
America’s Buses Need Our Love More Than Ever (2018) - jseliger
https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/05/love-the-bus-save-your-city/559262/
======
Thorentis
The thing I hate about buses in many cities is that they take longer than
driving to get somewhere. I think if this can be changed, more people will use
them.

Cities like Sydney get it right, by having dedicated express lanes on many
highways for buses (and taxis). When it becomes _faster_ to catch the bus in
peak hour because they can drive in lanes that bypass the gridlock, there is
an incentive to leave your car at home if you know you'll be leaving work
during peak hour and need to be somewhere ASAP.

Interestingly, this has also allowed taxis to have an edge over Uber et. al.
Just recently I was catching a ride to the airport in an Uber and forgot about
how bad peak hour traffic would be. We were stuck in awful traffic for over an
hour, and meanwhile, all these buses and taxis were flying past us in the
transit lane. The fare of the Uber ended up costing more than the fare it
would have been in a taxi due to how much longer it took.

If transit lanes can be put in more places, bus lanes created at more
intersections (so that buses can get ahead of traffic), and fares set at the
right amount, I think that with the rising cost of fuel, insurance etc., more
people will be willing to catch public transport, especially if it is _more_
convenient to do so.

~~~
perl4ever
"The thing I hate about buses in many cities is that they take longer than
driving to get somewhere."

In my experience they take within a few minutes of walking somewhere, and
perhaps three times as long as bicycling, never mind driving.

Perhaps someone will say that this indicates my local bus system is terrible,
but I don't see what could be improved about it. If they want to serve the
people who actually ride the bus, they have to go on routes with riders, and
stop at all the places people want to get on and off.

But I've tried riding the bus on trips ranging from <1 mi, to 3.5 miles, to
6-10 miles, and there's just no point, except in the case where I need to go
get my car and I have no alternative (or if I didn't own a car). For a longer
trip, it means sacrificing an entire evening for what would be a 10-15 minute
trip going directly.

For the longest trips (>6 miles) which coincide with a single route, the bus
can be substantially faster than walking, but it's still way too long to be a
viable commute. And shorter trips are very comparable to walking.

People say or imply that something could be different that would make a
typical bus system in a US city more effective for people who have
alternatives, but what?

The idea of the bus being "more convenient" with a few tweaks seems wildly
implausible to me based on my experience.

~~~
vidarh
Buses are most viable when combined with a well developed rail system. Then
it's worthwhile as an alternative to dealing with parking at the train
stations and because you won't have your car on the other end of that rail
journey.

~~~
perl4ever
I don't understand what you mean at all.

If I didn't have a car, of course I would ride the bus to the train station.
And I have in the past taken a fairly long distance bus to get to an airport
hub.

But this doesn't seem to have any relationship to daily life where I am, or
similar places, because train or plane rides are for going on long trips, say
over 200km.

Indeed, to travel to NYC from where I live by train would be the same time as
driving, and considerably quicker than a bus. But no way would I ever spend
about 2.5 hours daily going back and forth, so it's all unrelated to my normal
transportation needs.

Maybe by a "well developed rail system" you mean a subway, but it doesn't seem
realistic for an area with a million or two people to support one. With
infinite resources, you could run infinite free buses too, rather than
indirectly trying to create some sort of synergy.

~~~
jbay808
> Maybe by a "well developed rail system" you mean a subway, but it doesn't
> seem realistic for an area with a million or two people to support one.

Population of Kyoto: 1.47 million

Kyoto subway map:

[https://youinjapan.net/maps/kyoto/kyoto_metro_train_map.png](https://youinjapan.net/maps/kyoto/kyoto_metro_train_map.png)

I didn't cherry pick this from some ordered list of cities by train lines to
population ratio; I just picked it because I lived there and the train was as
incredibly convenient as it looked. And also gorgeous:

[https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%AC%E9%98%AA3000%E7%B3...](https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%AC%E9%98%AA3000%E7%B3%BB%E9%9B%BB%E8%BB%8A_\(2%E4%BB%A3\)#/media/%E3%83%95%E3%82%A1%E3%82%A4%E3%83%AB%3A%E4%BA%AC%E9%98%AA3000%E7%B3%BB%E8%BB%8A%E5%86%85.jpg)

~~~
rayiner
In Kyoto half the population of the entire metro area lives within city
limits. In a comparably sized American city like Philadelphia it might be a
quarter. Or you might have something like Atlanta, with a city that has 1/3 as
many people as Kyoto in a metro area that has twice as many.

The net result is that a good subway system in Kyoto can serve a majority of
the metro population, while that is not true for Philadelphia or Atlanta.
(That is true even though Kyoto is not particularly dense--closer in Atlanta
to density than to Philadelphia.)

~~~
jbay808
Perl4Ever was expressing doubt that an area of a million or two people could
support rail. I think Kyoto is an excellent counterexample to this claim, and
the rail lines are what propel the density as people want to buy homes that
are walking distance from a train station.

But let's look at Boston instead. Population 700,000 in the city limits; 4.8
million in the metro area, so about one seventh lives in the city proper.

[http://www.rochestersubway.com/images/photos/boston_subway_m...](http://www.rochestersubway.com/images/photos/boston_subway_map.jpg)

While perhaps not as developed as Kyoto, that's still a very healthy rail
system. And its first subway was built in 1897 when it had a population of
just about half a million.

~~~
perl4ever
"an area of a million or two people could support rail. I think Kyoto is an
excellent counterexample to this claim"

The metro area in which Kyoto is located is around 20 million people. The
metro area of Boston is almost 5 million people, you say. These are not
counterexamples to what I was trying to communicate. I don't really think my
comment was as hard to understand as you make it seem.

------
Ayesh
The author completely forgets there is a whole world outside the US, where
public transportation is efficient, preferred, and often makes good profts
too.

\- Singapore has a very good bus+ metro system and people actually prefer it.
Cars are heavily taxed which contributed to it, but their well planning has
helped too. Airport served by metro, so is the Malaysia border, and every
neighborhood has at least two nearby metro lines and a plethora of bus lines.

\- Kuala Lumpur has quite heavy traffic, but they have two free public bus
lines going around the important places in the city. They are free of charge,
every 15-30 minutes, have their routes well marked, and even has free WiFi.

\- Jakarta: they have the world's biggest bus rapid transit system. Dedicated
lanes, platforms, cashless payments, and the massive coverage help this
massive city to have slightly less traffic jams.

Jakarta also has motorbike taxis (ojek, Gojek/Uber apps) that serve the last
miles well. They are quite cheap (about 10 US cents per km) and I doubt they
will be economical once the VC money is burnt, but they are better than a
sedan with a driver and a passenger.

\- Berlin/Munich: Good tram system with commuter passes, day passes, etc. It's
common to give the day passes to someone at the ticket machines when we are
done for the day. They help keep the costs low in otherwise expensive cities
in Munich.

~~~
jonstewart
I think it’s clear the author is only talking about bus transit in the US.

------
mceachen
In the bay area, there was an express bus line from my town straight into
downtown San Francisco. I could work through my whole commute (as I had a seat
and a laptop), not worry about traffic or deal with road rage, and was filled
with a wide variety of people.

If each community added their own similar route, I wouldn't be surprised if
rush hour traffic was noticably impacted.

------
nradov
The HN demographic skews young and male, so I think many of us fail to
appreciate that older people and women often feel unsafe — or at least
uncomfortable — on public transit. Increased law enforcement presence and
enforcement of decent behavior would do a lot to make people love the bus.

~~~
Mordisquitos
>I think many of us fail to appreciate that older people and women often feel
unsafe — or at least uncomfortable — on public transit. Increased law
enforcement presence and enforcement of decent behavior would do a lot to make
people love the bus.

That may be true for the US, but interestingly in Spain (and I daresay in most
of Europe) the opposite is true: the prototypical users of public buses are
older people, and particularly older women. They generally don't use or don't
need a car, are not in enough of a hurry to use the Metro, and want to avoid
the latter's long stairways and escalators.

Maybe the solution for women and older people in the US to start using the bus
more needs to start with stricter law enforcement and presence, but I can't
say it is a factor in Spain. Law enforcement and security guards are very
rarely seen in buses, though their overall heavy usage and the fact that most
of the city has a high density of foot traffic anyway is probably enough to
discourage feelings of unsafety.

~~~
iamnotacrook
"the opposite is true: the prototypical users of public buses are older
people, and particularly older women. "

That's not the opposite. The statement isn't that old/women don't use public
transport; it's that they feel unsafe using it and would use any alternative
were it affordable/possible.

------
microcolonel
My city's buses often take longer than walking, and I have to stand on them
because the suspension is not sufficient on our roads, it's probably not even
safe to sit sometimes. The HVAC and rattling/flapping noises are extremely
loud.

I ride the bus here when absolutely necessary, I usuallly walk the 3km to/from
the regional train station to avoid it. Often it's not even an option, since
all of the routes close down at about 1:30, and at that point come every
couple hours.

------
mung
Busses have to be one of the worst modern mass-transit options. Auckland NZ
has bus lanes, so that is fine. But they are diesel. So they are noisy and
polluting. Get two or three busses in a row and you cannot see past them. They
block entire roads, and really, the have a low head count for the amount of
space they take up. I'm not even speaking as a driver, I'm speaking as a
pedestrian. Busses really suck.

~~~
et-al
It seems like your compliant should be directed more specifically towards
diesel vehicles than actual busses. There are low-emission busses out there.

~~~
kwhitefoot
Here in Norway the trend is toward battery electric buses via diesel hybrids
and gas (not gasoline).

But even the diesels are quieter than the buses I have seen in the US and
certainly a lot cleaner.

Buses in both the US seem stuck in some alternate reality where clean fuel and
quiet motors are somehow impossible. I realize that this might well be an
unwarranted generalization from my experience in the Raleigh-Durham Triangle,
perhaps it's better elsewhere.

------
smileysteve
The school bus system is an interesting microcosm of transportation to look
at; Over the last 30 years, bus use has dropped while [privileged] parents
drive their children to school, wait in a carpool lane;

Interesting concepts

\- Time Wasted in the pickup lane (and often the drop off lane)

\- Traffic in the pickup and drop-off lanes

\- High School parking lot size

\- Use during inclement weather

In Snowpocalypse in Atlanta, a large portion of the mess was contributed to by
the 3 trips; Parent to Home, Parent to School, Parent and Child to home;
Instead of offering for parents to pickup their children from school, much of
the traffic could have been resolved with the existing bus system; In the end;
if chains were needed, it's easier to fit 50 busses with chains in a bus yard
than 1000+ cars.

~~~
CaliforniaKarl
Sometimes chains aren’t even needed.

While I was an undergrad at The Ohio State University, I was a part-time bus
driver for the campus bus system (which used 35- and 40-foot city-type buses).

During my time there, we had one snow day, and I was on-shift that day. That
was when I learned that the bus had traction control. Once I learned that, I
was able to adjust my driving such that climbing the hill to the Freshman
remote parking lot was no problem.

------
algaeontoast
In Boston because of traffic, even with dedicated bus lanes, bikes and/or
electric scooters were always faster than public transit. Only downside was in
the winter when bike lanes and sidewalks were covered in snow / ice.

~~~
nine_k
Another downside of a bike is that you arrive covered by sweat if you try to
ride faster than public transit in the summer.

An electric bike solves this, of course.

~~~
algaeontoast
Agreed, my office had a shower and it was still a hassle.

1) there was only one shower per bathroom, which meant if anyone else decided
to ride their bike to work or go for a jog there'd be a 30min queue for the
shower

2) even if there wasn't any wait - it still takes 20min minimum to shower and
change before work

3) it's dangerous AF to ride a bike in adverse conditions like snow or cold
rain around cars (never-mind frost-bite / injuries involved with slipping on
ice)

------
torgian
Reading all the comments here makes me happy about living in East Asia (Taiwan
and Japan specifically).

------
denkmoon
I will use the bus the moment I can have the same level of peace and quiet I
get in my car. My commute is not long, but it gives me time to think about
things. My experience with public transport is pure unrelenting noise.

~~~
baroffoos
Have you tried noise canceling headphones. I have a pair of bose QC headphones
that can turn a packed hearing damage level pub down to a fairly relaxing
sound level. On a bus with some music playing I can't hear any sound at all
from outside.

------
bengerbil
Fortunately in Canada, we view busses as transport for the plebes. So when we
finally brought LRT service up (a bit late) and the bus trip from home to work
went from 45 minutes to an hour, my 15 minute driv was unaffected.

------
johnmarcus
you can't just tell people to "love the bus", the bus has to actually be
loveable. No one is avoiding the bus because 'climate change is cool man, fuck
the bus'. People don't ride the bus because it's jam packed shoulder to
shoulder, can smell like puke and piss, subsidezed homeless travel while the
rest of us need to pay a dumb fare, requires exact change in world ruled by
tap-to-pay devices. And then yeah, traffic and time, but that's not really the
core detraction. Oh, yeah, and Uber pool and Lyft rides are nearly as cost
effective, when you consider time-to-income it's often more cost effective.

Make the bus an experience that at least doesn't make want people want to
vomit and then people may start to take the bus again. As another commenter
said, there are countries where busses don't suck, and ergo busses are used.

~~~
momokoko
If you are not aware, this type of comment is fairly common on HN when
discussing public transit.

 _> Make the bus an experience that at least doesn't make want people want to
vomit and then people may start to take the bus again._

Please do not take personal offense to this, but this type of comment leads me
to believe that you have very derogatory views of people that have chosen or
have ended up in different life paths. Have you ever considered that it is
possible that you live a very isolated and segregated life and that something
like the bus is unsettling to you because it forces you to associate with the
general population as opposed to your typical, highly controlled, environment?

~~~
rayiner
Contrary to what some people believe, the “general population” follows rules
and decorum and doesn’t like people blaring music on the bus, or aggressive
pan handlers, or people talking to themselves any more than OP does. If they
had a bit more money they’d be driving instead to get away from the
troublemakers just like OP. And they are the ones who suffer most when
elitists insist that public transit (and public schools, etc.) should be
forced to deal with troubled or anti-social people, be de facto homeless
shelters, etc.

~~~
momokoko
Those people are a sample of the general population. Most of the people on
that bus are not blaring music or aggressively panhandling. A small
percentage, just like in the general population, are.

I imagine, from the above poster's comments, that they have chosen to live in
a community which isolates itself from a large portion of the population. When
utilizing a service like the bus, or maybe the DMV(Department of Motor
Vehicles), they are now forced to be around the general population that they
have been able to avoid for most of their life.

My point is that their comments have less to do with the bus, and more to do
with their opinions on the general population. Of which they typically spend
very little time around.

~~~
rayiner
> Most of the people on that bus are not blaring music or aggressively
> panhandling. A small percentage, just like in the general population, are.

My point is that the rest of the "general population" is upset by that "small
percentage" as much as OP, and the "general population" wishes there was more
aggressive enforcement of social and legal norms on the bus. And that it's
elitist to fault OP for his view, instead of faulting the government for not
properly policing the bus.

