Good day my good friend.

With the whiff of civil unrest very much in the air in the UK, I feel that it is my duty to remind you all that should you wish to exercise your right to protest, you do so in a peaceful and non-confrontational manner. Like these fine people in Germany who decided to cycle en masse on a Autobahn. I like their style. Very Critical Mass like.

If you have any suggestions for interesting news items or bits of research to include in this newsletter, you can email me.

You should also join a lot of like-minded people at Mobility Camp in Bristol in September. Get your tickets now. Sponsorship slots are also available.

James

Shared in a capitalist sense is not the same as shared in a public sense

Right, theory time. This pretty good article by Jun Zhang puts together a good critique of shared bikes. Namely that there is not much shared about them, as private companies effectively tried to fill a hole in providing shared transport that the public sector could not do (with the notable exception of Paris at the time when shared bikes started taking off). Plus, their motives are different. Which of course makes sense, as any transport company must sweat their physical assets as hard as they can to generate a return. No wonder revenue per ride and number of rides per asset are the main metrics for shared mobility operators.

This points to something more fundamental – the difference in the value of common assets. When something is seen as a social asset (primarily, but not solely, publicly owned) its value is simply in being there in times of need. But when it is privately owned, it pivots to a rate of a return on the investment made. And in transport, which has a high capital cost base, this means focussing on trips that give the best utilisation. For a while, we forgot those subtle differences.

The environmental impacts of charging EVs is more variable than you think

I’m not going to kick start a whole discussion on the life cycle emissions of electric vehicles. That science is (reasonably) settled. In summary: electric vehicles are probably better over the course of their life than fossil fuel vehicles. What I want to do right now is focus on something that is covered in this great article on emissions from charging vehicles in the UK: When the vehicles are charged matters more than you think when it comes to the emissions from charging.

The most common time of day when electric vehicles are plugged in to charge is from 5pm and running overnight. Between 4:30pm and 6:30pm is also the typical ‘grid peak,’ and renewables reduce in their output overnight. In both situations, fossil fuel power is needed to keep the lights on. So this poses the interesting thought. Could we reduce the carbon impact of electric vehicles by simply shifting the times when they are charged? It seems logical.

Random things

These links are meant to make you think about the things that affect our world in transport, and not just think about transport itself. I hope that you enjoy them.

• Elon Musk Says World Needs More Oil and Gas as Bridge to Renewables (Bloomberg)

• Civilian AI Is Already Being Misused by the Bad Guys (Spectrum IEEE)

• Nazi warships revealed as Danube River levels drop (Live Science)

• Why I should be running vital public services, by a pirate (Daily Mash)

• A US Freight Rail Crisis Threatens More Supply Chain Chaos (Wired)

Something interesting

Helen Pidd wrote an article on the hatred of cyclists in the UK. And this thread by Robert Davis adds a lot of good meat to the bones.

If you do nothing else today, then do this

This article by the Centre for Cities on what a future-proof High Street looks like is interesting reading. A lot makes a lot of sense, and seems basic, but the point is that many High Streets will try and achieve this in different ways. Maybe the pandemic may see the end of High Streets being all the same.