Transcript Slide 1

THE 21ST CENTURY INDIAN CITY
Developing an Agenda for
Urbanization in India
Urban transport and
climate change: New
concerns for cities
Dinesh Mohan
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
Urban transport – changing concerns
 1990s-
Pollution
 2000s-
Road Safety (concern but
unscientific)
 Late 2000s-
Lip service to climate change
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
India rich
India middle
class
2050
India poor
Poor have to increase energy consumption
Rich and middle class must reduce energy consumption
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
City density – traditional understanding
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
Car use and density redone
Source: MEES, P. (2010) Density and sustainable transport in US, Canadian and Australian cities: another look
at the data, World Council Transportation Research, Lisbon, Proceedings 12th WCTR.
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
Density, cities > 10 million
Asia/Africa
Europe/USA
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
Density, cities ~ 5 million
Asia/Africa
Europe/USA
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
Mature European Cities
(19th and mid 20th century)
Post colonial Indian City
(Late 20th – 21st Century)
Central business district
critical
Multiple business districts,
cities within cities
Public transport (mainly rail)
before cars
Motorcycles, inexpensive
comfortable cars challenge
role of public transport
Manual labour in factories
Service and informal sector
Car movement & speed
concerns dominate
Safety, climate change &
pollution
Management by mechanical
systems
Internet & ITS
IIT Delhi July 15
The Indian City: 18th -21st Century
Present
city
Indian high
density city
– pre 1850
Colonial
city –
1850-1950
IIT Delhi July 15
MATRIX
BY O/D PAIRS
PLOT
mf35:
all
LI
CON
mf35:
LOWER
UPPER
EXCLU
SCALE
WI
541.1
4675.
EMME/2 PROJECT: kp
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
04-05
Vehicle ownership in countries with per capita
incomes US$ 1,500-8,000
India 2030
Cars/100 MTW/100
France
50
10
Japan
45
10
Singapore
12
3
UK
47
2
USA
69
2
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
Regional car segment share in 2015
Smallest
India
Largest, SUV
Europe
USA
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
Pre-conditions for clean air
 Shorter trips
 Mixed land use
 Negative feedback for long trips –
• Fares based on distance
• Transport speeds around 15-20 km/h
 Use of less polluting modes
walking, cycling >> safety essential
 Use of public transport
 Close to home and work – dense network
 Minimum infrastructure
 Lowest emissions for vehicles
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
Delhi CO2 emissions transport 2030
CO2 emissions: tonnes per person
0.80
(In collaboration with London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine)
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
2010
BAU
Lower Carbon
Driving
Active Travel
Combination
14
DELHI
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
CO2 emission estimates for Taipei
Metro
D
Bus Rapid
Transit
Source: Prof Jason Chang
IIT Delhi 2008
Life cycle emissions – rail modes
Source: Mikhail Chester and Arpad Horvath 2008 Environmental Life-cycle Assessment of Passenger Transportation: A Detailed Methodology for Energy,
Greenhouse Gas, and Criteria Pollutant Inventories of Automobiles, Buses, Light Rail, Heavy Rail and Air. WORKING PAPER, UCB-ITS-VWP-2008-2,
University of California, Berkeley.
Life cycle emissions – road modes
Source: Mikhail Chester and Arpad Horvath 2008 Environmental Life-cycle Assessment of Passenger Transportation: A Detailed Methodology for Energy,
Greenhouse Gas, and Criteria Pollutant Inventories of Automobiles, Buses, Light Rail, Heavy Rail and Air. WORKING PAPER, UCB-ITS-VWP-2008-2,
University of California, Berkeley.
Estimates CO2 emissions per
passenger in Delhi
Calculations based on:
 Passengers carried per day (metro system and per bus)
 Energy consumed (Total electricity bill for Metro and diesel consumed
per bus
 CO2 emitted per MVAH at the powerhouse, well-to-wheel CO2 for
diesel
 Fly ash emitted by metro system not included
IIT Delhi July 15
Delhi Metro Ridership
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
DOOR TO DOOR
TRIP TIMES
Walking to station/veh
Walking in station - in
Waiting at station
Journey in vehicle
Walking in station - out
Walking to destination
Congestion (car)
One change
45
30
40
25
35
Time, minutes
Time, minutes
20
15
10
30
25
20
15
10
5
5
0
ELEVATED/ SURFACE
Metro
BRT
Car
CAR
UNDERGRND
PT
PT
3 KM
Bicycle
BICYCLE
Walk
WALK
60
0
ELEVATED
UNDERGRND
Metro
PT
SURFACE
PT
BRT
6 KM
CAR
Car
BICYCLE
Bicycle
100
90
50
80
Time, minutes
70
Time, miniutes
40
60
30
50
40
20
30
20
10
10
0
0
Metro
ELEVATED
UNDERGRND
PT
SURFACE
BRT
PT
12 KM
Car
CAR
ELEVATED
Metro
UNDERGRND/
PT
SURFACE
BRT
PT
24 KM
CAR
Car
IIT Delhi 2011
ISSUES
 Even cities in high income countries have
not been able to solve the problems that
all of us have to deal with in the near
future
NO INDIAN CITY HAS CAR USE MORE THAN 15%
IIT Delhi July 15
Expenditure in Rs - 6 km round trip per day for 1 month
Marginal cost
Minimum family income in Rs per month:
Bus use –
6,000
Metro Motorcycle 30,000
Car -
9,000
60,000
20-30% families earn less than Rs. 5,000 per month
70% families earn less than Rs 35,000 per month
IIT Delhi July 15
CO2 and roads
20th CENTURY SOLUTIONS:
One way streets?
Road widening
& expansion?
“One-way
streets reflect
the dominance of the
elevated/underground
carFlyovers,
and the failed
go-faster policies of the traffic
corridors?
engineers.
As we begin to realise that walking
Metro/LRT/Monorail/Skybus
and
cycling should be the dominant forms
of
providing
corridorstreet
capacity
transport,
the one-way
shouldto
beserve
link demand
consigned
to the dustbin of history.”
Underground trains seen as a major
solution
coldArchitecture
war asCentre,
nuclear
Peter
Murray, Headduring
of the New London
shelters
 Surface transport less energy consumimng
 Underground or elevated transit does not reduce
congestion, provides extra supply > CO2
 CO2 ≈ road area + distance of travel
Solutions contractor driven
Not people driven
IIT Delhi 2011
A typical brick shelter found on a Valley Lines railway
station in South Wales U.K. (left) and a redesigned
transparent shelter (right) (Source: Cozens, 2004)
33 per cent
increase in
annual
passenger flows
IIT Delhi 2009
Latest evidence
Possibilities to reduce CO2 emissions from road traffic for urban
planners seem limited: a restriction of space dedicated to traffic and
a change of transport means for commuting represent leverage
points.
Reckien,D., Ewald,M., Edenhofer,O., & Ludeke,M.K.B. (2007). What Parameters Influence the Spatial Variations in
CO2 Emissions from Road Traffic in Berlin? Implications for Urban Planning to Reduce Anthropogenic CO2
Emissions. Urban Studies, 44(2), 339-355.
The results suggest that public transport users could achieve
dramatic savings on their commute if the density of that network
was increased considerably
Murphy,E. (2009). Excess commuting and modal choice. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice,
43(8), 735-743.
Current urban policy, which relies predominantly on ambitious and
expensive programmes of transport infrastructure provision must
be rethought in Beijing
ZHAO, P., LU, B. & LINDEN, G. J. J. (2009) The effects of transport accessibility and jobs and housing balance on
commuting time: evidence from beijing. International planning studies, 14, (1) 65-83.
High speed systems will further encourage sprawl and greater
energy consumption, and hence, Public Transit (PT), even if the
commercial speed is rather low, is probably the only way to
improve urban accessibility and urban attractiveness in a
sustainable way
CROZET, Y. Economic development and the role of travel time: the key concept of accessibility, Gothenberg:
Volvo Research & Educational Foundations, pp. 1-22.
IIT
Delhi 2011
Indian cities
 Modal shares
 30-50% Pedestrians
 10-20% Bicycles
 ~ 30% formal/informal “public” transport
 10-20% Motorcycles
 5-10% cars (Delhi ~ 15%)
 Cannot afford very expensive transit systems:
Subsidy in Delhi – Rs 35,000/passenger per year
 Motorcycles: Rs 1 per km marginal cost – keeps public
transport fares low, need minimum infrastructure cost to
minimise subsidy
 ~ 80% employment in informal sector
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015
Safe roads a precondition for the future low
CO2 city
 Children, elderly, walking speed ~ 0.8 m/s
 Pedestrian green phase < 30 s
 Therefore, motorised lanes < (30 X 0.8) = < 24 m
 Shops and/or street vendors by design
 City blocks ~ 800 m square
 Maintain urban average speeds at 15 km/h
 Public transit on surface
IIT Delhi
17 July 2015