whole trains like it it too....
iron wheels are much more energy efficient for carrying mass,
but the path is fixed
PeakOil is You
THE Private transportation after PO Thread (merged)
Re: Transportation - PO
by bantri » Wed 04 Jan 2006, 08:33:44
i like space to move around,
whole trains like it it too....
iron wheels are much more energy efficient for carrying mass,
but the path is fixed
whole trains like it it too....
iron wheels are much more energy efficient for carrying mass,
but the path is fixed
-
bantri - Wood
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Re: Transportation - PO
by Wildwell » Wed 04 Jan 2006, 08:39:07
Prices would be considerably higher without cars for both trucks and buses.
It's often quoted that bus travel is cheaper, but this ignores the fact that bus operators get 80-100% of their fuel duty repaid back to them, therefore pay nothing toward the infrastucture. In effect it's the car driver than pays for it, moreover damage don't to the road surface to almost exclusively done by heavy vehicles like trucks and buses. It has been determined during numerous tests that the effective wear done to the road is roughly proportional to the 4th power of vehicle weight. Indeed, consultants for the UK government calculated that truck operators do not pay enough tax for the damage they cause.
A hypothetical car weighs half a ton per axle. A 6-axle, 38-ton truck also travelling on the same road weighs in at over 6 tons per axle (about the same as a bus). The truck causes 20,736 times the wear of the car (12 times the car's axle load, with a power of 4, yielding 12^4 = 20,736). Actual trucks can have even higher axle loads, though there is a wide variation in the configuration of trucks, with some having larger, wider tyres, or multiple tyres per axle, which will cause the exact figures to vary.
It's often quoted that bus travel is cheaper, but this ignores the fact that bus operators get 80-100% of their fuel duty repaid back to them, therefore pay nothing toward the infrastucture. In effect it's the car driver than pays for it, moreover damage don't to the road surface to almost exclusively done by heavy vehicles like trucks and buses. It has been determined during numerous tests that the effective wear done to the road is roughly proportional to the 4th power of vehicle weight. Indeed, consultants for the UK government calculated that truck operators do not pay enough tax for the damage they cause.
A hypothetical car weighs half a ton per axle. A 6-axle, 38-ton truck also travelling on the same road weighs in at over 6 tons per axle (about the same as a bus). The truck causes 20,736 times the wear of the car (12 times the car's axle load, with a power of 4, yielding 12^4 = 20,736). Actual trucks can have even higher axle loads, though there is a wide variation in the configuration of trucks, with some having larger, wider tyres, or multiple tyres per axle, which will cause the exact figures to vary.
Last edited by Wildwell on Wed 04 Jan 2006, 08:53:15, edited 1 time in total.
-
Wildwell - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1962
- Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: UK
Re: Transportation - PO
by aahala » Wed 04 Jan 2006, 08:51:14
cube, I think you're on to something. Steroids will definately
be needed, for the passengers.
When's the last time you have taken a greyhound bus for more than
two hours? The discomfort level is allegedly an exponetial function
compounded 4% for each additional ten minutes.
be needed, for the passengers.
When's the last time you have taken a greyhound bus for more than
two hours? The discomfort level is allegedly an exponetial function
compounded 4% for each additional ten minutes.
-
aahala - Tar Sands
- Posts: 944
- Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Re: Transportation - PO
by emersonbiggins » Wed 04 Jan 2006, 11:29:57
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Wildwell', 'P')rices would be considerably higher without cars for both trucks and buses.
It's often quoted that bus travel is cheaper, but this ignores the fact that bus operators get 80-100% of their fuel duty repaid back to them, therefore pay nothing toward the infrastucture. In effect it's the car driver than pays for it, moreover damage don't to the road surface to almost exclusively done by heavy vehicles like trucks and buses. It has been determined during numerous tests that the effective wear done to the road is roughly proportional to the 4th power of vehicle weight. Indeed, consultants for the UK government calculated that truck operators do not pay enough tax for the damage they cause.
A hypothetical car weighs half a ton per axle. A 6-axle, 38-ton truck also travelling on the same road weighs in at over 6 tons per axle (about the same as a bus). The truck causes 20,736 times the wear of the car (12 times the car's axle load, with a power of 4, yielding 12^4 = 20,736). Actual trucks can have even higher axle loads, though there is a wide variation in the configuration of trucks, with some having larger, wider tyres, or multiple tyres per axle, which will cause the exact figures to vary.
It's often quoted that bus travel is cheaper, but this ignores the fact that bus operators get 80-100% of their fuel duty repaid back to them, therefore pay nothing toward the infrastucture. In effect it's the car driver than pays for it, moreover damage don't to the road surface to almost exclusively done by heavy vehicles like trucks and buses. It has been determined during numerous tests that the effective wear done to the road is roughly proportional to the 4th power of vehicle weight. Indeed, consultants for the UK government calculated that truck operators do not pay enough tax for the damage they cause.
A hypothetical car weighs half a ton per axle. A 6-axle, 38-ton truck also travelling on the same road weighs in at over 6 tons per axle (about the same as a bus). The truck causes 20,736 times the wear of the car (12 times the car's axle load, with a power of 4, yielding 12^4 = 20,736). Actual trucks can have even higher axle loads, though there is a wide variation in the configuration of trucks, with some having larger, wider tyres, or multiple tyres per axle, which will cause the exact figures to vary.
Thanks for the figures, Wildwell.
I've often heard phrases such as "trucks cause 9600 times the road damage as cars" bandied about, but I've never seen the math behind the numbers."It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."
George Carlin
George Carlin
-
emersonbiggins - Expert
- Posts: 5150
- Joined: Sun 10 Jul 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: Dallas
Re: Transportation - PO
by Starvid » Wed 04 Jan 2006, 12:05:47
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('aahala', '[')b]cube, I think you're on to something. Steroids will definately
be needed, for the passengers.
When's the last time you have taken a greyhound bus for more than
two hours? The discomfort level is allegedly an exponetial function
compounded 4% for each additional ten minutes.
be needed, for the passengers.
When's the last time you have taken a greyhound bus for more than
two hours? The discomfort level is allegedly an exponetial function
compounded 4% for each additional ten minutes.
In Europe many youths travel by bus for days, for example Stockholm to Rome. It pretty inconvenient, but people do it as it is simpler and much cheaper than train.
Well, nowadays even youths fly as air travel has become so very cheap. Stockholm-Rome for €50 by air beats Stockholm-Rome for €100 by bus.
Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
-
Starvid - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3021
- Joined: Sun 20 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Re: Transportation - PO
by cube » Wed 04 Jan 2006, 12:30:58
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Wildwell', 'I')t has been determined during numerous tests that the effective wear done to the road is roughly proportional to the 4th power of vehicle weight. Indeed, consultants for the UK government calculated that truck operators do not pay enough tax for the damage they cause.
I agree that heavy vehicles do not pay taxes in proportion to the amount of wear and tear they cause to the roads. In other words yes they are subsidized.
However if my memory serves me correctly the airline industry has a habit of going bankrupt every 10 years and EVERY single time "Uncle Sam" bails them out. Greyhound buses do not have this problem. I guess the government doesn't consider them "sexy" enough to be deserving of a $10 billion dollar check every 10 years. I don't have any stats but my gut tells me the airline industry gets far more subsidies then the "dirty dog" (greyhound bus).
The last airline bailout was for $15 billion after 9/11. When PO hits I can only imagine how much money the airline industry will request. Will Americans bailout the airlines or will that be the final straw?
- cube
- Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3909
- Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Re: Transportation - PO
by Wildwell » Wed 04 Jan 2006, 12:46:04
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Starvid', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('aahala', '[')b]cube, I think you're on to something. Steroids will definately
be needed, for the passengers.
When's the last time you have taken a greyhound bus for more than
two hours? The discomfort level is allegedly an exponetial function
compounded 4% for each additional ten minutes.
be needed, for the passengers.
When's the last time you have taken a greyhound bus for more than
two hours? The discomfort level is allegedly an exponetial function
compounded 4% for each additional ten minutes.
In Europe many youths travel by bus for days, for example Stockholm to Rome. It pretty inconvenient, but people do it as it is simpler and much cheaper than train.
Well, nowadays even youths fly as air travel has become so very cheap. Stockholm-Rome for €50 by air beats Stockholm-Rome for €100 by bus.
Yes, a couple of other myths out to put to rest, one concerns so-called cheap airlines. In actual fact, that works through a clever system called yield management.
For a full description see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yield_management
How it works with regards to airlines (and other things such as hotels etc) is the initial seats are given away at a very low price, or even free, which are sold at a loss. The price gets progressively higher as the plane loads up. Thus, the idea is to get a high ‘seat load factor’. If you can exceed your basic unit costs then you are in profit, but it is erroneous to suggest that flying is cheap in terms of unit costs than bus or even train travel, it just so happens they are different markets.
On the British Airways site between London and Manchester over the next few days the situation reflects this.
Notice the prices reflect demand, this tickets on the 16th and 17th are being given away at a loss on the 16th and 17th at £30. If you click on that said day, you will be given a list of options, the flights least booked up are the cheapest. Thus, the whole idea is to raise the seat load factor and increase profits.
Train and bus companies do the same.
The situation with London-Manchester train tickets next Monday notice the £12.50 advance singles haven’t been taken, as they get taken only the £18, £23 pound tickets or just ‘walk on’ (IE Ticket bought on the day) prices will become available, the latter being £56. In the peak (say a Friday evening) when travel demand is high, only the highest price will be available, thus the going market rate in order to maximise revenues.
The same applies to bus.
However on very short bus and rail trips, especially those that service rural or late night destinations there isn’t the option of doing this. Thus, when motoring is cheap, it is more difficult to build a high load factor and return a profit. Obviously when oil becomes more expensive, the price dynamics will change and substitution in some sectors will be easier than others.
It has to be noted however people are prepared to pay very high prices (often without realising it) with personal transport.
The cost of motoring is:
The fuel cost+vehicle cost+taxes+insurance+maintenance+loan interest (if applicable). This for a typical UK car, it comes out at 40-60p a mile. You can check auto magazine on this price, very often they give the cost of running per mile.
Therefore your present cost of running a car, with a single person in it is nearer £100 for London-Manchester. Obviously a group brings the cost down per person, but for a single person the trip generally already hugely in excess of flying, train or bus.
Obviously in the case of peak oil, I think physical shortages are going to be the problem and on that particular trip only rail is non-oil powered.
-
Wildwell - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1962
- Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: UK
