4 ms·

> Induced demand as a concept just doesn’t make sense. If demand is “induced” it just means that the supply wasn’t adequate to meet demand. That’s it. It isn’t

> Induced demand as a concept just doesn’t make sense. If demand is “induced” it just means that the supply wasn’t adequate to meet demand. That’s it. It isn’t a large mystery, and there isn’t any logical argument or evidence that greater supply will keep “inducing” demand infinitely. There are a finite number of people and finite minutes in a day, and if they are able to derive value from driving more, then they will do so, but only up to a limit. In return for that driving, they will also gain something for it (the value that motivated them to drive). The phrase “induced demand” is simply a part of the rhetorical war waged by anti car activists. Right, it's not surprising but highway expansions are often sold as "reducing congestion" rather than the reality of "causing more people to drive more miles with the same resulting level of congestion." If the actual goal of highway expansions is to make it efficient for people to drive more miles/have longer commutes then there isn't an issue with there being "induced demand," but there may be various reasons why this isn't actually a very good goal. Highway expansions do have benefits to people who end up moving further out (more affordable housing), but there may be better ways to achieve the goals of providing housing to more people around urban areas by increasing density, or to help people get around urban areas by transit, etc.

tuatoru 5y ago
> There are a finite number of people and finite minutes in a day, and if they are able to derive value from driving more, then they will do so, but only up to a limit. This is the primary objection I have to self-driving cars. By enabling people to do other things while they are travelling, self-driving cars raise that limit considerably. When self-driving takes off, so will congestion.
- njarboe 5y ago
  This is very true. Hopefully the Boring company can be successful in reducing tunneling costs by a factor of 10 or 100. Then cities will just have to fined the political will to allow them to be built. Maybe public, self-driving taxies can be made to travel close enough together so that they look like and can be called "trains". Then all the public transport supporters might not try and block them even if the tunnels are open to people's individually owned vehicles also.

tuatoru 5y ago

> There are a finite number of people and finite minutes in a day, and if they are able to derive value from driving more, then they will do so, but only up to a limit. This is the primary objection I have to self-driving cars. By enabling people to do other things while they are travelling, self-driving cars raise that limit considerably. When self-driving takes off, so will congestion.

njarboe 5y ago
This is very true. Hopefully the Boring company can be successful in reducing tunneling costs by a factor of 10 or 100. Then cities will just have to fined the political will to allow them to be built. Maybe public, self-driving taxies can be made to travel close enough together so that they look like and can be called "trains". Then all the public transport supporters might not try and block them even if the tunnels are open to people's individually owned vehicles also.