文章 Articles

多管齐下,破解北京交通困境

征收进城费的好处远远不止于减缓气候变化。菲利克斯•克鲁特齐格说,就连司机们也会感受到更加绿色的交通基础设施所带来的益处。

Article image

交通造成的排放要占全世界温室气体排放总量的将近四分之一,但和电力部门比起来,这里的减缓行动还几乎为零。更糟糕的是,交通排放的增长速度比任何其他部门都要快。在这个灾难性的增长中,具有标志意义的就是中国机动车的增长。30年前,北京的机动车还不到10万辆,而如今已经超过360万辆。

对于历史上累积的排放,经合组织国家负的责任当然要比中国大得多,也没有谁打算剥夺中国人民购买私家车的梦想。但是,中国还是有充分的理由去抵制气候变化。气候变化的后果将带来严重的威胁。举个例子,中国的供水严重依赖正在迅速缩小的喜玛拉雅冰川。问题已经不限于气候变化:快速的经济发展和交通的机动化都给人民带来了迫在眉睫的危险。

北京的人口只有全国的百分之一,汽车数量却占全国的十分之一。结果,北京各主干道的交通拥堵已经不限于早晚两个高峰。被堵的不仅是小轿车,人满为患的公共汽车也一样,通勤的人们每天在路上要花好几个小时。空气污染造成了哮喘和肺癌的多发。北京市每年有一千多人死于汽车交通事故,这进一步降低了人们骑自行车的积极性。实际上,自行车是最适合中国城市情况的环保交通方式,直到最近也还是最普遍的手段。然而,行人和自行车的通行被都被主干道的滚滚汽车流和物理障碍所阻。一句话,北京现在的交通就是一场恶梦。

许多中国人都渴望成为有车一族,汽车成了一个生活目标。但是,经济上的益处怎样才能平衡那些不利因素呢?如果我们把交通拥堵和其他危害货币化,也许就能回答这个问题。运用既定的方法,我和美国能源基金会中国可持续能源项目的何东权对拥堵造成的时间成本、空气污染造成的健康成本以及交通噪音造成的压力成本,乃至交通事故死亡造成的损失进行了估算。气候变化损失的成本,可以通过北京机动车辆产生的二氧化碳排放总量来估值。

这个破坏的确巨大。即使按照很保守的估计,交通拥堵和空气污染引起的损失每年也有200亿人民币(约29亿美元)。另外还要算上拥堵造成的乘客时间损失60亿元(8.77亿美元),尽管公车乘客的单位时间损失没有私家车司机那么大。交通事故和噪音污染的成本相对较小,每项只有10亿元(1.46亿美元)。令人吃惊的是,对北京人来说,气候变化损害的成本还不如交通拥堵和空气污染大,只有14亿元(2.05亿美元)。这些数字都是2005年的,占当年北京GDP的7.5%。而2005年以来,情况只会更加恶化,因为这几年中北京的汽车总数增加了100多万辆。

但是,这并不是说气候变化和北京的交通瓶颈毫无关系。气候变化的社会成本中的不确定因素要比其他环境危害更多。在对机动车普及的社会成本的高额估计(占北京GDP的15%)中,气候变化的成本与空气污染和交通拥堵的成本一样高。

那么,怎样才能解决这个危机呢?就像亚历克斯·帕斯特纳克为“中外对话”撰写的文章中所说的:出路就是明智的增长。必须以公共交通为中心规划卫星城;土地使用、工作和生活都必须在更短的移动半径内重新组织。但是,北京现在存在很多问题,如主要依靠公路干道,超大社区,以及远离CBD的“睡城”居住区等,都不是那么容易就能解决的。

奥运会期间,北京通过单双号成功限制了车流量,赛后又实行五天一轮的尾号限行。但是,这些措施的长期效果并不理想:新车还在不断上路,有些车主为了规避限行,干脆买了第二辆车。通过禁止老型号的重污染车辆上路,空气污染也相对有所改善,不过由于机动车数量的猛增,基本情况仍然在不断恶化。

要解决这个案例中的根本问题,经济学理论要求我们采取成本内部化措施。传统上,这种措施就是收取交通拥堵费。但是,我倾向于把“进城费”作为一个名目也作为一个概念,这是因为我们的目标不仅在于消除拥堵,还在于减缓环境破坏的最大影响和解决其它问题。进城费的核心理念就是:污染者所付费用要让机动车需求与其交通的社会成本相符。

如果北京征收“进城费”,汽车流量将下降四分之一,主要拥堵能得到解决,车速平均将提高21到28公里/小时,空气污染和气候变化的影响也会减小。拥堵解决,车速和安全性都大大提高,开车族是最大受益者,但同时他们也是进城费的支付者。要实现上述效果,每天的进城费要达到50元人民币(7.9美元),这对大多数司机来说都是一个大数目。所以北京市政府的决策者才会对此缺乏兴趣。

再稍微深入探究一下经济学理论可能会有帮助。“需求弹性”说的是人们如何对价格信号作出反应。拿进城费来说,如果人们对价格信号相对敏感,从而减少开车时间,那么它就是有益的。较高的需求弹性意味着较低的进城费就能取得较高的收益,这是一个很诱人的结果。于是下一个问题又来了:怎样才能增加需求弹性呢?

最具决定性的措施应该就是公车和地铁的速度与数量了。当这些交通手段都很便利的时候,私家车主就能很容易地转乘公共交通。实际上,完备的公共交通能够将“理想”的进城费每天减少10元人民币(1.5美元),同时还能更大幅度地降低车流量及其危害。

城市规划者们明白北京需要的不是环路和主干道,他们开始大量投资建设轨道交通网络。根据规划,到2015年,北京的轨道交通总里程将由目前的200公里增加到560公里。这样一来,越来越多的通勤者就不会挤着去买汽车了。但是,这些还不足以打破目前的交通僵局。要解决这个问题,必须建立起低成本、高效能的快速公交系统,同时要对公路重新规划,提高效率。还要为自行车和电动自行车设立专用车道,这样才能遏制住这一环保交通手段普及率不断下降的势头。综上所述,进城费、快速公交系统、轨道交通和有利于行人和骑车者的基础设施,这几项措施加在一起,就能为北京开辟出一条通向可持续和节能型的交通之路。

通过交通需求管理来减缓气候变化,既能使有车族大大受益,让他们享受更加宽松的道路,同时也能让那些期待“蓝天日”的民众满意。这个结论有点令人吃惊。当然,要实现这一点,必须动用政治力量消除汽车利益集团的影响,即使不能阻止人们购车,至少要劝他们少开车。


作者简介:菲利克斯·克鲁特齐格,加州大学伯克利分校伯克利环境研究所博士后,现在为北京的中国能源基金会工作。完整的研究报告近期将在《运输研究D部分》上发表。

首页图片由
Shazari

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

希望只能放在轨道交通身上

在北京,自行车道往往被汽车占据,自行车无路可走,而且空气污染严重,所以,自行车的生存空间被严重压缩。快速公交系统北京现在还只有三条,未来北京的市内交通只能靠地铁和轻轨等轨道交通。

Rail transit_our last straw

In Beijing, the bicycle lane is often taken up by cars. Bikes have no way of getting through and air pollution is severe. Therefore the existence of bicycle space is being gravely reduced. Beijing's Bus Rapid Transit currently only has three lines. In the future, within the city of Beijing, one will only be able to rely on the subway and light rail transport such as trams.

(Comment translated by Ellen Schliebitz)

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

北京地铁

北京的地铁换成相当麻烦,浪费时间,这成了轨道交通的污点,北京正在大力发展轨道交通,如果以后的地铁换成还像现在这样,那就太失败了

The Beijing Subway

The Beijing subway has become quite inconvenient and time-wasting, blemishing the concept of rail-based transportation. The city of Beijing is currently energetically developing this type of transportation, and if the subway of the future is to be just more of what we have today, then that will be a real failure.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

可悲!

一直认为,金融危机发生后,中国政府提出振兴汽车产业的政策是错误的决定,至少在鼓励私家车购买方面。想想,什么政策才是真正代表最广大人民的利益,我想鼓励私家车购买绝对不是代表最广大人民的利益。
我们应该将侧重点投向公共交通的建设,为骑自行车的人开辟道路。
也许汽车产业短期内会带动一些就业和需求,对经济的刺激有所帮助,但是中央政府应该以老百姓长期的利益为根本。
北京的空气污染是自作自受,但有一点我们要说,再也不要因为北京一个地方的空气质量问题而影响到周边地区经济的发展,这不公平。
(YZHK)

Tragic

I was always thinking the Chinese government had made a false decision to promote the prosperity of auto industry after the breakout of the financial crisis, at least in encouraging the purchase of private cars. We should make a reflection on the exact policy that truly represents the interests of the overwhelming majority of people, in my opinion, spurring the buying of sedan cars is definitely not the right one. Perhaps,we should transfer our focus to the construction of public transportation to clear the way for bicycles. Maybe the auto industry could expand employment and demand in the short run, which is of help to stimulating the economy, however our central government must base their decisions on the long-term benefit of the common people. Beijing is stewing in its own air pollution. What's more, another point to make is that we shouldn't let the peripheral areas suffer from the effects of Beijing's air quality problem any more, it's unfair.

This comment was translated by Mingzhu Yao.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

痛苦的出行

参见路透社刊发的关于北京交通问题的文章:http://blogs.cn.reuters.com/blog/2009/03/31/%E5%8C%97%E4%BA%AC%E4%BA%A4%E9%80%9A%E4%BD%95%E5%8E%BB%E4%BD%95%E4%BB%8E/.
北京可以向伦敦学习,对经过市中心的私家车征收拥堵费,同时鼓励人们多骑自行车、多乘轨道交通。这也是很无奈的办法,关键是政府要做出一个科学、清晰的城市规划。

The painful trip

With reference to Reuters News Agency on the issue of Beijing's traffic: http://blogs.cn.reuters.com/blog/2009/03/31/%E5%8C%97%E4%BA%AC%E4%BA%A4%E9%80%9A%E4%BD%95%E5%8E%BB%E4%BD%95%E4%BB%8E/.
Beijing could learn from London to encourage the use of bicycles and public transport (subway system) by imposing "congestion charge" on private cars running in the city centre. This is a way out of no way after all. The government must come up with a scientific and clear urban planning if it wants the problem solved.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

光靠规划/政策是不够的

和北京的年轻人交谈后发现,他们中不少人愿意采用公共交通或是骑自行车来替代私家车上班。然而,当你问他们:“那么当你有孩子的时候呢?”答案立刻就变了。住在北京已经成家的人们希望为其家庭使用私家车。这是他们买车的原因。他们需要停车的地方,住宅区里也就需要较大用于停车的面积,这就提升了住家到公车站之间的步行距离,也降低了人们使用公共交通的倾向。同时,市中心和娱乐场所的停车位不够,这使得私家车驶进自行车道或是开在人行道上,进一步降低了骑自行车的意向。几乎没有人来管理这一问题,就算有人管理,罚金的数目对于一个能够买车的人来说也微乎其微。在我看来,北京有可能自发变成一个低碳生活方式城市的这一观点是行不通的,这就好像问北美人对这一问题的看法,而他们回答:“我会转向低碳生活,但它不能影响我的生活方式。”一样。光靠好的规划和政策是不够的。只有通过数代人在文化意识上的改变才能解决这一问题。

本评论由 Renate ZHAO 翻译

More than just planning/policy needed

Talking to many young people in Beijing, many of them are willing to accept the concept of public transit or cycling to work as an option for mobility.

However, when you ask them, "so what about when you have a baby..." the answer changes significantly. People in Beijing want cars for their families. So they buy the cars. They need places to park their cars, so residential areas need large parking lots, thereby increasing the walking distance between home and a bus station, and reducing any incentive to take public transit.

In the meantime, downtown and leisure areas don't have enough parking, forcing cars into bike lanes and onto sidewalks, further reducing the attractiveness of cycling. There is little or no enforcement of this offense, and even when enforced, the penalty is small for anybody who can afford to buy a car in the first place.

As for the comment that Beijingers might change to a low carbon lifestyle voluntarily, in my opinion, it would be the same as a North American attitude: "I'll change to low carbon, as long as it doesn't affect my lifestyle."

More than good planning and policy is needed. Only cultural change over generations can solve this problem.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

空气污染和气候变化

空气污染对北京来说既是个政治问题也是个经济问题。为了去年的奥运会,限制了公车以及部分私车出行,效果据说非常好,因为报道说首都空气质量明显改善。奥运会是我们的大事,当然个人需要做些牺牲,是政治需要。奥运过去了,一切又回到了从前:还是那样堵车。
就像这篇文章分析的,堵车是有代价的,工作效率的损失,发动机低效运转,对事故的引发作用等等,对北京整个社会和经济是有负面影响的。如果我们把这个问题深入考虑一下,我们会得出个结论:事情不是做不到,不管你是气候变化还是交通问题。我们政府还是有办法暂时解决一些问题,但是问题是如何让这些问题能够持久的缓解,慢慢向好的方向发展。这个确实很难。
咱们这样说,气候变化我承认是很重要。可是如果你是政府的领导,或者是人大代表,你就要考虑现实和未来,近的和远的。我们首都的空气质量问题都得不到有效的改善,沙尘暴还没有消除,这些天天影响北京1千5百多万人民的大事还没有解决,我们干什么要去考虑更加遥远或者看不见的温室气体的问题?
至少目前看来,沙尘暴比气候变化厉害,更有杀伤力。我还不知道哪个发达国家的首都有这样严重的本地空气污染问题。当然了,也许气候变化部分促成了首都空气的问题,这两者的关系目前谁也闹不清楚。理想的状态是一手抓本地的污染,一手抓温室气体,两手都很硬。不过这种可能性不大。我们目前没有这个实力,这个首都的污染搞了这么多年,好像成效不大。这么大一点的地方的空气问题也解决不彻底,况且解决这个问题不是没有现实的办法,不像气候变化历史上无先例可循。
所以,我们古话说得好,“两害相权取其轻”。气候变化嘛,现在看来只能算是“轻”的。等到我们解决了首都的空气问题,蓝天白云比不上华盛顿嘛,也至少像个巴黎,那时候再说吧。
各位看官,你们觉得呢?

Air Pollution and Climate Change

In the case of Beijing, air pollution is both a political and an economic problem. The restrictions on public vehicles and some private cars that were introduced in the run-up to last year's Olympics apparently yielded extremely positive results; reports claimed that there had been a clear improvement in the capital's air quality. The Olympics was an important event after all, so of course it became a political requirement for individuals to make certain sacrifices. But now the Olympics are over, the city has returned to normal: the traffic's as bad as it ever was.

As demonstrated by the article, traffic jams come at a price: work efficiency suffers, engines run at low fuel efficiency, the risk of accidents increases... the end result impacts negatively upon the whole city's economic and social life. If we probe the issue further, we end up with the following conclusion: regardless of whether you come at it from the point of view of climate change or traffic problems, the issue is not an unsolvable one. Our government is quite capable of providing short-term fixes for such problems. The issue is how to turn them into long-term solutions, how to set up a gradual chain of progress in the right direction - that's the tricky part.

It's all very well to say "yes, climate change is a serious issue and I'm very concerned about it," but if you are a government leader or an NPRC representative, you have to think about how you're going to strike a balance betwen current realities and the future, between immediate concerns and distant ones. Beijing's dismal air quality and annual sandstorms, both of which directly affect the daily lives of over 15 million people, continue unabated. In these circumstances, there's precious little room for concern for more remote, invisible problems like the greenhouse effect.
From present perspectives at least, sandstorms pose a more severe, and more deadly threat than global warming. I can't think of any capitals of developed countries that face such severe local air pollution problems. Of course, it's possible that climate change is a contributing factor to this predicament, but no-one is yet clear of the exact nature of any potential link between the two. The ideal course of action would be to grasp a problem in each fist, crushing air pollution with the left, and climate change with the right. However, this remains a fairly unrealistic aim. In a city that's already been fighting a losing battle with pollution for some years now, we just don't have the means. But unlike the uncharted territory of preventing climate change, Beijing's local air pollution problems have definite solutions, even if we haven't got around to pushing them through thoroughly.
As the old saying goes: "When faced with two problems, set the lesser one aside." It looks like climate change is the 'lesser' problem right now. Wait until we've sorted out our air quality, until we have the blue sky and white clouds to rival Washington or even Paris, and then we'll have another look.

What does anyone else think?