Future Prospect for Sustainable Urban Transportation in India

8/19/2019 Future Prospect for Sustainable Urban Transportation in India

1/54

CURRENT CHALLENGES AND FUTUREPROSPECTS FOR SUSTAINABLEURBAN TRANSPORTATION IN INDIA

Kumares C. Sinha

Purdue University

First Indo-US Symposium on Advances in Mass Transit and Travel Behaviour Research (MTTBR-08)

12-15 February 2008, India


2/54

Challenges in Urban Transportation Increasing demand for passenger and goods

movement with limited resources

Congestion in Indian cities


3/54

Challenges in Urban Transportation

Need for sustainability: Safety

Environmental quality Social equity

Air pollution in Indian cities


4/54

Challenges in Urban Transportation Level of economic

growth, urbanization and

other economicconditions

Common thrust: How tocope with motorization

Congestion in Atlanta, GA


5/54

History Repeats Itself Similarity exists in trends:

Rising personal income

Growth in private vehicleownership and use

Low density urban sprawl

Decline of publictransportation

The Elephant and TheDragon: The Rise of India

and China


6/54

History Repeats Itself

Walking

Bicycling and MotorScooters


7/54

History Repeats Itself

Bus Rail

Auto-rickshaw Auto


8/54

The Emergence of Affordable

Vehicle In 1908, Ford Model T:

Response toconsumer’s desire for

personal travel avoidingslow and restrictive

service of streetcars

Henry Ford, founder of FordMotor Company standing beside

the Ford Model T


9/54


Vehicle In 2008, Tata Nano:

Fulfilling aspirations ofmiddle class in Indiathat finds travel byexcessively

overcrowded publictransportation andmotor scooters unsafeand exhausting


10/54

Overcrowded Public Transportation


11/54

Congested Highways


12/54


Vehicle Possible impacts:

Travel behavior andpattern

Residential locationchoice

Environmentalsustainability


13/54

Indicators of Urban

Transportation Sustainability Decennial data from 46 cities in the US, Australia, Canada, Western Europe and

Asia 1960-1990 (Kenworthy and Laube) Indicators of transport efficiency in 37

global cities 1990 (The World Bank)


14/54

Pearson Correlations of Population Density

Variables 1960 1970 1980 1990 1960-1990Transit boardings /capita 0.76 0.66 0.66 0.69 0.67

Total energy consumption /capita -0.51 -0.54 -0.64 -0.69 -0.58

Car kms of travel/ car -0.43 -0.64 -0.64 -0.38 -0.51

Cars/1000 people -0.78 -0.79 -0.80 -0.82 -0.71

Parking spaces in CBD/1000

employees

-0.55 -0.62 -0.47 -0.49 -0.46

Road length/ capita -0.70 -0.60 -0.65 -0.67 -0.61

Energy consumption by private

modes /capita

-0.63 -0.56 -0.65 -0.69 -0.60

Car kms of travel/ capita -0.76 -0.70 -0.72 -0.71 -0.64

Boardings per transit km of travel 0.76 0.77 0.43 0.45 0.48


15/54

Population density & Car and Transit Demand


16/54

Transit & Transportation Energy Demand

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Transit Boardings (per capita/year)

T r a n s

p o r t a

t i o n

E n e r g y

C o n s u m p

t i o n

( M J / c a p

i t a

/ y e a r )

y = -17130 ln x + 122749

r2 = 0.731


17/54

T it M d Sh & T t ti


18/54

Transit Mode Share & Transportation

Emissions

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

0 20 40 60 80 100

JTW by Transit (%)

C O

2 e m i s s i o n s ( k g / c a p i t a / y e a r )

y = -1291.8 ln x + 6505.6

r2 = 0.6367


19/54

Population Density & Transit Cost Recovery

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

0 100 200 300 400

Urban Population Density (persons/hectare)

T r a n s i t C o s t R e c o v

e r y F a c t o r

y = 0.2696 ln x – 0.3511

r

2

= 0.6219


20/54

Economy, Population andUrbanization


21/54

2006 GNP/capita for USA ($44,970) is55 times larger than India ($820)

26% of Indian population lives inpoverty

Poor cannot even afford basic public

transportation


22/54

Worldwide Trends

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year

I n d e x

( 1 9 5 0 = 1

0 0 )

Automobile Use

Motor vehiclefleet

Urbanpopulation

Totalpopulation


23/54

Urban population density in India(15,700 persons/sq. km) is about 14

times higher than in the USA (1,150persons/sq. km)


24/54

Megacities and Cities in India

Mumbai (mega)Pop: 16.4 mDensity:29,650 person/m2 Kolkata (mega)

Pop: 13.2 m

Density:23,900 person/m2

Delhi (mega)

Pop: 12.8 mDensity:11,050 person/m2

ChennaiPop: 6.0 mDensity:

14,350 person/m2

BangalorePop: 5.4 mDensity:10,010 person/m2


25/54

Megacities and Cities in USA

New York (mega)

Pop: 18.8 mDensity:2,050 person/m2

San FranciscoPop: 3.23 mDensity:2,350 person/m2

Los AngelesPop: 11.8 mDensity:2,750 person/m2


26/54

Rapid pace of urbanization is aworldwide phenomenon

In USA, sprawl was initiated primarilyby choice

In India, it is mostly by necessity


27/54

Travel Characteristics


28/54

Modal Split in Indian Cities

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

M u m b

a i

K o l k a

t a D e

h l i

C h e n

n a i

B a n g

a l o r e

H y d e

r a b a d

A h m e

d a b a

d P u

n e

K a n p

u r

L u c k

n o w

M o

d a l s p

l i t

Public transport

Privatemotorized

Non-automatedtransport

Walk


29/54

Modal Split in US Cities

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%100%

N e w Y o

r k

C h i c a

g o

W a s h

i n g t o n

D . C

.

S a n F

r a n c i s

c o

P

h i l a d

e l p h i a

L

o s A n g

e l e s

M o d a l s

p l i t

Public transport

Privatemotorized

Non-automatedtransport

Walk


30/54

Annual rate of travel demand growth in majorcities ranges 2.2-9.5%

The use of public transportation is high (30-78%)

Predominant mode is walking and non-motorizedtransportation

The percentage of trips by private vehicles isrelatively small, 10-20%, but rapidly increasing

Bus represents 90% of public transportation use


31/54

Except in New York and a few large cities, theproblem of public transportation in USA is the

lack of demand In India, it is the lack of supply

Indian cities are on the cusp of a major shift intravel behavior

The experience of cities in USA since the 1950sis about to be repeated in Indian cities

Travel Characteristics


32/54


33/54

Traffic Congestion in Indian, Chinese

and US Cities

City Average speed during peakcongestion in downtown

Mumbai, India 38 km/h (1963)

15-20 km/h (1993)

Delhi, India 20-27 km/h (1997)15 km/h (2002)

Chennai, India 13 km/h (2003)

Kolkata, India 7-15 km/h (2003)

Beijing, China 45 km/h (1994)

5-12 km/h (2003)

Shanghai, China 9-18 km/h (2003)

Los Angeles, USA* 8-32 km/h (2005)


34/54

Congestion is endemic aroundthe world

Most acute and aggravating inIndian cities: Limited road space

Poor road design

Lack of maintenance Mixed traffic

Traffic jams last many hoursand spread over a large area


35/54

Traffic Safety


36/54

Road fatality rate per million people has almosttripled in India over the past few decades: Over 100,000 traffic fatalities in 2003

Fatality rate per 100,000 motor vehicles in 2003(108.1) was five times that in the USA

Four largest cities accounts for 5.4 percent of all roadfatalities

56% involves pedestrians and bicyclists 20% involves scooters

Urban poor is disproportionately affected

Possible sustainability in question


37/54

Environment and Energy


38/54

Air, noise and waterpollution

Old and poorly maintainedvehicles and infrastructures

Indian cities are some of themost polluted

SPM concentrations aremany times higher thanChina or in the USA, 3 to 4times higher than the WHO

standards

Smog in China

Environmental Pollution in India China

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/05/08/environment/source/4.htm


39/54

Environmental Pollution in India, China

and USA

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

B e i j i n

g

S h a n

g h a i

S h e

n y a n

g

M u m b

a i

K o l k a

t a D e

l h i

L o s A n g

e l e s

S a n F r a n

c i s c o

N e w Y o

r k P o

l l u

t a n

t c o

n c e n

t r a

t i o n

( m i c r o

g r a m

p e r c u

b i c m

e t e r )

Suspended ParticulateMatters

SOx

NOx


40/54

Vehicular traffic renders some cities noisiest inthe world

Long-term hearing loss and damage to nervoussystem


41/54

Noise Pollution in India, China and USA

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Beijing Shanghai Shenyang Mumbai Kolkata Delhi

N o i s e L e v e l ( d B )

USEPA Limit of 67 dBfor Residential Areas


42/54

Greenhouse Gases

150 million cars by 2020

Even with 50 mpg, Nano

will add an enormousamount of CO2 to thecurrent emission of 220million tons per year

CO2 and Global Warming


43/54

Future Prospects


44/54


45/54

Pricing

Pricing mechanisms do notconsider the full cost ofautomotive transportation

Road safety and environmentalimpacts should be internalizedand translated into user chargesto slow down demand for roadtraffic

Additional revenues collected canbe used: Improving road safety

Developing vehicle and fueltechnologies

Improving public transportation

Electronic Road Pricing inSingapore


46/54

Land Use Management

Minimize dispersal and travel

Long-range land use-transportation

policies Smart growth in central cities and suburbs

Examples of China

With low car ownerships, opportunity isstill there


47/54

Public Transportation

Make Public Transportation an Attractive Alternative

Increase level of service and quality of public

transportation Seamless travel through integration of services

Market segmentation

New suburban rail and bus rapid transit systems

Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) Use of cleaner technologies

Infrastructure for non-motorized transportation


48/54

Alternative Fuels

Explore alternativefuel options:

Plug-in hybrids Cellulosic bio-fuels

Hydrogen fuel cell

Promote R&D in thedevelopment ofalternative fuel


49/54

Research, Education andTraining

Research centers of excellence atcompetitively-selected universities:

Cooperation with public and private sectors Collaboration with domestic and foreign universities

Funded as part of the national transportationdevelopment program

Multidisciplinary Integration with academic programs

Continuing education and training


50/54

Long Term Vision for SustainableUrbanization

Three-way relationship:

Land use

Internet

Transportation


51/54

Long Term Vision for SustainableUrbanization

Harness the potential ofemerginginformation/communication

technologies Tele-commuting, tele-schooling,

tele-shopping and tele-entertaining

Effects on trip rates, distancesand distributions of various trippurposes


52/54


53/54

Conclusions

Process of motorization and attendant sprawl with declinein public transportation is a worldwide phenomenon

Need for sustainability and countermeasures to

motorization

Reconfiguration of urban communities

Role of technology

Cities as a collection of livable communities

Travel and residential location choice

Understanding of travel behavior

Research, education and training

Need for political will


54/54

End of Presentation

Documents

Future Prospect for Sustainable Urban Transportation in India