
Uber data reveals motoring slower than walking in many cities - liotier
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/05/22/uber-data-reveals-motoring-slower-than-walking-in-many-cities/
======
garethrees
This is a well-known principle of urban transport. If driving is faster than
the alternative transport mode (whether that's public transport, if any, or
walking), then at the margins people will switch to driving, but that means
more traffic on the road, more congestion, and slower driving speeds.
Conversely, if driving is slower than the alternative, then at the margins
people will switch away from driving, reducing traffic and increasing driving
speeds. So in places where road space is the bottleneck, we expect driving
speed to be similar to the speed of the alternative mode. In central London,
for example, travel speed has been roughly the same whether you drive or take
the Underground, for more than a century.

Update since some commenters seem to be having trouble: this process depends
on the travellers "at the margin", that is, the people who are most willing to
switch modes to reduce their journey time. Thinking in terms of the average or
typical traveller is misleading.

~~~
neaanopri
This doesn't mean driving is useless. Cars are generally air conditioned, and
have a greater capacity to carry luggage than walking.

...so cars should this be _slower_ than cars, given these benefits

~~~
pergadad
The average commuter won't carry huge luggage around. But they might spend the
time reading or working out they are sitting in a train/metro compartment. And
they exercise when using the bicycle, meaning they will be healthier and have
reduced health issues and cost. Bicycles are also much less costly and
environmentally friendly, don't pollute, are less likely to have accidents
(except with cars), ... But infrastructure is much cheaper and easier to
maintain then that for cars. Cars on the other hand block the roads not just
for each other, but also for public transport, trucks, emergency vehicles, ...
They produce co2 and microparticles, take up valuable space when parked, etc.
Overall cars have huge externalities.

So no, cars are not the best means of transport just because you can carry
lots of stuff which you usually don't carry...

~~~
vonmoltke
> But they might spend the time reading or working out they are sitting in a
> train/metro compartment.

That's a big "might" that is conditioned on having a seat and space in which
to do these things, none if which is a given.

> Bicycles ... are less likely to have accidents (except with cars)

After three years as a pedestrian in NYC I have almost been run over by
assholes on bikes more than I have almost been run over by assholes in cars.

> But infrastructure is much cheaper and easier to maintain then that for
> cars.

How do you figure? Paved streets are still needed, arguably maintained to
slightly higher standards than they are for cars. Signalling is still needed,
unless you want a free-for-all of bike traffic (which I don't).

In general, you seem to be comparing the happy cases of bicycles and public
transit to the negatives of cars. It's and unfair and disingenuous comparison.

~~~
oftenwrong
>After three years as a pedestrian in NYC I have almost been run over by
assholes on bikes more than I have almost been run over by assholes in cars.

Perception, meet reality:

[http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nycdot-
pedestrian-...](http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nycdot-pedestrian-
fatalities-by-bike-motor-vehicle.pdf)

Summary: From 2002-2016 there were 2355 pedestrians killed by bicycle or car
in NYC. 2345 of those fatal collisions were car-pedestrian, and only 10 were
bicycle-pedestrian.

~~~
pedantsamaritan
NYC has open crash data too: [https://data.cityofnewyork.us/Public-
Safety/NYPD-Motor-Vehic...](https://data.cityofnewyork.us/Public-Safety/NYPD-
Motor-Vehicle-Collisions/h9gi-nx95)

From mid 2012 to mid 2019, there were 940 reports of a crash with a bike as
the primary vehicle and 1+ pedestrians injured. In the same time period, there
were 69776 reports of a crash without bicycle as primary vehicle injuring 1+
pedestrians.

~~~
vonmoltke
Now _that_ is an interesting dataset that demonstrates my experience thus far
is an outlier.

------
lqet
We live in a town in Germany with roughly 250.000 inhabitants, but I grew up
in a small village. I always get weird looks from relatives when I tell them
that we do not own a car. For some of them, not owning a car is literally
equivalent to "cannot leave the house", because buses only serve their village
every 2 hours or so, and the service stops at around 8pm.

We use car sharing, but only if we have to buy something that really cannot be
transported via bike or public transport, like furniture, or for trips to
remote places that are very complicated to reach via public transportation. I
tried driving to work a few times (~8 km across town), but it takes me roughly
35 minutes by car, compared to 25 minutes by bike, and is much, much more
stressful than using my bike. If the weather is very bad, I take the tram. For
groceries, we usually walk to the nearest supermarket.

Truth is, at least in Europe, I cannot think of any reason why you should own
a car in a town with an average public transportation network and some form of
car sharing.

~~~
ryanmercer
(I assume the massive downvotes are from the people that have never lived in
the Midwest and/or have never lived anywhere other than 'downtown' in a major
city, or ancient city that was built before locomotion, and are wholly
unfamiliar with suburbs)

>I cannot think of any reason why you should own a car in a town with an
average public transportation network and some form of car sharing.

Because you don't want to waste an hour or more every day standing around
waiting on a train/bus? Would like to regularly visit friends and family on
the other side of town? Would like to not have to plan your life around
transportation schedules?

I could maybe see getting by in Europe, I've one friend in Germany that is
quite happy taking the train a half mile or so from his apartment for most
stuff but even he still owns a car for getting to work, doing groceries, going
to his postal box, bringing home stuff for art, going to the woods etc.

I cannot fathom life without a car. I'd say my closest friend is 10 miles
away, two I go to see fairly regularly are 50 miles away. If I want to go see
a movie it's 3-20 miles depending on which theater I want to go to, work is
about 10~ miles from my apartment with my two gyms between me and work that
I'm at 4x a day each and at another a 5th day. All of the performing arts
theaters around Indianapolis are downtown, on the east side or north of Indy
in Carmel - all of which are a 20-40 minute drive for me probably 15-25 miles.

I can go to these places above in 5-60 minutes in my car, public
transportation would require multiple transfers and probably 4-5 hours, with
some of them running fairly infrequently, for some of them and a couple of
them I simply could not get to with public transportation.

Without a car I'd also have no way to get to the meetinghouse of my Church, or
to singles firesides at a meetinghouse on the other side of town.

Without a car in the spring and summer I'd show up to dates, or to hang out
with friends, sweaty and smelly. It will be 86F with the humidity reaching a
high of 87% today.

Without a car, I couldn't go shooting if I wanted... I can't get on a bus with
long arms and a few bricks of ammunition and be like "hey, I know that isn't a
stop up there, but can you drop me in front of that range... this stuff is
heavy". I couldn't go hunting, I couldn't go fishing, I couldn't go mushroom
hunting in the spring, I couldn't go hiking because buses don't go to the
woods.

~~~
lqet
I agree, it may not work everywhere, and this is why I mentioned the
precondition of having an average public transportation network and some form
of car sharing. You are forgetting that time spent driving is essentially dead
time, while you can do all sort of things in a train, and with a bike you get
exercise for free. So you cannot compare the travel times directly. For
example, my work place is roughly the same distance from our apartment as
yours. As I have mentioned, it saves me roughly 10 minutes driving there by
bike, and I do not have to go to the gym, because I ride the bike for 20 miles
daily.

I'll give you a few other examples:

* If I want to go see a movie in town, I can take the tram (20 minutes, runs every 5 minutes) or the bike (10 minutes), or car sharing (5 minutes walk to nearest station, 10 minute drive, 10 minutes searching for a parking spot in a garage, 10 minutes walking from said garage to the cinema.)

* If I want to visit my parents, it is a 2.5h car drive or a 3.5h tram/train/bus ride with 3 changes. Time lost in car: 2.5 hours. Time lost with PT: at most 30 minutes waiting at stations, the 3 hours in the train can be used for reading or working.

* If we want to visit the parents of my wife, it is a 50 minute car drive or a 80 minutes tram/train/bus ride. Time lost on car: 50 minutes, time lost with PT: roughly 10 minutes.

* If I want to visit someone in a remote village, or take a leisure trip to some remote place, or go hikin, I walk 5 minutes to the nearest car sharing station and take a car from there.

~~~
scld
You can certainly listen to audiobooks, music or podcasts in a car. You can
also have a private conversation with the passenger. Driving is by no means
"lost time" for many people.

~~~
dougmwne
Eh. Driving time isn't completely lost, but it is pretty low capacity if you
want to study or be entertained. I used my metro commute for 3 years to learn
programming languages, take college courses, read stacks of books, nap, learn
to cook with cooking shows, and solve technical problems for work. I used my
car commute for 3 years to...listen to some light entertainment and music. I
managed to get a speeding ticket while listening to a podcast because I wasn't
focused enough on driving.

------
bunderbunder
Random anecdotes:

When I'm traveling, if I ask the hotel staff to recommend any restaurants
"within walking distance", they'll grimace and say there aren't really any,
even while Yelp informs me that there are six within a kilometer.

Yesterday I ended up spending about 15 minutes waiting for a bus that was
late. Someone else spent about the same amount of time as me waiting on that
normal street corner, and then got back off the bus about 5 blocks later. So,
that makes ~15 minutes standing around waiting for the bus and $2.25 spent on
a fare, in order to save a 5 minute walk. I assume they're at least as able-
bodied as I am, because, unlike me, they didn't opt to sit on the bench during
the wait.

I just don't think the US has a culture that considers feet to be a valid mode
of transportation.

~~~
mikestew
_I just don 't think the US has a culture that considers feet to be a valid
mode of transportation._

In some cases, I've found that to literally be true. I used to live a few
miles from a large suburban mall (well, Castleton Square Mall is/was
technically within the city limits of Indianapolis). I decided to walk to the
mall one day, what the hell, good exercise. There were no crosswalks or
signals to cross either the N/S nor E/W roads. No sidewalks. I recall no bike
racks once you got there. It was as if (and I imagine literally true) there
was no consideration given to any other means of transportation but a car.
Other examples abound, but that one particularly stands out in my mind.

~~~
JAlexoid
The irony of motorists' outrage on small towns banning car parking in the city
and creating pedestrian only zones, is that they don't produce enough economic
activity to let them park.

There's a reason why the most coveted retail real estate is in pedestrian
accessible areas... not parking only strip malls.

------
amelius
Perhaps we should ban cars from cities altogether.

[https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/05/madrid-
spain-...](https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/05/madrid-spain-car-
ban-city-center/561155/)

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
There are certain reasons cars are needed: goods transport and people with
disabilities for example. I wonder if you could do a general ban with enough
exceptions to be okay.

There's be a fraud problem though, and it could make it difficult for disabled
people in practice (they may not be able to easily get the right badge, or be
believed when they do, they wouldn't be able to benefit from car
infrastructure…)

~~~
bunderbunder
I'm really fond of the areas I've been where the only cars allowed on many
streets are things like delivery and service vehicles.

I would expect that that kind of environment is actually a net improvement to
accessibility for people with disabilities. It's probably _quite_ annoying for
people who use wheelchairs to get around a lot of places without a car, simply
because the sidewalks are so frequently blocked off by people who've parked
their cars across the sidewalk. There's one man in my neighborhood who
frequently has to go out in the street to get around those sorts of
obstructions, and is then stuck out in the middle of the road until he can get
to the next wheelchair ramp in order to get back on the sidewalk. Limiting
private car usage would admittedly only remove a portion of the sources of
obstruction, but it would get rid of essentially all of the safety hazard that
he has to take on in order to get around them.

And, especially now that cars are going electric and getting quieter and
quieter, I would guess that restricting unnecessary car usage could be a big
boon for blind people who want to be able to leave the house without a
chaperone. I had one acquaintance who would essentially Uber everywhere - at
great expense to herself - because she just didn't feel safe even trying to
cross the street.

(Heck, I'm sighted, and sometimes _I_ don't feel safe trying to cross the
street, especially later in the evening when a sizable portion of drivers are
intoxicated and really are not watching for pedestrians.)

~~~
asdff
A lot of university campuses are like this. Very limited car access on certain
roads, but maintenance etc. gets free reign to drive on the walkways even
during heavy foot traffic.

------
2T1Qka0rEiPr
My (completely anecdotal) experience of London, was that having a car anywhere
near the city center was close to pointless, as you could easily outpace it on
a bike. It's also nice to see a gradual shift towards making the city public-
transport- and bike- friendly (e.g. super-highways, but also ultra-low
emission zones), but there's a lot more to be done!

~~~
cbzoiav
Rain, luggage, bike theft, having a driver so you can work from the back etc.

Also depends on time of day. In the early hours a car is definitely faster
than a bike in 95% of the city.

------
jpalomaki
I would love Uber to use this data to propose me options for taking a short
walk to cut total travel time.

In some places walking a few hundred meters puts you in a much better position
for pick-up. Same thing in destination, propose a location that minimizes
total travel time.

~~~
cbzoiav
The number of tourists in London getting the underground distances that are
less than the distance down to the train and back up...

~~~
megablast
Sure, the underground is an experience in itself. And walking around a foreign
city can be very confusing for a lot of people.

------
Theodores
The example of Trafalgar Square is quite comical.

On a bicycle you have options when the traffic is slow, including getting off
to walk. But the place would be that densely packed with buses, motorbikes,
taxis and actual cars that this was neigh on impossible. If you did walk then
you would be waiting for lights, at least by bicycle you have the Highway Code
on your side.

Before the top bit of Trafalgar Square was pedestrianised it took 27 lane
changes to go from the Whitehall side to the Charing Cross road exit, by
bicycle using the bus lane shortcuts.

Even though you could see where you were heading you could emerge from the
hell of Trafalgar Square to make it onto easier roads to then see a clock,
e.g. Big Ben. Only then would you realise that navigating the square had taken
twenty minutes as half an hour had gone by since leaving work.

The other vehicles would take considerably longer. But that is motoring, there
is no expectation of forward movement, sitting in traffic spewing fumes and
blaming the world for the predicament is par for the course. If you are on a
bus you can just dibble with your phone so it doesn't matter. People put up
with it.

------
kijin
It would be a waste of time and money to take an Uber to get from one end of
Trafalgar Square to the other. But if your destination is several miles away
and your route just happens to take you through a busy block, driving will
still be faster than walking because the car can reach higher speeds in less
congested parts of the route.

Many people who drive around in urban centers aren't really trying to get from
one part of the urban center to another; they just happen to be in the same
car they just drove in from the suburbs. That trip as a whole tends to be much
faster than walking, and it takes quite a bit of time to park somewhere other
than your destination. So if you're optimizing for speed, it can still be
rational to drive all the way to your destination.

~~~
ghaff
That’s true in a lot of places. Do I get in a car to go 5 blocks if I’m
already in a city? Of course not barring special circumstances (injury, heavy
packages, etc.)

But if I’m driving in from where I live for dinner and theater in the evening,
yes I drive, including through congested areas.

------
dTal
>Uber’s Speeds dataset also shows that exceeding the speed limit on some roads
is endemic, but the company says its data is anonymized and cannot be used to
track–and sanction–individual speeding drivers.

Yeah, bullshit. Maybe that's true of this particular "anonymized" dataset, but
Uber did the anonymizing. They absolutely have the data to track and sanction
speeding drivers. They just don't care to. Why would they?

~~~
jon-wood
Their driver app shows your current speed, and pops up a warning when you
exceed the posted limit for the road you're on. Are they seriously trying to
tell us they couldn't fire off an API call to report the driver is over the
limit at the same time?

~~~
Nasrudith
There is a difference between can and should.

Would you want your car to do so completely insensitive to current contexts?
Especially if the road data winds up inaccurate in areas. I have had several
GPSes tell me that I was "speeding" by going the 45 MPH because it thought it
was a 25 road.

There is an expectation of servicing the user - if they did that they would be
called Orwellian and lose drivers enmasse. It would also fail to address
speeding in general as they would speed without tracking then.

------
ativzzz
This should say "many European cities". This is certainly not true anywhere in
Texas, and probably not anywhere else in the U.S.

~~~
asdff
I beat cars all the time on my bike and I'm in the midwest; I go 12-15mph
while traffic goes maybe half that averaging for the lights. Splitting lanes
means you go the same speed regardless of traffic and therefore I'm always at
the front of the intersection at a red and the first to move on green, while
that car I passed 200 yards ago has to sit through another light cycle.

~~~
ativzzz
Title says walking, not biking. In addition, cycling and walking are becoming
less safe in the U.S.[1]. Also, enjoy your 20+ mile bike commute in the
summers down here in Texas.

[1] [https://www.civilbeat.org/2019/03/us-cities-are-becoming-
mor...](https://www.civilbeat.org/2019/03/us-cities-are-becoming-more-
dangerous-for-cyclists-and-pedestrians/)

------
tyfon
I was at Isla Mujeres (island outside of Cancun, Mexico) a couple years ago
and I was walking from the dock to the hotel with my baggage when an American
stopped on a golf cart of sorts (they were all over the place) and asked if I
wanted a ride. I said "thank you, but I'm Norwegian, we walk". The man looked
at me for a few seconds then barked "Well I'm American!", then drove off and
we both laughed.

The feet are superior everywhere except highways, especially if you are not
known in the area and need to get familiar.

I also enjoy walking, when I am at home I take 1-2 hour walking trips in the
forest by the house while listening to audio books almost every day.

Since I currently live in the countryside I need a car for large item
transportation and things like that, but I have never owned one when living in
a city.

~~~
radcon
> I said "thank you, but I'm Norwegian, we walk". The man looked at me for a
> few seconds then barked "Well I'm American!", then drove off and we both
> laughed.

What a clever, considerate American, making use of energy-efficient
transportation and stopping to offer rides to strangers along the way!

> The feet are superior everywhere except highways

Try walking to work in business attire on a few 100 degree (38C) days and then
tell me how you feel about that...

~~~
tyfon
> What a clever, considerate American, making use of energy-efficient
> transportation and stopping to offer rides to strangers along the way!

Yes, he was really nice. Americans usually are from my experience :)

> Try walking to work in business attire on a few 100 degree (38C) days and
> then tell me how you feel about that...

I'll concede to this point. I don't have to wear that kind of outfit very
often and the temperatures here rarely reach that high luckily.

~~~
radcon
> I don't have to wear that kind of outfit very often and the temperatures
> here rarely reach that high luckily.

I usually grin and bear it but I know plenty of older people who don't
tolerate heat well. Men especially seem to suffer since they run hotter and
they're not allowed to wear skirts and sleeveless shirts to work (or, if they
are allowed, it's still not quite culturally acceptable enough yet...). A lot
of "professional" workplaces don't even allow men to wear short sleeves, and
they _definitely_ don't allow shorts.

------
Wheaties466
I can tell you i've taken ubers when I could have easily walked. But there are
several reasons why my wife and I did not.

Weather/tempature. We live in FL and sometimes walking more than 5 min outside
brings you to a full sweat. Conversely you may want it to take an uber because
it is way too cold.

clothes - if you're in high heels or a dress you may not want to walk as far.

------
Asmod4n
I know I shouldn’t post this here, but the only reason I got a car and stopped
using public transport are ppl who don’t stay home when they have the flu.
I’ve been sick 2 months each winter because of it, with flu shots. Aren’t
their ACs which can filter that out?

~~~
quickthrower2
It's a good point, and one of my bugbears of getting on a crowded rush hour
Sydney bus or train. Geez the amount of sneezing. That said Sydney generally
has journeys that are way to expensive by car (you need to park) so public
transport is the only option and conversely journeys that are epic by public
transport but quite quick by car. There rarely feels like there is a "hmm what
do I fancy today" kind of choice.

------
andy_ppp
* On very specific routes in high congestion parts of the city. The article and headline reads as if the data says walking is faster - for 99% of journeys this isn't true!

We really need better journalism than using statistics to make up lies to get
clicks...

------
bartread
Speed isn't necessarily the reason you take an Uber though. I used to use them
a lot more when I worked for a client in London and would have to head back to
the railway station after a few days with my suitcase. It wasn't fast, but it
did mean I didn't have to drag a suitcase through the London Underground at
rush hour (not fun).

If you want to get places fast in London, as the article suggests, you want to
be on two wheels. Cycling is probably the best option, but motorcycle or
scooter also works well.

------
agumonkey
It's obvious with the new trend of electric scooters. Cars, due to traffic and
intersections.. are sluggish in cities.

------
dwild
There's a subway station 20 minutes away from my work that I take from time to
time when I want to go to a specific movie theater. There's a bus that go
pretty directly, without much stop, but during rush hour, it takes at least 5
minutes less to walk.

------
S_A_P
Context here matters. I would uber if I were in work clothes, and its Houston
in August in the afternoon. Im not trying to walk 15 minutes and arrive
drenched in sweat to a work meeting.

------
korethr
When I click on the link, I get a 404. That's not the usual response to the
hug of death. Anyone have an alternate link?

------
sneak
Less sweaty, though.

------
magwa101
Duh

