public transport pros and cons essay

14 Advantages and Disadvantages of Public Transport

• Redaction Team
• February 19, 2024
• Entrepreneurship , Remote Work

Advantages of Public Transport

• Cost-Effectiveness : Public transport is often cheaper than using a personal vehicle, especially for long distances or traveling from one city to another.
• Reduced Carbon Emissions : Public transport helps reduce carbon emissions and contributes to combating global warming by promoting the use of shared vehicles over individual cars.
• Accessibility : Public transport services, such as trains and buses, are accessible to everyone, providing a reliable way to get around, particularly in densely populated areas.
• Convenience : Public transport operates on a timetable, allowing passengers to plan their journeys in advance and providing a convenient alternative to driving.
• Environmental Benefits : Using public transport instead of a private car helps reduce smog and air pollution, contributing to cleaner and healthier cities.
• Community Collaboration : Public transport fosters collaboration by bringing people together from different backgrounds and facilitating social interaction during journeys.
• Efficiency : Public transport services, such as trains and buses, offer efficient transportation options, especially during peak hours, helping to alleviate traffic congestion.

Disadvantages of Public Transport

• Limited Flexibility : Public transport may not offer the same level of flexibility as using a personal vehicle, as passengers must adhere to predetermined routes and schedules.
• Crowding : Public transport services, especially during rush hours, can be crowded and uncomfortable, leading to inconvenience for passengers.
• Reliability Issues : Public transport services may experience delays or disruptions due to factors such as mechanical issues, weather conditions, or infrastructure problems.
• Privacy Concerns : Using public transport may raise privacy concerns for some passengers, as they have limited control over their personal space and interactions with others.
• Safety : Public transport may pose safety risks, such as accidents or incidents, although these are generally rare and measures are in place to ensure passenger safety.
• Accessibility Challenges : Public transport may not be accessible to everyone, particularly those with mobility issues or disabilities, due to limitations in infrastructure or services.
• Limited Coverage : In some areas, public transport services may be limited or nonexistent, making it difficult for residents to access transportation options.

What is Public Transport?

Public transport refers to the transportation system that is available for use by the general public. It is a mode of transportation that is provided by the government or other authorities, and it includes various types such as buses, trains, trams, and subways.

Definition of Public Transport

Public transport, also known as public transportation, is a system of transportation that is available and accessible to the public. It involves shared vehicles and facilities that are used for the movement of people from one place to another.

Types of Public Transport

There are several types of public transport available, including buses, trains, trams, subways, and ferries. Each type of transport offers different benefits and caters to different commuting needs.

Benefits of Public Transport

Public transport offers a number of benefits to users and the environment. It is a cost-effective mode of transportation, reduces traffic congestion, and is an environmentally friendly option compared to private vehicles.

Cost-effective Transportation

One of the major advantages of public transport is its cost-effectiveness. Using public transport, such as buses or trains, can be significantly cheaper than owning and maintaining a private vehicle. Public transport fares are generally more affordable, especially for regular commuters.

Reduced Traffic Congestion

Public transport plays a key role in reducing traffic congestion on roads. By encouraging people to use public transport instead of private vehicles, the number of cars on the road decreases, leading to less congestion and smoother traffic flow. This benefit is particularly important in densely populated urban areas where traffic congestion is a significant problem.

Environmentally Friendly Option

Public transport is considered an environmentally friendly mode of transportation. It helps reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions compared to private vehicles. Public transport vehicles, such as buses and trains, can carry a large number of passengers, which means fewer individual vehicles on the road and reduced emissions.

Reliability and Delays

One of the main drawbacks of public transport is the potential for delays and unreliability. Public transport schedules may not always be strictly followed, leading to inconveniences for passengers who rely on a particular timing to reach their destinations. Factors such as traffic conditions and mechanical issues can also contribute to delays and disruptions in service

Limited Flexibility

Public transport systems operate on fixed routes and schedules, which can limit flexibility for users. Passengers are required to adhere to predetermined schedules and routes, which may not always align with their specific travel needs. This lack of flexibility can be inconvenient, especially for individuals who require more personalized transportation options.

Crowdedness and Lack of Privacy

Public transport can often be crowded, especially during peak hours. Passengers may have to stand or share limited seating space with other commuters, resulting in a lack of privacy. Additionally, crowded conditions can be uncomfortable and may increase the risk of the spread of infectious diseases.

Pros and Cons of Using Public Transport

Pros of using public transport.

Using public transport offers several advantages. It is an affordable option, reduces traffic congestion, and has a lower environmental impact compared to private vehicles. Public transport also allows passengers to relax, read, or work during their commute, making efficient use of travel time.

Cons of Using Public Transport

Despite the benefits, there are also drawbacks to using public transport. These include potential delays and unreliability, limited flexibility in terms of routes and schedules, and crowdedness which can reduce comfort and privacy for passengers.

Comparison with Private Transport

When comparing public transport with private transport, there are several factors to consider. Private vehicles offer more flexibility and convenience in terms of scheduling and routes. However, private transport is often more expensive, contributes to traffic congestion and air pollution, and requires significant maintenance and parking expenses.

The Impact of Public Transport on Pollution

Air pollution and emissions.

Public transport plays a crucial role in reducing air pollution and harmful emissions. Private vehicles are major contributors to air pollution, releasing pollutants such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter. By encouraging people to use public transport instead of private vehicles, the overall level of air pollution can be significantly reduced.

Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Greenhouse gas emissions, primarily carbon dioxide, contribute to global climate change. Private vehicles are significant sources of greenhouse gas emissions. By promoting the use of public transport, which typically emits lower levels of greenhouse gases per passenger, the transportation sector can make a positive impact in reducing overall emissions.

Public Transport as a Solution to Congestion

Traffic congestion is a major challenge in urban areas, leading to wasted time, increased fuel consumption, and higher levels of air pollution. Public transport provides a solution to congestion by reducing the number of vehicles on the road. Implementing efficient public transport systems can help alleviate congestion and enhance the overall transportation infrastructure.

Privacy Overview

Pros & cons: Making public transportation free

Experts present their pros and cons lists for making public transit free for communities.

Public transit is an important part of many people’s daily lives. Image: epSos.de / CC BY

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0

December 13, 2019. Now that Kansas City has become the first major U.S. city to make all public transportation free , the debate over whether or not this is a viable option for most cities is back in the spotlight. The viewpoints of the following experts are still very much relevant to today’s discussion.

The following question was recently posted on Quora : “What are the arguments against and for making public transportation free?”

Read the diverse opinions from experts below.

Don Johnson, Urban Planner and Economist

There are a couple of economic arguments for making public transportation free (or at least cheaper than it costs to provide:)

• Cars impose a lot of costs on society that drivers don’t pay for
• Everyone benefits when people can travel around freely.

The technical term for the first one is “negative externality,” and there are two big ones associated with cars: pollution and congestion. Every time you start your car and get on the road, you put mono-nitrogen oxides, VOCs, ozone, and carbon dioxide in the air, and you make the road more crowded and thus slower. These are real costs, measurable in environmental damage, health care costs, and wasted time, that other people have to pay for .

Economists like efficiency, and efficient economic systems are ones in which people pay for costs directly, because then they can make choices rationally. (I’ll wait for everyone to stop laughing before I continue.) That’s why economists and planners have been fantasizing about congestion pricing for so long - in a well-designed congestion pricing scheme, drivers actually pay more when they choose a congested road. And if there were an additional tax on gas dedicated to relieving air pollution and improving respiratory health (the existing gas tax in the US only pays for roads) that would make drivers pay the cost of pollution and also be economically efficient. But in the absence of those, subsidizing public transit (which gets people to drive less than they otherwise would) is kind of a second best solution.

The technical term for the second argument is “public good.” It’s good for everyone if transportation costs are reduced - workers can get to more jobs, companies can choose from more workers and more suppliers, people can take more spur-of-the moment road trips to outlet malls, etc. Robert J. Kolker will say that making the price zero don’t make it free -- somebody somewhere is paying -- and he’s right, but under some conditions you can probably show that making everyone pay to make transit free for some people actually makes everyone collectively better off. Again Robert will say that’s not fair, but this is not a fairness argument but a collective benefit argument. But in any case our society is not run by economist philosopher kings.

Because economists famously don’t agree on anything I have to point out that there are also economic arguments against making transit free:

• Free transit is a poor substitute for making drivers pay actual costs of driving
• Free anything makes people use it too much - in theory, anyway, transit that’s too cheap is just as bad as driving that’s too cheap. Somebody will end up paying for lots of trips that didn’t really need to be made.
• As noted above, people may feel that it’s not fair that they have to pay for other people’s bus tickets, even if it does make everyone better off. I’m personally not very sympathetic - pretty much every decision society makes is unfair to somebody. Is it fair to me that we spent $62 billion to develop the F-22 fighter plane, when I don’t feel any safer because of it? But I digress.

In summary there is a lot of reasonable thought behind subsidizing public transit (even if not making it absolutely free) and indeed that’s what most cities end up doing.

Andrew Levy

• We would need more public transport. Buses, planes, trains etc. all harm the environment, just as cars do. If everyone used public transport, more buses would pollute cities. It should also be mentioned that the manufacturing and creation of a public transport system is very energy intensive, drawing largely on coal and fossil fuels for energy. This releases significant carbon emissions into the atmosphere.
• With the financial crisis, we can’t afford to spend more money on something like this. It would cost too much for the government to pay for running public transport services. With the economic crisis, it needs to spend the money on other more important things.
• Car sales would drop significantly. If it were free for everyone to get to work, families wouldn’t need two or three cars; just one or even none, depending on their availability to public transport of course. Most families have several cars, and one is used just for someone to get to work each day. This wouldn’t be necessary. It would hurt the car industry and car makers would most likely lose their jobs, and car companies may collapse, which is very bad news.
• There are many people who would also lose their jobs. People like conductors, parking cops and plenty of other people wouldn’t have their jobs any more, because their services would be no longer required.
• Some public transport cities are already terrible; this would just increase the strain. Some public transport networks are already crowded and/or unreliable. With increased customers and pressure, these networks wouldn’t manage.
• If it was free, companies would not be expected to provide top service, because they are not paying customers. Generally when you pay a little bit more, you are paying for a good service. But if you aren’t paying anything, and heaps of people are using the service, you can’t expect top-notch customer service. Generally people look after paying customers more. If it was free, companies could lower their service under the excuse that its customers aren’t paying anything so they should just “get what their given”.
• Many people dislike public transport and still would not use it. Many people will stick to their cars, and some would even stop using public transport, because with it being free, so many people will use it, it would become a mess and be way too crowded.
• “Why Free Public Transport is a bad idea?!?”, World Streets Blog
• Baum, Herbert J. (1973), “Free Public Transport”, Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, January 1973
• “Myth: Making public transport free will encourage use”, Public Transport Users Association, Australia
• “Free public transport is not our ticket to ride”, Australia
• Free public transport would reduce the number of cars on the road. Global warming is a serious issue and if public transport was free, more people would use it, taking cars off the road. 1 train could take 2000 cars off the road. A public transport system with 20 trains could take 40,000 cars off the road. Some people would simply choose to not own cars, further reducing the number of cars on the road. Across dozens of cities in a nation and thousands world-wide, the result of free public transport would be dramatic in cutting vehicle emissions and combating global warming.
• The government’s job is to provide services. This would be a great service that could be used by everyone. Taxes already pay for health care, schools and roads etc. so why not let taxpayers see the benefits for themselves, in a useful service everyone can use.
• The environment would greatly benefit. As well as providing services, the government should look out for the environment. No amount of money is too much to protect the environment.
• We would need more public transport workers. With increased and better public transport, we would need more bus and train drivers, creating jobs. This is great with the global financial crisis. And it work make it easier for people to get to their job - they could just get on a bus.
• The government would be forced to improve public transport. With more users, bad public transport networks would be improved by the government, to make it worthwhile using. Bad networks would be greatly improved, and the benefits can be used by everyone. Its definitely a worthwhile incentive.
• A lot of public transport companies are reliable and need more customers. Most public transport organisations offer friendly and reliable service and could do with some more “customers”. They would be happy to take them and it would get cars off the road.
• Single or zero fare maximizes the efficiency, convenience and attractiveness of public transport systems for both users and operators in inner cities. “The option of a single and potentially free public transport fare zone in the Sydney CBD should be examined as a way of immediately simplifying fare structures, eliminating CBD interchange fare penalties, eliminating other CBD fare anomalies and maximising the efficiency, convenience and attractiveness of CBD public transport systems for both users and operators.” Independent Public Inquiry - Sydney’s Long Term Public Transport Plan, May 2010
• Heaps of people would be tempted by free transport. If free public transport was offered to everyone, of course they would use it. Yes, some people may stick to their cars, but the majority would think it was a great idea. If you had the choice of paying thousands each year to run a car, or to get on a train every morning for free, what would you choose?
• A lot of people would already be using it if it didn’t cost so much. For a lot of people, the only reason they don’t catch public transport is because it costs too much. If it was free, they’d definitely start using it.
• Free Public Transit Blog
• Møller, Berit and Thoegersen, John (2008), “Breaking Car Use Habits: The Effectiveness of a Free One-Month Travelcard”, Transportation, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 329-345, 2008
• Thoegersen, John (2009), “Promoting Public Transport as a Subscription Service: Effects of a Free Month Travel Card”, Transport Policy, Vol. 16, 2009
• “Perspectives on implementation of free public transport - assessments and recommendations from a working group under the Danish Board of Technology”, Summary, English version, November 2006
• Scottish Socialist Party’s campaign for free public transport, UK
• Campaign for Free Public Transport, UK
• Free Public Transport, Finland
• Transport Vsem, Russia
• Saltada Popular, Spain
• Planka.nu, Sweden
• “At Any Cost? The hidden costs of charging for public transport”, Alex Berthelsen, Planka.nu, Sweden
• freepublictransports.com, USA
• Zero-Fare, Canada
• “Free ride: the future of public transport”, The Age, March 5, 2006, Australia
• “The case for free public transport”, Green Left, Australia
• Fare Free, New Zealand
• “A Case for Free Comfortable Public Transport?”, Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities Center

Prashant Prasad

In my opinion, encouraging public transport is a very good way to reduce pollution and other traffic related problems in any city. But in most of the cases, creating a free public transportation system is not a feasible solution.

The following are what I see as the pros and cons of making public transportation systems free of cost:

• More users will get attracted to the public transportation system as their mode choice which will reduce number of small and private vehicles on street resulting lesser congestion and lesser emission (good for the environment).
• Time taken to purchase the travel ticket will be saved.
• It will be accessible to the economically weaker section of the society also.
• Will reduce the societal gap between poor and rich in the society as people from all economic status will be able to travel together.
• This will provide job opportunities to more people as more public transportation vehicles will be required to ply in the Country.
• Initially managing the crowd in the public transport will be a major challenge in populated countries like India.
• It will become a burden on the government to maintain the quality and finally to sustain the public transportation system.
• Many people will not use the public transport as it will be too crowded.
• Human psychology is that free things are not valued much, so the system may get abused by the public.

However there are countries like Germany where public transportation is free for students and the money for the same is collected as a semester fee. In countries like India the challenge is quite unique. In India we have a huge range of users ranging from a homeless person to a millionaire.

There are two types of users, according to the literature: Choice riders and Captive riders.

• Choice riders : users who can afford to travel by other private modes of transport
• Captive riders: users who cannot afford anything other than public transport.

We need to find a balance between their requirements and affordability, keeping in mind that anything we do will need money and money cannot be grown on trees. In order to attract both types of riders towards public transport, we need to keep the fare within an affordable range of the user groups and need to uplift the quality of the service to match the choice riders’ needs.

This can be done by creating segments in the public transportation system:

• A higher service quality for which the fare will also be a little lighter as the choice riders’ affordability range is higher and
• A comparatively lower service quality which will sustain itself with a lower fare and also will fit within captive riders’ pocket.

Ways to get funds to improve the service-quality of entire transportation system:

• The revenue of the higher service quality can support the lower quality to improve and come to the same level.
• The revenue from the goods transportation system can also contribute in improving the public transportation service-quality.
• In order to maintain the interest of the choice riders we will need to think of providing some advantages against the higher fare they will pay. Like less crowed in the higher class and little more pleasant condition.

The entire process to improve the quality of public transport and reducing various problems due to vehicles needs to be worked out in detail. This will take a longer time but this should work better than making it completely free for all.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

student opinion

Should Public Transit Be Free?

Several cities in Massachusetts are experimenting with free public transit. Do you think that getting to and from work and school on public transportation should be a right?

By Nicole Daniels

Find all our Student Opinion questions here.

How do people get around in your community? Are there different forms of public transit, such as trains and buses? Is it more common for people to drive or cycle to and from work and school? Does your community have shared forms of transit like ride-share services, taxis or shared bikes?

Do you think your community should make public transit free for everyone?

In “ Should Public Transit Be Free? More Cities Say, Why Not? ,” Ellen Barry writes about cities in Massachusetts that are experimenting with offering free public transit:

Mayor Daniel Rivera of Lawrence, intrigued after hearing his friend Ms. Wu speak about fare-free transit, asked his regional transit authority how much was collected on three of the city’s most-used bus lines. The answer was such a small amount — $225,000 — that he could offset it from the city’s surplus cash reserves. “What I like is the doability of this, the simplicity of it,” Mr. Rivera said. “We are already subsidizing this mode of transportation, so the final mile is very short. It isn’t a service people need to pay for; it’s a public good.” Around 100 cities in the world offer free public transit, the vast majority of them in Europe, especially France and Poland. A handful of experiments in the United States in recent decades, including the cities of Denver and Austin, were viewed as unsuccessful, because there was little evidence that they removed cars from the road; new riders tended to be poor people who did not own cars, according to a 2012 review by the National Academies Press. But in another sense, they were successful: They increased ridership right away, with rises between 20 and 60 percent in the first few months. That statistic accounts for its revival among a new wave of urban progressives, who see transit as a key factor in social and racial inequality.

Some cities are drawn to the idea because they have seen a decline in ridership:

The idea also appeals to moderates in places like Worcester, the state’s second-largest city, which is struggling to persuade residents to use its buses. Ridership has dropped by 23 percent since 2016, and the buses now run half-empty, according to a report released last May by the Worcester Research Bureau, a nonpartisan policy group. At a City Council meeting last week, a parade of citizens lined up to express support for a proposal to make Worcester’s buses free for three years, as a pilot program. Revenue from bus fares is so low, and the cost of collecting them so high, that it could be replaced by an infusion of $2 million to $3 million a year.

Mayor Marty Walsh of Boston has expressed concern about the potential profit loss, saying that in 2019 bus fares in his city generated $109 million:

“There’s no such thing as free,” Mr. Kane said. “Someone has to pay. Boston has the highest-paid bus drivers in the country. They’re not going to work for free. The fuelers, the mechanics — they’re not going to work for free.” Advocates of free transit have suggested that the cost could be offset by a gas tax increase; but replacing $109 million would mean raising the gas tax by 3 and a half cents, Mr. Kane said. And all the while, he said, the system is straining to cope with the current demands. “I hate to be the guy who says, ‘eat your peas,’” he said. “But that’s where we are.” Proponents of the idea argue that Mr. Kane’s numbers are inflated and that the true replacement cost would be closer to $36 million. That gap, they say, could be covered by a 2-cent rise in the gas tax. “That’s where something controversial or impossible a few years ago now seems possible,” said Stacy Thompson, the executive director of the LivableStreets Alliance, a transportation research group. The Boston Globe editorial board, which endorsed the idea of making Boston’s buses fare-free this month, suggested the cost could by covered by philanthropy.

Students, read the entire article , then tell us:

What is your reaction to the different perspectives presented in the article? Do you think that public transportation should be free, or do you have concerns about the financial burden on cities? How much does it cost to ride a bus or train in your city? Do you agree with the fares?

How do you get to and from school? How does your family get to and from work? What are other times when you have to travel around your community? Do you have a sense of how much these trips cost you, either in fares or in gas money? Is that something you pay for, or your family pays for — or is it provided by your school or local government?

Some people support free public transit as a way to have fewer cars on the road and to reduce carbon emissions. How important is that to you? Try this Carbon Footprint Calculator from the Nature Conservancy to see your travel carbon footprint. If you select the “Advanced” settings, you will be able to enter miles for specific forms of public transit. Experiment with changing miles spent driving a car versus miles spent riding a bus and see if there is a significant difference or impact.

In the article, Dionisia Ramos, 55, uses the bus twice a day to get to and from community college. Ms. Ramos has appreciated the access to free buses and said that public transportation was “not a luxury,” but a “basic need.” Do you agree with her statement? How do you imagine public transit fares affect people like Ms. Ramos, who receives an unemployment check for $235 once a month and has bus fares of $2.40 a day? Are there other solutions you can imagine that would support someone like Ms. Ramos?

The article states that for some people, free public transportation is a way to create social and racial equality. What do you think? How do people view public transit in your community? Are there beliefs or stereotypes about the kind of people who use public transportation or about the safety and quality of those services? Or is public transit normalized and used by a wide variety of people in your community?

In New York City, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (M.T.A.) hired an additional 500 police officers to patrol subway stations for fare evasion and crime, even though New York Police Department statistics indicate that crime in the subway has decreased. The New York Times editorial board has come out against the increased policing , saying that:

Adding hundreds of officers to the transit system without good cause could also lead to the sort of over-policing of black and Hispanic boys and men that the city has seen before. Already, between October 2017 and June 2019, black and Hispanic people made up more than 90 percent of those arrested on charges of fare evasion.

What do you think? Have you observed a connection between policing for fare evasion and race or socioeconomic status in your community? Do you think that making New York City trains and buses free would eliminate these issues or create more problems?

Students 13 and older are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public.

Nicole Daniels joined The Learning Network as a staff editor in 2019 after working in museum education, curriculum writing and bilingual education. More about Nicole Daniels

• Essay Editor

Essay on Pros and Cons of Public Transport

1. introduction.

Public transportation systems bring many benefits to individuals, communities, and the local economy, but all those benefits are at risk if we don't pay attention to change. Public transportation systems, particularly bus routes, are always going to face challenges as the characteristics of the communities they serve change over time. A public transportation system that was originally designed to move workers from their homes to the classic 9-5 workday has to evolve when the workforce is much more diverse, the workday is longer, and rush hour lasts from 5:30 am until 7:00 pm. Similarly, bus routes will always struggle to attract riders in lower-density areas without employment centers, daycare facilities, retail stores, or other services that are relatively close together in time or space. Over the past twenty-five years, land use planners and policy researchers have done extensive work on the fundamental relationship between the structure of the built environment and the social, economic, and environmental impacts of transportation. The way that buildings and other structures are arranged affects the built environment's density, mix of uses, form, and connectivity, and those elements interact with each other to affect how people and goods move within it. The transportation system that serves it, in turn, also influences how land is used. The location and design of transportation facilities by themselves affect how people choose to travel and where we choose to live, work, shop, and play.

2. Pros of Public Transport

Firstly, public transportation is much more than just traveling. Public transit saves 4.2 billion gallons of gasoline annually. Among the less onerous benefits that cannot be ignored, public transportation would have taken 20.4 billion in congestion costs away from motorists in 2006 and also saved 37 million metric tons of CO2 emissions in 2006. High gas prices, congestion, increased accidents, greenhouse gas emissions, and other factors have combined to make the public turn to public transportation. The use of public transportation is about saving money, time, energy, and the environment while preserving our way of life for future generations. It helps ease congestion, make communities more walkable and desirable, increase safety, and promote economic development. Furthermore, the majority (57 percent) of the users of public transportation services during the normal work week leave their cars at home so offering the flexibility to use public transit for other trips during the week is important. Also, providing riders with reduced fares encourages additional travel by bus and train. For instance, frequent riders are provided with commuter passes. Frequent riderships also mean the transit agency is recovering the share of operating expenses from passenger fares and has an effect on the percentage of operating expenses covered by the farebox.

2.1. Environmental Benefits

Public transport often saves energy and reduces air pollution and gas emissions because it takes more people where they want to go compared to private car transport. Public transportation systems alone have the potential to reduce our nation's dependence on fossil fuels, all while providing equal access to modern, safe, and efficient options. According to the American Public Transportation Association, public transportation in the United States saves approximately 1.4 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions and 13 million barrels of oil each year. Motor vehicles produce major pollutants that affect public health, such as nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter. Tailpipe emissions account for most of the United States' air pollution. Public transportation reduces the need for new roadways and extends the life of existing systems and frees up right-of-way for other uses when routes are established, making it an environmentally efficient option. Beyond the immediate environmental benefits, there are a number of ways public transit positively affects the environment, including fostering the creation of compact and mixed-use development surrounding transit stations, which expands transportation choices and lowers the amount of resources consumed. Also, public transportation's efficiency saves vast amounts of energy and reduces the carbon 'footprint' by decreasing the number of cars on the road. At the same time, it promotes the use of alternative fuels to fight our alarming depletion of the air layer. By adopting high-capacity transit, cities can reduce the amount of fuel used by cars and decrease the need for larger highways. Finally, by revitalizing urban centers, it reduces dispersal, invasive urban growth, and the destruction of green spaces. However, this environmentally friendly public transport pipeline is not costless.

2.2. Cost-Effective

In the United States, since the 1970s, considerable resources have been dedicated to the development of new alternative fuels and hybrid and fuel cell vehicles, as well as trucking automation. However, diverse studies have shown that mass transit and train services are the most cost-effective, as they deploy scarce physical resources (vehicles and infrastructures plus their life cycle) and energy in an economical way to fulfill a defined transportation service. In most OECD countries, despite recurrent changes in their accounting, deregulation, appropriation scope and methods, public transport has since the 1970s been accountable, directly or indirectly, for covering a notable fraction of the general transportation system costs. This includes enabling city mobility of lower income groups who cannot afford a car, reducing growing traffic congestion, freeing space for highly tax-deductible goods and services transportation vehicles to circulate, compensating for greenhouse gas production, compensating for spatial distortion of urban mobility, and compensating for under-priced broad accessibility on long-distance transportation services.

2.3. Reduced Traffic Congestion

There is no doubt that public transportation can relieve much traffic congestion. Both public transportation and pedestrians are given priority over other traffic, leading to a reduction in city traffic. Public transportation therefore encourages commuters to switch from using private cars to more efficient and cheaper city travel modes. Many of the bus priority schemes include car parking restrictions to prevent buses from becoming blocked behind standing traffic. It has been found that buses moving from the bus pick-up zones into vehicle streams often encounter difficulties in merging with the traffic. This goes some way to negating the advantages gained from the restrictions. Bus stop sites which are accessible to all passengers need to be considered, and the conflicting demands of buses and other traffic also need to be managed. Similar measures can be used on the approach roads to stop traffic queuing, which blocks buses at the stop site, and road widening and changes to junction arrangements are also feasible to allow buses to move more freely. A point which has been made is that bus priority operations are expensive in both environmental and financial terms. What is advocated is that the use of these facilities be developed with some moderation to ensure that it can be compatible with other elements of a successful retail center called a city. It can be so extreme as to impede city center activity, and the police in Edinburgh describe some of the measures introduced as being akin to social engineering.

3. Cons of Public Transport

Overcrowding There are a number of problems that are likely to spring up as a result of overcrowding on public transport. Many of the knock-on effects of public transport problems can be far-reaching and ironic considering the supposed purpose of public transport. Overcrowding leads to unpleasant travel experiences for passengers who may have to stand with their noses wedged directly into somebody else's armpit. Overcrowding can lead to some people being left behind and having to wait for the next mode of transport, if there is even one, thereby causing the problem to bottleneck out from the crowded public transport vehicles into the streets. Overcrowding can result in a public safety hazard, with numbers sometimes so high that vehicles are at risk of toppling off the road or tracks. A notably disturbing development relates to drivers ramming more passengers than was designed into the vehicles; examples from the developing world include drivers ramming 1800 people into trains and 80 people onto buses designed for 30. Time The promise of good public transport is that it takes less time to travel by bus or by train than it does to use a private mode of transport. By and large, this is a fair point. It may take you longer door to door than a private mode of transport, but during your journey, you can listen to music, read, catch up with work, or get a bit of sleep. Buses and trains can only be so efficient because it is not always practical to travel directly from a point of origin to a destination, so to accommodate as many people as possible, public transport vehicles stop off to pick up and drop passengers. Waiting at stations and stops is bulking to the amount of time one has to set aside for travel if reliance is placed on public transport. The timetables can also play havoc with people's schedules. Buses and trains keep to a timetable that suits the majority of passengers. If this is not you, then they will continue ignoring your individual needs regardless of the inconvenience this might cause.

3.1. Limited Flexibility

For many travelers, whether by choice or necessity, public transit is often the only way they can get from point A to point B. It is true that transit connects people to many opportunities - jobs, education, health care, shopping, and entertainment. For some people, transit is the best, or only, way to make those trips. For everyone else, those not dependent on transit and who have viable alternatives, the answer is not so clear-cut. Public transit can be acknowledged as playing an important role in mobility for those who depend on it and for those who travel in congested corridors and areas with insufficient parking facilities. But doing so does not diminish the singular appeal of the automobile. The automobile creates its own demand. Automobiles are comfortable, convenient, functional, and assure a measure of privacy not available on transit. If time of travel is limited, people drive for the same reasons. In most urban areas throughout the world, only transit stops are known, not where people live or where they are going. By nature, transit travel is less direct and requires more time than automobile travel. Factors contributing to longer transit travel times include walking to stations, waiting for transit, multiple stops to pick up and deliver passengers, and circuitous routing. People who drive never waste time waiting for their transportation to move. They leave when they are ready, and travel time is generally a function of distance and mitigated somewhat at times of heavy traffic by routes not traveled. The rail system is less flexible in adapting to passenger needs. With rare exceptions, stations are fixed and service is determined by fixed schedules. If people do not live or work within a reasonable walking distance of a station, or if service to their destination is inadequate, they have an insufficient motivation to use transit.

3.2. Reliability Issues

A safer, faster, and more reliable level of service is likely to attract more users to rail travel and is an important tool for increasing sustainability. Satisfaction with the service is much higher if passengers find that the system is reliable and punctual. Additionally, reliability reduces operating costs. Because of their mass and large kinetic energy, railway systems are relatively sizeable contributors to a nation's security forces, especially now in the era of terrorism. There are various reasons why the reliability of a railway system can be endangered. Some are the direct result of action taken by railway management itself, others are basic to the nature of all complex technical systems under all economic systems, and the remainder stem directly from the government policy and financial policy to the system. Real-time information tools are located at station areas and railway crossings to inform vehicle drivers and traffic about the movement of the vehicles and the timing of the traffic indicators. They are also used to control operations at stations or platform edges. Displayed information can be controlled and created in a real-time manner, based on the real-time information collection and processing module. There are more requirements and expectations for the real-time information system, e.g. user-friendly interfaces with touch-screen compatibility, indoor/outdoor visibility and weather resistance, power saving or alternative energy resources. Management tools are also required for real-time scheduling, monitoring ticket checking, and so on. There are a lot of potential customer-service functions, including traveler information and distribution of commercial information.

3.3. Crowdedness and Lack of Privacy

Lack of personal space. When it comes to public transport, you do not have the luxury of personal space. When you are taking public transport, you share the space and time with other passengers. You may not like it, but that is the way it is. This can be uncomfortable, especially if the bus or train is packed with passengers. What's worse? You do not have a say in who you will share your space and time with. A major inconvenience of public transport is the lack of control over various factors, including who you will share your personal space with. Think about it. Can you really feel comfortable being packed like sardines with complete strangers? Privacy and personal space are two things you take for granted until you have no choice but to let go of them. Crowding. Crowding refers to being surrounded by many people. This is especially true when taking public transport. If the bus or train is crowded, it can be very uncomfortable, especially for people who value their personal space. Do you really think it is possible to relax and enjoy the ride when you are like a sardine surrounded by complete strangers? Furthermore, crowding is not just uncomfortable. It can stress you as well. Crowding may lead to unwanted interactions with strangers. Additionally, you may feel the need to be more vigilant and watchful of your belongings. Still, some public transport users may not mind the lack of privacy. They may even enjoy it. But let us face it. If you truly value your expenses on public transport, it can be taxing.

4. Conclusion

The public transportation serves as a solution to the traffic problem. Additionally, it does not require massive infrastructure. This structure is the road of great camp, properly articulated to realize intermodality with the underground and the local balances. The flexible road binds the districts in relation to the northern districts, beyond the current tunnel of the lines. This structure should provoke manageable corridors to articulate the river with the south. Its urbanistic integration should result in the creation of a structure of road of great camp with a capacity of 60,000 passengers transported per hour. The complementary structure, taken the articulated current road, would serve about 25,000 passengers during the period of validity of the subway. It ties the south old still I structure of closed road presents interesting capacity of processing, therefore already exists subway in a band of the road, we could use the A line in the temporary dead time. Its predicted capacity is about 1,400 passenger entrances at the moment. The conclusion of Arkady Baje and Elie Mur Philipko is that the best transport model exists, requesting a public transportation system that has a station for about 15,000 people. These authors estimate that the average system is composed of 20 independent lines with about 32,000 passengers per hour per direction. I begin to assess the model proposed by Robert Sulzer, who defends the notion that every central area needs a subway of 40,000 passengers per hour directly, that is, only 20,000 is viable punctually. The end of this work is tied to the presentation and notion of three methods that try to measure the importance of the punctual service in the pot-city of the transport system. The models used are adjustments from the supply and demand balance 'Bookings and Alonowe to, a modification of the method of Adam Smith and Adam Freud.

Related articles

The economic and cultural significance of "del puerto de" in global trade.

1. Introduction This article offers substantive grounds and contributes to the debate on the economic and cultural relevance of the "del puerto de" concept in early modern world trade. Today, it is clearly accepted that special commercial privileges and the so-called manipulation of the Spanish Consulado were the reasons that allowed Spain to facilitate such an exceptionally elevated flow of metallic monetary mass. This statement is also shared by some modern commercial relations. These referen ...

The Impact of Political Instability on Tourism in Jammu and Kashmir

1. Introduction Tourism plays a very important role in the economic development of any region. It is the largest service industry on the global arena in terms of income generation and employment creation. Apart from being a significant source of foreign exchange, tourism also possesses the potential to generate multiple impacts within an economy. However, the tourism industry is vulnerable to a number of forces, including major economic recessions that have a significant impact on travel due to ...

The impact of Universidad Central on local community development and economic growth

1. Introduction The purpose of this document is to argue the connection between Universidad Central (UCentra) and local sustainable economic growth in Ibague City, Colombia. It describes regional economic dynamics in the post-desconsolidation of the national economy and national balance, focusing on the need for regional economic organizations to enter into local sustainable economic plans as a main objective. The document also provides data regarding the history of Law 30 and the general groun ...

El impacto de las políticas de salario mínimo en el crecimiento económico y la igualdad social

1. Introducción En el presente texto me propongo llevar adelante un análisis sobre las distintas políticas que se relacionan con el salario mínimo. En tal sentido, tengo en consideración expresiones sobre las consecuencias de su establecimiento sobre cuestiones específicas, tales como: la tasa de empleo, la pobreza relativa, la inflación, el crecimiento económico y la distribución del ingreso. En función de ello, mi cometido será observar la relación existente entre el salario mínimo y el desar ...

The Socioeconomic Impact of the Global Pandemic on Developing Nations

1. Introduction International development is a process that involves the use of resources to achieve improvements in the well-being of people in developing countries. It captures both quantitative improvements, such as increased income, reduced malnutrition, and longer life expectancy, and qualitative improvements in terms of social well-being, such as greater equality and participation. The novel coronavirus pandemic is a major public health crisis that requires governments, international orga ...

El impacto de la sostenibilidad en la rentabilidad empresarial

1. Introducción a la sostenibilidad empresarial Hoy en día cabe cuestionarse la rentabilidad de las organizaciones empresariales y su obsolescencia como modelo de éxito en la gestión, orientándolas única y exclusivamente a maximizar la rentabilidad económica. A la luz de los datos, es evidente que la sociedad demanda una responsabilidad social empresarial acorde con las expectativas de sus interlocutores, pero los elementos de la cuenta de resultados no se han establecido en los estados financi ...

The Importance of Education in Modern Society

1. Introduction An individual's level of education has a major bearing on his or her chances to find suitable employment, significantly influences his or her income, and generally determines his or her position in society. Since these factors also exert a strong influence on the individual's quality of life, indeed, on his or her very survival, the issue of education is increasingly at the center of public and political attention. This being so, however, society can ill afford to see resources ...

La importancia de la educación en el desarrollo social y económico: un análisis de un tema específico

1. Introducción Tenemos la oportunidad de analizar un asunto muy relevante actualmente. Me gustaría que analicemos la importancia de la educación en el desarrollo social y económico. Si añadimos que, en países con una democracia consolidada o que adquieren una democracia representativa, la educación jugará un rol fundamental para un sinfín de factores en multitud de ámbitos que marcarán la diferencia entre el resto de países. Una de las afirmaciones y análisis sobre la educación y el desarrollo ...

Advantages and Disadvantages of Public Transport

Looking for advantages and disadvantages of Public Transport?

We have collected some solid points that will help you understand the pros and cons of Public Transport in detail.

But first, let’s understand the topic:

What is Public Transport?

Internal Public Transport refers to the transportation system within a city, town or a municipality that includes buses, trains, subways and trams that are operated by the local government or other public authorities. It plays a vital role in reducing carbon emissions, promoting a sense of community, easing traffic congestion, enhancing mobility options and saving money as compare to personal vehicle.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of Public Transport

The following are the advantages and disadvantages of Public Transport:

Advantages of Public Transport

• Reducing carbon emissions – Public transportation utilizes fuel-efficient vehicles, leading to a lower carbon footprint compared to individual car usage.
• Promoting a sense of community – Using public transport allows us to interact with a diverse group of people, fostering a sense of connection and camaraderie.
• Easing traffic congestion – By providing an alternative mode of transportation, public transport can alleviate the strain on roads and highways, leading to a smoother flow of traffic.
• Enhancing mobility options – Public transport can offer services to underserved or remote areas, improving accessibility and mobility for all members of the community.
• Saving money – Public transport can be a more economical choice compared to owning and maintaining a personal vehicle, especially in urban areas with high parking and fuel costs.

Also check:

• Paragraph on Public Transport

Disadvantages of Public Transport

• Limited accessibility – Public transportation may not always be available in all areas, making it difficult for people to get to their desired destination.
• Time constraints – Using public transport can often be time-consuming, as we may have to wait for a bus or train to arrive or transfer to another mode of transportation.
• Potential for overcrowding – During peak hours, public transportation can become overcrowded, making it uncomfortable and unpleasant for riders.
• Lack of privacy – When using public transport, we are often surrounded by strangers and may not have the same level of privacy as we would when using our own personal vehicle.
• Vulnerability to crime – Using public transportation can also pose a risk of crime, as we may be more susceptible to theft or other forms of victimization.
• Advantages and disadvantages of Internal Check
• Advantages and disadvantages of Knock-Out Tournaments
• Advantages and disadvantages of LVDT

You can view other “advantages and disadvantages of…” posts by clicking here .

If you have a related query, feel free to let us know in the comments below.

Also, kindly share the information with your friends who you think might be interested in reading it.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

What are the pros and cons of using public transport?

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Fully explain your ideas

To get an excellent score in the IELTS Task 2 writing section, one of the easiest and most effective tips is structuring your writing in the most solid format. A great argument essay structure may be divided to four paragraphs, in which comprises of four sentences (excluding the conclusion paragraph, which comprises of three sentences).

For we to consider an essay structure a great one, it should be looking like this:

• Paragraph 1 - Introduction
• Sentence 1 - Background statement
• Sentence 2 - Detailed background statement
• Sentence 3 - Thesis
• Sentence 4 - Outline sentence
• Paragraph 2 - First supporting paragraph
• Sentence 1 - Topic sentence
• Sentence 2 - Example
• Sentence 3 - Discussion
• Sentence 4 - Conclusion
• Paragraph 3 - Second supporting paragraph
• Paragraph 4 - Conclusion
• Sentence 1 - Summary
• Sentence 2 - Restatement of thesis
• Sentence 3 - Prediction or recommendation

Our recommended essay structure above comprises of fifteen (15) sentences, which will make your essay approximately 250 to 275 words.

Discover more tips in The Ultimate Guide to Get a Target Band Score of 7+ » — a book that's free for 🚀 Premium users.

• sustainability
• economic feasibility
• infrastructure
• overcrowding
• incentivize
• service quality
• equitable access
• fiscal responsibility
• public subsidy
• taxpayer burden
• Check your IELTS essay »
• Find essays with the same topic
• View collections of IELTS Writing Samples
• Show IELTS Writing Task 2 Topics

Some people think that schools should reward students who show the best academic results, while others believe that it is more important to reward students who show improvements. Discuss both views and give your own opinion

Some people say that living in a high-rise apartment block is a lonely experience because there is no community spirit. others say that people who live in high-rise apartments have a much better sense of community than those live in houses. discuss both views and give your own opinion., some children spend hours every day on their smartphones. why is this the case do you think this is a positive or a negative development, in many countries, people are now living longer than ever before. some people say an ageing population creates problems for governments. other people think there are benefits if society has more elderly people. to what extent do the advantages of having an ageing population outweigh the disadvantages., in some areas of the us, a “curfew” is imposed, in which teenagers are not allowed to be out of doors after a particular time at night unless they are accompanied by an adult. what is your opinion about this.