Do we really need one car per 2 people, the average in the UK and W.Europe? 

(in N.America and Australasia the car/people ratio is more like 2 cars per 3 people)

everyday fun on the M25 (the London orbital motorway)

CARS – DO WE REALLY NEED THEM..?

Obviously we CAN live without cars, but can we live comfortably without them..?   And if so, HOW..?

The car lobby (and even perhaps most economists) would argue that, since such a large part of our economies revolve around the motor industry (at least 10-15% of GDP if we include all its ancillaries), we cannot afford to get rid of it.

The economic argument is that cars create lots of jobs, and they generate lots of taxes, penalties, and other economic boosts like finance, insurance, motorway pile-ups, breakdown truck industry, crash repair shops, police, lawyers, courts, etc, etc.    Or, as Zorba the Greek would say, the “full catastrophe”..!

The Car lobby would doubtless argue – “how would people in outlying commuter suburbs get to work, shops, schools, etc. without cars?”

The Green lobby would counter-argue “we need more and better and cheaper public transport, like most European cities have”

But the comparisons with better-served European cities like Paris or Barcelona ignore 2 crucial facts –

• European cities are much more densely-populated than London and (2) their public transport is very heavily subsidised

So why not BANISH private cars – at least from cities – altogether..? Why is nobody talking about that possibility..?

Well occasionally they do, as in this Guardian article which opens with a brash “cars must be driven out of cities…..not just replaced with electric vehicles”.

Realising how “impossible” this would be, the writer quickly backtracks and reverts to the same tired old cliches about “walking, cycling and better public transport”.

Prof Frank Kelly says fewer not cleaner vehicles are needed, plus more cycling and walking and better transit systems

Cars must be driven out of cities to tackle the UK’s air pollution crisis, not just replaced with electric vehicles, according to the UK government’s top adviser. Prof Frank Kelly said that while electric vehicles emit no exhaust fumes, they still produce large amounts of tiny pollution particles from brake and tyre dust, for which the government already accepts there is no safe limit.

Kelly said “The safe and efficient movement of people around the capital can only be achieved through a clean and expanded mass transit system – served by buses, overground train and the underground system – and by as much active transport in the form of walking and cycling as is feasibly possible.” “Attitudes toward car ownership do appear to be changing, with younger Londoners increasingly replacing little-used vehicles with car club membership and ride-sharing apps,”.

“the infrastructure that would make cycling and walking safe” IS no motorised vehicle infrastructure at all..!

NEGATING THE NEED FOR PRIVATE CARS

“Better public transport” is NOT the solution..!

  Buses and trams and subways cannot possibly compete with the comfort and convenience of a car.  Its no fun waiting in a draughty bus shelter at the best of times, but its a very miserable experience on a dark, cold, windy and wet night, especially if you’re over-burdened with shopping bags or young children.   When the bus finally arrives – 20 minutes late – its over-crowded and, most infuriatingly of all, 2 more buses are right behind..!

Of course It’s not possible – either practically or politically – to simply “ban” motor vehicles from cities. Our entire urban infrastructure is built around motor vehicles and, since there is not going to any wholesale demolition our existing cities are stuck with cars for the foreseeable future.

We are never going to achieve a really substantial emissions reduction when we have almost as many cars as people.

If we didn’t use cars on a daily basis but only for occasional pleasure outings we wouldn’t “need” anywhere near the number of cars we now have.

Within our existing urban sprawls, where homes workplaces shops and schools are widely scattered, it would be highly impractical – not to say very unpopular – to ban cars. Although in places like London “congestion charges” – which are constantly being “upped” – and other stealth revenue-raising methods, which are justified/disguised as “environmental taxes”, are making car ownership increasingly unaffordable for all but the most wealthy.

And the ONLY way to totally negate the need for cars (and most other motorised traffic) is to create completely new habitats in which people do not NEED cars at all.

My idea of Oasis Cities is similar in many ways to resort hotels

Of course this cannot be done overnight or even in a matter of decades

Once OA-Cities have proved their worth, OB-Cities will be gradually depopulated and maybe even abandoned.

But before that happens they will become dystopian hell-holes ruled by criminal gangs.