Segway in EasyConnect II Inter-modal Commuting Test in San Francisco Area
12 June 2006
 |
| Bay Area commuter on a Segway. |
Segway is participating in a new alternative transportation program called EasyConnect II, a field test designed and coordinated by University of California, Berkeley’s Institute of Transportation Studies and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), to save fuel, reduce emissions, traffic and parking congestion in the San Francisco Bay Area.
The EasyConnect II program offers commuters who ride the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) or ride-share to the Pleasant Hill Bay BART station the opportunity to utilize a range of shared-use, low-speed vehicles, including one of ten Segway Human Transporters (HT) free-of-charge for the last few miles of their commute to the office.
For the evening commute, participants ride the shared-use vehicles back to the station where the units are stored in electronic lockers overnight. Participants can use the vehicles as they wish during the day for travel to lunch or on errands.
This is the first time Segway HTs will be used in an inter-modal public transit system in the US. Since December 2004, 16 Segway HTs have been in use by the City of Lille, France to connect commuters between remote parking areas, the train station and other locations in the city out of the new “Station Oxygène.”
When we began development of the Segway HT, we envisioned it as an essential part of the transportation continuum—a link that would transport people for the first and last miles of their daily trips. This field test is the embodiment of that vision.
—Dean Kamen, the chairman and founder of Segway
The Segway HT is a self-balancing electric personal transportation platform. Two 1.88 kW motors turn each of the two wheels independently, and at variable speeds if necessary. The neodymium-iron-boron motors are constructed with two independent sets of windings, each driven by a separate board and motor. Under normal conditions, both sets of windings work in parallel, sharing the load.
Twin Li-ion battery packs provide power for a range of 15-24 miles at a top speed of 12.5 mph.
The purpose of EasyConnect II is to provide insight into whether the introduction and integration of innovative technologies at Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) sites can significantly increase transit access and use.
A TOD is essentially an aggregation of commercial, retail, and residential developments around a transit facility.
While a range of configurations and definitions are found in the literature, there is general consensus among transit professionals as to what constitutes a TOD: “a pattern of dense, diverse, pedestrian-friendly land uses near transit nodes that, under the right conditions, translates into higher patronage.”
—EasyConnect II paper (below)
The components of the EasyConnect II trial include:
Shared-use low-speed modes vehicles, including electric bicycles and non-motorized bicycles in addition to the Segway HTs, available for commuting from the BART station to area businesses.
Electronic lockers (“eLockers”) at the station and nearby businesses that are a unique physical and technology design solution to the problem of low-speed mode access to traditional transit.
Smart parking technology to provide cost-effective and space-efficient solutions to parking at the TOD site.
A web-based information system that allows users to reserve, pay, and access travel information, moving seamlessly across a range of available modal options and transportation services.
Innovative distributed power generation technologies to help meet growing electrical loads associated with the introduction of advanced electronic transportation and information technology systems. The research team is planning on the use of a hydrogen fuel cell for this.
Resources:
Isn't this nation fat enough? How about walking?
Posted by: t | 12 June 2006 at 06:43 PM
yeah, or normal old pedal powered bike!!!
Posted by: Ritch | 12 June 2006 at 09:07 PM
That's fantastic.
Posted by: Joseph Willemssen | 12 June 2006 at 10:22 PM
Im about 400lb and I walk when I go short distances like to the local park. It always amazes me people driving to go just 1000 feet. Mind you around here I do understand much of the time it simply is icky weather wise to walk.
Posted by: wintermane | 12 June 2006 at 11:21 PM
Talk about complicating your life when you can just walk.
Posted by: Joe Thompson | 13 June 2006 at 01:09 AM
The Segway HTs strike me as overkill for the purpose of getting drivers to choose commute alternatives. Also, are these devices really powerful enough to climb and descend the steep hills of the Bay Area with e.g. a 300lb load?
Here in Vienna (Austria) we have something called CityBike. Near all the major railway and subway stations, there are special stalls for special bicycles equipped with tracking devices. You buy a membership card for EUR 1 with which you can unlock any CityBike and use it. The first hour is free of charge, after that there are progressive fees that are automatically debited to your bank account. If you damage the bike or fail to return it to a CityBike stall, there's a stiff penalty. Special rates apply for tourists without local bank accounts. The system has proved successful and is being expanded.
http://www.citybikewien.at/
Click on the "English" button if you don't speak German.
Of course, a CityBike concept only works in a city with sufficient building density, well-developed public transportation systems and space for parking the bikes nearby. This applies in many European cities, much less so in North America.
Another option is to take along a (folding) bicycle in the train. You can also choose to commute with an electric and/or covered bicycle to avoid working up too much of a sweat on the way to the office (as opposed to the way home)
http://www.electric-bikes.com/
http://www.aerorider.com/index.php?lang=en
These options are expensive compared to regular bikes but much cheaper than an extra car. They also let you exercise as you commute and drastically reduce your fuel bills/CO2 footprint.
Posted by: Rafael Seidl | 13 June 2006 at 02:04 AM
Agree,
citybike is the way to go. Good for your health , zero emission, no power source needed except for yourself and way cheaper than a Segway. It would dare to say; the Segway is sort of the American way...
Posted by: Joep Fruman | 13 June 2006 at 03:49 AM
The Segway was built for America without an American price. At $3000 its just to expensive. Except for being cool and reducing needed rider skill it does not do much more then a gas powered skateboard would at 1/6 the price.
Posted by: hampden wireless | 13 June 2006 at 04:17 AM
Actauly the issue is one of scale. Because american cities are very young and were mostly built after the car came about they are much larger. Instead of dealing with a compact city and a few mass transit lines your dealing WITHOUT the funds needed for those lines and about 40x the space to cover. Your also dealing with about 10x less time that the city has had to build up infrastructure.
So the designers of multi modal mass transit have to deal with gaps far larger then in europe. Gaps too large for a operson to walk or ride a bike across.
In the end the ONLY option is prt. You use conventional mass transit between cities and use prt within them. But some nitwits are blocking prt so ecpect that to take a few more decades.
Posted by: wintermane | 13 June 2006 at 04:22 AM
Gaps too large for a bike? The maximum Segway speed is 12 miles per hour. I can do that on my bike easily. I think the real issue is American's obsession with personal scent. They don't want to get sweaty for fear of smelling bad. When I tell my coworkers I'm riding my bike to work, that's the first thought that comes into their head.
Posted by: Icelander | 13 June 2006 at 05:43 AM
Well,at least we all agree. The sedgway is a solution in search of a problem. This is technology run amuk. Why, our President can't even ride one without falling down.
Posted by: t | 13 June 2006 at 06:57 AM
Wintermane:
I am with you. We need PRT, but not one is willing to invest, yet. I expect to see it in India or China long before being adopted in the U.S. However, a CityBike or Segway could be useful if we built infrastructure to accomodate them, or trained drivers not to run over them. In the State, IMHO it is simply too risky for most people to ride a bike on our streets or roads.
Posted by: JMartin | 13 June 2006 at 09:11 AM
I didnt say it was a food idea I would wride a segway after all im just saying its a distance they dont expect most americans will cross sans car. Concoidering I know people who cant go 1000 feet without a car I think they are very right.
Posted by: wintermane | 13 June 2006 at 09:16 AM
JMartin -
a few (ok, very few) municipalities in the US have bike lines, others signposted bike routes that guide cyclists away from major thoroughfares.
As for traffic safety, a good place to start would be tying vehicle insurance rates to the completion of an official drivers' ed class on pedestrian & cyclist safety. Such a class could be made mandatory for those applying for their driver's license for the first time. Fwiw, my personal experience on the West Coast was that Americans and Canadians anyhow drive far less aggressively than Europeans do.
Cyclists could be required to wear helmets and mount reflectors (all directions) plus lighting on their bikes. MTB outfitters would have to figure out appropriately ruggedized solutions. For those who never rode a bike before, or who have not done so in a long time, the DMV could offer a class and training area (for a fee).
In addition, carmakers could be required to provide greater low-speed frontal crash safety for pedestrians and cyclists. This is already the case in Europe.
In sum, the traffic safety argument is a red herring when it comes to bicycles. If you want to get results, you have to be prepared to take calculated risks.
Posted by: Rafael Seidl | 13 June 2006 at 09:55 AM
I really wonder why people keep bringing up bikes. Do you think that people are unaware that bikes exist? That the technology hasn't had enough time to be exposed to the public as an option?
In reality, any distance greater than a 5 minute walk (about 3 blocks) is considered "too far" by most Americans and they just use their car, then. The average person spends a huge portion of their income on their car, most of which is sunk costs (ie, depreciation and insurance). So the less one uses one's car, the more expensive its marginal use becomes.
The reason transit fails in this country is trip speed. Unless you live directly on or very near an express route that goes very close or directly to your destination, then transit, for most Americans, is a huge time suck. Solving the last mile problem with feeder electric vehicles (and the Segway is relatively low-cost compared to NEV alternatives like GEM cars) would allow for the development of more widespread high-speed transit. As it stands, most transit is buses with stops every 2 blocks, since the "feeder system" is walking. NEVs allow for much greater distances between transit stops, and hence, faster travel times. In the end, too, it will allow for far more express routes in number, to help move away from the hub-and-spoke type of system design which tends to predominate now.
Posted by: Joseph Willemssen | 13 June 2006 at 10:18 AM
A Segway is a great piece of technology, but it still does not compare to a bicycle.
A Segway i180 costs $3000, weighs 80lbs, goes a maximum of 12.5mph and has a maximum range of 24 miles.
A nice touring bicycle (like a Jamis Coda) with accessories like lights, pannier bags, and fenders costs $800 and weighs 30lbs. With a reasonably experienced rider, it will have a maximum speed over 18mph and a range of over 40 miles. With the money leftover, you could buy a used Civic and get 35mpg on longer trips.
The only real advantage the Segway has is that the driver does not have to work. Anyone with a Segway friendly commute who wants to reduce environmental impact could have started riding a bicycle long before the Segway was invented.
Posted by: Peter | 13 June 2006 at 10:34 AM
That's a very rational argument, Peter. Now - why do so few people avail themselves of those options?
The only real advantage the Segway has is that the driver does not have to work.
Like it or not, that's about the only advantage that most people care about.
Posted by: Joseph Willemssen | 13 June 2006 at 10:42 AM
You don't have to work with an electric bike, either, and those are substantially cheaper than a Segway.
Posted by: Rafael Seidl | 13 June 2006 at 11:06 AM
You don't have to work with an electric bike, either, and those are substantially cheaper than a Segway.
So, you think people are unaware of the existence of electric bicycles? Is your complaint about Segways per se, or is it just a critique of people being too "lazy" to walk or bike a mile?
I'm not a big fan of the Segway, but this article isn't really about Segways. It's about a coordinated approach to transit using feeder vehicles that are part of a vehicle pool. That's what's of interest to me, not some fruitless appeal about the wonders of bicycles and "if Americans would only" types of speculation.
Segways are not completely analogous to bicycles, anyway.
Posted by: Joseph Willemssen | 13 June 2006 at 12:35 PM
Main reasons mass transit fails..
1 Poeple are ICKY! the more people the worse it gets.
2 Most places simply dont have the money for the busses or rail cars needed. Remember most busses now are a million each thats buttloads of cash. A road is cheap.
3 While a car or road is mostly financed by those who will use it mass transit is mostly financed by people who HATE the way it works.
4 You cant shop for much via mass transit.
5 There simply is a fear one will get far from home and not be able to get home.
6 Stikes.
Posted by: wintermane | 13 June 2006 at 12:51 PM
I guess you haven't been to Japan, wintermane.
Posted by: Joseph Willemssen | 13 June 2006 at 12:57 PM
"I really wonder why people keep bringing up bikes. Do you think that people are unaware that bikes exist?"
In a word, YES. People discard bicycles off hand as a viable transportation option. Why? Because transportation planning and execution have eliminated possibilities for a viable bicycle transit infrastructure in the United States. Yes, Oil Boyz, Sand and Gravel Boyz, and the Automakers all prefer that we use a ICE vehicle rather than walk, bicycle, or take public transit for our transportation needs.
Bicycling is incredibly viable, IF, the risks posed to the bicycle operator are reduced. I bicycle commute 28 miles round trip approximately 2 days/week for the past 8 years. How many times have I hit a pedestrian or vehicle due to my negligence? Zero. How many times as a motor vehicle operator hit me due to their negligence? Twice.
Without well marked bicycle lanes, bicycle paths, bicycle parking facilities, and facilities for bicycle commuters to "clean up" (shower, primp, etc.), along with enforced traffic safety laws to promote the equal rights to roadways for bicyclists, the pool of bicycle commuters will be those who assume the risk to their health at the hands of careless motor vehicle operators.
A shame really, as the bicycle offers significant energy efficiencies and exercise benefits.
http://www.exploratorium.edu/cycling/humanpower1.html
http://www.biketrans.com/info.html
http://eco-living.net/writings/transport/effengine.html
http://www.sightline.org/research/sust_toolkit/solutions/bicycle
Posted by: john galt | 13 June 2006 at 04:57 PM
Again, John - I'm not the one who needs convincing. Bikes have been around for a very long time, and given time, things have come to where they've come. You can mark bike lanes, put in showers -- do all the infrastructural build-out -- but it still takes tremendous effort and discipline to bike 28 miles a day just to get to and from work. Put that in a climate like ours (-30 in the winter and 100+ in the summer) with the terrain we have, then it's really not worth discussing.
And you point out something else - you don't hurt anyone but you've been hit. Do you think people like getting hit by a car? I've been hit more than once and it sucks. I could have very very easily died.
Sweat, danger, exertion, social stigma -- you name it, it's got a lot against it, and it's not going to change as long as bikes share the same horizontal plane with vehicles weighing tons going very fast. It's especially true for the kinds of distances you commute.
Posted by: Joseph Willemssen | 13 June 2006 at 05:12 PM
Actauly the stress of mass transit in japan is immense. Poeple do not like being crammed in that close and as the fabric of japan tears apart its getting worse fast. The gov is frantic about it because they know there is nothing they can do to stop the decline.
And again on the bike what percentage of the population can ride a bike? Its not even 50%. You can stand on a moving platform wich is realy all the segway is and yes cheap segwayesque scooters are popping up that are fully stable and far cheaper.
Oh and you do understand that as soon as developing nations get enough money thier people toss the bikes and get motorbikes and cars... because it increases range and decreases strain.
Posted by: wintermane | 14 June 2006 at 07:11 AM
Joseph and wintermane...
Google research a bit on Holland, Denmark, Germany, Belgium, China, Vietnam, etc. It is quite easy to conclude that in excess of 50% of the population in these countries utilize the bicycle as a critical component of their transportation system. The countries in Europe I've mentioned are most definitely "developed nations" and they have definitely not tossed bicycles as a transportation option. On a side note, I don't buy the obesity card as a barrier to ride a bicycle for transportation. I see way too many folks with obesity challenges riding bikes to work and school on a regular basis.
The point is, reasonable behaviorial change is the primary factor necessary to integrate the bicycle in a transportation ecosystem. Of course, it benefits dense population areas and short trips the most. Europeans have proven that temperature and weather variations are not a barrier to utilizing the bicycle as a transportation tool.
The Segway is really limited in what it can offer. What it does provide is essentially a compact and maneuverable electric wheelchair. For persons with disabilities, the Segway serves a niche. Otherwise, it is a very expensive gimmick.
Posted by: john galt | 14 June 2006 at 07:31 AM