Wolverhampton - A car-free city, myth or possibility - Essay Example

? Wolverhampton - A car-free myth or possibility Wolverhampton - A car-free myth orpossibility Introduction When it comes to the current state of transport, a lot has changed nowadays, with each kind of transport having a different impact onto the immediate surrounding and environment. Nowadays every effort is geared towards conserving the little resources that are available for human beings. Furthermore, efforts are made to make life easy. One of the areas that tries to conserve the environment and at the same time benefit from its own program is sustainable mobility (Ozge, & Karaaslan, 2011, p 28). This roughly means that the project aims at holding to the resources that are available in relation to the movement from one location to another. In the current world, the aspect of globalisation has led to the jeopardisation and astronomical increase in the need to use transport and has turned mobility of people, their concepts and commodities into a very important feature in our current society. At the same time, the transport segment in most of the countries has become one of the largest contributors to the carbon dioxide that the vehicles emit. This transport segment over period of time has built a great percentage on the number of pollutants contributing to the environmental degradation and has increased the level of energy consumption (Thomsen, 2011). It is with this in mind that I set this research on the grounds explained above. I will look at Wolverhampton concerning whether there is a possibility of turning the city into an environmental conscious city. As for this aspect of a car-free city, I will be selecting a suitable and sustainable mobility concept that can work in the city and also explain the concept itself and how it will be implemented. This will be analyzed with the relevant literal materials (Shane & Graedel, 2000, p77). The first area I will tackle in this essay will be the sustainable mobility as a concept and thereafter I will chose the most appropriate concept for sustainable mobility in the Wolverhampton area. Sustainable Mobility The word “mobile” means that one is capable of making movement in a space, virtually like in the flow of information in a particular network, be it socially (in this case, climbing the ‘social ladder’ to be in a different level or status), or even being physically making the movements (Neuman, 2011, p 41). In a statistical perspective, it means that mobility is the movement between two places, from one place to another and this does not clearly emphasize which means were used. Therefore, in my case, I will assume that mobility involves different means of transport and the mode of transport used for the movement to be made. According to Staley and Ybarra (2008), sustainable mobility is “mobility which does not endanger public health or ecosystems and meets needs for access consistent with: a) Use of renewable sources below their rates of regeneration; b) Use of non-renewable resources at below the rates of development of renewable substitutes”. The concept of mobility in some quarters has a different definition. According to Kasanen (1994) and Berge et al (1992), mobility is the potential for movement. For instance, a product might have a high mobility which means it might have a potential for movements by having qualities and characteristics that will make it easy to make a move and through the existence of means of transport to carry the movement out. At the same time, the mobility in people will greatly vary depending on each person’s factors like the age of the person, gender, health of the person and the occupation among many other factors. At the same time, the different periods of time at individual disposal and varied accessibility to the correct means of transport play a major part too. This is further supported by Hoyer (1999) who also describes mobility as “…an expression for both the potential for movement and the volume of the actual movement taking place. It can be linked to persons, goods, and resources. It can be applied at an individual level, that is, for a person or a commodity. However, it can also be applied within sectors, or at a superior societal level.” The concept of Sustainable Mobility One of the perfect examples of how the concept of Sustainable Mobility is being utilized is the Wolverhampton city centre whereby the concept of a Car-free plan is being developed to be implemented in order to make the city centre more attractive. The target of the plan is to create areas where there are new one-way systems; in other areas, there will be car-free zones. The plan on Wolverhampton is to create one-way systems and pavements will be widened and the majority of the streets will be pedestrianised in order to create more spaces in the shops, offices and even homes. This will make the area welcoming and very vibrant one-of-a-kind city centre (Van Exel, de Graaf, & Rietveld, 2011, 67). This method is actually derived from one of the concepts of sustainable mobility called the alternative mobility. The main purpose of this type of concept is to redirect the traffic to other means of transport which has a value for both human and the natural environment. According to Neuman (2011, 33), another way that alternative can be used is mainly organised with the idea of various means that include several diverse means of transport across two places. The concept here, therefore, is to combine different modes of transport in order to replace the aspect of a private car. Like the Wolverhampton city type of design, it will not be entirely pedestrianised and also the concepts will not entirely be covered by bikes when it comes to travelling or using the public transport but, instead, the concept offers a combination of all the three alternatives. Papon and Francis (2003) clarify that no method taken in isolation will rival the private car. The first condition of alternative transport to the private car is the development of a credible alternative supply, by bringing along various modes and by encouraging synergy between them. The basis of the alternative supply may be made up by walking, cycling and public transport, topped up with cars used in contexts other than individual property: traditional taxis and hire cars or new solutions such as car pooling or shared ownership of a car. This will mean that alternative mobility is made up of complex approach since in the real world, the surety of the future mobility will hamper the private cars in terms of car ownership (William & David, 2011). In a case of the Wolverhampton, it will be prudent to use different means of transport depending on its usage and relevance to the journey and this is referred to as intermodality. Conclusion The sustainable mobility is quite relevant in the current generation as it helps to check the impact of environment as a result of the transport means as a pollutant. Therefore, in the current world trends, cities are being redeveloped in order to put into consideration the conservation of the environment. Additionally, the car-free city, like Wolverhampton, will create enough space that was initially difficult to get. Therefore, I believe that the dream of Wolverhampton being car-free will be possible with the combination of the alternative mobility as a concept. Bibliography Berge, G. MFL. (1992) Velferdsvirkninger av redusert mobilitet. TOI rapport 138/1992. Oslo: TOI. Hoyer, K. G. (1999). Sustainable mobility - the concept and its implications: PhD. thesis. Roskilde, Institute of Environment, Technology and Society, Roskilde University Centre. Kasanen, P. (1994) Demand for Mobility and Transportation. Working Paper at SUMSEM Network meeting 24-25.05.1994. Aalborg: SUMSEM, Universitetet I Aalborg. Neuman, M. (2011). Ildefons cerda and the future of spatial planning: The network urbanism of a city planning pioneer. The Town Planning Review, 82(2), 117-143. Ozge, Y. E., & Karaaslan, S. (2011). Next-generation urban design guides for sustainability of small towns: A case study on Gudul, Turkey. Urban Design International, 16(2), 105-124. Papon, F., & Soulas, C. (2003), Les conditions d?une mobilite alternative a l?automobile individuelle, Annales de Mines, pp.84-93. Shane, A. M., & Graedel, T. E. (2000). Urban environmental sustainability metrics: A provisional set. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 43(5), 643-663. Staley, S. & Ybarra, S. (2008). Quelle mobilite durable ?, Fondation Reason, 19 June 2008, p.1. Thomsen, J. (2011). Reflections on the opportunities of urban planning to promote non-vehicular transportation in a sustainable settlement in Norway. Urban Design International, 16(3), 162-170. Van Exel, N.J.A., de Graaf, G., & Rietveld, P. (2011). "I can do perfectly well without a car!". Transportation, 38(3), 383-407. William, L. W., & David, W. A. (2011). Thriving as A city in year 2020: A model for urban vitality. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(21). Read More