Ep 10 Transport for Dublin

Where to start? Where to end? If only there was a convenient way to get there. Is it really the best time to be discussing transport? Shit is going down in the world; it feels like America is speedrunning the 1930s, but hey, at least their trains will run on time. And, in some sense, I agree. This isn’t the time to be distracted by frivolous topics, which is why I’m talking about transport, because it’s not a frivolous topic. It’s as frivolous (I love the word frivolous, it just sounds nice to say. Say it with me, frivolous) as the food we eat, the clothes we wear, and the homes we live in. In short, it’s incredibly frivolous, and yet intrinsic to us. Right now, it’s just as important to focus on the basics, as it is to combat the rise of fascism, because I’ll have to deal with shitty traffic regardless, and I wanna show that fascists don’t have a monopoly on train timetables.

The problem with transport is that we treat it like it is frivolous. For something we spend an hour using every day [1], we really don’t seem to care about what we get, what we’re given. We accept the choices made for us, and daren’t dream of something better. Only, like lots of things, the choices being made for us, the options presented to us, are suboptimal, dare I say, shit. Profit? Or maximise people-moving efficiency? It’s not your choice, but it could be. And like many other things, we are incapable of fixing broken systems, preferring to bath in the quagmire with as much glee as a green ogre in the best opening sequence of a movie ever produced, only the L is squarely on our foreheads. The fundamental choice of transport boils down to private cars vs public transit. On a larger scale, transport is the perfect vehicle through which we can explore our incapacity to come together collectively to solve problems, which is mirrored by our own individualistic belief that we are owed more than our fair share of the world.

Transport is as important as the design of its systems is complex. If only it were as simple as getting from A to B. It’s not, but if only it were. We have to think about speed and price and comfort, and classist connotations and climate change. Fuck. Transport is at the heart of the muddled mess that is our human psyche – freedom to move, liberation, fairness, mobility, equality, justice, economic growth. Did I mention 20 % of our greenhouse gas emissions too [2]? Without transport, where would we be? Stuck at home no doubt, or limited to a 5km radius just like during covid. The capacity to transport people and things is the fuel that drives our economies forward (hmm, no maybe fossil fuels would be a better analogy here – fossil fuels are the fuel that drives our economies forward. You’re welcome Shell, you can use this one on the house). Ok ok, transport is as basic a building block for our society as train tracks and roads. You get the picture. I don’t need to tell you that transport is important. It’s not an abstract concept. It’s something we interact with on a daily basis, to which we all have our own relationship, as unique as the ass imprint you’ve left in your car – mmm snug fit.

To me discussing transport is important because a) I need it to live my life, & b) I want to be able to do so without fucking the planet which leads me to c) wanting a cheap, flexible, convenient transport system that is also sustainable such that, if everyone acts like me, people will still have a planet to move on in the future. This is not something currently accessible to me, but it’s not impossible. The frustrating fact is that we don’t require new technology to change transport, despite what greedy capitalists might say. What we need is to change minds of what is possible. You can see examples of functioning, cheap, reliable, green systems elsewhere. This is no fantasy. This isn’t impossible. We just make it so. That is our choice. And I, for one, refuse to go along with this bullshit any longer.

Unfortunately, I must be in the minority. Rather than be angry at the poor transport system at their disposal, most people view any attempt at change through the lens of zero-sum game warfare akin to our all-too-familiar road rage in insulated, metal death traps. Dublin has the second worst commute in Europe [3] and yet, I don’t see that changing any time soon. Instead, people are pitted against one another; car owners against public transport users against cyclists against pedestrians (when the real battle is cars and planes against the planet, but I’ll get to that later). Urban vs suburban vs rural dwellers, divided not united. We feel part of a team that needs defending. There is something to be won, and more importantly, something to be lost. Our jealousy plays us the fool, and we end up as divided as if the Berlin Wall [4] were erected between us. I would like to note here that these divisions are imposed upon us by vested interests and crumby politicians who would rather capitalise on our emotions than address a system which works perfectly for them but not us. Cycle paths are part of the solution, not the cause of our problems…

Don’t get me started on cyclists
(I gulp. Clearly mentioning cycle infrastructure was a bad way to demonstrate climate credentials. It’s only been a week of canvassing and yet I swear I could fill a book, or at least an OpEd, with what people are saying at the door).

House 2
Cars have been here forever
I don’t need to google this one… bikes are older xoxoxo [5]

House 8
Cyclists don’t pay taxes
Income tax, babes (quite proud of my quip)
Yeah but VRT/Road Tax ...
We must ask ourselves why are these taxes paid;
Is it for the upkeep of the roads? If so, cars cause exponentially more damage than cyclists do due to their weight [6].
Or is it to account for social harms like air pollution and carbon emissions? Cyclists win again 😉
Or is it an attempt to price the usage of publicly owned infrastructure? Bikes take up less space, aren’t a contributor to traffic in the way cars are, and, as I’ve said, don’t damage the surfaces of roads.

(Did I go too far? No vote from you, I guess. There’s always the next house).

House 22
Cars are being forced off the road and vilified, VILIFIED I TELL YOU, by the anti-car agenda
(Eye-roll … I’ve heard this before)
In a literal sense, there are plenty of cases when cyclists have been forced off the road by drivers, usually resulting in serious injury, or worse, to the cyclist [7].
In a figurative sense, if you view public expenditure as a zero-sum game then yes, focusing on active and public transport infrastructure comes at the expense of cars, unless these investments reduce traffic for all road users. But to those accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression … perhaps it’s time for cars to lose their favoured status.

(Deep breath. Just knock on the door, they won’t shout at you like last time).

House 11
Look at how it will affect the city centre!
I know, pretty good, right. (Finally, someone gets it.)
(Shocked gasp. Points to European cities)
(Confused) But it’s working in European cities… [8]
We’re miles behind them
So does that mean we shouldn’t try to catch up?
Well, business associations say it’s bad
Plenty of studies say otherwise.

(Sigh. I’m just a volunteer. It’s raining. I’m cold. I can’t feel my hands. Do you know how painful it is to shove a soaked leaflet through those stupid black bristles? Well, I do. And your faces all look the same. I won’t remember you in a minute, but you’ll know who I am, what I stand for. Your driveways fill me with a sense of foreboding. “Welcome home”. I’m not welcome here. Please don’t answer the door. *A shy knock. The sound of footsteps is not a good sign. I didn’t mean to disturb you. I’m just a volunteer).

House 27
It’s leading to traffic, especially the construction!
(You’re not ready to change. Smile, meekly.)
Ok, thank you.

(Which house is next? This place is a fucking maze. The houses are as identical as their owners. Is there no joy in being different? Was this place built as a home for cars or for humans? Traffic from the construction of bike lanes is short-term only. Long-term, better flow of people! Oh, they wouldn’t listen anyway. What’s the point?)

House 35
Bike lanes and bus lanes are disjointed and disconnected.
(You’re telling me! So they will remain if we stop now. I’m the one who has to cycle around this place to get to you! My bike is currently locked to a lamppost. I dunno if that’s even legal! There’s so much space, and yet not a single space to leave my bike. No wonder, you drive to get milk.)
Have a good day.

(New street, new me)
House 4
Construction is complete but they haven’t been opened.
(Are you for real? Patience, young padawan, patience. But you’re not young, are you? I’m the young one, what do I know? How dare I attempt to talk to you about politics. But, do you even care about me and the world I will inherit?)
Cool, thanks.

House 18
They’ve made the roads more dangerous!
(Fuck this)
Narrowing roads and intersections actually improves safety. [9]
(Glare)
Goodbye, now.

House 34
All this talk about cyclists is raising my blood pressure!
(Hmmm, if only there was a mode of transport with proven health benefits …) [10]
That’s a shame.

Really, it was my blood pressure that needed lowering after dealing with countless people who refused to consider transport as an active choice they make, or, to those economically constrained, a future choice that they can vote on! Fortunately, I used my bike to cycle between these wonderful conversations, so I needn’t worry. I was getting those proven health benefits (whilst I choked on all the air pollution). Wait, air pollution? Where’s that coming from??? Cars, you dummy, not that you care. I wish you would redirect your vehement anger away from cyclists, and towards cars. Just pretend you’re doing a three-point turn, but make sure to check the wing mirrors and your rear view one too, wouldn’t want to cause a splatter now would we.

There are so many reasons to be angry at cars. Let me start with the easiest; deaths. The leading cause of death worldwide for young people are cars [11]. Does any more need to be said? Cars cause deaths via accidents and collisions, but also via the second reason to hate cars; air pollution. If air pollution doesn’t kill you, it can certainly take years off of your life, and can lead to reduced standards of living (and economic unproductivity if, yawn, that’s your thing) [12]. Thirdly, if you want an additional reason to hate cars, I will say to you, carbon emissions. It’s right there in the name; car-bon. It was this that caused me first to dislike what I had once adoringly watched paraded around on Top Gear. Let me tell you, it only gets worse. Hmm, they’re expensive too. Cars. They kill us quicky. They kill us slowly. They kill the planet we live on too. Oh, and they’re expensive.

To these concerns, I’m sure there will be responses containing two technologies that supposedly solve these problems; EVs and self-driving. Let’s have a think, shall we. Well, yes, EVs have lower levels of air pollution than standard cars (though some does come from the mining of the precious metals for their batteries, but do we really care about what’s happening elsewhere. Nahh, we couldn’t give a shit about environmental pillaging elsewhere). However, they are very heavy due to their batteries which causes air pollution from the degradation of asphalt and tyres. And, yes, in theory they have far lower carbon emissions than traditional cars, but still not as low as other forms of electrified transport per passenger kilometre [13]. For EVs to truly be sustainable their source of electricity must be clean, which it usually isn’t, and won’t be for a while to come. And when it finally is clean, EVs will place huge demands on electrification. And of course, we can think about the conditions found in those faraway mines, not that Western consumers typically care about child and slave labour as long as they result in cheaper products. Money talks, children don’t, or at least they shouldn’t. Beyond these concerns, yes, EVs are likely better than traditional cars in the fields of carbon emissions, and air pollution. But how about deaths? That’s where self-driving cars come in (at least in theory). In practice, there is no evidence for this claim, as autonomous vehicles don’t actually exist in their final form.

To understand why self-driving, electric cars still suck, let’s paint a picture. No, not literally, I already tried animations and it didn’t go very well! In a world populated by one person, a car is the perfect form of transport. You are your own pilot (well), the captain of your ship, you have ultimate control over your journey and destination. It’s when you add additional players that the game of life gets interesting. With a second road user, you’ll probably be fine. I’m sure you won’t get in one another’s way. The simple addition of road users will work, until it suddenly won’t. You can’t keep adding road users. You’ll get traffic eventually because cars are really bad at moving as many people as quicky as possible, i.e. mass transport [14]. So what, widen the roads? You could, but you’ll just get more road users until you’ve paved over every square inch of this grey, dull earth [15]. Then there’ll be no place left to go, and nowhere worth driving. We all need to go places, but we can’t all drive there. Wingardium leviosa, reductio ad absurdum.

The scariest part of a world filled with self-driving cars is how much harder they would make the system to change. My bikes rides through housing estates and suburbia taught me that Dublin’s semi-ds weren’t built to house humans, but cars. So many walls. So many roads. Barely any space left to build any more houses. And no space for me. Urban planners unaware of climate change, let alone the effect suburbs have on transport emissions, had no idea what they were locking in. They designed our areas for cars, and there will be pain rectifying this situation. But what happens when you introduce self-driving cars to the mix? Go watch NotJustBikes if you want the answer [16].

EVs and self-driving are convenient, commercial solutions that improve a system that’s inherently broken. They enable our malaise and don’t force us to change our habits or lifestyles. They’re what we deserve, because we won’t do enough. They are the exact solution we get in neo-liberal capitalism. The real question we should be asking is how we move away from car reliance, not how we improve a car reliant system. These are the choices being made for us, the false options presented to us. But there is another way, another route, another means to get there. All the complaints levelled at cars could be brought against any form of transport, but you know something, cars are the worst. They have higher emissions, air pollution, death, and costs per passenger kilometre than any other form of transport. That’s the long and short of it. But cars have one superior quality, they can make people very wealthy. EVs vs bullet trains? Building a bullet train won’t line Elon’s pockets. Anti-Mercosur? Wouldn’t want to get in the way of the German car industry now would we.

When pushing an anti-car (or pro public transport) viewpoint, there are certain arguments that people think you are making, and they need to be addressed. Firstly, never did I say rural communities shouldn’t have cars. Cars make sense here. And in these instances, I am very pro EVs. But rural communities also need public transport. And this ties in with a second complaint; what about the people who can’t cycle everywhere? Well, I currently live in a rather rural area, and I can’t drive. So, I know how it feels to have to cycle, or use incredibly infrequent buses. And you know who else understands this? Immigrants, young people, old people, and poor people. These are my fellow travellers, the ones who can’t afford cars, or are not allowed to drive them, or just don’t feel comfortable in them. These are the vulnerable communities that are forced to rely on public transport, no matter how bad, because they genuinely have no other choice. So no, I don’t expect an old granny to have to cycle between villages to go do her shopping (side note: visit Japan. There you will see many cyclists, of many ages, in all weather conditions). But we should all make sure she has dignified options. My granny deserves to retain her independence now she doesn’t feel comfortable driving. Promoting and subsidising car use doesn’t help her, or the teenagers who long for freedom, or those who simply don’t have enough money to buy, repair and fuel cars. So don’t pretend you care about rural communities and their rights to movement, because these are the people that suffer.

Cheap, reliable, convenient, quick, safe, and sustainable. That’s all I want. This is what freedom is to me. How do we get it? Well, there’s no perfect answer, every system has drawbacks, but at least we can all agree the one we have currently just isn’t working. If I had a magic wand, I would instigate a ULEZ in the city, and, while I was at it, I would move to pedestrianise many of the central streets. I love the idea of Bus Connect and can’t wait to see its full implementation, but its been slow and hampered by NIMBYs who prevent their poorer, outer borough neighbours commuting into the city. Dreaming bigger, there really is no excuse for having intra-Ireland flights. However, looking at maps comparing Ireland’s current and former rail network, there is a lot of work to do. Bigger still, when self-driving does come along (and yes I know Waymo, Waymo, Waymo), imagine a public fleet that you could book whenever you wanted, negating the need for all those cars sitting idly in driveways. Beyond the Pale, rural communities need public transport services too. They won’t be as frequent as a city, but that doesn’t mean they should be non-existent. And like the rest of you, I wait for the day that I can take a metro in my own city. The biggest challenge is contending with our spread-out suburbs and commuter-villes that were designed car-reliant. We are stuck in that awkward position where we don’t have the density to have a world-class system, and yet we are still a city with needs that can’t be met by cars. Designating areas around prospective metro stops as high density could help, if we are willing to see our city transform. And when we attempt to provide our utopic vision, we need to reflect on the genuine need for it to be cheap. Because, when we pit environmentalism against cost, it feels like fascism is winning. But, at least you can sleep easy knowing there’ll be cyclist to shout at on tomorrow’s morning commute, lest they dare to skip all the traffic you’re stuck in.

And of course. Build more bike lanes.

[1] Getting 58 minutes average for Ireland in 2022 according to the CSO.

[2] 21.5% to be exact – Environmental Protection Agency

[3] Dublin is the world’s tenth most congested city. People who commute by car to the city centre lose 155 hours to traffic every year. The city, itself, is a carpark at rush hours. One thing to note about this study is that car-centric US cities actually perform well. We mustn’t mistake this for having a successful transport system (in terms of sustainability).

[4] If you know, you know. If you don’t, just google Ireland MEP cycle lanes Berlin Wall.

[5] I checked. I was right.

[6] I’m lazy. Must you be spoon-fed? Anyway, here you are: Fourth Power Law

[7] The RSA …

[8] Businesses benefit too. Here is a collection of case studies.

[9] Road width correlates with the , “the number of risky events” on the road. “

[10] Half a year longer life expectancy! Economic benefits too!

[11] Who said that? Oh, you did

[12] It’s a TRAP (Traffic-related air pollution)!

[13] EVs are beaten by: rail, trams, metros, coaches, and ferries. Thanks Elon.

[14] https://transformative-mobility.org/multimedia/passenger-capacity-of-different-transport-modes/

[15] Induced demand, baby