That's very interesting....it's an old argument held by those against the liberalising of transport routes that the unprofitable / quieter routes would lose out!!
I am also not sure full stop about some of these orbital routes as currently routed\timetabled, whether run by Dublin Bus or another operator, 90% of the time when I see a 104 bus it has less than 5 people on it!
Every fair is subsidised through the State subsidy of Dublin Bus. How do they subsidise those who use private cars? The road infrastructure is funded through general taxation and everyone benefit from it whether they use the road or not.
Are you sure about that? If our occupancy rates are similar to the UK then the emissions per passenger per Km travelled are 5 times higher for bus passengers than car passengers. Given the amount of road space given over to bus lanes I’m doubtful about how much busses reduce congestion. Again, I can’t find Dublin Bus data but in the linked article the average bus carried 2.3 passengers per Km travelled whereas the average car carried 1.2 passengers.
Where did you get that from?
Why not introduce a congestion charge in Dublin city centre? Motorists who use the M50 pay €2 each way to cross the Liffey. €5 to drive into the city centre would cause a bigger change in behaviour than an extra €0.50 subsidy on every bus journey.
Yea, but the bus has its own lane and if our occupancy rates are similar to the UK then on average during rush hour two cars = 1 bus.
That's very interesting....it's an old argument held by those against the liberalising of transport routes that the unprofitable / quieter routes would lose out!!
I don't think anyone would be running the route for profit with a bus - it would only be done as part of a tender \ subsidy \ package of routes.
Those are the same EURO standards that VW got such great results on? There's bugger all difference between EURO 3 and EURO 5 emissions levels and as Dublin Bus don't release statistics for passenger per Km traveled we just don't know what their CO2 and NOx levels are. The level to which engines are maintained has a huge impact on the amount they pollute so quoting emissions levels for new buses, which could well have be falsified anyway, tells us very little. I don't think behaviour patterns in a city in the UK and a city in Ireland will be greatly different.Purple you're quoting research carried out by a pro-car lobby group that is based on reports from 2 councils in the UK. Emissions calculated on UK buses with EURO 3 vehicles, Dublin Bus have mostly EURO 5 vehicles with newer buses EURO 6 - these are the buses that will be used by Go Ahead. Essentially that report is rubbish.
The LUAS is electric and much of it's lines are not on public roads.No one here seems to have a problem with LUAS, this is the exact same model as used for LUAS.
Not if the old drivers are wondering around various depots around Dublin with nothing to do but drawing the same wage.Go Ahead have stated what they can provide the service for, the fare box goes to the NTA, all fares are decided by the NTA. Go Ahead are providing the service for less money than Dublin Bus, that's a saving for the taxpayer.
Last year Dublin Bus carried 125 million passengers and received nearly €100 million in subsidies (€57 million to cover the Public Service Obligation and the rest in other payments to buy new buses etc. That means there is a subsidy of €0.80 per journey. For someone using the bus to get to work each day that's an extra €4.00 per week.As for your ludicrous statement that the full fare should be paid without subsidy, you really should think that through. How would our cities work without public transport? It has to be subsidised. Essentially only those that can afford cars would be able to get to work at any place distant to their homes and it would take forever to do so if there was no subsidy for fares. You usually talk some degree of sense but not on this occasion.
According to the NTA:
"Under the provisions of the tender, not only will service levels on the routes in question be maintained, they will actually be increased by about 35pc. So passengers in areas served by these routes have absolutely no reason to worry about this change. Matters such as fares, frequency and scheduling for the service will all be set by the NTA, and not the operator."
http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...ntract-for-24-routes-in-capital-36021211.html
Perhaps you should ask them?
Yes, that's all very positive. But another posted claimed that the 104 service is 90% of time almost empty. It's hard to marry the two views. One would suggest increasing capacity for passengers, the other would suggest that the service shouldn't even exist.
Can you please explain this? The NTA has stated that services will either stay the same or be increase and fares will remain unchanged. Where is the cost of the consumer?
If services and prices stay the same, then presumably Go Ahead will need a state subsidy to make any sort of profit? Either that, or they will have to cut costs. How will they cut costs?
Yes, that's all very positive. But another posted claimed that the 104 service is 90% of time almost empty.
It's hard to marry the two views. One would suggest increasing capacity for passengers, the other would suggest that the service shouldn't even exist.
The 125 million passengers, being taxpayers themselves, contribute in equal measure to the subsidy through their taxes as non-passengers do.
None of us know who, or when, or how many times any one of us will use or never use the public transport system. My kids, when they grow up, may move to Dublin and need to use public transport. That's why I'm happy to contribute a relatively miniscule amount to ensure a continued vital service in our capital city.
That argument can be made to provide any public service or utility free at the point of consumption.The 125 million passengers, being taxpayers themselves, contribute in equal measure to the subsidy through their taxes as non-passengers do.
None of us know who, or when, or how many times any one of us will use or never use the public transport system. My kids, when they grow up, may move to Dublin and need to use public transport. That's why I'm happy to contribute a relatively miniscule amount to ensure a continued vital service in our capital city.
The 125 million passengers, being taxpayers themselves, contribute in equal measure to the subsidy through their taxes as non-passengers do.
None of us know who, or when, or how many times any one of us will use or never use the public transport system. My kids, when they grow up, may move to Dublin and need to use public transport. That's why I'm happy to contribute a relatively miniscule amount to ensure a continued vital service in our capital city.
I couldn't disagree more. People who use public transport already pay their fares and subsidise those that choose to use private cars to transport to work.......
And if your paying tax at the higher rate, you'll save half the cost of that ticket. So €1,110 is the true cost.In Dublin, if you want / need a ticket for bus / luas / dart it will set you back 2180 euro. 2.5 times more expensive than Paris. And that is for a service that is essentially really bad.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?