With the car I can get to point A to point B on my time and my schedule. Not have to smell piss and vomit , or stand because somebody's primark handbag needs a seat. A car every time here , because public transport really is the pits.
I happened to be doing some sums on my cars to decide which one to sell- the nicer of my cars costs £4.80 a day (depreciation, VED, servicing, tax, insurance etc.). I looked into how much it was going to cost to get the train to work and it was £9.80- even allowing for fuel it's £1 cheaper to go in the car, which, as it takes me door to door is quicker. It's not a particularly flash car, but it cost £8k and is pretty luxurious inside and is relatively new.
If the train were something like £6 I'd take it in a heartbeat - it's the right thing to do, but it also has to be the right thing to do for me. We do take the bus around Edinburgh when we don't cycle because we can go close enough to most of the places we need to go and not worry about parking but if we want to go to our pals that live 2 miles around town from us we can't do it directly as most of the buses go into the middle of the city rather than around it.
(fuel is 10p/mile when you’re at 45 mpg)
At £1.28 per litre for diesel your fuel cost is over 12p a mile @45mpg. Being 20% out on one figure throws the other numbers you quote into some doubt.
At £1.28 per litre for diesel your fuel cost is over 12p a mile @45mpg. Being 20% out on one figure throws the other numbers you quote into some doubt.
My bad, the converter I used was set to US gallons, rather than imperial. Lets say 25p a mile then, rather than 20. Still a significant way from any public transport options other than, weirdly, flying, which I've had below 3p/mile in the past (£300 return flights to LA)
Most cars are North of 50p/mile these days, certainly most lease or HP or PCP cars, and if it’s vaguely nice it can be £1 a mile before you even fuel the thing.
Not sure how you're coming up with £1 per mile before fuel my lease costs me 27p a mile based on the allowance of miles per month.
Sounds like fuel needs to be far more expensive, so that we really are looking at "cost to drive an extra mile" rather than "cost of ownership spread over all miles driven".
My office is 23 miles away, cross country. It takes on average 31 minutes to drive. I can use a motorway & big dual carriageway option, but it's longer (30 miles). It can take 25 minutes, it can also take an hour & a half.
I have a car anyway, because I don't live in a big city & public transport (albeit on a mainline station) isn't practical. Maybe if I lived in a city like Amsterdam with a great public transport system & a safe environment to ride in, I wouldn't need a car, but I don't live there, I live on the south coast of the UK.
I can get a train. It only takes 1h 52m & a cost of £14.60 a day. When I say 'a' train, it's actually 3.
Having a look, I can also get a bus. But that takes 2h 56m. Slightly cheaper though at £13.40. This is actually 5 different buses.
Not exactly practical.
Multi modal is what we should aim for. Right tool for the job. Car work well for many journeys or parts of journeys it should be easier and quicker to swap modes of transportation. Same thing with trains and bikes
That's the idea with park and ride but every time I have used p&r (Oxford and sailsbury) it only works out if you are going into town for a long period of time on your own. Plus waiting for a bus that is at best every 15-20 mind is not very nice. Make it one, two, three hours with two to three people and the coat and time difference doesn't work out.
I say all of this as someone who likes buses (outside mega rush hour)
Sounds like fuel needs to be far more expensive
It's not just cost. It's availability, and journey time as well. As I said I like public transport but outside a few cities it's poor quality and poorly integrated with many black holes even within those cities.
if self driving cars really take off, and we end up with a model where its cheaper to hail a driverless uber every time you need to get somewhere, rather than have your own car (excepting the 38 people who live in houses too far from anywhere to make sense) then surely most public transportation will die off? Driverless would mean an ability to have a much higher traffic density, and run higher speeds on existing infrastructure (compared to the cost of HS2 this is important), and if you manage to get a ~50% utilisation rate out of a vehicle (compared to what - sub 10% today) the costs should drop dramatically. The efficiencies of scale that a bus manages would largely be eradicated, to the point that they become unviable
I don't see how driverless cars can run at higher speeds unless it's completely isolated roads.
A driverless bus with still work out cheaper with better density. Maybe there will be less big busses more mdid and mini but it would still work out cheaper to bus it in large towns and cities
unless it’s completely isolated roads.
no reason it couldn't be. motorways are already only available to a subset of road users. once driverless technology gains hold, it would be eminently sensible to ban 'driven' cars from them. In the space of 3 lanes of cars running at 70mph each leaving a gap of 4 car lengths, you could have 5 lanes of cars (simply closer together as they drive more accurately), leaving a gap of 1/4 a car length, running at 120mph. I make that an 11 times increase in road capacity on the motorways without any investment in infrastructure. even if you scaled a load of those back, it'd be easy to give a 3-4x increase in capacity.
Doing this on non-motorways would be a lot more problematic, but there's no reason you couldn't have a higher speed limit for a driverless car on a normal road, as long as it just chugs along when it reaches something slower
It was non motorways (as this is the vast majority of the roads and most of the conversation has been about town based driving) I was referring to, I should have been explicit.
The only thing driverless cars would be able to do is react quicker than a human but but most of the stopping distance is made up of braking distance which is the same so a higher speed limit is not justified.
It’s a 2 mile journey
what amazes me about this thread, this forum (it being a cycling forum) and this countries love affair with the motor car, is that if there is a journey that could easily be done by bike or an E-Bike this is probably it.
My wife is unable to drive at the moment due to a neck injury
😉
its still a 2 mile journey, and cycling as an option doesn't really figure in the discussion.
it’s for poor people or for odd people who knit their own yoghurt.
What we need are super econmical elecric scooters that have maybe a 2kw electric motors
Thy go from where you are , your house , they take you to where you want to go.-Work mostly
They cost less than 1p per mile to fuel, quiet , good enough range for the majority of commutes ( below 20 miles ) , fast enough to whizz around and keep up with traffic flow ( 35-40mph ) ability to filter through traffic
Drawbacks. - Invisable to superior car drivers , not so good on fast dual carriageways, not exactly weatherproof , stealable I guess, carrying passengers is out, carrying a holdall is out, taking your bike to work so you can stop off on the way home is a no-no.
I would like to know if most peoples commutes would be quicker if they could use an E-ped , but I bet they would not switch out of their PCP Audi for a substantial green saving, cost saving, time saving etc as they cannot project a 'I am doing betterer than Yaow' from an E-ped as they can from a heated leather armchair they are hiring for a few months...which is a shame
its still a 2 mile journey, and cycling as an option doesn’t really figure in the discussion.
The OP's wife probably can't cycle of they can't drive. Seems little point in discussing the distance.
The only thing driverless cars would be able to do is react quicker than a human but but most of the stopping distance is made up of braking distance which is the same so a higher speed limit is not justified.
at 30mph a modern car has about 50% of its braking distance in reaction time (the highway code distances are based on 60s cars) so there is some scope for this. I doubt it'd ever happen, but it'd be reasonable
singletrackmind
Member
Leccy bikes are the way forward for city travel!
I've done about 1000 miles on mine since I got it.
Cost £850 conversion kit.
Bike maintenance costs in that time. - about 100quid (donor bike needed a fair bit of attention attention)
Cost to charge is about 12p/KWH, I've an 850wh battery.
I'd need to check but I think think done about 20ish charging cycles. call it 25 just for talking sake.
So that's 1000/25 = 40 mile per charge. (that's in a mix of road and hilly off road terrain, running 2.4 high rollers and me horsing it about unrestricted on 9 everywhere. 😆 )
850wh/1kwh = 0.85 x 12p = 10.2p/40miles = 0.255p per mile.
Putting on some slicks will most likely double the range if just using it for commuting.
There will be other ongoing costs, repair/kits/bike upgrade.
But still if economical commuting is what people want, they should add one into their travel options. Not suitable for every journey. But they'll help cut costs significantly I'd bet.
Drac
Subscriber
its still a 2 mile journey, and cycling as an option doesn’t really figure in the discussion.The OP’s wife probably can’t cycle of they can’t drive. Seems little point in discussing the distance.
Not a permanent issue. 😉 I think it's worth sticking up a comparison just for info's sake in what is a commuting costs thread.
My wife is unable to drive at the moment
"The value to the public purse of the land used for parking – in cities even the burbs where on road parking is free that land is worth thousnads a year in rental but vcar drivers get it for free."
I'd dispute that drivers in suburbs get their parking free. My "burb" estate was built approx 45 years ago. The cost of the roads was met by the developer and in turn by the owners. The side road where we park have not been resurfaced in that time. As they are used almost exclusively by cars they last a long time. As I said upthread it's HGVs that destroy roads. So the parking on the streets and car parks here was paid for by the owners.
As virtually every houses has a car or 2 or 3 we share through council tax the ongoing costs like street lighting. Nobody is subsidising car parking on the streets here.
Why should car owners be charged for parking where there is no need to ration use? We don't charge pedestrians for using the footways?
I see on the news car ownership has reached a new record in Scotland. Three million cars for a 5 million population. People like cars. Democracy?
My two journeys today were 15 miles by bike. Followed by a 3 mile journey in my car. Can't carry 2 dogs on my bike. Convenience.
..and buses have lots of horrible, stinky people on them.
Maybe this was waiting for someone to bite so I'll oblige. They really don't. I have been on five buses in the last 24 hours, they just had people going places. If you can't get on with the fact that not everyone is just like you buses probably aren't for you. This sort of comment is peddled by people that have already made their mind up.
Buses don't work well for places that don't work well for buses. If you live in sparsely populated suburbia cul-de-sac wonderland under the current de-regulated operating model you can't expect operators to drive around losing money.
Cars are great, but I am a self confessed petrol head. That said I use public transport and often cycle.
Bus tickets here cost around 5 bucks and the ticket lasts for a few hours, meaning you can jump on and off the bus as many times as you like. Tends to p!ss off the driver though.
Better alignment of timetables
faster services
More frequent services where justified
Multi modal ticketing
Better pricing of tickets
/thread
(think I just described TFL or any other decent mass transit system in the world)
[strong]Hob Nob[/strong] wrote:
My office is 23 miles away, cross country. It
Not picking on you specifically, but I think this is a large part of the problem. Lots of people NEED cars as they work so far from home. In truth, they chose a job there becuase they know that the journey in a car is bearable. Lose your licence for some reason (or even just your ability to drive due to for instance an accident) and suddenly that long journey to the office is rather more difficult. In truth, public transport is not going to help people who "need" to commute so far. What needs to happen is a more deepseated change of mindset - for the average person to understand that their convenience is not king, that they probalby shold accept the local job offer that pays 5k pa less - becuase after all that's offset by the reduced commute
that they probalby shold accept the local job offer that pays 5k pa less
I've never been in a situation of being able to choose a more local job. It's always been a choice of
- being unemployed
- moving
- commuting
Commuting is usually the least worst option, especially if you have children and OH.
What about the people whose job involves more than commuting.
My commute is only 6 miles either way so, over a year, accounts for just under 3000 miles of the 20000-odd miles I need to do every year to do my job.
that they probalby shold accept the local job offer that pays 5k pa less – becuase after all that’s offset by the reduced commute
Do you think anyone has that sort of choice?
Out of curiosity what is your profession? Do you have a wide choice of work locations? Did you chose the most environmentally friendly location?
Public transport for an individual can be cheap, providing it goes where you want when you want to go there. But if you need a car for some journey's it becomes cost effective to use it for most. My last train ride was one way to pick up a ebay camper van purchase. It took 5.5 hrs and 4 changes, cost £89. Imagine that was with my family visiting relatives or something £356 !!! Coming back took just over 3hrs and £30 of diesel.
Yes, I'd imagine the vast majority of office drones would jump at a 5k drop in salary, that's realistic.
Or, local authorities could exercise existing planning powers to force developers into making a sustainable transport plan for new applications.
My commute is only 6 miles either way so, over a year, accounts for just under 3000 miles of the 20000-odd miles I need to do every year to do my job.
My commute is 1 mile total so I walk. So that's zero of the 15,000 miles I need to do for my job. Yeah take that panther.
Yeah take that panther
Yeah, but strictly speaking, an Ambulance is public transport.
Yeah, but strictly speaking, an Ambulance is public transport.
I don't work on the ambulances anymore, hence the low miles. 2 - 0 🦶🏻⚽️🥅
Public transport is more expensive for me...
Mileage 10000
MPG 35
Petrol cost per gallon £5.902
Total petrol cost £1686.285714
Tax £220 (something like this anyway)
Servicing per year £140
Cost of car (over 10 years) £300 (mondeo estate, £3k purchase price 8 years ago, would expect it to last at least another couple of years if not more)
Tyres - £40 (60 quid a corner for quiet dunlops off black circles, last three years)
Insurance - £320
Cost of bits that go wrong - £75 (£600 quid over 8 years so far)
Cost per mile £0.28/mile (probably missed out a cost there, but can't think of it off hand)
Parking would need to be added in, but normally I'm parking in the work carpark for free.
Last time I got a bus I got charged £3 to go 1.2 miles. £2.50/mile
Train into London costs £13.60 (excluding tube) single at a time i'd want to go - distance is 30 miles. £0.45/mile
If possible I try and cycle, as that's much cheaper...
Cycling - bought my commuter for £1100, 1.5 years old, likely to replace in say another 3.5 years. Generally get through a chain a year (£20), will need two new 11spd cassettes in that time (£80), and say six tyres (glass! - £20 a pop)... 11p/mile
What needs to happen is a more deepseated change of mindset – for the average person to understand that their convenience is not king, that they probalby shold accept the local job offer that pays 5k pa less – becuase after all that’s offset by the reduced commute
+1
Sadly it won't happen, mainly due to the sort of comments made above.
I'm a contractor, paid 35ppmm for my mileage only (which is about 20k, all business - I can't claim for anything other than mileage) so working out public transport costs v diesel is easy/straightforward for me. I'm currently waiting for confirmation of a couple of days work in Herts and Kent, then home to Wirral. Distance 580m = £203.
Trains right now are a total of £148 IF I book fixed times in advance. And that's standard class so I have to sit with the plebs. For any flexibility or if I book after this weekend, then cost is likely to be neutral or much, much worse... so I'll be driving for c. 10-12 hours including M25 twice.
Big, **** off trains and low fares would certainly help but sadly we lack governmental direction and drive for that.
I estimate that my car costs me around £3 per day, before I get into it and feed it. That includes the cost of the car over the time I've owned it, annual insurance, tax, maintenance, tyres, etc. It's not even cheap to run car either.
Granted, I probably spend far less than your average person, but that's a personal choice. Owning a car does not need to be expensive, and I'm quite confident I could get that figure under £2 per day if I were to choose a cheaper motor.
I got the bus to my parents recently, who live 3 miles down the road. It cost something like £7 return (would have been maybe £1 in fuel). It hardly encourages you to leave the car at home.
For those particularly living in more rural areas and weighing up the cost benefits of personal vs public transport, and then the flexibility of it, for many it's a no-brainer. And no sane person will pay that kind of money on top of their car ownership.
[strong]perchypanther[/strong] wrote:
What about the people whose job involves more than commuting.
My commute is only 6 miles either way so, over a year, accounts for just under 3000 miles of the 20000-odd miles I need to do every year to do my job.
if you need to drive for a living then it's not commuting, is it? Commuting is from home to the office
[strong]gobuchul[/strong] wrote:
that they probalby shold accept the local job offer that pays 5k pa less – becuase after all that’s offset by the reduced commute
Do you think anyone has that sort of choice?
Out of curiosity what is your profession? Do you have a wide choice of work locations? Did you chose the most environmentally friendly location?
yes, people do have that choice. Yes, I made that choice. I'm lucky that as a programmer, I can work in all sort of locations. I chose the job I can get to without a car if I have to. I do drive to work occasionally, usually when I'm going to do something else after work. Occasionally I lift share with a colleague who lives near me. Occasionally, I walk to the station and get the train. Mostly I commute by bike. It's only 6 miles each way so hat's about perfect. I could increase my salary greatly by working in Manchester centre, and perhaps even more by going to Trafford Park or Salford Docks, but frankly I don't want to increase my commuting time so I'll stay where I am thanks
Yes, I made that choice. I’m lucky
Exactly, you're lucky. Most aren't.
FWIW I commute typically every four weeks, normally travelling about 8hrs, so 16hrs return. So the equivalent of about 48 mins a day for someone working 5 days a week.
I think it would be an interesting experiment to make buses and trains free for 6 months and see what happens to the number of users. I would guess not much and people who use cars today would still use cars during the test period. That would at least take cost out of it as a reason.
I drive to work as I am 9 miles away and need to get home for lunch a few times a week for dogs. I used to use the bus for 6 miles and walk the remaining 3 until the service was cut and now first bus goes at 11:30 and last bus comes back at 17:00
Rather than wasting £56,000,000,000 on HS2 why are the government not spending that money on electric bikes and cars ?
Its £10k for 5.6 million commuters, which should be put toward solar panels, battery storage packs, E-Bikes, E-Peds and E-cars .
The CO2 / C0 reduction would be massive if we could get 5.6 million people out of cars and into greener transport solutions
They could use incentives like subsidised installs for plug in points , Income tax breaks, Subsidised insurance deals to make it even more attractive . Like Bike2work , but bigger and better and far further reaching
I blame Thatcher, and brexit, and vanity projects
Increasing rail capacity, and replacing the fuel type used by the vehicles glogging up our streets, are as unrelated as you can get.
Public transport where is live isn't expensive but it is very very limited in terms of both geographic coverage, linking to other services and available times.
Having to provide a car for my job (500-800 miles a month) along with the above means I'm only very rarely going to use it, essentially in desperation. I do cycle to work on occasion though and that's quicker than the bus!
What needs to happen is a more deepseated change of mindset – for the average person to understand that their convenience is not king, that they probalby shold accept the local job offer that pays 5k pa less – becuase after all that’s offset by the reduced commute
Another +1
I fell into it accidentally. When I started work I got a job where I could, lived where I liked and commuted between the two. Carried on doing that as I changed job then one day, more by luck than judgement, I ended up with a short cycle commute and it was a revelation. Never really considered not only how much time I was wasting but how much of my life as I was just doing what everybody else did so it must be right. I won't go on but it was a big change to my quality of life, freed up me evenings, which freed up my weekends. Since then I would only consider a long commute as a last resort or if there was a very good reason. I've put more effort into choosing where I work and where I live and it has been very worthwhile. I appreciate everyone has different circumstances but I'm willing to bet most people could cut their commute if they were willing to make some other changes to their lifestyle
Yes, such as a lower wage, less satisfying job, higher mortgage or their partner making similar changes. On or all of the above apply but if everyone were to live closer to work that is the reality of what would happen. Look at the south east as a prime example.
It's not as easy as just saying live closer to work, that is simplistic to the point of being unworkable.