With 600 million motor vehicles on the road releasing 350 million metric tons of carbon emissions into the air, the problem of global warming is increasing rapidly.
Each and every time carbon dioxide is released into the air, the health of the environment and people are at stake. Carbon emissions released by motor vehicles are one of the primary causes of global warming. There are four main greenhouse gases contributing to the problem of global warming; carbon dioxide is in the number one slot with over 75 percent, supplying a quarter of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions.
The statistics regarding the emissions of these motor vehicles are scary. On the average, a car that travels 550 miles a week releases 31,460 pounds of carbon dioxide into the air each year. Burning one gallon of gas generates 22 pounds of carbon dioxide.
In Neil Peirce’s article, "Transportation Efficiency: Are We Ready?" he said, "Federal studies show the average Washington commuter spends 58 hours a year in traffic. In the top 50 metropolitan regions of the country, traffic congestion for passenger and cargo movement already cost $45 billion a year. The result: frustration, aggressive driving behavior, lost productivity and wages, absenteeism and shipments that arrive late or not all."
In the quest to save the environment and cut down on traffic, congestion and smog, electric mass transit systems are making their way across large cities in the United States and Europe.
For example, in Seattle, a poet named Grant Cogswell and a cabdriver named Dick Falkenbury proposed a citywide monorail system. In 1962, Seattle built a one-mile monorail loop that connected the downtown area to the City Center. The monorail was built for the World’s Fair to demonstrate Century 21. In Tim Egan’s article, "Or Else Gives Seattle Voters the Last Laugh," he said, "It has served passengers for 35 years, though it is sometimes derided as the monorail to nowhere ... it has no doubt won a place in the heart of Seattleites: Built in six months at a cost of less than $2 million, quiet, reliable, and relatively non-polluting, the transit system evokes a time when public works were hardly more complicated than treehouses."
Cogswell and Falkenbury approached their dream by walking around the city with placards saying build a mass transit system. They continued their mission by collecting 20,000 signatures and trying to win a majority vote. Due to their determination, Seattle now has a monorail law and a system is underway. Egan said, "Now it is the law, the monorail ordinance calls for the city to explore how it can build up to 40 miles of monorail- elevated electric trains that run on rubber tires. The law envisions 28 stations."
Whatever the reason may be, the concept of electric mass transit is spreading and gaining more publicity and support each day.
Like Seattle, many other U.S. cities and European cities are switching to electric mass transit systems, monorails and peoplemovers in particular. With electric mass transit, people can commute to work while at the same time be saving the environment.
Electric mass transit systems are not a new concept. The technology and ideas started in the 1940s in both the United States and Europe. There are several types of electric mass transit systems. The most common systems are Supported Automated Peoplemovers (APM) and Suspended Urban Transit systems. Personal Rapid Transit systems (PRT) are in the development stages, yet some of the earliest systems were PRT systems. The oldest systems lasted only a few years. However, in the past 20 years, action is being taken all over the world.
In James MacKenzie’s article, "Two Transport Visions," he said, "PRT systems consist of small, dedicated computer operated electric vehicles capable of carrying three or four seated passengers. The vehicles ride on their own electrified guideways either elevated or below ground allowing the vehicles to travel safety at high speeds independently of existing motor vehicle
Numerous aspects need to be examined before planning an electric mass transit system. Some aspects include: looking at the history of these systems, the expenses of these systems and examining current ones in operation, particularly their reliability and success rates.
The first true electric mass transit system was a PRT system. It was the Cabtrack in Great Britain. The Cabtrack was researched and planned by L.R. Blake. Blake visited the United State’s systems before developing his own. In 1967, he wrote an article about the Cabtrack. His ideas were then sold to British Electric Co. Employees of Brush Electric Co. combined with the Minister of the Transport Department and the National Research and Development Board to gather funding so construction could begin. After it was constructed, various groups including Royal Aircraft studied and ran tests on the Cabtrack. In 1972 after the elections, a new minister of Environment was selected and the Cabtrack project was suddenly stopped.
The U.S. built a few systems of their own based on the PRT concept. The earliest PRT inventor in the United States was a man named Don Fichter. He started research on PRT and alternative transportation methods in 1953. He published his research in 1964. Edward 0. Hilton followed in Fichler’s footsteps. In 1960, he developed a monorail system in Dallas, Texas. Several other people developed systems of their own in the 1960s and 1970s but most of them did not make it past the research and testing phases.
Although the Europeans were the first people to build a true electric mass transit system, their research stemmed from the United States.
In actuality, the electric streetcar system developed in 1891 in Houston, Texas is really what started the phenomenon of electric mass transit. There were 50 miles of track built by 1910. The downfall occurred in the 1920s when Americas became fascinated with the automobile. As a result of the automobile phenomenon, Houston developed a monorail system in 1955. In 1956, Houston opened their system and called it the trailblazer. In its first weekend, 6,500 people received free rides. However, due to the expense and the lack of enthusiasm on behalf of the city officials, the trailblazer was transported to the state fair and city use was discontinued.
There are three main reasons why other countries constructed electric mass transit systems before the United States. The first reason is the impact of the automobile became a problem in the United States before it did in other countries. The second reason is that society did not force or try to persuade anyone to change. The third reason is that during the 1950s when other countries started development and construction, the United States was recovering from World War II. In addition, Great Britain is not the only country that developed electric mass transit systems. Japan, Germany, France, Sweden and Canada derived APM systems of their own as well.
On the other hand, the U.S. has had continuous efforts of APM and PRT systems since 1953. In 1972, President Nixon said, "if we can send men 200,000 miles away to the moon, we should be able to move 200,000 people three miles away to work." Unfortunately, Nixon’s words did not make action happen any quicker. The United States had done research and development on electric mass transit systems in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s but none of their systems had been successful. It took a long time before the U.S. had systems in operation.
There are several advantages to APM systems. Some include: they are quiet; they do not use much land; they do not pollute the air, and they create a sustainable world.
The U.S. government became involved in APM in the late 1960s. The Urban Transportation Act was passed in 1964. In addition, Congressman Henry S. Reuss from Wisconsin was a strong voice for alternative transportation technologies. Reuss gave speeches and demonstrations urging political support on the issue of alternative transportation methods. Due to his interest he was chosen to lead a committee on PRT and Dual Mode Systems. His committee helped develop the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964. Reuss’ personal efforts are included in the act. Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Transportation conducted 17 studies at $500,000 each on transportation and new technologies. Only two of the 17 studies impacted the government. The first successful study was done at Stanford Research Institute and it "developed new concepts from moving sidewalks to the dual mode and estimated economic benefits for the United States." The second successful study was done by General Research Corporation and it had the task of "modeling alternative transport systems in actual cities to determine how they performed compared to conventional systems."
In addition, in the early 1970s, it was said that federal money was available to develop PRT systems but businesses did not understand how they would benefit from these systems and as a result, opposed them. In J. Anderson’s article, "Some Lessons from the History of PRT" on the Internet, he said, "it became clear that federal money can be a curse as well as a blessing."
The most common and most preferred electric mass transit systems are monorails and peoplemovers. Some of the earliest systems in the United States were at international airports and universities as well as Disneyland and Disney World. Now, they are fortunately invading numerous metropolitan areas.
In addition to establishing APM systems and other alternative transportation technologies, some U. S. cites are setting up carpools, encouraging more bicycling and running more buses. For example, in Bradley Fikes’s article, "Coronado Trips Out With Alternate Travel Modes," he said, "Coronado, California developed van pools... In the past year, there have been 24 van pools which means 135,000 miles of trips to Coronado have been eliminated."
As a result of APM systems, numerous cities now have less congestion, less smog and most of all, less carbon emissions. Everyone plays a role in whether or not an APM system can be developed. For example, the United States Department of Health Education wants to develop a computer controlled driverless system for Pittsburgh. The first step in the process is knowing that a system is needed and why it is needed.
Presently, there are over 25 APM systems in existence, some of which are at airports and universities as well as metropolitan areas. The following are some descriptions of the largest APM systems in existence in the United States.
The first system is High Speed Ground Transportation (HSGT). It exists across U.S. cities. According to the HSGT website, "HSGT is self-guided intercity passenger ground transportation that is time competitive with air/or auto on a door to door basis for trips in the approximate range of 100-500 miles." At the present time, there is a system between New York and Washington, D.C. and there will soon be one between New York and Boston. HSGT also exists in other countries in Europe and Asia.
A second system is the Miami Metromover. The Miami Metromover opened in the late 1980s. It is fully automated and serves the downtown area. It runs in conjunction with the metrorail system. It began as a collector for the Metrorail as well as a transport system between hotels, parking areas and other facilities in the downtown area. Metromover vehicles travel the loop in 11 minutes and depart from a station every 90 seconds. Each vehicle can carry 82 standing and 14 seated passengers. Miami Metromover offers a smooth, quiet ride with an average speed of 12 mph. The fare is 25 cents.
A third system is the Detroit Peoplemover. It opened shortly after the Miami Metromover in July of 1987. It is 2.9 miles long and includes 13 passenger stations.
Data from its first year showed 98 percent reliability and 11,000 riders per day. The loop takes 14 minutes to travel and the average wait is two to three minutes. Currently, the average number of riders is 5,000 per day. The fare is 50 cents for the general public and 25 cents for the disabled. The elderly ride for free. Expansions are being proposed for the system to extend to Tiger Stadium and the Detroit Lions Stadium.
A fourth system is Jacksonville, Florida’s Automated Skyway Express Downtown Peoplemover. Technology for this system began in the 1970s, but the system did not open until 1984. It began as a .7 mile route and then an extension was planned. Additions began in 1992. The final phase of the Skyway Express will be completed in 1999. The completed route will be 2.5 miles. There are three mutilmodular stations at Terminal, Jefferson and Central. The average wait is three minutes.
Lastly, Otis Transportation Systems own and operate numerous transit systems throughout the U.S. According to the Otis website, "Otis Transportation systems combine innovative design with industry proven technology to create quality, reliable, cost efficient products. Unique Hovair air cushion suspension, end loading, Linear Induction Motor, LIM propulsion, are all features of Otis quality transit systems."
Furthermore, there are approximately 30 APM and Suspended Urban Transit systems under active development in both the U.S. and Europe.
One proposal being debated is a $1 billion, 33-mile monorail system for Cincinnati’s Tri-State area. In Dan Monk’s article, "$I Billion Monorail Pitched," he said, "the proposed 33-mile monorail has been described as the monorail industry’s newest battleground." It will run from the airport to King’s Island. The maximum fare will be $3.25 one way.
One of the biggest upcoming projects in the United States is the Las Vegas strip. At the present time, some hotels are linked by monorails but there is an ultimate goal. In Hugh Jackson’s article, "Monorail Link May Finally Be On Track," he said, "The Clark County Regional Transportation Committee hopes to have nearly 29 miles of monorail ... providing service up and down the strip and beyond."
It seems the concept of APM and other transportation technologies are in the spotlight increasingly each year, which is a step in the right direction.
If citizens are interested in trying to get an APM system in their own city they can share their ideas by joining the Advanced Transit Association (ATRA). According to the ATRA website, "ATRA was established in 1976 to focus attention on the unmet urban transportation needs and the ways in which advanced transit concepts can help satisfy them." ATRA is an international organization. Anyone is welcome to join. In addition, there is a transit alternative discussion list on the Internet. The list has between 100 and 150 subscribers from around the world. One does not have to be a member of ATRA to participate in the discussion list.
ATRA has five objectives, all revolving around advanced transit systems and their technology from the expenses, to the proposals, to the construction process, to the environmental impact.
A major issue concerning APM systems and other electric mass transit systems is the expense. In general, the approval process is a lengthy one. The funding for these systems varies from city to city and state to state. Some cities use tax dollars and others use city funds. Many questions are raised about the expenses and funding of these systems. One question is, can the U.S. set up a transportation fund for these projects? That is a subject to be investigated.
The fund would not have to supply the total cost of the project but a partial amount. This way cities can combine city funds, tax dollars and other means to provide for the expenses of the system.
There are many paths of action in which each and every individual can take regarding APM systems and other electric mass transit systems. Communities have to plan a strategy and then take steps to accomplish it, as the two men in Seattle did.
Each city and metropolitan area should incorporate some type electric mass transit system such as APM. Many people can benefit from these systems whether it is the money saved on gas or the free time gained from not having to sit in traffic. The concept of road rage will also be eliminated. With electric mass transit systems, people will get home quicker and more efficiently and at the same time be saving the environment. Anything is possible.
Bibliography
Topic: Electric Mass Transit Systems
Magazines:
Daniels. Stephen H. "Monorail Proposal Glides onto Seattle’s Transportation Agenda," ENR, 12/8/97, page 21.
Jakes, Andrew S., "Light Rail Goes Back to Future," Mass Transit, Nov/Dec 1997, pp 52-55.
Newcomb, John, "Elevating Public Transportation," Business Mexico, April 1995, pp 143-145.
Peirce, Neal R., "Transportation Efficiency: Are We Ready?" Nation’s Cities Weekly, 1/27/97, page 9.
Raymond, Martha K. "Guideway Delivers Precision Through Quiet Operation," Machine Design, 1/15/98, page 88,
Newspapers:
Egan, Timothy, "Or Else Gives Seattle Voters the Last Laugh," New York Times, December 7, 1997, page 1, 1 c, 1 bw.
Professional Journals:
Chapman, Betty T., "From Wagon Trains to Elevated Rail, City Has Long Faced Traffic Troubles," Houston Business Journal, 9/26197, page 40.
Fikes, Bradley J. "Coronado Trips out with Alternative Travel Modes," San Diego Business Journal, 4/22/96, pp 6-7.
Jackson, Hugh. "Monorail Link May Finally Be on Track," Las Vegas Business Press, 1/5/98, page 1.
MacKenzie, James J. "Two Transport Visions," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, September 1997, pp 192-199.
Monk, Dan, "$1 Billion Monorail Pitched," Cincinnati Business Courier, 2/10/97, pp 1-2.
Internet Sources:
"Advanced Transit Association," Online-World Wide Web. 1998 Available: www.advancedtransit.org/-index.htmI
"Innovative Transportation Technologies," Online. World Wide Web. 1998 Available: weber.u.washington.edu/-jbstitransfintamin.htm
Expert Sources:
Biosphere 2: Columbia University; Highway 77, Milemarker 96.5, Oracle, Arizona, 85623, phone: 1-800-828-2462.
Schneider, Jerry, Professor Emeritus, Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Weber, Washington, phone: 543-8678.