What Elon Musk Doesn't Get About Urban Transit

https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2017/12/what-elon-musk-doesnt-get-about-urban-transit/548843/

by atsneed • 9 years ago

79 133 9 years ago

"Musk doesn’t want to share a vehicle with “a bunch of random strangers.” But the presence of random strangers is what a city is"

Yes. This is the essential fundamental pro & con of living in the city: "There's a lot of other people nearby". If the benefits of this situation don't outweigh the downsides, then maybe the city isn't right for you.

This is not to say that maybe by appealing to the rich people who don't like associating with the rabble, he might have a successful business. But for the vast majority of commuters, the downside of public transport is not having to be close to strangers but rather the inconvenience (in america cities) of limited coverage and schedules.

I personally don't like noisy trains, but a simple fix could designate some train cars to be no-talking, so I can more easily get work done.

forapurpose• 9 years ago

Agreed. What I like best about cities is the people; we're social animals. (Musk and others are entitled to their preferences, of course.)

And there’s like a bunch of random strangers, one of who might be a serial killer

I suspect Musk is orders of magnitude more likely to win the California lottery jackpot than meet a serial killer on the bus, much less be killed by them. He's too smart for this silliness.

hinkley• 9 years ago

In one of his presentations he talks about the stress of commuting with such intensity (“hell”) that I remarked that perhaps he should talk to a guru or a therapist.

Now, I have never commuted in LA, but I have in chicago and Seattle and I can say from deep personal experience that much of the stress of commuting is self inflicted. There are ways to make that time less stressful and less “wasteful” but high intensity people often refuse to see.

walshemj3• 9 years ago

He is from SA which is a lot more violent so I maybe his initial upbringing has influenced him in that regard.

mlindner• 9 years ago

A lot of people need to work in a city but DONT want to live there. Many only live in cities because its convinient but would otherwise live outside the city.

francisofascii• 9 years ago

And many others would rather live in the city or closer to the city, but can't afford it.

nrhk• 9 years ago

The thing is we already have a solution to that, high speed commuter rails from the suburbs into the city, there's just not enough funding to build out the infrastructure.

The amount of people who come into Tokyo is mind boggling.

joelrunyon• 9 years ago

This is very NYC/east-coast true, but travel on the west coast is much more individualized.

closeparen5• 9 years ago

If you’re imagining getting work done, I don’t think you understand what transit crowding is like. In cities with busy transit systems, getting a seat is out of the question - the variable is how tightly you’ll be squished against your fellow standees, and whether it will even be possible to squeeze onto the train.

The problem is absolutely being too close to strangers. Still, going to individual cabins is an over-reaction, what we need is longer and more frequent trains so that people can at least have seats and/or room to breathe.

kevmo3142• 9 years ago

what we need is longer and more frequent trains so that people can at least have seats and/or room to breathe.

I think autonomously networked trains would be a huge leap towards accomplishing this. The headway between trains could be cut down dramatically and could allow for some magical improvements, eg express trains passing using the opposing direction's rail, that aren't feasible with human drivers.

Fricken3• 9 years ago

Nobody uses transit anymore, it's too crowded.

floriferous• 9 years ago

Switzerland has those silent cars. If you make just a bit too much noise, passengers will happily come and stop you. Great environment to work or read!

reaperducer2• 9 years ago

Chicago, too, on the Metra trains.

Unfortunately, Metra recently got rid of the bar cars on its commuter trains. Only Metra can lose money selling booze.

lurr2• 9 years ago

I'm not rich but I hate taking transit partly because of the people. Some kids in the back are being noisy, the homeless man there is pestering me for food because I have grocery bags, and some guy is falling asleep on my shoulder.

Gee, what a great time.

1_2__4• 9 years ago

Oh look more anti-car propaganda from citylab posted to HN, must be a day with y in it.

chroem-• 9 years ago

Honestly it's beginning to become a parody of itself how people in the bay area can't imagine life outside of a hypercrowded cityscape that has temperate weather year round.

tomjakubowski• 9 years ago

Most of the Bay Area is not even close to being hypercrowded. In fact, that's exactly the problem with the Bay: no town wants to get denser and build enough housing to meet the demand.

sjclemmy• 9 years ago

It seems to me that Musk’s goal isn’t transport on Earth. It’s transit on the moon or Mars. View his suggestions in that context and they make sense.

straws2• 9 years ago

I for one fully support Musk's efforts to hurl himself into space.

ACow_Adonis3• 9 years ago

Of course, the hypothesis that musk is a rich ignoramus also makes his comments make sense...

adventured• 9 years ago

The article is holding up an ideal premise that is never going to happen (subways everywhere), as a counter to a viable plan that will be a real improvement over a mediocre existing system (the one we have now).

If the US was ever going to do mass traditional subways, it would have been in the prior 50 years when it could have maybe afforded to. It's never going to happen now, not under any scenario imaginable. Combined with the disastrous cost, time it takes, zoning issues etc. to build above ground in most US locations (eg the California debacle). That's what Musk realized and it's why he is doing a partial patch on the mess with the boring company approach.

There is no plausible alternative. Musk's approach can give us a significant improvement over what we have. Wishing for fantasy subway lines everywhere, that would cost trillions of dollars the US is never going to have to spend on such things (particularly in the next 20-30 years, as entitlement obligations alone are already set to bankrupt the US Government), is pointless.

kevmo3142• 9 years ago

Musk's approach can give us a significant improvement over what we have.

But this isn't even necessarily true. As the article mentions, the entrances to the tunnels are rather low volume. The Boring Company seems to essentially be building an exclusive subway for the wealthy. How is that a solution?

typomatic2• 9 years ago

Why do you think the boring company plan is so much more viable than improving public transit?

Note that I am not using your strawman here (subways everywhere) as that's not the point--the point is better public transit, which includes subways, busses, etc. That seems like a much richer target than building an entirely unproven tech.

jnordwick• 9 years ago

"So Musk can imply that there’s something wrong with transit because it’s too crowded—an example of the Yogi Berra fallacy—but cities and transit agencies shouldn’t care. If they’re crowded, they’re succeeding."

That seems like an enormous leap in logic. Saying agencies shouldn't care about overcrowding seems flippant. They most definitely should care about rider experience. Soviet bread lines were massively long, but that didn't mean they were hugely successful.

I love the usefulness of the subway when it actually runs on time. I hate the experience most of the time. Next time I hear "Showtime!" I want to punch somebody.

InitialLastName3• 9 years ago

Elon Musk's livelihood depends on people wanting to live in separated housing (so they can each have powerwalls and solar-paneled roofs) and wanting to move through their regions in separated vehicles. It doesn't take Upton Sinclair to understand why he would use every propaganda outlet he can find to push that agenda.

OtterCoder• 9 years ago

Elon Musk's livelihood doesn't actually depend on anything anymore. That's what being rich means.

That said, I get your point, but I also think separated housing is necessary for my sanity.

InitialLastName3• 9 years ago

I think we as a society have learned in the past few years that people can have an ENORMOUS amount of money and still have "I need more money" as a personal driving force.

mehrdadn• 9 years ago

Elon Musk's livelihood depends on people wanting to live in separated housing (so they can each have powerwalls and solar-paneled roofs) and wanting to move through their regions in separated vehicles. It doesn't take Upton Sinclair to understand why he would use every propaganda outlet he can find to push that agenda.

Somehow I don't get the feeling he's this selfish. If that's an agenda he's pushing (which I don't know one way or another), I would expect it's because he genuinely thinks it's better for society, not because he wants to make himself feel good or rake in more profit. (To re-emphasize: it's not clear to me he is pushing this agenda.)

InitialLastName3• 9 years ago

Somehow I don't get the feeling he's this selfish. If that's an agenda he's pushing (which I don't know one way or another), I would expect it's because he genuinely thinks it's better for society,

I'd really like you to be right about that, but the cynic in me has to assume that's what he wants you to think (car companies run by "unselfish people who want to improve the world" sell more cars).

peeters• 9 years ago

I don't think he can credibly argue it's better for society, he's probably just a realist. The hunger for detached houses and independent cars has had a long opportunity to subside, but hasn't. So might as well make greener independent cars and detached houses.

Your carbon footprint commuting on high-occupancy diesel trains while living in a 50 year old highrise is usually going to be significantly lower than commuting in a Tesla and living in green detached house.

danans9• 9 years ago

It doesn't have to be selfishness.

Some of this kind of thinking could be attributed to simple ignorance, because his wealth and profile deprive him of routine exposure to what he is critiquing. As others have pointed out, this is why we shouldn't treat people like Musk as having omniscience on all topics.

In Musk's case, like most people as wealthy as him, he probably doesn't ever take mass transit. His impressions are drawn from a small sample of his own pre-wealth experiences, and also from the echo-chamber of similar people around him, who might have similar experiences, and therefore he focuses on, and emphasizes problems that stand out to him without the larger context of mass transit's benefits.

rndmize• 9 years ago

Normally I'm a fan of the "it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it" idea, but not in this case. If Musk gave a shit about his livelihood, he would have banked all his Paypal money and lived off market gains. He was willing to throw it all away to get SpaceX and Tesla off the ground, which is something I respect.

And "propaganda outlet"? "push that agenda"? Last I heard, this whole thing was in response to a audience question when he was talking about something else entirely.

tradersam• 9 years ago

Elon Musk lives here, in Southern California, where the population is incredibly sprawled. Public transportation is almost useless here. Buses run late and are somewhat dangerous, trains do not cover much if any of the three counties, and most people drive cars.

johnmarcus• 9 years ago

Wasn't he building a centralized battery power grid in both Australia and Puorto Rico? Or did I miss something?

marcell• 9 years ago

I like people too but not random train passengers. They smell bad, are unattractive and grouchy. I don’t want to strike up conversations with randos. They make the train dirty.

I don’t think this makes me “elitist.” The reason rich people don’t take public transit is because no one likes it, but the rich are more able to afford alternatives. A trend of history is extending luxuries of the few to the many.

This looks to me like CityLab is emotionally attached to the current transit system, with all its flaws, and is a bit annoyed that someone is working on a better alternative.

foldr3• 9 years ago

It sounds like you may be overgeneralizing your experiences in a particular city. At least here in London, the people you see on trains are a broad crossection of the general public, and are no smellier or less attractive (not sure why this matters?) than anyone you're likely to run into on the street.

So, no, it is not the case that "no-one" likes public transport. I like it fine, and experience none of the issues with it that you seem to. I would generally prefer to get the tube as compared to e.g. an Uber, even if there were no price difference.

lazerpants• 9 years ago

I would generally prefer to get the tube as compared to e.g. an Uber, even if there were no price difference.

The rest of the discussion aside, I agree with you regarding my experiences on the NYC subway. However, that is because I organized my entire living situation around the locations of subway stations and lines near my office. If that constraint didn't exist (there were a reasonable alternative to the subway), I may well choose to live elsewhere, and therefore, prefer to use Ubers or other methods of transportation. For many of us who use public transportation, we have built our lives around a constraint that may no longer be present in the future and may allow for people to live in currently less desirable parts of cities.

ghaff3• 9 years ago

I'm sure there are, on average, demographic differences between who takes the subway, who takes a taxi/Uber, and who has a reserved black car. That said, I don't disagree with you in general. In cities with good public transit systems where transit is a genuinely easier way to get around much of the time, many people take the subway even if they could afford something else. I know that's true for me in Boston, New York, and London to name 3 cities. I do take BART in SF but pretty much only to get in from the airport.

habosa• 9 years ago

Efficient transit goes hand in hand with density.

Stupidly simple example: Let' imagine we had a network of autonomous Teslas that drive everyone at 200mph for $0.05. We'd still end up putting two people in each Tesla, because it would double the efficiency.

If you want to be alone, cities are not for you. Transit in cities will never be both efficient and solitary. The whole point is that there are a lot of people going to a smallish set of general destinations and we're better off bringing them there together.

ACow_Adonis3• 9 years ago

Obviously one has to define rich here.

The ultra-rich obviously don't take it for matters of exclusion, privacy and personal safety.

But what middle class call the wealthy, I.e, the people who live in the most expensive inner city suburbs most certainly do catch public transport in my city.

Let us be frank, ghee wealthy don't catch public transport in American cities because you practically have none to catch and you're cities aren't designed for it

bunderbunder• 9 years ago

I like it. It's not perfect, but nothing is.

The worst flaw, which is that you occasionally have to sit near someone whose music is a bit too loud, is still way less bothersome to me than the worst flaws of the major alternatives, which are that they are some combination of expensive, stressful and dangerous.

That said, I am deeply sorry to hear that you are so offended to have to be in the presence of people who you don't find attractive. Automobiles do sound like a good accommodation for someone with special needs such as that.

typomatic2• 9 years ago

You don't want to ride the train with unattractive people, but you're not elitist.

lanius• 9 years ago

I like people too but not random train passengers. They smell bad, are unattractive and grouchy.

I wouldn't want to ride a train with you either.

mc32• 9 years ago

I like transit, but transit in SF is horrid. Slow, people with mental health issues on board, filthiness, it does not go everywhere (within 20min walk).

But, one of the biggest things is lack of cleanliness. I mean, after knowing the people who board and use the system, it's hard not to think of how unclean the trip is. Your hands, your clothing all possibly in touch with contaminants.

Also, of you want families to use the system, crack down on people who think they're in their on house (drinking of alcoholic bevs., on drugs, loud, obnoxious, profane, underdressed to put it lightly, etc.)

CaptSpify4• 9 years ago

I take public transportation every day. I much prefer it over owning a vehicle, but you are correct. I would, however, encourage you to try public transportation in non-US cities. The US does a really piss-poor job of it, even in the most public-transit friendly cities. If we used other cities as the base-level, you'd probably like it a lot more.

zionic2• 9 years ago

"If you just change what country you live in, it won't be so bad"

is pretty hilarious. People aren't going to move to the other side of the world to get good public transit.

rayiner• 9 years ago

The reason rich people don’t take public transit is because no one likes it, but the rich are more able to afford alternatives.

Have you ever been on Metro North? There are tons of people making $1 million+/year taking the train into NYC from Greenwich and Westchester every morning. The trains are clean, and much more comfortable than driving: there is more leg room, your seat is more upright, there are bathrooms. They're also cleaner than at least my car.

aqsalose• 9 years ago

They smell bad, are unattractive and grouchy.
I certainly won't miss riding the BART with sketchy looking characters at 12am.

I wonder if there is difference in the amount of, erm, sketchiness of your sketchy looking characters in public transit and what I see here where I live (Helsinki).

Taking a bus or metro during the normal daylight hours, I usually see a reasonable cross-section of the society, no less or more attractive than people you would see in any other public space. I can't recall anyone who would have smelled that bad (not counting the occasional overdose of perfume), not even the beggar who tries to sell The Big Issue.

danans9• 9 years ago

There is no comparison, because you aren't comparing transit systems, you are comparing the differences in the societies' minimum standard of living.

It's very likely that the beggar in Finland has access to much better public goods (like perhaps basic housing - hence a shower, healthcare) than their American counterpart.

vibrato• 9 years ago

As a Chicagoan, I’m jealous of all the non smelly public transit options written about here. More than once I’ve identified individuals by smell before seeing them

_0w8t• 9 years ago

I used BART and Caltrain for few weeks in total between 2006 and 2012. The experience was so much worse than anything in Europe. Caltrain and to lesser extent Bart felt like everything was falling a part and people just gave up.

And then the was the smell. Even Moscow underground was significantly better. There you got occasionally extremely smelly homeless people, but it was like each 20th trip, not each second or third. And in Norway I meet a situation when one does not want to seat near someone on a bus or train perhaps once a year.

danans9• 9 years ago

I like people too but not random train passengers. They smell bad, are unattractive and grouchy. I don’t want to strike up conversations with randos. They make the train dirty.

The vast majority of people who take mass transit in busy cities do not fit your description of "randos". They are clean, well mannered, and presentable.

Based on your description of "randos", it sounds like you are actually referring to homeless people using the train.

And while I agree that it is really unpleasant to have to occasionally share a train car with someone who hasn't bathed recently due to lack of housing, a better approach to that problem might be public support to help these people get housing and treatment for their afflictions, so that when they are on transit with you, they are no more or less offensive to you than anyone else.

straws2• 9 years ago

I for one fully support Musk's efforts to hurl himself into space.

paulus_magnus2• 9 years ago

Cities just don't work if everyone drives their own personal car. And keeps it parked 90% of the time. Perhaps when autonomous cars arrive we'll be driven around more but right now public transport is faster, more convenient, cheaper. [top gear race across London] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL_POxZSkaU

“Transit requires sharing space with strangers, which is icky.” Is this an American thing?? What about a sport stadium, music event, lots of strangers to share space with?

lev992• 9 years ago

It's not only the car being parked, but the traffic during peak travel times that make cars bad. Roads filled with Autonomous cars might be 10x more efficient then roads filled with cars with drivers, but autonomous buses are 100x more efficient and trains can be 1000x more efficient.

CaptSpify4• 9 years ago

Due to a lot of (stupid) reasons, public transportation in the US has a lot of homeless/drugged-out people on it. And due to crowding, you are often pressed up against them. It can be quite uncomfortable to listen to someone who smells like 3 day old liquor and urine tell you about how they hate all of the "niggers that keep taking the bus" (an actual quote said to me), while you are pushed up against them.

My experience of public transportation in other countries has generally been way better.

pmc1• 9 years ago

I think the author is misrepresenting Musk's views and statements. Musk isn't condemning public transit, he knows it plays a valuable role in large cities. Musk is simply saying that there are ways to make it better. Also the statement below is sort of troubling:

This means that if you decide not to ride transit because it’s too crowded, somebody else will be happy to take your place there, delivering the same level of efficiency.

That statement is fallacious. Overcrowded public transits can be a serious danger in the case of an accident and they should not be overlooked simply because someone else is willing to take your place. For example, on my morning commute in san diego the doors on the light rails can barely close due to being overcrowded and people jamming in to not miss the light rail. Sure its efficient in that a lot of people are riding, but if an accident happens we have no room to maneuver.

walshemj3• 9 years ago

And the US Rail system has a terrible safety record there have been no fatal accidents (excluding person on the line) on the UK rail system in the last decade.

The USA has mad many and the number of passengers caried is orders of magnitude less

vonmoltke• 9 years ago

The USA has mad many and the number of passengers caried is orders of magnitude less

The only way I can see to arrive at that statement is to count all train accidents but only Amtrak ridership (total US rail ridership is about 570MM rides, but Amtrak is only about 30MM of that).

godot3• 9 years ago

Not trying to troll, but one just needs to take a minute to get through a few pages on https://www.bartcrimes.com/ to see why public transportation in America, at least in the bay area, is not pleasant. I have first hand experience of taking Bart daily for a year or so, and even been through being the victim of an assault while walking out of a Bart station.

Perhaps public transportation works somewhere else, in other countries. There's something about America that makes it not work. Someone pointed out Japan to which Elon rebutted that it's too crowded. Trust me, trains in Japan are more pleasant than here in the SF Bay area even considering how they cram people in in Japan. I grew up in Hong Kong where cramming is also the norm. It is not nearly as unpleasant as Bart.

For someone who lives in California, I see why Elon Musk considers existing public transportation a failure right now.

mark-r2• 9 years ago

Fear is a very powerful motivator. Even if the chances of being the victim of a crime are small, the mere possibility is enough to put some people off. Stories of wonderful encounters with strangers will do nothing to counteract that.

Comparing it to being exposed to strangers just by living in a city doesn't work either. If you come upon a stranger that makes you nervous on the street, you can cross the street or walk past quickly. If you're stuck next to them on the subway you're going to feel threatened for the length of the trip.

taoistextremist• 9 years ago

What's so terrible about Bay Area transit? I mean this genuinely since I've never been to San Francisco so I've never used it, and I'm wondering why it makes you think all American public transit is bad. I've used public transit in two North American cities, Chicago and Montreal, and they seemed to work fairly well, enough that I could kind of enjoy them if I wasn't in a rush (which typically I wasn't since these were vacations). Maybe they weren't as pretty as what I saw in Tokyo or Beijing, but they functioned fine and didn't seem terrible in the least.

godot3• 9 years ago

I could be wrong about generalizing it to America in general, since I don't have much experience outside of SF Bay and a little bit in NY (where I also didn't have a pleasant experience, even as a tourist).

Trains in Hong Kong and Tokyo are at the very least clean, on time, for the most part crime-less, and no matter what time you arrive, even if you miss a train, there will be another one to your destination within 5 minutes (likely 2 minutes).

Bart is rarely on time, extremely unclean (encountering human feces is almost a regular basis), crime-ridden (as shown in that link above), and if you live anywhere outside of SF, missing a train usually means you have to wait 15-20 minutes for the next one (even during peak hours).

I consciously choose to drive in to SF downtown instead, even considering the premium I have to pay for parking (easily $20 a day), and enduring through bay bridge traffic. I know I'm also doing harm by carbon emission and adding to traffic on the freeways and bridge, but it poses a personal risk (both physical danger and health) to take Bart for myself.

ginko• 9 years ago

This pretty much mirrors my experience. I've also been to SF a bunch of times and never had any issues taking the local transit(bus, subway, BART, tram, etc.). Sure it isn't sparkling clean, but seems to do its job. The bus network in particular seemed pretty good.

ACow_Adonis3• 9 years ago

Only been to San Fran once briefly.

But my impression of Bart during that time was:

-infrequent

-loud: this one surprised me, the noise of the wheel screeches were another level of audible compared to the public transport I was used to.

- poverty: SanFran poverty and destitution was just on another level, and a significant amount of that seemed located around some of the stations.

- network coverage:so tiny and doesn't cover much.

That being said, my impression talking to the locals was that commuting in/out of SanFran by car had become a nightmare as well :/

reaperducer2• 9 years ago

My experience with SF transit is that it's simply overused. People love it -- to death. There isn't enough of it, and enough maintenance, to keep up with the demand. The entire system suffers because of it.

ericmcer• 9 years ago

Yeah I never understood how his comments were offensive. I used to take Bart 5 times a week and I definitely don't worry about all the great socializing I am missing out on now that I don't need to. Musk and his critics are probably all barely familiar with the realities of using public transportation every day. There is no commuter who would not use a faster, easier transportation method because they wanted the "social" benefits of mass transit.

danans9• 9 years ago

Nobody holds up BART or the Bay Area's transit system as an example of a well functioning transit system. If Musk has done his homework, he should realize that, too. As you have noted, there are many examples of much more pleasant to use transit systems.

However, the problem of crime isn't the fault of the transit system, but of the society in which the transit system operates. Transit doesn't generate crime in the Bay Area, that's caused by the history of inequality and concentrations of poverty.

trowawee2• 9 years ago

I would love to see more Bold Disrupting Entrepreneurs trying to disrupt the way that San Francisco treats poor and homeless people.

godot3• 9 years ago

Starting to go off a tangent from this thread, but I do have a genuine question. It's a popular argument to say poverty and wealth distribution causes crimes. But over in China, even Hong Kong to some extent, poverty has been a problem for generations( and China is only doing better in the past decade). There isn't nearly as much of the type of crime that happens in the US that puts you in personal danger, in China. There could be a lot of petty theft, or even actually stealing from you, but not much of the armed robbery/assault (knife or gun) that is so common in America.

I immigrated from Hong Kong to the US while in high school in the 90s. There is such a stark cultural differences in things like 1) Discipline -- people feel like they can do anything here (both good and bad), and that unfortunately includes the crime side of things. Young kids are much more "daring", as in they're not afraid to assault and rob people. In HK/China, even kids in gangs think of even just stealing a wallet from someone a big deal, much less direct assault. 2) On that topic, gang culture. High school kids here have such a glorified view of the gang life, whereas that sort of thing is really suppressed even among the notorious schools and students in HK/China.

In fact, it's not just an "Asia thing". Travel to Europe, most of the safety and crime issues you have to watch out for are pickpockets and scammers. In America, on Bart, you actually worry about armed assault. I feel like there's something about America culture, and it's not just inequality and poverty that's causing the sort of crime I only see here.

tbabb2• 9 years ago

I've heard from visitors to Japan that groping on public transit is a real problem.

keepper• 9 years ago

It works quite well in nyc.. so not sure what you mean by "There's something about America that makes it not work."

We have 5.6M average weekday riders, and about as much for the weekends ( Sun and Saturday). That's 1.7 Billion rides a year.. [1]

If that's what you consider "not working"...

Does it have its flaws? absolutely! But does it work? absolutely!

As someone who has visited the bay area yearly since 2000, a quick observation comes to mind on why mass transit doesn't work as well there... The crazy idea amongst "21st century" companies to stick to the 1950s model of the "company town" in the suburbs.. and well, BART not going a lot further down than it should.

Companies should be moving in droves to the east bay, were you can actually build transit ( and there actually IS some real transit infrastructure ), and two, you actually have land you can build buildings that are horizontally efficient... ( not sand land fill that doesn't support any decent vertical building )

[1]http://www.baruch.cuny.edu/nycdata/travel/mta-subwayridershi...

cududa• 9 years ago

Works well in NY. Are you kidding me? Did you not take it once this summer, or hear a single person talking about how atrocious its become, or read a single article on it?

allengeorge• 9 years ago

There's also an easier solution to the problem than what he's proposing.

tixiv_• 9 years ago

I think people don't want all the cars for one person on the road. For moving one person to and from the city current cars are too big, weight too much, ...

My preferred robo-taxi that may pick me up every morning is the C-1 from Lit Motors.

http://litmotors.com/c1/

xupybd• 9 years ago

Effective transit doesn’t go to your door

I don't know if this is true. If someone finds an efficient way to do this there is nothing wrong with it. Current transit is limited by resources and technology given sufficient increases in either going to you door is not a problem.

throwanem• 9 years ago

Maybe it's not a fair reading, but all I can see in commentary like Musk's is "I want to live in a city, except I don't, you know, actually want to live in a city. I want the part of living in a city that I find convenient, but not the rest of it. And that should totally be a thing that it's possible to do. I don't care if it works for anyone else. I care if it works for me."

Which, I mean, if that's your perspective on the matter, then sure, you do you. Reality, and other people, may choose to differ.

mark-r2• 9 years ago

To find out why transit isn't transporting 100% of the commuters, you can't look to the people who are using it - you need to ask the people who aren't. I think Musk's comments get to some important reasons why transit utilization isn't higher. If you simply sweep it under the rug and claim that transit's goal isn't to be appropriate for 100% of the people, you're throwing away an opportunity.

ared38• 9 years ago

I'm not impressed with either side in this argument.

Jarrett Walker is confusing capacity with crowding. It's ridiculous that he can't admit having someone's underarm shoved into your face during peak hours does in fact suck.

Meanwhile Musk is an idiot if he actually thinks single occupancy self driving cars will reduce traffic (I don't think he does). If sitting in traffic becomes more pleasant because you'll be watching tv, more people will choose to sit in traffic. Adding tunnels won't help if you're still wasting a car-sized space on a tiny human.

Just running more buses and actually policing harassment on them would make transit both more convenient and pleasant without giving up the capacity that's essential to move an entire city worth of people around. It doesn't have to be rocket science.

tbabb2• 9 years ago

Agree. I suspect Musk doesn't get how efficient good public transport can be (NYC when the system is working well), and the author doesn't get how substandard most public transit systems are.

I have strong doubts that single- or low-occupancy vehicles could outcompete trains or buses on efficiency. I also think public transit could be way better than it is. I'm not sure I buy Musk's vision (which does seem out-of-touch), and I definitely don't buy the author's position that "nothing is wrong".

dzhiurgis3• 9 years ago

It's probably one of those cases where less efficient node in the system makes entire system more efficient overall. Perhaps we need to reduce car use by 20% to make transport 300% more comfortable, practical, attractive.

I remember seeing pics of a concept bus Tesla was rumoured to manufacture, where every seat has it's own doors and personal area. So maybe it's capacity is half normal bus, but 20x a car. Even if it works like Uber Pool, overall it's a net win.

Finally, I don't think he's trying to disrupt public transport entirely, rather to introduce better options.

linkmotif• 9 years ago

It's ridiculous that he can't admit having someone's underarm shoved into your face during peak hours does in fact suck.

I live in New York. If it wasn’t for gropers, I think it’s actually OK. Kind of a nice way to commune with humanity actually. I’m tired of the opposite: people expecting to be in lonesome luxury everywhere they go. It’s not efficient, it’s sterile and boring. This from a solid misanthrope.

trowawee2• 9 years ago

Also a bit of a misanthrope, but I'd totally second this. I moved to Chicago from another Midwestern city that had no public transit a few years back, and I seriously sing the praises of the CTA to everyone. I have my share of gripes about city life, but on the whole, I love Chicago and I love public transit. I went from spending half an hour every morning and half an hour every evening in the boring-but-also-dangerous hell that is a car commute to spending that same time on a train. I usually listen to music in the morning and read in the evenings, and I've listened to more new albums and read more new books in the last few years than I have in any comparable period since college.

wayanon• 9 years ago

I'm a Tesla fan but in Elon's worldview would public transit be ok if it was barely used and all passengers were college educated and polite?

yohann305• 9 years ago

this whole situation reminds me of all the naysayers Musk proved wrong twice already. Electric cars will never happen. A private space company, Musk is insane. Better public transportation, who does he think he is... Who else can't wait to have Musk prove them wrong? ... I can't wait

rmah• 9 years ago

1) No one ever said "electric cars will never happen". There were electric and hybrid vehicles before Tesla even existed.

2) SpaceX is no more a "private space company" than the United Space Alliance/United Launch Alliance that builds rockets for NASA and others. Or both are. Both SpaceX and USA/ULA operate under similar models: clients both government and private pay them to build rockets.

I do not understand why people think NASA builds rockets. They don't.

Rob

greglindahl• 9 years ago

In 2017, ULA launched 8 government payloads and 0 commercial.

In 2017, SpaceX launched 6 government payloads and 11 (or 12) commercial payloads.

joekrill• 9 years ago

I can't help but get the sense that this is just a closed-minded way to think about things. Yes, if you've been studying transportation for decades you have probably got drilled into your head that "this is how public transit is supposed to work".

I'm sure there were plenty of people who made similar arguments about taxis when Uber started up. Or about horses when cars were invented. Or about planes, electricity, etc. Any fairly revolutionary technology started with most people saying "you're insane". I mean you don't even have to look far -- many of Musk's other accomplishments were scorned, too. Reusable rockets? Electric cars people actually want? That's ridiculous! Until it isn't...

mschuster91• 9 years ago

> And there’s like a bunch of random strangers, one of who might be a serial killer, OK, great
> Why do you want to get on something with a lot of other people

These two points of what Musk says are the core point, I believe. With a tight enough, and especially, well timed, mesh of rail, light-rail (tram) and buses you can solve the "doesn't take me where I want" problem, and for example in Munich it is solved well.

What is not solved is the "strangers" issue: cities all over the world have a yuge homeless persons "problem" - and this is what I dislike about public transport. Cities must tackle the (growing!) problem of homelessness first, if they want to increase acceptance of public transport. Give drunks, junkies and hobos safe places to stay, both during night and day, and lots of problems associated with public transport will go away. Often enough, public transport and its stations are the only thing that's both open 24/7 and warm...

danans9• 9 years ago

I often hear from well-off suburban Americans who have traveled in Europe how much they enjoy using the well-maintained transit systems in those countries, but not here in the US. Part of this no doubt is due to the fact that those European systems are more comprehensive and convenient.

But there is also the reality that those transit systems don't have to serve as temporary shelter for the homeless, since those countries deal with homelessness directly.

Americans' views on mass transit are tainted by the unfortunate (and incorrect) conflation of mass transit with our unaddressed social ills.

zionic2• 9 years ago

I'm not sure this is as pervasive as you suggest. I personally found the tube pretty terrible around heathrow and friends who studied abroad in various parts of europe complained about trains being late (Eurorail pass).

The fact is nothing will beat the appeal of point to point travel for the individual. In my experience it seems Europeans are, on average, more willing than Americans to sacrifice personal comforts for efficiency. I saw this in everything from elevator size to hotel room configuration, and even road layout.

danans9• 9 years ago

I personally found the tube pretty terrible around heathrow and friends who studied abroad in various parts of europe complained about trains being late (Eurorail pass).

Really, both of our arguments on this point are anecdotal, but there is a pretty solid body of evidence that European mass transit systems are far more efficient at moving large numbers of people efficiently between important destinations.

In my experience it seems Europeans are, on average, more willing than Americans to sacrifice personal comforts for efficiency. I saw this in everything from elevator size to hotel room configuration, and even road layout.

This isn't because of something essential about Europeans. It's a consequence of their urban infrastructure developing under space constraints, and doing so prior to the mass adoption of the automobile. Today, many American cities are approaching the levels of density of European cities without transit systems built out over time to handle the congestion that the density brings, largely because of the single-occupancy commute vehicle.

sologoub• 9 years ago

Author is very focused on "vs the elites" topic. However, the strangers comment is about safety. Even the quote used from Musk states that one of those strangers could be a serial killer.

That's not an elite-only concern. Staying alive and safe is a pretty basic need that has little to do with socio-economic status.

The question is whether the fear is more widespread in those more fortunate is debateable, but mass transit does have that weakness. From pickpockets to mass robberies (recent BART events for example) to acts of terrorism, when you have a concentration of people, they are vulnerable to being targeted.

There are also questions of hygiene - I once had to sit next to a person covered head to toe, including face, in some sort of orangish dust, minus the outline of the goggles he must have been wearing, probably from some sort of construction. I wasn't sure I wanted risk breathing that in, but it's a public space. Still, health is not an exclusively elite concern. We have asbestos laws for a reason, for example.

I would love to use mass transit that went close to where I want to start/stop (5-10 min walk), went in reasonable intervals (5-15 mins), was safe, reliable, clean-ish and cheaper than a car (with parking, maintenance, ins and all other expenses included).

The only really good point the article makes that is often missed is the distinction of crowded vs overcrowded. Not everyone should get a seat, but those who need it, should.

rdiddly• 9 years ago

The other thing is, almost any problem you can pick out with transit is basically not enough transit, not too much transit. Most of the money gets funneled away elsewhere -- to cars and freight. Spend some real money on it and see what happens.

junkscience2017• 9 years ago

I can see why Citylab would favor a system like BART...making everyone equally miserable (aka "levelling") is a primary motivation of the left

Citylabs fantasy community is an endless stream of apartment buildings virtually fenced in by taxation (so you can't even dream of escape) and regulation (so you could only ever get as far as public transportation would take you). all ruled by people who post on HN. no thanks!

vbuwivbiu• 9 years ago

Another false dichotomy. We need both public transport and cars. I like public transport because it brings total strangers together - a much-needed thing in this day and age.

By the way Musk, psychos drive cars too: witness the new terrorist tool, the car, mounting the sidewalk and mowing people down.

And think of the trust you place in total strangers every time you drive down the highway.

rsbartram• 9 years ago

He is a forward thinking individual. Those types of people are always open to criticism for ideas that can change and revolutionize the norm. You don't need to look any farther than Tesla and SpaceX. As a resident of Los Angeles I support his innovation and ideas behind alleviating traffic congestion. His work with The Boring Company and Hyperloop are simple examples of that.

https://latechnews.org/elon-musk-bores-152-meters-closer-dis... https://latechnews.org/hyperloop-one-reaches-192-mph/ https://latechnews.org/hyperloop-one-high-speed-project-test...

stmfreak• 9 years ago

It is one thing to claim transit is succeeding by cramming people into cars and another to wonder if all those people would choose private cars if the costs and time were equivalent.

It seems most city planners have assumed transit is the only answer and invested accordingly. Musk is appealing to individual preference for space and privacy and investing accordingly.

What Elon Musk Doesn't Get About Urban Transit

Related Stories