Are North American Automakers Ready for a New Paradigm?

The state of the North American auto industry has become an internationally relevant crisis that few of us can ignore. Of course, many of us will say ‘they had it coming’, and we environmentalists will secretly welcome the prospect of an end to business models and marketing responsible for spewing forth parking lots full of SUVs.. however, this won’t be a walk in the park for anyone. The North American economy in general is highly dependent on the Auto industry, and in many local economies its significance is much greater. The secondary effects of a downturn in this sector are likely to branch out to all areas of the economy. Some hard-core environmentalists may argue that for the environment this is not necessarily a bad thing, as consumption is reduced, so is the impact associated with it. However, for environmental market transformation, this is not great news. As economies falter, prices for energy fall, reducing incentives to conserve and drive markets for new, more efficient products.

Clearly some kind of bailout is necessary to avert the economic and social crisis that could befall North American automakers, but will it be enough to get them on track? Can the same leadership that got them into their current position be trusted to bring them out of it? How effectively will a strategic change be implemented across the vast, unionized, and capital intensive operations of the auto sector? The road ahead for these companies is a path full of obstacles. The global economy is one, however even with a strong economic outlook the writing is on the wall for Chrysler et al. Chinese automaker BYD just announced its first hybrid, a plug-in hybrid that effectively leapfrogs the incumbent competition, and offering a 100km range on batteries alone, and a price of roughly $22,000. This is still expensive for the Chinese market, but looks pretty good compared to the alternatives here in N.A. If this company is able to access the full potential of its export market, it stands to do very well. Warren Buffet seems to think so, as he’s currently invested in 10% of the company.

One notable difference between BYM and the struggling North American automakers is that it began life as a battery company- it makes 30% of the world’s cell phone batteries, which gives it an edge on a critical component for plug-in hybrids. For this reason it is far better suited to changing the technological paradigm of personal transportation than its competition. Auto manufacturers are steeped in the history and culture of the internal combustion engine. Envisioning the automobile of the future as an intelligent, electro-mechanical appliance as opposed to an integral link in the petroleum economy will be far easier for companies who possess the capacity for innovation, and for re-imagining the cultural relationship between cars and people.

TTC’s growing network (online)

It’s good to hear about any progress in public transit in Toronto, even if it is only in the online realm. The TTC’s plans to redesign its website and better engage with bloggers and the patrons of online media (See today’s article in the Globe “Transit Commission goes to the blogs”, and the post in spacingwire from a former TTC manager for some history and interesting details). Maybe Adam Giambrone’s strategy of engaging the capabilities of online communication represents more than a new focus on technology, perhaps it means the TTC will begin to operate a bit more like a business, and perceive itself as a real brand. The TTCs past failures to capitalize on the potential of social media represented failure to engage both its customers and some of its most ardent champions.

Cities: The Careless and the Carless

An article in the travel section of the Globe and Mail today prompted this entry- it was an article about Montpellier France, an urban centre off-limits to cars. One observation is how pedestrians in a city are able to experience much more, and without the worry of cars, people are more free to do so. As a former automobile commuter, I now appreciate the ability to take public transit, walk, or bike to almost everywhere I need to go (benefits of living and working downtown Toronto- this model certainly doesn’t extend far enough across the GTA). I’ve also noted a distinct difference in perception resulting from the use of different transit modes. For example, nothing creates a more insular detached and uninspiring view of the urban environment than car travel. Whether walking or taking public transit, we are forced to be aware of those around us (either pleasantly or unpleasantly, but the experience nevertheless has a grounding effect on our conception of social reality), and the immediate human-scale amenities of the city (or lack thereof).

This brings to my mind other inspiring examples of transportation planning done right. Curtiba, Brazil, is a noted example and has employed networks of buses to achieve ridership rates of 70% among commuters, despite having one of the highest rates of car ownership in Brazil. As a side note, the bus system is privatized- 10 companies own and operate the bus systems, and operate without any subsidies.

The article’s author, John Allemang, contrasts the city’s philosophy on urban development with that of Toronto, where a streetcar right of way project on St. Clair Ave. has produced considerable opposition. Toronto stands, along with many North American cities, as an example of automobile-centric planning philosophy- plagued by smog, traffic congestion, and sprawl. An underdeveloped public transit system fails to compete with the alternative, and without ridership growth, must rely on government funding to continue to operate.

The worry of groups such as “Save our St. Clair” that oppose further development of public transit is that it will disrupt local businesses by reducing car traffic. I believe that this is a short-sighted objection- and I would contend that these local businesses are able to survive because St. Clair has the benefits of local pedestrian traffic due to the proximity of relatively dense neighborhoods, and streetcar transit. By giving free reign to cars, St. Clair will become simply a 2 lane thoroughfare, allowing expanded development in the west end of the city (where already a cluster of big-box stores has emerged), and impacting the local businesses.

We already know that car-centric design and sprawl are unsustainable. This concept of urban planning is based in a time where the abundance of fossil fuels seemed limitless, and that an automobile centered lifestyle would provide us with social advantages of freedom and convenience, instead of confining with congested freeways and downtown gridlock.

Transportation is a major planning concern, especially for a city which is already so spread out. There are plenty of working models we can look to, whether it is the streetcars and pedestrian-only areas of Montpellier, the buses of Curtiba, or the bikeways of many European cities. Toronto needs to take as example the best practices of cities that have succeeded in gaining reductions in automobile use while preserving the utility of urban spaces.