Do car-sharing schemes work in the States?

Our government has just agreed to a car-sharing lane scheme in the north of England, arguing that these have proved successful in the USA.

Is that true?

Only if you're a city-dwelling hippie and nobody else in your group wants the car on Tuesday.

I don't have personal experience but a couple people I know who are in this one think it's great.

I think he's talking about commuter lanes. They have them in Seattle. Do they actually encourage people to car-pool? I don't think so. But if you are the sort to car-pool it really cuts down on the drive time.

Oh yeah, I could actually look at the link next time. I dunno.. there aren't a lot where I drive. Although there is a lane restricted for buses on Chestnut Street in Center City, which people seem to ignore fairly often.

Shows me I should read the article rather than commenting on what I think the post is about.

HOV lanes are either a blessing or a curse, depending upon how many people you have in the car.

I've never car-pooled. I either didn't have enough co-workers in the company fow which I was working , or nobody lived out my way. I don't think there are any car pool lanes/routes here in the Phila. area. I only see them when I drive through New York City, and down towards D.C.

Cyclefrance wrote:

...... in the north of England, arguing that these have proved successful in the USA.

That depends on your definition of "successful".

It seems to me that these lanes are in the Hartford, Ct. area on highway 84 outside the metro areas. IIRC there were times during heavy traffic that one would see one car using this lane just blasting up the highway laughing and mocking the slower moving traffic. They also seemed to run quite a distance away from Hartford.

You dont think about using that lane until you're stuck in traffic alone and you see someone whiz by. The lane is normally clear so in that moment that you think "wow, if I had someone else with me I could be moving right now instead of parking" that car is long gone.

Here in the DC area, they are everywhere. I don't drive my car during rush hour, so I can't comment on them first hand.

But that won't stop me from posting.

As Wolf says, HOV lanes are awesome if you have a full car and can take one. They generally move without congestion.

We also have informal lines of people, called slugs, who line up at central locations downtown and ride with random strangers who pull up to the curb and drive them to their drop off point in the suburbs. That allows the single driver to use the HOV lanes by picking up living breathing human bodies before they get to the HOV lanes. The slugs get a free ride most of the way into town in the morning, and a free ride most of the way home at night. It's a win win situation. I'm amazed that nobody has been raped or murdered by crazies. It seems to work extremely well.

So nobody is making a killing selling inflatable passengers then....?

PS - apologies for the bad thread title - should have included the word 'lanes' there as well.

I also commute in the DC area which, as glatt indicates, has made heavy use of HOV (high-occupancy vehicle) lanes. Some lanes require 3 occupants per vehicle and some only require 2 occupants.

I do not believe they work. Let's take 395 in Virginia as an example. Highway 395 runs from basically the White House in the center of DC to points south. 395 is broken into 3 sections: a Northbound lane (2-4 lanes) that anyone can use, a Southbound lane (3-4 lanes) that anyone can use and a center, reversable lane (2 lanes) that is HOV northbound from 6am to 9am and southbound from 3pm to 6pm. Outside the HOV hours, anyone can use the HOV lanes which flips direction at noon and midnight.

While HOV may in fact produce the result of "fewer cars on the road" and thereby "prove" that the goal of reducing congestion is met but I would counter that the average commute time across all drivers (HOV and non-HOV) actually increases which more than offsets the "feel good" metric of reduced congestion.

The problem is that not enough people, for whatever reason, use it. So while 10-15% of folks get home 30% faster, the other 85% of drivers' commute time increases by the same proportion resulting in longer commutes, more fuel consumption and more pollution than if the HOV lanes were opened to all drivers and the traffic could adjust between the lanes to achieve the most effective distribution of cars between HOV and non-HOV lanes.

The HOV lanes on 395 are grossly underused (the 3 people per car makes it very difficult to qualify for) and, during either rush hour, the non-HOV lanes are a parking lot and the HOV lanes are full of tumbleweeds. I usually stay late at work to time reaching the HOV entrance at 5:55 pm when the HOV is lifted because no one is on it at that time.

But no government official will speak out against HOV because the money to build HOV lanes is a gift from the Federal government to the states in exchange for enforcing HOV. So the states couldn't care less if it works or not because they need the money to build new roads. So no one at the state level will acknowledge the problem HOV creates lest they risk being cut off from the Federal money.

Now, I only know about the HOV lanes in my experience so there may be cases where it works very well. I just don't think the blanket statement that "it works great in the US" is really true. The government might think it works great but no one is asking the drivers who have to live with traffic decisions made by people who are driven to work in limousines.

Cyclefrance wrote:

So nobody is making a killing selling inflatable passengers then....?

And do they charge extra for the anatomically correct ones?:D

The HOV lane s around Hartford, CT, are ok during rush hours but off peak they should be avoided. Invariably you'll get stuck behind someone doing slightly less than the speed limit, while the non-HOV lanes are running 10, 20 and 30mph over.;)

The HOV lanes take train passangers and make them car poolers. Doesn't help.

CA did something really dumb: hybrids can now use HOV with one passenger. dumb.

I can almost always avoid rush hour.

Rock Steady wrote:

CA did something really dumb: hybrids can now use HOV with one passenger. dumb.

Virginia did the same thing. Then they had to cut new license plates to issue to the hybrids. Now, when the cops see a one-person car in HOV they have to first look at the plates to see if they should chase them or not. The cops are getting tired of all this crap. Dumb is too polite.

I've never car-pooled. I either didn't have enough co-workers in the company fow which I was working , or nobody lived out my way. I don't think there are any car pool lanes/routes here in the Phila. area. I only see them when I drive through New York City, and down towards D.C.[/QUOTE]

This is just a mean thought. Maybe nobody wants to carpool with you. I think I could have a lively commute with you for a day or two. But I don't want to die. And I know you'd be packing.

Here in GA, the HoV lane works alright, as long as you are going strait through ATL. There are precious few exit ramps from that lane, and it is on the far left, making getting off the interstate difficult during high traffic times. Proper planning would have greatly improved the system, but it is GA, right? Barring that, sometimes the HoV lane has as many cars in it as the rest of the lanes, and it is also the lane accident cars pull into, so if there is an accident, that lane is screwed, and good luck getting over because those in the fast lane hate you for having passed them two miles back.

Answering original thread topic: YES

Thanks

A study in CA says no.

Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley and California State University, East Bay have measured the effect of high occupancy vehicle (HOV) restrictions on 100 miles of freeway in the San Francisco Bay area and found the lanes have had the opposite of their intended effect. Using detectors buried in the pavement, they analyzed four-and-a-half years worth of speed and travel time data from 2001 to 2005. Because the HOV/carpool restrictions only apply for 8-10 hours a day on the freeway segments examined, traffic flow was measured both with and without the restriction.

"HOV lanes exacerbate the problem," the authors conclude. They found overall congestion would be reduced by eliminating the HOV lane, but only in areas where effective on-ramp metering is employed during congested periods.
A report released last year also shows that the most common form of HOV lane, where general and restricted traffic is not separated by a physical barrier, causes a fifty percent increase in accidents.

But it's San Francisco so you're mileage may vary. :cool:

Yeah but in San Francisco about half the drivers are Chinese and.. well.. do I really need to finish this sentence?

I certainly have my doubts about the idea as being proposed here - a 'self-enforcing' lane with no barriers to entry/exit - control by 'sense of shame' of cheating and police patrols. Judging by the findings of the UCBCS we're in for some heavy problems. Sadly, I dpoubt that our government will listen - seldom (make that 'never') has it the courage to change its mind in the light of major concerns or even glaring evidence that contradicts its proposals. This government of ours always goes for what I call 'headline solutions' - anything that catches the public eye, irrespective of the merits or otherwsie of the proposal.