Following article published by the New York Times
By SERGE SCHMEMANN
Published: July 26, 2007
PARIS
Now that Michael Moore has broken a taboo by holding up France as a model for national health care, maybe it’s safe to point out other things France seems to do right. Like how Paris is trying to manage traffic and auto pollution.
What Paris has done right is to make it awful to get around by car and awfully easy to get around by public transportation or by bike. Any tourist in a rent-a-car who’s circumnavigated the Arc de Triomphe most likely will never drive in Paris again. But there are plenty of Parisians who do it all the time — far too many, in fact. So Mayor Bertrand Delanoë, a Socialist, vowed in coming to office in 2001 to reduce car traffic by 40 percent by 2020.
He’s serious about it. I live near the Boulevard St. Michel, and two years ago the city laid down a granite divider between the bus-only lane and the cars, squeezing private cars from three lanes to two. Taxis and bicycles may use the bus lane.
At the same time, every bus stop was newly equipped with a screen that told you how long the wait was for the bus. During rush hour, when the cars stand still along Boul’ Mich, there’s nothing better than zooming past them in a bus.
Bus routes reach the most obscure corners of Paris. There’s also the Metro — and especially the great Line No. 1, which runs on tires under the Champs-Élysées and beyond. Then there’s a nifty new tramway that runs along the southern rim of the city and several suburban train lines that can be used for rapid transport within the city.
In short, public transportation will take you where you want to go, and you can use it all you want on an electronic card that can be paid by the week or by the month (about $70 these days). Taxis, of course, can also be summoned anywhere by phone.
The lesson for big-city mayors: If you’re going to squeeze the cars, first primp the public ride.
Mayor Delanoë’s latest front in the anti-car war is the bicycle. Last week, more than 10,000 stolid, gray-painted bicycles (no Tour de France speedsters) became available for rent at 750 self-service locations across Paris. The cost is modest, less than $1.50 for a one-day pass, about $7.50 for a week and about $43.50 for a year — and the bikes can be dropped off at any docking station. The number of bikes is supposed to double by the end of the year. Already in their first week, the bikes are all over central Paris, many carrying commuters — and, yes, some New Yorkers. (An outdoor advertising company paid for everything in return for exclusive use of city-owned billboards.)
Lesson for all big cities: This is an idea whose time has come.
Now, a word about cars. In American cities, it’s “big.”
Parisians overwhelmingly buy small cars. And it’s not because people are petite, but because fuel is drop-dead expensive. Gasoline costs more than twice as much in Paris as in New York.
But the price of diesel fuel is deliberately set far lower. That’s because diesel-powered cars produce about 30 percent less greenhouse gas pollution than equivalent gasoline-powered engines. So car-buyers in Paris get small, diesel cars not because the French are virtuous (a separate topic), but because it makes economic good sense.
Many of these small cars have ample room for full-size people and have no trouble maintaining (or seriously exceeding) the 130 kilometers-per-hour (about 80 m.p.h.) limit on the national highways and are as clean and almost as quiet as gasoline engines.
The lesson for the next U.S. president: raise the taxes on fuel. A lot.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Monday, July 16, 2007
July 16, 2007 China deregulation improves logistic support for transportation infrastructure
Article published by Reuters.
Increasing Government Support for Transportation Infrastructure Aid the Growth of the Logistics Industry in China
Monday July 16, 9:30 am ET
BEIJING, July 16 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Owing to the boom in its economy and the influx of foreign direct investments in 2006, China witnessed a surge in demand for logistics, experiencing robust market growth. The Chinese Government deregulation on foreign owned logistics companies has increased market opportunities for these companies to penetrate the market further.
New analysis from Frost & Sullivan, Strategic Analysis of the Chinese Logistics Market, reveals that the Chinese logistics market generated revenues of $7.38 trillion in 2006 and estimates this to reach $28.78 trillion in 2013.
If you are interested in a virtual brochure, which provides manufacturers, end users, and other industry participants with a strategic overview of the Chinese Logistics Market, send an e-mail to Danielle White, Corporate Communications, at dwhite@frost.com, with your full name, company name, title, telephone number, e-mail address, city, state and country. We will send you the information through e-mail upon receipt of the above information.
At the completion of the Chinese Government's 10th five-year plan on transportation infrastructure in 2005, the railway length had reached 76.6 thousand kilometers, while highways length had reached 1.9 million kilometers, with up to 41.0 thousand kilometers express highways.
Besides government initiatives, the evolution of logistics and supply chain software industry is driving the modernization and development of logistics.
"Improving logistics infrastructure such as integrating road and rail networks, construction of airports in second tier and third tier cities, and setting up of free trade zones is expected to create better connectivity to link ports and airports," notes Frost & Sullivan Research Analyst Amelia Wong. "The improving IT integration of local 3PL service providers and the ongoing development in transportation infrastructure are expected to aid the growth in this market."
However, the market remained highly fragmented in 2006, with more than 300,000 registered logistics companies, most of which were transformed from the local transporting or warehousing companies. Hence, market fragmentation and the small-scale nature of the industry, along with unhealthy price competition restrain market growth.
In addition, complex licensing process at the national, regional, and local levels of government authorities, bureaucracy, and regional protectionism impede market growth.
Consequently, moving goods among provinces continues to challenge foreign logistics service providers. For the benefit of the local governments, each level of state bureau levies toll fees on the vehicles from outside the province, favoring companies that use locally based logistics service providers. Therefore, unnecessary unloading and uploading cause delays and add to excessive cost.
"Hence, logistics service providers are recommended to streamline operation and reengineer management methodology with active deployment of technology," says Amelia Wong. "With higher operation efficiencies and cost reduction, service providers can offer more competitive prices."
Although service providers are to compete on the lines of price, prompt delivery, and quality of services, they must develop customer focused solutions and pricing for various modules of services, instead of quoting a common price for all clients.
Logistics service providers can also benefit by establishing a long-term relationship with the government, including every city transport authority as well as the central government.
Strategic Analysis of the Chinese Logistics Market is part of the Automotive and Transportation Growth Partnership Service program. All research services included in subscriptions provide detailed market opportunities and industry trends evaluated following extensive interviews with market participants. Interviews with the press are available.
Frost & Sullivan, a global growth consulting company, has been partnering with clients to support the development of innovative strategies for more than 40 years. The company's industry expertise integrates growth consulting, growth partnership services, and corporate management training to identify and develop opportunities. Frost & Sullivan serves an extensive clientele that includes Global 1000 companies, emerging companies, and the investment community by providing comprehensive industry coverage that reflects a unique global perspective and combines ongoing analysis of markets, technologies, econometrics, and demographics. For more information, visit http://www.frost.com.
Strategic Analysis of the Chinese Logistics Market
Contact:
Danielle White
Corporate Communications -- China
P: 210.247.2403
E: dwhite@frost.com
Vanessa Quezada
Corporate Communications -- North America
P: 210.477.8427
E: vanessa.quezada@frost.com
Increasing Government Support for Transportation Infrastructure Aid the Growth of the Logistics Industry in China
Monday July 16, 9:30 am ET
BEIJING, July 16 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Owing to the boom in its economy and the influx of foreign direct investments in 2006, China witnessed a surge in demand for logistics, experiencing robust market growth. The Chinese Government deregulation on foreign owned logistics companies has increased market opportunities for these companies to penetrate the market further.
New analysis from Frost & Sullivan, Strategic Analysis of the Chinese Logistics Market, reveals that the Chinese logistics market generated revenues of $7.38 trillion in 2006 and estimates this to reach $28.78 trillion in 2013.
If you are interested in a virtual brochure, which provides manufacturers, end users, and other industry participants with a strategic overview of the Chinese Logistics Market, send an e-mail to Danielle White, Corporate Communications, at dwhite@frost.com, with your full name, company name, title, telephone number, e-mail address, city, state and country. We will send you the information through e-mail upon receipt of the above information.
At the completion of the Chinese Government's 10th five-year plan on transportation infrastructure in 2005, the railway length had reached 76.6 thousand kilometers, while highways length had reached 1.9 million kilometers, with up to 41.0 thousand kilometers express highways.
Besides government initiatives, the evolution of logistics and supply chain software industry is driving the modernization and development of logistics.
"Improving logistics infrastructure such as integrating road and rail networks, construction of airports in second tier and third tier cities, and setting up of free trade zones is expected to create better connectivity to link ports and airports," notes Frost & Sullivan Research Analyst Amelia Wong. "The improving IT integration of local 3PL service providers and the ongoing development in transportation infrastructure are expected to aid the growth in this market."
However, the market remained highly fragmented in 2006, with more than 300,000 registered logistics companies, most of which were transformed from the local transporting or warehousing companies. Hence, market fragmentation and the small-scale nature of the industry, along with unhealthy price competition restrain market growth.
In addition, complex licensing process at the national, regional, and local levels of government authorities, bureaucracy, and regional protectionism impede market growth.
Consequently, moving goods among provinces continues to challenge foreign logistics service providers. For the benefit of the local governments, each level of state bureau levies toll fees on the vehicles from outside the province, favoring companies that use locally based logistics service providers. Therefore, unnecessary unloading and uploading cause delays and add to excessive cost.
"Hence, logistics service providers are recommended to streamline operation and reengineer management methodology with active deployment of technology," says Amelia Wong. "With higher operation efficiencies and cost reduction, service providers can offer more competitive prices."
Although service providers are to compete on the lines of price, prompt delivery, and quality of services, they must develop customer focused solutions and pricing for various modules of services, instead of quoting a common price for all clients.
Logistics service providers can also benefit by establishing a long-term relationship with the government, including every city transport authority as well as the central government.
Strategic Analysis of the Chinese Logistics Market is part of the Automotive and Transportation Growth Partnership Service program. All research services included in subscriptions provide detailed market opportunities and industry trends evaluated following extensive interviews with market participants. Interviews with the press are available.
Frost & Sullivan, a global growth consulting company, has been partnering with clients to support the development of innovative strategies for more than 40 years. The company's industry expertise integrates growth consulting, growth partnership services, and corporate management training to identify and develop opportunities. Frost & Sullivan serves an extensive clientele that includes Global 1000 companies, emerging companies, and the investment community by providing comprehensive industry coverage that reflects a unique global perspective and combines ongoing analysis of markets, technologies, econometrics, and demographics. For more information, visit http://www.frost.com.
Strategic Analysis of the Chinese Logistics Market
Contact:
Danielle White
Corporate Communications -- China
P: 210.247.2403
E: dwhite@frost.com
Vanessa Quezada
Corporate Communications -- North America
P: 210.477.8427
E: vanessa.quezada@frost.com
Saturday, July 14, 2007
July 13, 2007 Few kids who live near school walk or bike there
Following article was published by Associate Press.
More children may be getting rides due to safety concerns, experts suggest
Updated: 2:53 p.m. CT July 13, 2007
ATLANTA - Fewer than half of American children who live close to school regularly walk or ride a bike to classes, according to a new study that highlights a dramatic shift toward car commuting by kids.
Children in the South did the least hoofing and pedaling, partly because of safety concerns, experts believe. The issue is important because it’s linked to escalating rates of childhood obesity. Many schools have been cutting back on recess and physical education, observed Sarah Martin, the study’s lead author.
“Kids need to take advantage of the opportunities that do exist for physical activity,” said Martin, a Maine-based evaluation consultant and former researcher with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The article is being published in the August issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Martin did the research when she was at the CDC.
Other studies have found that relatively few kids walk or bike to school. The numbers have dropped as the population has grown while the number of schools has declined and the distance to get to them has grown for many families.
Downward trend
In 1969, about 90 percent of kids who lived within a mile of school walked or rode bikes to get there. In 2004, just 48 percent did that at least one day a week, the new study found. Separately, federal statistics suggest the numbers are worse, of course, for children who live farther from school. In 1969, 42 percent walked or cycled and in 2001 (the most recent data available for that group), just 16 percent did.
The figures for those living within a mile of school are based on a spring 2004 nationwide, random-digit-dialed telephone survey of families with children ages 9 to 15. More than 7,400 families were surveyed. The researchers didn’t ask why so many children were driven to school, but possible explanations include parental attitudes about exercise and concerns about safety, Martin said.
Generally, studies have found that less educated families exercise less and have higher rates of obesity. But Martin’s survey found that the children of well-educated parents were more likely to get a ride to school. She said in those families, both parents are likely to have jobs and may believe it’s safer and more expedient for one of them to drive their child to school on their way to work. Such families likely have more cars, too. Other researchers have found that the number of cars is key to whether kids walk, said Lawrence Frank, a professor of community and regional planning at the University of British Columbia.
“More cars means less likely to walk,” he said.
Fewer safety features
Also, many suburban and rural areas are built without sidewalks, good crosswalks or other safety features, several experts said. Older urban communities have the most walking and biking children, at least partly because they were built with pedestrians in mind. But newer communities — like many in the South — were designed around the car, and may lack continuous sidewalks or safe crosswalks, Frank said.
Research also has shown that the South has the lowest levels of exercise and adult activity. “They don’t view walking to school as very important,” Martin said.
Liz Hansen, a Lawrenceville, Ga., mother of a 19-year-old college student, recalled that when her son was young, the family lived just two blocks from his elementary school. But she usually drove him because she worried for his safety. Later, her son — Ryan — lived less than a mile from his high school, but he didn’t like to walk or even ride the bus. “It was uncool,” she said.
Other Sources:
CDC's Nutrition and Physical Activity Program has developed KidsWalk-to-School. Additional material can be found at the CDC's Resource Materials page where among many interesting documents can be found the Kids-Walk-To-School: A Guide to Promote Walking to School.
National Center for Safe Routes to School
Related article Walking to School Goes by Wayside published by the Chicago Tribune.
The World's Fastest Trains
Following was published by Forbes.com.
Japanese MLX01
A Japanese maglev Shinkansen train called MLX01 went 361 mph (581 km/h) in 2003. It broke its own 1990, 1997 and 1999 records in a slightly modified form.
French TGV
A TGV V150 train on a high-speed but standard track reached the amazing speed of 357.2 mph (574.8 km/h) in 2007. The train sported a 25,000-horsepower electric engine with overhead pantograph for cable power and three double-decker cars in its trip from Paris to Strasbourg.
Japanese MLX01
An earlier version of the maglev Shinkansen MLX01 achieved a speed of 320 mph (515 km/h) in 1990 that put the 300 mph (582.7 km/h) record in the shade.
German TR-07
A German maglev train out of Hamburg by the name of TR-07 reached a speed of 270.3 mph (434.9 km/h) in 1989. Its configuration was designed to help reduce its noise level.
Japanese MLU001
A Japanese maglev train, the MLU001, in 1987 went 248.9 mph (400.4 km/h). This was part of the beginning of the speed dominance soon to come of maglev trains.
French TGV
A French TGV train in 1981 broke records and reached a speed of 236 mph (380 km/h).
Japanese MLX01
A Japanese maglev Shinkansen train called MLX01 went 361 mph (581 km/h) in 2003. It broke its own 1990, 1997 and 1999 records in a slightly modified form.
French TGV
A TGV V150 train on a high-speed but standard track reached the amazing speed of 357.2 mph (574.8 km/h) in 2007. The train sported a 25,000-horsepower electric engine with overhead pantograph for cable power and three double-decker cars in its trip from Paris to Strasbourg.
Japanese MLX01
An earlier version of the maglev Shinkansen MLX01 achieved a speed of 320 mph (515 km/h) in 1990 that put the 300 mph (582.7 km/h) record in the shade.
German TR-07
A German maglev train out of Hamburg by the name of TR-07 reached a speed of 270.3 mph (434.9 km/h) in 1989. Its configuration was designed to help reduce its noise level.
Japanese MLU001
A Japanese maglev train, the MLU001, in 1987 went 248.9 mph (400.4 km/h). This was part of the beginning of the speed dominance soon to come of maglev trains.
French TGV
A French TGV train in 1981 broke records and reached a speed of 236 mph (380 km/h).
June 11, 2007 Megacities of The Future
Following was published by Forbes.com.
In 1900, the world's largest city was London, which did not even qualify as a megacity. (The threshold for that dubious distinction is 10 million people; London had 6.5 million that year.) Every city in the top 10 that year was in Europe or America, with one exception: Tokyo, then the world's seventh-largest city, with 1.5 million people. Today, Greater Tokyo tops the megacity list with a population of 35.2 million. In 2015, it will retain the pole position with 35.5 million, according to United Nations population projections. But Tokyo's growth rate is slowing. The demographic future belongs to cities like Mumbai, Shanghai and Dhaka.
#1. Tokyo, Japan
Projected Population in 2015: 35.5 million
Population in 2005: 35.2 million
Originally called Edo, this city did not amount to much until 1603, when Shogun Tokugawa Ieyasu made it his home. After Japan's Meiji Restoration in 1868, the emperor moved in and changed the name to Tokyo. The city was devastated by an earthquake in 1923 and by U.S. bombers in 1945. Despite these setbacks, and despite the damage inflicted by Godzilla in numerous films, Tokyo eventually surpassed New York to become the world's biggest city--a title it will retain at least until 2015.
#2. Mumbai, India
Projected Population in 2015: 21.9 million
Population in 2005: 18.2 million
The city's previous name, Bombay, was discarded as a relic of colonialism. But Mumbai itself is very much a relic of the colonial era. The land it occupies was ceded to Portugal by an Indian potentate in 1534, and then passed to Great Britain in 1661. Under British rule, Bombay developed into a major metropolis. Today, vibrant Mumbai is India's commercial and entertainment capital.
#3. Mexico City, Mexico
Projected Population in 2015: 21.6 million
Population in 2005: 19.4 million
Mexico's capital sprawls over the site of Tenochtitlan, capital of the Aztec Empire, which fell to the conquistador Hernan Cortes in 1521. A more recent disaster was the major earthquake that struck in 1985. This massive metropolis is Mexico's capital in every sense--political, financial and cultural. Built over a lake bed, the city is slowly sinking as it sucks water from the aquifer beneath it to slake the thirst of its teeming millions.
#4. Sao Paulo, Brazil
Projected Population in 2015: 20.5 million
Population in 2005: 18.3 million
Sao Paulo is a megacity created by coffee. Founded in 1554 by Jesuit missionaries, it grew to prominence in the 19th century thanks to its location in the heart of Brazil's richest coffee-growing region. Now, it's a financial center with a notably diverse population. In Sao Paulo, people of Italian descent outnumber people of Portuguese descent, and the cosmopolitan ethnic mix includes many people whose ancestors came from Japan, Lebanon or Africa.
#5. New York, United States
Projected Population in 2015: 19.9 million
Population in 2005: 18.7 million
The New York metropolitan area constituted the world's first megacity, passing the 10 million mark by 1950. It was founded during the 1620s as New Amsterdam, a Dutch colony that soon passed to British control. The key to its 19th-century growth was the Erie Canal, completed in 1825, which funneled commerce from America's interior to the Hudson River. These days, New York no longer is the world's busiest port, but it remains America's finance and media capital.
#6. Delhi, India
Projected Population in 2015: 18.6 million
Population in 2005: 15 million
Delhi was the capital of the Mughal emperors, whose Red Fort still broods over the center of the city. The British took over in 1857 and later built the New Delhi government complex, which has served as India's capital since independence. Mumbai may have Bollywood, and Bangalore may style itself India's Silicon Valley, but Delhi still exudes the old imperial glamour. As a seat of power, it has been attracting migrants for centuries, and they're still coming today.
#7. Shanghai, China
Projected Population in 2015: 17.2 million
Population in 2005: 14.5 million
Shanghai was diverted from obscurity in 1842, when China lost the First Opium War and was forced to open several ports to foreign exploitation. Thanks to its location near the mouth of the Yangtze River, Shanghai prospered mightily and grew into China's largest and most cosmopolitan city: "The Paris of the East." The foreigners fled in 1949 when the Communists took over, but in recent years, Shanghai has reclaimed its former stature as a financial and industrial behemoth.
#8. Calcutta, India
Projected Population in 2015: 17 million
Population in 2005: 14.3 million
Calcutta was founded in 1690 by the British East India Company, and it later prospered as a port from which the British shipped opium to China. Under the British, Calcutta was India's capital and largest city. These days, it is neither. Its main claim to fame (other than its enormous population) is its predilection for electing communists to run its municipal government. Being true believers, they haven't done nearly as well with their economy as have the lapsed communists who run Shanghai.
#9. Dhaka, Bangladesh
Projected Population in 2015: 15.2 million
Population in 2005: 12.4 million
Along with five other megacities on this list, Dhaka was associated with a part of the British Empire. (The others are Mumbai, New York, Shanghai, Delhi and Calcutta.) Earlier, Dhaka had belonged to the Mughal Empire; nowadays, it's the capital of Bangladesh, a Muslim nation that used to be part of Pakistan. (Pakistan's current largest city, Karachi, fell just short of this Top 10, coming in at No. 12.)
#10. Jakarta, Indonesia
Projected Population in 2015: 16.8 million
Population in 2005: 13.2 million
Jakarta is the capital of Indonesia. A port city on the heavily populated island of Java, it has been ruled at various times by Hindu kings, Muslim sultans, Dutch imperialists (who called it Batavia and made it the capital of the Dutch East Indies) and Japanese generals, who conquered it during World War II. Like many coastal megacities, Jakarta will be vulnerable to flooding if global warming raises the sea levels.
In 1900, the world's largest city was London, which did not even qualify as a megacity. (The threshold for that dubious distinction is 10 million people; London had 6.5 million that year.) Every city in the top 10 that year was in Europe or America, with one exception: Tokyo, then the world's seventh-largest city, with 1.5 million people. Today, Greater Tokyo tops the megacity list with a population of 35.2 million. In 2015, it will retain the pole position with 35.5 million, according to United Nations population projections. But Tokyo's growth rate is slowing. The demographic future belongs to cities like Mumbai, Shanghai and Dhaka.
#1. Tokyo, Japan
Projected Population in 2015: 35.5 million
Population in 2005: 35.2 million
Originally called Edo, this city did not amount to much until 1603, when Shogun Tokugawa Ieyasu made it his home. After Japan's Meiji Restoration in 1868, the emperor moved in and changed the name to Tokyo. The city was devastated by an earthquake in 1923 and by U.S. bombers in 1945. Despite these setbacks, and despite the damage inflicted by Godzilla in numerous films, Tokyo eventually surpassed New York to become the world's biggest city--a title it will retain at least until 2015.
#2. Mumbai, India
Projected Population in 2015: 21.9 million
Population in 2005: 18.2 million
The city's previous name, Bombay, was discarded as a relic of colonialism. But Mumbai itself is very much a relic of the colonial era. The land it occupies was ceded to Portugal by an Indian potentate in 1534, and then passed to Great Britain in 1661. Under British rule, Bombay developed into a major metropolis. Today, vibrant Mumbai is India's commercial and entertainment capital.
#3. Mexico City, Mexico
Projected Population in 2015: 21.6 million
Population in 2005: 19.4 million
Mexico's capital sprawls over the site of Tenochtitlan, capital of the Aztec Empire, which fell to the conquistador Hernan Cortes in 1521. A more recent disaster was the major earthquake that struck in 1985. This massive metropolis is Mexico's capital in every sense--political, financial and cultural. Built over a lake bed, the city is slowly sinking as it sucks water from the aquifer beneath it to slake the thirst of its teeming millions.
#4. Sao Paulo, Brazil
Projected Population in 2015: 20.5 million
Population in 2005: 18.3 million
Sao Paulo is a megacity created by coffee. Founded in 1554 by Jesuit missionaries, it grew to prominence in the 19th century thanks to its location in the heart of Brazil's richest coffee-growing region. Now, it's a financial center with a notably diverse population. In Sao Paulo, people of Italian descent outnumber people of Portuguese descent, and the cosmopolitan ethnic mix includes many people whose ancestors came from Japan, Lebanon or Africa.
#5. New York, United States
Projected Population in 2015: 19.9 million
Population in 2005: 18.7 million
The New York metropolitan area constituted the world's first megacity, passing the 10 million mark by 1950. It was founded during the 1620s as New Amsterdam, a Dutch colony that soon passed to British control. The key to its 19th-century growth was the Erie Canal, completed in 1825, which funneled commerce from America's interior to the Hudson River. These days, New York no longer is the world's busiest port, but it remains America's finance and media capital.
#6. Delhi, India
Projected Population in 2015: 18.6 million
Population in 2005: 15 million
Delhi was the capital of the Mughal emperors, whose Red Fort still broods over the center of the city. The British took over in 1857 and later built the New Delhi government complex, which has served as India's capital since independence. Mumbai may have Bollywood, and Bangalore may style itself India's Silicon Valley, but Delhi still exudes the old imperial glamour. As a seat of power, it has been attracting migrants for centuries, and they're still coming today.
#7. Shanghai, China
Projected Population in 2015: 17.2 million
Population in 2005: 14.5 million
Shanghai was diverted from obscurity in 1842, when China lost the First Opium War and was forced to open several ports to foreign exploitation. Thanks to its location near the mouth of the Yangtze River, Shanghai prospered mightily and grew into China's largest and most cosmopolitan city: "The Paris of the East." The foreigners fled in 1949 when the Communists took over, but in recent years, Shanghai has reclaimed its former stature as a financial and industrial behemoth.
#8. Calcutta, India
Projected Population in 2015: 17 million
Population in 2005: 14.3 million
Calcutta was founded in 1690 by the British East India Company, and it later prospered as a port from which the British shipped opium to China. Under the British, Calcutta was India's capital and largest city. These days, it is neither. Its main claim to fame (other than its enormous population) is its predilection for electing communists to run its municipal government. Being true believers, they haven't done nearly as well with their economy as have the lapsed communists who run Shanghai.
#9. Dhaka, Bangladesh
Projected Population in 2015: 15.2 million
Population in 2005: 12.4 million
Along with five other megacities on this list, Dhaka was associated with a part of the British Empire. (The others are Mumbai, New York, Shanghai, Delhi and Calcutta.) Earlier, Dhaka had belonged to the Mughal Empire; nowadays, it's the capital of Bangladesh, a Muslim nation that used to be part of Pakistan. (Pakistan's current largest city, Karachi, fell just short of this Top 10, coming in at No. 12.)
#10. Jakarta, Indonesia
Projected Population in 2015: 16.8 million
Population in 2005: 13.2 million
Jakarta is the capital of Indonesia. A port city on the heavily populated island of Java, it has been ruled at various times by Hindu kings, Muslim sultans, Dutch imperialists (who called it Batavia and made it the capital of the Dutch East Indies) and Japanese generals, who conquered it during World War II. Like many coastal megacities, Jakarta will be vulnerable to flooding if global warming raises the sea levels.
December 20, 2006 World's Densest Cities
Following was published by Forbes.com.
The world's most congested cities reflect dense concentrations of population along with the proliferation of vehicular traffic and insufficient roads to handle them. While the bulk of these cities are located in Asia, the list also includes one African and two Latin American locales.
Manila, Philippines
Population: 1,581,000
Density: 41,014 persons per square kilometer.
The capital of the Philippines, Manila boasts the highest population density in the world, with its sixth district the densest. It is poised between Manila Bay and Laguna Bay and has been a major port for centuries. The metropolitan area consists of some 10 million people. The roads are filled with buses, pedicabs (bicycles with sidecars) and cars. The traffic is consistently described as horrendous. Fixing this situation has to be put into the context of serious water problem and other infrastructure calamities.
Cairo, Egypt
Population: 15.2 million (official) / 25 million (unofficial)
Density: 36,618 persons per square kilometer.
Egypt's capital also happens to be the cultural capital of the Arab world and the largest city in Africa. Its traffic is overwhelming. It has to be seen to be believed. Compounding the ever more horrendous noise is the variety of vehicles: autos, buses, bikes, vans and trucks on narrow streets with the use of the sidewalk almost a must. The traffic rarely stays in lanes, instead weaving its own tapestry. It is an elemental force.
Lagos, Nigeria
Population: 10 million to 15 million
Density: 20,000-plus per square kilometer.
Once the capital of Nigeria, it no longer carries that title. Still, as the commercial center, it is in a growth pattern that is likely to make it a city of 20 million by 2010. Transportation is at best risky and very congested partly because of its location in a series of lagoons and partly due to its rate of growth. Its buses and motorcycles are unsafe for nonresidents and hardly safe for natives of Lagos as there are innumerable and apparently unstoppable crashes. As the nation???s leading port it has had some success in exporting timber and now oil (when the wells are not disrupted by political violence).
Macau
Population: 508,500
Density: 16,521 persons per square kilometer.
Part of the Special Administration Region of the People's Republic of China, its narrow streets complicate traffic. So it's not surprising that the most popular commuting vehicle is the scooter--the Vespa or a look alike. There are still slower means like the jinriksha and the trishaw, but as a means of locomotion they are giving way to scooters and motorcycles. The use of efficient buses has made traffic somewhat more tolerable.
Seoul, South Korea
Population: 10,297,000 (20 million-plus metro area)
Density: 16,391 persons per square kilometer.
South Korea's capital has great transportation facilities, but it also has 3 million vehicles plying its streets. The huge subway system moves 8 million a day. But rush hour in the evening is from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. Seoul is also South Korea's business center with company headquarters for Samsung, LG Group and Hyundai. It uses on its streets a full range of vehicle fleets: buses and taxis. Driving can be arduous, and citizens have to learn to be Seoul survivors.
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Population: 6,724,976 (11 million-plus metro area)
Density: 14,688 persons per square kilometer.
The capital of Bangladesh is gripped by severe pollution problems and a staggering amount of congestion. The city supports 400,000 rickshaws in use daily, and that is the most of any city in the world. Bicycles are also numerous, and the young people are now moving toward scooters, taxis and private cars. The 1,868 kilometers of roads leave much to be desired, but plans are in place for improvement.
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Population: 2,776,138 (12 million-plus metro area)
Density: 13,680 persons per square kilometer.
Argentina's capital is also the nation's finance, industrial and commercial center. Its roadways were once clear but are no longer--despite the Nueve de Julio Avenue, which is the widest boulevard in the world. Buenos Aires is often fully gridlocked, particularly at rush hours. It has a subway system that is extensive, but even this can't absorb the increased flow of traffic. As the major port city of the nation it has the additional traffic of trucks to and from the port.
Jakarta, Indonesia
Population: 8,792,000
Density: 11,360 persons per square kilometer.
The capital of Indonesia is also the country's commercial and financial center. It has heavy congestion combined with inadequate roads and public transportation--particularly in the central business district. It once had 160,000 rickshaws (called becaks), but they have been almost eliminated. There are now more aggressive motorcycles in great numbers that are increasing exponentially. An outer ring road is in the process of being built. The citizens of Jakarta are famous for breaking all the rules of the road, and that adds to the congestion.
Kaohsiung/Taipei, Taiwan
Population: of 1,510,577
Density: 9,835 persons per square kilometer.
The two cities of Taiwan are both nearly the same in density. Taipei might have worse traffic, but Kaohsiung has worse pollution. Kaohsiung is a major container ship port and also has manufacturing, refining and transportation industries; while Taipei is the capital of Taiwan and the center of mass media, politics and general commerce.
Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
Population: 2,530,000
Density: 9,516 persons per square kilometer.
The capital of the Dominican Republic is also the largest city in the Caribbean and the oldest city in the Americas. Driving is always chancy, as the rules of the road are to a degree up for grabs. Traffic can be quite dense, and there is a layer of smog over the city. There are regular traffic jams and taking the bus is an alternative, but they have odd, if any, schedules and not too many stops. There is a metro under construction, but it is best not to wait to get on.
The world's most congested cities reflect dense concentrations of population along with the proliferation of vehicular traffic and insufficient roads to handle them. While the bulk of these cities are located in Asia, the list also includes one African and two Latin American locales.Manila, Philippines
Population: 1,581,000
Density: 41,014 persons per square kilometer.
The capital of the Philippines, Manila boasts the highest population density in the world, with its sixth district the densest. It is poised between Manila Bay and Laguna Bay and has been a major port for centuries. The metropolitan area consists of some 10 million people. The roads are filled with buses, pedicabs (bicycles with sidecars) and cars. The traffic is consistently described as horrendous. Fixing this situation has to be put into the context of serious water problem and other infrastructure calamities.
Cairo, Egypt
Population: 15.2 million (official) / 25 million (unofficial)
Density: 36,618 persons per square kilometer.
Egypt's capital also happens to be the cultural capital of the Arab world and the largest city in Africa. Its traffic is overwhelming. It has to be seen to be believed. Compounding the ever more horrendous noise is the variety of vehicles: autos, buses, bikes, vans and trucks on narrow streets with the use of the sidewalk almost a must. The traffic rarely stays in lanes, instead weaving its own tapestry. It is an elemental force.
Lagos, Nigeria
Population: 10 million to 15 million
Density: 20,000-plus per square kilometer.
Once the capital of Nigeria, it no longer carries that title. Still, as the commercial center, it is in a growth pattern that is likely to make it a city of 20 million by 2010. Transportation is at best risky and very congested partly because of its location in a series of lagoons and partly due to its rate of growth. Its buses and motorcycles are unsafe for nonresidents and hardly safe for natives of Lagos as there are innumerable and apparently unstoppable crashes. As the nation???s leading port it has had some success in exporting timber and now oil (when the wells are not disrupted by political violence).
Macau
Population: 508,500
Density: 16,521 persons per square kilometer.
Part of the Special Administration Region of the People's Republic of China, its narrow streets complicate traffic. So it's not surprising that the most popular commuting vehicle is the scooter--the Vespa or a look alike. There are still slower means like the jinriksha and the trishaw, but as a means of locomotion they are giving way to scooters and motorcycles. The use of efficient buses has made traffic somewhat more tolerable.
Seoul, South Korea
Population: 10,297,000 (20 million-plus metro area)
Density: 16,391 persons per square kilometer.
South Korea's capital has great transportation facilities, but it also has 3 million vehicles plying its streets. The huge subway system moves 8 million a day. But rush hour in the evening is from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. Seoul is also South Korea's business center with company headquarters for Samsung, LG Group and Hyundai. It uses on its streets a full range of vehicle fleets: buses and taxis. Driving can be arduous, and citizens have to learn to be Seoul survivors.
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Population: 6,724,976 (11 million-plus metro area)
Density: 14,688 persons per square kilometer.
The capital of Bangladesh is gripped by severe pollution problems and a staggering amount of congestion. The city supports 400,000 rickshaws in use daily, and that is the most of any city in the world. Bicycles are also numerous, and the young people are now moving toward scooters, taxis and private cars. The 1,868 kilometers of roads leave much to be desired, but plans are in place for improvement.
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Population: 2,776,138 (12 million-plus metro area)
Density: 13,680 persons per square kilometer.
Argentina's capital is also the nation's finance, industrial and commercial center. Its roadways were once clear but are no longer--despite the Nueve de Julio Avenue, which is the widest boulevard in the world. Buenos Aires is often fully gridlocked, particularly at rush hours. It has a subway system that is extensive, but even this can't absorb the increased flow of traffic. As the major port city of the nation it has the additional traffic of trucks to and from the port.
Jakarta, Indonesia
Population: 8,792,000
Density: 11,360 persons per square kilometer.
The capital of Indonesia is also the country's commercial and financial center. It has heavy congestion combined with inadequate roads and public transportation--particularly in the central business district. It once had 160,000 rickshaws (called becaks), but they have been almost eliminated. There are now more aggressive motorcycles in great numbers that are increasing exponentially. An outer ring road is in the process of being built. The citizens of Jakarta are famous for breaking all the rules of the road, and that adds to the congestion.
Kaohsiung/Taipei, Taiwan
Population: of 1,510,577
Density: 9,835 persons per square kilometer.
The two cities of Taiwan are both nearly the same in density. Taipei might have worse traffic, but Kaohsiung has worse pollution. Kaohsiung is a major container ship port and also has manufacturing, refining and transportation industries; while Taipei is the capital of Taiwan and the center of mass media, politics and general commerce.
Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
Population: 2,530,000
Density: 9,516 persons per square kilometer.
The capital of the Dominican Republic is also the largest city in the Caribbean and the oldest city in the Americas. Driving is always chancy, as the rules of the road are to a degree up for grabs. Traffic can be quite dense, and there is a layer of smog over the city. There are regular traffic jams and taking the bus is an alternative, but they have odd, if any, schedules and not too many stops. There is a metro under construction, but it is best not to wait to get on.
March 22, 2007 World's 30 Busiest Airports
The following article was published by Forbes.com.
It was once observed that the economic health of New York could be accurately traced by the number of restaurant table napkins being laundered. Airport activity is an equally precise economic indicator. By this measure, Asia is doing just great, the U.S. seems busy but growing slowly, and Europe is steady but not dramatic.
The public has a somewhat jaded view of most airports, probably because so many millions of people have suffered through visits. Atlanta's Hartsfield Airport claims the title of having the most traffic, with more than 84 million visitors in 2006--somewhat larger than the entire population of Germany.
The airport with the largest tonnage of cargo in the world is Memphis, which includes a Fed Ex hub. It processes 3.5 million tons a year--the equivalent in weight of 75 Titanics.
In the U.S., the fastest-growing passenger airports are Denver and Newark, N.J., (of all places). Anchorage, Alaska, is growing fastest among U.S. cargo airports and is keeping pace with Asia, where it gets most of its business. Only three airports make the list of busiest in both passenger traffic and cargo traffic: Charles De Gaulle in Paris, Frankfort-am-Main in Germany and Los Angeles (LAX).
The 2006 World Airport Award, given out by the monitoring organization Skytrax, honored Singapore's Changi Airport as the best in the world. Their list of top 10 did not include any U.S. airports. Wong Woong Liong, the director-general of Singapore civil aviation, said upon receiving the award, "Changi Airport's constant upgrading in facilities and improvement in services, such as the complete renovation of our Terminal 2 and the launch of a dedicated Budget Terminal earlier this year, has been awarded with this strong approval from Skytrax global users."
Hong Kong and Munich, Germany, received the No. 2 and No. 3 position awards for 2006. Copenhagen Airport was given an award for the best on-site food.
Not everyone is happy with their airline experience, regardless of the airport. The recent debacle involving JetBlue (nasdaq: JBLU - news - people ) that left thousands stranded for days has brought on a storm of protest.
JetBlue and AMR Corp.'s (nyse: AMR - news - people ) American (the world's largest carrier) have developed versions of a passenger's bill of rights--but theirs are purely voluntary. On the legislative side, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., are proposing a passenger's bill of rights that is government designed and regulated. This would surely involve more costs to the airlines, which could be passed on to passengers in the form of higher fares. Above all, lawmakers want to assure passengers that they'll have access to advanced notification of delays, prompt return to gates when there is a delay, provisions while there is a delay and some form of compensation.
"I have serious concerns about airlines' contingency planning that allows passengers to sit on the tarmac for hours on end. It is imperative that airlines do everything possible to ensure that situations like these (JetBlue and American) do not occur again," says Mary Peters the U.S. Secretary of Transportation. She has asked the Inspector General of DOT to investigate.
It might well be that major airlines, particularly American, Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines, UAL's United, Japan, Northwest, Deutsche Lufthansa, Air Nippon, US Airways Group and Continental Airlines, are the right parties to decide upon a passengers rights with some input from passengers, consultants and the Department of Transportation.
Among the world's busiest airports, 16 are in the U.S., seven are in Asia, six are in Europe and one is in Canada. The 2006 passenger figures reflect a total of enplaned and deplaned passengers and are compiled by the Airport Council International (ACI).
tlanta
1. Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson Airport had a traffic volume of 84,846,639 passengers, making it king of passenger traffic. It has in past years vied with Chicago's O'Hare for top honors. It appears to have gained 1% more passengers in the past year.
Chicago
2. Chicago's O'Hare International Airport is No. 2, with 76,248,911 of passengers. It has had a modest increase over the past year but in relation to the fast-growing Asian airports appears to be falling behind.
London (LHR)
3. London's Heathrow Airport is big No. 3, with 67,530,223 passengers. Heathrow is also a major cargo airport, but in this category they seem to be losing ground.
Tokyo (HND)
4. Tokyo International Airport is a close fourth, with 65,225,795 passengers and a significant 3% increase over last year. Tokyo is also a modest player in cargo.
Los Angeles (LAX)
5. Los Angeles International Airport handled 61,048,552 passengers and saw a slight rise from the previous year. This airport is also a major cargo handler and ranks as No. 8 in the world.
Dallas-Fort Worth
6. Texas' Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport served 60,079,107 passengers and gained more than 1% over a year earlier. Dallas/Fort Worth is also another player in cargo--No. 28 in the world.
Paris (CDG)
7. Charles De Gaulle International Airport handled 56,808,967 passengers and saw a significant increase of 5% over a year earlier, after substantial increases in airport infrastructure. The airport is Europe's largest cargo handler and just outranks Frankfurt.Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany
8. Frankfurt International Airport's passenger traffic is 52,810,683, with a small growth of 1% over previous year. Frankfort, like Charles de Gaulle, is a large cargo airport and ranks seventh in the world for cargo tonnage handled.Beijing
8. Beijing Capital International Airport has handled 48,501,102 passengers last year. It is a beneficiary of the Asian boom in air traffic. It regularly posts double-digit annual growth, last year surging 18% over 2005.Denver
10. Denver International Airport has racked up traffic of 47,324,844 passengers. It was almost unique in its growth in passenger traffic in the U.S. last year with over 9% surge year-over-year.Las Vegas
11. Las Vegas is a good bet for growth, as it already has 46,194,882 passengers and a nice growth rate of over 4% over the preceding year. Further building of casinos, hotels and conference facilities is likely to lead to even more robust growth.Amsterdam, Netherlands
12. Amsterdam Schiphol Airport has 46,088,221 passengers. It is one of the better growing airports in Europe as it has in excess of 4% growth and is third in growth after Madrid and Charles De Gaulle.Madrid, Spain
13. Madrid Airport is increasing its passenger traffic by over 8% a year, reaching 45,500,489 in 2006. Its growth approaches Asia's best figures.Hong Kong
14. Hong Kong International Airport shares with its Asian neighbors a very healthy growth of more than 9% and last year boasted traffic of 44,020,000 passengers. Hong Kong is also the second-largest cargo handler in the world after Memphis.Bangkok, Thailand
15. Bangkok International Airport posted 2006 traffic of 42,799,532 and a growth rate of close to 10%. It is also a significant airport for cargo growth.Houston
16. Houston handled 42,628,863 passengers last year--up more than 7% over the year before--a far larger growth rate than its larger Dallas/Fort Worth neighbor.New York (JFK)
17. New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport had traffic of 42,604,975--a moderate 4% rise over a year earlier.Phoenix
18. Phoenix, Arizona's Sky Harbor Airport had traffic of 41,439,819 passengers last year and a nearly flat rate of growth.Detroit
19. Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport handled 36,356,446 passengers last year and is not growing at all. It has a significant presence in cargo but that service is not growing either.Minneapolis/St. Paul
20. Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport had traffic of 35,633,020 passengers in 2006 and is experiencing a nice 3%-plus growth rate.Newark, N.J.
21. Newark Liberty International Airport, part of the metropolitan New York airport collection, had traffic of 35,494,863 passengers last year and significant growth of more than 7%. Newark is also a center for cargo, with almost the same volume as London's Heathrow.Singapore
22. Singapore Changi Airport had traffic of 35,033,083 passengers last year and is growing at a rate of 8%--comparable with many of its Asian neighbors.Orlando, Fla.
23. Orlando International Airport, the nearest facility to Disney World, had traffic of 34,818,264 passengers--many of them families going for holiday. It is experiencing modest growth in volume.London (LGW)
24. London Gratwick, the British capital's second airport, welcomed 34,172,489 passengers last year--a more than 4% passenger volume growth, which is faster than its larger competitor, Heathrow.San Francisco
25. San Francisco International Airport carried traffic of 33,527,236 passengers, with a flat growth rate.Miami
26. Miami International Airport had traffic of 32,533,974 passengers and grew at a rate close to 5%. Miami is a significant player in cargo as well.Toyko (NRT)
27. Narita International Airport had traffic of 31,824,411 passengers and a low 1% growth. However, Narita is Japan's largest cargo airport and the fourth-largest in the world.Philadelphia
28. Philadelphia International Airport had traffic of 31,766,537 passengers and below 1% growth. It has a small presence in cargo traffic.Toronto
29. Toronto Pearson International Airport had traffic of 30,966,483 passengers and is growing at more than 3%.Jakarta, Indonesia
30. Jakarta Airport posted traffic of 30,863,806 passengers and a high rate of growth over 10%. It has experienced a slingshot effect from increases in Asian trade.
It was once observed that the economic health of New York could be accurately traced by the number of restaurant table napkins being laundered. Airport activity is an equally precise economic indicator. By this measure, Asia is doing just great, the U.S. seems busy but growing slowly, and Europe is steady but not dramatic.
The public has a somewhat jaded view of most airports, probably because so many millions of people have suffered through visits. Atlanta's Hartsfield Airport claims the title of having the most traffic, with more than 84 million visitors in 2006--somewhat larger than the entire population of Germany.
The airport with the largest tonnage of cargo in the world is Memphis, which includes a Fed Ex hub. It processes 3.5 million tons a year--the equivalent in weight of 75 Titanics.
In the U.S., the fastest-growing passenger airports are Denver and Newark, N.J., (of all places). Anchorage, Alaska, is growing fastest among U.S. cargo airports and is keeping pace with Asia, where it gets most of its business. Only three airports make the list of busiest in both passenger traffic and cargo traffic: Charles De Gaulle in Paris, Frankfort-am-Main in Germany and Los Angeles (LAX).
The 2006 World Airport Award, given out by the monitoring organization Skytrax, honored Singapore's Changi Airport as the best in the world. Their list of top 10 did not include any U.S. airports. Wong Woong Liong, the director-general of Singapore civil aviation, said upon receiving the award, "Changi Airport's constant upgrading in facilities and improvement in services, such as the complete renovation of our Terminal 2 and the launch of a dedicated Budget Terminal earlier this year, has been awarded with this strong approval from Skytrax global users."
Hong Kong and Munich, Germany, received the No. 2 and No. 3 position awards for 2006. Copenhagen Airport was given an award for the best on-site food.
Not everyone is happy with their airline experience, regardless of the airport. The recent debacle involving JetBlue (nasdaq: JBLU - news - people ) that left thousands stranded for days has brought on a storm of protest.
JetBlue and AMR Corp.'s (nyse: AMR - news - people ) American (the world's largest carrier) have developed versions of a passenger's bill of rights--but theirs are purely voluntary. On the legislative side, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., are proposing a passenger's bill of rights that is government designed and regulated. This would surely involve more costs to the airlines, which could be passed on to passengers in the form of higher fares. Above all, lawmakers want to assure passengers that they'll have access to advanced notification of delays, prompt return to gates when there is a delay, provisions while there is a delay and some form of compensation.
"I have serious concerns about airlines' contingency planning that allows passengers to sit on the tarmac for hours on end. It is imperative that airlines do everything possible to ensure that situations like these (JetBlue and American) do not occur again," says Mary Peters the U.S. Secretary of Transportation. She has asked the Inspector General of DOT to investigate.
It might well be that major airlines, particularly American, Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines, UAL's United, Japan, Northwest, Deutsche Lufthansa, Air Nippon, US Airways Group and Continental Airlines, are the right parties to decide upon a passengers rights with some input from passengers, consultants and the Department of Transportation.
Among the world's busiest airports, 16 are in the U.S., seven are in Asia, six are in Europe and one is in Canada. The 2006 passenger figures reflect a total of enplaned and deplaned passengers and are compiled by the Airport Council International (ACI).
tlanta
1. Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson Airport had a traffic volume of 84,846,639 passengers, making it king of passenger traffic. It has in past years vied with Chicago's O'Hare for top honors. It appears to have gained 1% more passengers in the past year.
Chicago
2. Chicago's O'Hare International Airport is No. 2, with 76,248,911 of passengers. It has had a modest increase over the past year but in relation to the fast-growing Asian airports appears to be falling behind.
London (LHR)
3. London's Heathrow Airport is big No. 3, with 67,530,223 passengers. Heathrow is also a major cargo airport, but in this category they seem to be losing ground.
Tokyo (HND)
4. Tokyo International Airport is a close fourth, with 65,225,795 passengers and a significant 3% increase over last year. Tokyo is also a modest player in cargo.
Los Angeles (LAX)
5. Los Angeles International Airport handled 61,048,552 passengers and saw a slight rise from the previous year. This airport is also a major cargo handler and ranks as No. 8 in the world.
Dallas-Fort Worth
6. Texas' Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport served 60,079,107 passengers and gained more than 1% over a year earlier. Dallas/Fort Worth is also another player in cargo--No. 28 in the world.
Paris (CDG)
7. Charles De Gaulle International Airport handled 56,808,967 passengers and saw a significant increase of 5% over a year earlier, after substantial increases in airport infrastructure. The airport is Europe's largest cargo handler and just outranks Frankfurt.Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany
8. Frankfurt International Airport's passenger traffic is 52,810,683, with a small growth of 1% over previous year. Frankfort, like Charles de Gaulle, is a large cargo airport and ranks seventh in the world for cargo tonnage handled.Beijing
8. Beijing Capital International Airport has handled 48,501,102 passengers last year. It is a beneficiary of the Asian boom in air traffic. It regularly posts double-digit annual growth, last year surging 18% over 2005.Denver
10. Denver International Airport has racked up traffic of 47,324,844 passengers. It was almost unique in its growth in passenger traffic in the U.S. last year with over 9% surge year-over-year.Las Vegas
11. Las Vegas is a good bet for growth, as it already has 46,194,882 passengers and a nice growth rate of over 4% over the preceding year. Further building of casinos, hotels and conference facilities is likely to lead to even more robust growth.Amsterdam, Netherlands
12. Amsterdam Schiphol Airport has 46,088,221 passengers. It is one of the better growing airports in Europe as it has in excess of 4% growth and is third in growth after Madrid and Charles De Gaulle.Madrid, Spain
13. Madrid Airport is increasing its passenger traffic by over 8% a year, reaching 45,500,489 in 2006. Its growth approaches Asia's best figures.Hong Kong
14. Hong Kong International Airport shares with its Asian neighbors a very healthy growth of more than 9% and last year boasted traffic of 44,020,000 passengers. Hong Kong is also the second-largest cargo handler in the world after Memphis.Bangkok, Thailand
15. Bangkok International Airport posted 2006 traffic of 42,799,532 and a growth rate of close to 10%. It is also a significant airport for cargo growth.Houston
16. Houston handled 42,628,863 passengers last year--up more than 7% over the year before--a far larger growth rate than its larger Dallas/Fort Worth neighbor.New York (JFK)
17. New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport had traffic of 42,604,975--a moderate 4% rise over a year earlier.Phoenix
18. Phoenix, Arizona's Sky Harbor Airport had traffic of 41,439,819 passengers last year and a nearly flat rate of growth.Detroit
19. Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport handled 36,356,446 passengers last year and is not growing at all. It has a significant presence in cargo but that service is not growing either.Minneapolis/St. Paul
20. Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport had traffic of 35,633,020 passengers in 2006 and is experiencing a nice 3%-plus growth rate.Newark, N.J.
21. Newark Liberty International Airport, part of the metropolitan New York airport collection, had traffic of 35,494,863 passengers last year and significant growth of more than 7%. Newark is also a center for cargo, with almost the same volume as London's Heathrow.Singapore
22. Singapore Changi Airport had traffic of 35,033,083 passengers last year and is growing at a rate of 8%--comparable with many of its Asian neighbors.Orlando, Fla.
23. Orlando International Airport, the nearest facility to Disney World, had traffic of 34,818,264 passengers--many of them families going for holiday. It is experiencing modest growth in volume.London (LGW)
24. London Gratwick, the British capital's second airport, welcomed 34,172,489 passengers last year--a more than 4% passenger volume growth, which is faster than its larger competitor, Heathrow.San Francisco
25. San Francisco International Airport carried traffic of 33,527,236 passengers, with a flat growth rate.Miami
26. Miami International Airport had traffic of 32,533,974 passengers and grew at a rate close to 5%. Miami is a significant player in cargo as well.Toyko (NRT)
27. Narita International Airport had traffic of 31,824,411 passengers and a low 1% growth. However, Narita is Japan's largest cargo airport and the fourth-largest in the world.Philadelphia
28. Philadelphia International Airport had traffic of 31,766,537 passengers and below 1% growth. It has a small presence in cargo traffic.Toronto
29. Toronto Pearson International Airport had traffic of 30,966,483 passengers and is growing at more than 3%.Jakarta, Indonesia
30. Jakarta Airport posted traffic of 30,863,806 passengers and a high rate of growth over 10%. It has experienced a slingshot effect from increases in Asian trade.
June 11, 2007 America's Worst Traffic Traps
In Pictures: America's 12 Worst Traffic Traps published by Forbes.com
Conservative estimates by the Department of Transportation say the U.S. loses $168 billion yearly from highway congestion. In 2004, the Federal Highway Administration says the nation's trucking system lost 243,032,000 due to traffic delays. Here are the 12 worst highway intersections--call them the dawdling dozen--as ranked by the hours of delays caused each year. Figures for delays are 2004 estimates from the Highway User Alliance.
Los Angeles, US-101 and I-405 Interchange - The king of traffic traps costs 27 million plus hours of delay each year. The interchange finished worst in a 2004 study, as well as in 1999 and 2002. The good news: major construction work being done to help, with a hopeful completion date in 2008. The bad news: The work will improve matters, not fix them, and will compound the problem in the meantime.
Houston, I-610 and I-10 Interchange - This enduring trap costs 25 million hours plus hours of delay, and came in No. 2 in both the 1999 and 2002 studies. Work to improve it will start soon and may help long term. Short term it's another story: Starting in June 2007 expect major lane closures.
Chicago, I-90/94 and I-290 Interchange - What is called the Circle Interchange has led to 25 million hours of delay, and it is getting worse. In a 1999 study, it was listed as the 13th worst traffic trap in the U.S.
Phoenix, I-10 and SR-51 Interchange - The so-called "Mini-Stack" causes 22 million hours of delay a year. While it was listed as No. 4 in the 2002 study, it didn't make the list in 1999, demonstrating the growth of Phoenix in recent years.
Los Angeles, I-405 and I-10 Interchange - This San Diego Freeway exchange causes 22 million hours of delay annually. Now undergoing car pool lane construction, expect things to get worse before they get better.
Atlanta, I-75 and I-85 Interchange - The "Downtown Connector" logs 21 million hours of delay each year, and things are getting worse. In 1999 the interchange was No. 12. By the 2002 study it had risen to the No. 6 slot, where it remains today.
Washington, D.C., I-495 and I-270 Interchange - This trap helps keep traffic on the Federal Government's mind, costing 19 million hours of delay a year. Called one of the worst commuting spots in the nation by the AAA, it showed up as No. 16 in 1999 and became No. 7 in the 2002 study.
Los Angeles, I-10 and I-5 Interchange - This Santa Monica Freeway interchange causes 18 million hours of delay in a year, adding to the hands-down win by Los Angeles as America's heart of traffic pain.
Los Angeles, I-405 and I-605 Interchange - This intersection on the San Diego Freeway cost 18 million hours of delay. A conjunction of roads that includes I-710 is overtaxed by trucks serving the nation’s busiest ports.
Atlanta, I-285 and I-85 Interchange - Sherman might not have taken Atlanta if he faced this formidable trap, nicknamed "Spaghetti Junction" by locals. It eats up 17 million hours of drivers' time each year. In a 1999 study it ranked 11th and took its present position in 2002.
Chicago, I-94 and I-90 Interchange - The great "Skyway Split" costs 16 million hours of delay each year and is undergoing major change. Coupled with the traffic horrors of the junction of I-88 and I-290, this is no place for out-of-towners.
Phoenix, I-17 and I-10 Interchange - "The Stack," as its known, causes 16 million hours of delay a year. Work is now under way to fix the problem, and closures are frequent.
Following article was published by Forbes.com.
Think your commute is bad? Anyone stuck in these bottlenecks would trade in a second. Could help be on the way?
By Robert Malone
They have nicknames: "Hillside Strangler," "Mixing Bowl," "Spaghetti Junction" and "Orange Crush." They drive commuters crazy. They stall commerce. They waste fuel uselessly. And fixing them? Nothing doing. When you're talking about America's worst traffic traps--the highway bottlenecks that cause the most hours of delay per year--there's been little to do but sit on someone's bumper and complain.
Could it be changing? Last week, nine of America’s most congested cities were named semi-finalists for a federal program that will provide a total of $1.1 billion to fight traffic jams. The Department Of Transportation (DOT) will consider proposals for its Urban Partnership program from Atlanta, Dallas, Denver, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Miami, New York City, San Diego, San Francisco and Seattle, with plans to announce winners by mid-August.
Part of the DOT's "National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America's Transportation Network," the program hopes to get Federal, State and local officials working together to reverse what it called "alarming trends of congestion."
"This program supports leaders with the wisdom and courage to develop plans that will cut traffic now, not years from now," said U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters.
They'll have to. The Eisenhower Interstate Highway system, completed in the 1960s, has failed to keep pace with a tripling of the number of vehicles operating. Conservative estimates by the DOT say the U.S. loses $168 billion yearly from highway congestion. The nation's trucking system in 2004 lost 243,032,000 hours due to traffic delays, according to the Federal Highway Administration.
Among the worst offenders:
--The Los Angeles US-101 and I-405 Interchange, which results in 27 million plus hours of delay each year;
--Houston I-610 and I-10 Interchange, which costs 25 million hours plus hours of delay;
--Chicago I-90/94 and I-290 Interchange. Known as the Circle Interchange, it leads to 25 million hours of delay per year;
--Phoenix I-10 and SR-51 Interchange causes 22 million delay-hours annually; and
--Los Angeles I-405 and I-10 Interchange. This San Diego Freeway exchange has causes 22 million hours of annual delay.
Traffic traps can be the result of many interrelated causes. Drivers bunch up and leave no space between cars to perform what is called a "snaking action," where each driver has little choice but to do what the car in front is doing. One answer: Timed entry from ramps is being used to pulse the traffic and help alleviate slow downs, as are electronic messaging to alert drivers to best speed, best route and length of delays to be anticipated.
Other causes of delay are a combination of an increased driving population near the traffic trap (think Orange County, Calif.), endless repair work, multiple lane accidents, traffic at peak times and infrastructure breakdown (bridge out, landslide, flooding through poor drainage) and acts of nature. But most of all, traffic is caused by success, says Anthony Downs, an economist and author of Still Stuck in Traffic.
"That is why traffic in high-tech areas fell sharply when the 'Internet bubble' burst in 2000," Downs wrote in The Washington Post last year. More economic activity equals more cars and more driving. "Moreover, since the U.S. population will continue to increase, and we hope it will remain efficient and with rising incomes, congestion will remain a fact of life for most Americans."
He's doubtful the traffic problem can be eradicated. But it can be helped. Downs advocates reducing congestion and bottlenecks through charging drivers a premium to travel during peak traffic times, and turning the profits back into improved highway infrastructures.
DOT is exploring this kind of "congestion pricing" solution, and expressed interest in a controversial proposal by New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg to charge drivers to enter Manhattan during certain times of day. They're also calling for enhanced transit services, increased use of telecommuting and flex scheduling, and advanced technology to help. Other projects include working to ease border congestion and reducing freight congestion at vital trade gateways, especially in Southern California.
"We're asking cities to try something different, innovative and daring when it comes to fighting traffic," Peters said. Those solutions may take a while. But heck, you're not going anywhere.
Conservative estimates by the Department of Transportation say the U.S. loses $168 billion yearly from highway congestion. In 2004, the Federal Highway Administration says the nation's trucking system lost 243,032,000 due to traffic delays. Here are the 12 worst highway intersections--call them the dawdling dozen--as ranked by the hours of delays caused each year. Figures for delays are 2004 estimates from the Highway User Alliance.
Los Angeles, US-101 and I-405 Interchange - The king of traffic traps costs 27 million plus hours of delay each year. The interchange finished worst in a 2004 study, as well as in 1999 and 2002. The good news: major construction work being done to help, with a hopeful completion date in 2008. The bad news: The work will improve matters, not fix them, and will compound the problem in the meantime.
Houston, I-610 and I-10 Interchange - This enduring trap costs 25 million hours plus hours of delay, and came in No. 2 in both the 1999 and 2002 studies. Work to improve it will start soon and may help long term. Short term it's another story: Starting in June 2007 expect major lane closures.
Chicago, I-90/94 and I-290 Interchange - What is called the Circle Interchange has led to 25 million hours of delay, and it is getting worse. In a 1999 study, it was listed as the 13th worst traffic trap in the U.S.
Phoenix, I-10 and SR-51 Interchange - The so-called "Mini-Stack" causes 22 million hours of delay a year. While it was listed as No. 4 in the 2002 study, it didn't make the list in 1999, demonstrating the growth of Phoenix in recent years.
Los Angeles, I-405 and I-10 Interchange - This San Diego Freeway exchange causes 22 million hours of delay annually. Now undergoing car pool lane construction, expect things to get worse before they get better.
Atlanta, I-75 and I-85 Interchange - The "Downtown Connector" logs 21 million hours of delay each year, and things are getting worse. In 1999 the interchange was No. 12. By the 2002 study it had risen to the No. 6 slot, where it remains today.
Washington, D.C., I-495 and I-270 Interchange - This trap helps keep traffic on the Federal Government's mind, costing 19 million hours of delay a year. Called one of the worst commuting spots in the nation by the AAA, it showed up as No. 16 in 1999 and became No. 7 in the 2002 study.
Los Angeles, I-10 and I-5 Interchange - This Santa Monica Freeway interchange causes 18 million hours of delay in a year, adding to the hands-down win by Los Angeles as America's heart of traffic pain.
Los Angeles, I-405 and I-605 Interchange - This intersection on the San Diego Freeway cost 18 million hours of delay. A conjunction of roads that includes I-710 is overtaxed by trucks serving the nation’s busiest ports.
Atlanta, I-285 and I-85 Interchange - Sherman might not have taken Atlanta if he faced this formidable trap, nicknamed "Spaghetti Junction" by locals. It eats up 17 million hours of drivers' time each year. In a 1999 study it ranked 11th and took its present position in 2002.
Chicago, I-94 and I-90 Interchange - The great "Skyway Split" costs 16 million hours of delay each year and is undergoing major change. Coupled with the traffic horrors of the junction of I-88 and I-290, this is no place for out-of-towners.
Phoenix, I-17 and I-10 Interchange - "The Stack," as its known, causes 16 million hours of delay a year. Work is now under way to fix the problem, and closures are frequent.Following article was published by Forbes.com.
Think your commute is bad? Anyone stuck in these bottlenecks would trade in a second. Could help be on the way?
By Robert Malone
They have nicknames: "Hillside Strangler," "Mixing Bowl," "Spaghetti Junction" and "Orange Crush." They drive commuters crazy. They stall commerce. They waste fuel uselessly. And fixing them? Nothing doing. When you're talking about America's worst traffic traps--the highway bottlenecks that cause the most hours of delay per year--there's been little to do but sit on someone's bumper and complain.
Could it be changing? Last week, nine of America’s most congested cities were named semi-finalists for a federal program that will provide a total of $1.1 billion to fight traffic jams. The Department Of Transportation (DOT) will consider proposals for its Urban Partnership program from Atlanta, Dallas, Denver, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Miami, New York City, San Diego, San Francisco and Seattle, with plans to announce winners by mid-August.
Part of the DOT's "National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America's Transportation Network," the program hopes to get Federal, State and local officials working together to reverse what it called "alarming trends of congestion."
"This program supports leaders with the wisdom and courage to develop plans that will cut traffic now, not years from now," said U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters.
They'll have to. The Eisenhower Interstate Highway system, completed in the 1960s, has failed to keep pace with a tripling of the number of vehicles operating. Conservative estimates by the DOT say the U.S. loses $168 billion yearly from highway congestion. The nation's trucking system in 2004 lost 243,032,000 hours due to traffic delays, according to the Federal Highway Administration.
Among the worst offenders:
--The Los Angeles US-101 and I-405 Interchange, which results in 27 million plus hours of delay each year;
--Houston I-610 and I-10 Interchange, which costs 25 million hours plus hours of delay;
--Chicago I-90/94 and I-290 Interchange. Known as the Circle Interchange, it leads to 25 million hours of delay per year;
--Phoenix I-10 and SR-51 Interchange causes 22 million delay-hours annually; and
--Los Angeles I-405 and I-10 Interchange. This San Diego Freeway exchange has causes 22 million hours of annual delay.
Traffic traps can be the result of many interrelated causes. Drivers bunch up and leave no space between cars to perform what is called a "snaking action," where each driver has little choice but to do what the car in front is doing. One answer: Timed entry from ramps is being used to pulse the traffic and help alleviate slow downs, as are electronic messaging to alert drivers to best speed, best route and length of delays to be anticipated.
Other causes of delay are a combination of an increased driving population near the traffic trap (think Orange County, Calif.), endless repair work, multiple lane accidents, traffic at peak times and infrastructure breakdown (bridge out, landslide, flooding through poor drainage) and acts of nature. But most of all, traffic is caused by success, says Anthony Downs, an economist and author of Still Stuck in Traffic.
"That is why traffic in high-tech areas fell sharply when the 'Internet bubble' burst in 2000," Downs wrote in The Washington Post last year. More economic activity equals more cars and more driving. "Moreover, since the U.S. population will continue to increase, and we hope it will remain efficient and with rising incomes, congestion will remain a fact of life for most Americans."
He's doubtful the traffic problem can be eradicated. But it can be helped. Downs advocates reducing congestion and bottlenecks through charging drivers a premium to travel during peak traffic times, and turning the profits back into improved highway infrastructures.
DOT is exploring this kind of "congestion pricing" solution, and expressed interest in a controversial proposal by New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg to charge drivers to enter Manhattan during certain times of day. They're also calling for enhanced transit services, increased use of telecommuting and flex scheduling, and advanced technology to help. Other projects include working to ease border congestion and reducing freight congestion at vital trade gateways, especially in Southern California.
"We're asking cities to try something different, innovative and daring when it comes to fighting traffic," Peters said. Those solutions may take a while. But heck, you're not going anywhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
