This is not an argument not to invest in public transit. In contrast, I am *VERY* much a supporter of major investments in mass transit and would like to see a second Transbay Tube on the ballot in the near future. I am concerned that these costs erode public trust and
-
Show this thread
-
make voters less willing to support necessary long-term infrastructural investments, which in turn cede more of our systems to private solutions, which can roll out more rapidly but are insufficient in the long run.
4 replies 6 retweets 82 likesShow this thread -
Self-driving cars will not address the fact that we have a limited number of bridges in the Bay Area, which have limited capacity and would face an induced demand problem should AVs reduce fares/cost.
9 replies 12 retweets 110 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
But AVs would also increase capacity. There’d be a new equilibrium point at higher volumes. Dynamic real-time road pricing adds another variable, as does having more than one person per vehicle
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @benedictevans
increase capacity & induce demand. Fixed-line, high capacity mass transit is complementary to AVs & ridesharing, not a substitution. This complementary effect is even more pronounced for large public transit agencies w/ rail. http://individual.utoronto.ca/jhall/documents/Uber_and_Public_Transit.pdf …
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
Trains have induced demand. All and any infrastructure has induced demand - that’s not ipso facto an argument against it. And on a multi-decade timeline a lot of possibilities for AV blur the difference between buses and cars.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @benedictevans
Train rides are not free. Road capacity is mostly free in this country and US/CA cities have to date largely been unable to generate political will for congestion pricing or toll roads.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
-
Replying to @benedictevans @kimmaicutler
I didn’t even own a car until I moved here - I prefer transit. But autonomy will transtorm road capacity, both because they drive differently (no traffic waves etc) and because they could make many more vehicles multiple-occupancy.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @benedictevans @kimmaicutler
And yes, induced demand applies to AVs, but also applies to trains - and indeed to home-building ;)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
If you think induced demand meaningfully applies to housing (which many Bay Area residents spend 50% of their income on unlike free roads & comparatively cheap gas costs globally), then maybe we should destroy lots of housing and see if nothing happens to prices.
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler @benedictevans
Already happened in Santa Rosa. Rent increased in surrounding counties.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.