Carpoolers Need Meeting Places, Not Databases

Carpoolers Need Meeting Places, Not Databases Presentation to support requests for budget for trials of flexible car pooling By Paul Minett, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Trip Convergence Ltd

The Problem

Peak traffic demand is plugging up the roads

Peak commuter demand is filling the buses and trains

We cannot afford to expand the system

Also issues of:

Air Quality,

Global Warming,

Energy Security,

Vehicle Miles Traveled,

But there are plenty of empty seats in the system! I would carpool if I could just find someone who travels at the same time as me

Solution Number One: Internet Based Ride Matching Systems So People Can Find Others Who Travel At The Same Time They Do Key Reason People Give For Not Car Pooling: “ I have a schedule that is not predictable, I don’t want to be tied to someone else’s schedule” Result: Ride Matching Systems have limited impact. “Databases don’t work!”

Casual Car Pooling in San Francisco saves 900,000 gallons of gas per year. Slug Lines in Washington DC save 2,000,000 gallons of gas per year. (23 meeting places, no database) (22 meeting places, no database)

The key difference between Internet-based ride matching systems and casual carpooling is that the former involves pre-arrangement and a commitment, while the latter does not. It seems reasonable to expect that people will only share rides with people whom they know. This turns out not to be the case. Our goal is to find out what it takes to launch a casual carpooling route in a new location: How do we get the benefit that San Francisco is getting, in Seattle, or Portland, or Vancouver, or Los Angeles?

Proposed Research Program: six trial locations, $2M