| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| No, No, No, DonÂ’t Follow Us |
| 2007-11-05 |
| By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN India is in serious danger — no, not from Pakistan or internal strife. India is in danger from an Indian-made vehicle: a $2,500 passenger car, the world’s cheapest. India’s Tata Motors recently announced that it plans to begin turning out a four-door, four-seat, rear-engine car for $2,500 next year and hopes to sell one million of them annually, primarily to those living at the “bottom of the pyramid” in India and the developing world. Welcome to one of the emerging problems of the flat world: Blessedly, many more people now have the incomes to live an American lifestyle, and the Indian and Chinese low-cost manufacturing platforms can deliver them that lifestyle at lower and lower costs. But the energy and environmental implications could be enormous, for India and the world. We have no right to tell Indians what cars to make or drive. But we can urge them to think hard about following our model, without a real mass transit alternative in place. Cheap conventional four-wheel cars, which would encourage millions of Indians to give up their two-wheel motor scooters and three-wheel motorized rickshaws, could overwhelm India’s already strained road system, increase its dependence on imported oil and gridlock the country’s megacities. Yes, Indian families whose only vehicle now is a two-seat scooter often make two trips back and forth to places to get their whole family around, so a car that could pack a family of four is actually a form of mini-mass transit. And yes, Tata, by striving to make a car that could sell for $2,500, is forcing the entire Indian auto supply chain to become much more efficient and therefore competitive. But here’s what’s also true: Last week, I was driving through downtown Hyderabad and passed the dedication of a new overpass that had taken two years to build. A crowd was gathered around a Hindu priest in a multicolored robe, who was swinging a lantern fired by burning coconut shells and praying for safe travel on this new flyover, which would lift traffic off the streets below. The next morning I was reading The Sunday Times of India when my eye caught a color photograph of total gridlock, showing motor scooters, buses, cars and bright yellow motorized rickshaws knotted together. The caption: “Traffic ends in bottleneck on the Greenlands flyover, which was opened in Hyderabad on Saturday. On day one, the flyover was chockablock with traffic, raising questions over the efficacy of the flyover in reducing vehicular congestion.” That’s the strain on India’s infrastructure without a $2,500 car. So what should India do? It should leapfrog us, not copy us. Just as India went from no phones to 250 million cellphones — skipping costly land lines and ending up with, in many ways, a better and cheaper phone system than we have — it should try the same with mass transit. India can’t ban a $2,500 car, but it can tax it like crazy until it has a mass transit system that can give people another cheap mobility option, said Sunita Narain, the dynamo who directs New Delhi’s Center for Science and Environment and got India’s Supreme Court to order the New Delhi bus system to move from diesel to compressed natural gas. This greatly improved New Delhi’s air and forced the Indian bus makers to innovate and create a cleaner compressed natural gas vehicle, which they now export. “I am not fighting the small car,” Ms. Narain said. “I am simply asking for many more buses and bus lanes — a complete change in mobility. Because if we get the $2,500 car we will not solve our mobility problem, we will just add to our congestion and pollution problems.” Charge high prices for parking, charge a proper road tax for driving, deploy free air-conditioned buses that reach every corner of the city, expand the existing beautiful Delhi subway system, “and then let the market work,” she added. Why should you care what they’re driving in Delhi? Here’s why: The cost of your cellphone is a lot cheaper today because India took that little Western invention and innovated around it so it is now affordable to Indians who make only $2 a day. India has become a giant platform for inventing cheap scale solutions to big problems. If it applied itself to green mass transit solutions for countries with exploding middle classes, it would be a gift for itself and the world. To do that it must leapfrog. If India just innovates in cheap cars alone, its future will be gridlocked and polluted. But an India that makes itself the leader in both cheap cars and clean mass mobility is an India that will be healthier and wealthier. It will also be an India that gives us cheap answers to big problems — rather than cheap copies of our worst habits. |
| Posted by:john frum |
| #17 Maybe India needs to adopt what Heinlein used in his short story, "The Roads Must Roll". Ironically, the idea of moving the roads, not the cars, is not as nonsensical as it used to be. That is, by selecting a few densely packed transportation corridors, and turning them into what amounts to giant conveyor belts, you could guarantee a consistent speed in both directions, and probably save energy in the process. Even stalled vehicles would not hold up traffic. This is already being done with pedestrian traffic in many airports, and has proven itself able to move far more people much further and faster than by them just walking. There is also no congestion. Importantly, the rolling roads need not run around the clock, just at times of peak congestion. There would be a stationary center safety lane, and perhaps a faster, much narrower moving pedestrian and bicycle lanes on the outside, like in the airports. The main road would be covered by panels that would support vehicles. Compared to stop-and-go averaging five mph, as well as obstructions that can halt everyone for minutes at a time, a guaranteed ten mph would seem very fast indeed. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-11-05 17:35 |
| #16 John, Thanks. That's part of what I love about the burg. There's not much somebody here doesn't know. I've recently read some of Joseph Needham's work on Chinese science and technology. Has anyone made a similar study of India? I know that they have generated an enormous body of computational and mathematical work. Where could I learn of contributions in other fields? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-11-05 17:13 |
| #15 What's with India and metalurgy? A long history The famed Damascus steel blades were made from wootz ingots inported from India. The iron pillar of Delhi is one of the world's foremost metallurgical curiosities, standing in the famous Qutb complex. The pillar—almost seven meters high and weighing more than six tons—was erected by Chandragupta II Vikramaditya (375-413 AD) The pillar is made up of 98% wrought iron of pure quality. It has attracted the attention of archaeologists and metallurgists as it has withstood corrosion for the last 1600 years, despite harsh weather. |
| Posted by: john frum 2007-11-05 17:09 |
| #14 There is also Jindal Steel Jindal Steel and Power Ltd won the development rights for 20 billion tonnes of iron ore reserves in Bolivia, and announced plans to invest $2.3 billion over the next 10 years for mining and setting up a steel plant there. |
| Posted by: john frum 2007-11-05 17:03 |
| #13 John, There's also Mittal. What's with India and metalurgy? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-11-05 16:54 |
| #12 When, in 1907, the Chief Commissioner for Indian Railways Frederick Upcott heard of JRD Tata's plan to produce steel, he said "Do you mean to say that Tatas propose to make steel rails to British specifications? Why, I will undertake to eat every pound of steel rail they succeed in making." Tata Steel bought Corus (the successor to British Steel) in February 2007. |
| Posted by: john frum 2007-11-05 16:50 |
| #11 Hang around. It won't be long before Friedman gives you another chance. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-11-05 16:45 |
| #10 Friedman is just jealous of India's Tatas. I wish I had said that! |
| Posted by: Chaimp the Scantily Clad7034 2007-11-05 16:36 |
| #9 Friedman is just jealous of India's Tatas. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-11-05 16:25 |
| #8 Yes, Mr. freedman, God forbid that peasants in India might have the freedom and ability to go where they want whenever they want. Like TW said, this car will not be affordable by peasants. The average peasant makes about 1/5 per year the cost of this car. I said average, because a substantial number of those in the peasant category make far less. And Zensters observation vis-a-vis corruption is spot on, even if a tad understated. Will the car go to market? Yes. Is it a good idea? Not in my opinion. But no one usually listens to me anyway. 8-) |
| Posted by: Cliting Jones5431 2007-11-05 16:23 |
| #7 The condescension dripping from every word, the holier than thou attitude, it's just painful. Attitude is typical of the enviro-zealot. He has the answer that must be imposed on the Indian masses. |
| Posted by: john frum 2007-11-05 16:19 |
| #6 Yes, Mr. freedman, God forbid that peasants in India might have the freedom and ability to go where they want whenever they want. /sarcasam |
| Posted by: Mike 2007-11-05 16:03 |
| #5 they are smart and will figure out what is best for them. That's a bit optimistic. Corruption and graft are still so pervasive in India that the really big decisions are rarely free of some truly stunning conflicts of interst. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-11-05 15:46 |
| #4 I do adore you, USN, Ret. :-) What India needs is proper roads, and at least double the number of traffic lanes per road, as Lonzo Ometh1773 points out. For perspective, however, a $2,500 car is a decidedly upper middle class purchase in India, which pretty much means those who have inherited money or work for international corporations. One million units sold annually, in a nation whose population is on one or the other side of one billion (I used to know, but I've forgotten), is not going to make a significant increase in traffic, especially if it means half the number of trips for those who've moved up from a motor scooter, ie all of them. The key is that one million units means high paying, skilled factory jobs plus the add-on jobs for the businesses that support the manufacturers, all of whom and which pay taxes, which will pay for the road construction the affluent and articulate car buyers will soon demand. At any rate, that's how it worked in the U.S., back when Henry Ford had his mass production epiphany. For an editorialist, Mr. Friedman has less understanding of economic principle than I do -- which makes his far to the left of pathetic. I am not so unfair, though, as to expect a dynamo like Ms. Narain to have any understanding of such plebian subjects whatsoever. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-11-05 15:42 |
| #3 Is this fool an example of the 'snob' TW was referring to in an earlier post? Let the Indian market decide; they are smart and will figure out what is best for them. |
| Posted by: USN,Ret. 2007-11-05 15:16 |
| #2 This man is absolutely nauseating. The condescension dripping from every word, the holier than thou attitude, it's just painful. Go and spend some time in India, pick a city, any city. You might change your tune. The very worst road here, is usually better than the best road there. India needs the Rs. 1 lahk, car like it needs more Maoists. |
| Posted by: Lonzo Ometh1773 2007-11-05 15:15 |
| #1 This man is absolutely nauseating. The condescension dripping from every word, the holier than thou attitude, it's just painful. And the comment from Ms. Narain (stack the deck, force everyone to pay hidden costs) "...and then let the market work"; a 'special understanding' of the market at work here. |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2007-11-05 15:00 |