Inefficiency of buses

[moreflaps]

Last year buses travelled 6.4 billion miles at a cost of 5.5 billion pounds.

The casualty rate per billion miles for buses was 2072 and for cars it was 561.

(All DOT statistics)

I can't find more accurate numbers but

Buses manage about 4 mpg with a claimed occupancy of 9 passengers.
Cars have and occupancy of ~1.5 but manage about 25 mpg. With more efficient cars appearing, the fuel consumption per passenger would be clearly lower than that for buses.

Yet the bus lobby still manages to push their green agenda and worsen congestion with bus lanes. Will the truth about the inefficiency of buses ever lead to sensible policies?

Cheers

[Rubin215]

Lets all go and buy bicycles...

[moreflaps]

Rubin215 said:

Lets all go and buy bicycles...

And have higher casualty figures and more C02 per mile? Congestion would be better though I think.

Cheers

[nerfherder]

DOT statistics are for America. DfT is for the UK.

Last year's stats for England are here: http://assets.dft.gov.uk/statistics/releases/annua...

[5lab]

hybrid systems should make busses a lot more efficient as they spend so much time in towns (I also think the casualty rate is probably squeued by peds getting spattered - if you look at the fatality rate for passengers, its probably tiny).

trouble is, in cities, there simply isn't enough road space for all the people who want to travel in cars. Neither for moving cars, nor for parked cars.

[Dr G]

Where does that data come from?

I've a friend at TFL I very much enjoy pissing off.

[moreflaps]

nerfherder said:

DOT statistics are for America. DfT is for the UK.

Last year's stats for England are here: http://assets.dft.gov.uk/statistics/releases/annua...

The numbers I quoted were UK (DfT)

Cheers

[untakenname]

The buses around my area run twice an hour from 8pm till past midnight but after 9pm your lucky to see one passenger on the bus, the combined mpg/co2 must be atrocious.

[kambites]

moreflaps said:

Rubin215 said:

Lets all go and buy bicycles...

And have higher casualty figures and more C02 per mile? Congestion would be better though I think.

Cheers

I think you'd have to be really unfit to put up as much CO2 as even the most efficient of cars. Bikes are orders of magnitude better than cars.

In answer to the OP though, it's the age old problem that public transport always has - it's only efficient (both economically and in fuel efficiency terms) if lots of people use it and as long as motoring is as cheap as it is, that's unlikely to happen.

[Hitch78]

5lab said:

hybrid systems should make busses a lot more efficient as they spend so much time in towns (I also think the casualty rate is probably squeued by peds getting spattered - if you look at the fatality rate for passengers, its probably tiny).

trouble is, in cities, there simply isn't enough road space for all the people who want to travel in cars. Neither for moving cars, nor for parked cars.

You seeeeeeeeeeeeeeeem to be defending buses there chap? Are you feeling ok?

[5lab]

Hitch78 said:

5lab said:

hybrid systems should make busses a lot more efficient as they spend so much time in towns (I also think the casualty rate is probably squeued by peds getting spattered - if you look at the fatality rate for passengers, its probably tiny).

trouble is, in cities, there simply isn't enough road space for all the people who want to travel in cars. Neither for moving cars, nor for parked cars.

You seeeeeeeeeeeeeeeem to be defending buses there chap? Are you feeling ok?

haha. I think busses have their place in cities, and on long 'slogs' between cities\to airports where trains don't have the right connections (for instance, if I need to travel from here (brighton) to heathrow, a bus takes 90 mins, car 60 mins, train 2.5 hours (into central london). parking is so expensive the bus gets my journey every time).

buses on rural routes\into housing estates are less practicle, but if you don't have a car their often the only option. I never travel on a bus in town (I cycle) but I don't think they should be got rid of (except bendy busses, those things are the devils own work)

[Baked_bean]

Im suprised that there are 10,000 deaths each year relating to buses? According to that bbc road deaths it says 36,000~ people died on the roads in the past ten years..... the stats don't work.

[thinfourth2]

5lab said:

haha. I think busses have their place

Yes

The scrapyard

[aizvara]

Why do people on PH have a problem with buses?

Surely if more people use them, the roads will, in general, be clearer. Also, if they are not publicly subsidised in the form of bus passes for the over 60, then there'll be more elderly people driving or being effectively trapped where they live.

Also, what bus lobby? Aside from in urban areas, bus services seem to be cut year on year. We've gone from one bus every half an hour, to one every two hours, in a space of about two years.

[nerfherder]

Costs me half as much to get the bus into work in the centre of town than to take the car and park. It's usually 75-100% full, so pretty efficient. Bloody annoying when they fail to turn up, though, and sometimes take twice as long.

[AndyACB]

Baked_bean said:

Im suprised that there are 10,000 deaths each year relating to buses? According to that bbc road deaths it says 36,000~ people died on the roads in the past ten years..... the stats don't work.

I think casualty rate means injuries not just deaths.

[J4CKO]

Those stats sound wrong, would love to know how people cycling would be more environmentally damaging than a Bus ?

[thinfourth2]

aizvara said:

Why do people on PH have a problem with buses?
.

They take up loads of road space but are normally empty apart from rush hour when they are like a mobile sardine can
They have their own sections of the road which are primarly there to annoy car drivers
Its illegal for bus drivers to look in their mirrors before pulling into the road
They puke soot everywhere
They are advertised as the solution to everything

[null]

aizvara said:

Why do people on PH have a problem with buses?

Surely if more people use them, the roads will, in general, be clearer. Also, if they are not publicly subsidised in the form of bus passes for the over 60, then there'll be more elderly people driving or being effectively trapped where they live.

Also, what bus lobby? Aside from in urban areas, bus services seem to be cut year on year. We've gone from one bus every half an hour, to one every two hours, in a space of about two years.

They're a nice idea in theory, they're a complete failure in practice, unless you happen to share the same commute at the same time, with everyone on your street.

My village has a bus that goes out on a tuesday and comes back on a thursday. Even if it turned up 5 days a week at suitable commute times for me to a suitable destination, I'd probably be the only one on it. And it'd still be too slow even if it wasn't late. And even if all that worked, I'd have to sit next to someone and wouldn't be able to play the radio without headphones or take private phone calls or...

[XitUp]

moreflaps said:

Rubin215 said:

Lets all go and buy bicycles...

And have higher casualty figures and more C02 per mile? Congestion would be better though I think.

Cheers

Go on, how are you working that one out?

5lab said:

hybrid systems should make busses a lot more efficient as they spend so much time in towns (I also think the casualty rate is probably squeued by peds getting spattered - if you look at the fatality rate for passengers, its probably tiny).

trouble is, in cities, there simply isn't enough road space for all the people who want to travel in cars. Neither for moving cars, nor for parked cars.

This, plus trolly busses.

moreflaps said:

nerfherder said:

DOT statistics are for America. DfT is for the UK.

Last year's stats for England are here: http://assets.dft.gov.uk/statistics/releases/annua...

The numbers I quoted were UK (DfT)

Cheers

Can you give us a link please.