Ethical Argument

This post will examine the value systems surrounding the environmental ethical dilemma of different modes of transport in the city including my own personal experiences with cars, buses, bicycles, and walking.

It is evident that private cars pose an environmental problem in the city. Not only does a multiplicity of private cars cause congestion and pollution, but there are environmental problems associated with highway and road infrastructure, parking, safety, and petroleum production, refinement, acquisition etc. Even though most people are aware of the obvious problems that cars pose to the environment many continue to drive alone. In addition, these commutes are not usually enjoyable. Have you ever heard of a person who relishes long commutes, sitting in traffic jams, avoiding accidents, or the stop and go of city driving? In Philadelphia the average commute is approximately 30 minutes according to a 2005 U.S. Census Bureau Press Release. Yet, people continue to drive individually, clogging the roadways with their cars. Let us look at the value systems behind driving, and the alternatives (specifically buses, biking, and walking).













Values
Driving Alone
The value systems that people draw on for driving alone are, in my opinion, usually more individual-oriented than community-oriented. These individual values consist of freedom, self-reliance, control, privilege, comfort, convenience, and sometimes ego.

Walking, Biking, Bus Riding
The value systems that people draw on for alternative modes of transportation can be multi-fold: either they don’t have the money or the desire to own and maintain a car, or they have an orientation that is more community-oriented or environmentally friendly. I think that people ride public transit because it can be cheaper (which is debatable, especially here in Philadelphia); they are not able to drive due to age (too young or too old) or physical or mental or language restrictions; they are actively trying to reduce pollution, parking, etc. for environmental or other ethical reasons (such as peace); they do not want to deal with driving for safety, weather, or parking reasons; they had one too many drinks at the bar; they want to get their exercise; or they just enjoy riding buses, trains, and bikes, or walking.

Bicycling is still considered one of the most efficient modes of transportation for short distance travel. Transportation Alternatives, a group dedicated to transforming the transportation system in NYC has an article about the cost-benefit arguments of bicycles and individual cars. If you check out the main page of their site, you will also see their Green Transportation Hierarchy. According to this hierarchy, walking and bicycling are the “greenest” modes of transport, followed by mass transit, and bottoming out with individual cars. The Bicycle Coalition of the Delaware Valley presented an action plan to Mayor John Street in 2000 to attempt to get Philadelphia on the right track to increasing bicycle ridership across the region. See the full proposal. This information would be helpful to anyone who wants to increase bicycle prevalence and safety in Philadelphia.

My Experience
Walking and Biking
One of the major pluses for me is that while biking and walking, I am in touch with what is around me. I interact with people and with my environment to a greater degree. The slower my means of transit, the more I notice intricacies, and connect with what is around me.

However, I am caught in the middle of this ethical dilemma. Although biking is my preferred means of transport, I live in the city and have class 5 nights per week in Ambler, Pa. In addition, my sister lives in Plymouth Meeting, Pa. Unfortunately, I am not able to bike that distance. Jaime Lerner would recommend that I live closer to where I work (or in this case, go to school), but life’s circumstances are not always so cut and dry, especially in a society that plans everything around the individual car as the epicenter of life. There are other challenges associated with biking as well. My options are quickly narrowed down to public transit, the Temple shuttle, or driving.

Shuttle Bus
Temple offers “free” shuttle bus service to its HSC, Tyler, and Ambler campuses, included in the cost of tuition. These buses run approximately every hour (with some discrepancies) throughout the day. This seems like a good option to my ethical dilemma of driving to Ambler for classes. Mass transit is more economical and environmental than driving. My problems with the bus are as follows:

Unlike others who are able to study on the hour long ride to Ambler, I am afflicted with a terrible case of motion sickness. You name it, if it moves, it probably makes me nauseous... boat, bus, plane, train, subway, truck, or car backseat. I am the one who sits in the front of the bus, meditating on a horizon focal point at all times. Despite this problem (I've been this way ever since I can remember, a trait I inherited from my father) I do make every attempt to ride the shuttle as much as I can possibly bear. This feat is made easier if certain bus drivers are not at the wheel… The ones that like to crank the heat up to desert-like conditions, slam on the brakes at the very last second or pulse-accelerate.

In addition to my motion sickness, I have Chronic Lateness Syndrome. True, CLS is a self-diagnosis, and no medical practitioner would probably agree to label it as such. However, ever since I was 10 days late for my own due date to make my appearance into the world, I have never seemed to catch up. I cannot seem to consistently be on time for anything. This is a problem when the shuttle and most other forms of public transport run on strict schedules. If I miss my schedule, I end up being more than an hour late for classes in Ambler. In Curitiba, Brasil buses run at much greater frequency (as often as one minute per stop). In his talk… Jaime Lerner says that public transit should follow these 3 principles: frequency, reliability, and ease of use.

This photo of a Hummer parked in the city streets is an example of egotistical reasoning for driving a car. It is clearly not necessary to drive a military vehicle that gets 8-9 miles to the gallon around in the streets of Philadelphia unless you are hoping for attention. I realize in saying this, that my value set is blatantly transparent. I will own my bias and say that I think that anyone who drives a Hummer is nothing less than selfish and egotistical, or perhaps, just ignorant. Some could say the same about me for driving an individual car, and I would probably concede.

Driving
Additional reasons I would rather drive than ride the shuttle are that I am moderately comfortable (not stuck in a vinyl seat that was designed with a second grader in mind, bordered by a dirty window, a wheel hump underfoot, a cage skyward, and another adult just as large as I squished in next to me), I can eat or drink almost anything I want, I can listen to my choice of radio (or none at all, which is a respite compared to the acid jazz on the bus), I don’t have to worry about having tokens or exact change, transfers, or figuring out the system (which may be considered laziness), and the number one reason is that I can control the ventilation and heating system. These may seem like ridiculous reasons, but they are probably similar to the reasons others drive their cars alone.

I know that I just made it sound like I would rather drive than ride the shuttle any day. However, that is not the slant I want to convey. The reality is that I don’t really like driving either, but I don’t want to gloss over the fact that sometimes I do drive. And every time I drive, even though my car is a compact diesel (for which I am actively searching out biodiesel suppliers in the area), I feel utterly guilty. I am aware of the Green Transportation Hierarchy. This is the environmental ethical dilemma I am faced with every day.

Photos by Bri Crowley 2006.