I finally had a chance to catch the video of Charlie Hales addressing a PSU transportation seminar about Streetcar.
You can find the stream and download here.
First, for Jim Karlock, Charlie quoted an average trip length for Streetcar (no, I don’t know his source): 3/4 of a mile. So go run your numbers, Jim!
In the Q&A session Charlie also speculated on why it may be difficult to make a Hawthorne Streetcar pencil (a question of how much redevelopment the neighborhood wants). He also suggests that a park-and-ride at the end of the Lake Oswego line is not a good idea.
Well worth catching.
15 responses to “A Number for Jim (at long last)”
Chris Smith: First, for Jim Karlock, Charlie quoted an average trip length for Streetcar (no, I don’t know his source): 3/4 of a mile. So go run your numbers, Jim!
JK: Thanks Chris. Charlie was answering my emailed question. I was just waiting until I got a copy of the video before going public with it (the download video took a few days to appear.)
The number is (if I calculated it correctly):
Streetcar……………..$1.67 per passenger-mile
for perspective here are some other modes of transport:
Trimet bus:………… $0.835 per passenger-mile
Trimet Rail: ………..$0.434 per passenger-mile
Lowest cost bus: ….$0.34 per passenger-mile (Best Trimet bus line)
Automobile actual..$0.185 per passenger-mile (national average auto cost-see link for sources)
See DebunkingPortland.comTransitCost-Cars-Transit2.htm for more and click on link to go back the original data sources to prove that I am not cheating. (the data are not all from the same year, so there may be some minor errors due to timing differences.)
If you find any factual errors, let me know & I’ll fix them.
Be sure to go up to DebunkingPortland.com for the debunking of a number of popular beliefs, mostly documented to original information sources.
Thanks
JK
Trimet Rail: ………..$0.434 per passenger-mile
Lowest cost bus: ….$0.34 per passenger-mile (Best Trimet bus line)
Automobile actual..$0.185 per passenger-mile
The last one is hard to believe. I’ll have to go check it out. Did you add in all the infrastructure to these? I wouldn’t think so because the Trimet Rail would have to be much higher, the bus numbers are impossible because it gets lopped in with all the road maintenance and isn’t accurately represented.
Thanks JK. Always dig the numbers, even when they’re a little skewed, albeit usually just as much or less than the “Guv’ment” numbers.
Ya know. I gotta wonder. Say someone buys a cheapo reliable new car (don’t feed me about how easy it is to pick up some POS used car)…
So let’s go with a Toyota Echo. Probably the most reliable, ULEV, Environmentally friendly, fuel conservative, low cost, useable, well engineered small car in the market today.
To summarize, even when I use that car, on about 12-15k miles per year (which I know is the “average”) I can’t get .18 per mile. The best I can get out of that is about 35 cents and the best I can find from a conservative estimate based on money spent on roads via the usage fee (gas), the taxes per state vary a little bit, but then in the end if you look at the national expenditure of state & federal money you have about 100+ billion per year.
Add up all those years and you get more than .18 JUST FOR THE ROAD COSTS!!!!
So I gotz two questions.
1. Where is the road cost data from a semi-reputable source like the Federal Government or a private road corporation?
2. What car that is able to be bought “new” costs .18 per mile without keeping the car for 10+ years. 10 years is the limit, if we’re talking national averages we should use 3 years. But that would skyrocket the cost of cars so far it would be insane. It would draw more parallels to taxi costs x2 than what we’re talking about here.
…so I digress, got answers?
I would remind people that “average” costs have little meaning when comparing the costs of transit trips to auto trips. You need to compare the cost of providing the same trip. If you drive to downtown Portland, its going to cost you more than $.18 per mile just to park your car. Or its going to cost someone more than that.
Adron –
I’ll run the numbers for my own car here, a Prius… (I’ll use the price of a base model without options for the purpose of this discussion)
I’ll assume that 150K miles is a reasonable life, and an average of 15K miles driven per year. That gives a 10-year lifespan.
Cost of Car: approx. $22,000 – over 150K miles that’s 14.67 cents/mile.
Cost of Fuel: Our actual real-world MPG for the 1st year of owning the car was 45.9mpg. (Mixed driving, mainly city.) Divide 150K miles by 45.9mpg gets you 3268 gallons consumed, multiple by $2.50/gallon = $8170 = 5.45 cents/mile.
Cost of Insurance: Prices vary widely per person — I’ll use a middle-of-the-road figure of $120/month. That’s $14,400 over the life of the car, or 9.6 cents/mile.
Cost of scheduled maintenance: $900 on 5K mile lube/oil/filter, etc @ $30 each, plus figure an extra $600 total for the major interval services. That adds 1 cent/mile.
Total: 30.72 cents/mile. This assumes no cost of financing and no repairs ever!
If the car were a complete gift, the operating costs are still 16.05 cents/mile, again assuming no repairs ever needed, and this is with the highest real-world MPG sedan currently on the US market.
Unless someone is giving out free cars that never need repairs, I think the 18 cent figure is unattainable.
FYI, here is AAA’s current brochure on estimating driving costs: http://www.aaapublicaffairs.com/Assets/Files/2006328123200.YourDrivingCosts2006.pdf
– Bob R.
In reality, after all costs are included, insurance, the cost of parking, the land needed, the roadways (and all the space they take up), the subsidization externalities and increased costs of supporting and industry via subsidization, the decreased saving of said socialization of the industry, the waste caused by congestion, and just those direct costs cause the per mile basis to drastically skyrocket.
I’d guess at about 1-3 bucks a mile. After one adds in stabilization costs for oil regions, the elimination of more community oriented modes of transportation, the dispersing of society into sprawl, and other such costs it probably tacks on at least a few more bucks.
Thanks for that quick break down Bob. That is similar to what I get when doing the calculations. The Echo btw, is a superior deal, including being as clean for the environment, but you’ll actually burn a little extra fuel over the course of about 6-10 years (depending on mileage). Just thought I’d toss that in.
But who’s to complain when they’re going to support better technology. :D
The Echo btw, is a superior deal
I’ve been assuming that you mean the Yaris, as the Echo nameplate was discontinued after the 2005 model year. Both cars are based on the Toyota Vitz platform.
In any case, it all depends on what you want. If you want low purchase price and high MPG and don’t care about other features, yes, the Yaris/Echo/Vitz is a great choice.
But, the Prius is a much larger car, over 2ft longer, more cargo room, over 5 inches more rear seat legroom. If you haul friends and relatives around frequently (as I do), that room makes an incredible difference.
The cars are about $10,000 different in price (give or take depending on features), and the Prius in real-world conditions will get over 10MPG better mileage, saving 960 gallons of fuel over the life of the car. At $2.50/gal, that’s $2,265.
So the question is: If you need the extra room and comfort, and want faster acceleration, is the car worth an extra $7,500 to you? In my case, the answer was Yes (plus, I’m getting the now-expired $3,500 tax credit, which also helps, but I left this subsidy out of my earlier cost-per-mile analysis because I know how you feel about subsidies.)
Sorry to be a bit pedantic about this, but I do get irritated sometimes with people eager to tell me that a hybrid won’t save me any money. Nobody tells people that a sunroof won’t save you money or that chrome wheels won’t save you money. It’s worth it to me to have an environmentally friendlier car, and, in my opinion, when doing apples-to-apples comparisons of similarly-sized cars, there is a small bit of money to be saved.
– Bob R.
Adron Says: So I gotz two questions.
1. Where is the road cost data from a semi-reputable source like the Federal Government or a private road corporation?
JK: Right on that page – follow the links – they go to the original government data sources and show the simple arithmetic involved.
Adron Says: 2. What car that is able to be bought “new” costs .18 per mile without keeping the car for 10+ years. 10 years is the limit, if we’re talking national averages we should use 3 years. But that would skyrocket the cost of cars so far it would be insane. It would draw more parallels to taxi costs x2 than what we’re talking about here.
…so I digress, got answers?
JK: Remember that we are using cost per passenger-mile not vehicle mile, except as noted. (I had to bring in vehicle mile for the AAA data) The conversion factor (and where it came from) is listed on the 2nd page.
Click on: Source of Number and calculation outline – Click for details
Bob R: FYI, here is AAA’s current brochure on estimating driving costs:
JK: That is where my AAA number came from. It is based on a lot of expensive things that just are not done by most people. For instance, they replace the tires every year, buy a new car when the current one is paid off etc.
Adron Says: In reality, after all costs are included, insurance, the cost of parking, the land needed, the roadways (and all the space they take up), the subsidization externalities
JK: Same applies to transit, just different details.
Adron Says: and increased costs of supporting and industry via subsidization, the decreased saving of said socialization of the industry, the waste caused by congestion, and just those direct costs cause the per mile basis to drastically skyrocket.
I’d guess at about 1-3 bucks a mile.
JK: Standard Sierra Klub Krap. Now lets list the advantages of car ownership:
Saves money over mass transit
Saves energy over mass transit
Saves time compared to mass transit.
Reduces exposure to crime.
Saves lives compared to light rail.
Guess I’ll have to put up a page dedicated to this topic. I’ll bet when we are done, you’ll find transit is no better, maybe even worse. (At lest cars don’t emit soot, mercury, uranium of thorium like transit does)
Adron Says: After one adds in stabilization costs for oil regions,
JK: You are forgetting that mass transit uses oil too. In fact buses us MORE ENERGY to do the same job as cars (deliver passenger-miles). So, you are reducing oil region problems by dumping transit for your car. Look at the real numbers not the Krap coming out of the Sierra klub.
Adron Says: the elimination of more community oriented modes of transportation, the dispersing of society into sprawl
JK: There you go again – wanting to force your lifestyle on others. Please stop being like George Bush.
Adron Says: and other such costs it probably tacks on at least a few more bucks.
JK: Don’t forget the externalities of mass transit: Wasted time, higher crime, enables drug deals, less comfortable.
One final note: private cars are responsible for a large part of put high standard of living because of letting us make more efficient use of our time.
Thanks
JK
In fact buses us MORE ENERGY to do the same job as cars
You’ve stated this before and I’ve thoroughly debunked it right here on this site.
You’re comparing actual nationwide fleet transit numbers to theoretical fleet fuel economy if everyone drove more efficient cars, and even then you aren’t comparing the same kinds of trips.
– Bob R.
I dug through my old comments and here is a re-hash:
According to the May 24th (2006) TriMet press release regarding fuel prices, the agency consumes approx. 6.5 million gallons of Diesel fuel annually. (What portion of that is dedicated to LIFT service is not stated.)
According to their 2005 ridership data, TriMet provided 230,061,600 passenger miles of bus service (excluding LIFT).
That works out to a fleet average of about 35 passenger-miles per gallon. If LIFT service can be separated out from the total fuel consumption statistic, that means that standard bus service provided at an even better rate of fuel efficiency than 35pmpg.
The USA fleet average for all new cars and light trucks sold in 2004 is 24.7mpg, based on NHSTSA and EPA estimates. Assuming a generous average vehicle occupancy of 1.2 persons, that 29.64pmpg. Note that this value does not include sales of used cars or the performance of existing, older cars. Actual real-world USA fleet MPG is likely much lower. Even so, transit comes out at a 15% advantage.
– Bob R.
And you have to remember that there is still lots of room on TriMet buses. Often, more passenger miles could be accomplished without using much more fuel.
Overall, TriMet (and transit agencies in general) sends a good amount of service to places where it doesn’t make sense in terms of economics or efficiency but is needed as a “social service”, e.g. for people who may have no other way of getting around. Therefore, it really isn’t fair to use compare fleet averages.
A few things I noticed about the data for the cost/pass-mile
1) The data compares FY06 transit data vs. 01 government data for the cars.
2) The pass-miles tarveled data includes pass-miles on buses. It also includes trucks, which I’m not sure the BEA data includes.
3)I don’t think the BEA data includes externalties such as the local road system (largely paid for with property tax) or parking. Some estimates put the cost of all parking (employer, commercial, or whatever paid) at $400B per year.
4) If you take the BEA $ for transit of $12.5B and divide by the pass-miles of transit of 46.5B you get $0.27 per pass-mile. Of course this doesn’t include subsidies and whatnot, but neither does the auto data
I’m cool with whatever data, but lets not compare apples to oranges
I have a report from the University of Minnesota that shows the total cost of driving. I’ll try to find it and post it.
Bob R. Says: I dug through my old comments and here is a re-hash:
According to the May 24th (2006) TriMet press release regarding fuel prices, the agency consumes approx. 6.5 million gallons of Diesel fuel annually. (What portion of that is dedicated to LIFT service is not stated.)
According to their 2005 ridership data, TriMet provided 230,061,600 passenger miles of bus service (excluding LIFT).
That works out to a fleet average of about 35 passenger-miles per gallon. If LIFT service can be separated out from the total fuel consumption statistic, that means that standard bus service provided at an even better rate of fuel efficiency than 35pmpg.
The USA fleet average for all new cars and light trucks sold in 2004 is 24.7mpg, based on NHSTSA and EPA estimates. Assuming a generous average vehicle occupancy of 1.2 persons, that 29.64pmpg.
JK: Actual occupancy is 1.57, nationally. Recalculating your number: 38.76 passenger-mile per gallon. (see footnote at the bottom of DebunkingPortland.com/Transit/Cost-Cars-Transit.htm)
Don’t forget the broader argument:
1. Buses do not save energy. (Being close, say 15% either way does not negate this claim as 15% is not a really big number and there are a lot of inaccuracies in real world data.)
2. The best cars are a lot better than average.
3. It is a hard sell to get people out of a BMW and onto transit.
4. It is an easier sell to convince the BMW driver to get a more efficient BMW.
5. Same for joe six pack – get a more efficient car! That will be more likely to succeed and thus more likely to save energy. Especially with the plug-in hybrid which promises to allow many people to be oil free without being car free!!!
Bob R. Says: Note that this value does not include sales of used cars or the performance of existing, older cars. Actual real-world USA fleet MPG is likely much lower.
JK: My data is actual real world from the US government – just follow the links back to the original data page.
Bob R. Says: Even so, transit comes out at a 15% advantage.
JK: Actually it doesn’t – see above. Also, I don’t think you are going to get very far telling people to walk a ½ mile in the rain, wait for 10 min the rain and then stand for ½ hour next to a person who smells bad just to save 15%. Especially when that15% may not be real. Also see above.
Thanks
JK
You are forgetting that mass transit uses oil too. In fact buses us MORE ENERGY to do the same job as cars (deliver passenger-miles). So, you are reducing oil region problems by dumping transit for your car. Look at the real numbers not the Krap coming out of the Sierra klub.
I don’t even read the Sierra Klub, or Sierra Club. I generally spend my time reading car manuals to make my 350Z more efficient (performance wise) and faster. Trust me, I know cars. On the other hand I know rail, LRVs, Streetcars, and all that mess too. But based on your argument here we should immediately start shutting down bus lines that are noisy, polluting, and expensive and migrate to Streetcars ala the NOLA style (See my recent entry – NOLA Streetcars vs. Skoda.
Adron Says: the elimination of more community oriented modes of transportation, the dispersing of society into sprawl
JK: There you go again – wanting to force your lifestyle on others. Please stop being like George Bush.
Hey, I dont’ actually complain about a lack of community these days. It’s the “regular people” in America that tend to complain. The majority of people want community. I could care less. It’s just very hypocritical that cars are such a push by urban planners and pro-suburbanite types, generally the same people always screaming about the destruction of “community” in America. But whatever.
Adron Says: After one adds in stabilization costs for oil regions,
JK: You are forgetting that mass transit uses oil too. In fact buses us MORE ENERGY to do the same job as cars (deliver passenger-miles). So, you are reducing oil region problems by dumping transit for your car. Look at the real numbers not the Krap coming out of the Sierra klub.
Ummm, MAX doesn’t use oil. Neither does the Streetcar. I checked. They’re 100% native US power source users. The busses will soon be too. Portland is doing an amazing job at stifling any reason it would be associated with our grand freedom forcing wars of peace and happiness in the middle east.
But the whole point of my entry isn’t really to start an fuss. It simply is to point out that the 18 cent figure is baloneeeeee! It’s like going by the operations only number for transit, then dividing it for vehicles that where half the price in the 80s and not counting inflationary or maintenance costs or something. But lapsing from that concern the numbers aren’t representative in what you are trying to say. They aren’t representative in what we get, and they aren’t representative in the functional result you are implying (that the majority of cars are cheaper than transit).
The simple fact is that cars are becoming less and less preferred. Because they’re annoying, sprawl areas to high heaven and back, and are becoming more expensive from operational costs. You take 90% of people from places in sprawled environments and they’d take PDX anyday. Especially Unfortunately they’re usually stuck where they live. Just like so many people are.
In all facets though, I would rather a free-market oriented transit industry again. With mighty tycoons storming in to provide services and build up cities like none of us are old enough could remember. I’d love to see roads built and tolls applied directly to the users and high speed rail right next to those toll roads… both comparably priced but competing visciously.
But between the FRA, Passenger Regulation Acts, Transit Authorities, Pro-Road Policies of Government actions we don’t have that choice. So far the best I can do is live in Portland vs. some 100% auto oriented rat hole like Jacksonville FL or Houston TX. (Which the later is so desperately trying to change)
But I digress.
Thanks again for your personal car numbers Bob. Btw – I meant the Yaris. I still call it an Echo. You also are correct in your account of the reasons to buy either of the cars. I was just tossing the standard argument out there to give ya a jab in the side
JK wrote: Actual occupancy is 1.57, nationally.
I really find that one difficult to buy into.
To achieve a 1.5 average, for every one car with one person, the next car would need 2 people (3 people, 2 cars = 1.5 persons per car.)
For every 3 cars with 1 person, the next car would need to carry 3.
Or, for every 9 cars with 1 person, the next car would have to carry 6 people.
Simple observation when driving around doesn’t bear this out. But, I don’t have to use anecdotal personal experience: ODOT compiles occupancy statistics from analysis of crash data and organizes it by city… from the 2005 report:
From selected points in the metro area (most useful for comparing to transit)
Portland: 1.27
Beaverton: 1.33
Gresham: 1.33
Wilsonville: 1.30
The highest occupancy recorded anywhere in the state was 1.52 in Woodburn, and the statewide average is reported as 1.32.
I concede that my original value of 1.2 for the Portland area was a bit off (it’s somewhere between 1.27 and 1.33). Even assuming 1.33, it still does not make the automotive fleet more fuel efficient than bus transit in this area.
– Bob R.