Transportation Revolution in China
January 10th, 2007
Post Submitted by Meghan Girvin:
There is little doubt that China is experiencing many changes as it advances as a society. One of these changes is the increasing desire of Chinese citizens to own a car. China has been known as the “kingdom of bicycles” for so long and recent development has people moving away from bicycles and favoring cars as the major mode of transportation. Chinese citizens purchased nearly 6 million cars in 2005, making China the second largest car market. Also, car ownership is increasing in China faster than anywhere else in the world - 15% per year.
This trend has implications for both Chinese society and the world as a whole. The increased desire for cars has come with major highway and roadway construction projects. This means that rural areas will now be better connected to bigger cities and residents of these areas may be able to get better jobs and have more access to things like medical supplies. But, this also means that cars will take over the roadways and the lower class in cities that rely on bikes for transportation will be pushed from the roads and may have a hard time getting to work.
Do the positives for the poor in rural areas outweigh the negatives faced by the poor in cities? From a global perspective, how is this new trend going to impact the environment? There are so many people in China and if they start to own and use cars like we do in America it is going to have a huge impact on the environment. Should there be some sort of regulation put in to place that limits the amount of cars allowed in China? Is that fair? Also, if more and more Chinese are driving cars there will be more competition for oil. Will this impact our ability to obtain enough oil to support the way we live? There are many things that may be affected by this new trend in China and it is important examine all possible implications. For more on this topic, read the article Shanghai by Bike in Sierra Magazine.
[Prof. Carr Addendum: Good post. Oh, and by the way, you think that the traffic is bad in LA? Yeah, right. Check out this One Man Bandwidth post and You Tube video on traffic in Guangzhou, one of the cities we will visit. See also the NY Times article directly related to Meghan's post, "GM Sees China, and the Chinese, in a Chervolet" -- it appears that only success in the Chinese market may save GM]
Entry Filed under: Pre-Departure, China, Misc.
3 Comments Add your own
1. Steven Rodger | January 11th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
The idea of China eventually having a people/car ratio similar to that of the United States is a frightening thought. Hopefully, this will not occur unless there are some radical improvements in terms of alternative energy cars. Scientists already believe the world is reaching its limits on oil. So then why are we still manufacturing gas guzzling cars at increased rates? It is hypocritical to say that Chinese should not drive cars and have big houses. On the other hand, if China proceeds with their current consumption rates approaching the United States’ levels, we are surely going to run into some major problems within our lifetime. In response to Meghan’s question, I do not believe restrictions on the number of cars should be placed, but rather restrictions on the types of cars would minimize future problems. Wouldn’t it be great if China took a step towards sustainability and manufactured more fuel efficient hybrids and alternative fueled cars as more of their population gets behind the wheel?
Bikes are known to be the most efficient form of transportation. Hence why China’s the Kingdom of Bicycles. It would be a shame if everyone started jumping off their bikes and instead people preferred driving cars. This would only increase the desire to drive, as many are scared to ride their bike. For example, cities with better bike paths have more people riding bikes, hence healthier people and lower pollution. Like many others at the University I commute with a bike, but it is often dangerous as drivers do not always give you the right of way. It is no wonder that China sees so many fatal traffic accidents daily, as cyclists become hood ornaments. As for the Guangzhou traffic video…I still think LA is worse.
While roadway construction may be beneficial for rural areas of China to connect them to the rest of society and possibly lower unemployment, bringing cars and transport to these rural areas comes at a cost…Higher pollution, urban sprawl and eventually congestion. The question becomes, which is more important: The environment and health, or advancements and wealth? Rural parts of India and China are battling over a similar questions as diesel generators used to power televisions are now polluting once pristine regions. Of course development will progress, but perhaps China should take a look at the United States dilemma before they get themselves into a similar situation. When traveling outside of the US you can realize how bad our country depends on personal transportation, and how it has created a nation incredibly dependent on oil. What happens if China catches up and has a demand for as much oil as the US? Could additional highly efficient public transportation in China be more beneficial than constructing roads everywhere? I surely hope their government will be wise in these important decisions in the years to come.
2. LONNIE | January 12th, 2007 at 5:03 am
I cannot breathe NOW.
3. Steve Feng | February 8th, 2007 at 12:29 am
What are the implications? Before our conflicts with the Middle East, who was our number one enemy? That’s right, China!
They are a growing nation. They need oil, and we need oil. They helped supported the Rewanda genocide to obtain oil. Do not be so quick to criticize, because the United States would have moved in if China was not there ( Hufbauer 2001). Both, China and the United States will do anything to obtain black gold. War? It’s possible.
If we go to war it needs to happen quick. Three years ago a consumption rate, oil was expected to last 30 years. Now, China is helping us consume the oil at faster rates. I do not have any source for the current projections including China’s growth, but maybe 20 years maximum. The benefit to this limited resource is that we can only screw up the environment for so long. The negative part is that the United States and China will be making some large adjustments in their infrastructure. Unfortunately, the technology is not available to change the infrastructure. Alternative energy may be a resolution. Ethanol can not solely resolve our demand. China can always go back to bicycles, which their infrastructure has supported. On the other hand the US may have a problem, could you imagine biking everywhere in the United States? If you have a meeting across the bay in San Francisco, you may have to bike or take the BART.
The benefit of China moving into the personal vehicle industry will be the extra alternative fuel technology. They will be competing with the United States to develop a successful resolution.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed