This article lists the regions in the US most and least affected by rising gas prices, stating that determining this had much less to do with the actual gas prices, and more to do with the number of miles driven by households on average in one year. It's no surprise that spread out suburban regions were the worst. The cities and suburbs of the region suffering the most "are close enough that people don’t think twice about driving from one to the other. Yet in doing so, the average household racks up 21,800 miles per year." This is shocking compared to the region suffering the least -- the average "household uses just 481 gallons a year to go 9,800 miles."
Interestingly, "despite soaring prices, demand for gasoline has stayed strong, down just 2% from a year ago." Consumers don't seem to be immensely affected by escalating gas prices. What does that mean for the prospects of incentivizing alternatives?
http://blogs.forbes.com/christopherhelman/2011/05/10/americas-biggest-and-least-gas-guzzling-cities/
This is a great article Selin! It shows that there is a high correlation between cities that have a good public transportation system and ones that do not. New York for example, which is one of the most densely populated cities in the world, is the #1 least gas-guzzling city in the U.S. because it has a reliable public transportation system.
ReplyDeleteYes this article brings up some very interesting facts of which I was previously unaware.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Also interesting that none of the cities in the list are in the Midwest, and several are in the south!
ReplyDeleteI think until gas prices go up significantly the number of people who drive their own cars will not change. As the article said despite soaring prices, demand for gasoline has stayed strong, down only two percent from last year. In the U.S. part of achieving the American dream is being able to have a car.
ReplyDeleteMark I agree with your point about New York having a reliable public transportation system. I would like to add that the traffic congestion in New York is high enough that the benefit of using public transportation outweighs having your own motor vehicle (motorcycle, car, moped…).
Interesting article. Some nice correlations like Mark was talking about.
ReplyDeleteReally neat points about the value of good public transit. Also, I'd guess that at least partly none of these are in the Midwest for the simple reason that the Midwest was bigger and had more room to build. Boston and New York have eaten up practically all the land around them and are packed in super tight, forcing them to improve public transit. Major midwestern cities had the luxury of almost endless space to build in so they created intentionally automobile friendly cities.
ReplyDelete