Carbusters » Feature Article

Undriver Licensing™: Creating Enthusiasm about Not Driving

carbusters — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 18:08:26 +0000

Undriver License

“Want to get your Undriver License™?” This question usually elicits either a surprised “huh?” or a broad smile from visitors to the Undriver Licensing Station™. Wherever it goes – festivals, community events, schools, employee transportation fairs – the Undriving™ program playfully nudges people of all ages to reconsider their transportation choices and get creative about getting around.

Since 2007, the Seattle, WA-based nonprofit, Undriving.org, has issued over 8,000 Undriver Licenses™ to people who make a pledge to reduce car use in the coming month. This positive, empowering approach leads directly to behavior change: 96 percent of Undrivers surveyed report following through on their pledges, and 72 percent report establishing a new transportation habit as a result of the program.

We can all be Undrivers, whether we drive every day or don’t own a car. A committed cyclist might pledge to talk to five people about the joys of bike commuting, while someone who needs to commute by car might pledge to try walking to the grocery store, or not driving on Sundays. The scale of the pledge is less important than the process of experimenting and seeing what we discover.

That the pledge is self-determined, and that it’s framed as an experiment, are both key to the program’s success. At the Station we might offer examples of what other Undrivers have pledged as thought-starters – but each Undriver comes up with his or her own pledge. And as an experiment, we’re trying something new, but we don’t know what the outcome will be.

One Undriver pledged to try bussing to work three days a week, even though this would involve two transfers and 1-1/2 hours each way. After a couple of tries, she decided this was just not practical, so she reverted to driving. Failed experiment? Well, back behind the wheel, she found herself feeling so guilty now that her awareness had been increased, that she decided to change jobs so she could work closer to home. Now she walks to work!

We’ve noticed that one change often leads to another. After discovering that bussing or biking to work is actually practical and desirable, many Undrivers start using that mode for other trips, too. One family pledged to leave their second car parked for a month, and try using bikes, walking, carpools, and transit more often. They discovered they really didn’t need the second car – so they sold it!

Undrivers regularly discover multiple benefits from Undriving, some of them unexpected. One woman pledged to try taking the bus to work. First she noticed that her stress level and expenses both went down considerably. Then, she found a wonderful community at her bus stop every morning! She now loves leaving her car at home when she goes downtown. Another Undriver pledged to try commuting by bicycle. He found that he arrived at work with more energy, and he lost weight, too. We might be motivated to get licensed by a concern about climate change, and discover how Undriving benefits our health, community connectedness, stress level, and wallets, as well as the planet.

Undriving.org in Portland, USA

Undriving sparks people’s curiosity, and helps them to tap into their creativity and resourcefulness (which all of us have in spades, whether we realize it or not). I am continually amazed by what Undrivers come up with. One car-free bicycling advocate pledged to teach an adult how to ride a bike – what a gift! Another woman’s pledge was to “get directions before I leave.” Ha! Think of all the miles she won’t drive as a result. Another creative pledge: “Freeze my car keys in a block of ice!”

One Undriver, Jon Ramer, described the Undriving pledging process as “Un-learning.” He thought about what he could do to drive less, and realized that every time he left his house, he got in his car. So his pledge was – to take his car key off his key ring! For the month, when he got to the door, he had to stop and think: do I really need my car for this trip? This simple pledge led to a whole new lifestyle. He and his wife now walk and bike much more than they did before – since he’s broken his own thought-pattern. (Watch this video of Jon’s story)

The license itself is a great reminder to Undrivers to get creative about getting around on a daily basis. It’s also a great a conversation-starter – a positive, non-confrontational way to talk with others about their car use. Undrivers are putting their licenses on commuter bags, backpacks, and Facebook pages, which opens them up to conversations with friends and strangers who ask, What’s that? One Undriver said, “I feel like you gave us permission to raise the issue with others.” Yes!

We’ve created quite a buzz since our launch in 2007, garnering press coverage on the radio, TV, in the New York Times, and even in Spain. We’ve also fielded inquiries from organizations around the country (and beyond), about utilizing the Undriver Licensing program.

We are now in the process of putting this proven program into the hands of organizations that have a mandate to reduce car use and could use a creative way to engage with their communities. Our first Official Licensing Partner, Intercity Transit in Thurston County, Washington, is now successfully utilizing Undriver Licensing™ in their work with employers around Commute Trip Reduction, in four school districts alongside their Safe Routes to School programming, and at public events to increase transit ridership. (If you know of an organization that would be interested in Undriver Licensing™, have them contact us.)

My own personal journey with Undriving began a couple years before Undriving was born. Seven years ago, I had a 1987 Honda Civic hatchback, that I envisioned going for another 100,000 miles. Until – I had a car accident, that was my fault. Fortunately, no one was seriously injured, but my 17-year-old car was totaled. First I decided not to repair it, and then, not to replace it. But I was not going car-free from a place of empowered choice. Rather, I was doing this out of fear, of my own capacity to be so inattentive. And, I feared that my life as I knew it, was over: I would not be able to do many of the things I loved to do, that I got to by car.

Well, you can imagine how this played out. Of course, it turned out that many destinations were walkable, others were bikeable, and transit filled in most of the other gaps, very well, thank you. Some activities required creative solutions: collaborating with others, catching a ride, or staying overnight with friends when I couldn’t make things work otherwise. And all this led to more connectedness – with people I wouldn’t otherwise have met, with nature, and with the world around me. I also am saving considerable money not owning a car. Buying new tires, replacing the alternator, having insurance – these were all “necessary expenses” with car ownership. It had never occurred to me that the car ownership itself was optional.

These are the kinds of discoveries that Undrivers are making every day through the Undriver Licensing process – but from a much more empowered place than I did.

I see Undriving as an ongoing process – an awareness practice, even. A couple years ago, a friend was coming over to pick me up, so we could go to the movies. All of a sudden it hit me: the miles she was driving, between her house and mine, were my miles! If I was going to take responsibility for my own transportation, I needed to go to her house and we could go from there. Or, better yet, I could invite her to bike or bus with me.

I’d never been aware of this before. And until we are aware of something, we can’t take action on it. This is part of what I love about Undriving. It opens us up to new possibilities, broadens our awareness, and invites us to question our assumptions. Is the bus too inconvenient? Is riding in the rain really that miserable? One woman, a frequent bike commuter, made a pledge to get good raingear. A month later, she reported: “I got over the idea that riding in the rain was too uncomfortable. Now I ride rain or shine!”

Our vision is of a world where more and more people are awake to our own curiosity and resourcefulness – experimenting with reducing our own car use, as well as supporting others to take their own next step, wherever we each are on the Undriving spectrum.

What’s your Undriving pledge? Visit Undriving.org and get licensed to Undrive!

— by Julia Field

Julia Field is Founder/Program Director of Undriving.org. After a car accident seven years ago left her car-free, Julia discovered her calling in Undriving.

For more information on Undriving, visit http://www.undriving.org, “Like” us on Facebook –

http://www.facebook.com/Undriving, and follow us on Twitter – http://www.twitter.com/

Undriving.

The Environmental Impact of Cars and Trains

carbusters — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:52:19 +0000

Vehicles impact the environment in numerous ways from their production, use and disposal. Below are some of the ways vehicles harm us and our environment.

Production

Manufacturing vehicles is harmful to the environment. The average U.S. vehicle (in 2007) required 1129 gallons of gasoline to produce. That’s equivalent to two years worth of gas bought by the typical driver and that’s before the car has ever hit the road. The hybrid Prius is minimally better, requiring 1065 gallons of gas to produce.

It isn’t just the gasoline consumed during vehicle production that pollutes the environment. According to Greenercars.org,

Environmental impacts start with mineral extraction and the production of the raw materials that go into the parts of a car. For example, iron ore gets turned into steel, which now accounts for most of the mass in vehicles…. The lead and acid in batteries are poisonous and dangerous…. Some degree of pollution is associated with all of these components, much of it due to the energy consumption, air pollution, and releases of toxic substances that occur when automobiles are manufactured and distributed.

Use

The average U.S. passenger vehicle uses 575 gallons of gasoline yearly. Hybrids, such as the Prius, guzzle about 255 gallons of gas a year.

Gasoline-powered cars emit the following greenhouse gases and pollutants:

- Benzene.

- Carbon dioxide (CO2).

- Carbon monoxide.

- Nitrogen dioxide.

- Polycyclic hydrocarbons.

- Sulphur dioxide.

About a third of all U.S. energy-related greenhouse gas emissions comes from transportation, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, with carbon dioxide making up 63 percent of the greenhouse effect. For every burned gallon of gasoline, almost 9*10-3 metric tons of carbon dioxide are produced. The average American household produces 11.7 tons of transportation related carbon dioxide every year, according to a 2003 U.S. Energy Information Administration report.

After Life

Even after cars’ lives end, their materials continue to pollute our environment. Lead, nickel, and other hazardous materials are in car parts and batteries, leaking into the ground as they sit in junkyards and landfills.

The Environmental Toll of Our Deficient Train System

Train systems are not something the U.S. is known for, unlike Asia and Europe. As a matter of fact, it isn’t an exaggeration to say that our train travel options are non-existent. When we do have the option to travel by train, we find it is either more expensive or comparable in price to travel by plane or car, which in many cases involves half, if not less, of the travel time of a train. European and Asian countries do not necessarily see price similarities or huge differences in travel time (unless the distance is exorbitant). The reason for these price and travel time discrepancies is mostly due to the fact that there aren’t many routes or a high usage of trains in the U.S.

While we all harp on the economics of it, we seem to forget the toll that plane and vehicle travel has on the environment when compared to train travel, which holds more passengers and emits substantially less CO2. It is difficult to know how plane versus train travel differs in the United States because of the lack of a sufficient train system. However, here is information comparing the two types of travel to routes from London to popular destinations in Europe from seat61.com.

CO2 Emissions Per Passenger
	By Plane		By Train
Route	Roundtrip Time	Roundtrip CO2 Emissions	Roundtrip Time	Roundtrip CO2 Emissions	Train Compared to Plane CO2 Emissions
London to Paris	3.5 hours	244 Kg	2.75 hours	22 Kg	91 % less
London to Edinburgh	3.5 hours	193 Kg	2.5 hours	24 Kg	87 % less
London to Nice	4 hours	250 Kg	8 hours	36 Kg	85 % less
London to Barcelona	4.5 hours	277 Kg	Overnight	40 Kg	85 % less
London to Amsterdam	4 hours	136 Kg	Overnight	27.2 Kg	80 % less
London to Dublin	4 hours	174.8 Kg	8 hours	46.8 Kg	73 % less
London to Tangier	5 hours	435 Kg	48 hours	63 Kg	85 % less

An article on planetgreen.discovery.com purported that the CO2 emissions of traveling alone by car over long distances were almost as bad as airplane emissions.

As is very clear, train travel produces considerably less CO2 in the environment than both passenger vehicle and plane travel; and seeing how CO2 contributes to the greenhouse effect by over 60 percent, this means something significant to the way our travels affect the environment.

The U.S. currently has plans to expand our train systems. However, to realize the environmental benefits of train travel in the U.S. will involve massive expansion; it isn’t an overstatement to say that to fully realize these benefits will take to decades, if not our lifetime. Until then, the U.S. will continue to use vehicles and planes as our primary means of travel.

Andy Singer - http://www.andysinger.com/

—

Gina Williams is a guest post and article writer bringing to us information on the environmental impact of vehicles and an insufficient train system in the U.S.

Gina also writes about various topics like “electric cars versus gas powered cars“.

Velocypedia Part III

carbusters — Sun, 24 Jul 2011 13:23:21 +0000

Velocypedia: A contemporary art exhibition about bicycle passion and sustainable transportation

International exhibition Velocypedia introduces works of artists, designers, craftspeople, and fans of cycling – everything inspired by the most known mode of transport powered by human force – the bicycle. The bicycle plays a main role as a symbol of sustainable mobility, providing unlimited pleasure and unusual functions.

The aim of the exhibition is to promote everyday cycling and at the same time to highlight the problems of transportation in big cities in 21^st century. Other important topics of the exhibition include criticism of the negative impacts of automobilism and the occupancy of public spaces for car expansion.

The exhibition was held in Prague, Czech Republic, from May 4th till May May 24th 2011.

Jan Slovenčík - Allez Marcel, allez!, Object 2011

Jan Jaroslav Sterec - Without the Smell, Instalation, 2011

Pavel Tichoň - Attempt for the World Guinness record: Longest distance cycled without hands while doing oil paining (17km) - Action documentation, 2006

Šimon Vahala - Fall, from the series My worst day - Digital print, 60x70 cm, 2006

Olja Triaška Stefanovič - Series Hole Photographs, 150x200 cm, 2005-2010 Non conceptional urban planning caused also by the expansion of the space for cars leaves the visible traces in the city landscape.

Dan Vlček - Wheels - Installation, 2011 Photo: Stephan Groetschel

Stanislav Zámečník - Car Expansion - Light Box, 100x55 cm, 2007

Petr a Jiří Hebedovi - Bamboo bicycle, 2010

H3T Architekti - Cyclo-Sauna, Kolonok, 2010 http://www.h3t.cz/en/dashboard/default/59?picture=186

Mikuláš Novotný - City folding Bicycle Folder, 2010 http://www.earch.cz/clanek/5824-mestske-skladaci-kolo-folder-city-folding-bicycle-folder.aspx

Dream Bike - Fixed gear, 2011 http://pedal-project.com/

Family Minkova/Podivínských - Family Cycloexpedition / Our trips on bicycles: 2005 - Journey there and back - to Venice and back - 2 800 km / 2006 - Journey to the mountains - through Czech and Slovak Mountains and Polish flatlands - 1 800 km / 2008 - Expedition El Gafla - to Morocco and back - 6 709 km / web: www.LivePla.net

Okolo - Design Ride, 2011 Selection of the bicycles creating in 20th and 21st centuries by some of the prolific interior designers. Bicycles by Jean Prouvé or Richard Sapper, among others, stand next to the designers famous furniture or lightning creations and create new contexts of their work. Everything on the minimalist drawings with the stories about the single bicycles. http://okoloweb.cz/our-projects

Jakub Valášek, Velocipedist´s Workshop, Performance, Installation of Historical Bicycles, 2011, http://www.velociped.cz/

Silvie Vondřejcová, Bike Line In Vysočany, Prague, Photographs, 2010

Concrete Bikes, Design Bicycle, 2010

Velocypedia Part II

carbusters — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 16:56:12 +0000

Velocypedia: A contemporary art exhibition about bicycle passion and sustainable transportation

Hana Lundiaková - Protect the Smallest - Object, 2011 / Photo: Jakub Smolík

Lenka Klodová - Male and Female Seat - Objects, 2011

Martin Melicherčík - Traffic Jam - Acrylic on canvas, 130x100cm, 2011

Martin Melicherčík - Aleluja - Digital print on paper, 42x48 cm, 2011

Gerardo Montes de Oca - Negotiations about the public Space - From the series Displacement - Photograph, 100x70 cm, 2010 / http://gmove.wordpress.com/

Tomáš Moravec, Roman Štětina - If - Photograph, 180x100 cm, 2010

Thomas Nymark - End of the Line - Photograph, 160x100 cm, 2010

Thomas Nymark - Incoherence - Photograph, 100x160 cm, 2010

Jan Pfeiffer - Photograph, 90x70 cm, 2011

Punx23 - Cars are for Losers, Public Transport for Sardines - Spray on paper, 2011

Punx23 - I Use What Moves Me Forward - Spray on paper, 2011

Zdeněk Ruffer - Ice Bike - Object, 2004

Zdeněk Ruffer - Experiment - Object, 2001

Zdeněk Ruffer - Armchair - Object, 2011

Milan Salák - Boy Who Sold Me a Bicycle - Oil on cardboard, 70x100 cm, 1991

Andy Singer - CARtoons - http://www.andysinger.com/bikesample2.html

Velocypedia Part I

carbusters — Sun, 10 Jul 2011 12:31:47 +0000

Velocypedia: A contemporary art exhibition about bicycle passion and sustainable transportation

A bike ride should be full of unlimited freedom, nevertheless in Prague it is often a fight for survival in the stream of motorized transport. The exhibition is an appeal to the Prague City municipality to systematically solve this unpleasant situation for cyclists.

The Velocypedia exposition in the NTK Gallery introduced more than 50 artistic projects (sculptures, installations, paintings, photography, film, and comics), design and simple do-it-yourself creativity. All the works are now presented online.

The exhibition was held in Prague, Czech Republic, from May 4th till May May 24th 2011.

Curators: Lenka Kukurová & Milan Mikuláštík

Contact: velocypedia@gmail.com

Mariana Alasseur - Parking, 2011

Mariana Alasseur - Prague Cactus, 2011

Alena Anderlová - Cyclist, 60x70cm, Oil painting on canvas, 2007

Conrad Armstrong - I am the Enemy, 2011 / http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62K6MCIUVhY

Michal Cimala - Harpbike, 2010 / http://www.vimeo.com/23435606

Patrik Čabla - Carriers, 2010

Olga Dubská - Chain Scooter, 2011

De Ardoise - The Tyreweb, 2008

Markéta Držmíšková - Make the Energy to Spotlight the Public Monuments, 2011 Prototype

Viktor Frešo - Tyre, 2008

Václav Girsa - Burning Car, Oil painting on cavas, 2x3 m, 2010

–

Patrik Hábl+a.ha. - Bike Coated in Wool, 2011

Helena Hladilová - Bike-Brush, 2011

Tomáš Hlavenka - Cars, granite, 2010

Matyáš Chochola - Cogito Ergo Sum, 2011

Krištof Kintera - There Is No Way To Go Now, 2007 Courtesy of Švestka Galllery, Prague

Krištof Kintera - Fatal Egoist I, 2007 Courtesy of Švestka Galllery, Prague

Svatopluk Klimeš - Bike Line, 90x80 cm, canvas, velvet, fire, ash, 2011

Svatopluk Klimeš - With a Speed of Light Solar Powered Sculpture, 2011

Weird Ways of Running a Car

carbusters — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:33:20 +0000

Cars have proven to be a very efficient way to burn oil in a very short time while heavily polluting earth and water for its extraction, and the air by combustion. Now that oil extraction is peaking (or about to peak, according to sources), car addicts look desperately for new ways to power their iron monsters. Here are the oddest examples listed by Netcars. Absurdity still has many long days ahead with its festival of bio fuels, green motorways, eco-friendly oil spills…

Bio

If you’ve ever worked in a power station, you’ll be familiar with biomass. It’s a new way of powering turbines and it’s very much an of-the-moment fuel. For those who aren’t employed at an electric-making station, it’s basically a mix of wood chippings, sawdust and other weird bits, and if used properly, it can be utilised as a fuel for your car.

Polystyrene

One of the most disliked materials on the planet can, despite the unlikeliness of it, be used as an additive to a biodiesel engine. Another scientist type at the University of Massachusetts has said that, if it’s mixed properly, it could be used as an additive. Don’t get too excited, though, as according to the same intelligent person, if the mixture is done wrongly, it can have catastrophic effects on emissions. This is a real no-no in today’s green environment.

Methane

Methane, aka that stuff that comes out of a cow’s rear end, is a proper environment terrorist. Despite its stinky smell, O-Zone layer destruction and environment ruining properties, methane can be made to power our cars. If your car runs on a natural gas conversion, it’s can also run off methane. Okay, so producing the stuff is a bit difficult; you need a refinery and lots of Daisies (cows). But if you’re passionate about saving money, you’ll find a way to own and run a farm.

Nappy power

If you’re American, they’re called diapers, if you’re British, they’re called nappies, but for all of us, they stink. So what do you do? How do you get rid of them in a feasible way? Land fill is an option but David Cameron would rather you didn’t. Burning them is also a good idea but who burns poo in this day and age? So, here’s the answer: you listen to a Canadian company named AMEC and put them in your petrol tank. According to the Canadians, they’ve been producing diesel from nappies since 2009 and it is a feasible form of power. Basically the fibres and plastics from the nappies are taken to a ‘let’s change you and turn you into diesel’ facility, and in just a matter of hours, you’ve got lovely diesel.

Chocolate

It’s one of our few pleasures, but chocolate is actually a great form of propulsion. Sure it can add pounds to your hips, but in the right hands it can put pounds in your wallet – probably. The boffins at the University of Warwick managed to design a Formula Three racing car that runs on 30 per cent biodiesel – from none other than chocolate. It seems, then, that Double Deckers (UK chocolate bar)aren’t just tasty, they’re helpful, too.

Solar paint

Paint – something you don’t necessarily associate with cars. You can paint a lovely picture of a car with some paint, but putting the stuff in your tank would probably result in a pretty but destructive failure. Don’t fret, though, as a team at Swansea University have managed to create a unique solar paint that captures energy from that big yellow thing in the sky and can, in a very boring way, subsequently power cars. Probably won’t work in Britain, though, as we get the same amount of sun as Pluto.

— This article was produced on behalf of Netcars used car search engine. We thank them for their open mindedness allowing us to publish this article from Carbusters point of view.

Stop Signs: Cars and Capitalism

carbusters — Mon, 30 May 2011 15:14:13 +0000

Stop Signs is probably the most comprehensive assessment of the power of the automobile I’ve yet read. It’s a history lesson on the car, and its rapid evolution and a field guide to Homo Automotivus. As the subtitle suggests, it focuses on the economic, social and environmental, but also neatly summarises topics like health, psychology, race, advertising and planning. It looks at the environment in which the car has flourished most, the United States, where it dominates the landscape.

All these are contained in the deceptively lightweight format of a whistle stop tour, to borrow a term from an age when the car was not so dominant. The book takes us on a long, tour of major U.S. cities by long distance bus. Thus, the book sounds like a travelogue of the key economic, social and environmental issues around automotivism.

Each of the discussions comes up naturally through observations recorded in each of the cities visited. It seems pretty clear the authors changed the sequence of cities so that the issues looked at unfold more naturally. And the resulting whole works well. They start with the health effects (respiratory illness in El Paso, obesity and Alzheimer’s in San Antonio), explore the social (race in Atlanta, religion in Salt Lake City, psychology in Miami) and progress to the economic, industrial and political aspects (all points of the compass).

Chapters are generally short, so as each issue rolled by, I wanted to know more rather than feeling overwhelmed. Thankfully, the copious references provide a comprehensive bibliography on all the issues touched on, which is particularly useful for non-US readers.

What these postcards from the edgelands also tell us is that experiencing US cities from the carless perspective is a novelty for the generally affluent, book-reading and -writing articulate middle class, but a familiar world for the generally voiceless, lower class. The Montreal-based authors are right to compare themselves with zoologists on safari. The species they are in search of are homo automotivus and the car itself. Their most useful guides are those who live close to the heart of darkness, in parallel with the “success” story that is modern homo automotivus, but don’t or can’t live that dream. One such witness is the security guard the authors meet in Baton Rouge, who is worried about severe local oil industry pollution poisoning his son.

“Automobiles proved a perfect vehicle – for making money, if not for getting people from A to B.”

Focussing on the core US habitat of the beast does not, though, mean an insular standpoint. The authors also give us more postcards from around the world, vividly setting out the consequences of the sheer demand for cars and unbridled economic growth: degradation and suppression in Amazonia and the Niger delta; war in Iraq, and so on.

And the book unpacks the “economic”: the auto came in the right (wrong) place at the right (wrong) time, a consumer product that could be mass-produced for a vast, newly “secured” country, rich in natural and human resources and in need of transport. Automobiles proved a perfect vehicle – for making money, if not for getting people from A to B. Investors loved the returns on capital: extracting the relatively low value of raw materials (oil, iron, rubber, hides and an increasing list of more exotic ingredients) with cheap labour, increasing the value by processing those, assembling them into the number one consumer product of all time, almost universally coveted and with a very high cash value. Money could be made at all stages of the process. And that outweighed its relative inefficiency as a means of transport, as a piece of engineering, let alone in environmental terms. In fact its neediness has been the source of its attraction to investors. It needed all kinds of support and the adaptation of its environment to sustain it. And all of this meant more opportunities to profit.

Over more than a century US society has seen progressive domination by the car. This meant action on all fronts: advertising was just the “official wing”. The “provisionals” included influencing educationalists and the press, lobbying legislators. Buying out, undercutting and trashing the perceived opposition, in particular rail, tram and trolley were normal operational practice. Mostly (but not exclusively) this was conducted by individual companies and cartels pursuing “legitimate” business interests, by legal means. The net effect is of a conspiracy prepared to go to any length to protect its needy mutant creation.

It would be charitable to describe the relentless pursuit of the car’s interests as “amoral”. Not just car manufacturers, not just all those supplying raw materials and parts, plus the road builders, bankers, insurers, property developers, planners and architects, the bulk of the US economy has come to see the car’s welfare as synonymous with the country’s. In some ways it’s most scary that the car has managed to achieve its stranglehold on the USA largely within the law. US democracy just wasn’t strong enough to cope with the onslaught. Free market parasites ran wild in the candy store and have gorged themselves.

“The model of suburbanism and commuting the car encouraged has effectively incapacitated community activity.”

This is not just a story of plunder. While the car’s agents had to exercise control to achieve their dominance and profits, what they developed is a tool for yet more social control. The authors cite a number of instances of this in the natural history of car culture: a working class up to their eyes in debt from the early years of the twentieth century would be reluctant to risk losing pay by striking. Freeways were driven across urban neighbourhoods to disrupt poor, black communities and to limit their expansion. Most of us believe in cars as symbols of success, superiority, virility, freedom, safety and style. The model of suburbanism and commuting the car encouraged has effectively incapacitated community activity.

Stop Signs is just that – showing us signs that mean we have to stop. It’s not, though, a recipe for action. The last chapter sketches out some of the alternatives to and critiques of automotivism that are gaining ground, including some revivals of public transport in North America and further afield. Many of these will be familiar to carbusters. Perhaps most significantly, the authors detect some shift in the automotive mentality. We seem to be less enchanted by the lump of metal. Or some of us do. They don’t argue for a purist approach. We have to seek allies among the sceptical, disillusioned car users.

Stop Signs is a powerful tool for raising awareness of the multiple and self-reinforcing ways

automotivism dominates us. But the question remains: what do we do about it?

— Roger Bysouth

Stop Signs: Cars and Capitalism on the Road to Economic, Social and Ecological Decay

Yves Engler and Bianca Mugyenyi,

RED Publishing, Vancouver, and Fernwood, Black Point, Nova Scotia, Canada, April 2011

Carfree Conversions: Squares & Green

carbusters — Tue, 17 May 2011 10:43:24 +0000

In the last article we turned to the question of where to begin carfree conversions and how to increase density in the carfree areas. The strategy was simple and obvious: start at the transport halts and gradually expand the carfree areas as alternatives to cars and trucks become readily available. We also considered how to increase the density of building construction. This matter is specific to any given city, but the methods are simple: make streets narrower and reclaim the space for buildings.

In this final installment, we examine two matters that might be called the carfree gravy: more and better public spaces, and new and expanded green areas in or near the city. We will consider public space first.

Improving Public Squares

Most cities today lack a sufficient number of high-quality squares or plazas. Many cities have them, but they are overwhelmed by the roar of traffic passing through or around them. Once the cars are gone, little needs to be done to improve these spaces and return them to civic uses. As we saw when cars were taken out of Times Square in New York, minor improvements to the space were conducted very quickly and at little cost. This square, long one of the most vibrant spaces in New York, has improved dramatically in quality. Even so, Times Square is still adversely affected by heavy traffic on the cross streets and where Broadway crosses 8th Avenue.

As we push cars out of the centers of our cities, we will find that many squares will enjoy a new lease on life. We should be prepared to spend small amounts of money to improve the paving (i.e., tear up the asphalt and replace it with something prettier) and provide street furniture suitable to the new uses.

Squares and their uses were taken up at great length in Carfree Design Manual. I’ll very briefly summarize a few main points here.

Pay attention to sun and wind when considering the functioning of squares and possible improvements
There are different kinds of squares; pay attention to existing and potential uses when rearranging squares post-car
Squares live or die by their furnishings; be sure to add the amenities that will draw people in
Add fountains and wading pools if at all possible
Try to add sidewalk cafes in most squares, even quite small ones
Add life to squares by encouraging street performers in at least some of the more active ones
Allow food carts in most or all squares
If a square is too big, add a high-quality public building to soak up the excess space
Do not be too hasty to add greenery to squares, but trees are often a welcome addition

None of these measures is difficult to implement, and there is a growing body of knowledge regarding the functioning of urban public space. Be sure to consult the literature or experts for advice. Be prepared to adjust the spaces if the first attempts are not entirely successful.

Public safety was more or less taken as a given in Carfree Design Manual, and carfree areas tend to be naturally crime-resistant. This is especially true if the adjacent buildings are occupied around the clock, which provides plenty of eyes on the street. Whatever the case, criminal activity must not be allowed to gain a toe-hold, as that can rapidly destroy the best public spaces, as happened to New York’s wonderful Bryant Park for a couple of decades. Most squares that are too big to draw quite a few people during the evening should be made smaller. Desolate squares are a magnet for criminal activity.

The new and improved squares should lead quickly to a better quality of life for the city’s residents. Over a longer span of time, the improved social cohesion in the city should lead to a significant strengthening of social cohesion.

Adding Green Space

Considering green space from the perspective of contemporary US cities, it is apparent that the more central areas consist almost entirely of highways, streets, parking, and buildings. At best there may be a few trees and small parks. Just beyond the downtown core, most US cities shift to some form of suburb. The oldest, closest suburbs will usually be the most dense and have well grown-in trees and greenery. The newest, most distant suburbs will usually have larger houses on much larger lots, with the trees still mere saplings. In all of these cases, this green space is privately owned and maintained. It can be attractive, but it serves the functions of a park only for the family that owns it, and generally poorly at that. These are social spaces only for the family and their guests. They are not shared space, nor are they in any sense wilderness.

Most suburban areas do have parks, and some of these are quite large. Many are densely wooded and may have streams and ponds. However, except for a fortunate few who live nearby, they are most easily accessed by car. As car traffic declines, more people will be able to reach these parks safely and comfortably by bike.

However, in suburbs undergoing conversion to the carfree model, parkland is really just a part of a larger problem: these areas are laid out in a fundamentally non-functional manner. Everything, including the parks, is allocated to one specific use. This results in having to drive somewhere for nearly every activity. In addition, the population density of the inhabited areas is too low to support good public transport.

Therefore, the reshaping of American-style suburbs will result in a wholesale redevelopment of these areas over a span of decades. Rearranging open space will of course be a major part of this process. In fact, the inhabited land area will in most cases decline quite significantly as its density increases several-fold. This will free up a great deal of land for other uses. Given that the supply of transport fuel will become steadily more problematic, it makes sense to grow perishable foods, which consume the most transport energy, as close to every city as circumstances permit. This leads us to the question of which parcels of open land should be made into parks and which should be allocated to other uses. The answer is generally simple. The land nearest the built-up areas should be made into parks because it is the quickest for residents to access and would be used by the greatest number of people. Rather than having a few large parks, many small parks should be established, so that a park is within walking distance of almost everyone. The category “park” includes playing fields and other managed outdoor areas dedicated to recreation and fitness.

Not all green space should be parks or playing fields; leave most of it for working farms, woodland, wetlands, and so forth. Children especially benefit from ready access to green space with a variety of functions. It is from this that they learn much about how nature functions, and there is increasing evidence that children crave direct contact with natural environments. Be sure to make this available to them, and, not incidentally, to their parents.

But what of the dense downtown cores that currently lack open space? Some of the broad streets can be made into boulevards. This will reduce the number of traffic lanes and allow the planting of trees, but the remaining road capacity will be more than adequate. This arrangement is especially suitable to the streets along which trams will operate. It will take decades for the trees to grow in, but the relief from the noise, stink, and danger of cars is immediate.

Surface-level parking lots can be turned quite easily into mini-parks, and their natural distribution would place a lunch-time pocket park within walking distance of nearly every workplace. Multi-story parking structures will be difficult to reuse, and most will probably be torn down. Good riddance. When siting parks, try to resist the temptation to place them in the center of the city, near public transport halts. This is precisely the land that should be most densely developed because of the proximity to transport. Low-intensity uses, including parks, need to be situated at the limit of walking distance from the transport halts. In most cultures, this will be about 2500 feet (say 750 meters).

Always reclaim waterfronts. These make by far the best parks, and people are always drawn to water. In some cities, elevated highways along a riverfront have already been torn down, and this example should be followed as quickly as possible in every city. New York was transformed by the removal of the elevated West Side Highway, and the city was finally reunited with the broad Hudson River.

Conclusion

This concludes this series of six articles on the conversion of existing cities to the carfree model. We have not considered this matter in much detail until now because the pure case of new carfree cities is simpler to analyze. New carfree cities will doubtless be widely built in India and China, where rapid urbanization continues, with new cities sprouting every year. However, in the Western world, where populations are approximately stable, the carfree conversion must of necessity become the norm.

In all cases, the process will have to be governed by existing conditions. The Reference Design is a useful yardstick and offers solutions to many problems, particularly transport-related. However, in most cases, carfree conversions will diverge considerably from the Reference Design. This is not a bad thing, so long as the one basic principle is observed: return the streets to human uses. Achieving sustainability is the great task of the 21st century. This is the largest challenge ever faced by humanity, but it comes at a time when our knowledge and human resources are greater than ever. The conversion of existing cities and suburbs to the carfree model is one of the cornerstones of any plan to reach sustainability. Fortunately, this change also produces plenty of tasty gravy for our cities.

— You can read more from J.H. Crawford on Carfree Cities

The Lost Cyclist: The Epic Tale of an American Adventurer and His Mysterious Disappearance

carbusters — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 10:22:04 +0000

If I could time travel into the past, I’d like to visit the Aztec city of Tenochtitlan where Mexico City stands today. I’d also like to be a guest in a Viennese parlor in 1793 listening to Beethoven play the piano. And I’d like to spend time in an American city after the bicycle had been introduced but before cars had appeared on the streets. The Lost Cyclist, a nonfiction book by historian David V. Herlihy, takes place during that very window of time when bicycles contended with horses and carriages on the roadways but not with cars. The book tells the story of two “wheelmen,” William Sachtleben and Frank Lenz, who never met but who both set out to circle the globe by bike in the early 1890s.

Sachtleben, a 25-year-old from Illinois, bicycled 15,044 miles through Europe, Turkey, Persia (now Iran) and China with his college buddy Thomas Allen, a trip that was considered at the time to be the “longest continuous land journey on record.” In the dispatches Sachtleben wrote from the road, he was clearly an early bike advocate. “Traveling always by first class is like staying in your own country. There is such a thing as too much convenience. For our part, we have long since tired of trains …. We love to roam on our bicycles, unfettered, among the scenes of unsophisticated nature and the common people.” The duo, who would return home to banquets, medals and front-page stories, left Shanghai by boat in December of 1892, six weeks before Frank Lenz arrived in China on his own westward solo bike trip.

Lenz, a 25-year-old bookkeeper from Pittsburgh, was riding a 57-pound “safety bike,” the name given to bikes with same sized tires (as opposed to the more accident-prone high wheelers). He carried 25 pounds of gear and a 13-pound Kodak camera, which he used to take photos that he sent to Outing. This New York-based magazine paid him $2,000 in travel expenses and agreed to publish photos and stories from his around-the-world trip. By the time Lenz reached China, he had already ridden across North America, taken a 1,000 mile tour of Japan and was set to travel across China, India, Persia and Turkey and then through Europe.

My favorite parts of this meticulously detailed book come in the first section where it offers glimpses into what international travel was like in the 1890s and the varied reactions to bicycles and bicyclists. In Rome, Sachtleben and Allen rode several laps in the Coliseum and were guests of honor at a banquet hosted by a local bicycle club. Days later, in the Italian town of David, they were arrested and fined for riding on the streets. They staged good-natured, impromptu races with farmers in mule-drawn carts in Greece and endured having their bicycles called “devil carts” in Turkey. Lenz too recounted how he was regularly yelled and laughed at in China, with mud, stones and sandals thrown at him. The black and white photographs in the book are fascinating to look at and include images from both of these long-distance trips as well as from Lenz’s early races and tours on a high-wheel bike in the US.

The book bogs down in the second section after Lenz, the lost cyclist of the book’s title, disappears in Turkey in 1894. Sachtleben reenters the story as the man Outing Magazine sends to find Lenz, or at least to find out what happened to him. Herlihy offers a slowly recounted chronology of Sachtleben’s dealings with embassies and consuls, police and politicians, courts and insurance companies and Lenz’s bereft mother back in Pittsburgh. In the end, neither Sachtleben nor Herlihy found the answer to what happened to Lenz. The best guess is that he was murdered. His body, his bike and his belongings were never found.

Herlihy, who won awards for his 2004 book Bicycle: The History, has done a worlds-worth of research for this book, drawing from newspaper accounts, government reports and the bicylists’ own diaries and dispatches. Far less attention is given here to the “original globe girdler,” Thomas Stevens, the British cyclist who biked across three continents from 1884 to 1886. Herlihy wrote this book to resurrect the names of these lesser known American cyclists who I view as early bike advocates. Their long rides within the U.S. and abroad no doubt helped to introduce the idea of bike riding as a mode of transportation.

The Lost Cyclist: The Epic Tale of an American Adventurer and His Mysterious Disappearance

David V. Herlihy

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2010, 326 pages

— Book Review by Kelly Nelson

Carfree Happiness

carbusters — Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:00:04 +0000

Smiley bike - cc Marcus respontour

I was wondering recently why I seem to be cheerful so much of the time. This is not necessarily my natural state, and living in a noisy city of 12 million people, with terrible traffic that makes going much of anywhere something between a struggle and a nightmare, it is often a challenge to stay upbeat.

Upon reflection, the only possible explanation I could find was that in being forced to tell innumerable people countless times during the day that I’m doing well, I can’t help but feel it. In responding to people’s salutes and waves and smiles with a cheery smile, I find the pretension towards good humour merging with the real thing. In other words, I am happy because I smile; I am doing well because I have to keep saying it.

Admittedly my case is an extreme, as a foreigner living in a mostly local area in Bangladesh. But watching those around me makes clear that people’s friendliness is directed at many others as well. In fact, the greetings of the locals are often far more exuberant than what I get, with shouts and vigorous handshakes or even hugs. Something, clearly, is going on.

The mystery is simple enough to explain, and parallels my experiences living in Hanoi in the mid-90s when the main vehicle on the street was still the bicycle. A colleague at the time described cycling in the city as being similar to attending a cocktail party: people regularly greeted each other and exchanged comments, mostly but not exclusively while waiting at intersections. A certain camaraderie formed while we waited, not at the intersection itself, but under the shade of a large tree on a hot day. A similar camaraderie is visible on the mean streets of Dhaka on those rare but wonderful occasions when the traffic consists mainly of cycle rickshaws, and both pullers and passengers comment on a passing demonstration or that old fall-back the weather.

And so it is for me on my daily walks with my dogs and to and from the office. Guards, vendors, and beggars, as well as some of the area residents who are also out walking or buying vegetables from bicycle carts, greet me. The usual greeting being “Good?” as in “Are you good?” I have little choice but to respond, “Good!” whether or not I feel it. The cheerful smiles all around can’t help but be contagious. The various forms of greeting are intriguing: the salute, the wave, the slight movement of the head to one side. Then there are all the quirky greetings one gets: the guard who inverts the usual question into “Good you are?”, the jogger who shouts his enthusiastic liking for my dogs, the woman who bulges her eyes at me, the man who raises and twists one gloved hand in an indecipherable gesture. For whatever reason, it never gets old, it never gets boring; each day I am enchanted by the flash of teeth, the curving of lips, the various ways of asserting a shared humanity.

And what does all this have to do with carfree cities? It is very hard to exchange cheerful greetings while in a car. The more one isolates oneself from others, the more one wishes to. Bus passengers are smelly, people on the streets are intrusive, the only way to travel in comfort, people begin to believe, is by car. They don’t know what they’re missing, and they blame their exasperation and misanthropy on the traffic, the crowds, on anything but their means of transport.

You have to be in a position to interact in order to gain all the pleasures of it. You have to mix with others to realize how wonderful people can be. You can’t be in a car, and the more cars there are on the roads, the more difficult it is for anyone else to enjoy life on the streets, the public life that civilizes cities.

Recently during a hartal (political strike), the streets were quiet though by no means empty: plenty of rickshaws and bicycles plied the streets and lots of people were out walking. All that was missing was the motorized vehicles. As I crossed the street I found myself dawdling, wanting to perform a few dance steps, a little jig. Usually it is the most terrifying act of my day; on that day it was pure pleasure. Walking my dogs, I found myself getting into small conversations with innumerable people whom I normally pass with just a smile and a nod. People seemed happier and more relaxed. There was no background symphony of horns; we could just talk. Hartals are a violent way to achieve car-free and thus fail to give it the good press it needs; but it is interesting to see the change just one day essentially without cars can bring. The same difference occurs, though not to quite the same extreme, early on weekend mornings: with less traffic, people are more relaxed and friendly.

Of one thing I am sure: in addition to the other innumerable benefits we will enjoy once our cities become carfree (including the incredible cost savings, the tremendous reductions in air and noise and other pollution, the better health, the decreased traffic injuries and deaths), people will be a whole lot more cheerful. I, for one, can hardly wait.

–Debra Efroymson