By Yorgos Voukas. CTS-Mexico, Transport Director. 2011 Sustainable Transport Symposium. Kocaeli, Turkey. April 6-8, 2011.

1. BRT in Latin America: The
Metrobus experience
YorgosVoukas
CTS-Mexico, Transport Director
Sürdürülebilir Ulaşım 2011, Kocaeli, April 2011

2. 1. CTS México
National NGO, member of the EMBARQ
network, presence in many cities, focus
on sustainable transport,
multidisciplinary team of more than 45 in
2009: ONG Nacional, miembro de la red
house professionals
EMBARQ, alcance en diversasciudades,
enfoquesustentable e integral del transporte,
45 colaboradores de múltiplesdisciplinas

3. Our mission
“Catalyze sustainable mobility solutions to
improve the quality of life in Mexican
cities.”

4. CTS México promotes:
•Integral planning of public transport,
housing, non motorized mobility and
public space.
•Development of Communities with
livable environments where mixed land
use makes it easier for people to live
in.

5. EMBARQ NETWORK

6. Mexico City: Facts & Figures

7. 73 municipalities
Population: 19,239,910
Density: 67 hab/ha
Autos: 5,592,293
IM: 291 auto/1000 p
Trips per day: 48,804,197
2,172 deaths per year on traffic
accidents*
*Number 1° in LatinAmerica
MEXICO CITY: BASIC DATA

8. For every child that is born in Mexico City, 2 cars
enter in traffic; in total? 200,000 autos per year
MEXICO CITY: MOTORIZATION TRENDS

9. Car Ownership
350.0 329.7
Autos/mil hab
300.0 290.7
Motos/mil hab
250.0
200.0
150.0 136.7
100.0
50.0
0.0
Population: 106 millons Autos: 24 millons Motos: 2.4 millons
Source: Observatorio de Movilidad Urbana. CAF. 2009
MOTORIZATION TRENDS LATIN AMERICA

10. CONGESTION

11. Greenhouse Gas Emission are expected to increase from 170
million tones of CO2 to 440 million by 2030 if current paterns
will not change (MEDEC)
EMISSIONS

12. 2,172 deaths per year
from road accidents
4,000 heavily injured
Externalities: 1.3% of
GDP
ACCIDENTS

13. Mexico City: Public Transport

14. Transport systems
METRO BUSES – MICRO BUSES
 4.5 million pax/day  19,899,500 pax/day
 11 lines, aprox. 250 km  54,532 buses
 Investment 11,851m USD* SUBURBAN RAIL
 200,000 pax/day
TROLLEY-BUS & LIGHT RAIL  26 km (State of Mex.-DF)
 286,000 pax/day
METROBUS
 13 trolley lines + 1 Light rail  650 000 pass/day
line
 3 lines
 Investment 470 m USD*  67 km
* Infrastructure  283 articulated buses
PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEMS

15. Bicicleta
1%
Pie
25%
Microbuses /
Autobuses
42%
Auto
17%
Taxi Metro
4% Metrobus 10%
1%
MODAL SPLIT

16. 2011
- 650,000 pax/day
- 67 km
- Flat fare: 0,45 usd
- No operational
subsidies
- 100% electronic &
prepaid card
Connection to 12
Metro lines and the
Sub-urban Light Rail
METROBUS, DF

17. METROBUS 2011
67 KILOMETERS,
NORTH TO SOUTH
235% MORE THAN 2005
EAST TO WEST
NORTH TO SOUTH
67 km
50 km
2011
20 km 2008
2005
METROBUS NETWORK

18. 160 PASSENGERS / 18 METERS
270 X
240 PASSENGERS / 25 METERS
13 X
283
228
270
ARTICULATED
2011
13
2010 BI-ARTICULATED
80
2005
BUS FLEET

19. EMISSIONS REDUCTION: TECHNOLOGICAL IMPROVEMENT EURO 0
M icrobuses
TECHNOLOGY CHANGE

20. DESTRUCTION OF OBSOLETE UNITS
647 MICROBUSES AND 31 BUSES DESTROYED BETWEEN LINES 1 AND 2, IN LINE 3 IT
WILL BE DESTROYED 430 MICROBUSES
SCRAPPING of MICROBUSES

21. EMISSIONS REDUCTION: MODAL SHIFT
Quit using cars in order
to travel by Metrobus
Over 72,000 people
leaving their vehicle
every day
MODAL SHIFT

22. EMISSIONS REDUCTION: GHG EMISSIONS REDUCTION
CARBON CREDITS
PERIODEMISSIONS REDUCTIONPAYMENT TO METROBÚS
2005 – 2006 29,177 CO2eqtons121,959 Euros
2006 – 2007 38,210 CO2eqtons159,717 Euros
2007 – 2008 39,870 CO2eqtons166,655 Euros
Total 1 0 7 ,2 5 7 CO2 eq tons
4 4 8 ,3 3 1 Eur os
EMISSIONS REDUCTION

23. INSTITUTIONAL MODEL

24. Transport operator shares
RTP MIV
22% 20%
COPSA
RECSA 5%
8%
CTT SA
7%
TSAJJ SA
3%
CE4 - 17 MSA
CISA 7%
28%
TRANSPORT OPERATORS. SHARES

25. BeforeMetrobus
TRAFFIC DISORDER

26. AfterMetrobus
TRAFFIC ORDER

27. BeforeMetrobus
TRAVEL CONDITIONS

28. TRAVEL CONDITIONS

29. BeforeMetrobus
AVERAGE SPEED:
12 KM / HR
TRAFFIC/ CONGESTION

30. AVERAGE SPEED :
17 KM / HR
SPEED AVERAGE:
20 KM / HR
TRAFFIC/ CONGESTION

31. BeforeMetrobus
INDIOS VERDES, TERMINAL

32. INDIOS VERDES, TERMINAL

33. INDIOS VERDES, TERMINAL

34. BeforeMetrobus
TEPALCATES, TERMINAL

35. BeforeMetrobus
TEPALCATES, TERMINAL

36. TEPALCATES, TERMINAL

37. BeforeMetrobus
ACCESSIBILITY

38. ACCESSIBILITY

39. FARE COLLECTION SYSTEM

40. Insurgentes Avenue Reduction
comparing with
Year Accidents recorded previous year
2005 822
2006 381 54%
2007 318 17%
2008 290 9%
2009 182 37%
2010 128
Fuente: Dirección de Ingeniería de Tránsito SSP de la Ciudad de México
Datos de accidentes viales en el corredor insurgentes.
ACCIDENTS REDUCTION

41. L1 INDIOS VERDES DOCTOR GÁLVEZ EL CAMINERO
BEFORE 2 HOURS, 40 MINUTES
…TODAY, WITH MB 1 HOUR, 23 MINUTES
…50% FASTER!
L2 TACUBAYA TEPALCATES
BEFORE 2 HOURS
…TODAY, WITH MB 60 MINUTOS
…45% FASTER!
L3 TENAYUCA ETIOPÍA
BEFORE 1.7 HOURS
…TODAY, WITH MB 60 MINUTOS
…40% FASTER!
TRAVEL TIME

42. MULTIMODAL INTEGRATION

43. 91%OF MBPASSENGERS
CONSIDERS THE SERVICE AS FAST OR VERY FAST
Cuarta encuesta de opinión a usuari@s de MB sobre equidad de género; Investigaciones Sociales Asociadas S. C. Septiembre 2009.
USER’s OPINION: FASTNESS

44. SECURITY AT MB
¿DO YOU CONDSIDER MBAS A SECURE TRANSPORT?
85%
90%
Cuarta encuesta de opinión a usuari@s de MB sobre equidad de género; Investigaciones Sociales Asociadas S. C. Septiembre 2009.
USER’s OPINION: SECURITY

45. THE 75%OF MBPASSENGERS
QUALIFY AS ABOVE
8
Cuarta encuesta de opinión a usuari@s de MB sobre equidad de género; Investigaciones Sociales Asociadas S. C. Septiembre 2009.
USER’s OPINION: OVERALL QUALITY

46. PHASE I (2007 - 2009)
2. INSURGENTES SUR (2007)
3. EJE 4 SUR (2007 - 2008)
4. EJE 3 ORIENTE (2008 - 2009)
5-a. PERIFÉRICO I (2008 - 2009)
6. PROL. DIV. DEL NORTE (2009)
PHASE II (2009 - 2011)
7. EJE 1 PONIENTE (2010)
8. EJE 6 SUR (2010)
9. EJE 8 SUR (2011)
5-b. PERIFÉRICO II (2010 - 2011)
PHASE III (2011 - 2012)
10. TLAHUAC – CHALCO (2011 - 2012)
5-c. PERIFÉRICO III (2011 - 2012)
REFORZAMIENTO STE
• EJE CENTRAL
• EJE 3 NORTE
• EJE 5 NORTE
• EJE 8 SUR
FUTURE

47. Government Vs Operators: Bus operators Vs Government
Bus operators are Administration of transport
stubborn, they never agree on authorities changes all the
anything time and we have to deal with
They have no idea how this new people that know nothing
business works about transport
The complain all We have 30 years in the
time, although they earn big business, they know nothing
money about it
They never want to invert on They never give to us enough
new buses or technologies information
How can we make investments
if they don’t raise the tariff?
COMMON ARGUEMENTS

48. TRANSPORT
OPERATOR
Fair Business
PUBLIC
PUBLIC TRANSPORT
AUTHORITY RIDER
Development, Equity Quality at service
SUCCESS

49. BUS OWNER/
BUS OPERATION
INDIVIDUAL
COMPANIES
OPERATOR
INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE

50. Regulation at Service
Safety and accessibility
Organized operation
Preventive & centralized maintenance
Economies of Scale
Financial Solvency
Zero cash leakage (due to electronic fare
collection)
Better working conditions
High quality public transport service in
affordable cost
BENEFITS OF NEW SCHEME

51. BRT SYSTEM AL 2011
125,000 pass/day
16km
41Articulated buses
104 feeder buses
15 feeder routes
27 Stations
Integrated fare
Connection with the
Light Rail
Macrobús

52. BeforeMacrobus
MACROBUS

53. BeforeMacrobus
MACROBUS

54. BeforeMacrobus
MACROBUS

55. BeforeMacrobus
MACROBUS

56. AfterMacrobus
MACROBUS

57. AfterMacrobus
MACROBUS

58. AfterMacrobus
MACROBUS

59. KOCAELI VISIT AT MEXICO

60. Teşekkürler