Spartz_why_worry

Sustainable Transportation in Rural Communities

More often than not, people consider sustainable transportation to be an issue for urban settings, but it is a problem in rural areas as well (Canada 2010). Rural areas tend to be described by low population density and having land devoted to agriculture (Dictonary.com 2012). There are many problems that contribute to the difficulties of public and sustainable transportation in rural areas. Since these areas tend to have a lower population density, there is more space between people and less people to use the conventional public transport systems such as trains or bus routes. Rural areas also tend to have less cycling and walking paths and carpool programs are seemingly less effective (Canada 2010). This is why transportation planners tend to focus on more densely populated areas or the “disadvantaged groups”(elderly, invalids, low income households) within rural communities, as these are the people who have better access to and are more likely to use public transportation (Murray 1998). The problem is that more than just the disadvantaged groups make up the 49 million people that live in rural areas. This is 17% of the U.S. population that, for the most part, does not have access to public transportation (Partnership 2011). Many of the households in rural communities that do have access to a car, either only have one for the person who makes the money in the family to get to work, or have multiple cars that have to travel farther so that everyone can get where they need to be (McLendon 2009). This means that people either can’t get where they need to be, or they are contributing to air pollution to since walking or riding a bike are the only potentially hazardous alternatives. Either way, there are not enough options available for transportation at all, let alone sustainable transportation (Canada 2010). Problems that are presented to the environment created by rural roadways involve the development and maintenance of the roads. When developing roadways across animal trails, habitat destruction and potential injury to both animals and humans are likely to occur. With an increased number of cars forced to be on the roads, roadwork crews are required to repair roads more often which brings in harsh chemicals that harm the ecosystem which make up 58% of particulate matter emissions of all construction and demolition projects and contribute 2.7 tons of NOx emissions per project (Eisinger 2007). More cars also require the need for more parking in highly trafficked areas. Putting in new parking lots requires removal of the environment that previously existed in that space. Driving distractions can also pose potential hazards to the environment, especially in rural areas where driving off the road would result in a vehicle ending up in a “natural environment”. Another problem that prevents rural communities from establishing public or sustainable transportation is that they don’t have the necessary money to put forward toward the planning and implementing these programs (Partnership 2011). These sorts of programs need money to pay a staff and cover the cost of the vehicles, fuel, insurance, and upkeep. If the local and national governments are not able to help, it makes it difficult for these communities to even consider more transportation options as a possibility (Canada 2010). Unfortunately, most governments write off rural areas since the needs of the people can’t be met at what they consider to be a “reasonable cost” (Murray 1998). The groups that make up the Partnership for Sustainable Communities (the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) have put together a program that will attempt to help rural communities become more sustainable. The problem with their program as it stands is that if one were to actually look at who is receiving funding for sustainable transportation efforts, he or she would see that it is mostly going towards Native American tribes and national parks and other tourist areas (Partnership 2011). While this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, there are still many communities that are not getting funding. Solutions to the problem of transportation options to rural communities would require groups like the EPA and the U.S. DOT to work with state and local governments as well as taxpayers, local businesses, schools and possibly airports to develop programs since the rural communities will most likely not have the information they need to successfully put a plan into action (Murray 1998). If they were able to work together it may help the taxpayers see that their money is being used in a more efficient manner. Since many rural towns are developed around transport hubs, it seems reasonable to think that there could a bus system that stops at a few centralized locations throughout several towns. The towns involved in the bus system could all split the cost of the shuttle which would lessen the need for one town to provide all the funding (Partnership 2011). To make bus services, both daily scheduled ones and ones that have a flexible route, more desirable to people who may otherwise want to get from place to place quickly, mobile hot spots could be included with these services, which would allow users to get work done on the bus on the way to and from work which, if companies were agreeable, could be chargeable time. Encouragement of more high-speed internet connectivity for rural communities would also support working from home which would take cars off the roads and less sick days to occur (Canada 2010). Simple solutions like the development of bike lanes or sidewalks would also be beneficial. All in all, by not addressing this as a sustainable problem, more pollutants will be introduced to the air by more cars having to be on the roads and many people may be stuck without the transportation they need to allow them to access the resources they need.

References: Eisinger, Douglas; Niemeier, Deb. “Construction Emissions: Using Project Data to Improve Regional Inventories.” UC Davis-Caltrans. 1/21/07. <[]>. Murray, Alan T.; Davis, Rex; Stimson, Robert J.; Ferreira, Luis. “Public Transportation Access.” Transportation Research. Elsevier. September 1998. Pg 319-328. “rural.” Dictionary.com. Accessed: 9/10/12.Updated: 2012. <[]>. “Supporting Sustainable Rural Communities.” Partnership for Sustainable Communities. Fall 2011. <[]>. “Sustainable transportation in small and rural communities.” Transport Canada. Accessed: 9/10/12. Updated: 8/26/10. <[]>. “Urban or rural: Which is more energy-efficient?” Mother Nature Network. 9/01/09. <[]>.

Downloadable Document: