Significance of Car Insurance

Cars are definitely the best mode of personal transport but cannot ignore the fact that the risk or cost of repair are high. Some of the factors contibuting to Car accidents are Equipment Failure, Roadway Design, Poor Roadway Maintenance,  Driver Behavior and the only way to over come this is the right insurance.

Different types of insurance cover will protect you from unexpected expenses which you will have to incur in case you are found liable for causing an accident. The cost of an insurance cover for a whole year can just be a peanut amount as compared to the amount of kilometers you drive and the amount of risks you take on the roads every single day. If you have still not taken an insurance cover for your car, do not delay any further. Get your car insured today.

Read More…

Electric Scooters: A Good Way Of Alternative Transportation

Cars have always been a great medium of transportation. But the days have passed when having a car of your own was a matter of glory. The high prices of gas in the modern time have forced the people (especially middle class and lower class ones) to think of alternative transportations other than the car. Because to purchase a car, meeting the fuel prices and then maintaining it is becoming more and more challenging day by day. Many people are opting bus, taxis and other transports for the journey. These are the most common form of alternative transportations. But there is another option of alternative transportation that can be very good. It is the electric scooter.

Many people going for alternative transportations has already confessed that electric scooters are user friendly, very much convenient, fun to ride and overall efficient. The popularity of electric scooters is increasing day by day. They are faster as well as less physically taxing compared to walking and other means of alternative transportation. Though they are less fast than their gas guzzling cousins, they cover that up by their small, lightweight and silent feature. Even the electric scooters can scurry up most of the hills without giving any chance of second thought.  If you rely on a electric scooter, you will be completely satisfied for sure. It can go right on the buys bike rack.

Electric scooters are not all about fun. Despite their taillights, headlights, turn signals etc., approaching traffic can be hard at times. Especially in foul weather and at night, this situation can arise. A driver driving electric scooter needs to have tremendous driving skills.

An average electric scooter can travel everywhere at an average speed of 8 to 25 Mph. Electric scooters experience mechanical problems very less. The biggest advantage is that it is very easy to maintain.  To charge the battery of an electric scooter, time as long as 4-6 hours can be taken.

So if you are worried about alternative transportations go with the electric scooter and have fun.

Moving Around In A City

One of the things that every human being needs to be able to do is move around. I am not talking about walking but about travelling larger distances through cities and from town to town. Not everyone is able to afford a car or is able to get a driver’s permit. Let us take a look at what alternative transportation is available in some cities.

The first option is to take a bus. These will generally run on assigned routes and stop at specified bus stops. These are great for moving short distances within towns or taking longer trips between towns. They do get expensive for medium length trips though.

Then there are trains and trams. These run on rails and travel quite a bit faster than most bus services. These are ideal if you need to get into a city or need to go from one end of the city to another. Trains are also great for long distance travel. This form of travel is inexpensive and pretty quick.

The last option is to take a taxi. This is generally only used by those who can afford it though as it can be pretty expensive as cabs charge according to distance travelled.

Significance of Car Insurance

Are you the owner of a car? If yes, you will surely know the importance of having car insurance. It has been made compulsory that while buying a car from a car showroom, the cost of insurance for the one year has to be paid by the owner of the car. The amount of insurance depends upon the value of the car. It is usually within 4% to 5% of the value of the car.

Well, just the way we have a life insurance cover for our lives, it is very important that we have a vehicle insurance cover for our car. But still there are millions of vehicle owners across the globe, who do not renew their car insurance once it completes one year. We must also remember that many countries do not allow cars to ply on the roads if the insurance has not been renewed.

Each year, the cost of insurance keeps reducing based on the depreciated value of your car. On an average, around 10% is removed every year from the actual value of the car as depreciation value. There are various reasons how a car insurance can help you overcome obstacles. Some of the different types of car insurance are –

Bodily Injury Liability – This insurance will cover the injury occurred to the driver of another vehicle. In case your car meets with an accident and the driver of the other vehicle is severely injured, your insurance company will bear the cost of the hospitalization charges for the injury caused to the driver of the other car. The advantage of this policy is that you will not be sued by the other vehicle owner for causing the accident.
Personal Injury Protection (PIP) Insurance – This is somewhat similar to the Bodily injury Liability insurance cover. Here, in case your car meets with an accident, you along with all the occupants of your car will be covered for medical treatment under this policy. This includes medical expenses, loss of wages etc.
Under Property Damage Liability – This policy will cover the vehicle of the other party in case your car meets with an accident. Here, the other vehicle repair charges will be borne by your insurance company in case you are at fault. Your car will not be covered and you will have to bear the cost of repairs for your car in such a policy.

On the same track

On the same track

It’s not always clear who your friends are. From the outside, the various factions of the alternative transportation world appear to be pulling in the same direction, yet that often isn’t the case. Lately, bike and train advocates have been sparring over access to the precious rights of way owned by the railroads. Old rail beds, which traverse miles of urban and suburban land without interruption, have become instrumental in the spread of bike trails throughout the country. Given the unfortunate but steady demise of the railroads in this country, the conversion of “rails to trails” has always felt like an appropriate way to honor the legacy of trains in this country. It turns out that not all of the owners of defunct railroads are ready to give up the fight. While on my vacation, I discovered this fascinating story, along with some tasty Lost Coast beer and a captivatingly eccentric street fair, in Eureka, Calfornia, where we had stopped for the day to celebrate the 4th of July. Bicycle advocates in Humboldt County have grand plans to connect Eureka with Arcata, a neighboring town eight miles to the north, and a dormant rail track connecting the two cities seemed to be the perfect solution. An obscure state agency, it seems, has other plans for the railroad, which hasn’t been used in ten years and, as the article details, faces serious obstacles in any attempt to establish relevant rail service along this corridor. Even with logic seemingly in its favor, the distracting, time-consuming battle with the rail agency makes prospects for the trail bleak.

A similar battle is occurring outside of Seattle, only this time, a new trail will likely be the winner. A three way land purchase and swap between King County, the Port of Seattle and BNSF Railway will transfer ownership of a 42 mile rail corridor to King County, which will then tear out the tracks and place a paved trail in their place. Ironically, in this case, rail advocates seem to have a far more convincing case for maintaining the rail corridor than in Eureka. Seattle’s Eastside is crippled with congestion, including the suburb-to-suburb kind that is usually immune to fixed rail solutions. The coalition to save the tracks, which include local businesses, claims that private commuter rail service could be running in 60 days with an investment of only $30 million. Whether these claims are realistic and whether enough car-addicted Eastsiders would avail themselves of the service to ease congestion is unclear. For the time being, the corridor seems destined to become another link in Seattle’s growing trail network.

As a regular cyclist, I can attest to the benefits of a freshly paved trail insulated from car traffic. In Portland, we have the Springwater Corridor, a 21 mile trail connecting downtown with the far eastern edge of the metropolitan area. Covering that same distance on surface streets would be a frustrating and potentially hazardous experience. So anytime someone mentions the possibility of putting in another trail, I’m onboard. But we mustn’t forget the real reason why rail and trail advocates are forced onto opposing sides: we’re fighting for the scraps. We shouldn’t have to choose. Both sides should be rewarded for their energy and commitment to a more sustainable future. As an Eastside rail advocate points out, a slightly bigger piece of the massive transportation (translation: roads) budget would easily fund improvements in both our train and bicycle networks. We need to stop falling prey to the divide and conquer strategy employed by the pro-car establishment. The next time we’re asked to choose, the correct answer is: “sorry, but we want both.”

Out with the old

Out with the old

Voters in the Pacific Northwest made loud statements on Tuesday in support of reducing the region’s car dependency. In Oregon, Measure 49, the ballot initiative restoring sanity to land use regulations, won by a wide margin. Measure 49 was designed to be the antidote to Measure 37, the 2004 initiative that allows property owners to bypass state and local land use controls. The legal chaos that resulted shortly after the passage of Measure 37 and the impending destruction of hundreds of thousands of acres of Oregon farmland and forests caused voters to do an abrupt about-face in just three years. Property rights advocates claim the battle isn’t over, but Oregonians have been given a glimpse of life without any restraints on property rights and are not likely to be fooled again.

The more cataclysmic shift occurred in the Puget Sound region, where voters in the three county Seattle – Tacoma metro area rejected a massive sales tax increase to fund new road construction and a light rail extension. This campaign was noteworthy for the break from form by the Cascade Chapter of the Sierra Club, which joined with tax and transit foes to oppose the referendum. The Sierra Club’s stance, derived from the realization that light rail did little to negate the environmental impact of the planned new roads, may signal the long overdue end of the counter-productive practice of linking money for transit with new road construction. The pro-transit opponents of the referendum, including the Sierra Club and King County President Ron Sims, have vowed to work toward a more environmentally-friendly approach to solving the region’s transportation woes.

The real victor in Tuesday’s election in Seattle may ultimately be congestion pricing. Faced with choking congestion on the roads, deteriorating bridges, a decades long wait for a light rail network of any scale, and a scarcity of funds, state and local officials have to throw out the old playbook and try something new. Congestion pricing offers the opportunity to simultaneously reduce the number of cars on the road and raise badly needed funds for bridge repair and transit projects. The region should take some inspiration from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who visited Seattle recently to attend a U.S. Conference of Mayors climate summit and took the opportunity to propose a national carbon tax on businesses. In April, Bloomberg unveiled a congestion pricing plan for New York City that, despite a detour caused by the State Assembly, still has a shot at being implemented. For the Seattle area, there may never be a more opportune time for congestion pricing. Surely a city known for its conspicuous need to stay on the cutting edge in technology, business and culture can figure out how to take the lead for once in managing its traffic.

Alternative Transportation

It is very important that we all try alternative transportation to commute from one place to another. Today, the best mode of alternative transportation is public transport such as buses, trains etc.

Not only are these modes of transportation cost effective but also reduces carbon pollution to a great extent thereby creating a positive impact on the environment. Many office goers are advised to take public transport which will not only save fuel, but also reduce stress which often occurs due to long driving hours.

Even car pooling has been recognized as an alternative transportation method. In this case, 4 or 5 colleagues working in the same company or nearby companies can use each ones car per week in rotation wise. This way, one person will have to use his/her car only for one week in a month while the remaining 3 weeks, they will share with their other colleague’s vehicle thereby saving a lot of money and the environment as a whole.

Transport to travel within city

Every city in the country has its transport system to connect with other cities. There are different types of source for travelling like Buses, Planes, Trains and Vans etc. The transport has its system inside the city to provide service for the city residence normally call Public Transport. It is basically related to the specific city and running in the limits of that specific city. There is no link with other city. In this transport normally buses, vans and rickshaws are included to provide travelling services to the general public. Mostly buses and vans are provided by the city administration to help the public travelling inside the city limit. The fair is quite affordable for the passengers and they have to drop and pick the passengers in their route. Their routes are also defined by the city administration. So in a city there is different routes and have their buses and vans to travel on those routes. Routes are basically distance of few kilo meters from main bus stop to different points in a city and then back to main bus stop.

Combined Mobility Thinking From Uitp

I was alerted to UITP’s work on this by the cover story of New Transit magazine (7 July 2011 issue) from the UK: “Time to forget modes… the future is in the Mobility Mix”. The article is well worth reading. It is subscription only but there is a free preview offer that allows a peek: Today’s customers have a new attitude to their travel choices. Offering “combined-mobility” across the modes can persuade people away from the private car. So what are the ingredients in this new mix, and who should take the lead on serving them up?

Read More:
Combined Mobility Thinking From Uitp

Taming man

Taming man

Sprawl and car dependence go hand in hand. Communities that grow without bounds tether people to their cars. Efforts to link ever expanding populations through public transportation become fruitless. Benefits to the environment from improved auto fuel efficiency are negated by sprawl. Sprawl, by its very definition, pits man against nature, and to look the other way or accept a laissez faire attitude about land use is to choose sides. This is the fallacy of the single-minded focus on automobile technology. Improving fuel economy is not a sufficient objective, especially if higher fuel efficiency results in an increase in vehicle miles traveled. And if increased car use results in the conversion of even more open space into parking, which, as Katharine Mieszkowski so eloquently chronicles in Salon, fuels much of sprawl’s insatiable appetite for land, you could even argue that we’re better off leaving the car as is. Retaining the nasty, guilt-inducing qualities of the car may be just what we need to keep people from getting too comfortable living closer to the wilderness than civilization.

Density, the means by which we measure sprawl, matters a great deal in our relationship with nature. High density living does more than just curb our car use; it makes us more efficient in how we use all our resources. The San Francisco League of Conservation Voters has produced an ingenious website to illustrate this point. The examples are various San Francisco neighborhoods, all of which would be characterized as dense by the average American. The comparison with the typical suburban neighborhood (which happens to be in Portland), however, demonstrates the dramatic difference in land and water use between dense, urban neighborhoods and dispersed suburban ones, as well as the obvious suppression of our driving habits in dense neighborhoods. These calculations demonstrate conclusively that, if your goal is to reduce transportation related emissions, where you live matters much more than what you drive.

In Oregon, we are acutely aware of both the benefits and challenges of battling sprawl. The state’s restrictive land use laws have contributed to denser communities with lower car use than the rest of the nation. In 2004, those restrictions were overturned in one fell swoop with the passage of Measure 37, which gave property owners the right to ignore existing state and local zoning laws if those laws diminished the supposed value of a person’s property. Governments that had fought sprawl so successfully for decades were now powerless. The passage of Measure 37 caught many in the state by surprise and continues to befuddle policymakers trying to make sense of the blunt tool that now governs land use in Oregon. In November, voters in the state will get a chance to make amends for their mistake three years ago. Measure 49 on this fall’s ballot corrects many of the flaws of Measure 37 and, most importantly, will prevent the largest, most egregious developments from occurring. If passed, the measure will restore Oregon’s rightful place as the nation’s leader in progressive land use planning. You can learn more about supporting Measure 49 by clicking on the link in the left hand column of this site.

© Copyright 2018 | All rights reserved worldwide