The growing automobile culture

[gato]

An article about the traffic dilemma in Beijing.

对北京市交通问题的一些思考, 王洪辉

http://www.cnup.com/zazhi/replay.asp?id=237

城市功能的空间布局和城市规模、城市发展水平共同作用决定了一个城市的交通流量，这是很浅显的道理。就北京而言，如果你工作在中关村，住在通州，还时不时得去西单、王府井购物的话，那将带来巨大的交通流；如果这个城市的大部分人采用这种长距离通勤的生活方式的话，整个城市的交通压力将非常大。北京正存在这种状况。

北京的城市布局是建国初由苏联专家以莫斯科为蓝本确定的，单中心，“摊大饼”式的向外扩散。这也是中央集权的政治体制的体现。在同心圆的扩张模式下，由北京旧城演变而来的中央大团承担着行政、商业、文教、医疗、旅游等一系列功能。作为政治、经济、文化中心的二环内62平方公里的老城区，集中了西单、王府井、和前门三个商业中心和金融街一个金融商务区，此外还集中了20多个中央部级机关，100多个局级机关以及北京市委、市政府所属的250多个单位。“边缘集团”则以居住为主要功能。居民们早晚拥挤在、往返于城市与郊区之间，如此潮汐式的涌动，公交、道路设施惟有超负荷运转，交通系统不堪重负。 据统计，三环以里集中了北京市出行量的50%，二环以内只不过占市区总面积的12%，却集中了市区总出行量的25%。

[devi9]

This thread reminds me of a recent problem in DC. People (mostly those who either don't live here or don't take the metro) have suggested in light of the recent bombings in London that they set up stricter security for the metro, either 'random' security checks, detectors, etc. to help prevent terrorist attacks. The problem with this is it would make riding the metro to work a time consuming hassle, where your arrival to work on time (no matter how early you leave, because of 'random' checks) could not be guaranteed. If such measures were taken, the number of people driving to work would increase dramatically, making DC even more hectic during rush hour. DC isn't exactly car friendly as the city's street plan might as well have been designed by monkeys, making it hard even for those who grew up in the city to find their way around by car.

[bhchao]

The MTA in NYC performed random security checks on bags in the subways in the weeks following the London attacks. Most transit riders understood the need to have their bags checked and cooperated, although there were a few who expressed frustration at having to wait while security personnel checked their bags.

It's either open your bags or exit the subway. I think random security checks (instead of checking everyone's bags) over the short term, or at any point in time, could serve as a psychological deterrent against potential terrorists since terrorists thrive on creating fear in people's minds, and seeing security officers perform random bag checking helps create a sense of security in many passengers' minds while deterring bombers.

I agree however that random bag checking is a hassle to many passengers who need to arrive to work on time. It also is an intrusion into one's personal belongings. I wouldn't want my luggage to be opened and checked whenever I use the subway to connect to JFK Airport. It also takes the fun away out of riding the subways.

I hate to bring racial profiling into the picture, but maybe profiling would make life in the subways a lot easier. It wouldn't make sense to check an eighty-year old woman's bags or someone who doesn't look like a terrorist. The recent random bag checking in NYC subways checked bags belonging to people of all races and genders. True, never judge a book by its cover, and sometimes one who looks innocent may actually be a terrorist after all. But the most recent terrorist activities dating from 2001 involved men of Middle Eastern origin.

[devi9]

Do you know if they are still checking bags in NYC?

As far as racial profiling is concerned, the difficulty with using such methods in diverse areas like DC and NYC because of the volume of individuals you'd have to check (which might explain why they check everyone's bag in NYC). I've heard recent reports that Middle Eastern women are also likely terrorists, some say even moreso than men. Although it might deter terrorists from attacking the metro systems, I feel that anyone determined enough to blow something up will find the means to do it.

Additionally, the manpower needed to maintain security checkpoints is ridiculous. If you take the NIH campus for example, there are at least four security guards at each checkpoint (that includes the entrances and buildings). Sure, it's provided a lot of people with jobs and a sense of security, but many events that were once held in NIH buildings have moved elsewhere (and have dropped in attendance) as the volume of people they attract is a security risk. Some have even been cancelled completely as there is no place nearby the could host them. Also, it takes approximately 10 minutes at every checkpoint if you are not a NIH employee.

Now, imagine that there were at least four security guards at every metro stop in DC doing random checks. It's just ludacris! The metro is supposed to be a fast and easy alternative to driving. When faced with the possibility of having my bag rummaged through I'd much rather work out some other mean of transportation.

It seems to me that the solution is not to continue to inconvenience civilians by setting up security checkpoints, rather change our foreign policy so everyone is not so eager to bomb us (how's that for idealistic?)!

[Ian_Lee]

I see car culture poses another problem to China -- land scarcity.

In a relatively land scarce country like China (as compared to the size of its population), the construction of extensive inter-provincial highway network and the huge parking lots attached to the megamalls in suburban areas naturally take away the valuable arable farmland.

IMO China should follow Japan's footsteps. Even though Japan got more automobile manufacturers than any country does, actually the government highly discourages personal ownership/usage of cars especially in the urban centers.

[wushijiao]

I see car culture poses another problem to China -- land scarcity.

This is a good point. Maybe to win the arguement against the growing car culture, people should frame the debate using the one thing government officials care about- Taiwan.

China has converted lots of farming areas into golf courses, seldomly used "high tech" industrial parks, and suburban housing. Thus, China had decreased production of key grains, like soy, recently (although this has reversed).

http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-11/01/content_387570.htm

In any case, if there is a "liberation" of Taiwan, China will almost certainly be put under international embargoes that could include food. China, from its point of view, must be able to feed itself. In most cases, highways certainly eat up a bunch of prime farming areas, which decreases food production.

[gato]

Cute argument, Wushijiao. Some of the highways are probably needed to improve efficiency for the transportation of goods. The suburbanization and golf-coursization should be slowed, if possible, but that might be hard. Some bureaucrats may have a personal financial interest in their develpment -- like with the Daxing mine in Guangdong, where 123 miners died in an accident recently, some local officials were unofficial shareholders in the mining company and kept the regulators off its back. See http://finance.bokee.com/industry/research_ind/29788.shtml

[Outofin]

I don't think land is a problem. It's all about value. If the land could generate more values being highway than being a farm, then do it. Of course this is based on the assumption that you could get unlimited food supplys that you could buy with your money. I feel that is true. But here comes wushijiao's argument about embargoes. Honestly, I really don't think that would happen because the chance is too low. I'd rather prepare for a world-wide drought than embargo on China.

[Ian_Lee]

Actually the growing car culture may yield two undesirable effects to the government:

Individualism and Privacy.

[bhchao]

In any case, if there is a "liberation" of Taiwan, China will almost certainly be put under international embargoes that could include food.

Also a long-term embargo on oil. If China becomes too reliant on oil to feed a growing automobile culture, its commuters will be stranded and all the newly built, asphalt highways could be an empty lot.

[Ian_Lee]

Anyway, I think the growing car culture should be restricted in China.

Why? Very simple. It is a matter of national security.

China is not an oil-rich country (unless large oil wells are discovered in the West). It should not waste its hard earned foreign exchange on imported oil.

And when it is too reliant on foreign oil, it may have to bend its foreign policy in times of energy crisis. Anybody remembers in 1975 that Japan had to condemn Israel involuntarily in UN owing to the threat from Middle East countries?

And should Chinese soldiers sacrifice their precious lives for the sake of oil on foreign lands like their American counterparts do?

[bhchao]

devi, coincidentally the NYTimes reported that the MTA reached an agreement today with Lockheed Martin to supply NYC subways with sophisticated surveillance equipment.

I agree that random bag checking might not stop the most determined terrorist, especially a suicide bomber. When requested to open his or her bags, the offender can simply refuse and leave the station, and go to another station until no one checks their bags.

The second contract that will be completed by the end of this year will provide the MTA with infrared sensors to detect bomb devices in the subways.

NYC should share this technology with European cities to safeguard them against possible future attacks on their transit systems, especially Madrid and London.

New Cameras to Watch Over Subway System

by Sewell Chan (Published: August 24, 2005)

Officials unveiled the high-tech future of transit security in New York City yesterday: an ambitious plan to saturate the subways with 1,000 video cameras and 3,000 motion sensors and to enable cellphone service in 277 underground stations - but not in moving trains - for the first time.

The Lockheed Martin Corporation was awarded a three-year, $212 million contract by the M.T.A. to create a surveillance and security system for its sprawling subway and bus system.

Moving quickly after the subway and bus bombings in London last month, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority awarded a three-year, $212 million contract to a group of contractors led by the Lockheed Martin Corporation, which is best known for making military hardware like fighter planes, missiles and antitank systems.

The authority abandoned its earlier reservations about cellphone service, agreeing that the benefits of allowing 911 and other calls during emergencies outweighed the costs and the risk of a phone-detonated bomb. It invited carriers to submit proposals by Oct. 12. The winning bidder, which would receive a 10-year license, would have to pay for the installation of the wireless network and would be required to disable all calls at the authority's request. It is not clear how long installation, which will cover 277 of the 468 stations, will take.

The surveillance and cellphone strategies, together with a police campaign begun last month to check riders' bags and packages, are a step toward what some critics have long said cannot be done - putting the nation's largest transit system under constant watch, and fortifying it with enough obstacles to deter potential terrorists.

The new security measures will be in place in the subway, along with the authority's two commuter railroads and nine bridges and tunnels and busy transit hubs at Grand Central Terminal, Pennsylvania Station and Times Square. While transit agencies in Boston and Houston have experimented with so-called "intelligent video" software, and London has far more cameras, the New York plan is the first to try to marry several advanced security technologies at once, experts said....

Mark D. Bonatucci, a Lockheed Martin program director, who will oversee the effort and who plans to move to the New York area with about a dozen colleagues, showed off a bank of video screens yesterday that will be part of a new computer-aided dispatch system. He demonstrated how security officials, to be based at eight control centers, might respond to two situations.

In the first, a person tries to enter a secure facility using an expired electronic access card; a computer detects and signals the security breach on an aerial photograph of the area. Officials would pinpoint the site, watch the attempted entry on a video monitor and send a security officer to investigate.

In the second, a briefcase is left on a busy Midtown subway platform. As a camera beams live images, software can distinguish the moving people from the motionless package, sending off an alert about an unattended, suspicious object. Police officers with bomb-sniffing dogs would be sent to the platform...

The Lockheed Martin contract, which includes optional extensions for maintenance work through September 2013, will focus on physical security. A second big contract, the details of which will be completed by the end of this year, will focus on equipment that can detect biological, chemical and radiological agents in the transit network...."

[bhchao]

Anyway, I think the growing car culture should be restricted in China.

China is not an oil-rich country (unless large oil wells are discovered in the West). It should not waste its hard earned foreign exchange on imported oil.

And when it is too reliant on foreign oil, it may have to bend its foreign policy in times of energy crisis. Anybody remembers in 1975 that Japan had to condemn Israel involuntarily in UN owing to the threat from Middle East countries?

If the growing car culture in China becomes too embedded in Chinese daily life, it will affect China's foreign policy approach and military posturing in the East China Sea.

Already China's thirst for oil to feed its growing automobile population and its economy is causing conflicts with Japan in the East China Sea. Currently China is drilling in the area to search for oil, causing tensions with the Japanese, who claim that China is siphoning off resources from the Japanese demarcation line. Since both countries are heavily reliant on foreign oil, there will inevitably be a potential conflict between the two countries as they look for alternative oil resources in East Asia instead of the Middle East.

[Outofin]

Anyway, I think the growing car culture should be restricted in China.

Why? Very simple. It is a matter of national security...

No no, that's not the modern spirit. Nowadays, no one restrains consumer's desires. Instead, they're encouraged. If you want something but can't affort it, work hard til you can, rather than forget it. If it's a security issue, build your army till it's no longer a security issue. Oh, we're all doomed this way. But that's the way things are.

Let's try some alternative energies.

[bhchao]

IMO China should follow Japan's footsteps. Even though Japan got more automobile manufacturers than any country does, actually the government highly discourages personal ownership/usage of cars especially in the urban centers.

Ian raises a good point, however I also like to add that China's growing automobile culture will be aggravated by the low energy efficiency there. China is very wasteful in terms of energy consumption, while the Japanese government widely promotes energy conservation, which citizens in Japan actively participate in.

Any oil shortage in Japan in the future will at least be offset somewhat by the high energy efficiency there. The rapidly growing number of cars on the road in China combined with poor energy efficiency is a recipe for disaster.

From a practical perspective, China can learn from Japan in this arena.

[gato]

Most people in China aren't wasteful with energy when their own pocketbook is on the line. You see taxi drivers pushing their cars with the engine off as they're queueing up for the the next passenger. Most people are very stingy with the use of air conditioning at home. There's also currently a propaganda campaign to promote the conservation of energy. An article in Beijing Youth Daily urged its readers to not charge their cell phone all night, but instead unplug it right after it finishes charging, so that one can save 0.03 KWh.

However, existing government regulations aren't always conducive towards energy conservation. I read that some government bodies -- I'm not sure at what level -- have banned either the use of smaller (and therefore more energy-efficient) motor vehicles on the argument that they're detrimental to the cities' image. One article reported that Shanghai office building operators complain about the cost of a law that requires them to keep all their lights on at night to give the city a night skyline.

[wushijiao]

Outofin- My original argument involving embargoes was mainly just a joke. The funny thing about China is that while debating, everything, no matter how trivial, is placed in the context of national defense/ national strengthening. For example, I went to KFC the other day, and all the employees were wearing some hilarious shirt saying, "为中国而变化, 打造新快餐!" In other words, eatin' chicken that's been done fried up nice and good, and served by an American company somehow strengthens China. The appeal to patriotism/ nationalism is something that one should be suspicious of in every country (including the US, in which stupid ideas wrapped in American flags get passed into law all the time), I think.

But it is true that as China's need for oil increases, its foreign policy will become less and less in its own control. Every American with a brain knows that the Saudis have been funding terrorism, and yet there is nothing we can do about it because so many sectors of the American economy rely heavily on oil and oil's by-products.

It just seems to me that from an environmental point of view, a protecting cities' architectural heritage point of view, and a helping-out-the-average-Zhou point of view, China should make a firm stand against the growing automobile culture.

[Outofin]

Outofin- My original argument involving embargoes was mainly just a joke.

Ya, I thought that was a joke. I got "what's in his mind?" But I was not sure and I tried not to say something like "wushijiao's post is a joke" to offend you. Glad you clarify it.

bhchao and gato, as far as the energy efficiency goes. Besides the comsumers behavior, how China as a nation uses energy is more important. Is that bhchao's point? Energy consumed at industrial level is far more than consumer's level. I don't have the data in my head. But I've seen many times that engergy consumed per GDP in China compared to other countries. IIRC, Japan is the most effcient country.

[wushijiao]

Energy consumed at industrial level is far more than consumer's level. I don't have the data in my head.

That is a good point. I've also read that the % of oil used at the personal level is small. But still, even if rasing fuel standards only influences a few percentage points per year, that does add up to millions and millions of barrels per year, which is significant.

[gato]

One thing I've been somewhat surprised about Beijing is the relative lack of high-density residential high-rises in Haidian/Zhongguancun district. I expected many more of them in such an expensive commercial centers. Most urban planners believe that high-density residential pattern is necessary for a healthy public transportation system. I suspect one reason what I see in Haidian is that a high percentage of the land is owned by the government, such as housing area for state-owned enterprises or schools. Developers probably aren't able to purchase the sites so they could be converted to higher-density buildings. As a result, most people who work in Zhongguancun commute far distances. A recent newspaper reported that a survey shows that 25% of those who work in Zhongguancun own a car.

The existing government owners aren't interested or aren't capable of doing so. Also many Beijing roads are very wide, usually with 6 lanes (two of which are designated for bicycles), which takes space away from residential development and makes crossing the road a relatively life-threatening activity.

See http://www.stdaily.com/gb/economy/2005-08/28/content_426873.htm

　　据调查，中关村地区现已有车的消费者达到了28%，中关村地区已经超过了北京市预计的2008年本市达到平均每4个人拥有一辆轿车的水平；而已有车的人群中，计划购买第二辆车的占了64%，其中12%的人计划在半年内购买，28%的人则计划在1年内购买。至于目前尚无车的受访人群中，有78%的人有购车计划。