From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Cost of public vs. private transportation
Date: 22 Jul 92 01:17:36 GMT
Organization: LLNL

In article <21985@venera.isi.edu> finn@atomic.isi.edu (Greg Finn) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.032157.1519@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
:
::#- :... In constrast, bus fare to LLNL from my
::#- :home is $7.50 a week, and a regular commute (5 days a week) to
::#- :Berkeley by bus and BART would cost nearly $30/week, and BART never
::#- :gets stuck in traffic jams. ...

::#- 	I see.  There are no public subsidies of BART.  The system
::#- 	is entirely capitalized by the fees paid by users.
::#- 	This is a remarkable achievement.  You did determine this
::#- 	in calculating your costs, surely you didn't forget it?
::
::	Give me a break.
::	I was only calculating "direct" costs. "Indirect" costs are
::another matter.
:
:	No.  You were making a point about costs.  You were
:	grossly inaccurate, leaving the reader with the impression
:	that your figures were correct.

	Same to you :-)

::	True, BART is subsidized. It receives a 0.5 cent/$ sales tax
::subsidy in the BART counties, which for me would run at a little less
::than $1 a week.

::	The total BART budget is about $238 million/yr, which is
::divided among about (on average) 125,000 users. The cost/user:
::$2000/year, of which about $1000/yr or so is recouped in fares [I
::don't have _really_ precise numbers]. $2000/year turns out to be about
::$8/week. That's better than your average auto insurance :-).

:	So your ticket is heavily subsidized by the millions in the greater
:	BART district through a 0.5% sales tax ... if those millions
:	all used BART you would have a point.  As they don't, you don't.
:	Every time you buy a ticket you are taking money away from
:	someone else to help you buy your ticket.  Very fair I think.

	I will concede this point if you concede that it is unfair for
non-drivers to subsidize drivers, for only-local drivers to subsidize
long-distance drivers, etc. etc.

	Actually, someone who really enjoys driving might have a
selfish reason to support mass transit -- it helps get all the others
off the road :-).

:	You never said where the funds to build BART came from nor
:	how service on the debt was paid.  I assume that it cost at
:	least a few dollars to construct.  How much?

::	Subsidies may be very visible for public transit, but
::subsidies for car and truck use exist, and are big.

:	If they are so big ... they must be very visible or are
:	these mysterious subsidies not easily cost accounted?
:	The user fees for roads are huge and very visible, starting
:	with gas taxes.  User fees are NOT subsidies, a big difference.

	But there _are_ subsidies, such as outlays to build freeways.
You haven't done anything to show that license fees and fuel taxes
_completely_ cover the costs of building and maintaining roads.

::	Consider the source of the money for building the Interstate
::freeway system -- public money. In fact, they would not have been
::built unless Eisenhower decided that they would be paid for out of the
::Federal pocket.  A subsidy?  You bet.

:	My understanding is that they were primarily paid for out of
:	user fees.  Those who use it pay for it directly, or at
:	least, used to, until mass transit began removing money
:	from the program.  A substantial portion of federal gas tax
:	money is now used to subsidize mass transit rather than
:	being used to support the road system (see below SCRTD
:	projected cost figures).  I wrote my Senator to confirm
:	this at the time.

	Your _understanding_?

	The freeways were paid for out of general funds. I hope I can
get Joseph Vranich's _Supertrains_ on hand for details.

:	Also, there is a 0.5% regional sales tax here in LA County region
:	for mass transit.  At present almost noone uses it but we all
:	pay for it and have for years.  Very fair.

	Well, about 10% of the population, and the less affluent part.
Certainly not all the selfish road hogs. It is fortunate that LA is
building some traffic-jam-proof systems and catching up with the rest
of the civilized world :-).

	And as a car worshipper, wouldn't _you_ be glad to have less
competition on the roads?

::#- 	Unlike auto/truck transportation and maintenance systems
::#- 	which primarily are paid by user fees and purchases, mass
::#- 	transit systems in most countries are extremely	heavily
::#- 	subsidized.

::	Numbers, please.

:	Gee.  I thought that you would never ask.  Thanks.

:Source: SCRTD

:	In millions of 1988 dollars for 4.4 mile Phase One funding:

:	 34   	City of LA
:	 90.6 	Secondary Federal Funds
:	130   	Private Sector Tax
:	176     Federal Mass Transit Fund           <<<
:	176	LA County Transportation Commission
:	203	Additional Mass Transit tax funds
:	213	State of California
:	225	Federal Gas Tax			    <<<

	So what?

	It's just not possible to collect fares until the system is
running.

	And how much do you think a new freeway costs?

	Answer (in case you think freeways are essentiall free):

	BIG BUX

:Source: SCRTD

:	Projected ridership:

:	54,803 daily reached by the year 2000

:Source: SCRTD
:
:	Estimated savings to automobile commuters:

:	 259 million miles that yields
:	$78 in annual fuel and maintenance costs (1988 dollars)

	$78 or $78 million or what?

	And how much would be collected in fares?

	I'd like to see how the calculation was done.

	I'd done some calculations for BART which shows that it is
indeed cost-effective for its users, and I had even posted them.

:If you want to argue with the Southern California RTD's own
:figures, be my guest.  I wonder if their figures are optimistic?

	Maybe just the opposite. Some mass-transit systems, like the
LA Blue Line and the Sacramento LRT system, have had
better-than-expected ridership. BART's ridership went up after the
Loma Prieta earthquake (can't get across the Bay Bridge, but could get
through the Transbay Tunnel, see?), and has _stayed_ there.
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.physics,sci.energy