Living Car Free - Do you consider it car-free if...

Do you consider it car-free if someone uses Zipcar (let's say 1x a week) and rents a car for longer trips (say 1x a month)? What about for more car usage?

You needed to add another option, "I cannot be car-free while there are cars left in the universe."

Having guilt feelings?

You're car-ownership-free. No one is truly car-free.

Yeah I would say your car-free if you dont own a private automobile. Zip car is just an expensive version of public transit.

I think it's fine.
But, I have been curious of a similar situation.
What if one owned a motorcycle? I'm considering that since Motorcycles are much cheaper to own and maintain, use MUCH less gas, and are still pretty darn fun (much like a bicycle, just without the excercise).
It's not a car.
-Gene-

Yeah I would say your car-free if you dont own a private automobile. Zip car is just an expensive version of public transit.

I wish we had Zip Car in my city. I could be totally car free.

I think it's fine.
But, I have been curious of a similar situation.
What if one owned a motorcycle? I'm considering that since Motorcycles are much cheaper to own and maintain, use MUCH less gas, and are still pretty darn fun (much like a bicycle, just without the excercise).
It's not a car.
-Gene-

For me, I would consider owning a motorcycle to still be car-free. However, they pollute at a much higher rate than cars which is of significant importance to me in my decision to forgo a car in the first place.

If the U.S. had the train system that it SHOULD have, I'd probably never need to rent a car or use a zipcar. If I want to travel to New York City from Maine, for example, my options are plane or car. I could take a car to Boston and then take the train to New York, but the train is ridiculously expensive and way too slow. To go from Boston to New York City (about 220 miles) takes a little over 3.5 hours on the fastest train. That's a paltry speed of 62 mph. And for two people to go from Boston to NYC would cost $400 round trip on the Acela. I can rent a car for 3 days for $105 (including any insurance, taxes). Add in gas: ~$45, and you're looking at about $150 total for two people versus $400. Only one of these is affordable.

If we had the train system of France or Japan, which can reach speeds of 300+ mph (but usually averages ~167 mph including stops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tgv), you could go from Boston to NYC in about 1.5 hours. There would no longer be a need for anyone to take a plane, or car - assuming the price was comparable.

If the U.S. had the train system that it SHOULD have, I'd probably never need to rent a car or use a zipcar. If I want to travel to New York City from Maine, for example, my options are plane or car. I could take a car to Boston and then take the train to New York, but the train is ridiculously expensive and way too slow. To go from Boston to New York City (about 220 miles) takes a little over 3.5 hours on the fastest train. That's a paltry speed of 62 mph. And for two people to go from Boston to NYC would cost $400 round trip on the Acela. I can rent a car for 3 days for $105 (including any insurance, taxes). Add in gas: ~$45, and you're looking at about $150 total for two people versus $400. Only one of these is affordable.

If we had the train system of France or Japan, which can reach speeds of 300+ mph (but usually averages ~167 mph including stops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tgv), you could go from Boston to NYC in about 1.5 hours. There would no longer be a need for anyone to take a plane, or car - assuming the price was comparable.

Boston->NYC on chinatown bus - $15

I wish we had Zip Car in my city. I could be totally car free.

Same here. It's slowly approaching my city from all directions, though...I'm just waiting. :p

The simple fact is that unless you live in a major metro area, even then you need to be specific, in the US it's near impossible to be truely car free. There is reality and then talk on a message board (and there are some fine messages and ideas on this board).

I happen to live in mid-town Manhattan so I have zero need to own a car for daily use. If I can't walk there I have the subway or trains. I don't even need to own a bike, I'm not a bike commuter, I'm an avid racer who equates bikes with training and racing.

That being said I rent cars when I need them. Usually 4-5 times (10-12 days total) a year and don't feel guilty about it and consider myself car free. I love to drive and also adore auto racing (formula 1, sportscars like Lemans). I see nothing wrong with that either.

Being car free, or taking it the next step further, living simply with a managed impact on your surroundings is more than dumping the clunker. It's making choices, changing lifestlye options and balancing philosophy with practicality.

The simple fact is that unless you live in a major metro area, even then you need to be specific, in the US it's near impossible to be truely car free.

If you buy groceries, you're not car free. The groceries got to the store somehow, and you're supporting the action of getting them there by buying them.

That's why I say you might be car-ownership-free, but you're not car-free.

If you buy groceries, you're not car free. The groceries got to the store somehow, and you're supporting the action of getting them there by buying them.

That's why I say you might be car-ownership-free, but you're not car-free.

Yes, I agree. That was my point in that statement. It is also why maybe 80% of the global population, maybe 99% of the western world , simply will never be truely car free.

I think it's fine.
But, I have been curious of a similar situation.
What if one owned a motorcycle? I'm considering that since Motorcycles are much cheaper to own and maintain, use MUCH less gas, and are still pretty darn fun (much like a bicycle, just without the excercise).
It's not a car.
-Gene-

That's where I am at I either ride my motorcycle or bicycle 99% o the time. I do own an F150 that I paid off a long time ago but hardly ever drive it.

If the U.S. had the train system that it SHOULD have, I'd probably never need to rent a car or use a zipcar. If I want to travel to New York City from Maine, for example, my options are plane or car. I could take a car to Boston and then take the train to New York, but the train is ridiculously expensive and way too slow. To go from Boston to New York City (about 220 miles) takes a little over 3.5 hours on the fastest train. That's a paltry speed of 62 mph. And for two people to go from Boston to NYC would cost $400 round trip on the Acela. I can rent a car for 3 days for $105 (including any insurance, taxes). Add in gas: ~$45, and you're looking at about $150 total for two people versus $400. Only one of these is affordable.

If we had the train system of France or Japan, which can reach speeds of 300+ mph (but usually averages ~167 mph including stops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tgv), you could go from Boston to NYC in about 1.5 hours. There would no longer be a need for anyone to take a plane, or car - assuming the price was comparable.


Interestingly enough I was just looking at a similar trip from NC to Boston with a one week stay over. Here is what we found.

Amtrak: 19+ hours one way $350 round trip (city center to city center)
Private Car: 14+ hours one way $152 for fuel, Rental would be in the ~$475 range Total=$627 not including parking
Airlines: 6 hours total travel time one way. Ticket $235, shuttles ~$170 (4 trips total) Total=$405
Greyhound: ~19 hours travel time one way. Ticket $244 city center to city center.

This was based on one person. For multiple people the cost of the car would win out in per person cost.

Hard choice there:lol:

Railway and bus service in this country is pitiful. You would also have a hard time convincing me that the cost of an airline ticket is not heavily subsidized at this point. We really don't need a super high speed rail system over the entire country, just getting Amtrak up to 100mph with an average of 70mph between locations would go a long ways towards improving the service. But it won't happen as long as we throw massive amounts of money into the automotive lifestyle. ie; $2.4billion dollars on Cash for Clunkers, that is about double Amtrak's annual budget for this year and that is a generous budget compared to those in years past.

Aaron:)

I personally consider any amount of zipcar use "car free." We need to change the car ownership culture in this country, and that is good enough for me. Also, if you have to pay for each trip you don't make frivolous trips IMHO.

I personally consider any amount of zipcar use "car free." We need to change the car ownership culture in this country, and that is good enough for me. Also, if you have to pay for each trip you don't make frivolous trips IMHO.

Started new thread...

If the U.S. had the train system that it SHOULD have, I'd probably never need to rent a car or use a zipcar. If I want to travel to New York City from Maine, for example, my options are plane or car. I could take a car to Boston and then take the train to New York, but the train is ridiculously expensive and way too slow. To go from Boston to New York City (about 220 miles) takes a little over 3.5 hours on the fastest train. That's a paltry speed of 62 mph. And for two people to go from Boston to NYC would cost $400 round trip on the Acela. I can rent a car for 3 days for $105 (including any insurance, taxes). Add in gas: ~$45, and you're looking at about $150 total for two people versus $400. Only one of these is affordable.

If we had the train system of France or Japan, which can reach speeds of 300+ mph (but usually averages ~167 mph including stops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tgv), you could go from Boston to NYC in about 1.5 hours. There would no longer be a need for anyone to take a plane, or car - assuming the price was comparable.

Try a bus. We have lots of those, and they're almost as efficient as trains.

If you buy groceries, you're not car free. The groceries got to the store somehow, and you're supporting the action of getting them there by buying them.

That's why I say you might be car-ownership-free, but you're not car-free.

AFAIK, most groceries are brought to the store in trucks. You're really talking about two different things--cargo and personal travel. I imagine that trucks and other motorized cargo carriers will forever be used, and always SHOULD be used.

Buy local when you can to reduce by a bit the amount of fuel that's used to schlepp your **** to the store. Otherwise, there isn't much we can do about this as individuals.

Try a bus. We have lots of those, and they're almost as efficient as trains.

Right now they are but if we ever converted our electricity to clean energy, the train would win out. :)

I have taken the bus before but it gets very difficult when you need to take a lot of stuff with you. You can't bring as much as in a car or train.

Any day you don't use a car you are car-free for that day.