Micromobility and the Fifth Era of Transportation
Last month, the North American Bike Share
Association released their first “State of the Industry” report which
documented the statistics for bike share and micromobility in 2019. According
to NABSA,
“the shared micromobility
industry has grown exponentially over the last decade and improved cities. In
2019, North American riders took 157 million trips across 194,000 vehicles in
292 cities. According to user surveys, 36% of these rides replaced a car trip,
and 5% were new rides that wouldn’t have been taken otherwise. Thanks to shared
micromobility, North Americans gained almost 30 million hours of additional
physical activity in 2019. Additionally, shared micromobility trips produce
considerably fewer greenhouse gas emissions when compared to motorized vehicles.
When comparing trips alone, shared micromobility trips offset approximately 65
million pounds of CO₂ emissions by replacing car trips. E-bikes have also had a
massive impact on the industry. Data from the report shows that the system
average utilization rate for e-bikes was about 1.7 times higher than the
average rate for pedal bikes for systems that deploy both types of bikes.”
-North
American Bike Share Association State of the Industry Report 2019
While the shared micromobility scene is still a small piece of the
transportation pie, the report makes it clear that its not just a fad of the
early aughts. Electric, connected, shared mobility services are here to stay. I
think the bigger question is whether they will continue to keep growing or if they
will hit a ceiling of ridership. I think there is a lot more governments can do
to foster growth in this sector, and there are lots of good reasons for it:
reducing SOV trips, health benefits, environmental benefits – the list goes on.
(However, some serious work will need to be done to ensure that these modes are
equitably distributed; the report states that shared micromobility users are
far more likely to be young, white, male, highly educated and high earning).
In our transportation class we discussed the four major eras of
transportation in America: the walking horse car era, the electric street car
era, the recreational auto era, and the freeway era. These eras have all
redefined the way people moved within cities and changed the way people thought
about and valued land. The question we ask now is what will the fifth
transportation era will look like. I believe that shared micromobility will
play a significant role in the fifth era. Expanding upon the diagram drawn by
P.O. Muller1, I believe that cities will continue to expand their
bicycle networks to the point where there is a truly safe, highly utilized
system of separate low-speed lanes that serve the dense urban core (Figure 1).
These networks will connect at mobility hubs, which will allow users to connect
with major transit services for longer trip distances. Not bike lanes, per se,
but smaller, slower lanes open for any small, connected, personal electric
vehicles used for intra-city trips (I think there’s a good case to be made for
e-bikes continuing to rise in their importance and utility). Cities will
continue to reclaim space previously dedicated (and frankly, over-allocated) to
automobiles, freeing up opportunities for active transportation and recreation.
At the same time, with the rising inevitability of autonomous
vehicles, I believe cities will sprawl even further into rural areas as personal
vehicles begin to platoon on
highways commute times drop, traffic decreases, and people realize that they can
do other activities while en route. Uber and Lyft will continue to provide ride
hailing (autonomously) with even greater service areas and decreased costs,
since the driver is the most expensive component of a taxi and charging
infrastructure won’t be confined to urban cores.
Thus, I see the 5th era of transportation as being one
that is ultimately connected and reliant on the internet and its related
technologies. I think cities will simultaneously become denser and their
suburbs become even more sprawled. Below, I’ve updated Muller’s graphic to
include a seamless, safe, low-speed micro/bike-lane network with mobility hubs,
and another radius to account for a growing popularity of exurban life:
1. Muller, P.O. (1995) “Transportation and Urban
Form: Stages in the Spatial Evolution of the American Metropolis”, in S. Hanson
(ed.) The Geography of Urban Transportation, 2nd Edition, New York: Guilford,
p. 29.
Hi Philip, thank you for sharing your take on the fifth era of transportation. I agree with you that shared mobility will be a continuous trend. As what we are seeing in China, it is definitely huge now. I think maybe the major difference between the US and China would be the car ownership. In China, the number is much lower, which might give people more incentive to try and use bike-share regularly as a more economic and time-saving substitute for bus or carpooling given the constant congestion during rush hour. So whether shared micromobility will continue growing might be depending on the future generation's attitude toward car ownership. Shared micromobility is now constrained mainly in the city center. A large part is because the cost of redistribution process is relatively high compared to the revenue generated from a larger operation zone. And this could be a n engineering problem.
ReplyDeleteHi Phil, thanks for the post. That's an interesting idea of simultaneous sprawl and density, but it makes sense how you arrived at that conclusion. I do think that's certainly possible, but I also wonder if, even if AVs improve travel times, how long folks want to sit in a car? Given connections between lengthy commutes and other health outcomes, I'm hopeful we will reverse the trend toward sprawl.
ReplyDeleteHey Phil, thanks for posting. You make some really great points about micro mobility playing a significant role in the 5th era of transportation AND how AV could lead us into further sprawl. Either way technology is becoming more intertwined with transportation. Recently I read about the equity implications of both new transportation technologies. Both disproportionately effect low-income communities. As we have seen in Portland, the e-scooters and e-bikes are less in areas within East Portland. Also when you think about driver profiles for Uber and Lyft, you tend to see more drivers are low-income/people of color. Thus if those companies decide to cut cost and go with AV, then a disproportionate highly number of low-income/people of color will be affected. Technology innovation will undoubtedly play a big role in the future with transportation, equity must be centered so that it reduces the negative impacts to the most vulnerable individuals.
ReplyDeleteFun post, Phil, and I love the updated diagram--I'd totally buy that t-shirt ;-)
ReplyDeleteMicromobility is a great example of research's role in setting policy. Right now, most statistics you'll see are from industry groups or raw data from cities, but in the next few years I think we'll get a much clearer sense of the real impact of these new options. I'm pretty skeptical that a third of scooter trips are replacing driving, but I'd love for that to hold up to scrutiny! A current study at PSU is looking into the full environmental impact of scooter use, including charging and re-distribution (mostly done via private cars). I think it's quite possible that scooters turn out to be environmentally questionable, especially when you take their short lifespans into account. Research will also help us understand the physical activity benefits of scootering. Of course, this also highlights a timing problem in the problem > research > policy paradigm--cities need to make decisions now, but the research won't be done (well) for years! That private companies are spearheading this "revolution" hampers the research process, as they all have reasons to protect their data from competition. Definitely an interesting time!