The United States leads the world in vehicle miles traveled per capita, with Americans driving nearly 16,000 miles yearly—about twice as much as people in other developed countries. Notably, this trend is largely confined to the last 100 years. For example, Los Angeles once boasted the largest electric train network in the world until the 1920s. Alternatively, cities in Europe and Asia have embraced transit systems that are efficient, accessible, and sustainable—offering valuable lessons for the U.S. to consider.
Transportation is not a one-size-fits-all issue. At Keolis, we recognize that different modes of transport serve different purposes. While alternatives to cars make sense in urban areas, automobiles still play a key role in the broader transportation ecosystem. The goal is not to replace cars but to strike a balance that uses each mode where it excels. So, the question is: with so many successful transit systems worldwide, how can we make public transportation the preferred choice in the U.S.?
One key difference between the U.S. and European cities is the prioritization of transportation infrastructure. European cities, many of which were built centuries before the rise of automobiles, are naturally dense and walkable. Narrow streets lend themselves more easily to public transit, like buses, trams, and trains, rather than private cars. For example, Amsterdam, which used to be as car-congested as cities like Dallas, successfully shifted its focus to bicycles and public transit through policy changes and investment, not architectural differences.
In contrast, U.S. cities grew rapidly during the 20th century as cars became increasingly central to daily life. The number of vehicles on American roads exploded from just 8,000 in 1900 to over 183 million by the late 1980s. Suburban sprawl expanded across vast areas, making most cities and their outskirts heavily car-dependent. While U.S. cities are not inherently unsuitable for public transit, the emphasis on car-based infrastructure over the past century has shaped cities in ways that deprioritized alternative transportation.
When investing in public transportation, U.S. urban planners and engineers often needed to place added priority on building networks with an eye to end-to-end travel. It's not uncommon to wait over an hour for a bus, a scenario almost unimaginable in Europe, where even small towns have regular, reliable bus services. The long wait times, limited routes, and infrequent service make buses an impractical option for many Americans, especially during off-peak hours. This lack of efficiency stands in stark contrast to European cities, where buses are integrated seamlessly into daily life and provide consistent, dependable service.
Rail systems were built in the U.S., but cities rarely ensured that people could access them conveniently without driving. As a result, outside of a few major cities, it's nearly impossible to rely solely on trains or metro systems. In contrast, European planners have integrated public transit into new suburbs, building communities around train and metro stations. This strategic urban planning not only makes public transit more viable, even in suburban areas, but also provides significant benefits to underserved communities. By offering a reliable, convenient alternative to car dependency, integrated public transportation connects people to jobs, education, and cultural experiences—opening opportunities for communities that have historically lacked easy access to such resources. This approach helps create more equitable and connected cities, where everyone can thrive.
According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, transportation is one of the highest annual expenses for households, averaging $12,295 as of 2023. Car ownership remains a central part of American life, with the U.S. Census Bureau reporting that 91.7% of households owned at least one vehicle in 2022, up from 90.9% in 2015. In many states, over 95% of households have access to a car. This heavy reliance on personal vehicles has deep cultural roots, tied to ideals of freedom, independence, and personal identity. Owning a car in America represents more than convenience; it symbolizes self-reliance and status. However, the financial burden of car ownership is significant, and families could potentially save more than $13,000 per year by using public transit instead of driving, according to the latest information on public transit fares, auto costs, and gasoline prices. These savings highlight the economic benefits of reducing car dependence, offering families a substantial opportunity to cut costs.
While European public transit systems have room for improvement, they are far ahead in building and expanding infrastructure. A key reason for this is cost. In the U.S., infrastructure projects are often 10 times more expensive than in comparable developed countries, making it difficult to build efficiently. In contrast, Europe benefits from lower construction costs, allowing for more frequent and widespread development. For example, in Dijon, France, Keolis launched a comprehensive multimodal pass that provides access to public transport, bike services, and car parking. Targeted at “occasional drivers,” particularly downtown residents with good public transport access, who still rely on cars occasionally, this initiative encourages people to rethink their car usage and opt for public transport and active mobility more often. Addressing the high infrastructure costs is crucial for creating sustainable, efficient, and convenient systems that can keep up with global peers and promote similar innovative transit solutions.
One crucial step for the U.S. is fostering a cultural shift toward more sustainable modes of transportation. This could involve campaigns that promote the benefits of public transit, cycling, and walking while challenging the deep-rooted attachment to cars. However, changing attitudes alone is not enough—urban planning must also prioritize creating pedestrian-friendly spaces and investing in robust public transit systems that can offer natural alternatives to driving.
Auto manufacturers spend massive amounts on advertising and lobbying each year, with Ford Motor Company alone spending $2.5 billion globally. Now, compare that to the operating budget of a major transit network like that in Chicago, which is the third largest in the U.S. and operates on just $1.9 billion annually. This stark difference highlights the disproportionate funding between cars and public transit. With the dedication of even a fraction of what automakers spend on marketing to improve transit systems, U.S. leaders could significantly enhance public transportation networks, making them more efficient, accessible, and sustainable for everyone.
A significant barrier to efficient transit in the U.S. is that buses and streetcars often share lanes with cars, leading to delays from traffic congestion. In countries like Canada, Australia, and Poland, dedicated transit lanes ensure that buses and streetcars move quickly and reliably, free from the delays caused by car traffic. While some U.S. cities, such as Richmond, VA, and Madison, WI, are beginning to adopt dedicated transit lanes, most transit riders still face delays caused by congestion.
Expanding car-free transit lanes in U.S. cities would not only reduce congestion but also improve the efficiency and reliability of public transportation. This shift would make public transit a more attractive option, particularly for those who rely on it for daily commutes. It also has environmental benefits, as transit passengers use less street space and contribute less to pollution compared to car drivers. Such changes would promote equity by providing faster, more reliable transit options for underserved communities.
In addition to transit lanes, modernizing rail infrastructure is another key opportunity for improving U.S. transit and greater emphasis has been address on a national scale recently. The Biden administration announced a $16 billion investment to enhance rail networks and facilities, contributing to projects like Brightline, the country’s only privately owned intercity railroad. Brightline’s newly completed line between Orlando and Miami cuts about an hour off drive time, offering a faster, greener alternative to driving. Similarly, California has made substantial investments in a high-speed rail route connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco, with plans for new tunnels, bridges, and stations to improve overall infrastructure.
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems are another promising option. Operating in major cities like New York, Los Angeles, and Boston, BRT provides fast, reliable service by utilizing dedicated lanes. Mid-sized cities, such as Minneapolis, Indianapolis, and Kansas City, are adopting BRT as a cost-effective solution for reducing traffic and providing efficient public transportation. With the incorporation of designated stations, BRT systems feel safer and more accessible for riders, offering a clear structure that enhances the passenger experience. Expanding these options across the country could transform U.S. transit, making it more modern, sustainable, and convenient for millions of riders.
Conclusion
American cities can still learn a lot from global transit networks. By embracing smarter urban planning, investing in modern, reliable public transit, and fostering a shift in how we think about transportation, U.S. cities have the potential to create transit systems that are more efficient, accessible, and eco-friendly. While Americans may always love their cars, introducing modernized public transportation options can offer a balanced approach—and who knows, with the right investments, the sky's the limit for what our transit networks could achieve!