IIT Delhi 2007

Road Traffic

+ Road Traffic Injuries

Congestion

+ Atmospheric Pollution

+ Noise+

Vibration

Road Transport – Problem Diagnosis

Life span Obesity Sleep BP School

FRIENDS & URBAN TRANSPORT

IIT Delhi 2007

3.0 friends

5.3 acquaintances

1.3 friends

4.1 acquaintances

0.9 friends

3.1 acquaintances

Light traffic

2,000 v/day

Moderate

8,000 v/day

Light traffic

16,000 v/day

Source: Dr.Carlos Dora

IIT Delhi 2007

More sustainability issuesMore sustainability issues

IIT Delhi December 07

Evidence from traffic interventions Narrow solutions: limited results

Continuing Traffic Growth Has Cancelled Out Pollution Savings from Cleaner and More Efficient Vehicles

• Cars are becoming heavier and more powerful.

• Trips are becoming increasingly long.

• Total kilometers traveled by road continues to grow

EC: Transport in Figures, 2000

IIT Delhi 2007Source: Dr.Carlos Dora

IIT Delhi December 07

Death rate for Tuberculosis, 1860-1960, United States, Source: US Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States; Colonial Times to 1970 (Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, 1975), Part 1 pp58,63. Note: Data between 1860 and 1900 for Massachusetts only.

IIT Delhi December 07

Death Rates for Measles in Children Under Age 15, England and Wales, 1850-1970

Source: Thomas McKeown, The Modern Rise of Population (Academic Press, San Francisco, 1976), pp. 93, 96. IIT Delhi December 07

World cities - factsCars/100 person

0

51015

20

2530

3540

London S’pore H.Kong Delhi

Trips per person per day

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

London (.95) S’pore (.96) H.Kong (1.14) Delhi (.73)

MRT Bus

IIT Delhi 2007

Similar road space except H’Kong

IIT Delhi December 07

17 20

4125 29

18 8

527

4542

60 29

4011

237

258 15

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

London New York Tokyo Singapore Hong Kong *

Percent share

Metro + Rail Bus Car + MTW NMT

EVIDENCE FROM LARGE RICH CITIES

IIT Delhi December 07

EVIDENCE FROM LARGE RICH CITIES

BRT productivity vs city population

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 5 10 15 20Population, million

Pas

s/da

y/km

, th

ousa

nd

BRT productivity vs per-capita income

0

510

1520

25

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000Per capita income US$/year (country)

Pas

s/da

y/km

, th

ousa

nd

Metro productivty vs city population

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 5 10 15 20Population, million

Pas

s/da

y/km

, th

ousa

nd

Metro productivity vs per-capita income

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000Per capita income US$/year (country)

Pas

s/da

y/km

, th

ousa

nd

Metro productivity vs system length

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 100 200 300

Total length, km

Pas

s/da

y/km

, th

ousa

nd

BRT productivity vs system length

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 50 100 150Total length, km

Pas

s/da

y/km

, th

ousa

nd

IIT Delhi December 07

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 B

risto

l, U

K

Lee

ds, U

K

Nan

tes,

Fra

nce

Hel

sink

i,Fi

nlan

d

Mar

seill

e,Fr

ance

Edi

nbur

gh, U

K

New

cast

le, U

K

Bru

ssel

s,B

elgi

um

Fra

nkfu

rt,

Ger

man

y

Stu

ttga

rt,

Ger

man

y

Am

ster

dam

,N

eth'

s

Perc

ent

Car + MTW PT W&C

EVIDENCE FROM MEDIUM RICH CITIES

IIT Delhi 2006

Conundrum – Public transport in large cities < $ 10,000 pc/y

How do we

Reduce trip lengths ?

Reduce number of trips ?

Reduce motor vehicle use ?

Increase walking and bicycling ?

Increase public transport use ?

Select public transport technology ?

Only 7% drive in

Mexico city

2616 17 18

5

6 3 5

635

5355

4521

108

18 22 17 14

1986 1989 1994 2000

Private vehicles Taxi Minibus & collectivo Large bus / light rail Metro

Just provision of high capacity systems does not provide

solutions

World cities - facts

Main mode to work in Mumbai, India

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

TrainPublic Bus

Auto-RickshawCar

Two-WheelerBicycle

Walk

Percent

All commuters Low income

IIT Delhi 2006

Transport mo des in S ingapo re

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Bus

M e tro

Bus + M e tro

Car

Car + M e tro

M TW

Taxi

W alk/b ike

Pe rce nt

W orkers Students

All infrastructure investments

IIT Delhi December 07

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Metro BRT Car Bicycle Walk

Tim

e, m

inut

es

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Metro BRT Car Bicycle

Tim

e, m

inut

es

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Metro BRT Car

Tim

e, m

iniu

tes

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Metro BRT Car

Tim

e, m

inut

es

Walking to station/veh Walking in station Waiting at stationJourney in vehicle Walking to destination Congestion (car)One change

3 km 6 km

12 km 24 km

IIT Delhi 2007

High rise buildings, congestion necessary for Metro

Hong Kong

Tokyo

New York

“Feeder trip” in lifts

Only way large number close to destination

Metros run empty in less dense cities

What kind of a city do we want ?

IIT Delhi 2007

020406080

100120140160

Car Bus Metro Light rail

Peak capacity 40% capacity

CO2 emissions per passenger km

Potential Environment Benefits

15000

16000

17000

18000

19000

20000

21000

22000

23000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2010 2025

年期

排放量 （ 噸 /日 ）MRT

BRT

CO2 (tons/day)

Elevated Expressway

Modern city characteristics

IIT Delhi 2007

Relatively low rise development with planned multiple business districtsVery high ownership of motorised two wheelers, especially in Asia. About 70 percent of families in Delhi own a motorised vehicle Marginal cost of operating a motorised two-wheeled vehicle is about Rs 0.75 per km at 2005 prices. This determines the maximum fare box levels for public transportMost cities are expanding in a radial mode and are not likely to develop one concentrated high density business district in the foreseeable futureMost cities have mixed land use patterns and we are not likely to succeed in implementing strict zoning for land use, even if it were desirable

THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NEED FOR VERY CAPACITY TRANSIT SYSTEMS

Metros, congestion and the environment

Reviews of the metro systems around the world conclude that rail based systems do not reduce congestion or improve the environment

“None of the systems (rail based) appear to have reduced the problems caused by the car…None of them caused a decline in overall bus usage…None of the systems caused reduction in car usage, congestion relief, or improve air quality”Mackett R. and Sutcliffe, E. B. New urban rail systems: a policy-based technique to make them more successful, Journal of Transport Geography, 11:151–164, 2003.

IIT Delhi 2007

Finances - Delhi example

Cost of 60 km project – 12,000 crores

Opportunity cost – Rs 1,200 crores per year for ever

Assumption 5% interest rateAssumption 5% depreciation rate

Current ridership : ~ 5 lakh passengers per day (20% of expected ridership)

Subsidy per passenger not counting operating costs :

IIT Delhi 2006

Rs. 30 – 40 thousand per passenger per year

Kolakata Metro: Operating at 10% projected capacity after 20 years

IIT Delhi 2007

Fatality risk in traffic crashes in US citiesCities within the same state have different crash rates - San

Diego and San Jose in California

Cities have different patterns - San Francisco has a higher rate for pedestrians and Los Angeles has a higher rate for vehicles

One city can have the a zero rate of fatalities (East Los Angeles CDP) and another city in the same state with a similar population have one of the highest rates (San Bernardino, CA)

Columbia Ann Arbor

Pop: 116,278 Ped: 5.16 MV: 16.63 Pop: 114,024 Ped: 0 MV: 0.0

Urban block, bus stop and road design

IIT Delhi 2007

Walking speed:

1 m/s

Pedestrian phase:

~20s

Carriageway:

< 25 m

Urban Block

< 1000 m

Bus stop

At junction

Why BRTS ?

Shortest planning & construction time BRT - 1.5 years / Metro - 7 years (~18km)

Shortest planning & construction time BRT - 1.5 years / Metro - 7 years (~18km)

Efficient utilization of road spaceEfficient utilization of road space

COST CONSIDERATIONSCOST CONSIDERATIONS

BRT5-20

crores / km

Metro100 to

200crores / km

Taipei, Taiwan

Creative use of lane space

BRTS Benefits• state-of-the-art mass transit system

at a fraction of the cost of other options.

• Bus Rapid Transit utilizes central lanes on arterials roads

• No friction with other vehicles• Not affected by traffic jams• Lanes can be used by police in

extreme emergencies• In operation in cities of all sizes

BRT : CAR 1 WAY, BUS ONE WAY ROW ~ 15 m

Pedestrian path 2 m x 2 Bus lane 3.3 - 3.5 mCar lane 3.0 m

Bicycle lane 2 m

IIT Delhi September 07

BRT : CAR 1 WAY 2 LANES, BUS ONE WAY ROW ~ 18 m

Pedestrian path 3 m x 2mBus lane 3.3 - 3.5 mCar lane 3.0 m X 2

Bicycle lane None

IIT Delhi September 07

BRT : CAR 1 WAY, BUS ONE WAY ROW ~ 10 m

Pedestrian path 2 mBus lane 3.3 - 3.5 mCar lane 3.0 m

Bicycle lane None

IIT Delhi September 07

BRT : CAR 1 WAY 2 LANES, BUS TWO WAY ROW ~ 30 - 35 m

Pedestrian path 4 m x 2Bus lane 3.3 - 3.5 m x 2Car lane 3.0 m x 2

Bicycle lane 2m x 2

IIT Delhi September 07

BRT : CAR 2 WAY 2 LANES, BUS TWO WAY ROW ~ 30 - 35 m

Pedestrian path 4 m x 2Bus lane 3.3 - 3.5 m x 2Car lane 3.0 m x 4

Bicycle lane Mixed

IIT Delhi September 07

IIT Delhi 2007

CONCERNS

FARE BOX LIMITED BY MARGINAL COST OF TWO-WHEELER USE, EXCEPT FOR LUXURY BUSES

About Rs 1.00 per km at 2007 prices

>>>>> Minimise cost of bus

Design must be flexible enough for future developments in technology – especially ITS

Design must maintain the flexible nature of BRT

Toyota’s new Intelligent Multimode Transit System (IMTS), driverless vehicles that move together automatically in a platoon formation on dedicated roads, as well as manual and independent operation as buses on ordinary roads. The system features the punctuality, high speed and large passenger capacity of conventional rail based systems and the economic efficiency and flexibility buses serving regular routes

IIT Delhi 2007

This makes it possible to directly link central cities with outlying regions, without requiring the passengers to switch buses. The system can be operated flexibly and efficiently according to changes in transportation demand, and at the same time can dramatically reduce the high construction and maintenance costs associated with conventional track-based systems

IIT Delhi 2007

30 minutes a day of Physical Activity is enough to reduce:

• By 50 % the risk of developing coronary hearth disease,

• By 50% the risk of developing non- insulin-dependent diabetes and obesity.

– By 30 % the risk of developing hypertension.

– The risk of colon /breast cancer.

– Helping to maintain bone mass and protecting against osteoporosis.

– Increases self-esteem, and promoting overall psychological well-being.

IIT Delhi 2007Source: Dr.Carlos Dora

HOW TO MAKE CITIES LIVEABLE AND SUSTAINABLE

According to latest issue of Current Science Indian cities face warming, more pollution, and water shortageMotor vehicles have killed more than 20-30 million people and injured > 500 million worldwideThis is not sustainableEmissions will reduce significantly only if more people walk, bicycle and use public transportOnly possible if walking and bicycling made saferCities will aesthetic, humane and human scale only if streets include large numbers of people walking and playing safelyOnly possible if streets free from crime – only possible if most streets have business and/or street vendors

IIT Delhi 2007

Therefore roads free from accidents and crime are necessary for cleaner air