Is Personal Rapid Transit the answer?

A recent comment by one of our readers brought our attention to the intriguing issue of Personal Rapid Transit systems. The PRT Project calls for a complete revolution in transportation, much like the revolution of the automobile. It's important to note that strong proponents of PRT seek not an evolution in transportation (hybrid vehicles and other innovations in fuel efficiency and mass transit), but instead are pushing for a dynamic change in how we get from place to place.

PRT is essentially a form of mass transit . . . with door-to-door service. According to the PRT Project's Web site, PRT "puts the automobile on tracks," and unlike most forms of mass transportation, PRT would seek to not co-exist with the automobile, but instead replace it. Proponents argue that set-up costs would be minimal, especially when compared with installing something such as a traditional light rail.

The vehicles are publicly owned, but you "summon" them for your private use. For instance, let's say I needed to get to the furniture store across town. I summon a PRT vehicle, it comes to my door in a few minutes, drops me off, and moves on to the next pick-up location.

And if I happen to buy a couch that strikes my fancy, I would simply have to summon another "freight" PRT vehicle.

Interesting? Yes. Straight out of the Jetson's? Definitely. Could it actually be put to use? Maybe.

Heathrow Airport in London, England is currently in the process of building a PRT system, which is scheduled to make its first run in the Spring of 2009. It's the first in the world, and many officials from the Heathrow and BAA Airports, the company that owns the London airport, appear optimistic about its benefits.

More than 20 million dollars has been invested in this project, but Project Manager David Holdcroft said the PRT team is hoping this new system will significantly improve both the passenger experience and the airport's environmental impact.

“It offers a completely new form of public transport – one that will deliver a fast, efficient service to passengers and bring considerable environmental benefits, saving more than half of the fuel used by existing forms of public or private transport. Not only that, it’s a world first," Holdcroft said.

In an airport like Heathrow, which is the third largest in the world, this type of technology makes sense. Many large airports utilize some sort of mass transportation for their passengers, and this new PRT system simply capitalizes on that formula. It's an incredible idea and a significant step for this type of technology, but it must be noted that this is not exactly how PRT advocates originally envisioned.

So, of course, the question remains: Are PRT systems realistic in the "real world?"

After perusing the PRT Project Web site, I have my doubts. Just take a look at the FAQ page, and most people will agree that many issues presented there simply seem to great to ignore. Everything from privacy concerns (wouldn't the government theoretically be able to track my every move?) to simple worries of timeliness (how long will this really take? and what about rural areas?) are mentioned, and several of the answers seem lacking in definitive support.

Ideally, everyone would wholeheartedly embrace the idea of PRT systems. Their electrical motors are certainly an intriguing solution to the increased worries of environmental sustainability and the worrisome oil market. However, I have a difficult time envisioning most individuals fully giving up their vehicles and the convenience they provide. I can't even count the amount of times I've stored things in my vehicle during the work day to do errands later in the afternoon, and the issue of traveling long distances also seems confusing. Would all the PRT systems in every city and every state be interconnected? And if that's the case, it seems it would take years to gain local, state, and national government support and funding.

The Web site does provide a "transition" plan, but once again, it seems to occur in an ideal setting with little thought to concerns of individuals who will physically have to be a part of the transition.

Finally, I view the economic impact as a possible concern as well. The final question presented in the FAQ says:

What happens to all the unused automobiles once the PRT system is implemented?

The answer provided seems overly simple:

The PRT system would take years to construct. Existing automobiles would naturally migrate to the unincorporated areas of the system as they are resold as used vehicles. So while the new automobile market would certainly be impacted, the existing automobiles would not be wasted.

Try telling that answer to the thousands of individuals who make their living in the automobile industry. Whether its production, sales, or service, the effect of countless people losing their jobs seems unfathomable.

Bottom Line: PRTs are interesting solutions for small, isolated communities such as airports, retirement villages, etc. Advocates say their plan is to begin with those types of areas, but their long-term goal of completely eliminating the automobile does not seem fully refined. Either way, it will most likely be several years before these ideas surface to the mainstream. Until then, auto makers must focus on strategies to make their vehicles universally more fuel efficient and environmentally friendly. Cars can remain competitive with mass transportation, but it is up to their manufacturers to pool the resources into making them so.

This interesting article from the TriCity Herald has some good information. The article thinks the time for PRT may have come. But for every proponent, there's someone blogging about the downsides to PRT. An rousing debate is bound to occur if this technology ever picks up speed.