Sunday Statshot « The Gondola Project

Sunday Statshot

03
Jul

2011

The Sunday Morning Stats with Nick Chu: Maglevs!

Maglev train technology has been touted as the technology of the future for decades but with little progress. The Chinese, however, have recently begun to look at the technology with some surprising results. Above: Shanghai's Maglev. Launched in 2004, it travels at a blinding top speed of 430 km/h and is the world's only commercial high speed maglev in operation today. Photo by flickr user chill.

A quick look at some of the things that make Maglevs work (or not):

Year maglev trains were first patented: 1934

Years until first commercial maglev available: 50

Year the world’s first commercial high-speed maglev opened in Shanghai: 2004

Energy consumption of high speed rail travelling at a speed of 300km/hr: 51 watt hours per seat km

High speed maglev: 33% less

Carbon emissions from short-haul flights: 160 grams per seat km

Maglev: 86% less

Cost of Shanghai Maglev line: $1.2 billion USD

Length: 30km

Travel time savings versus a car: 38 minutes

Cost per kilometer: $40 million USD

Cost per kilometer for Beijing’s S1 maglev line (under construction): $46 million USD

Cost per kilometer for Beijing’s subway construction: $100 million USD

Maglev concerns: Radiation

Shanghai maglev buffers: 200m

Proposed Beijing maglev buffers: 22.5m

Proposed speed of Tokyo-Osaka high speed maglev: 482km/h

Time to travel entire 505km: 67 minutes

Time savings versus a plane: 8 minutes

Cost per kilometer: $241 million

Cost per kilometer of New York’s Second Avenue subway: $1.2 billion

Cost of owning your own decommissioned Maglev carriage: $160 USD

Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.

Sunday Statshot

Comments

26
Jun

2011

Chinese Urbanism, Part 2 – The Sunday Stats with Nick Chu

Note: Nick Chu is presently on vacation in China but still managed to smuggle the follow observations out from behind The Great Firewall.

Dong Hai Station in Tianjin's Binhai Mass Transit system - longest "light rail" in China. Notice anything strange? Hint: Platform screen

A quick look at some of the things that make urbanism in China work (or not) – all stats from The Concrete Dragon by Thomas J. Campanella:

Length of Shanghai’s Inner Ring Road in Luwan and Huangpu district: 2 miles

Number of people displaced during its construction: 12,000

Miles of highway constructed by Robert Moses in New York in his career: 415

Miles of highway constructed by Shanghai officials in 10 years during the 199’s: Triple that of Robert Moses

Square miles of Chinese agricultural land lost between 1980-2004: 44,000 – equivalent to the combined land mass of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Hampshire and half of Maine.

Number of Chinese lifted out of poverty during the same time period: 300 million

Number of rural migrants making their way to urban centres in 1 year (1998): 27 million – equivalent to the total European migration to the US between 1820 and 1920.

Percentage of world’s footwear produced in Pearl River Delta: ~ 33%

Consumer electronics: ~33%

Toys: ~50%

Watches: ~66%

Percentage of furniture jobs lost in US attributed to the rise of the Dongguan furniture industry in China: ~33%

Number of employees working at Foxconn, manufacturer of Apple products: 200,000

Families relocated/tossed out of Shanghai’s inner district between 1992-1994: 200,000

Residents relocated from Minhang District for World Expo 2010: 50,000

Number of people displaced by urban renewal in Beijing during 1990s: 1 million

Total number of people displaced in 30 years of US urban renewal projects: 1 million

Number of middle class families in China in 2002: 50 million

Estimated number by 2020: 600 million – greater than the total combined populations of the US, Canada and Mexico.

Sunday Statshot

Comments

19
Jun

2011

Chinese Urbanism, Part 1 – The Sunday Stats with Nick Chu

Note: Nick Chu is presently on vacation in China but still managed to smuggle the follow observations out from behind The Great Firewall.

South Street in Xi'an. A dynamic mixture of construction cranes, ancient monuments, public transport (BRT), cars, bicycles and pedestrians often seen in many Chinese cities. Image by Nick Chu.

A quick look at some of the things that make urbanism in China work (or not) – all stats from The Concrete Dragon by Thomas J. Campanella:

Percentage of Chinese population living in cities at the founding of the PRC in 1949: 10.6%

Number of cities in China in 1949: 58

In 1978: 193

In 1999: 667

Number of rural migrants to Chinese cities from 1949 – 1956: 35 million

Estimated number of people who died during the 1960’s famine in China: 30 million (greater than the number of deaths caused by the European Black Death plague in the Middle Ages)

Percentage of Chinese population living in cities by 1960: 20%

By 1990: 27%

By 2006: 40%

By 2030 (estimated): 60%

Number of rural migrant workers presently in China: 140 million (equivalent to 5 times the number of undocumented Mexican nationals currently in the United States)

Annual salary of a rural migrant worker in Shanghai in 2002: 3,560 renminbi

In rural areas: 920 renminbi

Number of bicycles in China in 1990: 540 million

Percentage decrease in bicycle ownership between 2001 and 2006: 26%

Number of Chinese traffic fatalities in 2000: 83,000

Percentage of traffic fatalities in 2000 involving bicycles: 33%

Typical number of Americas travelling during Thanksgiving: 65 million

Number of Chinese worldwide travelling during New Year Holiday: 2 billion

Sunday Statshot

Comments

12
Jun

2011

Is Bike-Sharing Effective? Sunday Morning Stats With Nick Chu

We live in a golden age of bike-sharing schemes. But is this interesting form of public transportation effective? Like most things, the answer isn't as simple as 'yes' or 'no.'

A quick look at some of the things that make bike-sharing work (or not):

Number of bike share programs worldwide: 200

Number of bike-sharing schemes earning yearly profits: 0

Number of US cities with Bike Share programs: 10

Number of bikes in Washington’s bike share program: 1,000

Number of members: 12,000

Cost of subsidization per bicycle: $7,000

Expected number of bikes in New York’s scheme next year: 10,000

Number bikes in Paris Velib: 20,000

Percentage of original bikes destroyed/stolen: 80

Percentage of bikes stolen/vandalized in Edmonton’s People’s Pedal program: 95

Year Hangzhou bike share started: 2008

Number of bikes in 2008: 2,800

Stations: 61

Distance between docking stations: ¼ mile

Number of bike share bicycles in Hangzhou today: 50,000

By 2020: 175,000

Main clients: Tourists

Number of annual tourists in Hangzhou: 20 million

Number of annual tourists in London: 15 million

Month Guangzhou officials discussed implementing bike share: May 2010

Month bike share launched: June 2010

Sunday Statshot

Comment

05
Jun

2011

Does Free Public Transportation Work? Sunday Morning Stats with Nick Chu

Does making public transportation free automatically cause a net benefit? Debate is split and seems highly contingent on cultural context. Image by flickr user Velobry.

A quick look at some of the things that make free public transportation work (or not):

Arguably, the most successful free public transportation initiatives in the world: Hasselt, Belgium

Year free public transportation was first implemented there: 1996

Cost per household to implement free transportation in Hasselt: 22.64 Euros ($32 USD)

Urban bus rides per year before free public transportation in Hasselt: 331,551

After free public transportation: 3,200,000

Percentage of bus users that are new bus users: 37%

Percentage that were former bus users: 63%

Percentage that were former car drivers: 16%

Highest percentage of revenue collected by a United States public transportation system going specifically towards fare collection costs: 22%

Typical farebox recovery rate in small US transit systems: <10%

Percentage increase in ridership with 100% decrease in fares: 30%

Cost of collecting fares from transit riders in New York City: $200 million

Percentage drop in transit ridership for every 10% increase in fares: 3.8%

Cost of collecting fares in Skagit Transit in Washington State: $133,385

Total fares collected on Skagit Transit: $121,300

Last large metropolitan city in North America to try free transit: Austin, Texas

Percentage ridership increase: 75%

Cost per rider in Austin, Texas prior to fare-free experiment: $2.51

Cost per rider during 15 months of fare-free: $1.51

Percentage increase in auto-users using free bus service: 0%

Number of physical assaults before fare-free: 44

After: 120

Percent of Austin transit drivers who petitioned to discontinue free transit program: 75%

Year discontinued: 1990

Sunday Statshot

Comments

29
May

2011

Sunday Statshot with Nick Chu

A quick look at some of the things that make small (or big) space living work (or not):

If environmentally friendliness is directly correlated with living in smaller homes, then Mong Kok, Hong Kong with 130,000 persons per square km must be the world's most environmentally friendly place in the world. Image by flickr user wZa HK.

American home size in 1950: 983 sq.ft.

Minimum home size in New York State: 900 sq.ft.

In Hillsborough, California: 2500sq.ft.

How to stick it to the man (i.e. Hillsborough): Home on wheels

Size: 130 sq.ft.

Year of peak housing size: 2007

Size: 2521 sq.ft.

Projected housing size in 2015: 2152 sq.ft.

Average apartment size in Manhattan: 1300 sq.ft.

Average price of Manhattan apartment: $1.43 million

Average rent in Manhattan: $3600/month

Manhattanite Felice Cohen’s rent: $700/month

Size: 90 sq.ft.

Percentage of Hong Konger’s living in homes smaller than 700 sq ft.: 90

Percentage of Hong Kong’s private apartments smaller than 500 sq. ft: 50

Percentage more expensive Hong Kong’s real estate is compared to New York and London: 40

Size of Gary Chang’s apartment: 344 sq.ft

Number of residents: 6 (Gary, Mom, Dad, 2 Sisters, 1 Tenant)

Number of rooms apartment can transform into: 20

Number of rooms in Al Gore’s home: 20

Average US household energy consumption: 10,656 kWh

Gore’s home: 221,000 kWh

Sunday Statshot

Comments

22
May

2011

Sunday Statshot with Nick Chu

A quick look at some of the things that make intercity bus travel work (or not):

With the launching "Megabus", intercity bus travel is no longer confined to seedy bus depots and is actually no longer considered a last resort travel option. It's popularity has skyrocketed - esp amongst young adults. Image by flickr user Shreyans Bhansali.

Fastest growing form of intercity travel: Buses

Number of intercity bus trips in 1960: 140 million

In 1990: 40 million

% decrease in intercity bus service between 1980-2002: 50.6%

“Curbside” bus carrier – Megabus – inauguration date: 2006

First time in 40 years intercity bus travel grew: 2007

Percentage of Megabus riders between age of 18-34: 50%

Median annual income for male workers aged 25-34 in 1980: $46,700

In 2008: $40,000

Percentage more average wage worker earned in 1970 than today: 18%

Percentage of riders booking their Megabus tickets online: 90%

Cost per mile of Megabus ride: $0.08