 Hypothetical question
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Jun 5, 1:44 pm, "Bernie Kovack" <berniekovac...m> wrote:
>>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@> wrote in message
>>> news:a00cad23-c27b-4a3f-83f2-04dc629b3c7c@t54g2000hsg..com...
>>> On Jun 5, 1:43 am, "Bernie Kovack" <berniekovac...m> wrote:
>>> It's January 2010 and 95% of New Yorkers can't afford to pay $10 per
>>> gallon
>>> of gas and decide to take transit instead.
>>> Will the system be able to handle that many passengers? If not, what would
>>> need to be done, and how long would it take?
>>> How many more passe, er, "customers" is that than now? Maybe 50% more?
>>> Less than that?
>>
>> Maybe 50% of Manhattan, but not the entire metro area.
>
> You didn't ask about "the entire metro area." Considerably less than
> 50% of New York City residents have a car (the figures are regularly
> posted here), so considerably more than 50% of New Yorkers with jobs
> either walk or take transit to their jobs. If 65% is the current
> figure, then 95% represents a less than 50% increase.
According to Wikipedia, 54.35% of people in NYC take transit to work.
If that became 95%, it'd be a 75% increase. The system simply couldn't
take that unless workdays became a lot more flexible so that peak
traffic was more spread out.
Of course, NYC is in a better position to deal with it than most cities;
there are only 9 in the country where transit use is above 25% today,
and only 36 above 10%; most systems would simply collapse under the load
of 95% of the population switching to transit. OTOH, I don't think
$10/gal gas is enough for most people to do that, outside a few cities
like NYC, DC, and SF. It's simply not an option in most of the country,
so the choices are pay that price for gas or work from home.
S
|