27th November 2007

More than 25 people came to hear John Meadley from the Transition Stroud Transport group challenge the audience in looking at transport. The key thrust of the argument was that we need to reduce all transport costs.

Photo: Percentages of transport - see notes below 

Some notes from the evening:

A transport system to achieve what?People or goods?
Urban or rural?  Leeds, London or Manchester you can easily live without a car

Urban areas have a density of population that provides local shops and other activities and facilities – hence public transport (and car clubs etc) is more attractive, efficient and cost effective.In Stroud very difficult. Stonehouse to Moreton in the Marsh and to Aylesbury – in both cases 3.5 hours

Status quo – where people expect to travel anywhere anytime at low cost – Mobbs call hyper mobility? I suggest that we focus on the local – dealing with the realities that we know.

How important is road transport within the SDC carbon footprint?
See notes below.

Why do people expect to have the right to cheap oil?

The advent of under-priced oil and nuclear power – see hand out.Levi Strauss – US Atomic Energy Commission post war – “Our children will enjoy in the homes energy too cheap to meter”.

The political system is predicated on continuous economic growth – but with 9.5 billion people, oil peaking, climate changing, 2,650 litres of water to make a litre of bio fuel or a burger – the expectation is there but not unsustainable.  Therefore no point in trying to develop a transport system for a way of life that is not sustainable.

What can we do?  

Various initiatives – to do with cycling and with public transport.

Cycling can achieve a lot at the local level - cycle routes to schools, secure and dry bike stands, the Paris model (mainly urban like car clubs).  But cycling alone will not meet the needs of the elderly, those who work far away, those who need to take children to hospital etc.  Cycling vital – e.g. on Stroud District Cycling Strategy – but is relevance is limited.  Kids to school initiatives – but are we trying to tinker at the edges or do something fundamental?  Cycling in Paris.

Public transport.  Eco-freaks often say – I would have if I could – but no service or too much to do.  Read Mobbs: Energy beyond oil.

DEALING WITH REALITY.  In Kings Stanley we have 1,200 dwellings and a pop of 2,600 – of which (say) 800 are working.  Jobs in KS = 80 (Bakery, pubs, shops, mill and farms).  90% travel outside to work.  How can a public system meet all these various needs?  We have a bus but it does not meet people’s work travel needs.  Maidenhill has three teachers who individually travel from south Wales daily – no public transport system can meet that reality.  We cannot separate transport from other issues of where we live and work.

THE BIGGER PICTURE.

JM paper on climate change for QBG – highlighted the views of others and also put it in the context of population increase, our ability to feed the world, water and sanitation, poverty, conflict and war, the long shadow of livestock and peak oil – and what emerged from all of this was LESS.  As a world community we have to do, use , eat and travel less. Less is difficult. Gandhi – the world can meet people’s need but not their greed.

How to get people to change?  

Is it possible to change people’s minds or do we have to wait for £3 per litre.  There are already some rays of hope. M & S market research shows that 80% recognise the importance of global warming but only 20% are willing to act.  However, this is a significant increase on last year.

Einstein – one cannot alter a condition with the same mind set that created it in the first place.CBBC – programme on making a satchel.  3 x Big shots and 3 x 11 year old pupils.  25 kids to judge – 23/2 in favour of pupils!

Gandhi autobiography – research for cases and travelled for a year before saying anything.  Then he took action.

The same is true of the anti slavery campaign – Thomas Clarkson
Like Gandhi – and like Clarkson (and the sugar boycott) - we need to engage with local people.

TRANSITION STROUD INITIATIVES. 

Recognise the need to listen to people – not be a cell in a vacuum.  E.g. electric bikes;  doctors to villages, car share; social enterprise on bike maintenance; cycle map library; coordinated information on bus routes and times…………………………………

REDUCING PEOPLE’S  NEED TO TRAVEL

– which cannot be considered in isolation

Rebuild local communities – shops and facilities
Work from home
Provide local high tech workspace that people can hire
Shop on the web
Engage in parish plans – 17 out of 77 recommendations are about transport.
Location specific initiatives – e.g. Coaley Junction Action Committee – for Stone house Midland

Are we in the business of designing a system to cope with hyper mobility or for where we want to be in the future and to help people to get there and make the transition.

Handout from speaker:

SOME TRANSPORT STATISTICS GENERAL

Transport represents 34% of UK energy consumption and 22% of carbon emissionsIn 2005, 99% of all fuel used for transport in the UK was petroleum
The average car is only used for 5% of the time but uses 45% of transport energy – the balance is goods vehicles (24%) and air transport (23%).
75% of all car journeys are less than 8 km

STROUD DISTRICT CO2 EMISSIONS 

These are approximately 1,150,000 tonnes of which transport makes up 40% of 460,000 tonnes – of which approximately half is from diesel and half from petrol engines. The balance is industry and commerce @ 391,000 and domestic @ 299,000.  (Source – DEFRA) 

THE UNREALISTIC PRICE OF OIL 

1 Litre of oil = 9.5 kW of energy.  One person can on average generate 100 watts per hour with physical labour.  Therefore 1 litre of oil = 95 hours of human toil.  At £5 per hour this equals £475.  Oil is undervalued.  No other fuel is as energy dense or convenient to handle. Coal has 40% of the calorific value – and needs energy to convert it to a convenient format as a transport fuel.

THE TREASURY BIAS
Between 1985 and 2003:
The cost of driving a car fell by 5%
Average disposable income rose by 118%
The cost of bus fares rose by 71%
The cost of train fares rose by 84%
The Treasury gives a higher “economic” value to a journey to the supermarket by car than by bike – because someone in a car is likely to purchase more than someone in a car.

PUBLIC TRANSPORT 

Cutting use of cars by 60% and moving demand to buses/trains cuts the energy consumption in road passenger transport by only 26% (Mobbs: Energy beyond oil).