This site uses cookies to deliver our services. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our cookie policy Cookie Policy
Got It

Sustainable Mobility!

Open For Submission
Showing 1 - 5 of 5

Most Recent

The NEAC (Connected Autonomous Electric Nautical Shuttle) project is an autonomous maritime or river transport solution.

The desired objective will make it possible to offer a Mobility service (MaaS) for residents, tourists and river and maritime logistics through shuttles traveling on water in a non-polluting, autonomous and economical manner.

In addition to the regulatory constraints and the adoption of the concept of an autonomous and connected ferry, it will be necessary to demonstrate the functioning of the algorithmic solutions resulting from the theory of control, observation and signal and image processing in order to determine, in real time, the exact position of the boat, to take cognizance of its close environment (obstacle, mooring point on the quay, etc.), to study the ability to quickly redefine its trajectory and its mission, to control the position of the boat around the set path despite disturbances tending to move it away from it.
This project, based on a study of travel needs and a search for cost reduction to offer the market an innovative and efficient transport offer, will aim to demonstrate that an electric and automated river mobility solution can be an alternative to construction heavy infrastructure, while providing resilient transportation opportunities in an environment subject to climatic and maritime variations.

The first objective of NEAC is to design, develop and test an autonomous electric river shuttle (with hybrid hydrogen propulsion) allowing the transport of 8 to 12 people from one bank to the other of the Caen Canal.

Secondly, the operation of several shuttles in swarms will be studied to simulate “trains” of shuttles that may be necessary at certain times (transport of people or freight).

The third objective is to be able to propose to the city of Paris some nautical shuttle built and tested at a industrial level in the occasion of the Olympic Games in 2024.
4.8 4 Votes
​While flying cars may sound as if they belong to science fiction, technology seems to have brought them closer to reality—potentially helping to create a faster, cheaper, cleaner, safer, and more integrated transportation system.

“Mark my words. A combination of airplane and motorcar is coming. You may smile. But it will come.”— Henry Ford, 1940

A century ago, aviation pioneer Glenn Curtiss debuted the Autoplane, a three-seat car-cum-aircraft with removable wings.2 Ever since, automobile and aviation enthusiasts have been dreaming of “flying cars.” Flying can replace driving in cities around the globe, saving people's time as trips that take hours on the ground can be reduced to minutes in the air, improving productivity and quality of life. After decades of failed projects and false starts, we may now be on the threshold of this vision becoming a practical reality.

This new class of vehicles is emerging in the midst of an already dramatic transformation in the way people and goods move around. Driven by a series of technological and social trends, from ridesharing and bikesharing to electric and autonomous vehicles and beyond, the future of mobility could ultimately create a more integrated transportation system that is faster, cheaper, cleaner, and safer than today’s.3 Even as players across a host of industries come to grips with these changes to terrestrial mobility, advances in flying cars could add, literally, an entirely new dimension to an already complex landscape.

Even as players across a host of industries come to grips with these changes to terrestrial mobility, advances in flying cars could add, literally, an entirely new dimension to an already complex landscape.

While we are early in this journey, market segments seem to be forming, some early entrants are experimenting, regulations are being formulated, and technology is developing. This study looks at the emerging market for personal mobility, exploring both the current state of the technology—including the rapid advances made in recent years—as well as the many hurdles that remain before flying cars become widely adopted. It also examines important questions related to the regulatory framework and supporting infrastructure. Finally, the study explores how widespread use of passenger drones could reshape urban mobility, and suggests some key steps players in aerospace and other industries can do now to prepare for this exciting possibility, as well as what disruptions to possibly expect.

This study’s findings are based on both primary and secondary research. As part of our research, we interviewed subject matter experts and senior executives at leading aerospace and automotive companies as well as start-ups that are involved in the development of passenger drones and flying cars.

Passenger drones and flying cars are nearing commercial availability The technology and product development of passenger drones and traditional flying cars seem to be swiftly progressing. These vehicle concepts have been under development since the 1980s, and various prototypes already exist, with the majority capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL). A VTOL vehicle is an aircraft that takes off, hovers, and lands vertically and does not require runways. For this study, our definition of VTOL excludes any type of helicopter. While traditional helicopters have had this capability since their inception, most are considered highly energy inefficient, seeming to prevent large-scale operations. Many companies today are instead focusing on electric or hybrid-electric designs with VTOL capabilities. These vehicles, popularly called flying cars or passenger drones, are designed to accommodate around two to five passengers or the equivalent cargo weight; be highly energy efficient, with reduced or zero emissions; and be substantially quieter than a traditional helicopter. Several categories exist under the broad group of these proposed urban mobility vehicles, each with distinct characteristics and potential uses:
  • Passenger drones: A passenger drone is expected to be an electric or hybrid-electric quadcopter (although some may have more than four rotors) that can be used to move people or cargo between both established and on-demand origination and destination points. These vehicles can be either manually piloted, remotely piloted, or fully autonomous. When piloted, the pilots require a license or certification. Passenger drones would cover short to medium-range distances (up to 65 miles).
  • Traditional flying cars: A traditional flying car would be a vehicle where the driver/pilot can drive the vehicle in its car configuration to an airport, reconfigure the vehicle to an airplane mode, and then fly to a destination airport. It is designed to carry people and fly medium to long distances (50 to 200 miles). Currently, it would need to be operated by a licensed pilot, but it could be made fully autonomous and pilotless/driverless over time. In the near future, flying cars are likely to become VTOL capable.
  • Revolutionary vehicles: Revolutionary vehicles, which are expected to be a combination of passenger drone and traditional flying car, would be fully autonomous vehicles that can start or stop anywhere, with speed and range (distances greater than 200 miles) beyond passenger drones and the traditional flying cars. These vehicles have advanced VTOL capability and therefore can land and take off from almost anywhere because they may not require an established airport/vertiport. These would likely be piloted by a licensed pilot initially, but they could be made fully autonomous over time.
Figure 1 lists and compares some of the major flying car and passenger drone manufacturers and their proposed vehicles.

With the increasing popularity of small unmanned aerial vehicles or drones, and regulations increasingly supporting their commercial use, passenger drones and flying cars appear to be moving closer to reality, with aerospace and aircraft design technology being developed rapidly. Many passenger drone and flying car manufacturers have already passed the conceptualization/design phase, and a majority of them are currently in the prototyping and testing stage, with most manufacturers expecting delivery by 2020 (figure 2).

In terms of technology, the industry is at an advanced development phase, and if safety and regulatory hurdles are cleared, passenger drones are expected to get wings by 2018–2020, and traditional flying cars by 2020–2022, while revolutionary vehicles could be a reality only by 2025.

If safety and regulatory hurdles are cleared, passenger drones are expected to get wings by 2018–2020, and traditional flying cars by 2020–2022, while revolutionary vehicles could be a reality only by 2025.

What’s currently in the air?
China’s Ehang has already tested its self-flying passenger drone, named 184, which was showcased at the Consumer Electronics Show in 2016. This quadcopter has already been tested in Dubai, where it is expected to be operational as early as 2018, according to the company. However, Ehang still needs to obtain an aviation license.Aurora Flight Sciences, acquired by Boeing in October 2017, unveiled the eVTOL, with the prototype tested in the beginning of 2017. The company also announced a partnership with Uber, which is working on on-demand flying cars. Aurora aims to deliver 50 aircraft to UberAir by 2020.The final commercial design of Flying Car by AeroMobil was revealed in April 2017. The vehicle is designed to be both driven and flown, unlike those of other companies, which are mostly manufacturing VTOL aircraft. AeroMobil has started taking pre-orders, with deliveries anticipated to commence in 2020.Airbus’s Project Vahana, an electric autonomous helicopter, and CityAirbus, an air taxi, are also in the advanced development stage. Project Vahana is designed for both passenger and cargo transport, and Airbus plans to conduct flight tests of the prototype by the end of 2017. CityAirbus is a design for an air taxi, with multiple propellers and the appearance of a small drone. Customers would be able to book a seat on CityAirbus as they book an Uber ride.Volvo’s parent company, Geely, acquired a flying car start-up, Terrafugia, in November 2017. Terrafugia’s first flying car, Transition, is in its testing phase, with deliveries anticipated in 2019. The company is also working on a VTOL flying car, which is expected to debut in 2023. There are numerous potential applications for these new forms of urban mobility vehicles (table 1). For many of these, the airborne trip could be just one leg of a multimodal journey and potentially accessed via a single, integrated mobility-as-a-service interface. For example, a traveler could be picked up by a ride-hailing car from her home in the suburbs, driven to a nearby “vertiport,” and flown to another vertiport at the city’s edge, before taking the subway to her destination.

Challenges to taking flight Despite the technological progress and many potential applications for these aircraft, there are various challenges to consider with respect to regulations, certifications, infrastructure, and air traffic management (figure 3). While possibly daunting, none of these challenges are insurmountable, and the aerospace and related industries have navigated similarly complex challenges before—not least of which is the development and deployment of commercial airplanes. The key could be close collaboration between regulators and private sector stakeholders across the extended mobility ecosystem.
From a regulation perspective, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), its equivalent agencies around the world, and other transportation-related regulatory agencies have to weigh in on the requirements for these piloted and autonomous passenger drones: Is a pilot’s license required? What airspace can they occupy? What are the vehicle airworthiness8 requirements? There is some progress as the FAA has already started discussing certification options with some manufacturers and believes that initially these vehicles should be manned, then autonomously assisted, and then converted to a fully autonomous aircraft at a later stage.9 While regulations related to piloted passenger drones and flying cars could be relatively easy to address, fully autonomous VTOL operations are likely to be more challenging, with issues around how to allocate the use of the airspace (lower altitudes to higher altitudes) considering the exponential growth in piloted and autonomous vehicles utilizing the airspace. Beyond the FAA, the US Department of Transportation and other agencies will likely have to consider autonomous cars; for now, regulatory agencies would need to focus on issuing nonbinding guidelines while avoiding binding regulation as the technology is still in flux. Currently, national and local regulatory authorities are addressing regulations related to smaller drones. For example, in the United States, the FAA is considering extending commercial operations of drones over controlled airspace beyond visual line of sight.10 These advancements could be a starting point for regulations related to passenger drones and flying cars, and, ultimately, for revolutionary vehicles.

Technology maturity
In terms of technology, there are various considerations for VTOL manufacturers. First, in a GPS-denied environment, these vehicles would need on-board sensors such as radar, optics, and geolocation sensors. While these technologies exist and are being utilized in autonomous cars, they would have to be improved to provide the longer-range sensing and recognition capabilities required to deal with the multidirectional and convergence speeds associated with autonomous flight. Second, these vehicles would require advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence and cognitive systems, to enable advanced detect-and-avoid capabilities. Machine learning could be essential as operations move from piloted to autonomous: A vehicle would need to learn from the pilot’s actions over thousands of operational hours to become fully autonomous over time. Third, energy management is crucial: carrying an energy load sufficient to transport passengers or cargo, maintain a safety margin, and reload for the next flight. While battery technology is rapidly improving, in order to increase passenger and cargo capacity and extend the ranges of passenger drones, it will need to improve further, or alternatives would need to be found.

Infrastructure constraints include proper takeoff and landing zones, and parking and battery charging stations. A wide network of vertiports would require either new infrastructure or existing infrastructure, such as helipads, rooftops of large public buildings, and unused land, to be modified. To create a truly unified traffic management system, additional infrastructure may need to be installed along predefined flight corridors to aid high-speed data communications and geolocation. All these infrastructure changes would require the collaboration of commercial stakeholders and the local urban planning authorities.

Air traffic management
There would have to be a robust air traffic management system in place to guarantee safe and efficient operations of passenger drones and flying cars, which would meet the requirements of the FAA and the European Aviation Safety Agency. To achieve this, industry leaders and manufacturers would likely need to reach an agreement on a reliable traffic management framework that integrates with other modes of transport, especially in urban areas. In the United States, there is already progress, with Uber and NASA recently signing a Space Act Agreement for traffic management of autonomous vehicles that will fly at a low altitude.11

For the scaled adoption of passenger drones and flying cars (particularly fully autonomous) to occur, the operators of these vehicles would likely need to demonstrate a near-flawless safety record, covering both mechanical integrity as well as safe operations. As we have seen with autonomous cars, any mishap can garner significant attention and can slow the pace of adoption.12 While achieving mechanical integrity would be easier, the operations of VTOL in suburban and urban areas could pose unique challenges—some of which are described in the aforementioned infrastructure section.

Psychological barriers
Apart from other considerations, people also need to overcome any psychological barriers they may have associated with the idea of flying in a pilotless aircraft, since these vehicles are likely to be autonomous eventually. According to a recent survey by UBS, a Swiss global financial services company, 54 percent of the respondents said they were unlikely to take a pilotless flight.13 Furthermore, for passenger drones and flying cars to be widely accepted, they would likely have to be both ubiquitous and as versatile as an automobile—people should be able to fly the vehicle to a store or take it to the beach, and it should be able to cover longer distances safely. Psychological barriers can be overcome if manufacturers and regulatory authorities ensure these vehicles are as safe as an aircraft, and the vehicles have well-documented safety records.

For passenger drones and flying cars to be widely accepted, they would likely have to be both ubiquitous and as versatile as an automobile—people should be able to fly the vehicle to a store or take it to the beach, and it should be able to cover longer distances safely.

Delivery drones could pave the way for VTOL aircraft operations
In 2013, Amazon hosted a 60-minute demonstration of its ambitious drone delivery program, Amazon Prime Air. Four years later, the program is yet to take off on a commercial scale. However, a drone delivering anything from your online shopping packages to medicines or even food may not be such a far-fetched idea. Several other companies such as Google and Alibaba have since launched their own R&D programs to make this a reality.Over the past year, there have been various pilot programs featuring drones completing a successful delivery. In June 2017, Amazon patented a beehive-structured tower to serve as a multilevel fulfillment center from which its delivery drones can take off and land. Most of the drones for such programs are designed to take off and land vertically to transport even fragile goods with care, with a payload capacity of anywhere from 4 to 19 pounds.However, there seem to be two key challenges slowing these drones from becoming a commercial reality. First, electric motor efficiency and battery capacity still need significant improvement, as the delivery radius of current technologies is only 10 miles from the warehouse. Since a company can have only a limited number of warehouses, it appears that drone delivery, even if it becomes a reality, for now may be limited to shorter distances—although companies such as Amazon and UPS have started using delivery trucks to serve as mobile warehouses, from where drones can be launched. UPS has already tested launching a drone from a delivery truck to distribute a package to the destination.Second, the FAA in the United States and similar government bodies in other countries currently restrict drone usage due to a requirement for line-of-sight control, which means that a drone operator must be able to see (if not control) the drone first-hand throughout an entire flight. This safety requirement is focused on trying to avoid possible collisions with airplanes, power lines, and people and property on the ground. While such regulations are expected to be eventually lifted, the governments of some countries, such as China, have approved such drones.As package delivery drones make their way to commercialization, passenger drones are expected to follow a similar development path.
0 0 Votes
A sleek prototype of a high-speed train unveiled recently in China is designed to carry passengers at a speed of 600 kilometers per hour, or 370 mph. That’s more than 150 mph faster than the world's fastest passenger trains now in regular intercity service, which touch 217 mph on runs between Beijing and Shanghai.
The new train, under development by the state-owned China Railway Rolling Stock Corporation (CRCC), is designed not to run on rails but to float above the track using a technology known as magnetic levitation, or maglev.
Given the train’s tremendous speed, a trip by train could be even faster than traveling by air under certain circumstances, Ding Sansan, the head of the team developing the new train, told the Chinese newspaper Qingdao Daily. He said a trip from Beijing to Shanghai that might take four and a half hours by plane could be completed in about three and a half hours by the new maglev train.
Some media outlets reported that the train would begin service in 2021, but the company didn’t give an exact date — and rail experts say years of testing will be required before the train is ready to carry passengers.

“The Chinese maglev is very much a research project at this stage,” Chris Jackson, editor-in-chief of London-based Railway Gazette International, said. “There are no firm plans to develop a commercial route.”
Maglev train technology has been in development for decades. It uses powerful electromagnets to levitate train cars just above the track and provide forward propulsion, eliminating the friction from the metal wheels used by conventional trains.
In addition to being faster than conventional trains, maglev trains produce less noise and vibration, a boon for people living or working near the tracks, as well as for passengers and crew aboard the trains. Maglev trains also have fewer parts and thus promise greater reliability.
The new Chinese train won’t be the world’s first maglev train. Since 2002, a maglev demonstration train has been carrying passengers at speeds of up to 267 miles per hour on 19-mile runs between the outskirts of Shanghai and the city’s main international airport.

Japan is working on a maglev train that could begin service between Tokyo and Nagoya in 2027, carrying passengers at about 370 mph — the same speed projected for China’s new train.
A 300-mph maglev train has been proposed between Washington, D.C., and Baltimore, but Larry Blow, a maglev consultant in Arlington, Virginia, said the high cost of building it — estimated at $10 billion to $12 billion — is likely to scuttle that project.
But Blow said maglev trains could still find a place in the United States for urban transit systems, over short distances and at moderate speeds — perhaps around 60 mph. "That would be the much more popular application, if only for cost reasons," he said. The fastest passenger train currently in regular intercity service in the United States is Amtrak’s Acela Express, which reaches a top speed of 150 mph on runs between Boston and Washington, D.C. — but only for 34 miles of the 450-mile route.
0 0 Votes
The term “smart city” has gained in popularity, but the label still conjures the use the technologies to solve operational problems. Rather, cities are complex and need intelligent, transformative and engaged efforts.

Sustainable development goals such as in health, housing, education, energy, hunger and happiness have always been urban issues. The 1994 European Cities and Town Charter on Sustainability says it well:
“in the course of history, our towns have existed within and outlasted empires, nation states, and regimes and have survived as centres of social life, carriers of our economies, and guardians of culture, heritage and tradition… Towns have been the centres of industry, craft, trade, education and government… sustainable human life on this globe cannot be achieved without sustainable local communities.”

Yet power and revenue distribution make it difficult for communities to solve their own problems. The OECD Revenue Statistics show that Canadian municipalities generally receive 9.2 per cent of tax dollars.
Aside from revenue distribution, eliminating silos in favour of a collaborative governance model with shared responsibility would help. For example, the question of waste requires action on several fronts — more citizens, businesses and organizations involved in designing and implementing a holistic ecosystem.

Smart city development incentives
The challenge for policy makers and governments is how to stimulate the development of intelligent collaborative planning processes given digitalization, the fast pace of technological change, global warming and accelerating sustainable development needs on one hand, and the reticence to organizational change and change in our individual lives in the other.
There are questions on the value of top-down or bottom-up approaches. China and Europe have different systems — one is top down and the other bottom up — yet are achieving, collaborating and learning from one another.

There are questions around focused or flexible approaches. The United States issued a smart city challenge with a focus on mobility while Canada’s approach to smart city development invited communities to choose their challenge and its solutions.
A key theme for cities these days is the importance of collaboration and partnerships outside its own borders. In a chapter of the forthcoming book, Innovative Solutions for Creating Sustainable Cities, Sylviane Toporkoff and Gérald Santucci point out that at the turn of the 21st century, the pendulum swung more visibly from competitive cities to cooperative cities, particularly in Europe.

The phenomenon started with the European Union Fourth Framework Programme, to accelerate innovation and growth. It was followed by a number of collaborative initiatives including Eurocities and the Major Cities of Europe. This reflected the recognition that cities had individual problems and different ways to solve them, but still needed to collaborate, co-create and share rather than only compete. Differentiation and competition have their place, but so do equity and efficiency.
Canadian experience

The Canadian Smart Cities Challenge, announced in 2017, invited demonstrations of approaches that used data and networked technologies. Participating communities were asked to engage with their citizens to propose solutions for a significant local or regional challenge. Communities across Canada held hundreds of consultations with their citizens and reported on the value of the exercise. Partnerships and collaborations were encouraged and all applicants had internal stakeholders prepared to contribute. Interestingly, a handful chose to create a network of several communities to address common problems.
As a special advisor to the Smart City program and an academic, I reflected on and classified the 130 eligible applications into three streams:

Forty one per cent related to improving citizen well-being through health (physical, emotional), increased community engagement and safety. The use of mobile applications to disseminate information, monitor with sensors and cameras and self-management were popular ideas. Some projects proposed to develop networks for improved access to housing and food. Others suggested new multi-generational, multicultural business networks to mentor target groups, improve the sense belonging and reduce isolation.

Thirty one per cent wanted to improve the environment and mobility through new energy sources. These projects proposed managing energy consumption, traffic, offering multi-modal transportation, promoting bicycle use and facilitating electric vehicle use with charging stations. Others examined autonomous transit, waste management and environmental monitoring.
Twenty eight per cent were focused on economic development, including support systems for start-ups, attracting knowledge workers and technology industries, designing new educational programs and retrofitting specific sectors of the economy with digital tools.

Four projects received funding. The themes of the funded projects included: access to food and the development of a circular economy; sharing community data to support development; household and urban energy management; health monitoring and system improvements; Indigenous culture preservation; initiatives in sustainable transportation and mobility; environmental risk management; and child and senior safety (such as reducing risks for seniors and establishing systems for the healthy development of youth).

European experience
The European approach encouraged organizations to partner, co-create, share, model, innovate and duplicate. There are over 100 individual city projects listed on the European Smart City website. Projects are classified under six areas: smart economy, people, governance, mobility, environment and living. It is the pursuit of these six areas in combination that begins to move cities from smart to intelligent and the criteria encourages cities to progress along several lines.

Sharing knowledge and resources is key. Pilot projects such as the Issy Smart Grid in suburban Paris, integrating the local production of renewable energy, need to be replicated and are widely disclosed.
Collaborative approaches between cities are becoming a new norm and yield interesting innovations and opportunities - for example, seven municipalities under URBiNAT are regenerating and integrating social housing using nature-based solutions. Another example is Fabrication City, where 28 cities are developing sustainability through circular economies and strengthening local entrepreneurship.

Cities need to move from conventional ways of managing from a focus on immediate fixes to smart and intelligent approaches that look at solving root causes. I am convinced that the lessons learned from smart and intelligent urban projects worldwide can open new avenues to create healthy, sustainable, and happy places for everyone.
0 0 Votes
Rome is the last of thirteen European cities according to Greenpeace.
.A report by the Wuppertal Institute published in May 2018 on data relating to 2016, which compared thirteen European cities on the topic of sustainable mobility, states that Rome's position in this special ranking is the last.
.The study, commissioned by Greenpeace, is titled "Living. Moving. Breathing. Ranking of European Cities in Sustainable Transport ", and is based on data from official public sources or directly from city administrations.
In evaluating the performance of the researched cities, 21 indicators were selected, then grouped into 5 categories: public transport, road safety, air quality, mobility management, active mobility.
. By assigning each category a maximum of 20 points, a ranking was drawn up: on the podium Copenhagen (57/100), Amsterdam (55/100) and Oslo (50/100). After these, Zurich, Vienna, Madrid, Paris, Brussels, Budapest, Berlin, London and Moscow ... with Roma Capitale (27/100), lying on the bottom.
.The "best" results of the Italian city are achieved in the field of public transport and air quality, where however it does not rise beyond the eighth position; it goes down to the twelfth for active mobility and last for road safety and mobility management.
. The Rome case - Public Transport
.Roma has the highest rate of private car use and the lowest rate of bicycle use. Pedestrian journeys cover 6% of the total, while 29% are satisfied by local public transport. Rome, at the moment, lacks a Sustainable Energy Action Plan (currently being drawn up by the current council), while the sustainable mobility plans drawn up in the past have been largely disregarded. Road infrastructures largely dedicated to cars and policies that are too weak to discourage the use of private vehicles deliver the Romans to private mobility ”.
.The crisis at Atac, the company that manages the local Roman public transport, complicates the situation. In structural terms in recent years it has suffered from the lack of investment (for the renewal and modernization of the vehicle fleet). Some problems refer to other issues: managerial, financial and political.
. The Rome case - Road safety
.Roma shows very low numbers on active mobility and with the insecurity resulting from the high number of accidents it will be increasingly difficult for the city to incentivize the population for "soft mobility". And yet in the cities where people travel more by bicycle and on foot, the number of deaths on the street decreases sharply; equally, where the bicycle is used more, the number of accidents involving cyclists decreases enormously. Furthermore, it has been shown that when motorists or scooter and motorcycle drivers perceive a greater presence of cyclists and pedestrians, by reaction they drive more cautiously.
. The Rome case - Air quality
.In this ranking Rome ranks eighth, on a par with London, Berlin and Budapest. The average annual concentration value of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) exceeds the legal limits. It is the almost unique result of an enormous volume of motorized movements. In the case of Rome, air quality can have an impact not only on the health of the exposed population, but also on the architectural and historical heritage, which represents an essential economic asset for the city. If those of the World Health Organization take on benchmarks, the air is unhealthy and the concentrations of dust and dioxide expose the Romans to serious risks.
. The Rome case - Mobility management
. "Mobility management" means policies aimed at sustainable mobility. Parking for an hour in Rome is cheaper than a bus ticket. Furthermore, the Ztl provides free entry slots and is not permanent.According to the report, this is a rather weak implementation of the "Low Emission Zone" model developed by other cities. There is also a 40% extension of road travel times due to traffic, which does not favor the development of car sharing and bike sharing , whose availability is still too low.
. The Rome case - active mobility
.The journeys on foot or by bike represent, together, only 7% of the total citizen. Rome has many green areas, which can potentially encourage pedestrian traffic; however they are not "integrated" with other modal options. There are also a few bikes and cycle paths. Rome, therefore, should invest in infrastructures that facilitate and guarantee cyclists, reducing the number of motorized two-wheelers, as well as the private use of the machine, even increasing costs.
0 0 Votes

End of content

Incompatible Browser

Supported browsers are Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft Edge, IE 11+, Opera, and Safari.