public transportation vs drive a car

Public Transportation vs. Drive a Car.
Name:
Institution:
Date:
Public Transportation vs. Drive a Car.
We cannot run away from the reality that we all need to use cars, buses or trains at some point to move from one point to another. Recently, there have been calls by some stakeholders for people to abandon the use of personal cars and instead use public means. However, such calls have resulted in minimal fruits considering that people decide to use public means or a private car due to many factors. Such factors include the cost involved, convenience, effects on the environment, duration on the roads and much more. Therefore, we need to delve into some of these factors to determine which option may be the best.
According to Cakebread (2012), the cost comes at the top of the list. The researcher compares the cost of using rented or personal car to the cost of using public transportation in the city of Toronto. If one opts for the public transit, it will cost him or her approximately $120 per month under the monthly Metropass option. Under this option, a passenger gets unlimited access to the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) services for a whole month. This implies that under this option a passenger will spend a total of about $1440 in a year. For those who commute for longer distances, it is estimated to cost them $3300 a year. On the other hand, the researcher argues that it may cost up to $10,000 to use a private car. The cost includes depreciation cost that is based on the purchase price of the car.

Insurance cost is also a must for car owners and is based on the car model and region where the insurance is taken. Cars also require registration, gasoline, and regular maintenance. In this regard, Cakebread advises those who are looking for cheaper means of transport to consider using public transit as it will help them cut on costs. The researcher further notes that due to the large capacity of buses and trains they save on energy thus the low cost associated with public transportation. The researcher further says this is why buses are common in universities and large corporations hence the same should be replicated in big cities.
The other factor that affects the choice of the mode of transport is the level of comfort. A survey carried out by some scholars regarding this factor established that people prefer to use private cars. The participants of the study said that cars offer more comfort when compared to public transport means. A car offers a beautiful and cool interior that cannot be compared to buses or trains. Comfort also comes from controlling personal space in the car, turning on the radio when one pleases, sleeping in the car when tired and much more. It also means that individuals can enjoy a snack or make a phone call in the car without thinking that someone will judge them unlike in a bus or train. Cars owners also have the luxury of deciding when to leave a certain place, which roads to use, and their desired destination. For those who prefer comfort above everything else then use a personal car is the best option (Gardner & Abraham, 2007).
The effect on the environment also affects the choice of mode of transport. Many scholars argue that public transportation means are environmentally conducive. This is because when people decide to use public transportation, their contribution to the carbon emissions reduces and at the same time they conserve energy by not traveling in personal cars. Environmentalists say that a person traveling alone in his/her car and covers a distance of 20 miles has the potential of emitting close to 5,000 pounds of carbon to the environment annually. If this person opts for public means, he/she will save the environment from 10% of harmful gasses emitted by cars by a household annually. Unfortunately, the increased number of private cars has seen carbon emissions increase. However, environmental activists believe that public transportation offers a solution to this challenge by reducing the CO2 emissions while at the same time allowing people to commute. Equally, environmental activists say that use of cars causes congestion which leads to environmental degradation and low fuel efficiency. They say that public means of transport will ease congestion in towns and cities thus saving the environment and achieve high fuel efficiency (O’Toole, 2008).
Other studies have also linked accessibility to the choice of means of transport. According to a recent survey, it was established that close to 30% of private car users were forced to use their vehicles because they did not have access to public transportation. However, the researchers go ahead to say that when accessibility is obtained it may not be reflected in the change of the choice of mode of transport. Statistics also revealed that close to 20% of public transport users are not influenced by their accessibility to public transportation. Another significant percentage said that they opted for public transportation because they find it difficult to access parking when they use their cars. Similar surveys also established that access to public transport either from the workplace or residence is related to the low use of private cars. In this regard, the higher the level of accessibility to a bus stop, ferry or train, the lower the level of use of private vehicles. The researchers note that significant steps have to be taken to increase the use of public transportation. For instance, they suggest high-density development as a household will have better access to public transportation (Gärling & Schuitema, 2007).
According to Beirão & Cabral (2007), the trip purpose and time of day affect the choice of means of transport. They argue that private cars are mostly preferred for work-related trips at 90 percent. On the other hand, public transportation is highly preferred for commute and educational trips at 20% and 27% respectively. However, the purpose of the trip as a determinant of choice of mode of transport is also affected by factors such as cost and characteristics of the trip. Regarding time of the day, the scholars argue that private vehicles remain the most preferred mode throughout the day. Public transportation is, however, popular in morning and late hours especially due to huge traffic which may lead to more travel time and high costs for car owners thus opting for public means. Car use increases during the day when there is less congestion on the roads and motorists expect to use less time to arrive at their destinations. However, the rate at which households substitute public transport with private cars is not significant because households don’t consider congestion or travel time as a major issue.
Researchers have also found that the socio-demographic composition of households affects the choice of means of transport. According to Collins & Chambers (2005), people who are below eleven years and those between 30 and 60 years use cars more. These people are usually the working class and couples who have school going children. Equally, households that have high-income sources are likely to use private vehicles as opposed to public transportation. This implies that those who mostly use public transportation are aged between 11 and 20 years, a majority of students and those households that do not own cars. According to Nordlund & Garvill (2003), there is more than meets the eye regarding this trend whereby more young people are using public transport more rather than private vehicles. They say that young people now prefer to stay in neighborhoods where they can access public transportation or cycle to school, to work or even go for shopping. They attribute changes in technology as one of the causes of this change in attitude. Increased conscious awareness for a safer environment has also seen many youths deliberately use public transportation.
Additionally, scholars point out that advancements in technology have made public transportation attractive to the young generation. Applications like car-sharing and bike-sharing are revolutionizing the way people perceive transport across the world. Public transportation is now more adaptable to the lifestyle of many youths who would like to connect to each other unlike while driving a car. What is more, while in a bus or train youths can text, work on their computers something which is not possible while driving because in most states it is illegal to do so. Equally, recent changes in laws that make the process of obtaining a driver’s license for young people difficult have barred many young people from driving on the roads forcing them to use public transportation (Bamberg, Hunecke & Blöbaum, 2007)
According to Heath & Gifford (2002), health implications also influence the choice made by a household regarding public transportation and driving a car. It is widely acknowledged that minimal physical engagement may lead to diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, cardiovascular disease and osteoporosis. Biking and walking as a means of transport are considered some of the ways to gain physical fitness. For this reason, individuals may choose public transportation since most transit trips involve some cycling or walking thereby increasing physical engagement. Some experts argue that those who use public transportation are up to four times physically active when compared to those who travel in private cars. Other scholars have also established that some public transportation systems such as light-rail enhance physical activity reducing chances of obesity and other lifestyle diseases. In the US, transit users are said to engage in approximately 30 minutes of physical activity daily as opposed to 8 minutes by those who use private vehicles. Therefore those who want to avoid a sedentary life will ultimately choose public transit over personal cars.
In summary, there are many factors that affect peoples’ choice between public transportation and the use of private cars. Such factors include demographic factors, accessibility of the transit system, environmental factors, comfort, convenience and much more. The use of public transportation may also be influenced by the cost element. In a majority of cities such as Toronto, public transportation is much affordable when compared to the use of personal cars. The use of public transportation is equally said to be environmentally friendly. There is also the rise in conscious awareness among the youth to conserve the environment coupled with the changes in lifestyle and legislations. All these factors continue to affect the choice of mode of transport, but the choice ultimately remains in the hands of individuals and households.
References
Bamberg, S., Hunecke, M., & Blöbaum, A. (2007). Social context, personal norms and the use of public transportation: Two field studies. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(3), 190-203.
Beirão, G., & Cabral, J. S. (2007). Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: A qualitative study. Transport Policy, 14(6), 478-489.
Cakebread, C. (2012, October 27). Which costs more: driving an old car or taking public transit? – Chatelaine. Retrieved from http://www.chatelaine.com/living/budgeting/which-costs-more-driving-an-old-car-or-taking-public-transit/Collins, C. M., & Chambers, S. M. (2005). Psychological and situational influences on commuter-transport-mode choice. Environment and behavior, 37(5), 640-661.
Gardner, B., & Abraham, C. (2007). What drives car use? A grounded theory analysis of commuters’ reasons for driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 10(3), 187-200.
Gärling, T., & Schuitema, G. (2007). Travel demand management targeting reduced private car use: effectiveness, public acceptability, and political feasibility. Journal of Social Issues, 63(1), 139-153.
Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2002). Extending the theory of planned behavior: Predicting the use of public transportation1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(10), 2154-2189.
Nordlund, A. M., & Garvill, J. (2003). Effects of values, problem awareness, and personal norm on willingness to reduce personal car use. Journal of environmental psychology, 23(4), 339-347.
O’Toole, R. (2008). Does Rail Transit Save Energy or Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions?. Cato Policy Analysis, (615).