Benchmarking Efficiency of Sustainable Urban Transport in China
Benchmarking Efficiency of Sustainable Urban Transport in China Benchmarking Efficiency of Sustainable Urban Transport in China
Challenges 3 : While the needs of the reasonable private car can be meet, how to minimize its negative impacts? With increasing income, which kind of transport mode will you use?
Modal Split —— private car 98% residents without private cars San Francisco Chicago Toronto New York Amsterdam Hamburger Munich Nagoya Ly ons Nancy Marseilles Tokyo Beijing Hefei Nanjing Ningbo Tianjin Guiyang 2.57 2.25 1.19 0.8 7.22 3.76 Share of Private car 24.2 31.9 38 37.9 36.5 34.7 44 59.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 58 63 74.8 74.3 Restraint factors: • People’s idea: pursue personal travel, and lack of the idea of energy saving and environment protection • Motor industry development & the negative effect of the vehicle (full life cycling cost analysis) • Crazy competition for the car-owning • Lack of the policies and measures to promote the rational use of the private car • Access and discard mechanism for the private car waiting for refined %
- Page 1 and 2: Benchmarking Efficiency of Sustaina
- Page 3 and 4: Infrastructure —Road area ratio T
- Page 5: Restraint factors: •The long term
- Page 9 and 10: Great shortage in public transport
- Page 11 and 12: Infrastructure — Length of urban
- Page 13 and 14: Satisfaction ——Investigation Re
- Page 15 and 16: Environmental Pollution Good 35.2%
- Page 17 and 18: •E-bike” in China Rapid develo
- Page 19 and 20: Challenges 7 : How to provide safer
- Page 21 and 22: Development stage in China Field Pa
- Page 23 and 24: Vision ——Sustainable Urban Tran
- Page 25 and 26: 2. Prioritize Public Transport in U
- Page 27 and 28: 3. Coordinate Transport and Land Us
- Page 29 and 30: Before Case: Limited the usage of p
- Page 31 and 32: International Workshop on Integrate
Modal Split<br />
—— private car<br />
98% residents<br />
without private cars<br />
San Francisco<br />
Chicago<br />
Toronto<br />
New York<br />
Amsterdam<br />
Hamburger<br />
Munich<br />
Nagoya<br />
Ly<br />
ons<br />
Nancy<br />
Marseilles<br />
Tokyo<br />
Beij<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Hefei<br />
Nanj<strong>in</strong>g<br />
N<strong>in</strong>gbo<br />
Tianj<strong>in</strong><br />
Guiyang<br />
2.57<br />
2.25<br />
1.19<br />
0.8<br />
7.22<br />
3.76<br />
Share <strong>of</strong> Private<br />
car<br />
24.2<br />
31.9<br />
38<br />
37.9<br />
36.5<br />
34.7<br />
44<br />
59.6<br />
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80<br />
58<br />
63<br />
74.8<br />
74.3<br />
Restra<strong>in</strong>t factors:<br />
• People’s idea: pursue personal travel,<br />
and lack <strong>of</strong> the idea <strong>of</strong> energy sav<strong>in</strong>g and<br />
environment protection<br />
• Motor <strong>in</strong>dustry development & the<br />
negative effect <strong>of</strong> the vehicle (full life<br />
cycl<strong>in</strong>g cost analysis)<br />
• Crazy competition for the car-own<strong>in</strong>g<br />
• Lack <strong>of</strong> the policies and measures to<br />
promote the rational use <strong>of</strong> the private<br />
car<br />
• Access and discard mechanism for the<br />
private car wait<strong>in</strong>g for ref<strong>in</strong>ed<br />
%
Change language