Henry Ford likely never imagined the impact the automobile would have on the world when he developed the first assembly line techniques for his Model T.
This machine is not an efficient means of transportation, but rather serves as a symbol of individualism, consumerism, power, and is the hallmark monument to the age of petroleum. Petroleum and it's derivatives literally shape every aspect of modern global society from plastics to global trade and communications, and what single entity sums up all of these glorious and yet irresponsible behaviors than the automobile?
For the US, there is no other single symbol which so accurately represents the 20th century society. The US was the world's most important petroleum supplier from the beginning of the industry until the middle of the 20th century, only more recently being surpassed by the OPEC countries. The military advantages of hydrocarbon liquid fueled technology are unquestionably more effective than any other type of technology. It was this significant political and military advantage which helped the US win a decisive military victory in WWII on the European and Pacific theaters.
To secure this position, the political leaders at the time made a concerted effort to developing a permanent domestic market for this precious industry. Eisenhower's Interstate and Defense Highway Act of 1956 was one of the most prominent examples of how far the government was willing to go in order to ensure that the petroleum suppliers would have a stead market for their product. Not only infrastructure, but the values of independence and freedom which are a defining part of US culture were intimately tied to the automobile. In fact,
4% of US teens lose their virginity in cars. This ensured that the people not only used the machine for convenience, but they fell in love with it, and began to believe that it fundamentally represented their core value system.
By 1973, the US had so built their entire society around this symbol, that when OPEC threatened to cut off petroleum imports it nearly brought the society to its knees. The revelation of this dramatic vulnerability sparked an intense US political and military interest in the OPEC region which resulted in a series of bloody conflicts, which were all selfishly motivated as a way to ensure the continuation of this precious way of life.
The automobile is the central figure behind the entire transit system. Everything from low tax petrol, highways, parking lots, drive through food, and suburbs, the entire structure of society is based on this dominant form of transportation. In other parts of the world people use automobiles, but it is only one of many forms of transit and their entire society is not focused on this one mode of human transport.
For the purpose of this blog I will call this system centered around the automobile "Personal Motorized Transport System" or PMTS.
Personal meaning that it is not meant to transport multiple individuals along a common transit corridor in the way that mass transit does, but rather individual people using their own mechanism for the entire trip from origin to destination. Personal also limits the focus on human transport, rather than goods and raw materials.
Motorized means that it invokes the technology of internal combustion for purpose of superior speed performance, and Transport System is used to highlight that I am focusing on Personal Motorized vehicles as they relate to the purpose of transporting people on a regular basis. Recreational purposes are not in the scope of this discussion.
The relationship between the US and the PMTS is much like the relationship between Opium and Hong Kong society. When the British East India Company (EIC) started developing its trading center in the Pearl River Delta area, it needed to trade Opium to the Chinese in exchange for the valuable tea it planned to sell in Europe. the EIC promoted Opium use where it could as a way to ensure a market for its product. Hong Kong started its prosperity as a regional trading center as a result of the Opium trade. As an ode to this symbol of Hong Kong society, Opium became a favorite indulgence among many in the society as it not only served as an enjoyable recreational treat, but also symbolized the society's history and prosperity. Like Opium in Hong Kong, the PMTS of the US is an indulgence of the society which symbolically represent the society's historical prosperity. Also as in Hong Kong, this strong association with the society has been the result of an effort to ensure a domestic market for an important commercial product.
The analogy is remarkable in many ways, but it is the disturbing drug analogy that Opium shares with PMTS which I would like to highlight in more detail. PMTS is a kind of drug that the US society uses as a luxurious indulgence, without any regard for the potentially economic and well being risks associated with this highly dangerous indulgence. Like Opium the PMTS is certainly enjoyable, but also comes at a expensive and often fatal price. Also like Opium the US is now trapped in an inescapable addiction of which all forms of escape or freedom from the system would would come at a painful path of withdrawal.
Though Opium was at one time an inseparable part of Hong Kong society, the Chinese resisted this harmful drug and realized that its leisure and symbolic characteristics did not outweigh its harmful effect on society. Eventually the will of the people won out over their previous addiction.
Can the US or (any other society like the US in this way) break its addiction to its Personal Motorized Transport System? Is there a hope that the citizens can awake from their addiction to realize the harmful consequences of the system and demand that they no longer become bound to its grip? For those that are not convinced of the dangerous consequences that the PMTS imposes on society, I will summarize my position as concisely as possible by highlighting how the system affects both the individual user, as well as how it spills harmful effects onto non-users who also live in the society dominated by the PMTS.
PMTS negatively impacts the user's health and safety
PMTS expose users to a significantly higher fatality and injury risk than other transportation systems. Per kilometer travelled, a PMTS user's fatality risk is almost 50 times higher than other transport systems, such as walking, rail, buses, or planes. For average 15,000 miles/year and 70 years of use, users have 1 in 60 odds of dying in PMTS related accident. Most people in PMTS societies don't need anyone to remind them that they know many close friends or family who have died in an auto accident, and none in rail, bus, air, or pedestrian transport accidents. The source of most of the danger inherited in the system is the fact that humans of various skill level and disposition are operating the vehicles, as compared with rail, which follows a prescribed path and operated by an elite group of highly qualified professional operators. The root cause of over 80% of all PMTS related accidents are the result of human error. Contrary to some opinion, a user cannot lower his individual risk to the levels of other competing transport systems simply by improving his own operating performance, because he is still exposed to the risk of the irresponsibility of other drivers in the system.
Not only safety, but PMTS also poses an unnecessary health risk to the users.PMTS generally cut out much of the normal walking that other transit systems such as walk-bus-metro-bus-walk, have built into the beginning intermediate, and end of the transit stages. All other things equal, this lack of exercise exposes the user to a higher health risk as a result of this very sedentary transit system. Medical experts recommend a minimum amount of daily walking for normal health, and have linked many health diseases such as obesity to a lack of proper exercise. Assuming the user is aware of this heightened risk exposure, he would have to devote extra non transit time to exercising in order to lower his health risk to that of the users in other transit systems. Another negative impact on user health is that operating a vehicle poses an unnecessary daily stressor to the user which may contribute to stress induced health risks.
It comes as no surprise that in the US and other societies that rely on PMTS there is a mountain of medical literature available which shows the prevalence of sedentary lifestyle linked health consequences of such as obesity, hypertension, diabetes, etc... This not only impacts the individual users, but eventually the entire society pays for treating these diseases in the form of medical insurance premiums and medicare programs. A very large portion of the total cost of US health care can be linked to sedentary lifestyle.
Aside from the uncertainties associated with the concepts of health and safety risks PMTS imposes a heavy economic burden on individual users. Some might only consider fuel, but they need to remember that in other transit systems, there is no need for vehicle ownership and maintenance, so these costs must also be included in any comparison. Insurance, vehicle depreciation, maintenance and fuel are always orders of magnitude higher for the PMTS user than the mass transit user. Mass transit users typically pay one per-mile price in which the individual costs are instead managed by the transit provider. Operational expenses aside, lost time is more likely to be the bigger economic lost opportunity for PMTS users. While they are operating their personal vehicle, they do not have the choice of using that time for other productive or leisure activities, such as studying, reading, or even sleeping.
As highlighted in the way that PMTS causes medical costs to spillover from users to non-users, there are many ways that PMTS put a heavy burden on the society as a whole.In the local urban society, highways take up more valuable real estate in the urban landscape than rail lines, and the more personal vehicles on the road relative to mass transit vehicles, the wider the highways must be to accommodate the larger number of vehicles. Highways produce more noise and air pollution relative to electric rail transit systems, which may be powered by any number of non polluting energy sources (France's energy is 80% nuclear). The support infrastructure needed for cars such as highways and parking lots sprawls the urban landscape unnecessarily and raises the cost of other infrastructural developments such as waterworks, electricity, and communications. This sprawl undermines the feasibility of mass transit for those who cannot afford to or chose not to use PMTS, usually by making it difficult for corridor ridership to reach profitable levels. For example, it would be nearly impossible to have an economically viable rail system in the Houston metro area, which would have a station within reasonable distance of all major residential areas. The city is too sprawled and the cost of the infrastructure and operations would far out-weight the small revenue from the sprawled out transit users.
This incompatibility of the two systems also highlights how PMTS is biased in favor of a class of people in society who can afford the high cost of operating a vehicle. PMTS have a tendency to promote the formation of stratified social classes because PMTS users can physically segregate themselves from lower classes which rely on mass transit. Finally, one point those in the US may pay attention to is that PMTS vehicles pose a security risk since they may be used as weapons, car bombs in Iraq are a good example of how this can get out of control (relative to just a regular pedestrian suicide bomber). As I have always said, I'd much rather have a close brush with a drunk-walker than a drunk-driver.
Finally, the consequences of PMTS permeate even to the global level. Fuel economy for PMTS is significantly lower than that of mass transit systems, which results in inefficient use of limited energy resources. This is particularly true when the multi-passenger vehicles such as SUV and vans are normally under capacity, compared with buses and rail which normally average between 50 and 75% capacity. Of these energy sources, current technology limits PMTS to be entirely dependent on liquid hydrocarbon fuels, whose CO2 emissions elevate the risk of destructive global climate change.
I would like to highlight that I am not suggesting that automobiles don't have a place in the transport systems of society, only that they should not be the defining basis for all the transport needs. Ideally there should be an appropriate mix of options for users to be able to decide what is ideal for them. There are several scenarios where mass transit systems don't appear to work well, such as late night when ridership levels go down and cases where users are transporting heavy luggage. Taxis are a great solution to these gaps because they are operated by trained professionals and reduce the risk associated with PMTS considerably. I understand that not everyone is like me and wants to live in an urban environment like Hong Kong, which is essentially built around the MTR, but it is important for people to begin analyzing the risks of various modes of transport, and making conscious decisions about where compromises are needed.
The problem is that many people agree with everything I have presented, but they say,
So what?
What can I do?
I am a trapped victim of the system and have the choice only to conform or leave the system altogether.The simplest option is to avoid the US, but this is easier said than done. Many people have lives and loved ones that they are not willing to just pick up and leave for the sake of a poor public transit system. This leaves one with a sense of helplessness.
To all of you who feel helpless I can only tell you that you always have a choice, and a government is always subject to the will of its people. For me I have started a kind of boycott against the system. I live close to where I need to be every day. I actively avoid circumstances where I need a car, and use mass transit when available. I save lots of money from using less gas, and am more healthy from the increased daily exercise from walking. When given the opportunity, I will openly advocate for more public spending on public transit over highway improvements.
I'm sure that my actions in a small way have an affect on the overall system, and if others follow my example, the results could have a dramatic effect on the system.
Higher ridership rates on mass transit coupled with lowered gasoline revenues is one of the best ways of communicating to your city planning officials what you prefer. Surveys, opinion polls, donations, and voting are all effective tools in shaping the landscape of society.
A gasoline tax on non-commercial vehicles could serve as an excellent revenue source for infrastructural reform, as well as an economic incentive for users to switch to a safer system. These are a few examples of how the conscious actions of a few motivated individuals can be used to rid the society of its indulgent addiction.
Other options could include selling off the interstate highway system to the private sector who would presumably institute tolls to charge users per-use to ensure adequate maintenance and upkeep of the system, as well as a way to repay their initial investment. The public funds normally allocated for maintenance of the highway system, plus the funds generated from the sale of the highways would be more than enough to start building a 21st century public transit system - Light Rail, High Speed Rail, etc... This option also creates a disincentive to use the highways and provides alternative transit solutions.
Make an effort to tell others how you feel about the disadvantages of the current system, and show your support for reform when the opportunity comes. Talk to people about the issue, and explore the risks and benefits for yourself to decide what kind of society you want your children to live in.
