Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Cities around the world that are reducing car access

Options
19091939596119

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,382 ✭✭✭JohnC.




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,576 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    That is a myopic view that gives no attention at all to the vast social good that comes from car transport. Life is much better due to cars. This should be immensely self evident. They reduce journey time which is in effect extending peoples lives. So actually there is a moral imperative for cars, in so far as you balance usage of road space, which has to be done in busy areas. You criticise the endless road building, you know large train networks often require similar constant programmes of expansion. Also, all countries with great rail networks, are endlessly improving road networks.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Rail systems move people at efficiencies thousands of times greater than even the widest of roads meaning cost per user is a fraction of roads. In Ireland since about 2000 we've spent the guts of €20bn on new roads and less than €1bn on rail If that were the other way around we'd be like Japan, Limerick would have a metro.


    Life is not better due to cars, what a silly statement, the reason people have such long commutes is specifically because of car availability. If they were never invented nobody would have built mcmansions in the middle of nowhere with the intention of driving an hour every day to a city for work. Before they were afordable the vast majority of people commuted by walking we had a more extensive rail network and tram network.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,405 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    They reduce journey time which is in effect extending peoples lives.

    Cycling in the city, I move faster than cars. So that's extended my life. And the fact that it's good for my health extends my life even more!



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,711 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Pedestrianising a few city centre streets would still leave tens of thousands of km of roads there for people to drive on which should more than satisfy any supposed moral imperative.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,369 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    If you look at any attempt to remove cars is met with opposition, but afterwards most are happy with the improved facilities for the general populace.

    Grafton street used to be two way traffic jams with buses spewing soot into the atmosphere. No-one is campaigning to go back to that. Henry street - likewise.

    There are good solutions that have not been tried yet. Park and Ride and cheap/free public transport are two that should be keeping cars out of cities.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,576 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    I am not against cycling. I am very procycling. I am against people who claim cars are a net negative. People tend to be rational. Not all journeys can be made with bikes.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,576 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    Shocking to see such a false post being thanked. Rail cost per a user is only lower than roads on certain highly suitable routes. The routes where we have built motorways don't apply. If that 20 billion was spent on rail, we'd have no extra capacity for buses, freight or bikes. In no way we'd be like Japan. Not remotely realistic. If you were to take chunks of Japan with similar population density as us, rail density is similar to Ireland. When Ireland had maximum extent of rail, journey times were very high. I am warm to the argument that there is too much car usage in Dublin, but as a cars have been immensely positive. The road infrastructure we are talking about has been immensely positive.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    It would certainly be interesting to read a peer-reviewed paper on whether cars are a net positive or negative.

    But considering road deaths, environmental impact, health factors (inactivity/emissions/etc), and considering the large number of people who don't own a car, I can see why some people would find cars to be a net negative. Rather than being "against people" on the point, it might maybe the better use of energy to accept that their circumstances differ from your own and that you will struggle to "win them round" so to speak.

    I say all this as a car owner who drives quite a lot by the way.

    Not all journeys can be made with (by) bikes? Absolutely. There's barely a person on the planet who thinks that all journeys can be made by bike. The issue at hand is actually around "not all journeys can be made by car" though. We have as a country and along with many other countries, tried for around 60 years to make it possible to perform all journeys by car, but are now coming around to the realisation that it's just not possible or even particularly desirable. The net outcome of that is that we are generally reversing some of those car-centric efforts now. This particularly impacts urban, congested areas. As you say, most people are rational: most people understand this.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 38,906 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Lets break this down:

    That is a myopic view that gives no attention at all to the vast social good that comes from car transport. Life is much better due to cars. This should be immensely self evident.

    There is no doubt that cars have brought good to society. However, they have brought many ills with them too.

    Firstly, there is the environmental factor, air pollution, noise pollution, environmental pollution (especially from mineral mining for batteries) and so on.

    There are significant societal impacts also. Roads can separate an area. Motorways will have the effect of cutting people off from what weree neighbours. Within urban areas, dial carriageways and alrge wide roads segregate communities. It has gotten to the point in Ireland and elsewhere that it is regarded as unsafe to allow children play outside on the streets. Many children remain indoors which contributes to childhood obesity. Similarly, because roads are regarded as too dangerous, most parents won't let their kids cycle to school. Many parents won't even let their kids walk. You also see large numbers of parents driving their kids to and from school.

    We have allowed our lives to be controlled by a dependency on having a car. People make the choice to commute by car. This sedentary form of commute leads to many health issues including higher blood pressure, obesity and so on.

    We have also allowed ourselves to become desensitised to violent deaths every day.

    Without cars and other vehicles, there would be obvious downsides. However, the over-dependence on cars and the constant focus on urban design around road infrastructure has not been good for society as a whole. To say that cars are good or bad for society overall in one short sentence is pointless as it can't be done. While a claim such as "Life is much better due to cars. This should be immensely self evident" might apply to you, it cannot be substantiated for everyone!

    They reduce journey time which is in effect extending peoples lives.

    In some cases, they reduce journey times. My commute (~13km) is as fast for me on a bicycle as it is in a car simply because of congestion and this is predoiminantly on dual carriageways.

    Within a city, I'm definitley faster by bike.

    However, to pick you up on your "extending peoples lives" - over-reliance on cars to travel also contributes towards health issues which can reduce people's lives.

    So actually there is a moral imperative for cars, in so far as you balance usage of road space, which has to be done in busy areas.

    A moral imperitave? What utter crap!

    As for the balancing of road space - any reallocation of road space has been difficult with people in cars not being able to see past the windscreen view of the world. They have grudgingly allowed to share space despite the obvious effect of reducting the numbers of people driving.

    You criticise the endless road building, you know large train networks often require similar constant programmes of expansion.

    If there is a finite budget and most of it goes on road building then this usually represents poor value for moeny.

    Also, all countries with great rail networks, are endlessly improving road networks.

    The balance is shifting though, especially in cities with more and more progressive societies allocating more and more funding towards sustainable travel - public transit, active travel, etc.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    It was a hypothetical scenario, journey times on intercity routes were longer because it was 100 years ago, rail technology has moved on. Journeys within cities were actually faster though because there were no cars blocking everything up. The average commute time was lower than 15 mins before cars.

    Cars have planely not been immensely positive. Despite massive investment in safety, decades of effort and becoming a world leader in road safety, we still have 133 deaths by car annually. A premature death costs the economy about €20,000,000. That's just from accidents, more than a thousand people a year die from air pollution in Ireland . In March and April 2020 during lockdown, hospitalisations of people with asthma attacks dropped to 0, pre covid there were hundreds of hospitalisations with asthma per month. Then we spend another 1 billion per year on road infrastructure. Ireland doesn't have a car or oil industry, everything we spend on cars is stimulus for Germany, Japan and Saudi. Cars are literally costing us trillions of euros, increasing our average journey times and damaging our health.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,405 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder




  • Registered Users Posts: 13,766 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    I think basing our society around cars is up there with the worst things to happen in the 20th century, it completely ruined everything



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 38,906 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle




  • Registered Users Posts: 13,766 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    I saw that, surely it's fake?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Just so we're all on the same page here, the contentious issue brought up was not that "all cars should be banned" but rather that "removing cars from areas will lead to a lower quality of life" or that "ageing populations require more cars".

    I don't think anyone in the thread advocates for universal car bans from everywhere. Even if someone wanted it and even if it was technically achievable, I doubt it would be politically achievable. The motivation and challenge is to reduce car access in/to/through urban areas. For quality of life, for the environment and for better throughput.

    What's always most interesting about it to me is the level of resistance/pushback. People REALLY don't like the notion/idea of losing any car access.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,369 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Quote: [What's always most interesting about it to me is the level of resistance/pushback. People REALLY don't like the notion/idea of losing any car access.]

    I think it is people WITH cars who think like that. But that includes those who drive their kids the two km to school and park all over the place in the closest they can get to the school gates. Those same parents who do this do not want their kids to walk or cycle to the school because it is so dangerous because of all the cars on the roads.

    Now if it was illegal to stop or park within 1 km of the school, and the kids had to walk that last km - would it be safer and healthier for the kids?

    We need a mind reset on these habits that have escalated in the last few decades.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Yep but it's interesting to me that it's the mere IDEA of losing any car access, rather the practice of losing car access, that seems to meet massive resistance. I think there's a lot to be said about current perceptions, and the media's current influence.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 38,906 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    It's not just the media but those that invest in it. Look at the plans for Lucan which would have removed some parking places. This was misrepresented principally buy business owners who didn't want to lose spots right outside their door. The misinformation was repeated in local papers where those businesses also advertise.

    In terms of the national papers, they receive a lot of advertising revenue from the likes of motor manufacturers so it is a vested interest that they look to protect.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,393 ✭✭✭Grassey


    Saw this article this morning and it reminded me about this thread and the statement made a few posts back about "Life is much better due to cars. This should be immensely self evident.... actually there is a moral imperative for cars,"


    Those who own a car spend on average 13% of their gross income on it, above the 10% generally seen as the indicator of transport poverty. For those paying for their car with a finance or loan deal this proportion rises to 19%.


    So I guess yeah life is 'better' if you have the convenience of going wherever whenever and free parking to sweeten the deal. But the cost of ownership is pretty mental when you think about it and hardly makes life better when it sucks up so much income. Though if youre paying that much for it you might as well use it right?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭OEP


    I am completely pro-cycling and cycle everywhere within Dublin myself, and want car access reduced within urban centres - but, life is much better with a car. If you want to do anything outside of towns and cities you need a car.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    I presume you mean within the Irish context though, right? If you were in some parts of the world, I wouldn't be as confident that life is better with a car. It's an important distinction because we're really talking about a global context here, and the associated effort to bring Ireland's cities closer to some of those foreign cities in which car ownership is not a significant benefit, if that makes sense.

    In short: I have no doubt that in Ireland at the moment, it's much easier for most people to own a car, than to not own a car. But that shouldn't NEED to be the case. We're less car dependent than - for instance - Dallas, but we're doing much worse on that metric than many of our European counterparts.

    Car ownership isn't and shouldn't ever be associated with a better quality of life.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 38,906 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    That is principally (by a long shot) because our planning has been based around car dependency coupled with decades of under-investment in public transport.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭OEP


    With the exception of maybe somewhere like Switzerland, or if you live in a city like London, New York or Paris etc., then I would say life is better with a car. Lots of Swiss people have cars, with probably the best public transport in the world, so there most be something there!

    If you want to go to a beach, mountains, somewhere remote etc.., in nearly every country you need a car. If you're happy staying in cities, only going to "popular" places then you could survive without a car - for me, that would be a boring life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭OEP


    Depends on what you enjoy doing in life, see post above.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 38,906 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Very few people enjoy the lifestyle of commuting long distances every day, missing time with their kids, the extra cost to get to/from work and so on.

    I love driving but living a car dependant lifestyle is not in any way the same thing. Cars have their advantages but overall, they are a burden on society. Building a society that requires ownership of an expensive and unsistainable means to travel does not make for a good society.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭OEP


    Where did I say anything about people enjoying commuting long distances? I was refuting a post that was saying life isn't better with a car - in my opinion it is better. As I said in a previous post, Swiss people have access to the best public transport in the world and lots still have cars - probably because life is better with the car rather than without it.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 38,906 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    So does every Swiss person that owns a car own it because it makes thier life better or because there is a need for it? I assume that you'll have some form of study to back up your claim.

    You are telling us that you prefer having a car - which is fine. You then go and apply this logic to everyone.

    For the record, I have a car and in some ways it makes my life better but in many other ways, it does not. For a start, there is a significant ongoing cost base before I even consider driving it anywhere. However, my car spends most of its time sitting in my driveway. As a petrolhead, I gave serious consideration as to whether or not I should have replaced my last car and what swung it was a need rather than a preference. I would rather not be forced into buyng an expensive and unsustainable item. Despite the comforts, etc, overall it does not make my life better. Going back to my earlier point, Ireland's car based culture and poor public transport infrastructure has meant that most people own a car because they need to, not because they want to.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭OEP


    Did I say that? I don't need a study to back up my opinion, just like you don't have one to back up yours. I do work for a Swiss company and travel there often and get to ask my colleagues these questions however.

    Yes I am telling you that I prefer having a car, and no I am not applying this logic to everyone - you seem to be for some reason.

    My point is for a lot of people, no matter the quality of public transport in the country they live, having a car enhances their life. I would argue particularly those who have access to good public transport because it's a want as opposed to a need.

    You seem to be conflating me saying a car does make life better with saying that everyone wants to drive their car all of the time, to every location.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,683 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    I gave up my car about 6 months ago. I live in a country with very good public transport. Having a car was a good convenience but when i looked at it it didn't enhance my life. It was a large ongoing cost and a hassle to organise maintenance. I'm healthier now as I cycle more as i have no choice, i also found that sitting in traffic really affected my mood.

    One thing that enabled me being able to give up the car is the increase in car sharing apps in my area. Having access to a car when i need it without any of the ongoing costs of actually owning a car makes my life better.

    So id agree that having a car makes life better but that doesnt mean you have to actually own a car.



Advertisement