Car remains favourite form of transport for Irish people

djpbarry · 08-10-2013 10:57am #1

No surprises in the thread title perhaps, but some of the results of a survey from the National Transport Authority make for depressing reading:

Such is the love of the personal conveyance that more than half of all daily trips are less than three kilometres in length - and more than half of these short trips are made by car.
...
While half of those interviewed said they had walked in the past week the figures for sustainable travel could have been better.
...
Almost 40 percent of all trips to school or college were less than two kilometres in length - but almost half of these short trips were made by car.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/car-remains-favourite-form-of-transport-for-irish-people-1.1552888

Seems there are an awful lot of unnecessary, short trips being made by car. Whatever about the environmental impact or sustainability, it can’t be a good indicator of the nation’s health if half of all those surveyed said they had not walked in the past week. Three kilometres is what, a 30 minute walk? Have Irish people really become that averse to excercise?!?

robp · 10-10-2013 12:55pm

djpbarry wrote: »

No surprises in the thread title perhaps, but some of the results of a survey from the National Transport Authority make for depressing reading:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/car-remains-favourite-form-of-transport-for-irish-people-1.1552888

Seems there are an awful lot of unnecessary, short trips being made by car. Whatever about the environmental impact or sustainability, it can’t be a good indicator of the nation’s health if half of all those surveyed said they had not walked in the past week. Three kilometres is what, a 30 minute walk? Have Irish people really become that averse to excercise?!?

Bad planning has a lot to blame. So much ribbon development. I know Ireland is wet and hilly and this doesn't encourage cycling but I really think planning is the key culprit. It will cost us in the long run.

average_runner · 10-10-2013 12:58pm

robp wrote: »

Bad planning has a lot to blame. So much ribbon development. I know Ireland is wet and hilly and this doesn't encourage cycling but I really think planning is the key culprit. It will cost us in the long run.

Bad planning my ass. People are just lazy. School less than km from us and people drive to it.

Bad planning is just excuse. My secondary school when I was a kid was 2 miles away and we would either cycle or walk to it.

whippet · 10-10-2013 12:59pm

i'd love to be able to commute by any other means than the car. Unfortunately dublin public transport means that if you work on the outskirts of the city (m50 type places) you need to get in to the city centre and back out to the outskirts ... usually doubling or trebling the time taken to commute.

average_runner · 10-10-2013 1:01pm

whippet wrote: »

i'd love to be able to commute by any other means than the car. Unfortunately dublin public transport means that if you work on the outskirts of the city (m50 type places) you need to get in to the city centre and back out to the outskirts ... usually doubling or trebling the time taken to commute.

Why not cycle?

djpbarry · 10-10-2013 1:07pm

whippet wrote: »

i'd love to be able to commute by any other means than the car. Unfortunately dublin public transport means that if you work on the outskirts of the city (m50 type places) you need to get in to the city centre and back out to the outskirts ... usually doubling or trebling the time taken to commute.

Transport systems in most cities are radial - routes go into the city centre and back out again.

But anyway, it doesn't really explain why so few people are prepared to walk rather than drive.

djpbarry · 10-10-2013 1:07pm

robp wrote: »

Bad planning has a lot to blame. So much ribbon development.

Again, this doesn't really explain why people are so unlikely to walk or cycle short journeys instead of driving.

whippet · 10-10-2013 2:37pm

average_runner wrote: »

Why not cycle?

40 miles?

If I could get a train to somewhere along the perhipery and then another light rail / bus that would circle the outskirts of the city in reasonable time I would jump at the opportunity.

If I were to go down the public transport route my commute would be

- 5 min Drive / 20 min cycle to train station
- 45 min train journey
- 10 min walk
- 60 min bus journey
- 5 min walk

By Car:

- 50 min door to door

It's a no brainer really. If I could take a 30 min train journey to the outskirts of the city, with a radial bus / light rail network taking 30/40 mins to the general location of my office; I would gladly do it. The extra time can be spent quite happily reading a newspaper enjoying a morning coffee.

robp · 10-10-2013 2:49pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Again, this doesn't really explain why people are so unlikely to walk or cycle short journeys instead of driving.

Maybe not but blaming laziness is a bit of dead end isn't it?

djpbarry · 10-10-2013 3:40pm

robp wrote: »

Maybe not but blaming laziness is a bit of dead end isn't it?

But I'm not saying that laziness is the sole factor?

I think the "ah sure, the car's there, I might as well use it" attitude is probably a big one, but I don't think it's the only one. I think in the case of school runs, there's probably an irrational fear among parents that something might happen to their kids if they let them walk/cycle. It's also easier to keep control of your kids if you're driving them rather than walking with them.

But, even taking all that into consideration, I personally find the lack of willingness to walk somewhere pretty strange. I will always choose walking over any other form of transport, unless the weather doesn't permit it or I'm in a rush.

Grudaire · 11-10-2013 4:32pm

Here's a link to the survey itself:

http://6311664e1a241bd4b58f-3999d26af054d711e4557be72bd8ff23.r3.cf3.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Household-Travel-Survey-Summary.pdf

It's interesting reading, it's definitely a pity that people choose to use the car for short unneccesary trips. Then again we have a very dispersed population which makes driving a necessity for many people due to decisions on where they live.

I think we're slowly making progress in cycling becoming mainstream which is something.

robp · 13-10-2013 2:49pm

djpbarry wrote: »

But I'm not saying that laziness is the sole factor?

I think the "ah sure, the car's there, I might as well use it" attitude is probably a big one, but I don't think it's the only one. I think in the case of school runs, there's probably an irrational fear among parents that something might happen to their kids if they let them walk/cycle. It's also easier to keep control of your kids if you're driving them rather than walking with them.

But, even taking all that into consideration, I personally find the lack of willingness to walk somewhere pretty strange. I will always choose walking over any other form of transport, unless the weather doesn't permit it or I'm in a rush.

I guess habits are a problem. I can see habits developing via the sheer dispersed ness of the Irish population. Also one off housing is often located on busy roads outside towns without much space for bikes or walkers. This kind of situation would encourage car use even for short trips. Parents mindful of their kid's safety may actively insist on car use.

Eoghan Barra · 13-10-2013 4:21pm

If and when the cost of driving relative to income goes up, more and more people will be forced to rediscover those strange appendages called their legs again.

fits · 06-11-2013 7:47pm

In more positive news.... Bicycles are now outselling cars

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/bikes-now-outselling-cars-in-ireland-as-bike-industry-soars-to-record-values-heres-the-proof/

MayoSalmon · 24-11-2013 6:00pm

If I have to pay a large amount of money to not only have a car, but also tax, insure and NCT it...well by christ I am going to use it whenever possible.

Macha · 25-11-2013 8:11am

MayoSalmon wrote: »

If I have to pay a large amount of money to not only have a car, but also tax, insure and NCT it...well by christ I am going to use it whenever possible.

That's exactly the (I must admit flawed) logic behind the idea to shift all the taxes to fuel so that those who use their cars the most, pay the most taxes.

Akrasia · 25-11-2013 10:33am

Why do you say that logic is flawed?

I think it's an excellent idea to move road tax to fuel (and also third party compulsary insurance)

The main argument against it is the risk of smuggling if the price of fuel goes up, but we'd have a lot of extra gardai free from their traditional tax and insurance checkpoints, they could do some actual police work and catch the criminal gangs who launder the fuel.

If you're paying road tax per day, you're being penalised for leaving the car at home and taking public transport. You're essentially paying twice for the same journey.

Irish pubic transport is a complete disaster. I lived in holland and there was a proper bus service between large urban centres and the surrounding towns and villages. If you wanted to commute between your town and the town a few miles away, there would be busses every 20 minutes
In Ireland, if you're lucky, there's one bus a day

Grudaire · 25-11-2013 11:15am

And now in Ireland we have a cart before the horse problem..

Until there is demand for regular regional and local bus services the country cannot afford to provide them..
..but because the service isn't available people resort to using their cars.

In fairness I don't think there will/should ever be no tax on cars, equally (and perhaps more importantly) insurance should not be moved to fuel.

If you move insurance to fuel you will have good drivers clearly cross subsidising bad drivers. Indeed most drivers will experience an increase in their effective cost of insurance. It is likely only young drivers would benefit.
It would also remove the consequences of bad driving from people. The No-Claims-Bonus essentially acts as an incentive to drive well. Look up 'moral-hazard' if you have time

Macha · 25-11-2013 2:04pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Why do you say that logic is flawed?

I think it's an excellent idea to move road tax to fuel (and also third party compulsary insurance)

The main argument against it is the risk of smuggling if the price of fuel goes up, but we'd have a lot of extra gardai free from their traditional tax and insurance checkpoints, they could do some actual police work and catch the criminal gangs who launder the fuel.

If you're paying road tax per day, you're being penalised for leaving the car at home and taking public transport. You're essentially paying twice for the same journey.

Irish pubic transport is a complete disaster. I lived in holland and there was a proper bus service between large urban centres and the surrounding towns and villages. If you wanted to commute between your town and the town a few miles away, there would be busses every 20 minutes
In Ireland, if you're lucky, there's one bus a day

Oh sorry, I meant the logic of using a car that someone feels they've spent a lot of money more just to get good value. I aree that the shift to 'per use' tax is much better. As for insurance, I'd never thought about that but I think that's a separate issue to, say motor tax and fuel tax.

As for the smuggling, it will be a hell of a lot easier than, say, Luxembourg: we're mostly an island.

djpbarry · 25-11-2013 7:55pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Irish pubic transport is a complete disaster. I lived in holland and there was a proper bus service between large urban centres and the surrounding towns and villages. If you wanted to commute between your town and the town a few miles away, there would be busses every 20 minutes

I wouldn’t go so far as to describe it as a “complete disaster”. Outside Dublin, maybe, but to be fair, the population density in somewhere like the Netherlands is considerably higher than it is in Ireland, so it’s not really a fair comparison. Not much point in having a frequent bus service between A and B if few people have any need for it.

The fact that Irish people have spread themselves pretty thinly in search of semi-detached houses with big gardens means putting in place a cost-effective, high-quality public transit system is extremely difficult. For example, people from all over Leinster commute to Dublin every day. Leinster has a population density of just 126 persons per square kilometre, which is tiny relative to other European cities. For example, Greater Manchester has a similar population, but the density is about 15 times higher. It’s difficult to envisage a transport system that could cater for all those commuters just to get to/from Dublin, never mind two/from different points outside Dublin.

monument · 26-11-2013 1:07am

UK researchers have done some in-depth work on why people don't walk and cycle, and I think a lot of the results and issues would be common in an Irish study...

Reasons for not walking and cycling

The research found that assuming trips in the UK could be undertaken by bike or on foot just because they are short is a rather simplistic approach that fails to fully understand the nature of the problem. While attitudes to walking and cycling are mostly positive or neutral, many people who would like to engage in more active travel fail to do so due to a combination of factors:

Concerns about the physical environment, especially with regard to safety when walking or cycling;
The difficulty of fitting walking and cycling into complex household routines (especially with young children);
The perception that walking and cycling are in some ways abnormal things to do.

http://www.its.leeds.ac.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/UWCReportSept2011.pdf

robp wrote: »

Bad planning has a lot to blame. So much ribbon development. I know Ireland is wet and hilly and this doesn't encourage cycling but I really think planning is the key culprit. It will cost us in the long run.

Some parts of Ireland are wet but not all of the country. Dublin is around on par with Copenhagen and Amsterdam: http://irishcycle.com/myths/myths-weather/

average_runner wrote: »

Bad planning my ass. People are just lazy. School less than km from us and people drive to it.

Bad planning is just excuse. My secondary school when I was a kid was 2 miles away and we would either cycle or walk to it.

Since you went to school everything has been planned around the car -- it's a process that long before you went to school.

Our streets, roads, our housing, many of our shopping centres etc -- all planned around the car.

djpbarry wrote: »

I wouldn’t go so far as to describe it as a “complete disaster”. Outside Dublin, maybe, but to be fair, the population density in somewhere like the Netherlands is considerably higher than it is in Ireland, so it’s not really a fair comparison. Not much point in having a frequent bus service between A and B if few people have any need for it.

The fact that Irish people have spread themselves pretty thinly in search of semi-detached houses with big gardens means putting in place a cost-effective, high-quality public transit system is extremely difficult. For example, people from all over Leinster commute to Dublin every day. Leinster has a population density of just 126 persons per square kilometre, which is tiny relative to other European cities. For example, Greater Manchester has a similar population, but the density is about 15 times higher. It’s difficult to envisage a transport system that could cater for all those commuters just to get to/from Dublin, never mind two/from different points outside Dublin.

Public transport and cycling provision is still overall poor in the higher density areas of Dublin.

Only 5% of commuter trips in the Greater Dublin Area are from the hinterland into / out of the inner suburbs and the city centre (ie the area inside the M50 + M11) -- see charts and map here. And we're talking about 20% of the population of Ireland within the M50 alone, and a little over 10% in the rest of Co Dublin -- so around 30% of Ireland in Co Dublin and 40% in the GDA.

Dublin City population density is very comparable with Amsterdam (both around the 4,400/km2 mark). Just found this report, which says: "The city is of a similar size to Dublin; it was the only city to have similarities in GDP, employment, population and area."

Walking is out for so many trips (cycling far less so), but the issue of very long commutes is overdone in the media and in our imaginations.

djpbarry · 26-11-2013 10:50am

monument wrote: »

Concerns about the physical environment, especially with regard to safety when walking or cycling;

The difficulty of fitting walking and cycling into complex household routines (especially with young children);

The perception that walking and cycling are in some ways abnormal things to do.

Concerns with regard to cycling I can sympathise with. Difficulties associated with walking with kids I can sympathise with. But believing that walking is abnormal? That’s bizarre.

monument wrote: »

Public transport and cycling provision is still overall poor in the higher density areas of Dublin.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying there isn’t room for improvement. I just don’t think it’s as bad as some make it out to be (in making excuses not to avail of it).

monument wrote: »

Only 5% of commuter trips in the Greater Dublin Area are from the hinterland into / out of the inner suburbs and the city centre (ie the area inside the M50 + M11) -- see charts and map here.

The CSO suggests otherwise (although it’s possible they’re using a different definition of “Dublin City and suburbs”):

The daytime working population of Dublin City and suburbs in April 2011 was 469,987, of which 117,764 commuted from outside the area to work in the city, representing a quarter of the city’s workforce. The highest number of commuters were from Fingal (27,064), followed by Kildare (25,237), Meath (19,863) and Wicklow (17,300). These four counties combined comprised 76 per cent of all workers with a daily commute into Dublin.

http://www.cso.ie/en/newsandevents/pressreleases/2012pressreleases/pressreleasecensus2011profile10doortodoor

If we discount Fingal from those figures, that leaves a minimum of over 13% of Dublin’s workforce commuting in from Kildare, Meath and Wicklow alone.

monument wrote: »

Walking is out for so many trips (cycling far less so), but the issue of very long commutes is overdone in the media and in our imaginations.

According to the above link, the average commuting time for Dublin City workers is 50 minutes. That suggests that a lot of people are doing very long commutes.

monument · 26-11-2013 11:51am

djpbarry wrote: »

Concerns with regard to cycling I can sympathise with. Difficulties associated with walking with kids I can sympathise with. But believing that walking is abnormal? That’s bizarre.

Yes, to me it's also bizarre as I've cycled or walked most places since school but the car is the norm for most people even for short trips.

djpbarry wrote: »

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying there isn’t room for improvement. I just don’t think it’s as bad as some make it out to be (in making excuses not to avail of it).

Althought improvements are being made, it is far behind the likes of Amsterdam which has population size and area which is as comparable as you're going to get.

djpbarry wrote: »

The CSO suggests otherwise (although it’s possible they’re using a different definition of “Dublin City and suburbs”):
http://www.cso.ie/en/newsandevents/pressreleases/2012pressreleases/pressreleasecensus2011profile10doortodoor

If we discount Fingal from those figures, that leaves a minimum of over 13% of Dublin’s workforce commuting in from Kildare, Meath and Wicklow alone.

The figures I posted by the NTA are taken from CSO data -- the difference is the NTA looked at all trips in the GDA, not just the ones into the city.

djpbarry wrote: »

According to the above link, the average commuting time for Dublin City workers is 50 minutes. That suggests that a lot of people are doing very long commutes.

To add to what I say above:

Lots of people are doing car trips which are quicker to cycle or sometimes use public transport. The routes along the Grand Canal and the former N2 route south of Glasnevin graveyard are classic examples of routes which are still gridlocked.

ezra_pound · 26-11-2013 8:06pm

Cycling is definitely my preferred mode of transport. However the weekly shop in supermarket is always done by car. Also often pop down to local shop in the car if I'm tired after work.

Capt'n Midnight · 26-11-2013 9:07pm

MayoSalmon wrote: »

If I have to pay a large amount of money to not only have a car, but also tax, insure and NCT it...well by christ I am going to use it whenever possible.

When the cost of taking the bus is similar to what you would spend on fuel there isn't much incentive to change.

One problem with cycling is a general lack of shelter from the elements. It would be so much easier if you could nip in and wait a few minutes for a shower to pass by, instead of being destroyed or having to change into wet gear every time.

Akrasia · 27-11-2013 2:08pm

Cliste wrote: »

And now in Ireland we have a cart before the horse problem..

Until there is demand for regular regional and local bus services the country cannot afford to provide them..
..but because the service isn't available people resort to using their cars.

In fairness I don't think there will/should ever be no tax on cars, equally (and perhaps more importantly) insurance should not be moved to fuel.

If you move insurance to fuel you will have good drivers clearly cross subsidising bad drivers. Indeed most drivers will experience an increase in their effective cost of insurance. It is likely only young drivers would benefit.
It would also remove the consequences of bad driving from people. The No-Claims-Bonus essentially acts as an incentive to drive well. Look up 'moral-hazard' if you have time

We have a penalty points system and a driver licensing system.

If you are not fit to be on the road, then you should have your license taken away. If you have an accident that is your fault, the gardai and the courts should decide whether you're fit to remain on the road.

Also, people who drive fast use more fuel, and pay more insurance.
(not just fast as in breaking the speed limit, fast as in excessive acceleration, heavy breaking and high speed cornering)

I suggest placing the compulsary third party element of insurance on the price of fuel. Insurance companies would still be free to sell policies covering fire and theft and fully comprehensive cover. They could still charge more for these policies if the driver is a higher risk.

Using insurance as a method of deciding who is or isn't a good driver means that bad drivers who can afford high insurance can drive, while good drivers who can't afford insurance are left walking, and good drivers who have to make a claim through no fault of their own will be penalised.

Also, if the insurance is on the cost of fuel, then the pervasive risk of being hit by an uninsured driver is gone and insured drivers won't have to subsidise uninsured drivers anymore.

Also, the logic of putting road tax onto the price of fuel is diminished if the Gardai still have to mount checkpoints to check for insurance.

Grudaire · 27-11-2013 2:44pm

I can see the benefit of the idea, and I'm not arguing that the idea has no merit, but I don't think it's a good idea because of the downsides. An easier way to reduce the number of uninsured drivers would be to integrate the systems to identify cars that are getting the NCT/Tax but don't have insurance.

- Establishing the system would be quite expensive (and people would not all be in favour)
- No allowance for the risk profiles of the driver, young charged the same as old, convicted offenders the same as those with several years NCB etc etc
- Arguably Excesses and No Claims Discounts are a large part of the reason that the cost of insurance is managed. People are discouraged from bad driving and even claiming.
- Practical issues exist with encouraging using untaxed petrol, particularly diesel.
- Not forgetting the border of course, everyone near the border is probably going to pop to Newry for the weekly shop and petrol fill.

You have certain implicit assumptions which also aren't getting mentioned:
- You're assuming that a system based off a fuel levy would be as efficient than insurers running the scheme.
- Heavy drivers will be cross subsidising infrequent drivers, which won't necessarily reflect the risk patterns (80 yo granny vs 35 yo courier)

KeRbDoG · 27-11-2013 2:47pm

fits wrote: »

In more positive news.... Bicycles are now outselling cars

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/bikes-now-outselling-cars-in-ireland-as-bike-industry-soars-to-record-values-heres-the-proof/

(in response to the whole car reg change for the car sellers)
Will someone please think of the poor car industry in Ireland who are suffering...wait...what car industry? :pac:

djpbarry · 28-11-2013 10:49am

monument wrote: »

Althought improvements are being made, it is far behind the likes of Amsterdam which has population size and area which is as comparable as you're going to get.

I’m not going to disagree that Dublin’s transit system is still lagging behind other major European cities, but we have to remember where we started from. Public transit in early 80’s Dublin was virtually non-existent. Some pretty dramatic improvements have been made since, starting with the DART in ’84, with more in the pipeline. I think the linking up of the LUAS network, the underground DART interconnector and some modernising of bus routes would give Dublin a pretty decent system overall.

This isn’t directed at you, but when I go back to Dublin, I often hear people bemoaning Dublin’s shoddy transit system and drawing comparisons with London, asking why, in particular, Dublin doesn’t have an underground network comparable to London’s. Now this is just plain daft. Apart from the fact that London’s size is colossal relative to Dublin (and it’s questionable as to whether Dublin needs an underground “network”), the tube is 150 years in the making, much of it built when Britain was a massive imperial world power. Expecting something similar to spring up in Dublin in a matter of years is deluded. And then of course there’s the fact that the tube ain’t the glorious wonder they think it is (I’m not knocking it – it’s an engineering marvel), with chunks of it closed down every weekend for engineering works.

monument wrote: »

Lots of people are doing car trips which are quicker to cycle or sometimes use public transport. The routes along the Grand Canal and the former N2 route south of Glasnevin graveyard are classic examples of routes which are still gridlocked.

Fair point. It would be interesting to see typical commuting distances rather than times.

MayoSalmon · 28-11-2013 8:23pm

The British built us a fantastic state of the art tram system in Dublin and rail network across the country.

Thick short sighted paddys that we are ripped it all up.:o

monument · 28-11-2013 11:57pm

djpbarry wrote: »

I’m not going to disagree that Dublin’s transit system is still lagging behind other major European cities, but we have to remember where we started from. Public transit in early 80’s Dublin was virtually non-existent. Some pretty dramatic improvements have been made since, starting with the DART in ’84, with more in the pipeline. I think the linking up of the LUAS network, the underground DART interconnector and some modernising of bus routes would give Dublin a pretty decent system overall.

This isn’t directed at you, but when I go back to Dublin, I often hear people bemoaning Dublin’s shoddy transit system and drawing comparisons with London, asking why, in particular, Dublin doesn’t have an underground network comparable to London’s. Now this is just plain daft. Apart from the fact that London’s size is colossal relative to Dublin (and it’s questionable as to whether Dublin needs an underground “network”), the tube is 150 years in the making, much of it built when Britain was a massive imperial world power. Expecting something similar to spring up in Dublin in a matter of years is deluded. And then of course there’s the fact that the tube ain’t the glorious wonder they think it is (I’m not knocking it – it’s an engineering marvel), with chunks of it closed down every weekend for engineering works.

Exactly why I used the example of Amsterdam -- around about the same population, area, density etc.

Amsterdam metro lines opening years: 53 & 54 in 1977, 51 in 1990, 50 in 1997, and 52 due open in 2017 (some overlap).

djpbarry wrote: »

Fair point. It would be interesting to see typical commuting distances rather than times.

See that link I posted: Data from the census and a DTO survey: http://irishcycle.com/myths/myths-distances/

Also, same for all of Ireland from the NTA National Household Travel Survey 2012: http://irishcycle.com/2013/10/10/over-50-of-trips-a-day-in-ireland-are-less-than-3km/

djpbarry · 03-12-2013 5:47pm

monument wrote: »

Exactly why I used the example of Amsterdam -- around about the same population, area, density etc.

Amsterdam metro lines opening years: 53 & 54 in 1977, 51 in 1990, 50 in 1997, and 52 due open in 2017 (some overlap).

Granted, but planning and construction began considerably earlier. Dublin/Ireland was in no position to embark on such ambitious projects in the 70's and 80's.

djpbarry · 03-12-2013 5:50pm

I'm genuinely staggered by this:

London, for example, has a congestion charge, terrible parking and pretty good public transport, but the car remains the most popular way to commute.

Nearly a third of workers rely on a car or van to get in. The tube does come in a close second, with more than fifth of workers using the underground. Then comes the bus and the train, followed by walking, and cycling (around 4% get on their bike).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25175752

Car remains favourite form of transport for Irish people

Comments