The fundamental logic behind PRT is quite simply flawed with most advocates of the technology blind to the economic and technological limitations of it. But that doesn’t prevent it from being continually trotted out as transportation messiah.
Katie Fehrenbacher reports on the latest PRT boondoggle to go belly-up. What's different about this gadgetbahn debacle is it was killed on the drawing board by its own inventor:
The founder of Mint.com, Aaron Patzer, has been researching alternative urban transportation under a company called Swift over the past six months, but he has determined that the personal maglev system he had been envisioning is economically not viable for a company to produce. Patzer described all of his findings and development in a blog post (hat tip to Tech Crunch), including the high economics of such a transportation network.
In the end Patzer concludes what Vukan Vuchic, Michael Setty and Ihave said for years - it's just not feasible.
Patzer says he has abandoned building the project as a company. He calls the failure “fast” and “worthwhile fun” and will be looking for his next venture. He also splits his time as VP of Product Innovation at Intuit, which bought Mint two years ago for $170 million, points out Tech Crunch.
With that kind of dough, Patzer can afford to waste his time on pie-in-the-sky fantasy transport concepts, but not federal, state and local governments. MnDOT commissioner Tom Sorel is rumored to be considering wasting $1.6 million on a PRT study. Sorel should just read Patzer's analysis why PRT is a waste of time.
Not content to deep-six his own flawed concept Patzer goes on to trash Skytran In the swiftprt.com comments:
I’ve met with the SkyTran people. In my opinion it’s a sham that’s gone no where in the 15 years they’ve been advocating for it. If you look at their website, they claim things like runs on the power of two hairdryers (let’s say 3kW). Obviously they’ve never done even the basic energy calculations – you burn far more than that in aerodynamic drag at even automobile (100km/hr) speeds, even if you have a perfect drag coefficient (0.06 for a streamlined body), and a cross sectional area of less than 1m^2. They also claim capacities equivalent to 3 lanes of highway. Ridiculous to anyone who’s built a true physics based simulator (as I did with Swift).
You'd think the University of Minnesota's Center for Transportation Studies would steer clear of PRT. But, the CTS invited the pod hucksters to table at yesterday's 2011 Transportation Career Expo at the Coffman Union.
The CPRT's website announcement says they would talk to students about the "emerging PRT industry"... which of course there isn't much of what could be described as an "industry" and the flawed, absurd PRT concept has been "emerging" since there was a guy in the White House named Dwight Eisenhower... PRT is that old, I'm not kidding.
The University should also be concerned by what is clearly visible in the photo below - on the right corner of the table, a stack of maps created by disgraced former Minneapolis Councilman Dean Zimmermann:
In addition to taking bribes, Dean Zimmermann tried to convince real estate developer and government witness Gary Carlson to invest $250,000 in PRT:
A while back, I videotaped Zimmermann protesting reality-based transit and promoting Personal Rapid Transit at a transportation forum. Zimmermann gave me a tortured explanation for accepting cash from FBI witness Gary Carlson and refused to sign a waiver for the FBI tapes shown at this trial:
Members of the Citizens for Personal Rapid Transit (CPRT) also spread the nonsensical conspiracy theory that Zimmermann was framed by the FBI:
Recent news about the ongoing, worldwide pod boondoggle:
BAA has to go through a competitive tendering process, but if its selects Ultra the system could be in place at Heathrow by 2006
Richard Teychenne, ATS business development manager, said the key difference between Ultra and its competitors would be its flexibility, as it was for small groups of people
He said: "We have in this country the idea that public transport has to move people in big vehicles. But 90% of journeys are made in cars. Our system is like a network of automatic taxis or an elevator: you punch in where you want to go." The system could eventually see passengers punching in the reference code of their flight and being taken to the correct terminal. Ultra is being considered by 20 councils in the UK, including Swindon in Wiltshire, Corby in Northampton and Cardiff, as well as authorities abroad, with a possible view to delivering passengers from park-and-ride facilities directly to individual shops. Teychenne also met Greater London Authority officials this week to look at how the system could be adapted to the Olympic village
For six long years during which the pod people kept up an incessant PRT publicity barrage and yet the ULTra PRT at Heathrow is not in revenue service as predicted. What happened with the "20 councils in the UK" ? The much-hyped Daventry PRT experiment ended in fiasco when more than a hundred angry Daventry townspeople packed a meeting . They even put up a Say No To Daventry's P.R.T System Facebook page.
I recently received this response from Richard Teychenne concerning the ULTra pods at Heathrow:
I am sorry for the delay in replying I have been away for two weeks. I am not sure where the June idea came from as we have not agreed any dates with the customer BAA for the service to start. Our intention has always been to have the system ready for operations to start in the late summer of 2010. However when this actually happens is at the discretion of our customer BAA.
The current position is we are running passenger trials with a small number of real airport customers every day to allow the operators to gain familiarity with the system. This is ongoing and the system is working well.
Personally I do not expect BAA to want to make any announcements while there are ongoing negative news stories at Heathrow such as the BA and BAA industrial actions. Unfortunately this means that we have no way of knowing when they will actually allow us to officially open. It is also possible that they will not want to have a formal opening announcement because this may cause them other media issues and media management is generally their top priority. We may find that we are allowed to gradually move to full operation unannounced later this summer.
Ken, the June mention you may have picked up was a delay in the passenger trials schedule in June because we were asked to change the communications frequency the system uses to avoid any potential for interference with other airport systems. This necessitated a change in the wifi communications network setup. ULTra uses a communications network which is similar to the mobile wifi networks for mobile phones and laptops in offices. This change required our wifi supplier changing and retesting the fixed antennas on the system and the corresponding components in the vehicles. All of the work required was completed in June.
Richard Teychenne states " I am not sure where the June idea came from". That's interesting. According to a presentation by Martin Lowson (available at the ATRA website) the new launch window is in "Mid 2010":
Testing of the PRT System is continuing and, with all installation and communications challenges now resolved, we anticipate commencing passenger services in late Spring 2010." This is what I'd call a joint BAA/ATS approved statement. http://www.ultraprt.com/cms/index.php?page=latest-schedule
That link is broken. Here's a screenshot:
Well, when June arrived we got this info via a tweet from the PRT Guru that linked to his website where we found this statement:
June 2010: It appears ULTra will not meet its previously-announced June opening date at London’s Heathrow Airport. BAA has issued the following statement: "The Heathrow pod is innovative technology and we have always said that the system will be launched when it is ready to do so. The system, as well as being a world first, is bespoke [customized] to fit into existing airport infrastructure and the process of completing this is informing our decision about the launch date. Testing is continuing and we anticipate that the system will officially launch in the near future."
"The Heathrow pod is innovative technology and we have always said that the system will be launched when it is ready to do so. The system, as well as being a world first, is bespoke (custom-made) to fit into existing airport infrastructure and the process of completing this is informing our decision about the launch date. Testing is continuing and we anticipate that the system will officially launch in the near future." - BAA's schedule statement, June 2010.
Apparently there were earlier, scrubbed launches of the glorified golf carts of Heathrow according to this BBC report from 2009:
In less than two years' time, after the opening of Heathrow's Terminal 5 in March 2008, a network of 18 of these four-seater capsules will be ferrying passengers to and from a business car park to the new terminal building.
It's not surprising that the effect of these postponements of the much-hype ULTra have made public officials skeptical, even irritated at PRT promoters as explained in this video:
So, six years on (more if you count the failed attempt to bring pods to Cardiff, Wales) and the fabled ULTra pods are moving to India. Here's the news report... how many chances do these PRT guys get?
Last Thursday, I attended a presentation sponsored by the Carolina Transportation Program where Steve Raney essentially gave his sales pitch for the idea of PRT. Raney is a transportation planner and consultant with Advanced Transport Systems Inc. who is driving development opportunities for ULTra’s concept.
Its main success so far is seen at London’s Heathrow Airport where they are in the construction phase at Terminal 5. The system will connect passengers directly to the car park, but is envisioned to expand in the future connecting to other amenities like hotels. The idea has several selling points: 95% of passengers will have to wait less than 1 minute for a car; all the vehicles are battery-powered (making it green); and, the cars do not require drivers since they run on a closed system.
But, Raney didn’t focus much on the Heathrow project; instead, he spent most of his time selling the more general idea of PRT as a design solution
Yeah, like what's there to focus on?
Just another hilarious episode in a long list of flops and fiascos for the pod people - let's review the most recent:
The so-called Morgantown PRT (it's a mundane people-mover) was the subject of a student newspaper editorial after a malfunction created a "fireball" and filled a vehicle with smoke. The cost of fixing the Morgantown boondoggle is $93 million.
The proposed route for Personal Rapid Transit in Winona would include stops at Minnesota State College-Southeast Technical and Winona Health, according to the latest city proposal.
City leaders say the 1.3-mile route would serve as a showcase for PRT, a controversial transit system that uses small, pod-like vehicles on guideways to shuttle passengers to their destinations. The elevated guideway would loop through the East End near Hwy. 61, with planned stops at Southeast Tech and Winona Health and near Target and Fleet Farm.
... stop right there. Why would anyone take a pod that doesn't even have a trunk to Target and Fleet farm?
The city won't put local tax dollars toward the center and is unlikely to seek state funding, city officials said, meaning the project hinges on federal funding.
... the PRT guys can't face hearings at the legislature, so they are going for an earmark.
Winona City Council members will hear a presentation Tuesday on PRT before considering a resolution supporting a grant application seeking nearly $25 million for the project.
... another PRT dog and pony show like the one they show in city after city to ask for taxpayers' money for a project the PRT guys claim won't cost the taxpayers any money. For a preview, watch the PRT presentation in Alameda in 2008.
"The intent is for this to be a major project," said City Manager Eric Sorensen, citing the potential economic benefits of the proposal. "This would be a huge thing for us. It's a moneymaker."
City leaders envision Winona's businesses manufacturing components for the system and guideway. If the set-up serves as a prototype for PRT elsewhere, local universities and industries could be in the driver's seat to develop an emerging technology, Sorensen said.
So, it's not a transportation project, it's an economic development project (read; pork). How did PRT work out as economic development for Daventry? Not so good.
The technology will come before the Council for the first time Tuesday, with a presentation from Mike Lester of Taxi 2000, a Fridley, Minn., firm the city has been working with on the proposal.
"There's a lot of interest in this ... but everybody says, ‘We don't want to be the first one,'" he said, referring to other municipalities in the U.S. and abroad. "By being the first, it could equal a lot of jobs in Winona, a lot of jobs in Minnesota."
I hope someone makes a video of Mike Lester's presentation.
The proposal is already garnering support from the private sector. Winona's application will be accompanied by letters of support from Southeast Tech, Winona Health and Rivers Hotel Group, Sorensen said.
If submitted, Winona will learn if its funding application is approved this summer, Sorensen said. Under the terms of the grant, construction would have to begin within 18 months.
Public involvement and a systematic interdisciplinary approach are essential parts of the development process for proposed actions.
23CFR § 771.105(c)
FHWA's Public Involvement Requirements
Each State must have procedures approved by the FHWA to carry out a public involvement/public hearing program pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 128 and 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508.
State public involvement/public hearing procedures must provide for:
Coordination of public involvement activities and public hearings with the entire NEPA process.
Early and continuing opportunities during project development for the public to be involved in the identification of social, economic, and environmental impacts, as well as impacts associated with relocation of individuals, groups, or institutions. One or more public hearings or the opportunity for hearing(s) to be held by the State highway agency at a convenient time and place for any Federal-aid project which requires significant amounts of right-of-way, substantially changes the layout or functions of connecting roadways or of the facility being improved, has a substantial adverse impact on abutting property, otherwise has a significant social, economic, environmental or other effect, or for which the FHWA determines that a public hearing is in the public interest.
Reasonable notice to the public of either a public hearing or the opportunity for a public hearing. Such notice will indicate the availability of explanatory information. The notice shall also provide information required to comply with public involvement requirements of other laws, Executive Orders, and regulations.
Let's take a look at the comments to the article to get an idea what the citizens of Winona think of the pod project:
1.
easy said on: January 15, 2010, 10:04 am I agree with those who think it is a wasteful use of funds. And with the grant being 80/20, it looks like 'private sources' will have to come up with around six million. Who exactly will be contributing?
But if we just have to, must, spend the money, why that poor route? We want Winona to be a tourist destination, revitalize the downtown, and better utilize the riverfront....this WOULD bring people into town.
2.
What's the Point? said on: January 15, 2010, 10:00 am I think this thing should go from each of the campuses to all of the bars in town and have a last stop at the jail! Report Abuse Admin
3.
xfs said on: January 15, 2010, 9:24 am We will compete with Disney World's monorail! Wow! I can't wait to drive my car, find a parking space, walk to a pod, and go someplace that I don't need to go. What is wrong with buses and cars and taxis? And is fed money still not coming right out of my pocket? This brilliant city council needs to come back to earth and just fix the roads we already have.
4.
ssugarplum said on: January 15, 2010, 9:14 am So do I have this right? If I've driven to the clinic and want to take a trip to the school for... (????), I can whiz on over in the pod? Then I whiz back? Or I'm a student and like soo many I must go to the clinic during the day I again whiz on over? Is it just me or is this picture not making sense!
5.
Troller said on: January 15, 2010, 8:27 am It's not local money, it's federal money???? It'll create jobs until after construction is complete, then it's paid for by ???? So to ride to the clinic I can find parking at WSU or SETC, or do I park at the clinic and ride to WSU or SETC. A train from nowhere to nowhere. Perhaps this is just one more political misdirection project. Use the money to fix the current transportation system, not build another one to be ignored.
6.
CaptnTony said on: January 15, 2010, 8:17 am We ALREADY HAVE *personal* rapid transit! Spend the money fixing/expanding the roadways! Just another stupid reason to spend my money.
giverson said on: January 15, 2010, 7:53 am What a waste of Chinese money! I have a better idea, how about using busses? Taxpayers: don't let these criminals get away with this. Save your grandchildren.
8.
Captain Norb said on: January 15, 2010, 4:25 am Not saying this is or isn't a good use of federal stimulus money. But note that the private sector businessman pitching this is the guy that's been running those full page, star spangled ads about how the country is bankrupt and headed to hell in a handbasket.
.jpg)
