Why are we still spending trillions on ancient, costly, and unhealthy mass transit concepts?

California High Speed Rail just announced ideas for ripping up lots of San Jose. VTA and BART still plan to demolish downtown San Jose for a BART extension. Light Rail continues to run empty trains around the valley. All at mind-boggling costs. Will it ever stop? Brad Templeton at Forbes magazine explores how coronavirus might finally move mass transportation into a safer, better place.

"Public transportation has been on its way to a crisis and revolution, and the pandemic lockdown will hasten that and put it into sharp relief.

"America will awake to a harsh reality that all transit advocates will still deny — public transit is broken in most of North American and even lots of Europe. It’s not pleasant, convenient or quick unless it gets its own dedicated tracks and lanes, and shocking to most, in almost all cities it’s not even energy efficient, using more energy per passenger mile than efficient gasoline cars and way more than electric cars, according to the U.S. Dept. of Energy. Transit accounts for only about 8% of passenger-miles in the USA (and around 18% in Europe,) so it’s not a big part of transportation. 

"Many of our ideas about transit emerged in the 20th century, and even the 19th. Several of the factors on which transit is based are being changed, or will be changed, by new technology. Even though they don’t all change, radical rethinking is called for, regardless. Among the new technologies are ones that are already here, like smartphones on every person and in every vehicle, sensors and communications networks which enable digital management of vehicles, and lanes, and low cost electric powertrains. Coming soon are self-driving vehicles. Coming perhaps are low-cost tunnels and electric vertical take-off “flying cars.”

"Cost: Almost all public transit is heavily subsidized more than car travel, recovering an average of 1/3rd of the cost from fares. My own forecasts, and those of others, suggest “minicar” robotaxi service can be sold profitably for around 30 cents/mile, beating the price of transit tickets for most urban trips with no subsidy. Robotic shared van service can do even better.

"Efficiency and emissions: As noted, the idea that U.S. public transit is energy efficient is simply false, with a few exceptions in places like New York. To the shock of many, the average transit bus burns more fuel per passenger-mile than the average car. Some electric trains burn less fuel than gasoline cars, but more than electric cars. While these vehicles have barely improved, small vehicles are undergoing an efficiency revolution due to companies like Tesla TSLA. In the past, electric transit was found frequently, electric cars were rare. This will flip.

"Dedicated ROW: Obviously if one gets a dedicated lane or tunnel, one can beat vehicles on congested roads. But there’s no reason that only transit could or should get access to this ability. In the past, we haven’t had the technologies to control roads, lanes and tunnels while giving access to the public. While most train lines only do a train every 5 minutes, or worse, sitting empty most of the time, road lanes can carry vehicles of all sizes (including buses almost as large as train cars) on a 2 second headway, and a 1 second headway with computer driving.

"Theoretical Efficiency: Most transit thinking has revolved around the full capacity of transit vehicles, not their actual load factor, which is much lower. The efficiency of transportation is based on how many people it carries, not how many empty seats. High efficiency is found only at rush hour in dense cities, but you can’t offer service only a few hours a day. To the surprise of many, the instinct that “bigger is better” when it comes to efficiency is wrong. The demise of the A380 showed that.

"Capacity: At rush hour, a packed train with most passengers standing can attain, rarely, 30,000 uncomfortable passengers/hour, while highway lanes only do about 3,000 comfortable ones. If you wanted to fill a lane (or subway) tube with 15 passenger vans, though, you get 30,000 seatedpassengers per hour at today’s headways and over 50,000 at future ones. Unlike the trains, though, the vans would be going non-stop most of the time, with no stops at stations or transfers between lines, for much faster trips. (The vans would operate like modern elevators, in that you would indicate your destination stop, on any line, and get told which van and seat to get into for a journey with few or no stops.)

"And while a single road lane can in theory beat a single transit lane, we actually have quite a few roadway lanes already in existence. But the real future technique coming down the pike is lane management for private cars. Today, managed lanes are in their very early stages and barely make use of our modern digital infrastructure. The simple fact is that if a lane has a capacity, and you don’t exceed that capacity, congestion can be seriously mitigated. Today, if a lane can handle 2,000 cars and 3,000 want to use it, we just let all 3,000 fight it out, which was all we could think of doing in the past. Even on today’s roads, as cars whiz by with 3-4 empty seats each, there is a vast amount of unused passenger capacity which can be filled with carpooling apps and shared ride vehicles.

"Pleasant cities: One still valid argument revolves around the character of our streets and cities. Transitophiles hate the car, and one of their most spoken catchphrases is “Cities are for people, not cars.” That cities are for people is undeniably true, but it misses the fact that those cars have people in them. The wishes of the people in the cars are as valid as anybody else. Indeed, the users of the cars may resent what the cars do to the streets when they are a pedestrian on them, but realize it’s a trade-off for the time they want to be in one of the cars.

"With transit at a precipice, the new fear of getting into shared vehicles presents a particular challenge, and it’s one we’re not ready to handle. While future technology might handle the travel needs of the people without as much transit, today its capacity is needed. It will take decades to replace it, more in some places.

"The private taxis, particularly the robotaxis, have an expensive but possible option: They can be cleaned very frequently, even after each rider. In particular, they can be designed to make that cleaning easy, quick and cheaper. Interiors can be replaced with easy to clean, virus destroying surfaces (as will also happen in public transit if it has the budget for it) and passengers can wipe down seats on their own if they have to, with a supply of wipes. This is much harder on a bus or train, which can’t wait for you to clean it, and may only offer you a pole or loop to grasp rather than a seat. Capacity of transit vehicles is greatly reduced if people can’t pack tightly together — and they don’t want to pack tightly together. 

"There is a potential for taxis to put a barrier between the driver and passenger (this is there for security reasons in many places already) and group vehicles can even be redesigned and rebuilt with individual closed passenger compartments. For smaller road vehicles, it’s more practical to have compartments which each have a door to the outside — this is possible with some forms of buses but not with most trains which are boarded from only one side.

"Group vehicles can’t be sent for cleaning after every ride, but they can be practical if they are small enough for group journeys over a popular common route. For example, passengers can ride a short distance to a common point in a private vehicle, arrive in synchrony, and all board a van with say 5 rows of 2 compartments, boarded from each side. This van could then take them into town in morning rush hour, where it drops them at cleaned solo vehicles to complete their journey, then goes for disinfection.

"Some disinfection approaches may help all modes. For example, 220nm UV light can destroy virus particles in the air and on some surfaces. Compartments and vehicles can be equipped with these lights for use at all times and between rides. This might allow a compartmented subway to exist, but with much lower capacity.

"Fortunately, the early post-lockdown days will still see much reduced travel. This both means roads will have capacity, and transit vehicles will not be very full.

"Some day we’ll get back to being comfortable being on a train like the Tokyo subway car above. Perhaps after a highly effective vaccine is available. But in that time, progress will move on better, more comfortable, more efficient forms of transport, which combined with management of road lanes can handle the load. At the same time, more futuristic approaches, like cheap tunnels and electric flight will develop, though they won’t be in wide use for years to come. They offer the potential though, for a city that’s very pleasant for pedestrians and residents, and very walkable — if we can solve the problem of the death of the local retail that gives most city neighborhoods their walkability, that is."

This article originally appeared in Forbes. Read the whole thing here.

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity