The road less travelled
Bern Grush’s smart driving system could be the incentive people need to carpool, skip rush hour or decide to take transit instead.
BY Craig Saunders
Photography by Lisa Kannakko
Bern Grush has made it his life’s goal to change the way people think about driving. And with the help of a little electronic box, he plans to reduce congestion, clean up the air and make the way we pay for driving more equitable.
Through his Toronto company, Applied Location, Grush is proposing “location-based pricing.” That is, installing a GPS-based device in cars that would transmit location information to a central computer, which would calculate a variety of driving-related expenses based on actual usage. Fully implemented, it could replace the gas taxes, property taxes and tolls currently imposed to pay for roads and driving-related costs.
But the real gem of the system, according to Grush, is how it would change driving habits. Of the way we drive now, he says, “the best way to get the most out of your investment in your car is to drive as much as possible.” At issue is the fact that most car-related expenses are flat fees paid monthly or annually regardless of how much the vehicle is driven. It’s a system that Grush says encourages people to drive rather than walk, cycle or take public transit.
It’s not that Grush, who has an extensive background in data management and a master’s degree in systems design engineering, hates cars. Quite the contrary—he readily admits that he loves driving. It’s congestion he hates, and he has decided to do something about it. His theory, shared by many people in the emerging field of intelligent transportation systems, is that if people pay for driving by kilometre, they’ll approach it the way they approach travel by airplane, taxi or bus, rather than looking at driving the way they might look at an all-you-can-eat buffet. Ultimately, location-based pricing systems could be the stimulus needed to persuade people to carpool, combine errands into a single trip or commute shortly before or after rush hour (when road prices would be lower).
Acceptance is probably the biggest barrier Grush and his colleagues face. “It’s the right thing to do, and there are reasons to think it’s inevitable. But it’ll still be a bumpy road,” says Todd Litman, executive director of the Victoria Transport Policy Institute in British Columbia, noting that people are used to hidden subsidies that reduce expenses for some drivers. For example, in insurance pricing, good drivers pay extra to offset the cost of insuring the accident-prone.
He’s not alone in thinking it’s inevitable. Even the insurance industry, known for its reluctance to embrace changes to pricing structures, is experimenting with the idea. UK-based Norwich Union started a pilot Pay As You Drive program in August with 5,000 of its customers. The program measures where and when a driver is on the road, and those driving at less congested (and less dangerous) times will pay less in insurance.
Grush anticipates getting the public on-board could take almost 15 years. For the average driver, however, it means that parking, insurance, tolls and taxes could one day come on one monthly bill. It also means that every trip would involve a quick calculation—is it cheaper to take the bus or drive after rush hour instead? If enough people start thinking this way, Grush says, there will be less congestion, less pollution and less aggravation.
