The Automobile Virus
Looked at one way, automobiles are a virus. The would not exist in the form we know if there were not roads. I still have some questions about how this happened:
Why were railroads developed first? - Well, for one thing, rail roads were invented before locomotives - as an improvement over running carts on the rutted mud trails that passed for roads back then. Before this innovation, you needed pack animals to really haul cargo. (‘Teamsters’ drove the ‘team’ of animals.) And to travel swiftly, you needed a horse. Adding rails didn’t make pack animals obsolete - riding on rails reduced friction. But then, someone realized they could take advantage of machines to pull the load. And the machines they had were stationary. Suddenly it is possible to have cable cars. As with most technology, some minority desperately needed the improvement, and then once the improvement was visible, everybody else came up with new reasons to need it.
But don’t forget efficiency: A mine operator could splurge on a big honkin’ steam engine. The power needed for all the tough jobs was so great that efficiency didn’t seem to matter. The kind of engine that was small enough to fit in your cart but powerful enough to move it just didn’t exist yet. Even the locomotive was a stretch - until efficiency reached a certain point. They had to machine the parts a lot more accurately, and improve on the design a bit. Then it seemed possible. So in the march toward small efficient engines, you reach the locomotive first. Not so small or efficient, but enough power to pull a few train cars.
For a while this means that railroad demand is much greater that car-road demand. Carts are still being pulled by pack teams, and the muddy roads are good enough for hoof and wagon wheel.
Early adopters or automobile technology remind me of the computer kit builders of the 1970’s: Not a lot of infrastructure or support - just a loose network of hobbyists. Calling the Internet an “information superhighway” is really apt, because just as the early personal computers weren’t quite ready to surf the Internet, those early autos wouldn’t have fared too well on the Interstate.
My thesis - if it can be said that I actually have one: We built roads with trucking in mind, and automobiles took advantage. I always love the term ‘Motorist’. It suggests that these are people who believe in ‘Motorism’. And, that’s not so far from the truth. One of my friends has been suggesting that I read the Robert Moses biography. Perhaps it will explain Motorism to me.
In one possible scenario, rail does all the long-haul and heavy lifting. Roads are for local deliveries. With the rising price of Diesel fuel, there has been a lot more interest in this model. The railroad companies that were not run out of business may still have a future - but for me the irony is clear: The price of Diesel doesn’t have any effect on the efficiency argument. If trains can haul the same load with less fuel (must be those rails reducing the friction, huh?) then the price of the fuel is irrelevant.
But then, trucking is profligate because it can be. We must tend to value the flexibility as a fixed cost - and it matters less as those variable costs go up. I still can’t understand why cross country trucking would be so popular.
There Seems To Be, um… Something Wrong With My Lifestyle
I enjoy driving. I think I know why other people enjoy it too. But, I can’t see myself driving three-four hours a day to commute to work. Force me to do something, and suddenly it’s not so much fun anymore.
I am also fascinated by highway design and traffic control. If you get me on a roll, I’ll start laying out all sorts of neat interchanges and flyovers.
There’s just something about cruising down that highway, isn’t there? People enjoy that freedom; that individualism; that self-determination… Of course, you know it’s all an illusion, right? You can reach those speeds because we poured so much money into constructing the highway system. We shrank distances, but we’re pretty much at the end of the line. How much faster do you think we’re going to go? Rocket cars for everybody? Think it through. And, anyway, you’re probably stuck in rush-hour traffic on the Beltway.
The big obstacle is in baggage. Cars are perfect for luggage. No need for porters to get you on and off trains; No need to find storage lockers while you go do your thing in that faraway place. And you can still reach your toothbrush, because it’s not being shipped to your destination to meet up with you later.
I figure whatever future you’ve got is going to include a lot less travel. But look on the bright side: that travel will probably be more accommodating. Remember how you could take a lot more luggage on a train than you can on a plane?
Despite the “oil shocks” of the ’70s, my family drove to Ohio and back each summer when I was a kid. We lost nearly three whole days driving out of the one week we spent there. It must have been easier than flying with two kids, a pet and a vanload of luggage (yes, even for one week).
People are still going to want to go places, even if they can’t. I don’t know what we’ll do about this. We are scattered, and some times we don’t want to be scattered. We always just assumed that it would be possible to meet up. So what if that’s not true anymore? Maybe travel will become a luxury good. Maybe most of us will be scraping for tips from a wealthy few who had some reason to come to our neighborhood.
And cities are the key to survival: Not necessarily the megacities you could imagine. You’re more likely to see a pattern of small, dense settlements, not so far apart. Every city has a footprint, much larger than the foundations of its buildings. Cities are organisms that need to eat, breathe, and excrete waste, so just like the animal kingdom, enormous size comes at a cost - and with some ingenuity.
Okay, So You’re Probably Not Convinced About the Virus Thing Yet…
It is not so easy to see it - I look at city streets first: It seems like a plague of automobiles. And, as I mentioned, if you want to carry stuff with you, the subway is not convenient. Between commuters and the locals who appreciate the freedom and convenience, I assume that automobile traffic will plummet with rising fuel costs. This will leave mainly the working vehicles. Deliveries. Their jobs will be easier without all those cars in the way. (Maybe the bikes will become a real menace, though…)
The empirical evidence suggests that as we build more roads (in the misguided attempt to alleviate traffic), traffic increases. Work backwards to crappy little roads with less traffic. It doesn’t go back forever - an original reason to have the roads is for trucking. But with really high fuel prices, I think this logic will break down. New traffic will not leap in. New roads will not have to be built. This suggests automobiles were simply taking advantage of the existing infrastructure.
Why it’s hard to see is because in the intervening years, motorist advocacy drove the roadbuilding agenda. A feedback loop is created. The virus also has tools to alter the host. Use the existing machinery to it’s own advantage; Start managing the factory to produce a more parasite-friendly environment. But that won’t last forever: First there is stasis (death is a kind of stasis), then new facts may come into play. And, cheap energy is one of the things that supports our stasis. It could become really expensive to build and maintain roads. And, the short roads in town will probably survive that reality longer than the long roads out in the country.
Posted by Evan Bittner Sun, 15 Jun 2008 23:22:00 GMT
