Comparison Based on Speed: Light Rail Transit and Bus Rapid Transit

Introduction

Light Rail Transit is more superior than Bus Rapid Transit when it comes to speed. The average speed of the LRT's is about 27km/hr, while the average speed of BRT is about 17km/hr. Especially when the buses are traveling in mixed traffic (Liu, 2013). This significant difference in speed can be explained by the fact that LRT's travel on their lanes, wholly dedicated to them. Therefore, passengers are more likely to prefer using the LRT especially when they are in a hurry during the rush hours.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Comparison based on cost

Capital costs

According to a study done by the US General Accounting Office, BRT system had a lower capital cost as compared to LRT systems. The capital costs are used for initial investments which are majorly the development of infrastructure. The study revealed that BRTs capital cost ranged between $200000 for an arterial street to about $55M per mile for extremely dedicated busway systems. On the other hand, the capital costs of most LRT systems range from as high as $12.4M per mile to about $118.8M per mile (Kiihn,2002). This is relatively expensive. Erecting rails requires a high initial capital as compared to building busways.

Operating Costs

According to the US General Accounting Office Report detailing the operating and maintenance costs for BRT is cities, there were mixed results for both transit systems. For example, for the BRT systems, there were relatively lower operating costs per passenger per mile in cases where the transit demand was low. However, for the LRT system, the operating costs per passenger was only low when there was high transit demand for example in the D.C region (Kiihn,2002). Therefore, the operating costs for the two systems are entirely dependent on the situation at hand. None is superior to the other when it comes to the costs of operation and maintenance.

Comparison based on Capacities

The theoretical capacity of the LRT is higher than that of the BRT. However, the results giving the actual capacities of the LRT and BRT are mixed and vary from city to city. BRTs have the slightly higher capacity as compared to LRT especially during optimum conditions. LRT systems enjoy a better public image due to low issues related to pollution. However, there are also hybrid buses in use that also enjoy good public images. The buses could sometimes mimic the LRT design capacities for example when two buses operate simultaneously in a single offline station, thus doubling capacity. Even more efficient are buses which are not stopped at any station since they have been shown to increase the capacity to the maximum flow of 35000phd at peak hours as compared to that of the LRT which is about 28000 phd. (Kiihn,2002). Light rails, therefore, despite the fact that they have a higher theoretical capacity, busways can exceed them especially when they attain the expected ridership at optimum conditions in cities.

Comparison based on infrastructures

It is easier to manipulate the infrastructure of LRT as compared to those of BRTs, especially in CBDS. Geometric insertion of an LRT RoW is easier as compared to that of a busway RoW. This is because the width of an average LRT RoW is about 6 to 7.2 meters lesser than that of the average subway. The infrastructure of LRTs offers great flexibility in crowded urban centers unlike that of buses.

Emissions

LRTs have been reported to have lower carbon emission levels as compares to buses (Puchalsky, 2005). This is because LRTs can be wholly electrified such that there is no release of any harmful gas to the environment. Buses are more likely to pollute the environment than LRTs. However, there have been advances in the construction of buses in that hybrid mode which have lower levels of pollution have been achieved (Toronto Environmental Alliance,2018). Despite this, the use of BRTs poses a real challenge to the environment due to higher emissions as compared to BRTs.

Comparison based on Transit Oriented Development

The LRTs have recorded a higher transit-oriented development as compared to BRTs (Bottoms, 2000). It has been shown that developers are more likely to relocate their activities including industrial and real estate along LRT lines rather than BRT lines. This is because LRTs afford investors a lower initial capital especially when it comes to transportation. LRT lines are also fixed and predictable, unlike subway routes which can be changed or closed anytime.

Comparison based on Flexibility

BRTs have more flexibility than LRTs. This is because once established; the LRT systems are more permanent and fixed. However, for BRTs, bus routes can change anytime. Expansion can also be done when there is a need, especially along different routes. The routes can also be altered any time, for example, if a change in destination or demand for changes to make good use of profits. The BRT system is more dynamic and versatile in use as compared to the LRT systems.

References

Liu, R. R. (2013). Light Rail Transit light rail transit (LRT), Shared Infrastructural Issues light rail transit (LRT) shared infrastructural issues. In Transportation Technologies for Sustainability (pp. 683-703). Springer New York.

Kiihn, F. (2002). Bus rapid or light rail transit for intermediate cities?. Urban Mobility for All: La Mobilite Urbaine pour Tous, 357.

Bottoms, G. D. (2000). RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT IN WESTERN EUROPE FRANCE AND ITALY. In Light Rail: Investment for the Future. 8th Joint Conference on Light Rail TransitTransportation Research Board, and American Public Transportation Association.

Toronto Environmental Alliance, (2018). Light Rail Transit (LRT) vs. Other transit modes. Retrieved from http://www.torontoenvironment.org/campaigns/transit/LRTfaq

Puchalsky, C. (2005). Comparison of emissions from light rail transit and bus rapid transit. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1927), 31-37.