Enlarge image
"The cargo bike has a great future":
Urban planners are in the process of redefining and dividing up mobility and thus spaces
Photo: Arnulf Hettrich / imago images/Arnulf Hettrich
manager magazin: Mr. Carsten, when e-scooter rentals started in major German cities three years ago, e-scooters were also supposed to set an example for sustainable, new mobility. The complaints in
Düsseldorf
,
Hamburg
,
Nuremberg
and elsewhere are increasing.
Now the business is regulated and there are penalties.
Are the users unteachable or is there a lack of parking space?
Stefan Carsten
: We won't get anywhere with fines, after all we know that e-scooters will make an important contribution to the mobility revolution.
Space is a problematic commodity in cities, which is also distributed unequally and unsustainably.
More than half of the public space is used by cars - driving, standing or parking.
So there would be enough usable space for the new mobility.
Is there perhaps also a lack of will to make room for the new e-mobility?
There is a lack of will and apparently also of knowledge.
Even in the exemplary Berlin Mobility Act, the new mobility is hardly taken into account.
Are e-scooters actually part of the environmental network?
The task for politicians is therefore: The sharing offers must be offered throughout the city and not just in the apparently lucrative inner cities.
And spaces for parking must be defined, both in mobility hubs and decentrally for each street.
In order to discipline e-scooter drivers, you could use GPS to "cut off the juice", then they would have to push through parking or no-driving zones. The city day has been campaigning for geo-fencing, i.e. the digital sealing off of defined areas for e-scooters, for a long time. Why is so little done on this issue?
To put it bluntly: Scooters are not the problem, neither in the use of public space nor in the mobility transition.
The Germans' favorite child is the problem - the car.
But if you are already asking: I like to describe geofencing as neofencing.
As a sustainable means of controlling mobility.
In Paris, every parking bracket is georeferenced so that scooters can only be parked there.
In Germany, instead, the debate is more about the innovation of synthetic fuels.
Studies by the
University of Dresden
, the
German Energy Agency
or the
ETH Zurich
show: In cities, e-scooters and e-bikes as rental vehicles are not usually replacing the car, bus or S-Bahn, but walking or cycling.
So far, their contribution to the environmentally friendly turnaround in transport has been dubious.
Have you simply planned past the consumer?
Twenty years ago there were five or six means of transport in Europe.
Today there are around 30 in the big cities. With this I want to express that we first have to learn what the new mobility means in everyday life and how I can use it.
That takes a lot more time than three years.
But of course studies are important.
Because one thing is clear.
The socially, economically and ecologically most important mode of transport is either walking or cycling.
Will the eco-balance of e-mobility in the case of micro-vehicles improve further with regard to their manufacture and the logistics of the rental companies?
more on the subject
Mobility start-up: Bolt wants to stir up the car sharing market in GermanyBy Christoph Seyerlein and Jonas Rest
Definitive.
Batteries are currently being used that will probably no longer be available in 5 years.
Battery research will define new environmental standards here.
And in the future, cities will only certify providers who, for example, meet ESG criteria.
There won't be 10 providers, but maybe three, who will then be allowed to offer their services for several years before a new tender is issued.
The mobility picture in German cities includes parcel vans from DHL, UPS or DPD. Usually parked in the second row, they also narrow the spaces because of the flood of parcels. Do you see solutions here?
Oh yes, absolutely.
In Munich, UPS wants to distribute and transport its entire package volume on cargo bikes.
The cargo bike has a great future in Germany, and their number is constantly increasing.
Market experts predict that around two million cargo bikes will be sold in 2030 alone.
Currently there are maybe around 80,000 cargo bikes.
But one thing is also clear.
The number of packages will probably double again in the next five years.
Without new logistics concepts in the real estate sector and - again - new space and logistics concepts in cities, cargo bikes will hardly make it on their own.
I associate cargo bikes with the heavy, electrically assisted transport boxes on two wheels, often occupied by one or two children in the morning, which you can't get past on the bike path
.
The infrastructure in most cities is not designed at all for vehicles of this type or for the mass of e-scooters.
Absolutely right.
Cities in Germany still have to change a lot for sustainable new mobility.
But something is happening that I call "road diet" and has also been observed in Germany since the pandemic at the latest.
That means: Cities take space, area and infrastructure away from cars and rededicate them: for cyclists, for pedestrians or even new bus lanes.
A lot is changing in some cities.
We can also speak of an emerging spatial change in German cities.
Cyclists in particular are currently benefiting from this development.
As you can see, there are more and more, which means more and more bicycle streets in the cities.
Other cities, on the other hand, have not yet understood that this also benefits their prosperity and secures jobs.
After all, we now live in the knowledge society.
Therefore, the expansion of sustainable, healthy and inclusive spaces is irreversible.
Well, so-called bicycle streets – for example along the Hamburg Alster – cyclists mostly still have to share them with motorists. Do you have any information about how much space has already been taken away from car traffic in German cities in this way?
Unfortunately, no.
But I know that if 3,000 kilometers of cycle paths are planned or redesigned in Berlin, society as a whole will benefit.
Every investment in cycling infrastructure brings money to society, you claimed at a recent panel discussion. Can that be quantified?
Absolutely.
Every kilometer ridden by bike brings a positive social gain of 35 cents.
The result varies from study to study, but the bottom line is a win: for the welfare state, for the tax state - above all because health costs are massively reduced through physical exercise with a bicycle.
The same applies to pedestrian traffic.
Conversely, every kilometer driven costs society money, 11 cents to be exact.
The subsidy policy of German transport policy, for example in the form of tax privileges for company cars, is an anachronism in every respect.
You say that mobility in cities and their environs must be based on needs. The term "seamless mobility" often comes up in the discussion, i.e. the seamlessly coordinated offer of different mobility providers. That takes planning. How good are the cities in it?
Sustainable mobility does not mean talking about it, but rather implementing ideas and concepts and testing them in practice.
As always, a few cities are more progressive here, while many others just talk about it.
The integrated mobility flat rates in Augsburg, Jelbi in Berlin or Switch in Hamburg are certainly showcase models that must and will continue to develop.
We will be able to use these and many new offers in every city in the future.
How well do public transport and private mobility providers work together with a view to integrated mobility? Are there reservations, maybe even competition, that run counter to seamless mobility?
Before Corona there was almost no cooperation.
The private ones wanted to show the established public providers how to do it.
The stakeholders in public transport saw no reason for cooperation.
Since Corona, however, the debate about the mobility turnaround has gained momentum.
Both sides recognize the mutual benefit and cooperate on integrated offers or on tenders for new districts.
This gives courage for the future.
The 9-euro ticket sold 21 million copies in the first month. Exactly how people use it - for example for buses, underground or regional trains - cannot be determined. The state could continue the offer, even offer it for free. "Free public transport" - would that make economic sense?
Today's
transport
system does not pay off in any way: Taxpayers pay around 18 billion euros for company cars, commuter allowances, diesel and biofuels - while society has to bear the costs and corporations are closed to the future.
Free local public transport would be of similar dimensions.
Of course, the cities could not cope with this.
For society, however, these would be projected profits – in every respect.
It will probably be a long time before autonomous driving is really safe and the technical infrastructure is available everywhere. Is this the future of mobility, at least in cities? Will robotic vehicles prevail or will they be part of a new form of mobility?
The new traffic accident figures for 2021 have just been published: 2562 deaths.
The industry is celebrating these numbers as a success - the lowest it has been in 60 years.
I don't see it that way at all.
95 percent of road accidents are caused by human error.
In twenty years it will be exactly the opposite: 95 percent of all accidents are caused by mechanical failure, with the result that almost no people have to die in the traffic system.
Yes, autonomous mobility will prevail and revolutionize mobility, especially in rural areas.
Cities are currently being rebuilt for sustainable, healthy and inclusive mobility.