Personal Mobility In The Context Of Sustainable Development

Personal mobility can be shaped by many possible means, from strategic international agreements on joint standards, through national legislation on health and safety, sustainable municipality planning and development, up to education and promotion of environmentally friendly life style. This paper follows some of the main trends in the historical development of the travel demand, and shows the evolution of the personal mobility into an environmentally sensitive area.


Manufacturers
(www.worldometers.info/cars/)43,546,991 cars and commercial vehicles were produced in the first 6 months of 2013. Figure 1 shows the production figures -and the respective trend -of passenger cars, defined as motor vehicles with at least four wheels, used for the transport of passengers, and comprising no more than eight seats in addition to the driver's seat.
Car production has never stopped increasing in the examined period with the exception of the economically burdened 2001 and 2009.
At the beginning of the XXth century the mass production of the automobiles brought forward a new type of human mobility.The growth in welfare and the affordability of the means of transportation naturally created an increase in the demand for travel, both in terms of distance covered and of time spent on the road.In Western societies, "the spread of high-speed travel due to increased car availability among the households resulted in a widening of the activity space of individuals" (Vilhelmson, 1999).Certainly, if the individuals can afford cars, they can volunteer for work farther away from home, they can choose a larger shopping center at a more distant location, or they can buy a bigger home away from the cramped big city.
Nowadays according to (Metz, Saturation of Demand for Daily Travel, 2010), the average distance travelled by an individual, as well as the number of trips made is strongly related to his income.Similar conclusion is drawn by (Orfeuil & Soleyret, 2002): "Household income has a major impact on travel practices for all the markets."While it may be easy to accept the presumption that higher income produces more travel, the approach is not perfect, because individuals who cannot afford to live closer to their place of work also travel more, but apparently not because they have higher income.It is reasonable to expect, that the increase in personal travel demand must also stop at some point.If not for other reasons, then certainly due to the individual's time restraint.Unsurprisingly, this has already been independently confirmed for the developed markets.
Figure 2 shows the relation between GDP and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the USA for the period between 1936 and 2011.
Except for the war period, GDP and VMT have grown together until 2003.Presumably, the growth in VMT in the USA by that time might have reached a point of saturation and could not cope with the growth of wealth.
In the UK Metz, based on the 'The National Travel Survey of Great Britain', states that "the average trip rate has held steady at about a thousand journeys per person per year over the nearly four decades of the Survey, while the average travel time has been about an hour per person per day throughout.The average distance travelled increased from 4500 miles per year to reach 7000 miles in 1995, since when there has been little further change" (Metz, Demographic determinants of daily travel demand, 2012).
Using the National Travel Survey statistics of the UK (Transport, 2013) we can even see a clear decline in the distance travelled (Figure 3) as well as in total trips made (Figure 4).The saturation of the demand for daily travel as described by Metz is similar to "the saturation of ownership and use" as described by Lee Schipper based on the stagnating vehicle use not only in the UK, but in Australia, Germany, France, Italy and Japan (Schipper, 2009).A similar phenomenonstagnating and decreasing "vehicle miles traveled per capita" in the US -even leads Puentes and Tomer to the bold suggestion that "there may be a ceiling on the amount of driving that Americans are capable of" (Puentes & Tomer, 2008).
In Sweden "time saved by using faster modes of transport is now being spent on stationary activities to a greater extent than during the 1970s and 1980s" (Vilhelmson, 1999).Without mentioning it explicitly, Vilhelmson involuntary confirms that in terms of travelling the increased travelling speed seems to have always had a rebound effect in Sweden -reducing travel time through higher speed gave the opportunity to cover longer distances within the same time, and it is only recently that spending this additional time on stationary activities has become more popular.
Concerning motoring, the rebound effect is more often related to cost saving, rather than time saving.Ironically, only one person (Schipper, 2009) among the above cited authors mentions this type of rebound effect by name, stating that, "there is no evidence of any important rebound of driving because of greater fuel economy in Europe, although as Schipper and Fulton (2009) and Schipper (2009) point out, diesel cars in Europe are driven significantly more (50-100%) than gasoline cars." It is quite difficult to agree with the first half of his citation regarding the non-existence of important rebound of driving.We must give this author credit, though, because the second half of the same sentence finely confirms that same denied rebound, mainly by brilliantly citing two of his own papers not published yet at the time of printing the editorial. 1he reality is that general rebound effect is a fact, although in the U.S. Kenneth Small and Kurt Van Dender reveal "evidence that the rebound effect diminishes with income, and possibly increases with the fuel cost of driving.Since incomes have risen and real fuel costs have fallen, the rebound effect has declined considerably over time."(Small & Van Dender, 2007) I strongly disagree with this conclusion.If we presume that the rebound effect shall cause people to drive more due to cost saving, that shall definitely involve a clear perception by the consumer of what his fuel costs are.Obviously, this may not be appropriate to expect in this case, because another paper examining "the reality of how US consumers are thinking and behaving with respect to automotive fuel economy" plainly says, "We found no household that analyzed their fuel costs in a systematic way in their automobile or gasoline purchases.Almost none of these households track gasoline costs over time or consider them explicitly in household budgets.These households may know the cost of their last tank of gasoline and the unit price of gasoline on that day, but this accurate information is rapidly forgotten and replaced by typical information."(Turrentine & Kurani, 2007) It may be much more probable, that the explanation for the "considerable decline" of the rebound effect lies in my earlier suggestion -namely, an individual shall sooner or later run out of additional time he may spend on motoring, and that this breakthrough has been naturally achieved by the North American nation.
At global level, however, according to the International Energy Agency, the "demand for transport appears unlikely to decrease in the foreseeable future" -the World Energy Outlook 2012 projects that transport fuel demand will grow by nearly 40% by 2035.(International Energy Agency, 2012) The explanation for the seemingly contradictive reports on saturation and growth at the same time is twofold.The personal travel demand in many less developed countries is still far from its saturation level; and population in some of these countries is growing with steady rates.In regard to those nations, which still have plenty of time to spend on travel, their progress shall be monitored with special care: "Energy use in the transport sector grows faster than in any other sector of the global economy.Of that growth, an increasing proportion originates in emerging countries.This is a reflection of the low levels of car ownership in these countries and the near saturation levels achieved in nations like the United States.It is therefore important to understand better how increases in wealth affect car ownership and use, and how these in turn will affect energy consumption and (until hydrogen becomes commonplace fuel) emissions and greenhouse gases."(Ortúzar & Willumsen, 2011) Back in 1986 the Hungarian professor Pál Michelberger described the main trends in the technical development of the automotive industry of that period as follows: "The life-cycle CO2 emissions from production and use of fuels made by indirect coal liquefaction (ICL) would be lower than with production and use of petroleum-derived transportation fuels."(Larson & Tingjin, 2003).Which means, when liquid fossil fuels become scarce and/or too expensive, coal will come into fashion again.As it is now in China, whose dependency on oil and whose abundant coal supplies make the CTL (coal-to-liquids) technology increasingly popular.
Similarly to the other alternative fuels, the idea to produce liquid fuel from coal is not new.Richard Vietor (Vietor, Richard H. K., 1980) based on (Krammer, 1978) and (Hughes, 1969) points out that due to its encouraging governmental policy "by 1942 Germany was synthesizing about half of its gasoline, diesel oil, and aviation fuel from coal".In his highly educational work: "The synthetic liquid fuels program: energy politics in the Truman era" Vietor shows, how a similar option was seriously discussed in the US in the 1950s', but the oil lobby forced the idea out in order to protect its own interests.
As Representative Carl Perkins (D-Kentucky) put it before the closing of the debates: "We have a process that has been proved successful and has reached the point of being commercially competitive with crude oil.Yet, because of that fact, we want to destroy that process in favor of the oil lobby."(Vietor, Richard H. K., 1980) It seems that the oil business has always been very successful as a powerful lobby, and as a great survivor too.With the emerging of electric lightbulbs as a replacement for kerosene lamps the oil industry desperately needed a new customer base: "Rockefeller's company, Standard Oil, transformed its eventual loss of the kerosene market in the illumination business into an even more lucrative commerce, initially with locomotive engines and then with the automobile.In the United States of America (USA), internal combustion engines powered only 22% of the cars sold in 1900: 38% were electric and 40% were powered by steam engines.and by Harry Ricardo (sponsored by the Asiatic Petroleum Company) occurred independently of each other...The tetra-ethyl lead was a knocksuppressant, which reinforced even further the optimization of fuel quality and the functioning of the internal combustion engine.This knocking of the engine should be avoided since it meant loss of power, overheating and damage to the pistons and it's associated parts.This discovery illustrates that the two communities (automobile and oil) converged through the finding of a similar solutionthe discovery of lead -by two completely different approaches."(Taminiau, 2006) But with the resolution of the "knocking" problem almost instantaneously a "health" problem appeared.
According to Jerome Nriagu the first gallon of leaded gasoline was sold on 2 February 1923 to a motorist in Dayton, Ohio, and the extreme surge in the popularity of this type of fuel very soon brought an outbreak of severe lead poisoning, prompting the United States Public Health Service to halt the production in May 1925 and initiate an investigation.
"An intensive industrial lobby was mounted which effectively forestalled any government regulation on lead in gasoline... Thus, the threat of gasoline lead to public health remained essentially neglected and unappreciated for well over 30 years...As to be expected, the fight to censure a highly profitable product with multinational oil and automobile industries as key players was particularly acrimonious, but ultimately the concern for the risk to public health has outweighed any economic benefits."(Nriagu, 1990) We shall take into consideration that in addition to endangering humans lead is damaging the catalyst converters as well."The irony is that it was not the issue of health but the issue of air pollution that forced the ban of lead in fuels.Scientists did find irrefutable evidence that lead had damaging effects on the proper functioning of the catalytic converter, which became mandatory (with the Clean Air Act which was passed in 1970) to improve the air quality in California."(Taminiau, 2006) In a way, this is another proof of how important it is to pursue environmental issues on a broad scale.
Introducing general standards on emissions led to the introduction of catalytic converters, which made leaded fuel unwanted by the car manufacturers, increased pressure on the oil industry and finally phased out leaded fuel.That same leaded fuel, which had been successfully safeguarded from "direct" attacks for long decades since early 1920s.
Likewise, the issue of reducing vehicles emissions shall be approached from several directions.
The most prevalent, and, probably, most effective approach so far has been the vehicle efficiency improvement, quite often expressed in reducing fuel consumption of the traditional internal combustion engines (ICE).The statement is based on the observation that, "The potential of conventional ICE vehicles is still substantial as they will continue to offer high cost-effectiveness and driving performance which can be hardly matched by alternative technologies."(Ntziachristos & Dilara, 2012).The high cost of developing the alternative vehicle technology, its often nonexisting infrastructure, and conservatively cautious consumer behaviour give the traditional ICE technology a substantial advantage indeed, which makes carmakers to continue investing in the improvement of the powertrain based on the conventional combustion engines.Here efficiency improvement can be achieved by the manufacturers through technological development like variable valve timing (VVT), automatic cylinder deactivation, idle start/stop, smart transmission, low-resistance tire technology, reduced weight through lighter materials, reduced drag coefficient through improved aerodynamics, smaller vehicles, better air-conditioning equipment, application of monitoring systems for assuring optimal technical conditions (e.g.tire pressure monitoring) and of systems influencing driving habits (gear shifting reminders, economy evaluation gauges, etc.).
The latter closely relates to the use of technology to deliberately shape individual behaviour, thus trying to shift it towards environmentally responsible conduct.In this regard we can certainly add online navigational aids as systems influencing driving habits.Similarly, in his earlier mentioned work professor Michelberger shortly but clearly articulates that the "biggest reserve" for reducing fuel consumption lies in the "better management of vehicle traffic".(Michelberger, 1986) A great observation!In other words, it is not the vehicles, but rather the humans that have to be improved."Eco-driving campaigns aim to inform and educate drivers in order to induce them to drive in a fuelefficient and thus environmentally friendly way.There seems to be some consensus in the literature that eco-driving could lead to reductions in CO2 emissions of around 10 per cent."(Santos, Behrendt, & Teytelboym, 2010) Apart from the natural urge to improve and the desire to meet public demand for green machinery, the greatest incentive to invest into new technology development is coming from national governments, when they decide to introduce fuel efficiency standards: "First, there seems to be sufficient evidence that if there were no FE [fuel economy] standards or targets in force, new-car fuel economy would not have improved at the rates that have been observed in Europe and Japan in recent years, and this would most probably have happened in the US as well; as a result, transportation energy use would have increased more rapidly.Second, in order to attain the desired FE improvements without imposing any further standards or voluntary targets in Europe, fuel taxes would have to increase by 50%.Third, without higher fuel prices and/ or tighter FE standards, one should not expect any marked improvements in fuel economy under 'business as usual' conditions.Potential fuel savings due to autonomous technical progress in the past have been counterbalanced by changes in consumer preferences towards more comfortable and powerful cars, and there is no reason to believe why this trend should not continue in the future in the absence of impressive technological breakthroughs or an economic recession."(Zachariadis & Clerides, 2008) Indeed, consumer behaviour is not always based on long-term scientific wisdom, and as such shall be guided by proper governmental policies.In addition to the above conclusion, the authors address the issue of country specifics: "Our analysis shows that the question "standards or prices?"cannot be answered in a definite way for all world regions.In the US tighter FE standards and higher gasoline taxes need to be carefully examined against their welfare impact, and a combination of both policy options should not be excluded in view of the many uncertainties about the effectiveness and the side-effects of each measure.Conversely, regulations seem to be a more feasible option for Europe and Japan as it is hardly possible to increase fuel taxes because of their already high levels; how these regulatory measures will be designed and implemented, however, is crucial in order to avoid welfare losses for producers or consumers."(Zachariadis & Clerides, 2008) If we wish to summarize the trends in the efforts of volume orientated carmakers, we can state that all of them want to develop vehicles that would have a secure supply of fuel in the foreseeable future.At the beginning of the 21st century the prospectives of the renewable fuels were increasingly very highly evaluated, until the shale gas came into sight."Shale gas rose from less than 1% of domestic gas production in the United States in 2000 to over 20% by 2010."(Stevens, 2012) The increase in total US resources due to inclusion of shale gas was estimated to be 38%!(U.S.Department of Energy, 2013) In 2012 shale gas accounted for 39% of all natural gas produced in the United States.(The U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2013) This also made USA the largest producer of gas in the world (Figure 5).Furthermore, shale gas "has had a dramatic impact on US carbon emissions.Whereas the Europeans have been increasing the coal burn (and building new coal-fired power stations) the US has been switching from coal to gas in electricity generation.The result is that, contrary to Europe, and despite European's economic crisis, it is the US not Europe which has sharply falling carbon emissions.Without much by way of energy or climate policies, the US is on course to meet its emissions reductions targets.Emissions in the major European countries (Germany in particular) are now rising."(Helm, 2013) In the USA shale gas has brought forward distinct benefits like the above mentioned emissions reductions, like production boost and additional jobs.What is less conspicuous though, is the environmental threat in its many forms.
First comes the direct risk of the fracking technology itself, using huge quantities of water for pumping it underground, and thus creating waste water, which may contain potentially hazardous chemicals, causing groundwater contamination, and even triggering small earthquakes.
Second is the indirect negative impact generated by the appearance of the suddenly plentiful low cost gas.This reduces demand for carbon-free renewable energy sources, which makes them more expensive and further reduces demand, stalling environmental efforts.That is another reason to stress, that technology is not always pushing progress into the right direction.
When investigating the environmentally friendly effect of the technological improvement of vehicles I would group the different approaches as follows: 1. Improving fuel efficiency and userfriendliness of the common types of powertrains based on ICE -e.g.gasoline, diesel.
-Over time this model leads to considerable efficiency improvement, but being based on fossil fuels it has never been the right solution.
-This model can only be considered a better solution, than the previous one, if the fuel is renewable -such as bioethanol, biodiesel and biogas.However, there are serious concerns, that an uncontrolled demand for biofuel and its ensuing mass production may have grave impact on world ecosystems.

Introducing hybrid systems -ICE powertrain
together with electric engine.
-In light of the previous two models the hybrids are only a dead-end street on the route to sustainable mobility.This transient model nevertheless has shown its indisputable values through raising environmental awareness, accustoming consumers to electric drives and somewhat decreasing the current carbon footprint.
4. Building Electric Vehicles (EV) -either Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) or Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEV) using hydrogen or ethanol to produce their own electricity.
-The electric powertrain, when using green sources of energy, can definitely become the most promising sustainable solution of the future mobility.But the massive growth of world population in the developing countries and their increasing appetite for mobility need to be closely monitored.What will happen, if the Indian consumers reach the same level of car ownership as in Hungary?

GROWING MOBILITY AND ITS LIMITS
Using your own personal car has its clear benefitsindependence (freedom of movement), convenience, feeling of security within your own vehicle, nonintrusion on your personal space.At the same time, using your own personal car for transportation is apparently far from efficient, which has numerous negative side effects.Probably the main flaw of this mobility model is that most of the time a privately owned car is being parked, and when it is finally used, in the majority of cases it is used by one single person.
In Although European speed limits may be higher -from 140 km/h in Bulgaria and Poland, through 150 km/h in Italy, 160km/h in Austria, up to the no-limit highways of Germany, the authors have a very strong point.The cars we use are oversized and overpowered, but most people prefer to have "more", than "less" -just in case the need may arise!An exaggerated example is when a car is maintained by the private individual for the same "just in case" reason, although it is rarely used at all, or out of prestige considerations only, e.g. when the person actually has another -company -car as well for everyday use (with presumed zero cost for the user, as it is absorbed by the employer).
"Strategies for 'sustainable mobility' adopted by planners now often include -in addition to the promotion of non-motorized and public transportation and efficiency improvementsmeasures to reduce the sheer need to move."Here we see a clear message, that municipalities have a major influence on human mobility trends.
If the city is planned to be "non-auto", then greenthinking citizens will be happy not to use their cars, while less green-thinking administration will force upon consumers a strong reason to rethink their habits.
"Despite the growing global motorization, bike-sharing systems' demand, as a sustainable alternative transport mode, is continuously increasing.Such systems combine the advantages of bike usage, such as low cost, autonomy, flexibility, accessibility and health benefits, with the advantages of renting (as opposed to owning).This is already a reality.Even more so, modern telematics allow us to collect and store real-time data about almost everything in the vehicle, so if we take our travel needs as constant, and decide to reduce fuel consumption, we can start doing so by eliminating engine idling, speeding and harsh driving -the latter including not only braking and acceleration, but cornering as well.Those companies, who have big fleets and, consequently, high fuel costs, can greatly benefit from a monitoring system and a properly introduced management approach.For example, according to Masternaut, a UK-based provider of telematics solutions which operates in 32 countries, as a result of greater "vehicle utilisation visibility" and the subsequent rectification of their drivers' driving styles, their clients achieve up to 70% daily reduction in vehicle idling and considerable savings in fuel cost (Masternaut, 2013).
This approach can lead to responsible driving, and it has been called to life by simple business prudence.Insurance companies have also discovered the wisdom of telematics from their own point of view: "Telematics insurance uses data that describes how, when and where a vehicle is actually driven to calculate the risk presented by the driver.The data is collected by an electronic device fitted to the vehicle and is transmitted to the insurer via a telecommunications network."(Asquith, Mills, & Forder, 2012) In the same paper the authors cite data by (Quality Planning report in National Underwriter Online News Service, 2010) according to which in the UK "Norwich Union reported a 30 percent accident frequency reduction in its pilot in the consumer market and Pepsi reduced its fleet crash rates by 80 percent".Another advantage of the telematics insurance is that it helps to reduce fraud, and as such has the full support of the UK government.Evidently, environmental concerns may not be on the top of the insurers' priorities list, but -again -this is another proof of how important it is to pursue environmental issues on a broad scale.
Particularly when, "Recent market research suggests that there is also a consumer appetite for telematics insurance.According to research conducted in 2012 by Gocompare.com,57 percent of all UK drivers expect to switch to a telematics-based car insurance policy by 2017."(Asquith, Mills, & Forder, 2012) In broader terms, "The opportunity is now ripe to capitalize on society's naturally elevated motivation to change (given recent and predicted energy price increases)."(Dowd & Hobman, 2013) Consumers are becoming increasingly aware of the environmental necessity to stop energy waste, and all policies shall take that into consideration.
"Information has to be taken to the customer, rather than assuming that they will find it themselves.Individualised marketing is a good example of this dialogue-based technique for promoting the use of public transport, cycling and walking as alternatives to the car.It has been developed and applied in several European and Australian cities with positive outcomes (reductions in car use of around 10%), and more importantly, it seems that changes in travel behaviour are maintained over time."(Banister, The sustainable mobility paradigm, 2008) What will happen, if the government decides to replace the existing car purchase tax and the annual road taxes by kilometre-based charging differentiated by location, time of day and environmental performance of the vehicle?The results of a study conducted in the Netherlands show that even if the new charging scheme will be cost neutral for the average car driver, "abolishing the Dutch car purchase tax while at the same time introducing a kilometre charge will lead to 2.2% rise in car ownership".(de Jong, Kouwenhoven, Geurs, Bucci, & Tuinenga, 2009) If the purchase tax is high, then customers decide to buy a vehicle only if their expected mileage justifies this investment, but if the "entry cost" to the vehicle ownership drops, many citizens may ignore the longer term costs and choose the "joy of possession".Although in the longer run customer attitude may change, this is a warning to policy makers.After the consumers are provoked to become car-owners, even a reversed policy will have difficulties to remedy the situation.This threat shall be taken seriously: "The acquisition of a car is seen as a luxury, but once acquired the car becomes a necessity, so that disposing of a car is much more difficult.Car ownership is clearly associated with habit and resistance to change.Once the habit of motoring is acquired, it is not so easy to abandon, even if the economic consequences -in terms of alternative consumption foregone -are greater than previously."(Dargay, The effect of income on car ownership: evidence of asymmetry, 2001) While examining the urban transport in Latin America, Hidalgo and Huizenga provide an interesting observation, that "with the notable exception of Brazilian cities and Santiago, public transport is dominated by small private operators, using medium size vans (combis) or minibuses under dispersed ownership (one vehicle -one owner).These operators compete for passengers in the street (competition in the market), under informal economic rules.This causes severe negative externalities: congestion, pollution, and accidents."(Hidalgo & Huizenga, 2013) The phenomenon is not exclusive to Latin America.The 'one vehicle -one owner' model is also quite common for taxi drivers in the city of Budapest.One of the reasons to stick to this model is that a privately owned taxi car gives the taxi driver the opportunity to work extremely extended shifts -up to 12 or more hours a day.When their income depends on daily revenues, they are easily tempted to prolong the working hours.
This is somehow an exaggerated model of multiplayer inefficiency, the opposite of a centrally organized public transport company with employed drivers.The advantages of the latter model are quite obvious.But if we compare it to a taxi example, we can see a thought-provoking similarity of relationship between the following business models: • "One taxi -one driver", where the driver owns or rents the vehicle.• "One taxi -many drivers", where the vehicle is driven in shifts by different employees.
In the first case the vehicle is under-utilized, even if the driver is tempted to work overtime; the average maintenance and other costs are much higher, etc.Still, this model apparently does not attract any attention from the municipalities, which leads to taxi oversupply, overpricing and operational inefficiency.Perhaps, taxis shall be integrated into the public transport system?Back in 1996 Richard Arnott gave his article the following straightforward title: "Taxi Travel Should Be Subsidized".Following a thorough mathematical analysis his conclusion makes a serious point: "Taxi service provides many of the advantages of the automobile -flexibility, privacy, and convenience -without significant capital costs.Providing taxi travel at its shadow price might therefore contribute significantly to solving the urban transportation problem." (Arnott, 1996) If we shall design the most efficient Budapest taxi company ever, perhaps the guidelines shall be as follows: • Optimal choice of vehicles (to reduce pollution, decrease redundancies and improve cost efficiency) a.The taxi cars shall have the most efficient engines made especially for the city.E.g. electric engines with enough driving range for one working shift and/or replaceable batteries to ensure continuous operation of the vehicles.b.They shall not need to reach speeds of more than 75km/h, as the maximum legal speed within the city limits is 70km/h anyway.
• Optimized operation management (to reduce overspending and improve the return on investment) c.The financing, purchasing and servicing/maintenance processes shall be subject to public tenders and made transparent in order to minimize their costs.d.All vehicles shall be operated on a constant driver-rotation basis by multiple drivers.e.The city taxi company shall work as a non-profit organization, reinvesting its operational profit into its own fleet and systems.
The city municipality shall strongly consider incorporating taxi services into its public transportation system.
A taxi service from a company like that shall offer personal mobility on demand, complementing the public transport on a higher individual level and making private car ownership unnecessary for a growing part of the city dwellers.For those, who may occasionally need to travel longer distances, a scheme of rent-a-car service could be designed on similar public efficiency principle.For those, who would stick to their own cars, the growing costs of parking or the alternative creation of no-parking city areas will lead to decreased use of their own cars within city limits, making it a weekend car or recreational vehicle.This shall make the city a better place to live, eliminating traffic jams and pollution, and reducing the number of cars being parked everywhere.The increased use of city taxi with highly professional employed drivers can also contribute to better road safety -decrease of traffic accidents and injuries.
Carpooling (also known as car-sharing, ridesharing, lift-sharing and covoiturage) is another way of reducing car ownership and improving the efficiency of use.Different definitions are available, but the basic meaning is either travelling together (sharing a trip in one car instead of using two or more cars -a model present in every prudent family) or sharing a car (using it in turns, instead of using their own cars in parallel).
"Carpooling is one of the many travel alternatives promoted by transport policies to reduce the amount of vehicles on the road.In some cases the efforts can cause negative effect: "A noteworthy piece of Australian evidence is that the new parking lots at Sydney suburban stations are tending to attract individuals who already use the rail system, but who now drive and park rather than use the local bus service to and from the station."(Hensher, 2007) The idea of trip-sharing is not as fully supported as it might be expected, and can become a source of controversy.In 2012 it drew the close attention of the Hungarian tax authorities, which prompted an interpellation by Endre Spaller, a member of the Hungarian Parliament.State Secretary Zoltán Cséfalvay in his answer called it a ticklish question -on the one hand the carsharing effort shall be supported for environmental and efficiency reasons, but on the other hand those who engage in it on a regular basis might be charged with tax evasion.(Demokrata, 2012) A clear confession, that the obsession with additional revenues by the governmental bodies can threaten this great environmental initiative.
As mentioned previously, reducing excessive weight in the vehicle can become another source of fuel saving: "Every kilo of luggage costs you fuel.
To be precise: a weight of 100 kg can increase fuel consumption by up to 0.3 l/100 km.So inspect the contents of your luggage compartment on a regular basis.With today's network of filling stations there is no point in keeping a full fuel canister in the car.And nobody needs more than one road atlas.And the bag with the golf clubs doesn't have to be carted around all year -neither does the picnic basket in winter or the can of antifreeze in summer."(Volkswagen AG, 2010) Certainly, scientific research in fuel consumption can sometimes find hidden reserves for improving vehicle efficiency rates in quite unexpected areas, like the human bodies: "As many as one billion gallons or more of fuel consumed in the US each year can be attributed to excess weight in the US population."(Jacobson & King, 2009) CONCLUSION.
The mass production of the automobiles made mobility so affordable, that we have reached a point, where most people in the developed countries (and not only there) cannot imagine a day without driving.The evolution of the automobile, finely influenced by the subtle power of the oil lobby, together with the stable growth of living standards lead to our present addiction to vehicles using fossil fuels.This addiction is so serious, that apart from threatening human health it is steadily depleting the energy reserves of the planet.Some of the lessons we should be able to learn from our predecessors: Technology is not always pushing progress into the right direction.
To make human development sustainable, we shall pursue environmental issues on a broad scale.
If we want to achieve sustainable personal mobility, it is not the vehicles, but rather the humans that have to be improved.

Figure 1
Figure 1 Cars produced in the world (www.worldometers.info/cars/)

Figure 5
Figure 5 Natural gas production (Global Energy Statistical Yearbook 2013) (Santos, Behrendt, & Teytelboym, 2010)sharing policies lead to the reduction of Vehicle Miles/Kilometers Traveled (VMT/VKT) and the GHG.In North America the reduction is 44% per car-sharing user(Shaheen, Cohen, & Chung).According to(Lane, 2005)car-sharing participants report increased environmental awareness after joining the program.Finally, households can save more money for their development(Ciari, Balmer, & Axhausen, 2009)"As of May 2012, there were 33 personal vehicle sharing operators worldwide, with 10 active or in pilot phase, three planned, and four defunct in North America.Personal vehicle sharing could provide a model that overcomes some of the financial constraints and geographic limitations of fleet ownership and distribution, as in traditional carsharing.Interestingly, all personal vehicle sharing and traditional carsharing experts interviewed in this study agreed that personal vehicle sharing holds the potential to notably expand the shared-use vehicle market."(Shaheen,Mallery,&Kingsley,2012)Thisefficiency of use is closely connected to the public transport network: "It needs to be emphasised that any car-sharing system should be developed complementarily to public transportation, as only integrated mobility systems satisfy the variety of individual transportation needs, which is a necessary condition for a large-scale reduction of private vehicle usage."(Firnkorn&Müller,2011) "In order to meet urban mobility needs, a sustainable urban mobility concept must be multi-modal, integrating different modes of public transport, private cars, and walking and cycling."(Santos,Behrendt, & Teytelboym, 2010)