Light ideas
July 27, 2010 2 Comments
Where do I stand on light rail?
If its 20 years away, its a red herring for this election. We have more pressing priorities, and new technology is making it redundant.
Why do we want to spend $140+ million on light rail when we need urgent action on our water supply. We are going to need that $140 million for a new dam. Otherwise heavier water restrictions and water meters will be on the council agenda (or a rates\debt increase to fund both).
Countries that adopted light rail a decade ago did so to use electricity instead of fossil fuels and remove overhead wiring. New bus technology makes overhead wiring unnecessary. And bio-diesel is here.
So why invest in laying rail tracks and maintaining another mode of transport?
Light rail might be romantic, but we have more immediate concerns.
Its about priorities.
http://eco-thinker.com/no-plug-in-hybrid-wirelessly-rechargeable-bus-by-hino-motors/, http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC0612/S00039.htm, http://www.stuff.co.nz/marlborough-express/news/3865043/Businesses-consider-plan-to-buy-biodiesel-in-bulk, http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/2010/03/the-future-of-fuel-do-oil-and-water-mix/
Greening Wellington City 
Light rail can start well before 2020 but to get the whole route to the airport may take ten years. Light rail vehicles carry more people so reduce the “bus-jams”.
Biodiesel and emulsified fuels are certainlty relevant for other routes – and other vehicles as well as buses.
The key qustion is whether we increase the number of cars, this exacerbating fumes, inactivity and parking issues or significantly upgrade public transport and enable more active transport..
Good to have questions and debate on the issue anyway!
Don’t get me wrong, I like the aspiration behind a light rail proposal – “improving our public transport”, so its the preferred transport option across the city. I’m all for that!! But don’t rail tracks take up as much space as would a dedicated bus lane (which could also be made available for emergency services), which is something we still do not have. Which is why buses are still tied up in traffic. If rail can get a dedicated channel across town, why not buses? Or are you proposing an underground subway? I also think carriages carry as many people as buses – people are the same size in both. And if rechargable bus technology is here, what other reason is there for adopting rail? Perhaps we need to get serious about our buses and provide them dedicated uninterrupted lanes across the city, not just in small pockets? That all said, a more pressing concern is water. Which is my point. We need to sort that one out first. And in the interim, bio-diesel for buses can be implemented for minimal cost, in order to keep our city clean. Lets make some achievable changes now. Because I think council have to face facts. We do not have unlimited funding – and both water and light rail are expensive. So if you were mayor, which one would it be – water or rail?
And I certainly like hearing a willingness to engage and debate. Its why I am standing. Its about listening. Something our council has failed to do enough of.