Fuel costs

[Sarconia]

The prices of fuel are ridiculous but driving is still often cheaper than public transport.

 

This is why I still own a car...

 

For a fairly standard 75mile journey from my place to my parents house, here's how it breaks down:

 

By train it costs £16.70, takes 1hr 5mins and involves one train change, note: that's an off-peak train fare. I can walk to the station which I depart from as I live right next to it, so that's not an issue, however my parents house is a good 5 miles away from the train station at the other end, with all of my baggage (most likely a suitcase) it's not possible to walk. I could get the bus, however it was £2.50 for a single fare the last time I got on it (a few years ago) and takes a good 45mins to get there. So that'd bring the cost and time up to £19.20 and 1hr 50mins respectively.

 

By car it costs me £16.15 and takes 1hr 30mins (on average). Now I've calculated this as follows: It costs me just under £10 to do 75miles (that's what it costs me roughly when I fill up from having a full tank, I'm also assuming petrol is £1.20/ltr) About 60 miles of this are on the motorway. My car is a bit of an old banger and does approximately 38MPG (not the worst but by no means the best either).

 

Now I've also taken insurance and road tax into this equation, my insurance costs me £31/month but I only drive 500 miles a month so that one 75mile journey is going to cost me £4.65 in terms of insurance and £1.50 in road tax (£120 road tax for 12 months). Bearing in mind that I've not got the most economical car, or drive that many miles a month and I'm in a fairly high car tax bracket, it still manages to come under the cost of the initial train fare. I get to drive exactly to my parents house, I can take whatever I want with me (no worrying about suitcases being swiped... or where am I going to stash them on the train). I can drive at any time of the day and don't have to hang around for "off-peak" train fares and I can blast my music in my car to my heart's content. If I take more than one person with me in the car then it costs even less.

 

Overall, it's simply so much more convenient than going on the train and it works out to be cheaper too.

 

If I've missed any other car taxes, give me a prod. I've not included an MOT in the cost because I can't remember what my previous one cost! (I dont think it was that expensive anyway... £50 or so and it's only a once a year cost). I've not included any other car expenses such as break-downs and so on as the last time my car broke down, I bought the parts, hijacked my dad's tools and fixed it myself. (It would've cost about £500 in labour otherwise... took me a good 3 weekends to sort as well, so it wasn't exactly a small job). Haynes manual + the internet for the win!

[srochford]

If I've missed any other car taxes, give me a prod.

 

Not a tax, but you've not included the actual cost of the car! I appreciate that you probably didn't buy a car just to make this occasional journey but you still had to buy the car.

 

No idea what your car cost, how long it's going to last etc but is it reasonable to allocate £500 per year for the capital cost? If so, your 75 mile journey as fraction of your 6000 miles per year means that you should probably allocate (75/6000)*500 or £6.25 to the journey cost so your total cost is now about £22 and more expensive than public transport.

 

Of course, it's still not as convenient and if 2 or more of you were travelling then the costs are probably way more expensive by public transport (unless you can buy in advance; eg Southern Railways regularly do £3 singles to anywhere on their network but this is no use if they're not at the time or place you want!)

[Martin]

we must not forget the subsidies that we pay the private public tranport companies. A quick search and Hansard (albeit several years out of date) comes up with 4 pence per rail passenger mile and 12 pence per bus passenger mile (London bus figures).

 

So that is another £3.60 to add to the (private) public transport costs, and the car is back into the (value) lead again

 

mb

[Guest Guest]

Not just rural areas. There is one bus that runs through my village every half hour, from seven in the morning to midnight. Outside of these times there is nothing.

 

I live in a village of 20,000+ residents and our buses run from 8am-5pm so no good for a 9-5 job (or at last check they did). Everyone has just given up on them so its a catch 22; no one can get a bus because there isnt any, and the operators wont put more on because no one gets them.

 

 

Same old arguement repeated over and over; arrogant people saying us evil motorists should walk/cycle/bus/train because, living in the centre of London, thats what they do so why cant everyone else?

[SC-UK]

Try Rural Lincolnshire. I used to work just 12 miles away from home. I had to drive.

 

Public transport would have involved: 45 min walk to nearest bus station carrying normally 2 or 3 fairly heavy laptop cases/bags etc > 3 bus changes > an hour and half bus journey> £8.50 > a 20 min walk to work from the other end. On top of this, I had a choice of getting to work just over an hour early, or arriving 45 mins late. Then at home time this was repeated, either leave 20 mins early, or wait 2 hours for the first bus.

 

Needless to say, this was a complete waste of time and I only ever caught the bus once or twice when I was without the car for whatever reason.

 

Tom

[pauljonze]

I live 7.5 miles from work (as the pesky crow flies) and it would require catching 2 buses (I live in is in Staffordshire but work in the West Midlands); in order to get to the second bus I must catch the first bus of the day (leaving home almost an hour earlier than by car) but the connecting bus is timetabled to leave the station at the same time as I arrive on the first bus - the next one is 15 mins later and would make me late despite leaving home nearly an hour earlier. What's the point?

[36Degrees]

Petrol costs where I live at the moment are 120.9p per litre whereas on the way to work the cost is as low as 117.9p (biggest price differential has been 7p per litre!) There's never been a valid reason for the difference but as all local stations 'price match until one lowers it significantly the others aren't that bothered about being that competitive.

 

One factor not considered with public transport is why is it so expensive over here? A few years ago I remember watching a documentary where they tried to explain why the West Coast main line was costing much more to be upgraded than it was costing in Germany for a brand new high speed line that was actually longer. Much of it seemed to hinge around incompetence such as staff being paid to sit and wait for instructions, equipment not in the right place at the right time, ever changing specifications, etc. (Sound familiar i.e. Government IT projects?)

[Sarconia]

My car is an old banger which has done surprisingly well for itself. It cost me £500, 4 years ago and the only expensive bits I've ever had to replace were 2 tyres so I didn't really include it as it hasn't cost me that much money.

 

Although, if you've spent thousands on a car then, it could rack the price up a fair bit.

[moobsuk]

The policy has always been the same - get individual drivers off the roads, and in to trains.

 

And thats a joke! I need to get to London this weekend, so i thought lets take a train! looked for tickets online!! what a joke! cheapest return ticket for 2 people £85.

 

It will cost me less than £25 in Diesel to get me there and back again! so wheres the incentive to go by train?

[mac_shinobi]

The policy has always been the same - get individual drivers off the roads, and in to trains.

 

Any public transport in Northampton is very far from where I work and besides I have been using buses for a long long time so Im of the opinion that I have had enough of swapping between buses / trains etc and its got to the point where driving is a lot quicker / easier although obviously a bit more money involved as per above with taxes.

 

I used to catch the bus to work a few years back and started off paying £18 a week for the "gold ticket" or whatever it was called and near the end of working there ended up paying £21 a week ( £12 extra a month )

Edited April 22, 2010 by mac_shinobi

[Martin]

we must not forget the subsidies that we pay the private public tranport companies. A quick search and Hansard (albeit several years out of date) comes up with 4 pence per rail passenger mile and 12 pence per bus passenger mile (London bus figures).

 

So that is another £3.60 to add to the (private) public transport costs, and the car is back into the (value) lead again

 

mb

 

It seems that my figures above are somewhat out of date, and according to Transport Watch, rail is actually subsidised by 19p per passenger mile.

 

Thus Sarconia's (private) public transport journey is subsidised by £14.85 making a full cost of £34.05 - far more than by car. Indeed it is more than the amount the taxman would let yoiu claim at 40p per mile!!

 

Also, consider that motorists are taxed at around 50 billion pounds per year, of which only a fraction (i believe 7 billion) is actually invested in the roads - the rest helping subsidise (private) public transport that is still more expensive than cars.

 

To put that 50 billion into perspective, it could fund an entirely new motorway the equivalent of the M6 Toll (29 miles long) every single week of the year, every year - and it would all be paid for, so no tolls required. Think about it, a brand new three lane London to Birmingham motorway in about a month!

 

That sounds a lot more attractive than stealing the hard shoulder and fitting SPECS enforced mandatory reduced speed limits after inflicting years of contrafow and roadwords (again with camera enforced limits)!!

 

mb

[localzuk]

It seems that my figures above are somewhat out of date, and according to Transport Watch, rail is actually subsidised by 19p per passenger mile.

 

Thus Sarconia's (private) public transport journey is subsidised by £14.85 making a full cost of £34.05 - far more than by car. Indeed it is more than the amount the taxman would let yoiu claim at 40p per mile!!

 

Also, consider that motorists are taxed at around 50 billion pounds per year, of which only a fraction (i believe 7 billion) is actually invested in the roads - the rest helping subsidise (private) public transport that is still more expensive than cars.

 

To put that 50 billion into perspective, it could fund an entirely new motorway the equivalent of the M6 Toll (29 miles long) every single week of the year, every year - and it would all be paid for, so no tolls required. Think about it, a brand new three lane London to Birmingham motorway in about a month!

 

That sounds a lot more attractive than stealing the hard shoulder and fitting SPECS enforced mandatory reduced speed limits after inflicting years of contrafow and roadwords (again with camera enforced limits)!!

 

mb

 

You're missing one giant problem with that - we don't want the country covered in giant strips of concrete. We also don't want more pollution. The government has agreed to reduce CO2 output, so building new roads would damage that, and damage the environment we all live in.

 

If you don't mind this, I'd suggest paying a visit to Hong Kong, or Beijing - both horribly polluted cities. So much so that Hong Kong had notices to tell people to stay in doors not too long ago, because the pollution was so bad. We definitely don't want this to happen over here.

[localzuk]

And thats a joke! I need to get to London this weekend, so i thought lets take a train! looked for tickets online!! what a joke! cheapest return ticket for 2 people £85.

 

It will cost me less than £25 in Diesel to get me there and back again! so wheres the incentive to go by train?

 

I know, that's why I later said that whilst that policy exists, it doesn't mean it has been implemented well.

 

I would've liked to go to a friend's house this weekend, to celebrate her birthday but a return ticket would cost me £89 from Taunton to Warrington. Plus £13 in bus fairs from Minehead to Taunton.

 

Not cheap, but that's down to poor implementation of transport policy by this Labour govt, and the previous Tory govts.

[Tyiell]

You're missing one giant problem with that - we don't want the country covered in giant strips of concrete. We also don't want more pollution. The government has agreed to reduce CO2 output, so building new roads would damage that, and damage the environment we all live in.

 

If you don't mind this, I'd suggest paying a visit to Hong Kong, or Beijing - both horribly polluted cities. So much so that Hong Kong had notices to tell people to stay in doors not too long ago, because the pollution was so bad. We definitely don't want this to happen over here.

 

Is there not an argument that more (and wider) roads would decrease congestion, speed up traffic and thus reduce the amount of wasted time on the roads. The longer people are stuck on the m25 not going anywhere, the longer they are polluting the atmosphere. IMO you will never reduce car usage because no other mode of transport is even half as convenient. So it's best to make the car as economic as possible and reduce traffic rather than the number of cars!

[witch]

Is there not an argument that more (and wider) roads would decrease congestion, speed up traffic and thus reduce the amount of wasted time on the roads. The longer people are stuck on the m25 not going anywhere, the longer they are polluting the atmosphere. IMO you will never reduce car usage because no other mode of transport is even half as convenient. So it's best to make the car as economic as possible and reduce traffic rather than the number of cars!

 

No, all studies say that the more roads there are, the more traffic there will be - it doesnt help at all.

 

Train tickets: you can get much cheaper fares if you buy in advance - my son can get from uni in Portsmouth to London for about £20 return if he buys it early enough

[pauljonze]

Until everywhere is connected by giant water flumes (like in that Barclaycard advert) the car will remain the preferred mode of transaport.

[Tyiell]

No, all studies say that the more roads there are, the more traffic there will be - it doesnt help at all.

 

Ah but whose studies? The only ones I have heard of are the government ones, and they tell you that the car =

 

Seriously though, if I ruled the country (let me dream), I would not necessarily increase the number of roads, but bad layouts themselves almost seem to be designed to cause congestion (and therefore pollution)...

Edited April 22, 2010 by Tyiell

[broc]

As the state appears incapable of creating more affordable public transport I would like to see more of the road tax and fuel duty money spent on research involving emerging technologies such as fuel cells & better hybrid solutions, then maybe we could invest more in roads without the corresponding increase in pollution.

[creese]

It's quite interestin that the new Android Sat Nav app was delayed on its release to the UK "due to the UK's love of roundabouts". Roads are designed to slow down traffic and increase the journey length. What is the point of traffic lights on red when nothing is coming from the other direction. How many times have you had to stop at a red light at 2am with no traffic for miles.

 

I'm very sceptical about more roads more traffic, there is a finite number of vehicles that could possibly be on the road.

Edited April 22, 2010 by creese

[Jamo]

It's quite interestin that the new Android Sat Nav app was delayed on its release to the UK "due to the UK's love of roundabouts". Roads are designed to slow down traffic and increase the journey length. What is the point of traffic lights on red when nothing is coming from the other direction. How many times have you had to stop at a red light at 2am with no traffic for miles.

 

I'm very sceptical about more roads more traffic, there is a finite number of vehicles that could possibly be on the road.

 

Roads aren't 'designed' to slow down traffic! Thats insane, they go to huge lengths to stop that from happening. Its sheer volume of traffic in small areas that is the problem. I used to live in Dorset and had no problem driving from place to place on some of the most shocking quality roads. Now I live in Weston Super Mare and it has lovely huge roads but SOOOOOOO much traffic and it just can't cope. But they didn't design the roads to be a pain in the butt! They were designed for a town over 20 years ago when cars looked like boxes and mobile phones could be used to build houses.

 

Times have changed, I do agree that mroe funding needs to go in to alternative energy, I do beleive that bio fuels should be mixed into our current oil fuels to increase supply and ease us into a bio fuel economy.

[witch]

There are many places in the world that have good public transport, with integrated buses/trams/ trains etc. The only way this can be done is if the public transport is just that, NOT run by private companies for profit. They can never run at a loss, or run uneconomic routes for the benefit of a few passengers.

[jamesb]

It's quite interestin that the new Android Sat Nave app was delayed on its release to the UK "due to the UK's love of roundabouts". Roads are designed to slow down traffic and increase the journey length. What is the point of traffic lights on red when nothing is coming from the other direction. How many times have you had to stop at a red light at 2am with no traffic for miles.

 

I'm very sceptical about more roads more traffic, there is a finite number of vehicles that could possibly be on the road.

 

That finite number is rather high though, and of course the number of cars is not evenly distributed. (I'm far enough from London that I very rarely have traffic problems, except for a few minutes delay at rush hour).

 

Now, cracking down more on bad/unsafe drivers and getting them off the roads while simultaneously scrapping charges for public transport and this whole privatisation thing might help more. Unfortunately the investment to do this would be huge, and frankly I doubt there would be much of a return on it for a long time.

 

Even then the return, should people start using public transport then revenue to support it would begin dropping as it could no longer come from drivers to the same degree.

 

Alternatively changing the rules to get rid of local 'public' transport company monopolies and allowing genuine competition might be another option. I see more issues with that though, as the current infrastructure isn't really set up for it.

 

Really its a chicken and egg problem. The only way to solve it is someone to stop caring about public opinion on the matter which will always be self-contradictory, and just push an agenda they believe in. Sadly politicians aren't the right people to do this.

[creese]

Roads aren't 'designed' to slow down traffic! Thats insane, they go to huge lengths to stop that from happening. Its sheer volume of traffic in small areas that is the problem. I used to live in Dorset and had no problem driving from place to place on some of the most shocking quality roads. Now I live in Weston Super Mare and it has lovely huge roads but SOOOOOOO much traffic and it just can't cope. But they didn't design the roads to be a pain in the butt! They were designed for a town over 20 years ago when cars looked like boxes and mobile phones could be used to build houses.

.

 

I have to disagree with you quite strongly. Roads are designed to slow down traffic. In some cases it makes sense, try coming to the big city just to the east of you. With everything converging on the centre (because that is the only way to get from one side to the other). Recently a major road junction was designed so that either you turn off into side streets or went the long way around for about 1/2 mile where you used to be able to turn right.

 

As for Weston, most people are looking for somewhere to park. Put a park and ride outside and it would cut down plenty on the amount of traffic. We would use it rather than sit in traffic for ages around Morrisons.

[localzuk]

Public transport has to be just that - public. It isn't a service that can run at a profit, as the reasons for it are not just money related. Villages need good transport links, to ensure the villagers can get out and about (such as the elderly). When we have a government that wakes up and realises this, we may see some improvements. Until then, we're stuck with a poorly regulated set of private companies who will invest the absolute minimum into the system so as to maximise profits.

[Jamo]

I have to disagree with you quite strongly. Roads are designed to slow down traffic. In some cases it makes sense, try coming to the big city just to the east of you. With everything converging on the centre (because that is the only way to get from one side to the other). Recently a major road junction was designed so that either you turn off into side streets or went the long way around for about 1/2 mile where you used to be able to turn right.

 

As for Weston, most people are looking for somewhere to park. Put a park and ride outside and it would cut down plenty on the amount of traffic. We would use it rather than sit in traffic for ages around Morrisons.

 

 

Again though these places were built long before the volume of traffic currently seen by the roads was forseen. They were not designed this way to handle this traffic.

 

The examples you have suggested are countermeasures to reduce the amount of traffic which is great but it still doesn't prove that roads are designed to slow us down!

 

W-S-M is now having a road upgrade and they have spent thousands of pounds on computer modelling to improve traffic flow!!