Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the low recovery rate is a consequence of all the low-density suburban sprawl where a lot of bus service operates. due to the low population density in those areas, farebox recovery is not surprisingly, low. but in high-density metropolitan areas the recovery rate is obviously higher. In NYC and Chicago 55%, Philly 61%, DC 62%, Toronto 80% and so on.
in lower density sprawl regions such as Atlanta, farebox recovery is only 32%. in Los Angeles about 30%, in Miami 16%.
but the suburban sprawl economy is heavily dependent on buses that largely serve low wage retail sector workers to allow them to get to work because they can't afford a car, so you just can't eliminate the bus service. think of all those fast-food chains and big box stores. if it wasn't for the low wage immigrant labor working in all those fast food places and Walmarts the suburbs as we know it wouldn't exist.
besides the roads and highways, don't forget that the gasoline you put in your car is also heavily subsidized by state and federal govts. the true cost of gasoline at the pump would be more like $10 per gallon if you took away the oil (and automotive) industry's generous subsidies and tax breaks.
Last edited by cisco kid; 01-26-2013 at 07:11 AM..
the low recovery rate is a consequence of all the low-density suburban sprawl where a lot of bus service operates. due to the low population density in those areas, farebox recovery is not surprisingly, low. but in high-density metropolitan areas the recovery rate is obviously higher. In NYC and Chicago 55%, Philly 61%, DC 62%, Toronto 80% and so on.
in lower density sprawl regions such as Atlanta, farebox recovery is only 32%. in Los Angeles about 30%, in Miami 16%.
but the suburban sprawl economy is heavily dependent on buses that largely serve low wage retail sector workers to allow them to get to work because they can't afford a car, so you just can't eliminate the bus service. think of all those fast-food chains and big box stores. if it wasn't for the low wage immigrant labor working in all those fast food places and Walmarts the suburbs as we know it wouldn't exist.
besides the roads and highways, don't forget that the gasoline you put in your car is also heavily subsidized by state and federal govts. the true cost of gasoline at the pump would be more like $10 per gallon if you took away the oil (and automotive) industry's generous subsidies and tax breaks.
Your point is made, but 40 people in one vehicle can be driven for far less fuel per person than one person in a honda civic. To equate the consumption of bus vs. single occupant cars is like saying, "hey tankless water heaters use energy too so they're the same as a 5000 gallon model!"
Similarly, we've seen gas prices rise from $1-2/gallon to $3-4/gallon. There's been no mass-exodus to buses and development of urban neighborhoods in Sacramento hasn't exploded. A slight shift, yes. People are driving less and driving more fuel-efficient vehicles, which has the unintended consequence of lower gas tax revenues.
I think people will start to reach a pain threshold at about $5/ga. North of that you will increasingly see people question all options with regards transportation. Some will opt for smaller vehicles. Some will opt for hybrids/electric. Others will take transit at least some times. Others will re-calculate their desire for living in the burbs vs. living centrally.
But no doubt when the days of cheap oil end that radical changes will come to the suburbs.
Your point is made, but 40 people in one vehicle can be driven for far less fuel per person than one person in a honda civic. To equate the consumption of bus vs. single occupant cars is like saying, "hey tankless water heaters use energy too so they're the same as a 5000 gallon model!"
If the bus has 40 people. According to some of the figures people quoted, a bus running at lower capacities (say, 10 / bus — a peak direction where buses run nearly empty in one direction will lower the average even in a well used system) the efficiency savings are minor if anything. But this link quotes higher number energy efficiencies:
If the bus has 40 people. According to some of the figures people quoted, a bus running at lower capacities (say, 10 / bus — a peak direction where buses run nearly empty in one direction will lower the average even in a well used system) the efficiency savings are minor if anything. But this link quotes higher number energy efficiencies:
A system would have to have a lot of sparsely-used routes to be that inefficient. Additionally, lots of agencies route those commuter peak hour buses to other routes once they reach the CBD so they don't deadhead back after the run is complete.
Your point is made, but 40 people in one vehicle can be driven for far less fuel per person than one person in a honda civic. To equate the consumption of bus vs. single occupant cars is like saying, "hey tankless water heaters use energy too so they're the same as a 5000 gallon model!"
Buses don't have 40 people, however. They have 8-9. That's what the average bus carries, just as cars carry about 1.5. While it's great to make stupid claims about buses carrying 40 people while cars are limited to one, it's just more hilarious gesticulations from transit zealots. Buses the real world, as opposed to Streetblog/Grist fantasy land, actually use more gasoline per passenger than the average car, let alone than a fuel efficient one like a Honda Civic.
Buses don't have 40 people, however. They have 8-9. That's what the average bus carries, just as cars carry about 1.5. While it's great to make stupid claims about buses carrying 40 people while cars are limited to one, it's just more hilarious gesticulations from transit zealots. Buses the real world, as opposed to Streetblog/Grist fantasy land, actually use more gasoline per passenger than the average car, let alone than a fuel efficient one like a Honda Civic.
What happened, did a bus cut you off today or something? Your comment is remarkably rude. It adds nothing to your point, which is valid.
From your comments I think buses are operated extremely inefficiently in your area.
A diesel bus commuter service in Santa Barbara, California, USA, found average diesel bus efficiency of 6.0 mpg-US (39 L/100 km; 7.2 mpg-imp) (using MCI 102DL3 buses). With all 55 seats filled this equates to 330 passenger-mpg, with 70% filled the efficiency would be 231 passenger-mpg.[56]At the typical average passenger load of 9 people, the efficiency is only 54 passenger-mpg and could be half of this figure when many stops are made in urban routes.
So let's say for discussion's sake, as a bottom figure (representing a rather inefficient route) 27 passenger-mpg. Honda Civic city MPG is 28. So while a single-occupant car is not vastly less efficient than an under-utilized bus, it is not hilarious fantasy land.
I think people will start to reach a pain threshold at about $5/ga. North of that you will increasingly see people question all options with regards transportation. Some will opt for smaller vehicles. Some will opt for hybrids/electric. Others will take transit at least some times. Others will re-calculate their desire for living in the burbs vs. living centrally.
But no doubt when the days of cheap oil end that radical changes will come to the suburbs.
You saw people do that at $4 gas, it just wasn't this radical change some expected. To me it's absurd that there's some level where I suddenly adjust my behavior whereas at a cent or five cents or even a dollar less I just go along blithely. Gas going from $4-5 gallon... well again, more of the same. Instead of buying a $35,000 Explorer (old SUV-style) that gets 16 mpg you buy a $35,000 Explorer (new Crossover) that gets about 21 mpg. Old v8 4x4 driven 15,000 a year @4/gallon = $3,750 in gas. New crossover that gets 21 mpg driven 15,000 a year @5/gallon = $3,572. Cool. Gas just went up a dollar a gallon and with no other change than switching to Crossover look-a-like SUV you've saved money from when it was $4 gallon. No need for drastic measures such as switching to hybrids, changing neighborhoods, or riding buses to more than off-set gas going from $4 to $5 a gallon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
