Does Uber Make Cities More Energy Efficient?

It seems you can’t read an article about or the without stumbling across Uber; the mobility service that sprung up in 2009 to only five years later become Yes, Sony.

Two weeks ago, I found myself using the service for the first time, here in Paris. The ride went silky smooth largely due to its app, which is so easy-to-use your grandmother could use it. And I’ve since used it while traveling abroad, quickly realizing why so many opt for the convenience and availability over other options (often unknown for tourists). The company [] – which now allows you to split a ride with strangers, making Paris only the second city in the world after San Francisco to trial this service. It also announced a tie-up with music streaming service Spotify, to sync your two accounts so that However, Uber’s entry into the mobility market has been anything but smooth and its implications are still unclear.

Paris entertains an "Uber-solution" to its worsening traffic congestion and pollution. Photo by Tali Trigg.

Just recently, under pressure from taxi lobbies, India moved to Uber has been lambasted for , and even threatening . Taxi companies around Europe held protests against Uber, but as riders without options [ironically] ended up using the much-maligned, but also much-mentioned service. And of course, there’s the company’s CEO, Travis Kalanick, who has regarding competitor Lyft and other incidents.

Leaving all that aside, from a transport and energy perspective, the question is: does Uber make cities more energy efficient? The question has been hotly debated for carsharing for some time, including for such services as and ’, but with and , it at least seems there is continued appetite in cities for these efforts as they continue to grapple with issues of pollution, congestion, and jobs and innovation.

, Sarah Cannon (Manager at Google Capital) and Lawrence H. Summers (former President of Harvard University and 71^st Secretary of the Treasury) weighed in with some advice for Uber and other sharing economy actors, which boils down to this: in order to demonstrate both their business case as well as their value-add to cities, sharing economy players have to play offense with regulators. They need to be brought on-board, not just defended against.

One thing is certain: the world continues to urbanize, and congestion in cities is going nowhere but up. With this in mind, it seems that Uber or other similar services will play a role in our cities if for no other reason than that we want them to. and Either prospect is tantalizing no matter your preferred mode of choice. This is akin to ; or about 7.5 cars off the road for each carsharing vehicle introduced.

However, if carsharing only attracts existing car owners or creates a rebound effect by attracting those using efficient public transit, then the system certainly becomes less appealing. Though, there is another interpretation: perhaps Uber and Autolib’ and other services are filling demand for convenient mobility services, and as mobility should always be as safe and convenient as we’re willing to pay for, is this additional demand, or simply unmet demand?

In the words of the

What do you think? Is Uber really that different from taxis? And if so, is the overall energy benefit positive?