Skip navigation
9comments
Share conversation: Share via:

2013transportationjudges 2013transportationjudges

Jul 8, 2013
06:26

Judge


1 |
Share via:
The judges for the Transport Efficiency contest have selected this proposal as a finalist! Here are some of their comments on the proposal: - Although car pooling is not new, the use of modern technology to overcome barriers is fairly recent, and this is a concrete proposal for doing so. - The prototype implementation is encouraging and speaks to the feasibility of wider implementation. - The emissions reductions from this proposal will come at relatively low cost, however the uptake of carpooling does not rely only on the availability of information; thus the total carbon emissions benefits may not be very large. - There are some similarities to the other finalist titled "Smart Mobility for the 21st Century" The judges also want to emphasize that they will pay particular attention for the following elements when selecting a Judges' Choice winner from among the Transport Efficiency finalists: - An attempt, even if not exhaustive, at an analysis of the costs and benefits of the proposal. - References for assumptions, claims and numerical figures in the proposal or cost-benefit analysis. - Brevity and focus in the proposal statement; an economy of words.

Pia Jensen

Jul 14, 2013
05:23

Member


2 |
Share via:
consider: couple with agreements from companies to create more at tele-jobs (work at home some % of work week) and your probability of success in ride share rises due to less need and CO2 output decreases).

Pia Jensen

Jul 14, 2013
05:13

Member


3 |
Share via:
I mean to say "more at home tele jobs" See: Latest Telecommuting Statistics www.globalworkplaceanalytics.com/telecommuting-statistics from globalworkplaceanalytics.com

Clemens Rath

Jul 14, 2013
05:33

Member


4 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Hi Pia, thank you for the hint. Yes, working from home is for sure least CO2-intensive way of 'commuting'. Same for video conferences instead of business trips. Both should be considered by companies as well. Best regards, Clemens

Brian Chow

Jul 23, 2013
08:03

Member


5 |
Share via:
Out of the transport finalists I would choose this one. However, when I think of this in a personal context, how do small companies, with just a few dozen employees, in a large metropolitan area like Los Angeles do? I worked for such a small company. My nearest commute neighbor would have been nearly 10 miles away to the northwest - by contrast, my workplace was SSW. How would this plan be improved for the majority of people who work for small businesses located in large and spread-out cities like LA? Would the trust factor have to be compromised, or is there still a way around it?

Clemens Rath

Jul 24, 2013
01:04

Member


6 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Hi Brian, thanks for your support and your great question, which I'd like to answer as good as I can. Solving the traust issue by limiting a car pool to a trusted community is just one of many possible solutions. There might be other solutions such as automated identification via mobile devices and/or biometric scans in combination with feedback systems such as on eBay. We just haven't explored these options so far. But the limitation to a closed and trusted society such as a company will work as a good starting point. In some countries where carpooling is already quite common it might not be needed at all and the system might work well in public as well. This is to be tested. To your question, how smaller companies could benefit under the assumption that we would still use it in a trusted community: The smaller the employee population, the more widespread the collegues are scattered in the area around the office (matching routes) and the less regulated the shifts are (matching timing), the lower the matching probability will be. These are the variables to be considered. So just based on the pilot we ran, we believe the minimum population should be around 500 employees to reach a healthy matching probability of at least 50%. If you would not get a lift at least at every 2nd try (50%), you might not consider carpooling as a viable option for your daily commute. So bottom line, what we could try to reach a healthy matching probability in smaller companies is: - either start it with a few highly frequented routes - increase the population by establishing a car pooling club with people working closeby. A good example that such clubs could work is https://www.carriva.org. This is a carpooling club at Frankfurt Airport open to employees of several companies at the airport. Let me know in case I could further support. Good luck! Clemens

2013transportationjudges 2013transportationjudges

Jul 29, 2013
04:16

Judge


7 |
Share via:
Similar to the Smart Mobility proposal, also from Berlin. The authors both have connections with TU Berlin and have exchanged comments on each other's proposals, but they don't seem to be working together directly. Largish impacts with comparatively little capital investment, easier to implement than Smart Mobility, the implementation challenge is less compared to what could be achieved. While less arresting for this reason, it is also more grounded. This proposal is "bite sized" instead of "rather ambitious". Much closer to implementation, and that is impressive. Seems to be already developed and well-pitched to be a good cost/benefit proposition to employers.

Sabine Brun

Aug 20, 2013
03:17

Member


8 |
Share via:
We would like to use it for our company as well.

Clemens Rath

Aug 27, 2013
05:19

Member


9 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
We will be happy to support your company as well :-)
ADD YOUR COMMENT
You must be logged into your account to post a comment.