Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

sfcta.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 105 posts

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#51

Post by TangoTrotFox »

It seems tautological that uber/lyft would increase congestion. The one and only way it would not be true is if every single person who used the service had a previous option that they were readily utilizing. Though even there nonpassenger driving hours would probably cause a net increase in congestion anyhow. But I think it goes without saying that there are countless people that end up 'driving' far many more miles thanks to uber/lyft, myself being one of them.

In other words as you make transport more desirable, available, and affordable - congestion will increase. The natural retort against this is public transport, but route/time restrictions as well as other passengers will always pose a limit on both the desirability and availability of public transport, though it certainly tends to nail the third criteria at least.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#52

Post by antpls »

austenallred wrote: post #16

This is why it blows my mind that scooters are effectively banned in San Francisco. They’re such a perfect solution for inner-city travel.

Scooters are not a perfect solution. They are maybe part of the solution to the global problem of congestion, but how do you travel the last miles when you are 70 years old or you have a baby and it's raining ? Scooters only solve the problem for a specific segment of the population, not for everyone.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#53

Post by TangoTrotFox »

austenallred wrote: post #16

This is why it blows my mind that scooters are effectively banned in San Francisco. They’re such a perfect solution for inner-city travel.

In many ways, I think solutions like this are just kicking the can. Travel in a place like Bangkok for one day. Red lights look like the start of a motocross rally. There are even motorbike taxis. And motorcycles deciding the sidewalk doubles as a bike line is a common sight. But traffic is still completely brutal. That's also with city wide subway and airtrain transport options as well.

The problem is simple. People need access to the roadways in a fashion that grows linearly to low exponentially. But the capacity of the roadway capacity stays constant with an occasional constant bump. Even if you suddenly toss every single driver on a scooter, it's just one of those constant time bumps. You'll eventually bump into the exact same problem of a constant road capacity against an increasing roadway access demand.

You need a way of linearly, and indefinitely, increasing traffic capacity, not one-off constant value work-arounds.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#54

Post by product50 »

newnewpdro wrote: post #50
liotier wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have to pick up and drop off our daughter at her day care on a daily basis and without Uber I'm amazed that Uber is considered an affordable commute device. Is that a SV phenomenon ?

Ever heard the phrase "has more money than sense"?

Do you have kids? Do you know how expensive it is to raise them? The preschool costs around $3k/mo at least. Compared to that $300/mo is pretty minor and the convenience it offers is totally worth it.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#55

Post by product50 »

almost_usual wrote: post #42
product50 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#inflammatory At this point, you have no argument but probably are just pissed that families are co-habiting your preferred non-family only city space. Get a life and do something with it.

Not really, I’m friends with my neighbors who have kids and I have no problems with families in San Francisco. They take their kids on the MUNI and I see plenty of other families on there as well.

Well to each their own. I am not judging them and you should not judge us.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#56

Post by product50 »

superfrank wrote: post #41
liotier wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have to pick up and drop off our daughter at her day care on a daily basis and without Uber I'm amazed that Uber is considered an affordable commute device. Is that a SV phenomenon ?

Eh, it depends on how you look at it. If you are comparing Lyft/Uber to public transit, yeah they lose out by a lot, but I don't think a lot of people are doing that. I think a lot of people are comparing Lyft/Uber against the cost of owning a semi-new car in a major city and that's much more comparable. Here's a super ball park monthly cost breakdown: - Car payment: $250 - Parking: $200 - Insurance: $85 (~$500 every…

No - you are wrong. Dropping off kids has a lot of convenience if you take an Uber. You don't have to worry about parking and can actually spend time with your kid, like read them a story, when you drop off via Ubers vs. yourself. In my estimate, I save at least 15-20min per dropoff when I take Uber vs. when I do with my car. In the morning that 15-20min extra matter a lot.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#57

Post by chaboud »

burlesona wrote: post #6
Hansenq wrote: post #5

The issue with conclusions of reports like these is that yes, Uber/Lyft contributed to a congestion increase, but what would that increase have looked like without Uber/Lyft? How much would congestion have increased by without Uber/Lyft (due to the strong economy, jobs, etc)? Would people instead have purchased cars and driven them around instead? Would we actually have had higher congestion? Publishing reports like…

How exactly would you control for all the rest? Where is there another San Francisco that doesn’t have Uber that we can go measure? I think these estimates pass the sniff test at least. Downtown SF has very little parking relative to demand, so Uber / Lyft are practically the only way to get there in a car.

"Downtown SF has very little parking relative to demand, so Uber / Lyft are practically the only way to get there in a car."

So, wait... Your argument is that there is a natural disincentive to go downtown with a car, unless one uses Uber or Lyft... But you also somehow doubt that the car traffic that is downtown has been caused by Uber and/or Lyft?

So is everyone an idiot because they just drive around downtown, give up, and go home? Or they aren't in on this Uber/Lyft secret that nobody has heard about?

Or... And I'm just spit-balling here... Maybe you just argued against yourself very effectively.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#58

Post by godzillabrennus »

httpz wrote: post #49
pftburger wrote: post #46

To be clear, Uber and Lyft are in cash burn phase, still... Yes, this is essentially still a free market economy but the prices of rides are largely subsidised to bring them to a point where they compete with public transport. That said, public transport is often a last mile problem. How do you get to and from the node, with a baby, in bad weather etc. Public transport is far from ideal and TNCs fill the gap willingl…

I'm not sure how credible this is but someone who work at one of the ride sharing company told me most of the cash burn happens in new markets for rapid growth and established markets like SF are profitable.

I’ve heard the same.

Though reaching “profitability” is not really a focus for them until automated vehicles are ready to replace the humans on the road.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#59

Post by treerock »

pftburger wrote: post #46

To be clear, Uber and Lyft are in cash burn phase, still... Yes, this is essentially still a free market economy but the prices of rides are largely subsidised to bring them to a point where they compete with public transport. That said, public transport is often a last mile problem. How do you get to and from the node, with a baby, in bad weather etc. Public transport is far from ideal and TNCs fill the gap willingl…

> prices of rides are largely subsidised to bring them to a point where they compete with public transport

Is this location based? I'm in the UK and my recent trips with Uber have cost around the same as a standard taxi and nowhere near as cheap as a bus would have cost.

Re: First analysis of how Uber and Lyft have affected roadway congestion in SF

#60

Post by lathiat »

faitswulff wrote: post #24
product50 wrote: post #15

Uber is really a heaven sent product for me and my family. We have to pick up and drop off our daughter at her day care on a daily basis and without Uber, I am not sure how would we have done it. I hope we can expand studies like this with the quality of life improvement which services like Uber have been responsible. Also, there are other things which have improved too. Such as less drunk driving, improved safety es…

Do Ubers have carseats?

I think this exists in some markets but not all (and perhaps not most).
Post reply on HN