Category: bike

The Need for a Personal Mobility Plan for Melbourne

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 28/02/2022
No Comments on The Need for a Personal Mobility Plan for Melbourne

Governments at all levels seem to have forgotten urgent messages delivered at COP26 a little over a year ago to reduce green-house emissions. There has been minimal action on transport since. All the trends continue in the wrong direction and there are no credible plans to correct and reverse them. As the impact of covid wanes, government focus is on a return to business as usual, and massive infrastructure programs that will promote more travel, enable people to travel further generating even more emissions in the process. In the meantime, our carbon budget is rapidly shrinking. At current rates it will be gone within 6 years if we want to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees, or within 10-12 years if we want to limit it to 2 degrees.

It is time governments at all levels declared their commitment on this issue, and the extent to which they are really serious about addressing it. If they cannot make this commitment, they must say so and explain the implications. There is a lot that can be done very quickly if governments had the mindset and will to do so but unless there is radical change the most likely scenario is a 4-6 degree “warming” which will render most, if not all of our planet uninhabitable.

Achieving rapid reductions in emissions is possible but conventional transport plans which focus largely on infrastructure will not achieve this. These focus on inputs rather than measurable outcomes and are generally designed to increase mobility and travel movements instead of reducing them and result in further increases in greenhouse emissions.

What is required is a mobility plan that is designed to operate within the limitations of a carbon budget. This budget must be set at the level required to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees or 2 degrees at most and provide the basis for limiting and rationing transport movements.

The carbon budget must be shared amongst all sectors within the community. Transport must be assigned responsibility for operating within its own budget. This must be carried out by government – the transport industry and people who use it cannot and should not be expected to assume this responsibility. It can be achieved by simply rationing fuel and must include imbedded energy in transport vehicles, infrastructure and all other transport related activities. Fuel rationing is not new. It was carried out during war time and other crises including the OPEC oil crisis in the !970’s, and can be accompanied by a range of other measures designed to limit or moderate energy demand within the transport sector.

The plan must be designed to make the transition based on this environmental imperative by traveling less, less often over shorter distances and more efficiently. Removal of all fossil fuel powered vehicles before 2035 must be one of the key objectives.

The mobility plan must identify future transport pathways with transport options designed to meet a wide range of people’s travel needs supported by incentives to encourage people and business make the transition and disincentives to continue with business as usual. It is a service-based plan complete with carrots and sticks to make it work and deliver measurable outcomes and meet specified targets, with special provisions to ensure social and economically disadvantaged are not left behind.

The aim of the plan will be to maximise opportunities for zero emission travel modes, starting with active transport – walking and cycling. Public transport will have an important role but it must become more efficient and operated in a way that maximises its capacity as a network with a level of service that makes it competitive with the motor car, particularly in the short term. However, the capacity of public transport is limited, and other measures are required to wean the travelling public off fossil powered vehicles.

Electric powered vehicles will deliver a reduction in emissions but it will not be zero. Imbedded energy (and associated emissions) from the manufacture of electric vehicles, materials to make them and all related activities, including disposal at the end of their economic life must be brought to account, together with infrastructure and servicing that supports their use. Energy to power them must also be from a zero-emission source. But the electric motor vehicle must be used in a way that changes behaviour, not become an opportunity to maintain business as usual.

Even if these issues can be addressed, which is unlikely, the uptake of EV’s will be dependent on market supply and the community’s ability to buy them. Achieving this will become increasingly difficult and problematic. It will come at a time when rising costs of living, particularly food and other essentials, rising interest rates (and mortgage stress), collapse of industries that fail to adapt to climate change such as tourism and other industries supported by the Great Barrier Reef, and low or stagnant wage growth will contribute to declining living standards that will put households under considerable stress. These pressures will be passed on to government and add to other pressures including increasing interest repayments to service high debt levels created in response to covid, and the need to respond to a growing number of emergencies such as extreme weather events which will put pressure on budgets, the need for budget “repair” and the inevitability of further cuts to government services. It will become a vicious circle.

Whilst many, particularly our politicians, will find these trends unwelcome and be resisted they will become a mechanism that helps reduce emissions by reducing the affordability of travel forcing people to travel less, less often and find other ways to travel more efficiently. This will be reinforced by other pressures of a social, political, legal and economic nature, both local and international that will increase pressure for change in the future.

A mobility plan will not be a one-off for the short or even medium term, it must be a plan for the indefinite future. The message to government at all levels should be clear – act now or be left behind and be forced to make a transition that will be far more painful and disruptive in the future. But the decision for government should not be a pragmatic one based on economics and politics – it is moral one and must be acknowledged as such.

Tags mobility plan

best practice bike climate change public transport traffic congestion value for money

Delimiting Electric Bikes

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 12/02/2022
No Comments on Delimiting Electric Bikes

Whilst there is much talk about electric vehicles being the future for many of our transport needs most of the focus is on cars and larger vehicles which will continue to occupy the same road space and tend to promote business as usual. Far greater attention should be given to promoting small electric vehicles that take up less road space, have less material content and imbedded energy, demand less standby electricity and recharging infrastructure and promote behavioural change ie to travel less, less often and over shorter distances.

E-bikes are increasingly considered an ideal transportation mode as cities emerge from quarantine in the US and Europe. They are a growth industry. E-bike sales in Australia in 2020 were 60,000, ten times greater than electric cars (6000). Ridership is widely distributed and very popular amongst older people, including “grey nomads” and others who had ridden earlier. The e-bike is fun to ride. It encourages people to keep fit, ride more often and ride further but less intensively although they still use 70-75% of the energy used when riding a normal bike.

According to Allied Market Research “The global bicycle market was USD 65.43 billion in 2019. The global impact of COVID-19 has been unprecedented and staggering, with bicycles witnessing a positive demand shock across all regions amid the pandemic”. It is also believed sales could treble by 2030 with a CARA of 10.5% from 2030 to 2030. E-bikes have become increasingly flexible, offering a wide range of power and speed options that enables them to be used for a wider range of personal travel needs and become increasingly valuable as a cargo carrier, carrying loads up to 100kg. The Post Office likes them because they can carry heavier loads than electric or normal scooters.

Given such overwhelming benefits it is appropriate that governments at all levels support this trend and reinforce it with other incentives to get people out of their cars and remove restrictions that make it difficult to make the transition.

One of these restrictions is the limitation on the maximum speed supported by the electric motor, currently set at 25 kph and 250 watts. In Australia this limit was based on European standards adopted in 2009 but these have been updated (2017). Latest US standards allow 32 kph with an additional limit of 45 kph and larger power of 750 watts which enable it to be used to carry heavier loads as a cargo carrier. New Zealand has no speed restrictions but has a 300 watt power limit.

The 25 kph limit is outdated and unnecessarily restrictive, particularly for commuter use and longer distance travel and reduces its attractiveness as an alternative to the car. It also creates a significant speed differential between the bike and motorised traffic around it which increases the risk of an accident. The 25 kph limit has also increased the temptation for bike owners to delimit the motor allowing it to maintain power at higher speeds, which increasing numbers of people are doing enabling them to travel illegally and unsafely at excessive speeds, sometimes powered up to 70 kph or more.

A small increase in the powered speed limit to 30-32 kph would eliminate much of this abuse, and it is argued this should be implemented as quickly as possible. Concerns about the impact of higher-powered speeds on shared pedestrian/bicycle paths can be addressed by the imposition of speed limits. A 10 kph limit already exists along South Bank (10 kph) and applies to all bikes, powered or unpowered. A 20 kph limit may be appropriate along many sections of metropolitan shared pedestrian trails, particularly those that are heavily trafficked.

Of greater concern however is the need to improve the safety of the road network itself. This has been widely discussed over many years and there are many actions that can be carried out to achieve this. The costs are very low compared to those spent on major road infrastructure projects and can be carried out system wide very quickly. The return on investment (using a triple bottom line business case) is many times greater than other road projects, and is supported by treasury modelling from NSW and Queensland which is expected to be confirmed in March this year.

Safety is an important issue and highlights the need for bicycle education at schools and a broader road safety campaign to create a bicycle culture that promotes courtesy and respect for others as well as greater understanding of safety issues. The target audience must be the entire community, including all road users – motorists, cyclists and pedestrians alike.

Delimiting bikes should be a top priority and should apply to all bikes, powered or unpowered. Many of impediments to cycling can be addressed quickly and cheaply but it requires system change but there is no single solution. Melbourne could easily become the cycling capital – the Copenhagen of the south and achieve this very quickly. It just needs the mindset and commitment by government to make it happen.

Tags electric bikes

bike governance government policy traffic congestion

Cutting speed limits to help reduce greenhouse emissions and pollution, noise, road accidents and encourage walking and cycling

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 08/10/2021
No Comments on Cutting speed limits to help reduce greenhouse emissions and pollution, noise, road accidents and encourage walking and cycling

Unlike many of the measures proposed by many nations and the business lobby today which see technology as the answer to reducing greenhouse emission reductions, the focus of this initiative is not on technology but behavioural change designed to get people out of their cars and onto their bikes or simply walk more and limit car use for essential travel. It is a measure that can be implemented with immediate effect at minimal cost. A growing number of cities are doing this in Europe and it has popular support. It is a no brainer and we should be doing it here.

Quoting extensively from the report by Angela Charlton and Jeffrey Schaeffer in The Age 7^th October 2021, the latest city to do this is Paris which already had a 30kph limit on about 60% of the city but will extend this to all of the city with the exception of a few main thoroughfares where a 50kph limit will apply.

Other French cities with a 30 kph limit include Bordeaux, Strasbourg and Toulouse, but it is becoming more common elsewhere in Europe. Brussels imposed a 30kph limit on much of the city earlier this year and about 80% of Berlin’s streets have the same rule. Madrid has had speed curbs on most of the city centre since 2018 with a nationwide rule in Spain this year putting a 30kph limit on all one-way urban roads. Similar restrictions apply in residential Amsterdam and the city is proposing to expand this to larger roads.

It is almost certain this trend will continue at an escalating rate – not just in Europe but elsewhere reinforcing the environmental imperative which was clearly stated at our last forum ie to travel less, less often and more efficiently and to focus on behavioural change as the principal lever for reducing greenhouse emissions. This imperative applies to Australian cities and towns so it is time our politicians showed political courage and implement similar measures. This will require sophisticated strategies for managing the transition but it is critical these be developed as part of a comprehensive plan to reduce greenhouse emissions and implement it as a matter of urgency. It will require a fundamental change in government mindset however and the abandonment of many of the big build infrastructure projects being pursued by this government and other policies which continue to promote car use and car dependence instead of reducing it.

Some may argue that Australian cities are different – less densely populated and more spread out requiring longer distances to work and essential services, and pin their hopes on electric vehicles. Unfortunately the reliance on technology and EV’s in particular as discussed in an earlier blog is a false hope. It is necessary to include the energy impacts for the entire life of the vehicle – extraction and processing of raw materials, its manufacture etc as well as its use, maintenance and disposal at the end of its life. On this basis the footprint for an EV is no better than a conventional petrol driven car, and this assumes the electric power required for charging the vehicle comes from renewable sources – which in the case of Victoria is not the case and will take many years to achieve.

Whilst there will be opportunities to improve the environmental footprint of these vehicles, this will take time and even if this was achieved the ability to replace the existing fleet and the capacity of the community to afford it by 2030 is highly improbable. This means we have no choice but to change our behaviour. The 1973 OPEC oil crisis demonstrated that dramatic changes can be achieved when communities and nations are confronted with a crisis. Some of these responses will be discussed in our next blog. Private travel is only part of the transport task however and in some ways is the easiest to address. The challenges confronting freight and essential services to achieve zero emissions are much more difficult and more critical.

Tags speed limit

best practice bike climate change governance government policy sustainability

Melburnians urged to ditch cars for short trips

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 26/03/2021
No Comments on Melburnians urged to ditch cars for short trips

Article by Jackie Fristacky

As more people turn to driving post COVID, peak transport advocacy group, Transport for Everyone (T4e) is asking that the Victorian Government better educate Melbournians on the adverse impacts of driving fuel-based vehicles on city emissions, especially for short trips.

T4e highlights the New Zealand Energy & Conservation Authority (EECA) finding released last Friday, that 3 out of 5 people did not know that reducing the use of petrol and diesel cars is one of the most effective means of reducing emissions and climate change. This is despite reducing fuel usage from driving being nearly 4 times more effective in reducing emissions than recycling from the waste stream. Thus the EECA is urging Kiwis to swap the car especially for short trips. See: https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/124586956/kiwis-urged-to-swap-the-car-for-a-cycle-walk-or-scoot-on-short-trips

T4e urges Melburnians to similarly think about their contribution to city emissions and poorer air quality through short trips and consider simple alternatives. The organisation’s President, Jackie Fristacky joins the EECA in emphasising that “It is short car trips of 1-2 kms that produce the highest emissions compared to longer trips, because cold engines use more fuel and multiple short trips bring more toxic emissions.”

“With over 20% of car trips being under 2kms, 10% under 1 km, and 50% under 5 kms, these trips can readily be converted to walking or cycling, with huge multiple benefits in reducing emissions, congestion, travel cost burdens on households and improving health,” said President Fristacky.

Data from the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources has shown that while emissions from energy sources have fallen, emissions from transport were 33% higher in 2018-19 than in 2001-2002. Further, our National Transport Commission has identified that passenger cars in Australia produce 41% more emissions per km than in Europe and 16% more than in the US.

T4e has written to the Minister for Roads and Public Transport seeking that the Government combat rising emissions from transport by budget allocations in the May 2021 budget to upscale investment in walking, cycling, and electric vehicle recharging, vastly improving bus frequency and connectivity, and urging Victorians to use alternatives to driving, especially for short trips.

For more information, contact Cr Jackie Fristacky AM, President, Transport for Everyone (T4e) on Mobile 0412 597 794 or transport4everyone1@gmail.com

bike covid-19 public transport value for money

Covid has created a perfect opportunity for people who want to travel by bike

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 31/08/2020
No Comments on Covid has created a perfect opportunity for people who want to travel by bike

As reported by Timna Jacks in The Age public transport rides have dwindled to 9% of normal levels and are unlikely to recover fully for years to come as a direct result of the covid pandemic. But now is not the time to reinvest in more private car travel. Whilst it is true there will be more congestion on the roads as more people go back to their cars we know that building more roads and providing more car parking will not solve the congestion problem – it never has and only feeds it. There is an overwhelming imperative – environmental, social and economic to resist this and promote alternatives.

One of these is active transport – particularly cycling and e-biking which can be provided at minimal cost. There are huge benefits promoting cycling. It is accessible or should be for almost everyone now – particularly with the arrival of e-bikes. It is dirt cheap, particularly in comparison to the private car (which is important in a time of recession, particularly for young people who are bearing the brunt) and provides huge health and environmental benefits. It can also be linked with public transport ie by carrying them on trains. Buses and trams should also make this option available, but it should certainly be possible for people with small folding bikes.

What governments need to do is create a safer environment for people to ride ie make roads safer for cyclists. This can be done very cheaply using a variety of measures but it needs a change in government mindset at all levels to do this and that is something the community should be demanding now. Government should be reminded that if this can be achieved in cities like Copenhagen where 62% of Copenhageners choose to bike to work and study Melbourne can get many more people on bikes instead of cars if we create the right environment for bike travel.