Thursday, May 24, 2012
workaround

Donate Now tile

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.




workaround



Triangle Park Creative

The P is for pipe dream

May 20, 2011

Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) is a name not well known outside of transportation circles, and for good reason: its deployment is extremely limited and its concept has substantial flaws.

PRT advocates trumpet its benefits as if it is the best solution in transportation, able to replace both inefficient cars and cumbersome mass transit. This is often paired with theories about evil car and mass transit manufacturers blocking PRT, which earns its proponents the name 'PRTists'. In reality, PRT does have limited applications, but it is not a solution for city transportation systems.

Let's look at the basic idea of PRT. Small, computer-controlled cars holding anywhere from two to six passengers run on elevated tracks to the passenger's desired station, without stopping at any other stations along the way. In theory, empty cars will always be waiting for you at a station, so you never have to wait. It mirrors automobiles in its on-demand nature and small capacity and it mirrors some transit in its use of stations and electrified vehicles.

It's the best of both worlds, is what proponents—like Citizens for Personal Rapid Transit who had a booth at the Living Green Expo—would have you believe. A system in Minneapolis has even been proposed by now-former Minneapolis Councilmember Dean Zimmerman.

The problems, however, are significant. Elevated tracks often degrade any property beneath them, as well as the urban landscape in general. As Yonah Freemark of the Transport Politic points out, PRT and its small cars don't come close to matching the capacity of buses or light rail. If you ride the Hiawatha LRT during rush hour, try to imagine every individual (only occasionally more than one person) in their own car, and you can see the problem. They don't work along dense corridors.

Some PRT advocates claim the system to only be supplemental to other transit, serving as a 'last mile' solution. That 'last mile' is often through lower density areas, and the cost of elevated tracks and stations is hardly justified by low density corridors.

There are two PRT systems in operation in the world today. One is in Morgantown, designed to link the University of West Virginia's Morgantown campuses, and the other is in the new city of Masdar in the UAE. The operating systems are limited, with two passenger stations in Masdar, and five stations in Morgantown. A third system very close to completion is in London Heathrow Airport. These represent the range of applications of PRT. It is useful in places that have a constant, but low-capacity need for transportation between limited stations. Large shopping centers and corporate campuses fit this bill as well.

The only cities it works in, as Freemark states, are new cities where it can be incorporated into an urban landscape that is literally being built from scratch.

As Christopher Mims points out in a Txchnologist article, the real future of anything resembling PRT is autonomous cars, which use existing infrastructure and potentially provide more benefits than PRT. Google is developing autonomous cars, which we recently wrote about, so that future may not be too far away. For now in Minnesota, we should continue focusing on maintaining our infrastructure and funding our current transportation systems.

Photo credit: Skyburn, Wikimedia Commons

The Twin Cities Daily Planet is an edited news source produced by professional journalists working in collaboration with citizen journalists from the local community. We publish original reported news articles, articles republished from media partners, and some content (Free Speech Zone articles, reader-submitted blog entries, comments) that is moderated but not edited. Click here for a complete description of our editorial policies. Support people-powered non-profit journalism! Volunteer, contribute news, or become a member to keep the Daily Planet in orbit.

Comments

PRT applications

The first applications of PRT will be as a circulator on campuses, airports and malls.  PRT must shown to be functional in those applications prior to any funding commitment for transportation in a city.  The most likely uses for PRT in an intermodal transport system would be as a feeder, more to replace local buses than to replace light rail.  For example, it might make sense to have a PRT system around the Mall of America, connecting riders to the Mall and to light rail.  

PRT is not as limited as you claim

Dear Mr. Frost, PRT is not nearly as limited as you claim. First consider Morgantown (which you have chosen to characterise as PRT - it is actually GRT). It has a theoretical maximum capacity of 5,000 passengers per hour per direction - exceeding that of many light rail systems. It has put more than 3,000 passengers through one station in one hour.

Speaking of GRT, Vectus is developing a GRT option that allows larger vehicles to operate on its PRT track. Thus it is possible to have GRT serving a few high-demand stations with integrated PRT serving all stations.

You say PRT "mirrors automobiles in its on-demand nature and small capacity" yet automobiles have a very large capacity - they carry the vast majority of commuters to and from work every day.

You say "The only cities it works in, as Freemark states, are new cities where it can be incorporated into an urban landscape that is literally being built from scratch" yet a PRT system of 4 miles is being retrofitted to the dense existing Indian City of Amritsar and another of 66 miles is under design for the dense  existing Indian City of Gurgaon.

As for elevated tracks degrading the property beneath them, this can certainly be an issue in some locations. The solution may be to design elegant tracks that are judiciously located and publically acceptable. There is plenty of evidence that proximity to transit boosts property values.

Learn more about PRT at www.prtconsulting.com and about sustainable cities at www.sustainablecityconsulting.com

PRT in existing cities

Mr. Muller,


In paragraph four of your response here you make the case for PRT getting started in existing cities, but on your own website you have this:


"The full benefits of PRT can only be realized in a city designed to leverage this exciting form of transportation from the beginning."


I am a fan of PRT and I think Mr. Frost's arguments are not well considered.  But I found this apparent contradiction by following the link you posted in your reply.  More explanation would be helpful as these forum posts are the only source of info for we armchair PRT engineers.


As for Mr. Frost, in your example of picturing everyone on the light rail having their own cars, your argument misdirects people to imagining automobile traffic including red lights, merging and lane changing which would not be the case with a PRT solution.  All PRT (and not GRT) solutions have a model of point to point non-stop transportation.  It does not matter if I'm sharing the track with 1,000 other people, since there will be no poor driving, rubbernecking, or any of the other anomalies humans bring to driving that make traffic what it is today.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p> <br> <img> <span> <div>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use [google_ad:ad_slot] to display Google Admanager ads within your content.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
workaround

Blogs published in the Daily Planet come from our blog partners or from individuals who post blogs on the Daily Planet. We moderate, but do not edit, blogs, and publish all those that meet minimal standards. We choose about five blogs per day to feature in the newsletter and on the front page. More on blogs and directions for setting up your own blog here. The opinions expressed in the Free Speech Zone and Neighborhood Notes, as well as the opinions of bloggers, are their own and not necessarily the opinion of the TC Daily Planet.

Hindsight is the official blog of Minnesota 2020. Hindsight gives the run down on the news that jumps out at us on the issues that matter. Often times these stories show us how much further we need to go to have the progressive policy realized in Minnesota.

Free Speech Zone

The Free Speech Zone offers a space for contributions from readers, without editing by the TC Daily Planet. This is an open forum for articles that otherwise might not find a place for publication, including news articles, opinion columns, and announcements. The opinions expressed in the Free Speech Zone and Neighborhood Notes, as well as the opinions of bloggers, are their own and not necessarily the opinion of the TC Daily Planet.

Click here to see a display of Twin Cities problem reports, from potholes to neighborhood eyesores. Click here to report a problem. Have you used SeeClickFix? Have you gotten any response from city officials? Let us know - email info@tcdailyplanet.net