“BMW opened Frankfurt with its Vision EfficientDynamics concept, a 2+2 seat plug-in hybrid sports car that set the overall tone for a show where green technology and low emissions were the dominant focus. At the heart of the car is a small, 3-cylinder turbodiesel engine, positioned directly in front of the rear axle and working in tandem with a spine of lithium-polymer batteries powering electric motors.” -cardesignews.com

“The two-seat mid-engined MP4-12C follows the principles of Formula 1 cars, where everything is there for a reason. All lines, surfaces and details communicate the car’s engineering through its design, while particular attention was paid to aerodynamics and weight savings. In the construction of the new car, McLaren employed a single piece carbon fiber chassis the company calls a Carbon MonoCell, which not only reduces the weight of the structure but also allows for the use of lighter body panels.” -cardesignnews.com

Traffic congestion costs companies millions of dollars annually in lost productivity. Road congestion appears mainly at two times of the day, morning peak and evening peak traffic, where effectively the road space becomes inadequate for the demand. It seems in any period of economic growth there is an increase in vehicles on the road and car ownership. Many major cities have trialed and implemented changes to combat the traffic congestion problems such as Singapore, a city with the average population of around 4.48 million. “In May 1975 Singapore introduces the world’s first road pricing scheme within the CBD, a system where drivers had to pay a fee to drive on a restricted area of road. Car ownership levels then stood at 16 persons to a car. By 1989 the ratio fell to 9.9 persons to a car and has remained more or less the same since” (Rabinovitch 1995). A proposal such a raising the cost of car ownership in order to reduced the private ownership of cars is may be one possible solution (Ang 1990).

Vehicle traffic creates noise, air pollution, pedestrian delay, driver stress and aggravation, loss of work productivity, and a main cause of road accidents. (Chin 1996) As traffic congestion increases so does the potential for road accidents to take place. A troublesome relationship as the population continues to increase. Most commuters would rather drive than walk or cycle despite both these options being an environmentally sustainable transport. (Currie 2005) “Car dependence is a critical fact of Melbourne transport. Some 75% of all trips in the Metropolitan area are made by private car which also account for 86% of all travel distance covered by residents (Transport Research Centre, 1996).” People feel safer traveling by motor car, and for good reason. “It is seen that the risk of injury when walking is about 4 times higher than when driving a car. The risk of injury when cycling is about 7.5 times higher than for car occupants” (Elvik 2009). Thus, the more motor vehicles there are on the road, the more likely cyclists and pedestrians are at risk of being involved in an accident. Though the greater the presence of cyclists/pedestrians there are the more likely motorists are of noticing them. For example, the awareness of the average motorists would increase as there are less cars on the roads and more cyclists, due to the those former motorists now choosing to ride (Ang 1990).

Pollution, in particular air pollution, caused from the mass number of motor vehicles on the road effect the entire planet. The main source of carbon dioxide (CO) comes from the motor car, and is not only a problem for the environment but also a health risk for us all. Toxic air pollutants include lead, particle matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and hydrocarbons (Chin 1996). Pollution can cause health problems such as asthma, bronchitis, leukemia, and lung disease (Banister 2008). To correct these forces of destruction, the public must be made aware of their own environmental wrong doings as many may not be aware of the implications of their own actions. “One may not be aware of ones contribution of toxic fumes to the environment as a result of using a particular road. Secondly, even if one does perceive one’s private costs correctly, one does not necessarily take into account the possibility of the cost falling on the rest of society” (Chin 1996).

One of the obvious effects of traffic is the deterioration of efficient travel, which means it requires a longer period of time to travel from one place to another. There has always been the desire within the driver to travel faster. In a city where we are all so busy and time is money, it is perceived that traveling faster is beneficial as we are “time saving.” In all fairness, the work journey travel time is important, though as there is an increase in sustainable mobility the journey may become more of a leisure time. A change in the way we think of travel is a vital step forward to cure the planet of its destructive ways. Transport planning need to embrace the concept of healthy travel by persuading the public to walk and cycle more, by minimising road space for cars and increasing space for sustainable transportation. Current infrastructure has lead society in the wrong direction, with the mass peoples being influenced to drive everywhere due to the road and freeway system. “The primary concerns over the physical dimensions (urban form and traffic) should be balanced by the social dimensions (people and proximity)” (Banister 2008).

In order to understand why we choose a particular form of transport over another, we must consider analysing current trends. Some consider their motor vehicle a reflection of themselves, or use it as a tool to promote wealth. For whatever reason the motor car has become that of a status symbol and is considered a necessity of every day life. Car owners need to be influenced by mass numbers not an individual to reassure there decision making. For mass behavioral changes to occur users must be confident that the change will be beneficial to them. People would rather a solution that simply requires them to buy a product rather than to actively change their behavior. “Behavioral changes generally are associated with additional effort or decreased comfort. For example, reducing car use implies that we need to adjust our lifestyle, which will evoke (initial) resistance because it requires effort and reduces freedom, comfort and convenience” (Steg and Gifford 2005). If the change, however minimal, is well supported and well publicised, the public will be more inclined to catch on. “Public acceptability drives political acceptability, and it is only when there is sufficient public support for change, that action will take place” (Banister 2008).

Technology has played a key role in the development of the motor car and all systems of transportation that exist today. Technological innovation has made it possible for us to travel more efficiently than ever before with the advancements in the design of renewable energy sources and alternative fuels. Increasingly these ‘sustainable’ solutions are raising public awareness in promoting a greener future for the planet. To reward public response, standard could also be introduced to ensure access o certain parts of the city is restricted to those vehicles that are considered environmentally cleaner in comparison to other vehicles (Banister 2008). Germany has implemented separate classes of cars for annual taxes levied on owners of cars. If you own an electric car you are exempt from taxes for the first 5 years. The potential for technological contribution in the development of a better transport system is considered a future reality. In order for such grand proposals to take place, large investors are required to make the dream a reality. “the major driving force in innovation and R&D is the profit seeking goal of entrepreneurs in response to a potential market demand” (Stough 2006).  Therefore public support is vital in assuring confidence in the potential investors. Institutions are crucial in directing technological change towards sustainable solutions.

Encouraging people to use public transport as an alternative to the car is a viable option especially for suburbia to CBD travel. However the reputation and effectiveness of Melbourne’s current public transport is indeed cause for concern. The systems unreliability and lack of adequate public transport for its uses are just some of the issues associated with the poor quality of public transport in Melbourne. “Unfortunately the general lack of public transport for most residents, overloading on rail and trams stuck in traffic mean public transport is not a real option to address car dependence or traffic congestion” (Currie 2005). Melbourne’s train system is no where near the success rate of our European counter parts.  With the construction of new parking complex’s in and around the Melbourne CBD City (most with cheap all day parking for around $10), it is unlikely that, even with increased accessibility offered by public transport, it will do more than provide an interesting tourist attraction and satisfy the needs of those who believe in trains as the only form of public transport (Hensher 1998).

In conclusion the literature research found that traffic congestion is not being publicly addressed and therefore has not been treated with enough attention. While the government continues to build more roads, a quick fix approach, they are never really tackling the heart of the problem, being the staggering amount of motorists and their problematic thinking of travel. Our congestions problem is slowly deteriorating our environment and our health. A major change in consciousness is needed in order to implement a more sustainable form of transport. Technology plays a big role in development of environmentally efficient transportation. Given the already tatted image of our public transport system, the public needs an alternative.

References

Ang, B. W. (1990). “Reducing traffic congestion and its impact on transport energy use in Singapore.” Energy Policy 18(9): 871-874.

Banister, D. (2008). “The sustainable mobility paradigm.” Transport Policy 15(2): 73-80.

Chin, A. T. H. (1996). “Containing air pollution and traffic congestion: Transport policy and the environment in Singapore.” Atmospheric Environment 30(5): 787-801.

Currie, G. (2005). “Melbourne future transport options.” Institute of Transport Studies, Monash University.

Elvik, R. (2009). “The non-linearity of risk and the promotion of environmentally sustainable transport.” Accident Analysis & Prevention 41(4): 849-855.

Hensher, D. A. (1998). “The imbalance between car and public transport use in urban Australia: why does it exist?” Transport Policy 5(4): 193-204.

Rabinovitch, J. (1995). “A sustainable urban transportation system.” Energy for Sustainable Development 2(2): 11-18.

Steg, L. and R. Gifford (2005). “Sustainable transportation and quality of life.” Journal of Transport Geography 13(1): 59-69.

Stough, P. R. a. R. (2006). “Institutions, regulations and sustainable transport, a review.” European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 6(1): 99-112.

Interesting development of self driving vehicles completely operated by computer.  Similar concept features to the ones mentioned in my proposal.

My direction of interest for my major project will be a form of transportation design. My idea is to create an alternative form of transport for the everyday commuter which will hopefully replace the need for the average car, primarily within the CBD. It can be seen as a solution to the growing traffic and pollution problem we face as a city today. It would be to look for more sustainable and environmentally friendly technologies when designing the perfect mode for travellers. Specifically I will be targeting commuters based in both suburbia and the city, whom may travel to and from the CBD for work, school or leisure.

Body

The inspiration for my idea relates back to my personal experience with travelling to and from university on a regular basis. The various problems we face today as commuters can be derived from the many problematic aspects of our current trends when it comes to transportation. In my own travels I have experienced first hand some of the frustrating elements when driving to and from the CBD. Traffic congestion on the road is one of the main issues that prevent efficient travel in a motor car. From observation, it is astounding how so many cars stuck in traffic have only one occupant inside, add to this the growing population and as a result we’re contributing to Australia’s already alarming pollution issue. The reality that people now are having to travel further and further to reach anywhere near or around the city adds to the frustration of city travel.

Many people opt not to travel by public transport for many reasons which include the lack of personal or private space due to over crowded trains, exposure to whether at train stations, an unreliable train system, and many are concerned for there own safety. Motorists are forced to endure the expensive running costs, rising petrol prices and cost of parking, if they wish to still use there motor car for everyday travel purposes.

There is no easy solution to all these problems, and there is no quick fix, though there must be an alternative form of transportation.

The idea: to design a single occupant transportation pod. One which is capable of housing all the necessities that you would carry to work or school, as well as having all the comforts of the modern day motor car. Unlike public transport, the commuter has his own private space, and unlike a motor car the occupant is not travelling to and from the city in a large size, 5 seater family car (mostly used), dominating our roads. It will be a two-wheeled vehicle and will use similar balancing technology as that seen in the Segway. The transportation pod will take up a quarter of the space of the average family car and thus taking up less space on our roads. I am also proposing a driverless system, where the pods cannot be driven or controlled by the occupant, rather the pods are all electronically linked to a each other which then calculates a safe travel distance and speed in relation to one another, a kind of built in collision avoidance system. The pods will then be linked via satellite to a main system which could keep track of traffic flow in an emergency situation. All the pods would require would be a destination input from the passenger, much like a GPS unit.

The transportation pods are primarily aimed at the average male/female, white collar commuter between 24 to 50 years of age. Though not just exclusive for the working class, the pods could also appeal to University and possibly high school students. Unlike the privately owned motor car, the pods are owned by a government authority and an annual fee much like registration must be paid in order to use the pod. The hope is that overtime, the introduction of the Pods will eliminate the need for private car ownership in the city of Melbourne.

Research has began on implementing environmentally friendly technology to power the pods, as well as the possibility of a “free energy” solution to generate drive to the wheels of the pod without the use of any fossils fuels. Still under development, the technology works on the use of a magnetic motor which is used to spin a shaft or axle connected to the wheels. If the motor is successful in working then it will never need refuelling and will be a far cheaper option to own and maintain then any modern day motor car. This will also mean that the pod will have major environmental benefit of being a zero emission energy source.

On a larger scale, infrastructure will need to be put into place for the pods to travel amongst today cars, trucks, buses, ect. It will involve providing a specialized area or lane for Pod only traffic, which in the initial stages will start off as single lane traffic. As time progresses so with the popularity of the Pods and thus the number of lanes will then increase to 3 or 4 in both directions of travel. Once the pods make up the majority of vehicles on the road, the system can be fully functional and the CBD will be limited to pod traffic only.

The Pod form of travel creates the opportunity to change the way we think of transporting ourselves via vehicle. The system is best suited for suburbia to CBD travel and should reduce travel time by at least half. The pod  is an affordable, efficient, and a smart way for commuters to travel.

Key words

Transportation design, personal transportation, zero emissions, pod, vehicle, sustainability, changing infrastructure, Melbourne CBD, traffic congestion.