Green call to ban freeways
28 Apr, 2008
43 Comments 
The Public Transport Users Association has today made a submission to the Garnaut Climate Change Review calling for a halt to the construction of new freeways and other major arterial roads in a bid to cut emissions from vehicles.
Using a document they claim backs their view point, the group says that the expansion of freeways does nothing to alleviate congestion and instead encourages car use and worsens gridlock.
“The existence of congestion indicates high latent demand, so an increase in road capacity quickly induces additional traffic,” the report says.
“The need to shift a large proportion of motor vehicle journeys to walking, cycling and public transport, as well as the counter-productive effects of road capacity expansion, both demonstrate the need for a moratorium on new roads.”
Critics of the submission agree a combination of better roads and the construction of more efficient, reliable and more frequent public transport would be a better answer than to isolate one particular mode of transport individually, especially given the financial losses that could face the transport industry as a result of such drastic “knee jerk” responses.
Australian transport emissions make up only 14% of all national greenhouse gases annually.
Location: Home / Car News / ...
Rate Post: 
(5 votes, average: 4.2 out of 5)
Loading ...
Share it:
Print it:
![Vehicle Dynamics Area 1 [1024x768].jpg](http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/gallery/2008fordfalconofficial/Vehicle Dynamics Area 1 [1024x768].jpg "Vehicle Dynamics Area 1 [1024x768].jpg")
by Reckless1
April 28th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Typically Green logic. They don’t even have the brains to figure out that vehicles (including their beloved buses) crawling in traffic jams are producing many times more emissions per minute than vehicles which are flowing along freeways and getting to their destinations much quicker.
And have you ever tried taking your weekly family supermarket shopping home on a bike?
April 28th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
I wonder how many of these tree hugging, whale saving, dread locked morons drive around in 30 year old, blue smoke belching Dato’s? Give me a break. What’s next!?
April 28th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
LOL…..Casey, good call. I have seen some shocking smoke belching heaps being driven by these mungbean chewers.
April 28th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
They haven’t got a clue like anyone with extreme views and shave those armpits for god sake.
April 28th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Yeah I can see how crusing at 100km/h on an open road would produce more fumes than having hundreds of cars at a stand still on back streets - good thinking hippies, more bong fumes than car fumes in these thoughts clearly!
April 28th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
The really sad thing is our governments are giving the hippy, land-rights-for-gay-whales crowd more credence than motoring enthusiasts, who are for the most part normal people!
April 28th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
And for another thing…since many greenies are on the dole, they do not have to use freeways to travel, thus this suggestion must make sense to them. It makes me mad seeing who my tax money is supporting, sometimes…
End of rant…
April 28th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
These wankers are just car haters and have no credibility!!!!…….What governments need to do is give incentives for businesses to move to outer suburb’s and regional centres and also encourage immigrants to go to regional centres not just Sydney and Melbourne…..that would be a start!!!!
April 28th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Realcars…..They also need to learn how to use soap and toothpaste!!!
April 28th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Why doesn’t this surprise me? It’s one thing to have an excellent public transport system - something we do not have currently - but to call for this kind of drastic measure shows a complete lack of fore-thought and the typical absent mindedness that brings so much disrepute to the green movement.
Freeways reduce conjestion by centralising the traffic flow and reduce emissions thusley by providing “free” moving motoring.
If all freeways were well contructed and met with consistant, free flowing roads at all on & off points, they would work well to suit the needs of the motoring public and transport industry alike.
Where this falls apart is when you jump off the freeway only to be faced with a road clogged with bikes lanes, tram stops, pedestrian malls, speed humps, traffic islands and rail gates.
Keep the systems seperate. Underground rail networks - proven in many countries O/S. Seperate lines for light rail/tram and road systems, and as for push bikes? Use the bike paths you whinge about, our tax dollars pay for, and lay dormant 90% of the time instead of clogging the roads which were intended for CARS! Our registration fees pay for the roads, pushbikes do not.
April 28th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Casey, wake up man… they drive around in 30 to 40 year old Kombis. Peace out dude. (And they are much less efficient than an old dato)
April 28th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Dlr1 - Love it mate!!! So very true.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
errr, stop-start traffic (on normal roads) creates a lot more polution than that on fast arterial roads. but a better rail network (ie, Melbourne metro) is needed before people will even think of giving up their cars.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
The thing is the labor government will probably listen to them to. Soon they’ll be trying to ban cars with larger than 2.0 litre capacity and mandate the highest speed limit on country roads be 80 kays. Because “It would reduce pollution”
April 28th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
hahaha…..some VERY funny yet too true posts. As an ex-Tasmanian I can tell you the place is crawling with them,Greenies I mean! The worst thing is about the Green politicians is they need to practice what they preach!
I say ban the Greenies, and Bill Osborne who wants to ditch the V8 in Australia cause he thinks we are becoming a more emissions level conscious in Australia………….how big an impact does he think that banning only V8 Fords is really going to make? I think that if the Greenies stopped farting would have a larger impact every year
April 28th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
The greenies are destroying the planet with their ludicrous talk. Talking produces more CO2, and these wackjobs do a lot of pointless blabbing!
April 28th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
umm you people do know they are talking about congestion right? cruising at 100km/h isnt congestion. At peak hours of the day the cars are barely moving. If you make more freeways, then more people will use them, hence more polution.
if you dont make anymore, people wont take freeways and will try to find other ways to get around.
neither situation wins. just one of them creates more polution.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:50 pm
The amount of money wasted on new freeways is mind boggling. All it achieves is moving a traffic jam from one place to another because they just build more and more and more intersections. The cost of this is not only for the roads but the cost in the extra fuel use as cars are sitting idling for long periods. Why they dont just build overpasses is beyond me. That way the traffic would never stop. Dont anyone tell me it would cost too much when they seem to have an endless supply of money to build all these useless traffic jam creating new roadways.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Typical Capitalist garbage coming from middle class Anglo Saxons that think the world is theirs to rape of all its resources.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
What a load of nonsense from the greenies once again. I once worked in a quarry supplying stone for road building which was subject to greenie protestors, when asked how they got to the protest they said “by car”…say no more.
I’m all for congestion charging in city centres and increased parking charges to pursuade folks out of cars in cities but as usual the poor get hammered whilst the rich, driving high polluting cars can afford the charges.
Rich get richer the poor stay beaten down.
Parhaps I should call myself Robin Hood
April 28th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
i gotta love the very last bit of the article…….
“Australian transport emissions make up only 14% of all national greenhouse gases annually.”
yep motorvehicles are a big problem. ha ha ha ha ha ha
14 F**king percent!!!!!!!
thats nothing. in that 14 percent includes all tha big prime movers that run 24/7 on our roads.
of that 14% it wouldnt surprice me if only 4% was attributed to private motorists. the other 10% could very well be commercial transport.
also 14% is how mush stuff is exiting exhaust pipes, not a measure of what harm is actually being done to the planet.
i mean how much of that 14% is gobbled up by the trees naturally absorbing it? probably like 800% of it
April 28th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Yes, freeways really do solve congestion problems, while cutting pollution! Just look at LA which has one of the most extensive freeway network in the world. You can get around at an incredible 60kph on the freeways or less than 40kph on the arterials. They don’t call it the smog bowl for nothing either. So let’s duplicate that here!
Also funny how in cities with good public transport, that the public transport system doesn’t fall apart from bike lanes, pedestrian malls, etc. Maybe that’s because public transport is a far better mode in cities?
April 28th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Yeh Right on Andrew M - seems the poor old motorist doing their 15,0000k’s a year are the unfair target of the politicians. Its another scam to get more taxes from us to bolster their fat lux lives.
Business pulute more than the people….come the revoltion
April 28th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
15K K’s….sorry
April 28th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
No name,
phew,
was gonna say if you crank out 150,000k’s a year the tree huggers must arrive at your door step like a bible basher
April 28th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
KJ what’s with the racism? I don’t think that is called for on a car web site man.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
Goddamn hippies have crossed the line this time!!!!!!!!
April 28th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
150K’s yeh that was a bit much. Getting excited on the keyboard…
The most I ever done was 95,000Kms in a year for 2years(1.8LX Mondeo Wagon) a few years back. Trying to keep things a bit mopre local nowadays. And some folks down under don’t think we pohmms travel far cos blightys so small.
April 28th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
The greenies are the reason that traffic in the major cities is as slow as it is because they pushed for not only a bus lane but a bicycle lane.. which together takes up at least a lane and a half - and as they’re on both sides of the road thats alot of space which should be 3 extra lanes of traffic
The other thing is that when there is a bike lane how many cyclists [particularly the kamikaze couriers] do you see actually using them they’re often darting in and out between cars listening to their i-pods etc bumping mirrors and going through red lights.
I think that all vehicles that are going to be used on the raod should have a number plate because when a cycle courier hits you theres no way your car can identify who was riding it as they all look the same and are long gone yet they can tell which car hit them
April 28th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Wheelnut “theres no way your car can identify who was riding it as they all look the same and are long gone yet they can tell which car hit them”
Careful…looks like you might have given the game away that cycles are more efficient in town!!!!
April 29th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Just to put the roadies on notice about the true Costs of roads in australia
Road costs - Road construction & maintenance, land acquisition, road trauma, FBT and fuel tax concessions and subsidies $34,300m
Govt Revenue recouped in fuel excise, registration, insurance, tolls $26,250m
Roads are costing the Australian community a conservative $8billion per year. Road users really dont pay their way.
April 29th, 2008 at 11:11 am
In the ineterests of balance, while efforts to combat congestion often focus on freight and commercial traffic, passenger cars make up 80.7% of traffic in Australia’s capital cities; 82.5% in Melbourne, and 82.9% in Sydney. So the single occupant vehicle is the major pollution and congestion source.
* If it was a country, the Australian transport sector would be one of the top 50 greenhouse polluters in the world.
April 29th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Ill man the bulldozer with an uzi - lets get cracking on making some more freeways!
Whos with me!
Seriously though… stupiest idea. Ever.
April 29th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Please change the headline. It should read
Freeways call to ban Greenies
April 29th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
ummm.. banning freeways IS a good idea
don’t get me wrong - i work for one of the local car companies - i love cars to bits and enjoy nothing more then driving on nice uncongested roads…but
most of you are forgetting the true traffic impact freeways have. sure they reduce congestion - but THIS IS ALWAYS IN THE SHORT TERM. Case & point, the Monash Freeway between Warrigal & Punt Rd was only 2 lanes, it is now 3 lanes - this increase in capacity created an improvement for something like 5-10 years? Now the freeway is in absolute grid lock to the point they have decided to add an additional lane. This in turn will last for another 5 years?? This “short term” increase in capacity will entice more people to drive along the freeway - clogging up all arterial roads leading to it - can you imagine Toorak Rd, Bourke Rd, Blackburn Rd, Warrigal Rd with a conservative 10% more traffic on it? What is the solution then?… build more freeways of course!! in a world of increased fuel costs and concerns on global warming - how can this be logical?
Freeways do nothing more then INDUCE more traffic onto the road network - which will inevitabily lead to worse congestion. LA is a prime example - already LA & most of Europe have already woken up to this fact and have basically stopped or severely slowed Motorway construction over the past 20 years - its a shame Australia is still lagging.
The long term solution is major investment in public transport - especially heavy rail/metro systems - it is the only viable long term solution for cities as large as Melbourne & Sydney.
April 29th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
So much money is collected by freeway/motorway toll I doubt that they will stop making more(in oz anyway)at least until pay per KM,GPS based toll systems come on line.Which sux
April 29th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Hmmmm - So the Eastlink is awaste of time. pffft
April 29th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
Fact - Public transport in Australia is several decades away from a system which can deliver consistent “on time” performance as is the case in London, Paris and most major European cities.
If these fools have their way, you might as well buy a horse and cart and start a business in saddle making. Don’t laugh, the great majority of our state and federal public servants love to side with the loud minority. Be warned.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Admittedly the rail system is not much use, flying works, as does Melbournes trams. However I do have a problem with having to own a car and the expenses that go with it then being told to use privately owned “for profit” public transport. The punters loses out all the way. If I caught the bus to work it costs me about $9.40, fuel for the car ~$3.66. I still need the car for other things so I still bear the cost for insurance rego etc. Also the bus would take 45 mins the car 14 mins.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
why is it that the greens place so much creedence to the prius’s 45mpg and why bother with the city/country petrol cycle. I know im simple but my cars seem to use less petrol past Katoomba were I can constantly go at 90 to 100 kph than along Parramata Road were I can go at a constant 0 to 30 kph.
So make the freeways 2 lanes wider and start developing cars like the EV-1 to do 400km between charges so that no-one is idling at stop lights burning good fuel.
April 30th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I’ve not read all the replies as Captain Mainwaring hit the nail on the head in the first post.
Encouraging more walking and so on has it merits, but not if it means banning freeways.
May 4th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
AGREE with a much of what hmmmm says but I used to work around the Ringwood Bayswater Wantirna area,traffic nightmare due to tha lack of alternative arterial roads,coupled with enormous industrial & population growth over the past 30 years.
EAST LINK is twenty-five years overdue.
Infrastructure planning post WW2 has been reactive.
Houses first then you think about how to service a growing population,particularly with transport.
It was not always like this.
Glen Waverley rail line will one day(does)need to be extended out to possibly to Rowville & beyond.The alternative?Force everyone into cars?New York style underground subway or overhead?A headache for future planners.On the other side of town it is just as bad.St Albans/Deer Park at any time of day can be bad news.Both regions have poor public transport compounded by insufficient arterial roads which have enormous housing estates within the boundaries.
But there are two major Freeways nearby.
I count myself as fortunate,400m from the rail station,
7k’s from the city,car left at home MON-FRI but I think the planners of the past have presumed I am typical.
May 6th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Err, I think what they were saying was that if more resources were put into public transport (none of you can argue that anywhere near the amount spent on roads is spent on public transport), and as much effort was put into improving rail links, than less people would need to drive and hence the roads would be less congested. Hence, less stop-start traffic, hence less emissions. Free flowing freeways? Anyone here used the (Melbourne) Eastern in the morning? And don’t tell me that Eastlink is going to make that situation any better! I’d use the train if it was available for me - and I’m no tree hugging, dreadlocked greenie moron…