4 ms·

Talking about carrots for motorists is just privilege bias. We are where we are because of many policy decisions, many of which came with a particular world vie

Talking about carrots for motorists is just privilege bias. We are where we are because of many policy decisions, many of which came with a particular world view, including the idea that motorists should have more infrastructure investment to support them. If you come at it from the perspective of active transport, removing cars _is_ the goal. Further to that, fewer cars means public transport becomes much better. We have to get into the virtuous circle where fewer cars begets more active transport and public transport which begets fewer cars. All non-toll roads are loss making, let's not pretend that cars are free. That's even before we get into a discussion about the negative externalities of driving. The Cambridge GCP (essentially a talking shop with a remit to deliver new infrastructure, but prefers to deliver reports instead) commissioned proposals on a "metro". One of those proposals had loads of small self guided pods. Superficially they seemed like a great idea until you looked at the flow rate required to have them deliver the people required, and suddenly you have the the road congested with pods (or, if you will, cars). Ultimately, you need a policy that is consistent with geometry: https://thewaroncars.org/transcript-episode-79-the-end-of-uber-with-cory-doctorow/ https://thewaroncars.org/transcript-episode-79-the-end-of-ub...

timthorn 5y ago
Pods were trialled between the West Cambridge site and the P&R and were proposed to offer 24 hour service, but the main Cambridge Autonomous Metro proposal was for units that could seat over 100 people. But the new mayor likes buses.
- hgomersall 5y ago
  It was the Dromos proposal I was referring to. That's nowhere near a trial: https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/on-demand-driverless-pods-mooted-for-2bn-cambridgeshire-autonomous-metro-18-03-2021/ https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/on-demand-driverless... Self-driving buses I'm all in favour of.
  - timthorn 5y ago
    Yeah, the pod trial was with Aurrigo: https://www.connectingcambridgeshire.co.uk/smart-places/smart-cambridge/autonomous-vehicles/ https://www.connectingcambridgeshire.co.uk/smart-places/smar...
Silhouette 5y ago
Talking about carrots for motorists is just privilege bias. I have no idea what that means. However if we ever want to achieve more than talking in this area then we need to be realistic. And the reality is that lots of people rely on private cars every day in this country, and they collectively have enough money and political influence that you aren't going to change that behaviour at scale with a hostile strategy. You certainly aren't going to do it with arguments based on some kind of righteous indignation and words like "privilege". We have to get into the virtuous circle where fewer cars begets more active transport and public transport which begets fewer cars. That would be great. And if there is one thing we have learned about transport planning in the last fifty years it is that the cycle is not going to be started on the "fewer cars" side. You can criticise as much as you like, that is obviously your prerogative, but I prefer to explore policies that have a greater than zero chance of actually working. All non-toll roads are loss making, let's not pretend that cars are free. The UK government has consistently received 3-4x as much revenue from direct motoring taxes as government of all levels spends on direct motoring services for many years. This is why they are so worried about the loss of much of that revenue with the rise of electric vehicles. And if you want to include externalities in the costs of cars then you also have to include indirect benefits and again you might not like the answer if environmental concerns are your priority. It is interesting that you picked Cambridge as your example because it is an excellent example of what I am talking about here. For years the local authorities have been increasingly car-hostile and despite the unusually high prevalence of bikes in the city the council have always been heavily in favour of relying on buses to solve the congestion and pollution problems. They have been trying that for a very long time and it has never worked. But still every few months someone puts up the parking fees again or adds more restrictions on where you can drive or park or proposes this year's variation of congestion charging. Meanwhile cycling provision is still substandard and the city centre is still dying.
- hgomersall 5y ago
  Privilege bias is a bias that means you find it difficult to understand the position of those that are not in the privileged class. In this case, you think that as a driver the world should not be made more difficult for you, but you don't realise that making it more difficult for you makes it better for everyone that is not a driver. Cambridge has had very little impactful effort towards reducing car usage, hoping they can sidestep the difficult reality of having to reduce cars through a stick approach. Until that's done, there's no chance the buses will do much since as you don't quite point out, they're just stuck in the same traffic. They're still hoping to avoid reality by building special roads for buses and a few parking spaces outside the city. For sure cycling provision is substandard. You have no arguments from me there!

timthorn 5y ago

Pods were trialled between the West Cambridge site and the P&R and were proposed to offer 24 hour service, but the main Cambridge Autonomous Metro proposal was for units that could seat over 100 people. But the new mayor likes buses.

hgomersall 5y ago
It was the Dromos proposal I was referring to. That's nowhere near a trial: https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/on-demand-driverless-pods-mooted-for-2bn-cambridgeshire-autonomous-metro-18-03-2021/ https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/on-demand-driverless... Self-driving buses I'm all in favour of.
- timthorn 5y ago
  Yeah, the pod trial was with Aurrigo: https://www.connectingcambridgeshire.co.uk/smart-places/smart-cambridge/autonomous-vehicles/ https://www.connectingcambridgeshire.co.uk/smart-places/smar...

Silhouette 5y ago

Talking about carrots for motorists is just privilege bias. I have no idea what that means. However if we ever want to achieve more than talking in this area then we need to be realistic. And the reality is that lots of people rely on private cars every day in this country, and they collectively have enough money and political influence that you aren't going to change that behaviour at scale with a hostile strategy. You certainly aren't going to do it with arguments based on some kind of righteous indignation and words like "privilege". We have to get into the virtuous circle where fewer cars begets more active transport and public transport which begets fewer cars. That would be great. And if there is one thing we have learned about transport planning in the last fifty years it is that the cycle is not going to be started on the "fewer cars" side. You can criticise as much as you like, that is obviously your prerogative, but I prefer to explore policies that have a greater than zero chance of actually working. All non-toll roads are loss making, let's not pretend that cars are free. The UK government has consistently received 3-4x as much revenue from direct motoring taxes as government of all levels spends on direct motoring services for many years. This is why they are so worried about the loss of much of that revenue with the rise of electric vehicles. And if you want to include externalities in the costs of cars then you also have to include indirect benefits and again you might not like the answer if environmental concerns are your priority. It is interesting that you picked Cambridge as your example because it is an excellent example of what I am talking about here. For years the local authorities have been increasingly car-hostile and despite the unusually high prevalence of bikes in the city the council have always been heavily in favour of relying on buses to solve the congestion and pollution problems. They have been trying that for a very long time and it has never worked. But still every few months someone puts up the parking fees again or adds more restrictions on where you can drive or park or proposes this year's variation of congestion charging. Meanwhile cycling provision is still substandard and the city centre is still dying.

hgomersall 5y ago
Privilege bias is a bias that means you find it difficult to understand the position of those that are not in the privileged class. In this case, you think that as a driver the world should not be made more difficult for you, but you don't realise that making it more difficult for you makes it better for everyone that is not a driver. Cambridge has had very little impactful effort towards reducing car usage, hoping they can sidestep the difficult reality of having to reduce cars through a stick approach. Until that's done, there's no chance the buses will do much since as you don't quite point out, they're just stuck in the same traffic. They're still hoping to avoid reality by building special roads for buses and a few parking spaces outside the city. For sure cycling provision is substandard. You have no arguments from me there!