Widening a highway to cure congestion is like losing weight by buying bigger pants — but thanks to the same principle of "induced demand," adding bike paths and train lines to cure climate actually works.
Oh the Urbanity! has a great video about this, explaining why it isn’t equivalent because induced demand is a good thing for transit even while it’s a bad thing for driving.
(Side note: it took me way too long to look up the peertube version of the video instead of the YouTube one, because I couldn’t remember the instance name and PeerTube instances aren’t nearly as discoverable as they ought to be.)
Not to mention, transportation modes whose externalities are positive instead of negative. IMO that’s the aspect that is both most important and most neglected from consideration.
Oh the Urbanity! has a great video about this, explaining why it isn’t equivalent because induced demand is a good thing for transit even while it’s a bad thing for driving.
https://urbanists.video/w/pR25CxtjRpRG7hMhbeVcxP
(Side note: it took me way too long to look up the peertube version of the video instead of the YouTube one, because I couldn’t remember the instance name and PeerTube instances aren’t nearly as discoverable as they ought to be.)
Yeah, the goal should be to induce demand to higher throughput and lower total cost/additional user options
Not to mention, transportation modes whose externalities are positive instead of negative. IMO that’s the aspect that is both most important and most neglected from consideration.