Few Insights on Bike Sharing Schemes

Sudhir Gota

My previous blog resulted in a request for more insights on bike sharing system. Please find below some insights on such systems based on literature review and my understanding of the subject.

1.             A minimum standard of bicycle infrastructure is necessary to ensure safety and accessibility to bike-sharing stations. Experts argue that bikeways, bike lanes, special intersection modifications, and priority traffic signals and other facilities are the key for its success.  Without any infrastructure, bike sharing scheme does not have any chance.

2.             The number of daily users per bike increase for larger and denser systems. Isolated small systems have smaller impact. In other words, larger the system, wider the coverage, more would be the usage of a bike in a day.

3.             Bike-sharing trips should be short and the system should encourage short trips.

4.             More number of bikes should be located in CBD/tourist areas as the usage would be more

5.             Stations should be separated by not more than 500m. As a ageneral rule of thumb, It should be ideally less than 300m. In case, it’s more than 500m, it adversely affects the usage.

6.             Pricing should be optimal - virtually all schemes provide first 30 min or 60 min free to encourage short trips

7.             Bicycle availability and in good condition is important. To ensure this one needs to provide good budget for maintenance. many schemes use atleast 1000 USD/Year/Bike for operational maintenance

8.             In case the terrain is hilly, bike distribution to stations becomes difficult (people would not ride uphill). So distributing the bikes with trucks to various stations is a common solution. But better idea is to vary the pricing... provide more free time at low demand area.

9.             Availability of people already biking was considered initially as a recipe for success. Many cities which initially adopted this had high bike share (10-30%)... but slowly after its success in US where the bike population is not even 1% is making people consider this as a myth.

10.           No smart bike program has made a profit to date from its operation. So schemes designed with profit in mind are less likely to be successful.

11.           Interesting thing about ownership is that now even public transit authorities are getting involved in these schemes for solving first and last connectivity problem.  In fact, many consider that Bikes and stations should be co-located with transit for best integration.

12.           Temperature and rains have big impact. For example, data from velib indicates that the ratio of trips during bad weather and good weather is sometimes as high as 1: 4.6. The success of the scheme depends on design to counter the adverse impact of weather. Some cities are proposing 3 season design which means that the system would not work during rainy season or in hot summer. By using appropriate design like shades, overhead cover, routes through interlinked parks etc. the weather impacts can be reduced.

13.            Theft is a big problem. Many assume that this system does not work in cities having high crime rates based on Velib experience. This is not true. The design makes a big difference. Barcelona has higher crime rate then Paris but only few number of bikes vandalized or stolen. The locking mechanism and the technology used make a big difference.  Also, one cannot keep security deposit less than the cost of the bike (many cities have done that). Also, by allotting appropriate budget ( say 10%)  thefts can be reduced.

14.           Average trip length of bike users is around 4 km and >60% of users are less than 40 years old.

15.           Placement of bike station requires managing the conflicting desires of program visibility and aesthetics.

16.           Bike sharing stations should be so located so as to encourage multimodal transport. Locating bikes only at destinations or origins does not work.   

17.           Bike-share programs need have more docking stations than bicycles (typically 40-50% more) to ensure that users can always find a place to leave their bicycle. Sufficient bicycles and docks are needed to guarantee accessibility of bikes.

18.           Some argue that keeping the system open for 24 hours can increase the patronage as seen in Velib. Nearly 25% of trips are between 9 pm to 3 am. So keeping the stations open during the sunrise to sunset may reduce the demand.

19.           Experts believe that mandating helmet use on bike-sharing may not be a great idea and may adversely influence ridership. Some cities are changing their laws on helmets when implementing bike sharing schemes while some are handing out free helmets with annual subscription, launching safety campaigns etc.

20.           Share bikes should be distinctive and should be designed for urban areas. Like BRTS, branding is important.

21.           In case the commercial model follows franchise model relying on bicycle advertisements, than the priority areas for initial placement depends on demand.

Air Pollution in China

Revolutionizing Public Transport with Bike Sharing Systems

Sudhir Gota

London Mayor’s ambition to increase cycling in the city by 400 percent in 25 years has resulted in development of a new bicycle sharing scheme which is being publicized as   "a new dawn for the bicycle in the capital“.

London is not alone.  Such systems exist in more than 260 areas/cities worldwide. These kind of schemes are formulated with the philosophy of collaborative consumption and the best thing is -it’s low cost, works best for short trip lengths and helps prevent sprawl and improves health. Many believe that like BRTS, these systems have the potential to transform public transport systems and also help in evolving public acceptability of bike as a means of active transport.

This system has evolved in last four decades - from simple painted, free-to-use bicycle system to coin-operated locking system to third generation systems using card reading technology. Experts believe that the next generation of schemes would be more techno-savvy i.e. demand-responsive and multi-modal systems.  Good overviews of such systems are available here and here. Rich resources are being daily updated here.

Source : CAI Asia

Statistics reveal that the Bike-share programs bring substantial numbers of new people into bicycling. The evaluation of different schemes suggests that substantial number of public bike riders used to make bus trips (46%) earlier.  Clearly, increasing the number of buses need not be the only sustainable solution for the planners.  Investigations show that such schemes do not have significant impact on current congestion levels.  The approximate shift from Cars, two wheelers and taxis is found to be only 12%.  But, one also needs to consider the future growth of vehicles and subsequent congestion and future infrastructure investment required to realize the impact of such systems.  The positive impact of such schemes on environment should not be neglected. Quick conservative assessment reveals that a small system in Asia with 1000 bikes on an average can reduce 120 tons of CO2 emissions/year or 120 kg’s of CO2 emissions per bike per year.  On economic terms, the savings may be less but then one needs to consider the long term impact on people’s mindset and the land use.

Why bike sharing system is so popular with people?

Reports reveal that in a survey in China many people were asked as to why they prefer public bike systems and they responded - 35% - Convenient for transfer, 32% - Saves time versus previous mode, 18% - Environmental Friendly and 16% - Convenience

 
View The Bike-sharing World Map in a larger map

 Source : http://bike-sharing.blogspot.com/

  

It’s clear that when technology and infrastructure are harmonized to create a cheap public transport sharing system, the results can be exciting. In fact in order to encourage short trips, these systems provide generally free service up to 60 minutes.  Reports suggest that on an average, the bikes are being used 2 to 16 times a day depending upon the location, scheme and city structure. Such is the popularity of the system that it is been developed, financed and managed by diverse set of stakeholders ranging from local governments, transport agencies, advertising companies, for-profit, and non-profit organizations.

System	VELIB’	BICING	BIXI	Beijing	Hangzhou	Nanchang	Wuhan
Operator	JCDecaux	ClearChannel Adshel	Sta onnement de Montréal	Fortune	Bicycle service	Xinfeida	Xinfieda
City	Paris	Barcelona	Montreal, Canada	Beijing	Hangzhou	Nanchang	Wuhan
Start Date	Jul-07	Mar-07	Spring 2009	Aug-05	May-08	Aug-09	Nov-08
Bicycles	20,600	6,000	5000	10,000	50,000	1000	20000
Bike Stations	1451	400	400	1000	2000	30	718
Rentals/day	12.5	16	15	2.32	8	4	5

The potential for bike sharing in Asia is huge. Researchers believe that more than 60 percent of the increase in the world's urban population over the next three decades will occur in Asia. To accommodate such a large population not only the cities would enlarge, number of cities would also increase rapidly. Bike sharing schemes with low cost and high performance can provide better solutions for cities having significant number of trips with short trip lengths (less than 6 km).  Mark my words – “The bike revolution would revolutionize public transport systems.  ”

Walkability in Asian Cities - few Quotes and Statistics

Sudhir Gota

“In the age of carbon footprint we are forgetting human footprints”

I have collected few statistics and quotes on walkability. I am sure that these would derive a range of emotions from you – anger, surprise, despair, disgust, empathy etc….
Pedestrian facilities have been depreciating over the past decade. Cities which are naturally designed for walking are increasingly becoming motorized by vehicles. Travel time budgets are breaking new barriers with many people travelling for more than 2 hours a day and getting frustrated with the quality of transport. Everybody acknowledges that walkability is very important but however translating ideas to practice has been very slow.  Pedestrian improvement projects provide cheap solution to the problem of urban mobility. Using the same money as required for constructing 1 km metro, one can, on an average, construct 350 km of new quality sidewalks. 
If the footpaths had been expensive, things would have been different !!

Statistics from CAI-Asia study on Walkability in Asian cities

1. 82% of people in asia are willing to walk maximum of only 100m to access pedestrian crossings.
2. If the walking environment is not improved, 82% of people would shift to vehicles
3. About 40% of people consider that they are most exposed to air pollution while walking
4. More than 70% of people in Kathmandu and Jakarta consider their walkways as bad or of poor quality
5. In Asia, the budget for pedestrian facilities is often in the range of 0.2 to 5% of transportation budget while it accommodates more than 30% of trips.
6. On an average 28% of trips are within 3 km, 24% within 3 to 6 km in an asian city
7. Using the same money as required for constructing 1 km metro, one can, on average, construct 350 km of new quality sidewalks
8. In a city, commercial areas have the best walkability whereas the public transport terminals have the worst walkability

Source : Times of India

Statistics from other sources

1. In Sri Lanka, at least 1/10th of space of all roads within urban areas provided exclusively for non-motorized transport such as for sidewalks for walking and bicycle lanes  (Action Plan for Traffic Management in Greater Colombo (2008))
2. In Jakarta, people with disabilities must wear special signs that are visible to motorists - (Article 132 (3)) of Traffic and Road Transport Act of Indonesia
3. 40% of the total Road Length of Delhi has no Sidewalks- RITES Transport Demand Forecast Study: May 2008
4. Nearly half of fatal accidents in Delhi involve – pedestrians - Walkability Roundtable, Centre for Science and Environment, July 2009
5. Nearly half of fatal accidents in Philippines and Bangladesh involve pedestrians - World Health Organization (WHO, 2009)
6. Benefit-cost ratio of replacing the underground crossings with surface crossings is 7.6:1 – Transport for London
7. 68% of countries in the world don’t have national or local level policies that promote walking and cycling  - World Health Organization (WHO, 2009)
8. In Bangalore, three pedestrians are killed on roads every other day and more than 10,000 are hospitalized annually- Deccan herald
9. Children under ten years old are the most vulnerable pedestrian group in Thailand - Asian Institute of Technology
10. 50% of people don’t use skywalks since it involves climbing, descending and long detour - D Sanyal, Bangalore Transportation Summit
11. In Hong Kong only 13.5% of households have access to private vehicles – 2002, Transport Department
12. In Hong Kong, 49% of people don’t walk due to unsuitable weather – 2002, Transport Department
13. In Fushun, 58% of the survey respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that cars do not slow down at marked midblock crossings - Wendy Tao
14. In 2009, more than 70% of road fatalities in Mumbai were Pedestrians - Mumbai Traffic Police

Other quotes

1. “Restore human legs as a means of travel. Pedestrians rely on food for fuel and need no special parking facilities.” -  Lewis Mumford quotes (American Writer, 1895-1990)
2. Everywhere is walking distance if you have the time.  ~Steven Wright
3. No city should be too large for a man to walk out of in a morning.  ~Cyril Connolly
4. A pedestrian is someone who thought there were a couple of gallons left in the tank.  ~Author Unknown
5. Thoughts come clearly while one walks.  ~Thomas Mann
6. Walking:  the most ancient exercise and still the best modern exercise.  ~Carrie Latet
7. Don't let people drive you crazy when you know it's in walking distance.  ~Author Unknown
8. All truly great thoughts are conceived by walking. - Friedrich Nietzsche
9. "It is solved by walking." - Latin Proverb
10. "Every trip starts and ends on foot"  - ~Author Unknown
11. improving walkability entails improvement not only in the physical infrastructure but equally in the minds of people - CAI-Asia (2010)
12. Walking has important social benefits as well. More people walking on the streets is a signal that an area is safe and interesting. A prominent characteristic of vital urban neighborhoods is their vibrant pedestrian street life (Jacobs, 1961).
13. Man is first and foremost a pedestrian  ~Author Unknown

Depreciation in Trips

Virtually all the cities are showing depreciation in percentage of people using walking as a means of transport. Some cities show dramatic reductions in-spite of traffic models inconsistency to measure walking trips.

Please find a video on walkability in Asian cities which my colleague developed for training participants of ADB transport forum. You may find this interesting..

Impact of Expressways on Emissions

Sudhir Gota

Expressways are often packaged as a silver bullet solution to reduce congestion and emissions. While, expressways provides fast and reliable movement, but it is effective only when one optimally prices the travel. Building roads without pricing it optimally yields high induced development and traffic thereby causing gridlock again – a case similar to new mall providing discounts to generate the footfalls.

Huge number of literature has been generated from around the world showing that an expressway which provides cheap mobility often induces more traffic and thus builds congestion in the network. But, not much research has been carried out on life cycle assessment of such expressways. Three corridors in India and one in VietNam were considered for investigation.  The projects were essentially two lanes to four lane conversion projects. The VietnNam corridor was a new expressway project.

The impact has been considered in two stages – short and long term.

a.       Short Term: It is incorrect to assume that higher speeds always reduce emissions

It's a myth that higher the speed, lower would be the emission.  On the contrary, the emission is lowest when speed is in the range of 40-60 kmph. Lower emissions not only mean better environment but also saving precious fuel. The impact of capacity expansion on corridors during the first 5 years after the improvement after neglecting the induced traffic is shown below.  

Project	Scenario	Description (Kilo tons CO2/Km)					~V/C	Avg Speed (kmph)
		1st Year	2nd Year	3rd Year	4th Year	5th Year
Belgaum-Dharwad	BAU	2.65	2.78	2.92	3.07	3.22	0.45	58
	After Project	2.69	2.83	2.97	3.12	3.27	0.2	80
Salem-Namakkal	BAU	2.28	2.39	2.51	2.63	2.77	0.4	59
	After Project	2.32	2.43	2.55	2.67	2.81	0.2	80
Surat-Manor	BAU	5.959	6.452	7.434	7.962	8.107	0.85	41
	After Project	5.415	5.842	6.327	6.659	7.213	0.4	76
Ho Chi Minh -Long Thanh-Dau Giay	BAU	3.099	3.354	3.63	3.94	4.265	0.52	57
	After Project	3.211	3.476	3.763	4.073	4.41	0.23	80

Impact of Road Capacity Expansion in Corridors during Five Years 

(excluding induced traffic impact)

It is clear that even during initial years the capacity expansion may not yield CO2 savings.  The savings are obtained only in the projects which has existing speed below 40kmph. Increasing the capacity of road which already facilitates speed between 40-60 kmph is iatrogenic. The spur in speed can have disastrous effects on emissions if it exceeds the 40-70 kmph range.

b.      Long Term: Induced traffic should not be neglected in emissions quantification

An increase in traffic speed reduces the cost thereby attracting more traffic. Researchers globally have found lane kilometer to have a statistically-significant relationship with VKT. This impact has been quantified in the range of 0.5 to 1. Considering the above criteria and by varying the levels of induced traffic, the emissions were quantified to evaluate the impacts of induced traffic. Using an induced traffic elasticity of 1, the analysis shows that emissions typical national highway in India are higher by over 58% as compared to a scenario which excludes induced traffic considerations.  Under varying scenarios of elasticity from 0.25 to 1, the quantified emissions may range from 17 to 58% when tested for 3 different corridors.

An analysis of a typical corridor shows that induced traffic would reduce the initial year savings and would increase the emissions over the project lifecycle.

 

c.       Air quality impacts are highly correlated to CO2 emissions

In case the project provides CO2 reductions there is a huge likelihood that the project may provide similar air quality benefits.

% Increase with induced traffic ( elasticity 1)

	CO2	PM	Nox
Surat Manor	64	76	81
Salem Namakkal	80	82	82

  

d.      Construction of expressways make individual travel more efficient

It’s true that expressways due to high induced traffic may increase the emissions when compared with no project scenario. It’s also true that expressways make the individual travel better.  Over the project lifetime, it was found that the improvement is in the range of 20-25%. However, more traffic on the road nullifies the benefit and increases the total emissions.

e.    Road maintenance can impact the emissions profile of vehicles

By increasing the roughness from 2m/km to 4, 6 and 9 m/km, the emissions (CO₂ Tons/Km/Year) increase by 1.6, 3.3 and 5.8% respectively.  Thus by following good maintenance strategies, emissions can be reduced to a certain extent by keeping a check on emissions. More insights on impact of roughness can be found here.

f.      Construction Emissions should be considered in project analysis

Literature review and subsequent analysis indicated that the construction emissions are a significant fraction of total lifetime emissions. An analysis based on the quantity of construction materials used – cement, steel and bitumen indicates that the approximate emissions of a two lane to four lane improved highway is approximate 1100 tons/km. When all the quantities are considered including the emissions generated by machinery, the emissions range from 2100 to 2400 tons/km for high-speed roads  (four-lanes) based on traffic, topography and type of improvements suggested. The operations emissions calculated in the test corridors ranged from 1700 to 7000 tons/km indicating that for high speed roads, (at-grade four-lane highway) construction emissions can range from few months to maximum 2 years of operation emissions.

g.       Placeholders

The analysis of three corridors provided the following placeholders

•      CO2 Footprint  = 1100  Tons/lane-km/Year
•        CO2 Savings Indicator = -350 Tons/lane-km/Year ( - ve sign indicates increase in emissions when compared to BAU)

Please click here to read the entire report and access presentations. Comments can be mailed to sudhir(at)cai-asia.org.