Are you here because you care about public transportation

Are you here because you care about public transportation?
Canada will go broke in the attempt to use existing techniques to solve the transportation crunch that is being felt across the country. For some reason the concepts that more or faster or bigger or more expensive will provide the solution seems to be the mantra of transportation officials. Not only are the systems failing to deliver a significant capacity, but the expense (monetary, social, and environmental) is enormous. The proponents of existing mass transit systems point to the wonderful success and rave reviews for the newer systems. Unfortunately the success is only by their own definition. Heavy subsidies by governments are the only reason that these systems exist. The builders of these systems are happy to create the profitable projects and let the public carry the burden of operations. They have also lobbied for a government system of transportation that caters to their business model. Siemens employees pay bribes abroad or Six Siemens Execs Jailed in Bribery Scandal The "more roads" proponents want to pave over areas in the false hope that this will improve transportation. In urban areas the percentage of ground dedicated to wheeled vehicles has already reach ridiculous levels (>25%) and this approach does nothing to improve the availability of transportation to the public. Neither of these approaches can lessen the crunch and are frequently worse than doing nothing. The low energy groups (aka bicyclists and walkers) forget that there is a large portion of the population that cannot ride a bicycle or walk to accomplish their transportation needs. Being too young, too old, handicapped, poor, or a single parent trying to herd a young family on a simple errand should not prevent the use of public transportation. In fact these conditions should be addressed by public transportation. Efficient energy usage, low capital cost, low operating cost, low environmental impact, low travel time, and high useability are the important factors. Existing Techniques \| Capital Costs \| Operational Costs \| Environmental Impact \| Travel Time \| Energy Eff. \|Useability Automobile (roads) \| High \| High \| High \| Low - High \| Low \| Medium Bus (existing roads) \| Medium \| Very High \| Medium \| Med - High \| Low \| Low Bus (dedicated road) \| High \| Very High \| High \| Med \| Medium \| Low Train \| Very High \| Very High \| Very High \| Med \| Medium \| Low --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ideal System \| Low to none \| Low to profitable \| Low to none \| Low \| High \| High How do we get from here to there? Personal Rapid Transit technology has the characteristics closest to the desired ideal system.
Citizens For Personal Rapid Transit

Are you here because you care about public transportation?

Canada will go broke in the attempt to use existing techniques to solve the transportation crunch that is being felt across the country. For some reason the concepts that more or faster or bigger or more expensive will provide the solution seems to be the mantra of transportation officials. Not only are the systems failing to deliver a significant capacity, but the expense (monetary, social, and environmental) is enormous.

The proponents of existing mass transit systems point to the wonderful success and rave reviews for the newer systems. Unfortunately the success is only by their own definition. Heavy subsidies by governments are the only reason that these systems exist. The builders of these systems are happy to create the profitable projects and let the public carry the burden of operations. They have also lobbied for a government system of transportation that caters to their business model.

Siemens employees pay bribes abroad or Six Siemens Execs Jailed in Bribery Scandal

The "more roads" proponents want to pave over areas in the false hope that this will improve transportation. In urban areas the percentage of ground dedicated to wheeled vehicles has already reach ridiculous levels (>25%) and this approach does nothing to improve the availability of transportation to the public.

Neither of these approaches can lessen the crunch and are frequently worse than doing nothing.

The low energy groups (aka bicyclists and walkers) forget that there is a large portion of the population that cannot ride a bicycle or walk to accomplish their transportation needs. Being too young, too old, handicapped, poor, or a single parent trying to herd a young family on a simple errand should not prevent the use of public transportation. In fact these conditions should be addressed by public transportation.

Efficient energy usage, low capital cost, low operating cost, low environmental impact, low travel time, and high useability are the important factors.

Existing Techniques | Capital Costs | Operational Costs | Environmental Impact | Travel Time | Energy Eff. |Useability

Citizens For Personal Rapid Transit

Help spread the word!

Remove obstacles to implementing Personal Rapid Transit!

Support an important PRT Transit study for OTTAWA!