4 ms·

You say last-mile services are trivial, but they absolutely are not trivial in the slightest, and assuming they are demonstrates a fundamental lack of understan

You say last-mile services are trivial, but they absolutely are not trivial in the slightest, and assuming they are demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of how change gets made in a democratic, even republican, manner. Changing the primary transportation mode of a population requires a cultural shift to adopt the new mode. The population must be willing to forgo what they already have in favor of something new. You are saying that automated "people movers" (which is an emotional sketch rather than an defined policy item) will work well in car-ubiquitous US suburbia, but these folks live in suburbia specifically because of low population density and general quality-of-life. They explicitly enjoy being around people they know and not being around people they don't know. Any solution you're proposing must respect their existing values while providing an alternative option. Your examples of last-mile services aren't really last-mile services, save for the final one: >trams Since it seems infeasible to allow anyone to board a tram at any point on its journey, tram stops will be necessary. Perhaps you now face a last-quarter-mile problem, which is better but still may not be good enough for that specific population. Track maintenance may be significantly lessened by using a "trackless tram", but such would have severe challenges in a snowy climate. Trams only work in dense urban environments. >buses Buses have been used in cities for many decades, so our understanding of them is that they work generally well. Buses are common in suburban environments with many low-income residents. The benefit of buses is their limited amount of supporting infrastructure and route adaptability. However, similar to the tram situation, a bus still does not get you directly to your home. >actually usable bike lanes Bike lanes in dense urban environments are almost always a net positive. What constitutes an "actually usable" bike lane depends on an individual's risk tolerance. As a last-mile problem, not all people are physically able to bike from a train station, though ebikes do help. Again, weather can impact people being willing to bike, let alone leave the house. >automated "people movers" This service is more conceptual, but I imagine you're thinking of a Waymo-style service, where you can summon an autonomous vehicle which will pick you up at home and take you to-and-from the station. The main issues here are availability and reliability. If addressed, you'll likely crack the suburban transportation nut, but such individualized transportation in cities isn't sustainable.

hodgesrm 4y ago
> You say last-mile services are trivial, but they absolutely are not trivial in the slightest, and assuming they are demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of how change gets made in a democratic, even republican, manner. I"m not sure what point you are making here. The UK, Germany, and Japan have very good rail networks and were democratically governed the last time I looked.
KennyBlanken 4y ago
> You say last-mile services are trivial, but they absolutely are not trivial in the slightest, and assuming they are demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of how change gets made in a democratic, even republican, manner. We had an entire public transit system that included the "last mile." It was systematically destroyed by the automotive industry. The reset of the developed world has much better public transit. Terrible public transit isn't quite a uniquely American problem, but it's close. Do go on about how it's "absolutely not trivial in the slightest", though. > As a last-mile problem, not all people are physically able to bike from a train station, though ebikes do help Biking takes less energy and fitness than walking does, even at a faster speed. Before you argue with me, google it, please. Before you start whinging about the elderly: the people old enough to not be able to bike are about 10% or less of the population, and since bike lanes are not the only option, "the elderly can't do it" isn't even a valid counterpoint anyway.
- waterheater 4y ago
  >Do go on about how it's "absolutely not trivial in the slightest", though. It's not trivial because, as you note, past efforts WERE systematically destroyed by the automotive industry. Getting better public infrastructure is an advocacy problem, and the political environment needs to be supportive of such efforts. Also, you may be referencing the streetcars systems used by many cities about 100 years ago, which were destroyed by the auto industry in favor of their buses. Now that electric buses exist, I would much rather live in a city with a fleet of electric buses than electric streetcars. Some US cities are even implementing the point-to-point-charging supercapacitor buses, which is even more sustainable. >Biking takes less energy and fitness than walking does, even at a faster speed. No argument there. I bike multiple times a week in a large US city, even during rush hour and traffic jams. More people should bike, especially because of the health benefits, and most US cities will benefit from better bike infrastructure. We can look to Amsterdam and other European places for good examples of bike transportation and storage infrastructure. That said, biking in Amsterdam is very different than biking in much of the US. The Wikipedia article on Amsterdam says the average high over a year ranges between 43F - 72F. What an ideal climate for biking; no wonder so many people there bike. I've biked in traffic in snowstorms in one of the most bike-friendly cities in the US, and I was usually the only person out there. People just don't like to bike in the cold and extreme heat. People just don't like to be out in the cold and extreme heat in general, which is why personal vehicles are so appealing in those places.

hodgesrm 4y ago

> You say last-mile services are trivial, but they absolutely are not trivial in the slightest, and assuming they are demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of how change gets made in a democratic, even republican, manner. I"m not sure what point you are making here. The UK, Germany, and Japan have very good rail networks and were democratically governed the last time I looked.

KennyBlanken 4y ago

> You say last-mile services are trivial, but they absolutely are not trivial in the slightest, and assuming they are demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of how change gets made in a democratic, even republican, manner. We had an entire public transit system that included the "last mile." It was systematically destroyed by the automotive industry. The reset of the developed world has much better public transit. Terrible public transit isn't quite a uniquely American problem, but it's close. Do go on about how it's "absolutely not trivial in the slightest", though. > As a last-mile problem, not all people are physically able to bike from a train station, though ebikes do help Biking takes less energy and fitness than walking does, even at a faster speed. Before you argue with me, google it, please. Before you start whinging about the elderly: the people old enough to not be able to bike are about 10% or less of the population, and since bike lanes are not the only option, "the elderly can't do it" isn't even a valid counterpoint anyway.

waterheater 4y ago
>Do go on about how it's "absolutely not trivial in the slightest", though. It's not trivial because, as you note, past efforts WERE systematically destroyed by the automotive industry. Getting better public infrastructure is an advocacy problem, and the political environment needs to be supportive of such efforts. Also, you may be referencing the streetcars systems used by many cities about 100 years ago, which were destroyed by the auto industry in favor of their buses. Now that electric buses exist, I would much rather live in a city with a fleet of electric buses than electric streetcars. Some US cities are even implementing the point-to-point-charging supercapacitor buses, which is even more sustainable. >Biking takes less energy and fitness than walking does, even at a faster speed. No argument there. I bike multiple times a week in a large US city, even during rush hour and traffic jams. More people should bike, especially because of the health benefits, and most US cities will benefit from better bike infrastructure. We can look to Amsterdam and other European places for good examples of bike transportation and storage infrastructure. That said, biking in Amsterdam is very different than biking in much of the US. The Wikipedia article on Amsterdam says the average high over a year ranges between 43F - 72F. What an ideal climate for biking; no wonder so many people there bike. I've biked in traffic in snowstorms in one of the most bike-friendly cities in the US, and I was usually the only person out there. People just don't like to bike in the cold and extreme heat. People just don't like to be out in the cold and extreme heat in general, which is why personal vehicles are so appealing in those places.