What is Digg?Sponsored by Amazon.com
Kindle(TM) - Amazon's #1 most gifted product view!
amazon.com - Order Kindle now and receive it in time for Christmas. Free Expedited shipping. Click to learn more.
95 Comments
- SoccerBoy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12This is something that cities need to start to think about. Maybe increasing mass transit and whatnot...
- JimXugle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10"Many cities are too far gone to be easily re-designed around not using cars."
Like Pittsburgh... We're *****. The city is in a vally surrounded by beadrock-filled mountains and most commuters live on the other side of these mountains. I doubt they're goin to drill a few more tunnels for an extended metro system. - kremvax, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I think that the Tokyo system could give NYC's a run for its money.
Don't get me wrong, I ride the MTA every day, and it's a wonderful thing, but as far as size, length and ridership, I believe Tokyo's system is much larger. ( And cleaner. And, in fairness, better funded.) - johnjreiser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8The reason these cities were chosen was not because their roads are magically more fuel efficient. These cities are compact, pedestrian and have the density to support mass transit. Neither ethanol or fuel cells will solve the problem of suburban sprawl. The argument against sprawl used to be environmentally based as the outward growth impacted water and air quality and ate up what used to be open space. This was considered a weak argument when delivered to the public: many do not understand sprawl's impact or they simply don't care. Now, the argument against sprawl is clear as day to people: you're stuck at home. No trips to the mall, no dropping the kids off at soccer practice. Hope that you can make it to work.
You don't even have to live in a city to escape this future. Even well designed small towns can provide you with that single family home and enough to do that you won't always be so compelled to hop in the car for a jaunt over to Wal Mart. It's a matter of alternative places, not alternative fuels. - quasipalm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I live in new york and love it. BUT, the other day I was watching a PBS show about the subway in Beijing and it was soooo much cleaner and nicer looking than here in nyc.
I know that the subway system is 100 years old in parts, but come on, why the ***** can't those union members try and clean up a bit? There is a station in Queens that I use to get to a friends house... it's in a reasonably nice hood too, but the ceiling is literally rotting away, the tiles falling off, i've seen giant cockroaches (I don't even care about rats anymore... they're at least kinda cute) and the whole place smells like piss.
Sometimes I feel like I should move to a third world country just so I can ride a clean train to work.
But hey... It's still better than car-based big cities. And I guess I'll be cool with it all when I can still visit my friend after the first major oil crisis. :-) - randyest, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7You can't just increase it in many areas because the areas are too large/sprawling, and you need a critical mass of users to make it worthwhile. That takes time and long-term planning and investment. Many cities are too far gone to be easily re-designed around not using cars.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Nice to see Portland in the list. I can't believe how pathetic public transportation is in most other cities. In Portland, it is cheaper, faster and often more relaxing to take lightrail or a bus to wherever you need to go than it is to deal with traffic. In most other cities I have lived in (San Jose/Santa Clara, Denver/Broomfield, etc) -- the transit has been almost non-existant. When it does exist, it's expensive, complex and infrequent. I lived my entire life without owning a car, because I lived in Portland. I only bought one when I moved out to the Denver area and realized that not every city was blessed with great transit.
- SoccerBoy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6NYC is pretty good. I have been on several other good ones though... Toronto's (bus, train, subway, and streetcar) TTC is pretty close.
- Punkymonkey, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I doubt that we need to copy european mass transit systems. They are on strike every other week, and i don't just mean France. There is no more efficient and extensive subway and bus system than NYC.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If you have a diesel car, it costs $100 to convert to biodiesel. Then you can run it off all that toxic waste oil from fast food restaurants. Don't tell anybody else during an oil crisis though, they'll all be doing it.
Personally, I hope there is a devasting oil crisis, one bad enough to start nation-wide riots and shutdown the country. I think that, short of a full-on global warming apocalypse, is going to be the only thing to wake up gas-guzzling, terrorist oil-sucking, ignorant, lazy American morons--and the rest of the world.
You think Americans can't live through that? We can, and we will. What the real problem is that Americans have it too easy, they need a wake-up call to get them off their asses and demanding change--hybrid cars are not enough! We could be rid of oil dependence because of a genuine crisis much faster, AND CHEAPER, than the criminal Dick Halliburton administration wants you to believe.
Bring it on, you murderous oil company rats! We're going to shut you and your terrorist friends down for good! - corduroy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The problem with that is that the United States isn't Europe. The USA couldn't copy the European system because of its population distribution. We've been fortunate here in the States to have cheap gasoline which has enabled us to live outside of the city and buy big, cheap houses (and I'd say, healthier). But that double edged sword also means that we have taken up a much larger area.... which would reduce a mass transit system's efficiency. Europe, with its higher gasoline prices, has made it expensive for people to live far outside the city which obviously means that more people live in the city. A higher population density is much better for a transit system.
A common thread that binds most of those cities in that top ten list are their population densities. - SPNKrPunk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Honolulu makes a little more sense though. The bus network may not be so efficient, but Honolulu's relatively small footprint makes it a little more polite for non-motorized transportation, such as Bikes or simply walking. Also, they may be taking into consideration the distance people commute from home to work. For those that live in Honolulu, its rather short.
...though you'd spend a lot of time in traffic. - AeonTorpor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Hell, I think Phoenix, AZ is pretty far gone too. We're so damned spread out w/ so little public trans (only buses), we have to use cars. To get to the nearest community college is about 6-7 miles from my home, and the next closest is over 15 miles. My dad works over 30 miles from home.
And the real problem is since downtown is in the opposite direction of where we need to go, most of the buses don't head in our direction at appropriate times, especially to get to work or school in the minimum of 2 hours. To top that off my dad works at night. Try finding a bus at 4am to take you home from work. I'm thinking about getting a motorcycle because of this. Cheaper than a hybrid and > or = gas mileage. - JingJang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This group has nailed the issue. Food. Long before this study can be "tested" there will be civil breakdown because the U.S. infrastructure - which is mostly based on oil (diesel) trucks - will drive the cost of food through the roof. Being able to jump in the car and run over to Walmart will be a long lost dream at the point that we can't afford to put food on the table.
In fairness, this article did take into consideration which cities are close to "sources" of food (which is probably why Hawaii scored higher than some people thought it should), but I wonder about how "direct" the chain of food production to consumption really is. Earlier posters have commented on how much oil is require to produce our food also. - buss, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Most of canada's oil is locked up in oil-sand mixtures that is way too expensive to refine.
- lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Plus cost of goods would probably rise significantly because I am pretty sure that the cargo ships don't run on wind power.
- flamingmb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Hell yeah Portland OR! It seems that everywhere you turn here there is public transportation. And a lot of people ride bicycles too. I do not own a car, I ride a bike, so I think I would fare ok when the oil ran out. Really people if you live in a city like portland or nyc just ride a bike, its so much faster then going by car, and its cheaper by far, its also much funner to ride.
- buss, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I would make the argument that (in China) since the government provides the mass transit service and it wants to maintain legitimacy, it makes sure that the stations are perfectly clean. It results in good feelings toward the government.
- alistairf, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3as someone else commented, mass transit requires a critical mass of people willing to use it. Crappy roads help too. On the other hand, in Albuquerque (decent roads and Democratic mayor) they have been planning for mass transit for a few years (free wifi on the cross town buses). However, in Colorado Springs (crappy roads and I'm guessing a Republican mayor given "focus on the family" and a large military population in that town) is barely looking in the direction of mass transit.
What I'm waiting for is for the baby-boom generation that typically voted against mass transit proposals in a lot of areas (e.g. Orange County) to retire and get to the point where they can't drive. Too bad they voted against mass transit when they were driving their big cars. I bet when they get into their 70's mass transit all of a sudden seems like a great idea.
But I digress...(and ramble) - kurtm85, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2baltimore rules!
- mutz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2America has cheap oil? how does that come? you invade every freakin' country with some oil (covert or with blunt military).... if they don't eat your capitalism you stuff it through their throats...
American way of living... Fat plumpers everywhere.. Why do you fight?
Ever tought at that question when you're filling up your suv...
(offtopic, troll, etc...) - UNL1M1T3D, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well said.
- LexisNexis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Hopefully Hawaii gets a mass transit system like BART in the near future, it's getting pretty damn insane coming to town from Aiea, let alone Ewa or Kapolei.
- beoswulf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1daFilms: We are talking about one MTA strike in 20 years... so no, Americans don't strike in the memory of many Digg users.
Beijing's subway is great but it's a showpiece for the government, the same way the Moscow subway stations were palaces for the workers.
The NYC subway suffers from underfunding because the money comes from the state. The state government has a history ranging from apathy to outright hostility towards NYC. - spadin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I hear they have volcano catapults in Hawaii. It's pretty economical to hop from one island to the other.
- darkenin13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13 letters to describe this for happening, the SUV,
I live in NYC and all i see is small little ladies in giant escalades, hummers and Navigators, why do these tiny woman feel the need to be in Gigantic gas guzzling SUV's - johnjreiser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@quasipalm
Beijing has serious problems with pollution and smog. They're just beginning their trip to auto-dependency (which is increasing the demand on what oil is left). If you want to see clean transit systems, check out Germany, Holland and Switzerland.
The MTA system suffers due to lack of funding. Unless public sentiment (and political will) moves to support transit, it's likely that some stations will languish a little bit longer. - bharder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Our mom & pop gas prices are usually a bit less, but the chain stations float around the national average.
Public transit is horrible here, pretty much everyone I know owns a car.
(5 people in the house = 5 cars)
No sidewalks, no bike lanes... I hate it. - buss, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I recently stopped driving my car to school/work. I take the bus now. Sure its not as convenient, but I get about 30 minutes every morning and afternoon where I really can't do anything but study. Plus I'm not paying the $2.85/gallon of gas. The bus system in Gainesville, FL is pretty good. Near the University of Florida the buses come very often, I just live towards the edge of the city so I get the bus once an hour. Its free for students which is a huge bonus.
On a different note, I think buses are great candidates for introducing new fuel technologies. It beats the supply/demand requirement by introducing both at the same time. Then make the city pumps for alternate fuels for the buses open to the public and cheaper than regular gas and you will start to see people seriously making the switch. - Silencer7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Don't forget how much oil goes into the fertilizing, growing, and processing of your food.
http://www.harpers.org/TheOilWeEat.html
The Oil We Eat, by Richard Manning--really excellent article.
"Ever since we ran out of arable land, food is oil. Every single calorie we eat is backed by at least a calorie of oil, more like ten..." "It takes thirty-five calories of fossil fuel to make a calorie of beef this way; sixty-eight to make one calorie of pork..." - UNL1M1T3D, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1One of the many downfalls of living around the motor city. In Detroit we would be screwed hardcore, because other than the people mover (which holds probably a max of 100 people at a time and only goes to major tourist areas in the city) we are dependent on cars. I live about an hour from Detroit so it wouldn't really affect me too much, but I just started a new job about a half an hour away, and that would suck. Plus I heard from a very reliable source that gas prices are going to go up A LOT this summer. He couldn't elaborate a whole lot, but he just said be prepared for when the summer comes. Looks like I have one more reason to get that motorcycle I have been wanting for a while. ;)
- victortrash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You said it redhotwheels. Our mass transit is a mess. We've just recently gotten out of a bus strike that ended up with LESS busses on the road. We don't have any type of rail system. Twenty years ago, the legistature balked at the hundreds of millions price tag...now they're looking at somewhere along the lines of billions. Care to guess what they're decision is going to be? We live in the middle of the ocean. Aside from SOME food essentials, we're stuck here. I just hate to guess how much we're going to have to pay for toilet paper.
- qwab, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1We are so screwed!
- casca, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I doubt there will be riots. Just less people on the road and more people riding buses! haha sucks to be them.
- jerrysizzler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1whether one rides a bike, bus, spaceship, or segway to work, they use fuel. so we're dependent on oil. Thanks Captains Obvious, Redundant, and Retarded.
Everyone miss the point. Good job. - EricAnderton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yikes. Being a resident here, I know firsthand that DC has a few problems that make it almost completely dependent upon Gasoline:
- Building height ordinance in the city limits prohibits high-rises and thus encourages sprawl.
- Mass transit system *explicitly* designed to get people in and out of the downtown area exclusively.
- Operating hours for mass transit system tailored for 9-5 M-F workforce.
- Mass transit options in MD and VA refuse to service customers across county borders.
- Bus/Metro/Parking fares for a month worth of commuting are almost the same as a car payment.
- Typical NIMBY reaction for almost anything having to do with adding roads to shortening commutes or installing light-rail (see "purple line" proposal).
The net result is an environment that is hostile to people without cars (especially those in the burbs), and those who work off-hours or on weekends. As mass transit here is only useful for a core section of the workforce, this leaves a vast swath of people without any other options but to drive around. - kuyakew, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0nice to see my home town at #1.
- UNL1M1T3D, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Very well said. Though I don't want to have to pay $10 a gallon, I am afraid that might be the only thing that is really going to make people/companies change their ways.
- recursive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0$5/gallon? Oh no, that's no crisis. I think things might start shaking up a little when it hits $25 though. I think gas will be $5 within the next 5 years, maybe 3.
- Amiga, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0redhotwheels hit the nail on the head. My state of Hawaii would probably be the least able to handle an energy crisis. Honolulu has an alright bus system, but our roads were already a mess prior to the recent floods.
- millhouse5000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+01. RE: the comments about transporting food: RTFA. Proximity to natural resources was part of the equation - meaning that a city reliant on locally grown produce (NYC -> upstate NY, Long Island, NJ) requires LESS FUEL than a city in, say, the desert. They aren't saying "these cities will be impervious to an oil crisis" but rather "these cities will be LESS affected than other cities".
2. Commenters complaining about the lack of public transit to your local suburb: move to the city you live near. To everyone who lives in a sprawl area, that probably sounds ridiculous, but that's how it's done in places that it works. In public transit-oriented cities, easily the most important real estate decision is location -- mainly in relation to the closest subway stop. We don't rent/buy homes in places where there is no transit and then expect it to come to us. It reminds me of my brother-in-law, who has now built TWO gigantic brand new houses at least 30 miles from anything in any direction, but complains endlessly about the lack of road maintenance and services near him. - fizzeh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"published on 24 Mar 2006" -- This was definitely on digg before!
- cphuntington97, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1syko21 you found the magic word!
FOOD!
Guess how your food got to you? ON A TRUCK!
If your food was once an animal, guess how it ate when it was alive? Food was brought in to feed the animals ON A TRUCK!
Not getting to work is going to be the least of anyone's worries in a gas shortage. The big problem is going to be: hunger. - jerrysizzler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1not to mention that their busses suck, there's no bike-friendly streets anywhere, and it's in the middle of nowhere with no resources nearby but defunct train tracks and the busiest airport on Earth...
...now that Freaknik is gone, why keep that place around at all? - jerrysizzler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Hey RichPowers, meet my friends Max Power and Chesty LaRue...
as a Ballard resident, I don't hold King County Metro in quite as high regard as you. While they adequately cover those hubs throughout the city, they can't adequately support a city by only providing service every 30 minutes on many routes. ...but then again, they didn't even want to join Seattle two hundred years ago anyway, and as with any Seattle [NYC, SF, etc.] neighborhood, the area can be self-sufficient without having to flock downtown.
BUT there's no excuse for the moped-bashing. True, there's probably an inordinate number of those frickin' scooters in Seattle than elsewhere, but it's d-bags like you who probably also hate me and my [non-motorized] bicycle for knocking you and your groceries on the ground just before cutting your furniture delivery man off and causing him to crash into your favourite Taco Del Mar. Well you deserved it! - frozendice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1/me does the i'm glad I ride the bus dance.
gas == $0.00 - Hydraulix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow, I'm really glad Baltimore is on this list. Now if we can switch our murder rate (which is at #2) to where we are for oil (#9) the air might be a little cleaner. :)
- Silencer7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wait...what resources/necessities does Phoenix have that aren't trucked in, shipped in by rail or sent through pipes/canals?
- linuxrebel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I find this list to be interesting but I have one major problem with it. Food. You see everywhere I've been I've found that people do enjoy eating. That 3 dollar a pint coffee you drink. How many gallons of oil does it take to get it to you? Most of the cities on the list are highly dependent upon the trucking industry to deliver the most basic of commodities. Food.
In how many of these cities will you see 5 dollar a gallon diesel result in 3 dollar a dozen eggs? Now a whole bunch of wannabe rich upper middle class (but still middle class economically speaking) forget that although they can survive the 3 dollar a dozen egg situation by leaving the Mercedes at home, the woman down the street with 3 kids and a job at Denny's won't be as fortunate.
It's one thing when people are doing smash and grabs for quick cash to buy a pair of sneaks. it's entirely different when 1/4 of the city is unable to afford to feed itself because food prices are through the roof. Wait until Dick and Sally SUV find out that they can't walk from the Supermarket to their condo with a bag of groceries without taking their life into their own hands. Want to know what a man will do when pushed. Have his kids crying all the time because they are hungry. - linuxrebel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Respectfully your direct gas expenditure is 0. Yes. However your actual expenditure is much higher. Part of the charge for the bus is for gas Part of it is others. Then there is the gas money you spend to eat. (Food had to get to you somehow.) Plus the oil you burn doing things like reading, working on the computer (wanna know how much of your computer is built from Petro Chemicals?)
Riding the bus is nice but remember the top polluted cities in the world also have the best public transportation systems (London, Seoul and Tokyo for example.) If it where horses instead of cars we'd be up to our buns in horse manure. -
Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
