Barclays/TFL cycle hire scheme in London

[London_Calling]

Fwiw, I find it very difficult to look at any aspect of the transport policy in isolation - whether it's start-up costs or immediate consequences - it's just all so complicated, and it seems impossible to predict how the public react, especially indirectly.

I suppose, above all, it's a process perhaps begun with Oyster and the CC, developed with the income from the CC (to, for example, police bus lane compliance with CCTV), more busses, upgrading the tube, and now moving forward with the cycle scheme.

I have no idea how far London is through this 'journey' but it's been a pretty amazing 6 years since Oyster.


p.s. here's the grandest version of the super highway scheme

 

[Crispy]

p.s. here's the grandest version of the super highway scheme

Clearly shows the lack of cross-center routes. Unsurprising considering how narrow and congested most of them are. Although I reckon a Strand/Embankment East-West route really should be included to link some of them up. Those are wide roads that can cope with nice big cycle lanes.

 

[citydreams]

A 6% fall in speeds in central london is equivalent to....

a 4% increase in CO2 to 21,000 tonnes/year in Central London

a 5% increase in PM to 3 tonnes/year in Central London

a 4% increase in NOX to 76 tonnes/year in Central London

This doesn't include any effects of changes in speeds in inner & outer London resulting from central london congestion.. but there will be a knock on effect as queues will build back from central London across the network.

(Change in PM does not include tyre & brake wear).

 

[Crispy]

BUT, the scheme could increase takeup of cycling in more general terms, thus reducing local car trips to the shops etc.

 

[citydreams]

ok.. hazard a guess at the change in veh-km in Inner/Outer London and I'll run the resulting change in emissions...

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

Citydreams, I agree only a handful of these trips will be switches from private cars, and the majority will be switches from public transport.

However I'm willing to bet a sizeable minority will be switches from taxis which will certainly benefit the environment

 

[citydreams]

However I'm willing to bet a sizeable minority will be switches from taxis which will certainly benefit the environment

but the taxi will still be driving around looking for a pick up..

 

[London_Calling]

Clearly shows the lack of cross-center routes. Unsurprising considering how narrow and congested most of them are. Although I reckon a Strand/Embankment East-West route really should be included to link some of them up. Those are wide roads that can cope with nice big cycle lanes.

It's glaring isn't it. I thought about the Embankment, but also Marylebone/Euston Road/City Road - or rather a jink to the south.

Maybe it'll be a process.

 

[London_Calling]

but the taxi will still be driving around looking for a pick up..

If ever there was a case for electric bloody cars . . .

 

[London_Calling]

A 6% fall in speeds in central london is equivalent to....

but why is this?

This is slower speed not traffic becoming stationary: Higher speed = less pollution

 

[teuchter]

A study was done looking into the Parliament Square scheme to try to determine the pcu (passenger car unit - basically a measure of effect on the network) value for bicycles. Traditionally a value pof 0.25 is used as a global value, but obviously bikes take up different amounts of space depending where they are (e.g. they take up less space on the main body of a road than at a junction..) and how many bikes there are &c..

Using the results of the Parliament Square study (and comparing to traditional 0.25 PCU values), models were run for investigating the possibility of increasing cycle levels in London to meet Boris' vision of a 4-fold increase.

As most new cycle trips in Central London would be coming from public transport rather than from cars, the net effect would be increase demand on the network by about 10% (i.e 1 bus = 3 pcus. 1 bus carries 25 people. If 5 left the bus to become cyclists, then 5/25 * 3 pcus are removed, but 5 * 0.25 pcus are added).

The net effect is that speeds in central London would fall by around 6% in equilibrium.

A 6% fall in speeds in central london is equivalent to.... <starts computer....>

How does this fit in with the fact that TfL have been promoting cycle use quite heavily for a few years now? As in, this is not just a Boris thing - it was being promoted during the Ken era too. Why, if the studies suggest it will worsen congestion?

 

[fredfelt]

A study was done looking into the Parliament Square scheme to try to determine the pcu (passenger car unit - basically a measure of effect on the network) value for bicycles. Traditionally a value pof 0.25 is used as a global value, but obviously bikes take up different amounts of space depending where they are (e.g. they take up less space on the main body of a road than at a junction..) and how many bikes there are &c..

Using the results of the Parliament Square study (and comparing to traditional 0.25 PCU values), models were run for investigating the possibility of increasing cycle levels in London to meet Boris' vision of a 4-fold increase.

As most new cycle trips in Central London would be coming from public transport rather than from cars, the net effect would be increase demand on the network by about 10% (i.e 1 bus = 3 pcus. 1 bus carries 25 people. If 5 left the bus to become cyclists, then 5/25 * 3 pcus are removed, but 5 * 0.25 pcus are added).

The net effect is that speeds in central London would fall by around 6% in equilibrium.

A 6% fall in speeds in central london is equivalent to.... <starts computer....>

Thanks for that.

But to me one study of a junction / square cannot really be translated to a whole city's infrastructure.

I also very much doubt that every new journey by bike will be someone who used to travel by bus.

It does not also take into account the cultural change that may happen when people get used to making journeys by bike, rather than relying on their car.

I just started looking for other ways to measure this kind of thing - there's masses out there, including this site suggesting that bikes are easier to accommodate that buses but I should be working now so no time to take it in!

http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm104.htm

 

[citydreams]

How does this fit in with the fact that TfL have been promoting cycle use quite heavily for a few years now? As in, this is not just a Boris thing - it was being promoted during the Ken era too. Why, if the studies suggest it will worsen congestion?

TfL were previously promoting safer cycling.. They were funding cycling networks away from the main traffic, publishing maps, providing training, and improving infrastructure..

This is a Boris thing. He has a list of policies that must happen.. seriously. This is on his list. It will happen, no matter what.

Cycle hire was on Ken's list too, and we'll never know how he would have administered the scheme, but I know who I would rather push it through..

 

[citydreams]

But to me one study of a junction / square cannot really be translated to a whole city's infrastructure.

it isn't a study of just one square.. That was the historic background.. an analysis of PCU values allowed for some new analysis on cycling..

I also very much doubt that every new journey by bike will be someone who used to travel by bus.

the figures I quoted don't use that assumption.. more like 40%

I just started looking for other ways to measure this kind of thing - there's masses out there, including this site suggesting that bikes are easier to accommodate that buses but I should be working now so no time to take it in!

http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm104.htm

wrong country

 

[citydreams]

but why is this?

This is slower speed not traffic becoming stationary: Higher speed = less pollution

emission curves are parabolic.. even if you're not going anywhere you're still emitting pollution..

 

[teuchter]

TfL were previously promoting safer cycling.. They were funding cycling networks away from the main traffic, publishing maps, providing training, and improving infrastructure..

This is a Boris thing. He has a list of policies that must happen.. seriously. This is on his list. It will happen, no matter what.

Cycle hire was on Ken's list too, and we'll never know how he would have administered the scheme, but I know who I would rather push it through..

My impression (simply as someone who has been living in London for the last ten years or so, seeing adverts and so forth as I go about my business) has very much been that in, say, the last five years or so, cycling has been quite heavily promoted as a means of getting about in London. I've seen posters suggesting that people get on their bikes, not just measures to improve safety.

I don't see it as a particular change of policy attributable to Boris (I'm not a Boris fan by the way). Like you say, the Velib scheme was instigated by Ken.

In actual fact, I have always been a little sceptical about cycling being a solution to London's transport problems, for various reasons (I remember starting a thread a couple of years back asking why it was promoted when it's one of the most dangerous modes of transport there is - the answer seemed to be that the health benefits were calculated to outweigh the safety risks). Intuitively, it has seemed to me that once there a lot of bikes on the road, they are likely to cause congestion, and also that they appear a less efficient use of roadspace than buses. But I know that TfL carries out a lot of study into these things, and that its policy decisions (under Ken at least) are generally quite well informed by these studies.

So I'm a little surprised to learn about these studies you mention. It's just a bit confusing. Either Ken wasn't paying attention to them, or there was a miscommunication of a message which I interpreted as "use bikes more".

 

[citydreams]

The Centre of Cycling Excellence @ TfL had targets to increase cycling in London as cycling had been on the decline for certain age groups / genders. And cycling levels elsewhere were so small as to be practically dangerous.

The studies I've mentioned are post-Ken.

The difference now is that cycling has become much more popular.. roughly 10% of vehicles crossing Vauxhall Bridge at certain hours of the day, so the marginal effect of each additional cyclist on road congestion is that much larger.

And the other difference is that we now have a legal obligation to improve air quality in London or else face heavty fines from the EU.

 

[London_Calling]

emission curves are parabolic.. even if you're not going anywhere you're still emitting pollution..

I haven't explained my confusion at all well; if I understoof you correctly, the argument is that lower vehicle speeds (induced by higher cycling uptake) equals more vehicle pollution i.e

A 6% fall in speeds in central london is equivalent to....

a 4% increase in CO2 to 21,000 tonnes/year in Central London

a 5% increase in PM to 3 tonnes/year in Central London

a 4% increase in NOX to 76 tonnes/year in Central London

Is the increased pollution inferred from the belief that lower vehicle speeds must mean longer journey times?

 

[citydreams]

Is the increased pollution inferred from the belief that lower vehicle speeds must mean longer journey times?

Yes, but also from the fact that speeds in central London are on the downward slope of the emissions-curve. i/e an increase in speeds means engines work more efficiently and produce less emissions .. the marginal improvement in emissions continues until the engine reaches its sweet spot, where the gradient on the parabola is zero. So, taking the current situation, a decrease in speeds means a move up the slope = more emissions/km as the engine is working harder.

This was all explained to Boris, in person.

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

but the taxi will still be driving around looking for a pick up..

In the short term,yes. In the longer term, might this scheme mean slightly fewer taxis?

IMHO they are not a particularly 'green' form of transport, despite their Congestion Charge exemption.....

 

[London_Calling]

Yes, but also from the fact that speeds in central London are on the downward slope of the emissions-curve. i/e an increase in speeds means engines work more efficiently and produce less emissions .. the marginal improvement in emissions continues until the engine reaches its sweet spot, where the gradient on the parabola is zero. So, taking the current situation, a decrease in speeds means a move up the slope = more emissions/km as the engine is working harder.

This was all explained to Boris, in person.

Thanks for that. Very interesting.

Kick him in the nuts for me.

 

[teuchter]

IMHO they are not a particularly 'green' form of transport, despite their Congestion Charge exemption.....

I think there's an argument that if they can fill the gaps at the ends of journeys otherwise made by public transport, they are worth allowing.

ie. the kind of people who would get a train into London and then a taxi, instead of a bus, to their final destination: at least that's better than them driving all the way which might be their second choice.

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

I think there's an argument that if they can fill the gaps at the ends of journeys otherwise made by public transport, they are worth allowing.

ie. the kind of people who would get a train into London and then a taxi, instead of a bus, to their final destination: at least that's better than them driving all the way which might be their second choice.

Would be better still if they caught a train then got one of these bikes.

I accept this would need a major culture shift.

 

[fjydj]

Clearly shows the lack of cross-center routes. Unsurprising considering how narrow and congested most of them are. Although I reckon a Strand/Embankment East-West route really should be included to link some of them up. Those are wide roads that can cope with nice big cycle lanes.

Arrrgh there is still no convenient and safe way to cycle into the west end from South London

7 routes end at the edges of the City, one ends at Vauxhall and the other at Hyde Park Corner...using their numbers 12 and 8 need to be linked together as should 10 and 2.

 

[London_Calling]

I actually really enjoy the back roads from Vauxhall Bridge around the back of Westminster into Horseguards, etc. Interesting area.

Agree, the City into the West End isn't ideal though it's not that far, tbf.

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

At this point I should declare an interest.

From a purely selfish, self idulgent point of view I long to ride through Bloomsbury on a crisp early spring morning.

If it launches in Summer 2010 it looks like I'll have to wait til March 2011 for that, though.

I also like Boris. That means my replies here are not unbiased.

 

[ExtraRefined]

dumping a lot of cycles in central London is going to slow speeds considerably for all road users

Do you have any evidence to support this assertion?

 

[flash]

Do you have any evidence to support this assertion?

No but it's just the general concept of having these dumped around with some inevitably on the carriageway effectively acting like a form of traffic calming it will inevitably slow traffic down, or take up lane space/capacity increasing saturation of the traffic flow.

Incidentally have these been approved from a planning application point of view yet?

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

I've stated my bias. Notwithstanding that, I doubt we'll see PM jump 5%. The improvements in this between the vehicles of 20 years ago, even 10 years ago, and modern diesel vehicles are so great, 5% would be wiped out in a year, as older cars/buses/trucks are scrapped.

 

[London_Calling]

Do you have any evidence to support this assertion?

He does, read on.