Should cities not set up for public transportation do so for global warming's sake?

Question

There are many cities and towns that offer no public transportaion choice, thus there are more personal vehicles in use. Should these places take an environmental innitiative to change this, or should anything be done at all?

Answer 1

I live in a city that holds about 10 million people and more because of immigration. We have a current issue in the city due to public transportation. The city buses are out of date and breaking down a lot. There has been much debate as to when new buses will be made but so far it looks like public transportation is headed downhill due to money. Our taxis are also lingering because most people only travel to the airport by taxi. Those that are taxi drivers are quiting their jobs because there isn't enough cab fares to keep them from going bankrupt. We also have a trolley system that usually travels around and through the Downtown area, but those are also becoming out of date so there's that issue as well.

I forsee El Paso, Texas becoming #1 with no public transportation within 3 years if things keep heading downhill.

Oh, by the way my avatar likes what your avator has done with her hair. Unless I see a real picture of you and get to know you a bit more, I don't see us going anywhere. This is in reference to the question you answered: Has anyone noticed that Yahoo is starting to block certain words?

Answer 2

It might depend on the city. Unfortunately, some cities may not be well suited to public transportation due to social, economic, or geographic reasons.

Unfortunately, I think social and economic reasons are the main factors. It doesn't make sense to operate a public transportation system that no one will use. In modern society the independence and flexibility of personal transportation is highly regarded as a necessary way of life. To some extent is is a symbol and reflection of economic success.

As gas prices continue to rise some people are more likely to be forced for find cheaper alternatives, but not enough. The reason for that is that we are more likely to need to find employment in places that might not be served well by public transportation. I work 12 miles away from my home, which is about the closest that I've been able to find employment. This is in another town, so I can't take the local public buses to it. Besides that the buses tend to provide service to areas that are less likely to have the use of an automobile.

In larger cities like New York with the high population density, public transportation is a must. You can shop, work, dine-out, and find entertainment all within a short walk or bus ride. Again, where I live, shopping centers are 8 miles away, along with many restaurants.

I've often wondered about how or what could impact our society to reconsider our lifestyle. Perhaps the demise of the smaller neighborhood stores and communities in favor of mega stores and regional shopping areas is one of the symptoms or one of the causes. Perhaps it is our obsession as consumers to want to buy more for less. How do you change an entire society under these circumstances? Simply making public transportation available and affordable won't do it. Sad but true.

Answer 3

I concur. I believe that every major city and some midsize communities should have a public transporation system in place and that it work efficiently. For example, I live in Las Vegas. I use the bus although it is not reliable. I understand due to the growing population of this city that it cannot be perfect. However, even a modicum of relaibility would be nice as it is virtually impossible navigate to work in ths city unless one works at one of the major arteries. I have also seen transporation in small commnuities. A town of 6000 had a system where you paid a dollar for a ride and they took you the specific address you wanted. We'd all be better off it there was reliable, public transportation. It might shave off some of damage caused by nature and humans. I believe legislation should be in to place get communities to stand up and use that taxpayer dollar to benefit the Earth. Without a good Earth, we will just die. That's is a fact.

Answer 4

There are actually a number of reasons to encourage use of public transportation: reducing the effect on global warming, ensuring the movement of people, improving air quality, reducing the instance of traffic fatalities, reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, reducing the strategic importance of the Middle East to the United States, and enabling preservation of wilderness areas that might otherwise be spoiled by oil/gas extraction.

Public transportation is most effective in places with large populations; some towns and cities don't really have the numbers needed to support public transportation.

Individuals will choose private transportation over public transportation unless there is a clear benefit favoring public transportation, including one or more of the following:

Money - An increase in fuel prices, fuel taxes, or parking costs relative to the cost of public transportation.

Time - An increase in private vehicle travel time relative to the travel time of public transportation

Convenience/Accessibility - An increase in frequency, predictability, and accessibility of public transportation options.

Stress/Hassle - travelers prefer to keep moving; if buses and trains breeze by stop and go traffic in dedicated bus lanes and rail lines, more people will choose public transportation.

Planners and policy-makers can take steps to create an environment that favors public transportation rather than one that favors private transportation. Cities can implement more mixed-use zoning to allow developers to create spaces where people can live and work within walking distance, on the same block, or even in the same building. Cities can also reduce or eliminate parking requirements for new construction and rehabilitation in favor of city operated paid lots. States and the federal government can combine funding for highways, streets, and transportation to allow local jurisdictions to make choices based on their local needs for transit vs. more roads and highways. States, local jurisdictions, and companies can implement programs in which employees who carpool, bike, or walk to work actually get the money that would have been spent on employee parking.

With this combination of public and private initiatives, the country will beocme more livable and walkable, and reap all the benefits of alternative transportation I described earlier.

Answer 5

Yes, it's the most efficient use of energy to transport masses over the individual means of transportation (except for bicycles).

The cities should adopt an environmental initiative, but it may be restricted by lack of financial support. $4 a gallon for gasoline would definitely force city governments to seriously consider constructing public transportation. It would then be the absolute will of the people.

Answer 6

Unlike Europeans, We Americans would rather independently fuel our cars at any price than pay the taxes necessary to sustain large scale adoption of public transportation.

Most public transportation in the United States can not raise enough revenue thru the fare box to defray the operating expense not-to-speak of the capitol expense of constructing the system.

Answer 7

I agree with this. Places should take the initiative, and places that are set up, people should use it. I live in Las Vegas and every day no matter how hot it is, people wait for the bus. MP3 players and general conversation make it bearable.

When I lived in Salt Lake, my employer reimbursed me for taking the train to work. I left my car in the driveway and only used it when I went to the grocery store. I saved so much $$$

Answer 8

Cities should make a RELIABLE AND EFFECTIVE public transportation system that caters to both working people and those who simply do not have vehicles like many disabled, poor, and elderly people. If it is reliable and accessible, it should get more people out of their cars.

Answer 9

Absolutely. There might be some small rural towns where it wouldn't have much impact, but every larger city should follow the example set by San Francisco, where they have zero-emission electric buses on every major street.

Answer 10

I would like to say yes, but I think it may be too late to effect any real change on the environment. We could really use better mass trasit where I live, but the conservative SUV town that it is keeps voting it down. (Which really keeps us from being metropolitian too!) Making it is one thing, convincing people to ride is another. Unfortunately I think people are too lazy to change their habits. I used to be more optomistic, but the past 6 years have been pretty bleak. I would love to see something like your question happen:)