Anyone who claims that bike-sharing is a European-style transportation innovation has clearly never set foot in Hangzhou, China. The 50,000-bike system in this southern China city of almost 7 million people (about 1.5 million people fewer than New York City) blows all other bike-shares off the map. As Bradley Schroeder of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy said, “I don’t think there is anywhere you can stand in Hangzhou for more than a minute or two where you wouldn’t have a Hangzhou Public Bike go past you.”

Hangzhou’s 2,050 bike-share stations are spaced less than a thousand feet from each other in the city center, and on an average day riders make 240,000 trips using the system. Its popularity and success have set a new standard for bike-sharing in Asia. And the city is far from finished. The Hangzhou Bicycle Company plans to expand the bike-share system to 175,000 bikes by 2020.

Guangzhou is one of the fastest growing cities in the world. The economic hub of China’s southern coast, it has undergone three decades of rapid modernization, and until recently the city’s streets were on a trajectory to get completely overrun by traffic congestion and pollution. But Guangzhou has started to change course. Last year the city made major strides to cut carbon emissions and reclaim space for people, launching new bus rapid transit and public bike sharing systems.

The Guangzhou BRT system opened in February 2010. It now carries 800,000 passengers a day, seamlessly connecting riders to both the metro system and the city’s new bike-share network. For these innovations, Guangzhou won the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy’s 2011 Sustainable Transport Award. Watch this Streetfilm and see how one of the world’s most dynamic cities is, to borrow a phrase from President Obama, “winning the future” on its streets.

An analysis using the Balanced Transportation Analyzer shows how much time individual drivers steal from fellow drivers by choosing to drive into the New York City CBD.

I presented a paper last week at an international forum on traffic congestion in Guangzhou, China. People in that city are beginning to look at congestion pricing, and I was asked to discuss why the Bloomberg toll plan failed politically.

As part of my talk, I described the “social delay costs” from an additional car trip into the center of Manhattan -- literally, the total time that all road users combined spend in traffic because any one of them decided to drive. Afterwards, one of the organizers, a professor of transportation engineering, asked me to present a technical version of my paper to his students at South China University of Technology.

The next day, when I came to the part about social-delay costs, the professor peppered me with questions about my methodology. As I went through the steps -- basically, every trip takes up an incremental amount of limited street space, which lowers speeds, which adds to everyone's travel times -- the professor grew more intrigued. It wasn’t that the idea itself was new, but that if traffic speeds and other baseline data were known, then the delay-impact of one trip could be quantified. And, moreover, that the impact varied enormously depending on the time of day: when there is ample spare road capacity, say, in the middle of the night, an extra trip has little discernible impact, whereas one trip during congested peak times adds several hours to the aggregate time that all other vehicles must spend on the road.

I daresay that for the professor, my elucidation of one trip’s delay costs helped move congestion pricing from the realm of abstraction to something tangible and, perhaps, essential. If a peak trip to the center of New York or some other city can impose one or two hundred minutes worth of delays on others -- and if no driver is ever called on to take that impact into consideration -- then of course the city will be awash in gridlock. No city, not even Guangzhou, despite an emerging 21st century transit infrastructure of Bus Rapid Transit and new subway lines, will be able to forestall the tide of free driving.

The same construct animates the FreshDirect analysis in my Time Thieves paper, except that there the bulk of the delays result from the trucks’ double-parking. The point is the one I made in my Dot Earth post from Guangzhou: Motorists who pay only for their own lost time, but not for the time their trips take from other motorists, have little incentive to make efficient decisions about when to drive and how often. In the case of FreshDirect, this "time theft" averages $15 per delivery. If that cost were added to the delivery price, FreshDirect’s business, I estimate, would drop off by around 20 percent.

Then again, no one in New York City -- myself included -- is proposing congestion tolls even close to the social delay costs of the trips that would be tolled. The Kheel-Komanoff Plan’s $2-$9 variable tolls ($2-$3-$4 on weekends and holidays, $3-$6-$9 on weekdays) are a little under 10 percent of the same trips’ respective $30-$130 congestion costs. Yet, as I told the forum in Guangzhou, even this toll -- modest relative to the trip's full social cost -- would eliminate enough car trips that speeds within the Manhattan CBD would rise more than 15 percent.

Traffic in Delhi and Atlanta. Notice which scene also includes bikes. Photos: Ri Co Fo To and silvrayn via Flickr

As with many other issues, the world will expect America's "talk" -- say, urging China and India not to become auto-centric -- to be accompanied by "walk," at home. That, unfortunately, despite early glimmers of hope, is not happening. The stimulus bill has allocated about 8 billion dollars to transit, compared with 30 billion to highways. This is roughly in keeping with the traditional 80/20 split of federal transportation funds that have been enshrined since the Eisenhower days. If we are to get serious about halting climate-change, this split will also have to change.

Dutta cites Japanese and European models -- "Make cars, buy cars, just don't drive them all the time." -- as potential templates for India and other developing economies, so long as they, too, make adequate investments in public transportation.

The same could be said of the U.S., where the average citizen consumes 25 times as much energy as the average Indian. Dutta suggests America will need to commit to a long-term, "multi-generational" approach to transit development if it wants the kind of results already evident in its most urbanized cities.

The average Texan consumes approximately 500 million BTU per year, about six to seven times that consumed by a resident of New York City or San Francisco. The difference largely results from level of dependence on the automobile. Metropolitan regions where many people travel by public transportation (or by bicycles or on foot) are inherently more carbon-efficient than places that rely almost exclusively on automobiles, which is to say, most of the United States.

In the StreetsWiki entry on Beijing, contributor Meg Saggese looks at the decline of bicycling as the city's dominant mode of transportation, and its prospects for revival:

The hordes of bicycles that ruled Beijing's streets even two decades ago, however, are quickly becoming the stuff of nostalgia. In the 1990s, around half a billion bikes were still in use throughout the country. At the time, families in Beijing chose bicycles for 60 percent of their trips. By 2007, that figure was down to 20 percent. The culprit? Every day, a thousand more cars hit the pavement. As a result, bicycling has become a perilous affair on streets where vehicles predominate and traffic laws are poorly enforced. But only a few of those who have stopped biking can afford a car. The vast majority are forced to dismount by the rising danger in the streets and the worsening air quality of the city. Recently, even prominent leaders within the environmental community and the bike industry have decided to stop riding, citing the increased hazards.[3]

Many observers are tempted to applaud this transformation as the outcome of newly-acquired affluence and to reject the memory of bicycle-packed thoroughfares as a sign of former poverty. But some press accounts tell a different story. Immersed in congestion and gridlock, many residents feel betrayed by the false promise of automobiles. The city center comes to a standstill at rush hour, and the air is dangerous to breathe. Returning to bicycles becomes harder and harder with every new car.

We'll see after the Olympics whether the Communist Party's newfound enthusiasm for clear skies translates into more bike-friendly policies for Beijing.

As always, don't be shy about editing the post. Join the Livable Street Network to contribute.

The much-hyped and much-criticized Tata Nano, a car that will hit the Indian market retailing for a mere 100,000 rupees -- the equivalent of $2,500 -- got a perplexing nod of approval from the Economist newsmagazine last week:

Commuting in India's cities can be both cosy and deadly. Children squeeze snugly between father at the handlebars of a motorcycle, and mother riding side-saddle at the back. This precarious balancing act, says Mr Tata was the "visual target" he had in mind when he first conceived of the need "to create another form of transport." About 1,800 people die on Delhi's roads each year, perhaps one-third of them on two-wheelers. Only 5% die in cars. Tata's project may pose risks for investors, but it promises unaccustomed safety for customers.

While we don't have all the data needed to crunch the assumptions in that road-death statistic (what percentage are traveling in cars to begin with, for instance?), it's hard to imagine that an influx of Tata Nanos is going to magically bring order to the streets of India. A New York Times article discussing chaotic driving habits in the country's capital quotes a police official in New Delhi on his views:

"My concern is not with cars. My concern is with drivers," said Suvashish Choudhary, the deputy commissioner of police. "Every new car will bring new drivers who are not trained for good city driving."

In China, the other huge new market targeted by auto manufacturers, recently released statistics suggest his concern is well-placed. Road deaths there are on the rise, even as they decline in other parts of the world.

Meanwhile, protesters on the site of the factory that will manufacture the new car torched the Nano in effigy (above) in protest over the company's seizure of farmland to make way for the plant: "Until farmers get back their land forcibly acquired for the Tata Motors small car plant at Singur," said one organizer, according to the Economic Times of India, "we will not allow the company to manufacture cars there."

Photo: Strdel/AFP/Getty Images

The Financial Times reports that China's cities will participate in this year's World Car Free Day. These actions have a measureable effect. A recent study found that when Beijing ordered 800,000 cars off the roads for three days last year, local nitrogen oxide air pollution fell by 40 per cent.

More than 100 Chinese cities including Beijing and Shanghai are to take part in the country's first official urban "car-free day", barring automobiles from selected areas and ordering officials to swap their black sedans for public transport.

The decision to join other urban centres around the world in holding "no car" events on September 22 is a reflection of growing concerns about congestion, pollution and global warming that are clouding China's passionate love affair with the automobile.

In a report on the planned car-free day, the official Xinhua news agency said Beijing - where traffic jams are already a daily occurrence - was adding 1,000 new private cars a day, and that transport accounted for 20 per cent of society's total energy consumption. The government news agency said 106 cities had signed formal pledges to take part in the car-free day and an associated week-long promotion of public transport.

"City government leaders must set an example in taking part in this activity by going to work by public transport, walking or riding bicycles," Xinhua said.

While the Chinese economy is booming, the skies above its cities are blackening. China will actually pass the United States as the world's biggest source of greenhouse gases this year.

The World Wildlife Federation started a campaign in China to raise awareness of the issue.  The photo is their way of helping people visualize the problem. On their site www.20to20.org, which is geared toward China, you can take an energy quiz and download 20 tips to reduce CO2 emissions.

Thanks to Newton Streets for finding this one.

SHANGHAI is making efforts to prove that the title of "kingdom of bicycles" still fits the world's most populous country, even in the car age.

The city is renovating a 300-kilometer network of "cycling arteries," covering at least 60 percent of local roads open to cyclists, and plans to separate bicycles from motorbikes and scooters in some busy areas.

The government also plans to follow what London does: Using colorful road material to pave cycling lines and make them more noticeable. The efforts were inspired by a recent government-based survey showing nearly 30 percent of locals use bikes, motorbike or scooters as their regular transport.

In many western cities such as New York, cycling is a form of sport, and most people take subway or bus to work every day. In China, however, many people still follow the tradition of using bikes every day because it's cheap, easy to use and quick.

The Globe and Mail reports:

Last year, China became the world's second-biggest car market, behind the United States. In Beijing alone, there are 1,000 new cars on the streets every day.

As a result, bicycles are increasingly being squeezed to the margins. The streets are choked with traffic and automobile fumes. New roads are sometimes built without any bike lanes. Hundreds of bicyclists are killed in collisions with cars every year.

Pedal power has become so life-threatening that many Chinese have abandoned their bicycles.

The article refers to the foreign bicyclist who was photographed in a confrontation with a motorist and comments:

All of this is provoking a backlash across China. A movement is emerging to promote the rights of bicyclists. Environmentalists are calling for bike lanes to be restored and expanded. Newspapers are crusading on behalf of bicyclists, investigating the scandal of roads without bike lanes.

photo: idogu/Flickr

With perhaps the densest downtown in the world, Hong Kong is meeting its livability goals and addressing its congestion problems by strategically reclaiming streets as public spaces.

Hong Kong, even more than New York, is a city run by and for business interests, and its buildings, streets and public spaces have increasingly reflected this dominance. It is exactly this imbalance that makes it all the more impressive and relevant to New York City that the Hong Kong Transport Department has in the last few years seized the initiative to make its congested streets more pedestrian-friendly.

A high vehicle demand street in the Causeway Bay district of Hong Kong has not only been narrowed with various traffic calming measures, but it is completely closed to cars evenings and weekends.

In each of ten central districts the city has chosen to do a combination of traffic calming and permanent and part-time street closings. For instance, in the Causeway Bay area, the city has transformed a district of isolated, internally focused shopping centers into a unified shopping district with the streets as the main focus.

Green signifies full-time pedestrian streets, blue part-time and Yellow traffic calmed.

One of the commercial shopping centers is even called Times Square, highlighting the point that similar improvements could easily be made in New York City's Times Square. Closing streets in Times Square at specific times, like when the theaters get out, would be a boon for the district on many levels.

A temporary street closing is on a "Trial Run" near Hong Kong's Times Square shopping center.

Hong Kong thinks of itself as Asia's capital city, just as New York City sees itself as the primary city of North America. In recent years Hong Kong's centrality has been threatened by increasing congestion and diminishing quality of life. Businesses and workforce talent have been threatening to move to the Chinese mainland and other Asian cites like Singapore, Taipei, Shanghai and Tokyo. In response to that threat, Hong Kong is choosing to squeeze the private automobile out of its downtown.

A city that once had almost no space for walking and where tourists, business travelers and residents dreaded its transportation system now has speedy and efficient mass transit and nice public spaces.


Double-decker trolleys and buses carry the bulk of trips on Hong Kong's streets.

The streets still carry an extraordinary amount of capacity but it mostly consists of buses, trolleys and taxis. Hong Kong also improves on our Metro Cards with its Octopus Cards that do not even need to be swiped, but can just be briefly held over the turnstile. Like the Metro Card, the Octopus Cards have boosted ridership, efficiency and pride in the city's transport system.

Hong Kong is not a city that New York has historically looked to for inspriation, but this global commerce capital is creatively addressing many of the same challenges that New York City currently faces. I personally would not be an advocate of permanently pedestrianizing all that many streets in New York but closing streets temporarily in shopping areas during lunch hours, evenings and weekends would certainly work in Soho, Chinatown and a number of other selected spots. Why aren't we trying it out?

Traffic Calming and removing parking in many of the areas where we are trying to encourage walking, shopping, and better quality of life would also make a ton of sense.  I'm sure the folks in Hong Kong said it could never be done. Well, they're doing it. And it's working.  

Here are some before and after images from Hong Kong:

The Guardian reports that China is suddenly rediscovering the joys of urban bicycle transportation after a decade of motor mania:

The construction ministry announced on Thursday that any bike lanes that have been narrowed or destroyed to make way for cars in recent years must be returned to their original glory. This followed orders on Tuesday that all civil servants should cycle to work or take public transport to reduce the smog that chokes most city streets and urban lungs.

(Via Walk and Bike for Life. Post title courtesy of Ben Fried)