Transportation innovation has far-reaching repercussions into urban growth

photo credits: pexels.com-Tesla/pixabay.com-angry driver, Tylijura

Attaining an accurate account of modern and technologically advanced transit transportation systems is an elusive list, yet, never appears in the annals of government documents. To this, there’s an important question: why? Since transportation is the foundation to all urban growth that the government regulates, why is there no government interest in new transit system technology? The answer: vested interests in maintaining established 100- to 200-year-old modes of transportation technology to ensure the select few organizations; and their lobby presence, which orchestrates politically favored and financial dominance of those organizations. There is no governmental political interest to rid itself of the established policy circle of enrichment. This has rendered the public with no mode of transportation choice in urban growth design. There’s been no change of availability to the public’s mode of transportation; over the past 100 years.

One new transportation system technology is magnetic levitation (maglev). Maglev technology is the most efficient methodology in modern transportation. This technology is ideal for smaller vehicle transit systems technology.

Throughout the world; two companies dominate all public sector transit and train transportation. Those two companies produce no maglev technology and have no lobbying structure invested in maglev. Therefore, maglev technology is globally obscure except for a project in Japan, and with China building their fifth maglev system; where those two companies have little influence.

There is global awareness of maglev technology, the technology of Japan’s system being built is the fourth generation, quad-pole technology design, from Danby and Powell’s work based on superconductor maglev. China’s tremendous maglev growth began with the German, Transrapid technology. China is now developing and manufacturing their own technology.

Of the many attempts to bring maglev technology projects into the US and other countries; all attempts to advance the most efficient public transportation technology have been thwarted. The original task of California’s High Speed Rail Committee, formed in 1993, was to prepare a feasibility study and cost analysis between high-speed steel-wheel-on-rail and maglev. Once maglev became a consideration, it was politically eliminated as a viable technology.

What’s the process for bypassing the political juggernaut? New technology outpaces old technology in the market place, not in politics. Comparatively, record players and typewriters are now less than novel antiques. A new mode of fast, convenient and efficient transportation will gain market popularity as soon as new mode of transportation with its vehicle is invented.

Search for technology

There are several private sector companies with efficient new technology transit systems for public transit. Most of the advanced technology systems discussed are maglev.  Spread throughout the CATTCC articles on Advance Transit are names of companies working on advanced transit technology systems. The small automated vehicle parking lot circulators, amusement novelty rides, and ski-lift technology shuttle systems, are low-impact projects for isolated use, without widespread practicality, and not discussed as transportation solutions.

Although there is a transition period for the public, the dilemma to advance new technology transit is two-fold. First, a system has to be built to gain merit as advantageous for public acceptance. Secondly, although there are dozens of companies that have built new technology transit prototypes, the installation of such a systems is massively expensive and cost prohibitive for a single company to burden as a public system. To this, the government is risk adverse and will not invest to unproven transit system technology.

The article, Incremental Steps, points to the argument that the advent of autonomous cars is a tremendous advance to transportation. While this achievement is indeed remarkable, the technology belongs to the computer industry; it’s computer programing applied to the automobile. This changes nothing from the car being a car. It also has little to no effect to the unsustainability issue with automobile centric land-use design of urban growth.  

During the 1990s there was a tremendous push to implement new technology transit system designs with a technology called Personal Rapid Transit (PRT), Here is a short snippet from the article: New Transportation Technology, about the demise of PRT:

The sad story of PRT

This article in treehugger.com is an interesting history of Taxi 2000. The article has pictures of an era that provided innovative concepts that could have been a major transportation influence for the 2000s. 

What happened to PRT? Here is one of the best articles that provides information about the PRT industry; from The Verge.

To quote Adi Robertson from the article, PRT was “a public transit revolution that never was.”

Since PRT isn’t going to happen anytime soon, how about replacing streetcars with Group Rapid Transit (GRT)? There are a few transit technologies that have been around for over thirty-five years; still actively working to implement their technology. One such technology is CyberTran.

From the article, Alternative Transportation Beyond Status-quo: At the end of the PRT’s two-decade long development struggle, Hyperloop emerged. The process of its rise in interest was from a very different approach than the failed approach of the advanced transit development movement. It began with a billionaire entrepreneur releasing Hyperloop Alpha, a 58-page whitepaper describing a new era in transportation. 

In the search for viable new transportation technologies is ET3, an incredible long-distance transit system referred to as “Space travel on Earth”. 

Hyperloop

The technology of Hyperloop has been a project filled with frustration. This has been the result of investors sinking $hundreds of millions into a brand-new field of transportation they knew nothing about and continually making fatal errors due to not knowing anything about the field in which they entered.

One of the few remaining hyperloop technology systems, and currently being tested in Colorado, is Swisspod.

Cultural transformation

There is a social cry for transportation alternatives beyond 200-year-old train technology. The time has arrived for an alternative to 125-year-old automobile dependence. The only question is, when will the future of transportation become the next technological paradigm with gravity manipulated vehicles?

In the search for modern transportation technology, there’s a culture cry. It’s a demand for transportation to catch up with society’s long-promised transportation dream of flying cars and space exploration. Where are those advances? 

While today’s culture steeps in a masquerade of relevance from influencers in social media, there are still a few members of society who seek improvement to the human condition. Since transportation is the foundation to all urban growth, sustainable additions to the specific modes of transportation are essential.

Innovative normalcy

The meaning of innovation has dwindled to compromised adaptations. Having AI create an app from a website is now interpreted as innovative. This is flawed and a misconception to the intent of invention. Meanwhile, the transportation industry hires marketing personnel to claim their products are “innovative”, yet the only changes are equivalent to a different color of paint. This serves only to perpetuate the status-quo of existing modes of technology or mechanics to accumulate a constant flow of ‘quick profit return’ and add to transportation’s non-innovation. 

This website: https://maglevaero.com/ represents, in the opinion of this author, a potential in transportation of what might be referenced as the abuse of innovation. Although the technology is agreeably good, the application is from yawnsville. It’s the “revolutionary new status-quo”. Magnetic spin would be a great concept for linear motion. Applying this technology as an engine for aviation equates to an engine swap. This heeds no change to flight aeronautics. This concept is a distortion of Viktor Schauberger’s original design by ignoring the intent of his impeller. The abuse of innovation is that its application changes Schauberger’s intent of attraction motion, and continues the friction of push; propelling a device that creates aeronautic drag and resistance.

Although this type of engine design change is a more efficient use of a jet engine, the plane remains a plane. It’s the same ‘revolutionary’ change that an electric motor in a car does for a car. It’s indeed a good thing; however, the fundamental function of an automobile remains a 125-year-old technology. The fundamental mode of transportation is the same.

The terrible status-quo of unsustainable urban growth

Possibly the worse applications of status-quo in transportation, is urban growth. Since all urban growth is built upon its primary source of transportation, it’s imperative to advance transportation to keep pace with society’s technological changes.

CATTCC’s recommendation for sustainable urban growth are building sustainable transit technology systems to reach sustainable urban growth. Efficient and lower costs of new technology transit systems can provide higher density urban growth along existing transportation corridors, relieving environmental stress from population increase and disappearing agriculture land-use, preserving nature’s land-use, as well as allowing the automobile centric land-use design to function.

The current trend to building large high density apartment complexes conflicts with the automobile centric land-use design. This is destructive and dysfunctional land-use due to the over-consumption of buildings in a limited space. With its roads and parking, the automobile centric land-use design requires 70% of land for the automobile. Transit oriented land-use design is conducive to high-density vertical land-use, automobile centric land-use is not.

Society has two choices of modern transportation: automobiles or fixed-rail-type transit. High density urban growth can only be achieved with a transit-oriented land-use design and necessitates a transit mechanism. 100% of the clogged roads and traffic congestion are a direct result from government staff and officials who have zero comprehension of the simple fact that ALL urban growth is based on its primary source of transportation. Who can be held accountable for this government planning debacle which has endorsed this land-use disaster? What is the government solution for causing large scale land-use dysfunction and obliterating transportation functionality? Most metropolises intensify their land-use disasters by increasing stress to transportation dysfunction. This irresponsible maleficence is either selective ignorance, stupidity, or belligerent and deliberate contempt of incompetence.

To know and identify the cause of such a large-scale disaster, is alarming, however, publicly announcing such a catastrophe is inviting an unwanted assault from governmental officials.

Who can speak and address this horrible transportation dysfunction? It isn’t just bad planning, it’s a disaster, a dereliction of job duty, ignorant maleficence, and totally irresponsible to the public. Some argue that the only way to reduce traffic load is for 20 or 50 lane freeways. YES, exactly. Stop the automobile centric growth dysfunction; or build transit systems that accommodate high density land-use.

To any argument which does not place the direct responsibility of horrid traffic congestion in the lap of the government, is a fabrication.

In the conversation of subsidizing public or private transportation, a serious question arises. Regarding the rational that supports public new technology transit systems, why does the government pay to build roads and support the products of automobile manufacturers and oil companies? 

Traffic related stress is a real issue. How long will the government ignore the problem it created? Their “solutions” are intensifying the problem. Someone has to point out the solution to the problem. This identification of the issue is a beginning point.