We need both the COE and the ERP to keep Singapore’s compact 700 sq km free of grid-lock congestion.
Any steps taken to bring down COE prices, the cost of owning vehicles, and to control the vehicle population will not be good enough.
More importantly, It is how to make it expensive to drive as cars on the road contribute to congestion. Owning vehicles does not contribute to congestion but over usage does.
To achieve these objectives, we need to install the ERP satellite-tracking and charging system first.
In addition, I would like to suggest that the satellite ERP system should have the following new features:
1] Real-time interactive and able to have fast, hassle-free and frequent changes to the ERP charges;
2] Track all the cars going through each of the ERP gantries per month by each time slot;
3]Identify the cars which have gone passed each ERP gantry more than 20 times during the past month by each time slot;
4] With this data, LTA should transmit and invite the car owners to propose the ERP charges for that ERP gantry for the coming month. An ipad application should be used by the invited car owners to submit their proposed ERP charges via iphone or Internet using password verification. All communications between LTA and the motorists should be via iphone or Internet;
5] The new ERP charges for that ERP gantry for the coming month shall be the average of the top 30% highest amounts proposed by the motorists who have responded to the invitation. All the amounts proposed and the average calculations shall be made transparent on the LTA’s website;
6] The ERP charges for trucks and motorbikes shall be at a fixed percentage of the amount for cars. LTA shall decide the percentage for that particular ERP gantry and time slot.
The key features of the above proposal:
A]We can expect that this method will mean the ERP charges will self adjust one month to another.
B] Motorists will have to bear the consequences of traffic jams if they decide to manipulate the ERP charges far too low as that could attract more vehicles to go pass that particular ERP gantry or time slot.
C] This method will mean that LTA will not be responsible for fixing the ERP gantry charges but to leave it to the motorists to decide.
D] This will quell all the ongoing dissatisfaction and disquiet in the public domain that ERPs are outdated, inefficient and is a Govt revenue making tool. It is time for the Govt to wean off this responsibility.
=======
Our 713 sq km of 5m people is unique.
Why is that so?
Our CBD is at the southern tip of the island not in the middle of it.
Our reservoir catchment areas are in the middle of the island.
All these restrict the flow of traffic East to West and North to South.
We need both the COE and ERP systems due to all these restrictions to avoid gridlock situations like in the 1970s.
Those who believe that the ERP is a failed system should ask the Govt to let there be a free ERP day each year for us to experience the traffic chaos on our roads.
It will help many to thank the Govt for our systems in keeping our streets in the CBD free of gridlock like everyday is a Sunday.
=======
To justify spending S$556m, the main enhancement of the satellite system must be in removing LTA’s responsibility from fixing the ERP gantry charges, leaving it to the motorists to decide the charges and the level of congestion that they are prepared to live with and accept.
The most important point politically is for the satellite system to end the dissatisfaction and scepticism in the public domain that the ERP system is inequitable, and that it is not for managing traffic flow but a revenue generating tool for the Govt.
=======
Satellite-based ERP may not resolve congestion woes
PUBLISHED2 HOURS AGO in Straits Times Forum, 28th March 2016
I share Editor-at-Large Han Fook Kwang’s concerns that the expensive and complex satellite-based Electronic Road Pricing system might not be the most direct or cost-effective policy to address traffic congestion (“Satellite-based ERP: Great technology but what’s the policy?”; March 13).
Motorists and urban planners have long challenged the underlying concept of ERP.
Strong anecdotal evidence suggests that the selective introduction of tolls on arterial routes has succeeded in merely transplanting the traffic congestion from one road to another, rather than deterring private vehicle use to begin with.
With specific regard to a satellite-based ERP system, a pricing policy based on overall road use would disproportionately affect long-distance commuters, who might live far away from their workplaces and are thus forced to pay more simply out of circumstance.
If the current pricing model of a “restricted zone” is to remain, the existing gantry-based system would seem perfectly adequate, and far less expensive.
No major metropolis in the world is immune to traffic jams. Rather than eliminating congestion entirely, the realistic question is how best to manage it.
The certificate of entitlement (COE) system is a good starting point. After all, controlling the overall vehicle population tackles the root cause of widespread congestion.
In 2007, Singapore had 851,336 vehicles on 3,297km of roads, making for a vehicle density of 258 vehicles per kilometre. In 2014, 972,037 vehicles plying 3,496km of roads resulted in a density of 278 vehicles per kilometre.
More stringent limits on vehicle population growth are, hence, necessary to prevent unsustainable levels of vehicle density.
This could be enacted by way of tighter COE controls, and a more equitable distribution of the quota that prioritises those who require vehicles the most.
As Mr Han so eloquently put it, solving congestion might entail “no technology, just good old-fashioned policy”.
by Paul Chan Poh Hoi
======
Is ERP 2.0 merely a revenue generator?
PUBLISHED MAR 5, 2016, 5:00 AM SGT in Straits Times
The second-generation Electronic Road Pricing system, which uses satellite technology instead of gantries, will go “live” in 2020.
The $556 million system has islandwide coverage and the ability to charge according to distance travelled as well.
Several readers have written in, asking if a simpler solution to crimping car usage would be to raise fuel duty exponentially.
Others asked if the whole purpose is to generate revenue. Senior Transport Correspondent Christopher Tan addresses these questions.
If the Government relies solely on high fuel duty to manage car usage, every motorist will incur higher expenses – including those who drive their vehicles on relatively empty roads during off-peak hours.
ERP 2.0 is a finely calibrated congestion charging system.
Like the current ERP system, its purpose is to manage demand for space on congestion-prone roads and during peak periods.
Roads are priced in such a way that capacity utilisation is optimal (too high a price will lead to empty roads, which means an underutilisation of infrastructure).
If the Government’s objective is to raise revenue, it could simply raise petrol duty, or car taxes, or issue more certificates of entitlement.
Instead, it is investing $556 million on an equitable system that hinges on the “user pays” principle.
The system also has other uses, such as allowing coupon-less kerbside parking, and automatic charging for off-peak car usage.
tankoktim 