Pro-Car Propaganda
How Wendell Cox, John Tierney and other anti-transit "experts" walk the fine line between truth and fiction
"Give 'em cars"
Wendell Cox argues that it would be cheaper to provide new cars to people for free than to construct public transit
He underestimates the cost of his plan by $40-$66 billion
Why would he do this
Why does anyone make arguments that please the people with the most money and power in the US
How does he do it
he forgets that cars drive on roads but he naturally includes the cost of the rails in his estimated the cost of transit (Doh!)
he overlooks the $20 billion in congestion costs saved each year by public transit (TTI, 2003)
he overlooks the fact that many people who ride the miserable public transit system at present cannot drive and would have to be chauffeured
Smart Roads
"By squeezing three times as many cars on the highway, this technology could drastically ease traffic congestion -- if only engineers could figure out a way to get millions of drivers to buy these systems." (John Tierney)
What is it
stack of magnets in the center of each express spaced at intervals 1.2 meters apart
equipped car can drive down the road by itself, guided by the magnets and radar
engineers in San Diego sent a caravan of eight Buicks at 65 miles per hour and computers kept the cars just 15 feet apart
My questions:
Where does his "three times as many" figure come from
Does it include extra space for vehicles entering and leaving highway and changing lanes
Does it allow enough time for stopping in case the vehicle ahead needs to slam on its breaks
Does it use regular tailgating as its base figure (usually less than 15 feet when cruising) or average distances, which include extra margins for entering and leaving the road, as well as gaps that would occur in any case
What if one computer freezes up… how many people will die

下一页