel's reference carfree city would have no metro fare gates--it would be a public service,
just like streets and streetlights. That also means that there will exist no record of your
travel through a carfree city. Granted, the metro authority will probably track usage
numbers to fine-tune service intervals and train lengths, but that's not a privacy concern.

In an auto-centric city, you drive around with an ID number attached to your rear end
find out a good bit about you. Carfree city? Forget it--you'd have to take pictures and
match up the faces with ID cards. A bit harder than looking up license plate numbers,
especially since electronic facial recognition seems to be far from mature.

I don't like being tracked. Rant over. :-)

> >(How is cash delivered to ATMs in Venice?)
>
> Use electron-based transactions (debit cards, etc) instead. All money is is
> information. No need for heavy and burdonsome exteranl symbols like cash and
> coin.
> Or the neo-ludites can barter.
• Hi Matt, Good post. Can you shorten your lines by about 40% so the wrap nicely? Around 80 characters? Thanks, Joel ... J.H. Crawford
Message 16 of 22 , Mar 7, 2006
• 0 Attachment
Hi Matt,

Good post. Can you shorten your lines by about 40% so the wrap nicely?
Around 80 characters?

Thanks,

Joel

>I have to give that a big, fat "no". I'm huge on privacy and love how
>products in relative anonymity in an era of data mining. My classic
>example is that a
>relative gives you money to buy them cigarettes, you buy them with
>you soon get letters stating that your health insurance and home fire
>insurance rates are
>going up. I don't smoke and hate smoking, but you get the point.
>
>Among other reasons, that's one of my reasons to appreciate rail
>transportation:
>anonymity. My wife and I recently went to southern NJ: our Delta
>flight from Tallahassee to
>Philadelphia required photo ID and tickets in our names. But the NJT
>bus route winding
>through the small towns in south Jersey? I bought those tickets with
>cash and no ID. Thus,
>there exists no record that we ever made that trip--and that's the way
>I want it.
>
>When I was in Madrid in 1999, I bought a round-trip high-speed rail
>ticket to Sevilla with
>cash. Again, no record that I ever made that trip--just record that
>someone. Haven't been to Europe since 9/11, though, so I'm not sure if
>they require ID for
>inter-city today.
>
>Joel's reference carfree city would have no metro fare gates--it would
>be a public service,
>just like streets and streetlights. That also means that there will
>exist no record of your
>travel through a carfree city. Granted, the metro authority will
>probably track usage
>numbers to fine-tune service intervals and train lengths, but that's
>not a privacy concern.
>
>In an auto-centric city, you drive around with an ID number attached
>plate number and
>find out a good bit about you. Carfree city? Forget it--you'd have to
>take pictures and
>match up the faces with ID cards. A bit harder than looking up license
>plate numbers,
>especially since electronic facial recognition seems to be far from mature.
>
>I don't like being tracked. Rant over. :-)
>
>> >(How is cash delivered to ATMs in Venice?)
>>
>> Use electron-based transactions (debit cards, etc) instead. All money is is
>> information. No need for heavy and burdonsome exteranl symbols like cash and
>> coin.
>> Or the neo-ludites can barter.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
• Joel wrote: How is cash delivered to ATMs in Venice? Hey I have an idea in between carrying around salt tablets and having yourself chipped so ATM can read
Message 17 of 22 , Mar 7, 2006
• 0 Attachment
Joel wrote: How is cash delivered to ATMs in Venice?

Hey I have an idea in between carrying around salt tablets and having
so if you want to discuss please email me OFFLIST.

- T

------------------------------------------------------

Todd Edelman
International Coordinator
On the Train Towards the Future!

Green Idea Factory
Laubova 5
CZ-13000 Praha 3

++420 605 915 970

edelman@...
http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain

Green Idea Factory,
a member of World Carfree Network
• I apologize for the long lines. After a quick check, I found that Firefox for Mac OS X uses Courier for its text entry boxes, making the lines shorter in terms
Message 18 of 22 , Mar 7, 2006
• 0 Attachment
I apologize for the long lines. After a quick check, I found that
Firefox for Mac OS X uses Courier for its text entry boxes, making the
lines shorter in terms of the number of characters. Safari uses a
proportional font, thus allowing >80 characters to be squeezed on a line.

I hate needing so many browsers. There are sites that work best in
Safari for Mac, Firefox for Mac, Firefox for Windows, AND IE for
Windows. So I really can't standardize on one true browser, despite my
love of Safari. :-(

Now for the tie-in: almost reminds me of people who collect cars, and
I don't mean for display. Sedan for driving to work, SUV for shopping,
and sports car for going out.

I live three blocks from a Budget rental station, and I go there every
once in a while if I'm hauling a huge load and actually need the space
offered by a van. When my car gives up the ghost, I'm seriously
considering paring us down to only my wife's car. We're seldom out at
the same time, and for the occasional need for a car, I can run down
the street and rent a car. Even if I rent a car twice a month and
spend \$100 renting cars, it'll be far cheaper than owning a second car.

I have a feeling that a modern carfree city will have a significant
niche market for the rental of electric walk-behind trucks, either
just the truck or the truck with an operator.

In any case, since families won't have \$40,000 of debt in their
garages, they'll easily be able to afford very high quality hand
trucks for day-to-day needs with moving equipment. :-)

--- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> Good post. Can you shorten your lines by about 40% so the wrap nicely?
> Around 80 characters?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joel
>
>
> >I have to give that a big, fat "no". I'm huge on privacy and love how
> >products in relative anonymity in an era of data mining. My classic
> >example is that a
> >relative gives you money to buy them cigarettes, you buy them with
> >you soon get letters stating that your health insurance and home fire
> >insurance rates are
> >going up. I don't smoke and hate smoking, but you get the point.
> >
> >Among other reasons, that's one of my reasons to appreciate rail
> >transportation:
> >anonymity. My wife and I recently went to southern NJ: our Delta
> >flight from Tallahassee to
> >Philadelphia required photo ID and tickets in our names. But the NJT
> >bus route winding
> >through the small towns in south Jersey? I bought those tickets with
> >cash and no ID. Thus,
> >there exists no record that we ever made that trip--and that's the way
> >I want it.
> >
> >When I was in Madrid in 1999, I bought a round-trip high-speed rail
> >ticket to Sevilla with
> >cash. Again, no record that I ever made that trip--just record that
> >the trip was made by
> >someone. Haven't been to Europe since 9/11, though, so I'm not sure if
> >they require ID for
> >inter-city today.
> >
> >Joel's reference carfree city would have no metro fare gates--it would
> >be a public service,
> >just like streets and streetlights. That also means that there will
> >exist no record of your
> >travel through a carfree city. Granted, the metro authority will
> >probably track usage
> >numbers to fine-tune service intervals and train lengths, but that's
> >not a privacy concern.
> >
> >In an auto-centric city, you drive around with an ID number attached
> >plate number and
> >find out a good bit about you. Carfree city? Forget it--you'd have to
> >take pictures and
> >match up the faces with ID cards. A bit harder than looking up license
> >plate numbers,
> >especially since electronic facial recognition seems to be far from
mature.
> >
> >I don't like being tracked. Rant over. :-)
> >
> >> >(How is cash delivered to ATMs in Venice?)
> >>
> >> Use electron-based transactions (debit cards, etc) instead. All
money is is
> >> information. No need for heavy and burdonsome exteranl symbols
like cash and
> >> coin.
> >> Or the neo-ludites can barter.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ----- ### -----
> J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
> mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
>
• Matt wrote: ...I hate needing so many browsers... T: I wonder if future energy shortages will make manufacturers create a more standardised system and
Message 19 of 22 , Mar 7, 2006
• 0 Attachment
Matt wrote:

...I hate needing so many browsers...

T: I wonder if future energy shortages will make manufacturers create a
more standardised system and platform. The "PCC streetcar" of
computers....

---

....almost reminds me of people who collect cars...

T: Lots of cyclists in the USA especially have several bikes, too and not
just for sport. In the Netherlands it is very common for one person to
have two bikes (one is for city and one for home town; both are locked in
front of train stations - this is easier if you only need two one-speed
bikes). Of course it takes 5 or 6 people who use this system to take up
the space of one parked car, but Dutch are trying to reduce need for so
many bikes with things like <http://www.ov-fiets.nl/engels/index.html>.

---

.... I have a feeling that a modern carfree city will have a significant
> niche market for the rental of electric walk-behind trucks...

T: Forget "niche market", brother: Think "huge market for standardised
walk behind trucks". Buy the stock now and give me a percentage later.

---
> In any case, since families won't have \$40,000 of debt in their
> garages, they'll easily be able to afford very high quality hand
> trucks for day-to-day needs with moving equipment. :-)

T: Hmmm.. what will be the "Mercedes of hand trucks"? Other likelihood is
that teenagers and other not yet skilled people will be hired to to
delivery again. I think there is a huge possibility for
ultracapacitor-powered robot-handtrucks, too, using GPS, Galileo: You just
please"), and it goes there at walking speed, and teenagers etc are
dispatched to take stuff into building. This leaves you free time to help
all cities have systems like this.

* Address of White House in USA

------------------------------------------------------

Todd Edelman
International Coordinator
On the Train Towards the Future! -
"Sustainable, complementary, appropriate mobility in & in-between carfree
communities"

Green Idea Factory
Laubova 5
CZ-13000 Praha 3

++420 605 915 970

edelman@...
http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain

Green Idea Factory,
a proud member of World Carfree Network
• ... Actually, it s 1600. -- Robert Madison Milwaukee, WI http://community.webshots.com/user/rmadisonwi This message was composed using Mozilla Thunderbird
Message 20 of 22 , Mar 7, 2006
• 0 Attachment
on 2006-Mar-07 17:36 Todd Edelman said the following:
> (e.g. "1000 Pennsylvania Carfree Avenue*,
>
> * Address of White House in USA
>

Actually, it's 1600.

--
Milwaukee, WI

This message was composed using Mozilla Thunderbird

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
• Point of order: the address of the White House is 1700 Pennsylvania Ave NW, and it s carfree. I work as a firefighter in the District of Columbia (the capital
Message 21 of 22 , Mar 7, 2006
• 0 Attachment
Point of order: the address of the White House is 1700 Pennsylvania Ave NW,
and it's carfree.

I work as a firefighter in the District of Columbia (the capital city of the
US). Today, as part of training on the hazards of Hydrogen storage & use
(DC has the only commercial Hydrogen station in the US) I drove a hydrogen
fuel cell vehicle. While the version I drove was, in fact, a car, the
powerplant itself, or a much smaller version, would be an excellent motor
for freight movement within a car-free district. With cryogenic storage of
hydrogen, or even high pressure storage, the hazards associated with
Hydrogen are less than or equal to other energy storage media. The plant
itself is small, light, very very quiet, and only exhausts water vapor.

Note that hydrogen is not an energy source, rather, it is an energy storage
medium.

>From: "Todd Edelman" <edelman@...>
>To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] Re: Privacy (was: Efficiency and the
>automobile)
>Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 00:36:25 +0100 (CET)
>
>Matt wrote:
>
>...I hate needing so many browsers...
>
>T: I wonder if future energy shortages will make manufacturers create a
>more standardised system and platform. The "PCC streetcar" of
>computers....
>
>---
>
>....almost reminds me of people who collect cars...
>
>T: Lots of cyclists in the USA especially have several bikes, too and not
>just for sport. In the Netherlands it is very common for one person to
>have two bikes (one is for city and one for home town; both are locked in
>front of train stations - this is easier if you only need two one-speed
>bikes). Of course it takes 5 or 6 people who use this system to take up
>the space of one parked car, but Dutch are trying to reduce need for so
>many bikes with things like <http://www.ov-fiets.nl/engels/index.html>.
>
>---
>
>.... I have a feeling that a modern carfree city will have a significant
> > niche market for the rental of electric walk-behind trucks...
>
>T: Forget "niche market", brother: Think "huge market for standardised
>walk behind trucks". Buy the stock now and give me a percentage later.
>
>---
> > In any case, since families won't have \$40,000 of debt in their
> > garages, they'll easily be able to afford very high quality hand
> > trucks for day-to-day needs with moving equipment. :-)
>
>T: Hmmm.. what will be the "Mercedes of hand trucks"? Other likelihood is
>that teenagers and other not yet skilled people will be hired to to
>delivery again. I think there is a huge possibility for
>ultracapacitor-powered robot-handtrucks, too, using GPS, Galileo: You just
>please"), and it goes there at walking speed, and teenagers etc are
>dispatched to take stuff into building. This leaves you free time to help
>all cities have systems like this.
>
>* Address of White House in USA
>
>------------------------------------------------------
>
>Todd Edelman
>International Coordinator
>On the Train Towards the Future! -
>"Sustainable, complementary, appropriate mobility in & in-between carfree
>communities"
>
>Green Idea Factory
>Laubova 5
>CZ-13000 Praha 3
>
>++420 605 915 970
>
>edelman@...
>http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain
>
>Green Idea Factory,
>a proud member of World Carfree Network
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
• ... T: Ooops. The 1000 number is correct but I meant to say NEW White House : The old one at 1600 is converted to restaurant and visitor centre for outdoor
Message 22 of 22 , Mar 7, 2006
• 0 Attachment
> on 2006-Mar-07 Robert Madison said the following:

> Actually, it's 1600.

T: Ooops. The 1000 number is correct but I meant to say "NEW White House":
The old one at 1600 is converted to restaurant and visitor centre for
outdoor Smithsonian exhibit on grounds around White House building:
"Museum of the Former Automobile Age"

- T

------------------------------------------------------

Todd Edelman
International Coordinator
On the Train Towards the Future!

Green Idea Factory
Laubova 5
CZ-13000 Praha 3

++420 605 915 970

edelman@...
http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain

Green Idea Factory,
a member of World Carfree Network
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.