“The recent spike in gas prices is just one of many compelling reasons why convenient, fast, and reliable bus and rail service need to be expanded throughout our cities,” said Emily Rusch, Transportation Advocate with CALPIRG Education Fund. “Let’s face it: the era of cheap oil is over.”
Many experts predict that gas prices will exceed $4 a gallon in southern California in the coming weeks and months. Thanks to public transit, California saved more than 486 million gallons of oil, roughly equivalent to taking more than 800,000 cars off the road. That has made California far less dependent on oil than we otherwise would be, and has made consumers less susceptible to gas price spikes. In fact, the report estimates that existing public transit results in more than $1.2 billion dollars in gasoline cost savings annually for consumers.
A few highlights from California:
- The Bay Area’s BART system is the third best system in the country in oil savings, behind only MTA in New York and Washington D.C.’s Metro. BART cut the Bay Area’s oil use by 199 million gallons.
- The Los Angeles Metro bus system is the number one bus system in the country in oil savings, cutting Los Angeles’ oil use by more than 56 million gallons.
- Stockton and Bakersfield were recognized as having the most oil savings from public transit out of all urbanized areas with populations under 500,000.
Reduced oil dependence and insulation from gas price spikes aren’t the only benefits. California has also committed to reducing our global warming pollution by 25% by 2020, a commitment that will be difficult to reach unless we reduce our dependence on cars. Public transit prevents almost 3.6 million metric tons of carbon dioxide pollution annually.
The CALPIRG Education Fund report also found that every dollar invested in public transit reaps more than two dollars in benefits. Last year the California state legislature cut more than $1.26 billion from public transit agencies to balance the state budget.
“California’s budget was balanced last year with unacceptably high cuts to public transit agencies,” said Rusch. “We’re calling on Governor Schwarzenegger to ensure public transit gets its fair share of funding this year, so that we can invest in local transit and reduce California’s dependence on oil.”
Metro wants to know what you imagine. Tell us what you think of LA County’s transportation future by clicking the COMMENTS link below.
5 comments:
We definitely need to expand our rail system. A world-class metropolis like Los Angeles pales in comparison to places like New York, Paris and London in terms of miles of rail on our city. The Gold Line was long overdue boon. And even the Orange Line, which I refer as the Fake Train, has impressive ridership. But the Orange Line is a bandaid. It should have been a rail line from the start. As a dedicated busway, it's slower and has less passenger carrying capacity than rail, and it's my least favorite leg of my commute. We also need lines between downtown and Santa Monica (thank you Aqua Line!), plus a line connecting NoHo with Pasadena, covering a bit of Burbank and Glendale on the way. Plus trams (or trollies) through areas like Brand Blvd and Ventura Blvd would ease traffic immensely, I think. In my view, simply adding buses doesn't cut it. They just add to the problem by mixing in with automobile traffic. Rail for my money is clearly the answer.
The LAMTA provides 77% of all transit via petroleum (oil/natgas) direct sourced energy at less efficiency than private autos. 2/3rds of the remainder are provided via DWP from coal/NatGas/oil.
There was no energy saved.
L.A. has one of the best geographical structures for a wide-ranging and wide-serving system. I would kill to be able to take the subway from where I live, by the Red Line stop at Vermont and Santa MOnica, into Culver City, and further on down to the coast. Make it possible.
The rest of the world is disgusted by our lack of subway and the residents of LA are now screaming for it.
Why do all Metro plans seem to focus on carpool lanes and buses when we are decades behind the rest of the world in terms of subway coverage?
Something needs to change, and I think it has to do with the attitudes of transportation planners in Los Angeles who grew up with a freeway-centric world and don't know what urban transport should be like.
AMEN to the last anonymous. When I have friends and family visit from Chicago they laugh and scoff at the very notion that there aren't more rail options and that the latest running one is 12:30am!!!
For a city with no taxi coverage it's a joke.
The buses never run on time here due to poor hiring practices, but the trains are pretty reliable.
LA MTA is the worst in the world. They need to get their act together QUICK. I know LA mortgaged their future to Ford almost 100 years ago by skipping out on public transportation but that doesn't mean the mistake should continually be made.
Stop with the stupid carpool lanes and use the money on subways.
Post a Comment