Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
economist Robert Samuelson that “cars expand to fill
available concrete.”
T rade-Offs
Bicycles
Solutions: Reducing Automobile Use
Although it would be politically unpopular, we could
reduce our reliance on automobiles by making users
pay for their harmful effects.
Some environmentalists and economists suggest that
one way to reduce the harmful effects of automobile
use is to make drivers pay directly for most of the
damage they cause—a
user-pays
approach based on
honest environmental accounting. One way to phase
in such full-cost pricing would be to charge a tax on
gasoline that covers the estimated harmful costs of dri-
ving. Such taxes would amount to about $1.30-2.10
per liter ($5-8 per gallon) of gasoline in the United
States and would spur the use of more energy-efficient
motor vehicles and mass transit.
Proponents of this approach urge governments to
use gasoline tax revenues to help finance mass transit
systems, bike paths, and sidewalks. The government
could reduce taxes on income and wages to offset the
increased taxes on gasoline, thereby making this
tax
shift
more politically acceptable. Another way to re-
duce automobile use and congestion would be to raise
parking fees and charge tolls on roads, tunnels, and
bridges—especially during peak traffic times.
Most analysts doubt that these approaches would
be feasible in the United States, for three reasons.
First,
they face strong political opposition from two groups:
the public, which is largely unaware of the huge
hidden costs they are already paying, and powerful
transportation-related industries such as oil and tire
companies, road builders, carmakers, and many real
estate developers. However, taxpayers might accept
sharp increases in gasoline taxes if the extra costs were
offset by decreases in taxes on wages and income.
Second,
fast, efficient, reliable, and affordable mass
transit options and bike paths are not widely available
in most of the United States. In addition, the dispersed
nature of most U.S. urban areas makes people depen-
dent on cars.
Third,
most people who can afford cars are virtu-
ally addicted to them.
Advantages
Disadvantages
Affordable
Little protection
in an accident
Produce no
pollution
Do not protect
riders from
bad weather
Quiet
Require little
parking space
Not practical for
trips longer than
8 kilometers
(5 miles)
Easy to
maneuver in
traffic
Take few
resources to
make
Can be tiring
(except for electric
bicycles)
Very energy
efficient
Lack of secure bike
parking
Provide exercise
Figure 7-21
Trade-offs:
advantages and disadvantages of
bicycles. Critical thinking: pick the single advantage and dis-
advantage that you think are the most important.
T rade-Offs
Mass Transit Rail
Advantages
Disadvantages
More energy
efficient than cars
Expensive to build
and maintain
Produces less air
pollution than cars
Cost-effective only
along a densely
populated narrow
corridor
Requires less
land than roads
and parking areas
for cars
Commits riders to
transportation
schedules
Causes fewer
injuries and
deaths than cars
Solutions: Alternatives to the Car
Alternatives include walking, bicycling, and taking
subways, trolleys, trains, and buses.
Several alternatives to motor vehicles exist, each with
its own advantages and disadvantages. Examples in-
clude
bicycles
(Figure 7-21),
mass transit rail systems in
urban areas
(Figure 7-22),
bus systems in urban areas
(Figure 7-23, p. 150), and
rapid rail systems between
urban areas
(Figure 7-24, p. 150).
Can cause noise
and vibration for
nearby residents
Reduces car
congestion in cities
Figure 7-22
Trade-offs:
advantages and disadvantages of
mass transit rail systems in urban areas. Critical thinking: pick
the single advantage and disadvantage that you think are the
most important.
