So, the other day I was playing around with Bixi’s data. When I mapped Bixi trips, I was expected the flow to look almost symmetric between morning and afternoon rush hours. Interestingly though, the egress from the Plateau and the ingress to downtown stations remained a constant. This correlates well, visually at least, with Montreal’s terrain elevation. People are unsurprisingly more eager to take the bicycles downhill than uphill. You can see this by rendering the elevation layer on the below map.
In physical terms, people are spending the potential energy stored in uphill bikes to move. The system doesn’t move them back up at the same rate, hence the need for the Bixi trucks to collect them from some stations and move them to others.
Now, follow my train of thought for a moment:
- Bixi is a nonprofit created by the city of Montreal
- All fares cost the same regardless of destination
- Additional work in the form of pickup trucks is needed to move bikes back uphill and in stations that have a net departure of bikes
Now, there are two scenarios:
A) The riders cover all the costs
B) Bixi gets a subsidy in one form or another from the city
In years when B is correct, the city is effectively subsidizing gravity. In years when A is correct, uphill riders are subsidizing gravity. Now you might know where I’m going with this:
Should there be a different rate depending on the start and end destinations?